Chapter IV: The Counter-Reformation (16)

§ 129.1. =Luther’s Literary Works.=--In A.D. 1524 appeared the
first collection of spiritual songs and psalms, eight in number,
with a preface by Luther. His reforms of worship were extremely
moderate. In A.D. 1523 he published little tracts on baptism
and the Lord’s Supper, repudiating the idea of a sacrifice in
the mass, and insisting on communion in both kinds. In A.D. 1527
he wrote his “German Mass and Order of Public Worship” (§ 127, 1)
which was introduced generally throughout the elector’s dominions.
He wrote an address to burgomasters and councillors about the
improvement of education in the cities. Besides his polemic
against Erasmus and Carlstadt, against Münzer and the rebellious
peasants, as well as against the Sacramentarians (§ 131), he
engaged at this time in controversy with Cochlæus. A papal
bull for the canonization of Bishop Benno of Meissen (§ 93, 9)
called forth in A.D. 1524 Luther’s tract, “Against the new God
and the old Devil being set up at Meissen.” He was persuaded by
Christian II. of Denmark to write, in A.D. 1526, a very humble
letter to Henry VIII. of England (§ 125, 3), which was answered
in an extremely venomous and bitter style. When his enemies
triumphantly declared that he had retracted, Luther answered,
in A.D. 1527, with his book, “Against the Abusive Writing of
the King of England,” in which he resumed the bold and confident
tone of his earlier polemic. A humble, conciliatory epistle
sent in A.D. 1526 to Duke George was no more successful. He
now unweariedly continued his Bible translation. The first
edition of the whole Bible was published by Hans Lufft in
Wittenberg, in A.D. 1534. A collection of sayings of Luther
collected by Lauterbach, a deacon of Wittenberg, in A.D. 1538,
formed the basis of later and fuller editions of “Luther’s
Table Talk.” A chronologically arranged collection was made
ten years later, and was published in A.D. 1872 from a MS. in
the Royal Library at Dresden. Aurifaber in his collection did
not follow the chronological order, but grouped the utterances
according to their subjects, but with many arbitrary alterations
and modifications. The saying falsely attributed to Luther, “Who
loves not wine, women, and song?” etc., is assigned by Luther
himself to his Erfurt landlady, but has been recently traced to
an Italian source.

§ 129.2. The famous Catholic Church historian Döllinger, who in
his history of the Reformation had with ultramontane bitterness
defamed Luther and his work, twenty years later could not forbear
celebrating Luther in a public lecture as “the most powerful
patriot and the most popular character that Germany possessed.”
In A.D. 1871 he wrote as follows: “It was Luther’s supreme
intellectual ability and wonderful versatility that made him
the man of his age and of his nation. There has never been a
German who so thoroughly understood his fellow countrymen and
was understood by them as this Augustinian monk of Wittenberg.
The whole intellectual and spiritual making of the Germans
was in his hands as clay in the hands of the potter. He has
given more to his nation than any one man has ever done:
language, popular education, Bible, sacred song; and all that
his opponents could say against him and alongside of him seemed
insipid, weak, and colourless compared with his overmastering
eloquence. They stammered, he spoke. It was he who put a stamp
upon the German language as well as upon the German character.
And even those Germans who heartily abhor him as the great
heretic and betrayer of religion cannot help speaking his words
and thinking his thoughts.”

§ 130. THE REFORMATION IN GERMAN SWITZERLAND, A.D. 1519-1531.

While Luther’s Reformation spread in Germany, a similar movement sprang up in the neighbouring provinces of German Switzerland. Its earliest beginnings date back as far as A.D. 1516. The personal characteristics of its first promoter, and the political democratic movement in which it had its rise, gave it a complexion entirely different from that of the Lutheran Reformation. The most conspicuous divergence occurred in the doctrine of the supper (§ 131), and since the Swiss views on this point were generally accepted in the cities of the uplands, the controversy passed over into the German Reformed Church and hindered common action, notwithstanding common interests and common dangers.

§ 130.1. =Ulrich Zwingli.=--Zwingli, born at Wildhaus in
Toggenburg on January 1st, A.D. 1484, a scholar of the famous
humanist Thomas Wyttenbach at Basel, was, after ten years’
service as pastor at Glarus, made pastor of Maria-Einsiedeln
in A.D. 1516. The crowding of pilgrims to the famous shrine
of Mary at that place led him to preach against superstitious
notions of meritorious performances. But far more decisive
in determining his attitude toward the Reformation was his
appointment on January 1st, A.D. 1519, as Lent priest at Zürich,
where he first became acquainted with Luther’s works, and took
sides with him against the Romish court party. Zwingli soon
took up a distinctive position of his own. He would be not
only a religious, but also a political reformer. For several
years he had vigorously opposed the sending of Swiss youths as
mercenaries into the armies of foreign princes. His political
opponents, the oligarchs, whose incomes depended on this traffic,
opposed also his religious reforms, so that his support was
wholly from the democracy. Another important distinction between
the Swiss and German movements was this, that Zwingli had grown
into a reformer not through deep conviction of sin and spiritual
conflicts, but through classical and biblical study. The writings
of Pico of Mirandola (§ 120, 1), too, were not without influence
upon him. To him, therefore, justification by faith was not
in the same degree as to Luther the guiding star of his life
and action. He began the work of the Reformation not so much
with purifying the doctrine, as with improving the worship,
the constitution, the ecclesiastical and moral life. His
theological standpoint is set forth in these works: _Comment.
de vera et falsa relig._, A.D. 1525; _Fidei ratio ad Car.
Imp._, A.D. 1530; _Christian. fidei brevis at clara expos._, ed.
Bullinger, A.D. 1536; _De providentia Dei_; and _Apologeticus_.
Of the two principles of the anti-Romish Reformation (§ 121)
the Wittenberg reformer placed the material, the Zürich reformer
the formal, in the foreground. The former only rejected what was
not reconcilable with Scripture; the latter repudiated all that
was not expressly enjoined in Scripture. The former was cautious
and moderate in dealing with forms of worship and mere externals;
the latter was extreme, immoderate, and violent. Luther retained
pictures, altars, the ornaments of churches, and the priestly
character of the service, purifying it simply from unevangelical
corruptions; Zwingli denounced all these things as idolatry,
and burnt even organ pipes and clock bells. Luther recognised
no action of the Holy Spirit apart from the word and sacrament;
Zwingli separated it from these, and identified it with mere
subjective feeling. The sacraments were with him mere memorial
signs; justification solely by the merits of Christ as a
joyous assurance of salvation had for him a negative rather
than a positive significance, _i.e._ opposition to the Romish
doctrine of merits; original sin was for him only hereditary
moral sickness, a _naturalis defectus_, which is not itself
sin, and virtuous heathens, like Hercules, Theseus, Socrates,
and Cato were admitted as such into the society of the blessed,
without apparently sharing in the redemption of Christ. His
speculations, which led on one side almost to pantheism,
favoured a theory of predestination, according to which the
moral will has no freedom over against Providence.[365]

§ 130.2. =The Reformation in Zürich, A.D. 1519-1525.=--In
A.D. 1518 a trafficker in indulgences, the Franciscan Bernard
Samson, of Milan, carried on his disreputable business in
Switzerland. At Zwingli’s desire Zürich’s gates were closed
against him. In A.D. 1520 the council gave permission to priests
and preachers in the city and canton to preach only from the
O. and N.T. All this happened under the eyes of the two papal
nuncios staying in Zürich; but they did not interfere, because
the curia was extremely anxious to get auxiliaries for the
papal army for an attack on Milan. Zwingli was promised a rich
living if he would no more preach against the pope. He refused
the bait, and went on his way as a reformer. The continued
indulgence of the curia allowed the Reformation to take even
firmer root. Zwingli published, in A.D. 1522, his first work,
“Of Election, and Freedom in Use of Food,” and the Zürichers
ate flesh and eggs during Lent of A.D. 1522. He also claimed
liberty to marry for the clergy. At this time Lambert came from
Avignon to Zürich (§ 127, 2). He preached against the new views,
disputed in July with Zwingli, and confessed himself defeated
and convinced. Zwingli’s opponents had placed great hopes in
Lambert’s eloquence and dialectic skill. All the greater was
the effect of the unexpected result of the disputation. The
council, now impressed, commanded that the word of God should
be preached without human additions. But when the adherents of
the Romish party protested, it arranged a public disputation on
29th Jan., A.D. 1523, on sixty-seven theses or _conclusiones_
drawn up by Zwingli: “All who say, The gospel is nothing without
the guarantee of the Church, blaspheme God;--Christ is the one
way to salvation;--Our righteousness and our works are good
so far as they are Christ’s, neither right nor good so far as
they are our own,” etc. A former friend of Zwingli, John Faber,
but quite changed since he had made a visit to Rome, and now
vicar-general of the Bishop of Constance, undertook to support
the old doctrines and customs against Zwingli. Being restricted
to Scripture proof he was forced to yield. The cloisters were
forsaken, violent polemics were published against the canon
of the mass and the worship of saints and images. The council
resolved to decide the question of the mass and images by a
second disputation in October, A.D. 1523. Leo Judä, Lent priest
at St. Peter’s in Zürich, contended against image worship,
Zwingli against the mass. Scarcely any opposition was offered
to either of them. At Pentecost, A.D. 1524, the council had
all images withdrawn from the churches, the frescoes cut down,
and the walls whitewashed. Organ playing and bell ringing
were forbidden as superstitious. A new simple biblical formula
of baptism was introduced, and the abolition of the mass, in
A.D. 1525, completed the work. At Easter of this year Zwingli
celebrated a lovefeast, at which bread was carried in wooden
trenchers, and wine drunk from wooden cups. Thus he thought the
genuine Christian apostolic rite was restored. In A.D. 1522 he
had married a widow of forty-three years of age, but he publicly
acknowledged it only in A.D. 1524. He penitently confesses that
his pre-Reformation celibate life, like that of most priests
of his age, had not been blameless; but the moral purity of his
later life is beyond suspicion.

§ 130.3. =Reformation in Basel, A.D. 1520-1525.=--In Basel, at
an early period, Capito and Hedio wrought as biblical preachers.
But so soon as they had laid a good foundation they accepted a
call to Mainz, in A.D. 1520, which they soon again quitted for
Strassburg, where they carried on the work of the Reformation
along with Bucer. Their work at Basel was zealously and
successfully continued by Röublin. He preached against the mass,
purgatory, and saint worship, often to 4,000 hearers. On the
day of Corpus Christi he produced a Bible instead of the usual
relics, which he scornfully called dead bones. He was banished,
and afterwards joined the Anabaptists. A new epoch began in
Basel in A.D. 1523. =Œcolampadius= or John Hausschein, born
at Weinsberg in A.D. 1482, Zwingli’s Melanchthon, was preacher
in Basel in A.D. 1516, and was on intimate terms there with
Erasmus. He accepted a call in A.D. 1518 to the cathedral of
Augsburg, but a year after withdrew into an Augsburg convent
of St. Bridget. There he studied Luther’s writings, and, in
A.D. 1522, found shelter from persecution in Sickingen’s castle,
where he officiated for some months as chaplain. He then returned
to Basel, became preacher at St. Martin’s, and was soon made,
along with Conrad Pellican (§ 120, 4, footnote), professor in
the university. Around these two a group of younger men soon
gathered, who energetically supported the evangelical movement.
They dispensed baptism in the German language, administered the
communion in both kinds, and were indefatigable in preaching.
In A.D. 1524 the council allowed monks and nuns, if they so
wished, to leave their cloisters. Of special importance for
the progress of the Reformation in Basel was the arrival in
A.D. 1524 of William Farel from Dauphiné (§ 138, 1). He had
been obliged to fly from France, and was kindly received by
Œcolampadius, with whom he stayed for some months. In February
he had a public disputation with the opponents of the Reformation.
University and bishop had interdicted it, but all the more
decided was the council that it should come off. Its result
was a great impulse to the Reformation, though Farel in this
same year, probably at the suggestion of Erasmus, whom he
had described as a new Balaam, was banished by the council
(§ 138, 1).[366]

§ 130.4. =The Reformation in the other Cantons,
A.D. 1520-1525.=--In =Bern=, from A.D. 1518 Haller, Kolb, and
Mayer carried on the work of the Reformation as political and
religious reformers after the style of Zwingli. Nic. Manuel,
poet, satirist, and painter, supported their preaching by his
satirical writings against pope, priests, and superstition
generally. Also in his Dance of Death, which he painted on
the walls of a cloister at Bern, he covered the clergy with
ridicule. In A.D. 1523 the council allowed departures from the
convents, and several monks and nuns withdrew and married. The
opposition called in the Dominican John Haim, as their spokesman,
in A.D. 1524. Between him and the Franciscan Mayer there arose
a passionate discussion, and the council exiled both. But Haller
continued his work, and the Reformation took firmer root from
day to day.--In =Muhlhausen [Mühlhausen]=, where Ulr. von Hutten
spent his last days, the council issued a mandate in A.D. 1524
which gave free course to the Reformation. At =Biel=, too,
it was allowed unrestricted freedom. In East Switzerland,
=St. Gall= was specially prominent under its burgomaster Joachim
v. Watt, who zealously advanced the interests of the Reformation
by word, writing, and action. John Karsler, who had studied
theology in Wittenberg in A.D. 1522, and was then obliged,
in order to avoid reading the mass, to learn and practise the
trade of a saddler, preached the gospel here in the Trades’
Hall in his saddler’s apron in A.D. 1524, and took the office
of reformed pastor and Latin preceptor in A.D. 1537. He died in
A.D. 1574 as President of St. Gall. In =Schaffhausen= Erasmus
Ritter, called upon to oppose in discussion the reformed pastor
Hofmeister, owned himself defeated, and joined the reform party.
In the canton =Vaud= Thos. Platter, the original and learned
sailor, afterwards rector of the high school at Burg, laid the
foundations of the Reformation. In =Appenzel= and =Glarus= the
work gradually advanced. But in the Swiss midlands the nobles
raised opposition in behalf of their revenues, and the people
of Berg, whose whole religion lay in pilgrimages, images, and
saints, constantly opposed the introduction of the new views.
Lucerne and Freiburg were the main bulwarks of the papacy in
Switzerland.

§ 130.5. =Anabaptist Outbreak, A.D. 1525.=--In Switzerland,
though the reformers there had taken very advanced ground,
a number of ultra-reformers arose, who thought they did not
go far enough. Their leaders were Hätzer (§ 148, 1), Grebel,
Manz, Röublin, Hubmeier, and Stör. They began disturbances
at Zolticon near Zürich. Hubmeier held a council at Waldshut,
Easter Eve, A.D. 1525, and was rebaptized by Röublin. During
Easter week 110 received baptism, and subsequently more than
300 besides. The Basel Canton, where Münzer had been living,
broke out in open revolt against the city. St. Gall alone
had 800 Anabaptists. Zürich at Zwingli’s request at once took
decided measures. Many were banished, some were mercilessly
drowned. Bern, Basel, and St. Gall followed this example.[367]

§ 130.6. =Disputation at Baden, A.D. 1526.=--The reactionary
party could not decline the challenge to a disputation, but
in the face of all protests it was determined to be held in
the Catholic district of Baden. The champions and representatives
of the cantons and bishops appeared there in May, A.D. 1526,
Faber and Eck leading the papists and Haller of Bern and
Œcolampadius of Basel representing the party of reform. Zwingli
was forbidden by the Zürich council to attend, but he was kept
daily informed by Thos. Platter. Eck’s theses were combatted one
after another. It lasted eight days. Eck outcried Œcolampadius’
weak voice, but the latter was immensely superior in intellectual
power. At last Thomas Murner (§ 125, 4) appeared with forty
abusive articles against Zwingli. Œcolampadius and ten of
his friends persisted in rejecting Eck’s theses; all the
rest accepted them. The Assembly of the States pronounced
the reformers heretics, and ordered the cantons to have them
banished.

§ 130.7. =Disputation at Bern, A.D. 1528.=--The result of
the Bern disputation was ill received by the democrats of
Bern and Basel. A final disputation was arranged for at
=Bern=, which was attended by 350 of the clergy and many
noblemen. Zwingli, Œcolampadius, Haller, Capito, Bucer,
and Farel were there. It continued from 7th to 27th January,
A.D. 1528. The Catholics were sadly wanting in able disputants,
and they sustained an utter defeat. Worship and constitution
were radically reformed. Cloisters were secularized; preachers
gave their official oath to the civil magistrates. There were
serious riots over the removal of the images. The valuable
organ in the minster of St. Vincent was broken up by the
ruthless iconoclasts. A political reformation was carried
out along with the religious, and all stipendiaries received
their warning.

§ 130.8. =Complete Victory of the Reformation at Basel, St. Gall,
and Schaffhausen, A.D. 1529.=--The Burgomaster von Watt brought
to =St. Gall= the news of the victorious issue of the disputation
at Bern. This gave the finishing blow to the Catholic party.
Thus in A.D. 1528, certainly not without some iconoclastic
excesses, the Reformation triumphed.--In =Basel=, the council
was divided, and so it took but half measures. On Good Friday,
A.D. 1528, some citizens broke the images in St. Martin’s
Church. They were apprehended. But a rising of citizens obliged
the council to set them free, and several churches from which
the images had been withdrawn were given over to the reformers.
In December, A.D. 1528, the trades presented a petition asking
for the final abolition of idolatry. The Catholic party and
the reformed took to arms, and a civil war seemed imminent.
The council, however, succeeded in quelling the disturbance
by announcing a disputation where the majority of the citizens
should decide by their votes. But the Catholic minority
protested so energetically that the council had again recourse
to half measures. The dissatisfaction of the reformed led
to an explosion of violent image breaking in Lent, A.D. 1529.
Huge bonfires of images and altars were set a blaze. The strict
Catholic members of the council fled, the rest quelled the
revolt by an unconditional surrender. Even Erasmus gave way
(§ 120, 6). Œcolampadius had married in A.D. 1528. He died
in A.D. 1531. In =Schaffhausen= up to A.D. 1529 matters were
undecided, but the proceedings at Basel and Bern gave victory
to the reformed party. The drama here ended with a double
marriage. The abbot of All Saints married a nun, and Erasmus
Ritter married the abbot’s sister. Images were removed without
tumult and the mass abolished.

§ 130.9. =The first Treaty of Cappel, A.D. 1529.=--In the five
forest cantons the Catholics had the upper hand, and there every
attempted political as well as religious reform was relentlessly
put down. Zürich and Bern could stand this no longer. Unterwalden
now revolted, and found considerable support in the other four
cantons, and the position of the cities became serious. The
forest cantons now turned to Austria, the old enemy of Swiss
freedom, and concluded at Innsbrück in A.D. 1529 a formal league
with King Ferdinand for mutual assistance in matters touching
the faith. Trusting to this league, they increased their cruel
persecutions of the reformed, and burnt alive a Zürich preacher,
Keyser, whom they had seized on the public highway on neutral
territory. Then the Zürichers rose up in revolt. With their
decided preponderance they might certainly have crushed the
five cantons, and then all Switzerland would have surrounded
Zwingli in the support of reform. But Bern was jealous of
Zürich’s growing importance, and even many Zürichers for fear
of war urged negotiations for peace with the old members of the
league. Thus came about the First Treaty of Cappel in A.D. 1529.
The five cantons gave up the Austrian league document to be
destroyed, undertook to defray the costs of the war, and agreed
that the majority in each canton should determine the faith of
that canton. As to freedom of belief it was only said that no
party should make the faith of the other penal. This was less
than Zwingli wished, yet it was a considerable gain. Thurgau,
Baden, Schaffhausen, Solothurn, Neuenburg, Toggenburg, etc.,
on the basis of this treaty, abolished mass, images, and altars.

§ 130.10. =The Second Treaty of Cappel, A.D. 1531.=--Even
after the treaty the five cantons continued to persecute
the reformed, and renewed their alliance with Austria. Their
undue preponderance in the assembly led Zürich to demand a
revision of the federation. This led the forest cantons to
increase their cruelties upon the reformed. Zürich declared
for immediate hostilities, but Bern decided to refuse all
commercial intercourse with the five cantons. At the diet at
Lucerne, the five cantons resolved in September, A.D. 1531,
to avert famine by immediately declaring war. They made their
arrangements so secretly that the reformed party was not the
least prepared, when suddenly, on the 9th October, an army of
8,000 men, bent on revenge, rushed down on the Zürich Canton.
In all haste 2,000 men were mustered, who were almost annihilated
in the battle of Cappel on 11th October. There, too, Zwingli
fell. His body was quartered and burnt, and the ashes scattered
to the winds. Zürich and Bern soon brought a force of 20,000
men into the field, but the courage of their enemies had grown
in proportion as all confidence and spirit departed from the
reformed. Further successes led the forest cantons, which had
hitherto acted only on the defensive, to proceed on the offensive,
and the reformed were constrained to accept on humbling terms
the Second Treaty of Cappel of A.D. 1531. This granted freedom
of worship to the reformed in their own cantons, but secured the
restoration of Catholicism in the five cantons. The defeated had
also to bear the costs of the war, and to renounce their league
with Strassburg, Constance, and Hesse. The hitherto oppressed
Catholic minority began now to assert itself on all hands, and
in many places were more or less successful in securing the
ascendency. So it was in Aargau, Thurgau, Rapperschwyl, St. Gall,
Rheinthal, Solothurn, Glarus, etc.

§ 131. THE SACRAMENTARIAN CONTROVERSY, A.D. 1525-1529.[368]

Luther in his “Babylonish Captivity of the Church,” of A.D. 1520, had, in opposition to prevailing views, which made the efficacy of the sacraments dependent on the objective receiving without regard to the faith of the receiver, _opus operatum_, pressed forward the subjective side in a somewhat extreme manner. During the earlier period of his career as a reformer, and indeed even at a later period, as his letter to the men of Strassburg shows, he was in danger of going to the extreme of overlooking or denying the real objective and Divine contents of the sacrament. But decided as the opposition was to the scholastic theory of transubstantiation, and convinced as he was that the bread and wine were to be regarded as mere symbols, the text of Scripture seemed clearly to say to him that he must recognise there the presence of the true body and blood of Christ. His anxiety to avoid the errors of the fanatics, and his simple acceptance of the word of Scripture, led him to that conviction which inspired him to the end, that IN, WITH, and UNDER the bread and wine the true body and blood of the Lord are received, by believers unto salvation, by unbelievers unto condemnation.

=Carlstadt= (§ 124, 3) had denied utterly the presence of the
body and blood of the Lord in the sacrament. He sought to set
aside the force of the words of institution by giving to τοῦτο
an absurd meaning: Christ had pointed to His own present body,
and said, “This here is My body, which in death I will give
for you, and in memory thereof eat this bread.” When Carlstadt,
expelled from Saxony, came to Strassburg, he sought to interest
the preachers there, Bucer and Capito, in himself and his
sacramental view. But Luther was not moved by their attempts
at conciliation. =Zwingli=, too, took the side of Carlstadt.
In essential agreement with Carlstadt, but putting the matter
on another basis, Zwingli interpreted the words of institution,
“This is,” by “This signifies,” and reduced the significance
of the sacrament to a symbolical memorial of Christ’s suffering
and death. In an epistle to the Lutheran Matthew Alber at
Reutlingen in A.D. 1524 he set forth this theory, and sided
with Carlstadt against Luther. He developed his views more
fully in his dogmatic treatise, _Commentarius de vera et falsa
relig._, A.D. 1525, where he characterizes Luther’s doctrine
as an _opinio non solum rustica sed etiam impia et frivola_.
=Œcolampadius=, too, took part in the controversy as supporter
of his friend Zwingli when attacked by Bugenhagen, and wrote in
A.D. 1525 his _De genuina verborum Domini, Hoc est corpus meum,
expositione_. He wished to understand the σῶμα of the words of
institution as equivalent to “sign of the body.” Œcolampadius
laid his treatise before the Swabian reformers Brenz and Schnepf;
but these, in concert with twelve other preachers, answered in
the _Syngramma Suevicum_ of A.D. 1525 quite in accordance with
Luther’s doctrine. The controversy continued to spread. Luther
first openly appeared against the Swiss in A.D. 1526 in his
“Sermon on the Sacrament against the Fanatics,” and to this
Zwingli replied. Luther answered again in his tract, “That
the words, This is My body, stand firm;” and in A.D. 1528 he
issued his great manifesto, “Confession in regard to the Lord’s
Supper” (§ 144, 2, note). Notwithstanding the endeavours of the
Strassburgers at conciliation the controversy still continued.
Zwingli’s statement was the shibboleth of the Swiss Reformation,
and was adopted also in many of the upland cities. Strassburg,
Lindau, Meiningen, and Constance accepted it; even in Ulm,
Augsburg, Reutlingen, etc., it had its supporters.--Continuation,
§ 132, 4.

§ 132. THE PROTEST AND CONFESSION OF THE EVANGELICAL NOBLES,
A.D. 1527-1530.

For three years after the diet at Spires in A.D. 1526 no public proceedings were taken on religious questions. The success of the Reformation however during these years roused the Catholic party to make a great effort. At the next diet at Spires, in A.D. 1529, the Catholics were in the majority, and measures were passed which, it was hoped, would put an end to the Reformation. The evangelicals tabled a formal protest (hence the name Protestants), and strove hard to have effect given to it. The union negotiations with the Swiss and uplanders were not indeed successful, but in the Augsburg Confession of A.D. 1530 they raised before emperor and empire a standard, around which they henceforth gathered with hearty goodwill.

§ 132.1. =The Pack Incident, A.D. 1527, 1528.=--In A.D. 1527
dark rumours of dangers to the evangelicals began to spread.
The landgrave, suspecting the existence of a conspiracy of the
German Catholic princes, gave to an officer in Duke George’s
government, Otto von Pack, 10,000 florins to secure documents
proving its existence. He produced one with the ducal seal,
which bound the Catholic princes of Germany to fall upon
the elector’s territories and Hesse, and to divide the lands
among them, etc. The landgrave was all fire and fury, and
even the Elector John joined him in a league to make a vigorous
demonstration against the purposed attack. But Luther and
Melanchthon pressed upon the elector our Lord’s words, “All
they that take the sword shall perish with the sword,” and
convinced him that he ought to abide the attack and restrict
himself to simple defence. The landgrave, highly offended
at the failure of his project, sent a copy of the document
to Duke George, who declared the whole affair a tissue of
lies. Philip had begun operations against the elector, but
was heartily ashamed of himself when he came to his sober
senses. Pack when interrogated became involved in contradictions,
and was found to be a thoroughly bad subject, who had been
before convicted of falsehood and intrigues. The landgrave
expelled him from his territories. He wandered long a homeless
exile, and at last, in A.D. 1536, was executed by Duke George’s
orders in the Netherlands. All this seriously injured the
interests of the gospel. Mutual distrust among the Protestant
leaders continued, and sympathy was created for the Catholic
princes as men who had been unjustly accused.

§ 132.2. =The Emperor’s Attitude, A.D. 1527-1529.=--The
faithlessness of the king of France and the ratification of
the League of Cognac (§ 126, 6) led to very strained relations
between the pope and the emperor. Old Frundsberg raised an
army in Germany, and the German peasants, without pay or reward,
crossed the Alps, burning with desire to humiliate the pope.
On 6th May, A.D. 1527, the imperial army of Spaniards and
Germans stormed Rome. The so-called sack of Rome presented
a scene of plunder and spoliation scarcely ever paralleled.
Clement VII., besieged in St. Angelo, was obliged to surrender
himself prisoner. But once again Germany’s hopes were cast
to the ground by the emperor. Considering the opinion that
prevailed in Spain, and influenced by his own antipathy to the
Saxon heresy, besides other political combinations, he forgot
that he had been saved by Lutheran soldiers. In June, A.D. 1528,
at Barcelona, he concluded a peace with the pope and promised
to use his whole power in suppressing heresy. By the Treaty of
Cambray, in July, A.D. 1529, the French war also was finally
brought to a conclusion. In this treaty both potentates promised
to uphold the papal chair, and Francis I. renewed his undertaking
to furnish aid against heretics and Turks. Charles now hastened
to Italy to be crowned by the pope, meaning then by his personal
attentions to settle the affairs of Germany.

§ 132.3. =The Diet at Spires, A.D. 1529.=--In the end of
A.D. 1528 the emperor issued a summons for another diet at
Spires, which met on 21st Feb., A.D. 1529. Things had changed
since A.D. 1526. The Catholics were roused by the Pack episode,
halting nobles were terrorized by the emperor, the prelates
were present in great numbers, and the Catholics, for the
first time since the Diet at Worms, were in a decided majority.
The proposition of the imperial commissioners to rescind the
conclusions of the diet of A.D. 1526 was adopted by a majority,
and formulated as the diet’s decision. No innovations were to
be introduced until at least a council had been convened, mass
was everywhere to be tolerated, the jurisdiction and revenues
of the bishops were in all cases to be fully restored. It was
the death-knell of the Reformation, as it gave the bishops
the right of deposing and punishing preachers at their will.
As Ferdinand was deaf to all remonstrances, the evangelicals
presented a solemn protest, with the demand that it should
be incorporated in the imperial statute book. But Ferdinand
refused to receive it. The =Protestants= now took no further
steps, but drew up a formal statement of their case for the
emperor, appealed to a free council and German national assembly,
and declared their constant adherence to the decisions of the
previous diet. This document was signed by the Elector of Saxony,
the Landgrave of Hesse, George of Brandenburg, the two dukes
of Lüneburg, and Prince Wolfgang of Anholt [Anhalt]. Of the
upland cities fourteen subscribed it.

§ 132.4. =The Marburg Conference, A.D. 1529.=--The Elector of
Saxony and Hesse entered into a defensive league with Strassburg,
Ulm, and Nuremberg at Spires. The theologians present agreed
only with hesitation to admit the Zwinglian Strassburg. The
landgrave at the same time formed an alliance with Zürich,
which attached itself to the interests of Francis I. of
France. Thus began the most formidable coalition which had
ever yet been formed against the house of Austria. But one
point had been overlooked which broke it all up again, _viz._
the religious differences between the Lutheran and Zwinglian
confessions. Melanchthon returned to Wittenburg [Wittenberg]
with serious qualms of conscience; Luther had declared against
any league, most of all against any fraternising with the
“Sacramentarians,” and the elector to some extent agreed with
him. Even the Nuremberg theologians had their scruples. The
proposed league was to have been ratified at Rotach in June.
The meeting took place, but no conclusion was reached. The
landgrave was furious, but the elector was resolute. Philip
now summoned leading theologians on both sides to a =conference
at Marburg= in his castle, which lasted from 1st till 3rd Oct.,
A.D. 1529. On the one side were Luther, Melanchthon, Justus
Jonas, from Wittenberg, Brenz from Swabia, and Osiander from
Nuremberg; on the other side, Zwingli from Zürich, Œcolampadius
from Basel, Bucer and Hadio [Hedio] from Strassburg. After, by
the landgrave’s well-meant arrangement, Zwingli had discussed
privately with Melanchthon, and Luther with Œcolampadius, during
the first day, the public conference began on the second. First
of all several points were discussed on the divinity of Christ,
original sin, baptism, the word of God, etc., in reference
to which suspicions of Zwingli’s orthodoxy had been current
in Wittenberg. On all these Zwingli willingly abandoned his
peculiar theories and accepted the doctrines of the œcumenical
church. But his views of the Lord’s Supper he stoutly maintained.
He took his stand upon John vi. 63, “The flesh profiteth
nothing;” but Luther wrote with chalk on the table before
him, “This is My body,” as the word of God which no one may
explain away. No agreement could be reached. Zwingli declared
that notwithstanding he was ready for brotherly fellowship,
but this Luther and his party unanimously refused. Luther said,
“You are of another spirit than we.” Still Luther had found
his opponents not so bad as he expected, and also the Swiss
found that Luther’s doctrine was not so gross and capernaitic
as they had imagined. They agreed on fifteen articles, in
the fourteenth of which they determined on the basis of the
œcumenical church doctrine to oppose the errors of Papists
and Anabaptists, and in the fifteenth the Swiss admitted that
the true body and blood of Christ are in the sacrament, but
they could not admit that they were corporeally in the bread
and wine. Three copies of these Marburg articles were signed
by the theologians present.--Continuation, § 133, 8.

§ 132.5. =The Convention of Schwabach and the Landgrave
Philip.=--A convention met at Schwabach in Oct., A.D. 1529,
at which a confession of seventeen articles was proposed
to the representatives of the Swiss, but rejected by them.
Meanwhile the imperial answer to the decisions of the diet
had arrived from Spain, containing very ungracious expressions
against the Protestants. The evangelical nobles sent an embassy
to the emperor to Italy; but he refused to receive the protest,
and treated the ambassadors almost as prisoners. They returned
to Germany with a bad report. Hitherto there had been only a
defensive federation against attacks of the Swabian League or
other Catholic princes. Luther’s hope that the emperor might
yet be won was shattered. The question now was, what should be
done if an onslaught upon the reformed should be made by the
emperor himself. The jurists indeed were of opinion that the
German princes were not unconditionally subject to the emperor;
they too have authority by God’s grace, and in the exercise of
this are bound to protect their subjects. But Luther did not
hesitate for a moment to compare the relation of the elector
to the emperor with that of the burgomaster of Torgau to the
elector; for he maintained the idea of the empire as firmly
as that of the church. He insisted that the princes should not
withstand the emperor, and that they should bear everything
patiently for God’s sake. Only if the emperor should proceed
to persecute their own subjects for their faith should
they renounce their obedience. The landgrave’s negotiations
with Zwingli also led to no result. For political purposes,
notwithstanding the opposition of Wittenberg, there was formed a
coalition of all the Protestants of the north with the exception
of Denmark, extending also to the south and embracing even
Venice and France. The Swiss would stop the way of the emperor
over the Alps; Venice would be of service with her fleet, and
the most Christian king of France was to be summoned as the
protector of political and religious freedom of Germany. But
these fine plans were seen to be vain dreams when the time for
putting them in practice came round.

§ 132.6. =The Diet of Augsburg, A.D. 1530.=--From Boulogne,
where the pope crowned him, the emperor summoned a diet to
meet at Augsburg, at which for the first time in nine he was
to be personally present. He would once again seek to induce
the Protestants quietly to return to the old faith, and so
his missive was very conciliatory. But before its arrival new
irritations had arisen at Augsburg. The Elector John allowed
the preachers accompanying him, Spalatin and Agricola, to
engage freely in preaching. The emperor was greatly displeased
at this, and sent him a request to withdraw this permission,
which, however, he did not regard. On 15th June, accompanied
by the papal legate Campegius (§ 126, 2, 3), he made a brilliant
entrance, the Protestants, on the ground of 2 Kings v. 17, 18,
offering no opposition to all the civil and ecclesiastical
reception ceremonies. This gave the emperor greater confidence
in renewing the demand to stop the preaching. But the Protestants
stood firm, and Margrave George called down the unmeasured
wrath of the emperor by his decided but humble declaration,
that before he would deny God’s word, he would kneel where
he stood and have his head struck off. Just as decidedly he
refused the emperor’s call to join the Corpus Christi procession
on the following day, even with the addition that it was “to the
glory of Almighty God.” At last they yielded the matter of the
preaching so far as to discontinue it during the emperor’s stay,
on the other party undertaking to discontinue controversial
discourses. On 20th June the diet opened. The matter of the
Turkish war was on the emperor’s motion postponed, to allow
of the thorough discussion of the religious questions.

§ 132.7. =The Augsburg Confession, 25th June, A.D. 1530.=--In
view of the diet the evangelical theologians prepared for the
elector a short confession in the form of a revision of the
seventeen Schwabach Articles, the so called Torgau Articles.
Melanchthon employed the days that preceded the opening of
the diet in drawing up on the basis of the Torgau Articles,
in constant correspondence with the evangelical theologians,
the =Augsburg Confession=, _Confessio Augustana_. This concise,
clear, and decided though temperate document received the hearty
approval of Luther, who, as still under the ban, was kept back
by the elector at Coburg. It contained twenty-one _Articuli
fidei præcipui_, and also seven _Articuli in quibus recensentur
abusus mutati_. On 24th June the Protestants said they desired
their confession to be publicly read. But it was with difficulty
that they obtained the emperor’s consent to allow its being read
on the 25th June, and even then not in the public hall, but in
a much smaller episcopal chapel, where only members of the diet
could find room. The two chancellors of the electorate, Baier
and Brück, appeared, the one with a German, the other with
a Latin copy of the confession. The emperor wished the Latin,
but the elector insisted that on German soil the German copy
should be read. When this was done Dr. Brück handed both copies
to the emperor, who kept the Latin one and gave the German one
to the Elector of Mainz. Both were subscribed by Elector John,
Margrave George, Duke Ernest of Lüneburg, Landgrave Philip,
Prince Wolfgang of Anhalt, and the cities of Nuremberg and
Reutlingen. The confession made a favourable impression
on many of the assembled princes, and many prejudices were
dissipated; while the evangelicals were greatly strengthened by
the unanimous confession of their faith before the emperor and
the empire. The Catholic theologians Faber, Eck, Cochlæus, and
Wimpina were ordered by the emperor to controvert the confession.
Meanwhile Melanchthon entered into negotiations with the legate
Campegius, in which his love of peace went so far as to withdraw
all demands for marriage of the clergy, and the giving of the
cup to the laity, and to allow the ecclesiastical jurisdiction
of the bishops, reserving the question about the mass to the
decision of a council. But these weak concessions found little
or no favour among the other Protestants, and the legate could
make no binding engagement until he consulted Rome. On 3rd Aug.
the confutation of the Catholic theologians was read. The
emperor declared that it maintained the views by which he
would stand. He expected the princes would do the same. He
was defender of the Church, and was not disposed to suffer
ecclesiastical schism in Germany. The Protestants demanded for
closer inspection a copy of the confutation. This was refused.
The landgrave now left the diet. To the elector he said that
he gave over to him and to God’s word body and goods, land
and people; and to the representatives of the cities he wrote:
“Say to the cities that they are not women, but men. There is
no fear; God is on our side.” The zealous Papist Duke William of
Bavaria declared to Eck, “If I hear well, the Lutherans sit upon
the Scripture and we alongside of it.” The cities siding with
Zwingli, Strassburg, Memmingen, Constance, and Lindau, presented
their own confession drawn up by Bucer and Capilo [Capito], the
_Confessio Tetrapolitana_. In its eighteenth article it taught
that Christ gives in the sacrament His true body and His true
blood to be eaten and drunk for the feeding of the soul. The
emperor had a Catholic reply read, with which he expressed
satisfaction. Luther had meanwhile from Coburg supported those
contending for the confession by prayer, counsel, and comfort.
He preached frequently, wrote many letters, negotiated with
Bucer (§ 133, 8), wrought at the translation of the prophets,
and composed several evangelical works of edification.

§ 132.8. =The Conclusions of the Diet of Augsburg.=--The firm
bright spirit of the minority made it seem to the Catholic
majority too considerable to allow of an open breach. A further
attempt was therefore made to reach some agreement. A commission
was appointed, comprising from either side two princes, two
doctors of canon law, and three theologians. On the twenty-one
doctrinal articles, with the exception of that on the sacraments,
they were practically agreed, but the Protestants were called
upon to abandon everything in regard to constitution and customs.
Thus the attempt failed. Five imperial cities took the side
of the emperor, the rest attached themselves to the Protestant
princes. The Protestants wished to read Melanchthon’s apology
for the Augsburg Confession against the charge of the Catholic
confutation, but the emperor with unbending stubbornness refused.
This was the most decided piece of work Melanchthon ever did.
At the close of the diet, 22nd Sept., the Protestant princes
were informed that time for reflection would be allowed them
till 15th April of the following year; meanwhile they should
not enforce any innovations and should allow confession and
the mass in their territories. The early calling of a council
was expressly promised. The princes of the church had all their
rights restored. The emperor declared his firm determination to
enforce in its full rigour the edict of Worms, and commissioned
the public prosecutor to proceed against the disobedient even
to the length of putting them under the ban. The judicature was
formally and expressly empowered to carry out the conclusions
of the diet. Finally, the emperor expressed the wish that on
account of his frequent absence his brother Ferdinand should
be chosen King of Rome. The election was accordingly soon
carried out at Frankfort; but the elector lodged a protest
against it.

§ 133. INCIDENTS OF THE YEARS A.D. 1531-1536.

The Protestants now made an earnest effort to effect a union by forming in A.D. 1531 the Schmalcald League. To this decided action and the political difficulties of the emperor we owe the Peace of Nuremburg [Nuremberg] of A.D. 1532. The bold step of the landgrave freed Württemberg from the Austrian yoke and papal oppression. At the same time the Reformation triumphed in Anhalt, Pomerania, and several Westphalian cities. All Westphalia might have been one but for the Anabaptists. Bucer’s unwearied efforts at last succeeded by the Wittenberg concordat in opening the way for the Schmalcald League into the cities of the Uplands. The league now comprised an imposing array of powerful members.

§ 133.1. =The Founding of the Schmalcald League,
A.D. 1530, 1531.=--The conferring upon the court of justiciary
the power to execute the decrees of the Diet of Augsburg was
most dangerous to the Protestants. For protection against this
design, the Protestant nobles at a convention at Schmalcald in
Dec., A.D. 1530, formed the bold resolution, that all should
stand as one in resisting every attack of the court. But when
the question came to be discussed, whether in case of need they
should go the length of armed resistance to the emperor opinion
was divided. The views of the jurists finally prevailed over
those of the theologians, and the elector insisted on a league
against every aggressor, even should it be the emperor himself.
At a new convention at Schmalcald in March, A.D. 1531, a league
on these terms was concluded for six years. The members of it
were the electorate of Saxony, Hesse, Lüneburg, Anhalt, Mansfeld,
and eleven cities.

§ 133.2. =The Peace of Nuremberg, A.D. 1532.=--The energetic
combination of the Protestants had now rendered them formidable,
and the Sultan Soliman was threatening a new attack. If the
Protestants were to be conquered, an agreement must be come
to with the Turks; if the Turks were to be humbled, a peaceable
settlement with the Protestants was indispensable. Ferdinand’s
policy at first inclined to the latter direction, and by his
advice the emperor summoned a diet at Regensburg, and till the
meeting forbade any prosecutions on the basis of the decrees of
the Diet of Augsburg. But soon the catastrophe in Switzerland
(§ 130, 10) changed Ferdinand’s policy. It seemed to him now
the fittest time to deal a similar blow to the evangelicals in
Germany. He therefore sent an embassy to the sultan, empowered
to make the most humiliating conditions of peace. But Soliman
rejected all proposals with scorn, and in April, A.D. 1532,
advanced with an army of 300,000 men. Meanwhile the Diet of
Regensburg had opened on 17th April, A.D. 1532. The Protestants
no longer presented a humble petition, as they had done two
years before, but they firmly made their demands. There was
no longer talk of compromise or suffrance. They demanded
peace in matters of religion; the annulling of all religious
prosecutions; and, finally, a free general council, where
matters should be decided solely by God’s word. So long as
Ferdinand had any hope of getting a favourable answer from
the Turks, he would not seriously consider proposals for peace.
But when that hope was shattered, and Soliman’s terrible host
approached, there was no time to lose. At Nuremberg the peace
was concluded on 23rd July, A.D. 1532. The faithful elector
was allowed to see the happy day, but died in that same year.
He was succeeded by his son, =John Frederick the Magnanimous=,
A.D. 1532-1547. A noble army was soon raised from the imperial
guards. Soliman suffered various misfortunes on land and water,
and withdrew without accomplishing anything. The emperor now
went to Italy, and insisted on the pope calling a general
council. But the pope thought the time had not come for that.
Also the annulling of prosecutions promised in the treaty
remained long unfulfilled. Pending prosecutions, mostly about
restitution of ecclesiastical goods and jurisdiction, were
pronounced to be not matters of religion, but of spoliation
and breach of the peace. The Protestants made a formal complaint
in Jan., A.D. 1534. This was disregarded, and arrangements
were being made to put certain nobles under the ban when events
occurred at Württemberg which changed the aspect of affairs.

§ 133.3. =The Evangelization of Württemberg,
A.D. 1534, 1535.=--The Swabian League in the interest of
Austria had obtained the banishment of Duke Ulrich in A.D. 1528,
and frustrated every attempt to secure his return. His son
Christopher had been educated at the court of Ferdinand,
and in A.D. 1532 accompanied the emperor to Spain. He made
his escape into the Alps, and publicly claimed his German
inheritance. The Landgrave Philip, Ulrich’s personal friend,
had long resolved to reconquer Württemberg for him. At last,
in the spring of A.D. 1534, with aid of French gold, he carried
out his plan. At Laufen Ferdinand’s army was almost annihilated,
and he himself was obliged in the Peace of Cadau of A.D. 1534
to restore Ulrich to Württemberg as an under-feudatory, but
with seat and vote in the imperial diet, and to allow him a
free hand in carrying out the Reformation in his territory.
Luther’s views had from the first found hearty reception in
Württemberg. The oldest and most distinguished of the Swabian
reformers, whose reputation had spread far beyond Württemberg,
was John Brenz (§§ 131, 1; 132, 4; 135, 2; 136, 6, 8). He
was preacher in Swabian Halle from A.D. 1522, provost in
Stuttgart from A.D. 1553, and died in A.D. 1570. But Ferdinand’s
government had stretched its arm so far as to visit with death
all manifestations of sympathy with the Reformation. All the
more rapidly did the work of evangelization now proceed. Ulrich
brought with him Ambrose Blaurer, a disciple of Zwingli and
friend of Bucer, and Erhard Schnapf, a decided supporter of
Luther; to the former he assigned the evangelization of the
upper, and to the latter the evangelization of the lower
division of his territories. Both had agreed in accepting
a common formula of Reformation principles. By the founding
of the University of Tübingen, organized after the pattern
of Marburg, Ulrich rendered important service to the cause
of Protestant learning. Several neighbouring courts and cities
were encouraged to follow Württemberg’s example.

§ 133.4. =The Reformation in Anhalt and Pomerania,
A.D. 1532-1534.=--Wolfgang of =Anhalt= had at an early date
introduced the Reformation on the banks of the Saale and into
Zerbst. Another prince of Anhalt, George, at first an opponent
of Luther, but converted by means of his writings, began in
A.D. 1532 the Reformation of the country east of the Elbe. And
when the Bishop of Brandenburg refused to ordain his married
priests, he sent them to be ordained by Luther in Wittenberg.
Much more violent was the Reformation of =Pomerania=. Nobles
and clergy sought to rouse the people against Lutheranism.
Prince Barnim was an ardent supporter of Luther, but his brother
George was bitterly opposed. On George’s death, his son Philip
joined with Barnim in introducing the Reformation into the land.
At the Assembly of Treptow, in Dec., A.D. 1534, they presented
a scheme of Reformation, which the nobles heartily accepted. It
was carried into operation by Bugenhagen by a church visitation
after the pattern of that of Saxony.