Chapter III: Martin Luther (2)

Luther has left no record of his feelings when he was dragged from his carriage, mounted on a horse and spirited away. If he at first supposed himself to be a real captive he was soon informed that he was in the hands of friends. He was taken in the darkness and silence of the night to the castle at Wartburg, eight miles distant, by the order of the Elector Frederick, as a means of protecting him, where he spent the next ten months. He doffed his monk's gown, put on the garb of a country gentleman, let his beard grow, and was known as "Junker George." His time was spent in meditation, translating the New Testament into German and writing.

A CHANGE COMES OVER LUTHER

At Wartburg he began that course of interference with political administration and ecclesiastical organization which made his later years as a reformer so different from his earlier, and in the end led him to the practical denial of nearly every principle that he had affirmed. His own protection by the Elector Frederick against the combined power of pope and emperor made clear to him, he thought, the method by which a reformation might be attempted. While at Wartburg he thought out and wrote what he entitled, "Warning to all Christians to Abstain from Rebellion and Sedition," in which he maintained the principle from which he never thereafter departed, that the civil Rulers had both the right and the duty to undertake the reformation of the church, and that any other principle was impracticable and dangerous. That there be no mistaking his meaning I give his words:

Therefore have regard to the rulers. So long as they undertake nothing
and give no command, keep quiet with hand, mouth and heart, and
undertake nothing. If you can persuade rulers to undertake and
command, you may do it. If they will not you should not. But if you
proceed, you are wrong and much worse than the other party.

This no doubt was called forth by the news of the proceedings at Wittenberg. For even with Luther away, Wittenberg, with its growing, aggressive university, was the center of the Reformation. New thoughts had been put into men's minds, new aspirations, new purposes had come into their hearts. Luther had long before preached that the mass was wrong, but had gone right along celebrating it, and so had he taught about other things, but continued to practice them. His teaching had taken deep root, and Zwilling, chaplain of the Augustinian convent, a bold, zealous and eloquent man, who had the confidence of the people, declared that the mass ought to be abolished and that it was a sin to celebrate it. "The members of the convent, the prior excepted, agreed with him. The prior asserted his authority; the monks rebelled; the elector interfered and referred the case to the university. The university decided in favor of Zwilling and the monks, Melanchthon writing the opinion." He attacked earnestly and bitterly monastic vows, celibacy, clerical garb, the use of images and pictures in the churches. His teaching strongly implied that liberty could not be attained till all these things were swept away.

The movement to put these exhortations into practice began first among the clergy. Two priests in parishes near Wittenberg married; several monks left their cloisters and donned the garments of the common people; Melanchthon and several of his students "communicated in both kinds in the church," and his example was followed by others. Images were condemned and cast out of the churches. No one knew what would next be done, and disturbing rumors were being circulated. Carlstadt now took the lead and announced that on the first day of the new year he would "celebrate the Lord's Supper after the ancient manner in both kinds. When opposition threatened he anticipated the time and held the service on Christmas day. A beginning was made; opposition was silenced and Carlstadt had his way."

Things were going too fast for the Elector Frederick, too fast for Luther. In his quiet retreat in Wartburg he wrote against the mass and monkish vows, "but how great a step there is between condemning old customs in our hearts and changing them with our hands--between the thoughts and the act!" On being informed of the reformatory movements in Wittenberg, Luther resented it, and most sharply reproved them for practicing what he had preached. In a letter written to the Wittenbergers in December, 1521, he said:

They have introduced changes in the mass and images, attacked the
sacrament and other things that are of no account, and have let love
and faith go; just as though all the world hereabouts had great
understanding in these matters, which is not the fact; and so many
have brought it about that many pious people have been stirred up to
do what is really the devil's work. It would, indeed, be a good thing
to begin such changes, if we could all together have the needful
faith; and if they suited the church in such measure that no one could
take offense at them. But this can never be. We can not all be as
Carlstadt. Therefore we must yield to the weak; otherwise those who
are strong will run far, and the weak who can not follow them at like
pace will be run down.

It was not by Luther, but by men of a different type, that this practical work was begun. There was sore need for a Zwilling and a Carlstadt. This was an occasion when those who were called fanatics did a real service for mankind. They were strong in their convictions, saw only one thing, reckless of all consequences, and brave where other men are appalled, and with no misgivings kindled a fire that wrapped the world in flame. Had it not been for what they did, "Luther's writing and preaching might have ended in preaching and writing. They saw that something must be done, and they did it!" While this was needful in precipitating the conflict, it was equally necessary that others should direct it.

The excitement at Wittenberg soon reached an alarming height, and was intensified by the arrival of the Zwickan prophets, who claimed to be the first to have properly received the divine Spirit, and to have been called to carry on God's work. They boasted of prophetic visions, dreams and direct communications with God. They also rejected infant baptism, saying that there was no such thing taught in the Scriptures. The people, losing their hold on the old, were ready to take up with anything that came with a plausible face. Even the most prudent were afraid to condemn anything that might have truth in it, and especially were they unwilling to reject anything that seemed to be taught in the Scripture. Melanchthon was greatly troubled and disturbed. It was not so much the visions of the Zwickan prophets that disturbed him as their teaching on baptism, and instead of settling the matter by an appeal to the Word of God, he referred it to the Elector Frederick, who advised him not to discuss the subject with them, but wait for Luther, for they quoted Saint Augustine to prove that nothing could be brought in favor of infant baptism except ecclesiastical custom.

RETAINS THAT WHICH THE SCRIPTURES DO NOT EXPRESSLY FORBID

Luther returned from Wartburg to Wittenberg in the early part of 1522, when efforts were made to get him to drop infant baptism and make the Reformation thorough. But while translating the Bible, at Wartburg, he had determined to retain whatever practices it did not forbid. At first he had no little struggle on the subject of infant baptism. On other subjects he had been forced, against his will, step by step, to abandon the fathers, the councils, and Catholic tradition, being driven to it by the Scriptures. But when he found no authority in the Bible for infant baptism he assumed a new attitude. At that point he had a fiery contest with himself as to the true key of Biblical interpretation, and he deliberately chose the negative turn. That is, he determined to abide by what the Scriptures did not forbid, instead of by what they enjoined. He saw at a glance where his rule of interpretation on other subjects must inevitably lead him on this point. And he dared not venture one step further in free thought, for fear of invoking a complete revolution. To take one step more was to let infant baptism go and the State church with it. But this was not the kind of a church Luther wanted, so he dismissed the whole matter as a very inopportune question. Thus it appears that he was willing to do as a positive duty to God whatever the Scriptures did not prohibit, as in the Supper, when asked, "What scripture have you for elevating the cup?" to which he indignantly replied, "What is there against it?" By the same answer he might have justified the offering of masses for the dead, auricular confession, purgatory, infallibility of popes, and any other unauthorized thing practiced by the Catholics, but which the Scriptures had not positively forbidden.

The imperial edict against Luther at the diet of Worms could scarcely have been stronger than it was, and yet it was wholly ineffective, for after Luther returned from his hiding place to Wittenberg he went on tours of numerous places, preaching to thousands, encouraging them in reformation, and never felt any ill effects of the ban placed upon him.

The papal court made determined efforts to bring to nought the efforts of Luther at the diet of Nurnberg, 1522-1523, but with no success, for they were compelled to say that "among a thousand men scarcely one could be found untainted by Lutheran teaching."

It is generally agreed that the real separation into two opposite camps really began at the diet of Spires in 1524, although the real parting of the ways actually occurred after the Peasants' War. When Germany emerged from the social revolution which perpetrated this war, it soon became apparent that the religious question was still unsettled and was dividing the country into two parties, and that both held as strongly as ever to their distinctive principles. The reason for the increased strain was the conduct of many of the Romanist princes in suppressing the rebellion; and on the other hand those princes who favored Luther's teaching had a mutual understanding to defend one another against the attack upon their faith.

ORIGIN OF PROTESTANTISM

When the diet met at Spires in 1526 it was apparent that the national hostility to Rome had not abated. The grievances of Germany against the Roman court were again revived, and it was alleged, as it was in fact, that the chief causes of the Peasants' War were the merciless exactions of clerical landholders. In the absence of Charles V, who was at war with France, Ferdinand of Austria presided over the diet. "He demanded the enforcement of the edict of Worms and a decree of the diet to forbid all innovations in worship and in doctrine," but the diet was not inclined to adopt the suggestions. Luther's followers were in the majority, and the delegates from the cities insisted that it was impossible to enforce the edict. The Committee of Princes proposed to settle the religious question by a compromise which was almost wholly favorable to Luther's teaching. It was decided that "the marriage of priests, giving the cup to the laity, the use of the German as well as the Latin in the baptismal and communion services, should be recognized; that all private masses should be abolished; that the number of ecclesiastical holy days should be largely reduced; and that in the exposition of Holy Writ the rule ought to be that scripture should be interpreted by scripture"; and that each State should so live as it hoped to answer for its conduct to God and the emperor.

This was interpreted by those States favorable to the Reformation that they had a legal right to organize territorial churches and to make such changes in public worship as would bring it into harmony with their beliefs. This gave new life to the Reformation. Almost the whole North Germany adopted the principles of the Reformation. Various political intrigues caused division and discredit among the reform party. When the diet again met at Spires in 1529, the Roman Catholic party was largely in the majority. The emperor at the outset declared:

By my imperial and absolute authority I abolish the clause in the
ordinance of 1526 on which the Lutherans relied when they founded
their territorial churches; it has been the cause of much ill counsel
and misunderstanding.

The majority of the diet upheld the emperor's decision, and the practical effect of the ordinance was to rescind that of 1526; re-establish Roman Catholic rule everywhere, and with it the right of the bishops to direct all preachers in their dioceses. This ordinance called forth the celebrated "Protest," which was read before the diet April 19, 1529, when all concessions to the reformers had been refused. The legal position taken was that the unanimous decision of the diet in 1526 could not be rescinded by a majority. The "protesters" declared that they intended to abide by the decision of 1526, and not by that of 1529. They also declared their readiness to obey the emperor and the diet in all "dutiful and possible matters, but any order considered by them repugnant to God and his holy Word, to their soul's salvation, and their good conscience," they appealed to the emperor, to the free council, and to all impartial Christian Judges. The essential principles involved in the protest against this decree and in the arguments on which it was grounded were:

We protest publicly before God, our only Creator, Preserver, Redeemer
and Savior, who, as the only Searcher of all our hearts, judgeth
righteously, and we also protest before all the world, that both for
ourselves and for our connections and subjects, we do not consent or
agree with any resolutions or acts contained in the last decree of
Spires above referred to, which, in the great concern of religion, are
contrary to God and to his holy word, injurious to our soul's
salvation, and also in direct opposition to the dictates of our
conscience, as well as to the degree issued by an imperial diet at
Spires; and we hereby solemnly declare that, from reasons already
assigned, and from other weighty considerations, we regard all such
resolutions or acts as null and void.

Thus in the presence of the diet spoke those courageous men. This is the origin of the name "Protestant."

So critical was the situation that the Protestants immediately entered into an armed alliance for mutual defense. But as the only object now was to secure mutual defense in the right to have the same Gospel, the contest in progress was not one in which all wrongs were to be righted, but one in which they felt themselves justified in resistance only when the emperor attacked that which they all were convinced was of God.

An effort was made to perfect a union between the Protestants in Germany, but without success, and a divided Germany awaited the coming of the emperor. Charles V was now at the zenith of his power, and was determined to visit Germany and by his personal presence and influence end the religious difficulty which was distracting that portion of his vast dominions. He meant to use every persuasion possible, to make what compromises his conscience permitted, to effect a peaceful settlement. But if these failed he was determined to crush the Reformers by force.

He summoned the diet to meet at Augsburg on April 8, 1530, but it was not formally opened till June 20th. In his speech Charles V. announced that the assembly would be invited to discuss armament against the Turk, and that his majesty was anxious "by fair and gentle means" to end the religious differences which were distracting Germany. The Protestants were invited to give in writing their opinions and difficulties which compelled them to forsake the Church of Rome. It was resolved to take the religious question first. By June 24th the Lutherans were ready with the "statement of their grievances and opinions relating to the faith." On the following day it was read before the diet by the Saxon Chancellor, Dr. Christian Bayer, in such a clear voice that it was heard not only by those assembled within the chamber, but by the crowd that thronged the court outside.

They were reviewed before the Protestant princes, and it being deemed desirable that they should be extended and enlarged, the work was assigned to Melanchthon; thus was completed the famous Confession of Augsburg, the standard of faith of all the Lutheran churches. When read before the diet it produced a profound impression. It was signed by four princes of the empire, by the imperial cities of Nuremberg and Reutlingen, and by the Elector of Saxony. Faber, Eckins and Cochlæus, who represented the Roman court at the diet, drew up a refutation which was publicly read before the diet, the emperor demanding the acquiescence of the Protestants; for he was now determined to insist on their submission, and to close the dispute. This they absolutely refused. The emperor again took counsel with the pope, and the result was an imperial edict commanding the princes, States and cities which had thrown off the papal yoke to return to their duty, on pain of incurring the displeasure of the emperor as a patron and defender of the Holy See.

The emperor published the decision on November 19th, and the Protestants had to arrange some common plan for facing the situation. They met, princes and delegates of cities, in the town of Smalkald, December 22d to 31st, when they formed a religious alliance, to which they invited England, Denmark and other States in which the Reformation had now dawned, to join them. In 1532 the peace at Nuremberg composed for a time the differences between the emperor and the reformers; the Lutherans were permitted the free exercise of their worship until a general council or another diet should finally determine the faith of "Continental Christendom." In 1535 the pope, Paul III, proposed to summon a general council at Mantau. The Protestants of Germany, well satisfied that no advantages would result from such a synod, assembled at Smalkald in 1537, and published a solemn protest against the constitution of the council as partial and corrupt. To this they added a summary of their doctrine, drawn up by Luther, in order to present it to the council, if the pope should persist in calling it together. This summary, which was distinguished by the title of the "Articles of Smalkald," is generally joined with the creeds and confessions of the Lutheran Church. The pope, however, died and the council at Mantau was postponed. New projects were raised, with the vain hope of setting at rest the spirit of religious freedom by which all Germany was now disturbed. The emperor summoned a conference at Worms in 1541, and Melanchthon disputed three days with Eckins on the points at issue. A diet followed at Ratisbon, another at Spires in 1542, and a third was held at Worms in 1545; the emperor vainly attempting to intimidate the Protestants, or to induce their leaders to consent to a general council to be summoned by the pope. But their resolution was fixed: they denied the pope's right to call a general council; they regarded the proposal as a snare, and treated it with scorn.

The Council of Trent met in 1546, but the Protestant representatives appeared. It thundered its decrees, and the Protestant princes of Germany bade it defiance. The emperor, exasperated by their resistance and stimulated by the pope, assembled his forces, resolved to crush the spirit he could not otherwise subdue. All Germany was arming in defense of Protestantism or in submission to the emperor, and the storm darkened on every side. Such was the state of Germany when Luther died, February 18, 1546.

A religious war now broke out. The emperor was victorious and the Interim followed. This was an imperial edict, issued in 1547, guaranteeing certain concessions more specious than really important, to the Protestants, until the decisions of a general council should be given. It satisfied neither party, and the war soon raged anew. The emperor was defeated by the German confederate, under Maurice of Saxony, in 1552, and the pacification of Passau followed. At last, in 1555, the diet of Augsburg met, peace was restored, and the Protestant States of Germany secured their independence. It was decreed that the Protestants who embraced the Confession of Augsburg should be entirely exempt from the jurisdiction of the pope of Rome, and from the authority and interference of his bishops. They were free to enact laws for the regulation of their own religion in every point, whether of discipline or doctrine. Every subject of the German empire was allowed the right of private judgment, and might unite himself with the church he preferred; and those who should prosecute others under the pretext of religion were declared enemies of the common peace.

The "Religious Peace of Augsburg" has been claimed, and justly so, as a victory for religious liberty. The victory lay in this, that the first blow had been struck to free mankind from the fetters of Rome; that the first faltering step had been taken on the road to religious liberty; and the first is valuable not for what it is in itself, but for what it represents and for what comes after it. It is always the first step that counts.

The German Reformation was a vast stride from Rome, but it fell far short of a return to Jerusalem. About the best that can be said is that the Reformation was a change of masters; a voluntary one, no doubt, in those who had any choice; and in this sense an exercise, for the time, of their personal judgment. But as soon as the Augsburg Confession of Faith was written no one was at liberty to modify or change it, and those who did not conform to it were no less heretics than Luther had been when he failed to conform to the behests of Rome.