Writing to Leschassier upon the literary warfare of James I., he says it is a pity that the king did not abstain from theology and confine himself to the defense of his princely prerogatives against the claims of Rome.  He has exposed himself to the imputation of wishing to upset the foundations of the faith.  ’With regard to our own affairs [i.e. in Venice], we do not seek to mix up heaven and earth, things human and things divine.  Our desire is to leave the sacraments and all that pertains to religion as they are, believing that we can uphold the secular government in those rights which Scripture and the teaching of the Fathers confirm.’[154] In another place he says:  ’I have well considered the reasons which drew Germany and England into changing the observances of religion; but upon us neither these nor others of greater weight will exercise any influence.

[Footnote 153:  Lettere, vol. ii. pp. 3, 18, 96, 109, and elsewhere.]

[Footnote 154:  Ib. vol. ii. p. 6.]

It is better to suffer certain rules and customs that are not in all points commendable, than to acquire a taste for revolution and to yield to the temptation of confounding all things in chaos.’[155] His own grievance against the Popes, he adds, is that they are innovating and destroying the primitive constitution of the Church.  With regard to the possibility of uniting Christendom, he writes that many of the differences between Catholics and Protestants seem to him verbal; many, such as could be tolerated in one communion; and many capable of adjustment.  But a good occasion must be waited for.[156] Nothing can be done in Italy without a general war, that shall shake the powers of Spain and Rome.[157] Both Spain and Rome are so well aware of their peril that they use every means to keep Italy in peace.[158] If the Protestants of Europe are bent on victory, they must imitate the policy of Scipio and attack the Jesuits and Rome in their headquarters.[159] ’There is no enterprise of greater moment than to destroy the credit of the Jesuits.  When they are conquered, Rome is taken; and without Rome, religion reforms itself spontaneously.’[160] ’Changes in State are inextricably involved in changes of religion;’[161] and Italy will never be free so long as the Diacatholicon lasts.

[Footnote 155:  Lettere, vol. i. p. 237.]

[Footnote 156:  Ib. p. 268.]

[Footnote 157:  Ib. vol. ii. pp. 29, 48, 59, 60, 125.]

[Footnote 158:  Ib. p. 120, 124.]

[Footnote 159:  Ib. p. 226.]

[Footnote 160:  Ib. p. 217.]

[Footnote 161:  Ib. p. 427.]