|
The religious revolt that had been foretold by many earnest
ecclesiastics began in Germany in 1517. Its leader was Martin
Luther, the son of a miner, born at Eisleben in 1483. As a boy
he attended school at Eisenach and Magdeburg, supporting himself by
singing in the streets until a kind benefactress came to his assistance
in the person of Ursula Cotta. His father, having improved his
position in the world, determined to send the youth to study law at the
University of Erfurt, which was then one of the leading centres of
Humanism on the northern side of the Alps. But though Luther was in
close touch with some of the principal classical scholars of Germany
and was by no means an indifferent classical scholar himself, there is
no evidence of his having been influenced largely in his religious views
by the Humanist movement. He turned his attention principally to the
study of philosophy, and having received his degree in 1505, he
began to lecture on the physics and ethics of Aristotle.
Suddenly, to the surprise of his friends, and the no small vexation
of his father the young Luther, who had not been particularly
remarkable for his religious fervour, abandoned his career at the
university and entered the novitiate of the Augustinian monastery at
Erfurt (July 1505). The motives which induced him to take this
unexpected step are not clear. Some say he was led to do so by the
sudden death of a student friend, others that it was in fulfilment of a
vow which he had made during a frightful thunderstorm that overtook him
on a journey from his father's house to Erfurt, while he himself
tells us that he became a monk because he had lost confidence in
himself.[34] Of his life as a student very little is known for
certain. Probably he was no worse and no better than his companions in
a university city, which was described by himself in later life as a
"beerhouse" and a "nest of immorality."[35]
The sudden change from the freedom and excitement of the university to
the silence and monotony of the cloister had a depressing influence on a
man like Luther, who, being of a nervous, highly-strung
temperament, was inclined to pass quickly from one extreme to another.
He began to be gloomy and scrupulous, and was driven at times almost
to despair of his salvation; but Staupitz, the superior of the
province, endeavoured to console him by impressing on him the necessity
of putting his trust entirely in the merits of Christ. Yet in spite
of his scruples Luther's life as a novice was a happy one. He was
assiduous in the performance of his duties, attentive to the
instruction of his superiors, and especially anxious to acquire a close
acquaintance with the Sacred Scriptures, the reading and study of
which were strongly recommended to all novices in the Augustinian order
at this period.[36] In 1506 he was allowed to make his vows,
and in the following year he was ordained priest. During the
celebration of his first Mass he was so overcome by a sense of his own
unworthiness to offer up such a pure sacrifice that he would have fled
from the altar before beginning the canon had it not been for his
assistants, and throughout the ceremony he was troubled lest he should
commit a mortal sin by the slightest neglect of the rubrics. At the
breakfast that followed, to which Luther's relatives had been
invited, father and son met for the first time since Luther entered
the monastery. While the young priest waxed eloquent about the
happiness of his vocation and about the storm from heaven that helped
him to understand himself, his father, who had kept silent throughout
the repast, unable to restrain himself any longer interrupted suddenly
with the remark that possibly he was deceived, and that what he took to
be from God might have been the work of the devil. "I sit here,"
he continued, "eating and drinking but I would much prefer to be far
from this spot." Luther tried to pacify him by reminding him of the
godly character of monasticism, but the interruption was never
forgotten by Luther himself or by his friends who heard it.
After his ordination the young monk turned his attention to theology,
but, unfortunately, the theological training given to the Augustinian
novices at this period was of the poorest and most meagre kind.[37]
He studied little if anything of the works of the early Fathers, and
never learned to appreciate Scholasticism as expounded by its greatest
masters, St. Thomas or St. Bonaventure. His knowledge of
Scholastic Theology was derived mainly from the works of the rebel
friar William of Occam, who, in his own time, was at constant war
with the Popes, and who, during the greater part of his life, if not
at the moment of his death, was under sentence of excommunication from
the Church. The writings of such a man, betraying as they did an
almost complete unacquaintance with the Scriptures and exaggerating
men's natural powers to the undervaluing or partial exclusion of
Grace, exercised a baneful influence on a man of Luther's tastes and
temperaments. Accepted by Luther as characteristic of Scholastic
Theology, such writings prejudiced him against the entire system.
Acting on the advice of the provincial, Staupitz, he gave himself up
with great zeal to the study of the Bible, and later on he turned his
attention to the works of St. Augustine, particularly the works
written in defence of the Catholic doctrine on Grace against the
Pelagians. In 1508 he went to the university of Wittenberg,
founded recently by Frederick of Saxony, to lecture on Logic and
Ethics, and to continue his theological studies; but for some
reason, as yet unexplained, he was recalled suddenly to his monastery
at Erfurt, where he acquired fame rapidly as a lecturer and preacher.
Thirty foundations of the Augustinians in Saxony had accepted the
reform begun by Andrew Proles in the fifteenth century, and had
separated themselves definitely from the unreformed houses of the order
in Germany. They were subject immediately to the general of the
order, whose vicar at this time in Saxony was the well-known
Humanist, Staupitz.[38] The latter was anxious to bring about a
reunion between the two parties and to have himself appointed as
superior; but the party who stood for the strict observance were
opposed bitterly to such a step, and determined to send a
representative to Rome to plead their cause. The fact that they
selected so young a man as Luther to champion their interests is a
sufficient proof of the position which he had won for himself amongst
his religious brethren. He was looked up to already as an ornament of
the order, and his selection for this highly important mission served
to increase the over-weening pride and self-confidence that had
manifested themselves already as weak spots in his character.
Accompanied by a companion of his order he started on his long journey
across the Alps. As he reached the heights of Monte Mario and
surveyed the Popes he fell on his knees, according to the custom of
the pilgrims, and hailed "the city thrice sanctified by the blood of
martyrs." He had looked forward with pleasure to a stay in Rome,
where he might have an opportunity of setting his scruples to rest by a
general confession of his sins, but, unfortunately, his brother
Augustinians in Rome and those with whom he came most in contact
seemed to have been more anxious to regale him with stories about the
real or imaginary scandals of the city than to give him spiritual
consolation or advice. Yet in later life, when he had definitely
separated from the Church and when he was most anxious to blacken the
character of Rome and the Popes, it is remarkable that he could point
to very little detrimental to them of which he had personal knowledge,
and was forced to rely solely on what had been told him by others. Nor
did he leave Rome as a declared enemy of the Papacy, for even so late
as 1516 he defended warmly the supremacy of the Pope as the one
safeguard for the unity of the Church.[39] Many of his
biographers, indeed, assert that, as he stood by the "Scala
Sancta" and witnessed the pilgrims ascending on their bare knees, he
turned aside disgusted with the sight and repeated the words of St.
Paul, "the just man lives by his faith"; but such a statement, due
entirely to the imagination of his relatives and admirers is rejected as
a legend by those best qualified to judge.[40] The threatened union
of the strict and unreformed that had occasioned Luther's journey to
Rome was abandoned; but it is worthy of note that Staupitz had
succeeded in detaching him from his former friends, and that he
returned to Germany a convinced and violent opponent of the party of
strict observance, who had sent him to Rome as their representative.
During his stay in the city there is good reason for believing that on
his own behalf he sought for permission to lay aside his monastic habit
and to devote himself for ten years to study in Italy, but his request
was refused on the ground that it was not supported by the authority of
his superiors. This petition was probably the foundation for the
rumours that were circulated in Germany by his opponents that while in
Rome he endeavoured to have himself "secularised" and to obtain a
dispensation to marry.
On his return to Germany he devoted himself once more to the study of
theology in preparation for the doctorate which he won at Wittenberg in
1512. Almost immediately he was appointed professor at the
university and undertook to lecture on the Psalms. His eloquence and
his imagination, his retentive memory enabling him to illustrate his
texts by parallel passages drawn from the books of the Old Testament,
and in a certain way his exaggerations, his strength of diction, and
his asperity of language towards all with whose views he did not find
himself in agreement, made his lectures most popular at the
university, and filled his hall with an eager and attentive audience.
Amongst the students Luther had no rival, and even the few professors
who were inclined to resent his methods and his views were captivated by
the magic influence of their brilliant young colleague. The
Augustinians, mindful of the honour he was achieving for their order,
hastened to appoint him to the important position of district vicar
(1515), while the Elector Frederick could not conceal his
delight at having secured the services of so capable a professor for the
new university.
At Wittenberg Luther felt himself completely at home. He was proud
of the distinctions conferred upon him by his brethren, and of the
influence accorded to him by his companions in the university. Great
as were his industry and his powers of application, yet they were put
to the most severe tests to enable him to complete the programme he had
set himself to accomplish. His lectures at the university, his
sermons preached in the Augustinian church, his visitations of the
houses of his order in the district over which he was vicar, his
correspondence, partly routine and partly entailed by his close
relations with some of the leading men in Germany, occupied all his
time even to the exclusion of the spiritual exercises enjoined by his
rule. Very frequently he neglected to celebrate Mass or even to read
the divine office, and then alarmed by his negligence and guilt he had
recourse to extraordinary forms of penance. Fits of laxity were
followed by fits of scrupulousness until at last he was driven at times
almost to despair. It was then that he called to mind the consoling
advice given to him by his superior that he should put his trust in the
merits of Christ, and the teaching of St. Augustine on the frailty
of human nature unless it was aided and supported by divine Grace. He
began to develop the idea that justification could not be acquired by
good works, that concupiscence could not be overcome, and that
consequently man could be justified only by the imputation of the merits
of Christ. Years before, views such as these had been passing
through his mind, as may be seen in his sermons against the
Augustinians of the strict observance, but they found adequate
expression only in his commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul to
the Romans and to the Galatians (1515-6). Still, as yet,
he held strongly to the principle of authority in matters of religion,
and inveighed against heretics who would dare to set aside the authority
of the Pope in order to follow their own judgment. In reality,
however, his own teaching on merit and justification was no longer in
harmony with Catholic doctrine, and only a slight occasion was
required to bring him into open and definite conflict with the
authorities of the Church.
This occasion was provided by the preaching in Germany of an
Indulgence proclaimed by Leo X (1513-21). The building
of St. Peter's had been begun by Julius II and was continued by
his successor Leo X, the son of Lorenzo de' Medici, and the
great patron of the Humanist movement. In order to provide funds to
enable him to continue this gigantic undertaking Leo X proclaimed an
Indulgence. In addition to Confession and Holy Communion it was
ordered that those of the faithful who wished to share in the spiritual
favours granted by the Pope should contribute according to their means
for the completion of St. Peter's, or that they should pray for the
success of the work in case poverty did not permit them to give alms.
The publication of the Indulgence in a great part of Germany was
entrusted to Albrecht of Brandenberg, who had been elected
Archbishop of Mainz though he was already Archbishop of Magdeburg
and Administrator of Halberstadt. The fees to be paid by an
archbishop appointed to Mainz were exceptionally high not to speak of
the large sum required for the extraordinary favour of being allowed to
hold two archbishoprics. As a means of enabling Albrecht to raise the
required amount, it was proposed by an official of the Datary that he
should be allowed to retain half of the contributions given on the
occasion of the publication of the Indulgence in the provinces of
Mainz and Magdeburg, and in the lands of the House of Brandenburg.
To publish the Indulgence in the above-mentioned territories
Albrecht appointed the Dominican John Tetzel,[41] who had
acquired already considerable renown as a preacher. Tetzel was a man
of solid education and of good moral standing, whose reputation as a
successful popular preacher stood high in Germany at this period.
Many grave abuses have been alleged against him by his enemies
concerning his manner of carrying out the office entrusted to him by the
archbishop, and in regard to his own private life serious crimes have
been laid to his charge; but as a matter of history it is now admitted
that Tetzel was a much maligned man, that his own conduct can bear the
fullest scrutiny, and that in his preaching the worst that can be said
against him is that he put forward as certainties, especially in regard
to gaining indulgences for the souls of the faithful departed, what
were merely the opinions of certain schools of theologians. Nor is it
true to say that as the result of his activity vast sums of money made
their way into the papal treasury. The accounts of the monies received
during the greater portion of the time are now available, and it can be
seen that when all expenses were paid comparatively little remained for
either the Archbishop of Mainz or the building fund of St.
Peter's.[42]
Tetzel preached with considerable success in Halberstadt, Magdeburg
and Leipzig, and in May 1517 he found himself in the
neighbourhood of Wittenberg, whence many people flocked to see him,
and to gain the Indulgence. This was not calculated to please Luther
or his patron the Elector, Frederick of Saxony, and provided
Luther with an occasion of giving vent to his own views on good works,
Grace, and Justification. Years before, both in his sermons
attacking the Augustinians of the strict observance for their over
confidence in the merits of good works and penance, and in his
commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Romans and to the
Galatians, he had indicated already that his views on man's power to
do anything good, and on the means and nature of justification differed
widely from those put forward by Catholic theologians. At last,
after careful consideration, following the bent of his own inclination
and the advice of his friends, he determined to take the field openly
by publishing, on the eve of the festival of All Saints, 1517,
his celebrated seventy theses against Indulgences.[43] This
document was drawn up with great skill and foresight. Some of the
theses were perfectly orthodox and professed great reverence for the
teaching of the Church and the authority of the Pope; others of them
were open to an orthodox as well as to an unorthodox interpretation;
others, still, were opposed clearly and definitely to Catholic
doctrine, and all of them were put forward in a way that was likely to
arrest public attention and to win the support of the masses.[44]
They were affixed to the doors of the university church in
Wittenberg, and copies of them were spread broadcast through
Germany. Before a week had elapsed they were discussed with eagerness
in all parts of the country, and the state of feeling became so intense
that Tetzel was obliged to discontinue his mission, and to retire to
Frankfurt, where under the direction of Wimpina, he set himself to
draw up a number of counter theses which he offered to defend.
The circumstances of the time were very favourable to a campaign such
as Luther had initiated. The princes of Germany and even some of the
bishops made no secret of their opinion that indulgences had been
abused, and many of them were anything but displeased at the step that
had been taken by the Wittenberg professor. The old opposition
between the Teuton and the Latin was growing daily more marked owing
to the violent and abusive language of men like Ulrich von Hutten,
who posed as German patriots; while the Humanist party, roused by
the attacks made upon Reuchlin by the Dominicans of Cologne, backed
by the Scholastic Theologians, were not sorry to see their opponents
challenged in their own special department, and obliged to act on the
defensive. The knights or lower nobles, too, who had been deprived
of many of their privileges by the princes, were ready for any scheme
of violence in the hope that it might conduce to their advantage; and
the lower classes ground down for centuries were beginning to realise
their own strength, partly owing to the spread of secret societies,
and were willing to lend a ready ear to a leader who had given
expression to views that were coursing already through their minds.
From all parts of Germany letters of congratulation poured in upon
Luther. Many of these came from men who had no desire for a religious
change, but who thought that Luther's campaign was directed only
against abuses in the Church. From the Humanists, from several of
the professors and students of Wittenberg, and even from the superiors
of his order he received unstinted praise and encouragement. At least
one of the bishops, Lorenz von Bibra of Wurzburg, hastened to
intercede for him with Frederick the Elector of Saxony, while none
of the others took up an attitude of unflinching opposition. Tetzel,
who had been forced to abandon his work of preaching, defended publicly
at Frankfurt on the Maine a number of counter theses formulated by
Conrad Wimpina. To this attack Luther replied in a sermon on
indulgences in which he aimed at expressing in a popular style the
kernel of the doctrine contained in his theses. Sylvester Prierias,
the master of the Sacred Palace in Rome, to whom Luther's theses
had been forwarded for examination, published a sharp attack upon
them,[45] and was answered in Luther's most abusive style. The
most distinguished, however, of the men who took the field against him
was John Eck,[46] Professor of Theology and Vice-Chancellor
of the University of Ingolstadt. He was a man well versed in the
Scriptures and in the writings of the Fathers, a ready speaker and an
incisive writer, in every way qualified to meet such a versatile
opponent. While on a visit with the Bishop of Eichstatt he was
consulted about Luther's theses, and gave his opinion in the
"Obelisks" on the dangerous character of the teaching they
contained. The "Obelisks" was prepared hastily and was not intended
for publication, but it was regarded as so important that copies of it
were circulated freely even before it was given to the world. Luther
replied in the "Asterisks", a work full of personal invective and
abuse. A Dominican of Cologne, Hochstraten, also entered the
lists against Luther, but his intervention did more harm than good to
the cause of the Church by alienating the Humanist party whom he
assailed fiercely as allies and abettors of Luther. These attacks,
however, served only to give notoriety to Luther's views and to win
for him the sympathy of his friends. His opponents made one great
mistake. Their works were intended in great part only for the
learned, while Luther aimed principally at appealing to the masses of
the people. The Augustinians represented him as the victim of a
Dominican conspiracy, and to show their high appreciation of his
services they selected him to conduct the theological disputation at a
chapter meeting held at Leipzig six months after the publication of his
theses (1518). At this same meeting Luther defended the view
that free will in man and all power of doing good were destroyed by
original sin, and that everything meritorious accomplished by man is
really done by God. His old opponent at the university, Bodenstein
(surnamed Carlstadt from his place of birth), declared himself
openly in favour of Luther's teaching on free will, and published a
reply to Eck.
As a result of this controversy between Eck and Carlstadt it was
arranged that a public disputation should be held at Leipzig (27
June- 15 July, 1519). The Catholic teaching was to be
defended by Eck against his two opponents, Luther and Carlstadt. A
hall in the castle of Pleissenburg was placed at the disposal of the
disputants by Duke George of Saxony, who was a convinced Catholic
himself, and who believed that the disputation might be the means of
removing many doubts and misunderstandings. The acts of the
disputation were to be drawn up and forwarded to the Universities of
Paris and Erfurt for their decision. When it became known throughout
Germany that a meeting had been arranged between Eck and his two
principal opponents, the excitement, especially in the learned
circles, became intense, and so great was the rush of scholars from
all parts of the country to witness the encounter, that the immense
hall was packed with an eager and attentive audience when Eck and
Carlstadt entered the pulpits that had been prepared for them.
Few men in Germany, or outside it, were more fitted to hold their
own in such a disputation than the distinguished Vice-Chancellor of
Ingolstadt. He was a man of imposing appearance, gifted with a clear
and pleasing voice and good memory, even tempered and ready, quick to
detect the weak points of his adversaries, and keenly alert to their
damaging concessions and admissions. The first point to be debated
between him and Carlstadt was the question of Grace and Free Will.
Carlstadt was at last obliged to concede that the human will was active
at least to the extent of co-operating or of not co-operating with
divine Grace, a concession that was opposed entirely to the thesis he
had undertaken to sustain. Luther, alarmed by the discomfiture of his
colleague, determined to enter the lists at once on the question of the
primacy of the Roman See. He was not, however, more successful
than Carlstadt. Eck, taking advantage of Luther's irascible
temperament and his exaggerations of speech, forced him step by step to
put aside as worthless interpretations given by the early Fathers to
certain passages of Scripture, and to reject the authority and
infallibility of General Councils. Such a line of arguments,
opposed as it was to the teaching and beliefs of the Church, roused
the opposition of the audience, and served to open the eyes of Duke
George to the real nature of Luther's movement. Annoyed by his own
defeat and by the attentions and applause lavished upon his rival by the
people of Leipzig, Luther left the city in disgust. The disputation
undoubtedly did good in so far as it made clear to all the position of
the two parties, and succeeded in holding Duke George of Saxony and
the city of Leipzig loyal to the Church; but it also did much harm by
giving Luther the notoriety that he was so anxious to obtain, and by
winning to his side Philip Melanchthon, who was destined to be in
after life his ablest lieutenant. Both sides, as is usual in such
contests, claimed the victory. The Universities of Cologne and
Louvain condemned Luther immediately, as did also Paris in
1521, but as far as can be known Erfurt pronounced no decision on
the questions submitted.
Meanwhile what was the attitude of the authorities in Rome towards
Luther's movement. Leo X, having learned something of the
turmoil created in Germany by Luther's theses and sermons, requested
the vicar-general of the Augustinians to induce his rebellious subject
to recall his teaching, or, at least, to keep silent. The vicar
wrote to the principal, Staupitz, but, as the latter was one of
those who had encouraged Luther to take the steps he had taken, very
little was done to secure peace. Luther was, however, induced to
write a most submissive letter to the Pope in which he begged for an
investigation, pledging himself at the same time to accept the decision
of Leo X as the decision of Christ (30th May,
1518).[47] Not satisfied with the course of events, and
alarmed by the reports forwarded to him from Germany, the Pope
appointed a commission to examine the whole question, the result of
which commission was that Luther was summoned to submit at once or to
appear at Rome to defend himself within sixty days.
He and his friends were thrown into a state of great alarm by this
unexpected step. On the one hand, were he to submit and to
acknowledge that he had been in error his reputation would be
shattered, the Augustinians would feel themselves disgraced, and the
University of Wittenberg would lose caste in the estimation of
educated Germans. On the other hand, if he adopted the bold policy
of refusing to yield to the papal entreaties he was in danger of being
denounced publicly as a heretic. In this difficult situation his
friends determined to invoke the protection of the Elector Frederick
of Saxony, the founder and patron of Wittenberg University.
Alarmed by the danger that threatened this institution from the removal
or excommunication of one of its most popular professors, and anxious
to gain time, Frederick requested the Pope to refer the matter for
decision to some German bishop or to a neutral university. In reply
to this request Leo X appointed Cardinal Cajetan, papal legate in
Germany, to hold an inquiry (23 Aug., 1518). Luther,
having armed himself with a safe conduct, went to Augsburg to meet the
papal representative, who received him very kindly, and exhorted him
to withdraw his statements and submit. Luther endeavoured to induce
the cardinal to enter into a discussion on the questions in dispute,
but the latter did not allow himself to be drawn into a disputation.
Finally, Luther refused to submit, though, at the same time, he
declared solemnly that he wished unsaid and unwritten what he had said
or written against the Roman Church. A few days later he fled from
Augsburg after having drawn up a formal appeal "from the Pope
ill-informed to the Pope well-informed," while the cardinal,
disappointed by the failure of his efforts, turned to the Elector of
Saxony for help against the rebellious monk. But the latter,
deceived by the recommendations forwarded on Luther's behalf by his
own superior, Staupitz, yielded to the entreaties of Spalatin, the
court chaplain, and of the professors of Wittenberg, and declined to
take any steps to compel Luther to submit. Fearful, however, lest
his patron might not be able to shield him from the censures of Rome,
Luther determined to anticipate the expected condemnation by issuing an
appeal to a future General Council (28 Nov., 1518).
In the meantime Leo X who had learned from his representative the
result of the Augsburg interviews, issued the Bull, "Cum
postquam" (9 Nov., 1518), in which he explained
authoritatively the Catholic doctrine on Indulgences, and threatened
excommunication against all who refused to accept it. This document
was deprived of much of its effect owing to the misrepresentations of
Luther and his friends, who announced that it owed its origin to the
schemes and intrigues of their Dominican opponents at Rome and in
Germany. The occasion called for speedy and decisive action. But
the impending imperial election, in which Charles I of Spain
(1516-56) and Francis I of France (1515- 47) were
to be rival candidates, made it necessary for the Pope to proceed
cautiously, and above all, to do nothing that might antagonise the
Elector of Saxony, whose influence would be of the greatest
importance in deciding the votes of the electoral college, if,
indeed, it did not secure his own election. Had the appointment of a
successor to Maximilian I rested with Leo X it can hardly be
doubted that, in the hope of preserving the balance of power and of
securing the freedom of the Holy See, he would have favoured the
claims of the Elector against either or both the rival
monarchs.[48]
In these circumstances it was decided to send Karl von
Miltitz,[49] who was by birth a Saxon nobleman and at that period
a chamberlain at the Papal Court, to present Frederick with the
Golden Rose, and to bring about a peaceful settlement of a
controversy that had been disturbing the whole Empire. The selection
of Miltitz for such a delicate mission was most unfortunate. Proud,
obstinate, and ill- informed about the real issues at stake, he was
anxious to have the glory of putting an end to the controversy at all
costs, and hence he was willing to appear before Luther as a humble
suitor for peace rather than as a stern judge. All his severity and
reproaches were reserved for Luther's opponents, especially for
Tetzel, whom he held primarily responsible for the whole mischief,
and towards whom he acted both imprudently and unjustly. The Elector
showed himself but little inclined to respond to the advances of Leo
X. He consented, however, to arrange an interview between Miltitz
and Luther at Altenburg (Jan. 1519). During the course of
the interviews that took place between them, Luther pledged himself to
remain silent if his opponents were forced to do likewise. He
promised, too, that if Miltitz wrote advising the Pope to appoint a
German bishop to try the case and to convince him of his error he would
be willing to retract his theses, to submit to the Church, and to
advise all his supporters to remain loyal to the Holy See. At the
same time he prepared a letter for transmission to Rome, in which he
addressed the Pope in the most respectful terms, declaring as on oath
before God and creatures that it never entered into his mind to attack
in any way the authority of the Roman Church or of the Pope, that he
confessed willingly that in this Church was vested supreme
jurisdiction, and that neither in heaven or on earth was there anything
he should put before it except Jesus Christ the Lord of all
things.[50] Throughout these proceedings it is clear that Luther
meant only to deceive Miltitz and to lull the suspicions of the Roman
authorities, until the seed he had planted should have taken root.
Only a short time before he had written to a friend, hinting that the
Pope was the real Anti-Christ mentioned by St. Paul in the
Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, and asserting his ability to
prove that he who ruled at the Roman Court was worse than the
Turk.[51]
Several months passed and no further steps were taken by Rome to meet
the crisis. This delay was due in great measure to the death of
Maximilian I (1519), and to the sharp contest that ensued.
The two strongest candidates were Charles I, King of Spain, who
as son of Philip the Handsome (son of Maximilian), and of Joanna
of Castile (daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella), was ruler of
Spain, the Netherlands, Austria, and Naples, and Francis I,
King of France. For centuries the Pope had striven to prevent the
union of Naples and the Empire, and with good reason, for such a
union must prove almost of necessity highly detrimental to the safety of
the Papal States and the independence of the Holy See. For this
reason, if for no other, Leo X did not favour the candidature of
Charles. Nor could he induce himself to display any enthusiasm for
the cause of Francis I, whose intervention in Italian affairs the
Pope had good grounds to dread. As against the two the Pope
endeavoured to induce the princes to elect one of their own number,
preferably the Elector of Saxony. But the Elector showed no anxiety
to accept such a responsible office, and in the end Charles succeeded
in winning over to his side the majority of the princes. He was
elected and proclaimed Emperor under the title of Charles V
(1519).
While Rome remained inactive, and while the opponents of Luther in
Germany were handicapped by the crude diplomacy of Miltitz, Luther
was gaining ground with marvellous rapidity. His success was due
partly to his own great personal gifts as a popular demagogue, and
partly also to the fact that no man knew better than he how to make
capital out of the ecclesiastical abuses of the time, and to win to his
side all who had any reason to be discontented with the existing order.
He was strengthened very much by the inactivity of the German
bishops, who seemed unwilling to take any severe measures against him,
by the help and encouragement of Frederick of Saxony, who, during
the interregnum and for some time after the election of Charles V
was the real administrator of Germany, by his union with the leading
Humanist scholars and professors, especially Erasmus, all of whom
regarded Luther merely as the champion of liberty against the
obscurantism of the Scholastics, and by his secret alliances with
discontented nobles, such as Ulrich von Hutten and Franz von
Sickingen, whose sole hope of improving their fortunes lay in the
creation of public disorder.
Johann Eck, Luther's chief opponent, realising that there was no
hope of stirring up the German authorities to take action, hastened to
Rome to impress upon the Pope and his advisers the extreme gravity of
the situation, and to urge them to proceed against the revolt with all
possible energy and despatch. Luther himself recognised clearly enough
that the crisis he had long foreseen was at hand, and he began to
prepare men's minds for complete rupture with the Church by his sermon
on excommunication in which he bade defiance to the ecclesiastical
authorities. He threw himself with renewed energy into the fray,
turning out volume after volume with feverish rapidity, each more
violent and abusive than its predecessor, and nearly all couched in
language that was as intelligible to the peasant as it was to the
professor. In his "Address to the Nobles of Germany", in his
works "On the Mass", "On the Improvement of Christian
Morality", and "On the Babylonian Captivity", he proclaimed
himself a political as well as a religious revolutionary. There was no
longer any concealment or equivocation. The veil was lifted at last,
and Luther stood forth to the world as the declared enemy of the
Church and the Pope, the champion of the Bible as the sole rule of
faith, and the defender of individual judgment as its only
interpreter. In these works he rejected the Mass,
Transubstantiation, vows of chastity, pilgrimages, fasts, the
Sacraments, the powers of the priesthood, and the jurisdiction and
supremacy of the Pope. With such a man there could be no longer any
question of leniency or of compromise. The issues at stake, namely,
whether the wild and impassioned assertions of a rebel monk should be
accepted in preference to the teaching of Christ's Church, ought to
have been apparent to every thinking man; and yet so blinded were some
of his contemporaries by their sympathy with the Humanists as against
the Theologians, that even still they forced themselves to believe
Luther sought only for reform.
At Rome the trouble in Germany was one of the main subjects that
engaged the attention of the Curia. It was felt that the time had
come when decisive measures must be taken. After long and anxious
deliberations Leo X published the Bull, "Exsurge Domine"
(June 1520), in which forty propositions taken from Luther's
writings were condemned, his works were ordered to be burned, the full
penalties of excommunication were proclaimed against him unless he
withdrew his errors and made his submission within sixty days, while
his aiders and abettors were besought in the most touching terms to
abandon the dangerous path into which they had been betrayed. Had such
a pronouncement been issued at the beginning of the movement it might
have done much to restore peace to the Church, but, coming as it did
at a time when Luther's movement, backed by all the revolutionary
forces of Germany, had already acquired considerable dimensions, it
failed to put an end to the tumult. Besides, the papal decision was
deprived of much of its force by the fact that Eck, Caraccioli, and
Aleandro were appointed as a commission to superintend its execution.
The appointment of Eck was a great tactical blunder, as it afforded
Luther and his friends an opportunity of proclaiming that the sentence
of excommunication was procured by the intrigues and misrepresentations
of their personal enemies; while the fact that the German bishops were
disregarded in the execution of the Bull as if they were not above
suspicion themselves, was looked upon by many as a studied insult to
the entire German hierarchy. Even though Luther had entertained any
thoughts of submission, the triumph of Eck would have created very
serious obstacles; but, knowing as he did, that even at the worst he
could reckon upon the support of a certain number of the discontented
nobles who had pledged themselves to put their swords at his disposal,
he had no intention of making his submission.
The reception accorded to the papal document varied according to the
views of the local authorities and the state of public feeling in the
different cities and provinces. Thus, while its publication was
welcomed in Cologne, Mainz, Halberstadt, and Freising, it was
received with very mixed feelings at Leipzig and at Erfurt.
Frederick of Saxony, to whom Leo X had addressed a personal
appeal, refused to abandon Luther's cause unless it were proved from
the Scriptures that he was wrong. He did, indeed, suggest that
Luther should write a respectful letter to the Pope, but his
suggestion passed unheeded. At first Luther pretended that the Bull
was a forgery brought forward by Eck to discredit him, but when this
line of defence proved useless, he boldly attacked the papal
pronouncement in his pamphlet, "Against the Bull of
Anti-Christ", in which he denounced Leo X as a heretic and
apostate, an enemy of the Holy Scriptures, a tyrant, and a
calumniator. Lest, however, the courage of his supporters might be
overcome by the terrors of excommunication, he issued an appeal from
the sentence of the Pope to the judgment of a future General
Council. Finally, on the 10th December, 1520, in the
presence of an immense concourse of the citizens and students of
Wittenberg, he burned publicly the papal Bull and the writings of his
political opponents. On this occasion he proclaimed his intention of
overthrowing the ecclesiastical organisation, and of introducing a new
theological system. For the future it was to be war to the knife
against the Pope and the Church, and he called upon German patriots
and all true friends of personal liberty to take their stand by his side
in the conflict that had been begun.
Charles V was apparently in a very strong position. Not since the
days of Charlemagne had any ruler claimed jurisdiction over so wide a
territory as his, comprising, as it did, Germany and Austria, the
kingdom of the two Sicilies, Spain, and the Netherlands. But in
reality the very extent of his dominions made him much less powerful
than he might have been as the sovereign of a smaller but more compact
region. It served to awaken the suspicions of his subjects, who
feared that he might abolish their distinctive national constitutions
and weld his scattered territories into one great empire, and to excite
the jealousy of the other rulers of Europe, who imagined that he might
declare himself dictator of the western world. The German princes,
having resisted successfully all the efforts made by his grandfather,
Maximilian I, to convert the loose confederation of the German
States into a united and centralised nation, were on their guard lest
his successor should attempt a similar policy with the aid of Spanish
troops and Spanish gold; the Spaniards resented the absence of the
king from Spain, where many of the lower classes were in a state
bordering on rebellion; Francis I of France, trembling for the
very existence of his country, was willing to do all things, even to
agree to an alliance with the sons of Mohammed, if he could only
lessen the influence of his powerful rival. The Turks under Soliman
I were determined to realise the dreams of their race by extending
their territories from the Bosphorus to the Atlantic; while even the
Pope had good reason to suspect that Charles V, unmindful of the
example of his great namesake, might seek to become the master rather
than the protector of the Church.[52]
On account of the troubles in Spain it was only late in the year
1520 that Charles V could come to Germany to meet the
electors, and to take over formally the administration of the Empire
(23 Oct.). Less than two weeks had elapsed when the papal
representative, Aleandro, himself a distinguished Humanist, sought
an interview with the new ruler, and besought him to enforce the papal
Bull against Luther with the full weight of his imperial authority.
But the wavering attitude of many of the princes and the determined
opposition of Frederick of Saxony made the Emperor hesitate to
condemn Luther without giving him an opportunity for explanation and
defence. The Diet was soon to open at Worms, and Charles V
issued an invitation to Luther to attend, guaranteeing at the same
time his personal safety on the way to and from Worms and during his
sojourn in the city.
The Diet met in January 1521, but despite the efforts of
Aleandro the majority of the princes still failed to realise the
gravity of the situation. Feeling against Rome was running very high
in Germany at the time. Many of the princes insisted on presenting a
document embodying the grievances of Germany ("Centum
Gravamina")[53] to the papal ambassador, while even such an
orthodox supporter of the Church as Duke George of Saxony, brought
forward very serious complaints against the clergy, accompanied by a
demand that a General Council should be summoned to restore peace to
the Church. Luther, strengthened by the safe conduct of the Emperor
and by a secret understanding with some of the princes and knights, set
out from Wittenberg for Worms, where he arrived in April 1521.
On presenting himself before the Diet he was invited to state if he
were really the author of the works published under his name, copies of
which were presented to him, and, if so, was he willing to retract
the doctrines contained in them. In reply to the former of these
questions he admitted the authorship of the volumes, but asked for time
to consider what answer he should make in regard to the latter. A day
was allowed him for consideration. When he appeared again, all traces
of the hesitation and nervousness that marked his attitude at the
previous session had disappeared. He refused to retract his opinions,
and made it clear that he no longer acknowledged the authority of the
Pope or of General Councils as a safe guide in matters religious.
Thereupon the Emperor intimated to the princes that he was determined
to take vigorous action against such a heretic and disturber of the
public peace, though at the request of some of the princes he allowed
time for private conferences between Luther and representative
Catholic theologians, notably Eck and Cochlaeus.[54] These
conferences having failed to produce any result the Emperor issued an
order (25th April) commanding Luther to depart from Worms without
delay, and forbidding him to preach to the people on his journey under
pain of forfeiting his safe conduct. A month later Charles V
published a decree placing Luther under the ban of the Empire. He
was denounced as a public heretic whom no one should receive or
support; he was to be seized by any one who could do so, and delivered
to the Emperor; his writings were to be burned, and all persons
proved guilty of countenancing himself or his errors were liable to
severe punishment. Many hoped that the decree might put an end to the
confusion, but in reality Charles V was powerless to enforce it,
especially as the majority of the princes were unwilling to carry out
its terms in their territories. Hence, outside the hereditary
dominions of the House of Habsburg, the lands of Joachim I of
Brandenburg and of Duke George of Saxony, and in Bavaria, it
remained a dead letter.
On the route from Worms Luther was taken prisoner by soldiers of the
Elector, Frederick of Saxony, according to arrangements that had
been made for his protection, and was brought to the castle at
Wartburg where he remained for close on a year (May 1521-March
1522) under the assumed name of Yonker George, safe in spite of
the imperial decrees. In the silence of his retreat at Wartburg
Luther had an opportunity for reflection on the gravity of the
situation that he had created. At times he trembled, as he thought of
separating himself definitely from the great world-wide organisation
which recognised the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, and of
setting up his own judgment against the faith that had been handed down
for centuries, and that was supported by the ablest scholars from the
days of Clement of Rome to those of St. Thomas and St.
Bonaventure.
In his anxiety of mind he was the victim of hallucinations, believing
that the spirit of evil appeared to him in visible form, and held
commune with him in human speech. He was assailed, too, with violent
temptations of the flesh, which reduced him to a state bordering on
despair. But these moments of depression passed away, to be succeeded
by fits of wild exultation in which he rejoiced at the storm that he had
created already, and at the still greater storm he was soon to create.
He set to work with tireless energy, believing himself to be inspired
from on high as was the apostle, St. John, during his stay in the
island of Patmos. At the instigation of his friends, who urged him
to attack the celibacy of the monks and nuns, he turned his attention
to this question, and issued a work "On Monastic Vows", in which
he declared that such vows of chastity, being opposed to the freedom of
the Gospel, were sinful and should be neglected. In his book "On
the Mass" he assailed the Mass and the whole theory of the Christian
priesthood, declaring that every believer was in a true sense a
priest. He poured out a most violent torrent of abuse against Henry
VIII of England, who, in his "Defence of the Seven
Sacraments", had ventured to join issue with the German reformer.
At the same time he undertook to prepare a translation of the New
Testament as a means of advancing his propaganda. By aid of
mis-translations and marginal notes he sought to popularise his views
on Faith and Justification, and to win favour with the people by
opening to them the word of God, which he asserted falsely had been
closed against them for centuries.
All his pamphlets were couched in popular language and were exactly the
kind of works likely to appeal to the masses of the people, as well as
to the debased instincts of those who had entered into the religious
state in response to the wishes of their parents or guardians rather
than in obedience to the call of God. But while Luther thus catered
for the multitude, Melanchthon sought to gain the support of the more
educated classes by throwing Luther's teaching into scientific and
systematic form in his work, "Loci Communes" (1521), a book
that remained for centuries the standard authority on Lutheran
teaching.
It would be wrong to assume that Luther developed his theological
system in its entirety before his separation from the Church. On the
question of Justification and Free-will he had arrived at views
distinctly opposed to Catholic doctrine, but his system as such took
shape only gradually in response to the attacks of his opponents or the
demands of his friends. On the one hand, imbued with the ideas of
German Pantheistic mysticism, Luther started with the fixed
principle that man's action is controlled by necessary laws, and that
even after justification man is completely devoid of free will at least
in religious matters. According to him, human nature became so
essentially maimed and corrupted by the sin of Adam that every work
which man can do is and must be sinful, because it proceeds in some way
from concupiscence. Hence it is, he asserted, that good works are
useless in acquiring justification, which can be obtained only by
faith; and by faith he understood not the mere intellectual assent to
revealed doctrines, but a practical confidence, resulting, no doubt,
from this assent, that the merits of Christ will be applied to the
soul. Through this faith the sinner seizes upon the righteousness of
Christ, and by applying to himself the justice of his Saviour his
sins are covered up. For this reason Luther explained that
justification did not mean the actual forgiveness of sin by the infusion
of some internal habit called sanctifying grace, but only the
non-imputation of the guilt on account of the merits of Christ.
Since faith alone is necessary for justification it followed as a
logical consequence that there was no place in Luther's system for the
Sacraments, though in deference to old traditions he retained three
Sacraments, Baptism, Penance, and the Eucharist. These,
however, as he took care to explain, do not produce grace in the
soul. They are mere outward pledges that the receiver has the faith
without which he cannot be justified. Having in this way rejected the
sacramental system and the sacrificial character of the Mass, it was
only natural that he should disregard the priesthood, and proclaim that
all believers were priests. In harmony with his theory on
justification, and its dependence on faith, he denounced Purgatory,
Prayers for the Dead, Indulgences, and Invocation of the Saints
as being in themselves derogatory to the merits of Christ.
On the other hand, he laid it down as the leading principle that the
Bible was the sole rule of faith, and that individual judgment was its
only interpreter. Consequently he rejected the idea of a visible
authority set up by Christ as an infallible guide in religious
affairs. In this way he sought to undermine the authority of the
Church, to depreciate the value of the decrees of the Popes and
General Councils, and to re-assure his less daring followers by
stripping ecclesiastical censures of more than half their
terrors.[55]
The results of Luther's literary activity were soon apparent at
Wittenberg and other centres in Germany. The Augustinians in
Luther's own convent set aside their vows as worthless, and rejected
the Mass. Carlstadt made common cause with the most radical element
in the city, celebrated Mass on Christmas morning in the German
language (1521), and administered Holy Communion to every one
who came forward to receive, without any inquiry about their spiritual
condition. Putting himself at the head of a body of students and
roughs he went round the churches destroying the pictures, statues,
confessionals, and altars. To increase the confusion a party of men
at Zwickau led by a shoemaker, Nicholas Storch, and a preacher,
Thomas Munzer, following the principle of private judgment advocated
by Luther, insisted on faith as a condition for baptism and rejected
infant baptism as worthless. They were called Anabaptists. They
claimed to be special messengers from God, gifted with the power of
working miracles, and favoured with visions from on high. In vain did
Luther attack them as heretics, and exhort his lieutenants to suppress
them as being more dangerous than the Papists. Carlstadt, unable to
answer their arguments from Scripture, went over to their side, and
even Melanchthon felt so shaken in his opposition that he appealed to
Wartburg for guidance. The students at the university became so
restless and turbulent that Duke George of Saxony began to take the
prompt and decisive action necessary for dealing with such a dangerous
situation. Luther, alarmed for the future of his work, abandoned his
retreat at Wartburg (March 1522) and returned to Wittenberg,
where he had recourse to stern measures to put an end to the confusion.
He drove Carlstadt from the city, and even followed him to other
places where he tried to find refuge, till at last, after a very
disedifying scene between them in a public tavern, he forced him to
flee from Saxony. Carlstadt's greatest offence in the eyes of his
master was his preaching against the Real Presence of Christ in the
Eucharist, though Luther himself admitted that he should have liked
to deny the Real Presence if only to annoy the Pope, were it not
that the words of Scripture proved too strong. Carlstadt adopted a
different interpretation, but Luther was not the man to tolerate
individual judgment in the case of one of his own lieutenants.
Carlstadt was denounced as a heretic and a blasphemer, for whom no
punishment could be sufficiently severe. Munzer, too, was banished,
and with the assistance of the Elector, Luther was enabled to
overcome all his opponents.
Luther owed his success in the opening years of his campaign mainly to
his ability in gauging the feelings of the different classes whose
support he wished to obtain, as well as to his complete mastery of the
German language. In appealing to the monks and nuns, who were
longing to escape from the obligations they had contracted, he offered
them complete liberty by denouncing their vows as opposed to the freedom
of the Gospel and consequently sinful. Many of the monks and nuns
abandoned their cloisters and fled to Wittenberg to seek the pleasures
denied them hitherto, and to put in practice Luther's teaching on the
necessity of marriage. Though he encouraged bishops and priests to
marry, and though he forwarded his warmest congratulations to
Carlstadt on his betrothal to a fifteen year old maiden (1522),
Luther himself hesitated long before taking his final plunge; but at
last, against the advice of his best friends, he took as his wife
Catherine Bora, one of the escaped nuns who had sought refuge in
Wittenberg. His marriage (1525) was a source of amusement to
his opponents as it was of dismay to his supporters. Melanchthon
complained bitterly of the step his master had taken, but he consoled
himself with the thought that the marriage might out an end to his
former frivolity, and might allay the suspicions that his conduct had
aroused.[56] To the princes, the free cities, and the landless
knights he appealed by holding out hopes that they might be enriched by
a division of the ecclesiastical estates and of the goods of the
monasteries and churches. With the overthrow of the Pope and of the
bishops the princes were led to expect that they might themselves become
spiritual dictators in their own dominions. To the friends of the
Humanist movement and the great body of the professors and students he
represented himself as the champion of learning and intellectual
freedom, anxious to defend them against the obscurantism of the
Scholastics and the interference of the Roman congregations.
A large number of the leading Humanists, believing that Luther had
undertaken only a campaign against universally recognised abuses, were
inclined at first to sympathise with his movement. The friendly
attitude they adopted, and the influence employed by Erasmus and
others on his behalf during the early years of his revolt contributed
not a little to his final success. But as it became evident that his
object was the overthrow of the Church and of doctrines accepted as
dogmas of faith by the whole Christian world, his former allies fell
away one by one. On the question of free-will Erasmus, who had long
played a double role, found it necessary to take the field openly
against him.[57] Luther's answer, full of personal abuse and
invective, drew a sharp reply from Erasmus, and all friendly
intercourse between them was broken off for ever.
But it was on the mass of the people, the peasants and the artisans,
that Luther relied mainly for support, and it was to these he
addressed his most forcible appeals. The peasants of Germany, ground
down by heavy taxes and reduced to the position of slaves, were ready
to listen to the revolutionary ideas put forward by leaders like
Sickingen and von Hutten, and to respond to the call of Luther to
rise against their princes whether they were secular or ecclesiastical.
In the imagination of the peasants Luther appeared as the friend of
human liberty, determined to deliver them from the intolerable yoke
that had been laid upon them by their masters. His attacks were
confined at first to the prince-bishops and abbots, but soon realising
the strength of the weapon he wielded, he attacked the lay princes in
the pamphlets entitled "Christian Liberty" and "The Secular
Magistracy", and advocated the complete overthrow of all authority.
It is true, undoubtedly, that many of the peasants were already
enrolled in the secret societies, and that had there never been a
Luther a popular rising might have been anticipated; but his doctrines
on evangelical freedom and his frenzied onslaughts on the ecclesiastical
and lay rulers, turned the movement into an anti-religious channel,
and imparted to the struggle a uniformity and bitterness that otherwise
it could never have acquired.
Risings of the peasantry took place in various parts of Germany,
notably in Swabia, Thuringia, the Rhine Provinces, and Saxony
(1524). Thomas Munzer, the leader of the Anabaptists,
encouraged them in their fight for freedom. At first the attack was
directed principally against the spiritual princes. Many monasteries
and churches were plundered, and several of the nobles were put to
death. Soon the lay princes of Germany, alarmed by the course of the
revolutionaries and fearing for the safety of their own territories,
assembled their forces and marched against the insurgents. The war was
carried on mercilessly on both sides, close upon 100,000
peasants being killed in the field, while many of their leaders,
amongst them Thomas Munzer, were arrested and condemned to death.
In nearly every important engagement the peasants, as might be
expected, suffered defeat, so that before the end of 1525 the
movement was, practically speaking, at an end. Luther, who had been
consulted by both sides, and who had tried to avoid committing himself
to either, frightened by the very violence of the storm he had been
instrumental in creating, issued an appeal to the princes calling upon
them to show no mercy to the forces of disorder,[58] and even
Melanchthon, gentle and moderate as he usually was, did not hesitate
to declare that the peasants of Germany had more liberty than should be
allowed to such a rude and uncultured people. The Peasants' War,
disastrous as it was, did some good by opening men's eyes to the
dangerous consequences of Luther's extravagant harangues, and by
giving some slight indications as to the real character and methods of
the man, who was posing as a heaven-sent reformer and at the same time
as a champion of popular liberty.
But though Luther lost ground in many quarters owing to the part he
played before and during the Peasants' War, he had no intention of
abandoning the struggle in despair. During the early years of his
campaign his mind was so engrossed with the overthrow of existing
religious institutions, that he had little time to consider how he
should rebuild what he had pulled down. At first he thought that no
visible organisation was necessary, as the Church, according to his
view, consisted of all those who had true faith and charity. But soon
he abandoned this idea in favour of district or local churches that
should be left completely independent. The disturbances in Germany
during the Peasants' War taught him the hopelessness of such a
scheme, and showed him that his only chance of permanent success lay in
the organisation of state churches to be placed under the protection and
authority of the civil rulers. By this bribe he hoped to conciliate
the princes, whom he had antagonised by his attacks on their own body
as well as by his attitude during the early stages of the disturbance.
The Elector John of Saxony, who had succeeded his brother
Frederick, hesitated at first to assist him in the momentous work of
setting up a rival Christian organisation. But, at last, mindful of
the advantages that would accrue to him from being recognised as supreme
head of the Church in his own dominions, he gave a reluctant consent
to the plans formulated by Luther.
A body of visitors consisting of clerics and lawyers was appointed to
draw up a new ecclesiastical constitution, the most noteworthy feature
of which was the complete dependence of the new church on the secular
authority of each state. Episcopal jurisdiction was rejected, and in
place of the bishops, superintendents were appointed. The ordinary
administration was to be carried out by a synod of clerics and laymen
elected by the various parishes, but, in reality, the right of
appointment, of taxation, of apportioning the temporal goods, and of
deciding legal difficulties passed under the control of the sovereign.
Strange to say, though Luther insisted on individual judgment during
his campaign against the Catholic Church, he had no difficulty in
urging the civil rulers to force all their subjects to join the new
religious body. The goods of the Catholic Church were to be
appropriated, some of them being set aside for the support of the new
religious organisation, while the greater portion of them found their
way into the royal treasury. The Mass, shorn of the Elevation and
of everything that would imply the idea of sacrifice, was translated
into the German language, so that in all solemn religious services the
place of the Sacrifice was taken by the hymns, Scriptural lessons,
the sermon, and the Lord's Supper. Melanchthon wrote a Visitation
Book (1527) for the guidance of Lutheran ministers, and Luther
himself published two catechisms for the instruction of the children.
The Lutheran church was organised on a similar plan in Hesse and
Brandenburg and in many of the free cities such as Nurnberg,
Magdeburg, Bremen, Frankfurt, Ulm, etc. By these measures the
separation was completed definitely, and a certain amount of unity was
ensured for the new religion.
Meanwhile, how fared it with the Emperor and the Pope? Shortly
after the Diet of Nurnberg (1522) Charles V left Germany
for the Netherlands. Owing to the troubles in Spain and the long
drawn out war with France he was unable to give any attention to the
progress of affairs in Germany. The administration of the Empire was
committed to three representatives, the ablest of whom was the Elector
Frederick of Saxony, the friend and patron of Luther. The result
was that Luther had a free hand to spread his views notwithstanding the
decree of Worms.
Leo X died in 1521 and was succeeded by Adrian VI
(1522-3), a former tutor of the Emperor. As a Hollander it
might be anticipated that his representations to the German princes
would prove more effective than those of his Italian predecessor,
particularly as not even his worst enemies could discover anything
worthy of reproach either in his principles or personal conduct.
Convinced that Luther's only chance of winning support lay in his
exaggerated denunciations of real or imaginary abuses, he determined to
bring about a complete reform, first in Rome itself and then
throughout the entire Christian world. Owing to his ill-disguised
contempt for all that was dear to the heart of the Humanist Leo X,
and to the severe measures taken by him to reduce expenses at the Roman
Court, he encountered great opposition in Rome, and incurred the
dislike both of officials and people.
When he learned that a Diet was to be held at Nurnberg (1522)
to consider plans for the defence of the Empire against the Turks who
had conquered Belgrade, he despatched Chieregati as his nuncio to
invite the princes to enforce the decree of Worms, and to restore
peace to the Church by putting down the Lutheran movement. In his
letters to individual members of the Diet and in his instructions to
the nuncio, which were read publicly to the assembled representatives,
Adrian VI admitted the existence of grave abuses both in Rome
itself and in nearly every part of the church.[59] He promised,
however, to do everything that in him lay to bring about a complete and
thorough reform.
These admissions served only to strengthen the hands of Luther and his
supporters, who pointed to them as a justification for the whole
movement, and to provide the princes with a plausible explanation of
their inactivity in giving effect to the decree of Worms. The princes
refused to carry out the decree of Worms, alleging as an excuse the
danger of popular commotion. They brought forward once more the
grievances of the German nation against Rome ("Centum
Gravamina"), insisted on a General Council being called to restore
peace to the Church, and held out a vague hope that an effort would be
made to prevent the spread of the new doctrine till the Council should
be convoked.
The papal nuncio, dissatisfied with the attitude of the
representatives, withdrew from the Diet before the formal reply was
delivered to him. Adrian VI, cognisant of the failure of his
efforts and wearied by the opposition of the Romans to whom his reforms
were displeasing, made a last fruitless effort to win over Frederick
of Saxony to his side. The news that the island of Rhodes, for the
defence of which he had laboured and prayed so strenuously, had fallen
into the hands of the Turks, served to complete his affliction and to
bring him to a premature grave. He died in September 1523 to the
great delight of the Romans, who could barely conceal their rejoicing
even when he lay on his bed of death. He was an excellent Pope,
though perhaps not sufficiently circumspect for the critical times in
which he lived. Had he been elected a century earlier, and had he
been given an opportunity of carrying out reforms, as had been given to
some of his predecessors, the Lutheran movement would have been an
impossibility.
He was succeeded by Clement VII (1523-34). The new
Pope was a relative of Leo X, and, like him, a patron of
literature and art. He was a man of blameless life and liberal views,
and endowed with great prudence and tact, but his excessive caution and
want of firmness led to the ruin of his best-conceived plans and to the
failure of his general policy. He despatched Cardinal Campeggio as
his legate to the Diet of Nurnberg (1524). Once again the
princes of Germany closed their ears to the appeal of the Pope,
refused to take energetic measures to enforce the decree of Worms, and
talked of establishing a commission to consider the grievances of their
nation against Rome, and to inquire into the religious issues that had
been raised. Campeggio, feeling that it was hopeless to expect
assistance from the Diet, turned to the individual princes. He
succeeded in bringing about an alliance at Ratisbon (1524)
between the rulers of Austria, Bavaria, and several of the
ecclesiastical princes of Southern Germany for the purpose of opposing
the new teaching and safeguarding the interests of the Catholic
Church. A similar alliance of the Catholic princes of Northern
Germany was concluded at Dessau in 1526. At the same time the
princes who were favourable to Lutheran views, notably Philip of
Hesse, John, Elector of Saxony, the rulers of Brandenburg,
Prussia, Mecklenburg and Mansfeld, together with the
representatives of the cities of Brunswick and Mecklenburg, met and
pledged themselves to make common cause, were any attempt made by the
Emperor or the Catholic princes to suppress Luther's doctrine by
force. In this way Germany was being divided gradually into two
hostile camps.
Unfortunately Charles V, whose presence in Germany might have
exercised a restraining influence, was so engrossed in the life and
death struggle with France that he had no time to follow the progress
of the religious revolt. To complicate the issue still more, Clement
VII, who had been friendly to the Emperor for some time after his
election, alarmed lest the freedom of the Papal States and of the
Holy See might be endangered were the French driven completely from
the peninsula, took sides openly against Charles V and formed an
alliance with his opponent. The good fortune that had smiled on the
French arms suddenly deserted them. In 1525 Francis I was
defeated at Pavia and taken as prisoner to Spain, where he was forced
to accept the terms dictated to him by his victorious rival. On his
release in 1526 he refused to abide by the terms of the Treaty,
and a new alliance, consisting of the Pope, France, England,
Venice, Florence, Milan, and Switzerland was formed against
Charles V. Disturbances, fomented by the Italian supporters of the
Emperor, broke out in the Papal States, and a German army led by
the Prince of Bourbon marched on Rome without the knowledge of
Charles, captured the city, plundered its treasures, and for several
days wreaked a terrible vengeance on the citizens. Charles, who was
in Spain at the time, was deeply grieved when the news was brought to
him of the havoc that had been wrought by his subordinates. A
temporary peace was concluded immediately between the Emperor and the
Pope, and the peace of Barcelona in 1529 put an end to this
unholy strife. About the same time the hostilities between Charles
and Francis I were brought to a conclusion by the Peace of
Cambrai, and the Emperor, having been crowned by the Pope at
Bologna (1530), was free at last to turn his attention to the
religious revolution in Germany.[60]
During the struggle between Charles V and the Pope the Lutheran
princes had a free hand to do as they pleased, and, indeed, at one
time they were not without hope that Charles might be induced to place
himself at their head. Besides, owing to the fact that the Turks
were advancing on Hungary and were likely to overrun the hereditary
dominions of the House of Habsburg, they felt confident that no
attempt could be made to suppress Lutheranism by force. At the Diet
of Speier, in 1526, John Duke of Saxony, and Philip of
Hesse adopted so violent and unconciliatory an attitude that Germany
was on the brink of civil war, had not the Archduke Ferdinand,
alarmed by the success of the Turks, used all his powers to prevent a
division. It was agreed that both sides should unite against the
Turks, that a Council should be called within a year to discuss the
religious difficulties, and that in the meantime individual rulers were
free to enforce or disregard the decree of Worms as they wished.
These concessions, wrung from the Catholic princes owing to the fear
of Turkish invasion, did not satisfy either party. False rumours
were spread among the Protestant princes that Duke George of Saxony
and other Catholic rulers intended to have recourse to arms, and
though the Duke was able to clear himself of the charge, the relations
between the two parties became gradually more strained. In 1526
the Turks overcame the Hungarians and Bohemians at Mohacz, and
advancing into Austria were encamped under the very walls of Vienna.
It became necessary to summon another Diet at Speier (1529).
The Catholic princes were in the majority, and the knowledge, that
the Emperor had concluded peace with France and the Pope and was now
ready to support them, rendered them less willing to accept dictation.
It was carried by a majority that the Emperor should endeavour to have
a Council convoked within a year, that in the meantime the rulers in
whose territories the decree of Worms had been in force should continue
to enforce it, and that in the states where the new teaching had taken
root the rulers were at liberty to allow it to continue, but, in the
interval before the Council they should permit no further changes to be
introduced. Nobody should be allowed to preach against the Sacrament
of the Altar; the Mass should be celebrated if it had not been
abolished, and if abolished no one should be punished for celebrating
or attending it, and the Scripture should be expounded according to
the traditional interpretation of the Church.
The Lutheran party objected strongly to this decree, and as their
objections were over-ruled they submitted a formal protest, on account
of which they received the distinctive title of Protestants.[61]
The protest, signed by the Elector of Saxony, the Margrave of
Brandenburg, the Dukes of Brunswick-Luneburg, Philip of Hesse,
and the representatives of fourteen cities, having failed to produce
any effect on the Diet, a deputation was appointed to interview the
Emperor and to place their grievances before him. But Charles V,
mindful of his imperial oath, refused to allow himself to be
intimidated. He warned the deputation that he and the Catholic
princes had also their duties to fulfil towards God and the Church,
and that until a Council should assemble they must obey the decrees of
the Diet. In January 1530 he convened a new Diet to meet at
Augsburg at which he himself promised to be present.
The Diet was convened to meet at Augsburg in April 1530, but it
was the middle of June before the Emperor, accompanied by the papal
legate, made his formal entrance into the city. On the following day
the feast of Corpus Christi was celebrated with the customary
solemnities, and the Emperor was pained deeply when he learned that
the Protestant princes refused to be present or to take any part in the
function. At the opening of the Diet it was agreed that the religious
question should take precedence, and the Protestant princes were
invited to make a clear statement of their doctrines and demands.
Luther himself could not be present on account of the decree of
Worms, and hence the duty of preparing a complete exposition of the
Protestant doctrine devolved upon the ablest of his lieutenants,
Philip Melanchthon. He drew up and presented to the Diet the
document known as the "Augsburg Confession" ("Confessio
Augustana"), accepted by Luther himself as a masterly though
perhaps too moderate statement of the new teaching. The Confession
was divided into two parts, the former of which consisted of
twenty-one articles or dogmas of faith received by himself and his
friends; the latter dwelt with what he termed abuses which they
rejected, notable amongst these being celibacy of the clergy, monastic
vows, auricular confession, private masses, communion under one
kind, abstinence, and episcopal government. The Confession was
drawn up very skilfully, great prominence being given to the doctrines
on which all Christians were agreed, while the distinctive tenets of
the Protestant reformers were put forward in their mildest and least
offensive form. The document was read to the Diet in German by
Bayer, Chancellor of the Elector of Saxony, and undoubtedly it
produced a marked impression on the assembly. The Emperor held a
conference with the Catholic princes, some of whom advocated prompt
recourse to the sternest measures. Others, however, amongst them
being several of the ecclesiastical princes, misled by the temperate
and, in a certain sense, misleading character of Melanchthon's
statement, and believing that a peaceful solution to the religious
difficulty was still possible, urged Charles V to abstain from
decisive action. It was agreed that the work of examining and refuting
the Augsburg Confession should be entrusted to a certain number of
Catholic theologians, the most prominent of whom were Eck,
Cochlaeus, and Conrad Wimpina.[62] Unfortunately these men
allowed their natural feelings of irritation to overcome their
judgment, and not content with a calm and judicial refutation of the
document submitted to them, they attacked warmly the exaggerations,
contradictions, and misrepresentations of Catholic doctrine of which
Luther had been guilty, and succeeded in imparting to their reply a
bitter and ironical tone more likely to widen than to heal the
division. At the request of the Emperor they modified it very
considerably, confining themselves entirely to a brief and
dispassionate examination of the individual points raised by
Melanchthon, and in its modified form their refutation ("Confutatio
Confessionis Augustanae") was presented to the Diet (3rd
Aug.).
When the reply of the Catholic theologians had been read the Emperor
called upon the Protestant princes to return to the unity of the
Church; but his appeal fell upon deaf ears, and it seemed as if the
issue were to be decided immediately by civil war. By way of
compromise it was suggested that representatives of both parties should
meet in conference, Eck, Cochlaeus, and Wimpina being selected as
the Catholic theologians, Melanchthon, Brenz, and Schnep as the
champions of Lutheranism. From the very outset it should have been
evident to all that, where disagreement was so fundamental, one party
maintaining the theory of an infallible Church as the only safe guide
in religious matters, the other rejecting entirely the authority of the
Church and the Pope in favour of individual judgment, the discussion
of particular dogmas could never lead to unity. As a matter of fact
Melanchthon was willing to make most important concessions, and on the
question of original sin, free-will, justification, faith,
penance, and the intercession of the saints, formulas were put forward
not displeasing to either party. Even in regard to the Eucharist,
the jurisdiction of the bishops, and the supremacy of Rome,
Melanchthon was inclined to go far to meet his opponents, much to the
disgust of the extremists of his own party and to the no small alarm of
Luther.[63] But in reality the apparent harmony existed only on
paper, and the concessions made by Melanchthon depended entirely on
the meaning that should be placed on the ambiguous phraseology and
qualifications with which they were clothed. On the question of the
Mass, the celibacy of the clergy, and the meritorious character of
good works, no agreement was arrived at, as Melanchthon, alarmed by
the opposition of his own supporters and the reproofs of Luther, was
unwilling to modify his position. What the conference of theologians
had failed to do was undertaken by a mixed commission consisting of
princes, theologians, and lawyers, but without any result. In
September the Emperor announced that he was endeavouring to procure
the convocation of a General Council and that in the meantime the
Protestants should return to the old faith, a certain time being
allowed them for consideration, that they should attempt no further
innovations or interference with the followers of the old faith, that
they should restore the ecclesiastical goods which had been seized, and
that they should unite with the Catholics in opposing the Anabaptists
and the Sacramentarians.
The Protestant princes refused to submit on the ground that their
doctrines were in harmony with the Word of God, and to justify this
contention Melanchthon published the "Apologia Confessionis
Augustanae", which was in many points more full and explicit than the
Confession itself. Some of the German cities that had embraced the
Zwinglian doctrine, notably, Strassburg and Constance, repudiated
the Augsburg Confession, and presented a document embodying their
beliefs, known as the "Confessio Tetrapolitana" which found no
favour with Charles V or with the Diet. Finally, on the 18th
November, the Emperor announced to the Diet that until a General
Council should meet, everything must be restored to the "status
quo", that he felt it incumbent upon him as protector of the Church
to defend the Catholic faith with all his might, and that in this work
he could count on the full support of the Catholic princes.
Unfortunately, it was by no means correct to state that the Catholic
rulers of Germany stood behind their Emperor. Nearly all of them
were anxious to avoid civil war at any cost, and not a few of them
hesitated to support the Emperor lest the suppression of the
Protestant princes might lead to the establishment of a strong central
power. Nor were the Protestants alarmed by the threat of force.
With the Turks hovering on the flanks of the empire, they were
confident that they might expect concessions rather than violence.
The Protestant princes met in December (1530) at Schmalkald to
consider their position, and early in the following year (1531)
they formed the Schmalkaldic League for the defence of their religious
and temporal interests. Negotiations were opened up with France,
Denmark, and England, and notification was made to the Emperor that
they must withhold their assistance against the Turks until their
religious beliefs were secured. They refused, furthermore, to
recognise Ferdinand, brother of Charles V, whom Charles had
proclaimed King of the Romans. The Emperor, alarmed by the news
that Soliman was preparing an immense army for a general attack on
Italy and Austria, and well aware that he could not count either on
the assistance of the Catholic princes or the neutrality of France,
was forced to give way. In July 1532 peace was concluded at
Nurnberg. According to the terms of the Peace of Nurnberg it was
agreed that until a General Council should assemble no action should
be taken against the Protestant princes, and that in the interval
everything was to remain unchanged. This agreement, it was
stipulated, should apply only to those who accepted the Confession of
Augsburg, a stipulation that was meant to exclude the followers of
Zwingli.
Charles V was really anxious that a Council should be called, nor
was Clement VII unwilling to meet his wishes, if only he could
have been certain that a Council constituted as such assemblies had
been constituted traditionally, could serve any useful purpose. Time
and again Luther had expressed his supreme contempt for the authority
of General Councils, though he professed to be not unwilling to
submit the matters in dispute to a body of men selected by the civil
rulers. In 1532-3 Pope and Emperor met at Bologna to discuss
the situation, and messengers were despatched to see on what terms the
Protestants would consent to attend the Council. The members of the
Schmalkaldic League refused (1533) to accept the conditions
proposed by the Pope, namely, that the Council should be constituted
according to the plan hitherto followed in regard to such assemblies,
and that all should pledge themselves beforehand to accept its
decrees.[64]
Clement VII died in September (1534) and was succeeded by
Paul III (1534-49). He convoked a General Council to
meet at Mantua in 1537, but the League refused once more to
attend (1535). Even had there been no other difficulties in the
way, the war that broke out with renewed bitterness between Charles
V and Francis I would have made it impossible for such a body to
meet with any hope of success. The helpless condition of the
Emperor, confronted, as he was, on the one side by the French and
on the other by the Turks, raised the hopes of the Protestant party,
and made them more determined than ever to attend no Council in which
the authority of the bishops or the jurisdiction of the Pope should be
recognised. Moreover, each year brought new accessions to their
ranks. The appearance of organised Christian bodies, completely
national in character, accepting the civil rulers as their head, and
conceding to them full power to deal as they liked with ecclesiastical
property, created a deep impression on several princes and free
cities, and made them not averse to giving the new religion a fair
trial. In 1530, the Elector of Saxony, Philip of Hesse and
the rulers of Ansbach, Anhalt, Brunswick-Luneburg, Bayreuth,
East Friesland, and a few of the larger cities had gone over to
Luther. Before ten years had elapsed the greater part of Northern
Germany had fallen from the Catholic Church, and even in Southern
Germany Protestantism had made serious inroads. Several of the more
important cities such as Wittenberg, Strassburg, Nurnberg,
Magdeburg, Frankfurt-on-Main, Hamburg, and Erfurt became
leading centres for the spread of the new teaching, while many of the
German universities, for example, Erfurt, Basle, Frankfurt,
Rostock, and Marburg supported strongly the efforts of Luther.
The Catholic princes, alarmed by the rapid spread of the new
doctrines and by the extravagant demands of the Protestants, met
together to form the Holy League (1538) as a defence against the
Schmalkaldic confederation. Feeling was running so high at the time
that the long expected war might have broken out immediately, had not
the dread of a Turkish invasion exercised a restraining influence on
both parties. In 1539 negotiations were opened up for a temporary
armistice, and another fruitless attempt was made to arrive at peace by
means of a religious conference. Before any result had been attained
the Emperor summoned a Diet to meet at Ratisbon (April 1541).
Three theologians were appointed from both sides to discuss the
questions at issue. Though some of the Catholic representatives
showed clearly enough that their desire for union was much greater than
their knowledge of Catholic principles, an understanding was arrived
at only in regard to a few points of difference. By the Recess of the
Diet (known as the "Ratisbon Interim") it was ordered that both
parties should observe the articles of faith on which they had agreed
until a General Council should meet, that in the interval the terms
of the Peace of Nurnberg should be carried out strictly, that the
religious houses that had escaped destruction hitherto should remain
undisturbed, and that the disciplinary decrees promulgated by the
cardinal legate (Contarini) should be obeyed by the Catholics.
The Protestant princes were still dissatisfied. In order to procure
their assistance Charles was obliged to yield to further demands,
notably, to permit them to suppress the monasteries in their
dominions. But, fortunately for the Catholic Church, the agreement
embodied in the "Ratisbon Interim" was rejected by the more extreme
Protestant Party led by Luther himself, and the danger of grave
misunderstanding was removed.
During the following years the Lutheran movement continued to advance
by leaps and bounds. Duke George of Saxony, one of its strongest
opponents, died in 1539, and his successor invited the Lutheran
preachers to assist him in the work of reform. Henry, Duke of
Brunswick, was driven from his kingdom by the League of Schmalkald
and forced to seek refuge in Bavaria. The Bishoprics of Hildesheim
and Naumburg were captured by force, and it required all the efforts
of the Pope and of the Emperor to prevent Cologne from being handed
over to Luther's followers by its prince-bishop (Hermann von
Wied). Lutheranism provided almost irresistible attractions for the
lay rulers, who desired to acquire wealth and power at the expense of
the Church, as well as for the unworthy ecclesiastical princes who
were anxious to convert the states of which they were merely
administrators into hereditary dominions.
But though outwardly the movement prospered beyond expectation all was
far from well within. The fundamental principle enunciated by
Luther, namely, the rejection of all religious authority, opened the
way for new theories and new sects. Quite apart from the controversies
between the followers of Luther and Zwingli, which shall be dealt
with later, the Anabaptists and others continued to destroy the
harmony of the self-styled reformers. The Anabaptists seized the
city of Munster, proclaimed a democratic theocracy with John of
Leyden, a tailor, at its head, and pronounced their intention of
taking the field for the overthrow of tyrants and impostors. But their
success was short-lived. Conrad, bishop and prince of Munster,
raised an army, laid siege to the city which he captured after a
desperate struggle, and put to death the fanatical leaders who had
deceived the people (1535-6). Other writers and preachers
questioned the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation, and
advocated many heresies condemned by the early Church, some of them
going so far as to insist on the revival of circumcision and the Jewish
ceremonial law.[65]
Nor did the new teaching exercise an elevating influence on the morals
or conduct of its adherents. Luther himself was forced to admit that
the condition of affairs had grown worse even than it had been before he
undertook his campaign. "Since we have commenced to preach our
doctrine," he said in one of his sermons, "the world has grown daily
worse, more impious, and more shameless. Men are now beset by
legions of devils, and while enjoying the full light of the Gospel are
more avaricious, more impure, and repulsive than of old under the
Papacy. Peasants, burghers, nobles, men of all degrees, the
higher as well as the lowest are all alike slaves to avarice,
drunkenness, gluttony, and impurity, and given over to horrible
excesses of abominable passions."[66]
The princes, free from all religious and ecclesiastical restraints,
set an example of licentiousness which their subjects were not slow to
imitate. Philip of Hesse was the life and soul of the Lutheran
movement. He was married already to Christina, daughter of Duke
George of Saxony, by whom eight children had been born to him, but
finding it impossible to observe his marriage obligations, and wishing
to impart to his own sinful conduct an air of decency, he demanded
permission from Luther to marry one of the maids of honour in
attendance on his sister. This request placed Luther and Melanchthon
in a very delicate position. On the one hand, if they acceded to it
they would be regarded as patrons and defenders of adultery and would
expose themselves to the ridicule of their opponents; on the other,
were they to refuse compliance with his wishes, Philip, forgetful of
his former zeal for the pure word of God, might carry out his threats
to return to the Catholic Church. After long and anxious
deliberation they determined to exercise a dispensing power such as had
never been exercised before by any Pope. "In order to provide for
the welfare of his soul and body and to bring greater glory to God,"
they allowed him to take to himself a second wife, insisting,
however, that the whole affair should be kept a close secret. But
hardly had the marriage ceremony been gone through (1540) than the
story of the dispensation became public. Luther was at first inclined
to deny it entirely as an invention of his enemies, but he changed his
mind when he found that the proofs were irrefragable and determined to
brazen out the affair.[67]
Luther's last years were full of anxiety and sorrow. As he looked
round his own city of Wittenberg and the cities of Germany where his
doctrines had taken root he found little ground for self-
congratulation. Religious dissensions, bitterness, war-like
preparations, decline of learning, decay of the universities, and
immorality, had marked the progress of his gospel. In many districts
the power of the Pope had indeed been broken, but only to make way for
the authority of the civil rulers upon whom neither religious nor
disciplinary canons could exercise any restraint; the monasteries and
religious institutions had been suppressed, but their wealth had passed
into the treasuries of the princes, whilst the poor for whose benefit
it had been held in trust were neglected, and the ministers of religion
were obliged to have recourse to different occupations to secure a
livelihood. To his followers and his most intimate associates he
denied the liberty of thought and speech that he claimed for himself,
by insisting on the unconditional acceptance of his doctrines as if in
him alone were vested supreme authority and infallibility. For
exercising their right to private judgment, Carlstadt was pursued from
pulpit to pulpit till at last he was forced to seek safety in flight;
Zwingli was denounced as a heretic for whose salvation it was useless
to pray; the Anabaptists were declared to be unworthy of any better
fate than the sword or the halter; Agricola, his most zealous
fellow-labourer, was banished from his presence and his writings were
interdicted; and even Melanchthon was at last driven to complain of
the state of slavery to which he had been reduced.[68]
His failing health and his disappointments served to sour his temper
and to render him less approachable. The attacks that he directed
against the Papacy such as "The Papacy an Institution of the
Devil", and the verses prepared for the vulgar caricatures that he
induced Cranach to design (1545) surpassed even his former
productions in violence and abusiveness. Tired of attacking the
Papacy, he turned his attention once more to the Jews, upon whom he
invoked the vengeance of Heaven in the last sermon that he was destined
to preach on earth. He was taken suddenly ill in Eisleben, where he
had come to settle some disputes between the Counts of Mansfeld, and
on the 18th February 1546, he passed away.[69]
Luther is a man whose character it is difficult to appreciate exactly.
At times he spoke and wrote as if he were endowed with a deeply
religious feeling, convinced of the truth of his doctrines, and
anxious only for the success of the work for which he professed to
believe he had been raised up by God. Some of his sermons sounded
like a trumpet call from Heaven, warning the people that the hour for
repentance had drawn nigh, while his conversations with his intimate
friends breathed at times a spirit of piety and fervour redolent of the
apostolic age. This, however, was only one feature of Luther's
character, and, unfortunately, it was a feature that manifested
itself only too rarely. As a general rule his writings, his sermons
and speeches, and, in a word, his whole line of conduct were in
direct opposition to everything that is associated generally in the
popular mind with the true religious reformer. His replies to his
opponents, even to those who, avoiding personalities, addressed
themselves directly to his doctrines, were couched in the most violent
and abusive language. His wild onslaughts and his demands for
vengeance on any one who ventured to question his teaching, whether
they were Catholics, Zwinglians, Sacramentarians or Anabaptists,
were the very antithesis of the spirit of charity and meekness that
should characterise a follower, not to say an apostle, of Christ.
Nor were his over-weening pride and self-confidence in keeping with
the spirit of meekness and humility inculcated so frequently in the
writings of the New Testament.
In his letters, and more especially in his familiar intercourse with
his friends,[70] his conversation was frequently risky and
indecent; his relations with women, at least before his marriage with
Catherine Bora, were, to put it mildly, not above suspicion, as is
evident from his own letters and the letters of his most devoted
supporters; while his references to marriage and vows of chastity in
his sermons and pamphlets were filthy and unpardonable even in an age
when people were much more outspoken on such subjects than they are at
present. Though he insisted strongly on the necessity of preaching the
pure Word of God, he had little difficulty in having recourse to
falsehood when truth did not serve his purpose, or in justifying his
conduct by advocating the principle that not all lies were sinful
particularly if they helped to damage the Roman Church. His frequent
and enthusiastic references to the pleasures of the table were more like
what one should expect to find in the writings of a Pagan epicure than
in those of a Christian reformer. He was not, as is sometimes
asserted, a habitual drunkard. His tireless activity as a writer and
preacher is in itself a sufficient refutation of such a charge, but he
was convinced that a hard drinking bout was at times good for both soul
and body, and in this respect at least he certainly lived up to his
convictions.[71]
It would be a mistake to judge him by his Latin writings, which,
both in manner and style, seldom rise above the level of mediocrity.
It is in his German books and pamphlets that Luther is seen at his
best. There, he appears as a man of great ability and learning,
gifted with a prodigious memory, a striking literary style, and a
happy knack of seizing upon the weak points of his adversaries and of
presenting his own side of the case in its most forcible and attractive
form. No man knew better than he how to adapt himself to the tastes of
his audience or the prejudices of his readers. He could play the role
of the judge or the professor almost as well as that of the impassioned
fanatic convinced that behind him were arrayed all the powers of
Heaven. In dealing with men of education, who were not likely to be
captivated by rhetoric, he could be calm and argumentative; but when
he addressed himself to the masses of the people he appeared in his true
character as a popular demagogue, hesitating at nothing that was likely
to arouse their indignation against the Roman Church and their
enthusiasm for the movement to which he had devoted his life. In words
of fiery eloquence he recalled to their minds the real and imaginary
grievances of their nation against Rome, the over-weening pride and
tyranny of the spiritual princes, the scandalous lives of many of the
ecclesiastics, and the failure of the Pope and councils to carry
through a scheme of wholesale reform. He called upon them to throw off
the yoke imposed by foreigners on their fathers and themselves, and to
support him in his struggle for the liberty of the people, the
independence of the German nation, and the original purity of the
Gospel, promising them that if only they would range themselves under
his banner, all their grievances, both spiritual and temporal, must
soon be redressed. Had Luther never appeared, or had he been less
gifted as an orator, a writer and a popular leader than he was, a
crisis must have arisen at the time; but his genius and enthusiasm
turned what might have been a trickling stream into a raging torrent,
threatening destruction to beliefs and institutions hitherto regarded as
inviolable. The time was ripe for a reformer, and Luther's only
claim to greatness was his capacity of utilising in a masterly way the
materials, political and religious, that lay ready at his hand.
Religious abuses, social unrest, politics, personal vanities, and
the excesses always attendant upon a great literary revival, were
pressed into his service, and were directed against the Roman
Church. And yet his success fell far short of his expectations.
Beyond doubt he contrived to detach individuals and kingdoms from their
obedience to the Pope and their submission to ecclesiastical authority
only to subject them to the spiritual yoke of secular princes, and to
expose them to doctrinal anarchy subversive of dogmatic religion; but
the Catholic Church and the See of Rome, for the overthrow of which
he had laboured so energetically, emerged triumphant from the terrible
trial that had been permitted by God only for its purification.
During the period that intervened between the "Ratisbon Interim"
and the death of Luther (1541-6) Charles V, hard pressed
by the war with France and the unsuccessful expeditions against the
Barbary pirates, was obliged to yield to the increasing demands of the
Protestant princes; nor could Paul III, however much he desired
it, realise his intention of convoking a General Council. But at
last the Peace of Crepy (1544) which put an end to the war with
France, and the convocation of a General Council to meet at Trent
in March 1545, strengthened the hands of the Emperor, and
enabled him to deal effectively with the religious revolution. The
Protestant princes announced their determination to take no part in a
Council convoked and presided over by the Pope. Charles left no
stone unturned to induce them to adopt a more conciliatory attitude,
but all his efforts having proved unavailing, he let it be known
publicly that he would not allow himself to be intimidated by threats of
violence, and that if need be he would insist on obedience at the point
of the sword. John Frederick of Saxony and Philip of Hesse,
alarmed by the threatening aspect of affairs, determined to anticipate
the Emperor, and took the field at the head of an army of forty
thousand men (1546).
Charles V, relying upon the aid of the Pope and the co-operation
of the Catholic princes, issued a proclamation calling upon all loyal
subjects to treat them as rebels and outlaws. Maurice of Saxony
deserted his co-religionists on promise of succeeding to the
Electorship, joined the standard of Charles V, and in conjunction
with Ferdinand directed his forces against Saxony. The Elector was
defeated and captured at Muhlberg (April 1547). He was
condemned to death as a traitor, but he was reprieved and detained as a
prisoner in the suite of the Emperor, while his nephew, Maurice of
Saxony, succeeded to his dominions. Philip of Hesse, too, was
obliged to surrender, and Charles V found himself everywhere
victorious. He insisted on the restoration of the Bishop of Naumburg
and of Henry of Brunswick to his kingdom as well as on the resignation
of Hermann Prince von Wied, Archbishop of Cologne. He was
unwilling, however, to proceed to extremes with the Protestant
princes, well knowing that he could not rely on some of his own
supporters. Besides, he had become involved in serious difficulties
with Pope Paul III, who complained, and not without reason, of
the demands made upon him by the Emperor, and of the concessions that
the Emperor was willing to make to the Lutherans.
Charles V summoned a Diet to meet at Augsburg (1547), where
he hoped that a permanent understanding might be secured. A document
known as the "Augsburg Interim", prepared by Catholic theologians
in conjunction with the Lutheran, John Agricola, was accepted
provisionally by both parties. The doctrines were expressed in a very
mild form, though not, however, altogether unacceptable to
Catholics. Protestants were permitted to receive communion under both
kinds; their married clergy were allowed to retain their wives; and it
was understood tacitly that they might keep possession of the
ecclesiastical property they had seized. The "Augsburg Interim",
as might have been anticipated, was displeasing to both parties.
Maurice of Saxony, unwilling to give it unconditional approval,
consulted Melanchthon and others of his school as to how far he might
accept its terms. In their reply they distinguished between matters
that were essential and those that were only of secondary importance.
The latter might be accepted unreservedly in obedience to the orders of
the Emperor. In regard to doctrines, they were willing to compromise
on the question of justification and good-works, to accept the
sacraments, including confirmation and Extreme Unction, the Mass
with the addition of some German hymns, and in a certain sense the
jurisdiction of the bishops. Such concessions were a distinct
departure from Luther's teaching and would have been impossible had he
been alive.
The relations between the Pope and the Emperor took a more friendly
turn when the General Council was transferred from Bologna to Trent
(1551). The Protestant princes, invited to send
representatives, declined at first, but in a short time several of
them agreed to accept the invitation. Safe conducts were issued for
their representatives by the Council in 1551 and again in
1552. Even the Wittenberg theologians were not unfavourably
disposed, and Melanchthon was actually on his way to Trent. But
suddenly Maurice of Saxony, who had assembled a large army under
pretext of reducing Magdeburg, and had strengthened himself by an
alliance with several princes as well as by a secret treaty with Henry
II of France, deserted the Emperor and placed himself at the head
of the Protestant forces. When all his plans were completed he
advanced suddenly through Thuringia, took Augsburg, and was within
an inch of capturing the Emperor who then lay ill at Innsbruck
(1552). At the same time the French forces occupied Lorraine.
Charles, finding himself unable to carry on the struggle, opened
negotiations for peace, and in 1552 the Treaty of Passau was
concluded. Philip of Hesse was to be set at liberty; a Diet was to
be called within six months to settle the religious differences; in the
meantime neither the Emperor nor the princes should interfere with
freedom of conscience; and all disputes that might arise were to be
referred to a commission consisting of an equal number of Protestant
and Catholic members.
Owing to the war with France it was not until the year 1555 that
the proposed Diet met at Augsburg. The Protestant party,
encouraged by their victories, were in no humour for compromise, and
as it was evident that there was no longer any hope of healing the
religious division in the Empire, it was agreed that peace could be
secured only by mutual toleration. In September 1555 the Peace
of Augsburg was concluded. According to the terms of this convention
full freedom of conscience was conceded in the Empire to Catholics and
to all Protestants who accepted the Augsburg Confession. The latter
were permitted to retain the ecclesiastical goods which they had already
acquired before the Treaty of Passau (1552). For the future
each prince was to be free to determine the religion of his subjects,
but in case a subject was not content with the religion imposed on him
by his sovereign he could claim the right to migrate into a more
friendly territory.
A great difficulty arose in regard to the disposal of the
ecclesiastical property in case a Catholic bishop or abbot should
apostatise. Notwithstanding the protests of the Protestant party, it
was decreed that if such an event should occur the seceder could claim
his own personal property, but not the property attached to his
office. This clause, known as the "Ecclesiasticum Reservatum",
gave rise to many disputes, and was one of the principal causes of the
Thirty Years' War.
By the "Peace of Augsburg" Protestantism was recognised as a
distinct and separate form of Christianity, and the first blow was
struck at the fundamental principles on which the Holy Roman Empire
had been built. Charles V was blamed at the time, and has been
blamed since for having given his consent to such a treaty, but if all
the circumstances of the time be duly considered it is difficult to see
how he could have acted otherwise than he did. It is not the Emperor
who should be held accountable for the unfavourable character of the
Augsburg Peace, but "the most Catholic King of France" who
allied himself with the forces of German Protestantism, and the
Catholic princes who were more anxious to secure their own position
than to fight for their sovereign or their religion. Charles V,
broken down in health and wearied by his misfortunes and his failure to
put down the religious revolt, determined to hand over to a younger man
the administration of the territories over which he ruled, and to
devote the remainder of his life to preparation for the world to come.
In a parting address delivered to the States of the Netherlands he
warned them "to be loyal to the Catholic faith which has always been
and everywhere the faith of Christendom, for should it disappear the
foundations of goodness should crumble away and every sort of mischief
now menacing the world would reign supreme." After his resignation he
retired to a monastery in Estremadura, where he died in 1558.
Spain and the Netherlands passed to his legitimate son, Philip
II, while after some delay his brother, Ferdinand, was
recognised as his successor in the Empire.
Charles V was a man of sound judgment and liberal views, of great
energy and prudence, as skilful in war as he was in the arts of
diplomacy, and immensely superior in nearly every respect to his
contemporaries, Francis I of France and Henry VIII of
England. Yet in spite of all his admitted qualifications, and
notwithstanding the fact that he was the ruler of three-fourths of
Western Europe, he lived to witness the overthrow of his dearest
projects and the complete failure of his general policy. But his want
of success was not due to personal imprudence or inactivity. It is to
be attributed to the circumstances of the times, the rebellion in
Spain, the open revolt of some and the distrust of others in
Germany, the rapid advance of the Turks towards the west, and,
above all, the struggle with France. Despite his many quarrels with
the Holy See, and in face of the many temptations held out to him to
arrive at the worldwide dictatorship to which he was suspected of
aspiring, by putting himself at the head of the new religious
movement, he never wavered for a moment in his allegiance to the
Catholic Church.
|
|