The European Union in Prophecy The EU in Prophecy I | Page 151

The European Union in Prophecy
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 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 infallible
judge, and must be obeyed. The acceptance of the proposed arrangement would have
been a virtual admission that religious liberty ought to be confined to reformed
Saxony; and as to all the rest of Christendom, free inquiry and the profession of the
reformed faith were crimes, and must be visited with the dungeon and the stake.
150