sbourg. He contrasted the hopeful strain
in which he had described to his correspondent the prospects of
religion, a year since, with the terrors of the present situation.
Crediting the king with the best intentions, he cast the blame of so
disastrous a change upon the insane authors of the placards, who had
drawn on themselves a punishment that would have been well deserved, had
it been moderate in degree. But, unhappily, the innocent had been
involved with the guilty, and informers had gratified private malice by
magnifying the offence. Francis had, it was true, been led, at the
intercession of Guillaume du Bellay and his brother, the Bishop of
Paris, to interpose his authority and protect the Germans residing in
his realm. But, none the less, he begged Melanchthon to fly to his
succor, and to exert an influence over the king which was the result of
Vore's continual praise, in putting an end to this unfortunate state of
things. Francis, he added, was willing to give pledges for the
reformer's safety, and would send him back in great honor to his native
land, after the conclusion of the proposed conference. "Lay aside,
therefore," wrote Sturm, "the consideration of kings and emperors, and
believe that the voice that calls you is the voice of God and of
Christ."[365] Vore followed up this invitation with great earnestness
both in personal interviews and by letter.[366]

[Sidenote: His perplexity.]

What answer should the reformer give to so pressing an invitation? In
his acknowledgment of Sturm's letter, Melanchthon confessed that no
deliberation had ever occasioned him so much perplexity. It was not that
domestic ties retained him or dangers deterred him. But he was harassed
by the fear that he would be unable to accomplish any good. If only this
doubt--amounting almost to _despair_--could be removed, he would fly to
France without delay. He approved--so he assured his correspondent--of
checking those fanatics who were engaged in sowing absurd and vile
doctrines, or created unnecessary tumults. But there were others against
whom no such charge could be brought, but who modestly professed the
Gospel. If through his exertions some slight concessions were obtained,
while points of greater importance were sacrificed, he would benefit
neither church nor state. What if he secured immunity from punishment
for such as had laid aside the monk's cowl? Must he then consent to the
execution of those conscientious men who disappro