A Church or The Church? George Herbert's Ideas of Anglicanism

Church-rents and schisms

Brave rose (alas!) where art thou? In the chair

Where thou didst lately so triumph and shine,

A worm doth sit, whose many feet and hair

Are the more foul, the more thou wert divine.

This, this hath done it, this did bite the root 5

And bottome of the leaves: which when the winde

Did once perceive, it blew them underfoot,

Where rude unhallow'd steps do crush and grinde

Their beauteous glories. Only shreds of thee,

And those all bitten, in thy chair I see. 10

Why doth my Mother blush? Is she the rose,

And shows it so? Indeed Christs precious bloud

Gave you a colour once; which when your foes

Thought to let out, the bleeding did you good,

And made you look much fresher than before. 15

But when debates and fretting jealousies

Did worm and work within you more and more,

Your colour faded, and calamities

Turned your ruddie into pale and bleak:

Your health and beautie both began to break. 20

Then did your sev'rall parts unloose and start:

Which when your neighbours saw, like a north-winde,

They rushed in, and cast them in the dirt

Where Pagans tread. O Mother deare and kinde,

Where shall I get me eyes enough to weep, 25

As many eyes as starres? Since it is night,

And much of Asia and Europe fast asleep,

And ev'n all Africk; would at least I might

With these two poore ones lick up all the dew,

Which falls by night, and poure it out for you! 30

This essay attempts to interpret the above poem, and at the outset I must

differ from Louis L.Martz's essay (May, 2001) in Early Modern Literary

Studies. Martz identifies "my Mother" (="the rose") of line 11 with the

"Brave rose" of line 1. But how that flower can "blush" in the present

tense after being eaten by a worm and torn to shreds (l.9) may well be

asked. Martz says the bloodletting of l. 14 is the Crucifixion but I shall

argue that it is the martyrdoms of Anglican ecclesiastics under Mary

(1553-1558). Martz says the controversies alluded to in the title concern

predestination but if so, what is meant by saying Europe, Asia and Africa

are "asleep" (l. 27) is doubtful as no predestinarian controversy divided

those continents from each other or anything outside of them.

Predestinarian Switzerland, Saxony, the Netherlands, Navarre and

Scotland were divided from the Molinist or Arminian remnant of

Europe, but that cannot be the motive for saying all Europe is asleep,

much less that the Near East and Africa are. We must seek farther to find

what these rents and schisms are.

#

I imitate Martz by beginning with a consideration of Herbert's "The

"The British Church":

A fine aspect in fit aray,

Neither too mean, nor yet too gay,

Shows who is best:

Outlandish looks may not compare;

For all they either painted are, 5

Or else undrest.

She on the hills, which wantonly

Allureth all in hope to be

By her preferr'd,

Hath kiss'd so long her painted shrines, 10

That ev'n her face by kissing shines,

For her reward.

She in the valley is so shie

Of dressing,that her hair doth lie

About her eares; 15

While she avoids her neighbours pride,

She wholly goes on th'other side,

And nothing wears.

The difference between the Anglican church and,on the one side, the

Roman; on the other,the Calvinist, is purely esthetic, not moral or

theological. Roman ceremonies are gaudy, while Calvinism has no

ceremonies. Thus Britain is double-moated by God's grace, possessing

both true doctrine (which the others also have) and comely rites (which

are hers alone).

By the standards of the age, this is mild. Spenser portrays Calvinism

As the monster Error who

spewd out of her filthy maw

A floud of poyson horrible and blacke

Full of great lumpes of flesh and gobbets raw,

Which stunck so vildly, that it forced [Redcross] slacke

His grasping hold, and from her turn him backe:

Her vomit full of books and papers was- (Faerie Queene,

I.i.20)

Phineas Fletcher salutes the Roman church as follows:

Thou purple Whore, mounted on scarlet beast,

Gorg'd with the flesh, drunk with the blood of saints-(1)

To distinguish between the mild disapproval of "The British Church"

and the seething contempt of Spenser's and Fletcher's poems, let us

consider the two terms in Herbert's title: rent and schism.

Schiza in Greek, the language of the four general councils that defined the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Two Natures of Christ and other basic Christian doctrines, always hurling the curse of hell-fire (anathema) at dissenters from their formulae, signifies "a piece of wood cleft off, a lath, splinter" (Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon).

Rent in English means a sizable tear in a piece of cloth, of such kind as to make a hole, but not divide the cloth in two. "See what a rent the envious Casca made!" (Julius Caesar, III.ii.175)

A rent can be mended with needle and thread, but it makes little sense to talk of mending a schiza. It is formed intentionally, with an axe, not incidentally like a rent.

Milton explains that a rent differs from a schism in degree, not in kind: "Schism is a rent or division of the church, when it comes to the separating of congregations" (2). In short, first a church suffers a rent, also called a division; if it goes to that extreme, that congregations cease to receive each others' communicants, and hurl anathemas, then rent becomes schism. In Areopagitica and Of True Religion, Milton deplores the universal tendency of Protestants to turn rents into schisms; in the latter pamphlet he argued for the inclusion even of Socinians, Anabaptists and Arians with Anglicans in an affectionate Christian fellowship.

The mention of Europe, Asia and Africa in "Church-rents and schisms," ll. 27-28, alerts us to the real importance of the concept "rent"; every church in all Christendom--- Russian, Armenian, Greek, Coptic, Calvinist, Lutheran, Anglican, Roman--- formed part of a huge, ecumenical church, Catholic in the true sense of the word, its parts really separated only by rents, but, as they often imagined with deplorable lack of charity, by schisms, and in this respect the most uncharitable by far was the Roman. The Anglican church nevertheless--- at least the faction Herbert belonged to---

remembered that the first Archbishop of Canterbury had arrived in England as an emissary of the Pope, and now, notwithstanding the King of Spain's massacres of Protestants in the Netherlands, and his attempt to invade England in 1588, held out to the papacy the olive-branch of peace, provided of course the Pope would tyrannize only over central Italy and leave England alone. Milton expressed a similar idea in "Avenge, O Lord": the massacred Waldensians were to generate a number of Protestants equal to themselves multiplied times a hundred, and these must flee Italy, leaving "the triple Tyrant" to his own devices.

John Cosin (1594-1672), listed twelve doctrines or practices of the Roman church that his own rejected (sacerdotal celibacy, monasticism, services in Latin, the rosary, etc.), but added that he did not send the Pope and his adherents to hell for believing and doing these things;he only claimed for the Anglicans the right not to believe and do them. If the papists, he added, would confine themselves to what they had taught "during the first six hundred years," the Anglicans could be "at accord with them." (3)

Archbishop William Laud (1573-1645) wrote: "There is a great deal of difference, especially as Romanists handle the question of the Church, between the Church and a Church." That is, the Romanists

held Rome to be the church (outside of which was no salvation) and the Anglicans held it to be a church (an eccentric and irascible part, but still a part, of the Catholic church as defined above.) Jeremy Taylor wrote: "But a Church might have been very ancient, and yet become no Church; and without separating from a greater Church. The Church of the Jews is the great example; and the Church of Rome, unless she takes better heed, may be another." (4) So a church may conduct itself so badly as to lose its place in the Catholic church, and Rome is on the verge.

Stretching himself to grasp things that Canterbury shared with Rome, Cosin promised to introduce into the Anglican service Roman hagiographies, authentic or not ("painted and true stories"), provided they were treated as a kind of edifying pageant with " no danger to have them abused or worshipped with religious honour."(5)

All of Orthodoxy--- the national churches in the Byzantine empire and eastward---- had been excommunicated by Rome in the Great Schism, 1054. Two factors had made this anathema seem unwise to Anglicans: One, the subtle triviality of the point at issue, Orthodoxy's rejection of the Filioque, the Latin church's decree that the Holy Ghost proceeds not only from the Father but also from the Son; Two, the huge numbers of Christians consigned to hell. "Heaven gates" said Laud drily, "were not so easily shut against multitudes, when St. Peter wore the keys at his own girdle." (6)

So an Anglican with this vision of a truly Catholic Church, extended from the British isles all over western Europe and the Mediterranean basin, south as far as Ethiopia, east as far as Moscow, tendered friendship to Rome, not always a quixotic gesture; the pope in an obvious bid for reconciliation offered William Laud a cardinal's hat, which was declined. And did the Anglicans also offer friendship to Geneva, or rather Edinburgh? The Lambeth Articles of 1595 dyed the English church in a predestinarian doctrine as lurid as Geneva and Edinburgh themselves could ask. Until Laud's unhappy notion of forcing Anglican vestments and ceremonies on the Scots in 1637, the Anglicans contentedly permitted their bishops to vegetate in Scotland without meddling with the Presbyterian kirk. No reason appeared why the Presbyterians, too, might not be in the Catholic church.

The three churches mentioned in "The British Church" are bedded inside each other like Russian wooden dolls. The Roman church contains the English, or did until 1535; the English church contains the Puritans. Both the Roman church and the Puritans reject the medial church, but, with a charity and humility after God's own heart, it accepts them both---- an attractive picture, until we see what it finally became.

#

A colleague said that "Church-rents and schisms" is never included in anthologies or editions of Herbert's selected poems; never quoted. I believe her. The monstrous imagery strives to cover one absurdity with another. A worm with hair and feet bites the root of a brave rose, shining on a chair, till all that remains of the rose are shreds, "and those all bitten." (You don't say.---l.10) The worm, occupying the rose's chair, has feet and hair the more foul, the more the rose was divine.

As, at the beginning of the poem, a worm has feet and hair, so at the end, the poet wishes his eyes might lick up the dew and pour it out as tears to lament his mother's fate. How does an eye lick?

By ancient tradition, when amorous desire is expressed metaphorically by gazing, a poet may multiply eyes, as in Milton:

"Heav'n wakes with all his eyes, / Whom to behold but thee, Nature's desire" (PL V. 44-45). But when grief is expressed metaphorically by weeping, one exaggerates, not the number of eyes, but the quantity of tears, as in Donne: " O more than moon,/ Draw not up seas to drown me in thy sphere" (A Valediction of Weeping). Consequently, the present poem is alone in obtaining,with inelegant engineering, a flood of tears with a galaxy of eyes: "Where shall I get me eyes enough to weep, / As many eyes as starres?" (ll.25-26) This rates a giggle; picturing Herbert with thousands of eyes, shedding tears for ruined Anglicanism out of each one, is like picturing the monster in King Lear, IV.6, who tempts Gloucester to suicide: "he had a thousand noses," l. 84.

But when we consider what the three stanzas before us say, we see that the grotesque and chaotic imagery can be justified by the principle of decorum. The Catholic church is fragmented by schisms, not rents; nothing remains of it, nothing is the church, except Anglicanism, and after 1500 years of a Catholic church all over Europe, Africa and Asia, this situation, like the poem that describes it, is grotesque and chaotic. A detailed analysis of the poem may make this clear.

#

With typical architectonic structure, Herbert locates the via media of Anglicanism between the other two; Stanza One concerns the Roman church, Stanza Three the Puritans. The order is also chronological: first there was Romanism, then Anglicanism, lastly Puritanism.

All commentators agree that rose (l.1) alludes to the Song of Solomon , 2:1, "I am the rose of Sharon." As the whole song is interpreted to express Christ's love for his Church, and hence for his non-schismatic, Catholic church, the rose stands for that. In connection with the rose we may note that Catholic rebels in what had become Protestant England in the 16th Century used this symbol. "Richard de la Pole, nephew of Edward IV, and called while he lived "The White Rose" had more than once endeavoured to excite an insurrection" in favor of Catherine of Aragon. (7) The family of the Marchioness of Exeter, apparently in suspicious correspondence with the Pope and open cooperation with the Nun of Kent, were called the White Rose Faction. (8)We don't know at what exact date the Roman church, in Herbert's eyes, deteriorated from the church into a church, so the White Rose and the White Rose Faction may have been, to him, part of the rose. The chair is the Chair of Peter, a small wooden throne preserved in the Vatican as a relic, as well as a huge sculpture by Bernini in the apse of St.Peter's basilica; though the latter was after Herbert's time, it illustrates the awe in which the concept was held. As the church is now reduced to the pitiable wreck of a sect, the rose is in shreds, having been attacked at the root by a worm.

The latter is an incoherent symbol. The worm is the instrument of God--- it is God--- insofar as it destroys a church making a false claim to be The Church. But the worm replaces the rose and, filthy and emitting a stench ("foul,"l. 4), occupies its place on the throne, signifying that the ecclesiastical hierarchy, having ceased to deserve any allegience or reverence, is still in Rome, collecting fees, operating the Inquisition, issuing bulls, performing all its decadant functions. So the worm---an incongruous symbol of Good anyway----

is first Good, then Evil.

When the prophet Jonah sat on a hillside, vindictively awaiting the the destruction of the city of Ninevah, the Lord made him comfortable by causing a gourd (or a cucumber? wild vine? growth of ivy? The plant's name is a crux) to grow over his head, protecting it from the sun's rays. "But God prepared a worm when the morning rose the next day, and it smote the gourd that it withered" (Jonah 4:7). Martin Luther finds an allegory in this event:

...the plant bore no fruit. The leaves represent the words

and laws of God. Saint Paul says in Romans 3:2: "The

Jews are entrusted with the oracles of God." Jonah is

seated under these leaves, that is, the prophets and holy

fathers dwelt in the midst of Judaism as under a

temporal hut. But it bore no fruit, for the law, devoid

of the Spirit, could profit no one...

And now- God appoints a worm to smite the plant. This

Signifies that Christ appeared with His Gospel at a time

when the Jews vaunted most vaingloriously that they

alone were God's people. Therefore Judaism withered

and decayed in all the world, and thus we see it today.

Its verdure is gone, it flourishes no longer, nor is there

a saint or a prophet sitting in its shade today.(9)

The plant whose leaves are God's word and laws is struck by the worm of the Spirit and so withers and dies. This Lutheran allegory of the fate of the Jewish Church is analogous to Jeremy Taylor's concept: the Jewish church has died thus,and so may the Roman. All we need to produce the symbolism of Herbert's poem is to substitute rose for gourd, wild vine,cucumber or ivy, and to add: Rome has already died.

The poet asks rhetorically: is my mother the rose? That is, has the Anglican church (" deare Mother" in "The British Church," l.1) formerly so modest in rejecting exclusive honors, by default of Rome, been compelled to become the church? If so she blushes, that is, expresses her reluctance to accept the honor, and by that very act demonstrates that she has it ("she...shows it so," ll.11-12). In the beginning she accepted by faith the blood-sacrifice of Christ, this constituting her strongest claim to be either the church or a church. During the reign of the Romanist Mary (1553-1558) this blood was metaphorically let,as by a physician, in executions of Anglican ecclesiastics whose courage as they went to their deaths offered the powerful evidence of martyrdom. Anglicanism became more convincing ("fresher than before," l.15). Previously, Anglican

ecclesiastics had often deserved the condemnation Milton gives them in Lycidas. Bishop Anthony Kitchin had been a papist under Henry VIII till the Act of Supremacy, then a protestant; then a papist

again under Mary, then a protestant again under Elizabeth, by which time a little joke was going the rounds, that he loved the kitchen better than the church. Indeed, time-serving (not the American "putting in your hour" but serving the times,that is, the political and legal situation) was one day to become an Anglican tradition:

The Illustrious House of Hannover,

And Protestant succession,

To these I lustily will swear,

While they can keep possession;

For in my Faith and Loyalty,

I never once will falter,

But George my lawful King shall be,

Except the times shou'd alter.

And this is law, I will maintain

Unto my Dying Day, Sir.

That whatsoever King may reign,

I shall be Vicar of Bray, Sir!

In contrast to such blind mouths, Bishops Hugh Latimer and Nicolas

Ridley marched to the stake before Balliol College, Oxford, on 16

October, 1555, fully aware that they were strengthening

Anglicanism in a manner never to be undone."Be of good cheer,

Master Ridley, and play the man," said Latimer, "for we shall this

day light such a candle in England, as I trust by God's grace shall

never be put out." (10) In "Avenge, O Lord," Milton treated

martyrdom as an argument sufficient to convert a nation; when

he attacked the order of bishops in Of Reformation in England, he

became embarrassed that Anglicanism had martyr-bishops:

But it will be said, these men were Martyrs:

what then? Though every true Christian will be a Martyr

when he is called to it; not presently does it follow that

every one suffering for Religion, is without exception-

He is not therefore above all possibility of erring, because

he burnes for some Points of Truth.(11)

After Elizabeth re-established a church with bishops, Puritan clergy

inside the Anglican fold engaged in pro forma obedience to these

bishops, awaiting the day when they could, aided by parliament or

king, legally abolish them. An angry ideologue, Robert Browne,

challenged his fellow-puritans in his Treatise of Reformation without

tarrying for Anie and of the Wickedness of those Preachers which will

not reform till the Magistrate command or compel them (1582),

radicalizing a segment of them under the names of Brownists

or separatists, while those who still sought a legal settlement

may be called moderate Puritans. Two can play the game of

martyrdom, and two of Browne's parishioners, John Copping and

Elias Thacker, were hanged for selling copies of Reformation without

tarrying for Anie. A delegation of moderate Puritans waited on King

James at Hampton Court in 1604, suggesting ever so tactfully the

abolition of the bishops. When the king realized what they were

driving at, they became enraged: "What you are aiming at is a

Presbyteriall church government, which agreeth as well with

monarchy as God with the devil. No bishop, no king! If these be your

tenents, I will make you conform or harry you out of the land." (12)

Debates and fretting jealousies wormed and worked within Herbert's

beloved church (ll.16-17).

James, whose low opinion of "Presbyteriall church government" was

such that as soon as he ascended the English throne it was " the

passion of his heart to- break the neck of that Scottish Presbyterian

system with which he had been contending since his boyhood," (13)

began his campaign on Saturday, 4 August, 1621, by forcing the kirk

to accept the Five Articles of Perth. These permitted Anglican

practices in the kirk: communicants might kneel to receive

consecrated bread; individual parishes might celebrate Christmas

and Easter. The populace received these innovations with the

utmost hostility and the kirk acted through its assembly to

neutralize them. In short, the church whose hair lay about her

ears, and who wore nothing, when she received some fit array

from her comely neighbor, shook it off as if it were chains.

The Articles also created archbishops and bishops for Scotland. The

Earl of Clarendon reports: "Though these were bishops in name, the

whole jurisdiction and they themselves were subject to an assembly

which was purely Presbyterian: no form of religion in practice

[sc.no Anglicanism] , no liturgy, nor the least appearance of any

beauty of holiness." (14) Notwithstanding that the Anglicanism of

the Five Articles of Perth was a veneer, in the Scots' eyes it was

diabolical enough to earn for 4 August, 1621, the name "the Black

Saturday- one of the darkest and stormiest days ever known in

Scotland." (15) Like a north wind, the Scots rushed in and cast

Anglican ceremonies in the dirt (ll. 22-23).

If Herbert's original vision had been true, the Orthodox church,

the Roman, the Calvinist and indeed every Christian church on earth

would have basked in the light of the Gospel. But now that the

church that contained Anglicanism and the church that

Anglicanism contained were both divided from it, not by rents

but by schisms, Herbert was saddened to awake from his

ecumenical dream; the English church alone had the truth and the

rest of Europe, "Asia" (the near East) and Africa lay asleep (l.27) in a

night of heresy and superstition (l.26).

A typical warfaring Christian may be exhilarated by the news that

his church alone,and no nation but his, has the truth. Phineas

Fletcher, for example, hails God as

Thou world's sole Pilot, who in this poore Isle

(So small a bottome) hast embark't thy light,

And glorious selfe: and stear'st it safe, the while

Hoarse drumming seas and winds lowd trumpets fight

Who causest stormy heaven here only smile-(16)

Milton, in the hurlyburly of the English revolution, fancied that the

Independent sects might hammer out among themselves a

version of Christianity never before seen--- and yet the truth, to

be received by the whole world. With forced arguments he painted

England as a second Israel, full of prophets:

It would not be the first or second time since our ancient

druids, by whom this island was the cathedral of

philosophy to France, left off their pagan rites, that

England hath had this honor vouchsafed from heaven, to

give a reformation to the world. Who was it but our

English Constantine that baptized the Roman empire?-

Who but Alcuin and Wycliffe our countrymen, opened

the eyes of Europe, the one in arts, the other in

Religion? Let not England forget her precedence of

teaching nations how to live. (17)

But Herbert saw the propagation of the Gospel from Judea all over

The Roman empire as an outstanding example of God's providence:

-after [Christ's] death out of his grave

There sprang twelve stalks of wheat-

It prosper'd strangely,and did soon disperse

Through all the earth- ("Peace," ll. 27-32)

So the question arose what God meant spreading the truth through

the world like that so He could contract it into England.

For the symbol of dew (l.29) we return to the Song of Solomon where

we began. Luther construes the fifth chapter, second verse, " My

head is filled with dew, and my locks with the drops of the night" to

mean that the bridegroom (Christ) accuses the bride (the church) of

unkindness, of shutting him out, forcing him to stand drenched by the

night rains; " that is, you neglect Me, you administer the government

and the priesthood with equal negligence. My head and locks are

wet; that is, your leaders in both realms [church and state] go

unheeded-" (18) Herbert's "dew that falls by night" is the dew of

neglect in the night of ignorance; neglect of humility and charity,

ignorance of the catholicity of Christendom.

The disappointment to which this poem testifies results from a

frustrated longing to see God make sense of history, a humanistic

rather than a Christian passion. Herbert now produces a completely

novel solution to this problem.

#

The idea of a universal church including all communions under the

cross was, then, untenable; and Herbert found the idea of England

as a second Israel, chosen by God and surrounded only by His

enemies, equally untenable. So in "The Church Militant" he

developed an ingenious notion, paralleled only by the Hegelian

dialectic of history, so far as I know, that God brought the light of the

Gospel to a given land and then quenched it in a black cloud of sin,

simultaneously bringing the light to a land farther west.

The first Christian land was Egypt, for so Herbert interprets the story

of the ascetic hermits of the Thebaid, such as St.Simon Stylites.That

Egypt, rather than France, can thus claim to be the eldest daughter

of the church explains the puzzling phrase "And ev'n all Africk" in

l.28 of Church-rents and schisms. Africa includes Egypt, so the

meaning is that the universal decay of Christianity outside England

has affected even Egypt, its cradle ("The Church Militant," l.46).

The next Christian land was Greece (l.60), then Rome (l.75), then

Germany (l. 100) where Hegel's Absolute Idea stops but Herbert's

light of the Gospel moves west to England, and is there in the real

time of the poem, but at a later date, perhaps after Herbert's death,

will in turn disappear under a black mudslide of sin (l.110).

Herbert's ecumenism balances perfectly with the isolationism that

history had forced on him. All nations are equal, for each has its turn

to be the church. England is unique, for her turn is now. The

persiflage against the Pope startles:

As new and old Rome did one empire twist:

So both together are one Antichrist- (ll. 251-52)

The poet who, in "The British Church," had deemed Romanism a form

of Christianity with gaudy ceremonies, now takes a harder line: it is

Antichrist. But the sojourn of the true faith in England is to be brief;

faith is about to be transferred to the New World while England,

according to God's mysterious program, is inundated by deeds of

darkness:

Religion stands on tip-toe in our land,

Readie to passe to the American strand.

When height of malice, and prodigious lusts,

Impudent sinning,witchcrafts and distrusts

(The marks of future bane) shall fill our cup

Unto the brimme, and make our measure up-

Then shall Religion to America flee:

They have their times of Gospel, ev'n as we (ll. 274-79, 86-87).

Notes

(1) Giles and Phineas Fletcher, Poetical Works, ed. Frederick S.

Boas, M.A., Cambridge, Eng.; U.P., 1908, Vol.1, p. 129.

(2) Of True Religion, Heresy, Schism, and Toleration, Paragraph 5, sentence 1.

(3) Paul Elmer More, ed., Anglicanism, London:SPCK, 1962, pp.53-55.

(4) A Dissuasive from Popery, More, p.47; A Relation of the Conference between William Laud and Mr.Fisher the Jesuit,p.56.

(5) More, p. 56.

(6) Page 72.

(7) J.A. Froude, History of England (New York: Scribner, 1870), Vol.2, p.185.

(8) Page 187.

(9) Luther's Works, ed. Hilton C. Oswald, Concordia Publishing House, Saint Louis, 1974, Vol. 19, pp.102-103.

(10) The Lectionary, Internet.

(11) Columbia Milton, III.i.9-10.

(12) Focus: The Hampton Court Conference II (What Actually Happened), Icons: A Portrait of England, Internet.

(13) David Masson, Life of Milton,I, 424.

(14) Quoted, Masson, loc. cit.

(15) I, 425.

(16) Fletchers, Poetical Works, loc. cit.

(17) The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, "To the Parliament of England with the Assembly," ad fin.

(18) Luther's Works, ed.Jaroslav Pelikan, Vol. 18, p. 238.