Protest of the Princes
165
verted point, they should not oppose the celebration of the mass, they
should permit no Roman Catholic to embrace Lutheranism.”—Ibid., b.
13, ch. 5. This measure passed the Diet, to the great satisfaction of the
popish priests and prelates.
If this edict were enforced, “the Reformation could neither be
extended ... where as yet it was unknown, nor be established on solid
foundations ... where it already existed.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 5. Liberty
of speech would be prohibited. No conversions would be allowed. And
to these restrictions and prohibitions the friends of the Reformation
were required at once to submit. The hopes of the world seemed about
to be extinguished. “The re-establishment of the Romish hierarchy ...
would infallibly bring back the ancient abuses;” and an occasion would
readily be found for “completing the destruction of a work already so
violently shaken” by fanaticism and dissension.—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 5.
As the evangelical party met for consultation, one looked to another
in blank dismay. From one to another passed the inquiry: “What is to
be done?” Mighty issues for the world were at stake. “Shall the chiefs
of the Reformation submit, and accept the edict? How easily might
[200]
the Reformers at this crisis, which was truly a tremendous one, have
argued themselves into a wrong course! How many plausible pretexts
and fair reasons might they have found for submission! The Lutheran
princes were guaranteed the free exercise of their religion. The same
boon was extended to all those of their subjects who, prior to the
passing of the measure, had embraced the reformed views. Ought not
this to content them? How many perils would submission avoid! On
what unknown hazards and conflicts would opposition launch them!
Who knows what opportunities the future may bring? Let us embrace
peace; let us seize the olive branch Rome holds out, and close the
wounds of Germany. With arguments like these might the Reformers
have justified their adoption of a course which would have assuredly
issued in no long time in the overthrow of their cause.
“Happily they looked at the principle on which this arrangement
was based, and they acted in faith. What was that principle? It was
the right of Rome to coerce conscience and forbid free inquiry. But
were not themselves and their Protestant subjects to enjoy religious
freedom? Yes, as a favor specially stipulated for in the arrangement,
but not as a right. As to all outside that arrangement, the great principle
of authority was to rule; conscience was out of court; Rome was