require the invocation of saints, and censure the abuses in the
worship of saints. And although [even their own theologians], all
good men everywhere [a long time before Dr. Luther began to write] in
the correction of these abuses, greatly longed for either the
authority of the bishops or the diligence of the preachers,
nevertheless our adversaries in the _Confutation_ altogether pass
over vices that are even manifest, as though they wish, by the
reception of the Confutation, to compel us to approve even the most
notorious abuses.

Thus the _Confutation_ has been deceitfully written, not only on this
topic, but almost everywhere. [They pretend that they are as pure as
gold, that they have never muddled the water.] There is no passage in
which they make a distinction between the manifest abuses and their
dogmas. And nevertheless, if there are any of sounder mind among
them they confess that many false opinions inhere in the doctrine of
the scholastics and canonists, and, besides, that in such ignorance
and negligence of the pastors many abuses crept into the Church. For
Luther was not [the only one nor] the first to complain of
[innumerable] public abuses. Many learned and excellent men long
before these times deplored the abuses of the Mass, confidence in
monastic observances, services to the saints intended to yield a
revenue, the confusion of the doctrine concerning repentance
[concerning Christ], which ought to be as clear and plain in the
Church as possible [without which there cannot be nor remain a
Christian Church]. We ourselves have heard that excellent
theologians desire moderation in the scholastic doctrine which
contains much more for philosophical quarrels than for piety. And
nevertheless, among these the older ones are generally nearer
Scripture than are the more recent. Thus their theology degenerated