carried his fears too far, in representing all, without exception, who favoured the Reformation as thus seditious, nay even the principles of the reformers as factious and rebellions. But to such a hatred of Luther, Tindall, &c. had this great man wrought himself, that he reckon'd the followers of Luther a great part of those ungracyous people which late entred into [O 1]Rome with the Duke of Bourbon[O 2], and layd the whole[O 3] blame of the barbarities then committed on them, representing them as beasts more hot, and more busy then would the great Turk, and from howre to howre embruying their hands in blood, and that in such wise as any Turke or Saracene would have pitied or abhorred. He adds, that the unhappy deeds of that secte must needs be imputed to the secte it selfe, while the doctrine therof teacheth and giveth occasion to their evil deedes.
In the same manner had Sir Thomas wrought himself up in the point of the Pope's primacy. This he tells Mr. Secretary Cromwel he was, by reading the King's book against Luther, brought to believe was begun by the institution of God. And yet in his answer to Tindall[O 4], he says he never did put the Pope for part of the definition of the Church, defining the church to be the common known congregation of all christen nations under one head the Pope. Thus, says he, did I never define the church, but
- ↑ This sacking of Rome was but 9 years after Luther first began to oppose the Pope; so that it is very improbable that any of his followers should be a great part or any part at all of the army that then did so great cruelties. No, these beasts were all professed catholics.
- ↑ 1526.
- ↑ Dialogues.
- ↑ English Works, p. 614, col. 1.
