Chapter IV: , VII (211)

"As the abuse complained of had a double character, religious
and political, or financial, so also political events came in
aid of the opposition emanating from religious ideas.
Frederick of Saxony [on the occasion of an indulgence
proclaimed in 1501] … had kept the money accruing from it in
his own dominions in his possession, with the determination
not to part with it, till an expedition against the infidels,
which was then contemplated, should be actually undertaken;
the pope and, on the pope's concession, the emperor, had
demanded it of him in vain: he held it for what it really
was—a tax levied on his subjects; and after all the projects
of a war against the Turks had come to nothing, he had at
length applied the money to his university. Nor was he now
inclined to consent to a similar scheme of taxation. … The
sale of indulgences at Jüterbock and the resort of his
subjects thither, was not less offensive to him on financial
grounds than to Luther on spiritual. Not that the latter were
in any degree excited by the former; this it would be
impossible to maintain after a careful examination of the
facts; on the contrary, the spiritual motives were more
original, powerful, and independent than the temporal, though
these were important, as having their proper source in the
general condition of Germany. The point whence the great
events arose which were soon to agitate the world, was the
coincidence of the two. There was … no one who represented the
interests of Germany in the matter. There were innumerable
persons who saw through the abuse of religion, but no one who
dared to call it by its right name and openly to denounce and
resist it. But the alliance between the monk of Wittenberg and
the sovereign of Saxony was formed; no treaty was negotiated;
they had never seen each other; yet they were bound together
by an instinctive mutual understanding. The intrepid monk
attacked the enemy; the prince did not promise him his aid—he
did not even encourage him; he let things take their course. …
Luther's daring assault was the shock which awakened Germany
from her slumber. That a man should arise who had the courage
to undertake the perilous struggle, was a source of universal
satisfaction, and as it were tranquillised the public
conscience. The most powerful interests were involved in
it;—that of sincere and profound piety, against the most
purely external means of obtaining pardon of sins; that of
literature, against fanatical persecutors, of whom Tetzel was
one; the renovated theology against the dogmatic learning of
the schools, which lent itself to all these abuses; the
temporal power against the spiritual, whose usurpations it
sought to curb; lastly, the nation against the rapacity of
Rome."

_L. Ranke,
History of the Reformation in Germany,
book 2, chapter 1 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_J. Köstlin,
Life of Luther,
part 3, chapter 1._

_C. Beard,
Martin Luther and the Reformation,
chapter 5._

See, also, GERMANY: A. D. 1517-1523.

PAPACY: A. D. 1517.
The Ninety-five Theses of Luther.

The following is a translation of the ninety-five theses:

"In the desire and with the purpose of elucidating the truth,
a disputation will be held on the underwritten propositions at
Wittemberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin
Luther, Monk of the Order of St. Augustine, Master of Arts and
of Sacred Theology, and ordinary Reader of the same in that
place. He therefore asks those who cannot be present and
discuss the subject with us orally, to do so by letter in
their absence. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ in saying: 'Repent ye,'
etc., intended that the whole life of believers should be
penitence.

2. This word cannot be understood of sacramental penance, that
is, of the confession and satisfaction which are performed
under the ministry of priests.

3. It does not, however, refer solely to inward penitence; nay
such inward penitence is naught, unless it outwardly produces
various mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty thus continues as long as the hatred of
self—that is, true inward penitence—continues; namely, till
our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The Pope has neither the will nor the power to remit any
penalties, except those which he has imposed by his own
authority, or by that of the canons.

6. The Pope has no power to remit any guilt, except by
declaring and warranting it to have been remitted by God; or
at most by remitting cases reserved for himself; in which
eases, if his power were despised, guilt would certainly
remain.

7. God never remits any man's guilt, without at the same time
subjecting him, humbled in all things, to the authority of his
representative the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and
no burden ought to be imposed on the dying, according to them.

9. Hence the Holy Spirit acting in the Pope does well for us,
in that, in his decrees, he always makes exception of the
article of death and of necessity.

10. Those priests act wrongly and unlearnedly, who, in the
case of the dying, reserve the canonical penances for
purgatory.

11. Those tares about changing of the canonical penalty into
the penalty of purgatory seem surely to have been sown while
the bishops were asleep.

12. Formerly the canonical penalties were imposed not after,
but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

{2447}

13. The dying pay all penalties by death, and are already dead
to the canon laws, and are by right relieved from them.

14. The imperfect soundness or charity of a dying person
necessarily brings with it great fear, and the less it is, the
greater the fear it brings.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient by itself, to say
nothing of other things, to constitute the pains of purgatory,
since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven appear to differ as despair,
almost despair, and peace of mind differ.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems that it must needs be
that, as horror diminishes, so charity increases.

18. Nor does it seem to be proved by any reasoning or any
scriptures, that they are outside of the state of merit or of
the increase of charity.

19. Nor does this appear to be proved, that they are sure and
confident of their own blessedness, at least all of them,
though we may be very sure of it.

20. Therefore the Pope, when he speaks of the plenary
remission of all penalties, does not mean simply of all, but
only of those imposed by himself.

21. Thus those preachers of indulgences are in error who say
that, by the indulgences of the Pope, a man is loosed and
saved from all punishment.

22. For in fact he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty
which they would have had to pay in this life according to the
canons.

23. If any entire remission of all penalties can be granted to
anyone, it is certain that it is granted to none but the most
perfect, that is, to very few.

24. Hence the greater part of the people must needs be
deceived by this indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of
release from penalties.

25. Such power as the Pope has over purgatory in general, such
has every bishop in his own diocese, and every curate in his
own parish, in particular.

26. The Pope acts most rightly in granting remission to souls,
not by the power of the keys (which is of no avail in this
case) but by the way of suffrage.

27. They preach man, who say that the soul flies out of
purgatory as soon as the money thrown into the chest rattles.

28. It is certain that, when the money rattles in the chest,
avarice and gain may be increased, but the suffrage of the
Church depends on the will of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory desire to be
redeemed from it, according to the story told of Saints
Severinus and Paschal.

30. No man is sure of the reality of his own contrition, much
less of the attainment of plenary remission.

31. Rare as is a true penitent, so rare is one who truly buys
indulgences—that is to say, most rare.

32. Those who believe that, through letters of pardon, they
are made sure of their own salvation, will be eternally damned
along with their teachers.

33. We must especially beware of those who say that these
pardons from the Pope are that inestimable gift of God by
which man is reconciled to God.

34. For the grace conveyed by these pardons has respect only
to the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, which are of
human appointment.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine, who teach that
contrition is not necessary for those who buy souls out of
purgatory or buy confessional licences.

36. Every Christian who feels true compunction has of right
plenary remission of pain and guilt, even without letters of
pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has a share
in all the benefits of Christ and of the Church, given him by
God, even without letters of pardon.

38. The remission, however, imparted by the Pope is by no
means to be despised, since it is, as I have said, a
declaration of the Divine remission.

39. It is a most difficult thing, even for the most learned
theologians, to exalt at the same time in the eyes of the
people the ample effect of pardons and the necessity of true
contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves punishment; while the
ampleness of pardons relaxes it, and causes men to hate it, or
at least gives occasion for them to do so.

41. Apostolic pardons ought to be proclaimed with caution,
lest the people should falsely suppose that they are placed
before other good works of charity.

42. Christians should be taught that it is not the mind of the
Pope that the buying of pardons is to be in any way compared
to works of mercy.

43. Christians should be taught that he who gives to a poor
man, or lends to a needy man, does better than if he bought
pardons.

44. Because, by a work of charity, charity increases, and the
man becomes better; while, by means of pardons, he does not
become better, but only freer from punishment.

45. Christians should be taught that he who sees anyone in
need, and, passing him by, gives money for pardons, is not
purchasing for himself the indulgences of the Pope, but the
anger of God.

46. Christians should be taught that, unless they have
superfluous wealth, they are bound to keep what is necessary
for the use of their own households, and by no means to lavish
it on pardons.

47. Christians should be taught that, while they are free to
buy pardons, they are not commanded to do so.

48. Christians should be taught that the Pope, in granting
pardons, has both more need and more desire that devout prayer
should be made for him, than that money should be readily
paid.

49. Christians should be taught that the Pope's pardons are
useful, if they do not put their trust in them, but most
hurtful, if through them they lose the fear of God.

50. Christians should be taught that, if the Pope were
acquainted with the exactions of the preachers of pardons, he
would prefer that the Basilica of St. Peter should be burnt to
ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh,
and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians should be taught that, as it would be the duty,
so it would be the wish of the Pope, even to sell, if
necessary, the Basilica of St. Peter, and to give of his own
money to very many of those from whom the preachers of pardons
extract money.

52. Vain is the hope of salvation through letters of pardon,
even if a commissary—nay the Pope himself—were to pledge his
own soul for them.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the Pope, who, in order
that pardons may be preached, condemn the word of God to utter
silence in other churches.

54. Wrong is done to the word of God when, in the same sermon,
an equal or longer time is spent on pardons that [than] on it.

55. The mind of the Pope necessarily is that, if pardons,
which are a very small matter, are celebrated with single
bells, single processions, and single ceremonies, the Gospel,
which is a very great matter, should be preached with a
hundred bells, a hundred processions, and a hundred
ceremonies.

56. The treasures of the Church, whence the Pope grants
indulgences, are neither sufficiently named nor known among
the people of Christ.

{2448}

57. It is clear that they are at least not temporal treasures,
for these are not so readily lavished, but only accumulated,
by many of the preachers.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and of the saints, for
these, independently of the Pope, are always working grace to
the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell to the outer
man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church are the
poor of the Church, but he spoke according to the use of the
word in his time.

60. We are not speaking rashly when we say that the keys of
the Church, bestowed through the merits of Christ, are that
treasure.

61. For it is clear that the power of the Pope is alone
sufficient for the remission of penalties and of reserved
cases.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Holy Gospel of the
glory and grace of God.

63. This treasure, however, is deservedly most hateful,
because it makes the first to be last.

64. While the treasure of indulgences is deservedly most
acceptable, because it makes the last to be first.

65. Hence the treasures of the Gospel are nets, wherewith of
old they fished for the men of riches.

66. The treasures of indulgences are nets, wherewith they now
fish for the riches of men.

67. Those indulgences, which the preachers loudly proclaim to
be the greatest graces, are seen to be truly such as regards
the promotion of gain.

68. Yet they are in reality in no degree to be compared to the
grace of God and the piety of the cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to receive the commissaries
of apostolic pardons with all reverence.

70. But they are still more bound to see to it with all their
eyes, and take heed with all their ears, that these men do not
preach their own dreams in place of the Pope's commission.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let
him be anathema and accursed.

72. But he, on the other hand, who exerts himself against the
wantonness and licence of speech of the preachers of pardons,
let him be blessed.

73. As the Pope justly thunders against those who use any kind
of contrivance to the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. Much more is it his intention to thunder against those
who, under the pretext of pardons, use contrivances to the
injury of holy charity and of truth.

75. To think that Papal pardons have such power that they
could absolve a man even if—by an impossibility—he had
violated the Mother of God, is madness.

76. We affirm on the contrary that Papal] pardons cannot take
away even the least of venial sins, as regards its guilt.

77. The saying that, even if St. Peter were now Pope, he could
grant no greater graces, is blasphemy against St. Peter and
the Pope.

78. We affirm on the contrary that both he and any other Pope
has greater graces to grant, namely, the Gospel, powers, gifts
of healing, etc. (1 Corinthians xii. 9).

79. To say that the cross set up among the insignia of the
Papal arms is of equal power with the cross of Christ, is
blasphemy.

80. Those bishops, curates, and theologians who allow such
discourses to have currency among the people, will have to
render an account.

81. This licence in the preaching of pardons makes it no easy
thing, even for learned men, to protect the reverence due to
the Pope against the calumnies, or, at all events, the keen
questionings of the laity.

82. As for instance:—Why does not the Pope empty purgatory for
the sake of most holy charity and of the supreme necessity of
souls—this being the most just of all reasons—if he redeems
an infinite number of souls for the sake of that most fatal
thing money, to be spent on building a basilica—this being a
very slight reason?

83. Again; why do funeral masses and anniversary masses for
the deceased continue, and why does not the Pope return, or
permit the withdrawal of the funds bequeathed for this
purpose, since it is a wrong to pay for those who are already
redeemed?

84. Again; what is this new kindness of God and the Pope, in
that for money's sake, they permit an impious man and an enemy
of God to redeem a pious soul which loves God, and yet do not
redeem that same pious and beloved soul, out of free charity,
on account of its own need?

85. Again; why is it that the penitential canons, long since
abrogated and dead in themselves in very fact and not only by
usage, are yet still redeemed with money, through the granting
of indulgences, as if they were full of life?

86. Again; why does not the Pope, whose riches are at this day
more ample than those of the wealthiest of the wealthy, build
the one basilica of St. Peter with his own money, rather than
with that of poor believers?

87. Again; what does the Pope remit or impart to those who,
through perfect contrition, have a right to plenary remission
and participation?

88. Again; what greater good would the Church receive if the
Pope, instead of once, as he does now, were to bestow these
remissions and participations a hundred times a day on any one
of the faithful?

89. Since it is the salvation of souls, rather than money,
that the Pope seeks by his pardons, why does he suspend the
letters and pardons granted long ago, since they are equally
efficacious.

90. To repress these scruples and arguments of the laity by
force alone, and not to solve them by giving reasons, is to
expose the Church and the Pope to the ridicule of their
enemies, and to make Christian men unhappy.

91. If then pardons were preached according to the spirit and
mind of the Pope, all these questions would be resolved with
ease; nay, would not exist.

92. Away then with all those prophets who say to the people of
Christ: 'Peace, peace,' and there is no peace.

93. Blessed be all those prophets, who say to the people of
Christ: 'The cross, the cross,' and there is no cross.

94. Christians should be exhorted to strive to follow Christ
their head through pains, deaths, and hells.

95. And thus trust to enter heaven through many tribulations,
rather than in the security of peace."

_H. Wace and C. A. Buchheim,
First Principles of the Reformation,
page 6-13._

PAPACY: A. D. 1517-1521.
Favoring circumstances under which the Reformation in Germany
gained ground.
The Bull "Exurge Domine."
Excommunication of Luther.
The imperial summons from Worms.

"It was fortunate for Luther's cause that he lived under a
prince like the Elector of Saxony. Frederick, indeed, was a
devout catholic; he had made a pilgrimage to Palestine, and
had filled All Saints' Church at Wittenberg with relics for
which he had given large sums of money. His attention,
however, was now entirely engrossed by his new university, and
he was unwilling to offer up to men like Tetzel so great an
ornament of it as Dr. Martin Luther, since whose appointment
at Wittenberg the number of students had so wonderfully
increased as to throw the universities of Erfurt and Leipsic
quite into the shade. …
{2449}
As one of the principal Electors he was completely master in
his own dominions, and indeed throughout Germany he was as
much respected as the Emperor; and Maximilian, besides his
limited power, was deterred by his political views from taking
any notice of the quarrel. Luther had thus full liberty to
prepare the great movement that was to ensue. … The contempt
entertained by Pope Leo X. for the whole affair was also
favourable to Luther; for Frederick might not at first have
been inclined to defend him against the Court of Rome. … The
Court of Rome at length became more sensible of the importance
of Luther's innovations and in August 1518, he was commanded
either to recant, or to appear and answer for his opinions at
Rome, where Silvester Prierias and the bishop Ghenucci di
Arcoli had been appointed his judges. Luther had not as yet
dreamt of throwing off his allegiance to the Roman See. In the
preceding May he had addressed a letter to the Pope himself,
stating his views in a firm but modest and respectful tone,
and declaring that he could not retract them. The Elector
Frederick, at the instance of the university of Wittenberg,
which trembled for the life of its bold and distinguished
professor, prohibited Luther's journey to Rome, and expressed
his opinion that the question should be decided in Germany by
impartial judges. Leo consented to send a legate to Augsburg
to determine the cause, and selected for that purpose Cardinal
Thomas di Vio, better known by the name of Cajetanus, derived
from his native city of Gaeta. … Luther set out for Augsburg
on foot provided with several letters of recommendation from
the Elector, and a safe conduct from the Emperor Maximilian. …
Luther appeared before the cardinal for the first time,
October 12th, at whose feet he fell; but it was soon apparent
that no agreement could be expected. … Cajetanus, who had at
first behaved with great moderation and politeness, grew warm,
demanded an unconditional retraction, forbade Luther again to
appear before him till he was prepared to make it, and
threatened him with the censures of the Church. The fate of
Huss stared Luther in the face, and he determined to fly. His
patron Staupitz procured him a horse, and on the 20th of
October, Langemantel, a magistrate of Augsburg, caused a
postern in the walls to be opened for him before day had well
dawned. … Cajetanus now wrote to the Elector Frederick
complaining of Luther's refractory departure from Augsburg,
and requiring either that he should be sent to Rome or at
least be banished from Saxony. … So uncertain were Luther's
prospects that he made preparations for his departure. … At
length, just on the eve of his departure, he received an
intimation from Frederick that he might remain at Wittenberg.
Before the close of the year he gained a fresh accession of
strength by the arrival of Melanchthon, a pupil of Reuchlin,
who had obtained the appointment of Professor of Greek in the
university. Frederick offered a fresh disputation at
Wittenberg; but Leo X. adopted a course more consonant with
the pretensions of an infallible Church by issuing a Bull
dated November 9th 1518, which, without adverting to Luther or
his opinions, explained and enforced the received doctrine of
indulgences. It failed, however, to produce the desired
effect. … Leo now tried the effects of seduction. Carl Von
Miltitz, a Saxon nobleman, canon of Mentz, Treves, and
Meissen, … was despatched to the Elector Frederick with the
present of a golden rose, and with instructions to put an end,
as best he might, to the Lutheran schism. On his way through
Germany, Miltitz soon perceived that three fourths of the
people were in Luther's favour; nor was his reception at the
Saxon Court of a nature to afford much encouragement. …
Miltitz saw the necessity for conciliation. Having obtained an
interview with Luther at Altenburg, Miltitz persuaded him to
promise that he would be silent, provided a like restraint
were placed upon his adversaries. … Luther was even induced to
address a letter to the Pope, dated from Altenburg, March 3rd
1510, in which, in humble terms, he expressed his regret that
his motives should have been misinterpreted, and solemnly
declared that he did not mean to dispute the power and
authority of the Pope and the Church of Rome, which he
considered superior to everything except Jesus Christ alone. …
The truce effected by Miltitz lasted only a few months. It was
broken by a disputation to which Dr. Eck challenged
Bodenstein, a Leipsic professor, better known by the name of
Carlstadt. … The Leipsic disputation was preceded and followed
by a host of controversies. The whole mind of Germany was in
motion, and it was no longer with Luther alone that Rome had
to contend. All the celebrated names in art and literature
sided with the Reformation; Erasmus, Ulrich von Hutten,
Melanchthon, Lucas Cranach, Albert Durer, and others. Hans
Sachs, the Meistersänger of Nuremberg, composed in his honour
the pretty song called 'the Wittenberg Nightingale.' Silvester
von Schaumburg and Franz von Sickingen invited Luther to their
castles, in case he were driven from Saxony; and Schaumburg
declared that 100 more Franconian knights were ready to
protect him. … The Elector Frederick became daily more
convinced that his doctrines were founded in Scripture. …
Meanwhile, Luther had made great strides in his opinions since
the publication of his Theses. … He had begun to impugn many
of the principles of the Romish church; and so far from any
longer recognising the paramount authority of the Pope, or
even of a general council, he was now disposed to submit to no
rule but the Bible. The more timid spirits were alarmed at his
boldness, and even Frederick himself exhorted him to
moderation. It must be acknowledged, indeed, that Luther
sometimes damaged his cause by the intemperance of his
language; an instance of which is afforded by the remarkable
letter he addressed to Leo X., April 6th 1520, as a dedication
to his treatise 'De Libertate Christiana.' … The letter just
alluded to was, perhaps, the immediate cause of the famous
Bull, 'Exurge Domine,' which Leo fulminated against Luther,
June 15th 1520. The Bull, which is conceived in mild terms,
condemned forty-one propositions extracted from Luther's
works, allowed him sixty days to recant, invited him to Rome,
if he pleased to come, under a safe conduct, and required him
to cease from preaching and writing, and to burn his published
treatises. If he did not conform within the above period, he
was condemned as a notorious and irreclaimable heretic; all
princes and magistrates were required to seize him and his
adherents, and to send them to Rome; and all places that gave
them shelter were threatened with an interdict.
{2450}
The Bull was forwarded to Archbishop Albert of Mentz; but in
North Germany great difficulty was found in publishing it. …
On December 10th Luther consummated his rebellion by taking
that final step which rendered it impossible for him to
recede. On the banks of the Elbe before the Elster Gate of
Wittenberg, … Luther, in the presence of a large body of
professors and students, solemnly committed with his own hands
to the flames the Bull by which he had been condemned,
together with the code of the canon law, and the writings of
Eck and Emser, his opponents. … On January 3rd 1521, Luther
and his followers were solemnly excommunicated by Leo with
bell, book, and candle, and an image of him, together with his
writings, was committed to the flames. … At the Diet of Worms
which was held soon after, the Emperor [Charles V., who
succeeded Maximilian in 1519] having ordered that Luther's
books should be delivered up to the magistrates to be burnt,
the States represented to him the uselessness and impolicy of
such a step, pointing out that the doctrines of Luther had
already sunk deep into the hearts of the people; and they
recommended that he should be summoned to Worms and
interrogated whether he would recant without any disputation.
… In compliance with the advice of the States, the Emperor
issued a mandate, dated March 6th 1521, summoning Luther to
appear at Worms within twenty-one days. It was accompanied
with a safe conduct."

_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 2, chapter 3 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_L. von Ranke,
History of the Reformation in Germany,
book 2 (volume 1)._

_P. Bayne,
Martin Luther: his Life and Work,
book 5, chapter 3;
book 8, chapter 6 (volumes 1-2)._

_J. E. Darras,
History of the Church,
7th period, chapter 1 (volume 4)._

_P. Schaff,
History of the Christian Church,
volume 6, chapter 4._

PAPACY: A. D. 1519-1524.
The sale of Indulgences in Switzerland.
Beginning of the Reformation under Zwingli.

Near the close of the year 1518, Ulric Zwingle, or Zwingli, or
Zuinglius, already much respected for his zealous piety and
his learning, "was appointed preacher in the collegiate church
at Zurich. The crisis of his appearance on this scene was so
extraordinary as to indicate to every devout mind a
providential dispensation, designed to raise up a second
instrument in the work of reformation, and that, almost by the
same means which had been employed to produce the first. One
Bernhard Samson, or Sanson, a native of Milan, and a
Franciscan monk, selected this moment to open a sale of
indulgences at Zurich. He was the Tetzel of Switzerland. He
preached through many of its provinces, exercising the same
trade, with the same blasphemous pretensions and the same
clamorous effrontery; and in a land of greater political
freedom his impostures excited even a deeper and more general
disgust. … He encountered no opposition till he arrived at
Zurich. But here appears a circumstance which throws a shade
of distinction between the almost parallel histories of Samson
and Tetzel. The latter observed in his ministration all the
necessary ecclesiastical forms; the former omitted to present
his credentials to the bishop of the diocese, and acted solely
on the authority of the pontifical bulls: Hugo, Bishop of
Constance, was offended at this disrespectful temerity, and
immediately directed Zwingle and the other pastors to exclude
the stranger from their churches. The first who had occasion
to show obedience to this mandate was John Frey, minister of
Staufberg. Bullinger, Dean of Bremgarten, was the second. From
Bremgarten, after a severe altercation which ended by the
excommunication of that dignitary, Samson proceeded to Zurich.
Meanwhile Zwingle had been engaged for about two months in
rousing the indignation of the people against the same object;
and so successfully did he support the instruction of the
Bishop, and such efficacy was added to his eloquence by the
personal unpopularity of Samson, that the senate determined
not so much as to admit him within the gates of the city. A
deputation of honour was appointed to welcome the pontifical
legate without the walls. He was then commanded to absolve the
Dean from the sentence launched against him, and to depart
from the canton. He obeyed, and presently turned his steps
towards Italy and repassed the mountains. This took place at
the end of February, 1519. The Zurichers immediately addressed
a strong remonstrance to the Pope, in which they denounced the
misconduct of his agent. Leo replied, on the last of April,
with characteristic mildness; for though he maintained, as
might be expected, the Pope's authority to grant those
indulgences, … yet he accorded the prayer of the petition so
far as to recall the preacher, and to promise his punishment,
should he be convicted of having exceeded his commission. …
But Zwingle's views were not such as long to be approved by an
episcopal reformer in that [the Roman] church. … He began to
invite the Bishop, both by public and private solicitations,
with perfect respect but great earnestness, to give his
adhesion to the evangelical truth … and to permit the free
preaching of the gospel throughout his diocese. … From the
beginning of his preaching at Zurich it was his twofold object
to instruct the people in the meaning, design, and character
of the scriptural writings; and at the same time to teach them
to seek their religion only there. His very first proceeding
was to substitute the gospel of St. Matthew, as the text-book
of his discourses, for the scraps of Scripture exclusively
treated by the papal preachers; and he pursued this purpose by
next illustrating the Acts of the Apostles, and the epistles
of Paul and Peter. He considered the doctrine of justification
by faith as the corner-stone of Christianity, and he strove to
draw away his hearers from the gross observances of a
pharasaical church to a more spiritual conception of the
covenant of their redemption. … His success was so
considerable, that at the end of 1519 he numbered as many as
2,000 disciples; and his influence so powerful among the
chiefs of the commonwealth, that he procured, in the following
year, an official decree to the effect: That all pastors and
ministers should thenceforward reject the unfaithful devices
and ordinances of men, and teach with freedom such doctrines
only as rested on the authority of the prophecies, gospels,
and apostolical epistles."

_G. Waddington,
History of the Reformation,
chapter 27 (volume 2)._

{2451}

"With unflagging zeal and courage Zwingli followed his ideal
in politics, viz., to rear a republic on the type of the Greek
free states of old, with perfect national independence. Thanks
to his influence Zurich in 1521 abolished 'Reislaufen,' and
the system of foreign pay [mercenary military service]. This
step, however, brought down on the head of Zurich the wrath of
the twelve sister republics, which had just signed a military
contract with Francis I. … It was only in 1522 that he began
to launch pamphlets against the abuses in the Church-fasting,
celibacy of the clergy and the like. On the 29th of January,
1523, Zwingli obtained from the Council of Zurich the opening
of a public religious discussion in presence of the whole of
the clergy of the canton, and representatives of the Bishop of
Constance, whose assistance in the debate the Council had
invited. In 67 theses, remarkable for their penetration and
clearness, he sketched out his confession of faith and plan of
reform. … On the 25th of October, 1523, a second discussion
initiated the practical consequences of the reformed
doctrine—the abrogation of the mass and image worship.
Zwingli's system was virtually that of Calvin, but was
conceived in a broader spirit, and carried out later on in a
far milder manner by Bullinger. … The Council gave the fullest
approval to the Reformation. In 1524 Zwingli married Anne
Reinhard, the widow of a Zurich nobleman (Meyer von Knonau),
and so discarded the practice of celibacy obtaining amongst
priests. … In 1524 Zwingli began to effect the most sweeping
changes with the view of overthrowing the whole fabric of
mediæval superstition. In the direction of reform he went far
beyond Luther, who had retained oral confession, altar
pictures, &c. The introduction of his reforms in Zurich called
forth but little opposition. True, there were the risings of
the Anabaptists, but these were the same everywhere. …
Pictures and images were removed from the churches, under
government direction. … At the Landgemeinden [parish
gatherings] called for the purpose, the people gave an
enthusiastic assent to his doctrines, and declared themselves
ready 'to die for the gospel truth.' Thus a national Church
was established, severed from the diocese of Constance, and
placed under the control of the Council of Zurich and a
clerical synod. The convents were turned into schools,
hospitals, and poorhouses."

_Mrs. L. Hug and R. Stead,
Switzerland,
chapter 22._

ALSO IN:
_H. Stebbing,
History of the Reformation,
chapter 7 (volume l)._

_C. Beard,
The Reformation
(Hibbert Lectures, 1883).
lecture 7._

_J. H. Merle D'Aubigné.
History of the Reformation,
books 8 and 11 (volumes 2-3)._

_M. J. Spalding.
History of the Protestant Reformation,
part 2, chapter 5._

_P. Schaff,
History of the Christian Church,
volume 7, chapters 1-3._

PAPACY: A. D. 1521-1522.
Luther before the Diet at Worms.
His friendly abduction and concealment at Wartburg.
His translation of the Bible.

"On the 2nd of April [1521], the Tuesday after Easter, Luther
set out on his momentous journey. He travelled in a cart with
three of his friends, the herald riding in front in his coat
of arms. … The Emperor had not waited for his appearance to
order his books to be burnt. When he reached Erfurt on the way
the sentence had just been proclaimed. The herald asked him if
he still meant to go on. 'I will go,' he said, 'if there are
as many devils in Worms as there are tiles upon the
house-tops. Though they burnt Huss, they could not burn the
truth.' The Erfurt students, in retaliation, had thrown the
Bull into the water. The Rector and the heads of the
university gave Luther a formal reception as an old and
honoured member; he preached at his old convent, and he
preached again at Gotha and at Eisenach. Caietan had
protested against the appearance in the Diet of an
excommunicated heretic. The Pope himself had desired that the
safe–conduct should not be respected, and the bishops had said
that it was unnecessary. Manœvres were used to delay him on
the road till the time allowed had expired. But there was a
fierce sense of fairness in the lay members of the Diet, which
it was dangerous to outrage. Franz von Sickingen hinted that
if there was foul play it might go hard with Cardinal
Caietan—and Von Sickingen was a man of his word in such
matters. On the 16th of April, at ten in the morning, the cart
entered Worms, bringing Luther in his monk's dress, followed
and attended by a crowd of cavaliers. The town's people were
all out to see the person with whose name Germany was ringing.
As the cart passed through the gales the warder on the walls
blew a blast upon his trumpet. … Luther needed God to stand by
him, for in all that great gathering he could count on few
assured friends. The princes of the empire were resolved that
he should have fair play, but they were little inclined to
favour further a disturber of the public peace. The Diet sate
in the Bishop's palace, and the next evening Luther appeared.
The presence in which he found himself would have tried the
nerves of the bravest of men: the Emperor, sternly hostile,
with his retinue of Spanish priests and nobles; the
archbishops and bishops, all of opinion that the stake was the
only fitting place for so insolent a heretic; the dukes and
barons, whose stern eyes were little likely to reveal their
sympathy, if sympathy any of them felt. One of them only,
George of Frundsberg, had touched Luther on the shoulder as he
passed through the ante–room. 'Little monk, little monk,' he
said, 'thou hast work before thee, that I, and many a man
whose trade is war, never faced the like of. If thy heart is
right, and thy cause good, go on in God's name. He will not
forsake thee. A pile of books stood on a table when he was
brought forward. An officer of the court read the titles,
asked if he acknowledged them, and whether he was ready to
retract them. Luther was nervous, not without cause. He
answered in a low voice that the books were his. To the other
question he could not reply at once. He demanded time. His
first appearance had not left a favourable impression; he was
allowed a night to consider. The next morning, April 18, he
had recovered himself; he came in fresh, courageous, and
collected. His old enemy, Eck, was this time the spokesman
against him, and asked what he was prepared to do. He said
firmly that his writings were of three kinds: some on simple
Gospel truth, which all admitted, and which of course he could
not retract; some against Papal laws and customs, which had
tried the consciences of Christians and had been used as
excuses to oppress and spoil the German people. If he
retracted these he would cover himself with shame. In a third
sort he had attacked particular persons, and perhaps had been
too violent. Even here he declined to retract simply, but
would admit his fault if fault could be proved. He gave his
answers in a clear strong voice, in Latin first, and then in
German.
{2452}
There was a pause, and then Eck said that he had spoken
disrespectfully; his heresies had been already condemned at
the Council at Constance; let him retract on these special
points, and he should have consideration for the rest. He
required a plain Yes or No from him, 'without horns.' The
taunt roused Luther's blood. His full brave self was in his
reply. 'I will give you an answer,' he said, 'which has
neither horns nor teeth. Popes have erred and councils have
erred. Prove to me out of Scripture that I am wrong, and I
submit. Till then my conscience binds me. Here I stand. I can
do no more. God help me. Amen.' All day long the storm raged.
Night had fallen, and torches were lighted in the hall before
the sitting closed. Luther was dismissed at last; it was
supposed, and perhaps intended, that he was to be taken to a
dungeon. But the hearts of the lay members of the Diet had
been touched by the courage which he had shown. They would not
permit a hand to be laid on him. … When he had reached his
lodging again, he flung up his hands. 'I am through!' he
cried. 'I am through! If I had a thousand heads they should be
struck off one by one before I would retract.' The same
evening the Elector Frederick sent for him, and told him he
had done well and bravely. But though he had escaped so far,
he was not acquitted. Charles conceived that he could be now
dealt with as an obstinate heretic. At the next session (the
day following), he informed the Diet that he would send Luther
home to Wittenberg, there to be punished as the Church
required. The utmost that his friends could obtain was that
further efforts should be made. The Archbishop of Treves was
allowed to tell him that if he would acknowledge the
infallibility of councils, he might be permitted to doubt the
infallibility of the Pope. But Luther stood simply upon
Scripture. There, and there only, was infallibility. The
Elector ordered him home at once, till the Diet should decide
upon his fate. … A majority in the Diet, it was now clear,
would pronounce for his death. If he was sentenced by the
Great Council of the Empire, the Elector would be no longer
able openly to protect him. It was decided that he should
disappear, and disappear so completely that no trace of him
should be discernible. On his way back through the Thuringian
Forest, three or four miles from Altenstein, a party of armed
men started out of the wood, set upon his carriage, seized and
carried him off to Wartburg Castle. There he remained, passing
by the name of the Ritter George, and supposed to be some
captive knight. The secret was so well kept, that even the
Elector's brother was ignorant of his hiding place. Luther was
as completely lost as if the earth had swallowed him. … On the
8th of May the Edict of Worms was issued, placing him under
the ban of the empire; but he had become 'as the air
invulnerable,' and the face of the world had changed before he
came back to it: … Luther's abduction and residence at
Wartburg is the most picturesque incident in his life. He
dropped his monk's gown, and was dressed like a gentleman; he
let his beard grow and wore a sword. … The revolution,
deprived of its leader, ran wild meanwhile. An account of the
scene at Worms, with Luther's speeches, and wood cut
illustrations, was printed on broadsheets and circulated in
hundreds of thousands of copies. The people were like
schoolboys left without a master. Convents and monasteries
dissolved by themselves; monks and nuns began to marry; there
was nothing else for the nuns to do, turned as they were
adrift without provision. The Mass in most of the churches in
Saxony was changed into a Communion. But without Luther it was
all chaos, and no order could be taken. So great was the need
of him, that in December he went to Wittenberg in disguise;
but it was not yet safe for him to remain there. He had to
retreat to his castle again, and in that compelled retreat he
bestowed on Germany the greatest of all the gifts which he was
able to offer. He began to translate the Bible into clear
vernacular German. … He had probably commenced the work at the
beginning of his stay at the castle. In the spring of 1522 the
New Testament was completed. In the middle of March, the
Emperor's hands now being fully occupied, the Elector sent him
word that he need not conceal himself any longer; and he
returned finally to his home and his friends. The New
Testament was printed in November of that year, and became at
once a household book in Germany. … The Old Testament was
taken in hand at once, and in two years half of it was roughly
finished."

_J. A. Froude,
Luther: a Short Biography,
pages 28-35._

ALSO IN:
_G. Waddington,
History of the Reformation,
chapters 13-14 (volume 1)._

_W. Robertson,
History of the Reign of Charles V.,
book 2 (volume 1)._

_C. Beard,
Martin Luther and the Reformation,
chapter 9._

_J. Köstlin,
Life of Luther,
part 3, chapter 9._

PAPACY: A. D. 1521-1535.
Beginning of the Protestant Reform movement in France.
Hesitation of Francis I.
His final persecution of the Reformers.

"The long contest for Gallican rights had lowered the prestige
of the popes in France, but it had not weakened the Catholic
Church, which was older than the monarchy itself, and, in the
feeling of the people, was indissolubly associated with it.
The College of the Sorbonne, or the Theological Faculty at
Paris, and the Parliament, which had together maintained
Gallican liberty, were united in stern hostility to all
doctrinal innovations. … In Southern France a remnant of the
Waldenses had survived, and the recollection of the
Catharists was still preserved in popular songs and legends.
But the first movements towards reform emanated from the
Humanist culture. A literary and scientific spirit was
awakened in France through the lively intercourse with Italy
which subsisted under Louis XII. and Francis I. By Francis
especially, Italian scholars and artists were induced in large
numbers to take up their abode in France. Frenchmen likewise
visited Italy and brought home the classical culture which
they acquired there. Among the scholars who cultivated Greek
was Budæus, the foremost of them, whom Erasmus styled the
'wonder of France.' After the 'Peace of the Dames' was
concluded at Cambray, in 1529, when Francis surrendered Italy
to Charles V., a throng of patriotic Italians who feared or
hated the Spanish rule, streamed over the Alps and gave a new
impulse to literature and art. Poets, artists, and scholars
found in the king a liberal and enthusiastic patron. The new
studies, especially Hebrew and Greek, were opposed by all the
might of the Sorbonne, the leader of which was the Syndic,
Beda. He and his associates were on the watch for heresy, and
every author who was suspected of overstepping the bounds of
orthodoxy was immediately accused and subjected to
persecution.
{2453}
Thus two parties were formed, the one favorable to the new
learning, and the other inimical to it and rigidly wedded to
the traditional theology. The Father of the French
Reformation, or the one more entitled to this distinction than
any other, is Jacques Lefèvre. … Lefèvre was honored among the
Humanists as the restorer of philosophy and science in the
University. Deeply imbued with a religious spirit, in 1509 he
put forth a commentary on the Psalms, and in 1512 a commentary
on the Epistles of Paul. As early as about 1512, he said to
his pupil Farel: 'God will renovate the world, and you will be
a witness of it'; and in the last named work; he says that the
signs of the times betoken that a renovation of the Church is
near at hand. He teaches the doctrine of gratuitous
justification, and deals with the Scriptures as the supreme
and sufficient authority. But a mystical, rather than a
polemical vein characterizes him; and while this prevented him
from breaking with the Church, it also blunted the sharpness
of the opposition which his opinions were adapted to produce.
One of his pupils was Briçonnet, Bishop of Meaux, who held the
same view of justification with Lefèvre, and fostered the
evangelical doctrine in his diocese. The enmity of the
Sorbonne to Lefèvre and his school took a more aggressive form
when the writings of Luther began to be read in the University
and elsewhere. … The Sorbonne [1521] formally condemned a
dissertation of Lefèvre on a point of evangelical history, in
which he had controverted the traditional opinion. He, with
Farel, Gérard Roussel, and other preachers, found an asylum
with Briçonnet. Lefèvre translated the New Testament from the
Vulgate, and, in a commentary on the Gospels, explicitly
pronounced the Bible the sole rule of faith, which the
individual might interpret for himself, and declared
justification to be through faith alone, without human works
or merit. It seemed as if Meaux aspired to become another
Wittenberg. At length a commission of parliament was appointed
to take cognizance of heretics in that district. Briçonnet,
either intimidated, as Beza asserts, or recoiling at the sight
of an actual secession from the Church, joined in the
condemnation of Luther and of his opinions, and even
acquiesced in the persecution which fell upon Protestantism
within his diocese. Lefèvre fled to Strasburg, was afterwards
recalled by Francis I., but ultimately took up his abode in
the court of the King's sister, Margaret, the Queen of
Navarre. Margaret, from the first, was favorably inclined to
the new doctrines. There were two parties at the court. The
mother of the King, Louisa of Savoy, and the Chancellor
Duprat, were allies of the Sorbonne. … Margaret, on the
contrary, a versatile and accomplished princess, cherished a
mystical devotion which carried her beyond Briçonnet in her
acceptance of the teaching of the Reformers. … Before the
death of her first husband, the Duke of Alençon, and while she
was a widow, she exerted her influence to the full extent in
behalf of the persecuted Protestants, and in opposition to the
Sorbonne. After her marriage to Henry d'Albret, the King of
Navarre, she continued, in her own little court and
principality, to favor the reformed doctrine and its
professors. …

See NAVARRE: A. D. 1528-1563].

The drift of her influence appears in the character of her
daughter, the heroic Jeanne d'Albret, the mother of Henry IV.,
and in the readiness of the people over whom Margaret
immediately ruled to receive the Protestant faith. … Francis
I., whose generous patronage of artists and men of letters
gave him the title of 'Father of Science,' had no love for the
Sorbonne, for the Parliament, or for the monks. He entertained
the plan of bringing Erasmus to Paris, and placing him at the
head of an institution of learning. He read the Bible with his
mother and sister, and felt no superstitious aversion to the
leaders of reform. … The revolt of the Constable Bourbon [see
FRANCE: A. D. 1520-1523] made it necessary for Francis to
conciliate the clergy; and the battle of Pavia, followed by
the captivity of the King, and the regency of his mother, gave
a free rein to the persecutors. An inquisitorial court,
composed partly of laymen, was ordained by Parliament.
Heretics were burned at Paris and in the provinces. Louis de
Berquin, who combined a culture which won the admiration of
Erasmus, with the religious earnestness of Luther, was thrown
into prison." Three times the King interposed and rescued him
from the persecutors; but at last, in November, 1529, Berquin
was hanged and burned.

_G. P. Fisher,
The Reformation,
chapter 8._