AUTHOR OF THE " ASSERTIO SACRAMENTORUM," &C. 199 



the trumpet-note of defiance may reasonably be supposed to have 

 produced that concentration of his powers which kindled a flame of 

 eloquence in him that had never since or before burnt so bright. 



Burnett, however, is positive that the letter was not written by 

 Henry.* But this enunciation, unfenced as it is with any qualifi- 

 cations or exceptions, betrays a total ignorance or forgetfulness of 

 this indubitable fact, that when Luther threw out oblique hints 

 and insinuations to the foregoing effect, Henry replied, with great 

 distinctness of afltirmation, that he was the author of the work 

 printed in his name. " Although ye fayne yourselfe to thynke roy 

 booke not my owne, yet it is well knowne for myne, and I for 

 myne avouch it." Wolsey, also, in a letter to Dr. Clarke, the 

 English ambassador at Rome, after informing him " of the king's 

 catholique mind for repressing and extincting the diabolical opinions 

 and detestable heresies of Martin Luther," and likewise " what pain, 

 labour, and studie, his Highness had taken in devising and making 

 a book for the confutation of his said erroneous opinions," states 

 that *' the said booke is, by his Highness, perfected.^'f Moreover, 

 is it a likely or a conceivable thing, if this performance were not 

 the product of his own pen, that through that envoy he should 

 order copies to be presented, in his name, to the different princes of 

 Europe, and thus swell his shame, instead of his glory ? The chief 

 topics of argument in it were the Eucharist, Penance, Satisfaction, 

 Confirmation, Matrimony, Holy Orders, and Extreme Unction. 



* Vol. iii., p. 171. 



■j- See Cott. MSS., b. iv., No. 70. If the Cardinal, in the above quoted 

 passage, speaks of Luther with a reprobation sufficiently violent, the Monk 

 in return breaks out into expressions which must have shocked "the full 

 blown pride of Wolsey, with law in his voice and fortune in his hand," for 

 he abuses him with every coarse term of reproach. Take the following 

 specimen of his style and diction, — " illud monstrum et publicum odium Dei 

 et hominum, pestis ilia regni." — Opera., vol. ii. p. 517. The courtliness too of 

 the following epithets, blasphemer and liar, applied by Luther to Henry must 

 have produced a very surprising effect ; but, I trow, not of the most pleasing 

 kind, upon the muscles of the Royal countenance. " Nunc quam prudens et 

 sciens raendacuim componat adversus mei Regis majestatem in coelis, damna- 

 bilis Putredo et Vermis, jus raihierit pro meo Rege, , majestatem Anglicam 

 luto suoet sterecore conspergere,et coronam istam blasphemiam in Christum, 

 pedibus conculcare." Epist Lutheri contra Henricum AngUce Regem, Lond. 

 1626, p. 13. Well therefore might the temperate and judicious Melancthon 

 blush at the outrageous abuse poured forth in the writings of his great 

 Master : '• Quem quidem virum ego meliorem esse judico, quam quaUs 

 videtur facienti de eo judicium in illis volentibus scriptis ipsis." Epist. ad 

 Camer.y p. 90. 



