¹ Greg, W.W. (ed.), Marlowe's Doctor Faustus (Oxford: at the Clarendon Press, 1950), pp. 226–31.Google Scholar

² Dictionnaire historique et critique (5th ed.; 4 vols. Amsterdam et al. 1740), III, 161Google Scholar

³ For example, the Spanish Ambassador, Chantonnay. See his letter to Philip of 17 Sept. 1561, Paris, Archives Nationales, K 1494, No. 103. Also see Bossuet, J.B., Histoire des variations des églises protestantes (2 vols. Paris 1688), L. IX, c. 100.Google Scholar

⁴ Diario dell'Assembled de' Vescovi a' Poissy, ed. Joseph Roserat de Melin, in Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire, XXXIX (1921–2); and H. Outram Evennett, ‘Claude d'Espence et son “Discours” au Colloque de Poissy’, Revue historique, CLXIV (1930).

⁵ The Cardinal of Lorraine and the Council of Trent (CambridgeUniversity Press, 1930).Google Scholar See also Evennett, ‘The Cardinal of Lorraine and the Colloquy of Poissy’, The Cambridge Historical Journal, II (1927).Google Scholar It would seem that Evennett's careful delineation of Lorraine's character obviates the necessity of reconsidering the element of personality and facilitates the concentration here upon the lingering textual problems. Let it simply be pointed out that Lorraine's reputation is largely a consequence of Reformation polemics and that, moreover, there is reason to believe that the reputation of the subsequent generation of the Guises has often been read back into that of Poissy. This is poetically suggested by Marlowe himself, for his Cardinal of Lorraine is apparently a composite of both generations, as is the case in The Massacre at Paris.

As regards the later question of Lorraine and the conference at Saverne, this must be understood against the background of his disillusionment with the failure of Poissy and the fact that all sides were then preparing for war. In sum, Lorraine and Poissy is best understood by Lorraine at Poissy.

⁶ Théodore de Bèze (Geneva, 1949), pp. 156–7.Google Scholar

⁷ ‘Le Colloque de Poissy’, Bulletin de la société de I'histoire du protestantisme Français, CVII (1961);Google Scholar also see in same journal, same year, M. Mazauric, ‘A propos du Colloque de Poissy’. Hereafter cited as BSHPF.

⁸ Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, eds. Meylan, Henri and Dufour, Alain (Geneva, 1963), III, 198 n. 32,Google Scholar and the present writer's own doctoral dissertation, The Colloquy of Poissy: A Study in Sixteenth Century Ecumenism (University of Iowa, 1965), pp. 312–20,Google Scholar which takes up the matter of Lorraine and Poissy in proper detail and which is projected for publication soon.

⁹ The Variata. See Dufour, Alain, ‘Deux lettres oubliées de Calvin à J.Andreae (1556–1558)’, Bibliothèque d'humanisme et renaissance, XXIV (1962), 378–9.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See Evennett, passim, and among some other particulars it is well to note that he had unorthodox views on such things as, for example, the question of icons (Crevier, Jean-Baptiste Louis, Histoire de I'Université de Paris, depuis son origine jusqu'en I'année 1600, 7 vols. Paris, 1761, VI, 143);Google Scholar that he was so avid at Trent that the exasperated Legate said he sounded ‘like the Lutherans' (Sarpi, Fra Paolo, The Historie of the Councel of Trent, trans. Brent, Nathaniel, London, 1640, 704),Google Scholar and that he had long been in contact with Guillaume Postel and his De orbis terrae concordiae, (Bouwsma, William J., Concordia Mundi: The Career and Thought of Guillaume Postel (1510–1581), Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957, 226,CrossRefGoogle Scholar239). As regards the latter, the author has come upon a curious and apparently long-obscure irenical tract of Postel written in 1561 expressly for Poissy: Moyen proposé pour mettre en paix les Huguenots avec les Catholiques. This is in the Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris), Moreau Mss. 740, fos. 70–83, along with some other material pertinent to the Colloquy. Was this tract in the hands of Lorraine at Poissy? Perhaps. We do know that Postel addressed Lorraine not long before the Colloquy: Bouwsma, p. 229 n. 53.

¹¹ Beza, Correspondance, III, 169, no. 25.

¹² For example, see de Thou, Jacques-Auguste, Histoire (4 vols. The Hague, 1740), III, 77.Google Scholar

¹³ Evennett, , pp. 95 ff. The Venetian ambassador even considered him its inspiration. Despatches of Michele Suriano and Marc'Antonio Barbaro (1506–63), ed. Layard, Sir Henry (Huguenot Society of London, 1891), p. 12.Google Scholar It should be added that Suriano, as have some others, held that he did same in order to display his eloquence and erudition.

¹⁴ Susta, Josef (ed.), Die Römische Kurie und das Konzil von Trient unter Pius IV. Actenstücke zur Geschichte des Konzils von Trient (4 vols. Vienna, 1904–1914), I, 142.Google Scholar As a consequence of which the bishops informed Lorraine that‘ che passava in queste conferentie circa la doctrine era senza consenso loro’: Diario, p. 133.

¹⁵ Diario, , pp. 124, 133, 143–4. Bruslart even felt that Lorraine was, in a general way, in danger of excommunication. Mémoires de Condé (6 vols. London, 1743–1745), I. 52.Google Scholar The opinion of Hubert Languet that Lorraine was in secret accord with the bishops would seem to have no basis in fact. Arcana seculi decimi sexti (3 vols. in one; Halle, 1699), III, 144.Google Scholar

¹⁶ de Sainctes, Claude, Responsio F. Claudii de Sainctes Parisien, theologi ad apologiam Theodori Bezae…(Paris, 1567), p. 63;Google Scholar and de la Place, Pierre, Commentaires de I'estat de la religion et republique sous roys Henry et François seconds et Charles neufviesme, ed. Buchon, J.A C, Choix de chroniques et mémoires sur I'histoire de France (1st ed. 1565; Paris, 1836), p. 192.Google Scholar Claude d'Espence stressed that the ministers accept a ‘substantial’ presence, which was at least then implicit in the Catholic understanding of real presence. See his Discours, pp. 61–2, edited by Evennett, , and Beza, , Correspondance, III, 168 n. 17.Google Scholar The bishops' stipulations actually went beyond the Eucharist. After Lorraine's initial address Cardinal de Tournon thundered that if the ministers ‘wanted to subscribe to the two declared articles on the authority of the Church and on the sacrament, that as penitents they would be received with open arms, but should they remain obstinate, the Catholics would not want to treat with them any longer and they would never have anything but one God, one faith, and one king’, Diario, p. 124; and Chantonnay to Philip, 17 September 1561, Paris, A.N. K 1494, no. 103.

¹⁷ Histoire ec1ésiastique des églises Réformées au royaume de France, eds. Baum, G. and Cunitz, E. (1st ed. 1580; 3 vols. Paris, 1883–1889), I, 550.Google Scholar (Page cited is of original edition.)

¹⁸ Ibid. I, 587–8.

¹⁹ The irenical Catholic, Claude d'Espence, himself complimented Martyr as ‘the man who under heaven had written the most on this matter’, Discours, p. 64.

²⁰ Joannis Calvini opera quae supersunt omnia, eds. Baum, G. and Reuss, E. (59 vols. Brunswick and Berlin, 1863–1897), XVIII, 767.Google Scholar

²¹ This confession was published by Christoph Pfaff, M., Ada et scripta publica ecclesiae Wirtembergica (Tübingen, 1720), pp. 340–4.Google Scholar I am grateful to the editors of Beza's Correspondance, III, 168 n. 18, for the reference.Google Scholar

²² The Duke of Württemberg to the Duke of Guise, 24 July 1561, BSHPF, XXIV, 76.

²³ La Place, p. 192.

²⁴ III, 168 n. 18.

²⁵ I, 588.

²⁶ ‘Firma fide confitemur in augustissimo eucharistiae Sacramento verum Christi corpus et sanguinem realiter et substantialiter esse et existere, et sumi a communicantibus.’ Discours, p. 62. That this was of Lorraine's composition also see Claude de Sainctes, Responsio, 64, and d'Espence's Apologie contenant ample discours, exposition, response, defense de deux conferences…(Paris, 1569), p. 466,Google Scholar and Polanco, Jean in Monumenta historica societatis Jesu (Madrid, 1917), VIII, 756.Google Scholar This is materially different from the opening passage of the Confession of Württemberg that the editors of Beza cite, III, 168 n. 18, containing, as it does, the important verbs ‘esse et existere’, from which the ministers shrunk. De Sainctes, Responsio, pp. 64–5, and the Histoire ecclésiastique, I, 604–5.

²⁷ III, 162–3.

²⁸ La Place, p. 195; Histoire ecclésiastique, I, 594–5; and d'Espence, Apologie, p. 600.

²⁹ Schaff, Philip, The Creeds of Christendom (4th ed.; 3 vols. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1877), III, 13, which incidentally reads: ‘De Coena Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis Christi vere adsint, et distribuantur vescentibus in Coena Domini; et improbant secus docentes.’Google Scholar

³⁰ Due to its format, for unlike the Confession of Augsburg it is not itemized or otherwise enumerated. See Pfaff, pp. 340–4.

³¹ See his long footnote, 353 n. 5.

³² ‘De substantia Eucharistiae sentimus et docemus quod verum corpus Christi et verus sanguis ejus in Eucharistia distribuantur, et refutamus eos qui dicunt panem et vinum Eucharistiae esse tantum absentis corporis et sanguinis Christi signa. Credimus etiam omnipotentiam Dei tantam esse, ut possit in Eucharistia substantiam panis et vini vel annihilare vel in corpus et sanguinem Christi mutare.’ Evennett, p. 499. This is actually from the Confessio Wirtembergica of 1552, as earlier set before the Council of Trent. Heppe, Heinrich,Die Bekenntnisschriften der altprotestantischen Kirche Deutschlands (Cassel, 1855), pp. 514–15.Google Scholar It would be more likely that Lorraine would have used the more current confession of 1559.

³³ For they were well aware of the doctrine. That same year Martyr had written his Dialogus de utraque in Christo natura, against Ubiquity, which was actually a rejoinder to Brenz, the chief author of the Confession of Württemberg. And on 23 August, weeks before the Colloquy, he sent a copy of his tract against ‘that monstrous opinion’ to the Bishop of Norwich. The Common Places of the most Famous and Renowned Divine Doctor Peter Martyr, Divided into Foure Principall Parts: With a large edition of manie Theologicall and Necessarie Discourses, Some never Extant before, trans. Marten, Anthonie (London, 1583), pp. 148–9.Google Scholar Beza would also write a tract against Brenz. The Histoire ecclesiastique, I, 589, spoke of Brenz as ‘heretic, Eutychian, and Nestorian rolled into one!’.

³⁴ III, 162.

³⁵ For Martyr, see above, n. 20; for Polanco, see Monumenta, vi, 54. Polanco elsewhere notes a correspondence between the passage Lorraine used and one of Calvin himself that the liberal Catholic theologian, Claude d'Espence, had asked the ministers to approve: ‘…donde pareze que confesa lo mesmo’ ibid. VIII, 756. It goes without saying that this would make it incongruous for the passage to have included Ubiquity. For d'Espence and the pertinent passage or, as it happens, passages of Calvin, see Discours, pp. 61–2, and Beza, Correspondence, III, 168 n. 17.

³⁶ For example: ‘Sed credimus & docemus, quemadmodum & substantia panis & vini in coena adiunt, its & substantiam corporis & sanguinis Christi adesse, & cum Symbolis vere exhiberi & accipi.’ Pfaff, pp. 340–1.

³⁷ As seems to be the case in Beza, Correspondance, IV, 61 n.5.

³⁸ Alain Dufour to the author, 3 December 1965.

³⁹ See Sasse, Hermann, This is My Body: Luther's Contention for the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the Altar (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1959), p. 150.Google Scholar Perhaps it should be pointed out that Ubiquity should not be understood in any crass or pantheistic sense. Moreover, it would not seem germane to this paper to consider whether or not Luther himself taught Ubiquity. Ibid. pp. 155–60; and Schlink, Edmund, The Theology of the Lutheran Confessions, trans. Koehneke, P.F. and Bouman, H.J.A. (Philadelphia, 1961), pp. 187–9.Google Scholar The articles in question here do not make general statements of a christological nature. This excepts, of course, the Confession of Württemberg, already considered.

⁴⁰ Alain Dufour to the author, 3 December, 1965.

⁴¹ For the record, however, there is good reason to believe that it was the Confession of Augsburg of the Naumberg Convention, of 1561, terminologically identical to the original invariata edition. Diario, pp. 132–3; de Ruble, Baron Alphonse, ‘Le Colloque de Poissy’, in Mémoires de la Société de I'Histoire de Paris et de I'lle-de-France, XVI (1889), 37;Google Scholar and Gelbke, Johann H., Der Naumburger Furstentag (Leipzig, 1793), p. 191.Google Scholar

⁴² The pertinent passage is set after Beza's reply to Lorraine of 24 September, and reads: ‘Après cette harangue, les ministres presenterent leur confession de foy touchan le sacrament de l'Eucharistie: Et baillerent aussy avec ce quelques confessions de foy d'aucuns Ministres de Wittemberg, faites des l'année 1559 et fut ainsy mise fin au Colloque de ce jour.’ Paris A.N. G8*589A, fo. 176. Also see same in G8*s89B and G8589D, Paris, B.N. Fond Fr. 15812, fo 93. 5812, fo. 34, and 17813, fo. 130, Nîmes MS. 257 fo. 148 and Lyon MS. 1044 fo. 95. There are no variations beyond spelling, for example, ‘ Virtemberg’ in lieu of‘Wittemberg’. This would not seem significant for this is, in any event, a Lutheran document. The Recueilli was published in part as the mysterious propaganda piece, the Ample discours des actes de Poissy, sans this section. La Place, p. 192, based his study partially on the Recueilli and used identical language in describing this phenomenon, except that he had Lorraine make this presentation. Present evidence supports that this was a true emendation.

⁴³ Kugler, Bernhard, Christoph, Herzog zu Wittenberg (2 vols. Suttgart, 1872), pp. 291–3, 303–4–Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Romier, Lucien, Le royaume de Catherine de Médicis. La France à la veille des guerres de religion (2 vols. Paris, 1922), II, 262.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Heretier, Jean, Catherine de Medici, trans. Haldane, Charlotte (New York: St Martin's Press, 1963), p. 187.Google Scholar The author would not deny, however, that if Lorraine had any ecumenical preferences or priorities, they would probably be Lutheranism first, Calvinism second. But, then, was not Lutheranism closer to Catholicism, whereas the Germans were farther away than the Huguenots?