Part 186

_Herm._ I have not studied the symbol of Athanasius; for it is enough for me, that I believe in the living God, and that Christ is the Son of the living God, as Peter believed (Matt. 16), and in the Holy Ghost, which is shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, as Paul writes in the third chapter of his epistle to Titus.

_Fr. Corn._ Indeed? you are certainly fine fellows, that God should shed his Holy Spirit upon you who will not believe that the Holy Ghost is also God himself. But this heresy you pick up and study in the devilish books of that accursed Erasmus of Rotterdam, who in his preface to the books of St. Hilary writes, that St. Hilary, at the end of his twelfth book, says, that the Holy Ghost is nowhere in the holy Scriptures called God, but that we have become so presumptuous as to dare call the Holy Ghost God, which the ancient teachers of the church did not dare do. In like manner this wicked Erasmus is also a great enemy of the divinity of Christ. Ah, bah! would you follow this damned Trinitarian, eh?

_Herm._ We follow neither Erasmus nor Hilary, but we follow the holy Scriptures, as Hilary and Erasmus herein do.

_Fr. Corn._ Though the holy Scriptures nowhere call the Holy Spirit God, what matters it? The Holy Ghost himself has inspired our mother the holy Roman Catholic church, to call him God, as appears from the symbol of Athanasius, see. But in good faith, if you believe the holy Scriptures, why then will you not believe in the divinity of Christ, eh?

_Herm._ That be far from us, that we should not believe in the divinity of Christ, that he is divine and heavenly, and not earthly, as you people believe; therefore we are put to death by you.

_Fr. Corn._ * * * Bah, we put you to death, because you people will not believe, that Christ assumed the seed of Mary his blessed mother, see.

_Herm._ We believe that the word became flesh, as John writes in the first chapter of his gospel. _Fr. Corn._ Bah, now I have got you well cornered; for God was the word. And if God became flesh, why then would you bite into my trap, because I say, God’s flesh, God’s body, and God’s blood, eh?

_Herm._ We too believe that God was the word; but would you then therefrom understand, that the living God (of whom Christ is the Son) became himself flesh? this were certainly contrary to the entire holy Scriptures.

_Fr. Corn._ Yet Christ says, John 10:30; “I and my Father are one.” Again, John 14:9: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” Bah, where are you now, eh?

_Herm._ Christ also says (John 17:21–23): “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.” Again (Acts 4:32): “The multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul.” Again, Paul to the Galatians (3:8) says: “For ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Again (Ephesians 5:31,32): “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery.”

_Fr. Corn._ Tush, tush, you have preached enough; for all this you have drawn from the venomous breasts of Erasmus. But answer me, why Christ says: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father,” see.

_Herm._ Christ also says, John 6:46: “Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of the Father, he hath seen the Father.” Again, John 1:18: “No man hath seen God at any time.” Again, John 14:28: “For my Father is greater than I.” Again, Mark 13:32: “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” From this it is sufficiently shown that the Father himself did not become flesh.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, this you need not teach me; for I say myself that Christ, the second person in the Godhead, or of the holy Trinity, became man, whom you will not call God; do you understand this, you accursed Trinitarian that you are?

_Herm._ I call him the Son of the living God, as Peter called him (Matt. 16:16), and Lord, as the apostles call him.

_Fr. Corn._ O you accursed Trinitarian, I could jump out of my skin for anger, that I could.

_Herm._ Then you must jump out of your skin, when in the second chapter of the Acts of the apostles (verse 22), you read that Peter calls him but a man of God, saying: “Jesus of Nazareth, a man[310] approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him.” Again, in the same chapter (verse 32): “This Jesus hath God raised up.” Again, in the third chapter (verse 15): “Whom God hath raised from the dead.” Again, in Acts 4:10: “Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead.” Again, Paul (Acts 17:31) says: “Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”

[310] See German version.

_Fr. Corn._ Yes, yes, tush, tush, tush, bah! these are the same arguments which this damned Erasmus prefers, in his book, _de modo orandi_, and in _Apologia ad Episcopum Hispalensem, Alphonsum Mauricum_. But you Trinitarian, if you will call Christ only the Son of God, you do not esteem him better than Adam; for Luke says in his third chapter, that Adam also was the son of God. Bah! see once, with what we are tormented.

_Herm._ That be far from us, that we should not esteem Christ better than Adam; for because we believe, that the body of Christ is not earthy of the earth, as was Adam the first man, but that he is a heavenly man, as Paul writes in the fifteenth chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians; therefore we are put to death by you; hence you yourselves do not esteem him better than Adam.

_Fr. Corn._ O you accursed Trinitarian, how the devil does wag your tongue. Bah, if you will not believe, that Christ is truly man, and if you will also not believe, that he is the true God, what * * * is he then?

_Herm._ Do not talk so unbecomingly; for Christ is no devil; but he is the true Son of God, as John writes in the fifth chapter of his first epistle; and he is also a true man, as Paul writes in the fifth chapter of his epistle to the Romans.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, but does not St. John in the same chapter say of the Son: “This is the true God;” eh?

_Herm._ No, for John says: We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know the true God, and that we should be in his true Son. This is the true God, and eternal life. Hereby John means this true God whom the Son taught us to know.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, you Trinitarian; now it occurs to me that St. John says in the same chapter: There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one. Bah, here you are soundly cornered, poor Trinitarian that you are.

_Herm._ I have often heard it said, that Erasmus in his Annotations charges you papists with having interpolated these words, and that they are not contained in the Greek text, even as you people have taken out and added many other things in the holy Scriptures.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, may the fire of hell forever burn and torment you with your devilish, damned, accursed heretic Erasmus. Bah, I could tear my cap for anger, that I could.

_Herm._ Why then do you not tear your cap, when you read that Greek text yourself, and see that this is not contained in it?

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, my lords, what do you think of this--am I wrong in so sharply attacking in my sermons this damned heretic, this wicked Trinitarian Erasmus? For it is true, this he writes; yea, what is still worse, in his Annotations to the fourth chapter of St. Luke he has written, that a very great and strange corruption has been wrought in the holy Scriptures in the Greek and Latin copies, that sometimes something is added and interpolated and sometimes something taken away, omitted, and erased, on account of the heretics: yea, that the marginal notes which were now and then written by one or the other have all been foisted into the text, my lords, is it not a fine thing?

_Recorder._ Ah, Father Cornelis, we are no theologians; we do not understand these things.

_Fr. Corn._ Indeed? Bah, I believe it; but this Trinitarian would certainly understand it very well, as you hear, that he charges us with it. Bah, he would dare charge us Catholics with his arch-heretic, this wicked Erasmus, that in the ninth chapter of Romans, where Paul says: “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came;” we have interpolated: “Who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.” For this accursed Erasmus writes, that he has great doubts with regards to this clause: ”_Oui est benedictus in saecula. Amen._ Or these words are to be interpreted and understood as a thanksgiving to God the Father, thus: “Christ, etc, who is over all. God be blessed for ever. Amen.” “Otherwise,” he writes, “I have great doubts, whether this clause has not been interpolated, as I find also in some other texts, that they have added similar clauses, for the conclusion of discourses, as, _Tu autem Domine, etc._, _Gloria Patri et Filio, etc._, as their lessons and prayers are all concluded with such clauses.” But as regards the words of St. Thomas, in the twentieth chapter of St. John’s gospel, you have no way of escape; for there St. Thomas said to Christ: “My Lord and my God.” Bah, to this he does not reply, yea, with this he is soundly cornered; nevertheless, he spitefully writes with regard to this: “This is the first and last passage in the Scriptures, where Christ is called God.” Bah, but you Trinitarian, let us hear what you can say to this.

_Herm._ I reply to this, that Thomas said very well here; for David says in the eighty-second Psalm: “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High.” Christ himself also quotes these words in the tenth chapter of John. When the Jews took up stones to stone him, because he had said, “I and the Father are one,” Jesus answered them: “Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do you stone me? The Jews answered him, saying: For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the son of God?” Again, Ex. 22:8,9: “If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the gods, etc. The cause of both parties shall come before the gods; and whom the gods shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbor.”

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, but tell me without many words, why Christ did not say to St. Thomas: Stay: I am not your God? let us hear.

_Herm._ In regard to this my previous answer, John 10; David in Ps. 82 will serve; but answer me, why Christ did not reply to these words of Thomas: “Upon this rock I will build my church,” as he said, Matt. 16:18, when Peter answered him: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”? He also did not say to Thomas: “Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” Why also does Christ, John 20:17; say to his disciples: “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God”? Again, Matt. 27:46: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

_Fr. Corn._ Tush, tush, you Trinitarian. Bah, from this would probably follow diabolical arguments which would transcend all human comprehension. Ah, bah, is Christ not truly God? why then do we call his blessed mother the mother of God, eh?

_Herm._ Because you will nowhere follow the holy Scriptures, but would call everything by a contrary and different name; for the holy Scriptures call her the mother of Jesus, as in the first chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, in the nineteenth chapter of John, and in many other places of holy Scripture, where she is not once called the mother of God.

_Fr. Corn._ Indeed? Bah, do you think that we Catholics pay so much regard to the naked, bare, meagre Scriptures? Ah, bah, the worthy, holy council of Nice has ordained and decreed that she should be called the mother of God. What do you say to this?

_Herm._ Do you not hold the last council of Trent to be of as great authenticity, dignity, and holiness as the council of Nice?

_Fr. Corn._ Yea, in troth, and should we not? Ah, bah, the Holy Ghost taught and spoke just as well through the fathers in the worthy council of Trent, as through the fathers in the council of Nice. Bah, what need is there of asking this question? have you nothing else to ask me? Bah, I well perceive that you would fain drop the subject concerning the mother of God.

_Herm._ I had to ask this in order to hear your confession in regard to it; for now I know by the council of Trent all the other councils, because I have in my time heard and seen how things went at the former council, which mocks and puts to shame all previous councils.

_Fr. Corn._ O you hellish, devilish; accursed Trinitarian, you blaspheme the Holy Ghost. It is a wonder that we do not all together with you sink into the earth. My lords, I am absolutely afraid to speak any longer with this Beelzebubian Anabaptist, Sacramentarian and Trinitarian, and enemy of the mother of God, that I am.

_Recorder._ Can you not keep still in regard to these things, Herman, as we requested of you?

_Herm._ I do not blaspheme the Holy Ghost, nor am I an enemy of the mother of Christ.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, do you not blaspheme the Holy Ghost, when you ridicule, vilify and deride the worthy council of Trent, and all the previous holy councils? and will not call the worthy, holy, blessed virgin Mary the mother of God, as the holy council of Nice teaches and commands us to do? Bah, are you not then a blasphemer of the Holy Ghost, and an enemy of the mother of God, eh?

_Herm._ You papists were so presumptuous in your council of Nice, that you dared call the mother of Jesus Christ the mother of God, whom neither the apostles nor the evangelists dared call the mother of the Son of God.

_Fr. Corn._ O you damned, devilish Anabaptist, you hellish Trinitarian, Sacramentarian and deadly enemy of the blessed mother of God, we will call her the mother of God in spite of your teeth, and she is too the mother of God. Yea, she is the mother of God, that she is?

_Herm._ You said yourself that there are three persons in the holy Trinity, the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, and that these three persons are but one true God. If Mary then is the mother of this true God, then she is just as well the mother of the Father and of the Holy Ghost, and of the Son.

_Fr. Corn._ O you devilish heretic, I have proved to you from the symbol of Athanasius, that the Father is God, and that the Son is God, and that the Holy Ghost is God, and that there are nevertheless not three gods, but that these three are one true, inseparable God, see.

_Herm._ If these three are not each a distinct, separate God, but if the three are but one true inseparable God, and if Mary is the mother of God, then she must be the mother of all three, or the three must each be a separate God. Where are you now with your council of Nice?

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, may the fire of hell burn you, you wicked, evil, vile, false, crafty Trinitarian; the devil wags your accursed tongue. Bah, you would drive an hundred thousand doctors of divinity mad and crazy. Jesus, Jesus, worthy mother of God, how you are reviled, despised and rejected by this hellish devil’s brood, But in good faith, how would you have her called--Maeyken Timmermans,[311] as you call her in your hellish, devilish sermons in the Gruthuysbosch, eh?

[311] Probably an allusion to the fact that Mary’s husband Joseph, was a carpenter.

_Herm._ We call her the mother of Jesus, as she is called in the Scriptures, And how can you say that we revile, despise and reject her?

_Fr. Corn._ O you accursed Anabaptist, I will drop this, that you will not call her the mother of God; but is this not odious reviling, despising and rejecting, that your arch-heretic, Menno Symons writes, that Christ did not assume the sinful earthly seed of Mary, but that he came with flesh and blood, with skin and hair, from heaven, into Mary, and thus became man, and that he merely passed through her body, as water through a sieve, or through a spout;--bah, is this not reviling blaspheming, despising and rejecting? _Herm._ You do not understand what Menno Simons writes; for what you here say, cannot be found in his writings; but he shows with many Scriptures, that the Word became flesh (as John writes in his first chapter), and not the seed of Mary.

_Fr. Corn._ Ah, bah, was Christ then not born of the seed of David according to the promise; which seed he assumed in the blessed virgin Mary, of her most pure blood, and of that became flesh and man, eh?

_Herm._ That Christ was born of the seed of David (as regards the generation of which he was born) we well believe; but the angel said to Joseph: That which is begotten in her is of the Holy Ghost, Matt. 1:20. Again, John 16:28, Christ himself says: I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world.

_Fr. Corn._ Ah, bah, Christ says this of his divinity, that the same proceeded, and came into the world from the Father, and not from his humanity, you stupid Anabaptist.

_Herm._ Why then did Christ say, John 6:62: What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? Again, John 3:13: No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man. Again, Paul says, Eph. 4:9,10: That he ascended; what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, you stupid Anabaptist, did Christ then come from heaven into Mary with flesh and blood, with skin and hair, entrails and all, as he ascended up to heaven? Bah, what do you say of this, you great, stupid, awkward ass?

_Herm._ I do not say this; but I say that the Word came from heaven, and became flesh in Mary, as John writes in his first chapter.

_Fr. Corn._ And we Catholics say that the most pure blood of Mary became flesh, in spite of your miserable teeth, see.

_Herm._ This defiance to my teeth is a small matter; but this defiance to the holy Scriptures is a great blasphemy.

_Fr. Corn._ Ha, you damned Anabaptist, I do not blaspheme the holy Scriptures; but you revile the holy, blessed, pure virgin Mary. Bah, I am surprised that you do not say, that she conceived her son Christ of her husband Joseph, as your hedge-preachers preach in the Gruthuysbosch; is it not a fine thing?

_Herm._ You wrong us greatly, that you say this of us; for we believe as Matthew writes in his first chapter: “Joseph took his wife, and knew her not till she had brought forth her first born son.”

_Fr. Corn_ Ah, bah! did Joseph know her afterwards, eh?

_Herm._ It matters not to me whether he knew her afterwards, or not.

_Fr. Corn._ Indeed? and do you then not believe in the perpetual virginity of the blessed virgin Mary? let us hear now.

_Herm._ We find nothing said in the Scriptures, concerning her perpetual virginity.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, this accursed Anabaptist would pester me with the Scriptures. Will you then positively believe nothing else but what is contained in the holy Scriptures? Bah, hence it comes that you thus despise, reject and revile the worthy mother of God and imagine, yea, teach and believe that she did the carnal works of the married state with Joseph her husband, just as well as your filthy, sinful wives do with you, and that she had many children by Joseph her husband; bah, is this not a fine thing?

_Herm._ And if she had done the work of the married state with her husband Joseph, and brought forth more children (which is ordained and commanded of God, Gen. 1, and is a blessing) would she thereby have sinned?

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, God blessed Adam and Eve, and said: “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,” before they transgressed the commandment; but they did not continue in the blessing, but transgressed the commandment of God, and thereby the work of marriage became sin to them; bah, now you are cornered.

_Herm._ You are cornered yourself; for, Gen. 9:1, it is written: “God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them: Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” Again, the prophet Jeremiah, in the twenty-ninth chapter, says: “Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Take ye wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that ye may be increased.”

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, tush, tush, you have talked enough; bah, hear how much talk there is in this miserable Anabaptist. Bah, now that I hear you talk, I will believe, that you Anabaptists undisguisedly and presumptuously preach out there in the Gruthuysbosch, that Maeyken Timmermans, as regards the work of marriage, was not a hair better than your filthy, unchaste, carnal wives are. Yea, in order utterly to loose the marriage bond, and to show, that women may have divers husbands, you wicked Anabaptists dare preach and teach, that Mary had children of many different husbands, like your wives, whom you have in common--is this not a fine thing?

_Herm._ Of such things as you here say I never heard our teachers speak once, when they preached the word; but it may sometimes have been asked among us, whether the brethren and sisters of Christ, of whom the holy Scriptures make mention, Matthew 13; Mark 6, etc., were natural children by Joseph or Mary.

_Fr. Corn._ O you accursed Anabaptist, the holy Scriptures calls some apostles, as St. James, St. Simon, St. Judas, the Lord’s brethren, who were merely his cousins, you stupid Anabaptists that you are.

_Herm._ Yet, in the first chapter of Acts it is written (after the eleven apostles are enumerated): “These all continued with one accord in prayer [and supplication,] with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.” Nevertheless, I will not insist upon, or maintain, that Mary the mother of Jesus gave birth yet to other children.

_Fr. Corn._ Bah, but when you Anabaptists are assembled in the Gruthuysbosch, you will maintain it, and other things yet concerning her, which are still much more wicked and abominable; for I know it well, that I do.

_Herm._ We are greatly slandered, even as also you often stand in your pulpit and preach about us all that you please.

_Fr. Corn._ Indeed, do then any Anabaptists sometimes come to hear me preach, eh?

_Herm._ Though we do not hear you preach ourselves, yet we are told, that you stand in your pulpit and preach, that the Calvinists and Anabaptists teach and preach, that Mary the mother of Christ was a filthy whore, for which you are censured by learned men (in letters which they write to you), how you slander us thereby.