¹ Studies on Lefèvre have multiplied in recent years. I omit from this listing of those I have read the ones which seemed to be motivated by a patriotic desire to demonstrate or refute the autochthonous character of Protestantism in France. The following have to do chiefly with Lefèvre's relation to the Reformation: Barnaud, Jean, Jacques Lefèvre d'Etaples, Etudes d'Histoire Religieuse (Montpellier, 1936)Google Scholar; Dörries, Hermann, Calvin und Lefèvre, Zeitschrijt für Kirchengeschichte xliv (1925), 544–81Google Scholar; Hahn, Fritz, Faber Stapulensis und Luther, ZKG lvii (1938), 356–432Google Scholar; Kunze, Horst, Die Bibelübersetzungen von Lefèvre d'Etaples und von P. R. Olivetan verglichen in ihren Wortschatz, Leipziger Romanistische Studien, Heft ii (Leipzig: Selbstverlag des Romanischen Seminars, 1935)Google Scholar; Pannier, J., De la préréforme à la Réformer à propos des dernières publications de Lefèvre d'Etaples, in Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses XV (1935), 530–47Google Scholar; Mann, Margaret, Erasme et les débuts de la Réforme française (1517–36) (Paris, 1933)Google Scholar (Chapters II and III); Moore, W. G., La Réforme allemande et la littérature française. Recherches sur la notoriété de Luther en France (Thesis) (Strasbourg: Faculté des lettres à l'Université, 1930)Google Scholar; de Savignac, Jean, Un nouveau progrès dans la redécouverte de Luther, in Scriptorium, International Review of Manuscript Studies IX (1955), 274–78Google Scholar; Villain, Maurice, Le Message Biblique de Lefèvre d'Etaples, Recherches de Science Religieuse 40 (1952), 243–59Google Scholar.

The following have to do with Lefèvre's humanism and its relation to his work as a whole: John Woolman Brush, Lefèvre d'Etaples: three phases of his life and work, Reformation Studies, Essays in Honor of Roland H. Bainton (Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1962), 117–28Google Scholar; Dagens, A., Humanisme et Evangélisme chez Lefèvre d'Etaples, Centre d'Etudes Supérieures Specialisé d'Histoire des Religions de Strasbourg, Courants Religieux et humanisme à la fin du xvi^e Siècle (Colloque de Strasbourg, 1957; Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1959), 121–34Google Scholar; A. Renaudet, Paris de 1494 à 1517; Eglise et Université: Réformes Religieuses; Culture et Critique Humaniste, in the volume of the Strasbourg Colloquium mentioned just above, 5–24; idem, Humanisme et Renaissance. Dante, Pétrarque, Standonck, Erasme, Lefèvre d'Etaples … Rabelais, etc. Travaux d'Humanisme et Renaissance, XXX (Genève: E. Droz, 1958) ; idem, Préréforme et Humanisme à Paris pendant les Premières Guerres d'Italie (1494–1517) (2me ed., Paris: Librairie d'Argences, 1953); Rice, Eugene F., Jr., The Humanist Idea of Christian Antiquity: Lefèvre d'Etaples and his Circle, in Studies in the Renaissance IX (1962), 126–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar. (Prof. Rice will soon publish a book which is to include critical editions of most, if not all, of Lefévre's Prefaces. It will be extremely useful for subsequent work on Lefèvre.)

Articles which have to do with a topic approximating the one treated here are: M. J. Barnaud's Lefèvre d'Etaples et Bédier: premiers assauts donnés à le Réforme française in the Bulletin de la Société de l'histoire du Protestantisme français 85 (1936), 251–79Google Scholar. This will be cited hereafter simply as Bulletin. Also Wiriath, R., Les Rapports de Josse Bade Ascensius avec Erasme et Lefèvre d'Etaples, Bibtiothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance XI (1949), 66–71Google Scholar. I have had the opportunity recently of examining the PhD dissertation written by Walter F. Bense under the direction of Dr. George H. Williams (Harvard U., 1967), Noël Beda and the Humanist Reformation at Paris, 1504–1534. This is an ample treatment from a point of view quite sympathetic to Beda.

² Graf, Karl Heinrich, Jacobus Faber Stapulensis. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Reformation in Frankreich, Zeitschrijt für die Historische Theologie 22 (1852: 3–86, 165–237), p. 62 and n. 90Google Scholar. This splendid treatment has put subsequent students of Lefèvre in its debt, and still remains valuable. It will be cited hereafter simply as “Graf.”.

³ “In materia de Leuter de qua fuerat articulum, non fuit conclusio pacifica.” Clerval, L'Abbé A., ed., Registre des Procès-Verbaux de la Faculté de Théologie de Paris, Tome I, 1505–1523 (Paris: Lecoffre, 1917), 273Google Scholar. Hereafter this work will be referred to simply as “Registre.”

⁴ The Determinatio, with eight pages of propositions, each with its appropriate censure, is printed in César Egasse du Boulay, Historia Universitatis Parisiensis … authore Cesare Egassio Bulaeo (6 vols., Parisiis, apud F. Noëlet, P. de Bresche, 1665–1673), VI, 116f. This work will be referred to hereafter as “Bulaeus, Historia.” It may be found also (but without the propositions) in Charles Duplessis d'Argentré, Collectio judiciorum de novis erroribus qui … in Ecdesia proscripti sunt (3 vols., Lutetiae Parisiorum, apud A. Cailleau, 1728–1736), II, ii–iiii. The abbreviated reference to this work will be “d'Argentré, Collectio.”

⁵ Clerval, A., De Judochi Clichtovei … Vita el Operibus (Parisiis: Picard, 1894), 39–41Google Scholar, gives several bits of evidence in support of this statement. The strongest of them is that Clichtove wrote the Determinatio in his private daybook as his own work.

⁶ Registre, 296.

⁷ Bulaeus, Historia, VI, 173.

⁸ Duplessis, Dom Toussaints, Histoire de l'Eglise de Meaux (2 vols., Paris. Baudouin et Giffort, 1731), I, 326, 328Google Scholar. This work will be referred to hereafter as “Duplessis, Histoire.”

⁹ Carro, A., Histoire de Meaux et du Pays Meldois (Meaux and Paris, 1865), 185Google Scholar.

¹⁰ The Determinatio was printed before the end of the year by J. Petit at Paris. It is entitled Determinatio Facultatis super aliquibus propositionibus certis e locis nuper ad earn delatis de veneratione sanctorum, de canone missae deque sustentatione ministrorum altaris et caeteris quibusdam. The important parts of it may be found also in D'Argentré, Collectio, II, xiv–xx.

¹¹ Bulaeus, , Historic, VI, 173–84Google Scholar.

¹² Journal d'un Bourgeois de Paris (Bourilly, V–L., ed., Paris: Picard et Fils, 1910), 233Google Scholar; also Duplessis, Histoire, I, 325.

¹³ Graf, 168, with reference to Bretonneau, Guy, Histoire Généalogique de la maison des Briçonnets (Paris: Daumale, 1620), 170ffGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ Letter from Lefèvre to Farel, July 6, 1524. Herminjard, A. L., ed., Correspondence des Réformateurs dans Us Pays de Langue Française … (Genève: H. George, etc., 1866–97), I, 220, 222Google Scholar. This edition will be referred to as “Herminjard, Correspondence.

¹⁵ Commentarii initiatorii in quatuor evangelia (First published at Meaux “impensis S. Colinaei,” 1522. I have used the edition published at Basel “Ex Ædibus Andreae Cratandri,” 1523), fo. a 2 vo. This is the edition which will be referred to as “Comm. Init.”

¹⁶ Comm. Init., ibid. “Hoc unicum satis est ad vitam quae terminum nescit, inveniendam. Haec unica regula, vitae aeternae magistra est …. Non proponit Christus … intelligendum evangelium, set credendum, cum pleraque contineat … quae transcendunt intelligentiae non modo nostrae, sed et omnis (ut arbitror) creatae….”

¹⁷ Comm. Init., iiii ro.

¹⁸ “Agite igitur pontifices, agite reges, agite generosa pectora: ubivis gentium expergiscimini ad evangelii lucem, ad verum dei lumen, respirate ad vitam, eliminate quicquid huic puro obest officitque cultui. Nolite attendere quid dicat aut faciat caro, sed quid dicat aut iubeat deus.” (Ibid., fo. a 2 vo.).

¹⁹ I have had access to a reissue of the Gospels from the press of Simon de Colines, Paris, April 1524; and one of the New Testament from Martin L'empereur, 1531, at Antwerp.

²⁰ “Epistre Hortatoire” prefacing the April, 1524, edition of Les Evangiles, folii a ii vo., iii ro.

²¹ Gaudio cum percipio hanc bene pure agnoscendi Christum gratiam, jam bonam partem pervasisse Europae. Et spero Christum tandem nostras Gallias hac benedictione invisurum.” Herminjard, Correspondence, I,220.

²² “Epistre Hortatoire,” fo. a iii ro.

²³ Ibid., a v ro.

²⁴ Lefèvre had praise for Jean de Rély as “a great announcer of the word of God,” though he was offering something to take the place of his Bible Historèe, printed in 1587. (Herminjard, Correspondence, I, 160).

²⁵ “Epistre Hortatoire,” Les Evangiles, April, 1524, fo. a vi ro.

²⁶ Duplessis tells us (Histoire, I, 331) that Briçnnet was accused of distributing among the poor a number of copies of the New Testament and the Psalms which had newly been translated into French. Lefèvre himself, in a letter written to Farel during the summer of 1524, tells of the incredible eagerness with which the people received the word of God: “Vix crederes, posteaquam libri gallici Novi Organi emissi sunt, quanto Deus ardore simplicium mentes, aliquot in locis, moneat ad amplexandum verbum suum.” (Herminjard, Correspondence, I, 220).

²⁷ Ibid., 162, 163.

²⁸ Ibid., 167, 168.

²⁹ “Ayez soing de lire les evangiles … devant vous veniez aux predications, et les recorder souventesfois en la maison, enquerir diligentement le sens dicelles quelle chose est clere et quelle obscure in icelles … vous vous devez presenter tresatentifz aux predications.” You will be prepared then “aussi enseigner les autres.” (Preface to the second part of the New Testament [Paris: S. de Colines, 1524], fo. b ii vo., iii ro.). On February 5, 1526, the Parlement forbade simple conversations on religion, and prohibited all French translations of the Scriptures, notably Lefèvre's New Testament. Léonard, E. G., Histoire Générale du Protestantisme (3 vols., Paris: Presses Universitaires, 1961), I, 204Google Scholar.

³⁰ Recently made available in photographic reproduction: Jacques Lefèvre d'Etaples et ses disciples, Epistres et Evangiles pour les Cinquante et deux Sepmaines de l'an. Fac-simile de la première édition Simon du Bois, avec introduction, note bibliographique et appendices par M. A. Screech, D. Litt. (Genève, Librairie Droz, 1964). It is to this edition to which we shall refer under the symbol “Epp, et Evv.” The text, which Dr. Screech reproduces from the British Museum's copy of Simon du Bois' edition of 1525, is the earliest in existence, and may well be the first edition. (Introduction, 21, 24). Some critics have found reason to suspect an earlier edition in the fact that the Sorbonne, in criticising Lefèvre, used one which seems to have had a different title (Epistolae et Evangelia secundum usum Diocesis Meldensis), and certainly had a different pagination. But the text was the same in any case. (Ibid., 22).

³¹ See Graf, 77f., with reference to Bretonneau, 168; see also Epp. et Evv. (Introduction), 10f.

³² Rather than 1525. See Ph. Renouard, , Bibliographie des Editions de Simon de Colines, 1520–1546 (Paris: Huard et Guillemin, 1894), 53Google Scholar.

³³ Commentarii in Epistolas Catholicas, fo. a 3 ro., at the end of the letter dedicatory to Chancellor du Prat.

³⁴ Registre, 356.

³⁵ D'Argentré, Collectio, II, xi, and Bulaeus, Historia, VI, 183. See below, p. 131 and n. 47.

³⁶ Registre, 416, n. 19.

³⁷ “Facultati videntur maxime pernitiosa que … fieri cernuntur in causis fidei ut pote pro commentariis et translationibus magistri Jacobi Fabri …” (Registre, 378, August 14, 1523)

³⁸ Ibid., 380.

³⁹ Ibid., 402 (November 3, 1523).

⁴⁰ Parisiis: apud J. Parvum, 1525.

⁴¹ Sutor, De Tralatione, fo. A ii ro.

⁴² Ibid.

⁴³ For instance, “a mulierculis, a cerdonibus, a sartoribus, a fabris, a cementariis, a lanariis, a fullonibus, ab aliis denique id genus opificibus et humunculis.” (Ibid., fo. xcvii vo.)

⁴⁴ Ibid., fo. xciv–xcvi.

⁴⁵ Ibid., fo. lxxvii vo. “Probemus huiusmodi tralationes novas esse damnandas, penitusque profligandas a toto christianismo. Imprimis quod cassae, ineptae, temerariae ac falsae sint penitus. Deinde quod iniuriae, scandalosae et supramodum periculosae.”

⁴⁶ Graf, 171f.

⁴⁷ The eleven propositions, taken from the Commentarii Initiatorii are given in Bulaeus, Historia, VI, 183, as follows:

“Primaria Ecclesia quae tot Martyres Christo consecravit nullam regulam praeter Evangelium novit. 2. Humana divinis addita nihil perfectionis addunt, sed potius ut aqua vino meracissimo adiecta imperficiunt. 3. Consulto Christus ante cibi sumptionem manus non lavit, ut ostenderet in lege Dei institutiones humanas nihil dependendas. 4. Lex nova prohibit non modo pejerare, sed etiam omnino iurare. 5. Ultionem in veteri prosequi et expectare licebat, in nova vero vetitus est hie ulciscendi appetitus et damnum damno retalliandi modus. 6. Verum est quod Pilatus habebat potestatem a Deo crucifigendi Christum, sed non habebat potestatem dimittendi eum. 7. Magna fides est cognoscere Christum corporaliter esse ubi sacramentaliter est, sed maior est cognoscere eum absolute ubique corporaliter esse. 8. Cuius timor servilis est, nobis prohibemus. 9. Si ad Christum accedis et confidis bonitate alterius admissum iri male accedis, et fidem earn non habes quam habere debes. 10. Petendum a Deo potius quam a Sanctis ut Sanctorum suorum pro nobis apud se admittat precum orationumque suffragia. 11. Has nomenclaturas Sanctissimum, Beatissimum, piissimum, et caeteras id genus quantumcumque perfectae tribuere creaturae propemodum est idolatriam committere.” These propositions are given also in d'Agentré, Collectio, II, xi.

⁴⁸ These propositions with the censures are given in d'Argentré, Collectio, II, 35–40, and in Epp. et Evv. (ed. Screech), Appendix B, 41ff. I have taken them from the latter, after having checked them against d'Argentré. Where separate pages are given for the Propositions, they refer to the text of the Epp. et Evv. as reproduced in Screech's edition.

⁴⁹ Props XLI, XLII, XLIV.

⁵⁰ Props X, XXXIII, XXXIV.

⁵¹ Prop. IV. Ibid., p. 42.

⁵² “Prop. I. Tout nous est donné et pardonné en Jesus-Christ seulement, si nous avons foy en luy.” (Ibid., fo. ii vo.). “CENSURA. Haec propositio designans solam fidem requiri et sufficere ad remissionem peccatorum et justificationem, a procuranda sua salute per pia opera fideles perniciose avertit et haeresis est Lutheri.” (Ibid., p. 41). See also propositions XVI, XXII, XXVI, XLVII.

⁵³ Props. XI, XII, XVII, XXXVII, XXXVIII, XXXIX.

⁵⁴ Prop. XLIII. Ibid., p. 49 and fo. ccxv ro.

⁵⁵ Props. II, XXI, XXIV, XXX–XXXII, XL. “PROPOSITIO II: Et se aucun quiconque vous prêche et annonce autre chose que la parole de Dieu et de JESUSCHRIST, il n'est point fidele dispensateur, distributeur et annonciateur des secrets de Dieu, mais est un Infidele et un decepteur, par quoi ne l'écoutez point; c'est-à-dire ne le croyez point, et n'ajoûtez point de foy à ses paroles; car c'est un séducteur. … CENSURA. Haec propositio, in quantum praetendit nihil esse praedicandum Populo quod non expresse in Sacra Scriptura contineatur, quasi Catholicorum Doctorum expositiones et doctrinae Populo annunciandae non sint; et in hoc quod praetendit hactenus Scripturam Sacram non fuisse Populo fideliter annuntiatam, falsa est et schismatica, Ecclesiae, sanctis Doctoribus et verbi Dei Praedicatoribus injuria et sapiens haeresim, et in Spiritum Sanctum, qui semper Ecclesiam regit, blasphema, et assertorem ejus temerarium et arrogantem et impium manifestat.” (Ibid., p. 41f., and fo. xi vo.)

⁵⁶ Props. XIII, XV, XLVIII. “PROPOSITIO XIII: Le diable ne cherche sinon les moyens pour empécher la parole de Dieu, aucunes fois par tentations, aucunes fois aussi par herésies et par corruptions de coeur, et semblablement par traditions des hommes. CENSURA: Haec propositio quoad ultimam partem, qua dicit daemonum scrutari media impediendi verbum Dei, aliquando per traditiones humanas, haeresim fovet Lutheri, qui Ecclesiae Consitutiones nullius esse momenti schismatice et impie dogmatizavit.” (Ibid., p. 44 and fo. lx ro.)

⁵⁷ “Liber itaque praefatus praescriptos complectens errores, bonis operibus inique detrahens et pro peccatis satisfactionem contendens non esse saluti necessariam, nihilque humanas leges et Ecclesiasticas sanctiones ducendas esse; Sanctorum insuper cultum et eorum sacros dies, cum Catholicis Scripturae sacrae expositionibus … Manichaeorum haereses, Waldensium, Wiclefistarum ac Lutheranorum revocare satagit … quia continue inculcat nihil populo esse praedicandum praeter Evangelium…. Quamobrem ipse liber coram populo cui legendo aut praedicando disseminatus est, merito venit exurendus cum omnibus similibus et qui ilium composuerunt, aut legi, seu praedicari populo fecerunt: eundem publice ad scandali reparationem debent execrari et damnare et praecipue errores praenotatos.” (Ibid., p. 51, and D'Argentré, Cottectio, II, 39,40)

⁵⁸ The letter is preserved by Duplessis, Histoire, II, 282.

⁵⁹ “Et nisi Dominus Meldensis una cum sorore Regis omnem impendisset operam, vix citra flammas processisset res, quae, Deo ita volente ac nostre infirmitati consulente, feliciter terminata est.

“Ceterum non est inventus qui viriliter a parte Dei staret in evertendis hominum constitutiunculis, id quod Christiano negocio maxime expedit…. iam non subsit via qua queat expleri quod petis, nisi spiritus ille qui omnia potest, corda inflammet ac aliam nobis suggerat constantiam, per quam nihil persecutiones, tormenta, ignem et quodcunque aliud mortis [genus] exhorreamus.” Herminjard, Correspondence, I, 235, 276. Six weeks later (August 24, 1524) he wrote to Oecolampadius that the enemies of the Gospel in Meaux were many, and its friends, at least those bold enough to bear the cross of Christ, were few. Ibid., 276.

⁶⁰ Herminjard, Correspondence, I, 220, and above, p. 126 and n. 26.

⁶¹ See Graf, 180, 181. Erasmus, in a letter to John à Lasco dated March 8, 1526, mentions Lefèvre's sojourn in Strasbourg, “sed mutato nomine.” Allen, P. S., ed., Opus Epistolarum … Erasmi…. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, II vols., 1906–1947), VI, 281Google Scholar. This edition will be referred to hereafter simply as “Allen.”

⁶² Erasmus to W. Pirckheimer, June 6, 1526: “Jacobus Faber qui metu profugerat non ob aliud nisi quod verterat Evangelia Gallice, revocatus est in aulam.” (Allen, VI, 351).

⁶³ La Saincte Bible en françois translatée selon la pure et entière traduction de sainct Hierome, conferée et entèrement revisitée selon les plus anciens et plus correctz exemplaires. Anvers: Martin L'Empereur … cum privilegio imperiale, 1530. The French translation of the Old Testament (except the Psalter) had been published (in Antwerp also) in 1528.

⁶⁴ Annotationum Natalis Bede … in Jacobum Fabrum Stapulensem libri duo, et in Desiderium Erasmum Roterodamum liber unus…. This work was published in Paris by Jodocus Badius Ascensius, 1526, and at Cologne during the same year. I have used the Cologne impression, and shall refer to it as “Annotationes.”

⁶⁵ “Apologia Natalis Bedae theologi, adversus clandestinos Lutheranos. Parisiis: Jodocus Badius, 1529.

⁶⁶ The last of its three books dealt with Erasmus.

⁶⁷ Beda declares that he will examine Lefèvre's work “non in sensu quern vel ipse author gerebat, vel hi forsan concipiunt [qui] ipsi plus quam aequum sit favent; … semper illam sequutus intelligentiam … quam, prima fronte, aequis solet lectoribus … sese insinuare.” Annotationes, fo. aa. 3, ro.

⁶⁸ Ibid., fo. XCIII vo.

⁶⁹ Ibid., fo. XXII.

⁷⁰ Ibid., fo. aa 1 vo. — 2 vo.

⁷¹ Ibid., fo. CVI, vo. f. Also fo. CXLVII, vo.: “Ecce par cupivit esse Faber prophetis evangelistis ac apostolis, et praesertim Paulo.”

⁷² Ibid., fo. XVI, vo. f. Beda is here refuting Lefèvre's exposition of St. Paul's passage at the beginning of I Cor. 8 (Epistolae Divi Pauli [Paris: H. Stephanus, 1512], fo. 118 ro.). This edition will be referred to hereafter as “Comm. Epp. Pauli.” Here the discourse is on knowledge, which is divine, spiritual, coming from God, not men. Lefèvre does not here, or anywhere else, so far as I can recollect, claim this sort of knowledge for himself, but he does, of course, claim that the Holy Spirit illumines even simple minds, and enlarging upon the advantages of this kind of knowledge is a frequent theme in his writings. See also, for example, ibid., fo. 108, vo. Recall in this connection, too, his modest description of his role as commentator in the Comm. Init., quoted above, p. 124 and n. 17.

⁷³ Annotationes, XCIII, vo.

⁷⁴ Ibid., CVI, ro. and vo. A heading in the table of contents reads, “Cognitione spirituali Scripturae non caruit ecclesia, nee ea ab linguarum cognitione, sed a spiritu sancto datur.”

⁷⁵ “Sacrae Scripturae intelligentiam Faber, quia non rite quaesivit, non obtinuit.” (From the index)

⁷⁶ Vos autem … unicum in scripturis admittitis et prosequi contenditis sensum.” (Annotationes, fo. X, vo. See also folii CXLVII, CCXIIII.)

⁷⁷ Lefèvre did not wholly live up to his intention in this respect, and did not banish allegory altogether from his exegetical work. Even where he early proclaimed the primacy of the literal sense, he insisted there were two literal senses, one that which the Holy Ghost intended (Quincuplex Psalterium [Colophon: “In clarissimo Parisiorum Gymnasio ex chalcotypa Henrici Stephani officina, 1509.” The author's name does not appear in this edition, but there is so much contemporary attestation as to leave no doubt as to its authorship], fo. A ii, ro. and vo.).

⁷⁸ Annotations, CXLIIII, ro.

⁷⁹ Ibid., CCXIII. Lefèvre had likened elaborations of Scripture truth to water used to dilute pure wine.

⁸⁰ Comm. Init., fo. 372, vo. “Proinde simplices homines … cum evangelium nesciant … quomodo possunt in eo manere?”

⁸¹ “… magna fiducia alios illuminare debent …” (ibid.).

⁸² Beda makes propositions 177 and 178 of these comments of Lefèvre (Annotationes, CCXXIIII, ro.); and his disapproving remarks follow immediately atter.

⁸³ Ibid., fo. XXII, vo.

⁸⁴ Ibid., fo. XXII, vo., XXIII, ro.

⁸⁵ Comm. Epp. Pauli, 79, ro., 80, vo. “Per peccatum primi parentis mors introivit in orbem terrarum, et constituta est inter eum et deum inimicitia. Et hunc in modum mors in omnes homines, qui peccaverunt in eo quo peccaverunt pertransiit, et ob proprium peccatum mortui sint….” “Illud φᾠ et ‘in quo’ ambiguum esse an neutrum sit….”

⁸⁶ Annotationes, XXIX, vo., XXX, ro.

⁸⁷ Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 89, vo.

⁸⁸ Ibid., fo. 93, vo.

⁸⁹ Epp. et Evv., Prop. XXIII. “The Spirit of God alone is able to do everything in us, and actually does it.” Censure: “The second part of this proposition … because it excludes the operation of free will in good works is a Manichaean heresy.” (Screech, 45).

⁹⁰ Comm. Epp. Pauli, 71, vo.

⁹¹ Annotations, VIII, vo.

⁹² Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 89, vo.

⁹³ Ibid., fo. 90, vo.

⁹⁴ Annotationes, fo. LXXV, vo.

⁹⁵ Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 89, vo., 90, ro.

⁹⁶ Annotationes, fo. LI, vo. f. Beda has changed the wording somewhat, but not the sense, of a passage from Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 86, ro. and vo.

⁹⁷ Lejèvre had just made a highly speculative statement to the effect that Christ, before he took flesh, blessed the earth from which it was taken. (Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 85, ro.) Though the flesh is contrary to the spirit, there is a flesh which is assimilated to the flesh of Christ. (Ibid., fo. 84)

⁹⁸ Annotationes, fo. LI, vo. f.

⁹⁹ Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 126, ro.

¹⁰⁰ Annotationes, fo. CXIII, ro. and vo.

¹⁰¹ Comm. Init., fo. 317, vo., 318, ro.: “Manducat, qui perfecte credit…. Non enim quia teris signa sacramenti ad modum manducantis, manducas: sed quia alit et vivificat spiritum…. Huius manducationis sacramentum ut sacramentum, et sacramentalis manducatio, ut huiusmodi signum est; neque facit quicquam sacramentum sine fide, at fides sine Sacramento multum potest.” This is from the commentary on John 6. In that on Hebrews, we read: “Ergo quae in ministerio eius quotidie paraguntur, non tarn sunt iteratae oblationes quam unius eiusdem atque semel tantum oblata est victimae memoria ac recordatio.” (Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 243, ro.) Beda passes over both these passages without comment. He does have some puerile remarks to make on other statements in the commentary on Hebrews 7, which makes the omission of the above passage the more surprising.

¹⁰² “Prop. 86. Qui Christiani sunt, idem sentire debent, eadem mente, intelligentia, sententiaque vivere et id quidem maxime in iis quae religionem respiciunt.

Prop. 87. Unica est religio Christi, qui solus est attendendus, solus respiciendus, solus nominandus.

Prop. 88. Si nos aliorum nominibus quam Christi religiosos nominabimus: similes profecto eis erimus quos acerbe reprehendit Paulus: quorum nonnulli dicebant: nos sumus Pauli, alii, nos sumus Apollo, alii, nos sumus Cephe. Nonne quihaec faciunt dividunt? Nonne diversos scopos faciunt, et quodammodo stindunt religionem?” Annotationes, LXXXIX, vo.f.

¹⁰³ Ibid.

¹⁰⁴ Ibid., fo. CXII, ro. and vo.: Faber autem putat huiusmodi hominum institute ad evangelium non pertinere, sed ei potius adversari.”

¹⁰⁵ Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 106, ro. and vo. “… religiosos Christi se nominare debent.”

¹⁰⁶ Comm. Init., fo. 74, ro.: “Haec beatitudo Petro tribuitur, non quatenus a Petro, sed quatenus a patre coelesti….”

¹⁰⁷ “… super hanc petram inconcussibilisque veritatis fldem, quod Christus est filius dei vivi, fundavit dominus ecdesiam suam.” (Ibid.)

¹⁰⁸ Ibid., vo.: “Claves regni coelorum … sunt claves fidei, claves ligandi atque solvendi.” See also Annotationes, fo. CLXXV, ro. (prop. 46).

¹⁰⁹ Annotationes, ibid., prop. 47: “Claves regni coelorum pro doctrina fidei, doctrina Christi et verbo dei esse accipiendas, ex hoc Lucae II intelligere possumus: Vae vobis legisperitis qui tulistis davem sdentiae,” etc. Also Comm. Init., fo. 74, vo.: “Sunt tamen qui daves pontificiam ligandi solvendique intelligunt potestatem, verum CHRISTUS de hac fide, quod ipse esset filius dei … hic loquitur.”

¹¹⁰ “Omnes … ecclesiasticae dignitates et ordines debent sacro monarchae parere in sanctis institutionibus ut summus pontifex est; non autem ut peculiaris est alicuius lod pontifex.” (Comm. Epp. Pauli, 98f. in Ro. 13)

¹¹¹ Annotationes, fo. CLXXV, vo.

¹¹² “Illi (Petro) soli plenitudinem dedit potestatis, non autem Joanni, Jacobo aut cuilibet caeterorum. Primatum soli Petro contulit ideo dixit Tibi dabo.” The keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are no small responsibility such as can be widely shared. (Ibid., fo. CLXXVI, ro.)

¹¹³ “Sunt itaque haec inventa Jacobi veluti sanis divinorum eloquiorum sensibus dissona, et ecclesiae sanctae decretis adversa, et proinde ut schismatica refutanda penitus.” Ibid., vo.

¹¹⁴ The confutation of propositions 131–34. Annotationes, fo. CXXX, vo.fi.

¹¹⁵ “Nuperrime prava fuerunt damnata ilia dogmata quae in praeceptoris Fabri schola didicerant…. Neque ipsum liberat magistrum, quod hie non expressit nonesse purgatorium et alibi illud asserere videteur. Nempe (uti diximus) ex assertis per eum, illud evidenter colligitur. Hinc dixerunt eius discipuli: Nullum esse nisi quod per Christi mortem factum est; quod est proprium Iacobi Fabri assertum.” (Annotationes, fo. CXXXIII, vo.)

¹¹⁶ Comm. Epp. Pauli, fo. 205. Lefèvre was wrong in supposing that Gregory was a Cluniac, but the tradition goes back almost to Gregory's own time. See Berlière, Dom U., Grégoire VII Fut-il Moine, Revue Bénédictine X (1893), 341Google Scholar; and M. P. L. CL, Col. 792.

¹¹⁷ Annotationes, to. XXIII.

¹¹⁸ Ibid., fo. cxxxiii, vo.

¹¹⁹ W. G. Moore was impressed by the fact that N. Weiss abandoned de Berquin in favor of Lefèvre as the translator into French of Luther's treatise Tessaradecas consolatoria pro laborantibus et oneratis, written in 1519 for Frederick of Saxony when he was ill. It had a wide diffusion, but was certainly not one of Luther's more controversial works. The French title was La Consolation Chrestienne contre les afflictions de ce monde et scrupules de conscience. But, as Moore himself agrees, the ascription to Lefèvre must remain hypothetical. (La Réforme allemande et la léttirature française: recherch.es sur la notoriété de Luther en France [Strasbourg: publications de la Faculté des Lettres, à l'Université, 1930], 128, 152ff.)