strainedly, and have goaded the otherwise gentle heart of the Pope into dealing with Luther more severely than is perhaps expedient for the peace and quiet of the Republic of Christ. The character of Luther’s writings I am not at present considering, but only suggesting that we take into account not only what befits Luther but what makes for the peace of the Church. For often and openly have offences been ignored, that greater disturbance might not arise. In the first place it is distinctly enough admitted that the thing started from bad beginnings. It sprang, no doubt, from hostility to the good literature now springing up even among the Germans, and hostility to the languages now showing new life everywhere. For those who thus far, without being fortified by these things, have been held to be teachers of consummate learning, think their own influence is being overshadowed by the brilliancy of them. Certain persons, therefore, have left no stone unturned to crush them, differing greatly in this from the Roman Pontiff, who has the highest respect for these studies. Furthermore, as to Luther, the largest part of this evil must be laid at the door of those who have preached and written about indulgences and the power of the Roman Pontiff things which no educated and religious ear could bear, so that as far as the beginning of this disturbance is concerned Luther may fairly seem to have been influenced by devotion and zeal in the cause of the Christian Religion. Moreover, those who do not excuse his beginning afterwards to write more bitterly, yet make allowance for it, saying that he was not altogether without reason angered by the exceedingly bitter hectoring and taunts of certain persons. Without having yet read his books, they raised among the people the cry of “Heretic, Antichrist, Schismatic,” before the Pope had made any public interposition of his authority in the matter at all. Nobody admonished or confuted him, though he declared himself, as he even now declares himself, ready for discussion with any one—they only damned him. For 1Leo X. (1513-21).
the answer of Prierias the Augustinian even those who obtained the Bull against Luther do not countenance.
When the proposition of Eck had been entrusted to the decision of the School of Paris, the Schools of Cologne and Louvain, though nothing had been entrusted to them, came forward and simply damned Luther. And though they did this by common consent, they do not agree on certain points, and those vital ones. Furthermore, the personages by whom the matter has been managed so far are such as may fairly be looked on with suspicion, for their own interests were involved. Nor 15 their life or teaching such that their judgment ought to have any great weight, especially in so important a matter.
The method of procedure against Luther is, therefore, rightly discountenanced by all the best and most learned, even though Luther had written things clearly heretical. Nor does one, if he discountenances the course and the method of the proceeding, on that account side with Luther, any more, by heaven, than if one suggests that a murderer ought not to be punished unless he has been convicted and condemned by due process of law. And, in fact, the Bull which is promulgated rather mercilessly against Luther displeases even those who are devoted to the dignity of the Roman Pontiff, because it savours more of the impotent hate of certain monks than of the mildness of him who represents the gentleness of Christ, or than of the spirit of the Holy Father, Pope Leo, than which until now nothing has seemed more merciful and kindly. Hence a great suspicion arises that there are people who abuse his natural gentleness and kindliness to serve their own individual passions.
And yet, by as much as the authority of the Roman Pontiff is more sacred than all other, by so much should the more watchful care be taken to prevent anything ema-
[This is a mistake. He was a Dominican. Issued June 15, 1520. A translation is given by H. E. Jacobs in his life]
[of Luther (N. Y., in ” Heroes of the Reformation ” series, pp. 413-435).]
nating from him which may seem unworthy of him to those unspoken judgments of good men that no potentate, however great, can afford to disregard. Besides, the more widely this matter extends and the more dangerous it is, the more carefully should one avoid setting forth any decision without due consideration.
Every one knows that the Christian life, through the tendency of things gradually to deteriorate, has fallen off sadly from the pure gospel teaching of Christ, so that everybody admits there is need of some marked official renovation of regulations and customs. Therefore, while nothing ought to be attempted wantonly, neither should those be wantonly snarled at who offer suggestions with honest purpose, even if they seem to do it too freely. And even though it were beyond all controversy that Luther had quite wandered from the truth, yet it were the part of theological comity, first to give the man brotherly admonition, then to refute him by sound reasoning and by the testimony of the Holy Scriptures, and, if when thus refuted he would not return to wisdom, to treat him as we are wont to treat a lost member. Those who advise this course are not advocates of Luther, but of theological propriety and of the Papal dignity, if, peradventure, Luther might in this way be utterly done away with, cast out first from the minds of men and afterwards also from the libraries. As it is, by the burning of his books he is, perhaps, to a certain extent, plucked from the libraries, but meanwhile his opinions become fixed in the minds of a greater number of people, since they see that these are not refuted.
The better endowed minds of the laity have an opinion of their own, as well as the clergy, and opinions, even in the case of the learned, are apt to take their start from a man’s natural temperament. There are so many learned as well as good men, who, though most purely and tenaciously devoted to the truth of the gospel, yet find no cause of offence in Luther’s books! Minds of this kind desire to be taught; they neither wish nor ought to be driven by force.
It is the mark of a donkey to yield to force only, and the mark of a tyrant to use force. Surely it is most becoming to theologians to teach with all gentleness, and not to work with taunts or benefits or secret banding together.
Nor must we consider here what befits Luther onlyI am not sitting in judgment upon him now—but what at the present crisis is best for the peace of the Republic of Christ.
We see that Luther is respected by all for the uprightness of his life, and that he has thus acquired a firm hold upon the hearts of men, especially of the Germans, though among other nations also, the people of the soundest judgment, that 1s, the people farthest removed from things which are wont to corrupt the judgment, are all most favourably inclined to Luther.
Every one acknowledges that he has derived benefit from that preacher’s books, even if some things in them, perhaps, fairly deserve disapproval.
We know the feelings of the Germans, we see the per- sistency of Bohemia for all these years, and the not very different state of things in the neighbouring regions. We hear daily serious complaints from many quarters declaring that the yoke of the Roman See can be borne no longer. And this burden they do not perhaps lay so much to the charge of the Papal authority as to that of those who abuse the authority of the Pope to further their own tyrannical doings.
Thus if things are managed in a spirit of hatred and violence, anybody of much discretion will readily foresee what an upsetting of things may arise from this. For we see that the most dangerous dissensions in the world have often sprung from rather trifling beginnings.
Nay even, the world seems utterly weary of the old theology with its tendency to slip overmuch into the hairsplitting of the sophists. It thirsts for the fountains of the teachings of the gospel, and seems likely to burst in to reach them, unless the doors are opened. Thus even if Luther
be altogether obnoxious, yet the theology of the schools ought to be reformed.
Since, therefore, the difficulty arose from a bad beginning in the first place, and there seem to have been errors on both sides, first on the side of those who by their wicked denunciations roused the anger of Luther and then embittered him more and more by their hate-inspired and ungoverned uproar, and especially since they seem in this matter to be working for their own private gain, while no such suspicion can fall upon Luther content with his modest position, it seems desirable that this whole case be settled by a commission of persons who are absolutely free from suspicion of partiality.
But cognisance of matters of faith belongs in an especial degree to the Roman Pontiff, and his prerogative must not be taken from him. Yet for the general good he will suffer this matter to be entrusted to others, men of pre-eminent learning as well as of known honour and integrity, upon whom no suspicion can fall -either of a desire, from fear or hope, to toady to the Roman Pontiff as against the truth of the gospel, or of advocating the opposite side through general devotion to humanity.
These commissioners shall be nominated, one each from his own nation, by three princes themselves entirely beyond suspicion, the Emperor Charles, the King of England, and the King of Hungary. After having carefully read through Luther’s books and examined Luther orally, they shall give their decision and it shall be binding. And Luther now convinced, will frankly acknowledge where he is wrong and will see to the publishing of his works in another edition with the errors corrected by himself, that a rich harvest of gospel gain may not be lost on account of some few mistakes. For many men regard it as unfair and unprofitable that on account of a number of slips such as belong to human affairs the parts that are right should also be condemned. For in the books of St. Augustine there still exist and are read Henry VIII. Louis II.
answers of heretics taken down by the stenographers that are full of impiety and blasphemy.
But if Luther shall even after this persist in the things that have been condemned by the commissioners, it will be necessary to go to heroic treatment. Thus no one will side with Luther if thus beaten, and if he returns to wisdom the matter will be settled without disturbance of the Republic of Christ.
Nor will the authority of the Roman Pontiff be impaired by this course, but the suspicions of men will be met, with whom the decision of the Pontiff himself is likely to have less weight in this case, because he might seem to be favouring his own side in the matter of indulgences and the primacy. On the contrary, he will be the more commended by all men for devotion to his sacred duty in having given up something of his prerogative for the truth of the gospel and the peace of the Christian world.
But if there are any to whom this plan is not acceptable, the next best thing seems to be to refer this case to a General Council to be called at an early date, and such a council seems for various other reasons to be demanded by the condition of the Republic of Christ, unsound as it is in many respects. For it seems inopportune to treat so difficult a matter in a cursory sort of way, especially when such confusion reigns in the Emperor’s affairs, and things are unstable enough, both in Germany and in Spain, to make it undesirable to add stuff for new disturbances. Besides, it is fitting that the inauguration of a new Emperor be carried through with favourable omens, and not be rendered sinister and unpropitious by hateful things of this kind.
I would not prejudice any one in favour of this plan. I have only said with singleness of purpose what it appears to me best to do, and I have been especially influenced to do so by invitation of men in the highest places both lay and clerical. I pray that the truth of the gospel may prevail and that all things may redound to the glory of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Νικησάτω ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ παιδεία καὶ ἀλήθεια (may the knowledge and truth of Christ prevail!) Christ Our Lord’s Defence of Martin Luther addressed to the
City of Rome
Thou summonest me to rise and judge my cause, as if thy cause were mine. Thou thoughtest in thy wickedness that I should be like thee. 1 will accuse thee and will set before thy face, will set before thy face, I say, those things which I myself and afterwards Peter, first priest appointed by me, and Paul, chosen of me, taught thee, to wit, humility, gentleness, frugality, and peace, not arrogance, not tyranny, not extravagance, not wars. Show me in all of thee a single one of those virtues which Paul taught. Show me that thou art free from a single vice of those which Peter and Paul denounce. Thou sayest my Martin bases his reviling of thee upon empty rumours. If the rumour of the tyranny of Count Jerome had been an empty rumour, nine husbandmen had lived the longer whom he ordered strangled for one hunting dog, and Florence would have been free from treason. If the rumour concerning Brother Peter, Sixtus’s cardinal, and his pomp and luxury had been an empty rumour, thou hadst not deserved these verses against thee on his account: ” Holy Rome had put him into an unavailing hat.:
This urn of snowy marble holds Peter. Sylvetus mourns, Syrasia mourns and the lamb. It will be pander, she harlot, he catamite.”
The rumour concerning the vices and virtues of Caesar Borgia is not vague; rather all the world heard of his life and that of his father, Alexander Sixth, as not such as I taught, and strangers from all nations and kingdoms saw him at the Jubilee with a seraglio such as was especially unbecoming to my vicar. But greater and more dreadful things John Francis Sutanus set forth against thee in his unadorned speech. And there are people who proclaim openly the doings of Julius, Martin Luther. An allusion to Julius II., Pope, 1503-13.
his lust and the youths who are said to have danced before His Holiness with stark naked girls. You quote the words of my prophets. I have also other prophets, one of whom thundered: “Woe unto you that join house to house and lay field to field till there be no place! Will ye dwell alone in the midst of the earth? Woe unto you that rise up early in the morning that ye may follow drunkenness and drink till night! And the harp and the lyre and the tabret and pipe and wine are in your feasts, and ye regard not the work of the Lord.” And another of my prophets cried: ” Where are the princes of the nations who find their sport in the birds of heaven, who lay up treasures of silver and gold in which men trust, and there is no end to their acquisition thereof.” Thou mightest long since have returned to reason in consequence of other teachings and revilings from friends of mine who have castigated thy vices in these latter days. “Thou mightest read Sermon 85, Francis Petrarca, John Campanus, Bernard, Ludolph, John Pico della Mirandola, Philelphus, - Raphael Maffejus, Pace’s Speech at the Death of Innocent VIII., Baptista of Mantua’s Sylva, Fasti, Calamitates, First Parthenice, Ecloga, and various passages of Platina.? Hast thou never had pity upon captive Constantinople to restore her to me, though in thy Bulls of Indulgences thou hast for many years made frequent mention of the crucified capital and of casting out the enemies of my faith by the
[From Isa., v., 8, 11, 12. Latin Vulgate of Baruch, iii., 16-18. 3 By “Sermon 85”’ is probably meant the 85th homily in the collection of]
[Paulus Diaconus, which was the most familiar Homiliarium of the period.]
[It is taken from Ambrose and is upon Luke iv., 28, 29—the story of the]
[expulsion of our Lord from Capernaum—an appropriate passage here. It]
[will be found in Migne’s series of the Latin Fathers, xv., 1629. To facilitate reference to the works of the Humanists whose names appear]
[above, their names are here arranged alphabetically according to the form of]
[the names as given in the catalogue of printed books in the British Museum:]
[Bernardus, Sylvester; Campanus, Joannes Antonius; Filelfo, Francesca;]
[Ludolphus, de Saxonia; Maffejus, Raphael Volaterranus; Pace, Richard;]
[Peirarca, Francesco; Pico, della Mirandola, Giovanni Francesco; Sacchi,]
[Bartholomzus, de Platina; Spagnuoli, Baptista, Mantuanus.]
alms taken from the poor and humble of my fold? For what purposes has the money been disbursed that thou hast raked together or received from thy agents meanwhile? Where is the treasure left by Paul Second and Julius Second? Where the vast mass of money which at every moment thou has been wont to gather in gratifying all sorts of men? For thou refusest nothing if there is gold in it. Thou shalt give account some day of thy dealings. Thou shalt not escape me. Thou shalt not elude my judgment, even though thou dost triumph in thy arrogance over the simplemindedness of my children.
tD., 1471. 2D., 1573.
VIII I. What Zwingli Said and Preached at This Time Against the Mercenary Service of the Swiss (1521)
[Zeugenaussage und Predigtworte zu den Soldvertrágen mit dem Ausland. In Egli and Finsler ed.,i, 73. Translated by Walter Lichtenstein, Ph.D., Librarian of the North-western University, Evanston, Ill. The first text is taken from Zürcher Staatsarchiv, A. 225, 1 (Frankreich); the second from Heinrich Bullinger’s Reformationsgeschichte, herausgegeben von J. J. Hot-tinger und H. H. Voegeli, 1 Bd., Frauenfeld, 1838, p. 51, reprinted in Schuler and Schulthess ed., ii., 2, p. 350. They prove that Zwingli’s early disapproval of the Swiss entering the mercenary service, except that of the Pope, as shown in his poem The Ox,” had now no exception, for he exclaimed against the Pope as well. He does not appear to have published any tract on the subject, but satisfied himself with pulpit and private utterances. Very largely in consequence of Zwingli’s stand, the Canton of Zürich forbade all mercenary service.] A WOMAN told him that in a certain house here in Ziirich several people—he did not know whether or not they were natives of Zürich—sat together and wondered whether if the Swiss Confederacy considered Kiburg, Grüningen, ’ and the Lake of Zürich as separate, thus making of the city and dependent territory four independent members [of the Confederacy], they would also have joined the French league.
← 9. VI. A Christian Song Written When · Contents · 11. VIII. What Zwingli Said and Preached →