One might beforehand have augured of the work by the workmen. Each one understood that it was a question, not of refuting the Confession, but of branding it. Campeggio, who doubtless suggested this ill-omened list to Charles, was well aware that these doctors were incapable of measuring themselves with Melancthon; but their names formed the most decided standard of Popery, and announced to the world clearly and immediately what the diet proposed to do. This was the essential point. Rome would not leave Christendom even hope. It was, however, requisite to know whether the diet, and the Emperor who was its organ, had the right of pronouncing in this purely religious matter. Charles put the question both to the Evangelicals and to the Romanists.[622] [622] See the document extracted from the archives of Bavaria in F. Urkunden. ii. p. 9. "Your highness," said Luther, who was consulted by the Elector, "may reply with all assurance: Yes, if the Emperor wish it, let him be judge! I will bear everything on his part; but let him decide nothing contrary to the Word of God. Your highness cannot put the Emperor above God himself.[623] Does not the first commandment say, _Thou shalt have no other Gods before me_!" [623] Konnen den Kaiser nicht uber Gott setzen. (L. Epp. iv. p. 83.) [Sidenote: ROME AND THE CIVIL POWER.] The reply of the Papal adherents was quite as positive in a contrary sense. "We think," said they, "that his majesty, in accord with the electors, princes, and states of the Empire, has the right to proceed in this affair, as Roman Emperor, guardian, advocate, and sovereign protector of the Church and of our most holy faith."[624] Thus, in the first days of the Reformation, the Evangelical Church frankly ranged itself under the throne of Jesus Christ, and the Roman Church under the sceptre of kings. Enlightened men, even among Protestants, have misunderstood this double nature of Protestantism and Popery. [624] Romischen Kaiser, Vogt, Advocaten und Obristen Beschirmer der kirken. (F. Urkunden. ii. p. 10.) The philosophy of Aristotle and the hierarchy of Rome, thanks to this alliance with the civil power, were at length about to see the day of their long-expected triumph arrive. So long as the schoolmen had been left to the force of their syllogisms and of their abuse, they had been defeated; but now Charles the Fifth and the diet held out their hands to them; the reasonings of Faber, Eck, and Wimpina were about to be countersigned by the German chancellor, and confirmed by the great seals of the Empire. Who could resist them? The Romish error has never had any strength except by its union with the secular arm; and its victories in the Old and in the New World are owing, even in our days, to state patronage.[625] [625] Tahiti for instance. [Sidenote: PERILS OF THE CONFESSORS.]