_Scripsi olim adolescens, trimetris versibus, Et tetrametris, eâ phrasi et facundiâ Quæ tum per adolescentiam et mala tempora Licebat, evangelicum Asotum aut Prodigum Omnis quidem mei laboris initium._ After it had lain among his papers for thirty years, he brought it to light, and published it. In the prologue he intreats the spectators not to be offended that he had put his sickle into the field of the Gospel, and exhorts them while they are amused with the comic parts of the dialogue, still to bear in mind the meaning of the parable. _Sed orat author carminis vos res duas: Ne ægre feratis, quod levem falcem tulit Sementem in evangelicam, eamque quod audeat Tractare majestatem Iambo et Tribracho; Neve insuper nimis hæreatis ludicris Ludisque comicis, sed animum advortite Hic abdito mysterio, quod eruam._ After these lines he proceeds succinctly to expound the parable. Although the grossest representations were not merely tolerated at that time in the Miracle Plays, and Mysteries, but performed with the sanction and with the assistance of the clergy, it appears that objections were raised against the sacred dramas of this author. They were composed for a learned audience,—which is indeed the reason why the Latin or as it may more properly be called the Collegiate drama, appeared at first in a regular and respectable form, and received little or no subsequent improvement. The only excuse which could be offered for the popular exhibitions of this kind, was that they were if not necessary, yet greatly useful, by exciting and keeping up the lively faith of an ignorant, but all-believing people. That apology failed, where no such use was needed. But Macropedius easily vindicated himself from charges which in truth were not relevant to his case; for he perceived what scriptural subjects might without impropriety be represented as he treated them, and he carefully distinguished them from those upon which no fiction could be engrafted without apparent profanation. In the prologue to his Lazarus he makes this distinction between the Lazarus of the parable, and the Lazarus of the Gospel History: the former might be thus treated for edification, the latter was too sacred a theme, —_quod is sine Filii Dei persona agi non possiet._ Upon this distinction he defends himself, and carefully declares what were the bounds which ought not to be overpassed. _Fortassis objectabit illi quispiam Quod audeat sacerrimam rem, et serio Nostræ saluti a Christo Jesu proditam Tractare comicè, et facere rem ludicram. Fatetur ingenuè, quod eadem ratio se Sæpenumero deterruit, ne quid suum, Vel ab aliis quantumlibet scriptum, piè Doctève, quod personam haberet Christi Jesu Agentis, histrionibus seu ludiis Populo exhibendum ex pulpito committeret._