Chapter IV: Theology and Its Battles (16)

§ 123.2. =The Papal Bull of Excommunication, A.D. 1520.=--In
order to reap the fruits of his pretended victory at Leipzig,
Eck had gone to Rome, and was sent back triumphant as papal
nuncio with the bull _Exsurge Domini_ of June 16th. It charged
Luther with forty-one heresies, recommended the burning of his
works, and threatened to put him and his followers, if they
did not retract in sixty days, under the ban. Miltitz renewed
his attempts at conciliation, which, however, led to no result,
although Luther, to show at least his good will, attended
the conference, and, as a basis for a mutual understanding,
published his treatise, “On the Freedom of a Christian Man,”
in Oct., A.D. 1520. He accompanied this with a letter to the
pope, in which he treated him with personal respect, as a
sheep among wolves and as a Daniel sitting among lions; but
there was in it no word of repentance or of any desire to
retract. It could easily have been foreseen that these two
documents would prove thoroughly distasteful to the Romish
court. Meanwhile Eck had issued the bull. Luther published
a scathing polemic against it, and renewed his appeal, made
two years before, to an œcumenical council. In Saxony Eck
gained only scorn and reproach with his bull; but in Lyons,
Mainz, Cologne, etc., Luther’s works were actually burnt.
It was then that Luther took the boldest step in his whole
career. With a numerous retinue of doctors and students, whom
he had invited by a notice posted up on the blackboard, on the
10th Dec., A.D. 1520, at the Elster gate of Wittenberg, he cast
into the blazing pile the bull and the papal decretals with the
words, “Because thou hast troubled the saints of the Lord, let
eternal fire consume thee.” It was the utter renunciation of the
pope and his church, and with it he cut away every possibility
of a return.

§ 123.3. =Erasmus, A.D. 1520.=--Erasmus (§ 120, 6) had been
hitherto on good terms with Luther. They entertained for one
another a genuine regard. Diverse as their positive tendencies
were, they were at one in contending against scholasticism and
monkery. Erasmus was not sorry to see such heavy blows dealt
to the detested monks, and constantly refused to write against
Luther; he had also, he confessed, no wish to learn from his
own experience the sharpness of Luther’s teeth. When the papal
bull appeared, without hesitation he disapproved it, and indeed
refused to believe in its genuineness. He, as the oracle of his
age, was applied to by many for his opinion of the matter. His
judgment was that not the papal decision in itself but its style
and form should be disapproved. He desired a tribunal of learned,
pious men and three princes (the emperor and the kings of England
and Hungary), to whose verdict Luther would have to submit. When
Frederick the Wise consulted him, he expressed the opinion that
Luther had made two mistakes, in touching the crown of the pope
and the belly of the monks; he regretted in Luther’s proceedings
a want of moderation and discretion. Not without profit did the
elector hear the oracle thus discourse.--Continuation § 125, 3.

§ 123.4. =Luther’s Controversy with Emser,
A.D. 1519-1521.=--Emser, secretary and orator in the service
of Duke George, after the Leipzig Disputation, which he had
attended, sought by letter-writing to alienate the Bohemians
(§ 139, 19) from Luther, representing him as having there spoken
bitterly against them. This roused Luther to make a passionate
reply. After several pamphlets of a violent character had been
issued by both combatants, Emser issued his charge in a full and
comprehensive treatise, to which Luther replied in his work, “The
Answer of Martin Luther to the Unchristian, Ultra-ecclesiastical,
and Over-ingenious Book of Emser at Leipzig.” They had also a
sharp passage at arms with one another, in A.D. 1524, over the
canonization of Bishop Benno of Meissen, in which Emser, by his
duke’s order, took a zealous part (§ 129, 1). But all the later
writings in this controversy Luther left unanswered. Emser, with
great bitterness, assailed Luther’s translation of the Bible, in
which he professed to have found 1,400 heretical falsifications
and more than 1,000 lexical blunders. Luther was candid enough to
acknowledge that several of his animadversions were not unfounded.
On Emser’s own translation, which appeared shortly before his
death in A.D. 1527, see § 149, 14.

§ 123.5. =The Emperor Charles V.=--The Emperor Maximilian
had died on 12th Jan., A.D. 1519. The Elector of Saxony, as
administrator of the empire, managed to determine the election,
which took place on 28th June, A.D. 1519, against the French
candidate, Francis I., who was supported by the pope, in favour
of the young king of Spain, Charles I., grandson of Maximilian.
Detained at home by Spanish affairs, it was 23rd Oct., A.D. 1520,
before he was crowned at Aachen. All hopes were now directed
toward the young emperor. It was expected that he would put
himself at the head of the religious and national movement in
Germany. But Charles, uninspired by German sentiment, and even
ignorant of the German language, had other interests, which he
was not inclined to subordinate to German politics. The German
crown was with him only an integral part of his power. Its
interests must accommodate themselves to the common interests
of the whole dominions, upon which the sun never set. The German
movement he regarded as one, indeed, of high importance, but he
regarded it not so much from its religious as from its political
side. It afforded him the means for keeping the pope in check
and obliging him to sue for his favour. Two things required he
of the pope as the price of suppressing the German movement:
renunciation of the French alliance, and repeal of the papal
brief by which a transformation had been recommended of the
Spanish Inquisition, the main buttress of absolute monarchy
in Spain. The pope granted both demands, and the hopes of the
Germans in their new emperor, that he would finally free their
nation from the galling yoke of Rome, were thus utterly blasted.

§ 123.6. =The Diet at Worms, A.D. 1521.=--Immediately after the
arrival of the bull the emperor gave it the full force of law in
the Netherlands, where he was then staying. He did not at once
venture to make the same proclamation for Germany, specially from
regard to Frederick the Wise, Luther’s own prince, who insisted
that he should not be condemned unheard. Personal negotiations
between Frederick and the emperor and his councillors at Cologne,
in November, A.D. 1520, ended with a demand that the elector
should bring Luther to the diet, summoned to meet at Worms,
on 28th January, A.D. 1521; but at the desire of Aleander, the
papal nuncio, who energetically protested against the proposal
that civil judges should treat of matters of faith with an
already condemned heretic, the emperor, in December, withdrew
this summons. In the beginning of February there came a papal
brief, in which he was urgently entreated to give effect to
the bull throughout Germany. Aleander even sketched an imperial
mandate for its execution, but was not able to prevent the
emperor from laying it before his councillors for their opinion
and approval. This was done in the middle of February. And
now there arose a quite unexpected storm of opposition. The
councillors demanded that Luther should be brought under an
imperial safe conduct to Worms, there to answer for himself.
His attacks on Romish abuses they would not and could not regard
as crimes, for they themselves, with Duke George at their head,
had presented to the pope a complaint containing 101 counts. On
the other hand, they declared that if Luther would not retract
his doctrinal vagaries, they would be prepared to carry out
the edict. They persisted in this attitude when another scheme
was proposed to them, which insisted on the burning of Luther’s
writings. In the beginning of March a third proposal was made,
which asked only for the temporary sequestration of his works.
And to this they agreed. The emperor, though against his own
will, submitted to their demand, and cited the reformer of
Wittenberg to answer for himself at Worms. On 6th March he
signed a summons, accompanied with a safe conduct, both intended,
as Aleander said in writing to Rome, rather to frighten him
from coming than with any desire for his presence. But the
result was not as they desired. The courier appointed to deliver
this citation was not sent, but instead of him, on the 12th, an
imperial herald, who delivered to Luther a respectful invitation
beginning with the address, “Noble, dear, and worshipful sir.”
This herald was to bring him honourably and safely to Worms,
and to conduct him back again in safety. All this was done behind
the back of Aleander, who first came to know about it on the 15th,
and certainly was not wrong in attributing the emperor’s change
of mind to a suspicion of French political intrigues, in which
Leo X., notwithstanding his negotiations for an alliance with
the emperor, was understood to have had a share. Two weeks later,
however, such suspicions were seen to be unfounded. Too late the
sending of the herald was regretted, and an effort was made to
conciliate the nuncio by the publication of the sequestrating
mandate, which had been hitherto suppressed.

§ 123.7. =Luther= was meanwhile not idle at Wittenberg, while
waiting with heroic calm the issue of the Worms negotiations.
He preached twice daily, delivered lectures at the university,
taught and exhorted by books, letters, and conversations,
fought with his opponents, especially Emser, etc. While Luther
was engaged with these multifarious tasks the imperial herald
arrived. He now set everything aside, and on 2nd April boldly
and confidently obeyed the summons. The fears of his Wittenberg
friends and the counsels to turn back which reached him on
his way were rejected with a heroic consciousness that he
was in the path of duty. He had written on 14th March to
Spalatin, _Intrabimus Wormatiam invitis omnibus portis inferni
et potentatibus aëris_; and again from Oppenheim he wrote him,
that he would go to Worms even if there were as many devils
there as tiles upon the roofs. Still another attempt was
made upon him at Oppenheim. The emperor’s confessor, Glapio,
a Franciscan, who was by no means a blind worshipper of the
Roman curia, thought it possible that a good understanding
might be reached. He was of opinion that if Luther would
only withdraw the worst of his books, especially that on
the Babylonish Captivity, and acknowledge the decisions of
the Council of Constance, all might be agreeably settled. With
this in his mind he applied to the Elector of Saxony, and when
he received no encouragement there, to Franz von Sickingen, who
invited Luther, on his arrival at Ebernburg, near Worms, to an
interview with Glapio; but Luther declined the invitation.--His
journey all through was like a triumphal march. On 16th April,
amid a great concourse of people, he entered Worms, along with
his friends Justus Jonas and Nic. Amsdorf, as well as his legal
adviser Jerome Schurf. He was called to appear on the following
day. He admitted that the books spread out before him were his,
and when called on to retract desired one day’s adjournment.
On the 18th the trial proper began. Luther distinguished three
classes of his writings, systematic treatises, controversial
tracts against the papacy and papal doctrine, and controversial
tracts against private individuals, and did not know that he
had said anything in them that he could retract. He was asked
to give a direct answer. He then gave one “without horns or
teeth,” saying that he could and would retract nothing unless
proved false from Scripture, or on other good and clear grounds,
and concluded with the words, “Here stand I; I can no otherwise!
God help me, Amen.” Among the German knights and princes he had
won many hearts, but had made no favourable impression on the
emperor, who, when Luther denounced the absolute authority of
councils, stopped proceedings and dismissed the heretical monk.
On the following day, without consulting the opinion of the
councillors, he passed sentence of unconditional condemnation.
But the councillors would not have the matter settled in this
fashion, and the emperor was obliged, on 24th April, to reopen
negotiations before a select commission, under the presidency of
the Archbishop of Treves. Of no avail was a private conference
of the archbishop and Luther on the 25th, in which the prelate
accompanied his exhortation to retract with the promise of
a rich priorate in his neighbourhood under his own and the
emperor’s protection and favour. Luther supported his refusal
by confident reference to the words of Gamaliel, Acts v. 38.
On 26th April he left Worms unhindered; for the emperor had
decidedly refused to yield to the vile proposal that the safe
conduct of a heretic should be violated.--In consequence of
Luther’s persistent refusal to retract anything, the majority
of the diet pronounced themselves ready to agree to the
emperor’s judgment against him. The latter now assigned to
Aleander the drawing up of a new mandate, which should in the
severest terms proclaim the ban of the empire against Luther
and all his friends. After it had been approved in an imperial
cabinet council, and was ready for printing in its final form
in Latin and German, with the date 8th May, it was laid before
the emperor for signature, which, however, he put off doing
from day to day, and finally, in spite of all the nuncio’s
remonstrances, he decided that it must be produced before the
diet. When it appeared that this must be done, the two nuncios
were all impatient to have it passed soon. But it was only on
the 25th May, after the close of the diet, and after several
princes, especially the Electors of Saxony and the Palatinate,
had gone, that Charles let them present the edict, to which
all present agreed. On the 26th May, after Divine service
in church, he solemnly signed the Latin and German forms,
which were published with blast of trumpets on the following
day, and on Wednesday the sequestrated books of Luther were
burnt.--Undoubtedly political motives occasioned this long
delay in signing the documents. Perhaps he suspected the pope
of some new act of political treachery; probably also he wished
to postpone the publication of the edict until the imperial
councillors had promised to contribute to his proposed journey
to Rome, and perhaps until the nobles dissenting from the
proceedings against Luther had departed.

§ 123.8. =The Wartburg Exile, A.D. 1521, 1522.=--Some days
after Luther had dismissed the imperial herald, his carriage
was stopped in a wood near Eisenach by two disguised knights
with some retainers. He was himself carried off with show of
violence, and brought to the Wartburg, where he was to remain
in knight’s dress under the name of Junker Georg without himself
knowing anything more of the matter. It was indeed a contrivance
of the wise elector, though probably he took no active share
in the matter, so that he could declare at Worms that he knew
nothing of the Saxon monk. The most contradictory reports were
spread. Sometimes the Cardinal Albert of Brandenburg (§ 122, 2)
was thought of as the perpetrator of the act, sometimes Franz
von Sickingen (§ 124, 2), sometimes a Franconian nobleman who
was on intimate terms with Frederick. And as the news rapidly
spread that Luther’s body, pierced with a sword, had been found
in an old silver mine, the tumult in Worms became so great that
Aleander had good cause to fear for his life.--From the Wartburg
Luther maintained a lively correspondence with his friends, and
even to the general public he proved, by edifying and stirring
tracts, that he still lived, and was not inclined to be silenced
or repressed. He completed the exposition of the _Magnificat_,
wrought upon the Latin exposition of the Psalms, issued the
first series of his “Church Postils,” wrote an “Instruction
to Penitents,” a book “On Confession, whether the Pope have
the Power to Enjoin it,” another “Against the Abuses of the
Mass,” also “On Priestly and Monkish Vows,” etc. When Cardinal
Albert, in September, A.D. 1521, proclaimed a pilgrimage with
unlimited indulgence to the relic shrine at Halle (§ 115, 9),
Luther wrote a scathing tract, “Against the New Idol at Halle.”
And when Spalatin assured him that the elector would not suffer
its being issued, he declined to withhold it, but sent him
the little book, with imperative orders to give it over to
Melanchthon for publication. While Spalatin still delayed
its issue, Luther left his castle, pushed his way toward
Wittenberg through the very heart of Duke George’s territories,
and suddenly appeared among his friends in the dress of a knight,
with long beard and hair. When he heard that the mere report
of what he was proposing to do had led those in Halle to stop
the traffic in indulgences, he decided not to proceed with the
publication, but instead he addressed a letter to Albert, in
which the archbishop had to read many a strong word about “the
knavery of indulgences,” “the Pharaoh-like hardened condition
of ecclesiastical tyrants,” etc. The prelate sent a most humble,
apologetic, and gracious reply to the bold reformer. Luther then
returned to his protective exile, as he had left it, unmolested.
But the longer it continued the more insupportable did this
electoral guardianship become. He would rather “burn on glowing
coals than spend thus a half idle life.” But it was just this
enforced exile that saved Luther and the Reformation from utter
overthrow. Apart from the dangers of the ban of the empire,
which would have perhaps obliged him to throw himself into
the arms of Hutten and his companions, and thus have turned
the Reformation into a revolution this confinement in the
Wartburg was in various ways a blessing to Luther and his
work. It was of importance that men should learn to distinguish
between Luther’s work and Luther’s person, and of yet greater
importance was the discipline of this exile upon Luther himself.
He was in danger of being drawn out of the path of positive
reformation into that of violent revolutionism. The leisure
of the Wartburg gave him time for calm reflection on himself
and his work, and the extravagances of the Wittenberg fanatics
and the wild excuses of the prophets of Zwickau (§ 124, 1)
could be estimated with a freedom from prejudice that would
have been impossible to one living and moving in the midst of
them. Besides, he had not reached that maturity of theological
knowledge needed for the conduct of his great undertaking, and
was in many ways fettered by a one-sided subjectivism. In his
seclusion he could turn from merely destructive criticism to
construction, and by undisturbed study of Scripture became
able to enlarge, purify, and confirm his religious knowledge.
But most important of all was the plan which he formed in the
Wartburg, and so far as the New Testament is concerned carried
out there, of translating the whole of the Scriptures.[363]

§ 123.9. =The Attitude of Frederick the Wise to the
Reformation.=--Frederick the Wise, A.D. 1486-1525, has usually
been styled “the Promoter of the Reformation.” Kolde, however,
has sought to represent him as favouring Luther because of
his interest in the University of Wittenberg founded by him,
the success of which was largely owing to Luther, and because
of his patriotic desire to have German questions settled at
home rather than in Rome. This author supposes that after the
Diet of Worms Frederick took no particular interest in the
Reformation, beyond watching to see how things would turn out.
To all this Köstlin has replied that Frederick’s whole attitude
during the Diet of Worms betrayed a warm and hearty interest
in evangelical truth; that his correspondence with Tucher of
Nuremberg, A.D. 1518-1523, supports this view; that in one
of these letters he addresses his correspondent with evident
satisfaction as a good Lutheran; that in another he incloses
a copy of Luther’s _Assertio omnium articulorum_; that at a
later period he forwards him a copy of Luther’s New Testament,
and expresses the hope that he will gain spiritual blessing
from its perusal. He himself found it his greatest comfort
in the hour of death, partook of the communion in both kinds
after the reformed manner, which takes away all ground for
the suspicion that he yielded only to the importunities of
his brother John and his chaplain Spalatin. And even though
Frederick, as late as A.D. 1522, continued to increase the
rich collection of relics which he had previously made for
his castle church, this only proves that not all at once but
only bit by bit he was able to break away from his earlier
religious tendencies and predilections.

§ 124. DETERIORATION AND PURIFICATION OF THE WITTENBERG
REFORMATION, A.D. 1522-1525.

During Luther’s absence, the Reformation at Wittenberg advanced only too rapidly, and at last ran out into the wildest extravagances. But Luther hastened thither, regulated the movement, and guided it back into wise evangelical ways. This fanaticism arose in Wittenberg, but soon spread into other parts. The Reformation was at the same time threatened with danger from another quarter. The religious movement came into contact with the struggle of the German knights against the princes and that of the German peasants against the nobles, and was in danger of being identified with these revolutionary proceedings and sharing their fate. But Luther stood firm as a wall against all temptations, and thus these dangers were avoided.

§ 124.1. =The Wittenberg Fanaticism, A.D. 1521, 1522.=--In
A.D. 1521 an Augustinian, Gabriel Didymus or Zwilling, preached
a violent tirade against vows and private masses. In consequence
of this sermon, thirteen of the brethren of his order at once
withdrew. Two priests in the neighbourhood married. Carlstadt
wrote against celibacy and followed their example. At the
Wittenberg convent, secessions from the order were allowed
at pleasure, and mendicancy, as well as the sacrifice of the
mass, was abolished. But matters did not stop there. Didymus,
and still more Carlstadt, spread a fanatical spirit among the
people and the students, who were encouraged in the wildest
acts of violence. The public services were disturbed in order
to stop the idolatry of the mass, images were thrown out of
the churches, altars were torn down, and a desire evinced
to put an end to theological science as well as to clerical
orders. A fanatical spirit began now also to spread at Zwickau.
At the head of this movement stood the tailor Nicolas Storch
and a literate Marcus Stübner, who boasted of Divine revelations;
while Thomas Münzer, with fervid eloquence, proclaimed the new
gospel from the pulpit. Restrained by energetic measures taken
against them, the Zwickau prophets wandered abroad. Münzer went
to Bohemia, Storch and Stübner to Wittenberg. There they told
of their revelations and inveighed against infant baptism as
a work of Satan. The excitement in Wittenberg became greater
day by day. The enemies of the Reformation rejoiced; Melanchthon
could give no counsel, and the elector was confounded. Then
could Luther no longer contain himself. Against the elector’s
express command he left the Wartburg on 3rd March, A.D. 1522,
wrote him a noble letter, availed himself of his knight’s
incognito on the way, and appeared publicly at Wittenberg.
For a week he preached daily against fanaticism, and got
complete control of the wild revolutionary elements. The
prophets of Zwickau left Wittenberg. Carlstadt remained, but
for a couple of years held his peace. Luther and Melanchthon
now laboured to secure a positive basis for the Reformation.
Melanchthon had already made a beginning in A.D. 1521 by the
publication of his _Loci communes rerum theologicarum_. Luther
now, in A.D. 1522, against the decided wish of his friend,
published his _Annotationes in epist. t. Pauli ad Rom. et
Cor._ In Sept. of the same year appeared Luther’s translation
of the N.T. Besides these he also issued several treatises
in defence of the Reformation.

§ 124.2. =Franz von Sickingen, A.D. 1522, 1523.=--A private
feud led Franz von Sickingen to attack the Elector and Archbishop
of Treves in A.D. 1522, but soon other interests were involved,
and he was joined by the whole party of the knights. Sickingen’s
opponent was a prelate and a pronounced enemy of the Reformation,
and he was also a prince and a peer of the empire. In both
characters he was opposed by Sickingen, who called for support
in the name of religion and freedom. The knights, discontented
with the imperial government and bureaucracy, with princes and
prelates, crowded to his standard. Sickingen would also have
gladly secured the monk of Wittenberg as an ally, but Luther
was not to be won. Sickingen’s enterprise failed. The Elector
of the Palatinate and the young Landgrave of Hesse hasted to
the help of their beleaguered neighbours. The knights were
overthrown one after another; Sickingen died of mortal wounds
in May, A.D. 1523, immediately after the taking of the shattered
Ebernburg. The power of the knights was utterly broken. The
Reformation thus lost indeed brave and noble protectors, but
it was itself saved.

§ 124.3. =Andrew Bodenstein of Carlstadt, A.D. 1524,
1525.=--Even after the suppression of the Wittenberg
fanaticism, Carlstadt continued to entertain his revolutionary
views, and it was only with difficulty that he restrained himself
for a few years. In A.D. 1524 he left Wittenberg and went to
Orlamünde. With bitter invectives against Luther’s popism, he
there resumed his iconoclasm, and brought forward his doctrine
of the Lord’s Supper, in which the real presence of the body
and blood of Christ was absolutely denied (§ 131, 1). In order
to prevent disturbance, Luther, by the order of the elector,
went to Jena, and there in Carlstadt’s presence preached most
emphatically against image breakers and sacramentarians. This
roused Carlstadt’s indignation. When Luther visited Orlamünde,
he was received with stone throwing and curses. Carlstadt was
now banished from his territories by the elector. He then went
to Strassburg, where he sought to win over the two evangelical
pastors, Bucer and Capito. Luther issued a letter of warning,
“To the Christians of Strassburg.” Carlstadt went to Basel,
and published violent tracts against Luther’s “unspiritual
and irrational theology.” Luther replied in A.D. 1525,
earnestly, thoroughly, and firmly in his treatise, “Against
the Heavenly Prophets, or Images and the Sacraments.” Carlstadt
had secured the support of the Swiss reformers, who continued
the controversy with Luther. He involved himself in the Peasants’
War, and afterwards, by Luther’s intercession with the elector,
obtained leave to return to Saxony. He retracted his errors,
but soon again renewed his old disorderly practices; and, after
a singularly eventful career, died as professor and preacher
at Basel during the plague of A.D. 1541.

§ 124.4. =Thomas Münzer, A.D. 1523, 1524.=--The prophets
when expelled from Wittenberg did not remain idle, but set
themselves to produce all sort of disorders in church and state.
At the head of these disturbers stood Thomas Münzer. After his
expulsion from Zwickau, he had gone to Bohemia, and was there
received as an apostle of the Taborite doctrine (§ 119, 7).
In A.D. 1523 he returned to Saxony, and settled at Allstadt
[Allstädt] in Thuringia, and when driven out by the elector
he went to Mühlhausen. In both places he soon obtained a large
following. The Wittenberg Reformation was condemned no less
than the papacy. Not the word of Scripture but the Spirit was
to be the principle of the Reformation; not only everything
ecclesiastical but also everything civil was to be spiritualized
and reorganized. The doctrine of the evangelical freedom of
the Christian was grossly misconceived, the sacraments despised,
infant baptism denounced, and sole weight laid on the baptism
of the Spirit. Princes should be driven from their thrones,
the enemies of the gospel destroyed by the sword, and all
goods be held in common. When Luther wrote a letter of warning
on these subjects to the church at Mühlhausen, Münzer issued
an abusive rejoinder, in which he speaks contemptuously of
Luther’s “honey-sweet Christ,” and “cunningly devised gospel.”
From Mühlhausen, Münzer went forth on a proselytising crusade
in A.D. 1524, to Nuremberg, and then to Basel, but found little
response in either city. His revolutionary extravagances were
more successful among the peasants of Southern Germany.

§ 124.5. =The Peasant War, A.D. 1524, 1525.=--The peasants of
the empire had long groaned under their heavy burdens. Twice
already, in A.D. 1502, 1514, had they risen in revolt, with
little advantage to themselves. When Luther’s ideas of the
freedom of a Christian man reached them, they hastily drew
conclusions in accordance with their own desires. Münzer’s
fanatical preaching led to the adoption of still more decidedly
communistic theories. In August, A.D. 1524, in the Black Forest,
a rebellion broke out, which was, however, quickly suppressed.
In the beginning of A.D. 1525 troubles burst forth afresh.
The peasants stated their demands in twelve articles, which
they insisted upon princes, nobles, and prelates accepting.
All Franconia and Swabia were soon under their power, and
even many cities made common cause with them. Münzer, however,
was not satisfied with this success. The twelve articles were
too moderate for him, and still more distasteful to him were
the terms that had been made with the nobles and clergy. He
returned to Thuringia and settled again at Mühlhausen. From
thence he spread his fanaticism through the whole land and
organized a general revolt. With merciless cruelty thousands
were massacred, all cloisters, castles, and palaces were
ruthlessly destroyed. Boldly as Luther had attacked the
existing ecclesiastical tyranny, he resolutely left civil
matters alone. He preached that the gospel makes the soul
free, but not the body or property. He had profound sympathy
for the sorely oppressed peasants, and so long as their
demands did not go beyond the twelve articles, he hoped to
be able to regulate the movement by the power of the word.
The revolutionists had themselves in their twelfth article
offered to abandon any of their claims that might be found
to have no countenance from the word of God. When Münzer’s
disorders began in Thuringia, Luther visited the cities most
threatened and exhorted them to quiet and obedience. But the
death of the elector on 5th May called him back to Wittenberg.
From thence he now published his “Exhortations to Peace on the
Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants,” in which he speaks
pointedly to the consciences of the nobles no less than of the
peasants. But when the agitation continued to spread, and one
enormity after another was perpetrated, he gave vent to his
wrath in no measured terms in his book, “Against the Robbing
and Murdering Peasants.” He there, with burning words, called
upon the princes vigorously to stamp out the fanatical rebellion.
Philip of Hesse was the first to take the field. He was joined
by the new Elector of Saxony, Frederick’s brother, =John the
Constant=, A.D. 1525-1532, as well as by George of Saxony and
Henry of Brunswick. On 15th May, A.D. 1525, the rebels were
annihilated after a severe struggle at Frankenhausen. Münzer
was taken prisoner and beheaded. Even in Southern Germany the
princes were soon in all parts masters of the situation. In
this war 100,000 men had lost their lives and the most fertile
districts had been turned into barren wastes.

§ 125. FRIENDS AND FOES OF LUTHER’S DOCTRINE,
A.D. 1522-1526.

Luther’s fellow labourers in the work of the gospel increased from day to day, and so too the number of the cities in Northern and Southern Germany in which pure doctrine was preached. But Wittenberg was the heart and centre of the whole movement, the muster-ground for all who were persecuted and exiled for the sake of the gospel, the gathering point and nursery of new preachers. Among the theological opponents of Luther’s doctrine appears a crowned head, Henry VIII. of England, and also “the king of literature,” Erasmus of Rotterdam, entered the lists against him. But neither the one nor the other, to say nothing of the rude invectives of Thomas Murner, was able to shake the bold reformer and check the rapid spread of his opinions.

§ 125.1. =Spread of Evangelical Views.=--The most powerful
heralds of the Reformation were the monkish orders. Cloister
life had become so utterly corrupt that the more virtuous of
the brethren could no longer endure it. Anxious to breathe a
healthier atmosphere, evangelists inspired by a purer doctrine
arose in all parts of Germany, first and most of all among
the Augustinian order (§ 112, 6), which almost to a man went
over to the Reformation and had the glory of providing its
first martyr (§ 128, 1). The order regarded Luther’s honour
as its own. Next to them came the Franciscans, prominent during
the Middle Ages as a fanatical opposition (§ 98, 4; 108, 5;
112, 2), of whom many had the courage to free themselves of
their shackles. From their cloisters proceeded, _e.g._, the
two famous popular preachers, Eberlin of Günzburg and Henry
of Kettenbach in Ulm, the Hamburg reformer Stephen Kempen,
the fervent Lambert reformer of Hesse, Luther’s friend
Myconius of Gotha, and many more. Other orders too supplied
their contingent, even the Dominicans, to whom Martin Bucer,
the Strassburg reformer, belonged. Blaurer of Württemberg
was a Benedictine, Rhegius a Carmelite, Bugenhagen a
Premonstratensian, etc. At least one of the German bishops,
George Polenz of Samland, openly joined the movement, preached
the gospel in Königsberg, and inspired the priests of his diocese
with the same views. Other bishops, such as those of Augsburg,
Basel, Bamberg, Merseburg, sympathised with the movement or at
least put no hindrance in its way. But the secular clergy gave
crowds of witnesses. In all the larger and even in some of the
smaller towns of Germany Luther’s doctrines were preached from
the pulpits with the approval of the magistrates, and where these
were refused the preachers took to the market-places and fields.
Where ministers were wanting, artisans and knights, wives and
maidens, carried on the work.--One of the first cities which
opened its gates freely to the gospel was Strassburg. Nowhere
were Luther’s writings more zealously read, discussed, printed,
and circulated than in that city. Shortly before Geiler of
Kaisersberg (§ 115, 11) had prepared the soil for receiving
the first seed of the Reformation. From A.D. 1518 Matthew Zell
had wrought as pastor at St. Laurence in Münster. When the
chapter forbade him the use of the stone pulpit erected for
Geiler, the joiners’ guild soon made him a wooden pulpit, which
was carried in solemn procession to Münster, and set up beside
the one that had been closed against him. Zell was soon assisted
by Capito, Bucer, Hedio, and others.

§ 125.2. =“The Sum of Holy Scripture” and its Author.=--This
work, called also _Deutsche Theologie_, appeared anonymously
at Leyden in A.D. 1523, and was confiscated in March, A.D. 1524.
In various Dutch editions and in French, Italian, and English
translations, it was soon widely spread over Europe; but
so vigorously was it suppressed, that by the middle of the
century it had disappeared and was forgotten. In A.D. 1877
the Waldensian Comba discovered and published an old Italian
version, and Benrath translated into German in A.D. 1880 an
old Dutch edition of A.D. 1526, and succeeded in unravelling
for the most part its interesting history. He found that it
was composed in Latin, and on the entreaty of the author’s
friends rendered into Dutch. This led to the discovery, in
the possession of Prof. Toorenenberger of Amsterdam, of the
Latin original, which had appeared anonymously at Strassburg
in A.D. 1527 with the title, _Æconomica christiana_. Benrath
has also discovered the author to be Hendrik van Bommel, who
was in the first half of A.D. 1520 priest and rector of a
sisterhood at Utrecht, expelled in A.D. 1536 from Cleves,
from A.D. 1542 to 1560 evangelical teacher and preacher at
Wesel, dying in A.D. 1570 as pastor at Duisburg. The “Sum” is
evidently influenced by those works of Luther which appeared
up to A.D. 1523, its thoroughly popular, edifying, and positive
contents are based upon a careful study of Scripture, and it is
throughout inspired by the one grand idea, that the salvation
of sinful men rests solely on the grace of God in Christ
appropriated by faith.

§ 125.3. =Henry VIII. and Erasmus.=--Henry VIII. of England,
as a second son, had been originally destined for the church.
Hence he retained a certain predilection for theological
studies and was anxious to be regarded as a learned theologian.
In A.D. 1522 he appeared as the champion of the Romish doctrine
of the seven sacraments in opposition to Luther’s book on the
“Babylonish Captivity of the Church,” treating the peasant’s
son with lordly contempt. Luther paid him in the same coin, and
treated his royal opponent with less consideration than he had
shown to Emser and Eck. The king obtained what he desired, the
papal honorary title of _Defensor fidei_, but Luther’s crushing
reply kept him from attempting to continue the controversy.
He complained to the elector, who consoled him by reference
to a general council (comp. § 129, 1). The pretty tolerable
relations between Erasmus and Luther now suffered a severe
shock. Erasmus, indebted to the English king for many favours,
was roused to great bitterness by Luther’s unmeasured severity.
He had hitherto refused all calls to write against Luther. Many
pulpits charged him with having a secret understanding with the
heretic; others thought he was afraid of him. All this tended
to drive Erasmus into open hostility to the reformer. He now
diligently studied Luther’s writings, for which he obtained
the pope’s permission, and seized upon a doctrine which would
not oblige him to appear as defender of Romish abuses, though
to gauge and estimate it in its full meaning he was quite
incompetent. Luther’s life experiences, joined with the study
of Paul’s epistles and Augustine’s writings, had wrought in
him the conviction that man is by nature incapable of doing
any good, that his will is unfree, and that he is saved without
any well doing of his own by God’s free grace in Christ. With
Luther, as with Augustine, this conviction found expression
in the doctrine of absolute predestination. Melanchthon had
also formulated the doctrine in the first edition of his _Loci
communes_. This fundamental doctrine of Luther was now laid hold
upon by Erasmus in A.D. 1524 in his treatise, Διατριβή _de libra
arbitrio_, pronounced dangerous and unbiblical, while his own
semi-Pelagianism was set over against it. After the lapse of
a year, Luther replied in his treatise, _De servo arbitrio_,
with all the power and confidence of personal, experimental
conviction. Erasmus answered in his _Hyperaspistes diatribes
adv. Lutheri servum arbitrium_ of A.D. 1526, in which he gave
free vent to his passion, but did not advance the argument
in the least. Luther therefore saw no need to continue the
discussion.[364]

§ 125.4. =Thomas Murner.=--The Franciscan, Thomas Murner of
Strassburg, had published in A.D. 1509 his “Fools’ Exorcism”
and other pieces, which gave him a high place among German
satirists. He spared no class, not even the clergy and
the monks, took Reuchlin’s part against the men of Cologne
(§ 120, 4), but passionately opposed Luther’s movement. His
most successful satire against Luther is entitled, “On the
Great Lutheran Fool as Exorcised by Dr. Murner, A.D. 1522.”
It does not touch upon the spiritual aspect of the Reformation,
but lashes with biting wit the revolutionary, fanatical, and
rhetorical extravagances which were often closely associated
with it. Luther did not venture into the lists with the savagely
sarcastic monk, but the humanists poured upon him a flood of
scurrilous replies.

§ 125.5. A notable Catholic witness on behalf of the
Reformation is the “=Onus ecclesiæ=,” an anonymous tract of
A.D. 1524, written by Bishop Berthold Pirstinger of Chiemsee.
In apocalyptic phraseology it describes the corruption of
the church and calls for reformation. The author however
denounces Luther as a sectary and revolutionist, though he
distinctly accepts his views of indulgences. He would reform
the church from within. Four years after, the same divine
wrote a “_Tewtsche Theologey_,” in which, with the exception
of the doctrine of indulgence, the whole Romish system is
vindicated and the corruptions of the church are ignored.

§ 126. DEVELOPMENT OF THE REFORMATION IN THE EMPIRE,
A.D. 1522-1526.

In consequence of the terms of his election, Charles V. had, at the Diet of Worms, to agree to the erection of a standing imperial government at Nuremberg, which in his absence would have the supreme direction of imperial affairs. Within this commission, though presided over by Archduke Ferdinand, the emperor’s brother, a majority was soon found which openly favoured the new religion. Thus protected by the highest imperial judicature, the Reformation was able for a long time to spread unhindered and so made rapid progress (§ 125, 1). The Nuremberg court succumbed indeed to the united efforts of its political opponents, among whom were many nobles of an evangelical spirit, but all the more energetically did these press the interests of the Reformation. And their endeavours were so successful, that it was determined that matters should be settled without reference to pope and council at a general German national assembly. But the papal legate Campegius formed at Regensberg [Regensburg], in A.D. 1524, a league of the Catholic nobles for enforcing the edict of Worms, against which the evangelical nobles established a defensive league at Torgau, in A.D. 1526. The general national assembly was vetoed by the emperor, but the decision of the Diet of Spires of A.D. 1526 gave to all nobles the right of determining the religious matters of their provinces after their own views.

§ 126.1. =The Diet at Nuremberg, A.D. 1522, 1523.=--The
imperial court held its first diet in the end of A.D. 1522.
Leo X. had died in Dec., A.D. 1521, and Hadrian VI. (§ 149, 1),
strictly conservative in doctrine and worship, a reformer of
discipline and hierarchical abuses, had succeeded with the
determination “to restore the deformed bride of Christ to her
pristine purity,” but vigorously to suppress the Lutheran heresy.
His legate presented to the diet a letter confessing abuses and
promising reforms, but insisting on the execution of the edict
of Worms. The diet declared that in consequence of the admitted
corruptions of the church, the present execution of the Worms
edict was not to be thought of. Until a general council in a
German city, with guaranteed freedom of discussion, had been
called, discussion should be avoided, and the word of God, with
true Christian and evangelical explanation, should be taught.

§ 126.2. =The Diet at Nuremberg, A.D. 1524.=--A new diet was
held at Nuremberg on 14th Jan., A.D. 1524. It dealt first of
all with the question of the existence of the imperial court.
The reformatory tendencies of the government showed that what
was vital to this court was so also to the Reformation. This
party had important supporters in the arch-catholic Ferdinand,
who hoped thus to strengthen himself in his endeavour to obtain
the Roman crown, in the Elector of Mainz, the prime mover in
the traffic in indulgences, who had personal antipathies to
the foes of the court, in the elector of Saxony, its proper
creator, and in the princes of Brandenburg. But there were
powerful opponents: the Swabian league, the princes of Treves,
the Palatinate and Hesse, who had been successful in opposition
to Sickingen, and the imperial cities, which, though at one
with the court in favouring the Reformation, were embittered
against it because of its financial projects. The papal legate
Campegius also joined the opposition. Hadrian VI. had died in
A.D. 1523, and was succeeded by =Clement VII.=, A.D. 1523-1534.
A skilful politician with no religious convictions, he determined
to strengthen in every possible way the temporal power of
the papal see. His legate was a man after his own mind. The
opposition prevailed, and even Ferdinand after a struggle gave
in. The newly organized governing body was only a shadow of
the old, without power, influence, or independence. Thus a
second (§ 124, 2) powerful support was lost to the Reformation,
and the legate again pressed for the execution of the edict
of Worms. But the evangelicals mustering all their forces,
especially in the cities, secured a majority. They were indeed
obliged to admit the legality of the edict; they even promised
to carry it out, but with the saving clause “as far as possible.”
A council in the sense of the former diet was demanded, and
it was resolved to call a general national assembly at Spires,
to be wholly devoted to religious and ecclesiastical questions.
In the meantime the word of God in its simplicity was to be
preached.

§ 126.3. =The Convention at Regensburg, A.D. 1524.=--While the
evangelical nobles, by their theologians and diplomatists, were
eagerly preparing for Spires, an assembly of the supporters
of the old views met at Regensburg, June and July, A.D. 1524.
Ignoring the previous arrangement, they proceeded to treat
of the religious and ecclesiastical questions which had
been reserved for the Spires Diet. This was the result of
the machinations of Campegius. The Archduke Ferdinand, the
Bavarian dukes, the Archbishop of Salzburg, and most of the
South German bishops, joined the legate at Regensburg in
insisting upon the edict of Worms. Luther’s writings were
anew forbidden, their subjects were strictly enjoined not to
attend the University of Wittenberg; several external abuses
were condemned, ecclesiastical burdens on the people lightened,
the number of festivals reduced, the four Latin Fathers, Ambrose,
Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory, set up as the standard of
faith and doctrine, while it was commanded that the services
should be conducted unchanged after the manner of these Fathers.
Thus was produced that rent in the unity of the empire which
never again was healed.--The imperial and the papal policies
were so bound up with one another, that the proceedings of the
Nuremberg diets, with their national tendencies, were distasteful
to the emperor; and so in the end of July there came an imperial
rescript, making attendance at the national assembly a _crimen
læsæ majestatis_, punishable with ban and double-ban. The nobles
obeyed, and the assembly was not held. With it Germany’s hopes
of a peaceful development were shattered.

§ 126.4. =The Evangelical Nobles, A.D. 1524.=--Several nobles
hitherto indifferent became now supporters of the Reformation.
Philip of Hesse, moved by an interview with Melanchthon, gave
himself enthusiastically to the cause of evangelical truth.
Also the Margrave Casimir, George of Brandenburg-Ansbach, Duke
Ernest of Lüneburg, the Elector Louis of the Palatinate, and
Frederick I. of Denmark, as Duke of Schleswig and Holstein, did
more or less in their several countries for the furtherance of
the Reformation cause. The grand-master of the Teutonic order,
Albert of Prussia, returned from the Diet of Nuremberg, where
he had heard Osiander preach, doubtful of the scripturalness
of the rule of his order. He therefore visited Wittenberg to
consult Luther, who advised him to renounce the rule, to marry,
and obtain heirs to his Prussian dukedom (§ 127, 3). The cities
took up a most decided position. At two great city diets at
Spires and Ulm in A.D. 1524, it was resolved to allow the
preaching of a pure gospel and to assist in preventing the
execution of the edict of Worms in their jurisdiction.

§ 126.5. =The Torgau League, A.D. 1526.=--Friends and foes of
the Reformation had joined in putting down the peasant revolt.
Their religious divergences however immediately after broke
out afresh. George consulted at Dessau in July, A.D. 1525, with
several Catholic princes as to means for preventing a renewal
of the outbreak, and they unanimously decided that the condemned
Lutheran sect must be rooted out as the source of all confusion.
Soon afterwards two Leipzig citizens, who were found to have
Lutheran books in their possession, were put to death. But
Elector John of Saxony had a conference at Saalfeld with Casimir
of Brandenburg, at which it was agreed at all hazards to stand
by the word of God; and at Friedewald in November Hesse and the
elector pledged themselves to stand true to the gospel. A diet
at Augsburg in December, for want of a quorum, had reached no
conclusion. A new diet was therefore summoned to meet at Spires,
and all the princes were cited to appear personally. Duke George
meanwhile gathered the Catholic princes at Halle and Leipzig,
and they resolved to send Henry of Brunswick to Spain to the
emperor. Shortly before his arrival, the emperor had concluded
a peace at Madrid with the king of France, who had been taken
prisoner in the battle of Pavia. Francis I., feeling he could
not help himself, had agreed to all the terms, including
an undertaking to join in suppressing the heretics. Charles
therefore fully believed that he had a free hand, and determined
to root out heresy in Germany. Henry of Brandenburg brought
to the German princes an extremely firm reply, in which this
view was expressed. But before its arrival the elector and the
landgrave had met at Gotha, and had subsequently at Torgau, the
residence of the elector, renewed the league to stand together
with all their might in defence of the gospel. Philip undertook
to gain over the nobles of the uplands. But the fear of the
empire hindered his success. The elector was more fortunate
among the lowland nobles. On 9th June the princes of Saxony,
Lüneberg [Lüneburg], Grubenhagen, Anhalt, and Mansfeld met at
Magdeburg, and subscribed the Torgau League. Also the city of
Magdeburg, emancipated since A.D. 1524 from the jurisdiction
of its archbishop, Albert of Mainz, and accepting the Lutheran
confession, now joined the league.

§ 126.6. =The Diet of Spires, A.D. 1526.=--The diet met on
25th June, A.D. 1526. The evangelical princes were confident;
on their armour was the motto, _Verbum Dei manet in æternum_.
In spite of all the prelates’ opposition, three commissions were
approved to consider abuses. When the debates were about to begin,
the imperial commissioners tabled an instruction which forbade
them to make any change upon the old doctrines and usages, and
finally insisted upon the execution of the edict of Worms. The
evangelicals however took comfort from the date affixed to the
document. They knew that since its issue the relation of pope
and emperor had become strained. Francis I. had been relieved
by the pope from the obligation of his oath, and the pope
had joined with Francis in a league at Cognac, to which also
Henry VIII. of England adhered. All Western Europe had combined
to break the supremacy gained by the Burgundian-Spanish dynasty
at Pavia, and the duped emperor found himself in straits. Would
he now be inclined to stand by his instruction? The commissioners,
apparently at Ferdinand’s wish, had kept back the document till
the affairs of the Catholics became desperate. The evangelical
nobles felt encouraged to send an embassy to the emperor,
but before it started the emperor realized their wishes. In
a letter to his brother he communicated a scheme for abolishing
the penalties of the edict of Worms and referring religious
questions to a council. At the same time he called for help
against his Italian enemies. Seeing then that in present
circumstances it did not seem advisable to revoke, still less
to carry out the edict, the only plan was to give to each prince
discretionary power in his own territory. This was the birthday
of the territorial constitution on a formally legitimate basis.

§ 127. ORGANIZATION OF THE EVANGELICAL PROVINCIAL CHURCHES,
A.D. 1526-1529.

The nobles had now not only the right but also had it enjoined on them as a duty to establish church arrangements in their territories as they thought best. The three following years therefore marked the period of the founding and organizing of the evangelical provincial churches. The electorate of Saxony came first with a good example. After this pattern the churches of Hesse, Franconia, Lüneburg, East Friesland, Schleswig and Holstein, Silesia, Prussia, and a whole group of Low German states modelled their constitution and worship.

§ 127.1. =The Organization of the Church of the Saxon
Electorate, A.D. 1527-1529.=--Luther wrote in A.D. 1528 an
instruction to visitors of pastors in the electorate, which
showed what and how ministers were to preach, indicated the
reforms to be made in worship, protested against abuse of the
doctrine of justification by urging the necessity of preaching
the law, etc. The whole territory was divided under four
commissions, comprising lay and clerical members. Ignorant
and incompetent religious teachers were to be removed, but
to be provided for. Teachers were to be settled over churches
and schools, and superintendents over them were to inspect
their work periodically, and to these last the performance
of marriages was assigned. Vacant benefices were to be applied
to the improvement of churches and schools; and those not vacant
were to be taxed for maintenance of hospitals, support of the
poor, founding of new schools, etc. The dangers occasioned by
the often incredible ignorance of the people and their teachers
led to Luther’s composing his two catechisms in A.D. 1529.