Herm. Why then do you not tear your cap, when you read that Greek text yourself, and see that this is not contained in it?
Fr. Corn. Bah, my lords, what do you think of this—am I wrong in so sharply attacking in my sermons this damned heretic, this wicked Trinitarian Erasmus? For it is true, this he writes; yea, what is still worse, in his Annotations to the fourth chapter of St. Luke he has written, that a very great and strange corruption has been wrought in the holy Scriptures in the Greek and Latin copies, that sometimes something is added and interpolated and sometimes something taken away, omitted, and erased, on account of the heretics: yea, that the marginal notes which were now and then written by one or the other have all been foisted into the text, my lords, is it not a fine thing?
Recorder. Ah, Father Cornelis, we are no theologians; we do not understand these things.
Fr. Corn. Indeed? Bah, I believe it; but this Trinitarian would certainly understand it very well, as you hear, that he charges us with it. Bah, he would dare charge us Catholics with his arch-heretic, this wicked Erasmus, that in the ninth chapter of Romans, where Paul says: “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came;” we have interpolated: “Who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.” For this accursed Erasmus writes, that he has great doubts with regards to this clause: ”Oui est benedictus in saecula. Amen. Or these words are to be interpreted and understood as a thanksgiving to God the Father, thus: “Christ, etc, who is over all. God be blessed for ever. Amen.” “Otherwise,” he writes, “I have great doubts, whether this clause has not been interpolated, as I find also in some other texts, that they have added similar clauses, for the conclusion of discourses, as, Tu autem Domine, etc., Gloria Patri et Filio, etc., as their lessons and prayers are all concluded with such clauses.” But as regards the words of St. Thomas, in the twentieth chapter of St. John’s gospel, you have no way of escape; for there St. Thomas said to Christ: “My Lord and my God.” Bah, to this he does not reply, yea, with this he is soundly cornered; nevertheless, he spitefully writes with regard to this: “This is the first and last passage in the Scriptures, where Christ is called God.” Bah, but you Trinitarian, let us hear what you can say to this.
Herm. I reply to this, that Thomas said very well here; for David says in the eighty-second Psalm: “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High.” Christ himself also quotes these words in the tenth chapter of John. When the Jews took up stones to stone him, because he had said, “I and the Father are one,” Jesus answered them: “Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do you stone me? The Jews answered him, saying: For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the son of God?” Again, Ex. 22:8,9: “If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the gods, etc. The cause of both parties shall come before the gods; and whom the gods shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbor.”
Fr. Corn. Bah, but tell me without many words, why Christ did not say to St. Thomas: Stay: I am not your God? let us hear.
Herm. In regard to this my previous answer, John 10; David in Ps. 82 will serve; but answer me, why Christ did not reply to these words of Thomas: “Upon this rock I will build my church,” as he said, Matt. 16:18, when Peter answered him: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”? He also did not say to Thomas: “Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” Why also does Christ, John 20:17; say to his disciples: “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God”? Again, Matt. 27:46: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
Fr. Corn. Tush, tush, you Trinitarian. Bah, from this would probably follow diabolical arguments which would transcend all human comprehension. Ah, bah, is Christ not truly God? why then do we call his blessed mother the mother of God, eh?
Herm. Because you will nowhere follow the holy Scriptures, but would call everything by a contrary and different name; for the holy Scriptures call her the mother of Jesus, as in the first chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, in the nineteenth chapter of John, and in many other places of holy Scripture, where she is not once called the mother of God.
Fr. Corn. Indeed? Bah, do you think that we Catholics pay so much regard to the naked, bare, meagre Scriptures? Ah, bah, the worthy, holy council of Nice has ordained and decreed that she should be called the mother of God. What do you say to this?