Chapter XVII: Book I: Chap. I (12)

Crowds assembled at the hour, and committed the propositions of the Dominican to the flames, amid loud acclamations. One copy which escaped, Luther afterwards sent to his friend, Lange of Erfurt. These generous but imprudent youths followed the old precept, "_Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth_" and not that of Jesus Christ; but after the example which doctors and professors had given at Frankfort, can we be astonished that young students followed it at Wittemberg? The news of this academical execution spread throughout Germany, and made a great noise.[419] Luther was extremely vexed at it.

[419] "Fit ex ea re ingens undique fabula." (Ibid.)

"I am astonished," he writes to his old master, Jodocus, at Erfurt, "how you could think it was I that burned Tezel's theses. Do you think that I am so devoid of sense? But what can I do? When I am the subject of remark, every thing seems to be believed.[420] Can I tie up the tongues of the whole world? Very well! Let them say, let them hear, let them see, let them pretend whatever they please; I will act as long as the Lord gives me strength, and with his help will fear nothing." "What will come out of it," says he to Lange, "I know not, unless it be that my danger is much increased."[421] The act of the students shows how much their hearts already burned for the cause which Luther defended. This was an important symptom; for a movement among the young of necessity soon extends to the whole nation.

[420] "Omnes omnibus omnia redunt de me." (Luth. Ep. i, p. 109.)

[421] (Luth Ep. i, 98.)

The theses of Tezel and Wimpina, though little esteemed, produced a certain effect. They heightened the dispute, widened the rent which had been made in the mantle of the Church, and brought questions of the highest interest into the field. Accordingly, the heads of the Church began to look more narrowly at the matter, and to declare decidedly against the Reformer. "Verily, I know not in whom Luther confides," said the Bishop of Brandenburg, "when he dares thus attack the power of bishops." Perceiving that this new circumstance called for new proceedings, the bishop came in person to Wittemberg; but he found Luther animated with the inward joy which a good conscience imparts, and determined to give battle. The bishop felt that the Augustin monk was obeying an authority superior to his, and returned to Brandenburg in a rage. One day, in the winter of 1518, when sitting at his fireside, he turned to those who were about him and said, "I will not lay down my head in peace till I have thrown Martin into the fire, as I do this brand," throwing one into the grate. The revolution of the sixteenth century was not to be accomplished by the heads of the Church any more than that of the first century had been by the Sanhedrim and the synagogue. In the sixteenth century, the heads of the Church were opposed to Luther, the Reformation, and its ministers, in the same way as they were opposed to Jesus Christ, the gospel, and his apostles, and as they too often are at all times to the truth. "The bishops," says Luther, in speaking of the visit which the Bishop of Brandenburg had paid him, "begin to perceive that they ought to have done what I am doing, and they are consequently ashamed. They call me proud and audacious, and I deny not that I am so. But they are not the people to know either what God is, or what we are."[422]

[422] "Quid vel Deus vel ipsi sumus." (Luth. Ep. i, p. 224.)

CHAP. IX.

Prierio--System of Rome--The Dialogue--System of
Reform--Reply to Prierio--The Word--The Pope and the
Church--Hochstraten--The Monks--Luther replies--Eck--The
School--The Obelisks--Luther's Sentiments--The
Asterisks--Rupture.

A more serious resistance than that of Tezel was already opposed to Luther. Rome had answered. A reply had issued from the walls of the sacred palace. It was not Leo X who had taken it into his head to speak theology. "A quarrel of monks," he had one day said. "The best thing is not to meddle with it." And on another occasion, "It is a drunken German who has written these theses; when he recovers from his wine he will speak differently."[423] A Dominican of Rome, Sylvester Mazolini de Prierio or Prierias, master of the sacred palace, exercised the functions of censor, and in this character was the first man in Italy who knew of the Saxon monk's theses.

[423] "Ein voller trunkener Deutscher." (Luth. Op. (W.) xxii, p.
1337.)

A Roman censor and the theses of Luther! What a rencounter! Liberty of speech, liberty of investigation, liberty of faith, come into collision in Rome, with that power which pretends to have in its hands a monopoly of intelligence, and to open and shut the mouth of Christendom at its pleasure. The struggle between Christian liberty, which begets children of God, and pontifical despotism, which begets slaves of Rome, is, as it were, personified during the first days of the Reformation, in the encounter between Luther and Prierio.

The Roman censor, prior-general of the Dominicans, employed to determine what Christendom must say, or not say, and know or not know, hastened to reply, and published a tract, which he dedicated to Leo X. He spoke contemptuously of the German monk, and declared, with a self-sufficiency altogether Roman, "that he was anxious to know whether this Martin had a nose of iron, or a head of brass, which could not be broken."[424] Then, in the form of a dialogue, he attacked the theses of Luther, employing alternately, ridicule, insult, and threatening.

[424] "An ferreum nasum aut caput æneum gerat iste Lutherus, ut
effringi non possit." (Sylv. Prieratis Dialogus.)

The combat between the Augustin of Wittemberg and the Dominican of Rome took place on the very question which lies at the foundation of the Reformation; viz., "What is the sole infallible authority to Christians?" The following is the system of the Church, as expounded by its most independent organs.[425]

[425] See Joh. Gersonis Propositiones de Sensu Literali S. Scripturæ.
(Op. tom. i.)

The letter of the written Word is dead without the spirit of interpretation, which alone unfolds its hidden meaning. Now this spirit is not granted to every Christian, but to the Church; in other words, to the priests. It is great presumption to maintain, that he who promised to be with his Church always to the end of the world, could abandon it to the power of error. It will be said, perhaps, that the doctrine and constitution of the Church are not the same as we find them in the sacred oracles. This is true; but the change is only apparent, relating to the form, and not to the substance. Moreover, the change is an advance. The living power of the Spirit has given reality to what exists in Scripture only in idea; it has embodied the sketches of the Word, put a finishing hand to these sketches, and completed the work of which the Bible had furnished only the first outlines. Scripture ought, therefore, to be understood in the sense determined by the Church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Here the Catholic doctors are divided. General councils, say some, and Gerson among the number, are the representatives of the Church. The pope, says others, is the depositary of the Spirit of interpretation; and no man is entitled to understand Scripture in a sense differing from that of the Roman pontiff. This was the opinion of Prierio.

Such was the doctrine which the master of the sacred palace opposed to the rising Reformation. On the power of the pope and the Church he advanced propositions at which the most shameless flatterers of the court of Rome would have blushed. The following is one of the points which he maintains at the commencement of his tract:--"Whoever rests not in the doctrine of the Roman Church, and the Roman pontiff, as the infallible rule of faith, from which the Holy Scripture itself derives its force and authority, is a heretic."[426]

[426] "A qua etiam Sacra Scriptura robur trahit et auctoritatem,
hæreticus est (Fundamentum tertium.")

Then in a dialogue, in which Luther and Sylvester are the speakers, the latter tries to refute the doctor's propositions. The sentiments of the Saxon monk were quite new to a Roman censor. Accordingly, Prierio shows that he understood neither the emotions of his heart, nor the motives of his conduct. To the teacher of truth he applied the little standards of the valets of Rome. "Dear Luther!" says he, "were you to receive a bishopric and a plenary indulgence for the repair of your Church from our lord the pope, you would proceed more gently, and would even prose in favour of the indulgence which you are now pleased to blacken!" The Italian, so proud of the elegance of his manners, sometimes assumes the most scurrilous tone. "If the property of dogs is to bite," says he to Luther, "I fear your father must have been a dog."[427] The Dominican begins at last to be almost astonished at his own condescension in speaking to a rebellious monk; and concludes with showing his opponent the cruel teeth of an inquisitor. "The Roman Church," says he, "having in the pope the summit of spiritual and temporal power, may, by the secular arm, constrain those who after receiving the faith, stray from it. She is not bound to employ arguments for the purpose of combating and subduing the rebellious."[428]

[427] "Si mordere canum est proprium, vereor ne tibi pater canis
fuerit." (Sylvestri Prieratis Dial.)

[428] "Seculari brachio potest eos compescere, nec tenetur rationibus
certare ad vincendos protervientes." (Ibid.)

These words traced by the pen of one of the dignitaries of the Roman court had a very significant meaning. They failed, however, to terrify Luther. He believed, or feigned to believe, that this dialogue was not by Prierio, but by Ulrich von Hütten, or by some other of the authors of "The Letters of some Obscure Men," who (said he in his sarcastic strain) had, in order to stir up Luther against Prierio, compiled this mass of absurdity.[429] He had no desire to see the court of Rome in arms against him. However, after remaining for some time silent, his doubts, if he had any, having been dispelled, he set to work, and in two days after was prepared with his reply.[430]

[429] "Convenit inter nos, esse personatum aliquem Sylvestrum ex
obscuris viris, qui tantas ineptias in hominem luserit ad provocandum
me adversus eum." (Ep., i, p. 87, 14th Jan.)

[430] T. i, Witt. Lat., p. 170.

The Bible had produced the Reformer and begun the Reformation. Luther, in believing, had no need of the testimony of the Church. His faith was derived from the Bible itself; from within, and not from without. His thorough conviction that the evangelical doctrine was immovably founded on the word of God made him regard all external authority as useless. Luther's experience, in this respect, opened a new prospect to the Church. The living spring which had burst forth before the monk of Wittemberg, was destined to become a stream at which nations would quench their thirst.

The Church had said that, in order to understand the Word, the Spirit of God must interpret it, and so far the Church was right. But her error consisted in regarding the Holy Spirit as a monopoly conferred on a certain caste, and in thinking that it could be appropriated exclusively to certain assemblies and colleges, to a city or a conclave. "The wind bloweth where it listeth," were the words of the Son of God, when speaking of the Spirit of God; and, on another occasion, "They will ALL be taught of God." The corruption of the Church, the ambition of pontiffs, the animosities of councils, the squabbles of the clergy, and the pomp of prelates, had made this Holy Spirit, this breath of humility and peace, eschew the dwelling of the priesthood. He had deserted the assemblies of the proud, and the palaces of the princes of the Church, and gone to live in retirement among simple Christians and modest priests. He had shunned a domineering hierarchy, which often forced blood from the poor, whom it trampled under foot; he had shunned a proud and ignorant clergy, whose chiefs were skilled, not in the Bible, but in the sword; and he was found sometimes among despised sects, and sometimes among men of talents and learning. The holy cloud, withdrawing from proud basilisks and gorgeous cathedrals, had descended on the obscure dwellings of the humble, or on chambers where studious men calmly pursued their conscientious labours. The Church, degraded by her love of power and riches, dishonoured in the eyes of the people by the venal use which she made of the doctrine of life; the Church which sold salvation in order to fill a treasury, for luxury and debauchery to empty, had lost all respect. Men of sense no longer set any value on her testimony, but, despising an authority so degraded, turned with joy, towards the Divine word, and its infallible authority, as toward the only refuge which remained to them in the general confusion.

The age, therefore, was prepared. The bold movement by which Luther changed the point on which the human heart rested its highest hopes, and with a mighty hand transferred those hopes from the walls of the Vatican to the rock of the word of God, was hailed with enthusiasm. This was the work which the Reformer had in view in his reply to Prierio.

Putting aside the axioms which the Dominican had placed at the head of his work, he says, "After your example, I, too, am going to lay down some axioms."

"The first is the saying of St. Paul, 'Should we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.'"

The second is the following passage of St. Augustine, addressed to St. Jerome:--"I have learned to pay to the canonical books alone the honour of believing very firmly that none of them has erred; as to others, I believe not what they say, for the simple reason, that it is they who say it."

Luther then vigorously proceeds to lay down the fundamental principles of the Reformation,--_the word of God, the whole word of God, and nothing but the word of God_. "If you understand these principles," continues he, "you will also understand that your whole dialogue is completely overturned; for you have done nothing else than adduce the words and opinions of St. Thomas." Next, attacking the axioms of his opponent, he frankly declares his opinion that popes and councils may err. He complains of the flattery of the Roman courtiers in attributing to the pope the alleged infallibility of both popes and councils, and declares that the Church exists virtually only in Christ, and representatively only in Councils.[431] Coming afterwards to the supposition which Prierio had made, he says, "No doubt you judge me by yourself, but if I aspired to a bishopric, assuredly I would not use language which sounds so hateful in your ears. Do you imagine I am ignorant how bishoprics and the popedom are procured at Rome? Do not the very children in the streets sing the well known words--

[431] "Ego ecclesiam virtualiter non scio nisi in Christo,
representative non nisi in concilo." (Luth. Op. Lat., p. 174.) I do
not know the Church virtually, except in Christ, nor representatively,
except in a Council.

'Rome now-a-days is more unclean,
Than ought that in the world is seen?'"[432]

[432] "Quando hanc pueri in omnibus plateis urbis cantant: Denique
nunc facta est fœdissima Roma." (Ibid., p. 183.)

This was among the stanzas current in Rome before the election of one of the last popes. Nevertheless, Luther speaks of Leo with respect. "I know," says he, "that in him we have, as it were, a Daniel in Babylon; his integrity has repeatedly endangered his life." He concludes with a few words in reply to the menaces of Prierio: "In fine, you say that the pope is at once pontiff and emperor, and that he has power to constrain by the secular arm. Are you thirsting for murder? Take my word for it, your rhodomontades and your loud-sounding threats cannot terrify me. Though I be killed, Christ lives, Christ my Lord, and the Lord of all, blessed for ever and ever. Amen."[433]

[433] "Si occidor, vivit Christus. Dominus meus et omnium." (Ibid., p.
186.)

Thus Luther with a strong arm assails the infidel altar of the papacy, opposing to it the altar of the word of God, alone holy, alone infallible, before which he would have every knee to bow, and on which he declares himself ready to sacrifice his life.

Prierio published a reply, and after it a third treatise on "the Irrefragable Truth of the Church and of the Roman Pontiff," in which, founding on ecclesiastical law, he says, that though the pope were to send the people and himself to the devil _en masse_, he could not for so doing be either judged or deposed.[434] The pope was at length obliged to impose silence on Prierio.

[434] De Juridica et Irrefragabili Veritate Romanæ Ecclesiæ, lib.
tertius, cap. 12.

A new opponent soon entered the list. He too was a Dominican. James Hochstraten, inquisitor at Cologne, whom we have already seen assailing Reuchlin and the friends of letters, was furious when he saw Luther's boldness. It was indeed necessary that darkness and monkish fanaticism should engage in close fight with him who was to give them their death-blow. Monkism was formed after primitive truth had begun to decay, and from that period downward, errors and monks had gone hand in hand. The man who was to hasten their ruin had appeared; but these sturdy champions would not quit the field without a fierce combat. This combat they continued to wage with him throughout his whole life, though the proper personification of it is in Hochstraten; Hochstraten and Luther--the one, the free and intrepid Christian, and the other, the blustering slave of monkish superstition. Hochstraten unchains his rage, and, with loud cries, demands the death of the heretic.... His wish is to secure the triumph of Rome by means of the flames. "It is high treason against the Church," exclaims he, "to let so execrable a heretic live another single hour. Let a scaffold be instantly erected for him!" This sanguinary counsel was, alas! but too well followed in many countries; the voice of numerous martyrs, as in the first days of the Church, bore testimony to the truth in the midst of the flames. But in vain were fire and sword invoked against Luther. The angel of Jehovah constantly encamped around him and shielded him.

Luther replied to Hochstraten briefly, but very energetically. "Go," says he to him, when concluding; "go, delirious murderer, whose thirst can only be quenched by the blood of the brethren. My sincere desire is, that you guard against calling me a Christian and a believer, and that, on the contrary, you never cease to denounce me as a heretic. Understand these things well, you bloody man, you enemy of the truth; and if your furious rage impel you to devise mischief against me, do it with circumspection, and time your measures well. God knows what I purpose if he grants me life. My hope and expectation (God willing) will not deceive me."[435] Hochstraten was silent.

[435] Luth., Op. Leip. xvii, p. 140.

A more painful attack awaited the Reformer. Dr. Eck, the celebrated professor of Ingolstadt, who procured the liberty of Urban Regius, Luther's friend, had received the famous theses. Eck was not the man to defend the abuses of indulgences, but he was a doctor of the school, and not of the Bible, being well versant in scholastics, but not in the word of God. If Prierio had represented Rome, and Hochstraten had represented the monks, Eck represented the School. The School which, for about five centuries, had ruled Christendom, far from yielding to the first blows of the Reformer, proudly rose up to crush the man who dared to assail it with floods of contempt. Eck and Luther, the School and the Word, came to blows on more than one occasion; but the present was the occasion on which the combat commenced.

Eck must have regarded several of Luther's assertions as erroneous; for nothing obliges us to question the sincerity of his convictions. He defended the scholastic opinions with enthusiasm, just as Luther defended the declarations of the word of God. We may even suppose that he was somewhat pained at seeing himself obliged to oppose his old friend, and yet it would seem, from the mode of attack, that passion and jealousy had some share in his determination.

He gave the name of _Obelisks_ to his remarks on the theses of Luther. Wishing at first to save appearances, he did not publish his work, but contented himself with communicating it confidentially to his ordinary, the Bishop of Eichstädt. Soon, however, whether through the indiscretion of the bishop, or of Eck himself, the _Obelisks_ were circulated in all quarters. A copy having fallen into the hands of a friend of Luther, Link, preacher at Nuremberg, he lost no time in sending it to the Reformer. Eck was a much more formidable opponent than Tezel, Prierio, and Hochstraten; his work was the more dangerous the more it surpassed theirs in knowledge and subtlety. He affected pity for his "feeble opponent," (knowing well that pity injures more effectually than anger,) and insinuated that the propositions of Luther contained Bohemian poison, and savoured of Bohemia. By these malicious insinuations he threw upon Luther the obloquy and hatred which in Germany attached to the name of Huss and the schismatics of his country.

The malice which shone through this treatise roused Luther's indignation, while the thought that the blow was given by an old friend, was still more distressing. However, he must sacrifice his affections in defending the truth. Luther unbosomed his heart and its sadness, in a letter to Egranus, pastor at Zwickau--"I am called in the _Obelisks_ a venomous man, a Bohemian, a heretic, seditious, insolent, and presumptuous.... I say nothing of milder epithets, such as sleepy, imbecile, ignorant, contemner of the sovereign pontiff, etc. This book is full of the grossest insults, and yet the author is a distinguished man, alike remarkable for learning and talent; and (it is this that grieves me most) a man with whom I had recently contracted a close friendship,[436] viz., John Eck, doctor in theology, and chancellor of Ingolstadt, a celebrated and illustrious author. Did I not know the thoughts of Satan, I would be astonished at the furious manner in which this man has broken off a friendship at once so pleasant and so recent;[437] and this without giving me any warning--without writing or saying a single word."

[436] "Et quod magis urit, antea mihi magna recenterque contracta
amicitia conjunctus." (Luth., Ep. i, p. 100.)

[437] "Quo furore ille amicitias recentissimas et jucundissimas
solveret." (Ibid.)

But if Luther's heart be wounded, his courage is not destroyed. On the contrary, he girds himself for the combat. "Rejoice, my brother," says he to Egranus, whom a violent enemy had also attacked; "rejoice, and be not alarmed at all these flying leaves. The more furious my adversaries become, the more I advance. I leave the things which are behind, that they may bark after them, and follow those which are before, that they may in like manner bark after them in their turn."

Eck felt how shameful his conduct had been, and endeavoured to justify it in a letter to Carlstadt, in which he calls Luther "their common friend;" and throws all the blame on the Bishop of Eichstadt, at whose instigation he pretended that he had written the work. His intention, he said, was not to publish the _Obelisks_; but for this he would have had more regard for the friendship subsisting between him and Luther; and he requested that Luther, instead of coming to open rupture with him, would turn his arms against the theologians of Frankfort. The professor of Ingolstadt, who had not feared to strike the first blow, began to be alarmed at the power of the opponent whom he had imprudently attacked, and would willingly have evaded the contest. It was too late.

All these fine words did not persuade Luther, who was, however, disposed to be silent, and said, "I will patiently swallow this morsel, though fit for Cerberus."[438] But his friends were of a different opinion, and urged, or rather constrained him to answer. He, accordingly, replied to the _Obelisks_ by his _Asterisks_, opposing (as he says, playing upon the word) to the rust and lividity of Obelisks the light and dazzling brightness of the stars of heaven. In this work he treats his new opponent less harshly than those whom he had previously combated; but his indignation is seen peeping through his words.

[438] "Volui tamen hanc offam Cerbero dignam absorbere patientia."
(Ibid.)

He showed that in the chaos of the _Obelisks_ there was nothing from the holy Scriptures, nothing from the Fathers of the Church, and nothing from the ecclesiastical canons; that they contained only scholastic glosses, and opinion after opinion, many of them mere dreams;[439] in a word, contained the very things which Luther had attacked. The Asterisks are full of spirit and life. The author's indignation rises at the errors of his friend's book, but he shows pity to the man.[440] He reiterates the fundamental principle which he had laid down in his reply to Prierio:--"The sovereign pontiff is a man, and may be led into error; but God is truth, and cannot be deceived."[441] Then employing the _argumentum ad hominem_ against the scholastic doctor, he says to him, "It is certainly impudent in any one to teach, as the philosophy of Aristotle, any dogma which cannot be proved by his authority. You grant this. Well, then, it is _a fortiori_, the most impudent of all things to affirm in the Church and among Christians anything that Jesus Christ himself has not taught.[442] Now in what part of the Bible is it said that the treasure of Christ's merits is in the hands of the pope?"

[439] "Omnia scholastissima, opiniosissima, meraque somnia."
(Asterisci, Op. (L.) Lat. i, p. 145.) The whole most scholastic, most
opinionative, mere dreams.

[440] "Indignor rei et misereor hominis." (Ibid., p. 150.) I am
indignant at the thing, and I pity the man.

[441] "Homo est summus pontifex, falli potest, sed veritas est Deus,
qui falli non potest. (Ibid., p. 155.)

[442] "Longe ergo impudentissima omnium temeritas est, aliquid in
ecclesia asserere, et inter Christianos, quod non docuit Christus."
(Ibid., p. 156.)

He adds, "As to the malicious charge of Bohemian heresy, I patiently bear the reproach for the love of Jesus Christ. I live in a celebrated university, a distinguished town, an important bishopric, and a powerful duchy, where all are orthodox, and where, doubtless, no toleration would be given to so wicked a heretic."

Luther did not publish _The Asterisks_; he only communicated them to his friends. It was not till a later period that they were given to the public.[443]

[443] "Cum privatim dederim Asteriscos meos non fit ei respondendi
necessitas." (Luth. Ep. i, p. 126.) Since I have circulated my
Asterisks privately, he is under no necessity of replying.

This rupture between the doctor of Ingolstadt and the doctor of Wittemberg made a sensation in Germany. They had common friends. Scheurl, in particular, by whose instrumentality their friendship appears to have been originally formed, was exceedingly annoyed. He was one of those who longed to see a reform throughout the whole Germanic church, produced through the medium of its most distinguished organs. But if in matters of principle the most eminent theologians of the period came to open rupture, and while Luther advanced in a new path, Eck put himself at the head of those who kept to the old path, what disruption must inevitably ensue? Would not numerous adherents gather around each of the two chiefs, and form two hostile camps in the heart of the empire?

Scheurl exerted himself to reconcile Eck and Luther. The latter declared that he was willing to forget every thing; that he loved the genius, and admired the erudition of Dr. Eck,[444] and that the proceedings of his old friend had caused him more grief than anger. "I am ready," says he, "either for peace or war; but I prefer peace. Do you then set about it. Grieve with us, that the devil has thrown among us this beginning of strife, and then rejoice that Christ in his mercy hath removed it."[445] About the same time, he addressed a most friendly letter to Eck, who, however, not only did not answer it, but did not even send him a verbal message."[446] It was too late for reconciliation; and the breach became wider and wider. The pride of Eck, and his unforgiving temper, soon completely broke any remaining ties of friendship.

[444] "Diligimus hominis igenium et admiramur eruditionem." (Luth. Ep.
ad Scheurlum, 15th June, 1518, i, p. 125.)

[445] "Quod ad me attinet, scripsi ad eum has, ut vides, amicissimas
et plenas literas humanitate, erga eum." (Ibid.) As far as regards
myself, I have, as you see, written him in the most kindly and
friendly terms.

[446] "Nihil neque literarum, neque verborum ne participem fecit."
(Ibid.) I have had no communication from him, either by word or
writing.

CHAP. X.

Popular Writings--Our Father--Thy Kingdom Come--Thy Will be
Done--Our Daily Bread--Sermon on Repentance--Forgiveness
through Christ.

Such were the struggles which the champion of the word of God had to maintain at the outset of his career. But these combats with the leaders of society, these academical disputes, are of small account with the Christian. Human doctors imagine they have gained the noblest of triumphs if they succeed in filling some newspapers and some saloons with the noise of their systems. As it is with them more an affair of self-love, or party spirit, than of good to humanity, this worldly success satisfies them. Accordingly, their labours are only a smoke, which, after blinding us, passes off and leaves no trace behind. Neglecting to introduce their fire among the masses of the population, they do nothing more than make it skim along the surface of society.

It is not so with the Christian. His object is not success in a coterie, or an academy, but the salvation of souls. He therefore willingly avoids the brilliant skirmishing, which he might carry on at his ease with the champions of the world, and prefers the obscure labours which carry life and light into rural cottages, and the lanes of cities. Thus did Luther, or rather according to the precept of his Master, _he did the one, without leaving the other undone_. While combating inquisitors, university chancellors, and masters of the sacred palace, he strove to diffuse sound religious knowledge among the multitude. With that view, he at this time published different popular writings, such as his _Discourses on the Ten Commandments_, delivered two years before in the church of Wittemberg, and which we have already noticed; and his _Exposition of the Lord's Prayer, for simple and ignorant laymen_.[447] Who would not like to know how the Reformer then addressed the people?

[447] Luth. Op. Leips. vii, p. 1086.

We will quote some of the words which he sent, as he says, in the preface to the second of these works, "to course the country."

Prayer, that inward act of the heart, will doubtless ever be one of the points with which a reformation in heart and life must commence, and, accordingly, it early engaged the attention of Luther. It is impossible, in a translation, to keep up his energetic style, and the vigour of a language which was formed so to speak, as it fell from his pen; however, we will try.

"When you pray," says he, "have few words, but many thoughts and affections, and, above all, let these be profound. The less you speak, the better you pray. Few words and many thoughts make the Christian, many words and few thoughts, the pagan.

"Seeming and bodily prayer is that muttering of the lips, that external babble, which comes forth without attention, striking the eyes and ears of men; but prayer in spirit and in truth is the inward desire, the emotions, and sighs which proceed from the depths of the heart. The former is the prayer of hypocrites, and of all who trust in themselves. The latter is the prayer of the children of God, who walk in his fear."

Then coming to the first words of our Lord's Prayer, "Our Father," he thus expresses himself:--"Among all the names of God, there is none which inclines more toward him than the name of Father. We should not have so much happiness and consolation in calling him Lord, or God, or Judge.... By this name of father his bowels of compassion are moved; for there is no voice more lovely or touching than that of a child to its father.

"_Who art in heaven._ He who confesses that he has a Father in heaven owns himself to be, as it were, an orphan on the earth. Hence his heart feels an ardent desire like that of a child living out of its father's country, among strangers, in wretchedness and sorrow. It is as if he said, 'Alas! my father! thou art in heaven, and I, thy miserable child, am on the earth, far from thee, in all sorts of dangers, necessities, and sorrows.'

"_Hallowed be thy name!_ He who is passionate and envious, who curses or slanders, dishonours God, in whose name he was baptized. Applying the vessel which God has consecrated to profane uses, he resembles a priest who should use the holy cup to give drink to a sow, or to gather manure.

"_Thy kingdom come._ Those who amass wealth, who erect magnificent buildings, who seek after all that the world can give, and with the lips repeat this prayer, are like the large pipes of a church organ, which sounds and cries at full pitch, and without ceasing, but has neither words, nor sense, nor reason."...

Farther on, Luther attacks the error of pilgrimages, which was then so general. "One goes to Rome, another to St. James; one builds a chapel, another founds an endowment, in order to reach the kingdom of God; but all neglect the essential point, which is to become themselves his kingdom. Why do you go beyond seas in quest of the kingdom of God?... Your heart is the place in which it ought to rise.

"It is a dreadful thing," continues he, "to hear us utter this prayer, '_Thy will be done_.' Where in the Church do we see this will done?... Bishop rises against bishop, and church against church. Priests, monks, and nuns, quarrel and fight; throughout there is nothing but discord. And yet all parties exclaim that they have a good will and an upright intention; and so to the honour and glory of God they altogether do the work of the devil....

"Why do we say _our bread_?" continues he, "explaining these words, "_Give us this day our daily bread_." "Because we pray, not for the ordinary bread which pagans eat, and which God gives to all men, but for _our_ bread--bread to us, children of the heavenly Father.

"And what, then, is this bread of God? It is Jesus Christ our Lord; '_I am the living bread which came down from heaven, and give life to the world_.' Wherefore let us not deceive ourselves. Sermons and instructions which do not represent to us, or give us the knowledge of Jesus Christ, cannot be the daily bread and food of our souls....

"What avails it that such a bread is prepared for us, if it is not served out to us, and we cannot taste it?... It is as if a magnificent feast were prepared, and there were nobody to hand the bread, bring the dishes, and pour out the liquor; so that the guests would be left to feed by the eye and the smell.... This is the reason why it is necessary to preach Christ, and Christ alone.

"But what, then, you ask, is it to know Jesus Christ, and what profit is gained by it? Answer:--To learn to know Jesus Christ is to comprehend what the Apostle says--_Christ has of God been made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption_. Now, you comprehend this when you perceive that your wisdom is culpable folly, your righteousness damnable iniquity, your holiness damnable pollution, your redemption miserable condemnation--when you feel that, before God and all the creatures, you are truly a fool, a sinner, an impure and condemned man--and when you show, not only by your words, but from the bottom of your heart, and by your works, that there remains to you no comfort and no salvation, save Jesus Christ. To believe is nothing else than to eat this bread of heaven."

Thus Luther faithfully fulfilled his resolution to open the eyes of a people whom priests had blindfolded, and were leading at their pleasure. His writings, which in a short time spread over all Germany, caused new light to arise, and shed the seeds of truth in abundance on a soil well prepared to receive it. But while thinking of those at a distance, he did not forget those who were near.

The dominicans from their pulpits denounced him as an infamous heretic. Luther, the man of the people, and who, had he been so disposed, could with a few sentences have set them in commotion, always disdained such triumphs, and made it his sole aim to instruct his hearers.

His reputation, which was continually extending, and the courage with which he raised the banner of Christ in the midst of an enslaved Church, made his sermons be followed with increasing interest. Never had the confluence been so great. Luther went straight to the point. One day, having mounted the pulpit of Wittemberg, he undertook to establish the doctrine of repentance. The discourse pronounced on this occasion afterwards became very celebrated, and contains several of the fundamental principles of evangelical doctrine.

At first he contrasts the pardon of men with the pardon of heaven. "There are," says he, "two remissions--the remission of the penalty, and the remission of the fault. The former reconciles man externally with the Church; the latter, which is the heavenly indulgence, reconciles man with God. If a man has not within himself that tranquil conscience, that cheerful heart which God's remission gives, no indulgence can aid him were he to buy all that ever have been on the earth."

He afterwards continues thus: "They wish to do good works before their sins are pardoned, whereas sins must be pardoned before good works can be done. Works do not banish sin; but banish sin, and you will have works.[448] Good works should be done with a cheerful heart and a good conscience toward God; in other words, with the forgiveness of sins."

[448] "Nicht die Werke treiben die Sünde aus; sondern die Anstreibung
der Sünde thut gute Werke," (Luth. Op. (Lat.) xvii, p. 162.)

He then comes to the principal object of his sermon, an object which was identified with that of the whole Reformation. The Church had put herself in the place of God and his word; he objects to this, and makes every thing depend on faith in the word.

"The remission of the fault," says he, "is not in the power of the pope, or the bishop, or the priest, or any man whatever, but rests solely on the word of Christ, and your own faith. For Christ did not choose to build our comfort or our salvation on a word or work of man, but only on himself, on his own work and word. Your repentance and your works may deceive you, but Christ your God will never deceive, will never waver; and the devil cannot overthrow his words."[449]

[449] "Christus dein Gott wird dir nicht lugen: noch wanken." (Ibid.)

"A pope or a bishop has no more power than the humblest priest where the remission of the fault is in question. And even where there is no priest, each Christian, were it a woman or a child,[450] can do the same thing. For if a simple Christian says to you, 'God pardons sin in the name of Jesus Christ,' and you receive the saying with firm faith, as if God himself had spoken, you are acquitted.

[450] "Ob es schon ein Weib oder ein kind ware." (Ibid.)

"If you believe not that your sins are pardoned, you make your God a liar, and declare that you put greater confidence in your vain thoughts than in God and his word.

"Under the Old Testament neither priest, nor king, nor prophet, had power to proclaim the forgiveness of sins; but under the New Testament every believer has this power. The Church is quite replete with the remission of sins.[451] If a pious Christian comforts your conscience by the word of the cross, be it man or woman, young or old, receive the comfort with a faith so firm, that you would sooner submit to many deaths than doubt that it is ratified in the presence of God.... Repent, and do all the works that you can do; but let the faith which you have in the pardon of Jesus Christ stand in the front rank, and have sole command on the field of battle."[452]

[451] "Also siehst du dass die ganze Kirche voll von Vergebung der
Süden ist." (Ibid.)

[452] "Und Hauptmann im Felde bleibe." (Ibid.)

Thus spoke Luther to his astonished and enraptured hearers. All the scaffoldings which impudent priests had, for their own profit, reared between God and the soul of man, were thrown down, and man brought face to face with his Maker. The word of pardon came down pure from on high, without passing through a thousand corrupting channels. It was no longer necessary that the testimony of God, in order to be available, should previously be stamped by men with their false seal. The monopoly of the sacerdotal caste was abolished, and the Church emancipated.

CHAP. XI.

Apprehensions of Luther's friends--Journey to
Heidelberg--Bibra--The Palatine Castle--Rupture--The
Paradoxes--Dispute--The
Hearers--Bucer--Brentz--Snepf--Conversations with
Luther--Labours of the Young Doctors--Effects on Luther--The
Old Professor--The True Light--Arrival.

Meanwhile, the fire which had been kindled at Wittemberg behoved to be kindled elsewhere. Luther, not contented with announcing the truth in the place of his residence, whether to the academic youth or to the people, was desirous to shed the seeds of sound doctrine in other places. The Augustin order were to hold their general chapter at Heidelberg, in the spring of 1518. Luther, as one of the most distinguished men of the order, was invited to attend; but his friends did all they could to dissuade him from undertaking the journey. In fact, the monks had laboured to render the name of Luther odious in all the places through which he had to pass. To insult they had added threatening; and a small matter might have sufficed to excite a popular tumult of which he might have been made the victim. "Or even," said his friends, "what they may not dare to do by violence, they will accomplish by fraud and stratagem."[453] But in the discharge of a duty, Luther did not allow himself to be arrested by the fear of any danger, however imminent. He therefore turned a deaf ear to the timid suggestions of his friends, and directed them to Him in whom his confidence was placed, and under whose protection he desired to undertake the perilous journey. After the feast of Easter he quietly set out on foot,[454] on the 13th April 1518.

[453] Ibid., Ep. i, p. 98.

[454] "Pedester veniam." I will come on foot. (Luth., Ep. i, p. 98.)

He had with him a guide named Urban, who carried his small bundle, and was to accompany him as far as Wurzburg. How many thoughts must have occupied the heart of the servant of the Lord during this journey! At Weissenfels, the pastor, though not of his acquaintance, instantly recognised him as the doctor of Wittemberg, and gave him a hearty reception.[455] At Erfurt, he was joined by two other Augustin friars. At Judenbach, the three fell in with Degenard Pfeffinger, the Elector's confidential councillor, who entertained them at the inn. "I have had the pleasure," wrote Luther to Spalatin, "of making this rich lord some shillings poorer. You know how I like to take every occasion of making a hole in the purses of the rich for the benefit of the poor, especially if the rich are my friends."[456] He arrived at Coburg, worn out with fatigue. "All goes well by the grace of God," wrote he; "only, I confess I have sinned in undertaking the journey on foot. But for this sin I presume I will have no need of the remission of indulgences, for my contrition is perfect, and my satisfaction complete. I am knocked up with fatigue, and all the conveyances are full. Is not this enough, or rather more than enough of penitence, contrition, and satisfaction?"[457]

[455] Ibid., p. 105.

[456] Ibid., p. 104.

[457] Ibid., p. 106.

The Reformer of Germany, not finding a place in the public conveyances, nor any one who was willing to yield him his place, was obliged next morning, notwithstanding of his fatigue, humbly to resume his journey on foot. He arrived at Wurzburg on the evening of the second Sabbath after Easter, and sent back his guide.

Bishop Bibra, who had received the theses with so much delight, lived in this town, and Luther had a letter for him from the Elector of Saxony. The bishop, overjoyed at the opportunity of becoming personally acquainted with this bold champion of the truth, hastened to invite him to the episcopal palace. He went out to receive him, spoke to him in the kindest terms, and offered to furnish him with a guide as far as Heidleberg. But at Wurzburg, Luther had fallen in with his two friends, the vicar-general Staupitz, and Lange, the prior of Erfurt, who offered him a place in their carriage. He therefore thanked Bibra for his offer, and next day the three friends set out from Wurzburg. They travelled thus for three days, conversing together, and on the 21st April arrived at Heidelberg. Luther went to lodge at the Augustin convent.

The Elector of Saxony had given him a letter to Count Palatine Wolfgang, Duke of Bavaria. Luther repaired to his magnificent castle, the site of which is still the admiration of strangers. The monk of the plains of Saxony had a heart to admire the position of Heidelberg, where the two lovely valleys of the Rhine and the Necker unite. He delivered his letter to James Simler, steward of the court. Simler having read it, said, "Truly you have here a valuable letter of credit." The Count Palatine received him with much kindness, and often invited him, as well as Lange and Staupitz, to his table. This friendly reception added greatly to Luther's comfort. "We relax and amuse ourselves with an agreeable and pleasant chit-chat," says he, "eating and drinking, and surveying all the magnificence of the Palatine palace, admiring its ornaments, its armoury, and cuirasses; in short, every thing remarkable in this distinguished and truly royal castle."[458]

[458] "Ihr habt bei Gott einen köstlichen Credenz." (Luth. Ep. i, p.
111.)

However, Luther had other work to do. He behoved to work while it was day. Transported to an university which exercised great influence on the west and south of Germany, he was there to strike a blow which should shake the churches of those countries. He, accordingly, began to write theses which he proposed to maintain in a public discussion. Such discussions were of ordinary occurrence; but Luther felt, that in order to make his useful, it was necessary to give it a peculiar interest. His disposition, moreover, inclined him to present the truth under a paradoxical form. The professors of the university would not allow the discussion to take place in their public hall, and it became necessary to hold it in a hall of the Augustin convent. The 26th of April was the day on which it was to take place.

Heidelberg, at a later period, received the gospel, and even at this discussion in the convent, an observer might have augured that good would result from it.

The reputation of Luther attracted a large concourse of hearers; professors, courtiers, citizens, and students, crowded to it. The doctor gave the name of Paradoxes to his theses, and it is, perhaps, the name which might still be applied to them in the present day. It would be easy, however, to translate them into evident propositions. The following are some of the Paradoxes:--

1. "The law of God is a salutary rule of life. Nevertheless, it cannot aid man in his search after righteousness; on the contrary, it impedes him.

3. "Works of man, how fair and good soever they may be, are, to all appearance, only mortal sins.

4. "Works of God, how deformed and bad soever they may appear, have always an immortal merit.

7. "The works of the just themselves would be mortal sins, did they not, through holy reverence for the Lord, fear that their works would in fact be mortal sins.[459]

[459] "Justorum opera essent mortalia nisi pio Dei timore, ab ipsismet
justis, ut mortalia timerentur." (Luth. Op. Lat. i, 55.)

9. "To maintain that works done without Christ are dead, but not mortal, is dangerous forgetfulness of the fear of God.

13. "Since the fall of man, free will exists only in name, and when man does all that is possible for him to do, he sins mortally.

16. "A man who expects to attain to grace by doing all that it is possible for him to do, adds sin to sin, and doubles his guilt.

18. "It is certain that man, to become capable of receiving the grace of Christ, must entirely despair of himself.

21. "An honorary theologian calls evil good, and good evil; but a theologian of the cross speaks according to truth.

22. "The wisdom which teaches man to know the invisible perfections of God in his works, inflates, blinds, and hardens him.

23. "The law excites the wrath of God, kills, curses, accuses, judges, and condemns, whatever is not in Christ.[460]

[460] "Lex iram Dei operatur, occidit, maledicit reum facit, judicat,
damnat, quicquid non est in Christo." (Ibid.)

24. "Still this wisdom (§ 22) is not bad; and the law (§ 23) is not to be rejected; but the man who does not study the knowledge of God under the cross, changes its good into evil.

25. "He is not justified who does many works; but he who, without works, believes much in Jesus Christ.

26. "The law says, Do this! And what it commands is never done. Grace says, Believe in him! And, lo! all things are accomplished.[461]

[461] "Lex dicit: Fac hoc! et nunquam fit. Gratia dicit: Crede in
hunc! et jam facta sunt omnia." (Ibid.)

28. "The love of God finds nothing in man, but creates in him what it loves. The love of man proceeds from self-love."[462]

[462] "Amor Dei non inventit sed creat suum diligibile; amor hominis
fit a suo diligibili." (Ibid.)

Five doctors of theology attacked these theses. They had read them with the astonishment which novelty excites. The theology seemed to them very strange. Yet according to Luther's own testimony, they discussed them with a courtesy which he could not but esteem; and, at the same time, with force and discernment.

Luther, on his part, displayed an admirable mildness in his replies, incomparable patience in listening to the objections of his opponents, and all the liveliness of St. Paul in solving the difficulties which were started. His answers, which were short, but replete with the word of God, filled all the hearers with admiration. "He very much resembles Erasmus," said several; "but in one thing he surpasses him,--he professes openly what Erasmus is contented only to insinuate."[463]

[463] Bucer, in Seultetet, Annal. Evangel. Renovat." p. 22.

The discussion was drawing to a close. Luther's opponents had retired with honour from the field of battle, the youngest of them, Doctor George Niger, alone continuing the struggle with the mighty combatant. Amazed at the bold propositions of the Augustin monk, and feeling utterly at a loss for arguments to refute them, he exclaimed, in an agitated tone,--"Were our peasants to hear such things, they would stone you to death."[464] At these words there was a general laugh throughout the audience.

[464] "Si rustici hæc audirent, certe lapidibus vos obruerent et
interficerent." (Luth. Ep. i, p. 111.)

Never had hearers listened more attentively to a theological disputation. The first words of the Reformer had awakened men's minds, and questions which shortly before had met with indifference, were now full of interest. Several countenances gave visible expression to the new ideas which the bold assertions of the Saxon doctor had suggested to their minds.