To Richard Le Fevre, January 19, 1551. Bonnet, v. 2, p. 294.On the intercession of the Virgin Mary and the saints:Concerning the intercession of the Virgin Mary and departed saints, come back always tothis principle, that it is not for us to appoint advocates in paradise, but for God, who hasordained Jesus Christ a single one for all. Also, that our prayers ought to be offered up infaith, and therefore ordered by the word of God, as saith St. Paul in Romans x. Now, it iscertain, that throughout the word of God there is not a single syllable of what they say;wherefore all their prayers are profane and displeasing to him. If they further reply toyou, that it is not forbidden to us, the answer is easy : that it is forbidden to us to set aboutanything according to our own proper fancy, yea, in matters of far less moment; butabove all, that prayer is a most high privilege, and too sacred to be directed according toour fantasy. Nay more, they cannot deny that their having recourse to the saints arisesfrom pure distrust that Jesus Christ alone would be sufficient for them.To Madame de Cany, January 1552, referring possibly to Jerome Bolsec. Bonnet, vol. 2, p. 338.“Knowing partly the man he was,
I could have wished that he were rotting in some ditch
;and his arrival gave me as much pleasure as the piercing my heart with a poniard wouldhave done. But never could I have deemed him to be such a monster of all impiety andcontempt of God, as he has proved himself in this. And I assure you, Madame, that hadhe not so soon escaped, I should, by way of discharging my duty, have
done my best tobring him to the stake.
”To Thomas Cranmer, April 1552. Bonnet, 2:346.“The hireling dogs of the Pope cease not to bark, in order to prevent the pure Gospel of Christ from being heard: so great is the licentiousness that is here and there breakingforth, and the ungodliness that is spreading abroad, that religion is become a meremockery.”Letter to the French Church in London, September 27, 1552. Bonnet, vol. 2, pp. 361-362.On the term, “Mother of God.”“Concerning the other debatable points, I doubt not but there may have been somewhat of ignorance in their reproving the way of speaking of the
mother of God
, and together with ignorance, it is possible that there may have been rashness andtoo much forwardness, for, as the old proverb says, The most ignorant are ever the boldest. However, to deal with you with brotherly frankness, I cannot conceal that thattitle being commonly attributed to the Virgin in sermons is disapproved, and, for my own part, I cannot think such language either right, or becoming, or suitable. Neither will anysober-minded people do so, for which reason I cannot persuade myself that there is any