§ 17. And, indeed, we must wonder at the rashness of those foolish men, (or rather we should call them blind, and pity their wretchedness,) who, without any regard to the fear of God, are proved to cancel and set at nought what they, the apostles and prophets, have written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but nevertheless are afraid to erase or annul what themselves, or men like themselves, have written from the dictates of covetousness or luxury, as if, forsooth, it were sacred and sanctioned by Heaven itself. In this, unless I am deceived, they imitate the Gentiles, who despise the worship of God, but bow down before the deities which they have conceived in their own minds, and which their own hands have made. These they fear, worship, adore, and pray to, being indeed worthy of that rebuke of our Lord’s whereby he reproved the Pharisees, when they preferred their own secondary precepts to the Law of God: “Why do ye also transgress the word of God through your traditions?” But if they shall even produce writings got up in defence of their covetousness, and sanctioned by the subscription of noblemen, I beseech you never to forget the sentence of our Lord, wherein he says, “Every plantation that my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted out.” And I would fain moreover ask you this question, most Holy Prelate? Our Lord protests that “wide is the gate and broad the way which leadeth to destruction, and multitudes there be that enter in thereat; whilst straight is the gate and narrow the way that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” What, then, do you believe concerning the life or eternal safety of those, who throughout all their lives are known to be walking through the wide gate and broad way, and do not, even in the trifling things, restrain or resist their passions, whether of the mind or body, for the sake of a heavenly reward? Unless, perhaps, their alms, which amid their daily covetousness and enjoyments they give to the poor, are to be considered as able to exempt them from blame; whereas the hand itself, as well as the conscience which offers a gift to God, ought to be pure and free from offence. Or unless, also, they may be thought to be redeemed, now they are dead, by others, through the mystery of the holy oblation, of which, whilst they were alive, they appeared unworthy? Does the fault of covetousness appear to be trifling in them? I will speak a little more fully on this point. This it was, which rendered Balaam, a man full of the spirit of prophecy, an outcast from the lot of the saints. It was this which polluted Achan with sharing in the cursed thing, and thereby destroyed him. It stripped Saul of the diadem of the kingdom; it deprived Gehazi of the merits of prophecy, and defiled him and his seed with a perpetual leprosy. It cast down Judas Iscariot from the glory of his apostleship: Ananias and Sapphira, of whom we have before made mention, thereby became unworthy of the society of the monks, and were punished by the death of the body: and, to turn to heavenly examples, the angels were thereby cast down from heaven, the first created beings expelled from a paradise of endless enjoyment. And if you must know, this is that three-headed dog of Hell, called Cerberus in the fables, from whose ravening teeth the Apostle John would save us, when he says, “Beloved, love not the world nor those things that be therein: if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For every thing which is in the world, is the desire of the flesh, and the desire of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father, but is of the world.” Thus much briefly have I said against the poison of covetousness. But if I were to treat in like manner of drunkenness, feasting, luxury, and other contagions of the same king, my letter would be indefinitely lengthened. May the grace of the Chief Shepherd ever keep you safe for the wholesome feeding of his flock, Prelate, most beloved in our Lord: Amen!