the world, was by opening the Bible. Paolo Sarpi says that when in his discourses and arguments Luther appealed to the Scriptures the Cardinal Legate declined to argue with him, as the canonists and theologians had not been accustomed to search the Scriptures as the authority for their religion.1 In fact, theological opinions and decrees were not founded on the Scriptures. A Scotch bishop said he had never read the Bible, and did not see the use of it. Luther himself perhaps did not at first perceive that when once the reading of the Bible and the invention of printing furnished the minds of Germany and of Europe with ample stores of religious instruction, no partial reform of abuses would suffice. Yet Luther before long threw off his subjection to the Pope, and entered into open rebellion against the Church of Rome. The fault of Luther was, that in the very beginning of this mighty contest, he attempted to erect a new Church, to cover it with something like infallibility, and to defend it by persecution. It was a necessary part of priestcraft that, after miracles had ceased, the visible Church on earth should invent a theory by which they should say, Lo, Christ is here; Lo, Christ is there; and assume to themselves the เ Martino, con salvocondotto di Massimiliano, andò a trovar il legato in Augusta, dove, dopo una conveniente conferenze, sopra la materia controversa, scoprendo il Cardinale che con termini di teologia scolastica, nella professione della quale era eccellentissimo, non poteva esser convinto Martino, che si valeva sempre della Scrittura divina, la quale da' scolastici è pochissimo adoperata, si dichiarò di non voler disputar con lui,' &c.-Paolo Sarpi, lib. i. p. 21, edit. 1858. power and even the very presence of Christ. The last words of Christ, as recorded by St. Matthew, were, All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.' A few days before, at the Last Supper, when Jesus was giving them to eat and to drink, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.'1 In the same manner it is recorded by St. Mark that He said to his disciples, ' Verily, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day I drink it new in the kingdom of God.' 2 In nearly the same words St. Luke relates that Jesus said, 'for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.' 3 Although Christ had in these sublime yet simple lessons told his disciples to teach all nations whatsoever He had commanded unto them, and has pointedly 2 St. Mark, chap. xiv. 1 St. Matt., chap. xxvi. 3 St. Luke, chap. xxii. called the wine he drank the fruit of the vine, the Church which assumed his name, and said, 'Lo, Christ is here,' founded upon those two sayings their pretensions to miraculous powers. Although Christ had told them to teach all nations whatsoever he commanded, they taught that, by the rite of baptism, they could communicate to children of a day old, who were incapable of understanding a word of his commandments, a right to inherit the kingdom of heaven, and if these infants had not received this miraculous gift, they, innocent and unintelligent as they were, would be condemned to everlasting and eternal punishment. In the same spirit, although Christ had expressly called the wine he drank the fruit of the vine, the priesthood pretended that the bread which Christ distributed to his disciples was, at the moment He sat before them, changed into his body, and that the wine he drank was changed then and there into his blood. Moreover, the Church pretended that, for all time to come, they, the priesthood duly ordained, had the power of changing the bread and wine, prepared by their hands, into the body and blood of Christ, and to obtain the Real Presence of the Saviour in the celebration of the Sacrament. There was thus a sacrifice made, not once by Christ of his life upon the Cross, but a sacrifice daily and hourly made by the priest for the redemption of mankind. Had the Christians of early times been sufficiently instructed in the Scriptures they would have easily understood both the rite of baptism and the celebration of the Lord's Supper. They would have easily concluded that when a whole household were baptized it might be convenient to admit the infants of a family into the Church of Christ by baptism, but that no miracle attended that ceremony, and that it was not till the infants reached fourteen or fifteen years of age that they could properly comprehend the story of Christ's life, the gratitude due for his sufferings, and the duty of obeying his commandments. was In the same way they would gladly have partaken of the bread and wine, in commemoration of his Last Supper, and would no more have concluded that Christ was in the bread and wine than that He was a vine, or that He was present in the body when a cup of water was given to a child. But these simple interpretations did not answer the purpose of the priesthood. Luther was a monk; Calvin a student of theology, and the broken links of their chains hung about them while they were striving to set themselves free. Luctata canis nodum arripit, attamen illi 199 ESSAY XIII. ERASMUS. TOWARDS the close of the fifteenth century everything was preparing for one of those changes in the state of the world which are destined to influence for a long period subsequent generations. The great authors of Greece and Rome, whose works had been neglected or buried for centuries, were discovered anew, and revealed to the eyes of admiring nations. A passion for learning seized the minds, not only of studious men, but of the daughters of the aristocracy of Europe; there being few authors of the age or of the day whose style was polished and whose matter was interesting. The works of Homer and of Plato, of Virgil and of Cicero, attracted the attention and occupied the time of Lady Jane Grey, of Victoria Colonna, of the Princess Elizabeth of England, and of many noble ladies in different countries of Europe; but if these studies were the occupation or the recreation of illustrious ladies, were they not sure to absorb the vigilant studies of scholars, of professors, and of poets? But further, if profane authors of past times were the objects of enquiry and curiosity, was it not certain that the sacred books, which contained the miraculous flight of Moses from Egypt, and the records of the first beginnings of |