Such was the faith of the evangelical Christians of Scandinavia. This confession is a mirror which reflects their likeness feature for feature. We are better acquainted with them after reading it, and we see in them true disciples of the Gospel. Not so thought the prelates. This confession which the king had placed in their hands astonished them. They had expected that the Protestants would be intimidated, and would not venture to publish their faith; and now they found them putting it forward with great decision. They determined to present a bill of indictment against these innovators.[300] ‘We remember,’ they said to the prince, ‘the engagements which you made on your accession to the throne. Now, John Tausen and other disciples of Luther allege that the Church, for thirteen or fourteen centuries, has been tainted with error; that works are useless; that Christians of both sexes are priests; that all the convents must be demolished; that man has no free-will, and that every thing comes to pass by virtue of absolute necessity.’[301] The prelates, however, shrank from a _vivâ voce_ discussion, which would have resounded through the whole kingdom. They therefore required the Protestants to prove their assertions in writing, anxious that every thing should be confined to writings of which they alone should take cognizance. [Sidenote: Reply Of The Evangelicals.] The evangelicals energetically disproved these charges,[302] and particularly that of denying freedom and maintaining fatalism. With regard to the imputation brought against them of recognizing only a universal priesthood, they said—‘Will you reject a Turk or a Russian who has received Christian instruction from a layman, if he die before having been instructed by a priest?[303] There is then a priesthood for Christians; but no one may hold any office in holy Church without being appointed to it by the Church, for St. Paul will have _all things done decently and in order_.’ The evangelicals, who on this point were completely opposed to the prelates, did not content themselves with written apologies, but wished for a public disputation, at which they might defend their faith by word of mouth. This was conceded, and it was to be held in the royal palace. The halls for the meetings were ready. But the debates, according to the Protestants, ought to take place in the vulgar tongue, in order to be understood by the laity. The prelates, on the other hand, absolutely refused this, and would only agree to Latin, a language unknown to the people, the townsmen, and even to most of the nobles. The evangelicals further declared that they would recognize no other standard of authority than Holy Scripture; and they added that the king, the members of his council, and the whole people would be able themselves to discern which of the two parties were in agreement with it. ‘We acknowledge no other interpreters,’ said the bishops, ‘than the Fathers and the councils, nor any other judge than