§1
The name of Syncretism is infamous, the thing far more foul, its danger directed against all. Its end is most cruel and most unworthy. For through this counsel of an impious conspiracy destruction is prepared for the Roman Pontiff, the August Emperor, kings, princes, Catholic states, and the whole orthodox name. By examples of ancient crimes, by the notorious deceits of truces, a most accursed thirst for Catholic blood and Catholic money, most thirsty for our blood, advances against us. It has placed before its bloody conspiracy the peace and union of the Evangelicals and a general synod, so that it might impart an appearance of honor to its brigandage; it summons all Evangelicals so that they may profess themselves helpers in obtaining the plunder. It makes a splendid entrance hall so that secretly and safely, through a laboriously painted substructure, it may carry them off to prisons, quarries, undertakers, and pyres. A bland speech? The Union and Synod of the Evangelicals. A popular devotion to peace, and a book dedicated to the desires of peacemakers; but through these fair appearances, through this chrysocolla, the way leads to wounds and blood, to civil wars, to the theaters of savage superstition, to the amphitheaters of Calvinistic cruelty. For Calvinism at last, sooner or later, passes over into its own nature, and by the horror of its punishments betrays and disgraces the lies of its affected gentleness. What, then, does the adversary attempt by Syncretism and pacifications? What is the end of so great a disgrace? Let us hear the man himself.
§2
In Chapter 12 he commands that endeavors and counsels be joined in pious Syncretism against the common enemy Antichrist. In Chapter 11 he conducts this more ardently, and prefixes this title to it: “That, while a synod and full concord are being procured, the Evangelicals meanwhile ought to unite in pious Syncretism and mutual toleration, and to stand together against the Papacy.”
Therefore that Silesian Hannibal, now about to die, seeks throughout the whole world an enemy for the Romans—an enemy for the Romans, that is, for the Pontiff, his defenders, friends, and clients. He looks about on every side for auxiliaries, even faithless and doubtful ones, and by the same labor warns us to be cautious, lest we fail to know that war has been declared, which so well-known a fetial priest has proclaimed. I propose three things in this war for princes and their counselors to consider.
The first is that by the name Antichrist and Papacy not only the Pontiff, but all clerics and laymen of the Catholic and ancient religion, are designated by that gladiatorial trainer. The second is that he treats not only of his own defense but of an attack upon Catholics and of arms to be carried against them unprovoked. The third is that the war he recommends will be the most cruel of all those that have ever shaken the human race.
§3
The first is admitted. All define the Papacy as the pontifical kingdom. Graserus, in The Royal Plague, folio 54, attempts to show that the clergy are the flesh of Antichrist, and secular kings and princes his bones. Povellus says almost the same in his theses On Antichrist; Benedictus Aretius says it most pestilentially of all on Apocalypse 13:15. The name of the Beast is to be a son of the Roman Church, or a Catholic, or a member of the Roman Church. But two beasts are described by the Apostle John, of which they interpret the greatest and most monstrous as the Emperor or Empire, and the secondary, the servant of the first, as the Pontiff.
Therefore this war will rage most widely against kings and the firstborn of kings who sit upon their thrones, down to the firstborn of maidservants grinding at the mill; for when the Calvinist peacemaker begins to be provoked, all are Antichristian to him. Against all, I say, barbarous savagery will advance, but first against those whom it will be most profitable to have conquered: the Emperor, the Most Christian and Catholic kings, who are the firstborn sons of the Church and the most noble members in so divine a body. Nor do I say these things to arouse odium; no speech can be found equal to such atrocity, nor do those who teach thus care about reproach, since they account ingenious cruelty a praise to themselves. It seemed too little to them to demand in general that all be delivered to tortures and death, lest anyone trust that account would be taken of his dignity or lineage; Aretius the Calvinist expressly destines Caesar and the princes of the Empire for slaughter in his commentary on Apocalypse 13:7: “After the doctrine of Christ had been received, impious hypocrites presently snatched the title of the Church to themselves and persecuted the true commandments of Christ, which cause the successors of the imperial seat still strenuously defend.” And: “For as widely as the Roman name extends, so widely do the pious”—that is, Calvinists—“suffer persecutions.” When he wrote this, Calvinism had not yet invaded the Empire with so great a force. And on verse 1: “To marvel at the Beast is to marvel at the success and felicity of the Empire, proclaiming that august, holy, sacrosanct, and immortal thing.” And: “For the dragon is the Devil, who attaches his own ornaments to the Empire.”
But Graserus speaks far more abusively in The Royal Plague: he calls the Empire “the fullness of diabolism.” The same man, after calling all Catholics “bestiality” at folio 55, and then saying at folio 207 that all Catholics fornicate with the great whore and that kings are fornicators, adds: “In this order of FORNICATING KINGS, THE SPANIARD AND SPAIN hold first place.”
Nor does Pareus conceal these things, nor can he; for he orders all sects to stand against the Papacy and those whom, for the sake of insult, he calls Papists. Nor is he so stupid as not to know that the basilica of Peter is supported by the protection of many kings and peoples. He knows that their life and power prevent him from turning the rich plunder of Roman benefices into his own rewards; he knows that the common father in Christ of all orthodox kings cannot be attacked except through the sides of faithful kings. He knows that the praetorian ship of Saint Peter is surrounded by the victorious fleet of the whole Christian world, and cannot be taken and torn apart unless that fleet is scattered.
§4
But he would especially wish given over to destruction those whom in Chapter 29 he falsely says are forcing their provinces back under the yoke of Antichrist by deceit and arms. Who are they? “Documents of this matter,” he says, “are Eastern Francia, Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Hungary, Troppau, and Donauwörth.” In its place I shall bring forward a most just expostulation concerning this injury; now it is sufficient to show against whom Pareus declares war: namely, against the Emperor, the Austrian house, the Bavarian princes, and the duke of Eastern Francia. “These things,” he says, “must be opposed more strongly and more promptly by united vows, counsels, and ACTS.” These matters indeed especially concern kings, princes, and other secular men; since I have proved the case concerning them, it is not necessary to speak of ecclesiastics, whom they hate more bitterly. Concerning these I shall be content to produce the most calumnious opinion of Calvin, Letter 2, On the Duty of a Christian Man concerning Benefices, etc.: “Among upright”—Calvinist—“and incorrupt judges, it would surely not be so difficult to make manifest that that whole mass of Roman wealth, from the supreme see itself down to the least chaplaincy, as they call it, was compounded from impostures, thefts, robberies, sacrileges, and the worst arts; and that you cannot touch any particle of it without binding yourself by consciousness of many crimes.”
Laws and legal principles teach how impostors, thieves, robbers, sacrilegious men, usurpers of evil arts, bound by consciousness of many crimes, are to be treated; and when these men have conquered, they will turn all those laws—established to restrain the audacity of the wicked—toward attacking the innocence of the orthodox. For what will victors not attempt, when, although they do not yet possess much and do not yet securely possess what they have scraped together, they nevertheless wish war to be decreed against distant kingdoms, against princes under another’s jurisdiction, and against Caesar himself? When they grow hot with wine and anger beside the Neckar, they bear it ill if, in Eastern Francia, Austria, Styria, Hungary, Troppau, and the city of Donauwörth, the ancient truth into which those regions were first baptized is taught contrary to their will and dominion. I have said and proved that the calamity and ruin of that war are proclaimed against all; I shall now show the second point: he does not aim to preserve and defend things acquired in whatever manner, but to enlarge his dominion, carry hostile arms against others, kill, and strip away spoils.
§5
First, the Genevan, Helvetian, French, Belgian, British, and the now-emerging Brandenburg practice demonstrate this. Next, he thinks that war must be undertaken to propagate his perfidy, break images, and abolish Catholic ceremonies; but for one who attempts such things, defense alone is not sufficient: war must be carried forward by him, not merely sustained. But it is better to hear in his own words the Tartarean mob of civil war thundering. On Romans 13, Doubt, Proposition 7: “Christian kings and princes ought to resist pontifical tyranny, even with the sword, by obstructing and breaking it by force, removing idols, and restoring the Church to its liberty.” Everyone understands that offensive war is commanded here; or, if anyone doubts, surely the three reasons that he appends ought deservedly to remove every scruple.
The first reason: “Princes ought to be a terror to evil works and avengers unto wrath against those who do evil. But the works of Antichrist are the worst, and therefore his wickedness must be restrained with the sword.” Who would say that mere defense against crimes is commanded to a prince? Who denies that it is the magistrate’s duty diligently to search for and track down brigands, thieves, and malefactors, to drag them from hiding places, and to proceed by law against those convicted and judged? But who does not see that by this reasoning not only a right and a sword are given to Calvinists against the Pontiff, Caesar, and every Catholic Estate, but vengeance is also commanded? Truly an accursed heresy, which not only permits the license of wars and robberies against fellow princes who have persisted in the ancient religion of the fathers, but also commands cruelty.
The second reason is even more cruel: “Because this is commanded to them, Apocalypse 18:6: Render to her as she herself rendered to you, and double to her the double according to her works; in the cup in which she mixed, mix double for her. Therefore they ought to destroy the kingdom of the Pope.” A just command indeed, but against Antichrist and his helpers, against whom it is directed by God; impious and cruel when punishments of malefactors are transferred to priests and Christian kings because of their perseverance in ancient piety.
In the third reason he explains more fully what he wishes to be done: “Because,” he says, “it is foretold that Christian kings and princes will hate the whore, render her desolate and naked, eat her flesh, and burn her with fire; but the prediction possesses the force of a precept, so that they should do this.” I have elsewhere exposed the injuries, calumnies, and sacrileges of the adversaries in corrupting these words of Scripture; now I wish to establish only this: according to their judgment, the war they contrive is not defensive but offensive.
Hence Fredericus Braubomus the Calvinist, in Book 10, Chapter 5 of The Flowers of the Flamens, attempts throughout to prove that all Christian kings—indeed, all Calvinists—possess a divine command to overthrow the Pontiff. “Such a command,” he says, “as the private man Ehud possessed, we possess publicly.” Hence the warlike speech of Graserus in The Royal Plague. Hence Plessis’s trumpet call to the king of Britain, in which with great shouting he demands that the king seek Italy, pierce the Pontiff with an avenging sword, furnish the world a spectacle of the hunt, trample him upon the Milvian Bridge, ruin him, drive him out, and submerge him in Avernus like a millstone. With great passion the most gentle man seeks this, and desires himself to be present, to fight, and to lick swords warm with noble blood. “I,” he says in the preface to his Mystery of Iniquity, “shall mingle among the first battles; amid the triumphs, when the angel gives the signal, I shall repeat, FALLEN; I shall immerse myself wholly in this holy joy; caught up close to eternity, I shall die in it.”
I pass over the cruelty of this veteran soldier fattened on Catholic blood. I do not accuse the savage joy of a mind submerged in the gore of the slain, or a joy so exultant from butchery that it severs the life of the rejoicing man, because it belongs to Calvinist piety not to glory in the hope of the sons of God, not to rejoice in heavenly consolation, not to immerse oneself in the holy joy of divine love, but to set the highest pinnacle of gladness upon the gore of the slain, to be submerged in Catholic blood, and to melt with such great pleasure at another’s wounds and tortures that one dies in one’s own cruelty. This is the vow of the soldier; this is the vow of all the Calvinist ministers who have nourished that chick of Mars with blood.
I have now sufficiently explained two things: namely, that war has been decreed against all; next, that it is a war in which force is to be carried against others unprovoked, not one in which force offered is merely repelled. The third remains: namely, that if war is waged under the auspices of Pareus, it will be the most monstrous and foul of all that the world has thus far undergone, and that this savagery is the proper end of Syncretism.
§6
Plessis’s joy and pleasure can demonstrate the cruelty more clearly than my words. We have heard that there were many savage tyrants who took pleasure from the blood and pains of others and eagerly watched punishments. We recall none of so beastly and ferocious a disposition that the torments of the wretched furnished him so great a force of joy as to compel him to die; no executioner who derived from tortures applied to another’s body so much gladness that the pleasure of tormenting could effect in the one what pains and the laceration of the body effected in the other, so that the immensity of savage joy would take the tormentor’s life just as the magnitude of torture took the tortured man’s. Plessis alone professes that he will be wholly submerged in, and will die in, that joy of executioners. Let us imagine an army of Plessises, with Pareuses as its commanders. The mind shudders to speak of the rest; I do not intend to range over what no ingenuity of executioners has hitherto discovered.
§7
Perhaps you will ask what cause of savagery the Calvinists put forward. Most allege anger and hatred, all a false opinion, and some the pleasure that they perceive from another’s torture, which is proper to cruelty. They think Catholics, whom they call Papists, are Antichristians. Some persuade themselves of this so certainly that they assert it even with perjury, as Povellus does in his theses On Antichrist; others doubt, as does the Most Serene King of England. Yet because they think this, they therefore judge Catholics the most filthy, foul, and savage of all men, drunk with the blood of the saints, idolaters, Baalites, and “bestiality,” as they proclaim. “Under those elaborate masks”—of Catholics—says Graserus in The Royal Plague, “nothing other than cruel murderers, criminals, poisoners, impure fornicators, thieves, and brigands are concealed and hidden.” A grave accusation: that nothing else lies hidden there, nothing of humanity, nothing of truth.
Therefore, since they have long since judged us to be such criminal masks, from that prejudgment they determine that we must be vexed by every punishment and torn by every insult. Sacred Scripture teaches us that Antichrist will try every kind of savagery against the pious. “For then there will be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, when nations began to exist.” They judge the Pontiff to be Antichrist and Catholics to be Antichristian attendants and servants; for this reason they impute to us all the cruelty that Scripture attributes to Antichrist, and one greater than was ever exercised by any tyrant. But what is said in Apocalypse 18, “Render to her double,” they interpret so as to say that they have been commanded by GOD to apply to us torments twice as harsh as those by which Antichrist tortured the saints.
Although Pareus’s words are more monstrous than Plessis’s pleasure, let us hear them: “Nor is injustice commanded when it is commanded that double be rendered to her; rather, it is signified that no kind of vengeance against the Pope is unjust or excessive. ‘Double’ is understood not in relation to the punishment that he deserved, but to the evils which he formerly inflicted upon the pious and with which he afflicted the Church.” How emphatically: no kind of vengeance! Nor are punishments decreed against the person of the Pontiff alone. If Plessis conquers, the lot of kings and princes will be the same, for many of them have harmed Calvinists far more than the Pontiff has—especially those by whose pious care, life, and admonition certain provinces have been led back to knowledge of the ancient faith and the true worship of God.
These things are to be expected by us if Syncretism prevails and God ceases to govern the human race. Pareus, a minister of hell, will preside over the slaughterhouse; a harsh arbiter of punishments, he will multiply the tortures to double measure. Attentive and skilled in torture, he will take care that they do not pay less than double; for if the executioners please to exceed it, Pareus will permit it, “because no kind of vengeance is excessive or unjust.” Plessis will be present, wholly submerged in holy joy. Pareus will invent what Phalaris will marvel at, what Busiris will be astonished at, what Calvinism has not yet dared or has not yet been able to do. He will dictate punishments to be applied not merely to plebeian bodies but to the majesty of kings and princes and the sanctity of bishops; and, having vigorously employed so great a mastery of slaughter, he will extinguish Catholics by tortures and the army of Plessis by the joy conceived from the tortures of Catholics.
More savage are you than grim Busiris, more savage than he
Who roasted the false bull in a slow fire,
And he who is said to have given the bull to the Sicilian tyrant
And to have allied his arts with his words.
That Tuscan tyrant, about whom boys are accustomed to sing, was nothing beside the desire for Christian peace and the contrivances of Syncretism:
Indeed, he even joined dead bodies to living,
Matching hands to hands and faces to faces,
And thus killed them by a long death in a wretched embrace.
The Calvinist will double these things against us. What appearance will the world then have? What place will receive the fearful? How many punishments must the brave overcome? What groans? What sounds of blows? What fumes of fires hissing in wounds?
Who could disclose in relation so many
Deaths? Who could lament the abominable slaughters?
What such deeds are the monstrous ever said to have committed—
Either Scinis with the Isthmian pine, or Sciron from the deep cliff,
Or Phalaris with the bull, or Sulla with the prison,
Or the Dutch with swords, or the Huguenots with dormice?
O gentle horses of Diomedes! Altars of Busiris,
You are now merciful; Cinna is now pious, and Spartacus gentle,
When compared with Pareus.
How great will be the suffering that can produce mortal joy in a Calvinist? Although perhaps his hands have not yet been wet with Catholic blood, he has certainly dyed the pen with which he writes in our blood and bloodied his jaws with our death. These are the counsels of the tribunes of our age; these the decrees of the theologians: We cannot conquer by our cause; let us kill. “We possess publicly the divine command which Ehud the judge possessed privately against the king of the Moabites.” What sort of command is this? Kill. Who will ask whether courage or deceit is used against an enemy?
Can there therefore be peace for you, O Pareus, with those whom God commands you to kill? If a law has been commanded by the supreme Lord by which our slaughter is entrusted to you, and you judge that this is so, you break off every compact and every hope of concord forever.
You will say: “I shall make peace with you, but I cannot act against the law of God; he has commanded me to kill you. I possess a public command to kill you; the supreme Emperor’s authority renders private pacifications, treaties, and oaths void.” Our princes now understand you sufficiently. Divine goodness has therefore bound their power and courage by the closest alliance for their own defense, lest each one perish separately through the snares of these agitators. But to expect religious peace from those for whom it is the summit of all sanctity to kill their adversaries at the first opportunity is foolish—from those, I say, who introduce into the world not only treaties customary among nations but even shameful frauds of Syncretisms; namely:
So great a task it was to destroy the Roman nation.