IMPRIMATUR

EDM. CAN. SURMONT,

Vic. Gen.
Westmonasterii, die 12 Martii, 1917.

LUTHER

BY

HARTMANN GRISAR, S.J.

PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK

AUTHORISED TRANSLATION FROM THE GERMAN EY

E. M. LAMOND

EDITED BY

LUIGI CAPPADELTA

VOLUME VI

LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD.

BROADWAY HOUSE 68-74 CARTER LANE, E.G.
1917

A FEW PRESS OPINIONS OF VOLUMES I-V.

"His most elaborate and systematic biography ... is not merely a book to be
reckoned with; it is one with which we cannot dispense, if only for its minute
examination of Luther's theological writings." — The Athenasum (Vol. I).

"The second volume of Dr. Grisar's ' Life of Luther ' is fully as interesting as the
first. There is the same minuteness of criticism and the same width of survey."

The Athenreum (Vol. II).

" Its interest increases. As we see the great Reformer in the thick of his work,
and the heyday of his life, the absorbing attraction of his personality takes hold of
us more and more strongly. His stupendous force, his amazing vitality, his super
human interest in life, impress themselves upon us with redoubled effect. We lind
him the most multiform, the most paradoxical of men. . . . The present volume,
which is admirably translated, deals rather with the moral, social, and personal side
of Luther's career than with his theology." — The Athenceum (Vol. III).

" Father Grisar has gained a high reputation in this country through the translation
of his monumental work on the History of Rome and the Popes in the Middle Ages,
and this first instalment of his ' Life of Luther' bears fresh witness to his unwearied
industry, wide learning, and scrupulous anxiety to be impartial in his judgments as
well as absolutely accurate in matters of fact." — Glasgow Herald.

" This ' Life of Luther ' is bound to become standard ... a model of every literary,
critical, and scholarly virtue." — The Month.

"Like its two predecessors, Volume III excels in the minute analysis not merely of
Luther's actions, but also of his writings ; indeed, this feature is the outstanding
merit of the author's patient labours."— The Irish Times.

" This third volume of Father Grisar's monumental ' Life ' is full of interest for the
theologian. And not less for the psychologist ; for here more than ever the aiithor
allows himself to probe into the mind and motives and understanding of Luther, so
as to get at the significance of his development."— The Tablet (Vol. III).

"Historical research owes a debt of gratitude to Father Grisar for the calm un
biased manner in which he marshals the facts and opinions on Luther which his
deep erudition has gathered."— The Tablet (Vol. IV).

" We have nothing but commendation for the translation." — The Tablet (Vol. V).

" Another volume of Father Grisar's ' Life of Martin Luther1 . . . confirms the belief
that it will remain the standard ' Life,' and rank amongst the most valuable contribu
tions to the history of the Reformation."— Yorkshire Post.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER XXXV. LUTHER'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS
SOCIETY AND EDUCATION (continued from Vol. F.)

pages 3-98

3. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND HIGHER EDUCATION.

Luther's appeals on behalf of the schools ; polemical trend
of his appeals ; his ideal of elementary education ; study of
the Bible and the classics. The decline in matters educational
after the introduction of the innovations ; higher education
before Luther's day ; results achieved by Luther . pages 3-41

4. BENEVOLENCE AND RELIEF or THE POOR.

Organised charity in late mediseval times. Luther's
attempts to arrange for the relief of the poor ; the " Poor-
boxes " ; Bugenhagen's work ; the sad effects of the con
fiscation of Church-property ; and of the doctrine that good
works are valueless . wages 42-65

5. LUTHER'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORDLY CALLINGS.

Whether Luther's claim can stand that he was the first to
preach the dignity of worldly callings ? His depreciation
of the several classes of the nation due to his estrangement
from them. Attitude towards the merchant-class. His Old-
Testament ideas react on his theories about usury and
interest ; his views on the lawfulness of permanent invest
ments, etc. ........ pages 05-98

CHAPTER XXXVI. THE DARKER SIDE OF LUTHER'S

INNER LIFE. HIS AILMENTS . . . pages 99-186

1. EARLY SUFFERINGS, BODILY AND MENTAL.

Fits of fear, palpitations, swoons, nervousness ; his
temptations no mere morbid phenomena . . pages 99-112

2. PSYCHIC PROBLEMS OF LUTHER'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT.

Temptations to despair. The shadow of pseudo-mysti
cism. Temptations of the flesh . . . . pages 112-122

3. GHOSTS, DELUSIONS, APPARITIONS OF THE DEVIL.

The statements regarding Luther's intercourse with the
beyond and his visions of the devil. The misunderstood
reference to his disputation with the devil on the Mass. His
belief in possession and exorcism . . . pages 122-140

vi CONTENTS

4. REVELATION AND ILLUSION. MORBID TRAINS OF THOUGHT.

His conviction that he was the recipient of a special revela
tion ; his apparent withdrawals of this claim. His so-called
" temptations " viewed by him as confirming his mission ;
his persuasion that the Pope is Antichrist, that his opponents
are all egged on by the devil and that no man on earth can
compare with him. His tendency to self-contradiction ; his
changeableness, his feverish polemics . . . pages 141-171

5. LUTHER'S PSYCHOLOGY ACCORDING TO PHYSICIANS AND HIS

TORIANS.

Whether Luther's mind was abnormal, or whether all his
symptoms are to be explained by uric acid, or by degeneracy

pages 172-186

CHAPTER XXXVII. LUTHER'S LATER EMBELLISH
MENT OF HIS EARLY LIFE . . . pages 187-236

1. LUTHER'S LATER PICTURE or HIS CONVENT-LIFE AND

APOSTASY.

The legend about his first appearance on the field of history.
His supposed excessive holiness-by-works during his monastic
days . . . . . . . . pages 187-205

2. THE REALITY. LUTHER'S FALSIFICATION OF HISTORY.

Inward peace and happiness in his monastic days ; his
vows and their breach ; some peculiarities of his humility ;
his feverish addiction to his work ; the facts around which
his later legend grew ..... pages 205-229

3. THE LEGEND RECEIVES ITS LAST TOUCH ; HOW IT WAS USED.

Forged in the solitude of the Coburg. His characteristic
passage from the " I " to the " we." His monkish " experi
ence " useful to him ..... pages 229-236

CHAPTER XXXVIII. END OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
THE CHURCH-UNSEEN AND THE VISIBLE
CHURCH-BY-LAW . . . . . pages 237-340

1. FROM RELIGIOUS LICENCE TO RELIGIOUS CONSTRAINT.

Freedom as Luther's early watchword. Intolerance
towards Catholics, in theory, and in practice. Sanguinary
threats against all papists ; the death-penalty pronounced
against " sectarians " at home ; his justification : blasphemy
must be put down. The people driven to the new preaching ;
no freedom of conscience allowed : Luther's intolerance
imitated by his friends . ... . pages 237-279

2. LUTHER AS JUDGE.

The pigheadedness and arrogance of all the "sectarians."
None of them are sure of their cause ; none of them can work
miracles pages 279-289

CONTENTS vii

3. THE CHURCH-UNSEEN, ITS ORIGIN AND EARLY HISTORY.

Luther's invisible Church ; her marks ; only the pre
destined are members ; his shifting theory . . pages 290-308

4. THE CHURCH BECOMES VISIBLE. ITS ORGANISATION.

The Church materialises in Articles and a Ministry set up
by Wittenberg with the sovereign as " emergency-bishop."
The results of State-interference » . . pages 309-325

5. LUTHER'S TACTICS IN QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE CHURCH.

The Erfurt preachers at variance with the Town-Council.
Luther shifts his ground in his controversies with the
Catholics. How the Church, in spite of Christ's promises,
contrived to remain plunged in error for over a thousand
years. Luther's interpretation of Christ's words " On this
rock " . . . . pages 325-340

CHAPTER XXXIX. END OF LUTHER'S LIFE pages 341-386

1. THE FLIGHT FROM WITTENBERG.

His depression gets the better of him and he leaves the
town " for ever." Change of air sweetens his temper and he
returns and resumes his work with new ardour . pages 341-351

2. LAST TROUBLES AND CARES.

Quarrels with the Swiss and with New Believers nearer
home ; with the lawyers regarding clandestine marriages ;
the State proves a cause of vexation on account of its inter
ference in matters which concern the preachers. Luther's
fears for the future ; encroachments of human reason ; the
coming collapse of morals. .... pages 351-369

3. LUTHER'S DEATH AT EISLEBEN (1546).

Thoughts of death. His last visit to Mansfeld, to act as
arbitrator between the Counts. The versions of his last
moments ....... pages 370-381

4. IN THE WORLD or LEGEND.

The tale of Luther's suicide, of the disappearance of his
body, etc. Who was responsible for the habit of concocting
such stories . .... pages 381-386

CHAPTER XL. AT THE GRAVE . . . pages 387-462

1. LUTHER'S FAME AMONG THE FRIENDS HE LEFT BEHIND.

Extracts from the panegyrics and early biographies ;
medals struck in his honour ; his epitaphs . . pages 387-394

2. LUTHER'S MEMORY AMONG THE CATHOLICS. THE QUESTION

OF His GREATNESS.

Luther's defiance of the whole world, whilst evoking their
wonder, failed to secure the admiration of Catholics.
Whether Luther's undoubted strength of will makes of him

viii CONTENTS

a " great man." The part played by other factors in the
movement he inaugurated .... pages 394—407

3. LUTHER'S FATE IN THE FIRST STRUGGLES FOR HIS SPIRITUAL

HERITAGE.

Defeat of the Schmalkalden Leaguers. Osiandric,
Majorite, Adi aphoristic, Synergistic and Cryptocalvinist
controversies . . . • . . . . pages 407-423

4. MUTUAL INFLUENCE OF THE Two CAMPS. GROWING

STRENGTH OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

The Lutherans are induced to adopt the Formula of
Concord as a counterblast against the Council of Trent.
Catholic theology benefits by the new controversies ; the
Church's religious life is deepened ; progress in catechetical
instruction, in matters educational, Bible-study and
Church-history . . .... pages 423-439

5. LUTHER AS DESCRIBED BY THE OLDEN " ORTHODOX "

LUTHERANS.

Their "mediaeval" attitude. Luther the "Prophet of the
Germans," a New Elias and John the Baptist . pages 440-444

6. LUTHER AS SEEN BY THE PIETISTS AND RATIONALISTS.

Each in their own way make of Luther their forerunner
and breathe into him their own ideals . . pages 444-448

7. THE MODERN PICTURE OF LUTHER.

The Romanticists ; liberal theologians ; independent
historians ; the Janus-Luther, with one face looking back on
the Middle Ages and the other turned to the coming world.
Ritschl, E. M. Arndt. Luther the hero of Kultur ? Hous
ton S. Chamberlain's picture of the " Political Luther."
Conclusion . . . . . . pages 449-462

XLI. APPENDIX I. LUTHER'S WRITINGS AND THE
EVENTS OF THE DAY, ARRANGED IN CHRONO
LOGICAL ORDER . . . . . pages 465-495

XLIT. APPENDIX II. ADDITIONS AND EMENDATIONS

pages 496-516
1-2. LUTHER'S VISIT TO ROME.

The Scala Santa ; the General Confession : Oldecop's
account of Luther's petition to be secularised ; the outcome
for the Order of Luther's visit to Rome . . pages 496-497

3. LUTHER'S CONCEPTION OF "OBSERVANCE " AND HIS CONFLICT

WITH HIS BROTHER FRIARS .... pages 497-501

4. ATTACK UPON THE " SELF-RIGHTEOUS " . . pages 501-503

5. THE COLLAPSE OF THE AUGUSTINIAN CONGREGATION pages 503-504

6. THE TOWER INCIDENT . . . . . pages 504-510

7. THE INDULGENCE-THESES . . « . page 510

CONTENTS

IX

8. THE TEMPTATIONS AT THE WARTBURG . . . page 511

9. PRAYER AT THE WARTBURG .... pages 511-512

10. LUTHER'S STATE DURING HIS STAY AT THE COBURG . page 512

11. LUTHER'S MORAL CHARACTER . . . . pages 512-513

12. LUTHER'S VIEWS ON LIES . , pages 513-515

13. LUTHER'S LACK OP THE MISSIONARY SPIRIT . pages 515-516

14. Notes : Pope Alexander VI " the Marana " ; from Bishop

Maltitz's letters to Bishop Fabri . . . . page 516

General Index to the six volumes

pages 517-551

VOL. VI

SURVEY OF LUTHER'S WORK. HIS AILMENTS.
HIS DEATH

VI.— B

LUTHER

CHAPTER XXXV (Continued)
LUTHER'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS SOCIETY AND EDUCATION

3. Elementary Schools and Higher Education
Luther's Appeals on Behalf of the Schools

IN a pamphlet of 1524, on the need of establishing schools,
Luther spoke some emphatic and impressive words.1

There could be nothing worse, he declared, than to abuse
and neglect the precious souls of the little ones ; even a
hundred florins was not too much to pay to make a good
Christian of a boy ; it was the duty of the magistrates and
authorities to whom the welfare of the town was confided
to see to this, the parents being so often either not pious
or worthy enough to perform this office, or else too unlearned
or too much hampered by their business or the cares of
their household. The well-being of a town was not to be
gauged by its fine buildings, but rather by the learning,
good sense, and honourable behaviour of the burghers ;
given this the other sort of prosperity would never be lack
ing. Luther dwells on the urgent need of studying languages
and sees an act of Providence in the dispersion of the
Greeks whose presence in the West had been the means of
giving a fresh stimulus to the study of Greek, and even to the
cultivation of other languages. Without schools and learn
ing no men would be found qualified to rule in the ecclesi
astical or even in the secular sphere ; even the management
of the home and the duties of women to their families and
households called for some sort of instruction.2

1 " An die Radherrn aller Stedte deutschea Lands das sie Christl.
Schulen auffrichten und halten sollen." " Werke," Weim. ed., 15,
p. 9 ft'. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 170 ff.

2 Weim. ed., 15, pp. 30, 34, 35 f. ; Erl. ed., pp. 22, 173, 178, 180 f.

4 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Owing to their innate leaning to savagery the German
people, above all others, could ill afford to dispense with the
discipline of the school. All the world calls us " German
beasts " ; too long have we been German beasts, let us
therefore now learn to use our reason.1

He speaks of the educational value not only of languages
but of history, mathematics and the other arts, but above
all of religion, which, now that the true Evangel is preached,
must take root in the hearts of the young, but which could
not be maintained unless care was taken to ensure a supply
of future preachers.

He gives an excellent answer to the objection : " What is
the good of going to school unless we are thinking of becom
ing parsons ? " The wholesale secularisation of ecclesi
astical benefices had resulted in a great falling off in the
number of scholars, the parents often thinking too much of
the worldly prospects of their children. Luther, however,
points out that even the secular offices deserve to be filled
with men of education. " How useful and called for it is, and
how pleasing to God, that the man destined to govern,
whether as Prince, lord, councillor or otherwise, should be
learned and capable of performing his duty as becomes a
Christian."2 te-«

• I't *

This booklet, which is of great interest for the history of
the schools, was translated into Latin in the same year by
Vincentius Obsopceus (Koch) and published at Hagenau,
with a preface by Melanchthon.3 It also became widely
known throughout Germany, being frequently reprinted in
the original tongue. As the title shows, Luther addressed
himself in the work " To the Councillors of all the town
ships," viz. even to the Catholic magistrates among whom
he stood in disfavour. He declares that it was a question of
the " salvation and happiness of the whole German land.
And were I to hit upon something good, even were I myself
a fool, it would be no disgrace to anyone to listen to me."4

1 In such passages " beast " more often merely implies stupidity ;
cp. " bete " in French. Hence it would be a mistake to think that
Luther is here crediting the Germans with any actual " bestiality."
Cp. below, p. 15 and above, vol. v., p. 534, n. 2.

2 Weim. ed., 15, p. 44 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 189.
8 " De constituendis scholis," etc.

4 Weim. ed., 15, p. 53 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 198.

THE SCHOOLS 5

In thus calling for the founding of schools Luther was but
reiterating the admonition contained in his writing " To the
German Nobility." Such exhortations were always sure to
win applause, and served to recommend not only his own
person but even, in the case of many, his undertaking as
a whole.1 In his rules for the administration of the poor-box
at Leisnig Luther had been mindful of the claims of the
schools, nor did he forget them in the other regulations he
drew up later. In his sermons, too, he also dwelt repeatedly
on the needs of the elementary schools ; when complaining
of the decay of charity he is wont to instance the straits,
not only of the parsonages and the poor, but also of the
schools. " Only reckon up and count on your fingers what
here [at Wittenberg] and elsewhere those who bask in the
Evangel give and do for it, and see whether, were it not for
us who are still living, there would remain a single preacher
or student. . . . Are there then no poor scholars who ought
to be studying and exercising themselves in the Word of
God ? " But " hoarding and scraping " are now the rule, so
that hardly a town can be found " that collects enough to
keep a schoolmaster or parson."2

Many wealthy towns had, however, to Luther's great joy,
taken in hand the cause of the schools. Their efforts were to
prove very helpful to the new religious system.

In the same year that the above writing appeared steps
were taken atlMagdeburg for the promotion of education,
and Cruciger, ^Luther's own pupil, was summoned from
Wittenberg to assume the direction. Melanchthon and
Luther repaired to Eisleben in 1525, where Count Albert of
Mansfeld had founded a Grammar School. In some towns
the Councillors carried out Luther's proposals, in others,
where the town-council was opposed to the innovators and
their schools, the burghers " set at naught the Council," as
Luther relates, and erected " schools and parsonages " ; in
other words, they established schools as the best means to
further the new Evangel.3 At Nuremberg Melanchthon,

1 A schoolmaster of Zwickau remarked on the writing to the
Councillors : " With this pamphlet Luther will win back the favour of
many of his opponents." Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 548.

3 Erl. ed., H2, pp. 390, 389.

^ 3 Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 519 f. ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 381, in "Das man
Kinder," etc. The object of furthering the Evangel which is set forth
in both this and the former writing is indicated by the very title of the
first writing with its reference to " Christian " schools.

6 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

a zealous promoter of education, exerted himself for the
foundation of a " Gymnasium " which was to serve as a
model of the new humanistic schools of the Evangelicals,
and which was generously provided for by the town. May 6,
1526, saw the opening of this new school. Learned masters
were appointed, for instance, Melanchthon's friend Camer-
arius, the poet Eobanus Hessus and the humanist Michael
Roting. In 1530 Luther speaks of it in words meant to
flatter the Nurembergers as " a fine, noble school," for which
the " very best men " had been selected and appointed.
He even tells all Germany, that " no University, not even
that of Paris itself, was ever so well provided in the way of
lecturers " ; it was in no small measure owing to this school
that " Nuremberg now shone throughout the whole of
Germany like a sun, compared with which others were but
moon and stars."1

Yet it was certain disagreeable happenings at Nuremberg
itself which led him to write in 1530 his second booklet in
favour of the schools. In the flourishing commercial city
there were many wealthy burghers who refused to send their
children to the " Gymnasium," thinking that, instead of
learning ancient languages, they would be more usefully
occupied in acquiring other elements of knowledge more
essential to the mercantile calling ; by so doing they had
raised a certain feeling against the new school. Many were
even disposed to scoff at all book-learning and roundly
declared, as Luther relates, " If my son knows how to read
and reckon then he knows quite enough ; we now have
plenty German books," etc.2

In July of the above year, Luther, in the loneliness of the
Coburg, penned a sermon having for its title " That children
must be kept at school." The sermon grew into a lengthy
work ; Luther himself was, later on, to bewail its long-
windedness.3 This writing, taken with that of 1524, supplies
the gist of Luther's teaching with regard to the schools.

1 Ib., p. 518=379, in the writing mentioned below. See, how
ever, below, p. 36. 2 Ib., p. 519=380.

3 " Predigt, das man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle." Weim. ed.,
30, 2, p. 508 ff. ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 378 ff. As early as July 5, 1530,
Luther wrote from the Coburg to Melanchthon that he was " medita
ting " this writing and adds : " Mirum, si etiam anteafui tarn verbosus,
ut nunc fieri mihi videor, nisi senectutis ista garrulitas sit." It is curious
to hear him already speaking of his old age. When sending the finished
work to Melanchthon on Aug. 24, 1530, he wrote : " Mitto hie sermonem

THE SCHOOLS 7

In the preface, printed before the body of the work, he dedicates
the writing to the Nuremberg " syndic " or town-clerk, Lazarus
Spengler, an ardent promoter of the new teaching. A town like
Nuremberg, he there says, " must surely contain more men than
merchants, and also others who can do more than merely reckon,
or read German books. German books are principally intended
for the common people to read at home ; but for preaching,
governing and administering justice in both ecclesiastical and
temporal sphere all the arts and languages in the world are not
sufficient." Already in the preface he inveighs against those who
assert that arithmetic and a knowledge of German were quite
enough : These small-minded worshippers of Mammon failed to
take into consideration what was essential for " ruling " ; both
the civil and the ecclesiastical office would suffer under such a
system. l

In this writing his style follows his mood, being now powerful,
now popular and not seldom wearisome. He dwells longest on
the spiritual office, expressing his fear, that, should the lack of
interest in the schools become general, and the people continue so
niggardly in providing for their support, there would result such
a spiritual famine with regard to the Word of God, that ten
villages would be left in the charge of a single parson. Passing on
to the secular office he points out how the latter upholds the
" temporal, fleeting peace, life and law. ... It is an excellent
gift of God Who also instituted and appointed it and Who
demands its preservation." Of this office "It is the work and
glory that it makes wild beasts into men and keeps them in this
state. . . . Do you not think that if the poor birds and beasts
could speak and were able to see the action of the secular rule
among men they would say : Dear fellows, you are no men but
gods compared with us ; how secure you sit and live, enjoying all
good things, whereas we are not safe from each other for a single
hour as regards our life, our home or our food."2

" Such rule cannot continue, but must go to rack and ruin
unless the law [the Roman law and the law of the land] is main
tained. And what is to maintain it ? Fists and blustering cannot
do so, but only brains and books ; we must learn to understand
the wisdom and justice of our secular rule." Speaking of the
lawyers' office for which the young must prepare themselves, he
groups under it the " chancellors, clerks, judges, advocates,
notaries and all others who are concerned with the law, not to
speak of the great Johnnies who sport the title of Hofrat."3
On the calling of the physician he only touches lightly, showing
that this "useful, consoling and health-giving" profession

de acholis, plane Lutheranum et Lutheri verbositate nihil auctorem suum
negans, sed plane referens. Sic sum. Idem erit libellus de clavibua "
(" Brief wechsel," 8, pp. 80, 204). The latter remark certainly applies
to his long writing, " Von den Schliisseln," 1530 (Weim. ed., 30, 2,
p. 428 ff. ; Erl. ed., 31, p. 126 ff.).

1 Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 519 ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 381.

2 P. 554=401, 402. 3 Pp. 556, 559=403, 404.

8 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

demands the retention of the Latin schools, short of which it must
fall into decay.

The following hint was a practical one : Seeing that, in Saxony
alone, about 4000 men of learning were needed — what with
chaplains, schoolmasters and readers — those who wished to study
had good prospects of " great honours and emoluments since two
Princes and three townships were all ready to fight for the
services of one learned man." He urges that assistance should be
given to poor parents out of the Church property so as to enable
them to send their children to school, and that the rich should
make foundations for this purpose.

In this writing, as in that of 1524, he addresses himself to the
secular authorities and even demands that they should compel
their subjects to send their children to school in order that the
supply of capable men might not fail in the future. I consider,
he says, " that the authorities are bound to force those under
them to see to the schooling of their children, more particularly
those just spoken of [the more gifted] ; for it is undoubtedly their
duty to see to the upkeep of the above-mentioned offices and
callings." If in time of war they could compel their subjects to
render assistance and resist the enemy, much more had they the
right to coerce them in respect of the children, seeing that this
was a war against the devil who wished to despoil the land and
the townships of able men, so as to be able " to cheat and delude
them as he pleased."1

As regards the question whether all children were to be
forced to go to school, in this writing Luther does not speak
of any universal compulsion ; only " when the authorities
see a capable lad "2 does he wish coercion to be applied to
the parents. In his first writing on the schools likewise, he
had not advocated universal compulsion but had merely
pointed out that it was " becoming " that the authorities
should interfere where the parents neglected their duty ;3 he
does not say how they are to " interfere," but merely
suggests that one or two " schoolmasters " should be pro
vided whose salary should not be grudged.

" Hence it is incorrect," rightly remarks Kawerau, " to
represent Luther as the harbinger of universal compulsory
education."4

Fr. Lambert of Avignon, in his ecclesiastical regulations
dating from 1526, indeed sought to establish national
schools throughout Hesse, but his proposals were never

1 P. 586=420 f. 2 P. 587=421.

3 /&., 15, p. 34=22, p. 178.

4 " Reformation und Gegenroformation " (VV. Moller, " Lehrb. der
KG."), 33, p. 437, No. 2.

THE SCHOOLS 9

enforced. It was only at the beginning of the 17th century
that Wolfgang Ratke (Ratichius, fl635), a pedagogue
educated in the Calvinistic schools, established the principle
of universal education which then was incorporated in the
educational regulations of Weimar in 1619.1 But the Thirty
Years' War put an end to these attempts, and it was only in
the 18th century that the principle of compulsory State
education secured general acceptance, and then, too, owing
chiefly to non-Lutheran influences.

Before entering further into the details of Luther's
educational plans we must cast a glance at a factor which
seems to permeate both the above writings.

Polemical Trend of Luther's Pedagogics

If we seek to characterise both the writings just spoken
of we find that they amount to an appeal called forth by
the misery of those times for some provision to be made to
ensure a supply of educated men for the future. Frederick
Paulsen describes them, particularly the earlier one, as
nothing more than a " cry for help, wrung from Luther by
the sudden, general collapse of the educational system which
followed on the ecclesiastical upheaval."2 They were not
dictated so much by a love for humanistic studies as such or
by the wish to further the interests of learning in Germany,
as by the desire to fill the secular-government berths with
able, " Christian " men, and, above all, to provide preachers
and pastors for the work Luther had commenced and for the
struggle against Popery. The schools themselves were un
obtrusively to promote the new Evangel amongst the young
and in the home. Learning, according to Luther, as a
Protestant theologian expressed it, was to enter " into the
service of the Evangel and further its right understanding " ;
" the religious standpoint alone was of any real interest
to him."3

Melanchthon's attitude to the schools was more broad-
minded. To some extent his efforts supplied what was
wanting in Luther.4 His object was the education of the
people, whereas, in Luther's eyes, the importance of the

1 Cp. Kawerau, ib,

2 " Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts," etc., I2, 1896, p. 197.
8 See below, p. 20, n. 3. 4 See above, vol. iii., p. 361.

10 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

schools chiefly lay in their being '* seminaria ecclesiarum," as
he once calls them. With him their aim was too much the
mere promoting of his specific theological interests, to the
" preservation of the Church."1

According to Luther the first and most important reason for
promoting the establishment of schools, was, as he points out to
the " Councillors of all the Townships," to resist the devil, who,
the better to maintain his dominion over the German lands, was
bent on thwarting the schools ; " if we want to prick him on a
tender spot then we may best do so by seeing that the young
grow up in the knowledge of God, spreading the Word of God and
teaching it to others."2 " The other [reason] is, as St. Paul says,
that we receive not the grace of God in vain, nor neglect the
accepted time." The " donkey-stables and devil-schools " kept
by monks and clergy had now seen their day ; but, now that the
" darkness " has been dispelled by the " Word of God," we have
the " best and most learned of the youths and men, who, equipped
with languages and all the arts, can prove of great assistance."
" My dear, good Germans, make use of God's grace and His Word
now you have it ! For know this, the Word of God and His grace
is indeed here."3

In many localities preachers of the new faith were in request,
moreover, many of the older clergy, who had passed over to
Luther's side, had departed this life or had been removed by the
Visitors on account of their incapacity or moral shortcomings.
Those who had replaced them were often men of no education
whatever. The decline of learning gave rise to many difficulties.
Schoolmasters were welcomed not only as simple ministers but, as
we have heard Luther declare, even as the candidates best fitted
for the post of superintendent.4 How frequently people of but
slight education were appointed pastors is plain from the lists of
those ordained at Wittenberg from 1537 onwards ; amongst these
we find men of every trade : clerks, printers, weavers, cobblers,
tailors, and even one peasant. Seven years later, when the handi
craftsmen had disappeared, we constantly find sextons and
schoolmasters being entrusted with the ministerial office.5

1 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 15 : " Scholce crescentes verbi Dei
aunt fructus," says Luther, " et ecclesiarum seminaria " ; if these are
furthered, then, so God will, things will be in a better case (in Reben-
stock : " Hcec si promoveantur, tune Deo volente, nostrum inceptum
meliorem habebit progressum "). 76., p. 14 : Although the work of the
schools was performed quietly, " attamen magnum fructum exhibent,
ex quibus ecclesiae conservatio consistit . . . Inde collaborators et ludi-
magistri vocantur ad ministerium ecclesice" — Cp. Mathesius, " Tisch-
reden " (Kroker), p. 208 : " Wretched parsonages are not the place for
schoolmasters " ; they deserve to be superintendents and to rule over
others. /&., p. 213 on the importance of the schools.

a Weim. ed., 15, p. 29 f. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 173.

3 /&., p. 35 f.= 175. * See also above, n. 1.

5 Proofs in G. Rietschel, " Luther und die Ordination," 2, 1889.
Cp. Paulsen, p. 203.

THE SCHOOLS 11

This sad state of things must be carefully kept in mind if we
are to understand the ideas which chiefly inspired the above
writings, and as these have not so far been sufficiently empha
sised we may be permitted to make some reference to them.

" We must have men," says Luther in his first writing, viz.
that addressed to the councillors, " men to dispense to us God's
Word and the sacraments and to watch over the souls of the
people. But whence are we to get them if the schools are allowed
to fall to ruin and other more Christian ones are not set up ? "l
" Christendom has always need of such prophets to study and
interpret the Scriptures, and, when the call comes, to conduct
controversy."2 Similar appeals occur even more frequently in
the other writing, viz. that dedicated by Luther to his friend at
Nuremberg. Already in his first writing, Luther, as the ghostly
counsellor of Germany " appointed " in Christ's name, boldly
faces all other teachers, telling the Catholics, that what he was
seeking was merely the " happiness and salvation " of the
Fatherland.3 In the second he expressly states that it is to all
the German lands that he their "prophet" is speaking : "My
dear Germans, I have told you often enough that you have heard
your prophet. God grant that we may obey His Word."4 So
entirely does he identify the interests of his Church with those of
the schools. Well might those many Germans who did not hold
with him — and at that time Luther was an excommunicate outlaw
— well might they have asked themselves with astonishment
whence he had the right to address them as though he were the
representative and mouthpiece of the whole of Germany. Such
exhortations have, however, their root in his usual ideas of
religion and in the anxiety caused by the urgent needs of the time.

At the Coburg the indifference, coldness and avarice of his
followers appears to him in an even darker light than usual. He
well sees that if the schools continue to be neglected as they have
been hitherto the result will be a mere " pig sty," a " hideous,
savage horde of * Tatters ' and Turks." Hence he fulminates
against the ingratitude displayed towards the Evangel and
against the stinginess which, though it had money for everything,
had none to spare for the schools and the parsons ; the imagery
to which he has recourse leaves far behind that of the Old Testa
ment Prophets.

Here we have the real Luther whom, as he himself admits,
though in a different sense, stands revealed in this writing penned
at the Coburg. 6 " Is this not enough to arouse God's wrath ? . . .
Verily it would be no wonder were God to open wide the doors
and windows of hell and rain and hail on us nothing but devils,
or were He to send fire and brimstone down from heaven and
plunge us all into the abyss of hell like Sodom and Gomorrha . . .
for they were not one- tenth as wicked as Germany is now."6

1 Weim. ed., 15, p. 47 f. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 193.

2 76., p. 40=185. 3 Ib., p. 53=198.

4 Ib., 30, 2, p. 588= 172, p. 421 f. 6 See above, p. 6, ri. 3.

• Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 582 ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 418.

12 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Has then Christ, the Son of God, deserved this of us, he asks, that
so many care nothing for the schools and parsonages, and " even
dissuade the children from becoming ministers, that this office
may speedily perish, and the blood and passion of Christ be no
longer of any avail."1 Here again his chief reason for maintain
ing the schools is his anxiety : " What is otherwise to become of
the ghostly office and calling."2 Only after he has considered this
question from all sides and demonstrated that his Church's
edifice stands in need not merely of " worked stones " but also
of " rubble," i.e. both of clever men and of others less highly
gifted,3 does he come in the second place to the importance of
having learned men even in the secular office.

He had begun this writing with an allusion to the devil, viz. to
" the wiles of tiresome Satan against the holy Evangel " ; he also
concludes it in the same vein, speaking of the " tiresome devil,"
who secretly plots against the schools and thereby against the
salvation of both town and country.4

The author goes at some length into the question of languages
and declares that the main reason for learning them was a
religious one.

Languages enable us "to understand Holy Scripture," he
says, " this was well known to the monasteries and universities
of the past, hence they had always frowned on the study of
languages " ; the devil was afraid that languages would make a
hole " which afterwards it would not be easy for him to plug."
But the providence of God has outreached him, for, by " making
over Greece to the Turks and sending the Greeks into exile, their
language was spread abroad and an impetus was given even to
the study of other tongues." And now, thanks to the languages,
the Gospel has been restored to its " earlier purity." Hence, for
the sake of the Bible and the Word of God, let us hark back to the
languages. His excellent observations on the importance of the
study of languages for those in secular authority, though perfectly
honest, hold merely a secondary place. The chief use of the
languages is as a weapon against the Papacy. " The dearer the
Evangel is to us, the more let us hold fast to the languages ! "

So anxious is he to see the future schools thoroughly " Chris
tian," i.e. Evangelical and all devoted to the service of his cause,
that he expressly states that otherwise he " would rather that
not a single boy learnt anything but remained quite dumb."
Hence the earlier " universities and monasteries " must be made
an end of. Their way of teaching and living " is not the right one
for the young." " It is my earnest opinion, prayer and wish that
these donkey-stables and devil-schools should either sink into
the abyss or else be transformed into Christian schools. But now
that God has bestowed His grace upon us so richly and provided
us with so many well able to teach and bring up the young, we
are actually in danger of flinging the grace of God to the winds."

1 Ib., p. 584=419. 2 P. 530=387.

3 Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 456 ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 398.

4 P. 586=421.

THE SCHOOLS 13

" I am of opinion that Germany has never heard so much of God's
Word as now. . . . God's Word is a streaming downpour, the
like of which must not be expected again."1

Hence the two writings differ but little from his usual
polemical and hortatory works. They do not make of
Luther the " father of the national schools," as he has been
erroneously termed, because, what he was after was not
the real education of the masses but something rather
different ; still less do the booklets, with their every page
reeking of the Word of God which he preached, make him
the father of the modern undenominational schools.2

In fact, elementary schools as such have scarcely any
place in these writings. What concerns him is rather the
Latin grammar schools, and only as an afterthought does he
passingly allude to the other schools in which children
receive their first grounding.3

Luther's standpoint as to the Church's need of Grammar
Schools is always the same, even when he speaks of them in
the Table-Talk.

" When we are dead," he says for instance, " where will

1 76., 15, p. 36f.= 22, p. 181 f.

2 Cp. F. M. Schiele, in H. Delbriick, " Preuss. Jahrbiicher," 132,
1908, Art. " Luther und das Luthertum in ihrer Bedeutung fur die
Gesch. der Schule und der Erziehung," p. 381 ff. P. 386 : " The
principal motive with Melanchthon ... is the love of learning,
Luther's motive [in the above writings] is to educate leaders for
Christendom who shall deliver her from the unholy abominations of
the olden days. . . . With this is connected the fact that for him
' government,' whether exercised by the sovereign, the bishop, or the
father of the family, is a work of charity." P. 384 : According to Luther
" the erection of schools must always remain a matter which concerns
the Christian authorities." To those historians of education, who,
according to Schiele, are wont to ask : " Was not Luther the father of
the national schools ? " he replies : " The matter wears a different
aspect when viewed in the light of history." He roundly describes as
fabulous the supposed foundation of the national schools by Luther.
" Nor do we find in Luther's schemes for the organisation of education
the slightest trace of any tendency to the secularisation of the schools "
(pp. 384, 381 f.). The last words are aimed at the friends of the
secularised or undenominational schools of the present day.

3 In the Introduction to the Weimar edition of the writing " An die
Radherrn " (15, 1899, p. 9 ff.) we read : " It is very characteristic of the
reformer's attitude to the question of education in his day that he
does not, as we might expect, give the preference to these German
elementary schools in which we can see the beginnings of the national
schools, but, whilst admitting their claims, insists emphatically on the
need of a classic training." " To characterise the writing in question
as ' of the utmost importance for the development of our elementary-
school system ' (" Mon. Germ. Paedag." Ill, iii.) is to be unfair to it."

14 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

others be found to take our place unless there are schools ?
For the sake of the Churches we must have Christian schools
and maintain them."1—44 When the schools multiply, things
are going well and the Church stands firm."2 — 4t By means
of such cuttings and saplings is the Church sown and
propagated."— "The schools are of great advantage in that
they undoubtedly preserve the Churches."3

44 Hence a reformation of the schools and universities is
also called for," so he writes in a memorandum, 4 immediately
after having declared, that 4C it is necessary to have good
and pious preachers ; all will depend on men who must be
educated in the schools and universities."6

For this reason, viz. on account of the preparation they
furnished, he even has a kind word for the schools of former
days.

He recalls to mind, that, even in Popery 44 the schools
supplied parsons and preachers." 4t In the schools the little
boys learnt at least the Our Father and the Creed and the
Church was wonderfully preserved by means of the tiny
schools."6 — Of a certain hymn he remarks, that it was
44 very likely written and kept by some good schoolmaster
or parson. The schools were indeed the all-important factor
in the Church and the 4 ecclesia ' of the parson."7

1 Erl. ed., 62, p. 307. a Ib., p. 306.

3 Ib., p. 297 ; cp. p. 289.

4 Weim. ed., 19, p. 445 ; Erl. ed., 262, p. 7 : " Proposal how
permanent order may be established in the Christian community."

6 Compare with this Luther's letter to Johann, Elector of Saxony
(Nov. 22, 1526), advocating the Visitation ; Erl. ed., 53, p. 386
j" Briefe," 5, p. 406). Of the final articje of the Instructions for the
Visitors (1538), which refers to the schools, Kostlin-Kawerau says,
2, p. 37 : " The chief point kept in view here, as in Luther's exhorta
tions referred to above [in his writing to the Councillors], was the need
of bringing up people sufficiently skilled to teach in the churches and
to be capable also of ruling. Hence the regulations prescribed the
erection of schools in which Latin should be taught."

6 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 311, a conversation dating from
1542-3 noted down by Heydenreich.

7 Ib., p. 332. It may be mentioned here that amongst the German
universities, Erfurt, where he had received his own education, always
held a high place in his memory. " The University of Erfurt," he once
said in later years, " enjoyed so high a reputation that all others in
comparison were looked upon as apologies for universities — but now,"
so he adds sadly, " its glory and majesty are a thing of the past, and
the university seems quite dead." He extols the pomp and festivities
that accompanied the conferring of the mastership and doctorate, and
wishes that such solemnities were the rule everywhere. Erl. ed., 62,
p. 287.

THE SCHOOLS 15

Luther's Educational Plans

When, in his exhortations, Luther so warmly advocated
the study of Latin and of languages generally, he was merely
keeping to the approved traditional lines. Although he
values ancient languages chiefly as a means for the better
understanding of Scripture, he is so prepossessed in their
favour in " worldly matters " that he even praises Latin at
the expense of German. He is particularly anxious that
Latin works should be read ; among themselves the boys
were to speak Latin. Recommending the study of tongues,
he says : " If we make such a mistake, which God forbid,
as to give up the study of languages, we shall not only lose
the Gospel but come to such straits as to be unable to read
or write aright either Latin or German." The education of
earlier days had not only led men away from the Gospel
owing to the neglect of languages, but " the wretched people
became mere brutes, unable to read or write either Latin or
German correctly, nay, had almost lost the use of their reason."
It was statements such as these which drew from Friedrich
Paulsen the exclamation : " Hence Christianity and educa
tion, nay, even sound common sense itself, all depend on the
knowledge of languages ! 5?1

Well founded as were Luther's demands for a Latin
education, yet we find in him a notable absence of dis
crimination between schools and schools.

Even in the preparatory schools he was anxious to see the
study of languages introduced, and that for the girls too.
Boys and girls, he says, ought to be instructed " in tongues
and other arts and subjects." He was of opinion, that, in
this way, it would be possible from the very first to pick out
those best fitted to pursue the study of languages and to
become later "schoolmasters, schoolmistresses or preachers."2
He even appeals to the example of olden Saints such as
Agnes, Agatha and Lucy when urging that the more
talented girls should receive a grounding in languages.3 " It
would undoubtedly have been quite enough had the less
ambitious children been taught merely to reckon, and to
read and write German." " Luther's action in having as

1 " Gtesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts," I2, p. 198.
8 Weim ed., 15, p. 46 f. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 192.
8 Cp. Kdstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 37.

16 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

many children of the people as possible taught languages
. . . and his warfare against the use of German in the
schools, whether in the towns, the villages, or the hamlets,
was all very unpractical. . . . He had come to the con
clusion that German schools, for one reason or another, were
unsuited to be nurseries for the Church (' seminaria ecclesice '),
hence his effort to transplant into the Latin grammar
schools every sapling on which he could lay hands."1

The injunctions appended to Melanchthon's Visitation rules
(1538), which were sanctioned and approved of by Luther, lay
such stress on the teaching of languages that the humbler schools
were bound to suffer. When dealing with " the schools " their
only object seems to be the " upbringing of persons fit to teach
in the churches and to govern." And this aim, moreover, is
pursued onesidedly enough, for we read : " The schoolmasters
are in the first place to be diligent to teach the children only
Latin, not German, or Greek, or Hebrew, as some have hitherto
done, thus overburdening the poor children's minds." The
regulations then proceed to prescribe in detail the studies to be
undertaken in the lowest form : "In order that the children may
get hold of many Latin words, they are to be made to learn some
words every evening, as was the way in the schools in former
days." After the children have learnt to spell out the handbook
containing the " Alphabet, the Our Father, Creed and other
prayers they are to be set to Donatus and Cato ... so that they
may thus learn a number of Latin words and gain a certain
readiness of speech (* copia dicendi ')." Apart from this the
lowest form is to be taught only writing and " music."

The next class was to learn grammar (needless to say Latin
grammar) and to be exercised in ^Esop's Fables, the " Pedologia "
of Mosellanus and the " Colloquia " of Erasmus, such of the latter
being selected " as are useful for children and not improper."
" Once the children have learnt ^Esop they are to be given Terence,
which they must learn by heart." There is no mention made here
of any selection, this possibly being left to the teacher ; in the
case of Plautus, who was to follow Terence, this is expressly
enjoined. — Of the religious instruction we read : Seeing it is
necessary to teach the children the beginnings of a Godly,
Christian life, " the schoolmaster is to catechise the whole [2nd]
class, making the children recite one after the other the Our
Father, the Creed and the Ten Commandments." The school
master was to " explain " these and also to instil into the children
such points as were essential for living a good life, such as the

1 Schiele (above, p. 13, n. 2), p. 389, where he adds : " What the
children needed to fit them for household work they could as a matter
of fact have learnt better from their parents or at the dame-school than
in the Councillors' schools which Luther so extols." Cp. above, p. 7,
Luther's statement : " German books are principally intended for the
common people to read at home," etc.

THE SCHOOLS 17

" fear of God, faith and good works." The schoolmaster was not
to get the children into the habit of " abusing monks or others,
as many incompetent masters do." Finally, it was also laid down
that those Psalms which exhort to the " fear of God, faith and
good works " were to be learnt by heart, especially Psalms cxii.,
xxxiv., cxxviii., cxxv., cxvii., cxxxiii. (cxi., xxxiii., cxxvii., cxxiv.,
cxxvi., cxxxii.), the Gospel of St. Matthew was also to be ex
plained and perhaps likewise the Epistles of Paul to Timothy,
the 1st Epistle of John and the Book of Proverbs.

In the 3rd class, in addition to grammar, versification, dialec
tics and rhetoric had to be studied, the boys being exercised in
Virgil and Cicero (the " Officia " and " Epistolce familiares ").
" The boys are also to be made to speak Latin and the school
masters themselves are as far as possible to speak nothing but
Latin with them in order thus to accustom and encourage them
in this practice."1

In his two appeals for the schools in 1524 and 1530 Luther
is less explicit in his requirements than the regulations for
the Visitation. According to him, apart from the language?,
it is the text of Scripture which must form the basis of all
the instruction.

Holy Scripture, especially the Gospel, was to be every
where " the chief and main object of study." " Would to
God that every town had also a school for girls where little
maids might hear the Gospel for an hour a day, either in
German or in Latin. . . . Ought not every Christian at the
age of nine or ten to be acquainted with the whole of
the Gospel ? Young folk throughout Christendom are
pining away and being pitiably ruined for want of the
Gospel, in which they ought always to be instructed and
exercised."

" I would not advise anyone to send his child where Holy
Scripture is not the rule. Where the Word of God is not con
stantly studied everything must needs be in a state of
corruption."2

In the event, the Bible, together with Luther's Catechism
which had to be committed to memory, and the hymn-book,
became the chief manuals in the Lutheran schools. On these
elements a large portion of the young generation of Germany
was brought up.

For the study of languages Luther, like Melanchthon, recom
mended the " Disticha " ascribed to Cato and vEsop's Fables.

26, pp. '<
>2; Erl.

2 Ib., 6, p. 462 ; Erl. ed., 21, p. 349 f., " An den Adel."
VI.— c

18 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

"It is by the special mercy of God," he says, " that Cato's
booklet and the Fables of ^Esop have been preserved in the
schools."1 We shall describe elsewhere the efforts he himself
made to expurgate the editions of ^Esop which had become
corrupted by additions offensive to good morals. Various Latin
classics which Humanists were wont to put in the hands of the
scholars he characterised in his Table-Talk as unsuitable for
school use. " It would be well that the books of Juvenal, Martial,
Catullus and also Virgil's ' Priapeia ' were weeded out of the
land and the schools, banished and expelled, for they contain
coarse and shameless things such as the young cannot study with
out grievous harm."2 Of the Roman writers (with the Greeks he
is much less at home) he extols Cicero, Terence and Virgil as
useful and improving. As a whole, however, Luther always
remained " at heart a stranger to true Humanism. . . . Though
not altogether inappreciative of elegance of style, he is far from
displaying the enthusiasm of the Humanists."3 Although he
shows himself fairly well acquainted with the writings of the three
authors just mentioned, and though he owed this education to his
early training, yet, in his efforts to belittle the olden schools, he
complains, that " no one had taught him to read the poets and
historians," but, that, on the other hand, he had been obliged to
study the " devil's ordure and the philosophers."4

It must not be overlooked that he, like the Instructions for
the Visitors, recommends that Terence and other olden dramatists
should be given to the young to be read, and even acted, though, as
he admits, they " sometimes contain obscenities and love stories."
This advice he further emphasised in 1537 by declaring that a
Protestant schoolmaster of Bautzen was in the right, when,
regardless of the scandal of many, he had Terence's " Andria "
performed. Luther agreed with Melanchthon in thinking that
the picture of morals given in this piece was improving for the
young ; also that the disclosure of the " cunning of women,
particularly of light women," was instructive ; the boys would
thus learn how marriages were arranged, and, after all, marriage
was essential for the continuance of society : Even Holy Scrip
ture contained some love stories. " Thus our people ought not to
accuse these plays of immorality or declare that to read or act
them was prohibited to a Christian."6

The regulations for the Protestant schools, in following Luther
in this matter, merely trod in the footsteps of the older German
Humanists, who had likewise placed Terence and Plautus in the
hands of their pupils, On the contrary Jakob Wimpfeling, the
" Teacher of Germany," was opposed to them and wished to see
Terence banished from the schools in the interests of morality.

1 Erl. ed., 62, p. 458 f., " Tischreden."

2 16., p. 344.

3 Paulsen, ib., p. 204. O. Schmidt, " Luther's Bekanntschaft mit
den Klassikern," Leipzig, 1883.

* " An die Radherrn," Weim. ed., 15, p. 46 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 191 f.
5 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 431. Uttered in 1537 and noted by
Lauterbach and Weller.

THE SCHOOLS 19

At a later date in the Catholic Grammar schools this author was
on moral grounds forbidden to the more youthful pupils, and only
read in excerpts.1

In his suggestions on the instruction to be given in the
Latin schools (for in reality it was only of these that he was
thinking) Luther classes with languages and other arts and
sciences " singing, music and mathematics as a whole."2
Greek and Hebrew no less than Latin would also be in
dispensable for future scholars. He further wished the
authorities to establish " libraries " to further the studies ;
not, however, such libraries as the olden ones, containing
'; mad, useless, harmful, monkish books " — " donkey's dung
introduced by the devil" — "but Holy Scripture in Latin,
Greek, Hebrew and German, and any other languages in
which it might have been published ; besides these the best
and oldest commentaries in Greek, Hebrew and Latin, and
furthermore such books as served for the study of languages,
for instance, the poets and orators," etc. 4i The most impor
tant of all were, however, the chronicles and histories . . .
for these are of wonderful utility in enabling us to understand
the course of events, for the art of governing, as also for
perceiving the wonderful works of God. Oh, how many
fine stories we ought to have about what has been done and
enacted in the German lands, of which we, sad to say, know
nothing." In his appreciation of the study of history and
of the proverbial philosophy of the people Luther was in
advance of his day.

Owing to his polemics the judgment he passed on the
olden libraries was very unjust ; the remaining traces of
them and the catalogues which have been published of those
that have been dispersed show that, particularly from the
early days of Humanism, the better mediaeval collections of
books had reached and even passed the standard Luther sets
up in the matter of history and literature.

1 Cp. Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 13,
p. 166. — K. v. Raumer, " Gesch. der Padagogik," 1, Stuttgart, 1843,
p. 272, says : " It seems to us incredible that the learning by heart
and acting of plays so unchaste as those of Terence could fail to exert
a bad influence on the morals of the young. ... If even the reading of
Terence was questionable, how much more questionable was it when
the pupils acting such plays identified themselves wholly with the
events and personages of the drama." — Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 443 f.,
Melanchthon on the Roman condemnation of the school edition of
Erasmus's " Colloquia." Luther condemned this book of his opponent
in very strong language.

2 " An die Radherrn," etc., Weim. ed., 15, p. 46 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 192.

20 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Very modest, not to say entirely inadequate, is the amount
of time Luther proposes that the children should daily spend
in the schools. Of the lower schools, in which Latin was
already to be taught, he says, it would be enough for " the
boys to go to such a school every day for an hour or two and
work the rest of their time at learning a trade, or doing
whatever was required of them. ... A little girl, too, could
easily find time to attend school for an hour daily and yet
thoroughly perform her duties in the house." Only the " pick"
of the children, those, namely, who gave good promise, were
to spend " more time and longer hours " in study.1

From all the above it is plain that there is good reason
for not accepting the extravagant statement that Luther's
writings on education constitute the " charter of our
national schools." Others have extolled him as the founder
of the " Gymnasium " on account of his reference in these
works to the Latin schools. But even this is scarcely true,
for, in them, the author either goes beyond the field covered
by the Gymnasium or else fails to reach it. The Protestant
pastor, Julius Boehmer, says in the popular edition of
Luther's works :2 " It will not do to regard the work ("An
die Radherrn" ) as the 'Charter of the Gymnasium,' as has
often been done, seeing that, as stated above, it is concerned
with both the Universities and the lower-grade schools."3

As to attendance at the Universities, of which Luther also
speaks, he asks the authorities to forbid the matriculation of
any but the " clever ones," though among the masses " every
fellow wanted a doctorate."4

What he says of the various Faculties at the Universities
is also noteworthy. With the object of reforming philosophy
and the Arts course he wishes that of all the writings of
Aristotle, that blind heathen master, who had hitherto led
astray the Universities, only the " Logica" " Rhetorica "

1 /6., p. 47=192.

2 " Martin Luthers Werke," Stuttgart und Leipzig, 1907, p. 231.

8 Before this Boehmer had said : " The importance of the lower
schools, girl schools and national schools, was fully recognised.
Luther's concern was, however, with higher education. ... It was
not indeed his intention to promote classical studies as such, but he
wished to see them harnessed to the service of the Gospel and to the
furthering of its right understanding. Hence, though Luther had in
view other classes besides the theologians, and though he advanced
other motives in support of his plans, still it was the religious stand
point which was the determining one."

4 Weim. ed., 6, p. 461 ; Erl. ed., 21, p. 350, " An den Adel."

THE SCHOOLS 21

and " Poetica " should be retained ; " the books : 4 Physi-
coraw,' ' MetaphysicceJ l De anima ' and ' Ethicorum ' must
be dropped " ; curiously enough these are the very works on
which Melanchthon was later on to bestow so much attention.
We know how hateful Aristotle was to Luther, because,
in his heathen way, he teaches nothing of grace and faith,
but, on the other hand, extols the natural virtues. Luther's
impulsive and unmethodical mode of thought was also, it
must be said, quite at variance with the logical mind of the
Stagirite.

According to Luther " artistic education must be wholly
rooted out as a work of the devil ; the very most that
can be tolerated is the use of those works which deal with
form, but even these must not be commented on or ex
plained."1

" The physicians," he says, " I leave to reform their own
Faculty ; I shall see myself to the lawyers and theologians ;
and, first of all, I say that it would be a good thing if the
whole of Canon Law from the first syllable to the last were
expunged, more particularly the Decretals. We are told
sufficiently in the Bible how to conduct ourselves in all
matters." Secular law, so he goes on, has also become a
" wilderness," and accordingly he is in favour of drastic
reforms. " Of sensible rulers in addition to Holy Scripture
there are plenty " ; national law and national usage ought
certainly not to be subordinated to the Imperial common
law, or the land " governed according to the whim of the
individual. . . . Justice fetched from far afield was nothing
but an oppression of the people." Theology, according to
him, must above all be Biblical, though now everything is
made to consist in the study of the Book of Sentences of the
schoolman, Peter Lombard, and of his commentators, the
Gospel in both schools and courts of justice being left
" forlorn " in the dust under the bench.2

He rightly commends the Disputations, sometimes termed
" circulates" held at the Universities by the students under
the direction of their professor ; it pleased him well that the
students should bring forward their own arguments, even
though they were sometimes not sound ; for " stairs can
only be ascended step by step." The Disputations, in his

1 Paulsen, " Gesch. des golehrten Unterrichts," I2, p. 185.

9 Weim. ed., 6, p. 462 ; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 347, 348, " An den Adel."

22 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

view, also accustomed young men to " reflect more dili
gently on the subjects discussed."1

To conclude, we may say a few words concerning the
incentives he uses when urging parents to entrust their
children to the schools.

Here Luther considerably oversteps the limits. In one
passage, for instance, he thinks it his right to threaten the
parents with the worst punishments of hell should they
refuse to allow gifted children to study, in order to place
them later at the service of the pure Word of God, or of the
Christian rulers, as though forsooth parents and children
had no right in the sight of God to choose their own pro
fession. " Tell me what hell can be deep and hot enough
for such shameful wickedness as yours ? " "If you have a
child who studies well, you are not free to bring him up as
you please, nor to treat him as you will, but must bear in
mind that you owe it to God to promote His two rules."
Should the father refuse to allow the boy to become a
preacher, he says, then, so far as in him lies, he was really
consigning to hell all those whom the budding preacher
might have assisted ; compared with such a crime against
the common weal the " outbreaks of the rebellious peasants
were mere child's play." This he says in a printed letter
addressed in 1529 to the town commandant, Hans Metzsch
of Wittenberg, which served as a prelude to his pamphlet
" Das man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle."2 The writing
is solely dictated by Luther's bitter annoyance at the
dearth of pastors and the indifference displayed within his
fold.

In this letter, as in both his works on the schools, Luther,
whilst dealing with the excuses of the parents, at the same
time throws some interesting sidelights on the decline in
learning and its causes.

The Decline of the Schools Following in the Wake of the
Innovations

In the above letter to Metzsch Luther briefly gives as
follows the principal reason for the decay of learning :

1 Ib., Erl. ed., 62, p. 304 f., " Tischreden."

2 16., 63, p. 281 f. (" Briefe," 7, p. 73). Written in the middle of
March, 1529, this served at the same time as a preface to the work by
Justus Menius, " Oeconomia Christiana."

THE SCHOOLS 23

People were in the habit of saying, " If my son has learnt
enough to gain his living then he is quite learned enough."1

The contempt for learned studies was " largely due to the
strongly utilitarian temper of the age." " Owing in the first
place to the flourishing state of the towns in the 13th and
14th century, and further to the influence of the great
political upheaval which resulted from the discoveries and
inventions of the day, a sober, practical spirit, directed
solely to material gain, had been aroused throughout a wide
section of the German nation. Preference was shown for
the German schools where writing and reckoning were
taught and which prepared children for the calling of the
handicraftsman or the merchant."2 Against this tendency
of the day Luther enters the lists particularly in his second
work on the schools dedicated to the syndic of Nuremberg ;
at the same time he deals, not in the best of tempers, with
the objections advanced by the merchant and industrial
classes.3 He speaks so harshly as almost to place in the
same category those who refused to bring up their children
" to art and learning " and those who turned them " into
mere gluttons and sucking pigs, intent on food alone " (to
Metzsch). " The world would thus become nothing but a
pig-sty " ; these " gruesome, noxious, poisonous parents
were bent on making simple belly servers of their children,"
etc.4

It is a question, however, whether the development of the
material trend, so surprisingly rapid, with its destructive
influence on study was not furthered by the religious revolu
tion with which it coincided. Luther had sapped the
respect which had obtained for the clerical life and for those
callings which aimed at perfection, while at the same time,
by belittling good works he loosened the inclinations of the
purely natural man ; by his repudiation of authority he had
produced an intellectual self-sufficiency or rather self-seeking,
which, in the case of many, passed into mere material
egotism, though, of course, Luther's work cannot be directly
charged with the utilitarianism of the day.

What, however, made his revolt to contribute so greatly

1 76., p. 280.

2 Thus in the Introduction to Luther's " An die Radherrn," Weim.
ed., 15, p. 9 f.

3 See above, p. 6. * Erl. ed., 63, p. 280 f.

24 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

to the decline of learning was its destruction of the wealth
of clergy and monks, and its confiscation of so many livings
and foundations established for educational purposes. By
far the greater number of students had always consisted of
such as wished to obtain positions in the Church among her
secular clergy, or to become priests in some monastery. The
ranks of these students had been thinned of late years now
that the Catholic posts no longer existed, that the founda
tions which formerly provided for the upkeep of students
had disappeared and that an avalanche of calumny and
abuse had descended on the monasteries, priests and monks.1
In addition to this there was the fear aroused in Catholic
parents and pastors by the unhappy controversies on
religion, lest the young should be infected in the higher
schools these being so frequently hot-beds of the modern
spirit, of hypercriticism and apostasy. Then, again, there
was the distrust, springing from a similar motive, felt by
the Catholic authorities for the centres of learning, and their
niggardliness in making provision for them, an attitude
which we meet with, for instance, in Duke George of Saxony.
This was encouraged in the case of the rulers by the fear of
social risings, such as they had experienced in the Peasant
War, and which they laid to the charge of the new ideas on
religion.

Among those favourable to Lutheranism the Wittenberg
professor himself awakened a distaste for the Universities by
telling them they must not allow their sons to study where
Holy Scripture " did not rule " and " where the Word of
God was not unceasingly studied."2 No one ever depreciated
the Universities as much as Luther, who principally because
their character was still Catholic, was never tired of calling
them the " gates of hell," and places worse than Sodom and
Gomorrha.3 Nor did he stop short at the condemnation of

1 Luther expressed this in his way as follows : Of all " the wiles of
Satan " this, aimed at the holy Gospel, was perhaps the worst, for it
suggested to men such dangerous ideas as these : Now that there is
" no longer any hope for the monks, nuns or priestlings there is no
need of learned men or of much study, but we must rather strive after
food and wealth," " truly a masterpiece of diabolical art," for creating
" in the German lands a wild, hideous mob of ' Tatters ' or Turks."
Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 522 f. ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 383, Preface to the work on
the schools (1530).

" Werke," ib., 6, p. 462=21, p. 349 f., " An den Adel."

8 The violence of the tone in which Luther speaks of the Universities
in the writings which followed his "An den Adel," as the real strong-

THE SCHOOLS 25

their religious attitude. Luther's antagonism to the whole
system of philosophy, which the Universities, following the
example of Aristotle and the schoolmen, had been so
criminal as to admit, to the liberty they allowed to crazy
human reason in spiritual matters, and to their champion
ship of natural truth and natural morality as the basis of
the life of faith, all this, when carried to its logical con
clusion, necessarily brought Lutheranism into fatal conflict
with the learned institutions.

As Friedrich Paulsen points out : " Luther shared all the
superstitions of the peasant in their most pronounced form ; the
methods of natural science were strange to him and any scattering
of the prevalent delusions he would have looked upon as an
abomination."1 The latter part of the quotation certainly holds
good in those cases where Luther fancied that Holy Scripture or
his explanation of it was ever so slightly impugned. When, on
June 4, 1539, the conversation at table turned on Copernicus
and his new theory concerning the earth, of which the latter had
been convinced since 1507, Luther appealed (just as later oppo
nents of the theory were to do) to Holy Scripture, according to
which " Josue bade the sun to stand still and not the earth." The
new astronomer wants to prove that the earth moves. " But
that is the way nowadays : whoever wishes to seem clever, pays
no attention to what others do, but must needs advance some
thing of his own ; and what he does must always be the best.
The idiot is bent on upsetting the whole art of astronomy."2

Luther's condemnation of philosophy found a strong echo
among the Pietists, who were an offshoot of Lutheranism, and
even claimed to be its truest representatives. The loud de
nunciations of Aristotle were, for instance, taken up by the
theologian Zierold.3 But even from the common people who
looked up to him we hear such sayings as the following : " What
is the use of our learning the Latin, Greek and Hebrew tongues
and other fine arts seeing we might just as well read in German
the Bible and the Word of God which suffices for our salvation ? "

holds of the devil on earth, has perhaps never been equalled in any
attack on these institutions either before or after his day. See passages
in Janssen, ib., Engl. Trans., iii., passim. Some of the preachers of the
pure Gospel, who soon sprang up in great numbers, went a step
further : " The Word of God alone was sufficient and in order to under
stand it what was required was, not learning, but the spirit." Paulsen,
" Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts," I2, p. 185.

1 " Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts," I2, p. 177.

2 Erl. ed., 62, p. 319. The Note is by Lauterbach. Copernicus is
not named, but is merely alluded to as " the new astrologer "=
astronomer. His work " De orbium ccelestium revolutionibus," with
its detailed proofs in support of the new theory of the heavens, appeared
only in 1543, at Nuremberg.

3 Cp. for proofs H. Stephan, " Luther in den Wandlungen seiner
Kirche," p. 35 f.

26 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Luther was not at a loss for an answer. He says first : " Yes,
I know, alas, that we Germans must always remain beasts and
senseless animals." Then he falls back on his usual plea, viz.
that languages " are profitable and advantageous " for a right
understanding of Scripture ; he forgets that he has here to do
with the common people, and that a critical or philosophical
interpretation of the Bible was of small use to them. Such a
thing might be profitable to those who were being trained for the
ministry, though many even of the preachers themselves declared
that the illumination from above sufficed, together with the
reading of the Bible.1

Carlstadt was even opposed to the Wittenberg graduations
because they promoted pride of learning and the worldly spirit
instead of humble Bible faith. Melanchthon, at a time when he
was still full of Luther's early ideas, i.e. in Feb., 1521, in a work
written under the pseudonym of Didymus Faventinus, attempted
to vindicate against Hieronymus Emser his condemnation of the
whole philosophy of the universities ; physics as taught there
consisted merely of monstrous terms and contradicted the teach
ing of the Bible ; metaphysics were but an impudent attempt to
storm the heavens under the leadership of the atheist Aristotle.
" My complaint is against that wisdom by which you have drawn
away Christians from Scripture to reason. Go on, he-goat," he
says to Emser, " and deny that the philosophy of the schools is
idolatry " ; your ethics is diametrically opposed to Christ ; at
the Universities human reason had degraded the Church to
Sodomitic vices. Nothing more wicked and godless than the
Universities had ever been invented ; no pope, but the devil
himself was their author ; this even Wiclif had declared, and he
could not have said anything wiser or more pious. The Jews
offered young men to Moloch, a prelude to our Universities where
the young are sacrificed to heathen idols. 2

To such an extent had the darksome pseudo-mysticism which
seethed in Luther's mind laid hold for a while upon his comrade
— glaringly though it contradicted the humanistic tendency found
in him both earlier and later.

If we look more closely into the decline of the schools, we
shall find that it came about with extraordinary rapidity, a
fact which proves it to have been the result of a movement
both sudden and far-reaching.

" The immediate effect of the Wittenberg preaching," wrote in
1908 the Protestant theologian F. M. Schiele in the " Preussische
Jahrbucher " of Berlin, in a strongly worded but perfectly true
account of the situation, "was the collapse of the educational
system which had flourished throughout Germany ; the new zeal

1 Weim. ed., 15, p. 36 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 180 f., " An die Radherrn."

2 " Didymi Faventini pro M. Luthero ad versus Thomam Placen-
tinum oreiio," " Corp. ref.," 1, pp. 286-358, particularly p. 343. Cp.
Paulsen, ib., p. }.86f,

THE SCHOOLS 27

for Church reform, the growth of prosperity, the ambition in the
burghers, the pride and fatherly solicitude of the sovereigns who
were ever gaining strength, had resulted in the foundation on all
sides of school after school, university after university. Students
flocked to them in multitudes, for the prospects of future gain
were good. Scholasticism provided a capable teaching staff,
Humanism a brilliant one. Humanism also set up as the new
ideal of education a return to the fountain-head and the repro
duction of ancient civilisation by means of original effort on
similar lines. Wide tracts of Germany lay like a freshly sown
field, and many a harvest seemed to be ripening. Then, suddenly,
before it was possible to determine whether the new crops con
sisted of wheat or of tares, a storm burst and destroyed all
prospects of a harvest. The upheaval that followed in the wake
of the Reformation, and other external causes which coincided
with it, above all the reaction among the utilitarian-minded laity
against the unpopular scholarship of the Humanists emptied the
class rooms and lecture halls. . . . Now all is over with the
priestlings ; why then should we bind our future to a lost and
despised cause ? . . . Nor was this merely the passing result of
a misapprehension of Luther's preaching, for it endured for
scores of years."1

As to the common opinion among Protestants, viz. that
" Luther's reformation gave a general stimulus to the schools and
to education generally," Schiele dismisses it in a sentence : " The
alleged ' stimulus ' is seen to melt away into nothing."2

Eobanus Hessus, a Humanist friendly to Luther, who
lectured at Erfurt University, was so overcome with grief
at sight of the decline that was making itself felt there that,
in 1523, he composed an Elegy on the decay of learning
entitled " Captiva " and sent it to Luther. The melancholy
poem of 428 verses was printed in the same year under the
title " Circular letter from the sorrowful Church to Luther."
Luther replied, praising the poem and assuring the sender
that he was favourably disposed towards the humanistic
studies and practices. He even speaks as though still full of
the expectation of a great revival ; his depression is, how
ever, apparent from the very reasons he gives for his hopes :
" 1 see that no important revelation of the Word of God has
ever taken place without a preliminary revival and expan
sion of languages and erudition." The present decline

1 " Preuss. Jahrbucher," 132, 1908 (see above, p. 13, n. 2), p. 381 f.
The author safeguards himself by remarking that the above account
contains " nothing new." In Janssen, " Hist, of the German People,"
vol. xiii., this subject is dealt with in full.

2 P. 382. In the " Archiv fur Kulturgesch.," 7, 1909, p. 120,
Schiele's art. is described as " an excellent piece of criticism."

28 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

might, however, he thought, be traced to the former state
of things when they did not as yet possess the " pure
theology."1

But Hessus had complained, and with good reason, of the
evil doings of the new believers, instances of which had come
under his notice at Erfurt, and which had caused many to
declare sadly : " We Germans are becoming even worse
barbarians than before, seeing that, in consequence of our
theology, learning is now going to the wall."2 At Erfurt the
Lutheran theology had won its way to the front amidst
tumults and revolts since the day when Crotus had greeted
Luther on his way to Worms with his revolutionary dis
course.3 Since then there had been endless conflicts of the
preachers with the Church of Rome and amongst themselves.
Some were to be met with who inveighed openly against the
profane studies at the Universities, and could see no educa
tive value in anything save in their own theology and the
Word of God. Attendance at the University had declined
with giant strides since the spread of Lutheranism. Whereas
from May 1520 to 1521 the names of 311 students had been
entered, their number fell in the following year to 120 and in
1522 to 72 ; five years later there were only 14.

Hessus wrote quite openly in 1523 : "On the plea of the
Evangel the runaway monks here in Erfurt have entirely
suppressed the fine arts . . . our University is despised and
so are we."

His colleague, Euricius Cordus, a learned partisan of
Luther, expresses himself with no less disgust concerning
the state of learning and decline of morals among the
students.4 " All those who have any talent," we read in the
Academic Year-Book in 1529, " are now forsaking barren
scholarship in order to betake themselves to more re
munerative professions, or to trade."5

As at Erfurt, so also at other Universities, a rapid
diminution in the number of students took place during
those years. " It has been generally remarked," a writer
who has made a special study of this subject says, " that in
the German Universities in the 'twenties of the 16th century

1 To Eobanus Hessus, March 29, 1523, " Briefe," 4, p. 118.

2 Hessus had told Luther of this complaint, as is evident from the
latter's reply.

3 For a detailed account see above, vol. ii., p. 336 ff.

4 Janssen, Engl, Trans., xiii., p. 258. 5 Ib.

THE SCHOOLS 29

a sudden decrease in the number of matriculations becomes
apparent." He proves from statistics that at the University
of Leipzig from 1521 to 1530 the number of those studying
dropped from 340 to 100, at the University of Rostock from
123 to 33, at Frankfurt-on-the-Oder from 73 to 32 and,
finally, at Wittenberg from 245 to 174.1 The attendance at
Heidelberg reached its lowest figure between 1521 and 1565,
" this being due to the religious and social movements of the
Reformation which proved an obstacle to study." Of the
German Universities generally the following holds good :
" The religious and social disturbances of the Reformation
brought about a complete interruption in the studies. Some
of the Universities were closed down, at others the hearers
dwindled down to a few."2

"The Universities, Erfurt, Leipzig and the others stand
deserted," Luther himself says as early as 1530, gazing from
the Coburg at the ruins, " and likewise here and there even
the boys' schools, so that it is piteous to see them, and poor
Wittenberg is now doing better than any of them. The
foundations and the monasteries, in my opinion, are probably
also feeling the pinch."3 He speaks at the same time of the
decline of the Grammar schools and the lower-grade schools
which also to some extent shared the fate of the Universities.

In the Catholic parts of Germany the clergy schools and
monastic schools suffered severely under the general
calamity, as Luther had shrewdly guessed. Nor was the
set-back confined to the Universities, but even the elementary
schools suffered.

It was practically the universal complaint of the monas
teries, so Wolfgang Mayer, the learned Cistercian Abbot of
Alderspach in Bavaria, wrote in 1529, that they were unable
to continue for lack of postulants ; "in consequence of the
Lutheran controversy the schools everywhere are standing
empty and no one is willing any longer to devote himself to
study. The clerical and likewise the religious state is

1 Luschin v. Ebengreuth, " Gfitt. Gel. Anz.," 1892, p. 826 f., in a
review of Hofmeister, " Die Matrikel der Universitat Rostock," Part II.,
1891. Cp. Janssen, ib., p. 266.

2 F. Eulenburg, " tJber die Frequenz der deutschen Universitaten
in friiherer Zeit," " Jahrbiicher f. Nationaldkonomie u. Statistik," 3.
Vol. 13, 1897, pp. 461-554, 494, 525. Janssen, ib.

8 Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 550 ; Erl. ed., 172, p. 399, " Das man Kinder
zur Schulen halten solle."

30 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

despised by all and no one is inclined to offer himself for
this life." " Oh, God who could ever have anticipated the
coming of such a time ! Everything is ruined, everything
is in confusion, and there is nothing but sunderings, splits
and heresies everywhere ! " Yet these words come from
the same author, who, in 1518, in the introduction to his
Annals of Alderspach, had been so enthusiastic about the
state of learning in Germany and had said : " Germany is
richly blessed with the gifts of Minerva and disputes the
palm in the literary arena with the Italians and the Greeks."
Whereas, between the years 1460-1514 no less than eighty
brethren had entered Alderspach, Mayer, in his thirty years
of office as Abbot, clothed only seventeen novices with
the habit of St. Bernard, and, of these, five broke their vows
and left the monastery. He expresses his fear that soon
his religious house will be empty and ascribes the lack of
novices largely to the fate which had overtaken the schools
owing to the innovations.1

" Throughout the whole of the German lands," as Luther
himself admits : " No one will any longer allow his children
to learn or to study."2 At the same time contemporaries
bitterly bewailed the wildness of the students who still
remained at the Universities. With regard to Wittenberg
itself we have grievous complaints on this score from both
Luther and Melanchthon.3

The disorder in the teaching institutions naturally had a
bad effect on the education of the people, so that Luther's
efforts on behalf of the schools may readily be understood.
The ecclesiastical Visitors of the Saxon Electorate had been
forced to adopt stern measures in favour of the country
schools. The Elector called to mind Luther's admonitions,
that he, as the " principal guardian of the young," had
authority to compel such towns and villages as possessed
the means, to maintain schools, pulpits and parsonages,
just as he might compel them to furnish bridges, high roads
and footpaths. . . . "If, moreover, they have not the
means," so Luther had said, "there are the monastic lands

1 N. Paulus, " Wolfgang Mayer, Ein bayerischer Zisterzienserabt
des 16. Jahrh." ("Hist. Jahrb.," 1894, p. 575 f?.), p. 587 f. from MS.
notes.

2 Weim. ed., 15, p. 28 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 171 f., " An die Radherrn."

3 Cp. on Wittenberg, Janssen, Engl. Trans., xiii., 286 and below,
xxxix, 1.

THE SCHOOLS 31

which most of them were bestowed for this very purpose."1
But in spite of the measures taken by the Elector and the
urgent demands of the theologians for State aid, even in
towns like Wittenberg the condition of the intermediate
educational institutions was anything but satisfactory. In
the case of his own sons Luther had grudgingly to acknow
ledge that he was " at a loss to find a suitable school."2 He
accordingly had recourse to young theologians as tutors.

The disappointment of the Humanists was keen and their
lot a bitter one. They had cherished high hopes of the
dawn of a new era for classical studies in Germany. Many
had rejoiced at the alliance which had at first sprung up
between the Humanist movement and the religious revolu
tion, believing it would clear the field for learning. They
now felt it all the more deeply seeing that the age, being
altogether taken up with arid theological controversies and
the pressing practical questions of the innovations, had no
longer the slightest interest in the educational ideals of
antiquity. The violent changes in every department of life
which the religious upheaval brought with it could not but
be prejudicial to the calm intellectual labours of which the
Humanists had dreamed ; the prospect of Mutian's " Beata
tranquillitas " had vanished.

Mutian, at one time esteemed as the leader of the Thur-
ingian Humanists, retired into solitude and died in the
utmost poverty (1526) after the Christian faith had, as it
would appear, once more awakened in him. Eminent
lawyers among the Humanists, Ulrich Zasius of Freiburg
and Christopher Scheurl of Nuremberg, openly detached
themselves from the Wittenbergers. Scheurl, who had once
waxed so enthusiastic about the light which had dawned in
Saxony, now declared confidentially to Catholic friends that
Wittenberg was a cesspool of errors and intellectual dark
ness.3 The reaction which the recognition of Luther's real
aims produced in other Humanists, such as Willibald Pirk-
heimer, Crotus Rubeanus, Ottmar Luscinius and Henricus
Glareanus, has already been referred to.4 It is no less true

1 Erl. ed., 53, p. 387. See above, vol. v., pp. 582, 590.

2 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 483.

3 Cp. Chr. Scheurl, " Briefbuch, ein Beitrag zur Gesch. der Ref.,"
ed. Soden and Knaake, 2, 1872, pp. 127, 132, 138, 177. See also
Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 790 (p. 653, N. 2).

4 Cp. for the change in Humanism, above, vol. ii., p. 38 ff., etc.

32 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

of the Humanists favourable to the Church than of those
holding Lutheran views, that German Humanism was
nipped in the bud by the ecclesiastical innovations. As
Paulsen says : " Luther usurped the leadership [from the
Humanists] and theology [that of the Protestants] drove the
fine arts from the high place they had just secured ; at
the very moment of their triumph the Humanists saw the
fruits of victory snatched from their grasp."1

The event of greatest importance for the Humanists was,
however, Erasmus's open repudiation of Luther in 1523, and
his attack on that point so closely bound up with all intel
lectual progress, viz. Luther's denial of free-will.

Quite independent of this attack were the many and bitter
complaints which the sight of the decline of his beloved
studies drew from Erasmus : " The Lutheran faction is the
ruin of our learning."2 " We see that the study of tongues
and the love of fine literature is everywhere growing cold.
Luther has heaped insufferable odium on it."3 He regrets
the downfall of the schools at Nuremberg : " All this laziness
came in with the new Evangel."4 He wished to have
nothing more to do with these Evangelicals, he declares,
because, through their doing, scholarship was everywhere
being ruined. " These people [the preachers] are anxious
for a living and a wife, for the rest they do not care a hair."5

In the above year, 1523, at the beginning of his public
estrangement with Erasmus, Luther had written : " Erasmus
has done what he was destined to do ; he has introduced the
study of languages and recalled us from godless studies (4 a
sacrilegis studiis '). He will in all likelihood die like Moses,
in the plains of Moab [i.e. never see the Promised Land].
He is no leader to the higher studies, i.e. to piety " ; in
other words, unlike Luther, he was not able to lead his
followers into the land of promise, where the enslaved will
rules.6

Luther's use of the term " sacrilega studio, " invites us to
cast a glance on the state of education before his day.

Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts," I2, p. 177.

Opp.," 3, col. 777 : " Lutherana factio . . . perdit omnia studio,
nos ra."

/&., col. 915 : "... intolerabili degravavit invidia."
Ib., col. 1089 : " Tantam ignamam invexit hoc novum evangelium."
Ib., col. 1069 : "Amant viaticum et uxorem, cetera pili non faciunt."
To CEcolampadius, June 20, 1523, " Briefe," 4, p. 164.

THE SCHOOLS 38

Higher Education before Luther's Day

The condition of the schools before Luther, as described
in our available sources, was very different from what Luther
pictured to his readers in his works.

According to Luther's polemical writings, learning in earlier
days could not but be sacrilegious because Satan " was corrupt
ing the young " in " his own nests, the monasteries and clerical
resorts " ; " he, the prince of this world, gave the young his good
things and delights ; the devil spread out his nets, established
monasteries, schools and callings, in such a way that no boy
could escape him."1 With this fantastic view, met with only too
frequently in Luther under all sorts of shapes, goes hand in hand
his wholesale reprobation and belittling of the olden methods and
system of education. The professors at the close of the Middle
Ages were only able, according to Luther, to " train up profligates
and greedy bellies, rude donkeys and blockheads ; all they
could teach men was to be asses and to dishonour their wives,
daughters and maids." " People studied twenty or forty years
and yet at the end of it all knew neither Latin nor German."
" Those ogres and kidnappers " set up libraries, but they were
filled ** with the filth and ordure of their obscene and poisonous
books " ; " the devil's spawn, the monks and the spectres of the
Universities " when conferring doctorates decked out " great fat
loutish donkeys in red and brown hoods, like a sow pranked out
with gold chains and pearls." " The pupils and professors were
as mad as the books on which they lectured. A jackdaw does not
hatch out doves nor can a fool beget wise offspring."

It is in his " An die Radherrn," the object of which was to
raise the standard of education, that we find such coarse language.

What is of more importance is that Luther seems here to be
seeking to conceal the decline in learning which he had brought
about, and to lay the blame solely on the olden schools. If the
corruption had formerly been so great then some excuse might
be found for the ruin which had followed his struggle with the
Church. — Such an excuse, however, does not tally with the facts.

That, on the contrary, education, not only at the Univer
sities, but also in the Latin schools, which Luther had more
particularly in view, was in a flourishing condition and full
of promise before it was so rudely checked by the religious
disturbances which emptied all the schools, has been fully
confirmed to-day by learned research. " The increased
attendance at the Universities in the course of the 15th and
the commencement of the 16th century is a very rapid one,"
writes Franz Eulenburg. " Hence the decline in the

1 Weim. ed., 15, p. 29 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 172, " An die Radherrn."

VI. — D

34 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

'twenties of the latter century is all the more noticeable."1
" At the beginning of the 16th century," says Friedrich
Paulsen, " everyone of any influence or standing, strength or
courage, devoted himself to the new learning : prelates,
sovereigns, the townships and, above all, the young " ; but,
shortly after the outbreak of the ecclesiastical revolution,
" everything became changed."2

What had contributed principally to a salutary revival
had been the sterling work of the older Humanists. Eminent
and thoroughly religious men of the schools — men like
Alexander Hegius and his pupils and successors Rudolf von
Langen, Ludwig Dringenberg, Johannes Murmellius and,
particularly, Jakob Wimpfeling, who, on account of his
epoch-making pedagogic work, was called the teacher of
Germany — zealously made their own the humanistic ideal
of making of the classics the centre of the education of the
young, and of paving the way for a new intellectual life, by
means of the instruction given in the schools.3 An attempt
was made to combine classical learning with devotion to
the old religion and respect for the Church. They also
strove to carry out — though not always successfully — the
task which was assigned to the schools by the Lateran
Council held under Leo X ; the aim of the teacher was to be
not merely to impart grammar, rhetoric and the other
sciences, but at the same time to instil into those committed
to their charge the fear of God and zeal for the faith.4 The
sovereigns and the towns placed their abundant means at
the disposal of the new movement and so did the Church,
which at that time was still a wealthy organisation.

The number of the schools and scholars in itself proves the
interest taken by the nation in the relative prosperity of its
education.

To take some instances from districts with which Luther must
have been fairly well acquainted : Zwickau had a flourishing
Latin school which, in 1490, numbered 900 pupils divided into
four classes. In 1518 instruction was given there in Greek
and Hebrew, and bequests, ecclesiastical and secular, for its
maintenance continued to be made. The town of Brunswick
had two Latin schools and, besides, three schools belonging to
religious communities. At Nuremberg, towards the close of the

1 Work cited above, p. 29, n. 2 (p. 525). 2 /&., p. 260.

3 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 1, p. 68 ft

* Raynald., " Annal. eccles.," a. 1514, n. 29.

THE SCHOOLS 85

15th century, there were several Latin schools controlled by
four rectors and twelve assistants ; a new " School of Poetry "
was added in 1515 under Johann Cochlseus. Augsburg also had
five Church schools at the commencement of the 16th century,
and besides this private teachers with a humanistic training
were engaged in teaching Latin and the fine arts. At Frankfurt-
on-the-Main there were, in 1478, three foundation schools with
318 pupils ; the college at Schlettstadt in Alsace numbered 900
pupils in 1517 and Geiler of Kaysersberg and Jakob Wimpfeling
were both educated there. At Gorlitz in Silesia, at the close
ot the 15th century, the number of scholars varied between
500 and 600. Emmerich on the lower Rhine had, in 1510,
approximately 450 pupils in its six classes, in 1521 about 1500.
Miinster in Westphalia, owing to the labours of its provost, Rudolf
von Langen, became the focus and centre of humanistic effort,
and, subsequent to 1512, had also its pupils divided into six
classes. l

The " Brothers of the Common Life " established their schools
over the whole of Northern Germany. Their institutions, with
which Luther himself had the opportunity of becoming acquainted
at Magdeburg, sent out some excellent schoolmasters. The
schools of these religious at Deventer, Zwolle, Liege and Louvain
were famous. The school of the brothers at Liege numbered in
1521 1600 pupils, assorted into eight classes.

In the lands of the Catholic princes many important grammar-
schools withstood the storms of the religious revulsion, so that
Luther's statements concerning the total downfall of education
cannot be accepted as generally correct, even subsequent to the
first decades of the century.

Nor were even the elementary schools neglected at the close of
the Middle Ages in most parts of the German Empire. Fresh
accounts of such schools, in both town and country, are con
stantly cropping up to-day in the local histories. Constant efforts
for their improvement and multiplication were made at this time.
About a hundred regulations and charters of schools either in
German, or in Dutch, dating from 1400-1521 have been traced.
The popular religious handbooks were zealous in advocating the
education of the people.2 Luther himself tells us it was the
custom to stir up the schoolmasters to perform their duty by
saying that " to neglect a scholar is as bad as to seduce a maid."3

Luther's Success

Did Luther, by means of the efforts described above,
succeed in bringing about any real improvement in the
schools, particularly the Latin schools ? The affirmative

1 Cp. Janssen (Engl. Trans.), xiii., 9 ff. 2 Ib., i., p. 25 ff.

3 Weim. ed., 15, p. 33 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 177, " An die Radherrn " :
" When I was young there was a saying in the schools : ' Non minus est
negligere scholar em quam corrumpere virginem.' This was said in order
to frighten the schoolmasters."

36 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

cannot be maintained. At least it was a long time before
the reform which he desiderated came, and what reform
took place seems to have been the result less of Luther's
exhortations than of Melanchthon's labours.

On the whole his hopes were disappointed. The famous
saying of Erasmus : " Wherever Lutheranism prevails, there
we see the downfall of learning,"1 remained largely true
throughout the 16th century, in spite of all Luther's efforts.

Schiele says : Where Melanchthon's school-regulations
for the Saxon Electorate were enforced without alteration,
Latin alone was taught, " but neither German nor Greek
nor Hebrew," that the pupils might not be overtaxed.
Instruction in history and mathematics was not insisted on
at all. Bugenhagen added the rudiments of Greek and
mathematics. Only about twenty years after Luther's " An
die Radherrn " do we hear something of attempts being
made to improve matters in the Lutheran districts. As a
rule all that was done even in the large towns was to amalga
mate several moribund schools and give them a new charter.
" Even towns like Nuremberg and Frankfurt were unable,
in spite of the greatest sacrifices, to introduce a well-ordered
system into the schools. The two most eminent, practical
pedagogues of the time, Camerarius and Micyllus, could not
check the decline of their council schools."2

Nuremberg, the highly praised home of culture, may here
be taken as a case in point, because it was to the syndic of
this city that Luther addressed his second writing, praising
the new Protestant gymnasium which had been established
there (above, p. 6). Yet, in 1530, after it had been in
existence some years, this same syndic, Lazarus Spengler,
sadly wrote : " Are there not any intelligent Christians who
would not be highly distressed that in a few short years, not
Latin only, but all other useful languages and studies have
fallen into such contempt ? Nobody, alas, will recognise the
great misfortune which, as I fear, we shall soon suffer, and
which even now looms in sight."3 In the Gymnasium, which

1 " Ubicunque regnat Luther anismus, ibi litterarum est interitus. Et
tamen hoc gemis hominum maxime litteris alitur. Duo tantum qucerunt,
censum et uxorem. C cetera prcestat illis evangelium, i.e. potestatem
vivendi ut volunt." To Pirkheimer, 1528, from Basle. " Opp.," 3,
col. 1139. 2 Schiele, ib., p. 391.

3 C. Hagen, " Deutschlands literarische und religiose Verhaltnisse
im Reformationszeitalter," 32, 1868, p. 197. Janssen, ib., xiii., p. 100.

THE SCHOOLS 37

he had so much at heart, instruction was given free owing
to the rich foundations, nevertheless but very few pupils
were found to attend it. Eobanus Hessus, who was to have
lent his assistance to promoting the cause of Humanism,
left the town again in 1533. When Hessus before this
complained to Erasmus that he had given offence to the
town by his complaints of the low standard to which the
school had fallen (above, p. 32), the latter replied in 1531,
that he had received his information from the learned
Pirkheimer and other friends of the professors there. He
had indeed written that learning seemed to be only half
alive there, in fact, at its last gasp, but he had done so in
order by publishing the truth to spur them on to renewed
zeal. " This I know, that at Liege and Paris learning is
flourishing as much as ever. Whence then comes this
torpor ? From the negligence of those who boast of being
Evangelicals. Besides, you Nurembergers have no reason
to think yourselves particularly offended by me, for such
complaints are to be heard from the lips of every honest man
of every town where the Evangelicals rule."1 Camerarius,
whom Melanchthon wished to be the soul of the school,
turned his back on it in 1535 on account of the hopeless
state of things. J. Poliander said in 1540 : In Nuremberg,
that populous and well-built city, there are rich livings and
famous professors, but owing to the lack of students the
institution there has dwindled away. " The lecturers left
it, which caused much disgrace and evil talk to the people
of Nuremberg, as everybody knows."2 When Melanchthon
stayed for a while at Nuremberg in 1552 by order of the
Elector, the Gymnasium was a picture of desolation. In
the school regulations issued by the magistrates the pupils
were reproached with contempt of divine service, blasphemy,
persistent defiance of school discipline, etc., and with be
ing " barbarous, rude, wild, wanton, bestial and sinful."
Camerarius even wrote from Leipzig advising the town-
council to break up the school.3

There is no doubt that in other districts where Lutheran-
ism prevailed Latin schools were to be found where good
discipline reigned and where masters and pupils alike

1 " Opp.," 3, col. 1363 aq.

2 M. Toppeu, " Die Grundung der Universitat Kdnigsberg," etc.,
1844, p. 78. Janssen, ib.y p. 101. 3 Janssen, ib., p. 102.

38 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

worked with zeal ; the records, however, have far more to
say of the decline.

Many statements of contemporaries well acquainted with the
facts speak most sadly of the then conditions. Melanchthon
complained more and more that shortsighted Lutheran theo
logians stood in the way of the progress of the schools. Camer-
arius, in a letter to George Fabricius, rector of Meissen, said in
1555 that it was plain everything was conspiring for the destruc
tion of Germany, that religion, learning, discipline and honesty
were doomed. As one of the principal causes he instances " the
neglect and disgust shown for that learning, which, in reality, is
the glory and ornament of man." "It is looked upon as tom
foolery and a thing fit only for children to play with." " Educa
tion, and life in general, too, has become quite other from what
we were accustomed to in our boyhood." Of the Catholic times
he speaks with enthusiasm : " What zeal at one time inspired the
students and in what honour was learning held ; what hardships
men were ready to endure in order to acquire but a modicum of
scholarship is still to-day a matter of tradition. Now, on the other
hand, learned studies are so little thought of owing to civil
disturbances and inward dissensions that it is only here and
there that they have escaped complete destruction."1

What he says is abundantly confirmed by the accounts of the
failure of educational effort at Augsburg, Esslingen, Basle,
Stuttgart, Tubingen, Ansbach, Heilbronn and many other towns.

The efforts made were, however, not seldom ill-advised. If it
be really a fact that the Latin " Colloquia " of Erasmus, which
Luther himself had condemned for its frivolity, " played a
principal part in the education of the schoolboys,"2 then, indeed,
it is not surprising that the results did not reach expectations.
The crude polemics against the olden Church and the theological
controversies associated with the names of Luther and Melanch
thon, which penetrated into the schools owing to the squabbles
of the professors and preachers, also had a bad effect. Again
education was hampered by being ever subordinated to the
interests of a " pure faith " which was regarded as its mainstay,
but which was itself ever changing its shape and doctrines.3

" The form of education required for future ministers," says
Schiele, " became the chief thing, and education as such was
consequently obliged to take a back seat." " At the Universities
it was only theology that flourished," the olden Hellenists died
out and the young were, in many places, only permitted to
attend the " orthodox " Universities. Among the Lutherans
" the Latin schools were soon no longer able to compete with the
colleges of the Jesuits and the Calvinists. Not a single Lutheran
rector or master of note is recorded in the annals of the history of
education. It is true that the so-called Kuster-sehools spread

1 Cp. Dollinger, " Die Ref.," 1, p. 483 ff. ; 2, p. 584 ff.

2 For proofs soe Jarissen (Engl. Trans.), xiii., p. 71 ff.

3 " Preuss. Jahrb.," loc. cit., p. 392.

THE SCHOOLS 39

throughout the land simultaneously with the spread of orthodoxy.
But when we see how the orthodpx clergy despised their cate
chetical duties as of secondary importance, and hastened to
delegate them as far as possible to the Kiister [parish-clerk], it
becomes impossible for us to regard such schools as a proof of
any interest in education on the part of the orthodox, rather the
contrary. How otherwise can we explain, even when we take
into account the unfavourable conditions of the age, that, a
hundred years after Luther's day, far fewer people were able to
read his writings than at the time when he first came forward. x

In the elementary schools which gradually came into
being the parish-clerk gave instruction in reading and
writing, and, in addition, tried to teach the catechism by
reciting it aloud and making the children repeat it after him.
The earliest definite regulations which imposed this duty on
the clerk in addition to the catechism were those issued by
Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg in 1559, who also devoted
his attention to the founding of German schools. The latter,
however, were not intended for the smaller villages, nor did
they receive any support from the " poor box." Nor did all
the children attend the schools kept by the clerk. The
school regulations issued by the Protestant Duke were in
themselves good, but their effect was meagre.2 In the
Saxon Electorate it was only in 1580 that the parish-clerks
of the villages were directed to keep a school.3

Finally, to come to the Protestant Universities ; it was
only in the latter part of the 16th century that the attend
ance, which, as we saw above, had fallen so low, began once
more to make a better show.

In 1540 Melanchthon expressed himself as satisfied with
the condition of learning which prevailed in them.4 But
among others whose opinion was less favourable we find
Luther's friend Justus Jonas, who, two years before this, in
1538, wrote, that, since the Evangel had begun to make its
way through Germany, the Universities were silent as the

1 Ib., p. 393.

2 Janssen, ib., p. 43. Schiele, ib., p. 593.

3 Schiele, ib., p. 390.

4 He even says : " Academics nunc quidem Dei beneficio omni genere
doctrinarum ftorent." " Corp. ref.," 3, p. 1068. Bishop Julius Pflug
informed Pope Paul III, in a letter in which he gives him a vivid
picture of the needs of the country in order to determine him to active
assistance : " Scholce Lutheranorum cum privatce turn publicce florent,
nostrce frigent plane ac iacent." " Epistolae Mosellani," etc., p. 150 sq.
Kawerau, " Reformation und Gegenreformation "3, (Moller, " Lehrb.
der KG.," 3, p. 437.

40 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

grave.1 The testimony of Rudolf Walther, a Swiss, who
had visited many German Universities and been on terms of
intimacy with eminent Protestant theologians, must also
receive special attention. In 1568 he wrote — though his
words may perhaps be somewhat discounted by his own
theological isolation — " The German Universities are now
in such a state that, to say nothing of the conceit and
carelessness of the professors and the impudent immorality
which prevails, they are in no way remarkable. Heidelberg,
however, is praised more than the others, for the attacks
which menace her on all sides do not allow this University
to slumber."2

Heidelberg was the chief educational centre of those who
held Calvinistic views. Since 1580 the attendance at the
University had notably increased owing to the influx of
students from abroad. Towards the close of the century,
with Wittenberg and Jena, it headed the list of the Univer
sities of the new faith in respect of the number of matricula
tions. Jena, like its sister Universities of Marburg, Konigs-
berg and Helmstadt, had been founded as a seminary of
Protestant theology and at the same time of Roman law,
which served to strengthen the absolutism of the princes.
Since the appointment of Flacius Illyricus in 1557 it had
become a stronghold of pure Lutheranism. The theological
squabbles within the bosom of Protestantism, here as in the
other Universities, were, however, disastrous to peace, and
any healthy progress. Characteristic of the treatment meted
out to the professors by Protestant statesmen of a different
opinion, even when they were not summarily dismissed, is
the discourse of the Saxon Chancellor, Christian Briick, to
the professors of the theological Faculty at Jena in 1561 :
" You black, red and yellow knaves and rascals ! A plague

1 G. Steinhausen, " Gesch. der deutschen Kultur," Leipzig and
Vienna, 1904, p. 515. There we read (p. 514) in the description of the
education given by the Protestant Universities that it was " rendered
sterile " by the new theology. " The intellectual leaders of the time
became more and more Court theologians. It is noteworthy that many
of the edicts and regulations begin with an improving theological
preface. . . . What had become of the intellectual revival of the first
decades of the 16th century ? " Eobanus Hessus had prophesied in 1523
that the new theology would bring in its train a worse barbarism than
that which had been overthrown, and already in 1524 he had been
obliged to speak of the " New Obscurantists."

2 Ddllinger, " Die Ref.," I2, p. 509.

THE SCHOOLS 41

upon you all you shameless scamps and rebels ! Would
that you were knocked on the head, disgraced and
blinded ! "*

The University of Wittenberg now registered the largest
number of students. Although on Luther's first public
appearance crowds of students had been attracted by the
fame of his name, yet these decreased to such an extent that
between 1523 and 1533 not a single theological degree was
conferred. About 1550, however, the Faculties again
numbered about 2000 students, thanks chiefly to Melanch-
thon. In 1598 the number is even given as exceeding
2000. Throughout the whole of the century, from the
beginning of the ecclesiastical schism, a considerable
percentage of students had poured in from abroad. Of
the wantonness of the Wittenberg students of the various
Faculties, contemporaries as well as official documents wax
so eloquent that the University would seem to have enjoyed
an unenviable notoriety in this respect among the Protestant
educational establishments.2 The fact that, as just men
tioned, the students were largely recruited from other
countries must be taken into account. Wittenberg suffered
more than the other Universities from the quarrels which,
according to Luther, tore to pieces Protestant theology.
What was said in a sermon in 1571 on the words " Peace be
with you " is peculiarly applicable to Wittenberg : " Only
see what quarrelling and envy, hatred, and persecution, and
expulsion there has been, and still is, among the professors
at Wittenberg, Jena, Frankfurt-on-the-Oder, Konigsberg
and indeed all the Universities which really should be
flourishing in the light of our beloved Evangel ; it would
indeed be a great and heavenly work of God if all the young
men at these Universities did not fall into such vices, and
even become utterly corrupted."3

1 M. Hitter, " Matthia Flacii Illyrici Leben " 2, 1725, p. 106 Janssen,
ib., p. 265.

2 For proofs see Janssen, ib., p, 286 ff.

3 16., p. 295.

42 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

4. Benevolence and Belief of the Poor

Luther's attitude towards poor relief, which ever since the
rise of Protestantism has been the subject of extravagant
eulogies, can only be put in its true light by a closer examina
tion of the state of things before his day.1

At the Close of the Middle Ages

Indications of the provision made by the community for
relief of the poor are found in the Capitularies of Charles the
Great, indeed even in the 6th century in the canons of a
Council held at Tours in 567. Corporate relief of the poor,
later on carried out by means of the guilds, and the care of
the needy in each particular district undertaken by unions
of the parishes, were of a public and organised character. It
has been justly remarked concerning the working of the
mediaeval institutions : " The results achieved by our
insurance system were then attained by means of family
support, corporations, village clubs and unions of the lords
of the manors. . . . Such organised relief of the poor made
any State relief unnecessary. The State authorities con
cerned themselves only negatively, viz. by prohibiting
mendicancjr and vagabondage."2 Private benevolence
occupied the first place, since the very nature of Christian
charity involves love of our neighbour. Its work was
mainly done by means of the ecclesiastical institutions and
the monasteries. Special arrangements also were made,
under the direction of the Church, to meet the various needs,
and such were to be found in considerable numbers both in
large places and in small ; all, moreover, was carried out on
the lines of a careful selection of deserving cases and a wise
control of expenditure.

The share taken by the Church in the whole work of
charity was, generally speaking, a guarantee that the work
was managed conscientiously.

Though among both monks and clergy scandalous
instances of greed and self-seeking were not wanting, yet

1 On the contrast between mediaeval and Lutheran charity, see
above, vol. iv., p. 477 ff., and Janssen, " Hist, of the German People "
(Engl. Trans.), vol. xv., pp. 425-526.

2 Adolf Bruder, art. " Armenpflege," " Staatslexikon der Gorres-
gesellschaft."

POOR RELIEF 43

there were many who lived up to their profession and were
zealous in assisting in the development of works of charity.
The mendicant Orders, by the very example of the poverty
prescribed by their rule, helped to combat all excessive
avarice ; their voluntary privations taught people how to
endure the trials of poverty and they showed their gratitude
for the alms bestowed on them by their labours for souls in
the pulpit and in the school, and by doing their utmost to
promote learning.

Every Order was exhorted by its Rule to fly idleness and
to perform works of neighbourly charity.

There are plentiful sermons and works of piety dating from
the close of the Middle Ages which prove how the faithful
were not only urged to be charitable to the needy, but also
to obey God's command and to labour, this exhortation
referring particularly to the poor themselves, who were not
unnecessarily to become a burden to others. Again and
again are the words of the Bible emphasised : "In the
sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat thy bread," and " Whoever
will not work neither let him eat " (Gen. iii. 19 ; 2 Thes.
iii. 10).

In spite of this, lack of industrial occupation, the difficulty
and even sometimes the entire absence of public super
vision, and, in part also, the ease with which alms were to
be had, bred a large crop of beggars, who moved about from
place to place and who, in late mediaeval times, became a
perfect plague throughout the whole of Germany. Hence
all the greater towns in the 15th century and early years of
the 16th issued special regulations to deal with the poor.
In the matter of these laws for the regulation of charity the
city-fathers acted independently, strong in the growing
consciousness of their standing and duties. Lay Guardians
of the Poor were appointed by the magistrates and poor-
boxes were established, the management of which devolved
on the municipal authorities. The Catholic Netherlands set
an excellent example in this respect by utilising the old
hospital regulations and, with their help, drawing up new
and independent organisations. Antwerp, Brussels, Louvain,
Mechlin, Ghent, Bruges, Namur and other towns already
possessed a well-developed system of poor relief.

" The admirable regulations for the relief of the poor at Ypres "
(1525), to which reference is so often made, " a work of social

44 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

reform of the first rank " (Feuchtwanger), sprang from such
institutions, and these, in turn, were by Charles V in 1531 made
the basis of his new Poor Law for the whole of the Netherlands.
The Ypres regulations declared, that, according to the divine
command, everyone is obliged to gain his living as far as he can.
All begging was strictly prohibited, charitable institutions and
private almsgiving were not allowed to have their way unchecked,
admission of strangers was made difficult and other salutary
restrictions were enforced, yet, on the other hand, Christian
charity towards those unable to earn a living was warmly
welcomed and set in the right channels.1

In the Netherlands, Humanism, which had made great progress
in Erasmus's native land, co-operated in the measures taken, and
it was here that the important " De subventions pauperum " of
Juan Ludovico de Vives, a friend of Erasmus, of Pope Hadrian IV
and of Sir Thomas More, and a zealous opponent of Lutheranism,
was published in 1526.

In the Catholic towns of Germany, particularly in the south, it
was not merely the stimulus of Humanism but still more the
economic and political development which, towards the end of
the Middle Ages and during the transition to modern times, led
to constant fresh efforts in the domain of the public relief of the
poor. The assistance of the poor was, in fact, at that time " one
of the principal social questions, poor relief being identical with
social politics. To provide for the sick members of the guilds,
for the serf incapable of work, for the beggar in the street, for
the guest in the hostel, for the poor artisan to whom the city
magistrates gave a loan free of interest, for the burgher who
received cheap grain from the council, all this was, to give freely,
to bestow alms and to perform works well pleasing to God."2

The gaping rift in the German lands and the chaotic conditions
which accompanied the transition from the agrarian to the
commercial system of economy were naturally not favourable
to the peaceful work of alleviating poverty. It was, however,
eventually to the advantage of the towns to form themselves into
separate administrations, able to safeguard their own charitable
institutions by means of an efficient police system. Thus the
town councils took over what had been formerly to a great
extent the function of the Church, but this they did without any
animosity towards her. They felt themselves to be acting as
beseemed " Christian authorities." They were encouraged in this
by that interference, in what had once been the domain of the
Church, of the territorial princes and the cities, which had become
the rule in the 15th century. The more or less extensive suzerainty

1 F. Ehrle, " Beitrage z. Gesch. u. Reform der Armenpflege," 1881 ;
do. " Die Armenordnungen von Niirnberg (1522) und von Ypern
(1525)," "Hist. Jahrb.," 9, 1888, p. 450 ff. Ratzinger, "Gesch. d.
kirchl. Armenpflege "2, 1884, p. 442 ff. Janssen, p. 431.

2 L. Feuchtwanger, " Gesch. der sozialen Politik und des Armen-
wesens im Zeitalter der Reformation" ("Jahrb. fur Gesetzgebung, "
etc., ed. G. Schmoller, N.F. 32, 1908, p. 168 ff. (I), and 33, 1909,
p. 191 ff (II), I, p. 169.

POOR RELIEF 45

in Church matters which had prevailed even previous to the
religious schism in Saxony, Brandenburg and many of the
Imperial cities may be called to mind. In towns such as Augs
burg, Nuremberg, Strasburg and Ratisbon the overwhelming
increase which had taken place in the class which lived from
hand to mouth, called for the prohibitive measures against
beggary and the other regulations spoken of above.

At Augsburg the town council issued orders concerning the
poor-law system in 1459, 1491 and 1498. Those of 1491 and 1498
sought to regulate and prevent any overlapping in the distribu
tion of the municipal doles, the " holy alms which are com
passionately given and bestowed daily in many different parts and
corners of the city " ; to these were subjoined measures for
enforcing strict supervision of those who received assistance and
for excluding the undeserving ; whoever was able to work but
refused to do so was shut out, in order that the other poor people
might not " be deprived of their bodily sustenance." A third and
still better set of poor-law regulations appeared in 1522. They
provided for a stricter organisation of the distribution of the
monies, and made the supervision of those in receipt of help
easier by the keeping of registers of the poor and by house to
house visitations. Beggars at the church doors were placed under
special control. No breach with the ecclesiastical traditions of the
past is apparent in the rules of 1522, in spite of the influence of the
religious innovations in this town. From the civil standpoint,
however, they, like the poor laws generally drawn up at the close
of the Middle Ages, display a " thorough knowledge of the
conditions and are true to a well-tried tradition of communal
policy." The principal author of this piece of legislation was
Conrad Peutinger, the famous lawyer and statesman who since
1497 had been town clerk. He died greatly esteemed in 1547,
after having done more to further than to check the religious
innovations in his native town by his uncertain and vacillating
behaviour.

From the Nuremberg mendicancy regulations Johannes
Janssen quotes certain highly practical enactments which belong
to the latter half of the 14th century. The so-called " meat and
bread foundations," which had been enriched by the Papal
Indulgences granted to benefactors, were not available for any
public beggars, but only for the genuine poor. In 1478 the
town council issued a more minute mendicant ordinance. Here
we read : " Almsgiving is a specially praiseworthy, virtuous
work, and those who receive alms unworthily and unnecessarily
lay a heavy burden of guilt on themselves." Those allowed to
beg were also obliged at least " to spin or perform some other work
according to their capacity." Beggars from foreign parts were
only permitted to beg on certain fixed days in the year. Conrad
Celtes, the Humanist, in his work on Nuremberg printed in 1501,
boasts of the ample provision for widows and orphans made by
the town, the granaries for the purpose of giving assistance and
other arrangements whereby it was distinguished above all other

46 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

towns ; families of the better class who had met with misfortunes
received yearly a secret dole to tide them over their difficult time. l

New regulations concerning the poor, more comprehensive than
the former, appeared at Nuremberg in 1522. These deal with the
actual needs and are in close touch with the maxims of govern
ment and old traditions of the Imperial cities. In them all the
earlier charitable, social and police measures are codified : the
restriction of begging, the management of the hospitals, the
provision of work and tools, advances to artisans in difficulties,
granaries for future famines, the distribution of alms, badges for
privileged beggars, etc. The whole is crowned by the Bible text,
so highly esteemed in the Catholic Middle Ages : " Blessed is he
that hath pity on the poor and needy, for the Lord will deliver
him in the evil day." " Our salvation," so we read when mention
is made of the relief funds, "rests solely in keeping and perform
ing the commandments of God which oblige every Christian to
give such help and display such fraternal charity towards his
neighbour."2 At Nuremberg the new teaching had already taken
firm footing yet the olden Catholic conception of the meritorious
character of almsgiving is nevertheless recognisable in the regula
tions of 1522.3

At Strasburg a new system, dating from 1523, for regulating the
distribution of the " common alms " was established in harmony
with the great traditions of the 15th century, and above all with
the spirit and labours of the famous Catholic preacher Geiler of
Kaysersberg (fl510). Janssen has given us a fine series of
witnesses, from Geiler's sermons and writings, of the nature at
once religious and practical of his exhortations to charity.4
Charity, he insists, must show itself not merely in the bestowal
of temporal goods ; it is concerned above all with the " inward
and spiritual goods, the milk of sound doctrine, and instruction
of the unlearned, the milk of devotion, wisdom and consolation."
He repeatedly exhorts the authorities to stricter regulations on
almsgiving.

After various improvements had been introduced in the poor
law at Strasburg subsequent to 1500, the magistrates — the clergy
and the monasteries not having shown themselves equal to their
task — issued a new enactment, though even this relied to a great
extent on the help of the clergy. The regulations of Augsburg
and Nuremberg were the most effectual. It was only later, after
the work of Capito, Bucer and Hedio at Strasburg, that, together
with the new spirit, changes crept into the traditional poor-law
system of the town.

All the enactments, dating from late mediaeval times prior
to the religious innovations, for the poor of the other great

1 " De origine, situ, moribus et institutis Norimbergse," cap. 12.

2 Reprint of the Regulations of 1522 according to the oldest
revision, in Ehrle, " Die Armenordnungen," p. 459 ff. For the passage
" Our salvation," etc., see p. 467.

3 Ehrle, ib., p. 477 f. Feuchtwanger, ib., I., p. 184.

4 Janssen, ib., xv., p. 439 ff.

POOR RELIEF 47

German towns, for instance, of Ratisbon (1523), Breslau
(1525) and Wiirzburg (1533) are of a more or less similar
character. Thus, thanks to the economic pressure, there
was gradually evolved, in the centres of German prosperity
and commercial industry, a sober but practical and far-
sighted poor-law system.1

It was not, indeed, so easy to get rid of the existing
disorders ; to achieve this a lengthy struggle backed by the
regulations just established would have been necessary.
Above all, the tramps and vagabonds, who delighted in
idleness and adventure and who often developed dangerous
proclivities, continued to be the pest of the land. The cause
of this economic disorder was a deep-seated one and entirely
escapes those who declare that beggary sprang solely from
the idea foisted on the Church, viz. that " poverty was
meritorious and begging a respectable trade."

Luther's Efforts. The Primary Cause of their Failure

The spread of Lutheranism had its effect on the municipal
movement for the relief of the poor, nor was its influence all
for the good.

In 1528 and 1529 Luther twice published an edition of the
booklet " On the Roguery of the False Beggars " (" Liber
vagatorum "), a work dating from the beginning of the 16th
century ; in his preface to it he says, that the increase in
fraudulent vagrancy shows " how strong in the world is the
rule of the devil " ; " Princes, lords, town-magistrates and, in
fact, everybody " ought to see that alms were bestowed only
on the beggars and the needy in their own neighbourhood,
not on "rogues and vagabonds " by whom even he himself
(Luther) had often been taken in. Everywhere in both towns
and villages registers should be kept of the poor, and strange
beggars not allowed without a " letter or testimonial."2

He was, however, not always so circumspect in his
demands and principles. In a passage of his work " An den
Adel " he makes a wild appeal, which in its practicability
falls short of what had already been done in various parts of
Germany. The only really new point in it is, that, in order
to make an end of begging and poverty, the mendicant

1 Feuchtwanger, ib., p. 182. For all the towns mentioned above
see Janssen, loc. cit.

2 Weim. ed., 26, p. 639 ; Erl. ed., 63, p. 270.

48 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Orders should be abolished, and the Roman See deprived of
their collections and revenues. Of the ordinary beggars he
says, without being sufficiently acquainted with the state of
the case, that they " might easily be expelled," and that
it would be an " easy matter to deal with them were we only
brave and in earnest enough." To the objection that the
result of violent measures would be a still more niggardly
treatment of the poor he replied in 1520 : "It suffices that
the poor be fairly well provided for, so that they die not of
hunger or cold." With a touch of communism he exagger
ates, at the expense of the well-to-do and those who did no
work, an idea in itself undoubtedly true, viz. that work is
man's portion : " It is not just that, at the expense of
another's toil, a man should go idle, wallow in riches and
lead a bad life, whilst his fellow lives in destitution, as is now
the perverted custom. ... It was never ordained by God
that anyone should live on the goods of another."1

In itself it could only have a salutary effect when Luther
goes on to speak, as he frequently does, against begging
among the class whose duty it was to work with their hands,
and when he attempts both to check their idleness and to
rouse a spirit of charity towards the deserving.2 He even
regards the Bible text, " Let there be no beggar or starving
person amongst you," as universally binding on Christians.
Only that he is oblivious of the necessary limitations when
he exclaims : "If God commanded this even in the Old
Testament how much more is it incumbent on us Christians
not to let anyone beg or starve ! "3

The latter words refer to those who are really poor but
quite willing to work (a class of people which will always
exist in spite of every effort) ; as for those who " merely
eat " he demands that they be driven out of the land.
This he does in a writing of 1526 addressed to military men ;
here he divides "all man's work into two kinds," viz.
" agricultural work and war work." A third kind of work,
viz. the teaching office, to which he often refers elsewhere, is

1 76., 6, p. 450f.= 21, p. 335 f.

2 Cp., for instance, the passage in the Church-Postils, Erl. ed., 142,
p. 391 : " The whoje \vorld is full of idle, faithless, wicked knaves,
among the day labourers, lazy handicraftsmen, servants, maids, to say
nothing of the greedy, work-shy beggars," etc.

3 Weim. ed., 6, p. 42; Erl. ed., 162, p. 87. (Longer) Sermon on
Usury, 1520.

POOR RELIEF 49

here passed over in silence. " As for the useless people," he
cries, " who serve neither to defend us nor to feed us, but
merely eat and pass away their time in idleness, [the Emperor
or the local sovereign] should either expel them from the
land or make them work, as the bees do, who sting to death
the drones that do not work but devour the honey of the
others."1 His unmethodical mind failed to see to what dire
consequences these hastily penned words could lead.

With the object of alleviating poverty he himself, however,
lent a hand to certain charitable institutions, which, though
they did not endure, have yet -their place in history. Such
were the poor-boxes of Wittenberg, Leisnig, Altenburg and
some other townships. This institution was closely bound
up with his scheme of gathering together the " believing
Christians " into communities apart. These communities
were not only to have their own form of divine worship and
to use the ecclesiastical penalties, but were also to assist the
poor by means of the common funds in a new and truly
Evangelical fashion.

The olden poor-law ordinances of mediaeval times had been
revised at Wittenberg and embodied in the so-called
" Beutelordnung."2 Carlstadt and the town-council, under
the influence of Luther's earlier ideas, substituted for this
on Jan. 24, 1522, a new " Order for the princely town of
Wittenberg " ; at the same time they reorganised the
common funds.3 These regulations Luther left in force,
when, on his return from the Wartburg, he annulled the rest
of Carlstadt's doings ; the truth is, that they were not at
variance even with his newer ideals.

In 1523 he himself promoted a similar but more highly
developed institution for the relief of the poor in the little
Saxon town of Leisnig on the Freiberg Mulde ; this was to
be in the hands of the community of true believers into
which the inhabitants had formed themselves at the instiga
tion of the zealous Lutheran, Sebastian von Kotteritz. At
Altenburg also, doubtless through Luther's doing, his friend
Wenceslaus Link, the preacher in that town, made a some
what similar attempt to establish a communal poor-box. In

1 /&., 19, p. 654f.=22, p. 281 in "Ob Kriegsleutte auch ynn
seligen Stande seyn kxinden."

2 Barge, " Andreas Karlstadt," 2, p. 559 f.

3 E. Sehling, " Die evang. Kirchenordnungen des 16. Jahrh.," 1, 1.
p. 696 ff.

VI. — E

50 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

many other places efforts of a like nature were made under
Lutheran auspices.

How far such undertakings spread throughout the Protes
tant congregations cannot be accurately determined. We
know, however, the details of the scheme owing to our still
having the rules drawn up for Leisnig.1

According to this the whole congregation, town-councillors,
aldermen, elders and all the inhabitants generally, were to bind
themselves to make a good use of their Christian freedom by the
faithful keeping of the Word of God and by submitting to good
discipline and just penalties. Ten coffer-masters were to be
appointed over the " common fund " and these were three times
a year to give an account to the " whole assembly thereto con
vened." Into this fund was to be put not merely the revenue of
the earlier institutions which hitherto had been most active in
the relief of the poor, viz. the brotherhoods and benevolent
associations, as also that of most of the guilds, and, moreover, the
whole income drawn by the parish from the glebes, pious founda
tions, tithes, voluntary offerings, fines, bridge dues and private
industrial concerns. Thus it was not merely a relief fund but
practically a trust comprising all the wealth of the congregation,
which chiefly consisted in the extensive Church property it had
annexed. In keeping with this is the manner in which the income
was to be apportioned. Only a part was devoted to the relief of
the poor, i.e. to the hospital, orphanage and guest-houses. Most
of the money was to go to defray the stipend of the Lutheran
pastor and his clerk, to maintain the schools and the church, and
to allow of advances being made to artisans free of interest ; the
rest was to be put by for times of scarcity. The members of the
congregation were also exhorted to make contributions out of
charity to their neighbour.

The scheme pleased Luther so well that he advised the printing
of the rules, and himself wrote a preface to the published text in
which he said, he hoped that " the example thus set would prove
a success, be generally followed, and lead to a great ruin of the
earlier foundations, monasteries, chapels and all other such
abominations which hitherto had absorbed all the world's wealth
under a show of worship."

Hence here once more his chief motive is a polemical one, viz.
his desire to injure Popery.

He invites the authorities on this occasion to " lay hands on "
such property and to apply to the common fund all that remained
over after the obligations attaching to the property had been
complied with, and restitution made to such heirs of the donors
as demanded it on account of their poverty. In giving this advice
he was anxious, as he says, to disclaim any responsibility in the
event of " such property as had fallen vacant being plundered

1 Ib., p. 596 ff. ; also " Luthers Werke," Weim. ed., 12, p. 11 ff. ;
Erl. ed., 22, p. 112 ft'. On Leisnig cp. above, vol. v., p. 136 ff.

POOR RELIEF 51

owing to the estates changing hands and each one laying hold on
whatever he could seize." " Should avarice find an entry what
then can be done ? It must not indeed be given up in despair. It
is better that avarice should take too much in a legal way than
that there should be such plundering as occurred in Bohemia. Let
each one [i.e. of the heirs of the donors] examine his own conscience
and see what he ought to take for his own needs and what he
should leave for the common fund ! "1

The setting up of such a " common fund " was also suggested in
other Lutheran towns as a means of introducing some sort of
order into the confiscation of the Church's property. The direct
object of the funds was not the relief of the poor. This was merely
included as a measure for palliating and justifying the bold stroke
which the innovators were about to take in secularising the whole
of the Church's vast properties.

This, however, makes some of Luther's admonitions in his
preface to the regulations for the Leisnig common fund sound
somewhat strange, for instance, his injunction that everything be
carried out according to the law of love. " Christian charity must
here act and decide ; laws and enactments cannot settle the
difficulties. Indeed I write this counsel only out of Christian
charity for the Christians." Whoever refuses to accept his
advice, he says at the conclusion, may go his own way ; only a
few would accept it, but one or two were quite enough for him.
" The world must remain the world and Satan its Prince. I have
done what I could and what it was my duty to do." He was half
conscious of the unpractical character of his proposals, yet any
failure he was determined to attribute to the devil's doing.

His premonition of failure was only too soon realised at
Leisnig. The new scheme could not be made to work. The
magistrates refused to resign the rights they claimed of
disposing of the foundations and similar charitable sources of
revenue or to hand over the incomings to the coffer-masters,
for the latter, they argued, were representatives, not of the
congregation but of the Church. Hence the fund had to go
begging. Luther came to words with the town-council, but
was unable to have his own way, even though he appealed
to the Elector.2 He lamented in 1524 that the example of
Leisnig had been a very sad one, though, as the first of its
kind,3 it should have served as a model. Of Tileman
Schnabel, an ex-Augustinian and college friend of Luther's
at Erfurt, who had been working at Leisnig as preacher and
" deacon," Luther wrote, that he would soon find himself

1 Ib., pp. llff., 14=106ff., 110.

2 Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 551.

3 It was the first to be established with so much pomp and circum
stance.

52 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

obliged to leave if he did not wish to die of hunger. " Inci
dents such as these deprive the parsonages of their best
managers. Maybe they want to drive them back to their
old monasteries."1

Thus the parochial fund of Leisnig, which some writers
have extolled so highly, really never came into existence.
It lives only in the directions given by Luther.

So ill were parson and schoolmaster cared for at Leisnig,
in spite of all the Church property that had been sequestered,
that, according to the Visitation of 1529, the preacher there
had been obliged to ply a trade and gain a living by selling
beer. In 1534, so the records of the Visitations of that date
declare, the schoolmaster had for five years been paid no
salary.

Link, the Altenburg preacher, was also unsuccessful in his
efforts to carry out a similar scheme. He complained as
early as 1523, in a writing entitled " Von Arbeyt und
Betteln," that this Christian undertaking had so far " not
only not been furthered but had actually gone backward "
in spite of all his efforts from the pulpit. He, too, addresses
himself to the " rulers " and reminds them that it is their
duty " to the best of their ability to provide for the poverty
of the masses."2

To Luther's bitter grief and disappointment Wittenberg
(see above, p. 49) also furnished anything but an encouraging
example. Here the incentive to the introduction of the
common fund by Carlstadt had been the resolve of the town
council " to seize on the revenues of the Church, the brother
hoods and guilds and divert them into the common fund, to
be employed for general purposes, and for paying the Church
officials. ... No less than twenty-one pious guilds were to
be mulcted."3 Yet the Wittenberg measures were so little a
success, in spite of all Luther's efforts, that in his sermons
he could not sufficiently deplore the absence of charity and
prevalence of avarice and greed amongst both burghers and

1 To Spalatin, Nov. 24, 1524, " Brief wechsel," 5, p. 72 f.

2 Cp. Ehrle, " Die Armenordnungen," etc. (" Hist. Jahrb.," 9,
1888), p. 475. The Altenburg regulations are no longer extant.

3 Feuchtwanger, " Jahrb. f. Gesetzgebung," etc., I., p. 173. He
quotes the enthusiastic words written on this occasion by the Witten
berg student Ulscenius : " O factum apostolicum, fervet hodie in
Wittenbergensium cordibus Dei et proximi dilectio ardentissima" etc.,
and remarks : We may take in conjunction with this statement the
libertinism which actually prevailed in the town at the end of 1521.

POOR RELIEF 53

councillors.1 The Beutelordnung continued indeed in
existence, but merely as an administrative department of
the town council.

It is not surprising therefore that Luther gave up for the
while any attempt at putting into practice the Leisnig
project elsewhere ; his scheme for assembling the true
Christians into a community had also perforce to betake
itself unto the land of dreams. Only in his " Deudsche
Messe " of 1526 does the old idea again force itself to the
front : " Here a general collection for the poor might be
made among the congregation ; it should be given willingly
and distributed amongst the needy after the example of
St. Paul, 2 Cor. ix. . . . If only we had people earnestly
desirous of being Christians, the manner and order would
soon be settled.5'2

Subsequent to 1526, however, Bugenhagen drafted better
regulations and poor laws for Wittenberg and other Protes
tant towns, founded this time on a more practical basis.
(See below, p. 57 f.)

Luther, nevertheless, continued to complain of the
Wittenbergers. The indignation he expresses at the lack
of all charitable endeavours throughout the domain of the
new Evangel serves as a suitable background for these
complaints.

Want of charity and of neighbourly love was the primary
and most important cause of the failure of Luther's efforts.

" Formerly, when people served the devil and outraged the
Blood of Christ," he says in 1530 in " Das man die Kinder zur
Schulen halten solle " (see above, p. 6), " all purses were
open and there was no end to the giving, for churches, schools
and every kind of abomination ; but now that it is a question
of founding true schools and churches every purse is closed
with iron chains and no one is able to give." So pitiful a sight
made him beg of God a happy death so that he might not live to
see Germany's punishment : " Did my conscience allow of it I
would even give my help and advice so as to bring back the Pope
with all his abominations to rule over us once more."3

What leads him to such admissions as, that, the Christians,
" under the plea of freedom are now seven times worse than
they were under the Pope's tyranny," is, in the first place,

1 Cp. below.

2 Weim. ed., 19, p. 74 ff. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 231.

3 Ib., 30, 2, p. 584 f.= 172, p. 419 f.

54 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

his bitter experience of the drying up of charity, which now
ceases to care even for the parsonages and churches. Under the
Papacy people had been eager to build churches and to make
offerings to be distributed in alms among the poor, but, now that
the true religion is taught, it is a wonder how everyone has grown
so cold. — Yet the people were told and admonished that it
was well pleasing to God and all the angels, but even so they
would not respond. — Now a pastor could not even get a hole in
his roof mended to enable him to lie dry, whereas in former days
people could erect churches and monasteries regardless of cost. —
" Now there is not a single town ready to support a preacher and
there is nothing but robbery and pilfering amongst the people
and no one hinders them. Whence comes this shameful plague ?
' From the doctrine,' say the bawlers, ' which you teach, viz. that
we must not reckon on works or place our trust in them.' This is,
however, the work of the tiresome devil who falsely attributes
such things to the pure and wholesome teaching," etc.1

He is so far from laying the blame on his teaching that he
exclaims : What would our forefathers, who were noted for their
charity, not have done " had they had the light of the Evangel
which is now given to us " ? Again and again he comes back to
the contrast between his and older times : " Our parents and
forefathers put us to shame for they gave so generously and
charitably, nay even to excess, to the churches, parsonages and
schools, foundations, hospitals," etc.2 — "Indeed had we not
already the means, thanks to the charitable alms and foundations
of our forefathers, the Gospel itself would long since have been
wiped out by the burghers in the towns, and the nobles and
peasants in the country, so that not one poor preacher would have-
enough to eat and drink ; for we refuse to supply them, arid,
instead, rob and lay violent hands on what others have given and
founded for the purpose."3

To sum up briefly other characteristic complaints which belong
here, he says : Now that in accordance with the true Evangel
we are admonished " to give without seeking for honour or merit,
no one can spare a farthing."4 — No one now will give, and,
" unless we had the lands we stole from the Pope, the preachers
would have but scant fare " ; they even try " to snatch the
morsels out of the parson's mouth." The way in which the
" nobles and officials " now treat what was formerly Church
property amounts to " a devouring of all beggars, strangers and
poor widows ; we may indeed bewail this, for they eat up the
very marrow of the bones. Since they raise a hue and cry against

the Papists let them also not forget us Woe to you

peasants, burghers and nobles who grab everything, hoard and
scrape, and pretend all the time to be good Evangelicals."5

1 See Dollinger, " Die Ref.," 1, p. 303 ff.

2 Erl. ed., 142, p. 391. Church Postils. 3 /&., p. 389.

4 Weim. ed., 32, p. 409 ; Erl. ed., 43, p. 164. Expos, of Mat. vi.
6 Ib., Erl. ed., 44, p. 356. Sermons on Mat. xviii.-xxiii. — For
similar statements see the passage in the last Note and Erl. ed., 23,

POOR RELIEF 55

He is only too well acquainted with the evils of mendicancy and
idleness, and knows that they have not diminished but rather
increased. Even towards the end of his life he alludes to the
"innumerable wicked rogues who pretend to be poor, needy
beggars and deceive the people " ; they deserve the gallows as
much as the " idlers," of whom there are " even many more " than
before, who are well able to work, take service and support them
selves, but prefer to ask for alms, and, " when these are not esteemed
enough, to supplement them by pilfering or even by open, bare
faced stealing in the courtyards, the streets and in the very
houses, so that I do not know whether there has ever been a time
when robbery and thieving were so common."1

Finally he recalls the enactments against begging by
which the " authorities forbade foreign beggars and vaga
bonds and also idlers." This brings us back to the attempts
made, with the consent of the authorities in the Lutheran
districts, to obviate the social evils by means similar to those
adopted at Leisnig.

A Second Stumbling Block : Lack of Organisation

It was not merely lack of charity that rendered nugatory
all attempts to put in force regulations such as those drafted
for Leisnig, but also defects in the inner organisation of the
schemes. First, to lump all sorts of monies intended for
different purposes into a single fund could prove nothing but
a source of confusion and diminish the amount to be devoted
directly to charitable purposes ; this, too, was the effect of
keeping no separate account of the expenditure for the relief
of the poor.

Then, again, the intermingling of secular and spiritual
which the arrangement involved was very unsatisfactory.
We can trace here more clearly than elsewhere the quasi-
mystic idea of the congregation of true believers which
retained so strong a hold on Luther's imagination till about
1525. With singular ignorance of the ways of the world he
wished to set up the common fund on a community based
on faith and charity in which the universal priesthood was
supposed to have abolished all distinction between the
spiritual and secular authorities, nay, between the two very

S. 317 ; also above, vol. iv., passim. Cp. also Luther's statements
i Janssen, " Hist, of the German People," xv., p. 465 ff. ; Dollinger,
" Die Ref.," 2, p. 215, 306, 349.

1 Erl. ed., 23, 313 f. " An die Pfarherrn wider den Wucher." 1539.

56 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

spheres themselves. He took for granted that Evangelical
rulers would be altogether spiritual simply because they
possessed the faith ; faith, so he seemed to believe, would of
itself do everything in the members of the congregation ;
under the guidance of the spirit everything would be " held
in common, after the example of the Apostles," as he says
in the preface of the Leisnig regulations. But what was
possible of accomplishment owing to abundance of grace in
Apostolic times was an impossible dream in the 16th century.
" The old ideal of an ecclesiastical commonwealth on which,
according to the preface, Luther wished to construct a kind
of insurance society for the relief of the poor, could not
subsist for a moment in the keen atmosphere of a workaday
world where men are what they are."1

Hence the latest writer on social politics and the poor law,
from whom the above words are taken, openly expresses his
wonder at the " Utopian, religio-communistic foundation on
which the Wittenberg and Leisnig schemes, and those drawn
up on similar lines, were based," at the " Utopian efforts "
with their " absurd system of expenditure," which, owing to
their " fundamental defects and the mixing of the funds,
were doomed sooner or later to fail." This " travesty of
early Christianity " tended neither to promote the moral
and charitable sense of the people nor to further benevolent
organisation. " Any rational policy of poor law " was, on
the contrary, shut out by these early Lutheran institutions ;
the relief of the poor was thereby placed on an * ' eminently
unstable basis " ; the poor-boxes only served " to encourage
idleness." " Not in such a way could the modern poor-law
system, based as it is on impersonal, legal principles, be
called into being."

" No system of poor law has ever had less claim to be
placed at the head of a new development than this one [of
Leisnig]."2

The years 1525 and 1526 brought the turning point in
Luther's attitude towards the question of poor relief,
particularly owing to the effect of the Peasant War on his
views of society and the Church.

The result of the war was to bring the new religious
system into much closer touch with the sovereigns and

1 Feuchtwanger, II. (see above, p. 44, n. 2), p. 192.

2 Ib., pp. 197, 180, 177 f., 176.

POOR RELIEF 57

" thus practically to give rise to a theocracy."1 In spite of
the changes this produced, Luther's schemes for providing
for the poor continued to display some notable defects.

For all " practical purposes Luther threw over the principle of
the universal priesthood which the peasants had embraced as a
socio-political maxim, and, by a determined effort, cut his cause
adrift from the social efforts of the day. ... He worked himself
up into a real hatred of the mob, of ' Master Omnes,' the ' many-
headed monster,' and indeed came within an ace of the socio
political ideas of Machiavelli, who advised the rulers to treat the
people so harshly that they might look upon those lords as
liberal who were not extortionate." After the abrogation of
episcopal authority and canon law, of hierarchy and monasteries
" there came an urgent call for the establishment of new associa
tions with practical aims and for the construction of the skeleton
of the new Christian community ; we now hear no more of that
ideal community of true believers which, thanks to its heartfelt
faith, was to carry on the social work of preventing and alleviating
poverty."

The whole of the outward life of the Church being now
under the direction of the Protestant sovereign, the system
of poor relief began to assume a purely secular character,
having nothing but an outward semblance of religion. The
new regulations were largely the work of Bugenhagen, who
was a better organiser than Luther. The many enactments
he was instrumental in drafting for the North German towns
embody necessary provisions for the relief of the poor.

Officials appointed by the sovereign or town-council
directed, or at least supervised, the management, while the
" deacons," i.e. the ecclesiastical guardians of the fund, were
obliged to find the necessary money and, generally, to bear
all the odium for the meagreness and backwardness of the
distribution. The members of the congregation had practi
cally no longer any say in the matter. The parish's share
in the relief of the poor was made an end of even before it
had lost the other similar rights assigned to it by Luther,
such as that of promulgating measures of discipline, appoint
ing clergy, administering the Church's lands, etc. Just as
the organisation of the Church was solely in the hands of
the authorities to the complete exclusion of the congrega
tions, so poor relief and the ecclesiastical regulations on
which it was based became merely a government concern.

1 The quotations here and in what follows are from Feucbtwanger.

58 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

What Bugenhagen achieved, thanks to the ecclesiastical
regulations for poor relief, for which he was directly or
indirectly responsible, gave " good hopes, at least at first, of
bringing the difficult social problem of those days nearer to
a solution." At any rate they were a " successful attempt
to bring some order into the whole system of relief, by means
of the authorities and on a scale not hitherto attempted by
the Church."1 It is true that he, like those who were
working on the same lines, e.g. Hedio, Rhegius, Hyperius,
Lasco and others, often merely transplanted into a new soil
the rules already in vogue in the Catholic Netherlands and
the prosperous South German towns. Hedio of Strasburg,
for instance, translated into German the entire work of
Vives, the opponent of Lutheranism, and exploited it
practically and also sought to enter into epistolary com
munication with Vives. The prohibition of mendicancy, the
establishment of an independent poor-box apart from the
rest of the Church funds, and many other points were
borrowed by Bugenhagen and others from the olden
Catholic regulations.

Such efforts were in many localities supplemented by the
kindliness of the population and, thanks to a spirit of
Christianity, were not without fruit.

As, however, everybody, Princes, nobles, townships and
peasants, were stretching out greedy hands towards the now
defenceless possessions of the olden Church, a certain
reaction came, and the State, in the interests of order, saw
fit to grant a somewhat larger share to the ecclesiastical
authorities in the administration of Church property and
relief funds. The Lutheran clergy and the guardians of the
poor were thus allowed a certain measure of free action,
provided always that what they did was done in the name
of the sovereign, i.e. the principal bishop. The new institu
tions created by such men as Bugenhagen soon lost their
public, communal or State character, and sank back to
the level of ecclesiastical enterprises. Institutions of this
stamp had, however, " been more numerous and better en-

1 Feuchtwanger, II., p. 197. He quotes from the compilation of
A. L. Richter, " Die evang. Kirchenordnungen des 16. Jahrh.," and
Sehling (above, p. 49, n. 3) Bugenhagen's " Ordnungen " subsequent to
those set up for Wittenberg in 1527. Cp. in K. A. Vogt, " Bugen
hagen," 1367, p. 101 ff., on £he latter's " Von den Christen-loven,"
etc., 1526, \

POOR RELIEF 59

dowed in the Middle Ages and were so later in the Catholic
districts."

Owing in part to a technical defect in the Protestant
regulations, dishonesty and carelessness were not excluded
from the management and distribution of the poor fund, the
administration falling, as a matter of course, into the hands
of the lowest class of officials. Catholics had good reason for
branding it as a " usury and parson's box."1 The reason
why, in Germany, Protestant efforts for poor relief never
issued in a satisfactory socio-political system capable of
relieving the poor and thus improving the condition of both
Church and State, lay, not merely in the economic difficulties
of the time, but, " what is more important, in the social and
moral working of the new religion and new piety which
Luther had established."2

Influence of Luther's Ethics. Robbery of Church Property
Proves a Curse

Not only had the Peasant Rising and the reprisals taken
by the rulers and the towns brought misery on the land and
hardened the hearts of the princes and magistrates, not only
had the means available for the relief of the poor been
diminished, first by the founding of new parishes in place of
the old ones, which had in many cases been supported by
the monasteries and foundations, secondly, by the demands
of Protestants for the restitution of many ecclesiastical
benefices given by their Catholic forefathers, thirdly, by
the drying up of the spring of gifts and donations, but
" the common fund, which had been swelled by the shekels
of the Church, had now to bear many new burdens and
only what remained — which often enough was not much
— was employed for charitable purposes." In the same
way, and to an even greater extent, must the Lutheran
ethics be taken into account. Luther's views on justification
by faith alone destroyed " that impulse of the Middle Ages
towards open-handed charity." This was " an ethical
defect of the Lutheran doctrine " ; it was only owing to his
" utter ignorance of the world " that Luther persisted in
believing that faith would, of itself and without any " law,"

1 Cp. Janssen, xv., p. 456 f.

2 Feuchtwanger, ib., II., p. 206.

60 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

beget good works and charity.1 " It was a cause of wonder
and anxiety to him throughout his life that his assumption,
that faith would be the best ' taskmaster and the strongest
incentive to good works and kindliness,' never seemed to be
realised. . . . The most notable result of Luther's doctrine
of grace and denial of all human merit was, at least among
the masses, an increase of libertinism and of the spirit of
irresponsibility."2

The dire effects of the new principles were also evident
in the large and wealthy towns, the exemplary poor-law
regulations of which we have considered above. After the
innovations had made their way among them we hear little
more of provisions being made against mendicancy, for the
promotion of work and for the relief of poverty. Hence,
as regards these corporations . . . the change of religion
meant, according to Feuchtwanger, " a decline in the quality
of their social philanthropy." (Cp. above, vol. iv., p. 477 ff.)

From some districts, however, we have better reports of
the results achieved by the relief funds. In times of worst
distress good Christians were always ready to help. Much
depended on the spirit of those concerned in the work. In
general, however, the complaints of the preachers of the
new faith, including Melanchthon, wax louder and louder.3
They tell us that the patrimony of the poor was being
carried off by the rapacity of the great or disappearing under
the hands of avaricious and careless administrators, whilst
new voluntary contributions were no longer forthcoming.
We find no lack of those, who, like Luther's friend Paul Eber,
are given to noting the visible, palpable consequences of
the wrong done to the monasteries, brotherhoods and
churches.4

1 Cp. ib., p. 214. 2 Ib., p. 212.

3 In his instruction against the Anabaptist doctrines (Wittenberg,
1528, D 3b) Melanchthon says : " Never have the people shown
themselves more unfriendly and malicious towards the parsons and
ministers of the Church than now. Some who wish to be thought very
Evangelical seize upon the property given to the parsons, pulpits,
schools and churches, and without which we should end by becoming
heathen. The common people and the mob refuse to pay the parson
his dues," etc.

4 See Janssen, ib., xv., p. 480, n. 1, where the touching complaint
of Eber's is quoted, viz. that the ministers of the Church were stripped
and left to starve. He prophesies that future times will show how
" little blessing spoliation brought those who warmed and fed them
selves on Church property." It was everywhere worst in the villages
and small towns.

POOR RELIEF 61

A long list of statements from respected Protestant contem
poraries is given by Janssen, who concludes : " The whole
system of poor relief was grievously affected by the seizure and
squandering of Church goods and of innumerable charitable
bequests intended not only for parochial and Church use but also
for the hospitals, schools and poor-houses."1 The testimonies in
question, the frankness of which can only be explained by the
honourable desire to make an end of the crying evil, come, for
instance, from Thomas Rorarius, Andreas Musculus, Johann
Winistede, Erasmus Sarcerius, Ambrose Pape and the General
Superintendent, Cunemann Flinsbach.2 They tend to show that
the new doctrine of faith alone had dried up the well-spring of
self-sacrifice, as indeed Andreas Hyperius, the Marburg theo
logian, Christopher Fischer, the General Superintendent, Daniel
Greser, the Superintendent, Sixtus Vischer and others state in
so many words.

The incredible squandering of Church property is proved by
official papers, was pilloried by the professors of the University
of Rostock, also is clear from the minutes of the Visitations of
Wesenberg in 1568 and of the Palatinate iu-^556 which bewail
" the sin against the property set aside for God and His Church."3
And again, " The present owners have dealt with the Church
property a thousand times worse than the Papists," they make
no conscience of " selling it, mortgaging it and giving it away."
Princes belonging to the new faith also raised their voice in
protest, for instance, Duke Barnim XI in 1540, Elector Joachim II
of Brandenburg in 1540 and Elector Johann George, 1573. But
the sovereigns were unable to restrain their rapacious nobles.
" The great Lords," the preacher Erasmus Sarcerius wrote of the
Mansfeld district in 1555, " seek to appropriate to themselves
the feudal rights and dues of the clergy and allow their officials
and justices to take forcible action. . . . The revenues of the
Church are spent in making roads and bridges and giving
banquets, and are lent from hand to hand without hypothecary
security."4 The Calvinist, Anton Prsetorius, and many others
not to mention Catholic contemporaries, speak in similar terms.

Of the falling off in the Church funds and poor-boxes in the
16th century in Hesse, in the Saxon Electorate, in Frankfurt-on-
the-Main, in Hamburg and elsewhere abundant proof is met with
in the official records, and this is the case even with regard to
Wurtemberg in the enactments of the Dukes from 1552 to 1562,
though that country constituted in some respects an exception ;5
at a later date Duke Johann Frederick hazarded the opinion that
the regulations regarding the fund " had fallen into oblivion."

The growth of the proletariate, to remedy the impoverishment
of which no means had as yet been discovered, was in no small
measure promoted by Luther's facilitation of marriage.

1 Ib., xv., p. 477. 2 Ib., p. 469 ff.

3 Ib,, p. 481 ft'. 4 For proofs see Janssen, ib.

5 G. Kawerau, " Lehrb. der KG.," 3, ed. W. Moller, 3rd ed., 1907,
p. 434, with a reference to the works of Bossert.

62 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Luther himself had written, that " a boy ought to have recourse
to matrimony as soon as he is twenty and a maid when she is
from fifteen to eighteen years of age, and leave it to God to
provide for their maintenance and that of their children."1
Other adherents of the new faith went even further, Eberlin of
Giinsburg simply declared : "As soon as a girl is fifteen, a boy
eighteen, they should be given to each other in marriage." There
were others like the author of a " Predigt iiber Hunger- und
Sterbejahre, von einem Diener am Wort " (1571), who raised
strong objections against such a course. Dealing with the causes
of the evident increase of " deterioration and ruin " in " lands,
towns and villages," he says, that " a by no means slight cause
is the countless number of lightly contracted marriages, when
people come together and beget children without knowing where
they will get food for them, and so come down themselves in body
and soul, and bring up their children to begging from their
earliest years." " And I cannot here approve of this sort of thing
that Luther has written : A lad should marry when he is twenty,
etc. [see above]. No, people should not think of marrying and
the magistrates should not allow them to do so before they are
sure of being able at least to provide their families with the
necessaries of life, for else, as experience shows, a miserable,
degenerate race is produced."2

What this old writer says is borne out by modern sociologists.
One of them, dealing with the 16th and 17th centuries, says :
" These demands [of Luther and Eberlin] are obviously not
practicable from the economic point of view, but from the ethical
standpoint also they seem to us extremely doubtful. To rush
into marriage without prospect of sufficient maintenance is not
trusting God but tempting Him. Such marriages are extremely
immoral actions and they deserve legal punishment on account
of their danger to the community." " Greater evil to the world
can scarcely be caused in any way than by such marriages. Even
in the most favourable cases such early marriages must have a
deteriorating influence on the physical and intellectual culture of
posterity."3

Owing to the neglect of any proper care for the poor the plague
of vagabondage continued on the increase. Luther's zealous
contemporary, Cyriacus Spangenberg, sought to counteract it by
reprinting the Master's edition of the " Liber vagatorum." He says :
" False begging and trickery has so gained the upper hand that
scarcely anybody is safe from imposture." The Superintendent,
Nicholas Selnecker, again republished the writing with Luther's
preface in 1580, together with some lamentations of his own. He

1 Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 303 f. ; Erl. ed., 162, p. 541 (in 1522).

2 Cp. Janssen, ib., xv., p. 501.

3 O. Jolles, " Die Ansichten der deutschen nationaltfkonomischen
Schriftsteller des 1C. und 17. Jahrh. iiber Bevolkerungswesen"
("Jahrb. f. Nationalftkonomie u. Statistik," N.F. 13, 1886, p. 196).
Janssen, ib.

POOR RELIEF 63

complains that " there are too many tramps and itinerant
scholars who give themselves up to nothing but knavery," etc.1

Adolf Harnack is only re-echoing the complaints of 16th
century Protestants when he writes : " We may say briefly
that, alas, nothing of importance was achieved, nay, we
must go further : the Catholics are quite right when they
assert that they, not we, lived to see a revival of charitable
work in the 16th century, and, that, where Lutheranism
was on the ascendant, social care of the poor was soon
reduced to a worse plight than ever before."2 The revival
in Catholic countries to which Harnack refers showed itself
particularly in the 17th century in the activity of the new
Orders, whereas at this time the retrograde movement was
still in progress in the opposite camp. " For a long time the
Protestant relief system produced only insignificant results."
It was not till the rise of Pietism and Rationalism, i.e. until
the inauguration of the admirable Home Missions, that
things began to improve. But Pietism and Rationalism are
both far removed from the original Lutheran orthodoxy."3

Some Recent Excuses

It has been remarked in excuse of Luther and his want of
success, that, " with merit and the hope of any reward,
there also vanished the stimulus to strive after the attain
ment of salvation by means of works," and that this being so,
it was " not surprising " that charity — the selfless fruit of
faith — was wanting in many ; " for new, albeit higher moral
motives, cannot at once come into play with the same
facility as the older ones which they displace ; there comes
a time when the old motives have gone and when the new
ones are operative only in the case of a few ; the leaven at
first only works gradually." The history of the spread of
" the higher motives of morality " not only at the outset
of Christianity but at all times, shows, however, as a rule
these to be most active under the Inspiration of the Divine

1 Janssen, ib., xv., p. 505. Feuchtwanger must have been familiar
with all this though he never quotes Janssen. He says (p. 214) : " Only
one who was unfavourable to the reformation would judge Protestant
ism by the fruits of its first two centuries."

2 " Reden und Aufsatze," 2, 1904, p. 52, in the lecture " Die evan-
gelisch-soziale Aufgabe im Lichte der Gesch. der Kirche."

3 F. Schaub, " Die kath. Caritas und ihre Gegner," 1909, p. 45.

64 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Spirit at the time when first accepted. Nor does the com
parison with the leaven in the passage quoted apply to a
state of decline and decay, where, for a change to be effected,
outside and entirely different elements were needed. We
are told that the new motives could not at once take effect,
but, where the delay extends over quite a century and a half,
the blame surely cannot be laid on the shortness of the time
of probation.

Again, when we hear great stress laid on the fact that
Luther at least paved the way for State relief of the poor
and, thus, far outstrode the mediaeval Church, one is
justified in asking, whether in reality State relief of the
poor, with compulsory taxation, non-intervention of Chris
tian charity, or individual effort, or without any morally
elevating influence, is something altogether ideal ; whether,
on the other hand, voluntary charity, as practised par
ticularly by associations, Orders or ecclesiastics, does not
deserve a much higher place and take precedence of, or at
least stand side by side with, the forced " charity " of the
State. Even to-day Protestantism is seeking to reserve a
place for voluntary charitable effort. Considerations as to
the value of mere State charity would, however, carry us too
far. We must refer this matter to experts.1

That, before Luther's day, the authorities took a reason
able and even larger share in the relief of the poor than he
himself demanded, is evident from what has been said
above (p. 43 ff.).

As a matter of fact, judging by what has gone before, the
assertion that the system of State relief of the poor was
originated by Luther or by Protestantism calls for con
siderable " revision." " The reformation," so the socio
logical authority we have so frequently quoted says,
" created neither the communal nor the governmental

1 See the excellent work by Sehaub, p. 14 ff., quoted in the previous
Note, where it is stated, that, under present conditions, private charity
certainly does not suffice and that, therefore, State relief is necessary ;
yet the latter is always merely subsidiary, because what is assumed by
real Christian charity, i.e. self-sacrifice, and individual care, can only
be realised in private relief of the poor ; the State, on the other hand,
has its efficient compulsory taxation (" caritas coacta ") and its own
bureaucratic means of carrying out its work ; in any case the State
must not monopolise any branch of poor relief, and public and private
charity ought to be in close touch. These remarks may serve to assist
in the right appreciation of the historical movement described above.

THE SECULAR ESTATE 65

system of poor relief."1 This he finds borne out by the
different schemes for the relief of the poor contained in the
old ecclesiastical constitutions. It is true, he says, that,
" according to the idea in vogue, the origin of our present
Poor Law " can be traced back directly " to the Reformation.
Nevertheless, the changes that took place in the social care
of the poor subsequent to Luther's day, though certainly
44 far-reaching enough," were " exclusively negative " ;2
owing to his exertions the Church property and that set
aside for the relief of the poor was secularised, and the
previous free-handed method of distribution ceased ; all
further growth of legislation on the subject in the prosperous
and independent townships was effectually hindered ; out
of the mass of property that passed into alien hands only
a few scraps could be spared by the secular rulers and
handed over to the ministers for the benefit of the poor.

This was no State-regulation of poor relief as we now
understand it. Still, the way was paved for it in so far as
the props of the olden ecclesiastical system of relief had
been felled and had eventually to be replaced by something
new. In this sense it may be said that Luther's work
tc paved the way " for the new conditions.3

5. Luther's Attitude towards Worldly Callings

An attempt has been made to prove the truth of the
dictum so often met with on the lips of Protestants, viz.
that " Luther was the creator of those views of the world
and life on which both the State and our modern civilisation
rest," by arguing, that, at least, he made an end of contempt
for worldly callings and exalted the humbler as well as the
higher spheres of life at the expense of the ecclesiastical and
monastic. What Luther himself frequently states concern
ing his discovery of the dignity of the secular callings has
elsewhere been placed in its true light (and the unhistoric
accounts of his admirers are all in last resort based on his).
This was done in the most suitable place, viz. when dealing
with " Luther and Lying," and with his spiteful caricature
of the mediaeval Church.4 Still, for the sake of completeness,
the claims Luther makes in this respect, and some new

1 Feuchtwanger, II., p. 194. 2 /&., pp. 212, 214.

3 Cp. ib., p. 214. * Vol. iv., p. 127 ff.

VI.— F

66 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

proofs in refutation of them, must be briefly called to mind
in the present chapter. It is not unusual for his admirers to
speak with a species of awe of Luther's achievements in this
respect :

" One of the most Momentous Achievements of the
Reformation "

The claims Luther makes in respect of his labours on
behalf of the worldly callings are even greater than his
admirers would lead one to suppose. His actual words
reveal their hyperbolical character, or rather untruth, by
their very extravagance.

Luther we have heard say : " Such honour and glory have
I by the grace of God, that, since the time of the Apostles no
doctor . . . has confirmed and instructed the consciences
of the secular estates so well and lucidly as I."1 — It was
quite different with the " monks and priestlings " ! They
" damned both the laity and their calling." These " revo
lutionary blasphemers " condemned " all the states of life
that God instituted and ordained " ; on the other hand, they
extol their self -chosen and accursed state as though outside
of it no one could be saved.2

The phantom of a Popish, monkish holiness-by-works
never left him. In his Commentary on Genesis, though he
holds that he has already taught the Papists more than they
deserve on the right appreciation of the lower callings and
labours, yet he once more informs them of his discovery,
" that the work of the household and of the burgher," such
as hospitality, the training of children, the supervision of
servants, " despised though they be as common and worth
less," are also well-pleasing to God. " Such things must be
judged according to the Word [of God], not according to
reason ! . . . Let us therefore thank God that we, en
lightened by the Word, now perceive what are really good
works, viz. obedience to those in authority, respect for
parents, supervision of the servants and assistance of our
brethren." " These are callings instituted by God." "When
the mother of a family provides diligently for her family,
looks after the children, feeds them, washes them and rocks

1 Erl. ed., 31, p. 236. " Verantwortung der auffgelegten Auffrur,"
1533. Above, vol. v., p. 59.
* Ib., p. 239 f .

WORLDLY CALLINGS 67

them in the cradle," this calling, followed for God's sake, is
" a happy and a holy one."1

Luther is never tired of claiming as his peculiar teaching
that even the most humble calling — that of the maid or day-
labourer — may prove a high and exalted road to heaven and
that every kind of work, however insignificant, performed
in that position of life to which a man is called is of great
value in God's sight when done in faith. He is fond of
repeating, that a humble ploughman can lay up for himself
as great a treasure in heaven by tilling his field, as the
preacher or the schoolmaster, by their seemingly more
exalted labours.

There is no doubt, that, by means of this doctrine, which
undoubtedly is not without foundation, he consoled many
of the lower classes, and brought them to a sense of their
dignity as Christians. It is true that it was his polemics
against monasticism and the following of the counsels of
perfection which led him to make so much of the ordinary
states of life and to paint them in such glowing colours.
Nevertheless, we must admit that he does so with real
eloquence and by means of comparisons and figures taken
from daily life which could not but lend attraction to the
truth and which differ widely from the dry, scholastic tone
of some of his Catholic predecessors in this field.

He does not, however, really add a single fresh element
to the olden teaching, or one that cannot be traced back to
earlier times.

Either Luther was not aware of this, or else he conceals it
from his hearers and readers. It would have been possible
to confront him with a whole string of writers, ancient and
mediaeval, and even from the years when he himself began
his work, whose writings teach the same truths, often, too,
in language which leaves nothing more to be wished for on
the score of impressiveness and feeling.2 So many proofs,
from reason as well as from revelation, had always been
forthcoming in support of these truths that it is hard for us
now to understand how the idea gained ground that Chris-

1 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 4, pp. 202-204.

2 Cp. N. Paulus, " Die Wertung der weltlichen Berufe im MA.,'*
("Hist. Jahrb.," 1911, pp. 725-755). "Similar testimony," Paulus
says, p. 740, " dating from the close of the Middle Ages is to be found
in abundance." He lays particular stress on the witness of monks and
friars.

68 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

tians had forgotten them. Those who, down to the present
day, repeat Luther's assertions make too little account of
this psychological riddle.

Here we shall merely add to what has already been
brought forward a few further proofs from Luther's own day.

Andreas Proles (fl503), Vicar General of the Saxon Augustinian
Congregation and founder of the reformed branch which Luther
himself joined on entering the monastery, reminds the working
classes in one of his sermons of the honour, the duty, and the worth
of work. " Since man is born to labour as the bird to fly, he must
work unceasingly and never be idle." He warmly exhorts the
secular authorities to prayer, but reminds them still more
emphatically of the requirements and the dignity of their calling :
" The life of the mighty does not consist in parade but in ruling
and discharging their duties towards their people." He praises
voluntary chastity and clerical celibacy, but also points out
powerfully that the married state " is for many reasons honour
able and praiseworthy in the sight of God and all Christians."1

Gottschalk Hollen, the preacher of Westphalia, was also an
Augustinian. In his sermons published at Hagenau in 1517 he
displays the highest esteem for the worldly callings. Those
classes who worked with their hands did not seem to him in the
least contemptible, on the contrary the Christian could give
glory to God even by the humblest work ; ordinary believers
frequently allowed their calling to absorb them in worldly things,
but these are not evil or blameworthy. In a special sermon on
work he represents such cares as a means of attaining to ever
lasting salvation. He insists everywhere on a man's performing
the duties of his calling and will not allow of their being neglected
for the sake of prayer or of out-of-the-way practices, such as
pilgrimages. 2

Just before Luther made his public appearance two German
works of piety described the dignity and the honour of the work
ing state and at the same time insisted on the obligation of
labour. They speak of the secular callings as a source of moral
and religious duty and the foundation of a happy life well pleasing
to God.

The " Wyhegertlin," printed at Mayence in 1509, says : " When
work is done diligently and skilfully both God and man take
pleasure in it, and it is a real good work when skilful artisans
contribute to God's glory by their handicraft, by beautiful

1 Sermon on Marriage in his " Sermones dominicales," Leipzig,
1530, Bl. J. 4a, LI. Q 2b. Paulus, ib., p. 741.

2 Of pilgrimages in particular, Luther is fond of saying, that the
monks enjoined them at the expense of the duties of a man's calling.
Cp., for instance, the passage cited above, p. 67, n. 1 (p. 203) : " Mater
familias . . . non faciat, quce in papatu solent, ut discurrat ad templa,"
etc. For the passages from Hollen see Paulus, ib., p. 740, and Fl. Land-
mann, " Das Predigtwesen in Westfalen in der letzten Zeit des MA.,"
1900, p. 179 f.

WORLDLY CALLINGS 69

buildings and images of every kind, and soften men's hearts so that
they take pleasure in the beautiful, and regard every art and
handicraft as a gift of God for the profit, comfort and edification
of man." — " For seeing that the Saints also worked and laboured,
so shall the Christian learn from their example that by honourable
labour he can glorify God, do good and, through God's mercy, save
his own soul."1

In an " Ermanung " of 1513, which also appeared at Mayence,
we read : "To work is to serve God according to His command
and therefore all must work, the one with his hands, in the field,
the house or the workshop, others by art and learning, others
again as rulers of the people or other authorities, others by
fighting in defence of their country, others again as ghostly
ministers of Christ in the churches and monasteries. . . . Who
ever stands idle is a despiser of God's commands."2

These instances must suffice. Though many others could be
quoted, Protestants will, nevertheless, still be found to repeat
such statements as the following : " Any appreciation of secular
work as something really moral was impossible in the Catholic
Church." " The Catholic view of the Church belittled the secular
callings." " The ethical appreciation of one's calling is a signifi
cant achievement of the reformation on which rests the present
division of society." Luther it was who " discovered the true
meaning of callings . . . which has since become the property
of the civilised world." " The modern ethical conception of one's
calling, which is common to all Protestant nations and which all
others lack, was a creation of the reformation," etc.

Others better acquainted with the Middle Ages have argued,
that, though the olden theologians expressed themselves correctly
on the importance of secular callings, yet theirs was not the view
of the people. — But the above passages, like those previously
quoted elsewhere, do not hail from theologians quite ignorant of
the world, but from sermons and popular writings. What they
reflect is simply the popular ideas and practice.

That errors were made is, of course, quite true. That, at a
time when the Church stood over all, the excessive and ill-
advised zeal of certain of the clergy and religious did occasionally
lead them to belittle unduly the secular callings may readily be
admitted ; what they did furnished some excuse for the Lutheran
reaction.

What above all moved Luther was, however, the fact that he
himself had become a layman.

To assert that even the very words " calling " or " vocation "
in their modern sense were first coined by him is not in agreement
with the facts of the case.

On the contrary, Luther found the German equivalents already
current, otherwise he would probably not have introduced them
into his translation of the Bible, as he was so anxious to adapt

1 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 2, p. 9 f.
Paulus, ib., p. 749.

2 Janssen, ib. Paulus, ib.y p. 748.

70 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

himself to the language in common use amongst the people so as
to be perfectly understood by them. x It is true that Ecclus xi. 22,
in the pre-Lutheran Bible, e.g. that of Augsburg dating from 1487,
was rendered : " Trust God and stay in thy place," whereas in
Luther's — and on this emphasis has been laid — we read : " Trust
in God and abide by thy calling." All that can be said is, how
ever, that Luther's translation here brings out the same meaning
rather better. That the word wras not coined by Luther, but was
common with the people, is clear from what Luther himself says
incidentally when speaking of 1 Cor. vii. 20, where the word
vocatio (K\i)<ris) is used of the call to faith. " And you must
know," he writes, " that the word ' calling ' does not here mean
the state to which a man is called, as when we say your calling is
the married state, your calling is the clerical state, etc., each one
having his calling from God. It is not of such a calling that the
Apostle here speaks," etc. The expression " as we say " shows
plainly that Luther is speaking of a quite familiar term which
there was no need for him to invent when translating Ecclus. xi.
22. Much less did he, either then or at any time, invent the
" conception of a calling."

Luther's Pessimism Regarding Various Callings.
The Peasants

When olden writers dealt with the relation between the
Gospel and the worldly callings as a rule they pointed out
with holy pride, that Christianity does not merely esteem
every calling very highly but embraces them all with holy
charity and cherishes and fosters the various states as sons
of a common father. Nothing was so attractive in the great
exponents of the Gospel teaching and renovators of the
Christian people — for instance in St. Francis of Assisi — as
their sympathy, respect and tenderness for every class
without exception. The Church's great men knew how to
discover the good in every class, to further it with the means
at their disposal and indulgently to set it on its guard against
its dangers. They wished to place everything lovingly at the
service of the Creator.

Had Luther in reality brought back to humanity the
Gospel true and undented, as he was so fond of saying, then
he should surely have striven, in the spirit of charity and
good will, to make known its supernatural social forces to
all classes of men, and to become, as the Apostle says, " All
things to all men."

1 Cp. Paulus, ib., p. 750 ff., and H. Pesch, " Lehrb. der National-
dkonomie," 2, 1909, p. 726.

WORLDLY CALLINGS 71

Now, although Luther uses powerful words to describe
the dignity of the different worldly callings, on the other
hand, he tends at times to depreciate whole classes, this
being especially the case when he allows his disappointment
to get the better of him. Nor is the contempt openly
expressed here counterbalanced by any sufficient recognition
of the good, such as might have mollified his hearers and
made them forget the ungracious abuse he thundered from
his pulpit.

He speaks bitterly of the common people, the proletariate of
to-day, to which, according to him, belonged all the lower classes
in the towns. Although himself of low extraction he displays
very little sympathy for the people. " We must not pipe too
much to the mob, for they are fond of raging. . . . They have no
idea of self-restraint or how to exercise it, and each one's skin
conceals five tyrants."1 " A donkey must taste the stick and the
mob must be ruled by force ; of this God was well aware, hence in
the hands of the authorities He placed, not a fox's brush, but a
sword."2

He only too frequently accuses the artisan and merchant class,
as a whole, of cheating, avarice and laziness. At Wittenberg they
may possibly have been exceptionally bad, yet he does not speak
sufficiently of their less blameworthy side.

For the soldiers, it is true, he has friendly words of apprecia
tion of their calling ; it was for them that he wrote in 1526 a
special work, where he replied in the affirmative to the question
contained in the title : " Can even men-at-arms be in a state of
grace ? " Yet even here he does not shrink from bringing forward
charges against their calling : "A great part of the men-at-arms
are the devil's own and some of them are actually crammed with
devils. . . . They imagine themselves fire-eaters because they
swear shamefully, perpetrate atrocities, and curse and defy the
God of Heaven."3

Of the nobles he says in 1523, wishing to promote more
frequent marriages between them and those of lower birth :4
" Must all princes and nobles who are born princes and nobles
remain for ever such ? What harm is there if a prince takes a
burgher's daughter to wife and contents himself with a burgher's
modest dowry ? Or, why should not a noble maid give her hand
to a burgher ? In the long run it will not do for the nobles always
to intermarry with nobles. Although we are not all equal in the
sight of the world yet before God we all are equal, all of us
children of Adam, creatures of God, and one man as good as

1 Weim. ed., 19, p. 635 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 259. " Ob Kriegsleutte
auch ynn seligen Stande seyn kunden ? " 1526.

2 Ib., 18, p. 394= 242, p. 324. " Sendebrieff von dem harten Buchlin
widder die Bauren," 1525.

3 Ib., 19, p. 659=22, p. 287.

« Ib., 10, 2, p. 157=28, p. 200.

72 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

another." These words certainly do not express any lively con
viction of the importance of the existing distinctions of rank for
society.

It is perfectly true, that, occasionally, Luther has words of
praise and recognition for the good qualities of the " fine, pious
nobles," if only on account of those who were inclined to accept
his teaching. But far more often he trounces them unmerci
fully because they either failed to respond or were set on thwarting
him. The language in which he writes of them sometimes
becomes unspeakably coarse. " They are called nobles and « von
so-and-so.' But merd also comes ' von ' the nobles and might
just as well boast of coming from their noble belly, though it
stinks and is of no earthly use. Hence this too has a claim to
nobility." Then follows his favourite saying : " We Germans are
Germans and Germans we shall remain, i.e. swine and senseless
brutes."1

The rulers and the great ones of the Empire were the first to
win his favour. The writing " An den Adel," the first of his
so-called " reformation writings," he addresses to the nobles in
the hope of thus attaining his aims by storm. When, however, he
was disappointed, and they refused to meet him half-way, he
abused the princes and all the secular authorities in Germany and
wrote : " God Almighty has made our princes mad " ; " such men
were formerly rated as knaves, now we are obliged to call them
obedient, Christian princes." To him they were " fools," simply
because they were against him and thus belonged to the multitude
who " blasphemed " the Divine Majesty.2

After the defeat of the peasants in 1525 he supported those
princes favourable to his teaching at the expense of the
peasants, so that the latter were loud in their complaints of
him. In this connection, looking back at the overthrow of
the Peasant Revolt, he wrote to those in power : " Who
opposed the peasants more vigorously by word and writing
than I ? . . . and, if it comes to boasting, I do not know
who else was the first to vanquish the peasants, or to do so

1 /&., p. 631=255. He speaks before this of nobles, who, after the
peasant risings, had gone too far in their revenge. — Luther inveighs in
the strongest language against the way in which the nobles oppressed
the poor " burghers, unhappy pastors and preachers," and says :
" Here the lion has caught a mouse and fancies he has overcome the
dragon. Germany is now full of such nobles and Junkers, who stink
out the beer-houses and draw their steel only on the poor, wretched,
defenceless people ; such are the nobles. Out on such abandoned
people ! We Germans are indeed swine and savage beasts, and have no
noble thoughts or courage in us, as the world too thinks ! " This in
the Commentary on the Four Psalms of Consolation, 1526. Weim. ed.,
19, p. 604 f. ; Erl. ed., 38, p. 439 f.

2 Weim. ed., 11, p. 246 f. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 62 f. " Von welltlicher
Uberkeytt," 1523, Preface. — Cp. what was said, above, vol. ii., p. 205 f.,
etc.

THE PEASANTS 73

most effectually. But now those who did the least claim
all the honour and glory of it."1

After the Peasant War he was so filled with hatred of the
peasant class and so conscious of their dislike for himself
personally, as to be hardly able to speak of them without
blame and reproach. " The peasants do not deserve," he
says, " the harvests and fruits that the earth brings forth
and provides."

Of all classes the peasants around Wittenberg incurred his
displeasure most severely. " They are all going to the
devil," he says when lamenting that, " out of so many
villages, only one man taught his household from the Word
of God " ; with the young country folk " something " could
be done, but the old peasants had been utterly corrupted
by the Pope ; this was also the complaint of the Evangelical
deacons who came in touch with them.2 — " I am very angry
with the peasants," he wrote in 1529, " who are anxious to
govern themselves and who do not appreciate their good
fortune in being able to sleep in peace owing to the help and
protection of the rulers. You helpless, boorish yokels and
donkeys," he says to them, " will you never learn to under
stand ? May the lightning blast you ! — You have the best
of it. . . . You have the Mark and yet are so ungrateful
as to refuse to pray for the rulers or to give them any
thing."3

As a matter of fact, however, the great ones did not wait
for the peasants to " give " anything.

They oppressed the country people and plundered them.
Melanchthon wrote, particularly after 1525, of the boundless
despotism of the authorities over the people on the land.
Since the overthrow of the social revolution very sad changes
had taken place among the agriculturists. The violent
" laying of the yokels " became a general evil, and, in place
of the small holdings of the peasant class — the most virile
and largest portion of the nation — arose the large estates of
the nobles. Not merely where the horrors of war had raged,
but even elsewhere, e.g. in the north-east of Germany, the
peasant found himself deprived of his rights and left defence-

1 Weim. ed., 19, p. 278 f. ; Erl. ed., 65, p. 43. " Widder den Rad-
schlag der Meintzischen Pfafferey," 1526 (not published by him on
account of his sovereign's prohibition).

2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 175.

3 Weim. ed., 28, p. 520 ; Erl. ed., 36, p. 175.

74 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

less in the hands of the Junkers and knights.1 " The
reformation-age made his rights to his property and his
standing more parlous than before."2

What Luther says of serfdom, the oppression and abuse
of which had led to the Peasant Rising, is worthy of record :
" Serfdom," he says, " is not contrary to Christianity, and
whoever says it is tells a lie ! "3 — " Christ does not wish to
abolish serfdom. What cares He how the lords or princes
rule [in secular matters] ? "*

He makes a strict application of this in his sermons on
Genesis, where he even represents serfdom as a desirable
state. Luther delivered these sermons in 1524 and they
were printed from notes in 1527. In his preface he declares,
that he was " quite willing " they should be published
because they express his " sense and mind." He relates in
one passage how Abimelech had bestowed " sheep and oxen,
men-servants and maid-servants " on Abraham (xx. 14),
and then goes on to say of the people made over : " They
too were all personal property like other cattle, so that their
owners might sell them as they liked, and it would verily be
almost best that this stage of things should be revived, for
nobody can control or tame the populace in any other way."
Abraham did not set free the men-servants and maid
servants given him, and yet he was accounted amongst the
" pious and holy " and was " a just ruler." He proceeds :
" They [the patriarchs] might easily have abolished it so
far as they were concerned, but that would not have been
a good thing, for the serfs would have become too proud had
they been given so many rights, and would have thought
themselves equal to the patriarchs or to their children.
Each one must be kept in his place, as God has ordained,
sons and daughters, servants, maids, husbands, wives, etc.
... If compulsion and the law of the strong arm still ruled
(in the case of servants and retainers) as in the past, so that
if a man dared to grumble he got a box on the ear — things
would fare better ; otherwise it is all of no use. If they take
wives, these are impertinent people, wild and dissolute,
whom no one can use or have anything to do with."5

1 Cp. Janssen, " Hist, of the German People," xv., p. 137 ff.

2 K. J. Fuchs, " Die Epochen der deutschen Agrargesch." (" Allg.
Ztng.," 1898, Suppl. 70).

3 Weim. ed., 16, p. 244 ; Erl. ed., 35, p. 233 (1524-26).
* 76., 33, p. 659=48, p. 385 (1530-32).

5 lb., 24 p. 367 f.=33, p. 389 f.

DISAPPOINTED HOPES 75

The Psychological Background. Luther1 s Estrangement from
Whole Classes of Society

Both in Luther's treatment of the peasants of his day
and in his whole attitude to different classes of society, we
find the traces of a profound and general depression which
had seized upon him and which seems to accord ill with the
sense of triumph one would have expected in him at the
continued progress of his work, and at the apostasy from
the Roman Church. Such expressions of dissatisfaction
become more frequent as years go by and serve to some
extent to explain and excuse his pessimism concerning the
different classes.

This feeling had its origin, apart from other causes, in the
fact that Luther little by little lost touch with whole classes
of the people, while to many of the new conditions he
remained a stranger. He, who had held in his hands the
destiny of so many, was, in fact, becoming to a great extent
isolated, particularly since the actual direction of the new
Church had been taken out of his hands and vested in the
princes or municipal authorities.

Not only did the rift which separated him from the
peasants subsequent to 1525 become ever more pronounced,
but he found hostility and dislike growing between himself
and other classes of society.

Under the influence of the adverse wind blowing from
Wittenberg many of the Humanists had given up their at
one time enthusiastic friendship and turned against him.
Catholic scholars who had once been disposed to favour the
reform but had been disappointed in their hopes withdrew
from him in increasing numbers. In other districts which
had been recently Protestantised the country clergy re
mained faithful to the olden Church, as we see, for instance,
from a letter of Luther's dated Sep. 19, 1539, where he speaks
of " over five hundred parsons, poisonous Papists," who
had " been left unexamined and now are raising their
horns in defiance " — but who, he hopes, will soon be forcibly
sent about their business.1 In his own camp, again, there
were Anabaptists and other sectarians ; there were also
theologians who refused to fall into line and either failed to

1 To the Elector Johanri Frederick, Erl. ed., 55, p. 239 ; " Brief -
wechsel," 12, p. 246.

76 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

preach on faith and works as harshly as he wished, or,
running to the opposite extreme like the Antinomians,
went much further than he himself. In the Saxon Electorate
Luther felt grievously the decease of those Councillors, like
Pfeffinger and Feilitzsch, who had been well disposed
towards him, whose places were now taken by " greedy
Junkers and skinflints, who looked upon the ecclesiastical
revolution as a good opportunity for increasing their family
estates and for running riot at others' expense."1 Among
the princes who had apostatised from the Church he also
detected to his bitter vexation an ever-growing tendency to
separate themselves from Wittenberg, partly owing to the
influence of Zwinglianism, partly in consequence of their
independent Church regulations. Such was, for instance, the
action of Berlin, where the Protestant Elector, Joachim II
of Brandenburg, declared in an address to his clergy : "As
little as I mean to be bound to the Roman Church, so little
do I mean to be bound to the Church of Wittenberg. I do
not say : ' credo sanctam Romanam ' or ' Wittenbergensetn,'
but ' catholicam ecclesiamS and my Church here at Berlin or
at Collen is just as much a true Christian Church as that of
the Wittenbergers."2

In the sermon Luther preached at Wittenberg on June 18,
1531, he pours forth the vials of his wrath on the nobles and
peasants of the new faith. He was then doing duty for
Bugenhagen, the absent pastor, and devoting himself to
preaching, though he describes himself in a letter as " old,
sickly and tired of life," and elsewhere, alluding to his many
employments, says : " I am not only Luther, but Pomer-
anus, Vicar-General, Moses, Jethro and I know not who else
besides."3

In this sermon the Gospel of Dives and Lazarus recalls to his
mind the fact that, in the Saxon Electorate, he and his preachers
were being treated very much as Lazarus, whom the rich man
left lying at his gate and who had to get his fill of the crumbs that
fell from the rich man's table. " When we complain to the great,
we get only kicks," he exclaims indignantly ; " our foes would
gladly put a stop to the Evangel with the sword, whilst our own
people would no less gladly cut off our head, like John the
Baptist,^ only that the sword they use is want, misery and
hunger." If we preach against their wickedness they say we

1 Hausrath, " Luthers Leben," 2, 1904, p. 388
8 Ib. * Kdstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 246.

DISAPPOINTED HOPES 77

are trying to defy and contradict them ! Let the devil defy
them. They declare we want to set ourselves up against them,
and to rule, and to bring them under our feet. For preaching
against the rebellious peasants we are thanked by being called
the Pope of Germany, as though we were playing the master.
Not indeed that they mean this in earnest, but they are anxious
to bring us to preach as they wish, otherwise they punish us with
starvation. " The poor preachers they tread under foot, take the
bread out of their mouths and abuse them most shamefully."
" This ingratitude is worse than any tyranny ! " He tells them
finally that their fate will be that of Dives, viz. hell-fire ; then
they will long in vain even for a drop of water. x

The world hates me, we read in another sermon, for it ever
" hates the good." " They refuse to have anything to do with
the ministers [of religion], there is hardly a place where they
suffer the preacher, much less support him. My opponents
declare that : Did I preach the truth, the people would become
pious." This is the Anabaptists' way of concealing their own
errors. " But do not wonder," so he consoles his hearers, for
" the purer the Word, the worse almost all become ; only a few
become good. This is a sure sign that the doctrine is true ; . . .
for Satan, who is stung by the truth, tries to wreck it by cor
ruption of morals. ... He it is who sets himself up in defiance
of it." " But there are some few who are faithful and in earnest."
Nevertheless, the world must heap ingratitude and bitterness
upon us otherwise it would not be the world. " By my preaching
I have helped several, but what can I do ? If you wait till the
world honours you, then you wait a long time and only prepare
a cross for yourself."2

In a sermon on Jan. 22 of the same year he had quoted a
saying current at that time about Rome, applying it to Witten
berg : " The nearer to Rome, the worse the Christians." " For
wherever the Evangel is, there it is despised." " The Lord Him
self says in to-day's Gospel : ' I have not found such faith as this
in Israel.' The chosen people do not believe, though some few
do. ... In other regions Christ may find adherents with a
stronger faith than any in our principalities." " At Court and
elsewhere things go ill. . . . We tread the pearls under foot."
" So great is their shamelessness, ingratitude and hate that it is
a sign that God is getting ready to show us something ; the
persecution of the Evangel in our principality is worse than ever.
I am already sick of preaching (' iam tazdet me prcedicatio ')."
" Those who refuse the offered kingdom may go to the devil, etc."3
The faults of the government and the increase in the prices of
necessaries drew from him bitter words in a sermon of April 23
of the same year : " There is no government, the biggest criminals
(' pessimi nebulones ') rule; this we have deserved by our sins."
" When things become cheaper then war and pestilence will come
upon us."4

1 Weim. ed., 34, 1, p. 529 f.

2 76., p. 518 ff., Sermon of June 11, 1531.

3 /&., p. 109. 4 /&., p. 334 f.

78 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Thus the ill will gathering within him was poured forth, as
occasion offered, on the various classes indiscriminately.

It seemed to him as though little by little the whole world
was becoming a hostel of which the devil was the landlord
and where wickedness and lust reigned supreme — above all
because it was so slow to receive his preaching.1 Even the
supreme Court of Justice of the Empire became in 1541 a
44 devil's whore,"2 because the judges and imperial author
ities were against him and stood for the old order of things.
It was also at this time that his pent-up anger broke out
against the Jews.3 Here it will be sufficient to give a few
new quotations.

He put himself in the place of a ruler in whose lands the Jews
blasphemed Christianity and exclaimed : "I would summon all
the Jews and ask them," whether they could prove their insulting
assertions. " If they could, I would give them a thousand florins ;
if not I would have their tongues torn out by the root. In short,
we ought not to suffer Jews to live amongst us, nor eat or drink
with them."4 — " They are a shameful people," he says on another
occasion, " they swallow up everything with their usury ; where
they give a gentleman a thousand florins, they suck twenty
thousand out of his poor underlings."5 The demands with which
his anger against the Jews inspires him found only too strong an
echo amongst his followers. " It would be well," wrote the
Lutheran preacher Jodokus Ehrhardt in 1558, after complaining
of the usury of the Jews, "if in all places they were proceeded
with as Father Luther advised and enjoined when, amongst other
things, he wrote : * Let their synagogues and schools be set on
fire . . . and let who can throw brimstone. . . . Refuse them
safe conduct and all freedom to travel. Let all their ready money
and treasures of gold and silver, etc., be taken from them,' etc.
Such faithful counsels and regulations were given by our divinely
enlightened Luther."6

After all that has been said it would be very rash to apply
to Luther's attitude towards the different callings and pro
fessions the words which St. Paul wrote of himself when

1 Weim. ed., 28, p. 329 ; Erl. ed., 50, p. 350. " We are ministers in
a hostel where the devil is the landlord and the world the landlady,
and the barmaids all kinds of wicked lusts, and all these, landlord,
landlady and barmaids, are enemies and opponents of the Evangel."

2 Erl. ed., 32, p. 77. 3 Above, vol. v., p. 403 ff.
4 Erl. ed., 62, p. 375 f., " Tischreden." 5 /&., p. 366.

6 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People," xv., p. 49 ff. Lucas
Osiander the Elder sent Luther's Schem Hamphoras to Duke Frederick
of Wurtemberg in 1598 in support of his petition for the expulsion
of all Jews. For the same purpose, in 1612, the theological faculty
of Giessen had some of Luther's strongest sayings against the Jews
reprinted. /&., p. 51, n.

TRADESMEN AND MERCHANTS 79

considering humanity as a whole, i.e. of the power of God
by which he had striven with endless patience and charity
to bring home the Gospel to both Jew and Greek : "To
the Greeks and to the barbarians, to the wise and to the
foolish I am a debtor." " I have become all things to all
men in order to save all."

The Merchant Class

The opening up of many previously unknown countries,
the discovery of new trade routes, and the new industries
called forth by new inventions brought about a sudden and
quite unforeseen revival in trade and prosperity at the time
of the religious schism. An alteration in the earlier ideas on
political economy was bound to supervene. The upsetting
of the mediaeval notions which now could no longer hold and
the uncertainty as to what to build on in future led to a
deal of confusion in that period of transition.

What was chiefly needed in the case of one anxious to
judge of things from their ethical and social side was experi
ence and knowledge of the world joined with prudence and
the spirit of charity. Annoyance was out of place ; what was
called for was a capacity to weigh matters dispassionately.

Among the Humanists there were some, who, because the
new era of commerce turned men's minds from learning,
condemned it absolutely. Thus Eobanus Hessus of Nurem
berg laments, that, there, people were bent on acquiring
riches rather than learning ; the world dreamt of nothing
but saffron and pepper ; he lived, as it were, among " em
purpled monkeys " and would rather make his home with
the peasants of his Hessian fatherland than in his present
surroundings.1 — What was Luther's attitude towards the
rising merchant class and its undertakings ?

In his case it was not merely the injury done to the schools
and to " Christian " posterity, and the ever growing
luxury that prejudiced him against commerce, but, above
all, the constant infringement of the principles of morality,
which, according to him, was a necessary result of the new
economic life and its traffic in wares and money. He
exaggerated the moral danger and failed entirely to see the
economic side of the case. We do not find in him, says

1 C. Krause, " Eoban Hessus, sein Leben und seine Werke," 2, 1879,
p. 107. Janssen, ib., xiii., p. 101.

80 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Kostlin-Kawerau, " a sufficient insight into the existing
conditions and problems,"1 nevertheless he did not shrink
from the harshest and most uncharitable censure.

It was his deliberate intention, so he says, " to give scandal
to many more people on this point by setting up the true
doctrine of Christ." This we find in a letter he wrote after
the Leipzig Disputation when putting the finishing touch to
his first works on usury (1519). 2 Because no attention was
paid to his " Evangelical " ideas on usury he came to the
conclusion that, " now, in these days, clergy and seculars,
prelates and subjects are alike bent on thwarting Christ's
life, doctrine and Gospel."3 Hence he must once again
vindicate the Gospel. He, however, distorts the Christian
idea by making into strict commands what Christ had
proposed as counsels of perfection. There is reason to
believe that the mistake he here makes under the plea of
zeal for the principles of the Gospel is bound up not merely
with his antipathy to the idea of Evangelical Counsels,4 but
also with his older, pseudo-mystic tendency and with his
conception of the true Christian. We cannot help thinking
of his fanciful plan of assembling apart the real Christians
when we hear him in these very admonitions bewailing that
" there are so few Christians " ; if anyone refused to lend
gratis it was " a sign of his deep unbelief," since we are
assured that by so doing " we become children of the Most
High and that our reward is great. Of such a consoling
promise he is not worthy who will not believe and act
accordingly."5

1 1, p. 279.

2 To Johann Lang, Dec. 18, 1519, " Briefwechsel," 2, p. 281 :
" facturus, ut multo plures offendat Christi pura doctrina."

3 Weim. ed., 6, p. 38 ; Erl. ed., 1G2, p. 82. Sermon on Usury, 1519.

4 Ib., p. 37 f.= 81, on the words of Christ, Mat. v. 40 f., that, to him
who takes our coat we should leave our cloak also : " Many fancy this
is not commanded or to be observed by every Christian, but is merely
a voluntary counsel of perfection, and, like virginity and chastity,
counselled not commanded." But " these are the artifices whereby the
teaching and example of our dear Lord Jesus Christ as given in the holy
Gospel, together with that of all His Martyrs and Saints, is reversed,
neglected and altogether suppressed. . . . God will blind and disgrace
those who turn His clear and holy Word into darkness. ... No excuse
is of any avail, it is simply a command which we are bound to observe."
He continues : As true Christians v/e have to observe it, but, as mem
bers of a commonwealth we enjoy a divine institution whereby " the
secular sword " protects us from any injury to our possessions.

5 Ib., p. r>0f. = 98.

TRADESMEN AND MERCHANTS 81

In any case it was a quite subjective and unfounded
application of Holy Scripture, when, in his sermon on
usury, he makes the following the chief point to be com
plied with :

" Christian dealings with temporal possessions," he there
says, " consist in three things, in giving for nothing, lending
free of interest and lovingly allowing our belongings to be
taken from us [Mat. v. 40, 42 ; Luke vi. 30] ; for there is no
merit in your buying something, inheriting it, or gaining
possession of it in some other honest way, since, if this were
piety, then the heathen and Turks would also be pious."1

This extravagant notion of the Christian's duties led to
his rigid and untimely vindication of the mediaeval pro
hibition of the charging of interest, of which we shall have to
speak more fully later. It also led him to assail all com
mercial enterprise.

Greatly incensed at the action of the trading companies he
set about writing his " Von Kauffshandlung und Wucher "
(1524).

Here, speaking of the wholesale traders and merchants, he
says : " The foreign trade that brings wares from Calicut, India
and so forth, such as spices and costly fabrics of silk and cloth of
gold, which serve only for display and are of no use, but merely
suck the money out of our country and people, would not be
allowed had we a government and real rulers." The Old Testa
ment patriarchs indeed bought and sold, he says, but " only
cattle, wool, grain, butter, milk and such like ; these are God's
gifts which He raises from the earth and distributes among men " ;
but the present trade means only the " throwing away of our
gold and silver into foreign countries."2

Traders were, according to him, in a bad case from the moral
point of view : " Let no one come and ask how he may with a
good conscience belong to one of these companies. There is no
other counsel than this : ' Drop it ' ; there is no other way. If
the companies are to go on, then that will be the end of law and
honesty ; if law and honesty are to remain, then the companies
must cease." The companies, so he had already said, are through
and through " unstable and without foundation, all rank avarice
and injustice, so that they cannot even be touched with a good
conscience. . . . They hold all the goods in their hands and do
with them as they please." They aim " at making sure of their
profit in any case, which is contrary to the nature, not only of
commercial wares but of all temporal goods which God wishes to
be ever in danger and uncertainty. They, however, have dis-

1 16., p. 6=117 ; cp. p. 50=98.

2 Weim. ed., 15, p. 294 f. ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 201.

vr. — o

82 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

covered a means of securing a sure profit even on uncertain
temporal goods." A man can thus " in a short time become so
rich as to be able to buy up kings and emperors " ; such a thing
cannot possibly be " right or godly."1

As a further reason for condemning profit from trade and
money transactions he points out, that such profit does not arise
from the earth or from cattle. 2

With both these arguments he is, however, on purely mediaeval
ground. He pays but little regard to the new economic situation,
though he has a keen eye for the abuses and the injustice which
undoubtedly accompanied the new commerce. Instead, however,
of confining his censure to these and pointing out how things
might be improved, he prefers to take his stand on an already
obsolete theory — one, nevertheless, which many shared with him
— and condemn unconditionally all such commercial under
takings with the violence and lack of consideration usual in him. 3

In his remarks we often find interesting thoughts on the
economic conditions ; we see the remarkable range of his
intellect and occasionally we may even wonder whence he
had his vast store of information. It is also evident, how
ever, that the other work with which he was overwhelmed
did not leave him time to digest his matter. Often enough
he is right when he stigmatises the excesses, but on the whole
he goes much too far. As Frank G. Ward says : " Because he
was incapable of passing a discriminating judgment on the
abuses that existed he simply condemned all commerce
off-hand."4 He was too fond of scenting evil usury every
where. A contemporary of his, the merchant Bonaventura
Furtenbach, of Nuremberg, having come across one of
Luther's writings on the subject, possibly his " Von Kauffs-
handlung," remarked sarcastically : " Were I to try to write
a commentary on the Gospel of Luke everyone would say,
you are not qualified to do so. So it is with Luther when he
treats of the interest on money ; he has never studied such
matters."5 A Hamburg merchant also made fun of Luther's
economics, and, as the Hamburg Superintendent JSpinus
(Johann Hock) reported, quoted the instance of the
Peripatetician Phormion, who gave Hannibal a scholastic
lecture on the art of war, for which reason it is usual to dub

1 76., p. 312ff.= 223ff.

2 Ib., 6, p. 466=21, p. 357.

3 Cp. ib., 15, p. 304=22, p. 214 f.

4 " Daratellung und Wiirdigung der Ansichten Luthers vom Staat
und seinen wirtschaftlichen Aufgaben," 1898, p. 83.

6 Quoted by Luther in 1540, see Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 78.

TRADESMEN AND MERCHANTS 83

him who tries to speak of things of which he knows nothing,
a new Phormion.1

In his " An den Adel " Luther had shown himself more
reticent, though even here he inveighs against interest and
trading companies, and says : "I am not conversant with
figures, but I cannot understand how, with a hundred florins,
it is possible to gain twenty annually. ... I leave this to
the worldly wise. I, as a theologian, have only to censure
the appearance of evil concerning which St. Paul says
[1 Thess. v. 22] ' from all appearance of evil refrain ! ' This
I know very well," he continues, speaking from the
traditional standpoint, " that it would be much more godly
to pay more attention to tilling the soil and less to trade."
Yet, even in this writing, he goes so far as to say : " It is
indeed high time that a bit were put in the mouth of the
Fuggers and such-like companies."2

More and more plainly he was, however, forced to realise
that it was not within his power to check the new develop
ment of commerce ; he, nevertheless, stuck by his earlier
views. He was also, and to some extent justifiably, shocked
at the growing luxury which had made its way into the
burgher class and into the towns generally in the train of
foreign trade. Instead of " staying in his place and being
content with a moderate living," " everyone wants to be a
merchant and to grow rich."3

" We despise the arts and languages," lie says, " but refuse to
do without the foreign wares which are neither necessary nor
profitable to us, but [the expenses of] which lay our very bones
bare. Do we not thereby show ourselves to be true Germans,
i.e. fools and beasts ? "4 God " has given us, like other nations,
sufficient wool, hair, flax and everything else necessary for
suitable and becoming clothing, but now men squander fortunes
on silk, satin, cloth of gold and all sorts of foreign stuffs. . . . We
could also do with less spices." People might say he was trying
to " put down the wholesale trade and commerce. But I do my
duty. If things are not improved in the community, at least let
whoever can amend."5

" I cannot see that much in the way of good has ever come to
a country through commerce."6

He refused to follow the more luxurious mode of living which
had become the rule in the towns as a result of trade, but insisted

1 16. 2 Weim. ed., 6, p. 466 ; Erl. ed., 21, p. 357.

3 Ib., 15, p. 304=22, p. 213 f. Von Kauffshandluiig, etc.

4 /&., p. 36=181. " An die Radherrn."

5 Ib., 6, p. 465f.= 21, p. 356. a Ib., p. 466=356.

84 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

on leading the more simple life to which he had throughout been
accustomed. For the good of the people, poverty or simplicity was
on the whole more profitable than riches. " People say, and
with truth, ' It takes a strong man to bear prosperity,' and ' A
man can endure many things but not good fortune.' ... If
we have food and clothing let us esteem it enough. For the
cities of the plain which God destroyed it would have been better,
if, instead of abounding in wealth, everything had been of the
dearest, and there had been less superfluity." x — " What worse and
more wanton can be conceived of than the mad mob and the
yokels when they are gorged with food and have the reins in
their hands."2

Hence he took a " tolerable maintenance " as he expresses
it, i.e. the mode of living suitable to a man's state, as the
basis of a fair wage. The question of wages must in the last
instance, he thinks, depend on the question of maintenance.
Luther, like Calvin, did not go any further in this matter.
" Their conservative ideas saw in high wages only the
demoralisation of the working classes."3

Luther's remarks on this subject " recall the words of
Calvin, viz. that the people must always be kept in poverty
in order that they may remain obedient."4

According to his view " the price of goods was synony
mous with their barter value expressed in money ; money
was the fixed, unchangeable standard of things ; it never
occurred to anyone that an alteration in the value of money
might come, a mistake which led to much confusion. Again,
the barter value of a commodity was its worth calculated on
the cost of the material it contained and of the trouble and
labour expended on its manufacture. This calculation
excluded the subjective element, just as it ignored com
petition as a factor in the determining of prices."5 Thus,
according to Luther, the merchant had merely to calculate
" how many days he had spent in fetching and acquiring the
goods, and how great had been the work and danger involved,
for much labour and time ought to represent a higher and
better wage " ; he should in this " compare himself to the
common day-labourer or working-man, see what he earns in
a day, and calculate accordingly." More than a " tolerable

1 /&., 24, p. 351 f.= 33, p. 370 f.

2 Ib., 18, p. 391=242, p. 320 (1525).

3 Ward, " Darstellung," etc., p. 73.

4 Kampschulte, "Johannes Calvin," 1, 1869, p. 430. Ward, ib.
6 Ward, ib., p. 74.

TRADESMEN AND MERCHANTS 85

maintenance " was, however, to be avoided in commerce,
and likewise all such profit " as might involve loss to
another."1 It would have pleased him best had the author
ities fixed the price of everything, but, owing to their
untrust worthiness, this appeared to him scarcely to be
hoped for. The principle : "I shall sell my goods as dear as
I can," he opposed with praiseworthy firmness ; this was
"to open door and window to hell."2 He also inveighed
rightly and strongly against the artificial creation of scarcity.
Here, too, we see that his ideas were simply those in vogue
in the ranks from which he came.

" His economic views in many particulars display a retro
grade tendency."3 — " In the history of economics he cannot
be considered as either an original or a systematic thinker.
We frequently find him adopting views which were current
without seriously testing their truth or their grounds. . . .
His exaggerations and inconsequence must be explained by
the fact that he took but little interest in worldly business.
His interpretation of things depended on his own point of
view rather than on the actual nature of the case."4

The worst of it is that his own " point of view " intruded
itself far too often into his criticisms of social conditions.

Influence of Old-Testament Ideas

Excessive regard for the Old-Testament enactments helped
Luther to adopt a peculiar outlook on things social and
ethical.

He says in praise of the Patriarchs : " They were devout and
holy men who ruled well even among the heathen ; now there is
nothing like it."5 He often harks back to the social advantages
of certain portions of the Jewish law, and expressly regrets that
there were no princes who had the courage to take steps to re-
introduce them for the benefit of mankind.

In 1524, under the influence of his Biblical studies, he wrote to
Duke Johann Frederick of Saxony, praising the institution of
tithes and even of fifths : "It would be a grand thing if, accord
ing to ancient usage, a tenth of all property were annually handed
over to the authorities ; this would be the most Godly interest
possible. . . . Indeed it would be desirable to do away with all

1 Weim. ed., 15, p. 296 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 204. Ward, ib., p. 75.

2 " Werke," ib., p. 295=202. 3 Ward, p. 101.
4 Ward, »&., p. 94

* Weim. ed., 24, p. 368 ; Erl. ed., 33, p. 390.

86 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

other taxes and impose on the people a payment of a fifth or
sixth, as Joseph did in Egypt."1 At the same time he is quite
aware that such wishes are impracticable, seeing that, " not the
Mosaic, but the Imperial law is now accepted by the world and
in use."

Partly owing to the impossibility of a return to the Old
Covenant, partly out of a spirit of contradiction to the new party,
he opposed the fanatics' demand that the Mosaic law should be
introduced as near as possible entire, and the Imperial, Roman
law abrogated as heathenish and the Papal, Canon law as anti-
Christian. Duke Johann, the Elector's brother, was soon half
won over to these fantastic ideas by the Court preacher, Wolfgang
Stein, but Luther and Melanchthon succeeded in making him
change his mind.2 The necessity Luther was under of opposing
the Anabaptists here produced its fruits ; his struggle with the
fanatics preserved him from the consequences of his own personal
preference for the social regulations of the Old Covenant.

In what difficulties his Old-Testament ideas on polygamy
involved him the history of the bigamy of Philip of Hesse has
already shown.3 Had such ideas concerning marriage been
realised in society the revolution in the social order would indeed
have been great.

Luther's esteem for the social laws of the Old Testament finds
its best expression in his sermons on Genesis, which first saw
the light in 1527.

He says, for instance, of the Jewish law of restitution and
general settlement of affairs, in the Jubilee Year : " It is laid
down in Moses that no one can sell a field in perpetuity but only
until the Jubilee Year, and when this came each one recovered
possession of his field or the property he had sold, and thus the
lands remained in the family. There are also some other fine
]aws in the Books of Moses which well might be adopted, made
use of and put in force." He even wishes that the Imperial
Government would take the lead in re-enacting them " for as
long as is desired, but without compulsion."4

His views on interest and usury were likewise influenced
by his one-sided reading of certain Old- and New-Testament
statements.

Usury and Interest

On the question of the lawfulness of charging interest
Luther not only laid down no " new principles " which might
have been of help for the future, but, on the contrary, he
paved the way for serious difficulties. He was not to be

1 On June 18, 1524, Erl. ed., 53, p. 244 (" Brief wechsel," 4, p. 354).

2 Cp. Enders in n. 3 to the above letter.

3 See above, vol. iv., p. 13 ff.

* Weim. ed., 24, p. 8 ; Erl. ed., 33, p. 11 (1527).

USURY AND INTEREST 87

moved from the traditional, mediaeval standpoint which
viewed the charging of any interest whatever on loans as
something prohibited. His foe, Johann Eck, on the other
hand, in a Disputation at Bologna, had defended the lawful
ness of moderate interest.1

After having repeatedly attacked by word and pen usury
and the charging of any interest2 — led thereto, as he says,
by the grievous abuses in the commercial and financial
system, he published in 1539 his " An die Pfarherrn wider
den Wucher zu predigen," whence most of what follows has
been taken. As it was written towards the end of his life,
we may assume it to represent the result of his experience
and the final statement of his convictions.

In this writing, after a sad outburst on the increase of
usury in Germany, he begins his " warnings " by urging that
" the people should be told firmly and plainly concerning
lending and borrowing, and that when money is lent and a
charge made or more taken back than was originally made
over, this is usury, and as such is condemned by every law.
Hence those are usurers who charge 5, or 6, or more on the
hundred on the money they lend, and should be called
idolatrous ministers of avarice or Mammon, nor can they
be saved unless they do penance. . . . To lend is to give
a man my money, property or belongings so that he may
use them. . . . Just as one neighbour lends another a dish,
a can, a bed, or clothes, and in the same way money,
or money's worth, in return for which I may not take any
thing."3

The writer of these words, like so many others who, in his
day and later, still adhered to the old canonical standpoint,
failed to see, that, as things then were, to lend money was
to surrender to the borrower a commodity which was already
bringing in some return, and that, in consequence of this,
the lender had a right to demand some indemnification. As
this had not generally speaking been the case in the Middle

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 279. Cp. J. Schneid, " Hist.-pol. Bl.,"
108, 1891, pp. 241 ff. 473 ff., and B. Duhr, " Zeitschr. f. Kath. Theol.,"
24, 1900, p. 210.

2 Cp. the Sermons on Usury of 1519, also certain passages in his
" An den christl. Adel," the booklet " Von Kauffshandlung und
Wucher," 1524, arid the Sermon against Usury of April 13, 1539, which
he followed up by a written appeal to the Wittenberg magistrates.
M. Neumann, " Gesch. des Wuchers in Deutschland," Halle, 1868,
pp. 481, 618 ff. 3 Erl. ed., 23, p. 283 f.

88 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Ages, the prohibition of charging interest was then a just
one. Nevertheless, within certain limits, it was slowly
becoming obsolete and, as the economic situation changed
for that of modern times and money became more liquid,
the more general did lending at interest become.

Luther was well aware that to lend at interest was already
" usual " and even " common in all classes."1 It was also,
as a Protestant contemporary complained in 1538, twice
as prevalent in the Lutheran communities than among
the Catholics.2 Still Luther insists obstinately that, " it
was a very idle objection, and one that any village sexton
could dispose of when people pleaded the custom of the
world contrary to the Word of God, or against what was
right. ... It is nothing new or strange that the world
should be hopeless, accursed, damned ; this it had always
been and would ever remain. If you obey its behests, you
also will go with it into the abyss of hell."3

Though in his instructions to the pastors he condemns in
discriminately, as a " thief, robber and murderer," everyone who
charges interest, still he wants his teaching to be applied above
all to the " great ogres in the world, who can never charge
enough per cent." " The sacrament and absolution " were to be
denied them, and " when about to die they were to be left like
the heathen and not granted Christian burial " unless they had
first done penance. To the " small usurer it is true my sentence
may sound terrible, I mean to such as take but five or six on the
hundred."5

All, however, whether the percentage they charge be small or
great, he advises to bring their objections to him, or to some
other minister, " or to a good lawyer,"5 so as to learn the further
reasons and particulars concerning the prohibition of receiving
interest. Every pastor was to preach strongly and fearlessly on
its general unlawfulness in order that he may not "go to the
devil " with those of his flock who charge interest.

Not that Luther was very hopeful about the results of such
preaching. " The whole world is full of usurers," he said in 1542
in the Table-Talk, and to a friend who had asked him : " Why
do not the princes punish such grievous usury and extortion ? "
Luther answers : " Surely, the princes and kings have other
things to do ; they have to feast, drink and hunt, and can
not attend to this." " Things must soon come to a head and

1 Ib., p. 285.

2 The Anabaptist Jorg Schnabel said in 1538, that on 20 gulden
two or three were now taken as interest. For the text, see Janssen,
ib., xv., p. 38. » Erl. ed., 23, p. 285.

4 Ib., p. 304 f. * Ib., p. 285.

USURY AND INTEREST 89

a great and unforeseen change take place ! I hope, however, that
the Last Day will soon make an end of it all."1

As to his grounds for condemning interest, he declares in the
same conversation : " Money is an unfruitful commodity which
I cannot sell in such a way as to entitle me to a profit." He is
but re-echoing the axiom " Pecunia est sterilis," etc., maintained
all too long in learned Catholic circles. Hence, as he says in 1540,
" Lending neither can nor ought to be a true trade or means of
livelihood ; nor do I believe the Emperor thinks so either."
Besides, " it is not enough in the sight of heaven to obey the laws
of the Emperor." 2 According to him God had positively forbidden
in the Old Testament the charging of any interest, as contrary
to the natural law and as oppressive and unlawful usury (Ex. xxii.
25 ; Lev. xxv. 36 ; Deut. xxiii. 19, etc.). In the New Testament
Christ, so Luther thinks, solemnly confirmed the prohibition when
He said in St. Matthew's gospel : " Give to him that asketh thee
and from him that would borrow of thee turn not away " (v. 42),
and in St. Luke (vi. 35) still more emphatically : " Lend, hoping
for nothing."3

In the Old Law, however, the charging of interest was by no
means absolutely forbidden to the Jews (Deut. xxiii. 19 f.), so
that it could not be regarded as a thing repugnant to the natural
law, though the Mosaic Code interdicted it among the Jews them
selves. As for the New- Testament passages Luther had no right
to infer any prohibition from them. Our Saviour, after speaking
of offering the other cheek to the smiter, of giving also our cloak
to him who would take away our coat, and of other instances of
the exercise of extraordinary virtue, goes on to advise our lending
without hope of return. But many understood this as a counsel,
not as a command. Luther indeed says that thereby they were
making nought of Christ's doctrine. He insists that all these
counsels were real commands, viz. commands to be ever ready to
suffer injustice and to do good ; the secular authorities were
there to see that human society thereby suffered no harm. The
Papists, however, and the scholastics looked upon these things
in a different light. " The sophists had no reason for altering our
Lord's commands and for making out that they were ' consilia '
as they term them."4 "They teach that Christ did not enjoin
these things on all Christians, but only on the perfect, each one
being free to keep them if he desires." In this way the Papists
do away with the doctrine of Christ ; they thereby condemn,
destroy and get rid of good works, whilst all the time accusing us
of forbidding them ; " hence it is that the world has got so full
of monks, tonsures and Masses."5 — Yet, even if we take the
words of Christ, as quoted, let us say, by St. Luke, and see in
them a positive command, yet they would refer only to the social
and economic conditions prevailing among the Jews at the time

1 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 259 ; according to Heydenreich's
Notes. Ed. ed., 57, p. 360.

2 Erl. ed., 23, p. 306 f. * Ib. p. 319.

* /&., cp. above, p. 80, n. 4. » /6., p. 311 f.

90 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

the words were spoken. According to certain commentators,
moreover, the words have no reference to the question of interest,
because, so they opine, " it was a question of relinquishing all
claim not merely on the interest but on the capital itself."1

The Jesuit theologians of the 16th and 17th centuries as
a rule were careful to instance a number of cases in which the
canonical prohibition of charging even a moderate rate of
interest does not apply. They thus paved the way for the
abrogation of the prohibition. Of this we have an instance
in lago Lainez, who in principle was strongly averse to the
charging of interest. This theologian, who later became
General of the Jesuits, when a preacher at the busy com
mercial city of Genoa, wrote (1553-1554) an essay on usury
embodying the substance of his addresses to the merchants.2
Lainez there points out that any damage accruing to the
lender from the loan, and also the temporary absence of
profit on it, constitutes a sufficient ground for demanding a
moderate interest.3 He also strongly insists that the lender,
in compensation for his willingness to lend, may accept from
the borrower a " voluntary " premium ;4 the lender, more
over, has a perfect right to safeguard himself by stipulating
for a fine (pcena conventional**) from the borrower should
repayment be delayed. All this comes under the instances
of " apparent usury," which he enumerates : " Casus qui
videntur usurarii et non sunt " (cap. 10).

Luther devotes no such prudent consideration to those
exceptional cases. He was more inclined by nature harshly
to vindicate the principles he had embraced than to seek how
best to limit them in practice . "He did not take into account
loans asked for, not from necessity, but for the purpose of
making profit on the borrowed money " ;5 yet, after all,
this was the very point on which the question turned in the
early days of economic development. He discusses the
lawfulness of a voluntary premium and comes to the con
clusion that it is wrong. He scoffs at the lender, as a mere
hypocrite, who argues : " The borrower is very thankful for
such a loan and freely and without compulsion offers me

1 P. Schanz, " Commentar iiber clas Lukasevang.," 1883, p. 226.

2 Printed in H. Grisar, " lacobi Lainez Disputationes Tridentinse
torn. 2 : Disput. varise ; accedunt Commentarii morales," Oenipoiite,
1886, pp. 227-321, with Introduction, pp. 60*-64*.

3 P. 240 ; cp. p. 63*. * P. 344 syq.
? Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 432.

USURY AND INTEREST 91

5, 6 or even 10 florins on the hundred." " But even an
adulteress and an adulterer," says Luther in his usual vein,
" are thankful and pleased with each other ; a robber, too,
does an assassin a great service when he helps him to
commit highway robbery." The borrower does the lender
a similar criminal service and spiritual injury, for which no
premium can make compensation.1 As regards the case
where the loan is not repaid at the specified time, Luther is,
of course, of opinion that any real loss to the owner must be
made good by the borrower. But now, he says, " they
accept reimbursement for losses which they never suffered
at all," they simply calculate the interest on a loss which
they may possibly surfer from not having back the money
when the time comes for buying or paying. " In its efforts
to make a certainty of what is uncertain, will not usury
soon be the ruin of the world ! "2

In the Table-Talk a friend, in 1542, raised an objection :
If a man trades with the money lent him and makes 15 florins
yearly, he must surely pay the lender something for this.
Of this Luther, however, will not hear. " No, this is merely
an accidental profit, and on accidentals no rule can be
based."3 That the profit was " accidental " was, however,
simply his theory.

In spite of all this Luther did make exceptions, though, in view
of his rigid theory and reading of the Bible, it is difficult to see
how he could justify them.

Thus, he is willing to allow usury in those cases where the
charging of interest is "in reality a sort of work of mercy to the
needy, who would otherwise have nothing, and where no great
injury is done to another." Thus, when " old people, poor
widows or orphans, or other necessitous folk, who have learned
no other way of making a living," were only able to support
themselves by lending out their money, in such cases the " lawyers
might well seek to mitigate somewhat the severity of the law."
" Should an appeal be made to the ruler," then the proverb
" Necessity knows no law " might be quoted. " It might here
serve to call to mind that the Emperor Justinian had permitted
such mitigated usury [he had sanctioned the taking of 4, 6 or 8 per
cent], and in such a case I am ready to agree and to answer for it
before God, particularly in the case of needy persons and where
usury is practised out of necessity or from charity. If, however,
it was wanton, avaricious, unnecessary usury, merely for the
purpose of trade and profit, then I would not agree " ; even the

1 P. 287. 2 P. 294.

3 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 259.

92 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

Emperor himself could not make this legitimate ; for it is not
the laws of the Emperor which lead us to heaven, but the observ
ance of the laws of God."1

It follows from this that even the so-called " titulus legis "
found no favour in his sight in the case of actual money loans, for
it is of this, not of " purchasable interest," that he speaks in the
writing to the pastors. A real, honest purchase, so he there says
quite truly, is no usury. *

A remarkable deflection from his strict principles is to be found
not only in the words just quoted but also in his letter to the town
council of Erfurt sent in 1525 at the time of the rising in that
town and the neighbourhood. The mutineers refused among
other things to continue paying interest on the sums borrowed.
For this refusal Luther censures them as rebels, and also refuses
to hear of their " deducting the interest from the sum total "
(i.e. the capital). He here vindicates the lenders as follows :
" Did I wish yearly to spend some of the total amount I should
naturally keep it by me. Why should I hand it over to another as
though I were a child, and allow another to trade with it ? Who
can dispose of his money even at Erfurt in such a way that it
shall be paid out to him yearly and bit by bit ? This would
really be asking too much."3

Luther also relaxed his principles in favour of candidates for
the office of preacher. When, in 1532, the widow of Wolfgang
Jorger, an Austrian Governor, offered him 500 florins for
stipends for " poor youths prosecuting their studies in Holy
Scripture " at Wittenberg, at the same time asking him how to
place it, he unhesitatingly replied that it should be lent out at
interest ; "I, together with Master Philip and other good friends
and Masters, have thought this best because it is to be expended
on such a good, useful and necessary work." He suggested that
the money " should be handed in at the Rathaus " at Nurem
berg to Lazarus Spengler, syndic of that town ; if this could not
be, then he would have it " invested elsewhere." Such " good
works in Christ " are, he says, unfortunately not common
amongst us " but rather the contrary, so that they leave the poor
ministers to starve ; the nobles as well as the peasants and the
burghers are all of them more inclined to plunder than to help."*
Thus it was his desire to help the preachers that determined his
action here.

A writer, who, as a rule, is disposed to depict Luther's social
ethics in a very favourable light, remarks : " When his attention
was riveted on the abuses arising from the lending of money
[and the charging of interest] he could see nothing but evil in the
whole thing ; on the other hand, if some good purpose was to be
served by the money, he regarded this as morally quite justifi
able."5 That Luther "was not always true to his theories," and that

1 Erl. ed., 23, p. 306 f. 2 /&., p. 338.

5 Sep. 19, 1525, Erl. ed., 65, p. 239 f. (" Brief wechsel," 5, p. 243).
« To Dorothy Jorger, March 7, 1532, Erl. ed., 54, p. 277 (" Brief -
wechsel," 9, p. 160). 6 Ward, " Darstellung," etc., p. 94.

USURY AND INTEREST 93

he is far from displaying any " striking originality " in his
economic views, cannot, according to this author, be called into
question. l

Luther on Unearned Incomes and Annuities

A great change took place in Luther's views concerning
the buying of the right to receive a yearly interest, nor was
the change an unfortunate one. He was induced to abandon
his earlier standpoint that such purchase was wrong and to
recognise, that, within certain limits, it could be perfectly
lawful.

The nature of this sort of purchase, then very common,
he himself explains in his clear and popular style : " If I
have a hundred florins with which I might gain five, six or
more florins a year by means of my labour, I can give them
to another for investment in some fertile land in order that,
not I, but he, may do business with them ; hence I receive
from him the five florins I might have made, and thus he
sells me the interest, five florins per hundred, and I am the
buyer and he the seller."2 It was an essential point in the
arrangement that the money should be employed in an
undertaking in some way really fruitful or profitable to the
receiver of the capital, i.e. in real estate, which he could
farm, or in some other industry ; the debtor gave up the
usufruct to the creditor together with the interest agreed
upon, but was able to regain possession of it by repayment of
the debt. The creditor, according to the original arrange
ment, was also to take his share in the fluctuations in profit,
and not arbitrarily to demand back his capital.

At first Luther included such transactions among the
" fig-leaves " behind which usury was wont to shelter
itself ; they were merely, so he declared in 1519 in his
Larger Sermon on Usury, " a pretty sham and pretence
by which a man can oppress others without sin and become
rich without labour or trouble."3 In the writing " An den
Adel " he even exclaimed : " The greatest misfortune of
the German nation is undoubtedly the traffic in interest.
. . . The devil invented it and the Pope, by sanctioning it,
has wrought havoc throughout the world."4 It is quite true
that the arrangement, being in no wise unjust, had received

1 Ib., p. 95.

2 Weim. ed., 6, p. 53 ; Erl. eel., 162, p. 102 (1519).

3 76., p. 51=99. 4 Ib., p. 466=21, p. 356 f.

94 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

the conditional sanction of the Church and was widely
prevalent in Christendom. Many abuses and acts of oppres
sion had, indeed, crept into it, particularly with the general
spread of the practice of charging interest on money loans,
but they were not a necessary result of the transaction.
Luther, in those earlier days, demanded that such " trans
actions should be utterly condemned and prevented for the
future, regardless of the opposition of the Pope and all his
infamous laws [to the condemnation], and though he might
have erected his pious foundations on them. ... In truth,
the traffic in interest is a sign and a token that the world is
sold into the devil's slavery by grievous sins."1 Yet Luther
himself allows the practice under certain conditions in the
Larger Sermon on Usury published shortly before, from
which it is evident that here he is merely voicing his detesta
tion of the abuses, and probably, too, of the " Pope and his
infamous laws."

In fact his first pronouncements against the investing of
money are all largely dictated by his hostility to the existing
ecclesiastical government ; " that churches, monasteries,
altars, this and that," should be founded and kept going by
means of interest, is what chiefly arouses his ire. In 1519
he busies himself with the demolition of the objection
brought forward by Catholics, who argued : " The churches
and the clergy do this and have the right to do it because
such money is devoted to the service of God."

In his Larger Sermon on Usury he gives an instance
where he is ready to allow transactions at interest, viz.
" where both parties require their money and therefore
cannot afford to lend it for nothing but are obliged to help
themselves by means of bills of exchange. Provided the
ghostly law be not infringed, then a percentage of four, five or
six florins may be taken."2 Thus he here not only falls back
on the " ghostly law," but also deviates from the line he had
formerly laid down. In fact we have throughout to deal
more with stormy effusions than with a ripe, systematic
discussion of the subject.

Later on, his general condemnations of the buying of
interest-rights become less frequent.

He even wrote in 1524 to Duke Johann Frederick of
Saxony : Since the Jewish tithes cannot be re-introduced,
1 Ib. a /&., 6, p. 58= 162, p. 108 (1519).

USURY AND INTEREST 95

" it would be well to regulate everywhere the purchase of
interest-rights, but to do away with them altogether would
not be right since they might be legalised."1 As a condition
for justifying the transaction he requires above all that no
interest should be charged without " a definitely named and
stated pledge," for to charge on a mere money pledge would
be usury. " What is sterile cannot pay interest."2 Further
the right of cancelling the contract was to remain in the
hands of the receiver of the capital. The interest once
agreed upon was to be paid willingly. He himself relied on
the practice and once asked : "If the interest applied to
churches and schools were cut off, how would the ministers
and schools be maintained ? "3

With regard to the rate of interest allowable in his opinion,
he says in his sermons on Mat. xviii. (about 1537) : " We
would readily agree to the paying of six or even of seven or
eight on the hundred."4 As a reason he assigns the fact
that " the properties have now risen so greatly in value," a
remark to which he again comes back in 1542 in his Table-
Talk in order to justify his not finding even seven per cent
excessive.5 He thus arrives eventually at the conclusion of
the canonists who, for certain good and just reasons,
allowed a return of from seven to eight per cent.

In his " An die Pfarherrn " he took no account of such pur
chases but merely declared that he would find some other occa
sion " of saying something about this kind of usury " ; at the
same time a " fair, honest purchase is no usury."6

All the more strongly in this writing, the tone of which is only
surpassed by the attacks on the usury of the Jews contained in his
last polemics, does he storm against the evils of that usury which
was stifling Germany. The pastors and preachers were to " stick
to the text," where the Gospel forbids the taking of anything in
return for loans.7 That this will bring him into conflict with the
existing custom he takes for granted. In his then mood of pessi
mistic defiance he was anxious that the preachers should boldly

June 18, 1524, Erl. ed., 53, p. 245 f. (" Briefe," 4, p. 354).

To Sebastian Weller at Mansfeld, July 26, 1543, Erl. ed., 56,
p. Iviii.

To Count Wolfgang von Gleichen, March 9, 1543, ib., p. 57.

Ib., 45, p. 7.

Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 259. " The properties have risen.
Where formerly an estate was worth one hundred florins it is now worth
quite three ; qui ante potuit dare 5, potest nunc dare 6 vel septem"

' Erl. ed., 23, pp. 286, 338. In the above letter to Sebastian Weller
he declares (p. Iviii) that, in his epistle to the parsons, he had only
spoken " of mutuum and datum." 7 Ib., p. 289.

96 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

hurl at all the powers that be the words of that Bible which
cannot lie : where evil is so rampant " God must intervene and
make an end, as He did with Sodom, with the world at the Deluge,
with Babylon, with Rome and such like cities, that were utterly
destroyed. This is what we Germans are asking for, nor shall we
cease to rage until people shall say : Germany was, just as we now
say of Rome and of Babylon."1

He nevertheless gives the preachers a valuable hint as to how
they were to proceed in order to retain their peace of mind and
get over difficulties. Here " it seems to me better . . . for the
sake of your own peace and tranquillity, that you should send
them to the lawyers whose duty and office it is to teach and to
decide on such wretched, temporal, transitory, worldly matters,
particularly when they [your questioners] are disposed to haggle
about the Gospel text."2 "For this reason, according to our
preaching, usury with all its sins should be left to the lawyers, for,
unless they whose duty it is to guard the dam help in defending
it, the petty obstacles we can set up will not keep back the flood."
But, after all, " the world cannot go on without usury, without
avarice, without pride . . . otherwise the world would cease to
be the world nor would the devil be the devil."3

The difficulties which beset Luther's attitude on the
question of interest were in part of his own creation.

" In the question of commerce and the charging of interest,"
says Julius Kostlin in his " Theologie Luthers," " he displays,
for all his acumen, an unmistakable lack of insight into the true
value for social life of trade — particularly of that trade on a large
scale with which we are here specially concerned — in spite of all
the sins and vexations which it brings with it, or into the impor
tance of loans at interest — something very different from loans to

* Ib., p. 298. 2 Ib., p. 289.

3 Ib., p. 296. Very mild indeed are the directions he gives in his
letter to the town-council of Dantzig on the charging of interest (May
5 (?), 1525, " Werke," Erl. ed., 53, p. 296, " Brief wechsel," 5, p. 165) :
" The Gospel is a spiritual rule by which no government can act. . . .
The spiritual rule of the Gospel must be carefully distinguished from
the outward, secular rule and on no account be confused with it. The
Gospel rule the preacher must urge only by word of mouth and each
one be left free in this matter ; whoever wishes to take it, let him do so,
whoever does not, let him leave it alone. I will give an example : the
charging of interest is altogether at variance with the Gospel since
Christ teaches ' lend hoping for nothing.' But we must not rush in
here and suddenly put an end to all dissensions in accordance with the
Gospel. No one has the right or the power to do this, for it has arisen
out of human laws which St. Peter does not wish abrogated ; but it is
to be preached and the interest paid to those to whom it is due, whether
they are willing to accept this Gospel and to surrender the interest or
not. We cannot take them any further than this, for the Gospel
demands willing hearts, moved by the Spirit of God." The letter
seems also to be aimed at the fanatics, whose violent action in opposing
the charging of interest as un-Evangelical, Luther frowned on.

USURY AND INTEREST 9?

the poor — for the furthering of work and the development of
the land."1

With reference to what Kostlin here says it must, however, be
again pointed out that Luther's lack of insight may be explained
to some extent " by the great change which was just then coming
over the economic life of Germany." It must also be added, that,
in Luther's case, the struggle against usury was in itself a
courageous and deserving work, and, that, hand in hand with it,
went those warm exhortations to charity which he knew so well
how to combine with Christ's Evangelical Counsels. *.

In his attack on the abuses connected with usury his indigna
tion at the mischief, and his ardent longing to help the oppressed,
frequently called forth impressive and heart-stirring words.
Though, in what Luther said about usury and on the economic
conditions of his day, we meet much that is vague, incorrect and
passionate, yet, on the other hand, we also find some excellent
hints and suggestions.2

It is notorious that the controversy regarding the lawful
ness of interest, even of 5 per cent, on money loans, went on
for a long time among theologians both Catholic and Protes
tant. The subject was also keenly debated among the
16th-century Jesuits. No theologian, however, succeeded in
proving the sinfulness of the charging of a five per cent
interest under the circumstances which then obtained in
Germany. Attempts to have this generally prohibited under
severe penalties were rejected by eminent Catholic theo
logians, for instance, in a memorandum of the Law and
Divinity Faculties at Ingolstadt, dated August 2, 1580,
which bore the signatures of all the professors.3 On the
Protestant side the contest led to disagreeable proceedings
at Ratisbon, where, in 1588, five preachers, true to Luther's
injunctions, insisted firmly on the prohibition on theological
grounds. They were expelled from the town by the magis
trates, though this did not end the controversy.4

There was naturally no question at any time of enforcing
the severe measures which Luther had advocated against
those who charged interest ; on the contrary the social
disorders of the day promoted not merely the lending at

1 " Luthers Theol. in ihrer geschichtl. Entwicklung," 22, 1901, p. 328.

2 Kostlin- Kawerau, 1, p. 331, quotes G. Schmoller (" Zur Gesch.
der nationaldkonomischen Ansichten in Deutschland wahrend der
Reformperiode," in the " Zeitschr. f. die gesamte Staatswissen-
schaft," 16).

3 From the Munich Kreisarchiv, in B. Dulir, " Zeitschr. f. kath
Theol.," 1905, 29, p. 180.

4 Duhr, ib., 1908, 32, p. 609. Cp. 1900, 24, pp. 208 f., 210, on Eck.

VI. — B

98 LUTHER'S SOCIAL WORK

moderate interest, but even actual usury of the worst
character. When even Martin Bucer showed himself dis
posed to admit the lawfulness of taking twelve per cent
interest George Lauterbecken, the Mansfeld councillor, wrote
of him in his " Regent enbuch " : " What has become of
the book Dr. Luther of blessed memory addressed to the
ministers on the subject of usury, exhorting them most
earnestly," etc., etc. ? Nobody now dreamt, so he com
plains, of putting in force the penalties decreed by Luther.
" Where do we see in any of our countries which claim to
be Evangelical anyone refused the Sacrament of the altar
or Holy Baptism on account of usury ? Where, agreeably
to the Canons, are they forbidden to make a will ? Where
do we see one of them buried on the dungheap ? 'n

1 G. Scherer, " Drey unterschiedliche Predigten vom Geitz," etc.,
Ingolstadt, 1605, p. 57 f.

CHAPTER XXXVI

THE DARKER SIDE OF LUTHER'S INNER LIFE.
HIS AILMENTS

THE struggles of conscience which we already had occasion
to consider (vol. v., p. 319 ff.) were not the only gloomy
elements in Luther's interior life. Other things, too, must
be taken into our purview if we wish to appreciate justly the
more sombre side of his existence, viz. his bodily ailments
and the mental sufferings to which they gave rise (e.g.
paroxysms of terror and apprehension), his temptations,
likewise his delusions concerning his intercourse with the
other world (ghosts, diabolical apparitions, etc.), and, lastly,
the revelations of which he fancied himself the recipient.

1. Early Sufferings, Bodily and Mental

It is no easy task to understand the nature of the morbid
phenomena which we notice in Luther. His own state
ments on the subject are not only very scanty but also
prove that he was himself unable to determine exactly their
cause. Nevertheless, it is our duty to endeavour, with the
help of what he says, to glean some notion of what was
going on within him. His gloomy mental experiences are so
inextricably bound up with his state of health, that, even
more than his " agonies of conscience " already dealt with,
they deserve to take their place on the darker background
of his psychic life. Here again, duly to appreciate the state
of the case, we shall have to review anew the whole of
Luther's personal history.

Fits of Fear ; Palpitations ; Swoons

What first claims our attention, even in the early days of
Luther's life as a monk, are the attacks of what he himself
calls fears and trepidations (" terrores, pavores "). It seems

99

100 INNER TROUBLES

fairly clear that these were largely neurotic, — physical
breakdowns due to nervous worry.

According to Melanchthon, the friend in whom he chiefly
confided, Luther gave these sufferings a place in the fore
front of his soul's history. The reader may remember the
significant passage where Melanchthon says, that, when
oppressed with gloomy thoughts of the Divine Judgments,
Luther " was often suddenly overwhelmed by such fits of
terror (' subito tanti terror es ') " as made him an object of
pity. These terrors he had experienced for the first time
when he decided to enter the monastic life, led to this resolu
tion by the sudden death of a dearly loved friend.1

We hear from Luther himself of the strange paroxysms of fear
from which he suffered as a monk. On two occasions when he
speaks of them his words do not seem to come under suspicion
of forming part of the legend which he afterwards wove about
his earlier history (see below, xxxvii.). These statements,
already alluded to once, may be given more in detail here. In
March, 1537, he told his friends : " When I was saying Mass [his
first Mass] and had reached the Canon, such terror seized on me
(ita horrui) that I should have fled had not the Prior held me
back ; for when I came to the words, ' Thee, therefore, most
merciful Father, we suppliantly pray and entreat,' etc., I felt
that I was speaking to God without any mediator. I longed to
flee from the earth. For who can endure the Majesty of God
without Christ the Mediator ? In short, as a monk I experienced
those terrors (horrores) ; I was made to experience them before
I began to assail them."2 Incidentally it may be noted that
" Christ the Mediator," whom Luther declares he could not find
in the Catholic ritual, is, as a matter of fact, invoked in the very
words which follow those quoted by Luther : " Thee, therefore,
most merciful Father, we suppliantly pray and entreat through
Jesus Christ Thy Son our Lord to accept and bless these gifts,"
etc. Evidently when Luther recorded his impressions he had
forgotten these words and only remembered the groundless fear
and inward commotion with which he had said his first Mass.

Something similar occurred during a procession at Erfurt,
when he had to walk by the side of Staupitz, his superior, who
was carrying the Blessed Sacrament. Fear arid terror so mastered

1 " Corp. ref.," 6, p. 158. " Vitap reformatorum," ed. Neander, p. 5.
See above, vol. i., p. 17.

2 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 405. Cp. " Opp. lat. exeg.," 6,
p. 158 : " Totus slupebam et cohorrescebam. . . . Tanta maiestas
(Dei)," etc. ; Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 89 : "I thought of
fleeing from the altar ... so terrified was I," etc. (1532) ; Lauter-
bach, " Tagebuch," p. 186: "fere mcrrlii-us essem " ; ;i Colloq.," ed.
Bindseil, 1, p. 119; 3, p. 169; " Werke," Erl. ed., 60, p. 400. See
above, vol. i., p. 15 f.

LUTHER'S EARLY SUFFERINGS 101

Luther that he was hardly able to remain. Telling Staupitz of
this later in Confession, the latter encouraged him with the
words : " Christ does not affright, He comforts." The incident
must have taken place after 1515, the Eisleben priory having
been founded only in that year.1

If we go back to the very beginning of his life in the monastery
we shall find that the religious scruples which assailed him at
least for a while, possibly also deserve to be reckoned as morbid.
We shall return below to the voice " from heaven " which
drove him into the cloister.

Unspeakable fear issuing in bodily prostration was also at
work in him on the occasion of the already related incident in
the choir of the Erfurt convent, when he fell to the ground
crying out that he was not the man possessed. Not only does
Dungersheim relate it, on the strength of what he had heard from
inmates of the monastery,2 but Cochlaeus also speaks of the
incident, in his " Acta," and, again, in coarse and unseemly
language in the book he wrote in 1533, entitled " Von der
Apostasey," doubtless also drawing his information from the
Augustinian monks : " It is notorious how Luther came to be
a monk ; how he collapsed in choir, bellowing like a bull when
the Gospel of the man possessed was being read ; how he behaved
himself in the monastery," etc.3 We may recall, how, according
to Cochlaeus, his brother monks suspected Luther, owing to this
attack and on account of a " certain singularity of manner," of
being either under diabolical influence or an epileptic.4 The
convulsions which accompanied the fit may have given rise to the
suspicion of epilepsy, but, in reality, they cannot be regarded as
sufficient proof. Epilepsy is well-nigh incurable, yet, in Luther's
case, we hear of no similar fits in later life. In later years he
manifested no fear of epileptic fits, though he lived in dread of an
apoplectic seizure, such as, in due course, was responsible for his
death. A medical diagnosis would not fail to consider this
seeming instance of epileptic convulsions in conjunction with
Luther's state of fear. For the purpose of the present work it will
be sufficient to bring together for the benefit of the expert the
necessary data for forming an opinion on the whole question, so
far as this is possible.

From the beginning Luther seems to have regarded these
" states of terror " as partaking to some extent of a mystic
character.

To what a height they could sometimes attain appears from
the description he embodied in his " Resolutiones " in 1518, and
of which Kostlin opines that, in it Luther portrayed the culmin
ating point to which his own fears had occasionally risen. It is
indeed very probable that Luther is referring to no other than

1 Erl. ed., 58, p. 140 ; cp. 60, p. 129. Of his " territtis " we hear also
from Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 95, and " Colloquia," ed. Bindseil, 2,
p. 292. 2 See above, vol. i., p. 16 f.

3 Mainz, 1549, Bl. B. 8a. The book was written in Latin in 1533.

4 " Acta Lutheri," p. 1.

102 INNER TROUBLES

himself when he says in the opening words of this remarkable
passage : "I know a man who assures me that he has frequently
felt these pains."1 G. Kawerau also agrees with Kostlin in
assuming that Luther is here speaking of himself, 2 a view which is,
in fact, forced upon us by other similar passages. Walter Kohler
declares : " Whether Luther intended these words to refer to
himself or not, in any case they certainly depict his normal
state."3

Luther, after saying that, " many, even to the present day,"
suffer the pangs of hell so often described in the Psalms of David,
and [so Luther thinks], by Tauler, goes on to describe these pangs
in words which we shall now quote in full, as hitherto only
extracts have been given.*

" He often had to endure such pains, though in every instance
they were but momentary ; they were, however, so great and so
hellish that no tongue can tell, no pen describe, no one who has
not felt them believe what they were. When at their worst, or
when they lasted for half an hour, nay, for the tenth part of an
hour, he was utterly undone, and all his bones turned to ashes.
At such times God and the whole of creation appears to him
dreadfully wroth. There is, however, no escape, no consolation
either within or without, and man is ringed by a circle of accusers.
He then tearfully exclaims in the words of Holy Scripture : * I am
cast away, O Lord, from before Thy eyes ' [Ps. xxx. 23], and does
not even dare to say : ' Lord, chastise me not in Thy wrath '
[Ps. vi. 1]. At such a time the soul, strange to tell, is unable to
believe that it ever will be saved ; it only feels that the punish
ment is not yet at an end. And yet the punishment is everlasting
and may not be regarded as temporal ; there remains only a
naked longing for help and a dreadful groaning ; where to look
for help the soul does not know. It is as it were stretched out
[on the cross] with Christ, so that * all its bones are numbered.'
There is not a nook in it that is not filled with the bitterest
anguish, with terror, dread and sadness, and above all with the
feeling that it is to last for ever and ever. To make use of a
weaker comparison : when a ball travels along a straight line,
every point of the line bears the whole weight of the ball, though
it does not contain it. In the same way, when the floods of
eternity pass over the soul, it feels nothing else, drinks in nothing
else but everlasting pain ; this, however, does not last but
passes. It is the very pain of hell, is this unbearable terror, that
excludes all consolation ! ... As to what it means, those who
have experienced it must be believed."5

1 What Denifle urges to the contrary (" Luther und Luthertum,"
1, p. 726, n. 2) is not convincing.

2 Cp. Kawerau, " Deutsch-evang. Bl.," 1906, p. 447 : " What
anguish of soul he went through in the monastery is related by himself
as early as 1518 in the touching account contained in the ' Resolu-
tiones ' to his 95 Theses."

3 " Ein Wort zu Denifles Luther," p. 30.
* See above, vol. i., p. 381 f.

6 Weim. ed., 1, p. 557 f. ; " Opp. lat. var.," 2, p. 180 sq.

LUTHER'S EARLY SUFFERINGS 103

A physical accompaniment of these fears was, in Luther's
case, the fainting fits referred to now and again subsequent
to the beginning of his struggle against the Church.

On the occasion of the attack of which we are told by
Ratzeberger the physician, when he was found by friends
lying unconscious on the floor, he had been " overpowered
by melancholy and sadness." It is also very remarkable
that when his friends had brought him to, partly by the help
of music, he begged them to return frequently, that they
might play to him " because he found that as soon as he
heard the sound of music his l tentationes ' and melancholy
left him."1 According to Kawerau the circumstances point
to this incident having taken place in 1523 or 1524.2

On the occasion of a serious attack of illness in 1527 his
swoons again caused great anxiety to those about him.
This illness was preceded by a fit in Jan., 1527. Luther
informs a friend that he had " suddenly been affrighted and
almost killed by a rush or thickening of the blood in the
region of the heart," but had as quickly recovered. His
cure was, he thinks, due to a decoction of milk-thistle,3 then
considered a very efficacious remedy. The rush of blood to
the heart, of which he here had to complain, occurred at a
time when Luther had nothing to say of " temptations," but
only of the many troubles and anxieties due to his labours.

The more severe bout of illness began on July 6, 1527, at
the very time of, or just after, some unusually severe
" temptation."4 Jonas prefaces his account of it by saying
that Luther, " after having that morning, as he admitted,
suffered from a burdensome spiritual temptation, came back
partially to himself (' utcunque ad se rediit ')." The words
seem to presuppose that he had either fainted or been on the
verge of fainting.5 Having, as the same friend relates,
recovered somewhat, Luther made his confession and spoke
of his readiness for death. In the afternoon, however, he

1 See above, vol. ii., p. 170.

2 " Etwas vom kranken Luther " (" Deutsch-evang. Bl.," 29, 1904,
p. 303 ff.), p. 305.

3 To Spalatin, Jan. 13, 1527, " Brief wechsel," 6, p. 12 : "me subito
sanguinis coagulo circum prcecordia angustiatum pceneque exanimatum
fuisse"

4 Cp. vol. v., p. 333, above, and Kostlin- Kawerau, 2, p. 168.

5 " Briefwechsel des Jonas," ed. Kawerau, 1, p. 104 ff. ; also
" Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 160 sqq. Cp. Bugenhagen's account in
his " Briefe," ed. Vogt, p. 64 ff.

104 INNER TROUBLES

complained of an unendurable buzzing in his left ear which
soon grew into a frightful din in his head. Bugenhagen,
in his narrative, is of opinion that the cause of the mischief
here emerges plainly, viz. that it was the work of the devil.
A fainting fit ensued which overtook Luther at the door of
his bedchamber. When laid on his bed he complained of
being utterly exhausted. His body was rubbed with cloths
wrung out of cold water and then warmth was applied. The
patient now felt a little better, but his strength came and
went. Amongst other remarks he then passed was one,
that Christ is stronger than Satan. When saying this he
burst into tears and sobs. Finally, after application of the
remedies common at that time, he broke out into a sweat
and the danger was considered to be over.

There followed, however, the days and months of dread
ful spiritual " temptations " already described (vol. v.,
p. 333 ff.). At first the bodily weakness also persisted.
Bugenhagen was obliged to take up his abode in Luther's
house for a while because the latter was in such dread of
the temptations and wished to have help and comfort at
hand. For a whole week Luther was unable either to read
or to write.

At the end of August and again in September the fainting
fits recurred.

His friends, however, were more concerned about Luther's
mental anguish than about his bodily sufferings. The latter
gradually passed away, whereas the struggles of conscience
continued to be very severe. On Oct. 17, Jonas wrote to
Johann Lang : " He is battling amidst the waves of temp
tation and is hardly able to find any passage of Scripture
wherewith to console himself."1

In 1530 again we hear of Luther's life being endangered
by a fainting fit, though it seems to have been distinct from
the above attack of illness. This also occurred after an
alarming incident during which he believed he had actually
seen the devil. It was followed the next day by a loud
buzzing in the head. Renewed trouble in the region of the
heart, accompanied by paroxysms of fear, is reported to have
been experienced in 1536.2 After this we hear no more of

1 " Briefwechsel des Jonas," 1, p. 109 : " in illis undie tenta-
tionum." Cp. above, vol. v., pp. 334, 339.

2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 200, where we read (under Dec. 19,
1536) : " Eo die Lutherus magno paroxyamo angustia circa pectus

AILMENTS AND TEMPTATIONS 105

any such symptoms till just before Luther's death. In the
sudden attack of illness which brought his life to a close
he complained chiefly of feeling a great oppression on the
chest, though his heart was sound.1

Nervousness and other Ailments

Quite a number of Luther's minor ills seem to have been
the result of overwrought nerves due partly to his work and
the excitement of his life. Here again it is difficult to
judge of the symptoms ; unquestionably some sort of
connection exists between his nervous state and his depres
sion and bodily fears ;2 the fainting fits are even reckoned
by some as simply due to neurasthenia.

There can be no doubt that his nervousness was, to some
extent inherited, to some extent due to his upbringing. His
lively temper which enabled him to be so easily carried away
by his fancy, to take pleasure in the most glaring of exaggera
tions, and bitterly to resent the faintest opposition, proves
that, for all the vigour of his constitution, nerves played an
important part.

Already in his monastic days his state was aggravated by
mental overstrain and the haste and turmoil of his work
which led him to neglect the needs of the body. His un
interrupted literary labours, his anxiety for his cause, his
carelessness about his health and his irregular mode of life
reduced him in those days to a mere skeleton. At Worms
the wretchedness of his appearance aroused pity in many.
It is true that when he returned from the Wartburg he was
looking much stronger, but the years 1522-25, during which
he led a lonely bachelor's life in the Wittenberg monastery,
without anyone to wait on him, and sleeping night after
night on an unmade bed, brought his nervous state to such
a pitch that he was never afterwards able completely to
master it. On the contrary, his nervousness grew ever
more pronounced, tormenting him in various ways.

decubuit" The dates given in the Table-Talk are not as a rule alto
gether reliable, but here they may be trusted because they happen to
coincide with a portent in the sky looked upon as a bad omen.

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 622 f.

2 We may here call attention to what will be said in the next
chapter concerning similar phenomena in Luther's early days. This
chapter, no less than the present one, is important for forming a just
opinion on Luther's pathological dispositions.

106 INNER TROUBLES

So little, however, did he understand it that it was to the
devil that he attributed the effects, now dubiously, now
with entire conviction.

Among these effects must be included the buzzing in the
head and singing in the ears, to which Luther's letters
allude for many a year. When, at the end of Jan., 1529, the
violent " agonies and temptations " recurred, the buzzing
in the ears again made itself felt. He writes : " For more
than a week I have been ailing from dizziness and humming
in the head (' vertigo et bombus '), whether this be due to
fatigue or to the malice of the devil I do not know. Pray
for me that I may be strong in the faith."1 He also com
plains of this trouble in the head in the next letter, dating
from early in Feb.2 He was then unable to preach or to give
lectures for nearly three weeks.3

He goes on to say of himself : " In addition to the buffets
of the angel of Satan [the temptations] I have also suffered
from giddiness and headache."4 It was, however, as he
himself points out, no real illness : " Almost constantly is
it my fate to feel ill though my body is well."5

In the new kind of life he had to lead in the Castle of
Coburg in 1530, when, to want of exercise, was added over
work and anxiety of mind, these neurasthenic phenomena
again reappeared. He compares the noises in his head to
thunder, or to a whirlwind. There was also present a
tendency to fainting. At times he was unable even to look
at any writing, or to bear the light owing to the weakness of
his head.6 Simultaneously the struggle with his thoughts
gave him endless trouble ; thus he writes : " It is the angel
of Satan who buffets me so, but since I have endured death
so often for Christ, I am quite ready for His sake to suffer
this illness, or this Sabbath-peace of the head."7 " You
declare," he says laughingly in a letter to Melanchthon,
" that I am pig-headed, but my pig-headedness is nothing

1 To Johann Hess at Breslau, Jan. 31, 1529, " Brief wechsel," 7,
p. 50.

8 To Johann Agricola, Feb. 1, 1529, ib., p. 51.
3 Enders, ib., p. 54, n. 3.

* To Nicholas Hausmann at Zwickau, Feb. 13, 1529, ib., p. 63.

* To the same, March 3, 1529, ib., p. 61 : "fere assidue cogor sanus
asgrotare."

* To Melanchthon, Aug. 1, 1530, ib., 8, p. 162 : " ut neque tuto
legere litteras passim nequc lucem ferre " — common symptoms of
neurasthenia. 7 Ib.

AILMENTS AND TEMPTATIONS 107

compared with that of my head (' caput eigensinnigis-
simum ') j1 so powerfully does Satan compel me to make
holiday and to waste my time."1 Towards the middle of
August his head improved, but the tiresome buzzing fre
quently recurred. Luther complained later that, during
this summer, he had been forced to waste half his time.2

When, from this time onwards, " we hear him ever saying
that he feels worn-out (' decrepitus '), weary of life and
desirous of death ... all this is undoubtedly closely bound
up with these nerve troubles."3 The morning hours became
for him the worst, because during them he often suffered
from dizziness. After his " prandium," between nine and ten
o'clock, he was wont to feel better. As a rule he slept well.

The attacks which occurred early in 1532 must also be
noted.

In Jan., so his anxious pupil Veit Dietrich writes, Luther
had a foreboding of some illness impending and fancied it
would come in March ; in reality it came on on Jan. 22.
" Very early, about four o'clock, he felt a violent buzzing in
his ears followed by great weakness of the heart." His
friends were summoned at his request as he did not wish to
be alone. " When, however, he had recovered and had his
wits about him (' confirmato animo '), he proceeded to storm
against the Papists, who were not yet to make gay over
his death." " Were Satan able," he says, " he would
gladly kill me ; at every hour he is at my heels." " The
physician declared," so the account goes on, " after having
examined the urine, that Luther stood in danger of an
attack of apoplexy, which indeed he would hardly escape."
The prediction was, however, not immediately verified and
the patient was once more able to leave his bed. On Feb. 9,
however (if the date given in the Notes be correct),4 after
assisting at a funeral in the church of Torgau, he was again
seized with such a fit of giddiness as hardly to be able to
return to his lodgings. When he recovered he said : " Do
not be grieved even should I die, but continue to further

1 Aug. 3, 1530, ib., 8, p. 166. Cp. above, vol. v., p. 346.

s To Hans Honolcl at Augsburg, Oct. 2, 1530, Erl. ed., 54, p. 196
(" Briefwechsel," 8, p. 275).

8 Kawerau, " Etwas vom kranken Luther," p. 313.

4 Dietrich's Latin account, ed. Seidemann, " Sachs. Kirchen- und
Schulblatt," 1876, p. 355. Cp. Kuchenmeister, " Luthers Kranken -
gesch.," p. 71 ; Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 264 ; Kawerau, " Etwas vom
kranken Luther," p. 314.

108 INNER TROUBLES

the Word of God after my death. ... It may be we are
still sinners and do not perform our duty sufficiently ; if so
we shall cloak it over with the forgiveness of sins." This
time again he was not able to work for a whole month.

What he at times endured from the trouble in his head
we learn from a statement in the Notes of the Table-Talk
made by Cordatus : " When I awake and am unable to sleep
again on account of the noise in my ears, I often fancy I can
hear the bells of Halle, Leipzig, Erfurt and Wittenberg, and
then I think : Surely you are going to have a fit. But God
frequently intervenes and gives me a short sleep after
wards."1

No notable improvement took place until the middle
of 1533.

The noises in the head began again in 1541. He fancied
then that he could hear " the rustling of all the trees and
the breaking of the waves of every sea " in his head.2 When
he wrote this he was also suffering from a discharge from the
ear, which, for the time, deprived him of his hearing ; so
great was the pain as to force tears from him. Alluding to
this he says that his friends did not often see him in tears,
but that now he would gladly weep even more copiously ;
to God he had said : " Let there be an end either of these
pains or of me myself," but, now that the discharge had
ceased, he was beginning to read and write again quite
confidently.3

From the commencement of his struggle, however, until
the end of his life his extreme nervous irritability found
expression in the violence of what he said and wrote. There
can be no question that, had he not been in a morbidly
nervous state, he would never have given way to such out
bursts of anger and brutal invective. " There was a
demoniacal trait," says a Protestant Luther biographer,
" that awakened in him as soon as he met an adversary, at
which even his fellow-monks had shuddered, and which
carried him much further than he had at first intended."
He became the " rudest writer of his age." In his contro
versy with the Swiss Sacramentarians he " was domineering
and high-handed." " His disputatiousness and tendency to

1 Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 125.

3 To Melanchthon, April 12, 1541, " Brief wechsel," 13, p. 300.

3 Ib

AILMENTS AND TEMPTATIONS 109

pick a quarrel grew ever stronger in him after his many
triumphs."1 — But, even among his friends and in his home,
he was careless about controlling his irritation. We find
him exclaiming : " I am bursting with anger and annoy
ance " ; as we know, he excited himself almost " to death "
about a nephew and threatened to have a servant-maid
" drowned in the Elbe."2 (Cp. the passages from A. Cramer
quoted below, towards the end of section 5.)

Other maladies and indispositions, of which the effects
were sometimes lasting, also deserve to be alluded to. Of
these the principal and worst was calculus of which we first
hear in 1526 and then again in 1535, 1536 and 1545. In
Feb., 1537, Luther was overtaken by so severe an attack
at Schmalkalden that his end seemed near. — In 1525 he had
to complain of painful haemorrhoids, and at the beginning
of 1528 similar troubles recurred. The " malum Francice,"
on the other hand, cursorily mentioned in 1523,3 is not
heard of any more. The severe constipation from which he
suffered in the Wartburg also passed away. Luther was
also much subject to catarrh, which, when it lasted, caused
acute mental depression. The " discharge in his left leg "
which continued for a considerable while4 during 1533 had
no important after-effects.

The maladies just mentioned, to which must be added
an attack of the " English Sweat," in 1529, do not afford
sufficient grounds for any diagnosis of his physical and
mental state in general.5 On the other hand, the oppression
in the praecordial region and his nervous excitability are
of great importance to whoever would investigate his
general state of health.

The so-called Temptations no Mere Morbid Phenomena

Anyone who passes in review the startling admissions
Luther makes concerning his struggles of conscience (above,
vol. v., pp. 319—75), or considers the dreadful self-reproaches
to which his apostasy and destruction of the olden ecclesi
astical system gave rise, reproaches which lead to " death

Hausrath, " Luthers Leben," 2, 1904, pp. 189, 223, 226.
Cp. above vol. v., pp. 107-10, and vol. iv., p. 284 ff.
See vol. ii., p. 163, n. 3.
KOstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 268.

On uric acid and gout as the explanation of all his bodily troubles,
see below, xxxvi. 5.

110 INNER TROUBLES

and hell," and which he succeeded in mastering only by
dint of huge effort, cannot fail to see that these mental
struggles were something very different from any physical
malady. Since, however, some Protestants have repre
sented mere morbid " fearfulness " as the root-cause of the
" temptations," we must — in order not to be accused of
evading any difficulties — look into the actual connection
between natural timidity and the never-ending struggles
of soul which Luther had to wage with himself on account
of his apostasy.

Luther's temptations, according to his own accurate and
circumstantial statements, consisted chiefly of remorse of
conscience and doubts about his undertaking ; they made
their appearance only at the commencement of his apostasy,
whereas the morbid sense of fear was present in him long
before. Of such a character were the " terrores " which led
him to embrace monasticism, the unrest he experienced
during his first zealous years of religious life, and the dread
of which he was the victim while saying his first Mass and
accompanying Staupitz in the procession ; this morbid fear
is also apparent in the monk's awful thoughts on pre
destination and in his subsequent temptations to despair.
Moreover, such crises, characterised by temptations and
disquieting palpitations ending in fainting fits, were in every
case preceded by " spiritual temptations," and only after
wards did the physical symptoms follow. Likewise the
bodily ailments occasionally disappeared, leaving behind
them the temptations, though Luther seemed outwardly
quite sound and able to carry on his work.1

Hence the " spiritual temptations " or struggles of con
science were of a character in many respects independent
of this morbid state of fear.

They occur, however, on the one hand, in connection with
other physical disorders, as in the case of the attack of the
" English Sweat " or influenza which Luther had in 1529, and
which was accompanied by severe mental struggles ; on the
other hand, they appear at times to excite the bodily emotion
of fear and in very extreme cases undoubtedly tended to
produce entire loss of sleep and appetite, cardiac disturbance
and fainting fits. Luther himself once said, in 1533, that
his " gloomy thoughts and temptations " were the cause of

1 Cp. above, vol. v., 333 ff.

AILMENTS AND TEMPTATIONS 111

the trouble in his head and stomach j1 in his ordinary
language the temptations were, however, " buffets given
him by Satan."2 He is fond of clothing the temptations in
this Pauline figure and of depicting them as his worst trials,
and only quite exceptionally does he call his purely physical
sufferings " colaphi Satance," they, too, coming from Satan.
Now we cannot of course entirely trust Luther's own
diagnosis — otherwise we should have to reduce all his
maladies to a work of evil spirits — yet his feeling that the
"temptations" were on the one hand a malady in them
selves and on the other a source of many other ills, should
carry some weight with us.

It is also clear that, in the case of an undertaking like
Luther's, and given his antecedents, remorse of conscience
was perfectly natural even had there been no ailment
present. It was impossible that a once zealous monk should
become faithless to his most solemn vows and, on his own
authority and on alleged discoveries in the Bible, dare to
overthrow the whole ecclesiastical structure of the past
without in so doing experiencing grave misgivings. Add to
this his violence, his " wild-beast fury " (J. von Walther),
his practical contradictions and the theological mistakes
which he was unable to hide. Hence we need have no
scruple about admitting what is otherwise fairly evident,
viz. that his ghostly combats stand apart and cannot be
attributed directly to any bodily ailment.

It remains, however, true that such struggles and tempta
tions throve exceedingly on the morbid fear which lay hidden
in the depths of his soul. It must also be granted that
neurasthenia sometimes gives rise to symptoms of fear
similar to those experienced by Luther, as we shall hear
later on from an expert in nervous diseases, whom we shall
have occasion to quote (see section 5 below). Consideration
for such facts oblige the layman to leave the question open

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 268.

2 For the different passages quoted cp. " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 2,
p. 315 : Other temptations were nothing compared with this interior
" angelus Sathance colaphizans, <r/c6Xoi/'," where a man is nailed to the
gibbet. Cp. " Brief wechsel," 7, p. 53 : " Ego vertigine seu capite
hactenus laboravi, prceter ea quce angelus Sathance operatur. Tu ora pro
me Deum, ut confortet me in fide et verbo suo " (to N. Hausmann, Feb. 13,
1529). The " sting of the flesh " was not in his case, as has been
asserted, the result of nervousness, but an intellectual temptation to
waver in the " faith " he preached, and to doubt of the " Word."

112 INNER TROUBLES

as to how much of Luther's fear is to be attributed to
nervousness or to other physical drawbacks.

We do not think it desirable here to enter further into the
views of the older Catholic polemics, already referred to,
who looked upon Luther as possessed (as labouring under an
" obsessio " or at least a " circumsessio "). The fits of terror
he endured both before and after his apostasy seemed to
them to prove that he was really a demoniac. As already
pointed out above (vol. iv., p. 359), this field is too obscure
and too beset with the danger of error to allow of our
venturing upon it.1 Quite another matter is it, however,
with regard to temptations, with which, according to Holy
Scripture and the constant teaching of the Church, the devil
is allowed to assail men, and to discuss which in Luther's
case we will now proceed, using his own testimonies.

2. Psychic Problems of Luther's Religious Development

From the beginning of his apostasy and public struggle
we find in Luther no peace of soul and clearness of outlook ;
rather, he is the plaything of violent emotions. He himself
complains of having to wrestle with gloomy temptations of
the spirit. It is these that we now propose to investigate
more narrowly. In so doing we must also examine how
his nervous state reacted on these temptations, whereby we
shall, maybe, discern more clearly than before the con
nection of Luther's doctrine with his distress of soul.

Temptations to Despair

As to the temptations admitted by Luther to be such, we
must first of all recall the involuntary thoughts of despair
which occurred to him in the convent and the inclination he
felt, against his will, to abandon all hope of his salvation
and even to blaspheme God. Everybody in the least
acquainted with the spiritual life knows that such darkening
of the soul may be caused by the Spirit of Evil and often
accompanies certain morbid conditions of the body. When
the two, as is often the case, are united, the effects are all

1 Cp. the numerous statements of contemporaries who were unable
to explain Luther's uncanny behaviour, his " infernal outbreaks of
fury" and morbid hatred of the Pope (above, vol. v., p. 232 f.), other
wise than by supposing him to be possessed or mad (vol. iv., p. 351 ff.).

TEMPTATIONS TO DESPAIR 113

the more far-reaching. Now, on his own showing, this was
precisely the case with the unhappy inmate of the Erfurt
monastery. Luther felt himself compelled, as he says, to
lay bare his temptations (the " horrendce et terrificce cogita-
tiones") to Staupitz in confession.1 The latter comforted
him by pointing out the value of such temptations as a
mental discipline. Staupitz, and others too, had, however,
also told him that his case was to some extent new to them
and beyond their comprehension.2 Hence, understood by
none, he passed his days sunk in sadness. All to whom he
applied for consolation had answered him : " I do not
know."3 His fancy must, indeed, have strayed into strange
bypaths for both Pollich, the Wittenberg professor, and
Cardinal Cajetan expressed amazement at the oddness of
his thoughts.

His theological system finally became the pivot around
which his thoughts revolved ; to it he looked for help. He
had created it under the influence of other factors to which
it is not here needful to refer again ; particularly it had
grown out of his own relaxation in the virtues of his Order
and religious life.4 His system, however, had for its aim
to combat despair, overmastering concupiscence and the
consciousness of sin by means of a self-imposed tranquillity.
He was determined to arrive by main force at peace and
certainty. Only little by little, so he wrote in 1525, had he
discovered, " God leads down to hell those whom He
predestines to heaven, and makes alive by slaying " ;
whoever had read his writings " would understand this now
very well " ; a man must learn to despair utterly of him
self, and allow himself to be helplessly saved by the action
of God, i.e. by virtue of the forgiveness won by fiducial
faith.5 How he himself was led by God down to hell he sets
forth in his " Resolutiones" in the account of his mental
sufferings given above (p. 101 f.), a passage which transports
the reader into the midst of the pains which Luther endured
in his anxiety.

1 To Hier. Weller (July ?), 1530, " Brief wechsel," 8, p. 159 f.

2 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 9, of Staupitz : " dicebat, ge
nunquam sensisse"

* Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 129.

4 See vol. i., pp. 120 ff., 223 ff., 269 ft'.

6 Weim. ed., 18, p. 633 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 154.

VI.— I

114 INNER TROUBLES

The man most deeply initiated into the darker side of Luther's
temptations and struggles was the friend of his youth, the
Augustinian, Johann Lang. He, too, apparently suffered
severely beneath the burden of temptations regarding predestina
tion and the forgiveness of sins. It was in a letter to him, that,
not long after the nailing up of the Wittenberg Theses, Luther
penned those curious words : They would pray earnestly for one
another, " that our Lord Jesus may help us to bear our tempta
tions which no one save us two has ever been through."1 Shortly
before this Luther had commended to the care of his friend, then
prior at Erfurt, a young man, Ulrich Finder of Nuremberg, who
had opened his heart to him at Wittenberg ; on this occasion he
wrote that Finder was "troubled with secret temptations of soul
which hardly anyone in the monastery with the exception of
yourself understands."2 He also alludes to the temptations
peculiar to himself in that letter to Lang, in 1516, in which he
describes his overwhelming labours, which " seldom leave him
due time for reciting the hours or saying Mass." On the top of
his labours, he says, there were " his own temptations from the
world, the flesh and the devil."3 To this same recipient of his
confidences Luther was wont regularly to give an account of the
success attending his attacks on the ancient Church and doctrine ;
he kindled in him a burning hatred of those Augustinians at
Erfurt who were well disposed towards scholasticism and
Aristotle, and forwarded him the controversial Theses for the
Disputations at the Wittenberg University embodying his new
doctrine of the necessity of despairing of ourselves and of mysti
cally dying, viz. the new " Theology of the Cross."

Some mysterious words addressed to Staupitz, in which Luther
hints at his inward sufferings, find their explanation when taken
in conjunction with the above. He assured Staupitz (Sep. 1,
1518) in a letter addressed to him at Salzburg, that the summons
to Rome and the other threats made not the slightest impression
on him : " I am enduring incomparably worse things, as you
know, which make me look upon such fleeting, shortlived thunders
as very insignificant."4 His temptations against God and His
Mercy were of a vastly different character. By the words just
quoted he undoubtedly meant, says Kostlin, " those personal,
inward sufferings and temptations, probably bound up with
physical emotions, to which Staupitz already knew him to be
subject and which frequently came upon him later with renewed
violence. They were temptations in which, as at an earlier date,
he was plunged into anxiety concerning his personal salvation as
soon as he started pondering on the hidden depths of the Divine
Will."6

Nov. 11, 1517, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 126.
July 16, 1517, ib., p. 102.

Oct. 26, 1516, ib., p. 67 : " prceter propriaa tentationea cum came
mundo et diabolo" Cp. above, vol. i., p. 275.
" Brief wechsel," 1. p. 223.
Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 196.

PSEUDO-MYSTICISM 115

The Shadow of Pseudo-Mysticism

In this connection it will be necessary to return to Luther's
earlier predilection for a certain kind of mysticism.1

As we know, at an early date he felt drawn to the writings of
the mystics, for one reason, because he seemed to himself to find
there his pet ideas about spiritual death and wholesome despair.
Their description of the desolation of the soul and of its apparent
abandonment by God appeared to him a startling echo of his own
experiences. He did not, however, understand or appreciate
aright the great mystics, particularly Tauler, when he read into
them his own peculiar doctrine of passivity.

To a certain extent throughout his whole life he stood under
the shadow of this dim, sad mysticism.

He will have it that he, like the mystics, had frequently been
plunged in the abyss of the spirit, had been acquainted with
death and with states weird and unearthly. He refuses to relate
all he has been through and actually gives as his ground for
silence the very words used by St. Paul when speaking of his own
revelations : " But I forbear, lest any man should think of me
above that which he seeth in me, or anything he heareth from
me " (2 Cor. xii. 6). When speaking thus of the mystic death
he fails to distinguish between such thoughts and feelings as may
have been the result solely of a morbid state of fear, or of remorse
of conscience, and the severe trials through which the souls of
certain great and holy men had really to pass.

It is indeed curious to note how he was led astray by a com
bination of fear, mysticism and temptation.

He was deluded into seeing in his own states just what he
desired, viz. the proof of the truth of his own doctrine and
exalted mission to proclaim it ; he will not hear of this being a
mere figment of his own brain. On the contrary, he is convinced
that he, like the inspired Psalmist, has passed through every kind
of the terrors which the latter so movingly describes. Like the
Psalmist, he too must pray, " O Lord, chastise me not in thy
wrath," and like him, again, he is justified in complaining that
his bones are broken and his soul troubled exceedingly (Ps. vi.).
He even opines that those who have endured such things rank
far above the martyrs ; David, according to him, would much
rather have perished by the sword than have " endured this
murmuring of his soul against God which called forth God's
indignation."2

There is no doubt that Johann Lang might have been able to
tell us much about these gloomy aberrations of Luther's, for he
had a large share in Luther's development.

It is worthy of note that it was to this bosom friend that

1 Cp. above, vol. i., p. 166 ff., and, in particular, pp. 230-40.

2 Lauterbach. " Tagebuch," p. 50 : " illos horrores contra Deum,''
etc., March 29, 1538.

116 INNER TROUBLES

Luther sent his edition of " Eyn Deutsch Theologia." 1 " Taulerus
tuus" ("Your Tauler"2) so he calls the German mystic when
writing to his friend, and in a similar way, in a letter to Lang,
he speaks of the new theology built entirely on grace and passive
reliance as " our theology." " Our theology and St. Augustine,"
he says, " are progressing bravely at our University and gam
ing the upper hand, thanks to the working of God, whereas
Aristotle is now taking a back seat."3 We must not be of those
who, " like Erasmus, fail to give the first place to Christ and
grace," so he writes to Lang, knowing that here he would meet
with a favourable response. The man who " knows and acknow
ledges nothing but grace alone " judges very differently from one
" who attributes something to man's free-will."4

It was not long before Luther's pseudo-mysticism trans
lated itself into deeds. He persuades himself that he is
guided in all his actions and resolutions by a sort of Divine
inspiration. A singular sort of super-naturalism and self-
sufficiency gleams in the words he once wrote to Lang.
After reminding him of the unquestioned truth, that " man
must act under God's power and counsel and not by his
own," he goes on to explain defiantly, that, for this reason,
he scorns once and for all any objections the Erfurt Augus-
tinians might urge against the " paradoxical theses " he had
sent them a little earlier, also their charge that he had shown
himself hasty and precipitate : God was enough for him ;
of their counsel and instruction he stood in no need.5 As
though real wisdom and true mysticism did not teach us to
welcome humbly the opinion of well-meaning critics, and
not to trust too implicitly our own ideas, particularly in
fields where one is so liable to trip. But the " Theology of
the Cross," sealed by his fears, now seemed to him above all
controversy. During his temptations he had come to see
its truth, and it also fell in marvellously with his changed
views on the duties of a religious and with his renunciation
of humility and self-denial.

At a time when mysticism and the study of Tauler still
exercised a powerful influence over him he was wont in his fits
of terror to revert to Tauler's misapprehended considerations
on the inward trials of the soul.

In pursuance of this idea and hinting at his own mental state
he declares in his " Operationes in psalmos " (1519-21), that,
according to St. Paul (Rom. v. 3 f.), tribulations work in us

1 June 4, 1518, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 207.

2 (In Sep. ?) 1516, ib., p. 55. » May 18, 1517, ib., p. 100.

4 March 1, 1517, ib., p. 88. 6 Nov. 11, 1517, ib., p. 124.

PSEUDO-MYSTICISM 117

patience and trial and hope, and thus the love of God and
justification ; tribulation, however, consisted chiefly of inward
anxiety, and trial called for patience and calm endurance of this
anxiety ; the greater the tribulation, the higher would hope rise
in the soul. " Thus it is plain that the Apostle is speaking of the
assurance of the heart in hope,1 because, after anxiety cometh
hope, and then a man feels that he hopes, believes and loves."
" Hence Tauler, the man of God, and also others who have
experienced it, say that God is never more pleasing, more lovable,
sweeter and more intimate with His sons than after they have
been tried by temptation." 2 It is quite true that Tauler said this ;
he also teaches that the greater the desolation by which God tries
the souls of the elect, the higher the degree of mystical union to
which He wishes to call them ; for death is the road to life. It is
quite another thing, however, whether Tauler would have
approved of Luther's application of what he wrote.

Luther also refers both to Tauler and to himself elsewhere in the
" Operationes," where he speaks of the fears of conscience
regarding the judgment of God which no one can understand
who had not himself experienced them ; Job, David, King
Ezechias and a few others had endured them ; " and finally
that German theologian, Johannes Tauler, often alludes to such
a state of soul in his sermons."3 Tauler, however, when speaking
of such afflictions, is thinking of those souls who seek God and
are indeed united to Him in love, but who are tried and purified
by the withdrawal of sensible grace, and by being made to feel
a sense of separation from Him and the burden of their nature.

In his church-postils he again summons Tauler to his aid in
order to depict the fears with which he was so familiar, seeking
consolation, as it were, both for himself and for others. In his
sermon for the 2nd Sunday in Advent (1522) he speaks of " those
exalted temptations concerning death and hell, of which Tauler
wrote." Evidently speaking from experience he says : " This
temptation destroys flesh and blood, nay, penetrates into the
marrow of the bones and is death itself, so that no one can
endure it unless marvellously borne up. Some of the patriarchs
tasted this, for instance, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David and
Moses, but, towards the end of the world, it will become more
common." Finally, he assures his hearers, that, there were such
as were " still daily tried " in this way, " of which but few people
are aware ; these are men who are in the agony of death, and
who grapple with death " ; still Christ holds out the hope that
they are not destined to death and to hell ; on the other hand, it
is certain that the " world, which fears nothing, will have to
endure, first death, and, after that, hell."4

1 Luther wrote this about the time of the " Tower incident " (above,
vol. i., p. 377 ff.)» when engaged in wrestling after " certainty."

* Weim. ed., 5, p. 165. Cp. W. Kohler, " Luther und die KG.," I, 1
(1900), p. 260.

3 " Werke," ib., p. 203 ; Kohler, ib., p. 259.

4 Erl. ed., 10», p. 67.

118 INNER TROUBLES

Other Ordeals

Other temptations that assailed Luther must be taken
into account. Unfortunately he does not say what " new "
form of temptation it was of which he wrote to Johann Lang
in 1519. He says : A temptation had now befallen him
which showed him " what man was, though he had fondly
believed that he was already well enough aware of this
before " ; he felt it even more severely than the trials he
had to endure before the Leipzig Disputation ; he would
discuss it with him only by word of mouth when Lang came
to see him.1 Is he here referring to temptations of the
flesh of an unusual degree of intensity ? We have already
heard him bewail his temptations to ambition and hate.
Moreover, in this very year he speaks of temptations against
chastity in his Sermon on Marriage : It is a " shameful
temptation," he says ; " I have known it well, and I imagine
you too are acquainted with it ; ah, I know well how it is
when the devil comes and excites and inflames the flesh. . . .
When one is on fire and the temptation comes I know well
what it is ; then the eye is already blind."2 Already before
this he had had to fight against " very many temptations "
of the sort, which are " wont to attend the age of youth."3
Later on they startled him by their waxing strength. Of
the temptations of the senses (" titillatio ") to which he was
exposed he had complained, for instance, in the same year
(1519) in a letter to his superior Staupitz,4 and the worldly
intercourse into which he was drawn, " the social gather
ings, excessive indulgence in the pleasures of the table, and
general lukewarmness," of which he speaks on the same
occasion, make such temptations all the more likely in the
case of a young man of a temper so lively and impression
able, especially as his lukewarmness took the shape of
neglect of prayer and the means of grace, and of the help he
might have derived from the exercises of the Order.

Such fleshly temptations he bewailed even more loudly
when at the Wartburg. There, as we may recall, he became

1 " Brief wechsel," 2, p. 70.

1 Weim. ed., 9, p. 215 ; Erl. ed., 162, p. 52, in the first non-expur
gated form of the sermon (cp. above, vol. ii., p. 148).

3 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 19, p. 100.

4 Feb. 20, 1519, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 431. For " titillatio " see
vol. ii., p. 94.

TEMPTATIONS OF THE FLESH 119

the plaything of evil lust (" libido ") and the " fire of his
untamed flesh." " Instead of glowing in spirit, I glow in
the flesh."1 Admitting that he himself " prayed and
groaned too little for the Church of God," he exclaims :
" Pray for me, for in this solitude I am falling into the abyss
of sin ! "2 Though in bodily health and well cared for, he is
" being well pounded by sins and temptations," so he wrote
to his old friend Johann Lang.

To all this was still added great trouble of conscience con
cerning his undertaking as a whole. When he was passion
ately declaring that his misgivings were from the devil and
resolving never to flinch in his antagonism to the hated
vow of chastity he was himself falling into the state which
he himself describes : " You see how I burn within (' quantis
urgear cestibus ')." This to Melanchthon, after having
explained to him the struggle waging within between his
feelings and his knowledge of the Bible in the matter of the
vow of chastity. He is being carried away to take action,
and yet is unable, as he here admits, to prove his object by
means of the text of Scripture.3 He feels himself to be " the
sport of a thousand devils " in the Wart burg on account of
this and other temptations ; he falls frequently, yet the
right hand of God upholds him.4 The castle is full of devils,
so he wrote from within its walls, and very cunning devils
to boot, who never leave him at peace but behave in such
a way that he "is never alone " even when he seems to
be so.5 Hence he was writing " partly under the stress of
temptation, partly in indignation." What he was writing
was his " De votis monasticis," by means of which, as he
here says, he is about " to free the young folk from the hell
of celibacy."6

Ten years later he still recalls the " despair and the
temptation concerning God's wrath " which had then been
raging within him.7

1 To Melanchthon, July 13, 1521, " Briefwechsel," 3, p. 189. An
attempt has been made to deprive the word libido of the sense it
always has with Luther (cp. 1st Comm. on Galatians, 1519, and the
later Commentary of 1531). It was alleged to mean "nothing more
than an unusual desire for food and drink " ; in the same way
the word " flesh " was taken merely as the antithesis of " spirit," i.e.
the Holy Ghost !

2 76., p. 193 : " peccatis immergor in hac solitudine."

3 Aug. 3, 1521, ib., p. 213.

« To Nicholas Gerbel of Strasburg, Nov. 1, 1521, ib., p. 240.

5 To Spalatin, Nov. 11, 1521, ib., p. 247 f.

• 76. 7 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 9.

120 INNER TROUBLES

His temptations at that time must have been rendered
even worse by the morbid conditions then awakening in him,
by the dismal, racking sense of fear that peopled his imagina
tion with thousands of devils, and the mental confusion
resulting from his state of nervous overstrain.

It would carry us too far to pursue the diabolical tempta
tions to despair (or what he held to be such) throughout the
rest of his life, and to examine their connection with his
maladies. We shall only remark, that, even at a later date,
when we find him the butt of severe temptations of this sort,
an under-current of other trouble is frequently to be
detected. The " terrors " he endured in his youthful years
indeed moderated but never altogether disappear. The
" spiritual sickness " of 1537 of which he speaks, when for
a whole fortnight he could scarcely eat, drink or sleep, shows
the degree to which these thoughts of despair and struggles
of conscience could reach.

Summary

To sum up what we have said of Luther's temptations, a
distinction must be made between the temptations of the
Evil One, which Luther himself regarded as such, and
certain other things the real nature of which he failed to
grasp. Moreover, there are those " temptations " which
bore on his work and doctrines and which he wrongly
regarded as temptations of the devil, whereas they were no
more than the prick of conscience. All three are at times
reacted on by a morbid state which he likewise failed
rightly to understand, but which was made up of that
predisposition to anxiety to which his nature was so prone
and a kind of nervous irritability due to his struggles and
over-great labours. Only those of the first and second class
have any title to be regarded as temptations.

To the first class, i.e. to the temptations he felt and
described as such, belongs first of all that despair which
often disquieted him even in his later years ; then again the
temptations of the flesh of which we have also heard him
speak. Though he ascribes both to the machinations of the
Evil One, yet his method of fighting them was fatally
mistaken. The temptations to despair he withstood by
his erroneous doctrine of grace and faith alone, and, the
more such thoughts torment him, the more defiantly does

TEMPTATIONS OF THE FLESH 121

he stand by this doctrine. In the case of the temptations
against chastity he failed to make sufficient use of the
remedies of Christian penance and piety ; on the contrary,
under the stress of their allurements, he finally saw fit to
demolish even the barrier raised by solemn vows made unto
God.

The second class of temptations, which to him, however,
did not seem to be such, includes all the mental aberrations
we have had occasion to note during the course of his life
story, particularly at the beginning of his apostasy. Here
we shall only indicate the more important. It may be
allowed that many of them masqueraded under specious
pretexts and the appearance of good ("sub specie boni").
Thus, e.g. there was something fine and inspiring in his
plans of exalting the grace of Christ at the expense of the
mere works of the faithful ; of giving the religious freedom of
the Christian full play, regardless of unwarranted human
ordinances ; of improving the cut-and-dry theology of the
day by a deeper and more positive study of the Bible ; and
of stopping the widespread decline in ecclesiastical learning
and ecclesiastical life by stronghanded reforms. He allowed
himself, however, to be altogether led astray in both the
conception and the carrying out of these plans.

There was grave peril to himself in that sort of spiritual
ism, thanks to which he so frequently attributes all his
doings to the direct inspiration and guidance of Almighty
God ; real and enlightened dependence on God is something
very different ; again, there was danger in his perverted
interpretation of the teaching of the mystics of the past,
in his exaggeration of the strength of man's sinful con
cupiscence and neglect of the remedies prescribed in ages
past, particularly of the practices of his own Order, also in
his passionate struggles against the so-called holiness-by-
works prevalent among the Augustinians, in his characteristic
violence and tendency to pick a quarrel, and, above all, in
the working of his inordinate self-esteem and unbounded
appreciation of his own achievements as the leader of the
new movement, which led him to exalt himself above all
divinely appointed ecclesiastical authority.

In the above we were obliged to hark back to Luther's
earlier days, and this we shall again have to do in the follow
ing pages. The truth is, that many of the secrets of his

122 INNER TROUBLES

earlier years can be explained only in the light of his later
life, whilst, conversely, his youth and years of ripening
manhood assist us in solving some of the riddles of later
years. Hence we cannot be justly charged with repeating
needlessly incidents that have already been related.

Just as the Wartburg witnessed the strongest tempta
tions that Luther had ever to bear, so, too, it formed the
stage of certain of those manifestations from the other world
of which he fancied himself the recipient. Such manifesta
tions, which lead one to wonder whether Luther suffered from
hallucinations, are of frequent occurrence in his story. We
shall now proceed to review them in their entirety.

3. Ghosts, Delusions, Apparitions of the Devil

In investigating the many ghostly apparitions with which
Luther believed he had been favoured, our attention is
perforce drawn to the Wartburg. We must, however, be
careful to distinguish the authentic traditions from what has
been unjustifiably added thereto. As to the explaining and
interpreting of such testimonies as have a right to be
regarded as historical, that will form the matter of a special
study. In order that the reader may build up an opinion of
his own we shall meanwhile only set on record what the
sources say, the views of those concerned being given
literally and unabridged. This method, essential though it
be for the purposes of an unbiassed examination, has too
often been set aside, recourse being had instead to mere
assertions, denials and pathological explanations.

The Statements Concerning Luther's Intercourse with
the Beyond

On April 5, 1538, Luther, in the presence of his friends,
spoke of the personal " annoyance " to which the devil had
subjected him while at the Wartburg by means of visible
manifestations. The pastor of Sublitz, then staying at
Wittenberg, had complained of being pestered at his home
by noisy spooks. ; they flung pots and pans at his head and
created other disturbances. Referring to such outward
manifestations of the spirit- world, Luther remarked : "I
too was tormented in ray time of captivity in Patmos, in

APPARITIONS 123

the castle perched high up in the kingdom of the birds.
But I withstood Satan and answered him in the words of
the Bible : God is mine, Who created man and ' set all things
under his feet ' (Ps. viii. 7). If thou hast any power over
them, try what thou canst do."1

On another occasion he related before his friend Myconius
and in the presence of Jonas and Bugenhagen, " how the
devil had twice appeared at the Wartburg in the shape of a
great dog and had tried to kill him." It is Myconius who
relates this, mentioning that it had been told him by Luther
at Gotha in 1538, 2 "in the house of Johann Loben, the
Schosser."

Of one of these two apparitions, the physician Ratze-
berger, Luther's friend, had definite information. He,
however, quotes it only as an instance of the many ghostly
things which Luther had experienced there : " Because the
neighbourhood was lonely many ghosts appeared to him
and he was much troubled by disturbances due to noisy
spooks. Among other incidents, one night, when he was
going to bed, he found a huge black bull-dog lying on his
bed that refused to let him get in. Luther thereupon com
mended himself to our Lord God, recited Ps. viii. [the same
as that mentioned above], and when he came to the verse
' Thou hast set all things under his feet ' the dog at once
disappeared and Luther passed a peaceful night. Many
other ghosts of a like nature visited him, all of whom he
drove off by prayer, but of which he refused to speak, for he
said he would never tell anyone how many spectres had
tormented him."3

According to the account of his pupil Mathesius, Luther
often " called to mind how the devil had tormented him in
mind and caused him a burning pain which sucked the very
marrow out of his bones."4 Of visible apparitions Mathesius
has, however, very little to say : " The Evil Spirit," so we
read in his account of Luther's sayings, " most likely wished
to affright me palpably, for on many nights I heard him
making a noise in my Patmos, and saw him at the Coburg
under the form of a star, and in my garden in the shape of

1 Lauterbach, '' Tagebuch," p. 55. Cp. above, vol. ii., p. 81.

2 " Myconii Historia reformationis," ed. E. S. Cyprianus, p. 42.

3 " Ratzebergers Handschriftl. Gesch.," etc., p. 54.
« " Hist.," Bl.f 196.

124 INNER TROUBLES

A black pig. But my Christ strengthened me by His Spirit
and Word so that I paid no heed to the devil's spectre."1
Mathesius, in his enthusiasm, actually goes so far as to
compare such things to Satan's tempting of Christ in the
wilderness.

The encounter with the great black dog in the Wartburg
is related in an old edition of Luther's Table-Talk with a
curious addition, which tells how Luther, on one occasion,
calmly lifted from the bed the dog, which had frequently
tormented him, carried him to the window, and threw him
out without the animal even barking. Luther had not been
able to learn anything about it afterwards from others, but
no such dog was kept in the Castle.2

Of the strange din by which the devil annoyed him within those
walls Luther speaks more in detail in the German Table-Talk.
" When I was living in Patmos ... I had a sack of hazel nuts
shut up in a box. On going to bed at night I undressed in my
study, put out the light, went to my bedchamber and got into
bed. Then the nuts began to rattle over my head, to rap very
hard against the rafters of the ceiling and bump against me in
bed ; but I paid no attention to them. After I had got to sleep
there began such a din on the stairs as though a pile of barrels
was being flung down them, though I knew the stairs were
protected with chains and iron bars so that no one could come
up ; nevertheless, the barrels kept rolling down. I got up and
went to the top of the stairs to see what it was, but found the
stairs closed. Then I said : ' If it is you, so be it,' and commended
myself to our Lord Christ of Whom it is written : ' Thou shalt
set all things under his feet,' as Ps. viii. says, and got into bed
again." All this, so the account proceeds, had been related by
Luther himself at Eisenach in 1546.3 Cordatus, however, must
have heard the story of the nuts from his own lips even before
this. He tells it in 1537 as one of the numerous instances of the
persecution Luther had had to endure from the spooks of the
Wartburg : " Then he [the devil] took the walnuts from the table
and flung them up at the ceiling the whole night long."4

It also happened (this supplements an incident touched upon
above in vol. ii., p. 95), so Luther related on the above occasion,
in 1546, that the wife of Hans Berlips, who " would much have
liked to see [Luther], which was, however, not allowed," came
to the Castle. His quarters were changed and the lady was
put into his room. " That night there was such an ado in the
room that she fancied a thousand devils were in it."5 This story
is not quite so well authenticated as the incidents which Luther

1 Ib. * Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 440.

3 Erl. ed., 59, p. 340 f. * " Tagebuch," p. 293.

5 Erl. ed., 59, p. 341.

APPARITIONS 125

relates as having happened to himself, for it is clear that he had
it directly, or indirectly, only from this lady's account. Her
anxiety to see Luther would seem to stamp her as a somewhat
eccentric person, and it may also be that she went into a room,
already reputed to be haunted, quite full of the thought of ghosts
and that her imagination was responsible for the rest.

Luther goes on to allude to another ghostly visitation, possibly
a new one. He says : On such occasions we must always say to
the devil contemptuously : "If you are Christ's Master, so be
it ! " " For this is what I said at Eisenach."1 Nothing further
is known, however, of any such occurrence having taken place at
Eisenach. He may quite well have taken Eisenach as synonymous
with the Wartburg.

To pass in review the other ghostly apparitions which occurred
during his lifetime, we must begin with his early years.

When still a young monk at Wittenberg Luther already
fancied he heard the devil making a din. " When I began to
lecture on the Psalter, and, after we had sung Matins, was
seated in the refectory studying and writing up my lecture, the
devil came and rattled in the chimney three times, just as though
someone were heaving a sack of coal down the chimney. At last,
as it did not cease, I gathered up my books and went to bed."2
" Once, too, I heard him over my head in the monastery, but,
when I noticed who it was, I paid no attention, turned over and
went to sleep again."3

Luther can tell some far more exciting stories of ghosts and
" Poltergeists," of which others, with whom he had come in
contact in youth or manhood, had been the victims. Since,
however, he seems to have had them merely on hearsay, they
may be passed over. Of himself, however, he says : "I have
learnt by experience that ghosts go about affrightening people,
preventing them from sleeping and so making them ill."4

We find also the following statement : " The devil has often
had me by the hair of my head, yet was ever forced to let me go ";6
from the context this, however, may refer to mental temptations.

He says, however, quite definitely of certain experiences he
himself had gone through in the monastery : " Oh, I saw gruesome
ghosts and visions." This was probably at the time when " no
one was able to comfort " him.6 He was referring to incidents
to which no definite date can be assigned, when, anxious to refute
their claim to illumination by the spirits, he told the fanatics :
** Ah, bah, spirits ... I too have seen spirits ! "

The Table-Talk relates how on one occasion Luther himself,
in a strange house, was witness of a remarkable spectral

1 Ib. 2 Erl. ed., 60, p. 70.

3 Mathesius, " Aufzeichn.," p. 85, where Lcesche remarks that the
Gotha Codex 263, 122 proved this by an instance taken from Luther's
life. Cp. also Erl. ed., 59, p. 337.

4 Erl. ed., 59, p. 337. 5 76., 57, p. 65.
6 76., 60. p. 108.

126 INNER TROUBLES

visitation. He is said to have related the incident and to
"have seen it with his own eyes as did also many others."1
A maiden, a friend of the old proctor [at the University], was
lying in bed ill at Wittenberg. She had a vision ; Christ appear
ing to her under a glorious form, whereupon she joyfully adored
her visitor. A messenger was at once sent " from the college to
the monastery " to fetch Luther. He came and exhorted the
young woman " not to allow herself to be deceived by the devil."
She thereupon spat in the face of the apparition. " The devil
then disappeared and the vision turned into a great snake which
made a dash at the maiden in her bed and bit her on the ear so
that the drops of blood trickled down, after which the snake was
seen no more." This story was introduced into the German
Table-Talk by Aurifaber (1566).2 The young woman was
probably hysterical and was the only beholder of the vision. In
all likelihood what the others saw was merely the blood, which
might quite well have come from a scratch otherwise caused.
The story has been quoted as a proof of the dispassionate way in
which Luther regarded visions.

As a further proof of the " sobriety which he coupled with
a faith so ardent and enthusiastic " Kostlin quotes the following :3
" He himself related this tale," the Table-Talk says [the date is
uncertain but it was after he had already begun to preach the
"Word "] ; "he was once praying busily in his cell, and thinking
of how Christ had hung on the cross, suffered and died for our
sins, when suddenly a bright light shone on the wall, and, in the
midst, a glorious vision of the Lord with His five wounds appeared
and gazed at him, the Doctor, as though it had been Christ Him
self. When the Doctor saw it he fancied at first it was something
good, but soon he bethought him it must be a devilish spectre,
because Christ appears to us only in His Word and in a lowly and
humble form, just as He hung in shame upon the cross. Hence
the Doctor adjured the vision : ' Begone thou shameless devil !
I know of no other Christ than He Who was crucified, and Who
is revealed and preached in His Word,' and soon the apparition,
which was no less than the devil in person, disappeared."4 — This
story told by his pupils must refer to some statement made by
Luther, though the dramatic liveliness of its imagery may well
lead us to suspect that it has been touched up. Some natural effect
of light and shade might well account for the appearance which
the young monk so " busy " at his prayers thought he saw.

1 /&., 58, p. 128 f. Cp. above, vol. v., p. 286 f.

2 In Aurifaber's edition, 1568, Bl. 91, 92. Stangwald, who as a rule
eliminates, as he assures us, all that was not Luther's very own, has
retained it in his edition of the Table-Talk (1571) ; likewise Selnecker
(1577). For this reason we also find it in Forstemann's 1st ed., 1844,
p. 400. It is not given in the Latin Table-Talk, but, as a comparison
with Bindseil's " Tabellen," 3, p. 471, shows, we miss in the Latin
a whole number of unquestionably authentic Luther conversations
occurring in the German editions. It is to be found in '; Werke," Erl.
ed., 58, p. 129.

3 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 517. 4 Erl. ed., 58, p. 128.

APPARITIONS 127

It is hardly possible to suppress similar doubts concerning
other accounts we have from his lips ; his statements also refer
to events which occurred long previous. At any rate, in a select
circle of his pupils, the opinion certainly prevailed that Luther
was tried by extraordinary other-world apparitions, and this
conviction was the result of remarks dropped by him.

Greater stress must be laid on those statements of his
which bear on inward experiences, where the most momentous
truths were concerned and which occurred at certain crises
of his life.

In Nov., 1525, he assured Gregory Casel, the Strasburg
theologian, in so many words, that " he had frequently
had inward experience that the body of Christ is indeed
in the Sacrament ; he had seen dreadful visions ; also
angels (' vidisse se visiones horribiles, scepe se angelos
vidisse '), so that he had been obliged to stop saying Mass."1

He spoke in this way in the course of the official negotia
tions with Casel, the delegate of the Protestant theologians
of Strasburg. The words occur in Casel's report of the inter
view published by Kolde. It is true that Luther also speaks
here of the outward " Word " as the support of his doctrine,
particularly on the Sacrament. " We shall," he says,
" abide quite simply by the words of Scripture — until the
Spirit and the unction teach us something different." He
avers that the Strasburgers who denied the Sacrament
come with their " Spirit " and wish to explain away the
words of the Bible concerning the body of Christ in the
Bread. This, however, is not the " light of the Spirit," but
the " light of reason " ; he himself had long since learnt to
reject reason in the things of God. They were not con
vinced of their cause as he was, otherwise they would defend
their teaching publicly as he did, for he would rather the
whole world were undone than be silent on God's doctrine,
because it was God's business to watch over it.

His opponents declared they had their own inward experience.
" How many inward experiences have I not had," he replies,
" at those times when my mind was idle (' cum eram otiosus ') !
All sorts of things came before my mind and everything seemed
as reasonable as could be. But, by God's grace, I addressed
myself to greater and more earnest matters and began to distrust
reason. I too, like them, was ' in dangers ' [2 Cor. xi. 26], and in
even greater ones. And if it is a question of piety of life, I hope

1 Kolde, " Anal. Lutherana," p. 72.

128 INNER TROUBLES

that there, too, we are blameless." Coming back once more to the
spirit which the Strasburgers had set up against the Word of God,
he describes in his own defence the " terrors of death he himself
had been through ('mortis horror em expertus')" and then speaks
of the angelic visions referred to above which had disturbed him
even at the Mass. 1

He also will have it that at other times he had been consoled by
angels, though he does not tell us that he had seen them. In
1532 he said to Schlaginhaufen : " God strengthened me ten
years ago by His angels, in my struggles and writings."2

Luther, repeatedly and in so many words, appeals to his
realisation of the divine truths, and it may be assumed he
imagined he felt something of the sort within him, or that he
thus interpreted certain emotions. " I am resolved to acknow
ledge Christ as Lord. And this I have not only from Holy
Scripture but also from experience. The name of Christ has
often helped me when no one was able to help. Thus I have on
my side the deed arid the Word, experience and Scripture. God
has given both abundantly. But my temptations made things
sour for me."3

The Table-Talk assures us that, " Dr. Martin proved it
from his own experience that Jesus Christ is truly God ;
this he also confessed openly ; for if Christ were not God
then there was certainly no God at all."4 It was no difficult
task for him to include himself in the ranks of those " who
had received the first fruits of the spirit."5

In addition to this, however, as will be shown below,6
he thinks his doctrine has been borne in upon him by God
through direct revelation. More than once, without any
scruple, he uses the word " revelatum " ; he is also fond of
setting this revelation in an awesome background : it had
been " strictly enjoined on him (' interminatum ') under
pain of eternal malediction " to believe in it.7

In fact a certain terror is the predominating factor in
this gloomy region where he comes in touch with the other
world. He has not merely had experience that there are

1 /6., p. 71.

2 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 39, Jan. to March, 1532. The
passage commences : " Tanta spectra vidi" seemingly referring to the
ghosts at the Wartburg.

3 Mathesius, " Aufzeichn.," p. 97. 4 Erl. ed., 58, p. 4.
5 " Opp. lat. var.," 1, p. 20. Preface dating from 1545.

• See below, p. 142 ff.

7 " Fui (dignus), cui sub ceternce irce maledictions inter minaretur, ne
ullo modo de iia dubitarem" Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 81, n. From
Khummer's " Tagebuch." Reference to some external apparition is
not excluded.

APPARITIONS

roving spirits who affright men,1 but, in a letter from the
Wart burg, he insists quite generally, that, " the visions of
the Saints are terrifying." Of course, as we well know,
delusions and hallucinations very often do assume a terrify
ing character.

Luther also asserts that " divine communications " are
always accompanied by inward tortures like unto death,
words which give us a glimpse into his own morbid state.2
And yet he fully admits elsewhere the very opposite, for
he is aware that God is, above all things, the consoler. It is
not Christ Who affrights us " ;3 and " it is Satan alone who
wounds and terrifies."4 But, in practice, according to him,
things work differently ; there the fear from which he and
others suffer comes to the fore. " We are oftentimes
affrighted even when God turns to us the friendliest of
glances."5

This change of standpoint reminds us of another instance
of the same sort. Luther's teaching on the terrifying
character of the divine action is much the same as his
theological teaching that fear is the incentive to good deeds.
While, as a rule, he goes much too far in seeking to rid the
believer of any fear of God as the Judge, preaching an
unbounded confidence and even altogether excluding fear
from the work of conversion, yet, elsewhere, he emphasises
most strongly this same fear, as called for and quite indis
pensable ; this he did in his controversies with the Anti-
nomians and, even earlier, as on the occasion of the Visita
tions, on account of its religious influence on the people.

No change or alteration is, however, apparent in the
accounts he gives above of the cases in which he came in
touch with the other world ; he sticks firmly by his state
ment that he had experienced such things both mentally and
palpably. Hence the difficulty of coming to any decision
about them.

But there are further alleged experiences, also detailed at
length, which have a place here, viz. the apparitions of the
devil himself.

1 See above, p. 125. 2 Cp. above, p. 117, etc.

3 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 42. Cp. Cordatus, " Tage-
buch," p. 95.

4 Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 127.

& Cordatus, ib., p. 95. Cp. Erl. ed., 57, p. 305.
VJ.— K

130 INNER TROUBLES

In 1530 Luther was thrown into commotion by a glimpse of
the devil, under the shape of a fiery serpent, outside the walls of
the Coburg. One evening in June, about nine o'clock, as his
then companion Veit Dietrich relates, Luther was looking out of
the window, down on the little wood surrounding the castle.
" He saw," says this witness, " a fiery, flaming serpent, which,
after twisting and writhing about, dropped from the roof of the
nearest tower down into the wood. He at once called me and
wanted to show me the ghost (' spectrum ') as I stood by his
shoulder. But suddenly he saw it disappear. Shortly after, we
both saw the apparition again. It had, however, altered its
shape and now looked more like a great flaming star lying in the
field, so that we were able to distinguish it plainly even though
the weather was rainy." Here the pupil undoubtedly did his
best to see something. On his master, however, the firm con
viction of having seen the devil made a deep impression. He had
just enjoyed a short respite after a bout of ill-health. The night
after the apparition he again collapsed and almost lost conscious
ness. On the following day he felt, so Dietrich says, " a very
troublesome buzzing in the head " ; the apparition leads the
narrator to infer that Luther's bodily trouble, which now recom
menced in an aggravated form, had been entirely " the work of
the devil."1 So certain was Luther of having seen the devil that
he mentioned the occurrence in 1531 at one of the meetings held
for the revision of his translation of the Psalms. The words of
the Psalmist concerning " sagittce " and " fulgura," etc. (Ps. xviii.
(xvii.) 15), he applies directly to his own personal experiences and
to the incident in question, " Just as I saw my devil flying over
the wood at the Coburg."2 He means by this the fading away
and disappearance of the above-mentioned fiery shape ; this
psalm speaks of a " materia ignita," which no doubt suggested
his remarks. — Later, as Mathesius relates, he said he had seen the
"evil spirit at the Coburg, in the form of a star."3 Rawer an
terms the apparition an "optical hallucination."*

By the word hallucination is understood an apparent
perception of an external object not actually present. That
the " apparition " at the Coburg and other similar ones
already mentioned or yet to be referred to were hallucina
tions is quite possible though not certain. It is true that the
excessive play Luther gave to his imagination, particularly
at the Wartburg and, later, at the Coburg, was such that it
is quite within the bounds of possibility that he fancied he

1 From the MS. quoted by Kawerau, " Zeitschr. f. kirchl. Wissen-
chaft und kirchl. Leben," 1, 1880, p. 50. Cp. F. Kiichenmeister,

" Luthers Krankengesch.," p. 67 f.

2 " Werke," Weim. ed., on the German Bible, 3, p. xlii. Risch,
" N. kirchl. Zeitschr.," 1911, p. 80.

2 Above, p. 123.

4 " Deutsch- evangel. Blatter," 29, 1904, p. 310.

APPARITIONS 131

saw or heard things which had no real existence. On the
other hand, moreover, we know what a large share his
superstition had in distorting actual facts. Hence, generally
speaking, most of the ghosts or visions he is said to have
seen can be explained by a mistaken interpretation of the
reality, without there being any need to postulate an
hallucination properly so-called. Much of what has been
related might come under the heading of illusions, though,
probably, not everything. To analyse them in detail
is, however, impossible as the circumstances are not
accurately known. Certainly no one, however much
inclined to the supernatural, who is familiar with Luther
and his times, will be content, as was once the case, to
believe that the devil sought to interfere visibly and palpably
with his person and his teaching.

As to the apparition of the devil at the Coburg in the shape of
a flame, a serpent and a star, we may point out that the whole
may well have been caused simply by a lantern or torch carried
by somebody in that lonely neighbourhood. We might also be
tempted to think of St. Elmo's fire, except that the form of the
apparition presents some difficulty. — So, too, the black dog in
the Wartburg was most likely some harmless intruder. The noise
of the nuts flying up against the ceiling may have been produced
by the creaking of a weather-cock, or of a door or shutter in
the wind [or by the rats]. Other tales again may be rhetorical
inventions, simple fictions of Luther's brain, not involving the
least suggestion of any illusion or hallucination, for instance,
when he speaks of the angels who appeared to him at Mass. Such
an apparition was a convenient weapon to use against opponents
who alleged they were under the influence of the " Spirit." . More
over, some of these tales were told so long after the event as to
leave a wide scope to the imagination.

To proceed with the accounts of the apparitions of the
devil : About the reality of two of such, Luther is quite
positive.

One of these took place close to his dwelling. The devil he then
espied in the shape of a wild-boar in his garden under his window.
" Once Martin Luther was looking out of the window," so an
account dating from 1548 tells us, " when a great black hog
appeared in the garden." He recognised it as a diabolical
apparition and jeered at Satan who appeared in this guise,
though he had once been a " beautiful angel." " Thereupon the
hog melted into nothing."1 He himself refers to this apparition

1 Alber Erasm., Dialogus vom Interim, 1548, Bl. B. III. Cp. Seide-
mann, " Theol. Stud, und Krit.," 1876, p. 564 f.

132 INNER TROUBLES

in the words already recorded, in which he classes it with the
work of the noisy spirits in the Wartburg and the " appearance of
the star " at the Coburg.1

Indeed the hog and the flaming vision at the Coburg even
found their way into his printed sermons. We read in the home-
postils : " The devil is always about us in disguise, as I myself
witnessed, taking, e.g. the form of a hog, of a burning wisp of
straw, and such like "2 (cp. above, vol. v., p. 287 ff.).

The other apparition, the one which possibly suggests most
strongly an hallucination, was that which he experienced at
Eisleben at the time he was trying to adjust the quarrels between
the Counts of Mansfeld, i.e. just before his death. We have
accounts of this from two different quarters, based on statements
made by Luther ; first that of Michael Ccelius, a friend who was
present at his death, in the funeral oration he delivered im
mediately after at Eisleben on Feb. 20, and, secondly, that of
Luther's confidant, the physician Ratzeberger. The former in
his address recounts for the edification of the people how Luther
" during his lifetime " had suffered trials and persecutions at the
hands of the devil before going to his eternal rest ; hence in this
world he had been " disturbed and troubled in his peace of mind "
by Satan. It was true that latterly he had " enjoyed some
happiness " at Eisleben, but " that had not lasted long ; one
evening indeed," so Coelius continues, " Luther had lamented
with tears, that, while raising his heart to God with gladness and
praying at his open window, he had seen the devil, who hindered
him in all his labours, squatting on the fountain and making
faces at him. But God would prove stronger than Satan, that he
knew well."3 — Ratzeberger's account quite agrees with this as
to the circumstances ; he had learnt that Luther " related the
incident to Dr. Jonas and Mr. Michael Coelius." His information
is not derived from the funeral oration just mentioned, but
clearly from elsewhere. He is right in implying that it was
Luther's habit to say his night prayers at the window ; he has,
however, some further particulars concerning the behaviour of
the devil : " It is said that when Dr. Martin Luther was saying
his night prayers to God at the open window, as his custom was
before going to bed, he saw Satan perched on the fountain that
stood outside his dwelling, showing him his posterior and jeering
at him, insinuating that all his efforts would come to nought."4
The first place, however, belongs to the account of Coelius, who,
by his mention of the tears Luther shed, sets vividly before the
reader the commotion into which the apparition, which had
occurred shortly before, had thrown him.

Excitement and trouble of mind were then pressing heavily
on the aging man. His frame of mind was caused not merely by
the quarrel between the " wrangling Counts " of Mansfield with

1 Above, p. 123f.

2 C. F. Kahnis, "Die deutsche Reformation," 1, 1872, p. 142.

3 " Luthers Werke," Walch's ed. 21, Suppl., p. 325.*
« " Handschriftl. Gesch.," etc., p. 133.

APPARITIONS 133

whom "no remonstrances or prayers brought any help,"1 not
merely by his usual " temptations," but also, as Ratzeberger tells
us, by the healing up of the incision in the left leg, he (Ratzeberger)
had made, and which now led to bodily disorders. The disorders
now made common cause with his " annoyance melancholy and
grief." The " violent mental excitement," together with the bad
effects of the healing up of the artificial wound, were, according to
this physician, what " brought about his death." Ratzeberger
was not, however, then at Eisleben and we are in possession of
more accurate accounts of the circumstances attending Luther's
death.

In explanation of Luther's singular delusion regarding the
jeering devil we may remark that he is fond af attributing the
obstacles in the way of peace to the devil's wrath and envy. " It
seems to me that the devil is mocking us," he writes of the
difficulties on Feb. 6, " may God mock at him in return ! "2 The
Eisleben councillor, Andreas Friedrich, writes to Agricola on
Feb. 17 (18) of these same concerns, that Luther, when he found
there was still no prospect of a settlement, had complained : "As
I see, Satan turns his back on me and jeers as well."3 Here,
curiously enough, we have exactly what occurred at the fountain.
If the apparition, as is highly probable, belongs somewhat later,
then we may assume that the vivid picture of the devil under
this particular shape with which Luther was so familiar led
finally to some sort of hallucination. His extravagant ideas of
Satan generally might, in fact, have been sufficient. Everything
that went against him was " Satanic," and his only hope is that
" God will make a mockery of Satan."4

The account Luther gives in his Table-Talk of the two devils
who, in his old age, accompanied him whenever he went to the
"sleep-house" may be dealt with briefly. In this passage he is
alluding in his joking way to his bodily infirmities.5 Hence the
" one or two " devils who dogged his footsteps are here described
as quite familiar and ordinary companions, which is not in keep
ing with the idea of true apparitions ; they were the nicer sort,
i.e. pretty, well-mannered devils ; they " attacked his head "
and thus caused the malady to which he was most subject, hence
in his usual style he threatens to " bid them begone into his
a ," in short he is here merely jesting. This forbids our

1 Ratzeberger, ib.

2 To Cath. Bora, " Briefe," ed. De Wette, 5, p. 786. Cp. the letter
of Feb. 7 to the same, ib., 5, p. 787 : "I think that hell and the whole
world must be empty of devils who have all forgathered here at
Eisleben on my account ; so great are the difficulties."

3 " Fiinf Brief en aus den letzten Tagen Luthers," ed. Kawerau
(" Stud, und Krit.," 54, 1881, p. 160 ff.), p. 162 : " Ut video, Sathan
nates videndas porrigit mihi et ultra derisum adest (addit ?) " ; after this,
adds Friedrich, the way was paved for some sort of reconciliation.

4 To Amsdorf, Jan. 8, 1546, " Briefe," ed. De Wette, 6, p. 773 :
" Satanica aunt hcec, sed Deus, quern rident, ridebit eos suo tempore."
Cp. also vol. v., passim.

6 Mathesius, " Aufzeichn.," p. 113. Erl. ed., 60, pp. 55, 73.

134 INNER TROUBLES

taking the statement as meant in earnest though it is twice
quoted in the German Table-Talk quite seriously. In the early
days, immediately after Luther's death, the statements con
cerning the " two devils " were, strange to say, reverently
repeated by his pupils as an historic fact ; in reality they were all
too eager to unearth miraculous incidents in his life.

At a later period, when rationalism had made some headway,
Protestant biographers of Luther as a rule preferred to say
nothing about the apparitions Luther had met with, or to treat
them as pious, harmless jests misinterpreted by his pupils.
This, however, is not at all in accordance with historic criticism.
Luther admirers of an earlier date, on the other hand, went too
far in the contrary direction and showed themselves only too
ready to follow their master into the other world, or to represent
him as holding intercourse with it. Cyriacus Spangenberg (1528-
1604), a Luther zealot, is an instance in point. In his " Theander
Lutherus," speaking of Luther " the real holy martyr," he
says : He deserved to be termed a martyr on account of the
visible hostility of the devil ; one or two devils had been in the
habit of accompanying him in his walks in the dormitory in
order to attack him, and his illnesses were caused simply by the
devil. Needless to say, he does not allow the incidents men
tioned above to escape him : Satan had tormented him at the
Coburg in the shape of a fiery star and in the garden under that of
a hog ; he had tried to deceive him in his cell under the dazzling
image of Christ, had affrighted him in the Wartburg by making a
devilish noise with the nuts, and, finally, even in his monkish
days had driven the student at a late hour from his studies by
the din he made.1

It is a fact worthy of note that the older Protestant
writers, when speaking of the apparitions Luther had, never
mention any such or any revelations of a consoling char
acter, but merely terrifying stories of devils and diabolical
persecutions. This agrees with the observation already
made above (p. 128 f.). It is evident that as good as
nothing was known of any consoling apparitions ; nor
would the mild and friendly angels have been in place in the
warlike picture which his friends transmitted of Luther.
That he did not think himself a complete stranger to such
heavenly communications has, however, been proved above,
and it may be that his imagination would have had more to
relate concerning this friendlier world above had he not
had particular reasons for being chary about speaking of such
visions.

1 p. 193 ff.

APPARITIONS 135

The Disputation with the Devil on the Mass

In Spangenberg even Luther's famous disputation with
the devil on private Masses is also made to do duty among
the other apparitions. He, like many others, takes it as an
actual occurrence and represents it as further proof of the
" real martyrdom " of his hero.1 As, conversely, this
disputation also plays a part in the works of Luther's
adversaries, it may be worth while to examine it somewhat
more narrowly. It is urged that Luther admits he had
been instructed by the devil regarding the falsity of the
Catholic doctrine of the Mass, and, that, by thus tracing it
back to the devil, he stamps with untruth an important
portion of his teaching, seeing, that, from the father of lies,
nothing but lies can be expected.

What then are we to believe concerning this disputation,
judging from Luther's own words which constitute our
sole source ? The only possible answer is, that Luther is
merely making use of a rhetorical device.

It is true, that, in his " Von der Winckelmesse " (1533), Luther
speaks in so elusive a way of his dispute with the devil, and of
the truth he had learnt from the latter, that the incident was
taken literally, not merely by Spangenberg and other of Luther's
oldest friends, but actually by Cochlseus too, and was, at a later
date, made the subject of many disquisitions. Yet, if we look
into the matter carefully, we shall find he speaks from the very
outset not of any actual apparition of the devil, but merely of
his inward promptings : " On one occasion," so he introduces
the story, " I woke up at midnight and the devil began a disputa
tion with me in my heart,1' such as he has with me " many a
night."2 He then goes on, however, to describe the disputation
as graphically as had it been a real incident.

Luther's object with the writing in question is to fling at the
Papists his arguments against private Masses under a new and
striking form. He pretends that the Papists would be at a loss to
answer Satan, but would be forced to despair " were he to bring
forward these and other arguments against them at the hour of
death." Hence he introduces himself and shows how the devil
had driven him into a corner on account of his former celebration
of Mass. As for the arguments they are his usual ones. Here, put
in the mouth of the devil, they are to overwhelm him with
despair for his former evil wont of saying Masses. The only
reason he can espy why he should not despair is that he has now
repented and no longer says the Mass.

1 /&., p. 200. 2 Erl. ed., 31, p. 311.

136 INNER TROUBLES

He himself alludes to the artifice ; writing to a friend, he says,
that by the introduction of the devil he intends to attack the
Papists " with a pamphlet of a new kind " ; even those friendly
to the Evangel would be astonished at his new way of writing ;
they were, however, to be told that this was merely a challenge
thrown to the Papists ; that it only represented himself as
driven into a corner by the devil on account of the Masses he had
formerly said, in order to induce the Papists to examine their
consciences and see how they could vindicate themselves with
regard to the Mass.1 — Thus, for once, the devil might well figure
as an upholder of Luther's doctrine.

In the course of the drama the devil never grows weary of
proving, that, owing to the Masses Luther had said, and the
idolatry he had thus practised, he had been brought to the verge
of everlasting destruction. The devil's arguments are given at
great length and Luther concedes everything save that he refuses
to despair. The statement that he should, so he urges, is worthy
of the devil, who, in his temptations, constantly confuses the
false with the true.2 Luther, here, even introduces the devil
in a quasi-comic light : " Do you hear, you great, learned man ? "
etc. " Yes, my dear chap, that is not the same," etc. In a
similar tone Luther then turns on the Papists who say to him :
" Are you a great Doctor and yet have no answer ready for the
devil ? "

Certain Protestant writers, even down to our own times,
have, however, insisted that, at any rate inwardly, the
devil had sought to reduce Luther to despair on account of
his celebration of Mass as a Catholic ; that the spirit of
darkness had attached so much importance to the sup
pression of the Gospel, that he attempted to disquiet Luther
with such self-reproaches.3 It is true Luther once says that
the devil reproached him with his " misdeeds, for instance,
with the sacrifice of the Mass," and other Catholic practices
of which he had formerly been guilty.4 On other occasions,
however, he quite absolves the devil of any change con
cerning the Mass. He says, e.g. : " The devil is such a
miscreant that he does not reproach me with my great and

1 To Nich. Hausmann, Dec. 17, 1533, " Brief wechsel," 9, p. 363.

2 Cp. G. Koffmane, " Handschriftl. tJberlieferung von Werken
Luthers," 1907. See above, vol. iv., p. 520 f.

3 This was the view taken, e.g. by Fr. Balduinus, who published a
work at Eisleben in 1605 against the unfortunate attempt of the
learned Jesuit, Nicholas Serarius, to uphold the reality of the dialogue
with the devil. According to Balduinus it was really a " gravissima
tentatio beati Lutheri," by which the devil sought to reduce him to
despair.

4 Cp. Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 9, of Dec. 14, 1531.

APPARITIONS 137

awful crimes such as the celebration of Mass,"1 etc. Thus he
had persuaded himself quite independently of the devil that
the Mass was a grievous crime. We have, in fact, in Luther's
statements concerning his inward experiences a crying
instance of his changeableness. We shall return below to
his self-reproach on account of his celebration of Mass
(see section 4).

Possession and Exorcism

We may conclude our examination of diabolical appar
itions by some statements concerning the exorcisms Luther
undertook and his treatment of cases of possession.

His first followers believed he had been successful in 1545
in driving out Satan in the case of a person possessed. The
testimony of two witnesses of the incident must here come
under consideration, both young men who were present on
the occasion, viz. Sebastian Froschel, Deacon at Wittenberg,
and Frederick Staphylus, a man of learning who afterwards
abandoned Lutheranism and became Superintendent of the
University of Ingolstadt.2 The latter knows nothing of any
success having attended Luther's efforts, whereas the
former boasts that such was the case, though he somewhat
invalidates his testimony by saying nothing of the em
barrassing situation in which Luther found himself at the
close of the scene. According to both accounts the incident
was more or less as follows :

A girl of eighteen from Ossitz in the neighbourhood of Meissen
who was said to be possessed was brought one Tuesday to
Luther, and, while at his bidding reciting the Creed, was "torn "
by the devil as soon as she reached the words " and in Jesus
Christ." Luther hesitated at first to set about the work of
liberation and expressed his contempt for the devil whom he
" well knew." The next day, after his sermon, he caused the
"possessed" girl to be brought to him in the sacristy of the
parish church of Wittenberg by the above-mentioned Froschel.

We hear nothing of any regular examination as to whether it
was a case of possession, or not rather hysteria, as seems more
likely. At any rate, the unhappy girl when passing from the
church through the entrance to the sacristy, was seen to " fall

1 /&., p. 89, in May, 1532, thus only a few months after the above
statement.

2 Seb. Froschel, " Von den heiligen Engeln, vom Teuffel und des
Menschen Seele. Drey Sermon," Wittenberg, 1563, Bl. L2 to Bl. 4a. —
Friedr. Staphylus, " Nachdruck zu Verfechtung des Buches vom
rechten waren Verstandt des gottlichen Worts," Ingolstadt, 1562,
p. 154'.

138 INNER TROUBLES

down and hit about her." The door of the sacristy, where several
doctors, ecclesiastics and students were gathered, was locked.
Luther delivered an address on his method of driving out the
devil : He did not intend to do this in the way usual in Apostolic
time, in the early Church and later, viz. by a command and
authoritative exorcism, but rather by " prayer and contempt" ;
the Popish exorcism was too ostentatious and of it the devil was
not worthy ; at the time when exorcism had been introduced
miracles were necessary for the confirmation of the faith, but
this was now no longer the case ; God Himself knew well when
the devil had to depart and they ought not to tempt Him by
such commands, but, on the contrary, pray until their prayers
were answered. Thus Luther, not unwisely, refused to perform
any actual " driving out of the devil."

The Church's ritual for exorcism was, however, not so ostenta
tious as Luther pretends, and combined commands issued in a
tone of authority in the name of Christ (Mat. x. 8 ; Mark xvi.
17) with an expression of contempt for the devil and reprobation
of his evil deeds. Froschel noted down the address in question
together with everything that occurred and said later in a sermon,
that Luther's action ought to serve as a model in future cases.

In the sacristy the Creed and Our Father were recited, two
passages on prayer (from John xvi. and xiv.) were also read aloud
by Luther. Then he, together with the other ecclesiastics present,
laid hands on the head of the girl and continued reciting prayers.
When no sign appeared of the devil's departure, Luther wished
to go, but first took care to spurn the girl with his foot, the better
to mark anew his disdain for the devil. The poor creature whom
he had thus insulted followed him with threatening looks and
gestures. This was all the more awkward since Luther was unable
to escape, the key of the sacristy door having been mislaid ;
hence he was obliged, he the devil's greatest and best-hated foe
on earth, to remain cheek by jowl with the Evil One.

The satirical description Staphylus gives of the situation
cannot be repeated here, especially as the writer seems to have
added to its colour.1 Luther was unable to jump out of the
window, so he says, because it was protected with iron bars ;
" hence he had to remain shut up with us until the sacristan
could pass in a strong hatchet to us through the bars ; this was
handed to me, as I was young, for me to burst open the door, which
I then did." In place of all this, Froschel merely says of the girl,
who was taken home the following day, that afterwards " on
several occasions " reports came to Wittenberg to the effect that
the evil spirit no longer " tormented and tore her as formerly."

In the pulpit the Deacon immortalised the incident for his
Wittenberg hearers and made it known to the whole world in his
printed sermon " Vom Teuffel."2

1 " Whereupon Luther became even more anxious and alarmed. . . .
It was wonderful to see how he ran about the sacristy meanwhile,
wringing his hands for very fear."

8 Cp. " Briefe," ed. De Wette, 5, p. xxiv., where the exorcism is

APPARITIONS 139

Luther himself says nothing of it, though disposed in later
life to lay great stress on stories of the devil.1 Earlier than
this, in 1540, he had hastened to tell his Katey of the sup
posed deliverance of a girl at Arnstadt from the devil's power
through the ministrations of the Evangelical pastor there ;
the latter had " driven a devil out of the girl in a truly
Christian manner."2 He does not, however, mention this
incident in his published works.

On the other hand we have in the Table-Talk a full
account of his treatment of a woman " possessed," or,
rather, clearly ailing from a nervous disorder. Her symp
toms were regarded, as was customary at a time when so
little was known of this class of maladies, as " purely the
work of the devil, as something unnatural, due to fright and
devil-spectres, seeing that the devil had overlaid her in the
shape of a calf." Luther, on visiting the woman thus
" bodily persecuted by the devil," again laid great stress on
the need of praying that she might be rid of her guest,
though this time he did not scorn the use of the formula of
exorcism. " The night after, she was left in peace, but,
later, the weakness returned. Finally, however, she was
completely delivered from it ; "3 in other words, the malady
simply took its natural course.

Another much-discussed case which occurred after the
middle of the 'thirties was that of a girl at Frankfurt-on-the-
Oder, a report of which came to Luther from Andreas
Ebert, the Lutheran pastor there (see above, vol. iii.,
p. 148). In his reply to the circumstantial account of how
the " possessed " girl was able to produce coins by magic
Luther shows himself in so far cautious that he is anxious
to have it made clear whether the story is quite true and
whether the coins are real. Nevertheless, he does not
hesitate to declare, that, should the incident be proved, it
would be a great omen (" ostentum "), as Satan, with God's
permission, was thus setting before them a picture of the
greed of money prevailing among certain of the princes. He

transposed to Jan. 18(19). — /&., p. 772, Luther relates how he had
cured the madness (" mania ") of a " melancholy " person who had
been subjected by the devil to this " temptation," and also explains
how blessings were to be given.

1 See above, vol. v., p. 240 f.

2 To Bora, July 2, 1540, " Brief wechsel," 13, p. 107.

3 Erl. ed., 60, pp. 138-40.

140 INNER TROUBLES

was loath to see exorcism resorted to, " because the devil
in his pride laughs at it " ; all the more were they to pray
for the girl and against the devil, and this, with the help of
Christ, would finally spell her liberation ; meanwhile, how
ever, he expresses his readiness to make public all the facts
of the case that could be proved. In his sermons he spoke
of the occurrence to his hearers as a " warning."1

Theodore Kirchhoff, who, in the " Allgemeine Zeitschrift
fur Psychiatric," mentions " Luther's exorcisms of hysterical
women folk," not without bewailing his error, points out
that it was in part his own fancied experience with the devil
which led him to regard " similar phenomena in others as
diabolical " ; "his many nervous ailments," he says,
" strengthened his personal belief in the devil." " Indeed,
so far did he go in his efforts to drive out the devil that once
he actually proposed that an idiot should be done to death."2
" Such a doctrine [on the devil's action], backed by the
authority of so great a man, took deep root." It would be
incorrect, writes Kirchhoff, to say, that Luther inaugurated
a healthier view of " possession " ; on the contrary his
opinion is, " that, owing to Luther's hard and fast theories,
the right understanding and treatment of the insane was
rendered more difficult than ever ; for, if we consider the
immense spread of his writings and what their influence
became, it is but natural to infer that this also led to his
peculiar view becoming popular."3 Needless to say, other
circumstances also conspired to render difficult the treat
ment of the mentally disordered ; long before Luther's day
they had been regarded by many as possessed, and as the
physicians would not undertake to cure possessions, this
condition was neglected by the healing art. In many
instances, too, the relatives were against any cure being
attempted by physicians.

1 Luther to Ebert, Aug. 6, 1536, " Brief wechsel," 11, p. 21.

2 Kirchhoff is alluding to the case of the " changelings " mentioned
above, vol. v., p. 292. It is true Luther did not regard them as human
beings.

3 " Allg. Zeitschr. fur Psychiatrie," 44, 1888, p. 329 ft — For
Luther's view of the insane as possessed, see above, vol. v., p. 281.

REVELATIONS 141

4. Revelation and Illusion. Morbid Trains of Thought

One ground for considering the question of Luther's
revelations in connection with the darker side of his life
lies in the gloomy and unearthly circumstances, which,
according to his own account, accompanied the higher
communications he received (" sub ceternce irce maledic-
tione "),1 or else preceded them, inducing within his soul a
profound disturbance (" ita furebam" . . .), "I was terrified
each time."2

A further reason is the unfortunate after-effect that the
supposed revelations from above had upon his mind. Out
wardly, indeed, he seemed an incarnation of confidence, but,
inwardly, the case was very different. Chapter xxxii. (vol. v.)
of the present work will have shown how it was his new
doctrines, and his overturning of the Church which accounted
for his " agonies of soul," his " pangs of hell " and " nightly
combats " with the devil, or rather with his own con
science. " Why do you raise the standard of revolt against
the house of the Lord ? . . . Such thoughts upset one
very much."3 His irritation, melancholy and pessimism
were largely due to his disappointment with the results of
his revelations. " They know it is God Whose Word we
preach and yet they say : We shan't listen." " We are
poor and indifferent trumpeters, but to the assembly of the
heavenly spirits ours is a mighty call." " My only remain
ing consolation is that the end of all cannot be far off." " It
must soon come to a head. Amen."4 And yet, for all that,
he insisted on his divine mission so emphatically (above,
vol. iii., p. 109 ff.).

The revelations which confirmed him in the idea of his
mission deserve more careful examination than has hitherto
been possible to us in the course of our narrative.

That Luther ever laid claim to having received his
doctrine by a personal revelation from God has been several
times denied in recent times by his defenders. They urge
that he merely claimed to have received his doctrine from
above, " in the same way that God reveals it to all true
Christians " ; in this and in no other sense, does he speak

1 See above, p. 128, n. 7. 2 Vol. i., p. 391.

3 Above, vol. v., p. 322. * Above, vol. v., p. 226 ff.

142 INNER TROUBLES

of his revelations, nor does he ascribe to himself any
" peculiar mission."

It is true Luther taught that the content of the faith to
which every true Christian adheres had come into the world
by a revelation bestowed on mankind ; he also taught that
the Holy Ghost lends His assistance to every man to
enable him to grasp and hold fast to this revelation : " This
is a wisdom such as reason has never framed, nor has the
heart of man conceived it, no, not even the great ones of
this world, but it is revealed from heaven by the Holy
Ghost to those who believe the Gospel."1 — This, however,
is not the question, but rather, whether he never gave out
that he had reached his own fresh knowledge, and that
reading of the Bible which he sets up against all the rest of
Christendom, thanks to a private and particular illumina
tion, and whether he did not base on such a revelation his
claim to infallible certainty ?

Luther's Insistence on Private Revelation

Luther certainly never dreamt of making so bold and
hazardous an assertion so long as a spark of hope remained
in him that the Church of Rome would fall in with his
doctrines. It was only gradually that the phantom of a
personal revelation grew upon him, and, even later, its
sway was never absolute, as we can see from our occasional
glimpses into his inward struggles of conscience.

We may begin with one of his latest utterances, following
it up with one of his earliest. Towards the end of his life he
insisted on the suddenness with which the light streamed
in upon him when he had at last penetrated into the mean
ing of Rom. i. 17 (in the Tower), thus setting the coping-
stone on his doctrines by that of the certainty of salvation.2
Again, at the outset of his public career, we meet with
those words of which Adolf Harnack says : " Such self-
reliance almost fills us with anxiety."3

The words Harnack refers to are those in which Luther
solemnly assures his Elector that he had " received the
Evangel, not from man, but from heaven alone, through

1 Erl. ed., 92, p. 358 f.

2 See above, vol. i., p. 391 ff.

3 Above, vol. i., p. 398.

REVELATIONS 148

our Lord Jesus Christ." This he wrote in 1522 when on the
point of quitting the Wart burg.1

In the same year in his " Wyder den falsch genantten
geystlichen Standt," full of the spirit he had inhaled at the
Wartburg, he declared that he could no longer remain
without " name or title " in order that he might rightly
honour and extol the " Word, office and work he had from
God." For the Father of all Mercies, out of the boundless
riches of His Grace, had brought him, for all his sinfulness,
"to the knowledge of His Son Jesus Christ and set him to
teach others until they too saw the truth " ; for this reason
he had a better right to term himself an " Evangelist by the
Grace of God " than the bishops had to call themselves
bishops. " I am quite sure that Christ Himself, Who is the
Master of my doctrine, calls and regards me as such."
Hence he will not permit even " an angel from heaven to
judge or take him to task concerning his doctrine " ; " since
I am certain of it I am determined to be judge, not only of
you, but, as St. Paul says (Gal. i. 8), even of the angels, so
that whoever does not accept my doctrine cannot be saved ;
for it is God's and not mine, therefore my judgment also is
not mine but God's own."2

Such Wartburg enthusiasm, where all that is wanting is
the actual word revelation, agrees well with his statement
about the sort of ultimatum (" Interminatio ") sent him
by God : " Under pain of eternal wrath it had been enjoined
on him from above," that he must preach what had been
given him ; he describes this species of vision as one of
the greatest favours God had bestowed on his soul.3 Nor
did he scruple to make use of the word " revelation."

The dispute he had with Cochlaeus in the presence of others at
Worms in 1521 shows not only that he had sufficient courage to
do this but also, that, previously, from whatever cause, he had
hesitated to do so. We have Cochlaeus's already quoted account
of the incident in the detailed report of his encounter with
Luther. * It is true he only published it in 1540, but it is evidently
based on notes made by the narrator at the time. In reply to the
admonition, not to interpret Holy Scripture "arbitrarily, and
against the authority and interpretation of the Church," Luther

1 Erl. ed., 53, p. 106 (" Brief wechsel," 3, p. 296, end of Feb., 1522).
Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 111.

2 Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 106 f. ; Erl. ed., 28, p. 143 f.

3 Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 81 ; above, p. 128, n. 7.

4 Above, vol. iv., p. 258.

144 INNER TROUBLES

urged that there might be circumstances where it was per
missible to oppose the decrees of the Councils, for Paul said in
1 Corinthians : "If anything be revealed to another sitting, let
the first hold his peace,"1 though, so Luther proceeded, he had
no wish to lay claim to a revelation. In the event, however, as
he was always harking back to this instance of revelation men
tioned by the Apostle it occurred to Cochlseus to pin him down
to this expression. Hence, without any beating about the bush,
he asked him : " Have you then received a revelation ? "
Luther looked at him, hesitated a moment and then said : " Yes,
it has been revealed to me, ' Est mihi revelatum.' " His opponent
at once reminded him that, before this, he had protested against
being the recipient of any revelation. Luther, however, said :
" I did not deny it." Cochlseus rejoined : " But who will believe
that you have had a revelation ? What miracle have you worked
in proof of it ? By what sign will you confirm it ? Would it not
be possible for anyone to defend his errors in this way ? " The
text in question speaks of a direct revelation. It was in this
sense that Luther had appealed to it before, and that Cochlaeus
framed his question. It is impossible to understand Luther's
answer as referring to a revelation common to all true Christians.
Either Luther made no answer to Cochlaeus's last wrords or it was
lost in the interruption of his friend Hieronymus Schurf.2 In
any case his position was a difficult one and it was simpler for him
when he repeated the same assertion later in his printed writings
quietly to treat all objections with contempt. At any rate he
never accused the above account given by Cochlaeus of being false.
Again, in 1522, Luther declares in his sermons at Wittenberg,3
that " it was God Who had set him to work on this scheme " (the
reform of the faith), and had given him the " first place " in it.
" I cannot escape from God but must remain so long as it pleases
God my Lord ; moreover, it was to me that God first revealed
that the Word must be preached and proclaimed to you." Hence
his revelation was similar to that of the prophets, for he is
alluding to the prophet Jonas when he says that he could " not
escape from God."4 The Wittenbergers, he says, ought there
fore to have consulted him before rashly undertaking their own
innovations under Carlstadt's influence : " We see here that
you have not the Spirit though you may have an exalted know
ledge of Scripture."5 Hence, on the top of his knowledge of
Scripture, he himself possesses the " Spirit."

1 1 Cor. xiv. 30. The passage, however, refers to the " charismata "
of the early Church and sets up no sort of standard for judging of
doctrine in later times.

2 " Brief wechsel," 3, p. 175 f. Greving, p. 18 f. Cp. Steph. Ehses,
" Rom. Quartalschrift," 12, 1898, p. 456, on M. Spahn, " Cochlseus,"
p. 81, who criticises Cochlaeus unfavourably because he demanded
signs and wonders from Luther.

3 Weim. ed., 10, 3, p. 8 ; Erl. ed., 28, p. 211, from notes taken at
the time.

4 Jonas, i., 2 : " Surrexit lonas, utfugeret a facie Domini."
* " Werke," ib., pp. 11 = 214.

REVELATIONS 145

From the twelvemonth that followed Luther's spiritual
baptism at the Wartburg also date the asseverations he makes,
that his doctrine was, not his, but Christ's own,1 and that it
was " certain he had his doctrines from heaven."2

" By Divine revelation," as we learn from him not long after,
" he had been summoned as an anti-pope to undo, root out and
sweep away the kingdom of malediction " (the Papacy).3 In
1527 he assures us : This doctrine " God has revealed to me by
His Grace."4 And, at a later period, though rather more
cautiously, he does not shrink from occasionally making use of
the word revelation. From the pulpit in 1532 he urged opponents
in his own camp to lay aside their peculiar doctrines, because,
" God has enjoined and commanded one man to teach the
Evangel," i.e. himself.5

So familiar is this idea to him that it intrudes itself into his
conversations at home. It was the " Holy Ghost " who had
" given " to him his doctrine, so he told his friends and pupils
in his old age.8 At Wittenberg, according to his own words
which Mathesius noted down, they possessed, thanks to him,
the divine revelation. " Whoever, after my death, despises the
authority of the Wittenberg school, provided it remains the same
as now, is a heretic and a pervert, for in this school God has
revealed His Word." He also complains in the same passage
that the sectarians within the new fold who turned against him
had fallen away from the faith.7

At that time, i.e. during the 'forties, the idea of an inspiration
grew stronger in him. He boasts that his understanding of
Romans i. 17 was due to the " illumination of the Holy Ghost,"
and tells how he suddenly felt himself " completely born anew,"
as if he had passed " through the open portals into Paradise
itself," and how, " at once, the whole of Scripture bore another
aspect."8

Thus his idea of the revelation with which he had been favoured
gradually assumed in his mind a more concrete shape.

1 Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 40 ; Erl. ed., 28, p. 316 in the revision of the
above Wittenberg sermon entitled : " Von beider Gestallt des Sacra -
mentes zu nehmen."

2 Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 184 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, p. 391 : " Certus
sum, dogmata mea habere me de ccelo " (against Henry VIII).

3 Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 496 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 23 : " revelatione
divina ad hoc vocatus."

4 Weim. ed., 20, p. 674. The passage is from the Wolfenbiittel MS.,
which reproduces Rorer's Notes (revised, possibly, by Flacius). In
another set of Notes Luther speaks here of his doctrine as " evangelium
veritatis" — Cp. vol. iv., p. 408 : " not without a revelation of the Holy
Ghost."

5 Weim. ed., 32, p. 477 ; Erl. ed., 43, p. 263.

6 Note in Lauterbach's " Tagebuch," p. 81.

7 Mathesius, " Tischreden," ed. Kroker, p. 169 : " Deus revelavit
in hac schola verbum suum. Quicumque nos fugiunt et sugillant nos
clanculum, ii defecerunt a fide," etc. In 1540.

8 " Opp. lat. var.," 1, p. 22 sq. ; cp. " Opp. lat. exeg.," 7, p. 74.
Cp. Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 211.

VI. — L

146 INNER TROUBLES

According to the funeral oration delivered by his friend Jonas
on Feb. 19, 1546, at Eisleben, Luther often spoke to his friends
of his revelations, hinting in a vague and mysterious way at the
sufferings they had entailed. Jonas tells the people in so many
words, " that Martin himself had often said : ' What I endure
and have endured for the doctrine of the beloved Evangel which
God has again revealed to the world, no one shall learn from me
here in this world, but on That Day it will be laid open.' Only at
the Last Day will he tell us what during his life he ever kept
sealed up in his heart, viz. the great victories which the Son of
God won through him against sin, devil, Papists and false
brethren, etc. All this he will tell us and also what sublime
revelations he had when he began to preach the Evangel, so that
verily we shall be amazed and praise God for them."1

Hence Luther had persuaded his friends that he had been
favoured with particular revelations.

From all the above it becomes clear that the revelation
which Luther claimed was regarded by him throughout as
a true and personal communication from above, and not
merely as a knowledge acquired by reflection and prayer
under the Divine assistance common to all. It was in fact
only by considering the matter in this light that he was
able effectually to refute the objections of outsiders and
to allay to some extent the storms within him. The very
character of his revolt against the Church, against the
tradition of a thousand years, against the episcopate,
universities, Catholic princes and Catholic instincts of the
nation demanded something more than could have been
afforded by a mere appeal to the revelation common to all.
Of what service would it have been to him in his struggles

1 " Luthers Werke," Walch's ed., 21, p. 363* f. Seckendorf, " Com-
mentaria de Lutheranismo," gives the passage as follows : " Jonas
scepe eum dixisse memorat, se nemini mortalium aperturum esse, etc.,
fore autem ut in die novissimo innotescant, sicut et revelationes egregice,
quce sub initium doctrince habuerit et nemini detexerit " (Lips., 1694,
lib. 3, sect. 36, p. 647). Bugenhagen says in his funeral oration (Walch,
21, p. 329*), that God the Father had revealed His Son through Luther,
whilst Melanchthon goes so far as to boast that the latter had received
his doctrine, not from " human sagacity," but that God had revealed
it to him (see " Corp. ref.," 6, p. 58 sq., and Kostlin-Kawerau, 2.
p. 625). The expression that Luther's gospel had been " revealed "
became quite usual, as we see from the heading of a chapter in the Latin
" Colloquia," entitled : " Occasio et cursus evangelii revelati " (ed.
Bindseil, 3, p. 178). — Just as Luther asserted he was reforming the
Church, " divina auctoritate " (" Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 16), so
Calvin, too, claimed to derive his ministry of the Word (which differed
from that of Luther in so many points) from Christ. Zwingli did the
same, and his followers cared but little for Luther's claim to the
contrary.

REVELATIONS 147

of conscience, and when contending with the malice and
jealousy of the sects, to have laid claim to a vague, general
revelation ?

Nevertheless, the appeals Luther makes to the revelation
he had received are at times somewhat vague, as some of the
passages quoted serve to prove. We shall not be far wrong
if we say that he himself was often not quite clear as to
what he should lay claim. His ideas, or at any rate his
statements, concerning the exalted communications he had
received, vary with the circumstances, being, now more
definite, now somewhat misty.

Here, as in the parallel case of his belief in his mission,
his assertions are at certain periods more energetic and
defiant than at others (see above, vol. iii., p. 120 ff.).

However this may be, the idea of a revelation in the
strict sense was no mere passing whim ; it emerges at its
strongest under the influence of the Wartburg spirit, and,
once more, summons up all its forces towards the end of his
days, when Luther seeks for comfort amid his sad experi
ences and for some relief in his weariness. Yet, in him, the
idea of a revelation always seems a matter of the will,
something which he can summon to his assistance and to
which he deliberately hold fasts, and which, as occasion
requires, is decked out with the necessary adjuncts of angels
descending from heaven, visions, spirits, inward experiences,
inward menaces, or triumphs over the temptations of the
devil.

Some Apparent Withdrawals

Various apparently contradictory statements, such as
the reader must expect to meet with in Luther, are not,
however, wanting, even concerning his revelations.

Discordant statements of the sort do not, indeed, occur in
the passages, where, as in the quotations given above, he is
defending his theological innovations against the authority
of the Church. Often they are a mere rhetorical trick to
impress his hearers with his modesty. In his sermons at
Wittenberg in 1522, for instance, he declared that he was
perfectly willing to submit his " feeling and understanding "
to anyone to whom " more has been revealed " ; by 'this,
however, he does not mean his doctrine but merely the
practical details of the introduction of the new ritual of

148 INNER TROUBLES

public worship, then being discussed at Wittenberg. This
is clear from the very emphasis he here lays on his teaching,
thanks to which the Wittenbergers now have the " Word of
God true and undefiled," and from his description of the
devil's rage who now sees that " the sun of the true Evangel
has risen."1

Again, when, in his later revision of the same course of
sermons, we hear him say : " You must be disciples, not of
Luther, but of Christ,"2 and : " You must not say I am
Luther's, or I am the Pope's, for neither has died for you
nor is your master, but only Christ,"3 he has not the least
intention of denying the authority of the doctrine revealed
to him, on the contrary, on the same page, he has it that,
" Luther's doctrine is not his but Christ's own " ;4 he had
already said, " Even were Luther himself or an angel from
heaven to teach otherwise, let it be anathema."5 He is
simply following St. Paul's lead6 and pointing out to his
hearers the supreme source of truth ; he still remains its
instrument, the " Prophet," " Evangelist " and " Ecclesi-
astes by the grace of God," favoured, like the inspired
Apostle of the Gentiles, with revelations.

Nevertheless, we cannot shut our eyes to the fact, that,
subsequent to 1525, Luther tended at times to be less
insistent on his revelations. From strategic considerations
he was careful to keep more in the background his revela
tions from the Spirit now that the fanatics were also claiming
their own special enlightenment by the " Spirit." His
eyes were now opened to the danger inherent in such
arbitrary claims to revelation, and, accordingly, he now
begins to insist more on the outward " Word."7

It is true, that, in Nov., 1525, in refutation of the
Zwinglian theologians of Strasburg, he still appealed not
merely to his visions of angels (see above, p. 127) but also
to the certain light of his doctrine inspired by the Holy
Ghost, and to his sense of the " Spirit." " I see very well,"
he says, " that they have no certainty, but the Spirit is

1 Weim. ed., 10, 3, p. 8 f . ; Erl. ed., 28, p. 212.

2 76., 10, 2, p. 23 = 28, p. 298.

3 P. 40 = 316. 4 Ib.
5 P. 23 = 298; op. Gal. i. 28.

* Paul forbade his disciples to say : " Ego sum Pauli," and asked :
" Numquid Paulus crucifixus est pro vobis ? " (1 Cor. i. 12 sq.).
7 Cp. above, vol. ii., p. 363 ff.

REVELATIONS 149

certain of His cause."1 Even then, however, a change had
begun and he preferred to appeal to Holy Scripture, which,
so he argued, spoke plainly in his favour, rather than to
inspirations and revelations. Hence his asseveration that
this outward Word of God has much more claim to con
sideration than the inward Word, which can so easily be
twisted to suit one's frame of mind. He now comes unduly
to depreciate the inward Word and the Spirit which formerly
he had so highly vaunted, though, on the other hand, he
continues to teach that the Spirit and the inward enlighten
ing of the Word are necessary for the interpretation of Holy
Scripture.

His Commentary on Isaias contains a delightful attack
on the " ail-too spiritual folk, who, to-day, cry Spirit,
Spirit ! " " Let us not look for any private revelations. It
is Christ who tells us to ' search the Scriptures ' [John v. 39].
Revelations puff us up and make us presumptuous. I have
not been instructed," so he goes on, " either by signs or by
special revelations, nor have I ever begged signs of God ; on
the contrary I have asked Him never to let me become
proud, or be led astray from the outward Word through the
devil's tricks." He then launches out against those who
pretend they have "particular revelations on the faith,"
being " misled by the devil." These words occur in the
revised and enlarged Scholia on Isaias published in 1534.
It may, however, be that they did not figure in Luther's
lectures on Isaias (1527-30) but were appended somewhat
later.2

After thus apparently disowning any title to private
revelation and a higher light Luther's inevitable appeal to
the certainty of his doctrine only becomes the more confident.
Thanks to his temptations and death-throes, he had become
so certain, that he can declare : Possessed of the " Word "
as I am, I have not the least wish " that an angel should
come to me, for, now, I should not believe him."

" Nevertheless, the time might well come," so he con
tinues in this passage of the Table-Talk, " when I might be
pleased to see one [an angel] on certain matters." " I do
not, however, admit dreams and signs, nor do I worry about
them. We have in Scripture all that we require. Sad

1 In Casel's account, Kolde, " Anal. Lutherans," p. 74.

2 Weim. ed.; 25, p. 120 ; cp. " Opp. lat. exeg.," 22, p. 93 sq.

150 INNER TROUBLES

dreams come from the devil, for everything that ministers
to death and dread, lies and murder is the devil's handi
work."1

It is true Luther was often plagued by terrifying dreams,
and as he numbered them among his " anxieties and death-
throes " what he says about them may fittingly be utilised
to complete the picture of his inward state. To such an
extent was the devil able to affright him, so he says, that he
" broke out into a sweat in the midst of his sleep " ; thus
" Satan was present even when men slept ; but angels too
were also there."2 He assures us, that, in his sleep, he had
witnessed even the horrors of the Last Judgment.

The " Temptations " as one of Luther's Bulwarks

The states of terror and the temptations he underwent
were to Luther so many confirmations of his doctrine. Some
of his utterances on this subject ring very oddly.

To be " in deaths often " was, according to him, a sort of
" apostolic gift," shared by Peter and Paul. In order to be
a doctor above suspicion, a man must have experienced the pains
of death and the " melting of the bones." In the Psalms he
hears, as it were, an echo of his own state of soul. " To despair
where hope itself despairs," and " to live in unspeakable groan-
ings," " this no one can understand who has not tasted it."
This he said in 1520 in a Commentary on the Psalms.3 And,
later, in 1530, when engaged at the Coburg in expounding the
first twenty-five psalms : " ' My heart is become like wax
melting in the midst of my bowels ' [Ps. xxi. 15]. What that was
no one grasps who has not felt it."4 "In such trouble there must
needs be despair, but, if I say : ' This I do simply and solely at
God's command,' there comes the assurance : Hence God will
take your part and comfort you. It was thus we consoled our
selves at Augsburg."5

Many others who followed him were also overtaken by similar
distress of mind. Struggles of conscience and gloomy depression
were the fate of many who flocked to his standard (cp. above,
vol. iv., pp. 218-27). Johann Mathesius, Luther's favourite pupil,
so frequently referred to above, towards the end of his life, when
pastor at Joachimsthal, once declared, when brooding sadly,
that the devil with his temptations was sifting him as it were in

1 Mathesius, " Aufzeichn.," p. 49 ; cp. above, vol. v., p. 352.
Above, vol. v., pp. 339 f., 319, 328. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 176.

2 Above, vol. v., p. 327 f.

3 Weim. ed.. 5, p. 385. -i Operationes in Psalmos," 1519-21.

4 Erl. ed., 38, p. 225. 5 /&., p. 221.

THE "TEMPTATIONS" 151

a sieve and that he was enduring the pangs of hell described by
David. The very mention of a knife led him to think of suicide.
He was eager to hold fast to Christ alone, but this he could not do.
After the struggle had lasted two or three months his condition
finally improved.1

Such were Luther's temptations, of which, afterwards, he did
not scruple to boast. " Often did they bring us to death's
door," he says of the mental struggles in which his new doctrine
and practice of sheltering himself behind the merits of Christ
involved him. But, nevertheless, "I will hold fast to that Man
alone, even though it should bring me to the grave ! "2

Again, in 1532, we hear him making his own the words : " Out
of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord " (Ps. cxxix. 1).
The prophet is not complaining of any mere " worldly tempta
tions," but of " that anguish of conscience, of those blows and
terrors of death such as the heart feels when on the brink of
despair and when it fancies itself abandoned by God ; when it
both sees its sin and how all its good works are condemned by
God the angry Judge. . . . When a man is sunk in such anxiety
and trouble he cannot recover unless help is bestowed on him
from above. . . . Nearly all the great saints suffered in this way
and were dragged almost to the gates of death by sin and the
Law ; hence David's exclamation : ' Out of the depths have I
cried unto thee, O Lord ! ' " — The whole trend of what he says,
likewise the counsels he gives on the remedies that may bring
consolation, show plainly his attachment to this dark night of the
soul and his conviction that he is but treading in the footsteps of
the " great Saints " and " Prophets."3

At any rate there is no room for doubt that this opened
out a rich field for delusion ; what he says depicts a frame
of mind in which hallucinations might well thrive ; we shall,
however, leave it to others to determine how far patho
logical elements intervene.

In the certainty that his cause was inspired he calmly
awaits the approach of the fanatics ; they can serve only to
strengthen in him his sense of confidence. Of them and
their " presumptuous certainty " he makes short work in a
conversation noted down by Cordatus :4 Marcus Thomae
(Stiibner) he requests to perform a miracle in proof of his
views, warning him, however, that " My God will assuredly
forbid your God to let you work a sign " ; he also hurls
against him the formula of exorcism : " God rebuke thee,

1 See vol. iv., p. 222.

» "Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 53; cp. Erl. ed., 49, p. 91, on
John xiv.-xv.

3 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 20, p. 181 sq. Enarr. ps. cxxx. ; cp. Woim. ed.,
1, p. 206 ff. ; Erl. ed., 37, p. 420 ff.

4 Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 27 f.

152 INNER TROUBLES

Satan " (Zach. iii. 2).1 Nicholas Storch and Thomas
Miinzer, so he assures us, openly show their presumption.
A pupil of Stiibner was anxious to set himself up as a
teacher, but the fellow had only been able to talk fantastic
rubbish to him. Of people such as these he had come across
quite sixty. Campanus, again, is simply to be numbered
among the biggest blasphemers. Carlstadt, who wanted to
be esteemed learned, was only distinguished by his arrogant
mouthing. Nowhere was there profundity or truth. " Not
one of you has endured such anxieties and temptations as
I."2 " And yet Carlstadt wanted us to bow to his teaching.
. . . Like Christ, however, I say : ' My doctrine is not mine
but his that sent me ' (John vii. 16). I cannot betray it as
the world would have me do. The malice of all these
ministers of Satan only serves my cause and exercises me in
indomitable firmness."3 Hence he derives equal benefit
from the malice of his opponents within the fold and from
the inward apprehensions of which Satan was the cause.

The manifold errors which had sprung from the seed of his
own principles, in any other man would have elicited doubts
and scruples ; Luther, however, finds in them fresh support
for his dominating conviction : My glorious sufferings at
the devil's hands are being multiplied and, thereby, too, the
witness on behalf of my doctrine is being strengthened.

The mystical halo of the " man|of suffering " certainly
made a great impression on some offhis young followers and
admirers such as Spangenberg, Mathesius, Cordatus and
Veit Dietrich. On others of his circle the effect was not so
lasting.

Melanchthon, for instance, was well acquainted with
Luther's fits of mystic terror, yet how severe is the criticism
he passes on Luther's ground-dogmas, particularly after the
latter 's death.

The doctrine of man's entire unfreedom in doing what is
good may serve as an instance.

This palladium of the new theology had been discovered
by Luther when overwhelmed with despair ; by it he
sought to commit himself entirely into God's hands and
blindly and passively to await salvation from Him ; this he

1 On Marcus, cp. Weim. ed., 61, pp. 1, 73.

2 Cp. vol. ii., pp. 377 f., 371 f., and, with regard to Campanus, p. 378.

3 Cordatus, ib., p. 28.

THE "TEMPTATIONS" 153

regarded as the only way out of inward trials ; no man could
face the devil with his free will ; he himself, so he wrote,
" would not wish to have " free-will, even were it offered
him (" nollem mihi dari liberum arbitrium "), in order that
he might at least be safe from the devil; nay, even were
there no devil, free-will would still be to him an abomination,
because, with it, his " conscience would never be safe and
at rest." The words occur in the work he declared to be his
very best and a lasting heirloom for posterity.1 This par
ticular doctrine, Melanchthon was, however, so far from
regarding as a " revelation," that he wrote in 1559 : " Both
during Luther's lifetime and also later, I withstood that
Stoical and Manichsean delusion which led Luther and
others to write, that all works whether good or evil, in all
men whether good or bad, take place of necessity. Now it
is evident that this doctrine is contrary to God's Word,
subversive of all discipline and a blasphemy against God."2
Melanchthon did not even scruple to call upon the State
to intervene and prohibit such things being said. In his
Postils, dealing with the question whether heretics should
be put to death, he declares : " By divine command the
public authorities must proceed against idolaters and also
interdict blasphemous language, as, for instance, when a
man teaches that good or evil takes place of necessity and
under compulsion."3

He could not well have said anything more deadly against
the foundation on which Luther's whole edifice was reared.

In spite of all, Luther always stood by his pseudo-mystic
idea of his having received revelations. Without it he could
never have ventured to threaten as he did the secular and
ecclesiastical authorities who opposed his dogmas, with
" extermination " and " great revolts," or to proclaim so
confidently that they would fall, blown over by the breath
of Christ's mouth, or to prophesy that, even beyond the
grave, he would be to the impenitent Papists, what, accord
ing to the prophet Osee, God threatened to be to Israel,
viz. " a bear in the road and a lion in the path."4

1 Weim. ed., 18, p. 783=^" Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 362. " De servo
arbitrio." See vol. ii.. p. 276.

2 To the Elector Augustus of Saxony, " Corp. ref.," 9, p. 766 :
" Stoica et manichcea deliria." Cp. vol. v., p. 258.

3 Ib., 24, p. 375 ; cp. N. Paulus, " Protestantismua und Tolerant ion
16. Jahrh.," p. 81.

* Cp. vol. iii., pp. 45, 75 f., 125 f.

154 INNER TROUBLES

His whole process of thought was, as it were, held captive
in the heavy chains of this idea.

Three Perverted Theories Dominating Luther s Outlook

In order to enter even more deeply into Luther's mentality
three categories of ideas by which he determined his life well
deserve consideration here. Only at the point we have now
reached can some of his statements be judged of aright.

Among his strange ideas must be reckoned his threefold
conviction, first, that he was called to be the opponent of
Antichrist, secondly, that Popery was a thing of boundless
and utter depravity, thirdly, that in his own personal
experiences and gifts he was blessed beyond all other men.
Here again we shall have to refer to many passages already
quoted and also to some fresh ones of Luther's which afford
a glimpse into his perverted mode of thought and incredible
prejudice.

His obstinate belief in his mission against Antichrist keeps
the thought of a mortal combat ever before his mind ; a
decisive battle at the approaching end of all, between
heaven and hell, between Christ and the dragon. This
struggle, such as he viewed it, needless to say existed only
in his imagination. If, according to him, the devil fights
so furiously that at times Christ Himself seems on the point
of succumbing, this is only because Luther's cause does not
thrive, or because Luther himself is again the butt of gloomy
fears. As early as 1518, as we know, he fancied he had
detected the Papal Antichrist, and could read the thoughts of
Satan, who was at work V^hind his opponents.1 In this
idea he subsequently confirmed himself by his reading of the
Old-Testament prophecies, on which, till almost the very
end of his life, he was wont laboriously to base new calcula
tions. From the dawn of his career it has been borne in on
him with ever-growing clearness how Christ, using Luther
as His tool, will overthrow, as though in sport, this " man
of sin " of which Popery is the embodiment ; at the very

1 On his discovery of Antichrist see above, vol. iii., p. 141 ff. He
reached it amidst strange fears : " Ego sic angor," etc. To Spalatiii,
Feb. 24, 1520, " Brief wechsel," 2, p. 332. On the thoughts of Satan
see the letter to Egranus of March 24, 1518, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 173 :
" Nisi cogitationes Satance scirem, mirarer quo furore ille [Eccius]
solver et" etc.

THE PAPAL ANTICHRIST 155

close of his days, when the sight of the evils rampant in
Germany was causing him the utmost anxiety, he seems to
hear the trump that heralds the Coming of the Judge.

Using images that suggest a positive obsession, he depicts
the world as full of the traces of Antichrist and the devil his
forerunner. Yet all the machinations of the old serpent
avail only to strengthen the defiance with which he opposes
Satan and all his myrmidons. The signs in the heavens
above and on the earth below all point to him, the great,
albeit unworthy, champion of God's cause. Though Anti
christ and the powers that are his backers in this world may
for the time have the better of the struggle this is but the
last flicker of the dying flame which, by prophecy and
vision, he had been predestined to extinguish (above, vol. iii.,
p. 165 ff., etc.).

Hence his confidence in unveiling the action of Antichrist
as portrayed in the birth of the Monk-Calf ; like some seer he
hastens to pen a special work for the instruction of the people
in the meaning of the Calf's anatomy.1 His growing uncanny
imagination goes on to describe, in colours more and more
glaring, the abominations of that Antichrist from whom he
has torn the veil. The fury of the Turk is but child's play
to the horror of the Papal Antichrist. That portion of the
Table-Talk which deals with Antichrist, comprising no less
than 165 sections brimful of the maddest fancies, begins
with the description of Antichrist's head. " The head is at
the same time the Pope and the Turk. A living animal
must have both soul and body. The spirit or soul of Anti
christ is the Pope, his flesh or body the Turk " ;2 the con
cluding words on the subject are in the same vein : " The
blood of Abel cries for vengeance on them," viz. on the
followers of the Pope- Antichrist.3 These chapters of the
Table-Talk dealing with Antichrist scarcely do credit to the
human mind. We can, however, understand them, for to
Luther nothing is plainer than that the " nature of his foes
is utterly devilish " ; all he sees is the claws, paws, horns
and poison-fangs of Antichrist.4

Luther revealed the anti-Christian nature of the Pope,
in accordance with the prophet Daniel whom he read on

1 Vol. iii., p. 149 ff. 2 Cp. above, vol. iv., p. 301.

3 Erl. ed., 60, pp. 176-311.

4 Cp. his statement in Schlaginhaufen's Table-Talk, p. 56 : " Adver-
sariorum verbi natura non est humana, sed plane diabolica " (1532).

156 INNER TROUBLES

the principle : " Sic volo, sic iubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas " ;
" Nevertheless we attach but little importance to our
deliverance and are very ungrateful. This, however, is our
consolation, viz. that the Last Day cannot now be long
delayed. Daniel's prophecy is fulfilled to the letter and
paints the Papacy as plainly as though it had been written
post factum."1

In spite of Antichrist and " all that is mighty " the
Article concerning Holy Scripture and the Cross still holds
the field. And, so Luther proceeds in the Table-Talk, " I, a
poor monk, had to come," with " an unfortunate nun "
[Catherine Bora who doubtless was present], and " seize
upon it and hold it. Thus 4 verbum ' and ' crux ' are the
conquerors ; they make us confident."2

The reason why Luther longed with such ardour for the
coming of the Last Day has already been shown to have
been his growing pessimism and the depression resulting
from the sad experiences with which he had met (above,
vol. v., p. 245 ff.). In his elastic way he, however, manages,
when preaching to the people, to give a rather different
reason for his prediction of the fall of Antichrist and the
coming of the end. In Popery, he declares, we were not
allowed to speak of the Last Judgment ; " how we dreaded
it " ; "we pictured Christ to ourselves as a Judge to Whom
we had to give account. To that we came, thanks to our
works." But now it is quite otherwise. " Now on the
contrary I should be glad if the Last Day were to come,
because there is no greater consolation."3 Here he speaks
as though inspired solely by the purest of intentions when
he looked forward to the coming of the vanquisher of
Antichrist.

The wickedness of his opponents and the weapons to be
used against them constitute a second group of ideas. Here,

1 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 404 f. (Jan., 1537), with reference
to Dan. xi. 36 ; xii. 1. The " Sic volo," etc., from Juvenal, " Sat.," 6,
223, he applies to himself, above, vol. v., p. 517.

2 Mathesius, ib., p. 293. In 1542-3. The picture given at the
beginning of this portion of the Table-Talk of how Luther the " monk "
and Catherine the " nun " seated at table after dinner raise the cross
hand-in-hand against Antichrist and say : " Post scripturam non
habemus firmius argumentum quam crucem!" speaks volumes for their
infatuation.

3 Weim. ed., 34, 2, p. 410, in a sermon of Nov. 1, 1531.

DEPRAVITY OF OPPONENTS 157

once again, the psychological or pathological appreciation
of Luther's strange and morbid train of thought makes
imperative a further investigation of certain points already
discussed in other connections.

Often Luther seems unable to stem the torrent of charges
and insults that streams from him as soon as adversaries
appear in his field of vision. Frequently it almost looks
as though some superhuman agency outside himself had
opened the sluice-gates of his terrible eloquence. He is
determined to rage against them " even to the very grave " ;
his wrath against them " refreshes his blood." It is actually
when expressing his hatred in the most incredible language
that he is most sensible of the " nearness of God." Do not
his Popish foes deserve even worse than he, a mere man, is
able to heap on them ? Those scoundrels who " only seek
a pretext for telling lies against us and misleading simple
folk, though quite well aware that they are in the wrong."1
Their palpable obstinacy, in spite of their better judgment,
was so great, so he argued, that it was only because Luther
advocated it that they refused to hear of any moral reform,
for instance, of the clergy marrying, etc., otherwise they
would have held it " quite all right." He does not shrink
from demanding that such roguery should " be hunted down
with hounds," no less than the wickedness of these " most
depraved of brothel-keepers, open adulterers, stealers of
women and seducers of maidens."2

The most curious thing, however, one, too, that must
weigh heavily in the balance when judging of his mental
state, is that, as shown elsewhere, by dint of repeating this
he actually came to believe that his caricature of Catholicism
was perfectly true to fact. The calumnies become part of
his mental framework, the very frequency and heat of his
charges blinding him to all sense of their enormity, and
clouding his outlook. What is even worse is, that, even
when he occasionally glimpses the truth he yet believes it
lawful to deviate from it where this suits his purpose. Thus
he came to formulate the dangerous theory of the lie of neces
sity and the useful lie which we have already described in his
own words. He goes so far as to say, that the nature of his
foes was utterly devilish (above, p. 155, n. 4), and, when assail-

1 Erl. ed., 63, p. 276. On his abnormal hatred see vol. iv., p. 300 f.

2 76.

158 INNER TROUBLES

ing the wickedness of Popery, he considers " everything
lawful for the salvation of souls " (" omnia nobis licere
arbitramur ").1 Our "tricks, lies and stumblings" may
" easily be atoned for, for God's Mercy watches over us."2

On other occasions his opponents become " a pack of
fools " ; they deserve nothing but scorn and no heed should
be paid to their objections. Even should the world write
against him he will only pity them. All earlier ages and
" a thousand Fathers and Councils of the Church " cannot
rob him of the golden grains of truth which he alone
possesses.

No sooner does he speak of the Papists and their religion,
than, irresistibly, there rises up before his mind the picture
of the "tonsures, cowls, frocks and bawling in the choir," in
short the so-called holiness-by-works, on which he seizes to
load ridicule on all that is Popish.

This Luther is apt to do even when treating of subjects quite
alien to this sort of polemics.

In his "Von den Conciliis und Kirchen " (1539) he has a
lengthy dissertation on the marks of the Church ; the subject
being a wide one he is anxious to get on with it, yet, even so, his
pen again and again wanders off into vituperation. He apostro
phises himself incidentally as follows : " But how is it that I
come again to speak of the infamous, filthy menials of the Pope ?
Let them begone, and, for ever," etc. With these words he breaks
off a wild outburst in which he had declared that the Pope and
his men were persecuting the Word of God, i.e. Luther's doctrine,
" though well aware of its truth ; very bad Apostles, Evangelists
and Prophets must they be, like the devil and his angels."3

Yet, on the very next page, the same subject crops up again.
A lay figure serves to introduce it. To him Luther says : " There
you come again dragging in your Pope with you, though I wanted
to have no more to do with you. Well, as you insist on annoying
me with your unwelcome presence I shall give you a thoroughly
Lutheran reception." He then proceeds to enlarge in " Lutheran"
fashion on the fact, that the Pope " condemns the wedded life
of the bishops and priests." " If a man has seduced a hundred
maidens, violated a hundred honourable widows and has besides

1 To Lang, Aug. 18, 1520, " Brief wechsel," 2, p. 461.

2 Cp. vol. iv., p. 95 f. My belief that in the passage in question in
Luther's letter to Melanchthon of Aug. 28, 1530 (" Brief wechsel,'1 8,
p. 235), the word " mendacia " should be read after " doles," as in the
oldest Protestant editions, has since received confirmation from P.
Sinthern in the " Zeitschr. f. kath. TheoL," 1912, p. 180 ff., where the
quotations from Johann Lorenz Doller, " Luthers katholisches Monu
ment/' PVankfurt-am-Main, 1817, p. 309 ff., are set forth in their true
light. 3 Erl. ed., 252, p. 425.

DEPRAVITY OF OPPONENTS 159

a hundred prostitutes behind him, he is allowed to be not merely
a preacher or parson but even a bishop or Pope, and though he
keeps on in his evil ways he would still be tolerated in such an
office." " Are you not mad and foolish ? Out on you, you rude
fools and donkeys ! . . . Truly Popes and bishops are fine
fellows to be the bridegrooms of the Churches. Better suited
were they to be the bridegrooms of female keepers of bawdy
houses, or of the devil's own daughter in hell ! True bishops are
the servants of this bride and she is their wife and mistress."
According to you " matrimony is unclean, and a merdiferous
sacrament which cannot please God " ; at the same time it is
supposed to be right and a sacrament. " See how the devil
cheats and befools you when he teaches you such twaddle ! "
Further on he begins anew : "To violate virgins, widows and
married women, to keep many prostitutes and to commit all sorts
of hidden sins, this he is free to do, and thereby becomes worthy
of the priestly calling ; but this is the sum total of it all : The
Pope, the devil and his Church are enemies to the married state
as Dan. (xi. 37) says, and are determined to abuse it in this way
so that the priestly office may not thrive. This amounts to say
ing that the state of matrimony is adulterous, sinful, impure
and abominated of God."

Bidding farewell to Popery, Luther gives it a truly " Lutheran "
send off : " So for the present let us be done with the Ass-Pope
and the Pope-Ass, and all his asinine lawyers. We will now get
back to our own affairs."

This, however, he only partially succeeds in doing. After
discussing the 6th and 7th mark of the Church the " spirit "
once more seizes him. The caricature of Popery with which he
is wont to pacify his conscience here again figures with the
whole of the inevitable paraphernalia : " [Holy] water, salt,
herbs, tapers, bells, images, Agnus Dei, pallia, altar, chasubles,
tonsures, fingers, hands. Who can enumerate them all ? Finally
the monks' cowls," etc. A page further we again read : " Holy
water, Agnus Dei, bulls, briefs, Masses and monks' cowls. . . .
The devil has decked himself out in them all."

Weary as he is at the end of the lengthy work, he is still
anxious to " tread under foot the Pope, as Psalm xci. [xc.,
verse 13] says : ' Thou shalt walk upon the asp and the basilisk,
and shalt trample under foot the lion and the dragon ' ; this we
will do with the help and strength of the Seed of the woman
that has crushed and still crushes the serpent's head, albeit we
know that he will turn and bite our heel. To the same blessed
Seed of the woman be all praise and glory together with the
Father and the Holy Ghost, One True God and Lord for ever and
ever. Amen."

Here, in the few pages we have selected for quotation, the
whole psychological Luther-problem unrolls itself.

In the pictures his imagination conjures up, the sacrifice
of the Mass — the most sacred mystery of Catholic worship —

160 INNER TROUBLES

occupies a special place. It is the idolatrous abomination
foretold by the prophet, or rather the idol Moasim itself
(above, vol. iv., p. 524). One wonders whether he really
succeeded in persuading himself that his greatest sin, a sin
that cried to heaven for vengeance and deserved eternal
damnation (above, p. 136; cp. vol. iv., p. 509), was his
having — as a monk and at a time when he knew no better —
celebrated the sacrifice of the Mass ? It is true that, in the
solemn profession he makes of his belief in the Sacrament
(1528), when resolved to confess his faith " before God and
the whole world," he says : " These were my greatest sins,
that I was such a holy monk and for over fifteen years
angered, plagued and martyred my dear Master so grue-
somely by my many Masses." The words occur at the close
of his "Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis," with the
asseveration, that he would stand firm in this faith to the
very end ; " and were I, which God forbid, under stress of
temptation or in the hour of death to say otherwise, then
[what I might say] must be accounted as nought and I
hereby openly proclaim it to be false and to come from the
devil. So help me My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Who
is blessed for ever and ever. Amen."1

According to what he once remarked in 1531 (above,
p. 136 f.) it was, however, not the devil who was prompting
him to despair by calling up his crying sin of having said
Mass. If Luther is indeed telling the truth, and if his doings
as a zealous monk really seemed to him to be his worse sins,
then we can only marvel at his confusion of mind having
gone so far. From other admissions we should rather
gather that what disquieted his conscience was more the
subversion of the olden worship, the ruin of the religious life
and, in fact, the whole working of the innovations. And
yet, here, we have a solemn assurance that the very contrary
was the case.

It is in itself a problem how he contrives to make such
frightful sins of his monastic life — into which, on his own
showing, he had entered in ignorance — and of the Masses
which he had said all unaware of their wickedness.

But, in his polemics, such is the force with which he is
swept along, that he does not pause to consider his blatant
self-contradictions, or how much he is putting himself at the

1 Weim. ed., 26, p. 509 ; Erl. ed., 30, p. 372 f.

HIS OWN ENDOWMENTS 161

mercy of his opponents, or how inadequately his rhetoric and
all his playing to the gallery hides the lack of valid proofs
and the deficiencies of his reading of Scripture.

As for his foes, in his mind's eye he sees them wavering and
falling, blown over, as it were, by the strength of his reason
ing, even when they are not overtaken and slain by the
righteous judgment of God. When need arises he has ready
a list of deaths, particularly of sudden ones, by which oppo
nents had been snatched away.1 The " blessed upheaval,"
however, which is one day to carry them all off together, is,
so at least his morbid fancy tells him, still delayed by his
prayers.

As for himself personally, he stood under the spell of a
train of thought displaying pathological symptoms, which,
taken in the lump, must raise serious questions as to the
nature of his changing mental state.

Being chosen by God for such great things, being not
merely the " prophet of the Germans " but also destined to
bring back the Gospel to the whole Christian world, Provi
dence, in his opinion, has equipped him with qualities such
as have hitherto rarely graced a man. This he does not tire
of repeating, albeit he ever refers his gifts to God. He is
fond of comparing himself not merely with the Popish
doctors of his day but also with the most famous of bygone
time. In the same way he is fond of measuring foes within
the fold by the standard of his own greatness. He is thus
betrayed into utterances such as one usually hears only from
those affected with megalomania ; this sort of thing pleases
him so well, that, intent on his own higher mission, he fails
to see the bad taste of certain of his exaggerations and how
repulsive their tone is.2

God at all times has saved His Church " by means of
individuals and for the sake of a few " ; this Luther pointed
out to his friends in 1540, instancing Adam, Abraham,
Moses, Elias, Isaias, Augustine, Ambrose and others. " God
also did something by means of Bernard and now again
through me, the new Jeremias. And so the end draws

1 Vol. iv., p. 304.

2 See vol. iv., p. 327 ff., and the remark of Harnack, ib., p. 340 f. :
" Either he suffered from the mania of greatness or his self-reliance
really corresponded with his task and achievements."

VI. — M

162 INNER TROUBLES

nigh ! " l The end, however, for which he has made every
thing ready, may now come quite peacefully and speedily,
for he has not merely done " something," but " everything
that pertains to the knowledge of God has been restored " ;
" the Gospel has been revealed and the Last Day is at the
door."2

Fancying himself the passive tool of Divine Providence,
it becomes lawful for him deliberately to scatter over the
world his literary bomb-shells, exclaiming : God wills it,
for, did He not, He could prevent it ! He flings broadcast
atrocious charges of a character to arouse men's worst
passions, and, at the same time, writes to his friends : If it
is too much, God at our prayer must provide a remedy.3
Hence it is God Who must bear the blame for everything,
seeing that He works through Luther. God made him a
Doctor of Holy Scripture, let Him therefore see to it.

He " throws down the keys at the door " of God when the work
goes ill. Why did He will it ? "I cannot stop the course of
events," he says somewhat more truly in 1525, " for matters have
gone too far " ; he adds, however : "I will shut my eyes and
leave God to act ; He will do as He pleases."4

This way of thinking was nothing new in Luther, but may be
traced in his earliest literary efforts, which only shows how deeply
it was rooted in his mind. " In all I do I wish to be led, not by
the rede and deed of man, but by the rede and deed of God ! " so
he said in 1517, when declining the advice of those who only
wished to serve his best interests ; yet, in the same letter in
which these words occur, he confesses his " precipitancy, pre
sumption and prejudice," qualities " on account of which he was
blamed by all."5

Later, too, as we know, he saw in things both great and small
the hand of God at work in him ; all his efforts and even his
very mistakes were God's, not his. It was by God that, while yet
a monk, he had been " forcibly torn from the Hours,"6 i.e. freed

1 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 210.

2 Ib., p. 308 (1540). Cp. above, vol. v., p. 241 ff.

3 To Lang : " Sitne libellus meus [De captivitate babylonica] tarn
atrox et ferox tu videris et alii omnes, Libertate et impetu fateor plenus
est, multis tainen placet, nee aulce nostrce penitus displicet. Ego de me in
his rebus nihil statuere possum. Forte ego prcecursor sum Philippi
[Melanchthonis], cui exemplo Helice viam parem in spiritu et virtu te.
conturbaturus Israel et Achabitas [cp. 1 Kings xviii. 17] oratione itaque
opus erit, si quid peccatum est." A little later he says of Antichrist :
" Odi ego ex corde hominem ilium peccati et filium perditionis [2 Thes.
ii. 3] cum universo suo imperio."

4 In Casel's report (Nov. 29, 1525), Kolde, "Anal. Lutherana," p. 74.

5 To Lang, Nov. 11, 1517, " Briefwechsel," 1, p. 126.

6 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 6.

HIS OWN ENDOWMENTS 163

from the duty of reciting the Divine Office ; God had led him like
a blinkered charger into the midst of the battle ; it was God,
again, Who had " flung him into matrimony " and Who had laid
upon him, the " wonderful monk," the burden of preaching to
the great ones and the tenor of his message. " Hence you ought
to believe my word absolutely . . . but, even to this day, people
do not believe that my preaching is the Word of God. . . . But,
on it I will stake my soul, that I preach the true and pure Word
of God, and for it I am also ready to die. ... If you believe it
you will be saved, if you don't you will be damned."1

Seeing the tumults and disorders that had arisen through him,
he cries : " It is the Lord Who does this " ; "we see God's plan
in these things " ; "It was God Who began it " ; "in our doings
we are guided by the Divine Counsel alone."2

It is when in such a frame of mind that he detects those signs
and wonders that witness against his foes ; given the magnitude
of the war he was waging whilst waiting for the coming of the
Judge, these signs were no more to be wondered at than the
obstinacy of his foes : " Now that the end of the world is coming
the people [the Papists] storm and rage against God most
gruesomely, blaspheming and condemning the Word of God,
though knowing it to be indeed the Word and the Truth. And,
on the top of this, are the many dreadful signs and wonders in the
skies and among almost all creatures, which are a terrible menace
to them."3

Though quite full of the idea that his own doctrine was
alone right, yet, as already shown, he went in early days so
far as to grant to every man freedom of belief and the right
to read Scripture according to his lights ; for to him every
Christian is a judge of Holy Scripture, a doctor and a tool of
the Holy Ghost. The assumption underlying this, viz. that,
in spite of all, the necessary unity of doctrine would be pre
served, is not easy to explain. When, however, experience
stepped in and disproved the assumption, Luther's behaviour
became even more inexplicable. He was by nature so
disposed to ignore the claims of logic that the contradiction
between his demand that all should bow to his doctrine, and
such theories as that the Bible is, for all, the true and only
fount of knowledge, and that no other outward ecclesi
astical authority exists, never seems to have troubled him.
Though he claimed to be the " liberator of minds and
consciences," he, nevertheless, called on the authorities to
put down all other doctrines.4

1 Erl. ed., 57, p. 73. " Tischreden," ed. Aurifaber, Eisleben, 1566,
pp. 18 and 18'. 2 Above, vol. iii., p. 121.

3 Erl. ed., 65, p. 62, preface to his translation of Jeremias.

4 See below, xxxviii, 1.

164 INNER TROUBLES

The dignity of his chair at Wittenberg is exalted by him
to giddy heights. " This university and town," he said of
Wittenberg, may vie with any others. " All the highest
authorities of the day are at one with us, like Amsdorf , Brenz
and Rhegius. Such men are our correspondents." In com
parison, the sects are simply ludicrous in their insignificance.
Woe to those within the fold who dare to run counter to
Luther, " like ' Jeckel ' and ' Grickel ' ; they imagine that
they alone are clever and that they, like c Zwingel ' also,
never learnt anything from us ! Yet who knew anything
25 years ago ? Who stood by me 21 years since, when
God, against both my will and my knowledge, led me
into the fray ? Alas, what a misfortune is ambition ! "
This he said in 1540,1 but already eight years before he
had complained bitterly : " Each one wants to make him
self out to be alone in knowing everything. . . . Everywhere
we find the same Master Wiseacre, who is so clever that he
can lead a horse by its tail." Though one alone has received
from God the mission of preaching the Gospel, yet " there
are others, even among his pupils, who think they know ten
times more about it than he. ... Then, hey presto, another
doctrine is set up."2 " Deadly harm " to Christianity is
the result ; nevertheless, according to Christ's prophecy,
"factions and sects " there must be ; but their source is
and remains the devil3 — who, according to Luther, is the
true God of this world in which indeed his finger can every
where be seen. (See above, vol. v., p. 275 ff.)

Strange indeed is the frame of mind here presented to the
observer. So much is Luther the plaything of his fancy and
the feeling of the moment, that, at times he seems the
victim of a sort of self-suggestion and to be following
blindly the idea which happens to hold the field.

His judgment being seen to be so confused, it becomes
easier to estimate at their right value certain of his ideas,
particularly his conviction that he and his cause owed their
preservation to a series of palpable miracles. He contrived
to spread among his pupils the belief that " holy Luther "
was the greatest prophet since the time of the Apostles.4
Yet anyone who reflects how Luther could devote a special

1 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 169.

2 Weim. ed., 32, p. 474 ; Erl. ed., 43, p. 263.

3 76., p. 473 = 265.

4 Cp. Spangenberg, " Theander Lutherus," pp. 45 and 51.

CLASHING CONVICTIONS 165

tract to proving that so everyday an occurrence as the
" escape " of a nun from her convent was worthy of being
deemed a great miracle for all time, can only marvel at the
facility with which Luther could delude himself.1

Other Abnormal Lines of Thought and Behaviour

Luther's action presents many other problems to the
psychologist, for instance, in its waverings and contradic
tions. Strong in his belief in his Divine mission, he roundly
abuses kings and princes in the vilest terms, and yet, at the
same time, he teaches respect and obedience towards them
and even sets himself up as a model in this respect, all
according to his mood and as they happen to be favourable
to him or the reverse. On the one hand, he presumes to incite
the people to acts of violence, and, on the other, he preaches
no less cogently the need of calmness and submission. He
boasts of the courage with which he had dashed into the very
jaws of Behemoth, and of his utter contempt for his foes ;
yet this same Luther is obsessed by the idea that his own
life is threatened by poison and sorcery, just as his party is
menaced by the hired assassins of the monks and Papists.
While he extols the University of Wittenberg as the bulwark
of theological unity, he is at the same time so distrustful of
the doctrine of his friends that his intercourse with them
suffers, and, to at least one of his intimates, Wittenberg
becomes a " cave of the Cyclops."

Such contradictions and many of the like combined to
induce in him an abnormal state of mind. Harmony and
consistency of thought and feeling was something he never
knew. Hence the charge brought against him, not merely
by opponents, but even by many of his own followers, viz.
of being muddled, illogical and not sure of his ground.

While he is perfectly able at times to speak and write with
such candour and truth that one cannot but admire the
wholesome sense, and sober, witty, cheery style of his
literary productions, yet their tone and character change
entirely as soon as it becomes a question of his polemics or
of his Evangel. Then his mind becomes overcast, his
thoughts pursue one another like storm-clouds, assuming
meanwhile the strangest shapes and the reader is over
whelmed by a torrent of mingled abuse and paradox.
1 See above, vol. iii., p. 159 ff. On the nun Florentina.

166 INNER TROUBLES

His very proofs are caught up in the whirl and become so
distorted that it is often impossible even to tell whether they
are meant in earnest or are merely in the nature of a
challenge.

According to Luther, to mention only a few of the strangest of
his sayings, his doctrine of justification and the forgiveness of sins
is present " in all creatures " and is confirmed by analogy.1 The
very doctrine of creation rests on the doctrine of justification as
on " its foundation."2 " If the article of our souls' salvation is
embraced and adhered to with a firm faith, then the other articles
follow naturally, for instance, that of the Trinity."3

Marriage he finds stamped on the whole of nature, " even on
the hardest stones." New-born infants he assumes capable of
eliciting an act of faith in baptism ; simply because he could not
otherwise defend against the Anabaptists the traditional infant
baptism and at the same time maintain that the efficacy of the
sacraments depends on faith. His doctrine of the spiritual
omnipresence of the body of Christ is an absurdity involving the
presence of Christ in all food ; but even this is not too much for
him if it enables him to defend his theory of the Supper. His
imputation-theory led him to that considered utterance which
has shocked so many : " Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe
more boldly still."4 " Sic volo, sic iubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas,"
was elsewhere his answer to another objection.5

He made no odds about declaring rhetorically, of all classes of
men and all branches of religious knowledge : that, " in a word,
before me no one knew anything."6 Of the daring eloquence he
can use when expressing such ideas we have a sample in the
statement : " Were the Papists, particularly those who are now
bawling at me in their writings, all stamped together in the wine
press and then boiled down and distilled seven times over, not a
quarter would be left capable of using their tongues to teach even
one article [of the Catechism], nor from the whole of their
doctrine could so much be drawn as would serve to teach a man
servant how to behave in God's sight towards his master or a
maid towards her mistress."7 He alone, Luther, it was, who had
brought to all ranks and classes throughout the world " a good
conscience and order."8

1 Schlaginhaufen, " Tischreden," p. 92 : " Articulus remissionis
peccatorum est in omnibus creaturis " (a. 1532). Cp. p. 139 : " Deus in
omnibus officiis, statibus intromisit remissionem peccatorum," etc.

2 Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 201 (Khummer) : " Melanthon
retulit, Lutherum scepe dixisse, articulum de remissions peccatorum esse
fundamentum, unde exstruatur articulus de creatione."

Erl. ed., 58, p. 390.

See vol. iii., p. 195 ff.

See above, vol. v., p. 517.

Cp. above, vol. v., p. 585 ; vol. iv., pp. 331, 343 ; vol. ii., p. 294.

Weim. ed., 26, p. 531 ; Erl. ed., 63, p. 273 (1528).

/&., p. 530 = 272.

CHANGING MOODS 167

Finally we have the paradox apparent in his practical
instructions and the curious behaviour into which his
belief in his mission occasionally led him. We may recall
the means to be employed for overcoming temptations, one
of the mildest of which was a good drink, 1 and the measures
to be taken to induce peace of soul. " Break out into abuse,"
such is his advice, and that will bring inward peace. 2 If this
does not work, then coarse humour will often succeed, one of
those jests, for instance, where the sacred and sublime is
vulgarised simply to raise a laugh. " Against the devil
Luther makes use of ' stronger buffoonery ' and dismisses
him curtly, nay, often rudely."3 Pointless jests often spoil
the force of his words. For instance, he found himself in a
difficulty about the second wife whom one of Carlstadt's
followers, acting on Luther's own principles, wished to take
in addition to his ailing spouse ; whilst stipulating that the
man must first " feel his conscience assured and convinced
by the Word of God," and doing his best to dissuade him
from taking such a step, Luther adds in a jesting tone, that
it were perhaps better to let the matter take its course, as at
Orlamiinde (under the rule of Carlstadt and his Old-Testa
ment ideas) they would soon be introducing circumcision
and the Mosaic Law in its entirety. *

His instability of mind and ever-changing feeling ended
by impressing a peculiar stamp on his whole mentality.

At one time he is delighted to see all things subject to the
new Evangel, and extols the gigantic success of his efforts ;
at another he complains bitterly that the world is turning
its back on the Word and deserting the little flock of true
Evangelicals. Thus the world could promptly assume in
his mind quite contradictory aspects. Of his alternating
moods of confidence and despair he told his friends : " My
moods vary quite a hundred times a day — nevertheless I
stand up to the devil."5 Hence he was aware of his vacilla
tions, though on the same occasion he declares that he knows

1 See vol. iii., p. 175ff.

2 Erl. ed., 60, p. 129 f. : " Break out at once into abuse, particularly
if the devil attacks you with justification ! He frequently assails me
with an argument that is not worth a snap, but in the turmoil and
temptation I do not notice this ; but when I have recovered I see it
plainly."

3 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 515.

4 To Chancellor Briick, Jan. 27, 1524, " Brief wechsel," 4, p. 282.

5 Erl. ed., 60, p. 129.

168 INNER TROUBLES

right well how Holy Scripture strengthens him against
them. He also feels and acknowledges his inconsistency, in
being, for all his changeableness, so rigid and obstinate in
his dealings with his friends. They knew his character, he
said, and called it " obstinate."1

Profound depression can alone account for the step he
took in 1530, when, for a while, he discontinued his sermons
at Wittenberg because he was sick of the indifference of his
hearers to the Word of God and disgusted with their conduct.
The editor of the sermons of this year, which have only
recently been published, remarks justly, that " the only
possible explanation of this step is a pathological one."2
Luther even went so far as to declare from the pulpit that
he was " not going to be a swine-herd."3 Yet, a little after,
during the journey to the Coburg, a sudden change occurred,
and we find Luther making jokes and writing in a quite
optimistic vein, and, no sooner had he reached his new
abode, than he plunged into new literary labours. Never
theless, whilst at the Castle, he was again a victim of intense
depression, was visited by Satan's " embassy " and even
vouchsafed a glimpse of the enemy of God. On his departure
from the Coburg good humour again got the better of him,
as we see from his jovial letter to Baumgartner of Oct. 4,
1530, and on reaching Wittenberg, he was soon up to his
ears in work, so that he could write : "I am not only
Luther, but Pomeranus, Vicar-General, Moses, Jethro and
I know not who else besides."4 The facility with which his
moods altered is again apparent when, in his last days, he
left Wittenberg in disgust only to return again forthwith
in the best of spirits. (See below, xxxix., 1.)

Yet in his attitude to the olden Church this same man,
who otherwise shows himself so instable, knows how to dis
play such defiant obstinacy that Protestants who look too

1 To Melanchthon, Aug. 3, 1530, " Brief wechsel," 8, p. 166 : " My
head is indeed obstinate as you fellows say."

2 Paul Pietsch, in the preface (p. xxi. f.) to vol. 32 of the Weim. ed. :
" His annoyance and his tendency to see only the darker side of things
show plainly enough . . . that Luther was suffering from that deep
depression to which great men are sometimes liable. In later life, for
instance in 1544, this depression again overtook Luther, and he even
resolved to quit Wittenberg, and it was only with difficulty that he was
dissuaded from doing so. In 1545 again something similar occurred.
Yet in 1544 and 1545 his discouragement had again no real cause."

3 Cp. Paulus, " Koln. Volksztng." (Lit. Bail.), 1906, p. 355, on vol. 32
of the Weimar edition.

* To Link, Dec. 1, 1530, " Briefwechsel," 8, p. 326.

CHANGING MOODS 169

exclusively at this side of his character have even been able
to speak of his inflexible firmness. What steels him here is
his ardent belief in his calling.

The idea of his vocation ever serves to help him over his
difficulties. An instance of that marvellous elasticity of
mind with which he seizes on his calling to pacify both him
self and his friends, is to be found in an intimate conversa
tion held after the " greatest of his temptations " in 1527,
and recorded by Bugenhagen. After Luther had declared
that he saw nothing to regret in his severity towards his foes
he went on to speak, with tears in his eyes, of the sects that
would spring up and which his friends would not be able to
withstand. He proceeded to admit that " he was sorry
if he had given scandal by his buffoonery and by his vitupera
tion,1 but that the cause could not be displeasing to the
pious, for he loved mankind [this is Bugenhagen's remark] too
much and was an enemy to all hypocrisy." " God had not
ordained " that he, so Luther here declares, " should appear
as a stern and austere figure. The world finds no sins
(' crimina ') wherewith to reproach me, but, because it
follows its own judgment, it takes great offence at me, as
I see. Possibly," so he goes on, " God wishes to delude the
blind and ungrateful world (' mundum stultum facer e ') so
that it may perish in its contempt and never see what
excellent gifts God has bestowed on me alone out of so
many thousands, wherewith I am to minister unto those
who are His friends. Thus the world, which refuses to
acclaim the word of salvation which God sends through me,
will find in me, according to the divine counsel, what offends
it and is to it a stumbling-block. For this God is answer
able ; for I shall pray that I may never be to any a cause of
scandal by my sins."

" This I learnt with wondrous joy from his own lips," adds
Bugenhagen.2 Others will, however, find Luther's enig
matical train of thought more difficult to understand.

The above are but a few instances of an abnormal turn of
mind ; of the like the present work contains others in
abundance. Anyone desirous of penetrating further into
the folds and windings of a mind so involved should study

1 " Si quid hie iocis aut conviciis excedit"

8 " Briefwechsel Bugenhagens," ed. Vogt, p. 67 ff.

170 INNER TROUBLES

Luther's letters, particularly those dating from 1517 to
1522 and from 1540 to 1546. He will there find much of the
same sort, which can hardly be termed either sane or reason
able ; but even the passages we have quoted suffice to
reveal in him an uncanny power of self-deception such as
few historic characters display. Many a great genius has
betrayed psychological peculiarities, indeed it seems at
times to be the fate of those endowed with eminent gifts to
overstep the boundaries and to venture further than the
reason and reflection of thinking men can follow.1 That
Luther carried certain mental peculiarities to their utmost
limit is plain from what we have seen, nor can it be right to
close one's eyes to the fact.

Luther showed the defects of a " genius " not least in his
vituperation and in the other far from commendable
methods he used in his polemics. It was precisely these
defects which led Erasmus to question whether he was quite
in his right mind. " Had a man said this in the delirium of
fever, could he have uttered anything more insane ? " Thus
Erasmus in his " Hyperaspistes."2 He often speaks of his
opponent's feverish fancies. He denies that his spirit is a
" sober " one, and maliciously supposes that he was drunk.
In spite of his usual moderation and reticence, the scholar,
when dealing with Luther's assertions, constantly uses such
words as " delirus" " insanus" " lymphatus" " sine
mente" " mera insania" On one occasion he says of the
" devils, spectres, c lamice^ ' megcerce ' and other more than
tragic words " which Luther was addicted to flinging at his
foes, that such a habit was a " sign of coming madness "
(" ventures insanice prcesagia ") ; elsewhere he views with
misgiving the sort of compulsion (" non agere sed agi ")
which urges Luther to abuse all who differ from him. 3

In other circles, too, the opinion prevailed that Luther was
suffering from some sort of mental disease. We may recall
the remarks of Boniface Amerbach, who was not unkindly
disposed to Luther, in sending the latter 's tract of 1534
against Erasmus, to his brother Basil (above, vol. iv., p. 183).

1 We remember having recently read in a review, that many, at the
present day, consider " mental aberration an indispensable condition
of mental greatness."

2 "Si hcec a febricitante dicerentur, quid did possit insanius ! "
" Opp.," 10, col. 1282, in 1526.

3 The passages are given in Latin above, vol. iv., p. 353, n. 3.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 171

In Luther's immediate surroundings we also find traces
of a fear that the Master stood in some danger of losing
his mind.

A thoroughgoing investigation of the matter by some
unbiassed expert in mental diseases would, however, be of
immeasurably greater value than the mere opinions of
contemporary admirers and opponents. But the difficulty
is to find an impartial expert. Protestant theologians will
not easily be found ready to agree with Catholic writers
regarding the process which made of a quondam monk the
founder of the Protestant faith, or to see Luther's scruples
in quite the same light. Entire agreement would seem for
ever excluded, owing to differences of outlook so deep-
seated. If, to some, Luther appears as a " new Paul," and
as one who removed every obstacle to free religious research,
then the view they take of his inward change and later
spiritual life must perforce be coloured to some extent by
this idea.

Nor must the fact be lost to sight that many of the
apparently suspicious symptoms were, in Luther's case,
quite wilful. Thus his outbreaks of fury against Popery, the
psychological origin of which we have already described
(vol. iv., p. 306 ff.), are largely an outcome of the feelings of
hatred he deliberately encouraged, and a reaction against
his earlier and better convictions. Again, self-deception and
lack of self-control, i.e. moral elements, played a great part
in him. Since, however, even at the outset of his career he
already displayed these moral defects, they must be care
fully distinguished from his morbid states and no less from
his doubts and remorse of conscience.

At the very least, however, we should give to the purely
historical facts such unbiassed, broadminded recognition as
that editor of the great Weimar Edition of Luther's works
(see above, p. 168), who, as we heard, spoke of the " patho
logical " explanation of certain acts and statements of
Luther's as the only one possible. The word " patho
logical," and other similar ones, had, however, been used
even earlier, and, that, even by non-Catholics, as descriptive
of certain of Luther's states, nor was the remark entirely
new, that in many a great genius we find something patho
logical.1

1 Cp. above, vol. ii., pp. 267 and 274 ; cp. also below, what Hausrath
and Mobius say. The expression "abnormal state of temper " is used

172 INNER TROUBLES

5. Luther's Psychology according to Physicians and Historians

It is not our intention in the following to criticise the
opinions quoted ; they have been collected chiefly with the
object in view of providing those qualified to judge with
matter on which to exercise their wits. Nevertheless, we
have no intention of depriving ourselves of the right of
making occasional observations. Thus Hausrath's opinion,
to be given immediately, calls for some revision, as will be
clear even to the lay mind. No disturbance of Luther's
intellectual functions or mental malady amounting to
actual " psychosis " can be assumed at any period of his
life. This, however, is a quite different thing from admitting
that his case was not entirely normal.

" The psychology of men, who, like him, are engaged in
such a struggle," rightly remarks a Protestant theologian,
" is exceedingly complicated. Discrepancies are to be met
with side by side, and, according to the circumstances, now
one element now another comes to the fore."1 In Luther's
case the co-existence of bouts of illness with the unfettered
use of his powers, of fundamental delusions with true though
misapplied ideas, of frivolity, sensuality and temptations to
despair, and, on the top of all this, the contradictory state
ments he himself makes about himself, i.e. — he, the only
man who could have told us how the facts really stood — all
these circumstances render any sure conclusion extremely
difficult.

No Protestant hitherto has used terms so strong to
describe Luther's overwrought nerves as his most recent
biographer, Hausrath, the Heidelberg theologian, in his first
edition of his " Life of Luther." His assertions do un
doubtedly err on the side of exaggeration.2 For instance,

by W. Kohler in the " Theol. Literaturbericht," vol. 23 (1903), p. 499.
Elsewhere he calls Luther " the most paradoxical figure imaginable,
who speaks differently to every hearer " (ib., vol. 24, 1904, p. 517). —
See also Dollinger (" Kirchenlexikon,"2 art. "Luther," col. 344), and
Mohler, "Symbolik," §48, 1873 ed., p. 423. U. Berliere, O.S.B.,
recently remarked : " Une 6tude psychologique de Luther ne peut etre
separee de son histoire ni de 1'evolution de sa vie interieure, encore
moins de son etat pathologique. . . . Cette etude n'est pas encore
achevee " (" Revue benedictine," 1906, p. 630 f.).

1 See Kohler, " Ein Wort zu Denifles Luther," p. 27.

2 Cp. above, vol. i., p. 383. Cp. also the remarks on the next page,
n. 2.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 173

when he says, that, owing to his illness in the monastery
Luther had more than once been in danger of sinking into
"the abyss of religious melancholia."1 Erroneously regard
ing the " temptations " — in reality mere remorse of con
science — from which Luther suffered, as the outcome of his
morbid bodily and mental state, he even ventures to hint
expressly at the nature of the malady : " The regularity
with which the attacks return during all the years spent in
the monastery and after he had commenced his public
career, leads us to infer a recurrent psychosis, the attacks of
which became less frequent after his marriage, but never
altogether ceased."2

In recent times, apart from Hausrath, two other writers,
both of them non-Catholics, have looked more closely into
Luther's pathology. Dr. Berkhan in an article in the
" Archiv fur Psychiatric " entitled " Die nervosen
Beschwerden Luthers," and Gustav Kawerau in the study
" Etwas vom kranken Luther," printed in the " Deutsch-
evangelische Blatter." The two Protestants, Kuchen-
meister and Ebstein, who also dealt with Luther's maladies, 3
failed to discuss the psychological phenomena here under
consideration ; what interested them was more Luther's
ordinary illnesses though, it is true, they bring forward
various data which may prove of interest here ; these,
nevertheless, must be cautiously used, as the authors are
somewhat deficient in historical criticism. Older writers

1 In the art. " Luthers Bekehrung " (" N. Heidelb. Jahrb.," 6,
1896), p. 193.

2 "Luthers Leben," 1, 1905, p. 109 f. The author speaks of the
" secret sufferings of soul " which did not, however, interfere with the
thoroughness of his work (p. 110) ; incidentally, in exoneration of the
violence of Luther's writings against Zwingli, he urges that Luther
wrote it "at a time of great depression, which he even wished his
opponents might endure for but a quarter of an hour to see if it would
not convert them " (2, p. 213). At the Wart burg " his mental suffering
returned, as it always did when he remained for any length of time
without outward stimulus or active intercourse with the outside
world " (1, p. 475). In the supplement to his unaltered 2nd edition
Hausrath deals with the objections raised against his " pathological "
view though he considerably modifies his wordings (1, p. 573 ff.).

3 On Ebstein see below, p. 176 f. Ebstein's is an improvement on
Kuchenmeister, " Dr. Martin Luthers Krankengesch.," Leipzig, 1881.
Kuchenmeister did not do justice to the historical material and always
quotes at second hand. Th. Kolde rightly speaks of his work as a
" book that had better not have been written " (" Anal. Lutherana,"
p. 50). He also thinks Berkhan's treatment of the subject (ib., p. 51)
" of small value."

174 INNER TROUBLES

who treated of Luther's illnesses, e.g. the Protestant pastor
Friedrich Siegmund Keil, Garmann, the Chemnitz physician
and an anonymous writer in the " Neues Hannoversche
Magazin " are even less satisfactory.

Of the two first mentioned, Kawerau supplies a careful
review of those statements of Luther's which concern his
nervous maladies, not, however, carrying them back to his
earliest years. He gives us the picture " of a man occupying
a most responsible position, ever in friction with his sur
roundings " and " in a state of nervous overstrain due to too
much work of body and mind."1 With these words he seeks
to pave the way for a psychological appreciation of all that,
as he says, " so often appears repulsive or regrettable in
Luther, for instance, his waxing irritability, his unbridled
anger, the excesses he commits by word and pen, and his
sudden changes of mood." He even opines that " the
spiritual temptations may be accounted for by his all-too-
great labours and anxieties, and their effect upon his
constitution " ; 2 his conclusion is that a fuller knowledge of
Luther's ailments " helps us to understand him aright and
better to appreciate his greatness."3

The other writer, Dr. Berkhan, a Brunswick physician,
had, previous to Kawerau, attempted to lift the veil which
shrouds the " anomalies " presented by Luther ; he did not,
however, properly sift his materials, nor did he consider the
various symptoms in their complexus.4 He comes to the
conclusion that some of Luther's troubles, for instance, his
" hallucinations," " must be ascribed to an affection of the
nerve centres." These " hallucinations " he attributes to
" fluxions " due to overwork. Such hallucinations, accord
ing to him, were, in Luther's case, of two kinds ; some
optical and some auditory. They were induced, so he
thinks, not only by the permanent excitement of Luther's
life, but also by " his doubts and controversies." What
Luther terms temptations Berkhan also regards as, in the
main, mere psychic depression bound up with nerve disturb
ance. In view of certain other symptoms he diagnoses a case
of praecordial trouble.5

After Kawerau and Berkhan we must refer to P. J.

1 " Deutsch-evangelische Bl.," 29, Halle, 1904, p. 303 ff.

8 See above, p. 109 ff. * P. 316.

* " Archiv f. Psychiatrie," 11, Berlin, 1880-1, p. 798 ff.

* P. 799. Op. above, p. 100 ff.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 175

Mobius, the Leipzig expert in mental ailments. He is known
in connection with his highly original studies on Rousseau,
Goethe, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche ; on Luther he has
not expressed his views at any great length, but, such as they
are, they are drastic enough.1

Mobius points out2 that " in Luther's case the pathological
element is of the utmost significance." " Even Luther's recent
biographer, Professor Hausrath," he writes, " spoke of ' recurrent
psychosis.'3 According to what Kraepelin now says, it would be
better to term it a mild form of maniacal depression. 4 The main
point is that Luther, from his youth upwards, suffered at times
from the dumps without any apparent cause, was oppressed with
gloomy forebodings, sadness, fear and despair. The melancholic
phases may easily be traced throughout Luther's life ; probably,
too, the periods when he felt his power and gave vent to his
boundless wrath should be regarded as morbid and maniacal.
We may take it that, in Luther's case, the morbid mood made
the illness, and that his fantastic interpretation of certain inci
dents — combats with the devil, intercourse with spirits and
Divine inspirations — are to be explained, not as delusions, but as
the explanations he sought in the ideas then current."

" The present writer," continues Mobius, " does not in the least
believe that Luther suffered from hallucinations. It seems always
to have been a case of placing a superstitious interpretation on

1 Mobius proceeds on the principle that " in each of us what is
healthy is mixed with what is morbid and the more anyone rises
above the average, the further he departs from the normal." " The
pathological element is part of every eminent man." This, according
to Mobius, is particularly the case with the genius. Hence, in his
studies, it is his aim to show how psychiatry " may be used for appreci
ating great men." Mobius intended to deal in detail with the pathology
of Luther but was prevented by death from carrying out his plan. In
his study on Schopenhauer (" Ausgewahlte Werke," Bd. 4) — who
according to him was certainly not insane in the ordinary sense — he
says : "I consider Schopenhauer one of the best instances to prove
that it is only pathology which teaches us rightly to understand great
writers and their works. . . . Schopenhauer became the philosopher
of pessimism because, from the beginning, he was a sickly man. It was
not the recognition of the evils in the world that made him take this
line, but he deliberately sought out and described the evils because he
needed to vindicate his own pessimism. He had displayed the latter
even as a boy, having inherited it from his father, and his morbid
disposition influenced his whole mode of thought."

8 In " Schmidts Jahrb. der in- und auslandischen gesamten
Medizin," ed. P. J. Mobius and H. Doppe, 288, Leipzig, 1905, Hft. 12,
Dec., p. 264 in the notice of my articles " Ein Grundproblem aus
Luthers Seelenleben," in the " Koln. Volksztng.," Lit. Beilage, 1905,
Nos. 40 and 41.

3 [Above, p. 173.]

4 [Emil Kraepelin, " Psychiatrie, Ein Lehrbuch fur Studierende und
Arzte,"6 Leipzig, 1899, Cap. ix. : " Das manisch-depressive Irresein,
pp. 359-425.]

176 INNER TROUBLES

real phenomena. The black pig in the garden and the black dog on
his bed, were, most likely, of flesh and blood. In many instances
(the wrestling with the demon, and so forth) the language is
simply figurative. With Luther the pathological element made
history. His morbid fear led him to brood over justification ;
the sense of his own utter weakness convinced him that man can
do nothing of his own strength and by his own works, and that
the only possible course is to stretch out yearning hands and
seize on Grace. In his melancholic state he fell in with the
doctrine of justification by faith alone of St. Paul (who himself
suffered from the same ailment [ ! ]), and, around this centre,
his theological ideas grouped themselves, and, with ' sola fides '
as his war-cry, he proceeded to do battle with the ancient Church.
Thus, from the monk's melancholia, sprang the Reformation."

Proceeding on similar lines, Professor Willy Hellpach, of
Carlsruhe, observed in the Berlin "Tag" (" Psychologische
Rundschau," Jan. 18, 1912) : " Several years ago the Jesuit
scholar, Pater Grisar, published in the ' Kolnische Volkszeitung '
an article entitled 'Ein Grundproblem aus Luthers Seelenleben.'
Of this work Mobius said, and quite rightly, that it was the
best account so far given of the pathology of Luther's mind. That
Luther's mind was at times morbidly depressed without any
reasonable cause has never been doubted by any who knew him,
even when they happened to be Evangelicals. Hausrath, in his
biography, had spoken of ' recurrent psychosis,' a statement,
which, it is true, he modified later on account of the storm of
indignation which broke out among those queer folk who seem
to look upon a gifted man's malady as a worse blot than the
greatest crime." Hellpach points out that laymen are wrong
when they imagine that "psychosis" involves "an absolute
derangement of the power of thought."

Wilhelm Ebstein, a Professor of Medicine,1 recently, and
not without reason, registered a protest against the view
of those who maintain that Luther was actually out of his
mind. Himself interested in the treatment of cases of gout
and calculus, he comes to the conclusion that Luther's chief
sufferings were caused by uric acid and faulty digestion, the
two together constituting the principal trouble, and being
accompanied, as is so often the case with gout, by " neuras
thenic symptoms which at times recall psychosis " ;2 his
" hypochondriacal depression which passed all bounds "
was entirely due to these ailments. Not only these
" nervous symptoms," but also the other ailments of which
Luther had to complain, his palpitations, headaches, dizzi-

1 " Dr. Martin Luthers Krankheiten und deren Einfluss auf seinen
korperlichen und geistigen Zustand," Stuttgart, 1908.

2 Pp. 7, 64.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 177

ness, sore-throat, defective hearing, impaired digestion,
fainting fits, and particularly his oppression in the region of
the heart and the feelings of fear which accompanied it, all
these were, according to Ebstein, due more or less to gout
and the other troubles resulting from the presence of
uric acid.1

There can be no doubt that this learned physician gives us
many useful observations, but he has not himself selected his
historical matter and carefully tested its source. Much of it
comes from Kiichenmeister, whereas, at the present stage of
research, a medical opinion, to carry real weight, must neces
sarily enter at greater length into the facts more recently brought
to light. Some of Kiichenmeister's opinions have, however, been
revised by Ebstein, and not without good reason.

Among those of Ebstein's statements that must be character
ised as historically untenable are the following, viz. that Luther's
hallucinations and visions occurred " almost without exception
at a time when he was yet under the influence of the asceticism of
the monastery, with its night- vigils, spiritual exercises and
strenuous mental labours," i.e. in his Catholic days ; likewise,
that, in the monastery, he had striven " most diligently to outdo
the other monks in the matter of fasting, watching," etc. ; that,
in later days, he had " always been able to master his morbid
states, and to bid defiance to his moods of depression," and that
these latter had "in no way detracted " from his mental labours ;
that his method of controversy had never been a morbid one, as
Kiichenmeister had asserted on insufficient grounds, and that,
when even Luther referred to mental sufferings and temptations,
his " bodily ailments " always occupied the first place and
constituted the leading factor.2

His theory that Luther suffered from gout is also eminently
doubtful.

Of any symptoms of gout, for instance, of gouty swellings, we
hear nothing from Luther3 though lie was wont to expatiate on
his complaints, and though, according to Ebstein, he possessed a
" rare knowledge of medical matters."4 Nor did Luther perma
nently suffer from sluggishness and constipation of the bowels ;
we hear of it only at Worms and at the Wartburg in 1521, and
then again in 1525. To put down " his moodiness, melancholia
and depression " as Ebstein terms the remorse of conscience
experienced in 1528 at the time of his greatest " temptations "
to an attack of piles, described by Luther in a letter to his friend
Jonas on Jan. 6, 1528, is to misapprehend the facts of the case ;
for, actually, it was three years before this that Luther had for a
while been troubled with haemorrhoids, as is evident both from

1 Pp. 45 ff., 56 ff. 2 Pp. 62, 10, 63 f., 60, 55, 54, 64.

3 This Ebstein admits (p. 44), though he argues that the " seizures
in the joints " of which Luther complains must have had a gouty origin.

4 76., p. 40. But cp. above, p. 110 f.

vi. — N

178 INNER TROUBLES

the text of the inquiry made by Jonas (" ante triennium"), and
from Luther's answer : " My illness was as follows," etc.1

Moreover, Luther was not suffering from stone in 1521, and it is
only in 1526 that we hear him speaking of it for the first time ;
after this the malady was for a long time in abeyance,2 until,
between 1537 and 1539, it once more attacked him severely ; it
is again referred to in 1543.

Hence we must still await a more accurate medical diagnosis to
determine — if indeed this be possible — how far the history of
Luther's outward and inward troubles was dependent on uric
acid.3 Maybe, eventually, greater stress than hitherto will be
laid on Luther's heart troubles ; if so, then it will become
necessary to find out what the so-called " cardiogmus " was, from
which, according to Melanchthon, Luther suffered severely early
in 1545 ; for, in his friend's opinion, it was to this that Luther's
death later on was due.4 Ebstein himself says of the oppression
in the region of the heart and the resultant anxiety 5 from which
Luther suffered, until his death was ultimately brought about by
" heart failure," that it " leads us to diagnose some heart affec
tion " ; this, according to his theory, was due, in part directly
to gout, in part also to the obstinate constipation which ac
companied it. According to him the periodic attacks of heart-
oppression suggest heart asthma or angina pectoris, which,
notoriously, often co-exists with gout.

As regards Luther's mental sufferings, Ebstein will not
hear of Berkhan's hypothesis of " fluxions " ; he himself,
however, — and herein lies his principal fault, — does not
make sufficient account of his patient's frequent nervous
states. He thinks that Luther's black outlook, which,
according to him, resulted from gout, was not bound up
directly with any sufferings.6 As regards the " hallucina
tions of sight and hearing,"7 which Luther regarded as the
work of the devil, he declares, that Luther, from time to
time, fell into a condition of " weakness and irritability
which make the temporary disturbance of his brain-powers
quite intelligible " ; as to the cause of the lapses, Ebstein
finds it in " the strenuous mental labour " leading to a
" condition of inanition."8 He also allows, that, even as a
monk, and in early life, Luther was a victim of moodiness.9
He is, however, quite right when he says : " Insanity
cannot be thought of, nor even epilepsy."10 In his admira-

1 Cp. in " Brief wechsel Luthers," 6, p. 191, for the proofs in support
of this letter quoted by Enders from Kawerau.

2 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 168. 3 Ebstein, ib., p. 44.
4 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 691 f. 5 Pp. 49, 53.

6 P. 55 f. 7 P. 56. 8 P. 12. » P. 62. 10 P. 10.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 179

tion for Luther, he also credits him with having in his life
time endured " more days of suffering than of well-being."
To make this statement entirely true it would, however, be
necessary to include amongst the days of suffering, those
when he was so paralysed by remorse of conscience as to be
incapable of work. At any rate we quite admit with
Ebstein that, in Luther, we have " a man, during a
great part of his life, sorely tried by bodily ailments,"1 a
fact which can only make one wonder the more at the extent
of his labours.

To pass now to some older Catholic writers. In 1874
Bruno Schon, of Vienna, published an essay in which he
depicted Luther as mentally deranged.2

The author, who was chaplain to a lunatic asylum, was not
merely no historian and still less an expert in mental disease, but
lacked even a proper acquaintance with Luther's life and writings.
His historical groundwork he took from second-rate works, and
his opinion was biassed by his conviction that Luther could not
but be insane. He makes no real attempt to prove such a thing ;
all he does is to give us an account, clothed in psychiatric termin
ology, of the different forms of madness from which Luther
suffered ; in the first place he was afflicted with megalomania and
the mania of persecution, two forms of insanity frequently found
together. — But nervous irritability, anxiety, moodiness, excit
ability, a too high opinion of himself, perversion of judgment and
even hallucinations — could such be proved in Luther's case — all
these would not entitle us to say that he was ever really insane.
Nervous derangement, says Kirchhoff , is not psychosis, and people
subject to hallucinations are not always insane.3

Long before this other Catholic writers had instanced
certain peculiarities in Luther's mental state, though they,
like almost all recent writers, with the exception of Hausrath,
were ignorant of one of the most remarkable elements to be
taken into consideration, viz. the fits of terror to which
Luther had been subject from early youth. The treatment

1 P. 44 f .

2 "Luther auf dem Standpunkt der Psychiatrie beurteilt," Wien,
1874. Bruno Sch6n declares that Luther was " in part excused by the
fact that he was deranged " (p. 3) ; this derangement Luther contrived
to explain away by laying it all down to the devil, whom he had seen
in actual hallucinations (p. 9) ; he had regarded all his opponents as
fools, just as the inmates of an asylum look upon all others as fools and
on themselves as perfectly sane (p. 28), etc.

3 " Grundriss einer Gesch. der deutschen Irrenpflege," 1890, p. 76

180 INNER TROUBLES

of this matter was made all the harder by the fact that
Luther's extravagant after-accounts of his life in the
monastery, and the growth of his ideas, were received with
too much credulity, and that his letters, his Table-Talk and
many details of his life were but little known.

Maximilian Prechtl, Abbot of Michaelfeld (f!832), though
he refuses to regard Luther as insane, nevertheless calls
attention to the many " phantoms of a sick brain " which he
had seen ; " Luther believed," so he says, "that he often
saw the devil, and that under different shapes."1 The
learned Abbot brought out a new annotated edition of
Luther's " Against the Papacy founded by the Devil,"
which he published at the time of the Reformation-Festival
in 1817, in order to show the mad fury, hate and mental
confusion to which its author had fallen a victim. Luther's
writing betrays, so he opines, " no common fury but the
insane passion of the man, then almost at death's door."2
Too great stress must not be laid on some of the opinions
he here advances, which overstep the limits he himself had
traced and appear to credit Luther with insanity. Prechtl
spoke out more strongly in his " Rejoinder " to the
attacks made on his remarks. He emphasises " the in
controvertible proofs " to be found in Luther " of a troubled
fancy," and asserts that " he was not always in his right
mind."

Somewhat earlier, in 1810, the Catholic layman Friedrich
von Kerz, who continued Stolberg's " Geschichte der
Religion Christi," published a book " Uber den Geist und
die Folgen der Reformation " in which he comes to a far
too unfavourable opinion of Luther's mental state, which he
seeks to bolster up by statements incapable of historical
proof. In a nutshell, what he tentatively advances is, that,
" owing to the shock following the death of a friend struck
down at his side, Luther had lost his reason " ; " the
symptoms of a twisted mind soon became apparent."
" Luther not seldom appears in the light of an inexplicable
moral enigma, so that we are led, not indeed willingly, to
wonder whether a certain recurrent mental aberration and
periodic madness was not in reality the first and perhaps the

1 " Antwort auf das Sendschreiben,"3 Sulzbach, 1817, p. 70 ff.

2 See the 2nd ed. of this writing, bearing the same title as the 1st,
"Seitenstiick zur Weisheit Lathers." The 1st ed. is weaker in its
animadversions than the 2nd.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 181

only source of his vocation as a Reformer, of all his public
acts and of the greater part of his reforms."1

As against Kerz, Schon and even Prechtl, we must urge
that we have no proof that Luther was actually the slave of
his morbid fancies, or mentally diseased ; no such proof to
support the hypothesis of insanity is adduced by any of the
writers named. Of the temporary clouding of the mind they
make no mention.

As for the kind of megalomania met with in Luther, when
he insists on his being the mouthpiece of revelation, this is not
the sort usual in the case of the mentally deranged, when
the patient appears to be held captive under the spell of his
delusion. Luther often wavered in his statements regarding
his special revelation, indeed sometimes went so far as to
deny it ; in other words he was open to doubt. Moreover,
at the very times when he clung (or professed to cling) to it
with the greatest self-complacency, he was suffering from
severe attacks of depression, whereas it is not usual for
megalomania and depression to exist side by side. As for
the periodic fits of insanity suggested by Hausrath his
moods alternated too rapidly. His morbid ideas do not
constitute a paranoic system of madness, and still less is it
possible to attribute everything to mere hypochondriacal
lunacy.

The theory of Luther's not being a free agent is excluded
not only by his doubts and remorse of conscience, but also
by the bitter determination with which at the very beginning
he persuades himself of his ideas, insists upon them later
when doubts arise, and finally surrenders himself to their
spell by systematic self-deception. Such behaviour does
not accord with that of a man who is not free. It must
also be noted that the morbid symptoms of which Schon
speaks, in whatever light they be regarded, do not occur
simultaneously ; some disappear while others become more
marked as time goes on. This, however, also makes it
difficult and wellnigh impossible to discover what were the
components which originally went to make up Luther's
mentality before it had been seared by the errors and
inward commotion of his later passionate life. Above all
a fact repeatedly pointed out already must not be overlooked,
viz. that, throughout, wilful giving way to passion, lack of

1 P. 188.

182 INNER TROUBLES

self-control and too high an opinion of himself, united with
self-deception played a great part with him, particularly in
those outbreaks of fury against Pope and Papists in which
one might be tempted to see the work of a maniac. In
view of Luther's aptitude to pass rapidly from craven fear
to humorous self-confidence it would be necessary in order
to prove his insanity, to show clearly as far as possible — a
demonstration which has not yet been attempted — that
periods of depression or fear really alternated with periods
of exaltation, and what the duration of these periods was.

We cannot too much impress on those who may be
inclined to assume that, at least at times, Luther was not
in his right mind the huge and truly astounding powers of
work displayed by the man. Only comparatively seldom do
we hear of his being disinclined to labour or incapable of
work, and almost always the reason is clear. Even were the
advocates of intermittent insanity ready to allow the
existence of lengthy lucid intervals still so extraordinary a
power for work would prevent our agreeing with them any
more than with Schon, Mobius, Hausrath and the older
authors referred to above.

As to the question of the possibility of such a disability
having been inherited either from his father or his mother —
a matter into which modern psychiaters are always anxious
to inquire : Here, again, we find nothing to support the
theory of mental derangement. Hans Luther, his father,
was a stern, rude man of violent temper, and his wife,
Margaret, would also appear to have been a harsh woman,
without any joy in life and displaying small traces of the
more winning traits of affection. Neither of the pair did
much to sweeten the lad's hard boyhood and youth. This
certainly explains to some extent the thread of depression
and pessimism which runs side by side with the lively and
more cheerful one in the monk and university professor. Of
greater importance to the question in hand is the irritability
and violence of temper which showed itself in his father.
If the latter really committed manslaughter in a fit of anger,
as seems probable, and as has also been admitted by
Protestant scholars,1 then the son's irritability, and his
startling tendency to break out into foaming rage against
his opponents, may doubtless be traced back in part to the

1 See above, vol. i., p. 16.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 183

effects of heredity. In 1906 the fact came to light that
another Hans Luther, besides Martin's father, resided at
Mansfeld, and the latter, according to the records of the law-
courts, would appear to have borne a bad character and to
have been frequently punished for brawling and for being
too ready with his knife. If the latter, as the name would
imply, was a relative of Martin's we have here one more
argument to prove that the family was exceptionally
irritable.1

Luther's nervous irritability ought, indeed, to be made
more account of than it has hitherto been.

Addendum. Some Medical Opinions on Nervous
Degeneration, and Abnormal Ideas.

What was said above about Luther's " nervousness "
(p. 105 ff) may here be supplemented by some quotations
from August Cramer, the expert psychiater, now of Berlin.
It is true that what we shall quote is not intended to refer
to Luther, yet what he says may serve to explain certain of
Luther's symptoms, and, possibly, to show that some which
were put down to mental derangement may have been due
rather to a form of neurasthenia.2

" Even perfectly normal children are sometimes inclined in
their growing period to display great variations of temper, and to
be violent and changeable in their affections about the age of
puberty. This, however, is far more noticeable in the case of
people of a strongly developed nervous temperament. Ground
less outbreaks of anger, marked pathological absence of mind
and entire inability to concentrate their thoughts are often the
result. Fits of oppression and anxiety are not unknown ; head
aches are fairly frequent and the patients seem at times not to
be masters of themselves. They also tend to swing from an
exaggerated idea of their own importance to a despondent lack

1 " Zeitsehr. des Harzvereins," 39, 1906, p. 191 ft. It cannot be
proved from the records that the second Hans Luther had been guilty
of actual manslaughter. Hence in vol. i., it was not necessary to point
out that the manslaughter of which Wicel accuses Martin Luther's
father, repeating his accusation most emphatically in public writings
without its being called into question by Luther, cannot be placed to
the account of the second Hans with any semblance of likelihood
(though it has been done, cp. " Luther- Kalender," 1910, p. 76 f).
Wicel came to Eisleben in 1533, thus only a few years after the father's
death, and was able to assure himself of the facts, concerning which
there was not likely to be any mistake owing to Martin Luther's
celebrity at that time.

2 Aug. Cramer, " Die Nervositat," Jena, 1906.

184 INNER TROUBLES

of self-confidence. In their bents and friendships they are very
fickle. Hence we have here already in a very marked degree
that instability which von Magnan has pointed out as character
istic of degenerates.

In later life, too, such highly strung temperaments are often,
at least in the worse cases, predisposed to sudden changes of
views, and to fly to extremes, their varying moods tend at times
to become periodic, they are over-sensitive, are frequently unable
to bear alcohol, their sexual inclinations are abnormal and they
are often addicted from an early age to masturbation. . . .
Thus the predominant characteristic of the degenerate is lack of.
constancy (p. 175).

Of " nervosity " where it is combined with fear the same
author says : " The change of mood is often entirely without
cause and is by no means of a regular type, though instances of a
periodic character are occasionally to be met with. . . . We meet,
for example, persons whom we cannot possibly describe as ill,
who at times are exceptionally capable, lively and good-tempered,
and yet at other times give the impression of being downhearted,
self-centred and scarcely able to get through their daily tasks."

" Apart from those who are habitually depressed, there are
others who suffer from time to time, without any outward cause,
from slight fits of depression, mostly accompanied by more or
less severe fits of anxiety. Looking more carefully into these
various types, we shall find that they belong almost exclusively
to strongly marked nervous temperaments. ... In bad cases
the periodic changes of mood may become stronger and stronger,
and lead eventually between the fortieth and sixtieth year to
actual ' folie circulaire.' Anxiety is, of course, common to all
nervous people, but in many cases it plays the prominent part.
. . . Often the patients complain of all kinds of accompanying
symptoms, not seldom of palpitations, weakness in the legs,
headaches, attacks of dizziness, and, particularly, of the para
lysing effects of their vague dreads. When this anxiety over
takes them they become unable to work as usual, and their
spirit of enterprise is checked " (p. 207 ff.).

As to how far what Cramer says is applicable to Luther's
mental states may here be left open. The same holds good of
what we shall quote below from C. Wcrnicke and H. Fried-
mann. What the former says of " autochthonous " ideas
may conceivably be applicable to Luther's conviction of the
private revelations he had received and of which he speaks so
strongly above (p. 142 ff.) as even to suggest actual auditory
hallucination ; that there was no real hallucination seems
more likely for the reason that Luther elsewhere is disposed
to regard the incidents as of an inward character and is not
quite so wholly under their sway as would have been the
case had they been strictly speaking hallucinatory.

OPINIONS OF EXPERTS 185

As to " exalted ideas," of which both speak, they put us
in mind of some of Luther's ideas concerning his own person,
position, achievements and persecutions (cp. our summary
in vol. iv., pp. 329-41).

It must, however, be noted that " exalted ideas " can be
present in a mind otherwise perfectly sound, and that,
consequently, even if Luther had such ideas it would not
prove him to have been mentally deranged ; the same holds
good of " autochthonous " ideas, which, occurring singly,
are no warrant of insanity.

Again, even should Luther's idea of his revelations turn
out to be originally " autochthonous," yet the reception he
accorded it, the interpretation he placed on it and the use he
made of it seem, as we have already set forth, to have been
both deliberate and responsible. This is confirmed by the
circumstance that, in time, his keen sense of such impres
sions waned under the objections brought against them, and
that his insistence on the " revelations " and his interpreta
tion of them no longer found quite the same vigorous
expression as before. Nevertheless, we repeat it once more :
It is for experts to pass a definite judgment, but, in order
to do so fairly, they must not submit to the microscope
merely one class of Luther's mental manifestations, but
consider him as a whole, as monk no less than as Reformer,
and examine his mentality on all its sides.

Writing of certain kinds of abnormal ideas, viz. those which he
calls " autochthonous," Carl Wernicke says : l " The patient
becomes aware of ideas springing up in his mind that are alien
to him and not his own, i.e. which have not arisen along the
normal ideas and on the ordinary lines of association." Speaking
of those actually suffering from mental derangement, Wernicke
again alludes to this class : " Objective observers, who are quite
conscious of the alien character of the autochthonous ideas and
attach no fundamental importance to them, are only to be found
as the exception among those who are really mentally unsound.
Almost always the ideas are conceived as ' ready-made,' as
' forced upon the mind,' as * inspired,' or as ' derived,' but, from
whom, depends entirely on the individuality of the patient and
on the nature of the autochthonous idea (which is not unin
fluenced by the former). Pious thoughts are inspired by God, evil
thoughts by the devil ; more enlightened people have recourse to
material remedies and put their case in the hands of a doctor."

Of the so-called " exalted ideas " Wernicke says : " These are
sharply denned from autochthonous ideas by the fact that they

1 " Grundriss der Psychiatric," Leipzig, 1906, p. 104,

186 INNER TROUBLES

are in no way regarded by the patient himself as alien intruders
into his consciousness : on the contrary, he sees in them the
stamp of his innermost self, and fancies that, in vindicating them,
he is in reality asserting his own personality."

" One has to determine in each individual case whether the
idea is truly morbid and ' exalted,' or does not come within
normal bounds."1 On the next page he declares : " That almost
any incident may give rise to an ' exalted idea,' that the nature
of the emotion may be of the most varied character, and that
ideas exist, which, though in themselves normal, are nevertheless
able so to determine the individual's action as to impress on it
a morbid stamp."

H. Friedmann2 says of the same class of ideas : " According
to its origin the ' exalted ' idea . . . may find a place in the
mental process without any apparent cause. A strong emotion
may, so to speak, fling itself on a single idea, and, without any
actual derangement of the mind, allow it, and it alone, to assume
a morbid supremacy." A few pages further we read :3 "Hence,
as a matter of fact, in the case of the ' exalted ' idea, we have not
an isolated monomaniacal affection but a general disturbance of
the emotions and judgment. The result, likewise, is not an idee
fixe as in the case of mania, but merely a strong belief."

1 Ib., p. 141 f.

2 " Monatsschr. fur Psychiatrie," Berlin, 1907, p. 230,
» Ib., p. 236.

CHAPTER XXXVII

LUTHER'S LATER EMBELLISHMENT OF HIS EARLY LIFE

IN later life, looking back on his past, Luther was in the
habit of depicting certain of its principal phases in a way
which is at variance with the facts, and which even Protes
tants in recent times have characterised, as " a picture in
which he becomes a myth unto himself."1

It will be no matter for surprise to the dispassionate
observer that the memory of the vows Luther had broken
and the thought of his early days in the monastery — which
presented so striking a contrast with his later life — were
subject-matters of warped and distorted images. Particu
larly is this true of his monastic years which he insists on
depicting as one long night of sadness and despair.

Not merely in the fictions in which he came to shroud the
more fervent days of his life as a monk, but also in his
explanations of the various stages of his apostasy, Luther
affords us fresh data for the psychological study of his
personality, and thus the present chapter may serve to
supplement the previous one. Only after having studied
the legend he wove around himself and compared it with the
truth as otherwise known, will it be possible to arrive at a
considered judgment concerning Luther's mental states.

1. Luther's later Picture of his Convent Life and Apostasy

What Luther says of his life as a monk is what will
chiefly interest us, but, before proceeding to consider his
words and the strange problems they present, we must first
refer to the legendary traits comprised in his statements on
the first period of his struggle ; how false they are to the
facts will be clearly perceived by whoever has read the
detailed accounts already given.

1 A. Hausrath, " Luthers Leben," 2, p. 432.

187

188 THE LUTHER LEGEND

The Legend about his First Public Appearance

" Not only have the dates been altered," says Hausrath,
of Luther's later statements concerning his first public
appearance, " but even the facts. No sooner does the
elderly man begin to tell his tale than the past becomes as
soft wax in his hands. The same words are placed on the
lips, now of this, now of that, friend or foe. The opponents
of his riper years are depicted as his persecutors even in his
youth. Albert of Mayence had never acted otherwise
towards him than as a liar and deceiver. Even previous to
the Worms visit he had sought to annul his safe-conduct. . . .
Of Tetzel he now asserts, that, unless Duke Frederick had
pleaded for him to the Emperor Max, he would have been
put in a sack and drowned in the Inn on account of his
dissolute life. . . . The same holds good of the [equally
untrue] statement that Tetzel had sold indulgences for
sins yet to be committed. ... It is also an exaggeration
of his old age when Luther asserts that, in his youth, the
Bible had been a closed book to all. ... To the old
Reformer almost everything in the monastery appears in
the blackest of hues."1*

" The reason of my journey to Rome," he declares, " was to
make a confession from the days of my boyhood and to become
pious."2 "But at Rome I came across the most unlearned of
men."3 — God "led me, all unwittingly, into the game [his
struggle]."4 " I behaved with moderation, yet I brought the
greatest ruin on them all."5 "I thought I was doing the Pope
a service yet I was condemned."8 — " One, and that not the least
of my joys and consolations, is, that I never put myself out of the
Papacy. For I held fast to the Scarlet Woman and served the
murderess in all things most humbly. But she would have none
of me, banished me and drove me from her."7 " I only inveighed
against abuses and against the godless collectors of alms and
[indulgence] commissioners from whom even Canon Law itself
protects the Pope. The Pope wanted to defend them contrary
to his own laws ; this annoyed me. Had he thrown them over
I should in all likelihood have held my tongue, but the hour had
rung for his downfall ; hence there was nothing to be done for
him, for when God intends to bring about a man's fall He blinds
and hardens him."8 "I was utterly dead to the world until God

1 Ib., p. 432 f. 2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 169.

3 Ib. (from Rebenstock). 4 Ib., p. 175.

6 Ib., p. 170. • Ib. 7 Erl. ed., 31, p. 257.

8 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 195.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 189

thought the time had come ; then Junker Tetzel stung me with
his indulgences, and Dr. Staupitz spurred me on against the
Pope."1 "Silvester [Prierias] thereupon entered the lists and
sought to overwhelm me with the thunders of the following
syllogism : Whoever raises doubts against any word or deed of
the Roman Church is a heretic ; Martin Luther doubts, etc.
With that the ball began."2

Generally speaking, however, Luther prefers to trace the
whole of his quarrel with the Church back to Tetzel and to
his righteous censure of the abuse of indulgences. He seems
to have completely forgotten the deep theological chasm
that separated him from the Church even before his quarrel
with Tetzel. His theological attitude at that time, the
starting-point of his whole undertaking, has disappeared
from his purview ; he has forgotten his burning desire to
win the day for his own doctrines against free-will, against
the value of works, against justification as taught by
Catholic tradition, and for his denial of God's Will that all
men should be saved. His early antagonism to the theo
logical schools and to Canon Law as a whole has lapsed
into oblivion.3

In the preface to the 1545 edition of his Latin works Luther
asserts, as a fact, that he had been estranged from the Church
only through the indulgence controversy.

He had, so we there read, taken his vocation as a monk quite
in earnest ; he " feared and dreaded the Day of Judgment and
yet had longed with all his heart to be saved. ... It was not
my fault that I became involved in this warfare, as I call God
Himself to witness."

In order to make the " beginning of the business " plain to all
he goes on to relate to the whole world, how, as a young Doctor
in 1517, relying on the Pope's approval, he had raised his voice
in protest against the " shamelessness " of the indulgence-
preachers ; how, when his small outcry passed unheeded, he had
published the indulgence-theses and, then, in the " Resolutions,"
" for the Pope's own sake," had advocated works of neighbourly
charity as preferable to indulgences. Here was the cause of all
the world's hostility ! His teaching was alleged " to have dis
turbed the course of the heavenly spheres and to be setting the
world in flames. I was delated to the Pope and then summoned

1 76., p. 188 : " . . . et D. Staupitius me incitabat contra papam."

2 /&., p. 176.

3 See above, vol. i., pp. 104 ff., 184 ff., 303 ff., where his theological
attitude previous to the indulgence theses is discussed. It is taken
for granted that the account of his development given in vol. i. is
already known to the reader. The fictions have already been discounted
in vol. i., p. 20 f. and p. 110 f.

190 THE LUTHER LEGEND

to Rome ; the whole might of Popery was up in arms against
poor me."

He records his trial at Augsburg, the intervention of Miltitz and
the Leipzig Disputation, but records it in a way all his own.
At that date he already knew almost the entire Bible by heart
and " had already reached the beginning of the knowledge and
faith of Christ, to wit, that we are saved and justified, not by
works, but by faith in Christ, and that the Pope is not the head of
the Church by right Divine ; but I failed to see the inevitable
consequence of all this, viz. that the Pope must needs be of the
devil." Like the " blameless monk " that he was, his only trouble
in life was his keen anxiety as to whether God was gracious to
him and whether he could " rest assured that he had conciliated
Him by the satisfaction he had made." The words of the Bible
on the justice of God had angered him because he had erroneously
taken this to mean His punitive justice instead of the justice
whereby God makes us just. Then, when he was setting about
his second Commentary on the Psalms (1518-19), amidst the
greatest excitement of conscience (" furebam ita sceva et per-
turbata conscientia ") the light from above had dawned on him
which brought him to a complete understanding of the Divine
justice whereby we are justified. Paul's words concerning the
just man who lives by faith (Rom. i. 17) had then, and only then,
become clear to him (through his discovery of the assurance of
salvation).

After referring to the Diet of Worms he again reverts to his
pet subject, viz. the indulgence-controversy : " The affair of the
controversy regarding indulgences dragged on till 1520-21 ; then
followed the question of the Sacrament and that of the Ana
baptists."

This is how Luther wrote — confusing the events and
suppressing the principal point — when, towards the end of
his life, he penned for posterity a record of what had
occurred. Otto Scheel, in a compilation of the texts bearing
on Luther's development prior to 1519, rightly places this
later account, together with the other statements made by
him in old age, under the heading : " second and third rate
authorities."1 What, however, are we to think when the
considered narrative, written by a man of such eminence,
of events in which he was the chief actor, has to be relegated
to the category of second-rate and even third-rate author
ities ?2

1 " Dokumente zu Luthers Entwicklung " (" Sammlung ausge-
wahlter kirchen- und dogmengesch. Quellenschriften," 2, Reihe 9.
Hft.), 1911, p. 11 ff.

2 Luther's untrustworthiness here, where it is a question of his
polemics, does not render untrue certain other data of a non-polemical
character and otherwise supported. This is the case, e.g. with the

THE LUTHER LEGEND 191

To enumerate some other misrepresentations not con
nected with his monkish days : Luther assures us that
sundry opponents of his " had blasphemed themselves to
death " ; men who had the most peaceful of deathbeds he
alleges to have died tortured by remorse of conscience and
railing at God. He boasts aloud that it was the Papists who
made a " good theologian " of him, since, " at the devil's
instigation," they had so battered, distressed and frightened
him out of his wits, that he necessarily came to obtain a
more profound knowledge.1 Boldly and exultingly he points
to the many " miracles " whereby the Evangel had been
proved.2 He says of the Diets, that the Papists always
succeeded in wriggling out of a hole by dint of lies, so that
they looked quite white and " without ever a stain."3 Of
his own writings he says, that he " would gladly have seen all
his books unwritten and consigned to the fire."4 This in
1533, and again in 1539. 5 Before this, however, he had
declared he would not forswear any of his writings, " not for
all the riches of the world," and that, at least as a good work
wrought by God, they must have some worth.*

In such wise does the picture he gives of his life vary
according to his moods. He does not hesitate to sacrifice
the sacred rights of truth when this seems to the advantage
of his polemics (see above, vol. iv., p. 80 ff.), and, owing to
the peculiar constitution of his mind, the fiction he so often
repeats becomes eventually stamped as a reality to which he
himself accords credence.

The Legend about his Years of Monkish Piety

We may now turn to Luther's fictions regarding his
monkish days, prefacing our remarks with the words of
Luther's Protestant biographer, Adolf Hausrath. " The
picture of his youth is forced to tally more and more with
the convictions of his older years. What he now looks upon

date given above when the meaning of Rom. i. 17 first dawned upon
him ; this happens to agree with the facts. Cp. above, vol. i., p. 388 ff.

1 Erl. ed., 63, p. 405, in the preface of 1539 to his German writings.

2 See vol. iii., p. 153 ff. Cp. " Werke," ib,. p. 370, in a preface of
1531, where, referring to the " many and great miracles," he makes no
distinction between Evangel and Gospel.

3 Ib., p. 373 (1542).

4 Ib,, p. 400 in the preface of 1539 to his German writings.
6 Ib., p. 328. • Ib., p. 295 (1530).

192 THE LUTHER LEGEND

as pernicious, he declares he had found in those days to be so
by his own experience. . . . The oftener he holds up to his
listening guests the warning picture of the monk sunk in the
abyss of Popery, the more gloomy and starless does the
night appear to him in which he once had lived."1

That the use hitherto made of Luther's statements con
cerning his convent life calls for correction has already been
admitted by several Protestant students of reformation
history. As early as 1874 Maurenbrecher protested strongly
against the too great reliance placed on Luther's own later
statements, which, however, at that time, constituted
almost the only authority for his early history. " How
wrong it is to accept on faith and repeat anew Luther's
tradition is quite obvious. Whoever wishes to relate Luther's
early history must first of all be quite clear in his mind as
to this characteristic of the material on which he has to
work. . . . The history of Luther's youth is still virgin
soil awaiting the labours of the critic."2 The objections
recently brought forward by Catholics have drawn from
W. Friedensburg the admission that we have unreliable,
and, " in part, misleading statements of Luther's concern
ing himself."3 G. Kawerau also at least goes so far as to
admit that the historian of Luther at the present day " is
inevitably confronted by a number of new questions."4
The publication of Luther's Commentary on Romans of
1515-16 finally proved how necessary it is to regard the
theology of his early years as the chief authority for the
history of his development. Hence, in the account of his
youth given above in vol. i., we took this Commentary as
our basis.

A preliminary sketch of the picture he handed down in
his later sayings is given us by Luther himself in the
following :

God had caused him to become a monk, he says, " not without
good reasons, viz. that, taught by experience, he might be able to
write against the Papacy," after having himself most rigidly
isime ") abided by its rules.5 — "This goes on until one

1 Hausrath, " Luthers Leben," 2, p. 432.

2 " Studien und Skizzen zur Gesch. des Reformationszeitalters,"
p. 219.

3 " Schriften des Vereins f. RG.," Hft. 100, 1910, p. 14.— Cp. K. A.
Meissinger, quoted above, vol. ii., p. 362, n. 2.

4 " Theol. Stud, und Krit.," 1908, p. 580.

5 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 182.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 198

grows quite weary " ; " now my other preaching has come :
' Christ says : Take this from me : You are not pious, I have
done it all for you, your sins are forgiven you.' "l According to
the "Popish teaching," however, one cannot be sure "whether
he is in a state of grace " ; hence, when in the cloister, though I
was such a "pious monk," I always said sorrowfully to myself:
" I know not whether God is well pleased or not. Thus I and all
of us were swallowed up in unbelief."2

Hence churches and convents are nothing but " dens of
murderers " because they " pervert and destroy doctrine and
prayer." "Indeed no monk or priestling can do otherwise, as
I know, and have myself experienced"; "I never knew in the
least how I stood with God " ; "I was never able to pray
aright."3 This holiness-by-works of Popery, in which I was
steeped, was nothing but " idolatry and godless worship."4

" Learn," he says, thus unwittingly laying bare the aim of his
fiction, " learn from my example." " The more I scourged
myself, the more was I troubled by remorse of conscience."5
" We did not then know what original sin was ; unbelief we did
not regard as sin." 6 Their " unbelief," however, consisted in that
we Papists fancied " that we had to add our own works " (to the
merits of Christ).7 " Hence, for all my fervour, I lost the twenty
years I spent in the cloister."8 But I did not want to " stick fast
and die in sin and in this false doctrine " ; ° for such a pupil of
the law must in the end say to himself " that it is impossible for
him to keep the Law " ; indeed he cannot but come to say :
" would there were no God."10

Roughly, this is the tone of the testimony he gives of him
self. It is not our intention here simply to spurn it, but to
examine whether there is any call to accept it uncondition
ally — simply because it comes from Luther's lips — and
whether it comprises a certain quota of truth.11

First, it must be noted that he represents himself as a sort
of fanatical martyr of penance. He assures us : Even the
heroic works of mortification I undertook brought me no
peace in Popery : " Ergo," etc. He here opens an entirely

1 Weim. ed., 33, p. 431 f. ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 201.

2 lb., 49, p. 118. 3 Ib., 202, 2, p. 420.

4 " Comment, in Galat.," Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 138 ; Irmischer, 1,
p. 109 sq.

5 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 19, p. 100. 6 76., 7, p. 74.

7 Weim. ed., 33, p. 560 ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 306.

8 Erl. ed., 49, p. 27. Cp. 20, 2, p. 420.

9 Weim. ed., 33, p. 575 ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 317.

10 Erl. ed., 46, p. 73.

11 At the time the present writer's series of articles on Luther's
intellectual development was appearing in the " K6ln. Volkszeitung "
(1903, 1904), Denifle's work which also insists on the unreliable nature
of the legend ("Luther und Luthertum,"!1 1904, pp. 389 ff., 725 f.,
739 f.) was already in print.

VI. — O

194 THE LUTHER LEGEND

new page in his past. He tells his friends, for instance :
" I nearly killed myself by fasting, for often, for three days
on end, I did not take a bite or a sip. I was in the most
bitter earnest and, indeed, I crucified our Lord Christ in very
truth ; I was not one of those who merely looked on, but
I actually lent a hand in dragging Him along and nailing
Him. May God forgive me ! . . . for this is true : The
more pious the monk the worse rogue he is."1

" I myself," he says in his Commentary on Genesis, " was such
an one [a pious monk]. I nearly brought about my death by
fasting, abstinence and penance in work and clothing ; my body
became dreadfully emaciated and was quite worn out."2

The menace of death is also alluded to in a sermon of 1537 :
" For more than twenty years I was a pious monk," " I said
Mass daily and so weakened my body by prayer and fasting that
I could not have lived long had I continued in this way."3 Else
where he says that he had allowed himself only two more years
of life, and that, not he alone, but all his brethren were ripe for
death : "In Popery in times bygone we howled for everlasting
life ; for the sake of the kingdom of heaven we treated ourselves
very harshly, nay, put our bodies to death, not indeed with
sword or weapon, but, by fasting and maceration of the body we
begged and besought day and night. I myself — had I not been
set free by the consolation of Christ in the Evangel — could not
have lived two years more, so greatly did I torment myself and
flee God's wrath. There was no lack of sighs, tears and lamenta
tions, but it all availed us nothing."4

" Why did I endure such hardships in the cloister ? Why did
I torment my body by fasting, vigils and cold ? I strove to
arrive at the certainty that thereby my sins were forgiven."6
The martyrdom he endured from the cold alone was agonising
enough : " For twenty years I myself was a monk and tormented
myself with praying, fasting, watching and shivering, the cold by
itself making me heartily desirous of death."6

Besides his penances another main feature of his later
picture is his extraordinary, albeit misguided, piety and
virtue.

It is not enough for Luther to say that he had been a pious
monk, " an earnest monk," who " would not have taken a
farthing without the Prior's permission," and who " prayed

1 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 183.

2 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 11, p. 123 (1545).

3 Erl. ed., 49, p. 300. Comm. on John xiv.-xvi., of 1537.

4 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 7, p. 72. " Enarr. in Genesim," c.a. 1541.

5 Ib., 5, p. 267, a. 1539.

6 Erl. ed., 49, p. 27 (1537).

THE LUTHER LEGEND 195

diligently day and night" j1 he will have, that "if ever a monk
got to heaven by monkery then I should have got there ; of this
all my brother monks will bear me witness."2

He had been more diligent in his monastic exercises of piety
than any of the Papists who took the field against him.3

Nay, "he had been one of the very best."4 He "confessed
daily" [Is this a reference to the Confession made in the
Mass ?] and "tried hard" to find peace, but did not succeed.5
Daily, he tells us, he " said Mass and imposed on himself the
severest hardships," in order, " by his own works, to attain to
righteousness."6 It was because the devil had remarked his
righteousness, that he tempted him when engaged in prayer in
his cell by appearing to him in the shape of Christ, as already
narrated.7 God, however, tried him by temptations just as He
tries those of the elect through whom He intends to do great
things for the salvation of mankind.8 He, like the other cloistral
Saints, had been so penetrated with his sanctity, that, after
Mass, he " did not thank God for the Sacrament but rather God
had to thank him."9 He fancied himself in " the angel-choirs,"
but had all the while been " among the devils."10 Cloistral life
was indeed " a latrine and the devil's own sweet Empire."11

Other characteristic lines of the picture are, first, the
dreadful way in which his mind was torn by doubts con
cerning his own salvation, doubts arising simply from his
works of piety, and, secondly, his speedy deliverance from
such sufferings and attainment of peace and tranquillity
as soon as he had discovered the Evangel of faith. He
cannot find colours sombre enough in which to paint his
former state of misery, which is also the inevitable experi
ence of all pious Papists.

" In the convent I had no thought of goods, wealth or wife,
but my soul shuddered and quaked at the thought of how to
make God gracious to me, for I had fallen away from the faith

1 Weim. ed., 33, p. 561 ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 306. Comm. on John
vi.-viii., 1531.

2 Erl. ed., 31, p. 273. " Kleine An wort auff H. Georgen nehestes
Buch," 1533.

3 Comment, in Galat., Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 135 ; Irmischer, 1,
p. 107. Cp. p. 138 =p. 109. The passage was only introduced by
Luther in the 1538 ed., a fact remarkable for the history of the legend.

4 Erl. ed., 202, 2, p. 420.

5 Comment, in Galat. ed. Irmischer, 3, p. 20, 1535.

6 "Opp. lat. exeg.," 18, p. 226. Enar. in ps. 45, a. 1532.

7 See above, p. 126. 8 See above, p. 150.
9 Erl. ed. 58, p. 377.

10 "Opp. lat. exeg.," 23, p. 401. Enarr. in Is. (1543).

11 Comm. in Gal. Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 137 ; Irmischer, 1, p. 109, of
1535.

196 THE LUTHER LEGEND

and my one idea was that I had angered God and had to soothe
Him once more by my good works."1 "As a young Master at
Erfurt I always went about oppressed with sadness."3 But,
after his discovery he had felt himself " born anew," as though
" through an open door he had passed into Paradise." The
words Justice of God suddenly became " very sweet " to him
and the Bible doctrine in question a " very gate of heaven."
" Holy Scripture now appeared to me in quite a new light."3

He had, indeed, studied the Bible diligently in his early
monkish years, but he had, nevertheless, been greatly tempted
and plagued by the " real difficulties " ; his confessors had not
understood him. " I said to myself : No one but you suffers
from this temptation." And he had become " like a corpse," so
that his comrades asked him why he was " so mournful and
downhearted."4

Particularly the doctrine of penance had, he says, so borne him
down that " it was hardly possible for him, at the price of great
toil and thanks to God's grace, to come to that hearing that gives
joy [Ps. 1. 10]." For " if you have to wait until you have the
requisite contrition then you will never come to that hearing of
joy, as, in the cloister, I often found to my cost ; for I clung to
this doctrine of contrition, but the more I strove after rue, the
more I smarted and the more did the bite of conscience eat into
me. The absolution and other consolations given me by my
confessors I was unable to take because I thought : Who knows if
such consolations are to be trusted."6 On one occasion, however,
the master of novices strengthened and encouraged him amidst his
tears by asking him : Have you forgotten that the Lord Himself
commanded us to hope ? 6

Nevertheless, according to the strange description given by
Luther in a sermon in 1531, his keen anxiety about his con
fessions lasted until after his ordination. " I, Martin Luther,"
so he told the people, " when I went up to the altar after confession
and contrition felt myself so weighed down by fear that I had to
beckon to me another priest. After the Mass, again, I was no more
reassured than before." His trouble — which was possibly
caused, or at any rate heightened, by the spirit of obstinacy and
scepticism he describes — was, however (and it is on this that
he lays stress), common to all Papists whose consciences could
never be at rest. " They became its victims chiefly at the hour
of death. How much did we dread the Last Judgment ! . . .

1 Erl. ed. 45, p. 156. Sermon of Dec. 7, 1539.

2 Lauterbach, "Tagebuch," p. 36. From Khummer, no date, but
a late utterance.

3 " Opp. lat. var.," 1, p. 23, preface to the Latin works (1545).

4 N. Ericeus, " Sylvula sententiarum," 1566, p. 174 ff.
^ " Opp. lat. exeg.," 19, p. 100 (1532).

6 To Bugenhagen (1532), preface to the latter's edition of Athan-
asius, " De trinitate," " Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 523 (" Brief wechsel," 9,
p. 252).

THE LUTHER LEGEND 197

That was our reward for our works."1 The truth is, that, on his
own showing, he scarcely knew what inward contrition was, and
that he remained too much a stranger to the motive of holy
fear.2

To the period subsequent to his ordination must be assigned
assurances such as the following, the tone of which becomes more
and more crude the older he grows. " From that time [of his
first Mass] I said Mass with great horror, and thank God that He
has delivered me from it."3 "When I looked on [a figure of]
Christ I fancied I was looking at the devil. That is why we say :
O, Mary, pray for us to thy beloved Son and appease His wrath."
If I follow the principles of the monks and Papists, then " I lose
Christ my Healer and Consoler and make Him into the task
master and hangman of my poor soul."4

" As long as I remained a Papist I should have blushed with
shame to speak of Christ ; Jesus is a womanish name ; we
preferred to speak of Aristotle or Bonaventure."5 He also says :
" Often have I trembled at the name of Jesus ; when I saw Him
on the cross it was like a thunderbolt and when His Name was
mentioned I would rather have heard the devil invoked, for I
raved that I had to go on doing good works until I had thereby
made Christ friendly and gracious to me."6

They used to say : " Scourge yourself until you have yourself
blotted out your sin. Such is the Pope's doctrine and belief."7
Thus, in the monastery, I had " long since lost Christ and His
baptism. I was of all men the most wretched, day and night
there was nothing but howling and despair which no one was able
to calm. Thus I was bathed and baptised in my monkery and
went through the real sweating sickness. Praise be to God that
I did not sweat myself to death."8

Those Protestants who take Luther's statements too
readily, without probing them to the bottom and eliminating
the rhetorical and fabulous element, are apt to urge that
Luther's descriptions of the monastic state show that noth
ing but mental derangement could result from such a life.

1 Weim, ed., 34, 2, p. 410 (1531). In the text, for " deinde quando,"
read " deinde quanta." A second hasty report, ib., gives the passage in
this form: " Multos scio, et ego unus fui, quando confessus and clean
et dixi orationes meas, I came to the altar it was all not worth a
straw ; vocabam presbyterum, et quando absolutio had been pronounced
et missa perfecta [erat], turn certus ut antea [eram] and as much at
peace with God ut antea, ..." Of the Last Day: "Ego nonlibenter
audiebam istum diem"

Above, vol. i., p. 290 f. 3 Ericeus, " Sylvula," I.e.

G. Buchwald, " Ungedruckte Predigten Luthers 1537-1540,'
1905, p. 61 f. Scheel, " Dokumente," p. x., n.

Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 122 (1532).

Erl. ed., 45, p. 156. Sermon of Dec. 7, 1539.

Ib., p. 154, from the same sermon.

Ib., 31, p. 279. " Anwort auff H. Georgen nehestes Buch. '

198 THE LUTHER LEGEND

Dr. Kirchhoff, a medical man, basing his remarks on
Luther's accounts, is inclined to assume the existence of
some severe temperamental malady. He even goes so far
as to say that, at any rate, countless numbers of monks
lost their reason. " In the course of time," he adds, Luther
" acquired a greater power of resisting the temptations, and,
possibly, in his quieter after-life the physical causes may
have diminished ; it would appear that the accompanying
conditions disquieted him greatly."1

The fact is that Protestant authors as a rule fight shy of
undertaking any criticism of Luther's account of himself.
They accord it far too ready credence and usually see in it
a capital pretext for attacking the olden Church.

If Luther is to be taken literally and is right in his
generalisations, then we should have to go even further
than such writers and argue that, one and all, those who
sought to be pious in the religious life were mad, or at least
on the verge of insanity ; the Church, by her doctrine of
works, of satisfaction and of man's co-operation with Grace,
infects all who address themselves zealously to the perform
ance of good works with the poison of a subtle insanity.

We need waste no further words here on the falsehood
of Luther's objections against the Catholic doctrine of
works.2

We may pass over the countless clear and authentic proofs
furnished by Luther's elders and contemporaries, and even
by Luther himself previous to his apostasy, which place the
Catholic doctrine on works in a very different light. The
Church, in point of fact, always refused to hear of works
done solely by man's strength being efficacious for salvation,
and regarded only those works performed by the aid of
God's supernatural Grace as of any value — and that through
the merits of Christ — whether for the purpose of preparing
for justification or for winning an everlasting reward ; she
always recognised faith, hope and charity as conditions for
forgiveness and justification, and as the threefold spring
whereby good works are rendered fruitful.

There can be no question that Luther's picture of his
holiness-by-works in Popery is meant to include all his
earnest brother monks and their mistaken way of life, and

1 Dr. Kirchhoff, " Zeitschr. f. Psychiatrie," vol. 44, 1888, p. 376.

2 Cp. previous volumes, passim, particularly vol. iv., pp. 120-31.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 199

the doctrine and religious practices of Popery as such. The
fiction serves a twofold purpose. On the one hand, as its
author gives us to understand quite openly, it was his
excuse for having shaken off the yoke of the religious life,
on the other, it was to be used as a weapon against the olden
doctrine of the importance of works for personal salvation.
To be true to history, one must judge of his account of his
Catholic life from these two standpoints. How extremely
unreliable it is will then be more apparent. The following
observations on the contrast his account presents with
historical truth, particularly with the well-authenticated
incidents of his development, and even with the elements of
truth which he introduces into the legend, will place the
grave shortcomings of the latter in an even clearer light.

Since Luther would have us believe that God caused him to
become a monk, in order that, taught by his own experience, he
might write against the Papacy,1 no sooner does he begin to
speak of himself than he includes in the same condemnation his
brother monks and all those Christians who were zealous in the
practice of works.

Under the Pope's yoke he and all other Papists had been made
to feel to their " great and heavy detriment " what it spelt when
one tried to become pious by means of works. We grew more
and more despondent concerning sin and death. . . . For the
more they do the worse their state becomes.2 " Thus I, and all
those in the convent, were bondsmen and captives of Satan."3 —
" We hoped to find salvation through our frock."4 — With us all
it was " rank idolatry," for I did not believe in Christ, etc.5 —
Because we endured so many " sufferings of heart and conscience
and performed so many works," no one must now come and seek
to excuse Popery.8 — "We fled from Christ as from the very
devil, for we were taught that each one would be placed before
the judgment seat of Christ with his works "7 — a teaching which is,
indeed, almost word for word that of St. Paul (2 Cor. v. 10).

Remembering the other utterances in which he makes all Papists
share in his alleged experiences, for instance, in his " unbelief,"
we soon perceive how unreliable are all such statements of his
concerning the history of his personal development. The whole
is seen to be primarily but a new form of controversy and self-
vindication ; only by dint of cautious criticism can we extract
from it certain traits which possibly serve to illustrate the course
of his mental growth in the monastery.

1 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 182. See above, p. 192.

2 Erl. ed., 142, p. 342.

3 Comment, in ep. ad Galat., Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 137. Irmischer,
1, P. 109. •* Erl. ed., 47, p. 37.

5 /&., 49, p. 27. 6 /&., 45, p. 156 f. 7 76.

200 THE LUTHER LEGEND

Again, several details of the picture — quite apart from the
obvious effort to burden the olden Church with a monstrous
system of holiness-by-works — warn us to be sceptical. First
of all there is the customary rhetoric and playing to the
gallery. The palpable exaggeration it contains, its refer
ences to the howling by day and by night, to the scourgings,
to the tortures of hunger and cold, to the endless prayers
and watchings, and to the ravings of the woebegone searchers
after peace, do not prepossess us in favour of the truth of
the account. Luther, in so much of what he says on the
point, has shown us how little he is to be taken seriously,
that one cannot but wonder how his statements, even when
exaggerated to the verge of the ludicrous, can ever have been
regarded in the light of real authorities.

He is not telling the truth when he assures us that, as Doctor
of Divinity, he had never rightly understood the Ten Command
ments, and that many other famous doctors had not known
" whether there were nine, or ten, or eleven of them ; much less
did we know anything of the Gospel or of Christ." l After outward
works, indeed, we ran, but " what God has commanded, that we
omitted . . . for the Papists trouble themselves about neither
the Commandments nor the promises of God."2 In choir the
community daily chanted Psalm li. (L), in which joy in the Lord
is extolled, but " there was not one who understood what joy to
the pious is a firm trust in God's Mercy."3

We have, for instance, his remarkable saying, that he had
looked upon it as a deadly sin for a monk ever to come out of his
cell without his scapular, even though otherwise fully dressed.
Yet no reasonable man acquainted with the religious life, how
ever observant he might be, would have been capable of such
fears. Luther declares that he had seen a sin in every infringe
ment of the rule of his Order ; yet the Rule was never intended
to bind under pain of sin, as indeed was expressly stated. He
asserts that he had believed, that, had he made but a slight
mistake or omission in the Mass, he "would be lost" ; yet no
educated priest ever believed such a thing, or thought that small
faults amounted to mortal sins.

As an instance of the Papal tyranny over consciences he was
wont to tell in his old age how he had tortured himself on the
Saturday by reciting the whole of the Breviary that he had
omitted to say during the week owing to his other occupations.
" This is how we poor folk were plagued by the Pope's decretals ;
of this our young people know nothing." His account4 of these
repetitions varies considerably in the telling. He expects us to
believe he was not aware of the fact, familiar to every beginner in

1 76., 142, p. 185. 2 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 10, p. 232.

3 76., 19, p. 100. 4 See above, vol. i., p. 278.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 201

theology, that the recitation of the Hours and the Breviary is
imposed as an obligation for the day, which expires as soon as
the day is over, so that its omission cannot be afterwards made
good by repetition. From his account it would on the contrary
appear that the " Pope's decrees " had imposed such subsequent
making good. Even should he really, in his earlier days when he
first began to neglect the Breviary, have occasionally repeated
the task subsequently, yet it is too bad of him to make it part
of the monkish legend and an instance of how "we poor fellows
were tormented."1

"It is an astonishing and dreadful thing," he proceeds,
44 that men should have been so mad ! " Those who live
in the religious life and according to man-made ordinances
44 do not deserve to be called men nor even swine " ;2 a
44 hateful and accursed life " was it, with 44 all their filth ! "•

The young monk too — could we trust Luther's account
— must have been seriously wanting in discretion where
mortification was concerned, and a like indiscretion was
evinced by all others who took the religious vocation in
earnest. But the extravagant asceticism such as Luther
would have us believe he practised, and the theological
assumption underlying it, viz. that salvation depends on
bodily mortification, are quite against the older teaching
in vogue in his time. We may quote a few instances of the
teaching to the contrary.

Thomas Aquinas declares : " Abstinence from food and drink
in itself does not promote salvation," according to Rom. xiv. 17,
where we read : " The kingdom of heaven is not meat and
drink." He recognises only the medicinal value of fasting and
abstinence, and points out that by such practices " concupiscence
is kept in check " ; hence he deduces the necessity of discretion
("ad modicum") and warns people against the "vain glory"
and other faults which may result from these practices. Not
by such works, nor by any works whatsoever, is a man saved
and justified, but " man's salvation and justice," so he teaches,
" consist mainly in inward acts of faith, of hope and of charity,
and not in outward ones. . . . Man may scorn all measure
where faith, hope and charity are concerned, but, in outward
acts, he must make use of the measure of discretion."4

1 Cp. apart from the ** Dicta Melanchthoniana " (ed. Waltz,
" Zeitschr. f. KG.," 4, 1880, p. 324 ff.), p. 330 : — " diebus Sabbati, cum
esset vacuus a concionibus," etc., " initio evangelii — " " Colloq.," ed.
Bindseil, where the same thing is related no less than three times : 1,
p. 67 ; 1, p. 198 ; 3, p. 279, the German Table-Talk, Erl. ed., 59, pp. 10
and 21, and Ericeus, " Sylvula Sententiarum," 1566, p. 174 sq.

2 Erl. ed., 47, p. 37. " 3 /&., 49, p. 315.

4 Aquinas, " Summa theol.," 3, q. 40, a. 2 ad 1. In ep. ad Tim.

202 THE LUTHER LEGEND

But perhaps the best ascetical writer to refer to in this connec
tion is John Gerson of Paris, who was so much read in the
monasteries and with whom Luther was well acquainted. He
assigns to outward works, particularly to severe acts of penance,
the place they had, even from the earliest times, held in the
Church. He bids Religious care above all for inward virtue, which
they are to regard as the main thing, for self-denial and for obedi
ence out of love of God. He appeals to the Fathers and warns
his readers that " indiscreet abstinence may more easily lead to
a bad end than even over-feeding." Discretion could not be better
practised than in humility and obedience, by forsaking one's
own notions and submitting to the advice of the expert ; such
obedience was never more in place than in a Religious. l

These are but two notable witnesses taken from the
endless tale of those whose testimony is at variance with
the charges implied in Luther's legend, that the monks were
regardless of discretion where penance was concerned.

That Luther is guilty of self-contradiction in attributing
to the Catholic teachers and monks of his day such mistaken
views and practices and the doctrine of holiness-by-works
generally is fairly obvious.

If the young monk really " kept the Rule," then his extrava
gant penances for the purpose of gaining a gracious God can have
had no existence outside his brain ; the Rule prohibited all
exaggeration in fasting and maceration, wilful loss of sleep and
senseless exposure to cold. The Augustinian Rule, devised
expressly as it was, to be not too severe in view of the exacting
labours involved by preaching and the care of souls, had been
further mitigated on the side of its penitential exercises by
Staupitz's new constitutions in 1504.2 It was true the prior
might sanction something beyond what the Rule enjoined, but
it is scarcely credible that a beginner like Luther should have
been allowed to exceed to such an extent the limit of what was
adapted to all. His bodily powers were already sufficiently taxed
by his studies, the more so since he threw himself into them with
such impetuous ardour. It is all the less likely that any such special

c. 4, lect. 2. " Summa theol.," 2, 2, q. 88, a, 2 ad 3. Denifle, ib., I2,
p. 365 f., where other quotations are given from Thomas and the
mediaeval theologians.— Cp. the wholesome teaching of the " Imita
tion " — already widely read in Luther's day — on the value of outward
works compared with interior virtue and charity (Bk. II., cap. 1) :
" Regnum Dei intra vos eat, dicit Dominus," are the words with which
it begins. Bk. I., c. 19 : " Multo plus debet esse intus quam quod
cernitur for is," and, again : " lustorum propositum in gratia Dei potius
quam in propria sapientia pendet," etc. On the need of discretion see
ib., 3, c. 7.

1 " De non esu carm'um ap. Carthus.," " Opp.," 2, pp. 723, 729.
Denifle, ib., p. 370.

2 Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 49.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 203

permission was given him, seeing that, as we know, Staupitz had,
in consideration of his studies, dispensed the young monk from
the performance of the humbler duties of the monastery.

If what has been said holds good of the years spent at Erfurt,
much less can there be any question of his having indulged in
excessive rigour during his Wittenberg period. Here Luther
began at an early date to inveigh against what he thought was
excessive strictness on the part of his brother monks, against their
observance and against all so-called holiness-by-works. In his
sermons and writings of that time we have an echo of his vexation
at the too great stress laid on works ;x but such a frame of mind,
which was by no means of entirely new growth, surely betrays
laxity rather than over-great zeal. The doctrine of the all-
sufficiency of faith alone and of Christ's Grace was already
coming to the front.

Yet he continued — even after he had set up his new doctrine
and completely broken with the Church — to recommend works
of penance and mortification, declaring that they were necessary
to withstand sinful concupiscence ; nor does he even forget,
agreeably with the Catholic view, to insist on the need of
" discretion." He also knows quite well what is the true purpose
of works of penance in spite of all he was to say later in his
subsequent caricature of the Catholic doctrine and practice. We
hear him, for instance, saying in a sermon of 1519, when speaking
of the fight to be waged against concupiscence : " For this
purpose are watching, fasting, maceration of the body and
similar works ; everything is directed towards this end, nay, the
whole of Scripture but teaches us how this grievous malady may
be alleviated and healed."* And, in his Sermon on Good Works
(1520), he says: Works of penance "were instituted to damp
and deaden our fleshly lusts and wantonness " ; yet it is not
lawful for one to " be one's own murderer."3 All this militates
against his own tale, that, in the convent, discretion had never
been preached, and that, thanks to the trashy holiness-by-works,
he had been on the highroad to self-destruction. The Sermon
in question was preached some five years before the end of those
" twenty years " during which, to use his later words, he had been
his own " murderer " through his excessive and misguided
penances.

It may, however, be, that, for a short while, e.g. in the time of
his first fervour as a novice, he may have failed now and then by
excess of zeal in being moderate in his exercise of penance. This
would also have been the time, when, tormented by scruples, he
was ever in need of a confessor. To a man in such a state of
unrest, penance, however, even when practised with discretion,
may easily become a source of fresh confusion and error, and,
when undertaken on blind impulse and used to excess, such a one
tends to find excuses for himself for disregarding the prohibition
both of the Rule and of his spiritual director.

1 See above, vol. i., p. 80 ff.

2 Weim. ed., 4, p. 626. Denifle, I2, p. 376 f.

3 Ib., 6, p. 246 ; Erl. ed., 16», p. 180. Denifle, I2, p. 377 f.

204 THE LUTHER LEGEND

It is interesting to note the varying period during which
Luther, according to his later sayings, was addicted to these
excessive penances and to holiness-by-works. We already
know that it was only gradually that he broke away from
his calling, and that he had in reality long been estranged
from it when he laid aside the Augustinian habit.

According to one dictum of his, he had been a strict and right
pious monk for fifteen years, i.e. from 1505-20, during which time
he had never been able "to do enough " to make God gracious
to him. 1 Again, elsewhere, he assures us that the period of misery
during which he sought justification through his works had lasted
" almost fifteen years." 2 On another occasion, however, he makes
it twenty years (i.e. up to 1525) : " The twenty years I spent in
the convent are lost and gone ; I entered the cloister for the
good and salvation of my soul and for the health of my body, and
I fondly believed . . . that it was God's Will that I should abide
by the Rule."3 What a contrast this alleged lengthy period of
fifteen or even twenty years during which he kept the Rule
presents to the reality must be sufficiently clear to anyone who
remembers the dates of the events in his early history. To make
matters worse, in one passage4 he actually goes so far as apparently
to make the period even longer during which he had " been a
pious monk," and had almost brought about his death by fasting,
thus bringing us down to 1526 or 1527 if the reading in the text
be correct. It certainly makes a very curious impression on one
who bears in mind the dates to see Luther, the excommunicate,
after his furious attack on religious vows and the laws of the
Church, and after his marriage, still depicted as an over-zealous
and pious monk, whose fasting is even bringing his life into
jeopardy. But if Luther was so careless about his dates does
not this carelessness lead one to wonder whether the rest of the
statements he makes in conjunction with them are one whit more
trustworthy ?

" For over thirty years," he says in a sermon of 1537, *' I knew
nothing but this confusion [between Law and Gospel] and was
unable to believe that Christ was gracious to me, but rather
sought to attain to justification before God by means of the
merits of the Saints."6 This statement is again as strange as his
previous ones, always assuming that the account of the sermon
in question, which Aurifaber bases on three separate reports, is
reliable. In this passage he is speaking not of the years he spent

1 Weim. ed., 37, p. 661. Sermon of Feb. 1, 1534.

2 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 18, p. 226. Enarr. in ps. 45. Jan., 1532.

3 Weim. ed., 33, p. 561 ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 306. In the Comment, on
John vi.-viii., 27 Oct., 1531.

4 Erl. ed., 49, p. 300 (1537) : "I myself must testify from my own
experience : After having been a pious monk for over twenty years."
This reading of the sermons reported and edited by Cruciger is em
bodied in the text, whereas, in the notes, it is corrected to " fifteen."

* Erl. ed., 46, p. 78, Sermon of 1537.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 205

in the convent but of the whole time during which he was a
member of the Popish Church. If this be calculated from his
birth it brings us down to about 1515, i.e. to about the date of
his Commentary on Romans where the new doctrine of how to
find a Gracious God is first mooted. But what then of the other
account he gives of himself, according to which, for more than
ten years subsequent to, 1515, his soul remained immersed in the
bitter struggle after holiness-by-works ? If, on the other hand,
we reckon the thirty years from the first awakening of the
religious instinct in his boyhood and youth, i.e. from about 1490
or 1495, we should come down to 1520 or 1525 and find ourselves
face to face with the still more perplexing question as to how the
darkness concerning the Law could have subsisted together with
the light of his new discovery.

Luther's versatile pen is fond of depicting the quiet,
retiring monk of those days. As early as 1519 he wrote to
Erasmus that it had always been his ardent wish " to live
hidden away in some corner, ignored alike by the heavens
and the sun, so conscious was he of his ignorance and
inability to converse with learned men."1 These words in
their stricter sense cannot, however, be taken as applicable
to the period when they were written but rather to the first
years of his life as a monk.

The historical features of his earlier life in the monastery
deserve, however, to be examined more carefully in order
better to understand the legend.

2. The Reality. Luther's Falsification of History

The legend of Luther's abiding misery during his life as a
monk previous to his change of belief contradicts the monk's
own utterances during that period.

Monastic Days of Peace and Happiness. The Vows
and their Breach

The fact is, that, for all his sufferings and frequent
temptations, Luther for a long while felt himself perfectly
at ease in monasticism. In the fulness of his Catholic
convictions he extolled the goodness of God, who, in His
loving-kindness, had bestowed such spiritual blessings on
him. In 1507 he wrote that he could never be thankful
enough " for the goodness of God towards him, Who of His

1 On March 28, 1519, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 490 : " Fraterculus in
Christo . . . in angulo sepultus," etc.

206 THE LUTHER LEGEND

boundless mercy had raised him, an unworthy sinner, to the
dignity of the priesthood."1 The elderly friend to whom he
thus opened his heart was the same Johannes Braun, Vicar
of the Marienstift at Eisenach, to whom he again gave an
account of his welfare in 1509. To him he then wrote :
" God is God ; man is often, in fact nearly always, wrong in
his judgments. God is our God, and will guide us sweetly
through everlasting ages."2 — The inward joy which he found
in the monastery gave him strength to bear his father's
displeasure. He not only pointed out to him that it was
" a peaceful and heavenly life,"3 but he even tried so to
paint the happy life he led in his cell as to induce his friend
and teacher Usingen to become an Augustinian too.4 We
may also recall his praise of his " preceptor " (i.e. novice
master), whom he speaks of as a " dear old man " and " a
true Christian under the damned frock." He repeats some
of his beautiful, witty sayings and was always grateful to
him for his having lent him a copy, made by his own hand,
of a work by St. Athanasius.5 The exhortations addressed
to him by Staupitz when he was worried by doubts and
fears, for instance his excellent allusion to the wounds of
Christ, f] found an echo in Luther's soul, and, in spite of his
trouble of mind, brought him back to the true ideal of
asceticism. We also know how he praised Usingen, his
friend at Erfurt, as the " best paraclete and comforter,"

1 To Job. Braun, April 22, 1507, "Briefwechsel," 1, p. 1 f ; "sola
et liberalissiina sua misericordia . . . tanta divince bonitatis magnifi-
centia."

2 March 17, 1509, " Briefwechsel," 1, p. 6.

3 From a MS. sermon of Luther's of 1544 at Gotha. Scheel,
" Dokumente," p. 20.

4 To N. Paulus is due the credit of having drawn attention in 1893
to the description given by Luther to Usingen. Hausrath in his article
" Luthers Bekehrung " in 1896 (" N. Heidelb. Jahrb.,") also noted
how happy Luther had at first been in the convent. Cp. his " Leben
Luthers," 1, p. 22.

6 Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 197 (Khummer) : The good old
man had taught him to commit perplexing matters of conscience
" divines bonitati." — Preface to Bugenhagen's edition of St. Athanasius
" De Trinitate " : " Vir sane optimus et absque dubio sub damnato
cucullo verus christianus." — Cp. " Opp. lat. exeg.," 19, p. 100, on the
preceptor's words (above, vol. i., p. 10) : " Fili quid fads, an nescis,
quod ipse Dominus iussit nos sperare ? " — Cp. Lauterbach, " Tage
buch," p. 84 (Khummer) : Luther's reminiscence of the wise exhorta
tion of his preceptor on conversations with women (" pauca et brevia
loquatur "). — Cp. " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 1.

• See above, vol. i., p. 11.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 207

and wrote to a despondent monk, that his words were helpful
to troubled souls, provided always that they laid aside all
self-will.1

Hence, for a considerable part of his life in the monastery,
Luther was not entirely deprived of consolations ; apart
from the darker side of his life, on which his legend dwells
too exclusively, there was also a brighter side, and this is
true particularly of his earlier years.

The effort to attain to perfection by the observance of poverty,
chastity and obedience was at first so attractive to Luther, that,
for a while, as we have already pointed out, he really allowed it
to cost him something. Some years later, when he had already
begun to paint in stronger hues his virtues as a monk, he said,
perhaps not exaggerating : "It was no joke or child's play with
me in Popery." His zealous observance was, however, confined
to his first stay at Erfurt. A brother monk of his whom Flacius
Illyricus chanced to meet in that town in 1543 also bore witness
to Luther's piety there as a monk. The " old Papist," then still
a faithful Augustinian, had told him, writes Flacius, how he had
spent forty years in the Erfurt monastery where Luther had
lived eight years, and that he could not but confess that Luther
had led a holy life, had been most punctilious about the Rule and
had studied diligently. To Flacius this was a new proof of the
" mark of holiness " in the new Church.2

Nor are statements on the part of the young monk wanting
which prove, in contradiction with the legend he invented later,
that his theoretical grasp of the religious life was still correct even
at a time when he had already ceased to pay any great attention
to the Rule.3

Even as late as 1519, i.e. but two years before he wrote his
book against monastic vows, he still saw in these vows a salutary
institution. In a sermon he advised whoever desired " by much
practice " to keep the grace of baptism and make ready for a
happy death " to bind himself to chastity or join some religious
Order,"4 the Evangelical Counsels still appeared to him, accord
ing to statements he made in that same year, " a means for the
easier keeping of the commandments."5

1 To George Leiffer, Augustinian at Erfurt, April 15, 1516, " Brief -
wechsel," 1, p. 31.

2 Flacius Illyr., " Clarissimae quaedam notse verse ac falsae religionis,"
Magdeburgi (1549), pages not numbered, end of cap. xv. : " Affirmabat
is Martinum Lutherum apud ipsos sancte vixisse, exactissime regulam
servasse et diligenter studuisse." Copy of this rare work in the Vienna
Hofbibliothek.

3 On the passages in the Comm. on Rom. of 1515-16 in which he
speaks well of the religious life, see above, vol. i., p. 270.

* Weim. ed., 2, p. 736 ; Erl. ed., 21, p. 242. Denifle, I2, p. 39.

5 Ib.t 2, p. 644 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 2, p. 500, and in his " Letter to
the Minorites of Jiiterbogk," May 15, 1519, " Brief wechsel," 2. p. 40 :
" Media quibua facilius implentur prcecepta." Cp. Denifle, I2, p. 36.

208 THE LUTHER LEGEND

It was only after this that he began to think of tampering with
the celibacy of the priesthood, and that only in the hope of
winning many helpers in his work of apostasy. A little later he
attacked with equal success the sacred obligations freely assumed
by the monks. Yet we find nothing about the legend in his
writings and letters of this time, though it would have been of
great service to him. Everything, in fact, followed a much
simpler and more normal course than the legend would have us
imagine : The spirit of the world and inordinate self-love, no less
than his newly unearthed doctrine, were what led to the breaking
of his vows.

Many of his brother monks had already begun to give an
example of marrying when, in the Wartburg (in Sep., 1521), while
busy on his work against monastic vows he put to Melanchthon
this curious question : " How is it with me ? Am I already free
and no more a monk ? Do you imagine that you can foist a wife
on me as I did on you ? Is this to be your revenge on me ?
Do you want to play the Demea [the allusion is to Terence] and
give me, Mitio, Sostrata to wife ? I shall, however, keep my eyes
open and you will not succeed."1 Melanchthon was, of course,
neither a priest nor a monk. Luther, who was both, was even
then undoubtedly breaking away at heart from his vows. This
he did on the pretext — untenable though it must have appeared
even to him — that his profession had been vitiated by being
contrary to the Gospel, because his intention had been to " save
his soul and find justification through his vows instead of through
faith." " Such a vow," he says, " could not possibly be taken
in the spirit of the Gospel, or, if it was, it was sheer delusion."
Still, for the time being, he only sanctioned the marriage of other
monks who were to be his future helpers ; as for himself he was
loath to give the Papists " who were jawing " him the pleasure
of his marriage. He also denied in a public sermon that it was
his intention to marry, though he felt how hard it was not to
" end in the flesh." All these are well-known statements into
which we have already gone in detail, which militate against
Luther's later legend of the holy monk, who tormented himself
so grievously solely for the highest aims.

When, nevertheless, yielding to the force of circumstances, he
took as his wife a nun who had herself been eighteen years in the
convent, his action and the double sacrilege it involved plunged
him into new inward commotion. His statements at that time
throw a strange light on the step he had taken. By dint of every
effort he seeks to justify the humiliating step both to himself and
to others.

In his excitement he depicts himself as in the very jaws of
death and Satan. Fear of the rebellious peasants now so wroth
with him, and self-reproach on account of the marriage blamed
by so many even among his friends, inflamed his mind to such
a degree that his statements, now pessimistic, now defiant, now
humorous, now reeking with pseudo-mysticism, furnish a picture

1 Sep. 9, 1521, " Brief wechsel," 3, p. 226.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 209

of chaos. The six grounds he alleges for his marriage only prove
that none of them was really esteemed by him sufficient ; for,
that it was necessary for him to take pity on the forsaken nun,
that the Will of God and of his own father was so plain, and that
he was obliged to launch defiance at the devils, the priestlings
and the peasants by his marriage, all this had in reality as little
weight with him as his other pleas, such as, that the Catholics
looked on married life as unevangelical, and that it was his duty
to confirm the Evangel by his marriage even in the eyes of his
Evangelical critics.1 To many of his friends his marriage seemed
at least to have the advantage of shutting the mouths of those
who calumniated him. He himself, however, preferred to say,
that he had had recourse to matrimony " to honour God and
shame the devil."2

When once Luther had entered upon his new state of life all
remaining scruples regarding his vows had necessarily to be
driven away.

As was his wont he tried to reassure himself by going to
extremes. " The most successful combats with the devil," so he
tells us, are waged " at night at Katey's side " ; her " embraces "
help him to quell the foe within.3 He declares even more strongly
than before, that marriage is in fact a matter of downright
necessity for man ; he fails to think of the thousands who cannot
marry but whose honour is nevertheless untarnished ; he asserts
that " whoever will not marry must needs be a fornicator or
adulterer," and that only by a " great miracle of God " is it
possible for a man here and there to remain chaste outside the
wedded state ; more and more he insists, as he had already done
even before, that " nothing rings more hatefully in his ear than
the words monk and nun."4 He seizes greedily on every tale
that redounds to the discredit of the monasteries, even on the
silly story of the devils dressed as spectral monks who had
crossed the Rhine at Spires in order to thwart him at the Diet.

In all this we can but discern a morbid reaction against
the disquieting memory of his former state of life, not, as the
legend asserts, peace of mind and assurance of having won
a " Gracious God," thanks to his change of religion. The
reaction was throughout attended by remorse of conscience.

These struggles of soul in order to find a Gracious God,
which lasted, as he himself says (above, vol. v., pp. 334 f. ;

1 Above, vol. ii., p. 181 ff.

2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 183 : " in gloriam Dei et con/usionem
sathance."

3 Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 450 : " etiam in complexus veni
coniugis," etc. Cp. " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 299. See above,
vol. v., p. 354 ; vol. iii., p. 175.

4 To Nich. Gerbel of Strasburg, Nov. 1, 1521, " Brief wechsel," 3,
p. 241 : " ut nihil iam auribus meis sonei odiosius monialis, monaclii,
sacerdoiis nomine et paradisum arbitrer coniugium vel summa inopia
laborans." Thus the monk and priest, four years before his marriage.

VI. — P

210 THE LUTHER LEGEND

350 f.), even down to his later years, constitute a striking
refutation from his own lips, of the legend of the wonderful
change which came over him in the monastery.

On the other hand, the story of his long-drawn devotion
to the monastic practice of good works is no less at variance
with the facts. On the contrary, no sooner did Luther begin
his official career as a monk at Wittenberg, than he showed
signs of his aversion to works ; the trend of his teaching
was never in favour of strictness and penance, which, as he
declared, could only fill the heart with pride. (Above, vol. i.,
pp. 67 ff., 117 ff.) At a later date, however, he sought to base
this teaching on his own " inner experiences " and with
these the legend supplied him (above, vol. iv., p. 404, n. 2).

Some Doubtful Virtues

It is worth while to examine here rather more narrowly
than was possible when giving the history of his youth,
the zeal for virtue and the self-sacrificing industry for which,
according to the legend, the youthful monk was so con
spicuous. What in our first volume was omitted for the
sake of brevity may here find a place in order to throw a
clearer light on his development. Two traits are of especial
importance : first humility as the crown of all virtue, on
account of the piety Luther ascribes to himself, and,
secondly, the exact character of his restless, feverish
industry.

Luther's humility presents some rather remarkable
features. In the documents we still possess of his we indeed
find terms of self -depreciation of the most extravagant kind.
But his humility and forced self-annihilation contrast
strangely with his intense belief in his own spiritual powers
and the way in which he exalts himself above all authorities,
even the highest.

This comes out most strongly at the time when, as a young
professor at Wittenberg, Luther first dipped into the writings of
the mystics. The latter, so one would have thought, ought rather
to have led him to a deeper appreciation and realisation of the
life of perfection and humility.

He extols the books of certain mystics as a remedy for all the
maladies of the soul and as the well-spring of all knowledge. To
the Provost of Leitzkau, who had asked for his prayers, he
expressed his humility in the language of the mystics : "I confess

THE LUTHER LEGEND 211

to you that daily my life draws nigh to hell (Ps. Ixxxvii. 4)
because daily I become more wicked and wretched."1 At the
same time he exhorts another friend in words already quoted,
taken from the obscure and suspicious " Theologia Deutsch,"
" to taste and see how bitter is everything that is ourselves " in
comparison with the possession of Christ.2 "I am not worthy
that anyone should remember me," so he writes to the same,
" and I am most thankful to those who think worst of me."3

Yet mystical effusions are intermingled with charges against
the opponents of his new philosophy and theology which are by
no means remarkable for humility. " For nothing do my fingers
itch so much," he wrote about this time,4 " as to tear off the mask
from that clown Aristotle." The words here uttered by the
monk, as yet scarcely more than a pupil himself, refer to a scholar
to whom even the greatest have ever looked up, and, who, up till
then, had worthily represented at the Universities the wisdom of
the ancients. The young man declares, that " he would willingly
call him a devil, did he not know that he had had a body." Luther
also has a low opinion of all the Universities of his day : " They
condemn and burn the good books," he exclaims, " while fabricat
ing and framing bad ones."6

Self-confidence had been kindled in the monk's breast by a
conviction of future greatness. He speaks several times of this
inkling he had whilst yet a secular student at the Erfurt Uni
versity; when ailing from some illness of which we have no
detailed account, the father of one of his friends cheered him with
certain words which sank deeply into his memory : " My dear
Bachelor, don't lose heart, you will live to be a great man yet."
In 1532 Luther related to his pupil Veit Dietrich this utterance
which he still treasured in his memory.6 How strong an im
pression such lightly spoken words could make on his too
susceptible mind is evident from a letter of 1530 where he speaks

1 To George Mascov, Provost of the Premonstratensian house at
Leitzkau, end of 1516, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 76. At the close of the
letter, of which only fragments have been preserved, we read : " Quam
maxime rogo ut pro me Dominum ores ; confiteor enim tibi, quod vita mea
in dies appropinquet inferno, quia quotidie peior fio et miserior," which
must, of course, be understood of his moral, not his physical, condition.
The " drawing nigh to hell " is an echo of Ps. Ixxxvii., which was such
a favourite of his, where we read : " repleta eat malia anima mea et vita
mea inferno appropinquavit " (v. 3), and : " In me transierunt irce tuce,
et terrores tui conturbaverunt me " (v. 17).

2 Above, vol. i., p. 88.

3 To Spalatin, Dec. 14, 1516, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 73 f., where he
begins by humbly confessing his unworthiness to receive any attention
from the Elector (" talis tantusque princeps "), at whose Court Spalatin
held a post.

* To Joh. Lang, Feb. 8, 1517, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 86. " Quid
enim non credant, qui Aristoteli crediderunt, vera ease, quce ipse calumnio-
sissimus calumniator aliis affiingit et imponit tarn absurda, ut asinus et
lapis non possint tacere ad ilia ? " (ib., p. 85).

5 Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 44, from Dietrich's MSS.

• To Hier. Weller, July (?), 1530, " Brief wechsel," 8, p. 160.

212 THE LUTHER LEGEND

of his vivid recollection of another man, who, when Luther wa3
consoling him on the death of his son, had said to him : " Martin,
you may be sure that some day you will be a great man." Since,
on the same occasion, he goes on to refer to the remark made by
Staupitz, viz. that he was called to do great things, and declares
that this prediction had been verified, it becomes even clearer that
this idea had taken root and thriven in his mind even from early
years.1 But how does all this harmonise with the humility of
the true religious, and with the pious self-forgetfulness of the
mystic ? There can be no doubt that it is more in accordance
with the quarrelsomeness and exclusiveness, the hot temper and
lack of consideration for others to which the testimonies already
recorded have repeatedly borne witness. (Above, vol. i., passim.)

There is a document in existence, on which so far but
little attention has been bestowed, which is characteristic of
his language at one time. Its tone of exaggeration makes it
worthy to rank side by side with the mystical passage quoted
above, in which Luther professes to have himself experienced
the pangs of hell which were the earthly lot of chosen souls.2
Owing to its psychological value this witness to his humility
must not be passed over.

Luther had received from Christopher Scheurl of Nuremberg,
a learned lawyer and humanist, a letter dated Jan. 2, 1517, in
which this warm partisan and admirer of the Augustinians, who
was also a personal friend of Staupitz after a few words in praise of
his virtue and learning, of which Staupitz had told him, ex
pressed the wish to enter into friendly correspondence with him. 3
The greater part of Scheurl's letter is devoted to praising Staupitz,
rather than Luther. Yet the young man was utterly dumb
founded even by the meagre praise the letter contained. His
answer to it was in an extravagant vein, the writer seemingly
striving to express his overwhelming sense of humility in the face
of such all-too-great praise.4

The letter of one so learned and yet so condescending, so
Luther begins, while greatly rejoicing him had distressed him not

1 " Videbis," Staupitz had said, according to him, "quod ad res
magnas gerendas te ministro (Deus) utetur. Atque ita accidit," Luther
goes on. " Nam ego magnus (licet enim hoc mihi de me iure prcedicare)
factus sum doctor," Such utterances, he continues, have in them some
thing of the " oraculum et divinatio." Then follows the statement quoted
above concerning the other prophecy of his future greatness : " huius
dicti scepissime memini," and again he declares such words contain
" aliquid divinationis et oraculi.^ z Above, p. 102.

3 Reprinted in Luther's " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 79 : " De tua prce-
stantia, bonitate, eruditione creber sermo incidit." After having spoken
of Luther's " Celebris fama," Scheurl expresses the wish " to become
his friend." The words are simply those in common use among the
humanists.

4 Jan. 27, 1517, " Briefwechsel," 1, p. 82 8.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 213

a little. He rejoiced at his eulogies of Staupitz, in whom he
simply extolled Christ. ** But how could you sadden me more
than by seeking my friendship and decking me out in such empty
titles of honour ? I cannot allow you to become my friend, for
my friendship would bring you, not honour but rather harm, if so
be that the proverb is true: 'Friends hold all in common.' If
what is mine becomes yours then you will receive only sin,
unwisdom and shame, for these alone can I call mine ; but such
things surely do not merit the titles you give them." Scheurl,
indeed, would say, so he goes on in the same pathetic style, that
it was only Christ he admired in him ; but Christ cannot dwell
together with sin and folly ; hence he must be mindful of his
own honour and not fall so low ( ' degeneres ' ) as to become the
friend of Luther. Even the Father- Vicar Staupitz praises him
(Luther) too much. He made him afraid and put him in peril
by persisting in saying : "I bless Christ in you and cannot but
believe Him present with you now." Such a belief was, however,
hard, and the more eulogies and friends, the greater the danger
in which the soul stood (then follow three superfluous quotations
from Scripture). The greater the favour bestowed by men the
less does God bestow His. " For God wills to be either the only
friend or else no friend at all. To make matters worse, if a man
humbles himself and seeks to fly praise and favour, then praise
and favour always come, to our peril and confusion. Oh, far
more wholesome," he cries, " are hatred and disgrace than all
praise and love." The danger of praise he elucidates by a com
parison with the cunning of the harlot mentioned in Proverbs vii.
He is writing all this to Scheurl, not by any means to express
contempt for his good-will but out of real anxiety for his own
soul. Scheurl was only doing what every pious Christian must
do who does not despise others but only himself ; and this, too,
he himself would also do.

And, as though he had not yet said enough of his love of
humility, the writer makes a fresh start in order to explain and
prove what he has said. Not on account of learning, ability and
piety does a true Christian honour his fellow-men ; such a thing
had better be left to the heathen and to the poets of to-day ; the
true Christian loved the helpless, the poor, the foolish, the sinful
and the wretched. This he proves first from Ps. xli., then from
the teaching of Christ and from His words : " For that which is
high to men is an abomination before God " (Luke xvi. 15). " Do
not make of me such an abomination," so he goes on, " do not
plunge me into such misery if you would be my friend. But,
from so doing you will be furthest if you forbear from praising me
either before me or before others. If, however, you are of opinion
that Christ is to be extolled in me, then use His Name and not
mine. Why should the cause of Christ be besmirched by my
name and robbed of its own name ? To everything should be
given its right name ; are we then to praise what is Christ's
without using His Name ? Behold," so he breaks off at last
very aptly, " here you have your ' friend ' and his flood of words ;

214 THE LUTHER LEGEND

have patience friendly reader " — words which may apply to the
modern reader of this effusion no less than to its first addressee.
It cannot well be gainsaid that something strange lay in this kind
of humility. It would be difficult to find an exact parallel to such
language in the epistles of the humanists of that day, and still
less in the correspondence of truly pious souls. What may,
however, help us to form our opinion is the fact that, in the letters
written immediately after the above, we again find the young
professor condemning wholesale everything that did not quite
agree with his own way of thinking.

The passion, precipitancy and exaggeration which inspired
him during his monkish days is the other characteristic which
here calls for consideration. His fiery and unbridled zeal
was of such a character as to constitute a very questionable
virtue in a monk.

We may recall what has already been said of the youthful
Luther's passionate and unmeasured abuse, even in public, of the
" Little Saints " and " detractors " in his Order, for instance at
the Chapter of the Order held at Gotha in 1515. Bitter exaggera
tions are met with even in his first lectures. In the controversy
with the Observantines he goes so far as to make the bold asser
tion, that it was just the good works of his zealous brother monks
that were sinful, though they in their blindness refused to believe
it.1 In his Commentary on the Psalms in 1513-15 he even goes
so far as to denounce as " rebellion and disobedience " their
vindication of strict observance in the Order.2 His imagination
makes him fancy that they are guided by a light kindled specially
for them by " the devil."3 Such is his ardour when thundering
against the abuses in the Order that he forgets to make the need
ful distinctions, and actually, in the presence of the young
Augustinians who were his pupils, attacks the very foundations
of their Mendicant Order. Yet elsewhere, in the narrowest spirit
of party prejudice, he inveighs against worthy scholars who
happened to belong to other Orders, for instance, against Wimp-
feling, on whom he heaps angry invective.4 The slightest pro
vocation was enough to rouse his ire.

Soon his passion began to vent itself on the Church outside.
In his lectures on the Psalms he laments that Christianity was
hardly to be found anywhere, such were the abuses ; he can but
weep over the evil ; all pious men were, according to him, full of
sorrow that the Incarnation and Passion of Christ had come to
be so completely forgotten. We know how the young religious,
from the abyss of his inexperience, declared in the most general
terms, as though he had been familiar with all classes and all

1 Weim. ed., 1, p. 30 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 1, p. 57 : " Nolunt audire,
quod iustitice eorum peccata sint. . . . Gratiam maxime impugnant, qui
earn iactant."

8 " Incurrunt inobedientiam et rebellionem." See vol. i., p. 69.

3 " Ucec est lux angeli Satkance " (ib.). * Ib., p. 53.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 215

lands, that the desecration of what was most sacred in the Church
had gone so far that they had sunk below even the Turk ; " owing
to the unchastity, pomp and pride of her priests, the Church was
suffering in her property, in the administration of her sacraments
and of the Word of God, in her judicial authority and finally in
her government," etc., " the Sanctuary was, so to speak, being
hewn down with axes," churchmen doing spiritually what the
Turk was doing both spiritually and materially ; in vain was the
Word of God preached " seeing that every entrance was closed
to it."

Holy men, of real zeal, had always been able to discern the
good side by side with the bad. But the youthful Luther sees on
every side, and everywhere nothing but false teaching (" scatet
totus orbis," etc.), nay, a very " deluge of filthy doctrines."1 To
be made a bishop is to him tantamount to branding oneself a
" Sodomite " ; so full of vice is the episcopate that those wearers
of the mitre were the best who had no sin on their conscience
beyond avarice. 2 As for the men of learning, they rank far below
Tauler, and, thanks to their narrowness, had made the age " one
of iron, nay, of clay."3 When setting faith and grace against the
alleged heathenism of the scholars he goes so far as to say, that
his man is he " who outside of grace knows nothing."4 As early
as 1515 he thinks himself qualified to attack the authorities and
the highest circles because " his teaching-office lent him apostolic
power to say and to reveal what was being done amiss."6

Why, we may, however, ask, did not the reformer of the Church
begin with himself, seeing that, in the lectures on the Psalms just
mentioned, he already laments the coldness of his own religious
life ? 6 Even then he felt temptations pressing upon him ; already
in consequence of his manifold and distracting labours he had
lapsed into a state in which prayer became distasteful to him,
and of which he writes to an intimate friend in 1523 : "In body
I am fairly well but I am so much taken up with outward business
that the spirit is almost extinguished and rarely takes thought
for itself."7 These words and other earlier admissions (above,
vol. i., p. 275 ff.) throw a strange light on the legend according to
which he had wrestled in prayer by day and by night.

Even in his devotion to his studies and in his manner of
writing on learned subjects his natural extravagance stands

1 Weim. ed., 1, p, 12 ; " Opp. lat. var.," I, p. 33.

2 To Spalatin, June 8, 1516, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 41 : " prcesulari
id est pergrcecari sodomitari, romanari."

3 To Spalatin, in the spring, 1517, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 91 :
" eruditio sceculi nostri ferrea, immo terrea, sive sit Grcecitatis sive
Latinitatis sive Hebrceitatis."

4 To Lang, March 1, 1517, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 88.

5 See above, vol. i., p. 228. 6 /&., p. 70.

7 To Nich. Hausmann at Zwickau, " Brief wechsel," p. 144 :
" Corpore satis bene valeo, sed tot distrahor externis actibus, ut spiritus
prope extinguatur raroque sui curam habeat. Ora pro me, ne carne
consummer." Cp. Gal. iii. 3 : " Sic stulti estis, ut quum spirilu coeperitis,
nunc carne consummemini"

216 THE LUTHER LEGEND

revealed. His love for study was all passion ; his mode of thought
and expression was simply grotesque. It was the young monk's
passion for learning which led him on the occasion of his visit to
Rome to petition the Pope to be allowed for a term of several
years to absent himself from home and devote himself in the garb
of a secular priest to his studies at the Universities. At Witten
berg we find him in the refectory pen in hand in the silent
watches of the night when all the other monks had gone to rest,
and, in his excited state, he fancies he hears the devil making an
uproar. Though, according to his admission of Oct. 26, 1516, he
was so busy and overwhelmed with literary work, as " rarely to
have time to recite the Hours or to say Mass,"1 yet he still had
time enough to inveigh against the " sophists of all the Uni
versities " as he had, even then, begun to term the professors of
his day. He professed his readiness, were it necessary, to find time
to go to Erfurt in order to defend in a public disputation there the
Theses set up at Wittenberg in his name by his pupil Franz
Giinther ; the Erfurt Augustinians were not to denounce these
propositions as " paradoxical, or actually cacodoxical," " for
they are merely orthodox." " I wait with eagerness and interest
to see what they will put forward against these our paradoxes."2
In April, 1517, when Carlstadt caused some commotion by
publishing his erroneous views on nature and grace in 152 theses,
Luther called them in one of his letters the paradoxes of an
Augustine, excelling the doctrine in vogue as much as Christ
excels Cicero ; there were some who declared these propositions
to be paradoxical rather than orthodox, but this was " shame
less insolence " on the part of men who had studied and under
stood neither Augustine nor Paul ; "to those who understand,
however, the theses ring both pleasantly and beautifully, indeed
to me they seem to have an excellent sound."3

His restless style and love of emphasis is characteristic of his
own inner restlessness and excitement. He himself was quite
aware of the source of this disquiet, at least so far as it was the
result of a moral failing. In 1516 he lays his finger deliberately
on his besetting fault when he admits to a friend, that the " root
of all our unrest is nowhere else to be found than in our belief in
our own wisdom " ; "I have been taught by my own experience !
Oh, with how much misery has this evil eye [belief in my own
wisdom] plagued me even to this very day ! "4

1 To Lang, Oct. 26, 1516, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 67 : " raro mihi
integrum tempus est," etc. ; above, vol. i., p. 275.

2 To Lang, Sep. 4, 1517, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 106. Cp. vol. i.,
p. 313.

3 To Chr. Scheurl, May 6, 1517, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 97 : " Sunt
paradoxa niodestis et qui non ea cognoverint, sed eudoxa et calodoxa
scientibus, mihi vero aristodoxa. Benedictus Deus, qui rursum iubet de
tenebris splendescere lumen."

4 To George Leiffer, Augustinian at Erfurt, April 15, 1516, " Brief -
wechsel," 1, p. 31 : " sola prudentia sensus nostri causa et radix uni
verses inquietudinis nostrce."

THE LUTHER LEGEND 217

And yet he takes for one of his guiding principles the curious
idea that the opposition of so many confirmed the truth of what
he said. His work on the Penitential Psalms, so he wrote to his
friend Lang on March 1, 1517, would "then please him best if
it displeased all."1 And, two years later, he said to Erasmus,
when speaking of the system he followed in this respect : "I am
wont to see in what is displeasing to many, the gifts of a Gracious
God as against those of an Angry God " ; hence, so he assures
him, the hostility under which Erasmus himself was suffering,
was, for him, a proof of his real excellence."2

His burning enthusiasm at the time when he thought he had
discovered the sense of the passage : " The just man lives by
faith," has already been described elsewhere.3 This and other
incidents just touched upon recall those morbid sides of his
character referred to in the previous chapter.

As we might expect, during the first years of his great
public struggle his restlessness was even more noticeable
than before. The predominance of the imagination has
hardly ever been so fatally displayed by any other man,
though, of course, it is not every man whose life is thrown
amid times so stirring. " Because," so he wrote in 1541,
recalling his audacity in publishing the Indulgence-Theses
and the fame it brought him, " all the Bishops and Doctors
kept silence [concerning the abuse of indulgences] and no
one was willing to bell the cat. . . . Luther was vaunted as
a doctor, and as the only man who was ready to interfere.
Which fame was not at all to my taste."4 This latter asser
tion he is fond of making to others, but his letters of that
time show how greatly the charm of notoriety contributed
to unbridle his stormy energy. It was his opponents'
defiance which first opened the flood-gates of his passionate
eloquence. At the very outset he warns people that contra
diction will only make his spirit more furious and lead him
to have recourse to even stronger measures ; elsewhere he
has it : " The more they rage, the further I shall go ! "5

We may recall his reference to the " gorgeous uproar,"
and the passages where he assures his friends : "I am

1 " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 88 : " si nulli placerent, mihi optime
placer ent"

2 March 28, 1519, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 489.

3 Vol. i., p. 391 : " furebam ita sceva el perturbata conscience," etc.
* Erl. ed., 262, p. 71.

5 To Sylvius Egranus (Joh. Wildenauer), March 24, 1518, " Brief -
wechsel," 1, p. 173 : " Ego quo magis illi furunt, eo amplius procedo ;
relinquo prior a, ut in illis latrent, sequor posteriora, ut et ilia la/trent."

218 THE LUTHER LEGEND

carried away and know not by what spirit,"1 and " God
carries me away, I am not master of myself."2

In the light of his pathological fervour the contradictions
in which he involves himself become more intelligible, for
instance, what he wrote to Pope Leo X in his letter of May,
1518, 3 which so glaringly contrasted with his other words and
deeds. His unrest and love of exaggeration caused him to
overlook this and the many other contradictions both with
himself and with what he had previously written.

The picture of the monk which we have been compelled to
draw differs widely from the legendary one of the pious
young man shut up in the cloister, who, according to
Luther's account at a later date, led a fanatical life of
penance and, because he saw Popish piety to be all too
inadequate, " sought to find a Gracious God."

Luther's Alterations of the Facts

It was not altogether arbitrarily that Luther painted the
picture of the monk forced by his trouble of mind to forsake
Popery. Rather he followed, possibly to some extent un
consciously, the lines of actual history, though altering them
to suit his purpose.

He retained intact not a few memories of his youth,
which, under the stress of his bitterness and violence,
and with the help of a lively imagination unfettered
by any regard for the laws of truth, it was no difficult
task to transform. Among these memories belong those
of his time of fervour during his Noviciate and early
days as a priest. They it was which evidently formed
the groundwork of his later statements that he had
been throughout an eminently pious monk. Then again,
among the remarkable traits which made their appearance
somewhat later, the two elements just described have a place
in his legend, viz. his extravagant self-conscious humility
and his fiery zeal. In his later controversies he is disposed
to represent this strange sort of humility as real humility

1 Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 512.

8 To Staupitz, Feb. 20, 1519, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 430 : " Deus
rapit, pellit, nedum ducit me; non sum coynpos mei, volo esse quietus et
rapior in medios tumultus."

9 Above, vol. ii., p. 17.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 219

and as a sign of genuine piety. The pious, humble monk
hidden in a corner had all unwittingly grown into a great
prophet of the truth. In the same way the ardour of those
years which he never afterwards forgot, was transformed in
his fancy into a fanatical hungering and thirsting after
Popish holiness-by-works, in discipline and fasting, watch
ing, cold and prayer.

In addition to these there were memories of the transition
period of religious scruples, of temptations to doubts about
predestination, of his passing paroxysms of terror, gloom
and inherited timidity. These elements must be considered
separately.

Scrupulosity, with the doubts and nervousness it brings
in its train, probably only troubled him for a short time
during the first period of his life in the cloister. The admo
nitions of his novice-master, given above (p. 206), may refer
to some such passing condition through which the young
man went, and which indeed is by no means uncommon in
the spiritual life. The profound impression made by these
first inward experiences seems to have remained with him
down to his old age ; indeed it is the rule that the struggles
of one's younger days leave the deepest impression on both
heart and memory. His quondam scruples and groundless
fear of sin, eked out by his ideas of the virtues of a religious,
probably served as the background for the picture of the
young monk " sunk " in Popish holiness-by-works and yet
so profoundly troubled at heart.

But all this would not suffice to explain the legend of his
mental unrest, of his sense of being forsaken by God, of his
howling, etc.

What promoted this portion of the legend was the
recollection of those persistent temptations to despair which
arose from his ideas on predestination during the time of his
mystical aberrations.

The dreadful sense of being predestined by God to hell
had for many years stirred the poor monk's soul to its lowest
depths, even long before he had thought out his new
doctrine. It is no matter for surprise, if, later, carried away
by his polemics, he made the utmost use in his legend of his
former states of fear the better to depict the utter misery of
the monk bent on securing salvation by the practice of good
works. The doctrine of faith alone which he had discovered

220 THE LUTHER LEGEND

and the new Evangelical freedom were, of course, supposed
to have delivered him from all trouble of mind, and thus it
was immaterial to him later to what causes his fears and
sadness were assigned.

Yet his supposed new theological discoveries became for
him, according to the testimony of the Commentary on
Romans, in many respects a new source of fear and terror.
The doctrine of the Divine imputation or acceptation did not
sink into his mind without from its very nature causing far-
reaching and abiding fears. His then anxieties, which, as a
matter of fact, were in striking contrast with his later
assertion of his sudden discovery of a Gracious God, together
with the mystical aberrations in which he sought in vain for
consolation, doubtless furnished another element for the
legend of the terrors he had endured throughout his life as a
monk.

We need only refer to the passage in the Commentary where he
declares : Our so-called good works are not good, but God merely
reckons (" reputat ") them as good. "Whoever thinks thus is
ever in fear ('semper pavidus '), and is ever awaiting God's
imputation ; hence he cannot be proud and contentious like the
proud self-righteous, who trust in their good works."1

What is curious, however, is that, here and elsewhere in the
Commentary, the so-called self-righteous, both in the cloister
and the world, appear to be quite " confident " and devoid of
fear ; they at least fancy they may enjoy peace ; hence, as
depicted in the Commentary, they are certainly not the howling
and anxious spirits of whom the later legend speaks. On the
contrary it is Luther alone who is sunk in sadness, and whose
melancholy pessimism presents a strange contrast to all the
rest. His mysticism also veils a deep abyss.

Almost on the same page the pessimistic mystic speaks of
that resignation to hell which has a place in his new system of
theology. " Because we have sin within us we must flee happiness
and take on what is repugnant, and that, not merely in words and
hypocritically ; we must resign ourselves to it with full consent,
must desire to be lost and damned. What a man does to him
whom he hates, that we must do to ourselves. Whoever hates,
wishes his foe to be undone, killed and damned, not merely
seemingly but in reality. When we thus, with all our heart,
destroy and persecute ourselves, when we give ourselves over
to hell for the sake of God and His Justice, then indeed we
have alread}^ satisfied His Justice and He will deliver us."2 It
can hardly be considered normal that a monk should wish to live
— among brethren, who rejoiced in the promises of Christ and in

1 Lectures on Romans, ed. J. Ficker, 1908, Scholia, p. 221.
3 /&., p. 220.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 221

the Church's means of grace — the life of a lonely mystic sunk in
the depths of an abyss, where " a man does not strive after
heaven but is perfectly ready never to be saved, but rather to be
damned, and where, after having been reconciled by grace, a man
fears, not God's punishments, but simply to offend Him."1

Luther's recollections of the mental ailments he went
through as a monk also undoubtedly had their effect on the
legend. We know that Luther never rightly understood the
nature of these ailments and that he regarded his fits of
terror, his nervousness and his gloom as anything but what
they really were. It would appear that, in his old age, he
simply lumped all his sad experiences together as typical of
the sort of poison which Popery and Monkery, owing to their
false doctrines, offered to their adepts. Nothing seemed to
him to sho\v better from what horrors he had snatched man
kind. Whether involuntary self-deception played a part
here, or whether, by dint of constant repetition, he came to
believe in the truth of his tale, who can nowr venture to say ?
In any case his spirit of bitterness led him to make of his own
sufferings a sort of spectre of terror common to all, who, like
himself, had raved that they were zealously serving God
whether in the monastery or in Popery at large. Even
" great Saints " had, according to him, lived amidst the
" devil's factions and errors, under Rules and in monasteries
and institutions," but had finally " cut themselves loose and
been saved by faith in Jesus Christ."2

He completely shuts his eyes to the fact that both his
fears concerning predestination and his morbid states of
terror accompanied by fainting fits recurred in his case even
in later life, and, that, after his apostasy he had in addition to
suffer from remorse of conscience on account of his doings
against the Church. Nor does he seem to see that he
himself betrays the falsity of what he says of the general
depression to which all monks were subject when he relates
above, that he alone had gone about in the monastery
labouring under such oppression and that no one had under
stood him or been able to console him (above, p. 113) ; hence,
according to this, his brother monks cannot have suffered
from the terrors he afterwards attributed to them.

1 Ib.

2 Weim. ed., 26, p. 504 ; Erl. ed., 30, p. 366. " Vom Abendmal
Bekentnis," 1528.

222 THE LUTHER LEGEND

Th,e Monkish Nightmare

The strange " terrors " under which he was labouring
when he first knocked at the gate of the Augustinian convent
at Erfurt were, according to Melanchthoii's definite assur
ance already quoted, closely bound up with his habitual
states of fear. They were extraordinary states of mental
perturbation (" terror es ") and can only be explained when
looked at in the light of his other mental troubles.1 Of the
incidents that impelled him to enter the convent2 Luther
himself says in a passage which has also been quoted above,
that (on the occasion of his first Mass) he had tried to
reassure his father Hans by pointing out that he had been
called " by terrors from heaven " (" de coelo terrores ") ; to
which his father had harshly replied : " Oh, that it may not
have been a delusion and a diabolical vision " (" illusio et
prcestigium ").3 The happenings immediately previous to
his entering the monastery are of a rather mysterious
character. The inmates of the Erfurt convent declared at
that time in consequence of what they had gathered from
Luther, that he, like " another Paul, had been miraculously
converted by Christ."4 Oldecop, who began his studies at
Wittenberg in 1514, speaks in his Chronicle of " strange
fears and spectres " on account of which Luther had
taken the habit.5 Still more remarkable is the report based
on the account of Luther's intimate friend Jonas, and dating
from 1538. He says : When Luther, as a student, was
returning to Erfurt after having been to Gotha to buy some
books " there came a dreadful apparition from heaven
which he then interpreted as signifying that he was to
become a monk."6 If these statements were correct it would

1 Melanchthon in his " Elogium " on Luther, " Corp. ref.," 6,
p. 158 : " Vitse Reformatorum," ed. Neander, p. 5. See above, p. 100.

2 To supplement what we said in vol. i., p. 4, we may give a passage
from Rorer's notes of the Table-Talk (ed. Kroker, in "Archiv f. RG.," 5,
1908, p. 346) : " Cum in monasterium intrabam et relinquebam omnia
desperans de me ipso, postulavi iterum biblia." Ib., p. 369 f. " Causa
ingrediendi monasterii fuit, quia perterrefactus tonitru, cum despatiaretur
ante civitatem Erphordice, votum vovit Hannce et fracto propemodum
pede [? through being thrown down by the stroke of lightning ?] he
entered the cloister and bound himself by vows."

8 Vol. i., p. 16. * Dungersheim, " Dadelung," etc., Bl. 14.

5 " Chronik," etc., ed. Euling, 1891, p. 30.

• Account published by Tschakert in " Theol. Stud, und Krit.,"
1897, p. 578. The passage may possibly have been influenced by

THE LUTHER LEGEND 223

appear as though we have here already an instance of
hallucination worthy of being classed with the " sights and
visions " elsewhere mentioned. Even his earliest monastic
days would assume a suspiciously pathological character
if, even then, he was convinced of having been the recipient
of heavenly messages. It must, however, remain doubtful
whether Jonas's report means exactly what it seems to
mean and whether his sources are to be relied upon.

The possibility of his having been the victim of hallucina
tion at such an early date also raises the question whether
his later abnormal states can be explained by heredity or
his upbringing.

By their " harsh treatment," so Luther says on one
occasion, his parents had " driven him into the monastery " ;
here we have an entirely new version of the motives of his
choice of the religious life ; he adds that, though they
meant well by him, yet he had known nothing but faint
heartedness and despondency.1 Poverty still further
darkened his early youth. It is quite possible that the
young monk may have suffered for some considerable time
from feelings of timidity and depression as a result of his
education and mode of life. The natural timidity which was
apparent during a part of his youth may also have con
tributed its quota to the rise of the legend of the monk who
was ever sad. But all this does not explain as well as an
hereditary malady would the terrors or seeming hallu
cinations. Unfortunately the question of heredity is still
quite obscure, though the highly irritable temper of his
father referred to above (p. 182) may have some bearing
on it. Luther, however, says very little about his parents
and even less of his manner of bidding good-bye to the world.

The statements he makes, whether in jest or in earnest, con
cerning his vow to enter a religious Order, differ widely.

He declares he made the vow to God in honour of St. Anne,
but that God had " taken it in the Hebrew meaning," Anne
signifying grace, and had understood that Luther wished to
become a monk *' under grace and not under the Law," in fact
not a monk at all.2 Very likely it is no jest, however, when he
adds that, " he had soon regretted his vow, the more so since

Luther's statement above concerning his father's words " illusio et
prcestigium." Cp. below, p. 224, n. 6.

1 Mathesius/" Tischreden," p. 408 (in 1537).

2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 187, related by Luther to his friends
on the feast-day of St. Anne, July 16 [? 26], 1539.

224 THE LUTHER LEGEND

many sought to dissuade him from entering the convent " ; he
had, nevertheless, persisted, in spite of the objections of his
father and, after that, he had had no further thought of quitting
the convent, " until God deemed the time had come " (to thrust
him out of it).1

On another occasion he assures us he had entered the convent
only " because he despaired of himself."8 And again : " God let
me become a monk," " though I entered forcibly and contrary
to my father's wishes " ;3 for I had " to learn to know the Pope's
trickery."4 As a rule, however, he leaves God out of the matter.
He had taken the vow only "under compulsion," so he says in
self-defence ; he had not become a monk " gladly and willingly " ;
he did not then know that a father had to be obeyed, or that vows
rested only on " the commandments of men, on hypocrisy and
superstition,"5 but, during his life in the cloister, the suspicion of
his father, who had now been reconciled with him, about the
possibility of its having all been a diabolical delusion had sunk
deeply into his mind ; in his father's words he had perforce to
recognise the Voice of God.'

Again, the legend makes out the monk, in the time of his
first fervour, to have looked more like a corpse than a man ;
yet, so far as we can judge, it was only after he had begun his
public struggle, i.e. subsequent to 1517, that he began to
show signs of physical exhaustion and emaciation, and this,
too, was only owing to the way in which he went to work.
On the other hand, on March 17, 1509, i.e. nearly four years
after his entry into the religious life, when about to quit
Erfurt, he wrote, that, " as to himself, by God's grace, all
was going well." The expression he uses seems to imply
that, not merely his spiritual, but also his bodily, state
was satisfactory.7

In his legend Luther speaks repeatedly of certain morbid
states from which he had suffered and which he duly uses to
lash the Popish conception of holiness. They are too closely

1 Ib., under date, July 16 (1539), the anniversary of his entering the
convent.

2 See above, vol. i., p. 4.

3 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 182. * 16., 3, p. 185.

5 Weim. ed., 8, p. 573 f. ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, p. 239, in the dedica
tion to his father of " De Votis monasticis " (" Brief wechsel," 3, p. 249).

6 Ib., he refers to the same remark of his father's in a letter to
Melanchthon of Sep. 9, 1521, " Brief wechsel," 3, p. 225 : " Ulinam
non esset sathance prcestigium. . . . Videtur mihi per os eius Deus
velut a longe me allocutus, sed tarde, tamen satis."

7 To Job. Braun at Eisenach, " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 6 : " Quod si
atatum meum nosse desideras, bene habeo Dei gratia, nisi quod violentum
est studium."

THE LUTHER LEGEND 225

bound up with other facts in his mental life to be set aside
as simple inventions, though it must also be added that they
contain an element of uncertainty.

In the case of people who have been brought up as
Christians but who suffer from certain nervous disorders,
particularly when their temperament is of the melancholy
variety, a notable aversion for sacred objects may occasion
ally be observed. " Many such patients cannot bear the
sight of a cross, cannot listen to prayers, stop their ears at
the ringing of the Angelus, cannot mention the word
4 sacrament,' but use some circumlocution instead." "Among
perfectly normal people we do not meet with this sort of
thing, still it is nothing extraordinary."1

Now, oddly enough," we find Luther, in 1532, telling the
people quite seriously in his sermons on Matt, v.— vii., that,
as a novice, he had not been able to endure the sight of the
crucifix. " When I saw a picture or statue of Christ hanging
on the Cross, etc., I was so affrighted that I averted my
eyes."2 And, again, in the same sermons : " When I looked
at Him on the Cross He seemed to me like a flash of
lightning." He also adds that he " had often been affrighted
at the name of Jesus."3 " The Last Day," he says in a
sermon of 1534, he could not bear to hear spoken of, and
" my hair stood on end when I thought of it."4 These state
ments are doubtless exaggerations, but Luther has others
even stronger : He would " rather have heard the devil
spoken of than Christ " ; he would rather have seen " the
devil than the Crucified " ; " rather have heard of the
devils in hell than of the Last Day." It may be queried
whether the above were simply inventions designed to
vilify the monastic life and the faith in which he had grown
up. Nevertheless, whoever calls to mind the " terrors "
Luther experienced at his first Mass and in the procession
with Staupitz, whoever keeps before him the part played by
Luther's " fears " even at a later date,5 will certainly not
think it beyond the bounds of possibility that, at times, he

1 B. Heyne, " Uber Besessenheitswahn bei geistigen Erkrankungs-
zustanden," Paderborn, 1904, p. 126.

2 Erl. ed., 44, p. 127.

3 76., 45, p. 150. See above, p. 197.

4 /&., Weim. ed.,

36, p. 553 f. ; Erl. ed., 51, p. 140, Comment, on
1 Cor. xv.

6 See above, p. 99 ff.

VI.— Q

226 THE LUTHER LEGEND

should have shuddered at the sight of the cross or at the
mention of Christ or of the Last Judgment.

To all this, his bodily condition may have contributed,
yet, in his legend, Luther makes of these doubtless morbid
states of his the inevitable result of the holiness-by-works
practised in the convent and taught by Catholic doctrine.
It was because they had known Christ only as the Judge,
Who must be placated by works, that he had so dreaded the
Crucifix and the very mention of the Judgment. He says
that he could not but tremble at the sight of the Crucifix,
because, like the rest of the Papists, he had been taught to
think that " I must go on performing good works until I
have thereby made Christ my friend and gracious toward
me."1 For this reason alone he had " so often shrunk back
affrighted at the name of Jesus " and at the " Cross " as at
a " flash of lightning," because he, like all the rest, had lost
his faith ; "I had fallen away from the faith and^had no
other thought than that I had angered God Whom I must
once more propitiate by my works." " But praise and
thanks be to God that now we have His Word once more,
which leads us to Christ and depicts Him as our Righteous
ness " ; our heart need no longer " tremble and quake."2

After assuring us that he was often unable to gaze upon
the Cross, he also at once proceeds to make capital out of
this against the olden Church : " For," so he continues,
41 my mind was poisoned by this Popish doctrine," a
doctrine according to which " Christ, our Healer, had been
turned into a devil."3

Nor does he hesitate to make out that the sight of the
Saviour was likewise terrifying to all the zealous and
earnest " saints-by-works " in the religious life and Popery
generally.4 In another passage he speaks of the dreadful
emotion all felt at the mention of the coming Judgment
and the Last Day : " And so we were all sunk in the filth
of our own holiness and fancied that, by our life and works,
we could pacify the Divine Judgment " ; formerly they used

1 Erl. ed., 45, p. 156.

2 Note, ib. 3 Ib., 44, p. 127.

* G. Buchwald, " Luthers ungedruckte Predigten 1528-1546," vol.
iii., 1885, p. 50 : In Popery " horrible fears " had been caused by the
doctrine of Christ as Judge. " luventua non intelligit ; videat ne
amittat hanc lucem [of his Evangel]. Si scivissemus non ivissemus in
tcenobia. Quando Christum inspexi, vidi diabolum."

THE LUTHER LEGEND 227

to start " if anyone spoke of death or of the life to come " ;
but, since the light of the Evangel has risen, it is otherwise.

It is true that the way in which Luther here allows his
prejudice to exploit these terrifying experiences may raise
doubts as to whether they had ever actually existed even in
his own case, or whether he did not rather invent them with
the object of afterwards ascribing them to all. At the same
time it is easier to believe in their existence than to credit
him with having deliberately evolved them out of his own
fancy.

The utmost caution must indeed be exercised in accept
ing his assertions on this subject. We cannot sufficiently
express our amazement at the credulity with which Luther's
rhetorical statements about his life in the convent have often
been accepted, for instance even by Kostlin. The fact is, that
the ground on which Luther's later account rests, the elements
that he introduces into his transformation of the facts, and
above all the bitter and aggressive spirit which directs and
permeates everything, have not been adequately recognised
and thus the mythological nature of his fiction has remained
undetected. Otherwise it would surely have been im
possible to assert, that, just as Paul had been through the
mill of the Law, so Luther also had been through that of the
religious life, in order, by virtue of his experience, to discover
the supreme truth.

Various traits in the picture he drew, which, owing to its
difficulties, has puzzled many people, may, as we have seen,
be explained by his misapprehension or misinterpretation of
the phenomena of his own morbid, melancholy mind. Other
moral factors have, however, also to be taken into account.

As already pointed out, his depression of mind, due
primarily to physical causes, became so pronounced owing
to his refusal to submit to proper direction.

His dissatisfaction was increased by his growing im
patience with the religious life, by remorse of conscience
arising from his tepidity and worldliness, and by his growing
antipathy to his vocation.

It may be said, that, had the convent been wisely
governed, Luther would never have been admitted to
profession but have been quietly dismissed while yet a

228 THE LUTHER LEGEND

novice. Both for his superiors and for himself this would
have been the better course. A morbid temperament such
as his, whatever may have been its cause, was not suited
for the religious life, even apart from the obstacles in
Luther's character. The monotony and the penances
of the monastic life, the self-discipline and obedience ; also
the annoyances with which he had to put up from his
brother monks, whose habits and upbringing were not his,
must necessarily have aggravated his case, particularly as
he refused to submit to guidance. His superiors should have
foreseen that this brother would be a source of endless
difficulties. Instead of this, Staupitz, the vicar, clung to his
favourite. He even gave him to understand that he would
make of him a great scholar and an ornament of the Order.
Had he remained in the world, in a different and freer sphere
of action, Luther might possibly have succeeded in shaking
off his ailments and the resultant depression. But, in the
convent, particularly as he went his own way, he became
the victim of ideas and imaginations which promoted the
growth of his doctrine and helped to pave the way for his
apostasy. Nevertheless, his morbid states could not annul
the vows he had taken in the Order, hence his leaving and
his breach of the vows cannot be excused on the ground of
his illness, though the latter may help to explain his step.

From all the above it is plain how unwarrantable is the
assumption that to set aside Luther's legend is to shut one's
eyes to the severe inward struggles through which he went
previous to making his great decision.

There can be no doubt that, previous to his unhappy
change of religion, the monk had to wage a hard fight with
himself. He was striving against his conscience, and, by
overcoming it, he consciously and deliberately incurred the
guilt of his apostasy. " A frightful struggle of soul,"1 may,
and indeed must, be assumed, though a very different one
from that usually pictured by Protestants and by Luther
himself. It would indeed be " stupid " (to use the words of
a Protestant biographer of Luther) to seek to " obliterate
from history " the deep-down inward struggle which,
" maybe, lasted longer than we think." It is, however,

1 W. Kohler, " Ein Wort zu Denifles Luther," p. 28. The mental
struggle had not been denied, either by Denifle, or in my article in the
Beilage of the " Koln. Volksztng.," 1903, No. 44.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 229

gratifying to find that the same author admits that, as a
monk in the Erfurt priory, Luther " found some inward
contentment," in other words, that the legend is false in this
particular ; he also grants that, at least " in this or that
statement," Luther, in his later accounts, has been guilty of
" exaggeration " ; that his " development " did not proceed
quite on the lines he fancied later, at least that the " change
was not quite so sudden," and, finally, that " physical over
strain " had something to do with his struggles.1

3. The Legend receives its last touch ; how it was used

It is only after 1530 that we find Luther's legend of his
monkish life fully developed. Before this we see only the
first hints of the tale.

It cannot be argued that, till then, he had been silent on
his inward experiences as a monk, or that the MSS. of the
Table-Talk only commence subsequent to 1530. That, even
before this, he had frequently spoken of his earlier spiritual
experiences is evident from the passages already quoted,
and might be proved by many others ; moreover the
absence of any recorded Table-Talk is a detail, since the
latter is far from being our sole source in the present
question.

We are justified in assuming that the idea matured in
1530, during his stay at the Castle of Coburg where he had
to wage so severe a struggle with himself. Amid the trials he
endured during his days of retirement at the Wartburg he
had found time to pen his violent attack on monastic vows ;
so also, it was in the quiet of the Coburg, amidst the ghostly
conflicts and delusions, that he wove the caricature of his
own monkish life into the web of his history. At the very
time when Luther was at the Coburg the burning question
of German monasticism was being debated at the Diet of
Augsburg ; the Catholic Estates hoped that recognition
might again be won for it from the Protestants, or that it
might at least secure toleration in the districts where
allegiance was divided. It was also at the Coburg that
Luther penned many of the furious passages of his " Warning
to the Clergy forgathered at Augsburg."

1 Kohler, ib., pp. 27-29. Cp. Kohler, " Katholizismus und
Reformation," p. 69.

230 THE LUTHER LEGEND

He there says : " For the monks I know not how to plead.
For I am well aware you would rather they were all of them
given over to the devil, please God, whether they take wives
or not."1 In these words he erroneously takes for granted
that all ecclesiastics shared his own hatred for the monks.
He boasts in this writing that he " had destroyed the monks
by his teaching " ;2 he trusts that " the Bishops will not
allow such bugs and lice to be stuck again on their fur
cappas."3 The reason why his doctrine had destroyed the
monks was, because it had revealed how they were merely
" intent upon works." " For what else could come of it ?
If a conscience is intent on its works and builds on them,
then it is stablished on loose sand which is ever slipping and
sliding away ; it must ever be seeking for works, for one
and then for another and ever more and more, until at last
even the dead arc clothed in monks' cowls the better to
reach heaven."4 The last words are a caricature, a mis
representation of a pious custom by which no one ever
dreamt infallibly to win heaven. The " loose sand " is,
however, a favourite expression with him when speaking of
his teaching on works. It is the same teaching that he wants
to bring before the eyes of all by means of his fiction. How,
at that time, his thoughts were harking back to his former
life in the convent is plain from a letter of consolation he
then wrote to his " tempted " pupil Weller. He tells him
that he himself had also had his sadnesses and temptations,
but that what he had suffered as a monk had in the end
proved a schooling for his present high calling.5

Had he really been the butt of such " temptations " as
the legend depicts and contrived so successfully to vanquish
them by his doctrine on justification, then wre might expect
to find some trace of this in his first writings subsequent to
his change of outlook. Now, in the Commentary on Romans
we have a vivid document bearing on his change of opinions,
yet, full as it is of information about the author, we may
seek in vain for the legend. On the contrary it breathes a
high esteem for the religious state.6 In the " Resolutions "
to the Indulgence-Theses likewise, Luther speaks of the

1 Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 330 ; Erl. ed., 242, p. 391.

2 lb., p. 280 = 365. 3 Ib., p. 279f. = 364.
* Ib., p. 290=370.

» Late in June, 1530, " Brief wechsel," 8, p. 159 f.
6 See above, vol. i., p. 269 f.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 231

phases through which he had passed and of the mystical
sufferings he had endured.1 Yet here again the features
of the legend are wanting. Is it not somewhat remarkable
that an author usually so candid and talkative as Luther
should have kept silence about those experiences of which,
just at that time, i.e. at the beginning of his public struggle,
he must have been so full ?

Nor is the legend to be found in Luther's writings dating
from between 1520 and 1530. All the passages quoted above
date from a later period.

Had the tale it tells been based on history he would surely
have made capital out of it during this long spell of contro
versy with the monks and Papists. Thus, in his violent
" De votis monasticis " of 1521, he as yet has nothing to say
of his supposed so pious life, of his excessive penance, mis
guided holiness-by-works, and the despair he endured in the
convent, though, in the Preface, he alludes to his own life as
a monk. Nor, again, in his " De servo arbitrio " of 1525,
does he as yet put forward the actual legend. It is true that
here, when explaining his doctrine of Predestination, he
refers to the fears from which as a monk he had suffered
regarding his election, fear which arose from his doubts as to
the fate decreed for him by God from all eternity. As it is also
here that he for the first time airs his theory that his
doctrine of absolute predestination and his dogma of
justification were alone able to give peace,2 this would seem
to have been the place to give an account of his own life
in the monastery and its attendant circumstances. But the
legend was not as yet ready. We have merely a hint of
what is to come : The Catholic doctrine that heaven may be
won by works spells the end of all peace ; " this is proved
by the experience of all the holy-by-works, and this, to my
cost, I also learnt by the experience of many years."3 About
his heroic works of penance, his vigils, fastings, extra
ordinary piety, and the sudden and gratifying change, he
has not a word to say.

Heralds of the legend are certain statements met with
in a sermon of 1528 where he describes himself as having
been a " very pious monk," who was, however, wanting in
constancy and like a " shaking reed," not being firmly rooted

1 Above, p. 101 f.

2 Weim. ed., 18, p. 783 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 362. 5 Ib.

232 THE LUTHER LEGEND

in Christ j1 again at the end of his " Vom Abendmal
Bekentnis " he declares his " greatest sins " were his having
" been such a holy monk and having plagued God for more
than fifteen years with so many masses."2 In the latter
writing he at least admits that " many great saints had lived
in the monasteries " ;3 he even thinks that " it would indeed
be a fine thing if the monasteries and foundations were
retained, to the end that young folk might there be taught
God's Word, the Scriptures and how to live a Christian
life," in short as educational establishments for both boys
and girls. " But, to seek in them the road to salvation,
that is the devil's own doctrine and belief."4

Finally, in the sermons on John vi.-viii. which he began
in 1530 after his return from the Coburg to Wittenberg and
continued till 1532 we have the legend more or less complete :
He had been a monk and had kept the nightly watches
(i.e. had chanted the usual matins), had " fasted and prayed,
scourged his body and tormented it " ; he had been one of
the pious and earnest monks who took their life seriously,
" who, like me, were at some pains and examined and
plagued themselves, and wanted to attain to what Christ is
in order to be saved. But what did they gain thereby ? "5
At the same time he begins to enlarge in the most incredible
way on the beliefs and habits of the Papists with regard to
their own merits and the merits of Christ. All had held their
tongues concerning the Saviour, so he says, and he empha
sises his statement by adding : "I myself, I should have
blushed to say that Christ was the Saviour." Thus in a
sermon of Dec., 1530.6

In the period that follows, what he says of his piety, and
especially of his works of penance, grows more and more emphatic.
The argument at the back of his mind is this : "If even so
mortified, penitent, and holy a monk as he could find no peace in
Popery but only black despair, must not then all admit that he
was in the right in protesting against both the Church and
her vows ?

So strictly had he kept his Rule, that, if ever monk got to
heaven, it should have been he ; he had plagued himself to death

1 Weim. ed., 28, p. 48, June 10.

2 Weim. ed., 26, p. 508 ; Erl. ed., 30, p. 372.

3 Ib., p. 504 = 366. * Ib.

5 Weim. ed., 33, p. 574 f. ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 317.

6 Weim. ed., 32, p. 241. Cp. the similar passage quoted above,
p. 197, from Schlaginhaufen.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 233

with watching, prayer, study and other labour.1 This was the
time when he " sought to be a holy monk and to be reckoned
among the most pious."2 " If ever a monk was earnest then it
was I. ... I was at the utmost pains to keep the ordinances "
(of the Fathers).

He " had been one of the best "3 and was " wholly given over "
to "fasting, watching and prayer " ;4 "I nearly killed myself
with fasting, watching and cold . . . so mad and foolish was I."6
By fasting, sleeplessness, hard work and coarse clothing " my
body was dreadfully broken and worn out."6

In short, he had " sunk deeper into the quagmire [of mortifica
tion, obedience to the Church and monastic piety] than many an
other"; so much so that "it had been hard and bitter" to
him to cut himself adrift from the ordinances of the Pope ;
" God knows how hard I found it ! "7

As he himself gradually came to believe in his extra
ordinary " holiness-by-works " it may be that his thoughts
dwelt too exclusively to his earlier days as a monk, i.e. on
those passed at Erfurt, during which he certainly was more
zealous than in later years, though never such a fanatic as
he afterwards makes out. He may also have compared his
life as a monk with the small efforts after virtue he made
subsequent to his public apostasy, and the contrast may
have led him to make too much of his piety in the convent.
The contrast, indeed, often troubled him, and we find him
seeking for grounds to excuse his later lukewarmness in
prayer, so different from his earlier fervour.8 This also helps
us to explain the line of thought followed in the legend.

The true character of the legend becomes clearer when Luther
begins to exploit it in his polemics. He depicts himself as a sort of
"caricature of the monastic saint,"9 and then complains: This
damnable life could not but keep me ever in a state of fear, and
yet the Popish Church recommends and sanctions it ; the more
zealous I grew the further I withdrew from Christ — nay, brought
even my baptism into danger ! He had never been able to " find
comfort in it," nay, he had been compelled to " lose " it, to
" lend a hand in denying it." " This is the upshot and reward of
their doctrine of works."10 He even goes so far as to say that the

1 Erl. ed., 31, p. 273 in " Kleine Anwort auff H. Georgen nehestee
Buch." Given more in detail above, p. 195.

2 Weim. ed., 36, p. 554 ; Erl. ed., 51, p. 146.

3 Erl. ed., 202, 2, p. 420.

4 Comm. in Gal., Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 135 ; Irmischer, 1, p. 109.

5 Cp. Erl. ed. 31, p. 273.

6 "Opp. lat. exeg." 11, p. 123. 7 Erl. ed., 142, p. 343.
8 See above, vol. iii., p. 206 ; vol. iv., p. 213 f.

» Denifle, I2, p. 392. 10 Erl. ed., 192, p. 151 f.

234 THE LUTHER LEGEND

Papists " truly and indeed made nought of the baptism " of
Christ, for which reason " their doctrine is as baneful as that of
the Anabaptists " ; they " make of us Jews or Turks, as though
we had never been baptised."

Luther's persistent and obtrusive exploitation of his legend in
his controversies must not be lost to sight.

In his new-found zeal he not only as a rule passes too confi
dently from the I (I did so and so) to the we, or they, the better to
clap the blame attaching to himself on the monks in general, the
Pope and all the Papists, and then to conclude with the praise of
the new Evangel, but — and this reveals even more plainly the
origin of the invention, — he also follows the reverse order, speak
ing first of the New Evangel, then of the senseless martyrdom
endured by all the monks with their works, and, lastly, of his
own personal experiences, as though they had been necessarily
implied in his earlier premisses.

/ cruelly disciplined my body, he says, and goes on : " They
plagued and tormented themselves " ; for all that, " did they
find Christ ? Christ says : ' You shall die in your sins.' To this
they came." " The Pope, too, labours and seeks," to find what
Christ is ; " but never will he find it." All this leads to the
conclusion : " But now God has given His Grace, so that every
town and thorp has the Gospel."1

Above we heard him speak of the " quagmire " in which he was
sunk ; in the same connection he remarks : " We wore out the
body with fasting," etc., " and some even went crazy through it."
Then follows the inference : " And, at last, we lost our very souls."
For, to our " great and notable injury," we were made to feel " in
our anxious and troubled conscience " what it means " to try to
become pious by works and so to redeem ourselves from sin."
" We would gladly have had a cheerful conscience," but " it was
all of no use, and we naturally became more and more down
hearted about sin and death, so that no folk more unhappy are
to be found on earth than the priestlings, monks and nuns who
are wrapped up in their works." '* The more they do, the worse
things fare with them." But, since my doctrine has come into the
world, people have unlearnt their faintheartedness : " We run
to the Man Who is called Christ and say : Yes indeed, we must
take it from the Man without any merit whatsoever [on our part].
. . . He gives me freely that for which formerly I had to pay a
high price. He gives me, without any works or merit, that for
which formerly I had to stake body, strength and health."2

His supposed experiences as a monk are even made to do
service in his interpretation of Holy Scripture. In order to
understand the Scriptures, so he argues, deep inward experi
ence is called for. This he maintained when withstanding
the fanatics and their system of illuminism. Here he

1 Weira. ed., 33, p. 574 f. ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 317 f.
a Ib., 14 2, p. 342 ff.

THE LUTHER LEGEND 235

actually carries back the beginning of his own experience
to his convent days.

Already in the convent, so he declares, he had been com
pelled to bow to the idol of scepticism, because he, and all the
rest, knew nothing of any real faith in the Gospel. Far less
had he learned to pray Evangelically.

44 That Christ was a mystery, as St. Paul says, I looked upon
formerly, when I had to submit to being called a Doctor of Holy
Scripture, as a lying statement which I very well understood.
But now that, praise be to God, I have once more become a poor
student of Holy Writ, and that, the longer I live, the less I know
of it, I begin to see the marvel of such sayings, and find by experi
ence that they must necessarily remain mysteries. . . . Our
experience must bear witness to this, how amply, fully and
clearly we now possess this same Word of Christ."1 But, by the
Pope, it was " gruesomely murdered."3

Of the Saints of their Order the monks made their God, and of
their miracles they made their Gospel. " For know you this, that
I, Dr. Martin Luther, who am now living and write this, wras also
one of the crowd who were forced to believe and worship such
things [lying fables]. And had anyone been so bold as to doubt
one whit of it, or to raise a finger against it, he would have gone
to the stake or to some other evil end."3 That the latter wras an
exaggeration and the merest invention Luther was perfectly
well aware.

He also speaks untruthfully of the manner of prayer in the
convent. That he himself, when once he had fallen away from
his vocation, no longer prayed in a right spirit is very likely. He,
however, says : "I and all the others had not the right con
ception " (of prayer) ; it was no true " raising of the heart to
God because we fled from God ('fugiebamus Deum'). . . . We
only prayed ' conditionally ' and ' hypothetically,' not * cate
gorically.' ' This he said in 1537, admitting, however, with
regard to his own then family prayers, that they " were not so
fervent, because he was always forced to protest," i.e. to pour
out his anger against the Papists ; but, " in the congregation as
a whole, it comes from the heart and also serves its purpose."4

His wilful misrepresentation of the truth becomes more pro
nounced, when, in the exploitation of the legend, he seeks to
moderate the monks' practices of penance and mortification —
with the help of Terence and Aristotle.

In his Commentary on Genesis he complains : " The religious
life of the monk is so crooked that no exception (' epikia ') is
allowed, nor any moderation. Hence it is all wickedness and
unrighteousness. No hee.d is paid to the object of the Law, or to

1 Erl. ed., 63, p. 369 f., 1542. l Ib., p. 372.

3 Ib., 63, p. 374. Preface to his " Barfuser Eulenspiegel und Alco
ran," 1542.

* Matheeius, " Tischreden," p. 423.

236 THE LUTHER LEGEND

charity. . . . And yet what Terence says is still true : ' summum
ius esse summam iniuriam.' God does not wish the body to be
put to death, but that it be preserved for each one's calling and
for the service of our neighbour."1 " Learn, therefore, that peace
and charity must govern and direct all virtues and laws, as
Aristotle points out in the 5th book of his Ethics."2

Now, as a matter of fact, the Rule of the Hermits of St.
Augustine, with which he was thoroughly conversant, enjoined
consideration for the health of the individual.3 Brother Jordan
of Saxony, whose book was regarded as a standard work in the
Order, insists on care being taken of the body and only permits
penitential exercises " in moderation, with the superiors' approval
and without scandal to the brethren."*

His falsehoods are coupled with the outbursts of fury
against Catholicism into which he was so prone to fall when
attempting to describe the religious life he had forsaken.

Because we endured so much " pain and such martyrdom of
heart and conscience " no one must now seek to excuse the
Papacy ; on the contrary " we cannot blame and scold the Pope
enough " ; "that he should have so wasted the beautiful years of
my youth, and martyred and plagued my conscience is really
too bad." Popery is the " scarlet whore of Rome, the arch- whore,
the French whore, chock-full of blasphemies " ; "we must thank
our Lord God that He has revealed and discovered to us the Pope
as the dragon with his head, belly and tail."5 — The monks are a
" devilish crew," and monkery a " hellish cauldron " ; by day
and by night Christ is to all monks a " hangman and devil " ;
even the best and most learned, and St. Thomas of Aquin himself,
were all driven to despair and died of the ghostly poison.6 The
last words occur in the work he wrote in self-defence against Duke
George of Saxony (1533), who had twitted him with having
committed perjury in breaking his religious vows.

The thought of his own infidelity and his abuse of the graces of
the religious life was at times quite enough in itself to fill him
with fury. At any rate his whole picture of his earlier years is
steeped in polemics and the spirit of hate.

1 Weim. ed. 42, p. 504 ; "Opp. lat. exeg.," 3, p. 119.

2 /&., p. 505-200.

3 Cp. Denifle, I2, p. 368 and above, p. 202. 4 Ib.
6 Erl. ed., 45, p. 150 f. « Ib., 31, p. 279.

CHAPTER XXXVIII

END OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. THE CHURCH-UNSEEN AND
THE VISIBLE CHURCH-BY-LAW

1. From Religious Licence to Religious Constraint
Freedom as the Watchword

IN the early days of his public protest against the olden
Church, when Luther proclaimed the " universal priesthood
of all Christians," there could as yet be no question of any
compulsion in matters of doctrine, seeing that he expressly
conceded to the Christian congregations the right and power
to weigh all doctrines and "to set up or send adrift their
teachers and soul-herds." Every Christian, so he wrote,
who saw that a true teacher was lacking, was taught and
consecrated by God as a priest and was also bound, " under
pain of the loss of his soul and of incurring the Divine
displeasure, to teach the Word of God."1 It is not neces
sary after all we have already said2 to point out how im
possible it is to square such far-reaching concessions to
freedom with any idea of a positive body of doctrine. The
concessions may, however, have appealed to him particularly
because he himself was disposed to claim the utmost
freedom in respect of the dogmas of Catholicism. In those
days he was delighted to hear himself extolled as the
champion of freedom and the right of private judgment. The
interests of his party made such extravagant toleration
commendable, for any attempt at compulsion in doctrinal
matters, particularly at the beginning, would have lost him
many friends. He was also anxious that it should be said
of the new Church that it had spread of its own accord and
only owing to the power of the Word.

1 Cp. Weim. ed., 11, pp. 408-416 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 141-151.
8 Above, vol. v., p. 432 ff., and vol. iii., p. 9 ff.

237

238 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

In the sermon he preached at Erfurt in 1522 in support of the
change of religion in that town he had declared, that every
Christian, thanks to his kingly priesthood, was an "image of
Christ " and a " cleric," and '" able to judge of all things " ; to
his decision, based on the Word of Christ, " the Pope and all his
followers were subject " ; "he judges all things and is judged of

none.

Even two years later, in words proclaiming universal freedom
of belief, he had dissuaded the Saxon Princes from taking violent
measures against the fanatics : " Let the spirits fall upon each
other and clash ! " What cannot stand must in any case succumb
in the fight, and only those who fight rightly are assured of the
crown. " Just let them preach as they please ! "2

In 1525 he told Carlstadt and the Sacramentarians that each
one was free to follow his own conscience and to question the
Sacrament or refuse to receive it.3 This agrees with his state
ment of 1621 : " No one must be forced into the faith, but the
Gospel must be set before everyone and all be admonished to
believe, yet left free to obey or not. All the Sacraments must be
free to everyone."4

Luther registered a formal protest against the ancient
right of proceeding against heretics by means of temporal
penalties, particularly that of death. " To burn heretics
is against the will of the Holy Ghost," so he declared in
1518 and again in 1520.5 In 1520 he said : " Heretics must
be overcome by argument, not by fire.'*6

Most of what he was to say subsequently on the question
of public toleration refers to the bearing of the authorities,
especially towards the Anabaptists and Zwinglians. That
he himself, however, and every follower of his Evangel, were
bound to regard all opinions which diverged from his own
as godless heresies and brand them as such, that he had
never doubted from the moment he had discovered his new
Evangel. In accordance with this he proceeds to demand
more and more strongly of the " heretics " within the pale
unconditional acceptance of all the articles of faith.7

1 Cp. vol. ii., p. 346.

3 Weim. ed., 15, p. 218 f. ; Erl. ed., 53, p. 265, 1524.

3 Above, vol. hi., p. 392 f. 4 76., p. 10.

5 Weim. ed., 1, p. 624 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 2, p. 288. In the Resolu
tions, 1518.— Weim. ed., 7, pp. 139, 439 ; Erl. ed., 242, p. 139. " Opp.
lat. var.," 5, 221. In the " Assertio omnium articulorum." Cp.
proposition 33 condemned by Leo X, 1520, in the Bull " Exsurge
Domine." N. Paulus, in " Hist.-pol. Bl.," 140, 1907, p. 357 ff., and
" Protestantismus und Toleranz im 1C Jahrb.," 1911, p. 26 f.

• Weim. ed., 7, p. 139 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, p. 221.

7 Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 424 : " Hence there is no alternative, you
must either believe everything or nothing." and vol. v., p. 398, n. 3.

FREEDOM OF BELIEF 239

What were the authorities to do faced by teachings so
divergent ? In 1523, in a writing indeed intended mainly
for the Catholic rulers and opponents of his doctrine, Luther
is decidedly quite against any interference on the part of the
authorities : "To resist heretics, that is the bishops' duty
to whom this office is committed, not the princes' ; for
heresy can never be overborne by a strong hand. . . . Here
God's Word must fight."1 In April, 1525, in the midst of
the Peasant War, in his " Ermanunge," he enunciates, not
without some thought of his personal ends, this general
principle — " Yes, the authorities must not oppose what each
one chooses to believe and teach, whether it be Gospel or lie ;
it is enough that they hinder the preaching of feud and
lawlessness."2

Boehmer justly points out, that Luther's standpoint
and doctrine as a whole, essentially spelt not only " un
fettered freedom of teaching, but also entire freedom of
worship."

Meanwhile, however, Luther had already repeatedly urged
those in power, especially his own sovereign, to do their
supposed duty, and back up the new Evangel by their
authority and by forbidding Catholic worship, the Mass and
Catholic sermons.

In what follows we shall deal with Luther's behaviour
towards the Catholics, as distinguished from his attitude
towards sectarians within his own camp.

Intolerance Towards Catholics in Theory and Practice

We should be making a serious mistake were we to judge
of Luther's tolerance towards the olden religion from his
statements above on behalf of freedom. In Protestant
literature, even to the present day, such a one-sided view
has found a place, though it has long since been rejected by
clear-sighted historians of that faith. In the course of the
above narrative instances have been met with repeatedly
of Luther's intolerance in theory and practice with regard
to those who thought differently. Here we shall refer
concisely to various details already set on record and then
draw some new facts and utterances from the abundant
store bearing on the matter in hand.

1 Weim. ed., 11, p. 267 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 90.

2 Weim. ed., 18, p. 298 f. Erl. ed., 243, p. 276.

240 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

It was " his duty to oppose false teachers," Luther had written
to his Elector on May 8, 1522, of the Canons of Altenburg.1 In
the same way, with much storming, he had insisted that the
secular power should make an end of Catholic worship in the
collegiate church of Wittenberg.

From the standpoint of his principles it is rather remarkable
that, when the persecuted Canons of Wittenberg appealed to the
Elector's authority, Luther retorted : " What has the Elector to
do with us in such things ? " 2 and that, later, in one of his
sermons, he boldly replied to their objections in law : " What
care we about the Elector ? He commands only in worldly
matters."3 In making a stand against the celebration of Mass
at Wittenberg he had frankly declared : " It is the duty of the
authorities to resist and to punish such public blasphemy," just
as they are bound to punish the blasphemies uttered in the
streets by godless men. The Elector and his Councillors were
quite aware of the contradictions involved in Luther's teaching.
Hence, at the Prince's instance, the Court pointed out to him on
Nov. 24, 1524, that " he himself preached that the Word should
be left to fight its own way, and that this it would do in its own
good time, so God willed " ; he ought himself to be the first " to
practise what he taught and preached."4 In spite of this Luther,
soon after, was successful in violently making a clean sweep of
the Catholic Mass at Wittenberg.5

The theory that the Evangelical ruler must use force to root out
Catholic worship was proclaimed by the Court chaplain Spalatin,
a man " standing altogether under Luther's influence, and who,
as a rule, merely voiced his views " ;8 this he did in a letter of
May 1, 1525, where he cites the prescriptions of the Mosaic law
(Deut. vii.). According to this the secular authorities are bound
" by the Law of God to abrogate idolatrous and blasphemous
worship " ; any further toleration on the part of the Elector of
" idolatry " in his lands would be a great sin ; on the other hand
it would be a " great, consoling and Christian work " were he

1 Erl. ed., 53, p. 134 (" Brief wechsel," 3, p. 356). He adds that he
had notified the Altenburgers that " the rights, authority, revenues and
power of the Canons were at an end because they were publicly
opposed to the Evangel."

1 To the Wittenberg Canons, July 11, 1523, Erl. ed., 53, p. 178 f.
(" Briefe," 4, p. 176).

3 In a sermon of Aug. 2, 1523, Weim. ed., 12, p. 649; Erl. ed., 17s,
p. 57. Paulus, " Protestantismus und Toleranz," p. 5.

* Burkhardt, " Luthers Brief wechsel," p. 76. According to Burk-
hardt, Hier. Sehurf and the licentiate Pauli were entrusted with the
mission to Luther ; but " Luther continued to storm, and the council
took steps to forbid the Mass and even intercourse with others. So far
had Luther carried matters ! " — Bezold, " Gesch. der deutschen Ref.,"
Berlin, 1890, p. 563, observes of Luther's attitude at that time : " It
is of interest to note his transition from the principles of freedom of
conscience and the independence of the Church to religious coercion
and State assistance."

* Cp. above, vol. ii., p. 327 ff. ; vol. iv., p. 510.

* Cp. N. Paulus, " Protestantismus und Toleranz," p. 10.

FREEDOM OF BELIEF 241

" to put the Christian bit in the mouth of all the clergy." " Ah,
that would indeed be a noble work ! "x To the successor of the
then Elector who died shortly after this, Spalatin wrote on Oct. 1,
1525 : " Dr. Martin also says, that Your Electoral Highness ought
in no way to suffer anyone to proceed any longer with the un
christian ceremonies, or to set them up again" ;2 on Jan. 10,

1526, he, together with two Altenburg preachers, backed up the
petition to the Elector for the extirpation of " idolatry " by
pointing to the example of the pious kings of the Jews.8 At
Altenburg and elsewhere such exhortations were crowned all too
speedily with success.

" A secular ruler," Luther himself wrote to the Elector
Johann on Feb. 9, 1526, " must not permit his underlings to
be led into strife and discord by contumacious preachers,
for this may issue in uproar and sedition, but in each
locality there must be but one kind of preaching."4

On such grounds, however, Protestantism itself might
just as well have been denied a hearing, seeing that it had
come to disturb the peace, the " one kind of preaching "
and the one faith. The princes, however, spurred on by
their theologians, seized only too eagerly on this principle,
using it in favour of the innovations. The Elector Johann
declared as early as Feb. 31, 1526, that he had " graciously
taken note of the Memorandum" and would, "for the
future, conduct himself in such matters as beseemed a
Christian " ;5 and he kept his word.

The intolerance shown to Catholics and their systematic
oppression in Saxony stands in blatant contrast with the
claim made, that Luther by his preaching had won religious
freedom for the German lands. Banishment was the
punishment incurred by those who chose to remain stead
fast in their attachment to the Catholic faith. Thus, in

1527, it was expressly laid down in the regulations for the
Saxon Visitation, that : " Whoever is suspected in the
matter of the Sacraments, or of any other error in the
faith" is to " be summoned and questioned, and, if neces-

1 Reprinted in Kolde's, " Friedrich der Weise," 1881, p. 68 ff.

2 /&., p. 72.

3 The Memo, of the three preachers in "Mitteil. der geschichts-
forsch. Gesellschaft des Osterlandes," 6, 1866, p. 513 ff.; cp. Enders,
" Luthers Brief wechsel," 5, p. 318, n. 1. On Altenburg, see above,
vol. ii., p. 314 ff.

4 Erl. ed., 53, p. 367 (" Brief wechsel," 5, p. 318).

c In Burkhardt, " Luthers Brief wechsel," p. 102, and Enders,
" Briefwechsel," 5, p. 320,

242 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

sary, witnesses against him are also to be called." " Such
an ' inquisition ' is also to be instituted by the Visitors in
the case of the laity."1 If they refuse to abjure their
" errors" they are to be given a certain time to sell their
possessions and to quit the land, with a " warning of the
severe penalties ' ' with which any ecclesiastic or layman
will be visited who is again found in the country.2 Bearing
in mind the difficulty emigration presented at that time,
particularly in the case of the people on the land, one can
appreciate the injustice of the measure.

Luther and his followers frequently enough appealed to theo
logical grounds in support of such measures, above all to the Old
Testament enactments against blasphemers and contemners of
religion. One-sidedly they simply applied to their own day and
to their own controversial purposes, the exceptional regulations
of the Mosaic dispensation which sought to preserve the religion
of the chosen people in the midst of a heathen world. In this
connection Luther appeals to Moses without the slightest hesita
tion though, as a rule, armed with the New Testament, he is
ready enough to assail the Mosaic Law ; he also set up the pious
" Kings of Juda and Israel " as patterns. Wenceslaus Link did
much the same when he summoned the Altenburg Town-Council
to make a stand against Catholicism and abrogate the " lies and
fond inventions of the idolaters " ;3 nor did Spalatin hesitate to
point out to the Saxon Elector the commendation the pious
rulers of the Jews had earned from God for their bloody repression
of idolatry. 4

Another ground for compulsion, to which Spalatin gives
expression in a letter to the Elector, was, that : They must not
forget how " many a poor man would more readily come to the
Evangel, were that wretched system [of Popery and its idolatry]
no longer in existence." In other words, were Catholic worship
rooted out, Catholics would more easily be won over to the
Evangel. 5 It was on such a standpoint as this that the Augsburg
declaration of 1530 made by the theologians of the Saxon
Electorate was based. The Emperor had demanded from the
Protesting Princes toleration of the Catholic worship for those of
their subjects who chose to remain Catholic. The theologians
thereupon expressed themselves against such an arrangement,
and urged that, in this case, Lutheran proselytism would be

1 Text in Sehling, " Die evang. Kirchenordnungen des 16 Jahrh.,"
Abt. 1, 1. Halfte, 1902, p. 142 ff. See above, vol. v., p. 592 f.

2 76. These stern measures were aimed at the followers of Carlstadt
and Zwingli, but were also applied to the Catholics.

3 The writing, most probably by Link (spring, 1524), is in the
" Mitteilungen der geschichtsforsch. GeselLschaft des Osterlandes," G,
p. 119 ff.

4 In the Mem. referred to above, p. 241, n. 3.

5 Paulns, ib.f p. 12.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 243

hampered : " Were it to be said that the rulers were not to
hinder it, though the preachers were to preach against it, it is
clear of what [small] good would be all the teaching and preaching
of the ministers."1

In the Duchy of Saxony, as everybody knows, the intro
duction of Lutheranism was opposed by Duke George. His
severity he justified by appealing to the thousand-year-old
law of the one great world-wide Church, the Church of the
Apostles, of the Fathers and martyrs and (Ecumenical
Councils and great missioners of all ages, a law, moreover,
sanctioned by the Empire. When, in 1533, a number of
Lutherans were banished from the Duchy2 Luther seized
upon this as a pretext for controversy. Roundly scolding the
" Ducal tyrant," he declared this sentence of banishment
to be " a devilish and criminal thing." The authority of the
sovereign, so he now wrote, again contradicting himself,
44 only extends over life and property in secular matters."3
But, after George's death in 1539 and the accession of his
brother Henry, Luther's tone changed, for Henry held
Lutheran views. In a letter he sent about that time to the
Elector Johann Frederick, he is angry because more than
500 of the Saxon clergy, all of them " venomous Papists,"
had not yet been driven out. " For the sake of the poor
souls, many thousands of whom live neglected under such
parsons," he urges the Elector to do his best " to help and
promote a Visitation."4 He demands that Duke Henry, as
the sovereign and protector of the bishopric of Meissen,
should ' ' put a damper on the blasphemous idolatry ' ' as
best he could, for ' ' the Princes who are able to do so should
at once abolish Baal and all idolatry."5 He also wished that
the bishop of Meissen, though a Prince of the Empire, should
" at once bow his head to the Evangel" ; in this matter
there is no need for ' ' much disputing.' '

It was but natural that such intolerance often led to
scenes of brutality ; such was the case in the cathedral of
Meissen, where the splendid tomb of Benno, the saintly

1 " Corp. ref.," 2, p. 307.

2 Cp. their petition to George drafted by Luther, " Brief wechsel"
9, p. 285.

3 Letter of the first half of July. 1533, " Werke," Erl. ed., 31,
p. 243ft1. ("Brief wechsel," 9, p. 318).

4 Sep. 19, " Brief wechsel," 12, p. 246.

4 Beginning of July, 1639, in the Memorandum on the need of
abolishing the Mass at Meissen. Ib., p. 189. Paulus. t6., p. 15.

244 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

bishop of Meissen, was hewn in pieces, and the statue of the
patron, which was an object of veneration to all the people,
was set up headless at the church door as a laughing-stock
for the Lutherans.1

Hand in hand with such legal coercion, which he both
approved and furthered, went Luther's declaration — which,
though seeming to promote freedom, really constituted a
new encroachment on the rights of conscience — viz. that :
No one was to be forced to believe in his heart, but that
4 ' the people were to be driven to the sermons for the sake
of the Ten Commandments, so that they might at least learn
the outward works of obedience."2 " It would be grand,"
so he told Margrave George of Brandenburg, " if your
Serene Highness on the strength of your secular authority
enjoined on both parsons and parishioners under pain of
penalties the teaching and learning of the Catechism, in
order, that, as they are Christians and wish to be called
such, they may, please God, be compelled to learn and to
know what a Christian ought to know, whether he believes
it or not."3 At his instance attendance at the sermons was
imposed on all people in the Saxon Electorate under pain of
penalty, whatever they might think of the preaching.4

God Himself has abrogated " all authority and power where it
is opposed to the Evangel,"5 so, as early as 1522, ran one of the
principles he used for the violent suppression of Catholic worship.
Of the Catholic foundations he says in the same year : "If the
preacher does not make men pious (i.e. does not preach according
to Luther's doctrine), the goods are no longer his."6 Violent
interference with the Mass was, according to him, no revolt when
it came from the established authorities.7 " It is the duty of the
sovereign, as ruler and brother Christian, to drive away the
wolves,"8 and those who do not preach the Evangel are " wolves ";
it is "an urgent duty to drive away the wolf from the sheep-
fold."9 The Pope himself, however, deserves the worst fate, for
he is the "werwolf who devours everything. Just as all seek to

1 Paulus, ib.

2 To Jos. Levin Metzsch of Mila, Aug. 26, 1529, " Werke," Erl. ed.,
54, p. 97 (" Brief wechsel," 7, p. 149).

3 On Sep. 14, 1531, " Werke," Erl. ed., 54, p. 255 (" Brief wechsel,"
9, p. 103).

4 Sehling, " Kirchenordmmgen," 1, 1, pp. 175, 176, 187, 195.
Cp. Luther to Beier of Zwickau, 1533, undated, " Briefwechsel," 9,
p. 365.

6 Above, vol. ii., p. 311, and present vol., p. 240, n. 1.
6 Ib., vol. ii., p. 318. 7 Ib., p. 381.

8 /6., p. 319. » Jb.f p. 318.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 245

kill the werwolf, and very rightly, so is it a duty to suppress the
Pope by force."1

" Not only the spiritual but also the secular power must yield
to the Evangel, whether cheerfully or otherwise."2

Hence it follows that the salvation of his soul requires of a
Christian prince the prohibition of the Popish worship.3 If it is
his duty to resist the Turk far more must he oppose the Pope :
" What harm does the Turk do ? " It is clear that, " as regards
both body and soul the government of the Pope is ten times worse
than that of the Turk."4

" Whoever wishes to live amongst the burghers must keep the
laws of the borough and not dishonour or abuse them, else he
must pack and go." The authorities are not to " allow them
selves and their people to be forced into idolatry and falsehood."6
Hence " let the authorities step in and try the case and whichever
party does not agree with Scripture, let him be ordered to hold
his tongue."6 The Prince must behave like David, and hold
that, as regards " God and the service of His Sovereignty every
thing must be equal and made to intermingle, whether it be
termed spiritual or secular," being " kneaded together into one
cake."7 How many false teachers had David, his model, not been
forced " to expel or in other ways stop their mouths."8

It is not, however, enough to impose silence on them. They
must — so Luther began to teach about 1530 — be treated as
public blasphemers and punished accordingly :9 They " must
not be suffered but must be banished as open blasphemers."
Thus must we act with those who " teach that Christ did not die
for our sins but that each one must atone for them on his own ;
for this also is a public blasphemy against the Gospel."10 Hun
dreds of times does he charge the Catholics with thus robbing
the saving death of Christ of all significance by their doctrine of
good works.

These intolerant principles, which could not but lead to
persecution, were made even worse by the abuse and
invective which Luther publicly showered on the representa
tives of Catholicism. He taught the mob to call them
" blasphemous ministers of the Babylonian whore," knaves,
bloodhounds, hypocrites and murderers. In the Articles
of Schmalkaldcn which found a place among the Symbolic
Books, he introduces the Pope as the ' ' dragon ' ' who leads
astray the whole world, as the 4 ' real Antichrist ' ' and as the
"devil himself" whom it was impossible to " worship as

1 Above, vol. iv., p. 298. 2 Above, vol. iii., p. 45.

3 Ib., p. 359. * 16., p. 79 f .

5 Above, vol. v., p. 367. 6 /&., p. 578.

7 Ib., p. 580. » Ib., p. 579.

• Paulus, ib., p. 32.
10 " Werke," Erl. eel., 39, p. 250 f. Paulus, ib., p. 35.

•246 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

Master or as God," for which reason he would not suffer the
Pope as " Head or Lord " ; they must say to him : " May
God rebuke thce, Satan!" (Zach. iii. 2).1 Among his
monstrous caricatures of the Pope he also included one
depicting the " well-deserved reward of the Most Satanic
Pope and his Cardinals," as the inscription runs below.
Here the Pope is seen on the gallows with three Cardinals ;
their tongues which have been torn out by the root are
nailed to the gibbet and devils arc scurrying off with their
souls. The picture is embellished with the following
doggerel :

" Did Pope and Card'nal hero below
Their due reward receive,
Then would their tongues to gibbets cleave,
As our draughtsman's lines do show."2

Threats oj Bloody Reprisals against Papists, Priestlings
and Monks

At the right moment let us fall upon the Turks " and the
priests and smite them dead ! " Only then shall we be
successful against the Turks ! So runs one of Luther's
sayings in the Table-Talk. 3

" Oh, that our Right Reverend Cardinals, Popes and
Roman Legates had more kings of England to put them to
death!"4 This he wrote in 1535, after the execution of
Thomas More and John Fisher by Henry VIII.

As early as 1520 he had exclaimed against Prierias : If
thieves are punished by the rope, murderers by the sword
and heretics by fire, why not proceed against " these
noxious teachers of destruction — these Cardinals, Popes and
the whole swarm of the Roman Sodom, who are ever
ceaselessly destroying the Church of God — with every kind
of weapon, and wash our hands in their blood ? " 5

Towards the end of his life, in 1545, he showed that he was still
faithful to such views in spite of all the changes which had come
over some of his other leading ideas. Let " the Pope, the
Cardinals and the whole scoundrelly train of his idolatrous, Popish

1 Above, vol. iii., p. 431.

2 Denifle, "Luther und Luthertum,"1 p. 801. Cp. above, vol. v.,
p. 384, and elsewhere.

3 Above, vol. ii., p. 324. * Above, vol. v., p. 110.
* Vol. ii., p. 13.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 247

Holiness be seized," so he declares in " Das Bapstum vom Toui'fel
gestifft," and put to the death they deserve, either on the gallows
to which their tongues may be nailed, or by drowning the
"blasphemous knaves " in the Sea at Ostia.1

" It pleases me," he wrote on Dec. 2, 1536, to King Christian
of Denmark, " that Your Majesty has extirpated the bishops who
never cease to persecute God's Word and to worry the secular
power ; I shall do my best to explain and vindicate your action." a
At Wittenberg, as we see from a letter of a Wittenberg theologian,
the report was current that the Danish king had " struck off the
heads of six bishops."3 This false account " seems to have been
credited by Luther."* If this be so, then it seems that he was
perfectly ready to justify so cruel a deed. The truth is, that,
King Christian, after having had the bishops arrested (Aug. 20,
1536), released them as soon as they had promised to resign their
bishoprics.

In the summer of 1540 Luther had it that the Pope and the
monks were to blame for the many fires in Northern and Central
Germany. " If this turns out true, then there will be nothing left
for us but to take up arms in common against all the monks and
shavelings ; I too shall join in, for it is right to slay the miscreants
like mad dogs."5 The worst of the lot, according to him, were
the Franciscans. " If I had all the Franciscan friars in one
house," he said a few days later, " I would set fire to it, for, in the
monks the good seed is gone, and only the chaff is left. To the
fire with them ! "•

No one, in the least familiar with Luther's writings, will
be so foolish as to believe that it was really his intention
to kill the Catholic clergy and monks. His bloodthirsty
demands were but the violent outbursts of his own deep
inward intolerance. They were called forth occasionally by
other alleged misdeeds of Popcr}r, of its advocates and
friends, for instance, by the burdensome taxes imposed by
the Church, by her use of excommunication, and by the
action taken against the Lutherans, particularly by the
resolutions of the Diets for the suppression of Protestantism.
Nor must we forget that the religious dissensions grew into
a sort of permanent warfare and that war tends to produce
effusions such as would be unthinkable in times of peace ;
nor was the warlike feeling a monopoly of the Lutheran
side.

Above, vol. v., p. 383.

" Werke," Erl. ed., 55, p. 156 (" Brief wechsel," 11, p. 136).
Liborius Magdeburger (Dec. 2, 1536) to the Town Clerk of Zwickau
Johann Roth. Enders, " Luthers Brief wechsel," ib., p. 136, n. 3.
Enders, ib. 6 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 171.

76., p. 180.

'248 THE LUTHERAN CHU&CH

But who was it who was responsible for having provoked
the war ?

Occasional counsels to patience and endurance, to self-
restraint and consideration were indeed given by Luther
from time to time1 (they have been diligently collected by
his modern supporters), but, generally speaking, they are
drowned in the din of his controversial invective.

What was to be expected when the people, who were
already profoundly excited by the social conditions, were
told : " Better were it that all bishops were put to death,
and all foundations and convents rooted out than that one
soul should be seduced" by Popish error.2 " What better
do they deserve than to be stamped out by a great revolt ? " 3
If his reforms were rejected then it was to be wished that
monasteries and foundations " were all reduced to one great
heap of ashes."4 "A grand destruction of all the
monasteries, etc., would be the best reformation ! "5 What
wonder " were the Princes, the nobles and the laity to hit
Pope, bishop, priest and monk on the head and drive them
out of the land ? "6 The " Rhine would hardly suffice to
drown "the many " bull-mongers," Cardinals and "knaves."7

The Death- Penalty Jor Sectarians within the New Fold

In the above we have dealt with Luther's intolerance in
theory and practice towards the Catholic Church. It
remains for us to look at his attitude towards the sects
within his own camp.

The question, how far they were to be tolerated, or
whether it would be better forcibly to suppress them was
first brought home to Luther by the Anabaptist movement
under Thomas Miinzer. Sure of the upper hand, Luther
decided, as we know, at the end of July, 1524, to advise the
Saxon Princes to leave the Anabaptists in peace so far as
their doctrines were concerned. " Let them preach as they
please," was his advice, for " there ' must needs be heresies ' '
(1 Cor. xi. 19). 8 He explained to Lazarus Spengler of
Nuremberg on Feb. 4, 1525, that the Anabaptists were
not to be punished, particularly with "bodily penalties,"

1 Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 44 ff. 2 Vol. ii., p. 101. 3 Ib.
4 Vol. iii., p. 46. 5 Ib. 6 Ib. 7 /&., p. 126.

8 Weito. ed., 15, p. 218 f. ; Erl. ed., 53, p. 255 f.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 249

because, in his opinion, they were no real blasphemers, but
merely " like the Turks or straying Christians."1 In May
of the same year he showed himself disposed to universal
toleration. ' 4 The authorities are not to hinder anyone
from teaching and believing what he pleases " ; 2 a principle
which, as we have shown above (p. 239), he himself had
contravened in practice as early as 1522, and was finally
to set aside altogether.

As for the Anabaptists, in 1527 Luther was not yet in
favour of the "putting to death" and bloody "rooting
out" of these sectarians. In 1528 he even taught in his
exposition of the Parable of the Good Seed and the Tares
that " we are not to fight the fanatics with the sword."3
What made him hesitate to advise the putting to death of
these heretics was, as he told his friend Wenceslaus Link
of Nuremberg in 1528, the apprehension that this might
lead to abuses ; he feared lest, in the time to come, we
might turn the sword against the best " among us."4 But
without a doubt he approved of the Edict of the Elector
Johann (Jan. 17, 1528) which proscribed the writings of the
Anabaptists, Sacramentarians and fanatics throughout the
land — if indeed the Edict itself may not be traced directly
to Luther, as Zwingli suspected.5 In 1528 it also seemed
to him right to decree the penalty of banishment in the case
of the Anabaptists.6

When, however, the danger had become more evident,
which the Anabaptist heresy spelt both to the land-frith
and the foundations of Christianity, not to speak of the
Lutheran teaching, Luther adopted a sterner line of
action.

His views altered in 1530. After a Mandate had been
issued in the Saxon Electorate against the ' 4 secret preachers
and conventicles, Anabaptists and other baneful novel
teaching," six Anabaptists were executed early in the year
at Reinhardsbrunn in the duchy of Saxe-Gotha. The

1 " Brief wechsel," 5, p. 117.

2 Weim. ed., 18, p. 299 ; Erl. ed., 242, p. 276. Paulus, ib., p. 28 f.

3 Erl. ed., 42, p. 290 f. Paulus, ib., p. 30 f.

4 Letter of July 14, 1528, " Briefwechsel," 6, p. 299 : " In hac
causa ferret me exempli sequela, quam in papistis et ante Christum in
ludceis videmus. . . . Idem sequuturum esse timeo et apud nostros."
If on the other hand they erred on the side of severity in the matter of
banishment, the evil was not so great. Paulus, p. 31.

6 Paulus, ib., p. 29. « 76., p. 31.

250 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

discussion which took place on this event gave Melanchthon
occasion to declare in Feb., 1530, that, " even though the
Anabaptists do not advocate anything seditious or openly
blasphemous" it was, "in his opinion, the duty of the
authorities to put them to death."1 In the spring of 1530,
with the Anabaptists in his mind, Luther, in his com
mentary on Ps. Jxxxii. dealt with the question whether the
authorities " ought to forbid strange teachings or heresies
and punish them, seeing that no one should or can force
men into the Faith."2

His detailed reply to the question which it was then impossible
any longer to blink, centres round the distinction he makes of
two kinds of heretics, viz. those who were seditious, and those
who merely " teach the opposite of some clear article of faith."
Of the latter, i.e. the non-revolutionary, he says expressly :
" These also must not be allowed but must be punished like
public blasphemers." Of those, who, though holding no office,
force themselves in as preachers, and thus imperil the faith and
lead to risings, he writes, that their oath of allegiance obliged the
burghers not to listen to them but rather to report them either to
their parson or to the authorities. If such a one will not desist
" then let the authorities hand over knaves of that ilk to their
proper master, to wit Master Hans " (i.e. the hangman).3 As for
those Anabaptists who preached open revolt, they had, in his
opinion, by that very fact incurred the penalties of the law. At
any rate it was not merely on account of their sedition that
Luther wished to see the Anabaptists punished.

Another statement of his has come down to us from an outside
source. Luther's friend, Lazarus Spengler of Nuremberg, had a
little before this, on March 17, 1530, sought to secure from
Luther, through Veit Dietrich, some directions on how to deal with
heretics. Dietrich verbally obtained from his master the desired
instructions and promptly sent them to Spengler by letter. 4 They
were to the effect that not merely the heretics who offend against
public order were to be punished, but also those who merely do
harm to religion, such as the Sacramentarians (Zwinglians) and
Papists ; as they are to be looked upon as blasphemers, they
cannot be suffered. It is noteworthy, that, in Luther's corre
spondence in 1530, in a letter from the Coburg to Justus Jonas,
we find him congratulating himself 011 the report (a false one) of
the execution of a certain heretic. On receiving the announce
ment that Johannes Campanus, the anti-Trinitarian, had suffered

1 " Corp. ref.," 2, p. 17 sq. Paulus, »"&., p. 32.

* Erl. ed., 39, p. 224 ff.

3 76., pp. 250, 252, 254. The Commentary was printed in the spring
of 1530.

* U. Haussdorff, " Leben Spenglers," Nuremberg, 1741, p. 190 ff.
Paulus, ib., p. 34.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 251

death as a heretic at Liege, Luther wrote : "I learnt this with
joy " (" Iwlus audivi ").1

Early in October, 1531, agreeably with the Saxon Elector's
Mandate, a number of persons suspected of holding Anabaptist
views were taken to Eisenach for punishment and were there put
to the torture ; it was now judged advisable to obtain a fresh
memorandum from the Wittenberg theologians.

Accordingly, at the end of 1530, Melanchthou at the
instance of the Electoral Court once more took the matter
in hand. He drafted a memorandum on the duty of the
secular authorities in the matter of religious differences,
with particular reference to the Anabaptists. In it he set
forth at length the grounds for a regular system of coercion
by the sword. Luther, too, set his name to the document
with the words : " It pleases me, Martin Luther." In it the
sectarians were reprobated as blasphemers because they
reject " the public preaching oflice [the ministry] and teach
that men can become holy without any preaching and
ecclesiastical worship." They ought to be visited with death
by the public authorities whose duty it is to " befriend and
uphold ecclesiastical order " ; and in like manner should
their adherents and those whom they have led astray be
dealt with, who insist, " that our baptism and preaching is
not Christian and therefore that ours is not the Church of
Christ."2 Nevertheless, we can see from the words Luther
adds after his signature that the decision, or at least its
severity, aroused some misgivings in him. He says :
4 ' Though it may appear cruel to punish them by the sword,
yet it is even more cruel of them to condemn the preaching
office and not to teach any certain doctrine, to persecute the
true doctrine, and, over and above all this, to seek to destroy
the kingdoms of this world."

It is quite true that Luther and Melanchthon had an eye
on the seditious character of these sects, yet present-day
Protestant theologians are not justified when they try to
explain and excuse their severity on this ground. On the
contrary, as we have already pointed out, the texts plainly
show that they were chiefly concerned with the punishment
of the sectarians' offences against the faith. This was made
the principal point, as we see in Melanchthon' s memorandum

1 Aug. 3, 1530, " Brief wechsel," 8, p. 163.

1 " Corp. ref.," 4, pp. 737-740. Cp. Paulus, ib., p, 41 f.

252 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

just referred to. He says, for instance : " Though many
Anabaptists do not openly teach any seditious doctrines,"
yet " it was both sedition and blasphemy for them to
condemn the public ministry." It was therefore the duty
of the authorities, above all ' ' on account of the second com
mandment of the Decalogue, to uphold the public ministry ' '
and to take steps against them. If, to boot, they also taught
seditious doctrines then it was " all the easier to judge
them," as we read in another memorandum of the Witten
berg theologians (1536) of which Melanchthon was also the
draughtsman.1

To N. Paulus belongs the credit of having thrown light
on the true state of affairs, for, even previous to the publica
tion of his " Protestantismus und Toleranz im 16 Jahr-
hundert " (1911) he had discussed Luther's attitude both in
his shorter writing, ' ' Luther und die Gewissensf reiheit ' '
(1905) and in various articles in reviews. After him, the
Protestant historian P. Wappler took up the same views,
particularly in his ' ' Die Stellung Kursachsens ... zur
Tauferbewegung " (1910). In the " Neues Archiv fur
sachsische Geschichte " (1911) O. A. Hecker also quite
agrees in rejecting the opinion of certain recent Protestant
theologians, who, as he says, " all try to exonerate Luther
from any hand in the executions for heresy, though they can
only do so by dint of forced interpretations, as Paulus pointed
out."2

Between 1530 and 1532 Luther's intolerance comes yet more
to the fore ; it was indeed his way, when once he had made any
view his own, to urge it in the strongest terms. Thus, at the end
of 1531, he again alludes to Master Hans : " Those who force
themselves in without any office or commission are not worthy
of being called false prophets but are vagrants and knaves, who
ought to be handed over to the tender mercies of Master Hans."3
" It is not allowed that each one should proceed according to his
own ideas and set up his own doctrine and fancy himself a sage,
and dictate to, and find fault with, others." " This I call judging
of doctrine, which is one of the greatest and most scatheful vices

1 Printed at Wittenberg in 1536 and signed by Luther, Bugenhagen,
Cruciger and Melanchthon on June 5. Cp. " Brief wechsel," 10, p. 347 ;
" Corp. ref.," 3, p. 195 aqq.

* Vol. 32, 1911, p. 155, in a review of Wappler's work. For further
details from Wappler and from the valuable studies of W. Kohler see
below, p. 266 ff.

3 Weim. ed., 32, p. 507 ; Erl. ed., 43, p. 313.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 253

on earth, whence indeed all the fanatics have sprung." The two
last sentences occur in his sermons on St. Matthew's Gospel. l

Still more striking is the demand he makes of Duke Albert of
Prussia concerning the Zwinglians ; here his zeal against these
heretics seems to blind him, for his arguments recoil against
himself, though apparently he does not notice it. Every Prince,
he says in a psychologically remarkable passage, who does not
wish " most gruesomely to burden his conscience " must cast out
the Zwinglians from his land, because, by their denial of the
presence of Christ in the Supper, they set up a doctrine " contrary
to the traditional belief held everywhere and to the unanimous
testimony of all."

But how many doctrines had not Luther himself set up
contrary to the ancient faith and to the unanimous testimony of
all ? It was, so he goes on, " both dangerous and terrible " to
" believe anything contrary to the unanimous testimony, belief
and teaching of the whole of the Holy Christian Church, which,
from the beginning and for more than 1500 years, had been
universally received throughout the world." This was tanta
mount to " not believing in the Christian Church at all, and not
merely to condemn the whole of the Holy Christian Church as a
damned heretic, but also Christ Himself together with all the
Apostles and Prophets, who had formulated the Article which we
now recite, ' I believe one Holy Christian Church,' and borne
such powerful witness to it."2

" The worldly authorities bear the sword," so Luther said
in his Home-Postils, " with orders to prevent all scandal, so
that it may not intrude and do harm. But the most
dangerous and horrible scandal is where false doctrine and
worship finds its way in. ... For this reason the Christian
authorities must be on the look-out for such scandal. . . .
They must resist it stoutly and realise that nothing else will
do save they make use of the sword and of the full extent
of their power in order to preserve the doctrine pure and
the worship clean and undefiled."

" Then everything will go well."3

We have also his exposition of Ps. ci. (1534), where there
occurs the eulogy of David, the " scourge of heretics."4

How he was in the habit of dealing with the Sacra-
mentarians at a later date the following instance may serve
to show, which at the same time reveals his coarseness and
his reliance on the secular authorities. To Luther's

1 Ib., p. 475 = 264 f. Paulus, ib., p. 45.

2 Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 552 f. ; Erl. ed., 54, p. 288 f., Letter of Feb.
or the beginning of March, 1532 (" Briefweohsel," 9, p. 157).

» Erl. ed., I3, p. 196 f. (c. 1533).
« Ib., 39, pp. 318 320.

254 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

doctrine that Christ was bodily present, not only in the
Host, but throughout the world, the Sacramentarians had
rejoined : Good, Lhcn we shall partake of Him everywhere,
in " spoon, plate and beer-can ! ?>1 To this Luther's reply
ran : Sec " what graceless swine we abandoned Germans
for the most part are, lacking both manners and reason, who,
when we hear of God, esteem it a fairy tale. . . . All seek to
do their business into it and to wipe their back parts on it.
The temporal authorities ought to punish such blasphemers.
. . . God knows I write of such high things most unwillingly
because they must needs be set before such dogs and swine.
. . . Hearken you, you pig, dog, or fanatic, or whatever
brainless donkey you may be : Though Christ's body is
everywhere, yet you will not be able to lay hold of it so
easily. . . . Begone to your pigsty and wallow in your own
muck ! . . . there is a distinction between His Presence and
your laying hold of Him ; He is free and nowhere bound,"
etc. — Luther himself was, however, very far from making
clear what the distinction was. After much else not to the
point he concludes : " Oh, how few there are, even among
the highly learned, who have ever meditated so profoundly
on this article concerning Christ ! ' ' 2

The treatment of the sectarians in the Saxon Electorate
was in keeping with the theories and counsels of Luther and
his theologians.

Relentless measures were taken against them on account
of their deviation from the faith even when no charge of
sedition was forthcoming. On Jan. 15, 1532, the Elector
Johann admitted the following as his guiding principle for
interfering : " It is the duty of the authorities to punish
such teachers and seducers, with God and with a good con
science. . . . For were heretics and contemners of the
Word of God not punished we should be acting against
the prescribed laws which we are in every way bound to
observe."3

1 Weim. ed., 18, p. 148 ; Erl. ed., 30, p. 68.

2 16., p. 148ff. = 68f.

1 See Wappler, " Die Stellung Kursachsens und des Landgrafen
Philipp von Hessen zur Tauferbewegung," 1910 (" RG1. Studien und
Texte," ed. J. Graving), p. 156,

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 255

As early as 1527 twelve men and one woman, who had received
baptism at each other's hands, were beheaded.1 Similar execu
tions took place in 1530, 153:2 and 1538.-

In 1539 the members of the \Vittenberg High Court wrote
concerning three, Anabaptists then in prison at Eisenach : "If
they do not recant or allow themselves to be reduced to obedience,
it will be right and proper that they be put to death by the
sword, on account of such blasphemy and because they have
allowed themselves to be baptised elsewhere." Of any seditious
teaching there was no question in these proceedings.3

One Anabaptist, Fritz Erbe, who had only gone astray in
matters of faith, was kept in jail from 1530 to 1541, when death
set him free.4 Hans Sturm and Peter Pestel, both of Zwickau,
were harmless sectarians without any seditious leanings ; the
first was put in prison in 1529 and died there ; the latter was
beheaded on June 16, 1536.5 Hans Steinsdorf and Hans Hamster,
were condemned to death in 1538 as "stubborn blasphemers."6
In the 'forties Duke Henry of Saxony caused an Anabaptist to be
burnt as a heretic at Dresden.7

The Saxon lawyer, Matthias Coler (fl587), taught in his
" Decisiones Germanice,'' that, according to the laws of
Saxony those were to be punished by death at the stake
(" de lure saxonico cremandi veniunf ) who openly denied
cither the Divinity of Christ, or other important truths of
faith ; before being burnt they were, however, to be
questioned under torture concerning their confederates in
order that the land might be purged of such wicked men.8

In thus interfering the sovereigns were well aware that they
had the warm official approval of Luther and his fellows.
To this, for instance, the Elector Johann Frederick appealed
in 1533 when milder measures were suggested. He referred
to the memorandum which his father had obtained from the
Wittenberg theologians and lawyers concerning the execu
tion of the Anabaptists; their decision had been, "that
His Highness might with a good conscience cause those
charged with Anabaptism to be punished by death," and,
soon after, several of them were executed.9 The person who

1 Wappler, ib., p. 4. = Ib., pp. 12, 36, 85.

3 P. 204 f. * P. 37 ft\, 83 ft.

6 Wappler, " Inquisition und Ketzerprozesse in Zwickau zur
Reformationszeit," Leipzig, 1908, p. 28 ft\, 70 ff. Paulus, ib., p. 316.

8 Wappler, ib., p. 96 ff.

7 Hasche, " Diplomat ische Gesch. Dresdens," vol. ii., 1817, p. 221.
Paulus, ib., p. 317.

8 Wappler, " Stellung Kursachsens," p. 242. Paulus. ib., p. 319.
• Wappler, ib., p. 164. Paulus, ib., p. 314.

256 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

had thought otherwise, and to whom this vindication was
accordingly addressed, was no less a man than Landgrave
Philip of Hesse.

Luther himself, too, had been obliged on various occa
sions to justify the severity of his opinions.

Luther ',? Self-justification and Excuses

Philip of Hesse, though he treated Catholics with the
utmost intolerance, refused to hear of punishing the Ana
baptists with death unless indeed they were the cause of
public disturbances. " We cannot find it in our conscience
to put anyone to death by the sword on account of religion
unless we have sufficient proof of other crimes as well."
Such was the declaration he made in 1532 to Elector Johann
of Saxony, and which he emphasised in 1545 to the latter's
successor : *' Were all those to be executed who are not of
our faith what then should we do to the Papists, to say
nothing of the Jews, who err even more greatly than the
Anabaptists?"1

Luther was apparently far surer of his case. He is as
confident, subsequent to 1530, in drawing from Scripture the
principles for the treatment of the heretics as he is in
defending them against the obvious objections so often
brought against them.

Luther had it that the line of action for which he stood
was not coercion to any definite religious practices. " Our
Princes," so he sought to reassure himself as early as 1525,
" do not force people to the faith and to the Evangel but
merely set a term to outward abominations."2

The Elector, as was to be expected, expressed himself
likewise : ' ' Though it is not our intention to prescribe to
anyone what he must hold or believe, yet, in order to guard

1 Wappler, ib., pp. 155, 234. Paulus, ib., p. 311.

2 To Spalatin, Nov. 11, 1525. This is one of the answers he gave to
opponents who say, " neminem debere cogi ad fidem et evangelion," and
" principes in externis solum ius habere." To the latter he replies :
" principes cohibent externas abominationee" and goes on to add:
" Cum igitur ipsimet \adversarii] fateantur, in externis rebus esse ius
principum, ipsi sese damnant." If they wanted an example let them
remember Christ Who drove the sellers out of the Temple. This he
wrote, relying on the favour which the new Elector had extended to
his cause : " Nosti quantum princeps iste noster est evangelii studiosus,"
so he remarks with satisfaction. " Briefwechsel," 5, p. 271.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 257

against harmful uprisings and other disorders, we refuse to
recognise or permit any sects or schisms within our
Princedom."1

Many a one amongst the new Doctors had begun, as a Protes
tant historian of Saxony points out,2 " to claim for his conscience
the same right " (as Luther), while " following other paths than
Luther had trodden " (in his search after God). May not, indeed,
must not, such a one, so ran the objection, follow his conscience,
seeing that Luther himself tells us to consult our conscience ?
Yes, he may, is Luther's reply, but, if he be truthful, then he will
admit my plain interpretation of the Bible as the right one, for
** I have floored and overcome all my foes on the sure ground
work of Holy Scripture."3

Moreover, might not the Princes holding Popish views seize on
the coercion taught by the Lutherans as a pretext for similar
measures against the Lutherans in their territories ?

No, replies Luther, they must not do so for they would be
committing the same sin as the Kings of Israel when they " slew
the true prophets " ; but on account of the injustice of such
slaughter, we are not to make nought of the law or refrain from
stoning the false prophets. Pious authorities will not punish
anyone unless they see, hear, learn or know for certain that
they are blasphemers."4 — Even should Kaiser Charles come and
tell us, that he is convinced that " the doctrine of the Papists is
true, and that he must therefore, in accordance with God's
command, use all his power to extirpate our heretical doctrines in
his Empire," we must answer, that : " We know he is not
certain of this, and, in fact, cannot be certain."5

But does this not come to much the same as imposing faith
by some sort of compulsion ?

No, is his answer. " The faith is not thereby forced on any
one, for he is free to believe what he pleases. He is only forbidden
to indulge in that teaching and blaspheming whereby he seeks to
rob God and Christians of their doctrine and Word, whilst all the
while enjoying their protection and all temporal advantages. Let
him go where there are no Christians and have things his way
there."6

The severity of his demands is hardly mitigated or
excused by the right he gives people to leave the country.
At any rate those who do not see eye to eye with him must
get themselves gone, for, as he frequently remarks, whoever

1 In the Visitation Rules of 1527, Sehling, ib.

8 Brandenburg, " Moritz von Sachsen," 1, p. 22 f.

3 Erl. ed., 57, p. 6.

* Commentary on Ps. Ixxxii. Erl. ed., 39, p. 257 f.

5 Memorandum of 1530, Erl. ed., 54, p. 179 f. (" Brief wochsel," 8
p. 105).

• Comm. on Ps. Ixxxii., p. 251 f.

VI. — S

258 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

wishes to dwell among the burghers must not disregard the
laws of the borough.1

" By all this, however," so he says on another occasion,
" no one is forced into the faith but the common man is
merely set free from troublesome and obstinate spirits, and
the knavery of the hole-and-corner preachers is checked."2
Thus, if the man who thinks otherwise wishes to lock up his
convictions in his own breast, he is quite free to do so.
Within, he may enjoy the most far-reaching freedom, since
no earthly power extends to his thoughts. The reply of
those concerned was, however, obvious ; what right, they
asked, had the new religious tribunal to prevent a man from
revealing his convictions and openly living up to them, and
was not the order to keep silence tantamount to a stifling
of conscience and to forcing people to become hypocrites ?

Hence, in the ensuing discussions, we find that Luther and
his friends were ever making fresh efforts to meet the
objections ; in itself this was a sign of the weakness of the
exclusivism adopted by the Lutherans, in spite of all they
had formerly said, as soon as they had succeeded in winning
the favour of the State.

44 Some argue," we read in the memorandum of the
Wittenbergers published in 1536, " that the secular author
ities have no concern whatever with ghostly matters. This
is going much too far. . . . The rulers must not only
protect the life and belongings of their underlings, but their
highest duty is to promote the honour of God and to prevent
blasphemy and idolatry," etc.3

The memorandum was intended for Philip of Hesse. As
Luther was aware that the Landgrave was loath to proceed
to extremities with the Anabaptists, he added to the
memorandum a note of his own. " Seeing that His Serene
Highness the Landgrave reports that certain leaders and
teachers of the Anabaptists . . . have not kept their
promise (viz. to quit the land) Your Serene Highness may
with a good conscience cause them to be punished with the
sword, lor this reason also, to wit, that they have not kept
their oath or promise. Such is the rule. Yet Your Serene
Highness, needless to say, may at all times allow justice to
be tempered with mercy, according to the circumstances."4

i Ib. 2 Ib., p. 252 f. Paulua, ib., p. 39.

3 Above, p. 252, n. 1. * " Briefwechsel," 10, p. 340.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 259

If meant in earnest the latter recommendation to mercy
does the speaker credit and is the more noteworthy because,
in his later years, we do not often hear him pleading for the
heretics. As a rule he is all too intent on emphasising the
wickedness of what he terms " blasphemy and idolatry,"
i.e. of whatever was at variance with his own teaching.

But what — and this is the main objection — entitles Luther's
doctrine to be regarded as the standard of belief ? This point
Luther usually evaded. He says : Those heretics are to be
punished " whose teaching is at variance with the public articles
of the faith which are plainly grounded on Scripture and believed
throughout the world by the whole of Christendom."1 "Such
articles, common to the whole of Christendom, have already been
sufficiently tested, examined, proved and determined by Scrip
ture and by the confession of the whole of Christendom, confirmed
by many miracles, sealed by the blood of the holy Martyrs,
witnessed to and defended by the books of all the Doctors and
are not now to become the prey of faultfinders or cavillers."8
A sharp answer, one very much to the point, was given by
Bullinger of Zurich, who spoke of it as " truly laughable " that
his opponent should suddenly appeal to the fact " of the Church
having so long held this." " If Luther's argument, based on long
standing usage, be admitted, then is Popery quite in the right
when it harps on the Church and her age. But then the whole of
Luther's own doctrine tumbles over, for his teaching is not that
which the Roman Church has held for so long."3 — Nor is it easy
to tell which points of doctrine Luther, in his elastic fashion,
included among the articles " clearly founded on Scripture " and
held unquestioningly by the whole of Christendom. His words
occasionally presuppose that all divergent doctrines, not only
those of the Sacramentarians and Anabaptists, but even those of
the Papists, were to be punished by the authorities. If everyone
is to be punished who teaches " that Christ has not died for our
sins but that each one must himself make satisfaction for them,"*
(a doctrine unjustly foisted on the Papists by Luther), or who
" condemns the public ministry and draws the people away from
it," or who " insists that our baptism and preaching are not
Christian and therefore that our Church is not the Church of
Christ,"5 etc., — then many Catholics could not but fall victims
to the sword of the authorities. How often did not Luther
designate every specifically Catholic doctrine as rank "blas
phemy," and stigmatise every Catholic practice as idolatry ?
Blasphemy and idolatry were, however, according to him, to be
rooted out by violence. Truly his words gave promise of an
abundant harvest of persecution.

1 Comment, on Ps. Ixxxii. Erl. ed., 39, p. 250 f .

2 16., p. 251 f. Paulus, ib., p. 36.

3 To Albert, Margrave of Brandenburg. " Ein Sendbrief und Vorred
der Dieneren zn Zurich," Zurich, 1532. A 4b. Paulus. ib.. p. 4K.

* Comm. on Ps. Ixxxii., ib. * Ib.

2GO THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

As a reason of his animus against heretics within his own
fold Luther finally brings forward those personal considera
tions which are familiar to all who have followed his contro
versies.

His natural foes are those who in their " peculiar wisdom "
" seek to teach something besides Christ and beyond our preach
ing."1 Hence he was fond of insisting that Christ was slaying the
Papacy through him, and of rejecting all who " make a great
pother " and " claim to know something new." They come, and,
like Carlstadt, want to " seize upon the prize and poach upon
my preserves." Had not Carlstadt come along " with the
fanatics, Miinzer and the Anabaptists, all would have gone well
with my undertaking."2 These men want to "darken the sun
of the Evangel " so that the world " may forget all that has
hitherto been taught by us."3

" They want to have nothing to do with me," he complains of
the fanatics, " and I want to have nothing to do with them.
They boast that they have nothing from me, for which I heartily
thank God ; I have borrowed even less from them, for which, too,
God be praised."* The rupture with the Swiss came about
because they " wished to be first."5

In all these dissensions he finds many a one saying to the
Christians : "I am your Pope, what care I for Dr. Martin." And
yet he alone had the right to call himself the " great Doctor " "to
whom God first revealed His Word to preach."6

But did not his very self-reliance finally broaden the
ideas of the preacher of coercion ? Did not Luther in a
sermon preached at Eisleben on Feb. 7, 1546, as good as
repudiate his former exclusivism ?

It is true that this has been confidently asserted by Protestants,
but the text of this sermon, known only through Aurifaber's
Notes, does not justify such an inference.7 In it the preacher is
not treating of the attitude of the Christian authorities towards
heresy, but is only showing how the faithful and the preachers
must behave, surrounded as they are by wicked folk, by Ana
baptists and sectarians. The occasion for speaking of this was
supplied by the Sunday Gospel of the Tares, Mat. xiii. 24-30,
which grow up together with the wheat in God's field, and which
the Lord wishes to be left undisturbed until the Day of Judgment.
Hence he explains how this must be understood, the local con
ditions probably supplying him with a particular reason for doing

1 Above, vol. ii., p. 347. 2 Vol. iii., p. 390. 3 Ib., p. 392.

* Above, vol. v., p. 399. 5 Ib., p. 448. 6 Above, p. 144.

7 Erl. ed., 20 2, p. 555 ff. Aurifaber assures us that he " took clown
the sermon from Luther's lips " and revised it " with diligence " at
Wittenberg. Paulus, ib., p. 57 f. — Cp. the intolerant sermon preached
at Halle shortly before, below, p. 274.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 261

so, seeing that, in the County of Mansfeld, there must still have
been some Catholics and that the Jews stood in favour. The
greater part of the Sermon on the Tares is devoted to describing
the passions and lusts which Christians must fight against in their
own hearts with patience and perseverance. It is only towards
the end that he speaks of the wickedness rampant in the world.
He refutes the opinion of those, who ** would have a Church in
which there is no evil but where all are prudent and pious, and
pure and holy " ; thus " the Anabaptists, Miinzer and such like,
wish to root out and put to death everything that is not holy."
Hence " how are we to suffer the heretics and yet not to suffer
them ? How am I to act ? If I tear up or root out the tares in
one place then I spoil the wheat [according to the Parable], and
the weeds will still grow up again elsewhere. Thus if I root out
one heretic, yet the same devil-sown seed springs up again in ten
other places." Hence we must look to it that we do not make
matters worse by violence and suppression. " Papists and Jews
will ever be with us." " You will not succeed in this world in
entirely separating the heretics and false Christians from the
just." " Look to it that you remain master in your own house
hold ; see to it, you preachers, parsons and hearers [it is only to
these that he is addressing himself, not to the State authorities],
that heretics and seditious men, such as Miinzer was, do not rule
or dominate ; grumble in a corner, that indeed they may do, but
that they should mount the rostrum, get into the pulpit or go up to
the altar, that, so far as in you lies, you must not allow." Care
must be taken that the " pulpit and the Sacrament are kept
undented. " " By human might and power we cannot root them
out, or make them different. For, in this point, they are often
far superior to us, can get themselves a following, draw the masses
to them, and, on the top of it all, they have on their side the
prince of this world, viz. the devil."

The main thing therefore is that the heretics " should not rule
in our Churches."

But what are we to do against the tares, against the Papists
and Sophists, against Cologne, Louvain and the devil's other
thistles ? Of boils it holds good : " Let them swell until they
burst. So too it is in secular and domestic government : Where
[whether in the Town Council or among the servants] we cannot
get rid of the wicked without harm or detriment, there we must
put up witli them until the time is ripe."

In this much-discussed Sermon on the Tares Luther is very far
from wishing to give the authorities directions as to how to
treat the sectarians. On the contrary he makes it plain that some
other line of action than that described by him must be followed
even by the faithful and the preachers, and much more so by the
Christian authorities, whenever the heretics come out of their
"corner " and try to climb into the pulpit or mount the altar.
What was to be done that the pulpit and the Sacrament might
remain imdefiled, he had already sufficiently explained elsewhere.
Naturally, a sermon on the Gospel which tells us to leave the

262 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

Tares until the harvest was scarcely the place for Luther to
expound his severer theories on the treatment to be meted out to
unbelievers and misbelievers, so that his silence here cannot be
taken as a repudiation of the measures for which he so long had
stood. At the close of the next sermon, the last he was ever to
preach, addressing himself to the nobility, lie speaks very harshly
of the Jews. "If they refuse to be converted, then, as blas
phemers, they deserve that we should not suffer or endure them
among us." " You Lords ought not to tolerate but rather expel
them." This duty he bases on his usual principle : " Were I to
tolerate the man who dishonours, blasphemes and curses Christ
my Master, I should be making myself a partaker in the sins of
others."

His system of coercing and punishing heretics he certainly
never repudiated.

Compulsory Attendance at Church

" Facts have shown," Luther wrote to Spalatin in 1527 of
the conditions in his new churches, * i that men despise the
Evangel and insist on being compelled by the law and the
sword."1 He was very anxious to make attendance at the
Lutheran preaching a matter of obligation.

According to his earlier statements, attendance at the
preaching had been voluntary, for the matter of the sermons
was to be judged by the hearers, in order that they might
avoid what was harmful ; his subsequent practice of driving
all to the preaching made an end of this freedom, or rather
duty. Through the authorities, so far as his influence went,
he insisted on this principle : " Even though they do not
believe they must nevertheless, for the sake of the Ten
Commandments, be driven to the preaching, so that they
may at least learn the outward work of obedience." He
wrote this at a time when he had already justified such
coercion at Wittenberg, viz. on Aug. 26, 1529, in a letter to
the " strict and steadfast" Joseph Levin Metzsch of Mila,
who was shortly after appointed by the Elector to take part
in the Visitation.2 Instructions sent by Luther 011 the same
day to Thomas Loscher, pastor of the same locality, are to
the same effect (" cogendi sunt ad condones . . . audiant
etiam inviti").3 The orders of the authorities concerning
public worship were represented in the Visitation Uulcs for

1 Above, vol. iii., p. 39.

2 ErI. ed., 54, p. 98 (" Brief wechsel," 7, p. 151).

3 " Brief wechsel," ib.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 263

the pastors (1528) as universally binding : " All secular
authority is to be obeyed because the secular powers are
not ordering a new worship but enforcing peace and
charity."1 The Preface of the Smaller Catechism (1531)
was on the same lines. " Although we neither can nor
should force anyone into the faith, yet the masses must be
held and driven to it in order that they may know what is
right or wrong in those among whom they live."2

In the same year Luther advised Margrave George of
Brandenburg to compel the people to attend the Catechism
" at the behest of the secular authority," for, since they
" arc Christians and wish to be so called," it was only
fitting " they should be obliged to learn what a Christian
ought to know." The Ansbach preachers embodied this
requirement in the same year in the alterations they pro
posed in the church-regulations.3

Wittenberg served as the pattern. It was to Wittenberg
that Leonard Beyer addressed himself when he succeeded
Luther's friend, Nicholas Hausmann, as pastor of Zwickau.
Luther answered his letter by describing the system of
coercion practised in Wittenberg and the neighbourhood
when people persistently neglected to attend the sermons :
" With the authority and in the name of our Most Noble
Prince it is our custom to affright those who disregard all
piety and fail to attend the preaching, and to threaten them
with banishment and the law. This is the first step. Then,
if they do not amend, the pastors arc enjoined by us to ply
them for a month or more with instructions and representa
tions, and, finally, in the event of their still proving con
tumacious, to excommunicate them, and to break off all
intercourse with them as though they were heathen." He
concludes : " The words of the Bible [Mat. xviii. 17 ; 2 Thes.
iii. 6] concerning the avoidance of heretics are quite clear."4
—He, however, forgets to add that neither he nor the
pastors had ever been quite successful in their attempts at
excommunication.

The above regulations of the authorities were to remain in
force. In 1533 the Prince once more insisted that : No one
is to be permitted to absent himself from the " common

1 Weim. ed., 20, p. 223 ; Erl. ed., 23, p. 45 f.
- Weim. ed., 30, 1, p. 349 : Erl. ed., 21, p. 7.
:{ Enders, " Brief wechsel," 0, p. 104, n. II.
4 In 1533, undated, " Briefwechsel," 9, p. :JO«>

264 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

church-going,' ' everyone must be ' ' earnestly reminded of
this."1 In the General Articles of 1557 it was determined by
the Elector August, that, whoever absented himself without
permission from the sermon on Sundays and festivals,
whether in the morning or afternoon, " more particularly in
the villages ' ' was to be fined, or, if he was poor, "to be
punished with the pillory, either at the church or at some
prison."2 The parsons, however, were to notify the author
ities of any who contemned the preaching and the sacra
ments, or who obstinately persisted in their false opinion.
Even the practice of auricular confession was, at a later
date, made a strict law ; whoever evaded confession and
the Supper was liable to banishment.3 The Saxon lawyer,
Benedict Carpzov (1595-1666) in his " lurisprudentia
ecclcsiastica" defended as self-evident the legal principle
based on the practice of Luther's own country : " Those,
who, after repeated admonitions, maliciously absent them
selves from the Supper, are to be expelled from the land ;
they are to be compelled to sell their goods and emigrate.' ' 4
The same scholarly lawyer elsewhere alludes to the Saxon
custom of condemning seditious and blasphemous heretics
to die at the stake.5

At Wittenberg strong ramparts were set up for the
protection of the Lutheran doctrine and to prevent divergent
opinions finding their way in.

The Statutes of the Theological Faculty, probably drawn up in
1533 by Melanchthon with Luther's approval,* made it strictly
incumbent on the teachers to preach the pure doctrine in accord
ance with the Confession of Augsburg ; in the event of any
difference of opinion a commission of judges was to decide ;
" after that the false opinion shall no longer be defended ; if
anyone obstinately persists in so doing, he is to be punished with
such severity as to prevent him any more spreading abroad his
wicked views."7 "The same Luther," says Paulsen of this,

1 Sehling, 1, p. 195.

2 " Ordimngen," etc., Dresden, 1573, Bl. 132, 146. Paulus, ib.,
p. 318.

3 Cp. the Rescript of Sep. 1, 1023. Paulus, ib.

4 Hannovia?, 1652, p. 861. Cp. ib., p. 858 sqq. Paulus, ib., n. 4.

6 " Practica nova," I, q. 44, n, 45 : " Usu ac consuetudine saxonica
obtinuit, eiusmodi hwreticoa scditioxos ant blaftphptnanteft igne comburi."
Pnulus, ib., p. 323, n. 7.

8 Paulus, ib., p. 49 against O. Hitachi.

7 C. E. Forstemann, " Liber Decanorum facultatis theol. acad.
Vitebergensis," 1838, p. 152 sqq.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 265

" who, twelve years before, had declared that his conscience would
not allow of his conceding to Christendom assembled in Council
the right to determine the formula of faith, now claimed for the
Wittenberg faculty — for this is what it amounts to — the un
questionable right to decide on faith. From 1535 to the day of
his death Luther was without a break Dean of this Faculty."1

Again, subsequent to 1535, the preachers and pastors sent out
or officially recommended by Wittenberg had to take the so-called
" Ordination Oath " which had been suggested by the Elector
in order to exclude false preachers. The ministers to be appointed
within the Electorate, and likewise those destined to take up
appointments elsewhere, had to submit at Wittenberg to a
searching examination on doctrine ; only after passing it and
taking an oath as to the future could they receive their com
mission. The examination is referred to in the Certificate of
Ordination. Thus, in the Certificate of Heinrich Bock (who was
sent to Reval in Livonia) which is dated May 17, 1540, and signed
by Luther, Bugenhagen, Jonas and Melanchthon, it is set forth
that he had undertaken to " preach to the people steadfastly and
faithfully the pure doctrine of the Gospel which our Church
confesses." It is also stated that he adheres to the " consensus "
of the " Catholic Church of Christ," and, for this reason, is
recommended to the Church of Reval. 2 A similar Certificate for
the schoolmaster Johann Fischer, who had received a call to
Rudolstadt " to the ministry of the Gospel," is dated a month
earlier. His doctrine, so it declares, had been found on examina
tion to be pure and in accordance with the Catholic doctrine of
the Gospel as professed by the Wittenbergers ; a promise had also
been received from him to teach the same faithfully to the
people ; for this reason " his call has been confirmed by public
ordination."3 Fischer had received the " diaconate."

As early as 1535 we read of the solemn ordination of a certain
Johann (Golhart ?), "examined by us and publicly ordained in
the presence of our Church with prayers and hymns." He was
" ordained and confirmed by order of our sovereign," having
been called and chosen as " assistant minister " at Gotha by the
local congregation headed by their pastor Myconius.*

The doctrine of the punishment of heretics was afterwards
incorporated by Melanchthon in 1552, in the Wittenberg
instructions composed by him and entitled : ' ' The Examina
tion of Ordinands."5

1 " Geach. des gelehrten Unterrichtes," I2, p. 212.

2 " Briefwechsel," 13, p. 57.

3 /&., p. 35, April 18, 1540.

4 Luther to Myconius at Gotha, Oct. 24, 1535, ib., 10, p. 248
* " Corp. ref.," 23, pt cvii. xq.

266 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

Opinions of Protestant Historians

The above account of Luther's intolerance is very much
at variance with the Protestant view still current to sonic
extent in erudite circles, but more particularly in popular
literature. Luther, for all the harshness of his disposition,
is yet regarded as having in principle advocated leniency, as
having been a champion of personal religious freedom, and
having only sanctioned severity towards the Anabaptists
because of the danger of revolt. Below we shall, however,
quote a scries of statements from Protestant writers who
have risen superior to such party prejudice.

Walther Kohler, in his 4 ' Reformation und Ketzerprozess ' '
(1901), wrote :

" In Luther's case- it is impossible to speak of liberty of con
science or religious freedom." " The death-penalty for heresy
rested on the highest Lutheran authority."1 According to
Kohler there can be no doubt that prosecution for heresy among
the Protestants was practically Lather's doing. " The views of
the other reformers 011 the persecution and bringing to justice of
heretics were merely the outgrowth of Luther's plan, they
contributed nothing fresh."2 The same writer is of opinion that
the question, whether Luther would have approved of the
execution of Servetus "must undoubtedly be answered in the
affirmative."* " It is certain that Luther would have agreed to
the execution of Servetus ; heresy as heresy is according to him
deserving of death."4 One observation made by Kohler is
significant enough, viz. " that, when the preaching of the Word
proved ineffectual against the heretics," Luther had recourse to
the intervention of the secular authorities.6

The matter has been examined with equal frankness by
P. Wappler in various studies in which he utilises new data
taken from the archives.6

" That Luther in principle regarded the death penalty in the
case of heretics as just, even where there was no harm done to
the * regna mundi,' " says Wappler, " is plain from the advice
given by him on Oct. 20, 1534, to Prince Johaiiii of Anhalt in
reply to his inquiry concerning the attitude to be adopted
towards the Anabaptists at Zerbst." "The fact is, that from the
commencement of 1530 the reformers cease to make any real
distinction between the two classes of heretics [the seditious ones

1 P. 25 f . 2 P. 29. 3 P. 38.

4 Kohler, " Tlieol. Literaturztng.," 1900, p. 211.

5 '; Ref. und Ketzerprozess," p.' 23 • Cp. above, p. 202.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 267

and those who merely taught false doctrines]. Heretics who
merely * blasphemed ' were always regarded by them, at least
where they remained obdurate, as practically guilty of sedition,
and, consequently, as deserving the death penalty." " The
principal part in this was played by Luther, Mclaiichthon being
merely the draughtsman of the memoranda in which Luther's
ideas on the question of heretics were reduced to a certain
system."1 " The many executions, even of Anabaptists who are
known to have not been revolutionaries arid who were put to death
011 the strength of the declarations of the Wittenberg theologians,
refute only too plainly all attempts to deny the clear fact, viz.
that Luther himself approved of the death penalty even in the
case of such as wrere merely heretics."2

Wappler, after showing how Luther's wish was, that everyone
who preached without orders should be handed over to " Master
Hans," adds : " And what he said, was undoubtedly meant in
earnest ; shortly before this, on Jan. 18, 1530, as Luther had
doubtless learned from Melanchthon, at Reinhardsbrunn near
Ciotha, six such persons had been handed over to Master Hans,
i.e. to the executioner, and duly executed." Wappler regards it
as futile to urge that : " Luther could not prevent executions
taking place in the Saxon Electorate " ; it is wrong to put the
blame on Melanchthon rather than on Luther for the putting to
death of heretics. 3

Speaking of the execution of Peter Pestel at Zwickau, the same
author4 declares that it was " a sad sign of the unfortunate
direction so early [1536] taken by the Lutheran reformation that
its representatives should allow this man, who had neither
disseminated his doctrine in his native land nor rebaptised . . .
to die a felon's death." " Even contempt of the outward Word,"
he says, " carelessness about going to church and contempt of
Scripture — in this instance contempt for the Bible as interpreted
by Luther — was now regarded as 4 rank blasphemy,' which it was
the duty of the authorities to punish as such. To such lengths
had the vaunted freedom of the Gospel now gone."6 The
introduction of the Saxon Inquisition (See above, vol. v., 593)
leads him to remark : " The principle of evangelical freedom of
belief and liberty of conscience, which Luther had championed
barely two years earlier, was here most shamefully repudiated,
particularly by this lay inquisition, and yet Luther said never a
word in protest."8

In 1874 W. Maurenbrecher expressed it as his opinion that
" Luther's tolerance in theory as well as in practice amounted
to this : The Church and her ministers were to denounce such as
went astray in the faith, whereupon it became the duty of the
secular authorities to chastise them as open heretics."7 In 1885
L. Keller declared : "It merely displays ignorance of the actual

1 " Stellung Kursachsens," p. 123 f. z Ib.< p. 125.

3 Ib., p. 126 f. * " Die Inquisition," p. 70 f.

5 /&., p. 69 ft. 6 " Inquisition," etc., p. 6 f.

7 " Studien uiid Ski/zen zur Gesch. der RZ.," 1874, p. 20.

268 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

happenings of that epoch, when many people, even to-day, take
it for granted that such executions and the wholesale persecution
of the Anabaptists were only on account of sedition, and that the
reformers had no hand in these things."1 "Luther indeed
demands toleration," says K. Rieker, " but only for the Evan
gelicals ; he demands freedom, but merely for the preaching of
the Evangel."2 According to Adolf Harnack "one of the
Reformer's most noticeable limitations was his inability either
fully to absorb the cultural elements of his time, or to recognise
the right and duty of unfettered research."3

In Saxony, so H. Barge, Carlstadt's biographer, complains,
" the police-force was mobilised for the defence of pure doctrine " ;
" and Luther played the part of prompter " to the intolerant
Saxon government.4 " Luther's harsh, violent and impatient
ways " and their " unfortunate " outcome are admitted un
reservedly by P. Kalkhoff, another Luther researcher. 5 G. Lcesche
calls Paulus's studies 011 Strasburg a " Warning against the
edifying sentimentality of Protestant make-believe."6 Luther
" demanded freedom for himself alone and for his doctrine,"
remarks E. Friedberg, " not for those doctrines, which he regarded
as erroneous."7 Neander, the Protestant Church-historian,
speaking of Luther's views in general as given by Dietrich, says
they " would justify all sorts of oppression on the part of the
State, and all kinds of intellectual tyranny, and were in fact the
same as those on which the Roman Emperors acted when they
persecuted Christianity."8

Two quotations from Catholic authors may be added. The
above passage from Kohler reads curiously like the following
statement of C. Ulenburg, an olden Catholic polemic ; writing in
1589 he said : " When Luther saw that his disciples were gradu
ally falling away from him and, acting on the principle of freedom
of conscience, wrere treating him as he had previously treated the
olden Church, he came to think of having recourse to coercion
against such folk."9

" Historically nothing is more incorrect," wrote Dollinger in
his Catholic days, "than the assertion that the Reformation was
a movement in favour of intellectual freedom. The exact
contrary is the truth. For themselves it is true, Lutherans and

1 " Die Reformation und die alteren Reformparteien," 1885, p. 446.
Paulus, ib., p. 314.

z " Die rechtliche Stellung der evangel. Kirche in Deutscliland,"
1893, p. 90.

3 " Lehrb. der DG.," 3*, p. 816.

* " Andreas Bodenstein von Carlstadt," 2, 1905, pp. 138, 187.

5 " Literarisches Zentralblatt," 1905, No. 36.

6 " Deutsche Literaturztng.," 1896, No. 2, on Paulus, " tJber die
Reformatoren und die Gewissensfreiheit," 1895.

7 " Deutsche Zeitschr. i'iir KR.," 1896, p. 138.

* Neander, " Das Eine mid Mannigfaltige des christl. Lebens,"
] 840, p. 224.

9 " Ursachen, warumb die altgleubige catholische Christen bei dem
alten waren Christenthumb verharren sollen," Cologne, 1589, p. 354.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 269

Calvinists claimed liberty of conscience as all men have done in
every age, but to grant it to others never occurred to them so
long as they were the stronger side. The complete suppression
and extirpation of the Catholic Church, and in fact of everything
that stood in their way, was regarded by the reformers as some
thing entirely natural."1 — Luther's principles, aided by the
arbitrary interference of the secular power in matters of faith,
especially where Catholics were concerned, led both in his age and
in the following, "to a despotism" "the like of which," as
Dollinger expresses it, " had not hitherto been known ; the new
system as worked out by the theologians and lawyers was even
worse than the Byzantine practice."2

Luther's Spirit in his Fellows

The question concerning Melanchthon raised by Protestant
historians, viz. whether it was he who converted Luther to
his intolerance, or, whether, on the other hand, he himself
was influenced by Luther, cannot, on the strength of the
documents, be answered either affirmatively or negatively.
In some respects Melanchthon struck out his own paths, in
others he merely followed in Luther's wake.3 He was by no
means loath to making use of coercion in the case of doctrines
differing from his own. His able pen had the doubtful merit
of expressing in fluent language what Luther thought and
said in private, as we see from the Memoranda still extant.
His ill-will with the Papacy and the hostile sects within the
new fold, was, it is true, as a rule not so blatant as Luther's ;
he was fond of displaying in his style that moderation
dear to the humanist ; yet we have spontaneous outbursts
of his which sound a very harsh note and which doubtless
were due to his old and intimate spiritual kinship with
Luther.

For instance, we have the wish he expressed, that God would
send King Henry VIII a " valiant murderer to make an end of
him,"4 and, again, his warm approval of Calvin's execution of
the heretic Michael Servetus in 1554 (a " pious and memorable
example for all posterity ")5. He himself wrote about that time
a special treatise in defence of the use of the sword against those
who spread erroneous doctrines.6

1 " Kirche und Kirchen," 1861, p. 68. 2 /&., p. 50 f.
3 Above, vol. iii., pp. 358 ff., 438 ff. * /&., p. 358.

5 lb., Cp. Paulus, ib., p. 74 f.

6 " Corp. ref.," 10, p. 851 sqq. : " Qusestio, an politica potestas
debeat tollere heereticos."

270 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

With regard to Melanchthoh A. Hanel says : To Protestantism
" religious freedom was denied at every point." When Melonch-
tlion wrote to Calvin in praise of the execution of Sorvotus, his
letter, according to Hanel, " wa« not, as has been imagined,
dictated by the mere passion of the moment, but was the harsh
consequence of a harsh doctrine."1 It must be admitted,
remarks the Protestant theologian A. Hunzinger, " that Melanch-
thon was wont to lose no time in having recourse to fire and sword.
This forms a dark blot on his life. Many a man fell a victim to
his memorandum, who certainly had no wish to destroy the
' rer/na mundi.' "z

In consequence of the precipitate and often brutal intervention
of the authorities against real or alleged heretics Melanchthon
had afterwards abundant reason to regret his appeal to the
secular power. He himself, as early as Aug. 31, 1530, had fore
told, " that, later, a far more insufferable tyranny would arise
than had ever before been known," viz. the tyranny due to the
interference of the Princes in whose hands the power of persecu
tion had been laid. Hence his exclamation : "If only I could
revive the jurisdiction of the bishops ! For I see what sort of
Church we shall have if the ecclesiastical constitution is
destroyed."3 As we know, he was anxious gradually to graft
the old ecclesiastical constitution on Luther's congregations.

Coming from Luther and fostered by Melanchthon, these
intolerant ideas profoundly influenced all their friends.

Not as though there was ever any lack of opponents of the
theory of coercion among the Protestants, or even in
Luther's own flock. On the contrary there were some who
had the sense of justice and the courage to resist the current
of intolerance coming from Wittenberg. Indeed it was the
protests which Luther encountered at Nuremberg which led
him to emphasise his harsh demands.

Already in 1530 Luther's follower Lazarus Spengler wrote
from Nuremberg to Veit Dietrich begging him to seek advice of
Luther and to request his literary help ; in the town there were
some who opposed any measures of coercion against the divergent
doctrines, " some of ours, who are not fanatics but are regarded
as good Christians," desire that neither the " Sacramentarjans
nor the Anabaptists " should be prosecuted so long as they do
not " stir up revolt," nor yet the errors prohibited of " the
preachers of the godless Mass and other idolatries " ; " they
appeal on behalf of this to Dr. Luther's booklet, which he some
while ago addressed to Duke Frederick the Elector of Saxony

1 "Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch.," 8. 1869, p. 264.

2 " Die Theol. der Gegenwart," 3, 3, 1909, p. 49.

3 To Camerariu8, "Corp. ref.," 2, p. 334.

LUTHER'S INTOLERANCE 271

against the fanatic Thomas Miinzer, in which he approves this
view and admits it to be quite sound."1

At Augsburg (1533) the Lutheran lawyer, Conrad llol, siding
with his Catholic-minded confreres Conrad I'eutinger and Johann
Rehlinger* openly and courageously denied the Town-Councils
any rights in the matter. In 1534 Christoph Khem, a patrician
of Augsburg, who also held Lutheran views, wrote a little work
in which he demanded universal and unconditional toleration
and invited the Council to place some " bridle and restraint " on
the new preachers.3 At that time (1536) the Lutheran preacher
Johann Forster protested very strongly against Bucer, and
refused to hear of the forcible suppression of Catholic worship in
Cathedral churches outside the jurisdiction of the civic author
ities ; he appealed in this matter to Luther. Bucer just then was
bent on suppressing the Catholic worship with the help of the
magistrates. Forster was finally silenced by dint of " ranting,
raging and shouting " and was indignantly asked : " Whether
he wished to tolerate Popery and submit to such idolatry ? "*

At Strasburg in 1528 the Protestant Town-Clerk, Peter Butz, set
a brave example by openly and severely condemning in the
Council the system of coercion planned by some of the preachers.
Against the intolerance towards sectarians advocated by Bucer,
preachers and scholars like Anton Engelbrecht, Wolfgang
Schultheiss, Johann Sapidus and Jacob Ziegler were not slow to
protest,6 though they had nothing to say against the violent
abolition of Catholic worship.

At Coire the preacher Johann Gantner came into conflict with
Bullinger on account of the coercive measures favoured by the
latter ; he reproached the inhabitants of Zurich and Berne with
having fallen away from the freedom of the Evangel into the
Mosaic bondage. Gantner and others, in support of their protest,
usually appealed against the prevailing tendency to Sebastian
Franck's " Chronica," published at Strasburg in 1531. 6

Sebastian Franck, the witty and learned opponent of
Luther, " after Luther himself, the best and most popular
German prose writer of the day," took the line of pushing
to its bitter end Luther's subjectivism. He declared that
the new preaehers had made of Holy Scripture a paper idol
for the benefit of their private views, and that the Lutheran
Church was the invisible kingdom of Christ and as such
numbered among its members men of every sect ; hence he
argued that what was termed false doctrine and false
worship should not be interfered with.7 As Kawerau points

1 M. Mayer, " Spengleriana," 1830, p. 70 fit. Paulus, ib., p. 33.
Luther's " booklet " to which his opponents appealed is the letter of
July, 1524, to the Saxon Princes, quoted above, vol. ii., p. 365.

2 Paulus, ib., p. 143. 3 Ib., p. 144. * P. 156 ff.
5 P. 166. « Paulus, pp. 223, 226.

7 Cp. Kawerau in Moller's " KG.," 33, p. 471 ff.

272 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

out, Franck found in the 1 6th century " not a few readers
wherever dissatisfaction prevailed with the Papacy of the
theologians " ;* nevertheless, in 1531, he was expelled from
Strasburg on account of his liberal views ; later on, when he
had taken up his residence at Ulm, Melanchthon wrote
thither, in 1535, that he should be " dealt with severely"
(" severe coercendum") no less than Schwenckfeld.2 Driven
from Ulm he went to Basle in 1539, but even there the echo
of the verdict of the Wittenbergers reached him ; in March,
1540, the theologians assembled at Schmalkalden, con
demned him and charged him with ' 4 inducing people to seek
the spirit while neglecting the ' Word ' " ; they themselves,
they added, had broken with the Churches of the Pope
because of their idolatry, but there was " no reason what
ever for throwing over the ministry in our own Churches."3
As we have already shown, Landgrave Philip of Hesse
was likewise disposed to be less intolerant than Luther, at
least with regard to the Anabaptists. Relentlessly as he
refused any public toleration to the Catholic faith and
banished those Catholics who persisted in their religious
practices, yet, in a letter of 1532, addressed to Elector Johann
of Saxony, he declared himself against the execution of the
Anabaptists ; the actual words have been quoted above
(p. 256). In another letter, in 1545, to the Elector Johann
Frederick, he also points out, that : "If this sect be
punished so severely by us, then we, by our example, give
our foes, the Papists, reason to treat us in the same way, for
they regard us as no better than the Anabaptists."4

These and similar remonstrances were unavailing to
change the views which had taken root at Wittenberg.

George Major, Professor of theology at Wittenberg
University, \vas a learned and zealous disciple of Luther's.
He, like Melanchthon, on hearing of the execution of
Servetus at Geneva, declared that Calvin was to be com-

1 Ib., p. 474.

2 To Martin Frecht at Ulm, " Corp. ref.," 2, p. 955. Cp. his letter
to Buchholzer, Aug. 5, 1558, against Schwenckfeld, ib., 9, p. 579.
Paulus, ib., p. 78.

3 " Corp. ref.," 3, p. 983. Cp. on Franck's objections to compulsion.
A. Hegler, " Geist und Schrift bei S. Franck," 1892, p. 260 ff. — See also
below, p. 289.

* Wappler, " Die Stellung Kursaehsens," pp. 155, 223, 234. Paulus
ib., p. 311.

PROTESTANT INTOLERANCE 273

mended for having put to death the heretic, and, at a
Disputation held in 1555, expressly defended the thesis,
that it was the duty of the authorities to punish contu
macious heretics with death. They must 4< get rid of
blasphemers, perjurers and wizards. Amongst the blas
phemers must, however, be reckoned those who persistently
defend idolatrous worship, or heresies which clearly disagree
with the articles of the faith."1

Luther's code of penalties for any deviation from the
Wittenberg teaching fitted in well with Bugenhagen's
natural harshness, who showed himself only too ready to
make his own the words of Moses concerning the slaying of
unbelievers. We may recall how, in conversation, when
Luther mentioned the difficulties he had with Carlstadt,
Agricola and Schenk, Bugenhagen broke in with the remark :
4 ' Sir Doctor, we ought to do what is commanded in Deuter
onomy where Moses says they should be put to death."2
Bugenhagen, in the many places into which he brought the
new faith, was relentlessly severe in enforcing against the
Catholics the principles he had carried with him from
Wittenberg. Very characteristic is the tone in which he
reported to Luther that the Mass had been forbidden in
Denmark and the monks driven out of the land as ' ' sedition-
mongers" and " blasphemers."3 Not only had the bishops
been imprisoned, but, according to the account of Peter
Palladius the superintendent, some of the monks " had been
hanged."4

Justus Jonas began his labours at Halle in 1542 by a
written invitation to the Town-Council " completely to
purge the town of false doctrine and every kind of idolatrous
worship ' ' ; Luther and Melanchthon had sufficiently proved
in their works that this " was incumbent on Christian
magistrates." He declared that the monks still living in the
town were "obstinate and impenitent idolaters," "adders
and snakes " whom he " must reduce to silence with the use
of the gag " ; already, throughout the whole neighbourhood,

1 Paulus, ib.t p. 75. Cp. vol. iii., p. 3.58.

3 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 274, 1542. Cp. vol. iii., p. 400.

3 Feb. 4, 1538, to Luther and " Domini in Cfiristo et venerandi ft
amandi," i.e. the other theologians at Wittenberg, w' Brief wechsel," 11,
p. 328 : " Parata est paulo post satis feliciter per Christum ordinatio
ecclesiarum totius regni Danice a sereniss. refje," etc. " Per totum regnmn
Danice regnat Christus in omnibus ecclem'is," etc.

* See vol. iii., p. 413.

274 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

" merely at the exhortations of the preachers, the monas
teries, with their Masses and idolatrous worship, had
crumbled into ruins."1 Later, in a memorandum addressed
to the Town-Council in 1546, Jonas again inveighed against
the remaining handful of well-disposed and zealous monks,
and called to mind how " our beloved father, Dr. Martin, in
the very last sermon he preached at Halle shortly before his
decease, had exhorted the Town-Council and the whole
Church with all his burning, stormy earnestness to rid them
selves of the crawling things."2 Jonas appealed to his own
"conscience" and threatened to report matters to the
Elector of Saxony and " his Electoral Highness's scholars at
Wittenberg.' ' 3 With the outbreak of the Sehmalkalden war,
when the Electoral troops laid waste the monasteries his
hopes at last found their fulfilment. He announced on
March 3, 1547, that, at Halle, the " Papistic idolatry" had
now been swept away;4 when he wrote this he did not
expect the change in the position of the Catholics in the
town, for which the defeat of the Elector's troops in the
following month was responsible.

WTe are reminded how greatly Spalatin was imbued with
Luther's exclusivism and spirit of intolerance by his words
concerning the " Christian bit" which he wished placed in
the mouths of all the clergy.5 He was at great pains to press
upon the sovereign that he was not to permit " unchristian
ceremonies " and " idolatry."6

The Elector Johann was merely giving expression to the
views with which Spalatin and Luther had inspired him
when he declared that, " heretics and contemners of the
Word " must in every instance be punished by the author
ities.7 His successor, Johann Frederick, likewise followed
obediently the " Wittenberg theologians and lawyers," as

1 See J. 0. v. Dreyhaupt, " AusfiihrlLche Beschreibung des Saal-
Kreyses," 1, 1749, p. 982 ff. " Brief wechsel des Jonas," ed. Kawerau.
2, p. 1. Pauhis, ib., p. 80 ff.

2 On this sermon of Jan. 26, 1546, see below, xxxix., 3.

3 Dreyhaupt, ib., p. 210 ff. " Briefwechsel des Jonas," 2, p. 191.

4 To Lang the Erfurt preacher, " Briefwechsel des Jonas," 2, p. 224 :
Halle, with the whole of its Church, had submitted to the Elector
'" heneficio altiasimi Del ... a cultu Baal, a fanis idololatriris et omni
idoMntria tandem expurgata." * Above, p. 240 f.

6 Ib. Cp. his letter to the Elector, Oct. 1, 1525, Kolde, " Friednch
der Weise," 1881, p. 72. Paulus, ib.. p. 11.

7 To Philip of Hesse, Jan. 15, 1532. Wappler. " Die Stellung Kur-
sachsens/' p. 15f>.

PROTESTANT INTOLERANCE 275

he terms his authorities.1 lie instructed Melanchthon in
153G to write and have printed a popular "Answer to
sundry unchristian articles " against the Anabaptists, which
was to be read aloud from the pulpit every third Sunday,
and which insisted that the secular authorities were bound
to punish " all contempt of Scripture and the outward
Word " as " blatant blasphemy."2

At the Religious Conference at Worms in 1557 quite a number
of respected Lutheran theologians (J. Brenz, J. Marbach, M.
Diller, J. Pistorius, J. Anclrese, G. Karg, P. Eber and G. Rungius)
signed a lengthy statement by Melanchthon aimed at the Ana
baptists. As one of the errors of the sect is instanced their
teaching that God communicates Himself without the inter
mediary of the ministry, of preaching or the Sacrament. Those
" heads and ringleaders " of the sect who persisted in their
doctrines were "to be condemned as guilty of sedition and
blasphemy and put to death by the sword " ; the death penalty
prescribed in Leviticus for blasphemers was asserted to be a
44 natural law, binding, by virtue of their office, on all in
authority," hence 4' the judges had done the right thing " when
they condemned to death the heretic Servetus at Geneva.3

Johann Brenz, who helped to promote Lutheranism in Wurtem-
berg, had, in 1528, written and published a pamphlet in which he
deprecated the Anabaptists' being put to death 44 merely on
account of heresy " when not guilty of sedition.4 He was for this
reason regarded by Melanchthon as "too mild."5 His later
writings, however, show that the intolerant spirit of Wittenberg
finally seized on him too. In his treatment of Catholics — both
previous to 1528, and, even more so when the olden worship had
been suppressed at Schwabisch-Halle and he had been called to
Stuttgart — he was in the forefront in advising violent measures
against Catholic practices. When he reorganised the Church in
Wiirtemberg, in 1536, after the victory of Duke Ulrich, attendance
at the Protestant sermons was made obligatory on the Catholics
of Stuttgart under pain of a fine, or of imprisonment in the tower
on bread and water.6 Brenz, though widely extolled as tolerant
and broadminded, in his quality of spiritual adviser to Duke
Christopher, stooped to the meanest and most petty regulations
in order to induce the nuns who still remained faithful to their

1 His letter of 1533, above, p. 255 f.

2 " Verlegung," etc. (Wittenberg, 1536), Bl. A 4a, E 3a. Paulus.
ib., p.HL

3 " Prozess," etc.. Worms (1557). Paiilus, ib., p. 72 f.

* " Ob eine weltliche Obrigkeit . . . moge die Wiedertaufer . . .
riehten lassen," Marburg, 1528. Paulus, ib., p. 115, correcting Enders,
" Brief wechsel Luthera."

6 Melanchthon, Feb., 1530, to a friend, " Corp. ref.," 2, p. 18.

• F. L. Heyd, t4 Ulrich, Herzog zu Wiu-temberg," 3, 1844, p. 172.
pa.ulus, ib., p. 123,

276 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

religion— many of whom were of high birth and advanced in
years — to accept the new faith ; they were compelled to attend
the sermons and religious colloquies, deprived of their books of
devotion, their correspondence was supervised, they had to
entertain Protestant guests at table and to be served by Lutheran
maids, etc.1

The unenviable distinction of having most thoroughly assimi
lated Luther's intolerant views was enjoyed by two men in close
mental kinship with him, viz. Justus Menius and Johann Spangen-
berg.

Johann Spangenberg, an enthusiastic pupil of Luther's, and,
later, Superintendent at Eisleben, when preacher at Nordhausen
declared in a tract that " fear of God's wrath and His extreme
displeasure " had rightly led the Town-Council to forbid Catholics
to attend Catholic sermons, because, there, souls were " horribly
murdered " ; even Nabuchodonosor and Darius had set the
authorities an example of how "blasphemy against religion"
was to be treated. 2

Justus Menius, Luther's friend, who worked as superintendent
at Eisenach and Gotha, followed Luther in qualifying the Ana
baptists as the emissaries of the devil, as " rebels and murderers,"
who had fallen under the ban of the authorities because they did
not " profess the true faith according to the Word of God " and
live a " godly life." Of the authorities who were negligent in
punishing them he exclaims : " The devil rides such rulers so
that they sin and do what is unrighteous." Luther himself wrote
laudatory prefaces to his works on the subject. In 1552 Menius
demanded from Duke Albert of Prussia a severe prohibition
against the new believers' teaching or writing anything that was
at variance with the Confession of Augsburg. When, however,
his opponents secured the ear of the Court he had himself to
suffer ; the ruler pointed out to him that, in accordance with his
own theories of the supremacy of the sovereign, it was the duty
of the authorities, by virtue of their princely office, to withstand
false doctrine and, consequently, he himself must either submit
or go to prison ; upon this Menius made his escape to Leipzig
(t!558).3

Urban Rhegius, appointed General Superintendent by Duko
Ernest of Brunswick-Luneburg after the Diet of Augsburg, not
only defended in his writings a relentless system of compulsion
whereby Catholic parents were no longer permitted even in their
homes to instruct their children in the Catholic faith, but also
allowed " Zwinglians and Papists to be beaten with rods and
banished from the town." The authorities he invited to appropri-

1 Chr. Besold, " Virginum sacrarum monimenta," etc., 1636
p. 237 sqq. Janssen-Pastor, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl.
trans.), 7, pp. 80-90.

2 "Von den Worten Christi. Matt. xjii. (v, 30)," noplace, 1541,
Bl. C 1 to D 3, Paulas, p. 92 f .

3 Cp. P&ulns, *&.. pp. 86-91,

PROTESTANT INTOLERANCE 277

ate the property of the clergy. The inglorious war he waged
against the nuns of Liineburg, who, in spite of every kind of
persecution, stood true to their religion, has recently been brought
to light, and that, thanks to Protestant research ; it forms one of
the blackest pages in the history of Lutheran intolerance.1

A memorial of the Strasburg preachers dating from 1535
(printed in 1537) which might be termed the fullest and most
complete exposition of the Royal Supremacy in church affairs
drafted in that period, is the work of Wolfgang Capito, a preacher
often extolled for his moderation and prudence.2 In it we have
the picture of a Government-Church with a " Caliph " (Dollin-
ger's expression) at its head, who combines in himself the highest
secular and spiritual authority.

Martin Bucer though differing from Luther in much else
was yet at one with him in asserting that it was the duty of
the secular authority to abolish 4 ' false doctrine and per
verted ceremonials," and that, as the sole authority, it was
to be obeyed by " all the bishops and clergy." Though
anxious to be regarded as considerate and peaceable, he
defended the prohibition against Catholic sermons issued at
Augsburg by the City-Council in 1534, and even incited it
to still more stringent measures against the Catholics. He
advocated quite openly " the power of the authorities over
consciences."3 "Among us Christians," he asks, "is
injury and slaughter of souls by false worship of less import
ance than the ravishing of wives and daughters ? " 4 He
never rested until, in 1537, with the help of such hot-heads
as Wolfgang Musculus, he brought about the entire sup
pression of the Mass at Augsburg. At his instigation 4t many
fine paintings, monuments and ancient works of art in the
churches were wantonly torn, broken and smashed."5
Whoever refused to submit and attend public worship was
obliged within eight days to quit the city-boundaries.
Catholic citizens were forbidden under severe penalties to
attend Catholic worship elsewhere, and special guards were
stationed at the gates to prevent any such attempt.6

1 Cp. ib., pp. 100-115, with extracts from A. Wrede, " Die Euifuli-
ruiig der Reformation im Lxineburgischen durch Herzog Ernst den
Bekenner," 1887. Cp. Wrede, " Ernst cler Bekenner," 1888.

2 " Responsio de missa, matrimonio et iure magistratus in re-
ligionem," Argentorati, 1537. 2nd ed. 1540. Extracts from the latter
in Paulus, p. 129 ff.

3 C. Hagan, ib., quoted p. 153. 4 Paulus, ib., p. 155.

6 P. v. Stetten, " Gesch. der Stadt Augsburg," 1, 1743, p. 445.
• Paulus, ib., p. 160.

278 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

In other of the Imperial cities Bucer acted with no less
violence and intolerance, for instance, at Ulm, where he
supported (Ecolampadius and Ambrose Blaurer in 1531,
and at Strasburg where he acted in concert with Capito,
Caspar Hedio, Matthaeus Zelland others. Here, in 1529, after
the Town-Council had prohibited. Catholic worship, the
Councillors were requested by the preachers to help to fill
the emptj^ churches by issuing regulations prescribing
attendance at the sermons. Bucer adhered till his death
(1551), as his work " De Eegno Christi" (1550) proves, to
the principle of the rights and duties of authorities towards
the new religion.1

In the above survey of those who preached religious
intolerance only Luther's own pupils and followers have
been considered ; the result would be even less cheering
were the leaders of the other Protestant sects added to the
list.

At Zurich, Zwingli's State-Church grew up much as
Luther's did in Germany ; (Ecolampadius at Basle and
Zwingli's successor, Bullinger, were strong compulsionists.
Calvin's name is even more closely bound up with the idea
of religious absolutism, while the task of handing down to
posterity his harsh doctrine of religious compulsion was
undertaken by Beza in his notorious work " De hocreticis a
civili magistrate puniendis." The annals of the Established
Church of England were likewise at the outset written in
blood.

The sufferings endured by the Catholics in Germany
owing to the wave of intolerance which spread from Witten
berg arc reflected in the countless complaints we hear at that
time. Many writings still tell to-day of the injustice under
which they groaned. In a " Manual of Complaint and
Consolation for all oppressed Christians ' ' we read as follows :
4 ' Oh, what a mockery it is that these tyrants and abuscrs of
power should exclaim everywhere that their gospel is
Christian freedom, that they have no wish to tyrannise over
consciences when there could never have been worse tyrants
than those men who do not scruple to go on unceasingly
tormenting the consciences of the people, robbing them of
the consolation of the holy sacraments of the religious
ministrations of consecrated priests, of all their prayer-books

1 On Bucer, cp. Paulus, ib., pp. 142-175.

THE "SECTARIANS" 279

and devotional works, and, even on their death-beds, in
spite of their piteous entreaties refusing them the Holy
Viaticum ! " x This touching complaint is made more
particularly in the name of those most defenceless members
of society, who were devoid of legal protection and whose
very poverty made emigration impossible. " All the
iniquities committed in German lands and cities are attested
at the Judgment-Seat of God by the souls of thousands of
consecrated nuns, who never did wrong to anyone and who
asked for nothing more than permission to live and die in
their ancient faith, even though their worldly goods should
be taken away from them and they shut up within closed
walls."2

2. Luther as Judge

It must not be overlooked that Luther's severity towards
heretics within his fold is to be set down largely to his
nervous irritability arising partly out of his natural tempera
ment, partly out of his unceasing labours, so that, if we arc
to be just to him, his conviction that his doctrine was the
only authorised one must not be held to be entirely respon
sible for his behaviour. At the same time it is plain how
deeply he was affected by belief in his higher mission. Thus
he practically made himself a religious dictator, when, in
1542, he demanded that the Meissen nobles who had come
over to him should not only ratify their new belief by doing
penance, but also should " signify their approval of every
thing which has hitherto been done by us and shall be done
in the future."3

Another point on which we must also do him justice is the
service performed by him in his controversies with rivals, in
the field both of theology and Scripture-exegesis, by re
pressing with such energy and general success the danger
ous tendencies apparent in the Anabaptist heresy and the
Antinomianism of Johann Agricola. In the attacks of the

1 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 7, p. 91.

3 Ib.

8 To Anton Lauterbach, May 7, 1542, " Briefe," ed. De Wette, 5,
p. 468. The persons in question had already frequently communicated
under both kinds as a sign of their entry into Lutheranism, but had
passed unfavourable criticisms on certain measures of Luther's. He
commissions Lauterbach : " Ubi etiani pwuituerint, hoc exigendum est,
ut hactenus a nobis gesta et in posterum gerenda probent. Alioqui quce
crit pcenitentia, si nostra facta damnaverint hoc est sua omnia per fictam
panitcntiam stabilicrint ? "

280 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

Antinomians on all law, even on the Decalogue, there
undoubtedly lay a great danger for morality and religion.
Certain of Luther's own principles were carried to rash, nay,
foolhardy, lengths by the Antinomians. Hence it was not
unfortunate that Agricola found pitted against him so
redoubtable an opponent as Luther who, as was his wont,
interfered and nipped the evil in the bud.

The Conceit and the Obstinacy of the "Heretics"

Luther bitterly accuses of boundless presumption all the
heretics within the New Faith, but particularly Agricola.
The latter might even be classed with those doctors who
might most fittingly be compared with Arius and treated in
the same way.

"Tliis man," ho says of Agricola, "is presumption itself.
Neither with the flute nor with tears is he to be won. ... I see
it is my goodness that puffs him up. He says he is a guiltless
Abel. He is, forsooth, being made a martyr at my hands. ..."
But, so Luther continues, he will be such a martyr as was Arius
and Satan.1

In 1542, when the conversation at table turned on the teachers
of the New Faith whose opinions differed from Luther's, a good
many names were mentioned, " Those at Zurich " (Zwingli's
pupils), Carlstadt, Bucer and Capito, " Grickel and Jeckel "
some of them living and some of them already dead — all of whom
were insufferably presumptuous. It was then that Bugenhagen,
who was present, could not refrain from quoting the passage in
the Old Testament where Moses had commanded in God's name
" That prophet shall be slain because he spoke to draw you away
from the Lord your God. ... If thy brother would persuade
thee (to serve other gods), thou shalt presently put him to death.
Let thy hand be the first upon him and afterwards the hands of
all the people. With stones shall he be stoned to death : because
he would have withdrawn thee from the Lord thy God. If in
one of the cities thou hear that some have withdrawn the inhabi
tants of their city, inquire carefully and diligently the truth of
the thing by looking well into it, and if thou find that which is said
to be certain and that this abomination hath been committed,
thou shalt forthwith kill the inhabitants of that city with the
edge of the sword, and shalt destroy it and all things that are in
it, even to the cattle."2

Hence it was perhaps rather lucky that the Wittenberg
tribunal was presided over by the sovereign of the land, and that
the sentences pronounced at Luther's table or in the learned

1 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 322.

2 Dout. xiii. 5 ff., above, p. 273.

THE "SECTARIANS55 281

circles of the Theological Faculty required subsequent ratifica
tion by the authorities.

Luther's complaints elsewhere about the pride of the heretics
throw still further light on the jealousy which was at work in him
(above, p. 200).

" How is it that all the insurgents say ' I am the man ? ' They
want all the glory for themselves and hate and are grim with all
others, just like the Pope who also wants to stand alone."1
Zwingli appears to be one of the foremost among those desirous
of robbing him of his due glory. " He wras ambitious through
and through."2 On hearing that Zwingli had said that, in three
years, he would have France, Spain and England " on his side
and for his share," Luther became very bitter and several times
complained of Zwingli 's intention to seize upon his harvest ;
such words seemed to him the "boasting of a braggart."3
" (Ecolampadius, too, fancied himself the doctor of doctors and
far above me, even before he had ever heard me." And in the
same way Carlstadt said : ** As for you, Sir Doctor, I don't care
a snap ! Miinzcr, too, preached against two Popes, the old one
and the new,4 said I must be a Saul, and that though I had made
a good beginning, the Spirit of God had left me. . . . Hence let
all the theologians and preachers look to it and diligently beware
lest they seek their glory in Holy Scripture and in God's Word ;
otherwise they will have a fall."5 — "Mr. Eisleben [Johann
Agricola] labours under great pride and presumption ; he wants
to be the only one, and, with his pride and his puffed-up spirit,
to surpass all others."6 " They are scamps," so he abuses them
in another passage, " fain would they get at us and surpass us,
as though forsooth we were blind and could not see through their
tricks."7

Elsewhere in the Table-Talk we read : " My best friends,"
said Dr. Martin, with a deep sigh, " seek to stamp me under foot
and to trouble and besmirch the Evangel ; hence I am going to
hold a disputation." " Alas, that, in my own lifetime, I should
see them strutting about and seeking to rule." It was with him
as with St. Paul to whom God wished to showr how much he must
suffer for His Name's sake (Acts ix. 16). Some indeed were trying
to persuade him that these foes in his own household were not
really against Luther, but only against Cruciger, Rorer, etc. But
this was false. " For the Catechism, the Exposition of the Ten
Commandments and the Confession of Augsburg are mine, not
Cruciger 's or Rorer's."8

Of those near him "Mr. Eisleben " (Agricola) seemed to him
his chief rival ; those abroad troubled him less ; for a while
Luther was obsessed by the idea that Agricola, " with his cool
head, was set on securing the reins and was seeking to become a
great lord."9

Of Carlstadt Luther once said, referring to the rivalry between

1 Erl. ed., 61, p. 7, " Tischreden." 2 /&., p. 2C. 3 P. 8 f .
4 Cp. above, vol. ii., p. 377. 5 " Werke," ib., p. 26.

« P. 30. » P. 11. 8 P. 27 ff. 9 P. 31.

282 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

the pair : " He persuaded himself that there was no more learned
man on earth than he ; what I write that he imitates and seeks
to copy me." After a profession of personal humility, Luther
concludes : " And yet, by God's Grace, I am more learned than
all the Sophists and theologians of the Schools."1

Though Luther never grows weary of insisting against the
heretics at home on the c ' public, common doctrine,' ' and of
instancing the fell consequences of pride and obstinacy, even
going so far as to predict that they will in all likelihood
never be converted because founders of sects rarely retrace
their steps and recant, 2 yet he never seems to have perceived
that the point of all this might equally well have been
turned against himself.

The blindness of such heretics he describes in a tract of
1526 dedicated to Queen Mary of Hungary :

"' Here we may all of us well be afraid, and particularly all
heretics and false teachers. . . . Such a temper [obstinacy in
sticking to one's own opinion] penetrates like water into the
inmost recesses and like oil into the very bone, and becomes our
daily clothing. Then it comes about that one party curses the
other, and the doctrine of one is rank poison and malediction to
the other, and his own doctrine nothing but blessing and salva
tion ; this we now see among our fanatics and Papists. Then
everything is lost. The masses are not converted ; a few, whom
God has chosen, come right again, but the others remain under
the curse and even regard it as a precious thing. . . . Nor have
I ever read of heresiarchs being converted ; they remain obdurate
in their own conceit, the oil has gone into the bone . . . and has
become part of their nature. They allow none to find fault with
them and brook no opposition. This is the sin against the Holy
Ghost for which there is no forgiveness."3

In the same writing he describes the heretics' way of speaking :
" The heretics give themselves up to idle talk so that one hears
of nothing but their dreams. . . . They overflow with words ; all
evildoers tend to become garrulous. As a boiling pot foams and
bubbles over, so they too overflow with the talk of which their
heart is full. . . . They stand stiff upon their doctrine about
which there is no lack of ranting."4

The description (which seats so well on Luther himself) pro
ceeds : " Those are heretics and apostates who follow their own
ideas rather than the common tradition of Christendom, who
transgress the teaching of their fathers and separate themselves
from the common ways and usages of the whole of Christendom,

1 P. 14. 2 See e.g. the next quotation.

3 Weim. ed., 19, p. 609 f . ; Erl. ed., 38, p. 445 f ., " Vier trostliche
Psalmen . . . an die Konigyn zu Hungern."
* Ib., p. 585-414.

THE " SECTARIANS " 283

who, out of pure wantonness, invent new ways and methods
without cause, and contrary to Holy Writ."1 — They misread the
Word of God according to their whim and make it mean what
they please. In short they undertake something out of the
common and invent a belief of their own, regardless of God's
Word. . . . God must put up with their doctrine and life as
being alone holy and Godly."2

Again and again he brands pride as the cause of all heresy :
" This is the reason ; they think much of themselves, which,
indeed, is the cause and well-spring of all heresies, for, as
Augustine also says, ' Ambition is the mother of all heresies.'
Thus Zwingli and Bucer now put forward a new doctrine. . . .
So dangerous a thing is pride in the clergy."3 — "We cannot
sufficiently be on our guard against this deadly vice. Vices of the
body are gross, and we feel them to be such, but this vice can
always deck itself out with the glory of God, as though it had
God's Word on its side. But beneath the outward veil there is
nothing but vain glory."4 — " Lo, here you have in brief the cause
and ground of all idolatry, heresy, hypocrisy and error, what the
prophets inveigh against, and what was the cause of their being
put to death, and against which the whole of Scripture witnesses.
It all comes from obstinacy and conceit and the ideas of natural
reason which puffs itself up ... and fancies it knows enough,
and can find its way for itself, etc."5

Such statements of Luther's are of supreme importance
for judging of his Divine Mission. In his frame of mind
it became at last an impossibility for him to realise that
his hostility and intolerance towards "heretics" within
his fold could redound on himself, or that he was contra
dicting himself in continuing to proclaim freedom, or at
least in continuing to make the fullest use of it himself.
In reality he was living in a world of his own, and his mental
state cannot be judged of by the usual standards.

"Heretics" who cannot be sure of their Cause

Apart from the " pride of the heretics," another idea of
Luther's deserves attention, viz. that those teachers who
differed from him, in their heart of hearts, knew him to be
in the right, or at least neither were nor could be quite
certain of their own doctrines. Of any call in their case
there could be no question ; his call, however, was above
doubt, seeing his certainty. Hence, in his dealings with the

1 76., Weim. ed., 7, p. 394 ; Erl. ed., 24", p. 112.
3 76., 192, p. 273. 3 76., 38, p. 177 f.

« 76., Weim. ed., 17, 1, p. 235 ; Erl. ed., 39, p. 114.
s 76., 10s, p. 193 f.

284 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

" sectarians " we once again find the same strange attitude,
as he had exhibited towards the " Papists," who, according
to him, likewise were withstanding their own conscience and
lacked any real call.

To a man so full of such fiery enthusiasm for his cause
and so dominated by his imagination as Luther, it seems to
have been an easy task to persuade himself ever more and
more firmly, that all his opponents' doings were against
their own conscience.

The " teachers of faith," he says, speaking of the sectarians,
ought first of all " to be certain about their mission. Otherwise
all is up with them. It was this [argument] that killed (Eco-
lampadius. He could not endure the self -accusation : How if yon
have taught what is false ? "* Concerning (Ecolampadius Luther
professed to know that, even in his prayers, he had been doubtful
of his own doctrine. But, so he argues, if a man goes so far as to
pray for the spread of his doctrine he must surely first be ** quite
certain and not doubt thus of the Word and of his doctrine, for
doubts and uncertainty have no place in theology, but a man
must be certain of his case in the face of God." Before the world,
indeed, he continues, with a strange limitation of his previous
assertion, " it behoves one to be humble, to proceed gently and
to say : If anyone knows better, let him say so ; to God's Word
I will gladly yield when I am better instructed."2 Yet, in the
same works, where seemingly he professes such willingness to
listen to others, he himself proclaims most emphatically his great
mission and its exclusive character.3

All heretics, he once remarked, were disarmed by this one
question : " My friend, is it the command of our Lord God [that
you should teach thus] ? At this, one and all are struck dumb."4
Only by dint of lying are they able to boast of their inward
assurance of their cause. Here we have Campanus for instance :
" He boasts that he is as sure as sure can be of his cause and that
it is impossible for him to be mistaken." " But he is an accursed
lump of filth whom we ought to despise and not bother our heads
about writing against, for this only makes him more bold, proud
and brave. . . . Whereupon Master Philip [Melanchthon] said :
his suggestion would be that he should be strung up on the
gallows, and this he had written to his lord [the Elector]."6

With his own " certainty " Luther triumphantly confronts his
opponents who at heart were uncertain : " Every man who speaks
the Word of Christ is free to boast that his mouth is the mouth
of Christ " ; such a one, confiding in his certainty, may help to
" tear Antichrist out of men's hearts, so that his cause may no
longer avail."6 — "But, now, the articles of pure doctrine are

1 Mathesius, " Aufzeichii.," p. 83. 2 Erl. ed., 61, p. 17.

3 Cp. Weim. ed., 8, p. 684 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 56.

4 ic Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 321. 5 Erl. ed., 61, p. 5.
6 /&., Weim. ed., 8, p. 683 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 52 f.

THE "SECTARIANS'1 285

proved [by me] from Scripture in the clearest way, and yet it
carries no weight with them ; never has an article of the faith
been preached which has not more than once been attacked and
contradicted by heretics, who, nevertheless, read the same
Scriptures as we."1 — "In short, 'heretics must needs arise'
(1 Cor. xi. 19), and that cannot be stopped, for it was so even in
the Apostles' time. We are no better off than our fathers ; Christ
Himself was persecuted."2 "No heretic allows himself to be
convinced. They neither see nor hear anything, like Master
Stiff el [Michael Stiefel] ; lie saw me not nor heard me. ... It is
forbidden to curse, swear, etc., far more to cause heresy."3 —
Then one becomes hardened against God the Holy Ghost ; these
fanatics " do not even doubt " — which is astonishing — " they
stand firm." He had warned the Anabaptist Marcus (Stiibner),
so he relates, " to beware lest he err," to which he answered that
" God Himself shall not dissuade me from this."4

In short, since Luther's own cause is so clear and certain, those
who disagree, particularly the sectarians, must simply have
discarded the faith. For instance, " of Master Jeckel [Jacob
Schenk] I hold that he believes nothing."5 He, Luther, has " at
all times taught God's Word in all simplicity ; to this I adhere,
and will surrender myself a prisoner to it or else — become a Pope
who believes neither in the again-rising of the dead nor in life
everlasting."6 Thus he sees no middle course between the most
frivolous unbelief and the Word of God as he believes and
interprets it. Hence, with heretics, whether among the Pope's
men or in his own flock, " he will have nothing to do outside of
Scripture — unless indeed they start working miracles."

Where are your Miracles ?

The stress Luther lays on miracles as a proof of doctrine
is another trait to add to the picture of his psychology.
Again and again he repeated anew what he had already, in
1524, said of Miinzer and some of the preachers : They
must be told to corroborate their mission by signs and
wonders, or else be forbidden to preach ; for whenever God
wills to change the order of things He always works miracles.7
There is something almost tragic in the courage with which
he appealed to miracles in this connection, when we bear
in mind his own difficulties, in accounting for their absence
in his own case.8 Here it is enough to recall Hier. Weller's
words : " I still remember right well," Weller writes, " how
he once said that he had never thought of asking God for the

1 Ib., II2, p. 267. 2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 323.
3 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 295. * 76., p. 317.

5 76., p. 295. « Erl. ed., 61, p. 21. • 76.. p. 1,

• Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 153 ft'.

286 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

gift of raising the dead, or of performing other miracles,
though he did not doubt he might have obtained such of
God had he wished ; he had, however, preferred to be
content with the rich gift of Scripture-interpretation ; he
further said that he had raised two persons from the dead,
one of them being Philip Melanchthon and the other a God
fearing man.1

As against the sects and fanatics, Luther urges that he
himself laid no claim to any extraordinary mission ; as
they, however, did make such a claim, they must vindicate
it by miracles. <>4 I have never preached or sought to preach
unless I was asked and called for by men, for I cannot boast
as they do that God has sent me from heaven without means ;
they run of their own accord, though no one sends them,
as Jeremias writes [xxiii. 21] ; for this reason they work
no good."2 Neither here nor elsewhere does he explicitly
state by whom it is necessary to be " asked " or " called."
His account of the source whence he derives his mission
also varies, being now the Wittenberg magistrates, now
his Doctor's degree, now the sovereign, now the enthusi
astic hearers and readers of his word.3

Such was his confidence that Luther forgot that it was
by no means difficult for the " false brethren " within his
camp to pick out the weak spots in his doctrine. He refused
to recognise that much of their criticism was valid ; on the
negative side it even took the place of miracles. It was not
every Catholic polemic who succeeded in demonstrating so
clearly and convincingly the anomalies in Luther's views,
for instance, on the Law and Gospel, as the Antinomian.
Johann Agricola.

On the other hand, Luther could well note with satis
faction the inability of the heretics to bring forward any
thing positive of importance. They were dwarfs compared
with him. With his knowledge of the Bible it was child's
play to him to overthrow the fanatics' often ludicrous
applications of Scripture. Of Zwingli, too, it was easy for
him to get the better by dint of sticking to the literal sense
of Christ's words of institution : *' This is My Body."
Luther was not slow in pointing out the blemishes of the

1 Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 162.

2 Letter of Aug. 21, 1524, Weim. ed., 15. p. 240 (" Brief wechs.el,"
4, p. 377 L ; " Briefe," ed. De Wette, 2, p. 538).

* Above, vol. iii., p. 154,

THE "WITTENBERG DICTATOR" 287

" fanatics," their vanity and blind obedience to ambition
and self-will, and the impracticability of their fantastic, and
often revolutionary, theories. The very truth of his
strictures, for all his lack of miracles, raised him in his own
eyes, far above these clumsy teachers ; this perhaps enables
us to understand better the utter contempt he expresses
for them.

His Anger with Lemnius and Others

One had but to praise those whom he condemned to call
forth Luther's implacable anger.

This was the experience in 1538 of the humanist, Simon
Lemnius (Lemchen) of Wittenberg, a man otherwise kindly
disposed to the new teaching. A humanist above all, he
had won Melanchthon' s favour on account of his talent.

Lemnius had thoughtlessly dared to publish two books of
epigrams in which he not only attacked with biting sarcasm
certain Wittenberg personages, but actually ventured to praise
Archbishop Albert of Mayence, Luther's powerful opponent.
The poet, no doubt, was anxious to curry favour with the Arch
bishop so as to find in him a Maecenas ; he even went so far as to
extol him as the man who " had kept alive the olden faith." The
censorship for which Melanchthon as Rector of the University
was then responsible, was caught napping. Lemnius was indeed
arrested by the University, but he escaped and fled from Witten
berg. On Trinity Sunday, June 16th, Luther read out from the
pulpit a Mandate in which he abused Archbishop Albert in
disgraceful terms, and scourged as a criminal act the praise
bestowed in the " shameful, shocking book of lies " on Bishop
Albert, " a devil out of whom it made a saint." In it he also
declared that, " by every code of law, and no matter whither the
fugitive knave had fled, his head was forfeit."1 Thus Lemnius
was as good as outlawed — though no Court of Justice had yet
sentenced him. On July 4th Melanchthon formally expelled
him from the University on account of " faithlessness, perjury and
slander."2 The "perjury" consisted in his having fled, in
defiance of the obedience he owed to the University, HO as to
evade the harsh penalties he had reason to apprehend. The
whole edition of the Epigrams was destroyed.

"It is the devil who hatches out such knaves," remarked
Luther, " particularly among the Papists, through whom he
attacks and thwarts us. . . . Because we preach Christ alone he
persecutes us in every way he can." The bishops deserve to be
called " lost and godless knaves and foes of God," hence " those
must not be tolerated here who praise them in verse and prose."*

1 " Briefe," 6, p. 199 f. See ahove, vol. iv., p. 292.

2 " Corp. ref.," 3, p. 549.

3 Erl. ed., 60, p. 318 f, " Colloq.," cd, Bindaeil, 1, p. 160 ay.

288 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

When Lemnius had a second edition of the Epigrams printed
at Wittenberg this also was suppressed. He had added a third
book, devoted to abuse of Luther and containing the famous
" Merd-Song " on Luther, who was then ailing from diarrhoea.
Luther retorted with a " Merd-Song " of his own on Lemnius.
His verses he read aloud to his friends and they became public
property through being incorporated in Lauterbach's notes of
the Table-Talk.1

Lemnius, whose career had been wrecked by Luther's anger
and revenge, then wrote an " Apologia against the unjust and
lying decree " which the Wittenberg University had published
against him at the instigation (" itnperio et tyrannide ") of Martin
Luther and Justus Jonas. He still retained his loose humanistic
style after his return in 1538 to his native Switzerland, where he
obtained a position as schoolmaster at Coire.

The above Apologia was printed at Cologne, it would seem in
1539, but very few copies survive owing to the energy shown in
their suppression. It is only of recent years that the complete
text has become generally known ;2 till then Protestants like
Schelhorn and Hausen had only ventured to give fragments of
the work. In it the writer complains bitterly that Luther " has
published a pamphlet against him [the mandate read aloud in
the church] in which, playing both the judge and the sovereign,
Luther had condemned and abused him." "Such authority in
civil matters " does this soul-herd arrogate to himself. He robs
the bishops of their secular power, but he himself is a tyrant. The
charges against Luther's private life made in this work are
glaring, and they come, moreover, from a man who knew his
Wittenberg, but it must not be forgotten that he was now a bitter
foe of Luther. 3 He goes so far as to declare that Luther's shame
less attacks on the sovereigns, for instance on the Elector of
Mayence, gave grounds for apprehending contempt of all
authority and the outbreak of a war that would spell the ruin
of Germany.

Meanwhile " Luther sits like a dictator at Wittenberg and
rules ; what he says must be taken as law."4 He calls his opponent
the "Wittenberg Pope" ("Papa Albiacus"), who had been
faithless to his Vows.

In order rightly to appreciate, from their psychological
side, Luther's angry outbursts against the heretics in his
party we must above all remember his fears of a coming

1 See above, vol. iii., p. 234, n. 1.

2 Ed. Const, v. Hofler, " SB. der bohm. Cesellschaft cler Wissen-
schaften," 1892, p. 79 f.

3 P. 123 Lemnius says the following of Luther's private life : " Dum
ae episcopum iactitat evangelicum, qui fit, ut ille parum eobrie vivat ?
Vino enim ciboque sese ingurgitate solet suosque adidatores et assentatorcs
secum habet, habet suam Venerem ac fere nihil prorsns illi deesse potest,
quod ad voluptatem ac libidinem pertinet" Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 274.

* " Apologia," p. 136.

' THE WITTENBERG DICTATOR " 289

collapse of theology among his following ; that he foresaw
something of the sort has already been shown above.1

He was also keenly alive to the harm these dissensions
were doing to his reputation. Nor must we forget the
threatening and highly insulting behaviour of many of these
heretics. Taking all things together, it is easy to understand
how a temper such as his was lashed to fury when denounc
ing the '* presumption and foolhardiness " of his foes.2

" A muddled and obstinate head " sits on the neck of the
fanatics' ringleader; "his horns must be blunted."3 — " Carl-
stadt and Zwingli behave with insolence and defiance " ; " We
must needs decry the fanatics as damned " ; " they actually
dare to pick holes in our doctrine ; ah, the scoundrelly rabble do
a great injury to our Evangel even in the outland and enable our
foes to scoff at us."4 — " Their pride and audacity will bring about
their downfall."5

In truth, he says, " Carlstadt blasphemed himself to death."4 —
(Ecolampadius saw the " curse " of God fulfilled in himself, " and
withered away with fear the night after Zwingli had been struck
down " (at Cappel).7 Zwingli himself, like the rest, was urged on
merely by "his boundless ambition."8 — Egranus (Johann
Wildenauer) was a "proud donkey."9 — Bucer is a "gossip,"10
" a miscreant through and through, in every case, inflection and
rule of grammar ; I trust him not at all, for Paul says [Titus iii.
10] ' A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition,
avoid.' M11 — Sebastian Franck is a "wicked, venomous knave and
it is a wonder to me that those at Ulm care to keep him." 12 " He
only loved to do harm, is inconstant and boasts of the spirit ; but
his wife has plenty of spirit and it is she who inspirits him with
her spirit."13 — Schwenckfeld deserves as little as Franck to be
written against. " Agricola is only puffed up with hatred and
ambition."14

He " is and should be called a godless man who denies God,
which is what the Sacramentarians do.15 — " Of false brethren we
must above all things beware."16 — With such a one " there is no
hope of repentance; he is bold, impudent."17 — "He remains
obdurate," he says of one of these heretics, " a cunning, evil-
minded scoffer " ; he betrays us as " Judas betrayed Christ."18

The depth of the yawning abyss between the heretics and
Luther and also the hatred they bore him on account of his
treatment of them is plain from the words of Miinzer and
Ickelsamer already quoted.19

1 See above, vol. v., pp. 169 ff., 250 ff.

2 Erl. ed., 61, p. 16. 3 16., p. 7 f . 4 P. 8 f . 5 P. 17.

6 Mathesius, " Tischreden," ed. Kroker, p. 249.

7 Ib., p. 239. 8 P. 167. » P. 90. 10 P. 154. « P. 253
18 P. 109. 13 P. 166. " P. 403. 16 Erl. ed., 61, p. 19 f.

6 Ib., p. 22. 17 P. 24, 18 P. 25 « Above, voj, n., p. 377,
VI.— u

290 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

3. The Church-Unseen, its Origin and Early History

His doctrine of the Church may in many respects be
regarded as the key-stone and centre of the rest of Luther's
theology.

It is practically important in that it affords a clue to
anyone desirous of ascertaining to which of the competing
religious bodies he should belong. It was usually to this
article on the Church that those who afterwards returned to
Catholicism appealed in vindication of their step. It was
also the practice of Catholic writers, in their controversies
with Luther, to appeal to the doctrine of the one Church
which has never erred in dogma in order to convict him
more speedily of the guilt of his separation. All of them
started from the old definition, according to which the
Church is the visible commonwealth of the faithful, founded
by Christ on Peter, the Rock, which confesses the same
Christian belief and unites in the same Sacraments under
the guidance of its lawful pastors, in particular of the suc
cessors of St. Peter.

Luther himself was fully aware of the supreme importance
of this doctrine ; he frequently enough brings his opponents
on the scene " crying Church, Church!"1 Among the
Papists, he says, they do nothing but shriek Church, Church,
Church, and this is the chief obstacle to reunion.2 " Hence
there is indeed need that we should see what the Holy
Christian Church is. If it is the clergy and their mob, then
the devil has won and we two, God and His Word, arc the
losers."3 " The Pope quotes this text [John xiv. 17 : ' The
spirit of truth shall remain with you '] strongly and im
pressively. . . . They have become so certain of their cause
that they take their stand on it as on a wall of iron. . . .
This we ourselves must believe and say, viz. that the Holy
Ghost is with the Church which is certainly on earth and
will remain."4 But was Luther's Church a visible or an
invisible one ?

1 Erl. ed., 63, p. 415, in the Preface to the 2nd part of his German
Works (compiled from his writings). Cp. vol. 28, pp. 04, 89.

" Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 529 (1534).
3 Weim ed., 30, Q « •4rw • KV1 ~*
* Erl. ed., 49, p

Weim ed., 30, 3, p. 407 ; Erl. ed., 03, p. 303 (1531).
. 163 f.

THE CHURCH-UNSEEN 291

Invisibility of Luther's Church

Bearing in mind the religious compulsion practised by
Luther, the question would seem already answered. His
practice involved the existence of an outward ecclesiastical
authority with outward rules, a congregation to which it
was impossible to belong without submitting to the doctrine
of a visible head or corporation. Of the visible nature of
this Church there can be no question. It is with this tangible
authority that he confronts the Anabaptists, for instance
when he says : '* The presumption of these fanatics is un
bearable, for they altogether repudiate the authority of the
Church and will have it all their own way."1 The best-
grounded maxims of the best teachers are despised by them,
so he complains, and they only esteem the opinions they
themselves have rummaged for in Scripture ! " Yet great
heed should be paid to the Church."2

Nevertheless, according to Luther's own views which had
not changed much since 1519, the Church is in reality
invisible.

The Church is not an outward, tangible institution, with a
divinely appointed spiritual government and direction,
such as it had been to Catholics through all the ages ;
rather it is the ghostly congregation of true believers known
to Christ alone, Who alone is their head, guide and teacher.
Men holding " office " in the Church there must indeed be,
but only in order to preach and to dispense the sacraments ;
any spiritual authority with full powers for legislating and
guiding the faithful is non-existent.3 It is the "true"
faith and the possession of the 4 ' right ' ' sacraments that
constitute the Church. It is accordingly clear to him that
the Holy Church in which we are to believe, must be a
" ghostly, not a bodily one," " for what we believe," so he
proceeds, " is not bodily but ghostly. The outward Roman
Church we can all of us see, hence she cannot be the true
Church in which we believe which is a congregation or

1 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 17.

8 " Ecclesice ratio diligenter habenda est." Ib.

3 To Melanchthon, July 21, 1530, " Briofwechsel," 8, p. 128: a
bishop has no ecclesiastical authority, no " poteftta.^ statnendi quidquam
. . . quia ecclesia eat libera et domina"

292 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

assembly of the saints in faith ; but no one can see who is a
saint or who has the faith." This he said in his " Von dem
Bapstum tzu Rome " (1520). l

" The Church is altogether in the spirit," so lie again says
in the following year, "she is altogether a spiritual thing."2
" Christ," so he says later, " works in the spirit so that it is
hardly possible to smell His Church and bishops from afar, and
the Holy Ghost behaves as though He were not there " ; but
that Church which is so close at hand " that it is possible to lay
hold on her," as is the case with the Popish Church, is only the
Church of the devil.3 " Who will show us the Church," he asks,
" seeing that she is hidden in the spirit and is only believed in,
just as we say : ' I believe in one Holy Church.' " 4 " The Church
is believed in but she is not seen, and for the most part she is
oppressed and hidden, under weakness, crosses and scandals."5
In short, as a Lutheran theologian puts it, " he is speaking merely
of a Holy Church or congregation whose real complement of
Saints is not apparent, and which is therefore termed invisible."6
Nor could he speak otherwise, for the absence of a divinely
appointed hierarchy, and likewise his principle of the free examina
tion of Scripture, could not but lead him to assume an invisible
Church which lives only in the hearts of those who share the
faith and the possession of the Holy Ghost.

Although, as the theologian in question points out, in
Luther's idea of the Church visible elements are not lacking,
e.g. preaching and the sacraments, yet the actual congrega
tion of Saints is visible to God alone ; indeed the Church
would still be there even should her only members consist of
" babes in the cradle." 7 For instance, according to him, the
Church before his day comprised very few people, and those
unknown, who kept the Gospel undented and thus preserved
the Church ; some " elect souls must needs have come back,

1 Weim. ed., 6, p. 300 f. ; Erl. ed., 27, p. 107. Cp. ib., p. 296 f.-
102; the Church is chiefly "inward, spiritual Christianity," though
she, like the soul in the body, has also an external existence of a kind :
P. 297 f. = 103 : She is governed only by Christ. " Who can tell who
really believes or not ? "

8 Weim. ed., 7, p. 719 : " Opp. lat, var.," 5, p. 309 (1521) : " Dicft
autem, si ecclesia tola est in spiritu et res omnino spiritualis, nemo ergo
nosse poterit, ubi sit ulla eius pars in toto orbe."

3 Erl. ed., 252, p. 440 (1539).

* Weim. ed., 8, p. 419 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, p. 127 (1522): " Quis
ecclesiam nobis monstrabit, quum sit occulta in Spiritu et solum credatur ?
Ricut dicimus : Credo ecclesiam, sanctam."

6 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 20.

• Kostlin, Art. Kirche, in " R.E. f. prot. Th.," 103, 1901.

7 Weim. ed., 6, p. 301 ; Erl. ed., 27, p. 108.

THE CHURCH'S MARKS 293

at least on their death-beds, to the true path."1 — " Such
persons [inspired by the Holy Ghost] there must always be
on earth, even though there should only be two or three, or
just the children. Of the old there are, alas, but few. Such
as do not belong to this class have no right to look upon
themselves as Christians ; nor are they to be consoled as
though they were Christians by much talk of the forgiveness
of sins and the Grace of Christ."2

Thus, in so far as the visible elements were recognised by
Luther, Protestants are justified in teaching that Luther's
Church-Unseen was ' 6 not a mere idea or empt} phantom ' ' ;
if, however, they go on to say that, according to Luther,
the Church is " the living sum total of all who are united in
the Spirit,' ' one sees at a glance that, though, mentally, we
can make a class of all who come under the category of
14 believers," this implies no actual relation between such,
and consequently no "Church" or real though invisible
society.9

The Marks of the Church. Gradual Disappearance of the Old
Conception of the Church

It is a matter of common knowledge that the marks or
"4 notes " of the Church had been the subject of many dis
quisitions before Luther's day. We may now inquire
whether Luther himself also admitted the existence of these
44 marks," by which the true Church of Christ might be
known.

Though the admission of such marks seems incompatible
with his theory of the Church-Unseen, Luther repeatedly
seeks to prove the truth of his own Church and the falsehood
of Catholicism by this means. Especially is this the case in
his 4t Von den Conciliis und Kirchen " (1539).

Thus he asks : How can " a poor, blundering man know where
to find this holy Christian folkdom [the Church] ? For we are told
that it is [to be found] in this life and on this earth . . . where it

1 Cp. the passage quoted by Mohler, "Symbolik," §49, p. 427, from
" De servo arbitrio."

3 Erl. ed., 252, p. 416.

3 Cp. the theological doctrine of the distinction between the body
and soul of the Church. H. Hurter, "Theol. dogm. Comp.," I11. 1903,
p. 259. Tract iii., art. 2.

294 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

will also remain till the end of time." l This leads him to speak of
the marks of the true Church.

" First of all the holy Christian people can be told by its having
the Holy Word of God." Luther forgets to say how the latter is
to be recognised, though on this all depends ; for lie was far from
being the only one who laid claim to possessing the pure Word of
God. Hence many were not slow in pointing out how useless it
was on his part to say : " Where you hear or see this Word
preached, believed, confessed and acted upon, have no doubt
that there, assuredly, must be the true ' ecclesia sancta catholica,'
and the Holy Christian people, even though in number they be
but few."2 Nor did his theological opponents think any more
highly of the other marks of the true Church which he sets up in
the same work. They urged that the distinguishing marks should
surely be clearer than what was to be distinguished, and patent
and evident even to the unlearned. Concerning the marks set up
by Luther, however, there was doubt even among those who had
cut themselves adrift from Catholicism.

For instance, the second mark was " the Sacrament of Baptism
where it is rightly taught and believed, and administered accord
ing to Christ's ordinance."3 But, among the Zwinglians and
Anabaptists, baptism, so at least they claimed, was also rightly
administered according to the ordinance of Christ ; and, as for the
Popish Church, Luther himself admits that she had always
preserved baptism in its purity. Hence, here again, we have no
clear, distinctive mark.

The other marks, according to Luther's " Von den Conciliis,"
were, thirdly, " the Sacrament of the Altar where it is rightly
given, believed and received according to the institution of
Christ " ; and, fourthly, " the keys [forgiveness through faith] of
which they make public use." " Fifthly, the Church is known
outwardly by her consecrating or calling of ministers of the
Church, to the offices which it is her duty to fill." Sixthly, " by
her public prayer, praise, and thanks to God." " Seventhly, the
Christian people is recognised outwardly by the sacred emblem
of the holy Cross since it has to suffer misfortune and persecu
tion, all kinds of temptation and trouble — as we learn from the
Our Father — from the devil, the world and the flesh ; must be
inwardly in pain, foolish and affrighted, and outwardly poor,
despised, weak and sick."4

Bellarmine, the sharp-witted controversialist, and other
polemics even earlier, dealt with these marks and showed their
inadequacy. As regards the last mark Bellarmine, not un
naturally, expressed his wonder that Luther should have spoken
of it, seeing that inward suffering, sadness and apprehension are
of their very nature hidden things. Luther, however, hit upon
this mark because he was accustomed to regard his " tempta
tions " as a witness to the truth of his doctrine, and was con
vinced that the devil was causing them solely out of hatred for

1 Erl. ed., 252, p. 418. z Ib., p. 419.

3 P. 420. * P. 421 ff.

THE CHURCH'S MARKS 295

the truth.1 He thus carried his fancied experiences2 into his
teaching on the Church, a fresh proof that his theology was the
outcome rather of his inner life than of revealed doctrine. The
idea that the Church was ever to be sick, weak, foolish and
despised appealed to him all the more because his Evangel had not
brought forth the good moral fruits he desiderated, and because
he had vainly to struggle against the dissensions within his
congregations and their abuse of the freedom of the Gospel.

It was this experience of his which led him to the fantastic
plan already described of forming an " assembly of earnest
Christians," i.e. a Church-apart enrolled from the true believers
who would then realise the idea of a Church even to the extent of
having the power of excommunicating.

The seven marks of the Church were reduced to two in the
Augsburg Confession of 1530, viz. pure doctrine, and true sacra
ments, and it is thus that they appear in the " Symbolic Books "
of Lutheranism. On the other hand, Luther makes no appeal to
the marks of the Church as given in the olden so-called Nicene
Creed, " though all the olden Councils had insisted that it was
these marks, particularly the attribute of ' Apostolicity,' which
distinguished the Church from the sects."3

As a matter of fact the marks on which Catholic theologians
laid stress, viz. the Church's "oneness, holiness, Catholicity" and
apostolicity furnished a striking answer to the question : Where
is the Church ? She is Apostolic because her connection with
the Apostles has never been broken ; Catholic because of her
universal existence throughout the world ; holy in her aims and
means and in the practice of Christian virtue by the generality of
her followers, and also on account of the special gifts of grace which
have ever brightened her path through the ages ; lastly, she
is one, outwardly in being alone, and also inwardly, in the unity
of her faith and belief, liturgy and sacraments, and in her
character as a society in which a divinely appointed spiritual
authority rules which the rest obey. In the latter respect the
Church, to the Catholic mind, is even a " societas perfecta,"
visible, moreover, to the whole world like the " city set on a hill "
(Matt. v. 12) in which the Fathers of the Church indeed always
saw an image of the Church ;4 she is as a building built upon a
rock, as a flock gathered round the shepherd, both of them com
parisons which we owe to the Church's Divine Founder.

It was not without reason that Luther was averse to any appeal
to the four marks of the Church just referred to. What unity had
he wherewith to confront that of Catholicism under its Pope ?
Apostolicity, as an historical union with Christ's Apostles was
so evidently wanting in his case that he declared that the
doctrine he had come to preach had died out shortly after
Apostolic times. Any claim to Catholicity in the usual sense of

1 For Bellarmine, see " Controversies," Colon., 2, 1615, 1. 3. " De
ecclesia militante," p. 65 sq.

2 Cp. above, p. 150 ff. 3 Bellarmine, 1. c., p. 65.
* Hurter, "Theol. dogm. Comp.," p. 227.

296 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

the word was not to be thought of for a moment. The only olden
marks which he does not throw over is that of holiness. He
here relies on the existence of holiness in the case of a few as being
sufficient for his purpose.

Nevertheless, due justice must be done to the stress he is ever
disposed to lay on the holiness of the Church. He practically
makes all the other marks to centre in this, for he speaks of the
seven marks mentioned above as the sevenfold " sanctuary
whereby the Holy Ghost sanctifies Christ's holy nation."1

" Even though it was impossible for him," remarks Johaiui
Adam Mohler, " to teach that the Church was to be regarded as
a living institution in which men become holy, yet he sticks fast
to the idea that she ought by rights to be composed of saints. . . .
The inner Church [called by theologians the "soul" to dis
tinguish it from the outward "body " of the Church] is every
where in evidence, and the fact that no one is a true citizen of the
heavenly kingdom if he belongs only outwardly to the Church
and lias not entered into the spirit of Christ and felt within him
self its vivifying power, is pointed out [by Luther] in a way which
merits all praise."2

Such true believers, according to Luther's teaching, are
so much the sole representatives of the visible Church that
the wicked, the unbelieving, the hypocritical Christians who
only expose her to the scorn and derision of her foes, do not
really belong to the Church at all.3 They are members
of the Church merely in name, but, in reality, are not
Christians at all.4

It was not, however, easy for him to shake off the true
feeling he had inherited from youthful days, viz. that
whoever wished to be pious and pleasing to God, must
become so through the true Church. " Let us therefore pray
in the Church," so we hear him say, " let us pray with the
Church and for her."5 According to him the Church was
the ghostly Eve taken from the side of Christ, a pure virgin
and one body with Christ, great and splendid in God's sight,
the chief of His works, dear to Him, precious and highly
esteemed in His sight, etc.6 Hence we find him re-echoing
the beautiful words in which Catholic mystics had been wont
to extol the Church and her " soul."

1 Erl. ed., 252, p. 434. 2 " Symbolik," §49, p. 424 f .

3 Cp. " Apol. conf. August.," art. 7. Miiller-Kolde,10 p. 153.

4 The Church, according to his explanation of the article of the
Creed in question, is " the assembly of the Saints, i.e. an assembly
composed only of saints," not an assembly of all those who have been
baptised. Cp. Kdstlin, " Luthers Theol.," 22, pp. 257, 278.

5 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 21. 6 Erl. ed., 66, p. 440 f.

THE CHURCH'S MARKS 29?

Yet there is no doubt, that, in spite of all this, Luther had
explained away the Church's very essence.

It was indeed his tendency to spiritualise, and his favourite
idea that true believers must be enlightened by God directly
concerning His outward " Word " that helped him thus
to explain away the Church. As for any outward doctrinal
establishment or institutional Church having an authority
of her own, no such thing existed. Thus the Church which
Luther extols as so holy turns out to be something quite
intangible — water that for want of a holder runs away and
is lost. Even Kostlin admits this, though in guarded words :
" Certain main problems which the Reformed view of the
Church must necessarily face " " were only very insufficiently
grasped and discussed " by Luther and his friends. Among
such questions Kostlin includes some that touch the Church's
very essence : How far is purity of doctrine necessary in
order to belong to the Church ; how far are the old Creeds
still professed by Protestantism obligatory or binding
upon preachers ; where, finally, does the freedom preached
by Luther precisely end ?x But, in spite of all the lacuna
in his doctrine of the Church, Luther bitterly insists, that,
outside the Church there can be no salvation.2 Nor did he
even admit the usual Catholic limitation, viz. that those,
who through no fault of their own are ignorant of the
Church, may possibly be saved if their life has been other
wise good. Luther indeed, as already shown (p. 292), is of
opinion that some olden Catholics may have been saved, if,
in the end, they laid hold 011 Christ as Luther taught;3 he
also opines that salvation had been brought to all " worthy
men of every nation " who had died before the coming of
Christ, through His preaching during His visit to Limbo ;4
yet he does not believe that it was the Will of God that all
men, whether within or outside the Church, should be saved.5

After having in the above examined Luther's conception
of the Church, irrespective of its mode of growth, we may
now turn our attention to the genesis and historical develop
ment of this conception.

1 Art. " Kirche," in " RE. f. prot. Th.," 103, 1901, pp. 337, 349.

2 Cp. Kdstlin, " Luthers Theol.," 22, p. 262, with the quotation
from Erl. ed., 92, p. 285 f. : " In her each one must be found, in her
each one must be enrolled, whoso wishes to be saved and to come to
God, and, outside of her, no one will be saved."

3 Kostlin, ib., p. 269. * I6./p. 169.
6 See above, vol. ii., pp. 267 f., 287 f.

298 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

Origin and Early Outbuilding of the New Idea
of the Church

A curious psychological process accompanies the growth
of Luther's idea of the Church. We know that, even long
after he had fallen a victim to his theory of justification by
faith alone, he had still no thought of breaking away from
the Church's communion or of questioning the conception
then in vogue of the Church. It was only when the olden
Church refused to come over to his new doctrine and
prepared to condemn it, that he decided, after great struggles
within, to cut himself adrift, and it was in order to justify
this step to himself and to vindicate it to the world that he
gradually formed his new views on the Church. (Cp. above,
vol. i., p. 3*21 ff.) ^

Characteristically enough we find a first trace of what was to
come, in his sermon on the power of the Papal Ban, which lie
published in Latin in 1518 and in German in the following year.
Here, of course, lie had to deal with the question of the effects of
the threatened excommunication ; in so doing he reached the
false proposition, censured amongst his 41 errors in the Bull
Exsurge Domine of May 16, 1520 : " Excommunications are
merely outward penalties and do not rob a man of the Church's
common spiritual prayers."1 Not long after, according to his
wont, he went a step further. Among the condemned Theses we
find the paradoxical one : " Christians must be taught to love
excommunication rather than to fear it."2

At Dresden on July 25, 1518, when he was found fault with 011
account of his Wittenberg Sermon on Excommunication (which
was then probably not yet known in its entirety), he seems to
have shown scant respect for the supreme authority in the Church .
Emser, his then opponent, writes expressly that Luther had
declared he cared nothing for the Pope's Ban.3

Some weeks later, on Sep. 1, Luther himself wrote to Staupitz,
his superior, that his conscience told him he was in the right and
with the truth on his side ; " Christ liveth and reigneth yesterday,
to-day and for ever" ; he also tells him, that, in his " Resolu
tions," and in his replies to Prierias he had spoken freely, and
in a language that would wound the Romanists, and that lie
was ready, nay anxious, to give the brassy Romans an even
ruder German answer in the service of Christ, the Shepherd
of the people. " Have no fear ; I shall continue untrammelled
my study of the Word of God without any fear of the citation
[to Augsburg]."4

1 Prop. 23. 2 Prop. 24.

3 See above vol. i., p. 371. * " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 224.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 299

During the negotiations in the presence of Cajetan at Augsburg
we can see even more clearly how Luther stood under the spell of
his idea, that the only Church was a spiritual one, and that, even
should he break away from ecclesiastical authority by rising
against the Ban, he would still remain in this Church.

It was after his return from Augsburg, during the stormy days
when he appealed " from the Pope to a General Christian Council,"
i.e. in the winter of 1518, that he discovered the true " Anti
christ " who reigned at Rome.1 This discovery deprived him of
the last vestige of respect for the authority of the Church and for
her head.2 His own inward state when he made this discovery
was one of curious turmoil. In his letter to Link, of Dec. 11, 15,18,
we hear him speaking of his commotion of mind, of new projects
just on the point of birth which would show that, so far, he had
hardly made a serious beginning with the struggle ; he had a
k' premonition " then that Antichrist described by St. Paul
(2 Thes. ii. 3ff.) was seated in Rome where lie behaved even
worse than the Turk.3 At the beginning of 1519 with bated
breath he announced to his friends the impending war on all the
Papal ordinances. 4

Thus, even previous to the Leipzig Disputation, he must have
busied himself with his new idea of the Church.

It was, however, only during the Disputation that, pressed
hard by Eck, he was induced to deny openly the Primacy and to
proclaim his belief in an invisible Church controlled by no
authority.5 In the Disputation on July 4 and the following days,
he attacked the divine institution of the Pope's authority,
asserted that even (Ecumenical Councils could err, and, on
July 6, declared that the Council of Constance had actually
done so in rejecting the doctrine of Hus that there is " a Holy
Catholic Church which is the whole body of the elect."

In thus cutting the idea of the Church to his own measure,
Luther had reached the Husite theory of the predestined as
the sole members of the Church. " Luther found in this his
own view of the Church, for, according to him, on the one
hand there was no need of submission to Rome, and, on the
other, only the real Christians and the elect were actual

1 See above, vol. iii., p. 143 ft.

2 And yet he declares later (" Colloq.," ed Bindseil, 1, p. 15) that ho
would gladly have acknowledged the Pope ( i.e. sacrificed his doctrine
of the Church) " modo evangelium docuisset," i.e. if the Pope had agreed
to his doctrine of Justification. Indeed at the end of Feb., 1519, he
says, in the " Unterricht auff etlich Artikell " (see below, p. 307) " for
no kind of sin or abuse " is it lawful to begin a schism. Weim. ed., 2,
p. 72 : Erl. ed., 242, p. 10. Cp. W. Walther, " Fur Luther," 1906, p. 20.

3 " Brief wechsel," 1, p. 316.

* To Spalatin, Jan. 14, 1519, " Briefwechsel," 1, p. 352 ; he adds :
" Non ligat nee nocet ira Decretalium, quando tuetur misericordia
Christi."

5 Weim. ed., 2, p. 183 ft'. " Opp. lat. var.," 3, p. 296 sqq.

THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

members of the Church.5'1 In the " Resolutions," which he
published at the end of August immediately after the
Disputation, he adheres to the statement that even (Ecu
menical Councils had erred and that, even on the most
important questions of the faith. Still, strange to say, he
does not think there is any reason for fearing that the
Church had been forsaken by the Spirit of Christ, for by
the Church was to be understood neither the Pope nor a
Council.2 Here we have the basis of his new idea of the
Church. ... It is combined with another idea towards
which he had long been drifting, viz. of seeing in Holy
Scripture the sole source of faith.3 In the " Resolutions "
he says : " Faith does not spring from any external authority
but is aroused in the heart by the Holy Ghost, though
man is moved thereto by the Word and by example."4
Wherever Luther's doctrine is believed, there is the Church.5
The Papal Bull of 1520 condemned among the other
selected theses of Luther's, his attack on the Primacy and
the Councils, though saying nothing of his doctrine of the
Church, then still in process of growth. " The Roman Pope,
the successor of Peter," so the 25th of these condemned
Theses runs, " is not the Vicar of Christ set over all the
Churches throughout the whole world and appointed by
Christ Himself in the person of St. Peter." And the 29th
declares : " It is open to us to set aside the Councils, freely
to question their actions and judge their decrees and to
profess with all confidence whatever appears to be the truth
whether it has been approved or reproved of any Council."6

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 250. — Other statements made by Luther
at this time must be read in the light of the above theory, e.g. his words
ill the "Comm. on Gal." : "As widely, broadly, and deeply as possible
do I distinguish between the Roman Church and the Roman Curia."
" They must know that they are mistaken when they cry out that I do
not hold with the Roman Church ; I who love so truly not only the
Roman Church but the whole Church of Christ." " Comm. on Gal.," ed.
Irmischer, 3, p. 134 aq. Cp. W. Walther, " Fur Luther," 1906, p. 24.

2 Weim. ed., 2, pp. 399, 404 ft1., 427, 429 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 3,
pp. 240, 244 sqq., 281, 284. Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 255 ff .

3 For his earlier days cp. the passage in " Freiheyt dess Sermons
Bepstlichen Ablass belangend " (1518), Weim. ed.,1, p. 384 ; Erl. ed.,
27, p. 12 : "If already so many and thousands more, and all of them
holy Doctors had held this or that, yet they are of 110 account as
compared witli a single verse of Holy Writ, as St. Paul says, Gal. (i. 8) :
' Even though an angel from heaven,' etc."

* Weim. ed., 2, p. 431 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 3, p. 287.

5 Ib., p. 183ff. = 296*^. (Thesis 13).

6 Denzinger-Bannwart, " Enchiridion," p. 259.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 301

The originator of principles so subversive to all ecclesi
astical order had perforce to reassure himself by claiming
freedom in the interpretation of Scripture.

Hence, for himself and all who chose to follow him, he set
up in the clearest and most decided terms the personal
reading of the written Word of God, above all tradition and
all the pronouncements of the teaching office of the Church :
in this he went much further than he had done hitherto in
the questions he had raised concerning justification, grace,
indulgences, etc. It is easy to understand why it was so
necessary for him to claim for himself a direct enlightenment
by the Spirit of God in his reading of the Bible ; l in no
other way could he vindicate his daring in thus setting him
self in opposition to a Church with a history of 1500 years.
At the same time he saw that this same gift of illumination
would have to be allowed to others, hence he declared
that all faithful and devout readers of the Bible enjoyed
a certain kind of inspiration, all according to him being
directly guided by the Spirit into the truth without any
outward interference of Church doctrine, though the first
fruits of revelation belonged to him alone.2

By thus exalting the personal element into a principle,
he dealt a mortal blow at the idea of a Church to whom was
committed the true interpretation of doctrine.

Before pointing out, how, in spite of the boundless liberty
proclaimed by Luther, he nevertheless was anxious to
retain some sort of Church in the stead of the ancient one,
we may here put on record certain statements of his on the
illumination of the individual by God that have not as yet
been quoted ; albeit difficult to understand this is of the
very essence of Lutheranism and quite indispensable to the
new doctrine of an invisible Church.3

According to the " Resolutions " he published after the
Leipzig Disputation, every man is born into the faith through
the Evangel owing to the bestowal of certainty from on higli
without the intervention of the Church's authority or of any
doctrine outwardly binding upon him. Satan and all the
heretics, so he declares, could not have forged a more dangerous
opinion than that in vogue among Catholics concerning the
relations between the Church's authority and the Bible Word ;

1 Cp. M5hler, " Symbolik," §44, p. 399.

2 Cp. above, vol. iv., p. 387 ff. and vol, ii., p. 3G8.

3 Above, p. 237.

302 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

needless to say Luther makes out that, in their opinion, the Popo
was put above the Written Word and even above God Himself.1
The genuine Catholic doctrine, viz. that the Church is the
guardian of the true sense of Holy Scripture arid at the same tinio
a witness to the faithful of the authenticity and inspiration of the
Holy Books, is indeed poles asunder from the teaching foisted <>n
her. Moreover, it is in these very Resolutions to the Leipzig
Disputation that Luther disparages the .Epistle of James, arguing
that its style falls far short of the apostolic dignity and could in
no way compare with that of Paul. Here the " freedom " which
he exalts into a principle already begins to undermine his new
foundation, viz. the Bible itself.

Not long after this, in 1520, he lays claim in his " Von dem
Bapstum " and " De captivitate Babylonica," to having been
instructed solely by the Holy Ghost and out of the Bible regarding
the sense of Holy Scripture.

In the " De captivitate Babylonica " he teaches : the faithful who
surrender themselves to the Spirit of God and allow Him to work
upon them through the " Word " (he calls them the Church),
received from the same Spirit an infallible sense and an inspiration
by which to judge of doctrine, a sense which is indeed not
susceptible of proof yet which creates absolute certainty. The
same thing held good here as in the case of the truth, of which
Augustine had said, that the soul was so laid hold of and carried
away by it as to be enabled by its means to judge of all things,
though unable to prove the truth itself which nevertheless it was
forced to acknowledge with an infallible certainty.2 Luther also
appeals as a comparison to the evidence of certain fundamental
truths of mathematics or philosophy. This would at first sight
make it appear as though he excluded arbitrary freedom in the
interpretation of the Bible, since the mind must necessarily bow
to such logical and unquestionable truths as he instances ; this is,
however, not the case, and we may recall what a wide field he
opened up for delusion in this matter of inspiration. 3

When he teaches that the perception of the truth of religion
penetrates into every Christian soul as the direct result of a
certainty operated by God Himself we must, in order to under
stand him, keep in view the other points of his teaching, above
all his opinion of man's utter incapacity to do what is good, the
depravity of man's mental powers, his lack of free-will and absolute
passivity under the hand of God. Above all he needed some
such theory in order to justify his attack on the olden conception
of the Church and to defend his own alleged certainty.

The universal priesthood also serves him as a prop for his
idea of the Church. This priesthood, with the right to judge of

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 256, from Weim. ed., 2, p. 430 ; " Opp.
lat. var.," 2, p. 285.

2 Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 340. Augustine, however, is speaking
of truth in general.

3 See above, vol. iv., p. 403 ft1.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 303

doctrine, such as he pictures in his " To the German Nobility " and
"On the Freedom of a Christian Man," was a logical outcome of
the above doctrine of inspiration and of his own inclination to
break away from the olden Church. It gave to all complete
independence in spiritual and ecclesiastical matters.1

The above writings were followed in 1521 by his " Ad librani
Ambrosii Catha-rini Re&ponaio." Here lie treats in detail of the
Church, and of Christ the spiritual and invisible rock on which
alone she is built (without Peter and his successors) ; the Church's
nature is therefore spiritual and invisible ; he emphasises anew
the right of all the faithful individually to disregard all teaching
authority and to give ear to the voice of the Holy Ghost Who
speaks inwardly through the Evangel, and thus brings forth,
nourishes, educates, strengthens and preserves the true Church.
In this work Luther is, however, already at greater pains to bring
down the Church to the region of the visible ; he points out that at
least she possesses visible elements, Baptism, the Supper and the
Gospel. Nevertheless, direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost still
looms large in the " Responsio " as we may gather from the
elucubrations embellished with Bible texts in which he declares
that the Papal Antichrist had been foretold in the Word of God
and his appearance and workings even described in detail.2

In "Von Menschen leren tzu meyden " (1522), which is still
saturated with the spirit of the Wartburg he had just left, he
insists that : " Each one must simply believe that it is God's
Word because he feels in his heart that it is the truth, even
should an angel from heaven or all the world preach the con
trary." — His writing of 1523, " Das eyn Christliche Versamlung
odder Gemeyne Recht und Macht habe alle Lere zu urteylen,"
etc., was intended to promote unfettered freedom of spirit, but,
of course, only in the interests of the removal of the Popish -
minded clergy, for, naturally, there could be no question of such
freedom being used against Luther, or of anyone setting himself
up as judge of Luther's new doctrine. Here, and even more
strongly in the " De instituendis ministris Ecclesice," which he
published in the same year, he starts again from the standpoint
of the universal priesthood ; this was inconsistent with the
clerical order of the Popish Church ; by it every man was
qualified to decide independently on doctrine in accordance with
Scripture ; but whoever preached openly in the Church of God
only did so as representing the others and at their request ;
hence no preacher was to be at the head of any congregation
unless the latter wanted him, and, taught by the unction of the
Holy Spirit, found his doctrine right. A Christian might also, so
he continues, whether amongst other Christians or amongst those

1 Cp. Mohler, " Symbolik," §46, p. 409, with the following quotation
from Luther's " De captiv. Babylon." : " Christianis nihil nullo iure
posse imponi legum, sive ab hominibus, sive ab angelis, nisi quantum
volunt ; liber i enim sumus ab omnibus."

2 Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 398. Tho work is printed in Weim. ed.,
7, p. 704 ft ; k' Opp. lat. var.," 5, p. 286 sqg.

304 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

who had formerly been unbelievers, instruct his fellow-men in
the Gospel merely by virtue of his Christian calling ; anyone, if he
detected the ordinary teacher in error, might stand up and teach
without any call, as the Apostle says (1 Cor. xiv. 30) " if anything
be revealed to another, let the first hold his peace."1

But how is a man to be so certain in his heart as to be able
to come forward in this way ? " You can then be certain of the
matter if you are able to decide freely and surely and to say this
is the pure and simple truth, for it I will live or die, and whoever
teaches otherwise, whatsoever be his title and standing, is
accursed."2

It would be a waste of words to point out that this was
to deal a death-blow at the olden conception of the Church.

Startling, nay, utterly stupefying, is the sharp contrast all
this presents to Luther's later attitude already described
above (pp. 241, 251, 262). There we have a rigid, coercive
Church held fast in the ban of the Wittenberg doctrine,
whereas here, in the days of the early development of
Lutheranism, we find an exuberant wealth of individual
freedom which scoffs even at the possibility of any ecclesi
astical order.

Only a dreamer and hot-head like Luther could have seen
in such an individualism, where each one is teacher and
priest, anything else than chaos.

Luther's expectations in those early days were strange indeed
and quite incapable of realisation ; not only were all delusions
to be excluded but everything, as he says of the enduring of
opposition, was to be done " decently and piously " ! If he is
really speaking in earnest, then he shows himself a hermit utterly
ignorant of human nature. And yet even in the seclusion of the
convent walls, the greatest enthusiast should have seen that
this was not the way to form a congregation on earth of believers,
or anything resembling a Church.

We can, nevertheless, easily understand, to cite Mohler in
confirmation of what has been said, " how the doctrine in
question could, nay, had to, arise in Luther's mind : Since the
authority of the existing Church was against him he had perforce
to seek for support in the authority of God working directly in
him. . . . He saw no other way than to appeal to an intangible,
inward authorisation."3 — This he then proceeded to work out

1 Weim. ed., 12, p. 169 ff. ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, p. 494 sqq.

8 Cp. the passages quoted by Mohler, " Symbolik," §45, p. 405, n. 2 :
" Christianus ita certus est, quid credere et non credere debeat, ut etiam pro
ipao moriatur, aut saltern mori paratus sit." Thus to teach as a priest
involved nothing very dreadful, " cum verbum Dei hie luceat et iubeat,
simul necessitas animarum coyat."

9 " Symbolik," §45, p. 409,

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 805

into a system for the other believers. In the fashion of the true
demagogue he flatters every Cliristian and invests him with tiuch
perfection as any unprejudiced mind must repudiate on the most
cursory glance into his own heart."1

The truth is, the doctrine put forward by Luther against the
Church, i.e. that Holy Scripture is the sole judge, has no meaning
except on the assumption of a certainty through direct divine
illumination.

Luther was quite right in declaring Holy Scripture to be the
source of the doctrine of salvation ; but it was a very different
thing to assert that Holy Writ is the judge which determines what
is the doctrine of salvation contained therein. He only readied
the latter assertion by taking for granted the direct action of God
in man for imparting a knowledge of the true sense of Scripture.
Hence in his statements on Holy Scripture we frequently find
one thing strangely confused with the other, the outward Book
with the inward knowledge of the same, so that, as Mohler puts it,
" the direct transmission of its contents to the reader is assumed
in a quite childish fashion."2 Even Kdstlin has to admit this
confusion, though he does so with reserve : " In Luther," he
says, " we see in many passages an intermingling of the pure
Word and pure doctrine."3

Luther's Later Attitude Towards the Idea of the Church.
Objections

Henceforward there remained deeply rooted in Luther's mind
the conviction that the individual was taught by God and that
this Divine enlightenment was always leading to the adoption of
his own chief articles of faith and to the promotion of the Lutheran
Church.*

There is no call to follow up this idea through all his various
writings. We may, however, call to mind a remarkable arid
warlike statement with which, towards the end of his life, he
sought to justify his attacks on the Pope and the ancient
Church, and that, too, at a time when he mast long since have
been disappointed at the results of the freedom of judging
which he had once allowed but had now already in many ways
curtailed.

In his " Wider das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft," he quotes
the words of Christ which refer to prayer in common : " Where
two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the
midst of them." This leads him to conclude, strange to say,
" that even two or three gathered together in Christ's name hold
all the power of St. Peter and all the Apostles." And, at once,
he proceeds in his old vein to declare that two or three, nay, even
a single one, who has been enlightened by Christ, is as good a

1 lb., §45, p. 406. » Ib., §44, p. 399.

:1 Art. Kircbe, " RE. f. prot. Th.," 103, p. 337.
* (> Mohler, " Symbolik," §49, p. 42".

VI.—*

306 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

teacher as the whole Church, and, indeed, in certain cases, even
takes precedence of her. " Hence it comes," he says, " that,
often, a man who believes in Christ has withstood a whole crowd
... as the prophets withstood the Kings of Israel, the priests
and the whole nation [to say nothing of Luther himself who had
withstood the whole Church]. In short, God will not be bound as
to numbers, greatness, height, power, or anything personal to
man, but will only be with those who love and keep His Word
even though they be no more than stable boys. What does He
care for high, great and mighty lords ? He alone is the greatest,
highest and mightiest."1 Thus he practically claims a Divine
dignity for an undertaking such as his, and paints his career afresh
as that of a prophet who had a right to exalt himself even over
the topmost hierarchy ; only that he invests all the faithful, and
even the " stable boy," with the like high calling.

But, in such a sj^stem, what place was there left for any
thing more than a phantom Church ? Obviously the Church
had to withdraw into the region of the invisible. For her
again to become visible and assume the shape to be con
sidered below, seems almost a paradox.

In view of the elasticity and vagueness of Luther's teach
ing on the Church it is not surprising that his followers, to
this very day, are divided as to whether, in point of fact,
Luther wanted a " Church " or not.

A well-known Lutheran theologian admits in plain language
that Luther left the problem of the Church unsolved ; only after
the Reformer's time did certain " important problems " arise in
respect of Luther's tentative definition of the Church. 2 Another
theologian, writing in a Protestant periodical, says that Luther
left behind him no " Evangelical Church." " The Reformation,"
lie says, " spelt Christendom's deliverance from the Church. . . .
His great anticlerical bias was never repudiated by Luther. . . .
He committed the care of the pure Evangel to the hands of the
civil authorities. It ought no longer to be disputed that Luther
and the Reformers were not the founders of the Evangelical
Church — and that their ideal Protestantism was one minus a
Church. It is only necessary to take the idea of the Church in its
strict sense — not as the congregation, or the people of God, nor
yet as a body of men holding the same opinions, nor as the
kingdom of Christ — but as an independent complexus of regula
tions ordering the religious life, as a special iastitution to provide
for the particular needs of the religious commonwealth within
traditional limits." Hence " the fact that, in our homeland,
three hundred years after Luther's time, we find the Evan-

1 Erl. ed., 262, p. 188.

8 Koatlin in the "RE. f. prot. Th.," 72, p. 71 f>. Omitted in the

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 807

gelical preacherdom firmly consolidated in a body not unlike
the State, and professing to be the official representative of
Protestantism is one of the most astounding paradoxes in all
the history of the Church."1

There is no need to go so far, nor is it really necessary to put
the words evangelical " Church " or " Churches " in inverted
commas, as Protestants sometimes do in order to mark the quite
unusual meaning of the word Church according to Luther's view.
It is obvious that logic had no place in Luther's ideas and aims
in respect of the Church, and his subjectivism imposed on him in
this matter the utmost vagueness.

Frequently we find in Catholic works on dogma extracts
from Luther's writings dating from 1519 and 1520, which,
it is alleged, show his positive conviction at that time that a
Church — i.e. one in the olden Catholic sense — was to be
recognised. But this is a mistake. The documents contain
ing such utterances were of a diplomatic character, and we
have no right to build upon them. They do not in any way
invalidate what has been said above.

One of these is Luther's " Unterricht auff etlich Artikell,"
dating from the end of Feb., 1519, i.e. from a time when he had
already discovered the Roman Antichrist ;2 the other, his " Oblatio
sive Protestatio," dating from the summer of 1520, is a tract un
mistakably intended to forestall the publication of the Roman
Bull. 3 In the first work, composed at the instance of Miltitz, it is
true he says in praise of the Roman Church that, in her, " St.
Peter and St. Paul, 46 Popes and many hundred thousand
martyrs had shed their blood," that she was honoured by God
above all others, and that, for the sake of Christian charity and
unity, it was not lawful to separate from her for all her present
blemishes ; he will not, however, express himself regarding the
" authority and supremacy of the Roman Church," " seeing that
this does not concern the salvation of souls " ; Christ, on the
contrary, had founded His Church on charity, meekness and
oneness, and, for the sake of this oneness, the Papal commands
ought to be obeyed. By this he fancies that he has proved that
he " does not wish to detract from the Roman Church."4

What he says in the other writing referred to above is even
less acceptable, though here too he wishes to appear "as a
submissive and obedient son of the Holy Christian Churches."4
The circumstance that many shortsighted persons doubtless took
him at his word at this critical time of his excommunication must
have served powerfully to promote the apostasy.

1 " Christl. Welt," ed. Rade, 1, 1902, No. 38.

2 Weim. ed., 2, p. 69 ff ; Erl. ed., 242, p. 5 ff.
;l /&., 6, p. 477 ft. ; 9, p. 302 ft. -12 ff.

4 //>., 2, p. 72f. = 242, p. 10 f.

J lb., 6, p. 480 -242, p. 13. Cp. Weim. ed., G, p. 303 L ; 9, p. 47fi t,

308 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

As to the changes to which Luther's mode of thought was
liable, we may perhaps be permitted to make a general observa
tion before passing from the consideration of the invisible Church
to that of the Church visible.

The charge brought against him of having formerly taught
differently on many points from what he did at a later date,
Luther lightly swept aside with the assurance that he had gone on
gradually advancing in the knowledge of the truth. His defenders
seek to escape the difficulty in a like way. His changeableness
and inconstancy must undoubtedly weigh heavily in the balance.
We must not, however, be unfair to him or argue that the fact of
his having at first defended elements of Catholic doctrine which
he afterwards abandoned constituted a grave self-contradiction.

Luther openly admits that it was only gradually that he came
to attack the Church so bitterly.

When King Henry VIII reproached him with the contra
dictions apparent between his earlier and later teaching on the
Papacy and the Church, Luther boldly appealed in 1522 in his
" Contra, Henricum regent Anglice " to his having only gradually
learnt the whole truth : "I did not yet know that the Papacy
was contrary to Scripture. ... God had then given me a
cheerful spirit that suffered itself to be despised [by his oppo
nents]. . . . By dint of so doing they forced me on, so that the
further I went the more lies I discovered . . . until it became
plain from Scripture, thanks to God's Grace, that the Papacy,
episcopacy, foundations, cloisters, universities, together with all
the monkery, nunnery, Masses, services were nothing but dam
nable sects of the devil. . . . Hence it came about that I had to
write other books in condemnation and retractation of my earlier
ones."1 He will also, so he adds ironically, retract what he had
previously said in his " De captivitate Babylonica," viz. that the
Papacy was the prey of a strong Nimrod, as this had scandalised
the lying King of England, who was himself the robber of his
country. This, in his own style, he now proposes to amend as
follows : "I should have said : The Papacy is the arch-devil's
most poisonous abomination hitherto seen on earth."2

If it was a difficult matter to give an account of Luther's
invisible Church, owing to the changes which took place in his
own views, even more difficult is the task of tracing the
further growth of his teaching. His invisible Church
becomes more and more clearly a visible Church ; yet all the
while it protests, that, in its nature, it is invisible.

1 //>., 10, 2. p. 232 r-2S. p. 3r.o.
» lb., p. 232-351,

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 309

4. The Church becomes visible. Its organisation

What was Luther's view of the Church's character when
the time came to set up new congregations within the circle
of the " Evangel " ?

Theologically the question is answered in the authentic
publicly accepted explanations he gave of his doctrine on the
Church. Of these the oldest is comprised in the Schwabach
Articles of 1529, * where we read in Article XII :

There is "no doubt that there is and ever will be on
earth a holy Christian Church until the end of the world, as
Christ says in Matt, xxviii. 20. ... This Church is nothing
else than the believers in Christ, who hold, believe and
teach the above-mentioned articles and provisions [of the
Schwabach Confession], and who, on this account, are
persecuted and tormented in the world. For where the
Gospel is preached and the sacraments rightly used, there is
the holy Christian Church, bound by no laws and outward
pomp to place or time, persons or ceremonies." — " Thus did
the Evangelical idea of the Church," so we read in Kostlin-
Kawerau, "find expression once and for all in the funda
mental confessions of Protestantism, faith in Christ being
identified with faith in the said ' articles and provisions.' "2

In the "Augsburg Confession" of 1530 — "which Confession,"
according to Luther, " was to last till the end of the world and
the Last Judgment "3 — we read : " The Church is the mateship
of the saints ( ' congregatio sanctorum') in which the Evangel is
rightly taught and the sacraments rightly dispensed."4 The
" Apologia " to this Confession contains the following : " The
Church is not merely a commonwealth of outward things and
rites like other institutions, but it is rather a society of hearts in
faith and the Holy Ghost. She has, however, outward signs by
which she may be known, viz. the pure doctrine of the Gospel and
a dispensing of the sacraments in accordance with Christ's
Gospel."6 Of "Church government" the Confession of Augs
burg states : " Concerning the government of the Church we
hold that no one may teach publicly or dispense the sacraments
without being duly called " ; this is further explained in tho

1 Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 86 ff. ; Erl. ed., 243, p. 337 ff. " Corp. ref.,"
26, p. 151 sqq. Kolde, " Die Augsburgische Konfession " p. 123 ff.

2 Vol. ii., p. 179.

3 Cp. Mohler, " Syrnbolik," §49, p. 428 n.

• " Confessio Au^nst.," art. 7. " Symbolische Bucher," ed. M tiller
Kolde, p. 40.

6 " Apol. confess.," art. 7, " Symbol. Bucher," p. 152.

310 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

" Apologia " : " The Church has the command of God to appoint
preachers."1

Regarding the same matter the Schmalkalden Articles of 1537-
1538, which also form a part of the " Symbolic Books," have the
following : " The Churches must have power to call, choose and
ordain the ministers of the Church, and such power is in fact
bestowed on the Church by God . , . just as, in case of necessity,
even a layman can absolve another and become his pastor. . . .
The words of Peter : ' You are a kingly priesthood ' refer only
to the true Church, which, since she alone has the priesthood,
must also have the power to choose and ordain ministers. To
this the general usage of the Churches also bears witness."2

When the above was penned, indeed, even when Melanch-
thon wrote the " Confessio Augustana," the new Church,
though theoretically invisible, had long since received an
established outward form. Yet its invisibility is emphasised
in the Schwabach Articles which reject such outward laws
as are inconsistent with the Church's character ; the Con
fession and Apologia also refer to the (ghostly) union
of hearts in the faith, and to the assembly of the (unknown)
saints.

Nevertheless the visibility, so strongly insisted on in the
Schmalkalden Articles, was practically indispensable, and
was also a logical result of the whole work undertaken by
Luther.

First of all it was called for by the very nature of this
" ministry " of those who were to preach and to dispense
the sacraments in the name of the congregation ; according
to Luther's teaching, the dispensing of the sacraments went
hand in hand with preaching, the sacraments being efficacious
only through the faith of the recipient, and the dispenser's
duty being confined to making the recipient more worthy of
the inpouring of grace through the word of faith which
accompanies the visible sign of the sacrament. The minis
terial " office " was not conferred by a sacrament as was
the case in the priestly ordination of the olden Church, but,
as Luther teaches, " ordination, if understood aright, is no
more than being called or ' ordered ' to the office of parson
or preacher." Among the Papists " Baptism and Christ had
been weakened and darkened " by the ordinations. " We
are born priests and as such we want to be known." " By

1 Art. 14, " Symbol. Bucher," p. 42.

2 " De potestato ot iurisdict. episcoporum " (by Melanchthon).
" Symbol. Biicher," p. 341 f.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 311

Holy Baptism we have become the true priests of Christen
dom as St. Peter says : 4 You are a royal priesthood.' "*
Ministers (i.e. servants) of the Word was the proper title for
those who performed all their functions in the name of the
common priesthood of the whole people.

As soon, however, as it became a question of appointing
preachers a visible Church at once appeared on the scene,
though one without either Pope or hierarchy.

It may be recalled that Luther's plan was originally to
leave it to each congregation to appoint a preacher either
from its own body or an outsider, who was then to act in
their name and with their authority. There seemed no
better way of securing control over the preacher's doctrine.
As for the ecclesiastical penalties, Luther, even in his
" Deudsche Messe," left their use to the congregation as a
whole.2 At a later date he still clung to the idea of the
ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the congregation. Even to
absolve from sin belonged, in his opinion, — and to this he
adhered to the end, — to all believers, and such absolution
was as valid as had it been pronounced by God Himself
(always assuming that faith had already been awakened in
the penitent).3 On the authority of the congregation was
to rest, not only the lower ministry, but also the quasi-
cpiscopatc. The scheme he sketched in 1523 in the Latin
work he addressed to the Bohemians, " De instituendis
ministris eccleslce" has already been described.4

The many abuses which arose, and indeed were bound to
arise, from the independence of the congregations soon com
pelled him to cast about for a more reliable framework.
The phantom of a community of believers united in spirit,
of a " brotherhood " minus any social or constitutional
cohesion and devoid of any vigorous direction, proved
incapable of realisation.

Help was to be looked for only from the State.

By clinging to its solid structure the religious innovations
would have a chance of avoiding the conventicle system
and the danger of its congregations falling asunder. The

1 Erl. ed., 31, p. 348 f. (1533).

2 Ib., Weim. ed., 19, p. 75 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 230.

3 In " Von den Schliisselii," 1530, Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 435 ff. ; Erl.
ed., 31, p. 126 ff. Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 222 f.

4 See above, vol. ii., p. 112.

312 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

tendency to drift towards the State was also promoted by
the opposition of the fanatical Anabaptists, for this sect
was a menace to order in the congregations owing to its
excesses and also to the pertinacity with which, following
out Luther's own teaching, it insisted on individualism and
repudiated the " office " of the ministry. Not only did
Luther, after the rise of the Anabaptists, emphasise the out
ward rather than the inward Word, but, for the same
reason, he also laid much greater stress than formerly on the
" office " and on the external representation of the Church's
members — invisibly united by the faith — by duly called
officials.

Thus, the Church, whose invisibility and spirituality
Luther had been so fond of emphasising, became, in course
of time, more and more a visible and concrete body, though
remaining closely bound up with the State. Yet, even in
Luther's earlier views on the Church, certain indications
pointed to the visible Church yet to come ; indeed the ideas
he retained from Catholic days were to prove stronger than
he then anticipated.

Of a statement contained in " De servo arbitrio " (1525),
a book written after the rise of the Anabaptist subjectivism,
Mohler justly remarks : " This passage views the clergy as
the representatives of the Church which is thus quite
visible ; professing the faith of the invisible Church and
expressing its mind, this Church has a definite doctrinal
standpoint which she advocates through her clergy, and,
which, as the dictum of the Saints, she regards as true and
infallible. Hence the visible Church appears as the expres
sion and facsimile of the invisible Church."1

Already in his books against Alveld and Catharinus
Luther was at pains to insist that the Church which he
taught was a real community living on earth in the flesh,
though not tied down to any definite place or persons.2
Wavering and confusion, here as elsewhere, characterise
Luther's teaching.

We can understand how his Catholic opponents, for
instance Staphylus, make much of the change from the
visible to the invisible Church. Staphylus dubs those who
persisted in advocating her invisibility, the " Invisibiles"

1 " Symbolik," §47, p. 416.
* Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 398.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 313

such being the followers of Flacius, Sehwenckfeld and
Osiander, and also the Anabaptists.1

It is a fact that Melanchthon, particularly in his later
years, insists on the Church as an institution and on her
visible nature more than Luther does. The eenturiators
defined the Church as " ccetus visibilis" and, after Chemnitz's
day (|1586), the Church of the Lutheran theologians is
something quite visible, and is spoken of as an institution
for the preservation and promotion of pure doctrine and of
the means of grace which work by faith. 2

Nor can the Wittenberg view of the Church be taken
otherwise when we see how the theologians of that town in
Luther's own time proceeded in appointing ministers and
controlling and supervising their office. The preachers and
pastors, after their doctrine had been found consonant with
that of Wittenberg,3 were " entrusted with the ministry "
though it is not apparent whether the authorisation came
from the congregations who applied for them, or from the
theological examiners, or from the sovereign and his mixed
consistory. The formulas used are by no means clear, save
on one point, viz. that they expressly claim for the Witten-
bergers the character of a true " Catholic Church," or at
least their harmony with such a Church.

In the ordination-certificate of Heinrich Bock (above, p. 265),
who received a call as pastor and superintendent to Reval, the
quondam city of the Teutonic Order in Esthland, and who had
been " ordained " on April 25, 1540, by Bugenhagen, the pastor
of Wittenberg, we find it stated : " His doctrine tallies with the
consensus of the Catholic Church which our Church also holds,

1 " Christlieher Gegenbericht," 1561, Bl. Y HI'. (The copy in the
Munich State Library contains the autograph dedication of Staphylus
to Joh. Jacob Fugger.) Also in the " Apologia," by Laur. Surius,
Colon, 1562, p. 353. Cp. Bellarminus, " Controversiae," t. 2 (Colon,
1615), p. 58.

2 " Centur.," 1, lib. 1, c. 4, col. 170, in Bellarmin, ib. In recent
times Protestant theologians have divided on the subject, some favour
ing more the visible, others the invisible Church. The latter are the
more logical. Cp. G. Kawerau's statement : " We may dispute as to
whether the term invisible ' Church ' is well chosen or not, but what it
means is clear ; for what else is it but a decided protest against every
attempt to attribute within the domain of the Evangel, to a visible,
ecclesiastical, legally constituted society the attributes of the Church in
which we believe? Protestantism by its very nature cannot make of
its outward edifice an ' ecclesia proprie dicta.' " " Uber Berechtigung
und Bedeutung des landesherrlichen Kirchenregiments," 1887, p. 12.

3 See above, p. 265.

314 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

and he is free from every kind of fanaticism condemned by the
Catholic Church of Christ."1 Hence they claimed to be one with
the universal Church throughout the world and not to form an
isolated community apart ; this, as we know, was Melanchthon 's
favourite view. The olden hierarchy was, however, replaced by
that of Wittenberg, as we read in the same certificate : " We "•
the signatories, Luther, Bugenhagen, Jonas and Melanchthon —
" have entrusted him with the ministry of the Church, that he
may teach the Gospel and dispense the sacraments instituted by
Christ," " iuxta vocationem," i.e. in accordance with the call of
the authorities at Reval who had summoned the ordinand to
govern their Church (" ad gubernationem ecclesice suce"). The
testimonial was the work of Melanchthon.

Other testimonials of this kind are similarly worded.

The certificate of Johann Fischer who went from Wittenberg
to Rudolstadt in 1540 (above, p. 265) sets forth that " he had
been called to the ministry of the Gospel by the people there, who
had also borne witness to his good moral character " ; they had
asked that " his call might be reinforced by public ordination " ;
this had been conferred on him when it had been shown that he
held " the pure, Catholic doctrine of the Gospel which our Church
also teaches and professes," and that he rejected all the fanatical
opinions which the Catholic Church of Christ rejects.2 The state
ment embodied in the testimonial, giving the grounds on which
the signatories, the pastor of Wittenberg and other " ministers of
the Gospel," undertook such an ordination is noteworthy : " We
may not refuse to do our duty to the neighbouring Churches for
the Nicene Council made the godly rule that ordination should
be requested of the neighbouring Churches." Of the objections
that theology and Canon Law might have raised those who
drafted the document seem to have no inkling.

In this case the Wittenbergers claim to be no more than a
" neighbouring Church " ; elsewhere they are more ambitious.

The fact is, Wittenberg was anxious to stand at the head
of the visible Church.

It was at Wittenberg that Luther, as the leader of the
young Church, had first preached the truth of the Gospel
urged thereto " by Divine command " ; on the strength of
such a command he was compelled to defend himself against
the Elector's lawyers who wanted to play havoc with " his
Church."3

" By divine authority we have begun to ameliorate the
world."4

Foes at home twitted him with setting up an " office of
the Word " by which an end was made of all freedom ; they

1 Testimonial of May 17, 1540, " Brief wechsel," 13, p. 57 f.

2 Testimonial of April 18, 1540, ib. p. 35 f.

3 Above, vol. iii., p. 41. 4 See above, vol. v., p. 250.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 315

urged, that, at Wittenberg, people were trying to " breathe
new life into despotism, to seat themselves in the chair and
to exercise compulsion just as the Pope had done hereto
fore."1 Luther proclaims loudly : " We, who preach the
Evangel, have full powers to ordain ; the Pope and the
bishops can ordain no one."2 — " You are a bishop," said
Luther once jokingly to a Superintendent, " just as I am
Pope."3 Beneath the jest there lay bitter earnest, for the
authority of the " Wittenberg school " in Luther's estima
tion stood high indeed ; whoever " despises it, so long as
the Church and school remain as they are, is a heretic and
a bad man," seeing that, in this school, God has " revealed
His Word."4 — Nevertheless, the Wittenberg theologians
complained that this authority was not recognised, that the
Church was a " spectacle of woe," without " oneness either
in doctrine or in worship " ; " our princes and cities " ought
to bring about unity. Moreover things are bound to grow
worse, seeing that " each one wants to be his own Rabbi."3
Outside Wittenberg, and even within the city walls, and that
even in Luther's time, the prediction of Duke George about
the 72 sects of the Protestant Babel seemed about to be
fulfilled.6

Yet Luther, in setting up the Wittenberg Primacy,
retained his former principles which were altogether at
variance with unity and subordination. "Who holds the
public office of preacher," so he declared in 1531, is not
" forbidden to judge of doctrine " (before this, as tin-
reader may remember, every " miller's maid " had been
free to do this) ; but whoever has no such office may not do
so, because he would be acting " of his own doctrine and
spirit."7

Where is your office ? Such was his question in 1525 to
his opponent Carlstadt. The latter appealed to the call he
had received from the congregation of Orlamfinde. But of
this Luther even then refuses to hear. He required from
Carlstadt, in addition, the ratification of the sovereign,
viz. of the Saxon Elector.

Even in those days he was most anxious to see Church
discipline established and excommunication resorted to,

1 Erl. ed., 43, p. 281. Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 102.

2 Above, vol. v., p. 191, n. 4. 3 Ib.

* Above, vol. v., p. 170. 6 Ib. 6 Ib., p. 171. 7 Ib.

316 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

even though this involved making the Church something
visible ; the disruption and confusion everywhere rampant
cried aloud for regulations, laws and penalties.1 " Such
punishment and discipline through the Ban," so he says,
" is utterly odious to the world and causes the faithful
ministers much work and danger ; for vice has already
grown into a habit ; it is no longer a sin ; the ungodly have
power, riches and position on their side. The greater the
rascal the better his luck."2 Yet, according to him it was
impossible for the Church to make laws, otherwise we would
again be putting up " snares for consciences " as in Popery.3
Laws must be made only by the sovereigns — whatever
discipline was enforced against the unruly was enforced by
the secular authorities. " The most the parsons did for
discipline was in following out the Electoral instructions to
the Visitors and denouncing offenders to the secular officials
and judges."4 Of the " blasphemers," viz. those who were
obstinate or opposed the New Evangel, Luther wrote in 1529
to Thomas Loscher, parson of Milau : " They must be
forced to attend the preaching," needless to say by temporal
penalties ; in this way they will be taught the obedience
they owe as citizens and also their duty to the State,
" whether they believe in the Evangel or not. ... If they
wish to live among the people, then they must learn the
laws of the people, even though unwillingly."5 Hence here
and in other instructions it is no longer a question of the
Church but only of the sovereigns ; these, so he urged, were
to be backed by the preachers. He praised the Bohemian
Brethren and the Swiss for having better discipline in their
Churches, he also admitted that the action of the authorities
would not of itself alone be sufficient to correct grave moral
disorders.6

" Unless the Court gives its support to our regulations,"
Melanchthon once said, the result will be mere " platonic
laws."7

References such as these to the State, which was now seen
to be necessary for the support of the Church when once

1 Cp. above, vol. v., p. 138 f.

2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 2G. 3 Above, vol. v., p. 180.
4 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 47.

6 Aug. 26, 1529, " Brief wechsel," 7, p. 151.

6 Kostlin, Art. " Kirche " in the v' RE. f. prot. Th. und Kirche,"
vol. 103. 7 Above, vol. v., p. 180.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 317

it had become a visible body, l are to be met with repeatedly
by anyone who follows the history of Lutheranism in its
beginnings, more particularly in the years 1525-1528. It
was during this period that the union of the new Church
with the State, which has been described above, was ac
complished. The sovereign arrogated to himself those
powers which gradually made him the supreme head of the
Church and permanent "emergency-bishop."2 The visi
bility of the Church, or rather Churches — as all claim to
catholicity was abandoned save in the crcdal formularies —
rested on the enactments of the rulers, who, not without
Luther's connivance, soon introduced the compulsory
element into religion. To make use of the invisible power of
the Gospel and to give advice to consciences as to moral
conduct, was indeed left to the ministers of the Word. But
it was the State that had to establish " the right form of
worship and the right ecclesiastical organisation."3

All heretical communities from the commencement of the
Church had looked to the State for help. But no heresiarch
ever put himself so completely in the hands of the State in
all outward matters as Luther and his fellows did where
princes of their own party were concerned. " The common
Christian Church " was, according to him, to retain for her
self only the true faith and the sacraments which worked
by faith.

When, in the State Church thus called into being, the
authorities proceeded too vigorously against the preachers
and treated Luther without due consideration, the latter
had himself a taste of the state of servitude into which he
had brought the Church. Dollinger says truly that this

1 Cp. " Colloq., ' ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 20 : " Lutherua dicebat de uau et
necessitate consistorii, quod lapsam et pendentem ecclesiam iterum
fulciret," etc.

2 Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 520 ; Erl. ed., 31, p. 217, in the writing " Von
den Schleichern und Winckelpredigem " (1532), Luther directs
" officials, judges and whoever has to rule " to ask the teachers who
were under suspicion : " Who has sent you ? " '; Why are you after
setting up something new ? " "If this work was done with zeal it
would be of great profit. . . . Otherwise, unless they insisted on the
call or command, there would come to be no Church left." — Concern
ing the provision for the Church's needs Luther speaks of the " duty "
of the Elector to see in some way that the parsonages were adequately
supported " in order that the Universities and divine worship be not
hindered from want, from the needs of the poor belly." Erl. ed., 53.
p. 331.

3 Kostlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 552,

318 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

restriction must have been " doubly irksome to a man who
had known the old episcopal, ecclesiastical rule and who
now had to admit to himself that it was he who had brought
about the destruction of a system which, in spite of all its
defects, had dealt with Church matters in an ecclesiastical
spirit, and that it was he who had paved the way for the
new and quite unccclesiastical order of things."1

Not seldom do we hear Luther reproaching himself
bitterly for the changes.

Among the thoughts that chiefly disturbed his conscience
was, as he himself repeatedly admits, that of having rent
asunder the great Church. How can you justify your revolt
against the one great Church of antiquity, the heir to the
promises, so the inner voices said to him as he himself
relates : " The words ' sancta ecclesia ' affright a man. They
rise up and say : ' Preach and act as you like and can,
the ''ecclesia Christiana* is still here. Here is the bark of
Peter, it may be tossed about on the waves, but perish it
will not ! . . . What was I to do ? And how was I to
comfort myself ? . . . And yet I had to do it [i.e. preach
against this Church] as here [John viii. 28] the Lord Christ
also does and preaches against those who in name are God's
Kingdom and God's priesthood.''2

Elsewhere he admits : " What am I doing in preaching
against such [representatives of the olden Church], like a
pupil against his masters ? Thoughts such as these storm in
upon me : Now I see that I am in the wrong ; oh, that I
had never begun, never preached a single word ! For who
is allowed to set himself up against the Church ? ... It is
hard to persist and to preach against such a Ban."3 — And
yet, in his defiant spirit, he does persist : " This hits one
smartly in the face, as has often happened to me . . . yet
the One Man, my Beloved Lord and Healer Jesus Christ, is
more to me than all the holiest people on earth." Since he
thinks it is His Evangel he is defending, he is able, though
only at great costs, " to rise above the cry of ' Church.
Church,' " though he has to admit that, " this troubles me
greatly," and "it is truly a hard thing ... to leave the
Church herself and not to believe or trust her doctrine
any more."4

1 " Luther, pine Skizze," p. 50 ; Art. " Luther," " KL,," 88, p. 338.

* Weim. ed.. 30, 3, p. 625 f. ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 358.

* Ib., Erl. ed., 50, p. 8. * lb.. 46, p. 226.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 319

It was no real parallel when Luther, in order to justify the
State Church, appealed to the conditions in the Middle Ages
where the rulers had a share in Church matters,1 for if then
the princes had intervened in Church matters their action,
at least in principle, was always subordinate to the ecclesi
astical authority which kept the power in its own hands, and
concerned moreover only those outward things in which the
Church was thankful for their assistance : The two co
ordinate powers, the secular and the spiritual, helped one
another mutually — such at least was the ideal of world-
government in those days, — acting in Christian agreement
in the service of God and for the general welfare of mankind.
Now, however, that the olden spiritual authority had been
cither completely paralysed or reduced to the shadow of its
former self, Luther undertook to replace it by the State,
and thus the Church ceased to be any longer a co-ordinate
power.

Though the Wittenberg theologians insisted that to them
belonged the care of souls and this alone, still the limits
between this domain and that of the State became every
where confused when once the new system had begun to
work. Owing to the friction this caused, Luther, in the
course of time, came to emphasise merely the duty of the
authorities to arrange by law for the establishment of
" schools and pulpits," and to " allow us divergency in
preaching or morals."2 Otherwise he left those in power,
the high-handed nobles and officials, to do as they pleased,
or, else, he lashed them ineffectually with violent and
abusive language. In 1586 he declared, speaking of the
marriage questions : " The peasants and the rude people
who seek nothing but the freedom of the flesh, and likewise
the lawyers who arc always bent on thwarting our decisions,
have wearied me so greatly that I have thrown aside the
marriage cases and written to some that they may do as
they please in the name of all the devils ; let the dead bury
their dead."3 It was chiefly in the matter of these matri
monial cases that he came into conflict with the Court

1 Luther says, for instance, that, in earlier days, '; Emperors and
Kings had commanded and instituted public worship in their lands "
( K <">stl in -Ka weran, 2, p. 42).

2 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2. p. 42.

a To Albert Count of Mansfeld, Oct. 5, 1530, Krl. ed., f>5, p. 147
(" Brief wechsel," 11, p. 90).

320 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

lawyers, e.g. as to the validity of the secret marriage
contracts. It was in this connection that he declared that,
" in his Church," which was God's own institution, he would
retain in his own hands the decision on such matters by
virtue of his ecclesiastical office. In other strong remon
strances wrung from him by the arbitrary interference of
the State officials and the nobles in Church matters, he
sometimes spoke so strongly of the inalienable rights of the
Church that one might well think that he regarded the
Church as essentially an independent institution with an
organisation and spiritual authority of its own.1 More
usually, however, he simply sighs. When the Court of
Dresden interfered with his plans for the improvement of
Church discipline he wrrote resignedly : " Satan is still
Satan. Under the Pope he pushed the Church into the
world's sphere and now, in our day, he seeks to bring the
State system into the Church."2

Without reverting to the subject of the State and Estab
lished Church already dealt with (vol. v., 568 ff.) we may
refer to the close connection between Luther's theology on
the Church and the development which was its outcome.
His theology, from the outset, had aimed at undermining
the authority of the Church, while at the same time enlarging
the sphere of the secular power.

As early as 1520 in his work addressed to the German nobility
he had praised the secular lords as " priests like us, equal in all
things " ; " they were to give free scope to the office and work
which they have from God, wherever it is needed or useful." Of
the clergy, without considering their authority in ecclesiastical
matters, he writes : " The priests, bishops or popes must deal
with the Word of God and the sacraments, this is their work and
office."3

" The direction of the outward business of the Church, i.e.
what we now term Church government," so Sehling, the Protes-

1 We may quote the remarkable letter to the Town Council of
Zwickau, dated Sep. 27, 1536, Erl. ed., 55, p. 146 (" Brief wechsel," 11,
p. 88) : " My feeling is always that the two rules, the spiritual and the
secular, or Church and Town-Hall, are not to intermingle, otherwise
the one devours the other and both perish as happened in Popery."
Cp. on the other hand, above, vol. v., p. 580 : " everything must be
equal and made to intermingle whether it be termed spiritual or
secular."

8 To Daniel Cresser, parson at Dresden, Oct. 22. 1543. " Briefe," 5,
p. 696.

8 Weim. ed., 6. p. 409 ; Erl. ed.. 21, p. 284.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 321

tant Professor of Canon Law, says, " Luther in his writing to the
German nobility, and ever after, attributes directly to the worldly
authorities. . . . Nor, above all, does he claim for the Church
any power of legislating. The Reformed Canon Law, so far as it
was reorganised legislatively, was based entirely on the code of
the State."1

Luther, in fact, recognised no other authority throughout* the
whole of the social order than that of the State ; nowhere except
ing amongst the secular authorities was there, according to him,
any real power ; there is on earth only one power, viz. the
secular. " Worldly superiors, by virtue of their calling, maintain
order and rule according to law and equity ; as for the Church
she has, by God's ordinance, her common ministry of Word and
Sacrament." 2 " The power of the Churches," says the Schwabach
Visitation Convention of 1528, " only extends to the choosing of
ministers and the enforcing of the Christian Ban " ; besides this
they may also provide for the care of the poor ; "all other power
belongs either to Christ in heaven or to the secular authorities on
earth."3

Nor could he well recognise any apostolic teaching authority in
the " higher orders of the Church," seeing that a " little maid of
seven years " on the side of the New Faith " knows more than
the Apostles, Evangelists and Prophets " on the other side ;
the latter are but the " devil's apostles, evangelists and prophets."*

How he casts aside all the authority of the Church is perhaps
shown most plainly in the short Theses of 1530 in his writing
" Ettlich Artickelstiick, so M. L. erhalten wil wider die gantze
Satans Schiile ufi alle Pforten der Hellen " : " The Christian
Church has no power to issue the least order concerning good
works, never has done so and never will." " The parson or
bishop [i.e. the Evangelical ministers] has not the right to assert
his authority everywhere for he is not the Christian Church. Such
parson or bishop may exhort his Church to sanction certain fasts,
prayers, holidays, etc., on account of the present needs, to be
observed for a time and then be allowed to drop."5 — But what the
Evangelical ministers cannot do, that the secular authorities may
do, for, in another passage, Luther points out expressly the
binding character of the rules which the authorities might draw
up, for instance regarding fasts ; should the sovereign order fast-
days, everyone must obey. In the same way if the German Prince-
Bishops gave such an order it was to be obeyed, but only because
they were Princes, not because they were bishops.6 During the

1 Mejer (f) und Sehling, " Kirchengewalt," in the " RE. f. prot.
Th.,"3. Cp. the art. " Kirchenregiment " : ki The Church, as a body
separate from the State, is something modern (?) and quite unknown
to Luther."

" Colloq.." ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 22.

See Emil Richter, " G-esch. der evangel. Kirchenverfassung in
Deutschland," 1851, p. 64.

Erl. ed., 252, p. 424 f.

/&., Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 424 f. ; Erl. ed., 31, p. 122 f.

To Melanehthon, July 21, 1530, k' Brief wechsel," 8, p. 129 f.

VI.— Y

322 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

Diet of Augsburg he refused to admit that, in future, there
should be bishops having at the same time princely powers. On
the other hand, however, he himself made the princes to all
intents and purposes bishops.

The contradiction in which he here involves himself has been
brought out very strongly by a recent historian and theologian
who as a rule is on Luther's side : " To our mind there is a glaring
contradiction between Luther's theses on the spirituality of faith
and the rights of the Christian authorities. Luther never noticed
this contradiction, and, all his life, stood for both simultaneously.
. . . From the religious standpoint he advocates the principle of
unlimited freedom as inherent in the nature of faith ; in the
secular sphere, i.e. in the domain of the State, he is unwilling to
overthrow the principle shared by all [?] in his day, viz. that tho
authorities have a right to assist in deciding on public worship and
doctrine ; in the rightful domain of the worldly authorities his
controversies have no right to intervene. Hence the contradic
tion."1 "Luther, who, where the peasants are concerned, plays
the part of Evangelist, refuses to tamper anywhere with the
existing [?] laws of the State where it is a question of their
lords."2

Here Luther's fundamental idea of the separation between
Church and world also comes into play.

The Church of his theology must necessarily be absorbed by
the State, because, being a stranger to the world, it was not con
versant with the conditions and, even with the best will in the
world, was unable to hold its own against the visible powers.
The spiritual rule, according to him, was to be as widely
sundered from the secular " as the heavens are from the earth."3
Thus the Church fled into a spirit realm and left the world to the
tender mercies of the secular power. She thus became herself the
cause of her "alienation and isolation from real life."4 It
naturally, indeed necessarily, followed that the sovereign set up
government departments, which called themselves spiritual, but
which in reality were secular and derived all their jurisdiction
from him alone. Such were the consistories.

The relations between State and Church in Lutheranism
may be regarded as an indirect justification of the Catholic
doctrine of the Church's nature. According to the Catholic
view Christ founded the sublime structure of the Church
as a free spiritual society. He willed that the saving
grace he had won by His Death should be applied to
the souls of men by means of a visible and independent
institution, which, inspired by Him with His own ideal

1 H. Hermelink, " Der Toleranzgedanke im Reformationszeitalter "
(" Schriften des Vereins f. RG.," Hft., 98, pp. 37-70), 1908, p. 49.

2 76., p. 66, n. 3 Above, vol. v., p. 565.
4 See Paulsen, above, vol. v., p. 57.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 323

and holy aims and equipped with her own peculiar rights,
should work for the salvation of mankind until the end
of the world. Hence, the advocates of the olden Church
not only set the idea of the Church in the foreground
of the struggle, but they also explored, enlarged on and
illumined this idea with the help of Holy Scripture and
the teaching of the Fathers. Such was the work of men
like Eck, Cochlaeus, Johann Fabri, Bishop of Vienna, and
Catharinus, and, in the same century, of Melchior Canus,
Peter Canisius, Bellarminc and Staplcton. They indeed
allowed the inward side of the Church — its soul as it
has been called — to come into its rights, but, at the
same time, they maintained with equal firmness its
thoroughly visible character, above all they insisted on the
hierarchy with the successor of St. Peter at its head as
the holder of the threefold spiritual power — which Luther
denied — of shepherd, teacher and priest. On this point there
could be no yielding.

To those adherents of Luther's who fancied they could
reach union without the Church's help and without an entire
acceptance of the Catholic doctrine, Eck addressed the
following : " There is no middle course and words are of no
avail ; whoever wishes to make himself one in faith with the
Catholic Church must submit to the Pope and the Councils
and believe what the Roman Church teaches ; all else is wind
and vapour, though one should go on disputing for a
hundred years."1

What the above Catholic polemics said may be summed
up as follows :—

Because the Church, according to Christ's plan, was to be an
independent and living institution, His future " kingdom " and
" heavenly vineyard," it replaced the Jewish synagogue by an
even better institution. This Church was to be indestructible and
the gates of hell were not to prevail against her (Matt. xvi. 18).

As a real institution the Church was marked out by the gifts
bestowed on it at the outset by the Divine Founder ; out of the
plenitude of the power He possessed " in heaven and on earth "
He .created in her a real, and no mere phantom office, comprising
ghostly superiors, viz. the " ministerium ecclesiasticum " ; hence
a twofold society arose consisting of those whose duty it is to
guide and those who are guided. The latter receive from the
former, i.e. from the hierarchy of priests, bishops and Pope, viz.

1 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), vol. vi.,
p. 148.

324 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

the successor of Peter, the doctrine handed down by Christ, and
preserved intact and infallible, together with Holy Scripture and
its true reading. Those who have the oversight over the rest
admit the faithful into the sacred company by means of visible
rites, and, thanks to the obedience they receive as God's repre
sentatives, there results " a body " of faithful united with Christ,
the One True Head.

It was to this hierarchy that, according to the Catholic theo
logians, the solemn words of Christ were spoken : " He that
heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me "
(Luke x. 16). " Go ye and teach all nations baptising them in
the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost . . .
and lo I am with you all days even to the consummation of the
world" (Mat. xxviii. 19f.). The "Keys of the Kingdom of
Heaven " are entrusted to them and they are told : " Amen I
say unto you, whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound
also in heaven ; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall
be loosed also in heaven " (Mat. xviii. 18). They may " com
mand " as Paul did, who journeyed from place to place and
"commanded them to keep the precepts of the apostles and the
ancients" (Acts. xv. 41). Peter, moreover, and his successors,
received the right and duty to feed " the sheep " as well as the
" lambs " (John xxi. 16), besides the especial custody of the
keys (Matt. xvi. 19) ; on him and on his God-given constancy the
Church of Christ was built (Matt. xvi. 18).

The Holy Ghost " placed " the bishops " to rule the Church of
God " (Acts xx. 28). Whoever " will not hear the Church " is
shut out from salvation and is to be regarded " as the heathen
and publican " (Matt, xviii. 17).

Nowhere in these passages, so it was pointed out, is there ever
a word about the secular power having any hand in the growth of
the great society of God upon earth. Nor could Christ, in view
of the object to which He had founded His Church, without
proving untrue to Himself, have left behind Him a helpless and
unfinished work, dependent for its very life on the discretion of
the secular authorities and taking its laws from the State. The
Church's four marks (above, p. 295) point to something higher.

Even did Luther wish to disregard the words of institution, he
should at least, so it was urged, not shut his eyes to history ;
now, from the earliest historical times, the Church had always
existed under the form of a society, i.e. divided into the two
categories of the teachers and the taught. Even according to
Protestant writers this form may be traced back at least as far as
the 2nd century, and, to an unprejudiced eye, its traces will be
discernible even earlier in the authentic sources, i.e. the Bible and
history. None, however, was better fitted to bear witness to the
earliest organisation of the Church than the Church herself, for
she could do so out of the unbroken and untarnished consciousness
of her existence ; her testimony confirms her Divine appoint
ment to be an independent society and a hierarchically governed
institution.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 325

Lutheranism, however, took scant notice of these Biblical
and historical proofs.1 Its founder, at the end of his life,
left it as his legacy a church, or rather churches, of a
different structure. In the evening of his days, in spite of
the hopeless and imperilled state of his congregations, he
refused to admit any gleam of light that might have brought
him back to the unwavering authority of the ancient Church
which once, in the days of his crisis, he had extolled. By
heavenly signs and wonders, so he had pointed out in his
Commentary on Romans (1516), this Church was introduced
into the world ; she is the mother of those who teach ; to her
decision every doctrine must bow if it is not to become a
heresy, " robbed of the witness of God and of that divinely
authenticated authority " which " down to the present day
supports the Roman Church."2

Since he had descended into the arena of controversy his
attitude towards the dogma of the Church had become not
so much a matter of doctrine (for the essential question was,
as Kostlin aptly remarks, " very insufficiently grasped and
explained by him3) as one of policy.

5. Luther's Tactics in Questions concerning the Church

Both for Luther's views on doctrine and for his psychology
his tactics in his controversy about the nature of the Church
offer matter for consideration.

Controversy, as we know, tended to accentuate his
peculiarities. His talents, his gift of swift perception, his
skill for vivid description, his art of exploiting every ad
vantage to the delight of the masses were all of value
to him. What he wrote when not under the stress of
controversy lacked these advantages, advantages, moreover,
which, for the most part, were merely superficial, and some
times, when he was in the wrong, display a very unpleasing
side.

1 Kostlin refers to the same thing when he says : " The fact that
there was originally in Christianity a well defined office of overseers
was either riot recognised by him at all, or at least not adequately."
Art. " Kirche," " R.E. f. prot. Th.," 103.

2 Scholia to Romans, p. 248 f. Cp. above, vol. i., p. 323.

3 Above, p. 297.

326 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

The Erfurt Preachers in a Tight Place

In 1536 Luther took a hand in a controversy which had
arisen at Erfurt as to whether the " true Church was there,"
and whether his preachers, who represented the Church and
were being persecuted by some of the Town Council, should
leave the town.1

As early as 1527 he had had occasion to complain of the Erfurt
Councillors ; they had not the courage "to go to the root of the
matter " ; they tolerated the " dissensions " in the town arising
from the divergent preaching of the " Evangelicals " and the
" Papists," instead of " making all the preachers dispute together
and silencing those who could not make good their cause."2 Since
the Convention of Hamelburg in 15303 both forms of worship had
been tolerated in the town. To the great vexation of Johann
Lang and the other preachers the quick-witted Franciscan,
Conrad Kling, an Erfurt Doctor of Theology (above, vol. v.,
p. 341), delivered in the Spitalkirche sermons which were so well
attended that the audience overflowed even into the churchyard.
Catholic citizens of standing in the town and possessed of influence
over the Council, spread the report that the Lutheran preachers
were intruders who had no legitimate mission or call, and had not
even been validly appointed by the Council. In consequence of
this, Luther, with Melanchthon and Jonas, addressed a circular
letter in 1533 to his old friend Lang and the latter's colleagues, in
which he encourages them to stand firm and not to quit the town ;
he points out that their call, in spite of all that was alleged, had
been " with the knowledge of the magistracy," and not the result
of " intrigue."4 It is plain from this letter that the tables had to
some extent been turned on Lang and his followers who had once
behaved in so high-handed a manner at Erfurt,5 and that they
were now tasting " want and misery " as well as contempt. In
vain did the preachers attempt to shake off the authority of the
Council by claiming to hold their commission from God.

Some while after, owing to the further efforts of Kling and his
friends, the situation of the Lutherans became even worse ; it
was then that Frederick Myconius, Superintendent at Goth a,
took their side and persuaded Luther to write the above memor
andum of Aug. 22(?), 1536, on the True Church of Christ at
Erfurt. This was signed by Melanchthon, Bugenhagen, Jonas
and Myconius, and may have been the latter's work. The docu
ment is highly characteristic of Luther's tactics in the shifty
character of the proofs adduced to prove the call of the Erfurt

Memo, of Aug. 22 (?), 1536, " Brief wechsel," 11, p. 40 ff.
"An die Christen zu Erfurt," Jan. — Feb., 1527, Erl. ed., 53,
p. 411 (" Briefwechsel," 6, p. 15).
Above, vol. ii., p. 360.

Sep. 30, 1533, Erl. ed., 55, p. 25 (" Briefwechsel," 9, p. 341).
Cp. above, vol. ii., p. 336 ff.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 327

pastors. It did not succeed in inducing the Council to grant the
preachers independence or to abrogate the restrictions of which
they complained, although, as Enders remarks, " it exalted the
spiritual power as supreme over the secular."1

There can be no doubt, so Luther argues, that, among his
followers in the town of Erfurt, there was indeed the true " Holy
Catholic Church, the Bride of Christ," for they possessed the true
Word and the true Sacraments. God had indeed " sent down oil
the people of Erfurt the Holy Ghost, Who worked in some of
them a knowledge of tongues, discernment of spirits," etc. (1 Cor.
xii. 10), in the same way He had given them Evangelists, teachers,
interpreters and everything necessary for the upbringing of His
Body (Eph. iv. 11 f.). He urges that the ministers of the Word
were rightly appointed, though here he does not appeal as much
as usual, to the supposed validity of the call by the Town Council,
as the whole trouble had its source in the town magistracy. The
appointment of the preachers, so he now says, was the duty of
the Church rather than of the magistrates ; the Town Council
had given them the call only in its capacity as a *' member of the
Church," for which reason their dismissal or persecution was
quite unjustifiable. He also brings forward other personal,
mystic grounds for the validity of their call : they were " very
learned men and full of all grace " ; the appointment, which they
had received not only from the " people and the Church, but also
from the supreme authority." had taken place under the breath
of the Spirit (" impetu quodam spiritus ") Who had sent them as
reapers into the harvest ; they are recognised by all the Churches
abroad, even the most important, and no less do their sheep hear
their voice. Hence, if some of the magistrates now refuse to
recognise them, they must simply appeal to their calling " by
the Holy Ghost and the Church " ; the efficient cause here is, and
remains, Christ, Who gives the Church her authority. Hence at
all costs they must stick to their post.

The whole of the extremely involved explanation points to
the reaction now taking place in his mind owing to his bitter
experiences with the authorities in the question of Church
government.

In this frame of mind he often makes the call depend solely on
the Church, nay, on Christ Himself. If the Courts are to rule as
they please, so he wrote in the midst of one of these conflicts with
the authorities, the last state of things will be worse than the first.
They ought to leave the Churches to the care of those to whom
they have been committed and who will have to render an account
to God. Hence Luther urges that the two callings be kept
separate.2

What is also noteworthy in the memorandum for the people of
Erfurt is that, in order to defend the legal standing of the

1 In the Notes to the memorandum of 1533, " Brief wechsel," 9,
p. 342.

2 To Daniel Cresser, Oct. 22, 1543, " Brief e," 5, p. 596. See the
text, above, vol. v., p. 182.

328 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

preachers, he insists on the fact of their having been recognised
by their congregation, who are willing to listen to them as their
shepherds. Here we have the revival of an old idea of his, viz.
that the soul-herd was really appointed by the people and in their
name. In his later years he tended to revert to this view, though,
in reality, the people never had a say in the matter. After having,
in 1542, consecrated Amsdorf as " Bishop " of Naumburg, in the
ensuing controversies he referred to the will of the " Church,"
i.e. of the Naumburg Lutherans. " All depends," so he wrote,
" whether the Church and the Bishop are at one, and whether
the Church will listen to the Bishop and the Bishop will teach the
Church. This is exemplified here."1

Controversies with the Catholics on the Question of the Church

In what Luther wrote against the Catholics we occasion
ally meet some fine sayings on the unfettered authority of
the Church in its relations to the secular rulers,2 so greatly
was his versatile mind governed by the spirit of opportunism.

It was from motives of expediency that, in 1529, in his " Vom
Kriege widder die Tiircken " he makes out Emperors and kings to
be no protectors of the Church ; these worldly powers are " as
a rule the worst foes of Christendom and the faith." " The
Emperor's sword has nothing to do with the faith, but only with
bodily and worldly affairs."3 It must be remembered that he
wrote this just before the dreaded Diet of Augsburg. — Again,
in 1545, in the Theses against the " Theo legists of Louvain "
who had requested the State to protect the Catholic faith as
heretofore, Luther says : " It is not the duty of Kings and
Princes to confirm right doctrine ; they have themselves to bow
to it and obey it as the Word of God and God Himself."4 — If the
" Emperor's sword " and the " Kings and Princes " had been on
his side, then his language would have been quite different. As
it was, however, whenever he thought it might prove useful, he
was not unwilling to come back even later to the standpoint
of his writing " Von welltlicher Uberkeytt."5

When the Catholics, for instance at the Diet of Augsburg,
reproached his party with having completely secularised the
Church and with prohibiting Catholic worship with the help of
the Princes who favoured him, his replies were eminently
characteristic both of his temper and his mode of controversy.

He knew very well, so he wrote in 1530, " that the Prince's
office and the preacher's are not one and the same, and that the
Prince as sucli ought not to do thi.3 [i.e. prohibit the Mass]." But
in this the Prince was acting, not as a Prince, but as a Christian.
It is also " a different thing whether a Prince ought to preach or

1 Erl. ed., 262, p. 124. 2 Cp. above, p. 320 11. 1.

3 Weim. ed.. 30, 2, p. 130 f. ; Erl. ed., 31, p. 58 f.

* Erl. ed., 65, p. 177. 5 See above, vol. ii., p. 297 ff.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 329

whether he ought to consent to the preaching. It is not the
Prince, but rather Scripture, that prohibits ' winkle-masses ' " ;
if a Prince chose to take the side of Scripture that was his own
business.1

Another answer of Luther's was to the effect that the abomina
tions of Catholic worship which were being abolished by the secular
authorities were, after all, outward things, and that the power of
the sovereign without a doubt stretched over " res externce."2

Of these attempts at justification and of his doctrine of the
Church in general, Kostlin's observations hold good : " We
cannot escape the fact that, here, there is much vacillation and
that Luther stands in danger of contradicting himself." " We
must admit that he had not studied deeply enough the questions
arising out of the relations of the authorities to matters ecclesi
astical." 3 " The decision [of the sovereigns] as to what constituted
right doctrine was final as regards the substance of the preaching
in their lands." " A nobleman who had received orders from his
sovereign, the Duke of Saxony, to expel the Evangelical preachers,
was told by Luther — though what he said was undeniably at
variance with other utterances — that the sovereign had no right
to do this because God's command obliged him to rule only in
secular and not in spiritual concerns." " In fact the only
answer he could give to the Popish persecutors when they
alleged they were forced by their office and conscience to act as
they did was : ' What is that to me ? ' for it was clear enough
that they were using their authority wantonly."4

But how are we to explain his apparent readiness at the time
of the Diet of Augsburg in 1530 to recognise the olden Church, and
the power of the bishops, and even himself to submit to them if
only they would allow him and his followers freedom to preach
the Evangel ? The statements to this effect in his " Vermamig " of
this year have been widely misunderstood through being taken
apart from their setting. He does not for a moment imagine, as
he has been falsely credited with doing, that it was not " his
vocation to found a new Church separate from Catholicism " ;
neither has he any desire to remain united with his foes " in one
communion under the Catholic bishops."

Luther, as he here says, is only willing, " for the sake of peace,
to allow the bishops to be princes and lords," and this only on
condition that "they help to administer the Evangel" — i.e. take
his part ; in that case they " would be free to appoint clerics to
the parishes and pulpits." His offer is, " that we and the
preachers should teach the Evangel in your stead," and " that
you should back us by means of your episcopal powers ; only
your personal mode of life and your princely state would we leave

1 To the Elector Johann, Aug. 26, 1530, Erl. ed., 54, p. 188 (" Brief-
wechsel," 8, 215).

2 To Spalatin, Nov. 11, 1525, " Brief wechsel," 5, p. 272.

3 KOstlin, " Luthers Theol.," 21, pp. 554, 563. In the 2nd ed. the
chapter has been altered and not always for the better.

4 Ib., p. 563.

330 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

to your conscience and to the judgment of God."1 In the mean
time, on account of the Catholic faith to which they clung, he
calls them " foes of Cod," speaks of their " anti-Christian
bishopry," and, because of the infringements of the law of
celibacy, scourges them as the " greatest whoremongers and
panders upon earth."2

In his controversies with the Catholics he often enough
found himself faced by the objection, that the true Church
could not be with him, because on his side all the fruits of
holiness were wanting ; the Church being essentially holy
should needs be able to point to her good influence on
morals.

Thus, for instance, a Dominican adversary had written :
According to Luther the Gospel had been under the bench for
the last four hundred years ; but, now, surely enough, "it is
under the bench even more than heretofore, for the Gospel and
the whole of Scripture have never been so despised as at present
owing to Luther's teaching, who excludes all love of God and
man, all concord between lords and serfs, priests and laity, men
and women, rejects all good works and discipline, obscures the
truth and replaces it by nothing but lies and introduces hatred
and envy, unchastity, blasphemy and disobedience."3

In his replies to such arguments against the truth of his Church
Luther was loath to attempt the difficult task of proving the
existence of holiness in the domain of the Evangel. On the
contrary, with surprising candour, he usually meets his opponents
half-way as regards the facts. Thus, in his " Wider Hans Worst,"
in 1541, he admits that things are just as bad as they had been in
Jerusalem in the days of the prophets, " with us too there is
flesh and blood, nay, the devil among the sons of Job. The
peasants are savage, the burghers avaricious arid the nobles
grasping. We shout and storm our best, helped by the Word of
God, and resist as far as we can. . . . Willingly we confess and
frankly that we are not as holy as we should be."4

Such admissions are followed by astonishing attempts to evade
the force of the objection and by coarse attacks on the im
morality of the Papacy which he exaggerates beyond all
measure.

The few, he declares, who are good and virtuous suffice to prove
the Church's holiness. " Some do more than their part ; that
they are few in number does not matter. God can help a whole
nation for the sake of one man as he did by Naaman, the Syrian

1 Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 339 f. ; Erl. ed., 242, p. 396 ff.

2 /&., p. 338 = 396.

3 Job. Mensing, " Griindtliche Unterrichte, was eyn frommer
Christen von der heyligen Kirche . . . halten sol," 1528, in Paulus,
" Die deutschen Dominikaner," 1903, p. 25.

4 Erl. ed., 262, p. 66.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 331

(4 Kings v.). In short, one's life cannot be made a subject of
debate." — On another occasion he replies shrewdly that the mark
of holiness was not nearly so safe as other marks, for distinguish
ing the true Church ; for pious works were also practised at
times by the heathen. ... As regards its importance as a mark,
holiness must be subordinated to the true preaching of the Word
and to pure doctrine, which in the end will always bring amend
ment of life ; whereas corrupt doctrine poisoned the whole mass,
a scandalous life was damaging chiefly to the man who lived
it ; but corruption of doctrine had penetrated Popery through
and through.1 " We do not laugh when wickedness is committed
amongst us as they [the Papists] do in their Churches ; as
Solomon says (Prov. ii. 14) : ' Who are glad when they have done
evil and rejoice in most wicked tilings,' and also seek to defend
them by fire and sword."2

We have here an instance of the tactics by which lie turns on
his adversaries and abuses them. In his anxiety to turn the
reproach of his foes against themselves he selects by preference
the celibacy of the clergy and the religious vows ; nor does he
attack merely the blemishes which the Church herself bewailed
and countered, but the very institution itself.

In his " Von den Counciliis und Kirchen " he exclaims : "The
Pope condemns the married life of the bishops and priests, this is
plain enough now " ; " if a man has been married twice he is
declared by the Papists incapable of being promoted to the
higher Orders.3 But if he has soiled himself by abominable
behaviour he is nevertheless tolerated in these offices."4 " Why,"
he asks, most unjustly misrepresenting the Catholic view of the
sacrament of marriage, " why do they look upon it as the lowest
of the sacraments, nay, as an impure thing and a sin in which it
is impossible to serve God ? "5

To what monstrous and repulsive images he can have recourse
when painting the " whore Church " of the Papacy, the following
from " Wider Hans Worst " will serve to show : You are, so he
there writes in 1541 of the Catholics, " the runaway, apostate,
strumpet-Church as the prophets term it " ; " you whore
mongers preach in your own brothels and devil's Churches " ; it
is with you as though the bride of a loving bridegroom " were to
allow every man to abuse her at his will. This whore — once a
pure virgin and beloved bride — is now an apostate, vagrant
whore, a house-whore," etc. " You become the diligent pupils
and whorelings of the Lenae, the arch-whores, as the comedies
say, till you old whores bear in your turn young whores, and so
increase and multiply the Pope's Church, which is the devil's own,
and make many of Christ's chaste virgins who were born by

1 Kostlin, " Luthers Thool.," 21, p. 546.

2 Erl. ed., 2G2, p. 66.

3 " Digamy " as a canonical hindrance to ordination is founded on
the prescription of St. Paul, 1 Tim. iii. 2, 12. For the history of this
impediment see Phillips, k' Kirchenrecht," 1, p. 519 ft.

* Erl. ed., 252, p. 427 6 Ib., p. 428.

332 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

baptism, arch-whores like yourselves. This, I take it, is to talk
plain German, understandable to you and everybody else."1

Without following him through all he says we shall merely
draw the reader's attention to a proverb and a picture Luther
here uses. The proverb runs : " The sow has been wrashed in
the pond and now wallows again in the filth. Such are you, and
such was I once."2 In the picture "the Pope's Church." i.e. hell,
is represented as a " great dragon's head " with gaping jaws, as it
is depicted in the old paintings of the Last Judgment ; " there,
in the midst of the flames, are the Pope, cardinals, bishops,
priests, monks, emperors, kings, princes and men and women of
all sorts (but no children). Verily I know not how one could
better paint and describe the Church of the Pope,"3 etc.

After such rude abuse he comes back in the same writing to his
usual apology. There was, he says, no object in alluding to the
moral evils in the Lutheran Churches because of the Church being
of its very nature invisible. 4 Everything depends on the doctrine
'k which must be pure and undefiled, i.e. the one, dear, saving,
holy Word of God without anything thrown in. But the life that
ought to be ruled, cleansed and hallowed daily by such teaching
is not yet altogether pure and holy because our carrion of flesh
and blood still lives." Yet " for the sake of the Word whereby
he is healed and cleansed all this is overlooked, pardoned and
forgiven him, and he must be termed clean."6

The Papists have a beam in their own eye, i.e. their false
doctrine, but they see the mote in the eye of others *' as regards
the life."6 If it is a question with whom the true Church is to be
found he assures us : " We who teach God's Word with such
certainty are indeed weak, and, by reason of our great humility,
so foolish that we do not like to boast of being God's Churches,
witnesses, ministers and preachers or that God speaks through
us, though this we certainly are because without a doubt we

1 Erl. ed., 262, p. 45 f. 2 Ib., p. 46.

3 76., p. 43. This, some years later, was to form the frontispiece of
his book " Wider das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft."

* Cp. what he says elsewhere : " The Church is an assembly of the
people which is founded on the invisible. It is the ungodly who see in
the Church nothing but misery, weakness, scandal and sin. The wise
of this world take offence at her look because she is subject to scandals
and divisions ; they dream of a holy, pure and undefiled Church, the
Divine Dove. It is true that, in God's sight, the Church does so appear,
but to the eyes of men she resembles her bridegroom Christ Who
according te Isaias liii., seemed torn, bruised, spit upon, crucified,
mocked at " (" Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 14). — Luther was perfectly
aware of the works of holiness by which the Catholic Church is dis
tinguished, her penitential practices and life of prayer. Speaking of
this he is fond of depreciating it as something external and declaring :
" Hence we must speak differently of the matter and learn to know
that the Christian Church is holy, not in herself nor in this life, but in
Christ ; a holiness by grace is indeed received here, but it is completed
in the next world." Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 408 f. ; Erl. ed., 63, p. 304 f.
Preface to Crossner's " Sermon von der Kirche," 1531.

* Erl. ed., 262, p. 55. 6 P. 66.

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 333

have His Word and teach it " ; it is only the Papists " who
venture boldly to proclaim out of their great holiness : Here is
God and we are God's Church."1

It was not, however, bold presumption and lack of
humility that led Luther's literary opponents among the
Catholics to appeal to the promises Christ had made to His
Church ; rather it was their conviction that these solemn
assurances excluded the possibility of the Church's having
ever erred in the way Luther maintained that she had done,

The Indefectibility of the Church and Her Thousand-Year-Long

Error

When the question arose, how the Church, in spite of
Christ's protection, could nevertheless have fallen into such
monstrous errors,2 Luther was disposed to admit in his
polemics that the true Church, i.e. the community of real
believers, could not go astray. " The Church cannot teach
lies and errors, not even in details. . . . How could it
then be otherwise when God's mouth is the mouth of the
Church. As God cannot lie neither therefore can the
Church."3

Such an immutable and reliable guide to erring men for
their perfect peace of mind and sure salvation, the Catholics
retorted, did Christ intend to leave in His visible Church,
ruled by the successors of St. Peter.

An able Catholic work of 1528, already referred to above,
emphasises the Church's immutability in her dogma : " That
preacher who does not preach in accordance with the Holy
Catholic Church and the holy Fathers sins against the truth. . . .
With due reverence we firmly believe all that is written in the
approved Books of the Old and New Testament. We must not,
however, so confine ourselves to this as to look upon what the
Holy Church teaches apart from Scripture as human dross,
seeing that Scripture itself commands us to keep the doctrine of
the Church and the Fathers." The author goes on to show his
opponent Luther what services are rendered by the Church's

1 P. 55.

2 These errors constituted, according to Luther, a " flood of all kinds
of human doctrine, lies, errors, idolatry and abominations," " count
less devilish dens of murderers in which the welfare of souls suffers
gruesomely " (Erl. ed., 31, p. 336 f.).

3 /6., 262, p. 53. Cp. ib., 31, p. 337 : " The Church, or Christendom,
has remained and will stand, this is undoubtedly true."

334 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

authority, how she preserves intact and vouches for the Canon
of Scripture. It is only from the lips of the Church that we learn
which books were written under the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit. " For where is it written that we must believe the
Gospels of Matthew, John and the rest ? But, if it is nowhere
written, how is it you believe in these Gospels ? How much at
variance is your practice with your teaching ? "l

As to the infallibility of the Church Luther retorted : The
invisible Church cannot err, but " that Church which we usually
mean when we use the word, can and does err ; the congregation
of true believers cannot be assembled in one particular spot and
is often to be found where least expected. Moreover, even this
Church, i.e. the true believers and the saints, can sometimes go
astray by allowing themselves to be drawn away from the Word.
. . . Hence we must always regard the Church and the saints
from two points of view, first according to the Spirit, and, then,
according to the flesh, lest their piety and their Word savours of
the flesh."2 The Church teaches according to the Spirit when
her " belief tallies with the Word of God and the belief of Christ
Himself in heaven. To speak in this manner and meaning is
right."3 But " we must not build on her opinion or belief where
she holds or believes anything outside of and beyond the Word of
God."4 It was according to the flesh that all those abominations
of errors were taught which were termed " opinions of the
Churches, though they were nothing of the kind but merely
human conceits, invented outside of scripture and parading
under the Church's name."5

With this Luther's reader is flung back once more into the most
subjective of systems, for who is to decide whether this or that
doctrine "savours of the flesh." Each one for himself, solely
according to the standard of Holy Scripture or, rather, each one
as Luther dictates. But Luther's decisions touched only the
doctrines known to him ; who is to decide on the questions yet
to arise after his death ?

He condemns the errors of the Middle Ages. Yet he is occa
sionally ready to praise the Mediaeval Church. As we know he
acknowledged that she had preserved Baptism. When the
Church says that " Baptism washes away sin," this, to Luther,
does not savour of the flesh. " She also holds and believes that
in [?] the bread and wine the Body and Blood of Christ are
given. . . . Summa, in these beliefs the Church cannot err."6
These, however, merely happened to be Luther's own opinions.
Infant-Baptism Luther defended against the Anabaptists without
seeking help in the Bible ; as for the presence of Christ in the
Sacrament against the Zwinglians he indeed had the words of
the Bible, yet here, too, he was only too glad to reinforce what
he said by the traditions and infallible teaching office of the

1 Above, p. 330 n. 3. Paulus, ib.. p. 24.

2 Kostlin's summary. "Luther's Theol.," 21, p. 552.

3 Erl. ed., 31, p. 333. * /&., p. 332.
* Ib., p. 334. * 76., p 332

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 335

Church, though in so doing he was contradicting his own
theory. l

Luther, with characteristic disregard of logic, calls the earlier
Church a " Holy place of abominations." She was a " holy
place," for " there, even under the Pope, God maintained with
might and by wonders first Holy Baptism ; secondly, in the
pulpits, the text of the Holy Gospel in the language of each
country ; thirdly, the Forgiveness of Sins and Absolution both
in Confession and publicly ; fourthly, the Blessed Sacrament of
the Altar ; . . . fifthly, the calling or ordination to the preaching
office. . . . Many retained the custom of holding up the crucifix
before the eyes of the dying and reminding them of the sufferings
of Christ 011 which they must rely ; finally, prayer, the Psalter,
the Our Father, the Creed and the Ten Commandments, item
many good hymns and canticles both in Latin and in German.
Where such things survived there must undoubtedly have been a
Church, and also Saints. Hence Christ was assuredly there with
His Holy Spirit, upholding in them the Christian faith though
everything was in a bad way, even as in the time of Elias, when
the 7000 left were so weak that Elias fancied himself the only
Christian still living."2

Nevertheless, this was the selfsame Church, which not only
connived at the teaching of heretical abominations but actually
herself taught all the depravities which Luther describes in the
same writing, such as her peculiar doctrine of priestly ordination,
of the validity of the secret Canon of the Mass, of the spiritual
authority of the bishops, of justification, good works and satis
faction, of purgatory, saint-worship, etc.

That here he does not condemn the olden Church off-hand and
fling her to the jaws of the dragon as he was wont to do is a
casual inconsistency ; his moderation here is to be explained by
the necessity he was under then (after the Diet of Augsburg), of
showing that he could claim a certain continuity with the Church
of the past, and also by his desire to influence those Catholics who
were still sitting on the fence and whom he would gladly have
drawn over to his own side by seeming concessions, in accordance
with his tactics at Augsburg.

Yet, in spite of the above concessions, the Mediaeval
Church remains in his eyes a " place of abominations " ;

1 Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 552 : " While he ... repeatedly
declared, that, in spite of the Divine promises, Christendom had fallen
into error on certain points, he could never be induced to admit this
of the article of the Presence of the Body [of Christ in the Sacra
ment]."

2 Erl. ed., 31, p. 339. Elsewhere he likewise admits, that, in the
olden Church and particularly in the convents " there lived many
great saints " ; it was true that they, " the elect of God," had been led
astray, " yet they were at last delivered and made their escape through
faith in Jesus Christ." Weim. ed., 26, p. 504 ; Erl. ed., 30, p. 366
(1528).

336 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

her members, though validly baptised, are not members of
the Church ; they might indeed sit in the Church, but only
as Antichrist sits in the Temple of God (2 Thess. ii. 4) ; her
children would be saved if they died before coming to a full
knowledge of the Popish Church, but if they grew up and
followed her lying preaching then they would become
devil's whores;1 even as I myself " was stuck fast in the
behind of the devil's whore, i.e. of the Pope's new Churches,
so that it is a grief to us to have spent so much time and
pains in that shameful hole. But praise and thanks be to
God Who has delivered us from the Scarlet Woman ! "2

So low is his esteem for the authority of the tradition of
the " Holy Place of abominations," that he includes among
the doubtful and fallible statements of that Doctor of the
Church the famous saying of St. Augustine, that he would
not believe the Gospel were it not for the Church.3 He urges
that Augustine himself had declared, that his doctrines were
to be examined, and only those to be accepted which were
found correct. He prefers to harp on another passage where
St. Augustine says : " The Church is begotten, fed, brought
up and strengthened by the Word of God,"4 as though
St. Augustine in speaking thus of the soul of the Church
was denying her external organisation, her spiritual
supremacy, and her teaching office. Luther, however,
treated tradition just as he pleased ; theologians had always
distinguished between those traditions of the olden Doctors
that had been guaranteed by the Church and those views
which were merely personal to them ; the latter no theo
logian regarded as binding, whereas the former were accepted
by them with the respect befitting the witnesses. Here,
once more, we see Luther's subjective principle at work,
which excludes all authoritative doctrine that comes to man
from without, leaves him exposed to doubt and negation,
and quite overlooks the fact that all revelation in last
resort comes to the individual from without with an irre
sistible and authoritative claim to respect. Just as the
Divine revelation vindicates its claim to acceptance by the

1 Erl. ed., 262, p. 46 f. 2 /&., p. 43.

3 " Augustinus voluit scribere iudicanda non credenda, sicut alius
locus eiusdem scriptoria testatur : Nolo meis scriptis plus credi," etc.
(" Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 17). Cp. vol. iv., p. 400.

4 " Ecclesici verbo Dei generator, alitur, nutritnr, roboratnr '' (Erl. ed.,
252, p. 420).

IDEA OF THE CHURCH 337

faithful by means of proofs, so too, the teaching authority
of the Church — as Luther's Catholic opponents were not slow
to point out — could show proofs that what was presented
to the faithful as an article of belief might reasonably be
accepted without any need of previously testing it to see
whether it agreed with Holy Scripture — an examination,
which, as a matter of fact, most people were not capable of
undertaking.

As the polemic we quoted above argues, Protestants held
Holy Scripture to be so clear that everyone could under
stand it without outside help. " But, if the heretics think
Scripture to be so plain and clear, why do they write so
many books in order to explain it ? If Scripture is so clear,
plain and easy to understand how is it that they arc so
much at variance concerning that one text : ' This is My
Body?'"1

Luther now fell back on the Holy Spirit. " Without the
Holy Ghost," he says, " it is impossible to discern the
abominations from the Holy Place. But, so he was justly
asked, who is to vouch for it that a man has truly the Holy
Spirit ? And, if, as Luther opines, the Holy Ghost points
to the fruits as the means whereby He may be recognised,
everything again depends on the fruits being judged accord
ing to Luther's own moral standard. In short, in these
controversies, Luther revolves in a vicious circle.

In his Table-Talk Luther's habit of shielding himself from
objections behind the strangest misrepresentations is again
apparent. Such misrepresentations, occurring in his most
intimate conversations, show that he was very far from merely
using them in public or from motives of policy ; rather they
influence his whole mode of thought and feeling and were a second
nature with him. We have only to turn to his conversations on
the subject of the " Church," collected in 1538 by his friend and
companion Anton Lauterbach.2

Here we meet with the revolting assertion that, in the
Papistical Church, the Pope claimed to be the only one who
had a right to interpret Scripture, and that he did this " out
of his own brain " ; this Church, so Luther goes on, had set up
a mass of human regulations and vain observances which stifled
all freedom and true religion ; " the name Church was a pretext
for the most abominable errors." Further, " the true Church
[i.e. mine] teaches the free forgiveness of sins, secondly, she

1 Mensing, in Paulus, ib., p. 25.

2 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, pp. 13-25: " Ecclesia. qua? regnuw
Christi dic-itur"

VI. — 7,

338 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

teaches us to believe firmly, and, thirdly, to bear the cross with
patience. But the false Church [the Pope's] ascribes the forgive
ness of sins to our own merits, teaches men to waver, and, finally
does not carry the cross but rather persecutes others." Besides,
how can the Papists have the true Church, seeing that they are
" some of them Epicureans, some of them idolaters ? " — Fancy
talking about the authority of the Church ! Is it with this that
the fanatical Anabaptists are to be vanquished ? " Moreover, we
know that : The true Church never at any time bore the name
or title that the godless so boldly claim ; she was ever nameless
and is therefore believed rather than seen ; for the most part she
lies downtrodden and neglected ; weakness, crosses and scandals
are her portion. Only look at the Church under the tyranny of
the Pope ; the Papal Decretals are the ne plus ultra of un
godliness."

" I am astonished," so he ends, speaking of the Roman
Primacy, " at the great blindness with which men worshipped
the Pope's lies and his boundless and utterly shameless audacity,
as though Holy Scripture depended on the authority of the
Roman Church whose head lie claimed to be, basing his claim on
the words of Christ (Matt. xvi. 18) 'Thou art Peter and on this
rock I will build My Church.' "

Luther's Tactics in the Interpretation of the Bible

The text just quoted leads us to glance at his Biblical
arguments ; to conclude this chapter we shall therefore give
as a sample of his exegesis on the Church a more detailed
account of his exposition of the chief argument for the papal
primacy, viz. Christ's promise to Peter, using for this
purpose his last book against Popery.1

He would fain, so he says, " point out the Christian sense of
this text " as against that read into it by the hierarchical Church ;
nevertheless, at his first effort ho cannot rise above a coarse
witticism. "For very fear," on approaching this text " Thou
art Peter," etc., something "might easily have happened had 1
not had my breeches on ; and I might have done something that
people do not like to smell, so anxious and affrighted was I." Why
did not the Pope appeal rather to the text : "In the beginning
Cod created the heavens — that is the Pope — and the earth, that
is the Christian Church," etc. This is the first answer.

The second is a perversion of the Catholic view ; he accuses the
Pope of deducing from the text under discussion, that he has
"all power in heaven as well as on earth " and authority " over
all the Churches and the Emperor to boot." This parody of the
truth Luther proceeds triumphantly to demolish as " blasphemous

1 Erl. ed., 262, p. 172 ff., " Wider das Bapstum zu Rom vom Teuffel
gestifft," 1545,

"ON THIS ROCK" 339

idolatry." — There follows thirdly an appeal to the " Emperor,
Kings, Princes and nobles " to seize upon the Papal States which
the Pope has stolen by dint of " lying and trickery " and to slay
as blasphemers him and his Cardinals.

He goes on to explain the Bible passage in question by proving,
fourthly, against the " wicked, shameless, stiff-necked " Papists
from Eph. iv. 15, and from Augustine and Cyprian, " that the
whole of Christendom throughout the world has no other head
set over it save only Jesus Christ, the Son of God." The true
sense of Eph. iv. 15 and the real teaching of both the Fathers in
question are too well known for us to need to waste words on
them here. — fifthly, he brings forward John vi. 63 : " My words
are Spirit and life " and argues : " According to this the words
Matt. xvi. 18 [concerning Peter and the rock] must also be
Spirit and life. . . . The upbuilding must here mean a spiritual
and living upbuilding ; the rock must be a living and spiritual
rock ; the Church a living and spiritual assembly, nay, some
thing that lives for all eternity. — These facts, however, had always
been admitted by Catholic commentators without causing them
any apprehension as to the primacy or the visible Church. —
Sixthly, he seeks to demonstrate that the Church can only be built
on the rock indicated by Christ " by faith " ; this, however,
excludes the primacy of Peter, for " whoever believes is built
upon this rock." — Seventhly : " It is thus that St. Peter him
self interprets it, 1 Peter ii. 3 ff.," — though this is a fact only
credible to one who is already of Luther's opinion. — Eighthly, he
will have it that, in the famous passage, Christ meant to say
no more than : " Thou art Peter, that is a rock, for thou hast
perceived and named the Right Man, viz. Christ, Who is the true
Rock, as Scripture terms Him. On this rock, i.e. on Me, Christ, I
will build the whole of My Christendom."

This reading would certainly cut away the ground from under
the argument of the Catholics.1 Nevertheless Protestant
scholars have repeatedly shown themselves willing to apply
Christ's promise to the person of Peter, as ecclesiastical tradition
has ever done, and to defend this as the true sense of the words.
Thus the Berlin exegetist, Bernhard Weiss, writes : " By using
rai'TTj for the name (Peter), signifying a rock, any application of
the words either to Jesus or to the faith or confession of Peter
is shut out. ... It can only be understood of his person," etc.2
By Holtzmann, the Strasburg exegetist, the opposite interpreta
tion was uncharitably described as a fruit of the " school of
Protestant ex parte exegesis."3

1 As early as the Leipzig Disputation Luther had been obliged to
have recourse to the explanation, that by the rock was meant either
the faith Peter had confessed, or else Christ Himself. Kostlin-Kawerau,
1, 245, remarks on this : " We cannot honestly deny its weakness."

2 "Das Matthausevangelium und seine Parallelen," Halle, 1876,
p. 393.

3 *• Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol.," ed. Hilgenfeld, 1878, p. 115.—
H. A. Meyer, " Kritisch-exegetisches Handb. fiber das Evangelium des
Matthaus,"8 Gottingen, 1876, says of Matt. xvi. 18 f.: "There is no

340 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH

We must, however, allow that, both here and in his treatment
of the promise of the keys (Matt. xvi. 19), Luther shows himself
an adept in the use of language. " To speak plain German we
may say this," so he begins one of his commentaries, and indeed
he knows how to speak well and in a manner calculated to
impress his hearers. Of the matter, however, we may judge from
the following : "To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of
heaven," this means that, should anyone refuse to believe the
apostles, on him they should pass sentence and condemn him " ;
their " office " still remains in the Church, there always being
" retaining of sins for the impenitent and unbelieving, and for
giveness for the penitent and the believing " ; but, quite apart
from this " office," believers have absolute power " where two
or three are gathered together in the name of Christ (Matt, xviii.
20). MI Here again we have Christ's promise misconstrued, which
does not refer to spiritual authority but solely to the effect of the
prayer in common of two or more of the faithful.2

" Hence, let the Pope and his Peter be gone," so he concludes
..." even though there were a hundred thousand St. Peters,
even though all the world were nothing but Popes, and even
though an angel from heaven stood beside him ; for we have here
[Matt, xviii. 18, where the power of binding and loosing is bestowed
on all the apostles] the Lord Himself, above all angels and
creatures, Who says they are all to have equal power, keys and
office, even where only two simple Christians are gathered together
in His name. This Lord we shall not allow the Pope and all the
devils to make into a fool, liar or drunkard ; but we will tread the
Pope under foot and tell him that he is a desperate blasphemer
and idolatrous devil, who, in St. Peter's name, has snatched the
keys for himself alone which Christ gave to them all in common.
" It is the Lord Himself Who says this [John xx. 21 ff.] ; there
fore we care nothing for the ravings of the Pope- Ass in his filthy
decretals."3

doubt that the primacy among the Apostles is here bestowed on Peter."
— Schelling wrote (" Philosophic der Offenbarung," 2, Stuttgart, 1858,
p. 301) : " These words of Christ (Matt. xvi. 18 f.) are conclusive to all
eternity as to the primacy of St. Peter among the Apostles : it requires
all the blindness of party spirit to fail to see this or to give them any
other meaning."

1 P. 185. 2 Above, p. 305. 3 P. 188.

CHAPTER XXXIX

END OF LUTHER'S LIFE

1. The Flight from Wittenberg

" OLD age is here," so wrote Luther in a fit of depression to
his Elector on March 30, 1544, in his sixty-first year ; " old
age which in itself is cold and ungainly, weak and sickly.
The pitcher goes to the well until one fine day it breaks ;
I have lived long enough, may God grant me a happy
deathbed. . . . Methinks, too, I have already seen the best
I am like to see on earth, for it looks as though evil days
were coming. May God help His own ! Amen." He
recommends his sovereign to seek comfort in the " Dear
Word of God " and in prayer, assuring him : " These two
unspeakable treasures shall never be the portion of the
devil, the Turk, or of the Pope and his followers."1

About this time he had to complain of palpitations,
dizziness and calculus. His will he had already drawn up
on Jan. 6, 1542. 2 In it he refused to make use of the usual
legal forms, being determined to have nothing to do with
the lawyers, with whom he was always at variance. He was
quite aware that lawyers still insisted on the objections to
the validity of the marriages of clerics and monks and the
rights of inheritance of their children, as they indeed were
bound to do not only by Canon Law but also by the law of
the Empire.

How cheerfully he was inclined to look forward to death
even the year before is apparent from a letter to Myconius,
" the bishop of the Churches of Gotha and Thuringia," who
was then lying seriously ill ; here he says : " I pray our
Lord Jesus not to call to everlasting rest you and our
followers and leave me here among the devils to be still
longer tormented by them. Truly I have been long enough

1 " Brief e," ed. De Wette, 5, p. 638.

1 See vol. iv., p. 329. Cp. vol. iii., p. 436 f.

341

3*2 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

plagued by them and really I deserve that my turn should
come before yours. Hence my prayer is : May the Lord
lay your illness upon me and rid me of my earthly habitation
which is so useless, worn-out and exhausted. I see right
well that I am no longer good for anything."1

After his above farewell-letter to the Elector Luther's
thoughts reverted to death more frequently than before.
He cast up the books he had still to write and took stock of
his powers to see whether he would have time to finish
them. For his energy and spirit of enterprise were by no
means yet dead, though at times they seem to be paralysed.
Often enough he pulls himself together in his letters suffi
ciently to make jokes with his friends, the better both to
banish his own gloomy thoughts and to inspire the addressees
with greater courage and confidence. Nevertheless, through
it all, we can detect his disquiet and suffering.

" You often importune rne," so he wrote to his pupil Anton
Lauterbach about the end of 1544, " for a work on ecclesiastical
discipline, but you do not tell me where I am to find the leisure
and health, seeing that I am a worn-out and idle old man. I am
ceaselessly snowed under with letters. I have promised the
young princes a sermon on drunkenness, others and myself I
have promised a book on secret marriages, others again, one
against the Sacramentarians ; some now want me to set all else
aside and write a ' Summa ' and running gloss on the whole
Bible. Thus one thing stands in the way of the other and I get
through nothing. And yet I had imagined that, as one who had
already done his work, I had earned the right to some leisure, and
to live quietly and in peace and so pass away. But I am com
pelled to pursue my restless way of life. Well, I shall do what I
can, and, what I can't, I shall leave undone. . . . Pray for us as
we do for you."2

In Jan., 1545, when he had almost completed his long and
arduous work on Genesis, he sighed : " May God put an end to
this moribund and sinful life as soon as this book is finished, or
even before should it please Him ; do you ask God this for me.
. . . Yes, truly, pray for my happy dissolution and that I may
die a good death."3 " Pray for me," he wrote to Amsdorf in
May of the same year, " that I may be set free as soon as may be
from my fetters and be united to Christ, but that, if my life, or
rather my sickness, is to last still longer, God may bestow on me
strength of body and force of soul." He praises God that he him
self and his friends, "though unworthy sinners, had been chosen
for this blessed and glorious office, viz. to hear the voice of God's

1 Jan. 9, 1541, " Briefe," 5, p. 327.
8 Dec. 2, 1544, " Briefe," 5, p. 701.
3 To Wenceslaus Link, Jan. 17, 1545, " Briefe," 5, p. 714.

HE LEAVES WITTENBERG 343

Majesty in the Word of the Evangel ; on this the angels and all
creation wish us luck, but the Pope is dismayed and all the gates
of hell shake."1

Luther's extant letters covering the period from May to
December, 1545, afford us an insight into the emotions
through which he passed.

From the month of May onwards he sank deeper and
deeper into a dreary state of annoyance and sadness, and, at
last, at the end of July, he shook the dust of Wittenberg
from his feet. In the latter half of August, after he had
allowed himself to be persuaded to return, his spirits
rapidly revived, and such was the reaction that his new
mystical ardour knew no bounds while his exertions seem
almost incredible.

To take the period in question in its chronological order :
The month of May commenced with a bitter attack on Agricola,
and, on the latter's arrival at Wittenberg, he refused even to see
him. " Of this monster," he wrote on May 2, "I will hear
nothing but words of condemnation ; of him and his friends
may I be rid for all eternity. . . . Satan may rage and boast as
he pleases ! "2 His annoyance, as is usual with him, is speedily
transferred to Satan. That same day, plagued with a tiresome
matrimonial dispute, he asked : " Is then the devil master of the
world ? "3 Shortly after he declared the Pope to be the " monster
of Satan, the end of whose days was at hand."4 His joy at the
approaching end ( " gaudeamus omnes in Domino ") is, however,
not unmixed. The thought depresses him that the devil should
still be active even at Halle which had recently been won over
to the Evangel, and that he had there " just blessed, or rather
cursed, two nuns, thereby proving how much more he fain
would do."5

Annoyance at the bad treatment of his preachers also lets loose
a flood of complaints. " In many places," so he laments, " they
are treated very ill so that they are minded to depart and are even
compelled to take flight."6 The hostility of the politicians at
Court and the lawyers, was also a cause of profound grief to him.7

With greater apprehension than usual he saw at the beginning
of June terrifying natural portents and prayed with passionate
longing for the " overthrow of all things " which he was confi
dently awaiting.8

Already in spirit he saw the sparks of the coming conflagration
which was to consume Germany for her chastisement, " before
the outbreak of which may God deliver us and ours from this
misery ! "9

1 May 7, 1545, " Briefe," 5, p. 737.

2 /&., p. 735. 3 P. 733. * P. 737. 5 P. 738. • P. 739.
7 Sec below, p. 355 ff. 8 " Briefe," 5, p. 741. 9 Ib., p. 742.

344 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

In July anger at the " contempt of the Word on our side and
the blasphemy of our foes,"1 the sad sight of the want of unity
and growing number of sects in his own camp, where " each one
insists on following his own ideas,"2 the "decline of learning "
amongst his followers, where ** many bellies are set only on
feeding themselves,"3 all this combined with other experiences
tended to make his depression unendurable. To be obliged to set
in order the public worship spelt a positive torture to him. 4 Even
in his own household he had cause for bitter disappointment in
his niece Magdalene who had insisted on making love to a man
(whom she was ultimately to marry) of whom Luther did not
approve, thus giving Satan an opportunity for " maliciously
attacking " Luther's good name.6

Yes indeed, " Satan rules," he said to Amsdorf, in a letter of
July 9, " and all have lost their wits."6 Here the cause of his
vexation was the Emperor, who, so he had been told, was
insisting that the Protestants should attend the Council of Trent
and submit to it. It is true Luther does not give up all hope of
God again making a mockery of Satan,7 but, in the meantime,
he execrates and curses the Council.8 He also vents his wrath
on the Emperor, Ferdinand the German King, the King of
France and the Pope. And why ? Because he was only too
ready to give credence to a report which had reached him that
they had despatched ambassadors to the Grand Turk with gifts
and an offer of peace, and that, clothed in long Turkish garments,
they were humbling themselves before the infidel.9 " Are these
Christians ? They are hellish idols of the devil. Yet I hope they
are at the same time a glad token of the coming of the end of all
things. Let them worship the Turk, but let us call upon the true
God, Who will humble both them and the Turk in the Day of His
Coming."10

He is still suffering from the after-effects of the excitement in
which he had, as he says, penned his " book brimful of bitter
wrath, against the Papal monster," viz. his " Against the
Popedom founded by the Devil." He has not the strength left
to write a sequel to it, but he tells his friend Ratzeberger : "I
have not yet done justice either to myself or to the greatness of
my anger ; I know too that I can never do full justice to it, so
great and boundless is the enormity of the Papistic monster."
In such a frame of mind he feels keenly that he is the " trump
heralding the Last Judgment."11

He is conscious, however, that his trump cannot peal loud
enough in the world (" parum sonamus ") owing to his state,
borne down as he is by pains of body and soul. He was unable to
summon up the force to write either the continuation of his wrork

1 P. 743. 2 Ib., 6. p. 379. 3 /&., 5, p. 380.

* P. 739. 5 P. 745. 6 P. 746. 7 P. 746.

8 P. 750. » Pp. 744, 750 f. 10 P. 751.

11 P. 754. To Ratzeberger, Court Physician to the Elector, Aug. 6,
1545 : " credo, nos esse tubom illam novissimam, qua prceparatur e
prcecurrilur advent us Christi." Cp. above, vol. v., p. 239.

HE LEAVES WITTENBERG 345

against the Pope, or even the short reply to the Swiss which lie had
promised Amsdorf.1

The above false report of the Christian embassy to Turkey
current at Wittenberg he was at once ready to accept because it
was in keeping with his pessimistic outlook. The evil spirits of
suspicion, distrust and the mania of persecution made his
unhappy mind willing to credit everything that was unfavourable,
and even embittered the life of those about him. Melanchthon in
particular suffered under this mood owying to his disposition to
find a modus vivendi with the Swiss, whilst all the while con
cealing his leanings under a prudent and timid silence.2

" The wild and immoral life at Wittenberg, a town so greatly
favoured by God,"3 and the danger this spelt to the good name
of the whole of Luther's work stung him now more keenly than
ever before. Of his own remorse of conscience we hear nothing
at this time ; his letters even to his intimates, usually so com
municative, are silent as to any temptations or inward conflicts
with the devil. There is no doubt that public affairs were then
weighing more heavily on him, for instance the troubles arising
from the Hessian bigamy. He was now again suffering from
calculus. " I would dearly like to die," he writes, " a plague on
these excruciating pains ! If, however, it is the Will of God that
I succumb to them, He will give me grace to endure them and to
die, if not sweetly, at least bravely ! "*

When his physical sufferings diminished there came to his
mind the recollection of how, more than a year before, early
in 1544, he had determined to leave Wittenberg, of which he
had sickened, in order to seek a more peaceful life elsewhere.
It was only the extraordinary exertions of his friends that
had then succeeded in keeping him back. Bugenhagen and
the other preachers, the University and the magistrates, had
besought him with tears and entreaties. On that occasion
he was " incensed," so Cruciger, his friend and pupil, says,
" at some trivial matter, or rather he was full of suspicion
about us all, as I believe."5 Already in 1530, and again in
1539, he had declared that, owing to the annoyance given
him, he would never again mount the pulpit at Wittenberg.6
Now, however, his chagrin was even deeper and he resolved
to carry out his plan prudently and quit the town for ever.

1 P. 740. 2 See below, p. 352.

'J KOstJin-Kawerau, 2, p. 606.

4 To Amsdorf, June 15, 1545, " Brief e," 5, p. 743.

6 " Corp. ref.," 5, p. 513. Cp. also the passage quoted above, vol. v.,
p. 237.

* For the breaking off of the sermons in 1530 see above, p. 168. We
read in the " Historien " of Mathesius, that Luther " In [16]39 said
wildly that he would never again get up in the pulpit."

346 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

Without acquainting even Catherine Bora of the length
of his absence from the town he left Wittenberg at the end
of July accompanied by his son Hans, his guest Ferdinand
von Maupis, travelling with Cruciger, who was to decide a
quarrel between Medler and Mohr, the two Naumburg
preachers at Zeitz, on July 27. Luther also repaired to
Zeitz and took part in the negotiations, but instead of
returning with Cruciger to Wittenberg, he wrote a letter to
Katey from Zeitz on the 28th,1 stating that he had no
intention of returning to Wittenberg. " My heart has
grown cold so that I no longer like being there ; I advise
you to sell the garden and courtyard, the house and stabling ;
then I would make over the big house [the old monastery in
which Luther used to live] to my gracious Lord, and it
would be best for you to settle down at Zulsdorf [i.e. on her
own little property] while I am yet alive."2 He hoped, he
goes on, that the Elector would continue to pay him his
stipend as professor, " at least during the last year of his
life."

From the letter it is plain that it was annoyance at the
decline of morals in the town rather than any strained
relations with his friends at Wittenberg that drove him to
this sudden decision. " Let us begone out of this Sodom ! "
he writes and hints that, in addition to the disorders with
which he was already acquainted fresh scandals had reached
his ears on this journey ; the " government," i.e. the author
ities, aroused his deepest indignation. " There is no one to
punish or restrain, and besides this the Word of God is
derided " ; maybe the town " will catch the Beelzebub-
dance, now that they have begun to uncover the women
and girls [an allusion to the low-cut dresses] m front and
behind." " So I will wander about and rather eat the bread
of charity than allow my last days to be tortured and upset
by the disorderly life at Wittenberg and see all my hard

1 " Brief e," 5, p. 752 f.

- On Catherine's position at Wittenberg the following words speak
volumes : " After my death the four elements [Faculties] at Witten
berg will most likely not put up with you, hence it would be better that
what there is to do were done during my lifetime."' Luther was right in
his anticipations. After his decease '' the sad fate of a poor parson's
widow was not spared her. In countless petitions to the King of
Denmark, ' Dr. Martin's widow ' had year by year to beg for support
now that ' everyone looks at me askance and no one comes to my
assistance.' " Hausrath, " Luthers Leben," 2, p. 497 f.

HE LEAVES WITTENBERG 347

work brought to nought. You may tell Dr. Pommer and
Master Philip of this if you please," he concludes, " and see
whether Dr. Pommer will bid farewell to Wittenberg for me,
for I can no longer contain my anger and annoyance."

The Wittenberg notabilities were filled with consternation
on hearing of what Luther had done ; they could not
regard it as a mere passing whim, for they knew Luther's
determination. The University made representations in
writing to the Elector, begging him to intervene to prevent
such a misfortune ; the foes of the Evangel would rejoice at
the departure of the great teacher, other professors would
leave, and the result would be new dissensions.1 As we
know, Melanchthon, by his own account, was ready " to
slink away." Luther, so the University stated, like a new
Elias, was the chariot and horseman of Israel and quite
indispensable ; if he wished any changes made and order
established this would be done even should he find " fault
with the teaching of some." The University also sent
Bugenhagen and Melanchthon to talk the matter over with
Luther ; the town despatched its burgomaster and the
Elector sent him his own medical attendant, Ratzeberger,
with a friendly letter.2

In the meantime Luther had left Zeitz and gone on to
Merseburg, whither he had been invited by George of Anhalt,
formerly canon of the chapter there. The latter had gone
over to Protestantism, and, when the bishopric was seques
trated in 1541 by a secular prince — August, the brother
of Duke Maurice of Saxony — was appointed " spiritual
administrator " of the see. He now wanted to be formally
" consecrated " by Luther as bishop of Merseburg. To this
the latter readily agreed. On Aug. 2, with the assistance of
Jonas, Pfeffinger and others he reiterated the ceremonial
which he had once before performed on Amsdorf at Naum-
burg (above, vol. v., p. 194).

The festivities at Merseburg, the kindness and hospitality
of which he was the recipient at Lobnitz and Leipzig, and,
lastly, the change of air and surroundings brought Luther
to a much better frame of mind.

The messengers from Wittenberg found him at Merseburg.
After they had seen him and listened to his stern admoni-

1 Cp. Cruciger, " Corp. ref.," 5, p. 313.

2 Ratzeberger, " Gesch.," p. 125.

348 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

tions, they were delighted to receive his assurance that,
after all, he would return to Wittenberg. His resolve had,
in fact, been merely the result of strong excitement. Now,
moreover, not only had the depression ceased of which he
had so long been the victim but a notable change of mood
had supervened and his confidence and courage had been
restored. Such sudden changes are not without their
parallel in Luther's earlier life, as has been sufficiently
shown above.

He now returned in a better temper to Leipzig, where he
preached a vigorous sermon on Aug. 12, and was there
entertained by Camerarius, Melanchthon's confidant ; he
also "associated with his circle of friends in the best of
humours."1

After his return to Wittenberg on the 16th we hear no
more of his vexation, though he did not put much faith in
the disciplinary measures that had been drawn up for the
town, notwithstanding that they were backed by the Elector ;
the Court itself, so he wrote, read nothing and only scoffed at
everything.2

He now threw himself once more into the struggle with
his theological foes. A glance at these labours and at his
lectures shows him working at high pressure, while, as his
letters show, he retained his sense of humour.

He set to work immediately on the 32 articles which the
Louvain Faculty of Theology had published with the object of
enlightening Catholics on the nature of the Protestant doctrines.

Already in Aug. he had set up his 76 theses " Against the
Articles of the Theologists of Louvain."3 Here he does not take
his opponents seriously, but, for the most part, simply pours
forth his annoyance on them and their theses, sneering at them
and scourging them with coarse invective. He calls them arch-
idolaters, a school of blockheads, lazy bellies and rude asses, the
accursed, hellish brew of Louvain ; speaks of their mad, raving

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 608. What Aurifaber relates in the
German Table-Talk of a conversation of Luther's on the bigamy of
Philip of Hesse " at Leipzig in 1545 during a convivial gathering "
(Erl. ed., 61, p. 302) rests on a false chronology and only repeats a
conversation which took place much earlier. For the incorrectness of the
the date given, see Cristiani in the " Revue des questions historiques,"
91, 1912, p. 113.

! " Brief wechsel," ed. Burkhardt, p. 482 f.

3 In Latin in " Opp. lat. var.," 4, p. 480 sqq. German according
to the Wittenberg original ed. of 1545, in Erl. ed., 65, p. 170 ff.

RETURN TO WITTENBERG 349

conceit ; they are bloodthirsty incendiaries and fratricides, a
stinking cesspool, a school of obscenity and muck, are these great,
gross epicurean swine of Louvain. " They come straight from
hell and teach what they have seen in the Mirror of Marcolfus,1
i.e. the ordure of man-made laws." " For, instead of giving the
people Holy Scripture, they do nothing else but cack, spew,
belch forth and fling human filth amongst them. . . . Arid thus
Holy Church is to be looked upon as 110 better than a latrine for
the scamps of Louvain wherein they, playing the lord, may void
their belly when over-full, and where, moreover, they slay and
lay waste. This indeed may be termed foolery and raving ! "2
The strange elation in which Luther penned so odd-sounding
a " reply " is, again, not to be explained by any ordinary
psychology.

In Sep. Luther commenced a work on a larger scale against t he
Louvain theologians and their Paris colleagues, which, however,
he was not able to finish. The fragment " Against the Donkeys in
Paris and Louvain," which exists in two drafts, showrs plainly
enough what sort of book it would have been had death not
interrupted his work. He urges that, whoever wishes to teach
theology whilst refusing to acknowledge the truths taught by him
concerning the Law, sin and Grace, is as wTell fitted to do so as an
ass is to play upon the harp, as the Papacy is to govern the
Church, or as the Louvain scholars to promote the cause of
learning.3 In this work he fancied he had recovered his olden
stormy vigour. To his friend Jacob Probst he candidly admitted :
" I am more angry with these Louvain quadrupeds than beseems
me, an old man and so great a theologian ; but I want it to be
said of me that I took the field against these monsters of Satan,
even though it should cost me my last breath."4

He was busy at the same time on a revised edition of his Latin
" Chronology of the World," of which the aim was to show the
near advent of Christ.5 On Oct. 16 he finished his Latin Com
mentary on the Prophet Osee, and sent a copy as a gift to Mohr,
the dismissed pastor of Zeitz, with a kindly letter of religious
consolation and encouragement.6 He also despatched a lengthy
circular to the printers on the capture of Duke Henry of Bruns
wick, the enemy of the Evangel ; this letter is a monument to his
aggressiveness so nearly verging on the fanatical ;7 in this he
had been strengthened by the supposed intervention of heaven
on his behalf against Henry and against the Pope and the
Mass.8

His intimate correspondence was also steeped in the new
enthusiasm which had laid hold on him. " What a joyful victory

1 See above, vol. iii., p. 268.

2 Theses 31 and 32, p. 173.

3 Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 609.

4 Letter of Jan. 17, 1546, " Briefe," 5, p. 778.

5 See vol. iii., p. 147. 6 " Briefe," 5, p. 761

7 Above, vol. v., p. 394 f.

8 Cp. " Theol. Stud, und Krit.," 1894, p. 771 f.

350 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

has God, Who hearkens to our prayer, given us," so he wrote on
Oct. 26 to Jonas. " Let us believe and let us pray ! He is
faithful to His promises ! . . . O God, do Thou maintain our joy,
or, rather, Thine Own Glory ! "l

The jokes we had missed for a while now once more made their
appearance in his letters. In the first epistle written after his
return he hastens to tell Amsdorf of Mutian's reading of the
inscription " Soli Deo gloria " (viz. " To the Sun-God be glory ")
on a tower belonging to the Archbishop of Mayence ; after all
the " Satan of Mayence " was perhaps right, so he says, in having
the inscription taken down.2 In another letter he cheerfully
relates the old tale of the peasant who, with hands devoutly
folded, said to Satan : " Thou art my Gracious Master the
Devil."3 He is also delighted to be able to tell the story of a
Popish preacher, who, before the war, exhorting the people to
pray for the Duke of Brunswick, had said : " If he is worsted
then 14 parsons will be had for the price of a penny."4

His last lecture was delivered just before Christinas, 1545,
when he ended his exposition of Genesis. At its close he said :
" Here you have our dear Genesis ; God grant that, after me,
someone may do it better ; I am weak and can go on no longer ;
pray that God may grant me a happy deathbed."5 But his
"weakness" was merely temporary. A little after he wrote:
" Whoever must fall let him fall if he refuses to listen to the Son
of God. We pray and look for the day of our deliverance and
destruction of the world with its pomps and wickedness. Would
that it come speedily. Amen. I have taken the field against the
donkeys of Louvain and Paris, but, nevertheless, feel pretty well,
considering my advanced years."6

Impelled by the ardent desire to do something for the
furtherance of peace within his camp, in spite of his bodily
weakness and his distaste for \vorldly business, he under
took at the request of Count Albert of Mansfeld to act as
arbiter in the dispute between the latter and his brother and
nephew concerning the royalties from the mines and certain
other legal claims.

" My time is entirely taken up," so he says, " with affairs
which do not in the least interest me ; I must serve the belly
and the table."7 Already at the beginning of October these
matters had induced him, with Melanchthon and Jonas, to
proceed to Mansfeld. As soon as his course of lectures was
finished, viz. at Christmas, he again repaired thither, in spite

1 " Briefe," 5, p. 764 f.

2 Aug. 19, 1545, ib., p. 757. 3 16., p. 768. 4 P. 769.

6 " Opp. lat. exeg.," 11, p. 325.

• To Amsdorf, Jan. 19, 1546, " Briefe," 5, p. 780.

7 To Prince George, Administrator of Meraeburg, Oct., 1545, ib.,
p. 769.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 351

of the severity of the weather, again accompanied by
Mclanchthon, who was inclined to grumble at being called
upon to listen to the squabbles of quarrelsome people.
Luther, however, as he wrote to Count Albert, wished to
see the " beloved lords of his native land reconciled and on
good terms " before " laying himself to rest in his coffin."1
He returned to Wittenberg shortly after Christmas, owing
to Melanchthon's falling ill.

These two journeys to Mansfeld, afterwards to be followed
by a third and last, have, by controversialists, wrongly been
made out to have been due to Luther's desire to escape from
Wittenberg on account of his bitter experiences there.

2. Last Troubles and Cares
Theological Disruption

" The sad controversies of the last few years had made
Luther recognise that a race of theological fighting-cocks,
gamesters and idle rioters had arisen, and that dissensions
of the worst sort might be anticipated in the future. The
nation in which each one obstinately followed his own way
was beyond help. . . . The Swiss refused to have anything
to do with the German Reformation ; the Bucerites held
themselves aloof from both Lutherans and Swiss, the
Brandenburgers wanted to belong neither to the Church of
Home nor to that of Wittenberg ; at Wittenberg itself the
Martinians and the Philippists (so-called after Luther and
Melanchthon) were hostile to each other, and finally the
Princes and magistrates all went their own way. ' Things
will fare badly when I am dead,' such was Luther's repeated
prediction. Whether he looked at this Prince of the Church,
at that Landgrave, or that other Duke Maurice, there
was not one in whom he could entirely trust. More than
one Mene Tckcl was written on the wall, yet none perceived
it save the old man at Wittenberg at whom they all shrugged
their shoulders."2

Such is the description by Luther's latest Protestant
biographer of the " sad decline of the Evangelical party."

The Zwinglians had received a severe blow from Luther
in his " Kurtz Bekentnis " of Sep., 1544 ;3 but the Swiss,

1 To Count Albert of Mansfeld, Dec. 6, 1545, " Briefe," 5, p. 771.

2 Hausrath, " Leben Luthers," 2, p. 483.

3 See above, vol. v., p. 261.

352 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

who were hardy and independent fellows, soon prepared a
furious counter-reply.1 The " old man at Wittenberg " was
not deceived as to the profound and irremediable breach, yet
he succeeded, at least outwardly, in driving away his annoy
ance and cares by the use of ridicule. Early in 1546, to one
of his confidants who had bewailed the new step taken by
the Swiss, he wrote the following, which forms his last
utterance against the Zwinglians : " If they condemn me, it
is a joy to me. For by my writing I wished to do nothing
else than force them to declare themselves my open foes.
I have succeeded in this, hence so much the better. To
adapt the words of the Psalmist : ' Blessed is the man who
hath not sat in the council of the Sacramentarians, nor stood
in the way of the Zwinglians, nor sat in the chair of the men
of Zurich."2 To another intimate, Amsdorf, the " Bishop "
of Naumburg, who was allowed a deeper insight into his soul
than others, Luther confided that one of the principal
reasons of his hatred of his competitors in Switzerland and
South-West Germany was that " they are proud, fanatical
men, and also idlers. At the beginning of our enterprise,
when I was fighting all alone in fear and dread against the
fury of the Pope, they were bravely silent and waited to see
how things would go. Later on they suddenly posed as
victors, and as though, forsooth, they alone had done it all.
So it ever is : one does the work and another seeks to enjoy
his labour. Now they even go so far as to attack me, who
won their freedom for them. . . . But they will find their
judge. If I answer them at all it will be nothing more than
a brief recapitulation of the sentence of condemnation
irrevocably passed upon them."3 — No such answer was,
however, to be forthcoming.

Against Melanchthon Luther's ardent followers, the
Martinians, were, as we know, highly incensed for attempt
ing to modify the doctrines of the Master. Melanchthon's
sufferings on this account have already been described
(vol. v., p. 252 ff.). With a grudging silence Luther bore

1 " Orthodoxa Tigurinae ecclesiae ministrorum confessio . . . cum
responsione ad vanas et offendiculi plenas D. Martini calumnias, con-
denmationes et convicia, etc.," 1545.

2 To Jakob Probst, Jan. 17, 1546, " Briefe," 4, p. 778. Cp. Ps. 1, 1 :
" Beatua vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum ct in ria peccatorum non
stetit et in cathedra pestilentice non sedit."

3 April 14, 1545. " Briefe," 5, p. 728,

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 353

with his friend's Zwinglian leanings on the doctrine of the
Supper, and with their other differences.

Both, moreover, were surrounded by an atmosphere of
theological bickerings, " where individuals, who, had it not
been for these squabbles, would never have achieved
notoriety, gave themselves great airs."1

We may recall how Melanchthon had even thought of
leaving Saxony, where, as he wrote to Camerarius, he was
bound down by undignified fetters ; such \vas his weakness,
however, that he could not bring himself to do even this.
Luther's coarseness, lack of consideration and dictatorial
bearing it was that led Melanchthon to say that he who
ruled at Wittenberg was not a Pericles, but a new Cleon and
an unsufferable tyrant.2

On the question of the veneration of the Sacrament differ
ences at last sprung up even between Bugenhagen and
Luther ; the former, usually his pliant instrument, took
upon himself during Luther's absence to abolish at Witten
berg the elevation of the elements during the celebration.
Apparently this was in the second half of Jan., 1542. Luther
expressed his disapproval of this action and declared he
would revive the rite.3 In 1544, when the three Princes of
Anhalt were at Wittenberg and asked him whether it would
be right to abolish the Elevation, he replied : " On no
account ; such abrogation detracts from the dignity of the
Sacrament." There is no doubt that it was his antagonism
to the Zwinglians that was here the determining factor ;
moreover, as he admitted Christ to be present in the Sacra
ment during reception in the wider sense, i.e. during the
liturgical action, he had no theological grounds for doing
away with the elevation and adoration of the elements. In
his own justification he went so far as to say : " Christ is in
the bread, why then should He not be treated with the
greatest respect and also be adored ? "4

1 Hausrath, ib., 2, p. 469.

2 See Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 570. He was referring to Luther's
attitude towards the lawyers. On Melanchthon's earlier plan of leaving
the town, see above, vol. iii., p. 370 f.

3 Cp. No. 16 of the Theses " Wider die Theologisten zu Loven,"
Erl. ed., 65, p. 171, and the passage from Mathesius quoted in the
following note.

* Mathesius, " Tischredeii," p. 341 with Kroker's remarks ; the
latter places this important utterance recorded by Besold (1544) in its
right chronological setting, as against Loesche and Kostlin, Hfre

VI, — 2 A

354 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

The Lutheran preacher Wolferinus of Eisleben was in the
habit of pouring back into the barrel what remained of the
consecrated Wine after communion. Luther called him
sharply to account, as he found that his conduct was tainted
with Zwinglianism ; in order to evade the difficulty he
ordered that, in future, preachers and communicants should
see that nothing was left over after communion.1

Luther, towards the end of his life, had to taste a good
deal of that " theological ire " of which Melanchthon fre
quently speaks, and not only from the Swiss. We need only
call to mind Johann Agricola, and his " antinomian sow-
theology," as Melanchthon termed it. His inferences from
Luther's doctrine of the inability of man to fulfil the Law he
never really withdrew even when he had betaken himself to
Brandenburg. In the Table-Talk dating from the latest
period and published by Kroker, Luther's frequent bitter
references to Agricola show the speaker was well aware that
his Berlin opponent still hated and distrusted him as much
as ever. After Luther's death it became evident that
Agricola " was capable of everything," and that Luther was
not so far wrong, when, on another occasion, he declared
that he was not a man to be taken seriously.2 Agricola
finally died, loaded with worldly honours, in 1566.

A more serious critic of Luther, at any rate on the question
of the Sacrament, was Martin Bucer. The latter' s friend
ship with the Swiss and the too independent spirit in which
he planned the reformation of Cologne, caused Luther great
anxiety towards the end of his life. In his plan Luther, so
he says, was unable to find any clear confession of faith in
the Sacrament, but merely " much idle talk of its profit,
fruit and dignity," all carefully " wrapped up that no one
might know what he really thought of it, just as is the way
with the fanatics." In all this talk he could " readily discern
the chatterbox Bucer."3 Bucer, on his side, was dis-

Luther says, in condemnation of processions : " Alia res eat circumferri,
alia elevari." The Wittenberg Concord says evasively : " The Body
of Christ is present when the bread is received, and is truly given."
KoRtlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 346.

1 Hausrath, " Leben Luthers," 2, p. 475. The latter says of the
charges made by the Zwinglians : " It is not surprising that his
opponents found that his (Luther's) obstinacy and his hatred of every
thing Zwinglian was leading him into palpable self-contradiction."

2 Hausrath, ib., p. 465.

3 Hausrath, ib., p. 477 f.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 355

satisfied with the progress of Luther's work in Germany.
Owing to the Interim he was no longer able to remain at
Strasburg and accordingly accepted a post at the English
University of Cambridge and died in England in 1551.

The Controversy on Clandestine Marriages

It was, however, annoyances and disagreements of a
different sort that kept Luther to the end of his days in a
state of extreme indignation against the lawyers and
politicians of the Court.

A letter of Luther's to the Elector Johann Frederick dated
Jan. 18, 1545, on the controversy with the Saxon lawyers about
Luther's denunciation of clandestine marriages (those entered
upon without the knowledge of the parents) as illegal, carries us
into the thick of these disagreements. x His sovereign, he says, had
ordered him to confer with the lawyers and come to an arrange
ment with them ; Luther, however, after summoning them
before him, had declared categorically that, " I had no intention
of holding a disputation with them ; I had a divine command to
preach the 4th commandment2 in these matters." Thus, in the
questions under discussion, he is determined not to submit either
to the secular or the canon law but only to the Divine. " Otherwise
I should have to give up the Gospel and creep back into the cowl
[become a monk again] in the devil's name, by the strength and
virtue of botli the spiritual and the imperial law. And, besides
this, your Electoral Highness would have to cut off my head,
doing likewise with all those who have wedded nuns, as the
Emperor Jovian commanded more than a thousand years back."
As a result of his arguments, " the lawyers of the Consistory and
Courts agreed to give up and reject altogether the clandestine
espousals [i.e. marriages ' sponsalia de prcesenti ']." In these
words he announces his final apparent victory in this long-drawn
controversy.

In the same letter he touches on the deeper side of the quarrel.

The lawyers at the High Court have always stuck to many
points of " the Pope's laws " which " we of the clergy " don't
want. " Some, too, made out [in accordance with Canon Law
then still in force] that, on our death, our wives and children
could not inherit our goods and wished to adjudicate them to our
friends, etc." They had paid no attention to the writings of the
new theologians ; and yet the latter, " few in number and
insignificant maybe, have done more good in the Churches than
all the Popes and jurists in a lump." Hence the preachers had

1 "Briefe" 5, p. 715.

1 [The 4th Commandment, with the Lutherans as with the Catholics,
13 that known as the 5th by Anglicans and the English sects. Note to
the English edition.]

356 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

simply disregarded the lawyers, viz. in respect of the clandestine
marriages ; this had brought about peace. When, however, the
" Consistory had been set up " (1539), the whole business had
begun anew. " The jurists fancied they had found a loophole
through which to raise a disturbance in my Churches with their
damnable procedure, which, to-day and to all eternity, I want to
have condemned and execrated in my Churches." " Spoon-fed
jurists " thrust themselves forward ; but these " merry customers "
are not going to make " of my Churches, for which I have to
answer before God," "such dens of murderers."

In order to understand the victory over the lawyers of
which he speaks it will be necessary to cast a glance back on
the whole struggle.

As we have already pointed out in the words of a Protes
tant biographer of Luther the legal status of Lutheranism
threatened to give rise to dire complications, while any
downright abrogation of Canon Law, such as Luther wished
for, was out of the question.1 The sober view of the situation
taken by the lawyers did not deserve Luther's offensive
treatment. Moreover, under the leadership of Schurf, the
lay professors of jurisprudence at the Wittenberg University
had many objections to raise against Luther's demands.
They not only upheld clandestine marriages as valid, but, at
the same time, defended the indissolubility of marriage, even
in the case of adultery, in accordance with the laws of the
olden Church ; they also held that second marriages were
not lawful to the clergy. Schurf likewise wanted the " Evan
gelical bishops " to be consecrated by papal bishops. A further
cause of constant friction lay in the fact that the professors
of law were obliged to base their lectures on the books of
Canon Law in the absence of any others ; whence it came
that Luther had to listen to many disagreeable references to
the questions of Church property, of the right of inheriting
of the children of former monks, of the marriage of nuns, of
the legal status of the monasteries, etc. Schurf was other
wise a good Lutheran and had assisted Luther with advice
at the Diet of Worms. Melchior Kling, his pupil and
colleague at Wittenberg, agreed with him in following the
Canon Law on the question of clandestine marriages,
according to which (before the Council of Trent had required
for the validity of marriage, that it should be performed
publicly in the presence of the parish-priest), they were
1 Kostlin-Kawerau (above, vol. iv., p. 288).

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 357

regarded as valid, albeit wrong and forbidden, so that no
new marriage could be entered into so long as the parties
lived.

Luther hoped, by opposing such marriages, to bring about
some improvement in the sad state of morals which the
Visitations of 1528 and 1529 had disclosed in the Saxon
Electorate. The facility with which such marriages were
contracted by the Wittenberg students, and the bad effect
they had on the peace of the burghers seemed to him a real
blot on the New Evangel. He insisted very strongly that
the consent of the parents was required as a condition for
marriage ; without the parents' consent the marriages were
in his eyes neither public nor valid ; it was only where the
parents refused their consent on insufficient grounds that he
would admit that the bride had any right to enter into a real
marriage contract. The decision as to whether the parents'
objections held good was, however, one on which opinions
were bound to differ.

Shortly after the Visitations referred to above, in 1529,
he wrote his "Von Ehesachen," published early in 1530; in
it he declared : "A secret betrothal simply constitutes no
marriage whatsoever," whilst, as a secret bethrothal (i.e.
invalid marriage) he regards " any betrothal which takes
place without the knowledge and consent of those in
authority, and who have the right and power to settle the
marriage, viz. the father, mother or whoever stands in
their stead."1

In 1532 he also proclaimed his views against the lawyers
from the pulpit without, however, being able to alter there
by either their practice or their teaching. He lamented in
1538 the blindness of Schurf, who paid more attention to
man-made laws than to God's Word and authority.2

After some new disputes he delivered a sermon on Feb. 23,
1539, in which he threatened to put on his horns. In it he-
called his opponents blockheads ; they ought " to reverence
our doctrine as the Word of God, coming from the mouth of
the Holy Ghost."3 He was not going to worship the Pope's
ordure for the sake of the jurists ; "let them let our Church
be " ; but " now the lawyers are seeking to corrupt our
young students of theology with their Papal filth."4

1 Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 207 : Erl. ed., 23, p. 95 f.

2 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 469 f. 3 See vol. iv., p 289 f .
4 " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 292.

358 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

Schurf seems to have yielded so far as no longer to
attempt to make his opinions publie or official.

The greatest tussle, however, ensued on the establishment
of the Consistories in 1539, as the lawyers who were entrusted
with the matrimonial cases, treated the clandestine marriages
as valid, and, in other ways, also took Schurf 's side.

Luther asserted that by countenancing the " espousals,"
which were " an institution of the devil and the Pope," the
good name and the morals of Wittenberg were being under
mined. " Many of the parents say that, when they send
their boys to us to study, we hang wives round their necks
and rob them of their children." Not only the burghers and
students but even the girls themselves " who have waxed
bold " use their freedom most wantonly.1 In Jan., 1544, in
the pulpit, he poured out his wrath in most unmeasured lan
guage, particularly on the second Sunday after the Epiphany ;
in his tragic delivery he said, for instance : "I, Martin
Luther, preacher in this Church of Christ, take thee, secret
promise and the paternal consent that follows, together with
the Pope and the devil who instituted thee, I bind you all
together and fling you into the abyss of hell, in the name of
the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost."2

His anger and annoyance had been aroused by certain
concrete cases.

One of Melanchthon's sons had contracted such a marriage
as he was denouncing. In his own family circle the same
thing happened, probably in the case of his nephew, Fabian
Kaufmami. A student, Caspar Beier, who was on intimate
terms with Luther's household, wished to marry at Witten
berg, but was prevented by the lawyers of the Consistory on
account of a previous clandestine marriage which, however,

1 To the Elector Johann Frederick, Jan. 22, 1544, " Brief e," 5,
p. 614.

3 Kdstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 570. The text is embodied in the German
Table-Talk, Erl. ed., 62, p. 240. See in vol. iii., p. 39 ff. some further utter
ances of Luther's on the marriages in question. The allusion above to
" the paternal consent that follows " is probably to be understood as
referring to the unlawfulness of any subsequent ratification by the
parents. Such in any case was Luther's view : "In his eyes the secret
betrothals were sinful, even when the consent was obtained afterwards,
nay actually invalid," Kawerau, 2, p. 570. After Luther's " victory "
in 1545 it was, however, decided that such marriages should be null and
void until the parents gave their consent, or until the Consistories had
determined whether the parents' refusal was based on valid, important
or sufficient grounds.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 359

he denied ; he appealed from the Consistory to the sovereign,
and was supported by a letter from Luther. This quarrel
kindled a conflagration at Luther's home. Cruciger, a
friend of the house, was against Beier and described his
cause as " none of the best " ; Catherine Bora, on the other
hand, the "fax domestica" as Cruciger called her,1 seems to
have fanned the flames of Luther's wrath, in the interests of
Beier who was a relative of hers.

To a friend Luther admitted in Jan. that he "was so
indignant with the lawyers as he had never before been in
all his life during all the struggle on behalf of the Evangel."2

When the controversy was at its height, viz. in Jan., 1544,
the Elector arranged for an interview between Luther and
the Consistory. Later, in Dec., those negotiations were
followed by others, in which the members of the Wittenberg
High Court took part ; at last Luther's obstinacy and
violence won the day : All marriages without the knowledge
or approval of the parents were to be invalid until the latter
consented, or the Consistory had pronounced their opposition
groundless. To the Elector, who from the first had agreed
with Luther's view, the latter then addressed the letter
referred to above (p. 355) where, appealing to his " Divine
mission " to preach the 4th commandment, he announces
his final triumph over the lawyers and their edicts.

His triumph he owed to his strong will and, also, possibly,
to the fact that the Elector was on his side. The victory
also affected the case of Beier, whom Luther hastened to
acquaint of his freedom ;3 it further decided to some extent,
the yet more important question whether or not the lawyers
were to yield to Luther in ecclesiastical matters. They
accepted their humiliation with the best grace possible, but
we shall not be far wrong in assuming that they were not
over-pleased with Luther's irregular and illogical handling of
questions of law.

1 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, pp. 571, 687, n. " Fax domestica," see above,
vol. iii., p. 216.

2 To Spalatin, Jan. 30, 1544, " Briefe," 5, p. 626.

3 To Caspar Beier, Jan. 27, 1545, Ci Briefe," 5, p. 721 : " Respondc
amori te amantis el anxic cxpectcuitis, nihil moratus Satance et Satanic-arum
verba, quorum mundus

360 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

Difficulties with the State Church

The far-reaching encroachments of the secular authorities
in his Church became for Luther in his later years a source
of keen vexation.

Much of his Table-Talk, which turns on the lawyers, voices
nothing more than his indignation at the unwarranted inter
ference of the State in his new Church which he \vas powerless to
prevent. Thus, according to notes made at this time by Hiero-
iiymus Besold of Nuremberg who was a guest at Luther's table
in 1545, the Master on one occasion gave free rein to his anger with
the lawyers in the matter of the sequestration of Church lands :
" The lawyers shriek, ' They are Church lands.' Give them back
' their monasteries that they may become monks and nuns and
celebrate Mass, and then they too will allow you to preach.' [In
other words their proposal was that the new faith should make
its way peacefully. To this Luther's answer is] : ' Yes, but then
where are we to get our bread and butter ? ' ' We leave that to
you,' they say. Yes, and take the devil's thanks ! We theo
logians have 110 worse enemies than the lawyers. If they are
asked, ' What is the Church ? ' they reply, ' The assembly of the
Bishops, Abbots, etc. And these lands are the lands of the
Church, hence they belong to the bishops.' That is their dialectics.
But we have another dialectics at the right hand of the Father
and it tella us, ' They are tyrants, wolves and robbers ' [and
must accordingly be deprived of the lands]. Therefore we
here condemn all lawyers, even the pious ones, for they know
not what the Church is. If they search through all their books
they will not discover what the Church is. Hence we are not
going to take any reforms from them. Every lawyer is either a
miscreant or an ignoramus (" Omnis iurista est nequista aut
ignorista"). . . . They shall not teach us what 'Church' is.
There is an old proverb, ' A good lawyer makes a bad Christian,'
and it is a true one."1

It is somewhat astonishing to hear Luther in his " Table-Talk
on the lawyers "2 declaring that it was he who had whitewashed
these " bad Christians " and made them to be respected, and that
consequently he also could bring them again into disrepute, in
other words, that his tongue was powerful enough to do and to
undo. " Do not tempt me. If you are too well off I can soon
make things warm for you. If you don't like being whitewashed,
well and good, I can soon paint you black again. May the devil
make you blush ! "3 — In one of his very last letters (Feb., 1546),
owing to new friction with the lawyers about the Mansfeld
revenues, lie overwhelms them all with the following general

1 Mathesius, " Tisehreden," p. 340. Cp. " Aufzeichn.," p. 355 f.
and Erl. ed., 62, pp. 95 and 282.

- Erl. ed., 62, p. 214 ff. and " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 287 sqq.
3 Erl. ed., 62, p. 245.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 361

charges : " The lawyers have taught the whole world such a
mass of artifices, deceptions and calumnies that their very
language lias become an utter Babel. At Babel no one could
understand his neighbour, but here nobody wants to understand
what the other means. Out upon you, you sycophants, sophists
and plague-boils of the human race ! I write in anger, whether,
were I calm, I should give a better report I know not. But the
wrath of God is upon our sins. The Lord will judge His people ;
may He be gracious to His servants. Amen. If this is all the
wisdom that the jurists can show then there is really no need for
them to be so proud as they all are."1

Luther's attitude towards the lawyers is of special im
portance from two points of view. It shows afresh the high
opinion he entertained of himself, and, at the same time,
it reveals his jealousy of any outside influence.

" Before my time there was not a lawyer," he says for instance
in an earlier outburst, " who knew what it meant to be righteous.
They learnt it from me. In the Gospel there is nothing about the
duty of worshipping jurists. Yes, before the world I will allow
them to be in the right, but, before God, they shall be beneath me.
If I can judge of Moses and bring him into subjection [i.e.
criticise the Law in the light of the Gospel] what then of the
lawyers ? ... If of the two one must perish, then let the law go
and let Christ remain."2 He was not learned in the law, but, as
the proclaimer of the Evangel, he was " the supreme law in the
field of conscience (' ego sum ius iuriutn in re conscientiarum *)."3

" When I give an opinion and have to break my head over it
and a lawyer comes along and tries to dispute it, I say : * Do you
look after the Government and leave us in peace. You men of
the law seek to oppress us, but it is written : Thou art a priest for
ever'" (Ps. ex. 4).* — "The justice of the jurists is heathen
justice," he says ; but, after all, even the justice [righteousness]
of his own school of theology fell short of the mark. " Our
justice is a relative justice ; but if I am not pious yet Christ is
pious ; we are at least able to expound the commandments of
God, and do so in the course of our calling. But, even if you distil
a jurist five times over, he still cannot interpret even one of the
Commandments. ' ' 6

The other trait that conies out in his dealings with the lawyers
is his distaste for any outside interference with his Church. He
looked askance at the attempts of secular authorities, statesmen
and Court-lawyers to have a say in Church matters, which,
strictly, should have been submitted to him alone and his

1 To Melanchthon, Feb. 6, 1546, " Briefe," 5, p. 785.
~ Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 3.

3 /&., p. 14, and see above, vol. iv., p. 289 f.

4 Schlaginhaufen. ib., p. 81.

6 From the sermon of Feb. 23, 1539, " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 2,
. 295.

362 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

preachers. Yet it was he himself who had put the Church under
State control ; he had invited the sovereigns and magistrates to
decide on the most vital questions, doing so partly owing to the
needs of the time, partly as a logical result of the new system.
He himself had legalised the sequestration of the Church's lands
and had helped to set up the State Consistories. So long as the
secular authorities were of his way of thinking he left them a free
hand, more or less. He was, however, forced to realise more and
more, particularly in the evening of his days, that their arbitrary
behaviour was ruining his influence and only making worse the
evils that his work had laid bare to the world.

In his last utterances he is fond of calling " Centaurs " the
officials and Court personages who, according to him, were
stifling the Church in her growth by their wantonness, ambition
and avarice. He bewails his inability to vanquish them ; they
are a necessary evil. " Make a Visitation of your Churches all
the same," he told his friend Amsdorf, early in January in the last
year of his life ; " the Lord will be with you, and even should one
or other of the Centaurs forbid you, you are excused. Let them
answer for it."1

We have also other utterances which testify to his deep
distrust of the secular authorities, on account of their real or
imaginary encroachments.

" The Princes seize upon all the lands of the Church and leave
the poor students to starve, and thus the parishes become
desolate, as is already the case."2 — " The Princes and the towns
do little for the support of our holy religion, leave everything in
the lurch and do not punish wickedness. Highly dangerous times
are to come."3 — "The magistrates misuse their power against
the Evangel ; for this they will pay dearly."4 — " The politicians
show that they regard our words as those of men " ; in this case
we had better quit " Babylon " and leave them to themselves.6

" I see what is coming," he wrote in 1541, " unless the tyranny
of the Turk assists us by frightening our [lower] nobles and
humbling them, they will ill treat us worse than do the Turks.
Their only thought is to put the sovereigns in leading-strings and
to lay the burghers and peasants in irons. The slavery of the
Pope will be followed by a new enslaving of the people under the
nobles."' — In the same year he says : " If the nobles go on in
this way," i.e. neglecting their duty of " protecting the pious and
punishing the wicked," there will be " an end of Germany and we
shall soon be worse than even the Spaniards and Turks ; but they
will catch it soon."7 — In 1543 he indignantly told a councillor

1 Jan. 9, 1545, " Briefe," 5, p. 712.
- " Colloq.," ed Bindseil, 2, p. 284.

Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 193.

Mathesius. " Aufzeiclm.," p. 290.

To Wenceslaus Link, Sep. 8, 1541, " Briefe," 5, p. 399.

To Anton Lauterbach. Nov. 10, 1541, ib., p. 407.

To Duke Maurice of Saxony, 1541 (not dated), id., p. 417.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 363

who opposed him and his followers : " You are not lords over
the parishes and the preaching office ; it was not you who
founded it but the Son of God, nor have you ever given anything
towards it, so that you have far less right to it than the devil has
to the kingdom of heaven ; it is not for you to find fault with it,
or to teach, nor yet to forbid the administration of punishment.
. . . There is no shepherd-lad so humble that he will take a harsh
word from a strange master ; it is the minister alone who must be
the butt of everyone, and put up with everything from all, while
they will suffer nothing from him, not even God's own Word."1 —
In 1544 he even said of his own Elector : " After all, the Court is
of no use, its rule is like that of the crab and snail. It either
cannot get on or else is always wanting to go back. Christ did
well by His Church in not confiding its government to the Courts.
Otherwise the devil would have nothing to do but to devour the
souls of Christians." 2 — " The rulers shut their eyes," lie had written
shortly before, " they leave great wantonness unpunished, and
now have nothing better to do than impose one tax after another
on their poor underlings. Therefore will the Lord destroy them
in His wrath."3

" What then is to become of the Church if the world does not
shortly come to an end ? I have lived my allotted span," so he
sighed in 1542, " the devil is sick of my life and I am sick of the
devil's hate."4

He often gives vent to his wounded feelings in unseemly
words. A strange mixture of glowing fanaticism and coarse
jocularity flows forth like a stream of molten lava from the
furnace within him.

Thus we have the famous utterances recorded above (vol. iii.,
p. 233 and vol. v., p. 229) called forth by the decline of his Church,
the carelessness of the rulers and the remissness of the preachers.

" Our Lord God sees," he declares, " how the dogs [the princes
who were against him] soil the pavements, wet every corner and
smash the basins and platters ; but when He begins to visit them,
His anger will be terrible."5

" To these swine," so he wrote to Anton Lauterbach of the
politicians in the Duchy of Saxony, " we will leave their muck
and hell-fire to boot, if they wish. But they shall leave us our
Lord, the Son of God, and the kingdom of heaven as well ! . . .
With a good conscience we regard them as reprobate servants of
the devil ; ... be brave and cheerfully despise the devil in
these devil's sons, and devil's progeny until they drive you away.
* The earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof (Ps xxiii. 1). ...
By your joy you will crucify them and, with them, Satan, who

1 To a Town Councillor, Jan. 27, 1543, ib., p. 537.

2 To Amsdorf, July 21, 1544, ib., p. 675.

3 To Lauterbach, April 2, 1543, ib., p. 552.

* To Justus Menius, May 1, 1542, " Briefe," 5, p. 4(37.
5 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 124.

364 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

seeks to destroy us. To speak plain German, we shall s into

his mouth. Whether he likes it or not he must submit to having
his head trodden under foot, however much he may seek to
snap at us with his dreadful fangs. The seed of the woman is
with us, whom also we teach and confess and Whom we shall
help to the mastery. Fare you well in Him and pray for me."1

The minor State-officials he also handled roughly enough.
These " Junkers " take it upon them " to sing the praises of the
papal filth." " They stick to the Pope's behind like clotted
manure." " I know better what ' lus canonicum ' is than you all
will ever know or understand. It is donkey's dung, and, if you
want it, I will readily give you it to eat ! " "If donkey's dung
be so much to your taste, go and eat it elsewhere and do not make
a stench in our churches."2

The Present and the To-come

On his last birthday, which he kept on Martinmas-Eve,
1545, Luther assembled about him Melanchthon, Bugcn-
hagen, Cruciger, George Major and other guests, and to them
opened his mind. According to the account left by his friend
Ratzeberger he spoke of the coming dissensions : "As soon
as he was gone the best of our men would fall away. I do not
fear the Papists, he remarked ; they are for the most part
rude, ignorant asses and Epicureans ; but our own brethren
will injure the Evangel because they have gone forth from
us but were not of us. This will do more harm to the Evangel
than the Papists can." The sad political outlook of Germany
led him to add : " Our children will have to take up the
spear, for things will fare ill in Germany." Of the Catholics
he said : " The Council of Trent is very angry and means
mischief ; hence be careful to pray diligently, for there will
be great need of prayer when I am gone." All, he exhorted
" to stand fast by the Evangel."3

" For it is the command of our stern Lord [the Elector],"
he says elsewhere, " that we should maintain undefiled the
government of the Church, dispense aright the Word, the
Absolution and the Sacraments according to the institution
of Christ, and also comfort consciences."4

Towards his end, according to Ratzeberger, he frequently told
the faithful at Wittenberg that, in order to fight shy of false
doctrines, they must hate reason as their greatest foe. " As soon

1 Nov. 3, 1543, " Brief e," 5, p. 598. 2 Erl ed., 62, p. 245.
3 " Ratzebergers Gesch.," p. 131.
« Erl. ed., 62, p. 234.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 865

as he was dead they would preach and teach at Wittenberg a
very different doctrine " ; hence they must " pray diligently and
learn to prove the spirits aright " ; they were to keep their eyes
open to see whether what was preached agreed with Holy
Scripture (here again the right of judging falling on the simple
faithful). But if it was " outside of and apart from God's Word,
sweet and agreeable to reason and easy of comprehension, then
they were to avoid such doctrine and say : No, thou hateful
reason, thou art a whore, thee I will not follow."1

In a sermon on the 2nd Sunday after the Epiphany, 1546,
published three years later after Luther's death by Stephen
Tucher under the title "The last Sermon of Dr. Martin Luther
of blessed memory," 2 Luther again speaks at length of the " heresi-
archs " who had already arisen and whom more would follow ;
what the devil had been unable to do by means of the Kaiser and
Pope, that he " would do through those who are still at one with
us in doctrine " ; " there will be a dreadful time. Ah, the lawyers
and the wise men at Court will say : ' You are proud, a revolt will
ensue, etc., hence let us give way.' " But, in matters of faith,
there must be no talk of giving way, " pride may well please us
if it be not against the faith."3

The picture of reason as a mere prostitute was now once more
vividly before him. He hoped to dispose of the variant doctrines
of others, who, like himself, interpreted the Bible in their own
fashion, simply by urging contempt for reason. The faith in his
own teaching, so he declared, " in the doctrine which I have, not
from them but from the Grace of God,"* must be preserved by
means of a deadly warfare against " reason, the devil's bride and
beautiful prostitute " ; " for she is the greatest seductress the
devil has. The other gross sins can be seen, but reason no one is
able to judge ; it goes its way and leads to fanaticism." The evil
that is inherent in the flesh had not yet been completely driven
out ; " I am speaking of concupiscence which is a gross sin and of
which everyone is sensible." " But what I say of concupiscence,
which is a gross sin, is also to be understood of reason, for the
latter dishonours and insults God in His spiritual gifts and
indeed is far more whorish a sin than whoredom."5 When a
Christian hears a Sacramentarian fanatic putting forward his
reasonable grounds he ought to say to that reason, which is
speaking : " Dear me, has the devil such a learned bride ? — Away
to the privy with you and your bride ; cease, accursed whore,"
etc.6 Hence some restriction was to be placed on private judg
ment ; it was to be used in moderation and only in so far as it
tallied with faith (" secundum analogiam fidei ").7 This " faith,"
however, was in many instances simply Luther's own.

As Luther's personality could not replace the outward rule of

1 " Ratzebergers Gesch.," p. 132. - Erl. ed., 202, 2. p. 472 ff.
3 /&., p. 479 f. * P. 479.

5 P. 475. This is not the only passape in which Luther labels the
concupiscence " which everyone feels " as a " sin.'1
• P. 481. ' P. 480.

366 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

faith, viz. the authoritative voice of the teaching Church, his
dreary prognostications were only too soon to be fulfilled. Hence
in the appendix to another Wittenberg edition of Luther's last
sermon these words, as early as 1558, are represented as " the
late Dr. Martin Luther's excellent prophecies about the impending
corruption and falling away of the chief teachers in our churches,
particularly at Wittenberg."1

It is curious that, towards the close of his life, the Wittenberg
Professor should have come again to insist so strongly on those
points in his teaching for which he had fought at the outset, in
spite of all the difficulties and contradictions they had been
shown to involve, with the Bible, tradition and reason. He
«ould at least claim that he had not abandoned his olden theses of
the blindness of reason, of the unfreedom of the will, of the sinful-
ness of that concupiscence, from which none can get away, of the
saving power of faith alone and the worthlessness of good works
for the gaining of a heavenly reward, of the Bible as the sole source
of faith and each man's right of interpreting it, and, last, but not
least, that of his own mission and call received from God Himself.

The decline of morals, now so obvious, was another
phantom that haunted the evening of his days.

In the beginning of 1546 he confided to Amsdorf his anxiety
regarding Meissen, Leipzig and other places where licence
prevailed, together with contempt of the Gospel and its ministers.
" This much is certain : Satan and his whole kingdom is terribly
wroth with our Elector. To this kingdom your men of Meissen
belong ; they are the most dissolute folk on earth. Leipzig is
pride and avarice personified, worse than any Sodom could be.
... A new evil that Satan is hatching for us may be seen in the
spread of the spirit of the Miinster Dippers. After laying hold of
the common people this spirit of revolt against all authority has
also infected the great, and many Counts and Princes. May God
prevent and overreach it ! "2

He tells "Bishop " George of Merseburg, in Feb., 1546, that
" steps must be taken against the scandals into which the people
are plunging head over heels, as though all law were at an end."
It seems to him that a new Deluge is coming. " Let us beware
lest what Moses wrote of the days before the flood repeats itself,
how ' they took to wife whomsoever they pleased, even their own
sisters and mothers and those they had carried off from their
husbands.' Instances of the sort have reached my ear privately.
May God prevent such doings from becoming public as in the
case of Herod and the kings of Egypt ! "3 " The world is full of
Satan and Satanic men," so he groans even in an otherwise
cheerful letter.4

1 P. 482.

* Jan. 8, 1546, " Briefe," 5, p. 773 : " Spiritus Munsterianuft post
rurtico* nunc nobiles invasit," etc. 8 Feb. 10, 1546, ib., p. 789.
« To Beier, see above, p. 359, n. 3.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 367

Up to the day of his death he was concerned for the
welfare of the students at Wittenberg University. Among
the 2000 young men at the University (for such was their
number in Luther's last years) there were many who were in
bitter want. Luther sought to alleviate this by attacking,
even in his sermons, those who were bent on fleecing the
young ; he not only gave readily out of his own slender
means but also wrote to others asking them to be mindful of
the students ; of this we have an instance in a note he wrote
in his later years, in which he asks certain " dear gentlemen "
(possibly of the University or the magistracy) for help for a
" pious and learned fellow " who would have to leave
Wittenberg " for very hunger " ; he declares that he himself
was ready to contribute a share, though he was no longer able
to afford the gifts he was daily called upon to bestow.1

We know how grieved he was at the downfall of the
schools and how loud his complaints were of the lawlessness
of youth ; how it distressed him to see the schools looked
down upon though their contribution to the maintenance of
the Churches was " entirely out of question."2

For his University of Wittenberg he requests the prayers
of others against those who were undermining its reputation.
He sees the small effect of his earnest exhortations to the
students against immorality.3 The excellent statutes he had
laid down for the town and the University were nullified by
the bad example of men in high places. " Ah, how bitterly
hostile the devil is to our Churches and schools. . . .
Tyranny and sects are everywhere gaining the upper hand
by dint of violence. ... I believe there are many wicked
knaves and spies here on the watch for us, who rejoice when
scandals and dissensions arise. Hence we must watch and
pray diligently. Unless God preserves us all is up. And so
it looks. Pray, therefore, pray ! This school [of Witten
berg! is as it were the foundation and stronghold of pure
religion."4 He once declared sadly that, among all the
students in the town there were scarcely two from whom
something might be hoped as future pastors of souls. " If
out of all the young men present here two or three honest

1 Kdstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 495.

2 Erl. ed., 62, p. 287. Cp. the chapter of the Table-Talk dealing
with the " schools and universities " (ib., pp. 285-308), and " Colloq.,"
ed.'Bindseil, 2, pp. 13-20 where many excellent thoughts are found.

8 See above, vol. iv., p. 228 f. * Erl. ed., 62, p. 291 f.

368 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

theologians grow up then we should have reason to thank
God 1 Good theologians are indeed rare birds on this earth.
Among a thousand you will seldom find two, or even one.
And indeed the world no longer deserves such good teachers,
nor does it want them ; things will go ill when I, and you
and some few others are gone."1

" The world was like this before the flood, before the
destruction of Sodom, before the Babylonian captivity,
before the destruction of Jerusalem — and so again it is
before the fall of Germany. . . . Should you, however, ask
what good has come of our teaching, answer me first, what
good came of Lot's preaching in Sodom? "2

To divert his thoughts from these saddening cares he
often turned to ^Esop. It is of interest to note how highly
he always prized ^Esop's Fables, not merely as a means of
education for the young in the elementary schools, but even
as furnishing a stimulating topic for conversation with his
friends.

He is very fond of adducing morals from these fables both in
his Table-Talk and in his writings.

^Esop's tale of the fight between the wounded snake and the
crab he dictated to his son Hans as a Latin exercise,3 and, in
1540, when a Mandate of the Kaiser aroused his suspicions owing
to its kindly wording, the old man at once related to his guests
the fable of the wolf who seeks to lead the sheep to a good
pasture, and declared that he could easily see through this
" Lycophilia."*

For a long time he had a work on hand which he was destined
never to complete ; he was anxious to provide a new and better
edition of ^Esop for the schools, which, so he hoped, should replace
the, in some respects unseemly, fables of Steinhowel's edition
then in use which had been corrupted by additions from Poggio's
Facetiae. A series of amusing and at the same time instructive
fables which he translated with this object in view is still extant.
That he found time for such a work in the midst of all his other
pressing labours is sufficient evidence that he had it much at
heart. The Preface to his unfinished little work, which he read
aloud to a friend in 1538, pointed out, that writings of this kind
were intended for " children and the simple," whose mental
development he wished to keep in view, carefully excluding any
thing that was offensive. The collection of Fables then in
circulation, " though written professedly for the young," un
fortunately contained tales with narratives of " shameful and
unchaste knavery such as no chaste or pious man, let alone any

1 Hausrath, 2, p. 487 f. 2 Ib., p. 488.

3 Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 87. 4 /&., p. 135.

LAST TROUBLES AND CARES 369

youth, could hear or read without injury to himself ; it was as
though the book had been written in a common house of ill fame
or among dissolute scamps."1

He was very determined in putting down scandals when
they occurred in his own home. A young relative, who was
addicted to drunkenness, he took severely to task, pointing
out the good example, which in the interests of the Evangel
his household was strictly bound to give ; when the maid
servant, Rosina, whom he had taken into his house, turned
out a person of bad life, he could not sufficiently express his
indignation and dismissed her from the family. A similar
case also occurred at the time of his flight from Wittenberg
in July, 1545 ; he writes to Catherine in the letter in which he
tells her of his intention of not returning : "If Leek's
4 Bachschcisse,' our second Rosina and deceiver, has not yet
been laid by the heels, do what you can that the miscreant
may feel ashamed of herself."2

Catherine Bora was a good helper in matters of this sort.
In fact she performed with zeal and assiduity the duties that
fell to her lot in tending the aged and infirm man, and look
ing after the house and the small property. Amidst his
many and great difficulties he often confessed that she was a
comfort to him, and gratefully acknowledges her work. In
his letters to her during his later years he writes in so
religious a strain, and in such heartfelt language, that the
reader might be forgiven for thinking that Luther had
entirely succeeded in forgetting the irreligious nature of the
union between a monk and a nun. " Grace and peace in the
Lord," he writes in a letter from Eisleben of Feb. 7, 1546, to
his " housewife." " Read, you dear Katcy, John and the
Smaller Catechism, of which you once said : All that is told
in this book applies to me. For you try to care for your God
just as though He wrere not Almighty and could not make
ten Dr. Martins should the old one be drowned in the Saalc,
etc. Leave me in peace with your cares, I have a better
guardian than even you and all the angels."3

1 The fragmentary work, ed. E. Thiele in the " Neudrucken
deutscher Literaturwerke," No. 76, according to the Cod. Ottobon.
3029 in the Vat. Library. For an older ed. see " Luthers Werke," ed.
Walch, 14, p. 1365 f. — Cp. Luther's praise of JEsop and hints on i?t
use, in Mathesius, " Tischreden," p. 379.

2 End of July, 1545, " Briefe," 5, p. 753. See above, vol iii.,
pp. 280 f., 307. ' 3 Feb. 7, 1546, *&., p. 787

TI —2 B.

370 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

3. Luther's Death at Eisleben (1546)

In March, 1545, there was sent to Luther by Philip of
Hesse an Italian broadside purporting to have been printed
in Rome, and containing a fearsome account of Luther's
supposed death. In it " the ambassador of the King of
France " announces that Luther had wished his body set up
on the altar for adoration ; also that before he died he had
received the Body of Christ, but that the Host had hovered
untouched over the grave after the funeral ; a diabolical din
had been heard coming from the grave, but, on opening it, it
was found to be empty though it emitted a murderous
stench of brimstone. Luther at once published the narrative
with an half-ironical, half-indignant commentary. He
sought to persuade the people that the Pope had actually
wished for his death and damnation. In a poem which he
prefixed to the pamphlet he tells the Pope in his usual
style that : his life was indeed the Pope's plague, but that
his death would be the Pope's death too ; the Pope might
choose which he liked best, the plague or death. — About the
real origin of this alleged Italian production nothing is
known.1

In his bodily sufferings and anxiety of mind concerning
the present and the future of his life's work Luther frequently
spoke of his desire for a speedy release by death. His words
on this subject throw a strong light on his frame of mind.

As things are " ever growing worse," he says, " let our Lord
God take away His own. He will remove the pious and then
make an end of Germany." " I am very weary of life," he
declared, " may Our Lord come right speedily and take me away,
and, above all, may He come with His Judgment Day ! I will
reach out my neck to Him that He may strike me down with His
thunderbolt where I am. Amen." 2 — As early as June 11, 1539 ( ?),
when he was wished another forty years of life, he said that,
even were he offered a Paradise on earth for forty years, " I would
not accept it. I would rather hire an executioner to chop off my
head. So wicked is the world now ! And the people are becoming
real devils, so that one could wish him nothing better than a good
death and then away ! "3

1 Erl. ed., 32, p. 426. The Latin verses begin : " Dura lues pestis,
sed mors est durior ilia." One may well ask whether the broadside,
which bears no date, was not perhaps written in Germany by friends of
Luther's to afford a pretext for inveighing anew against the Catholics.

* Mathesius, " Aufzeichn.," p. 323 f.. 12, 113.

* Erl. ed., 61, p. 435,

THOUGHTS OF DEATH 371

Do you know, he said on one occasion, who it is that holds back
God's arm ? "I am the block that stops God's way. When I dio
He will strike. No doubt we are despised ; but let them gather
up the leavings when they are most despised ; that is my
advice."1

That, " even in our own lifetime, the world should thus repay
us," seemed to him intolerable.2 " I hold that, for a thousand
years, the world has never been so unfriendly to anyone as to me.
I am also unfriendly to it, and know of nothing in life that I take
pleasure in."3

Of the sudden death that confronted him he had, however, no
idea. On the contrary, in 1543, when he was suffering from
severe trouble in the head, he said to Catherine Bora, that he
would summon his son Hans from Torgau to Wittenberg to be
present at his death, which now seemed near at hand ; but, he
added : "I shall not die so suddenly, I shall first take to my bed
and be ill ; but I shall not lie there long. I have had enough of
the world and it has had enough of me. ... I give thanks to
Thee My God that Thou hast numbered me in Thy little flock
which endures persecution for the sake of Thy Word."4

Incidentally he declared : " If I die in my bed it will be to defy
the Papists and put them to shame." Why ? Because they will
not have been able to do me the harm " they wished, and, in fact,
were in duty bound to have done me."5

The thought of death often made his hatred of the Catholics to
flame up more luridly. " Only after my death will they feel what
Luther really was " ; should he fall a prey to his adversaries
before his time, he would carry with him to the grave " a long
train of bishops, priestlings and monks, for my life shall be their
hangman, my death their devil." He announces angrily, " They
shall not be able to resist me," and that, " in God's name, he will
tread the lion and the dragon under foot," but of all this, accord
ing to him, they were to have only a taste during his lifetime ;
only after his death would matters be carried out in earnest. 8

Brooding over his own death he says of the death of the
believing Christian, viz. of the man who puts his trust in the
Evangel : " If a man seriously meditates in his heart on God's
Word, believes it and falls asleep and dies in it, he will pass away
before he realises that death has come, and is assuredly saved by
the Word in which he has thus believed and died."7 These words
he wrote on Feb. 7, 1546, to an Eisleben gentleman in a copy of
his Home-Postils. He prefaced them with a passage from
Scripture in which he himself doubtless had often sought comfort :
" He that keepeth my Word shall not taste of death for ever "
(John viii. 51). In one of his last lengthy notes he also seeks to
make his own this believing confidence : " Christ commands us

Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 115.

To Jonas, Feb. 25, 1542, " Briefe," 5, p. 439.

Mathesius, *&., p. 113. 4 /&., p. 384. 6 Ib., p 113.

Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 387 ; Erl. ed., 252, p. 87.

Erl. ed., 52, p. 36.

372 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

to believe in Him. Although we are not able to believe as firmly
as we should yet God has patience with us." " I hide myself
under the shelter of the Son of God ; Him I hold and honour as
my Lord to Whom I must fly when the devil, sin or any other ill
assails me. For He is my shield, extending beyond the heavens
and the earth and the foster-hen under whose wings I creep from
the wrath of God." Thus he was so steeped in the delusion of
faith alone that he could thus wish to die in sole reliance on the
"Word of God," thanks to which he is to escape "the devil,
death, hell and sin."1 We may remember that, in one of his
earliest controversial sermons, where a glimpse of his new doctrine
is already to be detected, he had used the simile of the foster-hen.
Now, in his old age, he returns to it, the richer by the experience
of a long lifetime, albeit he now sees that it is difficult, nay im
possible, " to believe as firmly as we should."

In Jan., 1546, Luther set out for the third time for Mans-
feld, in order to settle the business of Count Albert of
Mansfeld ; only as a corpse was he to return home.

The Elector did not look with approval on Luther's
arduous labours as peacemaker, while Chancellor Bruck
even went so far as to characterise the Counts' interminable
lawsuits about the mines and the rest as a " pig-market."
Luther, nevertheless, set out again on Jan. 23, regardless of
his already impaired health, betaking himself this time to
Eisleben. He was accompanied by his three sons, their
tutor and his famulus Aurifaber, the editor of the German
Table-Talk. At Halle they were detained three days in the
house of Jonas on account of the floating ice and the flooded
state of the Saale. " We did not wish to take to the water
and tempt God," so he wrote to Catherine on Jan. 25, " for
the devil bears us a grudge and also dwells in the water ;
and, moreover, 4 discretion is the best part of valour ' ; nor
is there any need for us to give the Pope and his myrmidons
such cause for delight."2

On the 26th Luther preached a sermon in which, with all
the strength at his command, he poured forth his anger
against Popery, " which had cheated and befooled the whole
world." " The Pope, the Cardinals and the lousy, scurvy,
mangy monks have hoaxed and deluded us." He proceeded
to storm against the unfortunate monks who had dared to
remain in a town now almost entirely won over to the

1 Ib., 61, p. 432 ; 64, p. 289. Cp. ib., 32, p. 418 f. ; II2, p. 148 ;
Weim. ed., 16, p. 418 f.-Erl. ed., 36, p. 27. " Briefe," 6, p. 41 1.

j,a " iiriefe," 5, p. 780. For the devil's preference for water see a,bove,
vol. v., p. 285,

LAST VISIT TO MANSFELD 373

innovations : "I am above measure astonished that you
gentlemen of Halle can still tolerate amongst you these
knaves, the crawling, lousy monks. . . . These wanton,
verminous miscreants take pleasure only in folly. . . . You
gentlemen ought to drive the imbecile, sorry creatures out of
the town. . . . What we teach and preach we do not teach
as our own words, discovered or invented by us, like the
visions of the monks which they preach ; their lies are like
bulging hop-pockets or sacks of wool."1

On the 28th, after having been joined by Jonas, Luther
and his companions crossed the swollen Saale. On this
occasion he said to Jonas : " Dear Dr. Jonas, wouldn't it be
a fine thing were I, Dr. Martin, my three sons and you to be
all drowned ! " Not far from Eisleben they were overtaken
by a cold wind which brought the traveller in the carriage
to such a state of weakness and breathlessness that he nearly
fainted. " The devil always plays me this trick," so he
consoled himself, " when I have something great on hand."2

At Eisleben he took up his abode with the town-clerk, and
soon got well enough to take part in the negotiations ; he
visited the several families of the Counts and amused himself
in his hours of leisure by looking at the young nobles and their
ladies tobogganing.3 To Catherine he wrote jestingly on Feb.
1, that his fit near Eisleben was the work of the Jews,
numbers of whom lived there (at Rissdorf ) ; they had raised
up a bitter wind against him, which " penetrated the back
of the carriage and passed right through my cap into my
head, and tried to turn my brain to ice. This may have
brought on the fainting ; now, however, thank God, I am
quite well, were it not for the pretty women, etc." (cp. above,
vol. iii., p. 281). He extols the Naumburg beer, which suits
him well, says that his three sons have, gone on to Jena and
alludes to the blow he was planning against the Mansfield
Jews, on whom Count Albert frowned and whom he was
determined to abandon.4

When Catherine again expressed fears about his health he
replied in a joking vein on Feb. 10, giving her an account of
all that her anxious thoughts had brought upon him : The
fire that broke out just in front of his door had almost burnt

1 Erl. ed., 202, 2, p. 483 ff.

a Hausrath, 2, p. 493. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 618.

3 To Catherine Bora, Feb. 14, 1546, " Briefe," 5, p. 792.

4 " Briefe," 5, p. 783 f.

374 LUTHER'S LAST DAYS

him up, the plaster that fell from the ceiling of his room had
almost killed him, having a mind to verify your pious fears
if the dear and holy angels had not been watching over me,
I fear, if you don't put your fears to rest, the earth will
finally open and swallow us up. . . . We are, thank God,
well and sound."1

In the interval, while the negotiations were still proceed
ing, he had dealt very rudely with the Jews in a sermon on
Feb. 7, in spite of the fact that the Countess of Mansfcld,
Solms's widow, was said to be in their favour. He was
displeased to see them left unmolested. " No one lifts a
finger against them." In a manuscript " exhortation against
the Jews," written at that time,2 he briefly sums up his
wishes : " You Lords ought not to tolerate them, but rather
drive them out," at least if they refuse to become Christians.
Not long before he had declared that, with his own hands, he
could put a Jew to death who dared to blaspheme Christ ;
when writing to Elector Joachim II of Brandenburg he
also praised one of his partisans, a certain provost, simply
and solely for his hatred of the Jews : The provost pleases
me beyond measure because he is so strong against the
Jews."3

Altogether, Luther preached four sermons at Eisleben.
'Twice he went to the Supper, so we are told, after having
previously received " Absolution." On the second occasion
" he ordained " two priests,4 his friend's account narrates,
*' in the apostolic way." Every evening he assembled his
friends about him, the chief being Justus Jonas and the
Eisleben preacher, Michael Ccelius. In their company
he showed a good temper, much as the long-drawn, tedious
negotiations annoyed him. He put it down to the devil that
the scheme of settlement drawn up by expert lawyers,
encountered so much opposition on both sides ; indeed he
fancied that all the devils had gathered together at Eisleben
to mock at his efforts in this dreary business. He would fain
have himself played the poltergeist among the combatants,
to " grease the wheels of the lazy coach " and bring them back
at last to some sense of the duty of Christian charity."5
The reader will remember the apparition that Luther

1 Ib., p. 789 f. 2 Erl. ed., 65, 187 ff.

3 March 9, 1545, " Brief e," 5, p. 725.
* " Werke," Walch's ed., 21, p. 282.*
5 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 619.

LAST VISIT TO MANSFELD 375

thought he saw in those days.1 At last, on Feb. 14, he was
able to write to his " dear, kind housewife " : " God has
shown us great mercy here, for, through their solicitors, the
Lords have settled almost everything save two or three
points."2 These outstanding matters were satisfactorily
adjusted shortly afterwards.

In the same letter Luther said : " We hope, please God, to
return home this week." Thus he scarcely expected to die
yet, but still hoped to be able to get back to Wittenberg
before the end came. " Here we eat and drink like lords,"
so he assures his Catherine, " and are very well looked after."3
On Feb. 16, at table, when the talk turned on sickness and
death, Luther said : " When I get home to Wittenberg I
shall at once lay myself in my coffin and give the grubs a
nice fat doctor to feed on."4 For all his weakness his cheer
fulness had not left him.

New cares were now troubling his mind. He had learnt
how the Kaiser was insisting on submission to the Council,
how the religious conference at Ratisbon had been a failure,
and had merely given the Imperial forces time to arm them
selves for an attack on the Schmalkalden Leaguers. The
coming defeat of the League at Miihlberg was already
casting its shadow. " May God help His Highness cur
Master " (the Elector), remarked Luther ; " he is in fcr
a bad time."5 His annoyance with Kaiser Charles led him
to say : The " Emperor is dead against us, and now he is
showing the hand he so long had concealed."6

Luther, however, was not to live to see the blow delivered
which the flouted Imperial power had so long been threaten
ing.

" During those three weeks " Luther frequently left
the supper- table with the admonition to " pray for our
Lord God [i.e. for His cause]7 that it may go well with His
Churches; the Council of Trent is highly wroth."

Holy Scripture, to which he had always devoted himself
with so much energy, even now engrossed him. He felt

1 Above, p. 132. 2 " Briefe," 5, p. 791 f.

3 /&., p. 792. * Erl. ed., 61, p. 437.

5 Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 614.

« To Amsdorf, Jan. 8, 1546, " Briefe," 5, p. 773.

7 The phrase was a popular one and, though not above a suspicion
of frivolity, was certainly not " blasphemous." The account here is
that of Jonas.

37G LUTHER'S DEATH

keenly its obscurity and depth. The last short note he made
was on the Book of Books and the difficulty of reaching its
innermost meaning. After instancing the difficulty of
rightly understanding even Virgil or Cicero, it proceeds :
" Let no one think he has sufficiently tasted Holy Scripture,
unless, for a hundred years, he has ruled the Churches with
prophets such as Elias, Eliseus, John the Baptist, Christ and
the Apostles.1 By this significant admission he had of course
no intention of repudiating the principle, whereby in the stead
of the teaching authority of the Church he had put the
written Word of God as the clear and final rule for each
individual. At this time, just before his death, he was less
inclined than ever to retract one jot of his doctrine. Never
theless the fact that he himself was compelled to admit in
such terms the depth and the difficulty of the Bible seems
scarcely to bear out his usual contention, viz. that Holy
Scripture is the one and all-sufficient guide and master
for all.

On Feb. 17, the first symptoms showed themselves of the
attack which was to carry him off before the next dawn.2
During the day he was very restless ; once he said : " Here
at Eisleben I was baptised, how if I were to remain here ? "
In the evening he felt the oppression on the chest of which

1 " Briefe," 6, p. 414 : " Scripturas sacras sciat se nemo deyustassc
satis, nisi centum amiis cum prophetis, ut Elia et Elisceo, loanne Baptista,
Christo et Apostolis ecclesias gubernavit. Hanc tu ne Aeneida tenta, sed
vestigia pronus adora ("cf. Stalius, Thebaid. 1. 12, v. 816 sq.]. We are
beggars, hoc est verum. 16 Februarii anno 1546."

2 The following narrative is based on the account of witnesses who
were present at the death or called in immediately after, viz. 011 the
letter of Jonas to the Elector of Saxony dated in. the night of Luther's
death (Kawerau, " Briefwechsel des Jonas," 2, p. 177 ff.), the letters
of Count Albert of Mansfeld and Prince Wolfgang of Aiihalt to the
same and sent on the same day (Forstemann, " Denkmale," 1846,
p. 17 f.), the letter of Johann Aurifaber to Michael Gutt, also of the
same date (Kolde, "Analecta," p. 427) ; then on the panegyric of Michael
Ccelius on Feb. 20 at Eisleben, published together with the panegyric
of Jonas at Wittenberg, 1 546, and reprinted together with other matter
in " Werke," ed. Walch, 2 1, p. 274* ff. and particularly, the " Historia "
of the death written by Jonas, Cuelius and Aurifaber which appeared at
Wittenberg in the middle of March, 1546. It is also reprinted in Walch,
t'6.t p. 280* ff. For the report of the apothecary Johann Landau see
below, p. 379. Of no importance for the account of the death is the
so-called " Neues Fragment zu Luthers Tod," given by G. L. Burr in
the " Americ. Hist. Rev." (July, 1911, pp. 723-736), as it is merely a
repetition by one of Melanchthoii's pupils of the latter's funeral
address. The account, first made public at Philadelphia by A. Spaeth,
and printed in the " Lutherka lender " for 1911 (p. 88), likewise contains
nothing substantially new.

LUTHER'S DEATH 377

he had had to complain in previous illnesses ; he therefore
had himself rubbed down with hot flannels and, as soon as he
felt better, went off to supper. During the meal he was,
as usual, talkative and in good humour ; he told some
humorous anecdotes and also spoke of more serious things,
and ate and drank heartily. He casually said that, were he
to die as a man of sixty-three, he would have attained a
quite respectable age, " for people do not now live to be
very old. Well, we old men must live so long in order to
be able to look behind the devil [i.e. learn his wickedness]
and experience so much malice, faithlessness and misery in
the world that we may bear witness what a wicked spirit
the devil is." With the pessimism peculiar to him he con
cludes : " The human race is like the sheep being led to the
slaughter."

According to Ratzeberger, the Elector's medical adviser,
who collected the latest particulars concerning Luther, the
latter, on the evening of the 17th, " when about to lie down
to sleep after supper," wrote " with a piece of chalk on the
wall the verse : In life, O Pope, I was thy plague, in dying I
shall be thy death " (cp. above, vol. iii., p. 435). If we may
trust this account, then, on this occasion Luther again used
the words which had once before served him under similar
circumstances at Schmalkalden. Those actually present at
Eisleben make, however, no mention of this, and, in his
funeral address, Jonas merely says, that these verses were
Luther's fitting " epitaph " which he had once written for
himself. Coelius also, in his panegyric on Luther, says that
though dead he still survives in his books ; "he will also
after his death, please God, be the death of the Pope, thanks
to his writings, just as he was his plague during life." As no
mention of the writing on the wall is made by either of these
two, nor yet in the account of his death given by his three
friends, though there was no reason for their omitting it,
Ratzeberger 's account stands alone and must be taken for
what it is worth.1

1 Ratzeberger, i; Gesch.," p. 138. That the idea embodied in the
verse was familiar to Luther is clear from other sayings : cp. above,
vol. v., p. 102 and below, p. 394. Ratzeberger's narrative cannot,
however, compare in value with the other authorities quoted above,
p. 376, n. 2. and Catholic writers have lent too much credence to it.
Luther's prayer, for instance, which Ratzeberger quotes as having
been overheard by a servant, Johann Sickell, is given only by him
(p. 140).

378 LUTHER'S DEATH

The following is based principally on the narratives of
Jonas, Coelius and Aurifaber, though the fact that it
emanates from enthusiastic friends of Luther's has not been
overlooked. Even though, as is highly probable, the three
writers in question made the most of the edifying traits they
were able to mention, yet this is no sufficient ground for
rejecting their account as a whole. Even the short prayers
which they put on Luther's lips may not be pure inventions.

After supper Luther betook himself rather early to his
sitting-room and, as his custom was, said his prayers at the
open window. Another severe attack of heart oppression
then came on ; his friends hurried to his assistance and
again tried to mend matters by rubbing him with hot
cloths ; he was, however, only able to get an hour's sleep
on a sofa in the room. He refused to have the doctors called
in as he did not think there was any danger. For the next
two or three hours, viz. till 1 a.m. he slept in his own bed in
the adjoining bedroom, after telling his anxious friends and
his two sons, Martin and Paul, to go to rest. Jonas, the
principal witness at his death, had a couch in the same
room as Luther.

About one o'clock Luther suddenly felt very unwell. " Oh,
my God, how ill I feel," he said to Jonas, and, getting out of
bed, he dragged himself into the sitting-room, saying he
would probably die at Eisleben after all, and repeating
the prayer : " Into Thy hands I commend my spirit." He
complained of an intolerable burden on his chest. Two
physicians, one a doctor and the other a master of medicine,
were now summoned in haste. Before they arrived the
patient seems to have suddenly collapsed ; they found him
on the sofa, unconscious and with no perceptible pulse.
Recovering consciousness he said, all bathed in the cold
sweat of death : " My God, I feel so ill and anxious, I am
going," and then, according to Jonas, he said a short prayer
of thanks to God for having revealed to him His Son Jesus
Christ in Whom he believed and Whom he had preached and
confessed, whilst the hateful Pope and all the ungodly had
blasphemed this same Christ ; thereupon, all trustfully, he
commended his soul to the Lord. No less than three times,
according to this witness, did he repeat in Latin the familiar
Bible text : " God so loved the world that He gave His Only
Begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not

LUTHER'S DEATH 379

perish but have everlasting life." This text (John iii. 16) he
had, indeed, always esteemed highly, and seen in it the seal
of his doctrine. He is also said to have repeated other Bible
texts while medicines were being given him. Count Albert
and his relatives, who had eome in, also offered him various
remedies. Soon after he seemed again to lose consciousness.
In spite of the confessions just mentioned Jonas and Coelius
shouted once more in his ear the question, whether he
remained steadfast in the faith in Christ and His doctrine
which he had preached ; to which they caught the reply
' Yes." That was his last word. — To all appearance his
death was due to an apoplectic seizure.

All things considered, it is very odd that Luther apparently
never gave a thought to his life's partner, whom he had left
at Wittenberg, and that, at least as it seems, his sons were
not with him at his death. The argument from the silence
of his friends on this point is not devoid of force, for it would
have been so easy for them to supply what we here miss.
Their silence might even be adduced in support of the
substantial reliability of their narrative. The best explana
tion of Luther's apparent oblivion is probably to be sought in
the result of the stroke which stupefied him and blotted out
the memory of those dear to him.1

Towards 3 a.m., after drawing a last deep breath. Luther
yielded up his soul into the hands of the Judge. This was
on Feb. the 18th.

At the demand of both the physicians the apothecary of
Eisleben was sent for, either immediately after death had
taken place, or possibly just before, to administer a stimulant
by means of a clysteral injection. The apothecary, Johann
Landau by name, was a Catholic and a convert, a nephew of
the convert polemic Wicel. He drew up a report of his visit
which has become famous in the discussion of the question
stupidly broached anew of recent years as to whether Luther
committed suicide.2 We here give the principal passages of

1 With the silence of the witnesses present it is rather difficult to
square the statement contained in an Autograph of Paul, Luther's son,
which according to Kdstlin-Kawerau (2, p. 695) lies in the library at
Rudolstadt ; it tells how he, and his brother Martin, while standing by
their father's bedside had heard him repeat three times the text, John
iii. 16.

2 In Cochlaeus, " Ex compendio actorum M. Lutheri caput ultimum,
etc.," Moguntiae, 1548. In 1565 the account was embodied in the larger
work of Cochlaeus : " De actis et scriptis M. Lutheri." To N. Paulua

380 LUTHER'S DEATH

his very realistic narrative. He speaks of himself in the
third person.

;< The apothecary was awakened at the third hour after
midnight. . . . When he arrived he said to the doctors :
4 He is quite dead, of what use can an injection be ? ' Count
Albert and some scholars were present. The physicians,
however, replied : ' At any rate have a try Avith the instru
ment that he may come again to himself if there be any life
yet in him.' When the apothecary inserted the nozzle he
noticed some flatulency given off into the ball of the
syringe."1 The apothecary persevered in his efforts until
the physicians saw that all was useless. " The two
physicians disputed together as to the cause of death. The
doctor said it was a fit of apoplexy, for the mouth wras drawn
down and the whole of the right side discoloured.2 The
master, on the other hand, thought it incredible that so holy
a man could have been thus stricken down by the hand of
God, and thought it was rather the result of a suffocating
catarrh and that death was due to choking. After this all
the other Counts arrived. Jonas, however, who was seated
at the head of the bed, wept aloud and wrung his hands.
When asked whether Luther had complained of any pain
the evening before he replied : " Dear me, no, he was more
cheerful yesterday than he had been for many a day. Oh,
God Almighty, God Almighty, etc." — by this Jonas did not
mean to deny the fit of heart oppression that had occurred
the previous day, since he himself reports it to the Elector ;
distracted by grief as he was he probably only thought of the
good spirits Luther had been in that evening, a*nd of the
contrast with the dead body he now saw lying before him.
Or it may be that he did not regard the heart oppression as
actual " pain."

Landau's report continues : " In the meantime the Counts
brought costly scents to be applied to the body of the
deceased, for on several occasions before this he had been
thought to be dead when he lay for a long time motionless
and giving no sign of life, as happened to him, for instance,
at Schmalkalden when he was tormented with the stone. . . .

(below, p. 381, n. 2) belongs the credit of having examined in detail the
report (p. 67 ff.) and pointed out the author.

1 For some further remarks of the apothecary see above, vol. iii.,
p. 304.

J " Visa ttiim est tortura or is et dexterum latus totum in/uacatum."

THE WORLD OF LEGEND 381

The apothecary vigorously rubbed his nose, mouth, forehead
and left side for some time with the oils. Prince Wolfgang
of Anhalt came and bent over the corpse and asked the
apothecary whether any sign of life remained. The latter,
however, replied that there was not the least life in him
seeing that the hands, nose, forehead, cheeks and ears were
already stiff and cold in death. . . . Jonas said : It will be
best now for us to send a swift rider to the Elector and for
one of us to sit down and write and tell him all that has
happened."

Jonas himself wrote this first still extant account to his
sovereign " about four o'clock in the morning."

On Feb. 20 Luther's body was taken to Halle, and early
on the 22nd to Wittenberg, where it was received at the
Elster Gate — the scene of the famous burning of the Bull —
by the University, the Town Council and the burghers. He
was buried in the Schlosskirche. There his bones still rest
in the grave as was proved by an examination made on
Feb. 14, 1892.1

4. In the World of Legend

Barely twenty years later a report that Luther had com
mitted suicide went the rounds among certain of his oppo
nents, the report being subsequently grounded on the
alleged statement of a servant.

The first writer who mentions the servant is the Italian
Oratorian, Thomas Bozius, in a book on the marks of the
Church printed in Rome in 1591. "Luther after having
supped heartily that evening and gone to bed quite content,"
so he writes, " died that same night by suffocation. I hear
that it has recently been discovered through the confession
of a witness who was then his servant and who came over
to us in late years, that Luther brought himself to a miserable
end by hanging ; but that all the inmates of the house who
knew of the incident were bound under oath not to divulge
the matter, for the honour of the Evangel as it was said."2

1 On the grave see Kostlin, " Theol. Stud, und Krit.," 1894, p. 630 ff,
1897, pp. 192 ff., 824 ff. and in the " RE. f. prot, Th.," II3, p. 752 f.
Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 626.

2 Paulus, " Luthers Lebensende, eine kritische Untersuchung '
(" Erlauterungen und Erganzungen ?AI Janssens Gesch. des deutschen
Yolkes," vol. i., Hft. 1), 1898, p. f.3.

382 THE WORLD OF LEGEND

It was not till the beginning of the 17th century that the
text of the supposed letter of Luther's servant began to be
circulated, according to which, when the latter went one
morning to awaken Luther " as usual " (i.e. about 7 a.m.)
he found he had committed suicide ; this, however, is quite
at variance with the definite accounts we have of the time
of death. The supposed servant claims to have been alone
when he found " our Master Martin hanging from the bed
post, miserably strangled," whereas the notes made at the
time speak of the presence of witnesses both before and after
the death which, moreover, was quite a natural one. The
apocryphal letter bears no writer's name nor do we know
anything of its source ; it seems to have made its first public
appearance at Antwerp in 1606 in the work of the Franciscan
Sedulius, who probably took it in good faith. It is remark
able, that, down to 1650, as Paulus has proved, only one
German writer mentions this fictitious letter, though foreign
polemics were busy with it. Outside of Germany such
inventions found more ready credence, particularly among
the zealous and more imaginative Catholics of the Latin race,
who were only too willing to seize on any tale which was to the
discredit of the lives of the German foes of Catholicism.1

The falsehood of the legend of Luther's suicide was most
convincingly proved by N. Paulus in his special work on the
subject (1898). This scholar submitted the fable to the
sharp knife of criticism with a broadminded love of truth
that honours his Catholicism as much as his acumen does
honour to him as a critic.

It is barely credible to us to-day what inventions grew up
in the 16th century, both on the Catholic and the Protestant
side, about the deaths of well-known public men who
happened to be the object of animosity to one party or the

1 Paulus, ib., pp. 67-82. It may be added that, in the 2nd decade
of the 17th century the fable had no support at Munich, for
./Egidius Albertinus in his work " Der Teutscheii Recreation," printed
there in 1613 (which contains many falsehoods about Luther), says he
" died a sudden death " ; it is said that 4i a stroke, apoplexia, or the
hand of God, smote him " (p. 85 f.). That his sudden death as the
result of a stroke was known abroad is also plain from the account of
Pedro de Gante, Secretary to the Duke of Najera. This contemporary
of Luther's writes in his '; Relaciones " (Madrid, 1873), p. 149 : Luther
went to bed without feeling ill, but, " early in the morning he was found
dead in his bed, wearing suoh a dreadful countenance that it was
impossible to look at him without being dismayed," Cp. " Zeitsehr. t',
KG.." 14, 1894, p, 4.r>4T

THE WORLD OF LEGEND 383

other. Suicide, or murder at the hands of friend or foe, or,
more frequently, dreadful maladies or sudden death under
the most horrible shapes were the ordinary penalties
assigned to opponents, not only by the populace but even by
the more credulous type of learned writers. We must not
forget that Luther himself had at hand a list of the perse
cutors of the Evangel, who, in his own day, had been
snatched away by sudden death, and that it served him on
occasion in his sermons and writings.1

It is an undeniable fact that Luther did much to pave the
way for such stories. His printed Table-Talk could well be
taken as a model. Among the fearsome tales of death he
himself related was e.g. that of Mutian the humanist, who,
refusing to become a Lutheran, fell from poverty into
despair and poisoned himself ;2 of the Archbishop of Treves,
Richard of Greiffenklau, who was " bodily carried off to hell
by the devil " ;3 of the Catholic preacher, Urban of Kune-
walde, who, "having fallen away from the Evangel," was
" struck by a thunderbolt " in the church, and then again
by a flash of lightning that passed through his body from
head to foot, because he had asked heaven for a sign to prove
that he was in the right,4 etc.5 " All these perished miser
ably," he says, " like senseless swine. And so too it will
happen with the others."6

In those days, partly owing to Luther's influence, people
were very ready to admit the devil's intervention in the
horrible death that befell their foes ; the Catholic champions
would all seem to have had a shocking end, could we but-
trust the writers in the Protestant camp.7

Eck they depicted entirely possessed by the devil and
" dying like a brute beast, quite out of his mind." Of
Emser (when still living) Luther himself says, that he had
been killed suddenly by the " fiery darts and arrows of the

1 See above, vol. iv., p. 304.

2 Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 236. Paulus (p. 27) notes that, accord
ing to Aurifaber in Luther's Table-Talk (Eisleben, 1566), p. 586, and
Spangenberg in his '; Theander Lutherus," p. 191', the Papists had
told the same tale of Luther whilst he was still alive. Thus Luther's
own methods were applied to himself.

3 Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 83. Erl. ed., 60, p. 327.

4 " Werke," ib., p. 329.

6 See the chapter of the Table-Talk entitled " The end of the
enemies of God's Word," ib., p. 327 ff.

« 76., p. 328. 7 Paulus. p. 5 ff.

384 THE WORLD OF LEGEND

devil."1 Coehlseus, according to other writers, was removed
from the world in an awful way. Johann Fabri it was said
had died in despair, saying to those who exhorted him to
have confidence : " Too late, too late." Pighius was made
out to have died by his own hand. Latomus was repre
sented as crying out on his death-bed that he was a devil
incarnate and had claws on his fingers and toes. Hofmeistcr,
the learned Augustinian, according to the Protestant version,
repeatedly said before dying : "I belong to the devil body
and soul." Of the Jesuits, even their founder, Ignatius of
Loyola, had a bad death. Canisius was struck dumb in the
pulpit at Worms and was carried off by the judgment of
God ; some were not wanting, however, who declared that
he had been converted to Luther's doctrine. Seven years
before his death, it was reported of Bellarmine, the great
controversialist of that day, that " he had died miserably
and in despair," carried off on the back of a fiery he-goat
from hell ; and " even to this very day," so it was told
during his lifetime, " Bellarmine may be heard gruesomcly
howling in the wind, astride his flaming, winged steed."

Needless to say, many of the converts who turned their
back on Luther and took the part of the Catholic Church
" perished miserably " ! " Many of these devil's hench
men," writes a " simple minister of the Word," " who
knowingly and of malice aforethought, as they themselves
admit, deny the known truth of the Evangel, have been
carried off alive by the devil, or have howled before their
death like wolves and tigers, as notoriously happened
in the case of that firebrand Staphylus."2

If similar tales, representing in an unfavourable light
Luther's life and death, were equally rife among the
Catholics, this can be no matter for surprise if we bear in
mind how greatly they were vexed by the exaggerated
eulogies passed on him and his life's work, and how much
they had been stung "by his polemics and furious onslaught
on the Church. Whoever loved the olden Church held
Luther's very name in execration.

One such tale early current at Halle was that, when the

1 Erl. ed., 31, p. 318. Cp. Kawerau, " Briefwechsel des Jonas," 1,
p. 116. Paulus, ib., p. 7.

2 " Rechte Ausslegung der geheymen Offenbarung " (no place),
1589, p. 19 ; Paulns, ib.. p. 21. Staphylua, as Paulus points out, really
died a very edifying death.

THE WORLD OF LEGEND 385

funeral procession arrived at Wittenberg, the coffin was
found empty, Luther's corpse having vanished on the road.
A number of rooks having described circles in the air about
the corpse at Halle, a later tale made them out to have been
devils " streaming to the funeral of their prophet."1 Proof
of this general foregathering of the devils was even found in
the comparative calmness of those possessed, who, it was
argued, had evidently been forsaken for a while by their
diabolical tenants, the latter 's presence at the burial explain
ing their temporary departure from their usual habitats.2
The corpse, it was also said, gave out so evil a smell that the
bearers had to leave it on the road to Wittenberg.

Other versions of these tales deserve to be mentioned.
According to Johann Oldecop, the Hildesheim Dominican
(fl574), who, however, is not reliable in what he had at
second hand, Luther was simply found dead in his bed.
According to Simon Fontaine (1558), a French writer, who
also speaks of his sudden death, he had " his nun " with him
that night ; this is also affirmed in the works of Jerome
Bolsec and James Laing, printed in Paris, as well as in
a work published at Ingolstadt. According to William
Reginald, Professor at the English College of Douay (1597),
Luther had been strangled in the night by Catherine Bora.
The same tale was afterwards told at Miinster in Westphalia
by Johann Munch (1617).

Even more common were the reports, quite in accordance
with the manners which Luther had fostered, that the devil
had murdered him. The Polish scholar, Stanislaus Hosius,
asserted this in 1558, and, later, it is mentioned, though only
tentatively, by the Dutch theologian, William Lindanus
and the Paris theologian Prateolus. In 1615, Robert
Bellarmine, speaking in general terms, says that Luther,
after an illness lasting only a few hours, " yielded up his soul
to the devil " ; 3 but the " Compendium fidei " 1607 of
Franz Coster (already published in Dutch in 1595) had been
beforehand in particulars of Luther's death at the devil's
hands. He tells how, according to the statement of a noble
lady of Eichsfeld, Luther's body had been found with the
" neck red and out of joint," hence it was plain that " he
had been strangled by the devil." Peter Pazmany a Magyar
writer (1613) had heard that the devil had appeared in the

1 Paulus, ib., p. 61, n. 2. 2 /&., p. 61 f. 8 /&., p. 60, n. 0,
VI— 2 C

386 THE WORLD OF LEGEND

shape of a great sheep-dog to the guests at table on the
evening previous to Luther's death, and that Luther had
exclaimed : " What, so soon ? " Claude de Sainctes (1575)
a French theologian, finds nothing extraordinary in Luther's
horrible death, since most of the Church's foes had been
brought to a violent end by the devil as the examples of
Zwingli, Carlstadt, (Ecolampadius and others showed !

CHAPTER XL

AT THE GRAVE

1. Luther's fame among the friends he left behind

THE first panegyrics on Luther, the funeral orations and en-
coniums which were immediately printed and scattered broad
cast through Germany constitute an historical phenomenon
in themselves. They show orators and writers alike
fascinated as it were by Luther's overpowering personality,
and they, in turn, fascinated many thousands who read
them. Jonas was the first to deliver at Eisleben an address
in his honour, viz. in the afternoon of Feb. 19 ; this was
followed by another by Coelius previous to the departure
of the funeral procession on Feb. 20 ; whilst Bugenhagen,
too, delivered one of his own on the 22nd, after the arrival
of the body at the Schlosskirche. The rhetorical effusions
of Jonas and Ccelius, who had been present with Luther at
the end, likewise Bugenhagen's address, and the account of
Luther's death which they published in conjunction with
Aurifaber, are all crammed with incredible praises. Melanch-
thon, too, forgetful of all the pain he had suffered at Luther's
hand and shutting his eyes to all his weaknesses, paid his
tribute of honour to Luther's memory, first in a notice
affixed at the University, then in a Latin funeral-oration
which he delivered in the Schlosskirche as soon as Bugen
hagen had had his say, and, again, in a short writing on his
friend and master which he prefixed to the second volume
of the Latin edition of Luther's works (1546).

"Alas, gone is the chariot and horseman of Israel " (2 Kings ii.
12), so Melanchthon said in the notice of Luther's death, which
he addressed to the students,1 " who ruled the Church in this the
old age of the world. For it was not human sagacity that dis
covered the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins and trust in the
Son of God, but God revealed it through this man whom He

1 " Corp. ref.," 6, p. 58 sqt

387

388 LUTHER'S FAME

raised up before our eyes." In his funeral oration he extols the
departed as one of the long line of Divine tools starting in Old
Testament times, a man taught by God and exercised in severe
spiritual combats, of a friendly nature, not at all passionate or
quarrelsome and only inclining to be violent when such medicine
was needed by the ailments of the age. " Whatsoever things are
true, whatsoever modest, whatsoever just, whatsoever holy,
lovely and of good fame " according to the Apostle (Philip, iv. 8)
had been exemplified in him. Now, however, he had gone to join
the company of the Prophets in heaven, etc.

According to the similar address delivered by Jonas1 only at
the end of the world would people clearly see what " splendid
revelations he had had when first he began to preach the Evangel."
Luther had the " Spirit of God in rich and exalted measure," he
was "a past master in spiritual combats." "In the hour of
death he had cast all his cares on Christ." In the spirit of Luther,
who was equal to Noe in his words and preaching, Jonas prophe
sied, that what he had once said would be fulfilled, viz. that,
after his death, " all Papists and monks would be scattered and
brought low " ; Luther's death, like that of all the prophets,
would havo in it "a special power and efficacy to overcome the
godless, stiff-necked and blinded Papists," nay, before two years
were over, they would all be overtaken by a " gruesome chastise
ment." — To such an extent had Luther's pseudo-mysticism and
fanatical expectations infected his pupils. Nevertheless Luther's
admissions concerning the imperfection of his work were also
taken over by his pupils. " In spite of the great and bright light
of the Evangel," so Jonas confesses in his funeral oration, " the
world has reached such a pass that now among many are found
not only the common sins and shortcomings but, to boot,
blasphemy, disorders, defiance, or deliberate persistence in the
grossest vices ; yet no one is ready to acknowledge that he is a
sinner." The sermon in question was again preached by Jonas
at Halle later on.

Ccelius, in his funeral oration, declared that no one before
Luther had known how to call upon God, how to look up to Him
in trouble, or what a man ought to do, or how he was to serve
God. But " by him God has unlocked Holy Writ which
formerly was a book closed and sealed." The dear man had been
a " real Elias and Jeremias ; he was a new John the Baptist,
preaching the great day of the Lord, or else an Apostle."

According to Bugenhagen's sermon,2 the deceased was "un
doubtedly the Angel of whom it is written in the Apocalypse
(xiv.) : ' And I saw an angel flying through the midst of heaven
having the eternal Gospel to preach.' ' Through him, " the
God-sent reformer of the Church," God the Father has " revealed"
the great mystery of His Beloved Son Jesus Christ.

These eulogies, which owe their fulsomeness partly to the
bad taste of the humanistic period, were strong in their

* " Werke," Welch's ed., p. 365* ff. a Ib., p. 329* ff.

LUTHER'S FAME 389

effects on men's minds ; the preachers, moreover, who had
been trained or appointed by Luther, were anxious thereby
to strengthen their own position and to show their scorn for
Popery. Even in the above addresses Luther and what he
stood for is contrasted with " the oppression and tyranny of
the hateful Popedom " from which the world had been
delivered. (Bugenhagen.)

In many of the churches Luther's picture was hung up
with the inscription : " The Holy Dr. Martin Luther
(' Divus et sanctusS etc.)." Writings were published bearing
such titles as " Luther, the Prophet," " Luther, the Wonder-
Worker." All sorts of medals were struck in his honour, one
with the inscription : " Propheta Germanics, Sanctus
Domini" others with Luther's motto : " Pestis eram vivus^
etc.1 Even in his lifetime pictures appeared in reprints of
his works where he was represented with a halo and with the
Dove, as the symbol of the Holy Ghost, descending on him
from heaven.2

The most popular biography of Luther was that of Johann
Mathesius, who died as pastor of Joachimsthal in Bohemia.
He met with a success such as can be accounted for only by
the passion in favour of Wittenberg then prevalent in
Protestant Germany. The appellations so common in later
years, Luther the " Wonder- Worker," " Chosen Instru
ment," " True German Prophet," " Man full of Grace and
the Holy Spirit," are to be met with already in the
"Historien" of Mathesius, delivered originally as sermons
and first published in 1566. In these " stories " he has

1 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Eiigl. Trans., 6, p. 419).
Cp. on the medals M. C. Juncker, " Vita Lutheri nummis illustrata,"
Francof. et Lipsise, 1699, e.g. p. 176 (Plate II), and p. 459. Juncker
enlarged this work and published it in German as "Das Guldene und
Silberne Ehrengedachtniss Lutheri," Franc, and Leipsig, 1706. Cp. on
p. 212 the medal of 1546. On p. 260 he says that at the Wittenberg
Schlosskirche there was " an altar over which was a life-size effigy of
Luther as he stood in the pulpit " ; beside him was Melanchthoii
baptising a child and Bugenhagen sitting in the confessional. On
another picture in the parish church see F. S. Keil, " Luthers merk-
wiirdige Lebensumstande," Leipsig, 1764, p. 280. — Albertinus
(above, p. 382, n.) speaks, p. 87, of a wooden eftigy of Luther in the
Schlosskirche bearing the inscription : " Divus et aanctun doctor
Martinus Lutherus, propheta Germanics"

2 We find them in reprints of 1519, 1520 and 1521 . One edition with
the Wittenberg imprint contains the picture, but was really printed at
Strasburg. Thomas Murner, writing from Strasburg, refers to the
picture in 1520. See below, section 4.

390 LUTHER'S FAME

interwoven in Luther's laurel wreath much that is untrue or
doubtful, for instance, the saying attributed to Erasmus
and since frequently quoted on his authority, is spurious,
viz. " that, when Dr. Luther explains Scripture, on one
of his pages there is more reason and common sense than in
•all the tomes and scrolls of Scotists, Thomists, Albcrtists,
Nominalists and Sophists."1 Mathesius wishes people " not
to be forgetful of so worthy a man's life and testimony," yet
even he gives us a glimpse into the bitter controversies now
already raging among the Lutherans ; he points out how
" God loves the peacemakers and calls them His own dear
children while He sends adrift all who delight in war and
strife." He himself had some experience of the antagonism
between the progressive party and the more old-fashioned
Lutherans. Indeed one of the principal reasons why he
wrote the " Historien " was because " many an ungrateful
fellow actually forgets this great man and his faithful
industry and toil." He already sees the " Wittenberg
cisterns " denied by " all kinds of brackish, foul, baneful,
muddy and uncleanly waters."2

Though historically the tales of " the pious panegyrist," as
Maurenbrecher a Protestant calls him,3 cannot be said to rank
very high, yet the energy with which he claims a thoroughly
German character for Luther and for his own biographical work
was pleasing to many. He uses the term " Prophet of the
Germans" ad nauseam, even in the Preface addressed to the
Wittenberg authorities ; God had bestowed Luther " as a gift
on us, the descendants of Japhet, and the Holy German Empire
in these last days " ; he, Mathesius, had a living " under the
Bohemian Crown," but as a German by birth he had " preached
officially in his mother tongue " and " of set purpose, had these
German sermons, to the honour of Our God and the blessed
German Theology, published in German in order that some at
least in Germany might be reminded what this blessed German
Church in the Kingdom of Bohemia thought of the doctrines of
this great German Prophet."

By his exertions for the preservation of the Table-Talk
Mathesius also sought to glorify Luther's memory.

An influential group of panegyrists, who, like Mathesius, noted
down, collected, or published Luther's utterances, comprises

1 " Historien von des ehrwirden in Gott seligen the wren Manns
Gottes Doctoris M. Lutheri Anfang, Lehr, Leben und Sterben," Niirn-
berg, 1506, Bl. 200.

2 /&., Preface.

3 " Studien und Skizzen zur Gesch. der Reformationszeit,'' 1874,
p. 211.

LUTHER'S FAME 391

Cordatus, Dietrich, Rorer, Schlaginhaufen, Lauterbach and, to
pass over others, Aurifaber, Stangwald and Selnecker. Cordatus,
who went as Superintendent to Stendal in 1540, compared
Luther's sayings to the oracles of Apollo.1 Aurifaber, one of
those present at Luther's death at Eisleben, became in 1551
Court Chaplain at Weimar and in 1566 pastor at Erfurt. In the
" Colloquia," or Table-Talk, which he caused to be printed at
Eisleben in 1566, he says, in the Preface addressed to the Imperial
towns of Strasburg, Augsburg, Ulm, Nuremberg, etc., that
Luther was the " Venerable and highly enlightened Moses of the
Germans."

Like Aurifaber and Stangwald (1571), Semecker (1577) took
for the motto of his edition of the Table-Talk the words of Christ,
"Gather up the fragments that remain," etc. (John vi. 12); he
further embellished his collection with the words :

*' What, full of God's spirit, Luther once taught
That doth his godly flock now hold fast." 2

Of the Lutheran die-hards who were never weary of fighting
for the true olden spirit of Luther in opposition to the Protestant
critics who very soon sprang up, the most eminent were Flacius
Illyricus, Justus Menius, Nicholas Amsdorf and Cyriacus
Spangenberg.

Concerning the father of the latter, Johann Spangenberg,
Luther, in the last days of his life, had advised and " faithfully
exhorted, that he should be called as Superintendent [to
Eisleben]."3 Full of boundless admiration for Luther his son
Cyriacus wrote his " Theander Lutherus," where he says that the
latter was the " greatest prophet since the days of the Apostles "
and a " real martyr," particularly because the devil had perse
cuted him so greatly. In consideration of this he canonises him
and speaks of him as " St. Luther." * In the preface he assures us
that it was only Luther's holy and persistent prayers that had
hitherto spared Germany the perils of war which would otherwise
have overtaken her. The significant and lengthy title of this
remarkable work runs as follows : " Theander Lutherus ; of the
worthy man of God, Dr. M. Luther's spiritual Household and
Knighthood, of his office as Prophet, Apostle and Evangelist ;
How he was the third Elias, a new Paul, the true John, the best
Theologian, the Angel of Apocalypse xiv., a faithful witness, wise
pilgrim and true priest, also a good labourer in our Lord God's
vineyard, all summed up in one-and-twenty sermons."

Flacius Illyricus, the Wittenberg Professor famous for his
connection with the "Magdeburg Centuries," made Luther's
exemplary life play its part among the " Marks of the true
Religion." He proves in the book bearing this title the ad van-

1 See above, vol. iii., p. 228. 2 Erl. ed., 57, p. xvi.

3 Account of Hieronymus Mencel, dated Nov. 1, 1562, Kostlin-
Kawerau, 2, p. 695.

4 '' Theander Lutherus," Ursel, pp. 45, 193.

392 LUTHER'S FAME

tages of Protestantism over Popery by the mark of holiness, and
by the pious life of some of the New Believers so different from
that of the Catholics, and, in so doing, he appeals boldly to the
founder of Protestantism. Whatever was alleged against Luther
was false ; " the Papists have never ceased from spreading these
untruths, particularly in distant lands where the true state of the
case is not so well known."1

Luther's most ardent admirer after Flacius was perhaps
Nicholas Amsdorf. In the Jena edition of Luther's works for
which he was responsible Amsdorf extols him in the Introduction
as a man of God, " the like of whom has not been seen on earth
since St. Paul's day," a man whom God " had raised up by His
special Grace as a chosen instrument and bestowed on the
German nation " ; "by the Spirit and Word of God he had been
led to attack the Pope, and his services in revealing him as Anti
christ must be esteemed as highly as his vigorous advocacy of the
doctrines of the Trinity, the Incarnation and Justification through
Christ." Nay "he had been specially raised up" "in order to
unmask the Roman Antichrist." But, on account of all his other
doctrines too, " pious Christians ought to acknowledge with
grateful hearts this great miracle which God has shown to the
world and used against the Pope in these last sad times through
the precious man of God Martin Luther." Amsdorf, however, as
he hints in the same Preface, found to his dismay that Protestant
" cavillers " were now even more numerous than in Luther's
lifetime, who " picked from Luther's writings only antologies
and contradictions." Some had even dared to distort his writings.
He complains that the Wittenberg complete edition of Luther's
works was so unreliable that he was now compelled to undertake
the present new Jena edition : " Many things in those tomes
were deleted, expurgated and altered for the sake of currying
favour." a The real Luther, particularly as he is seen in his denial
of the need of good works, is numbered by Amsdorf among the
Saints ; this is clear from the title of one of Amsdorf's works,
where he places Luther on a par with the Apostle of the Gentiles. 3

Particularly around Luther's tomb did veneration centre.
Thus the verses of August Buchner invite his readers to
visit Luther's tomb, and proclaim it a greater thing to have
seen this little resting place than even the proud Temple of
Capitoline Jove. 4

Immediately after his death a lengthy " poem " was

1 Flacius, " Clarissimap qusedam notzE verse ac falsae religionis,"
Magdeburgi, 1549, end of cap. 15.

" Luthers Werke," Jena ed., 1555 ff., vol. i., Preface.

3 That the proposition " ' Good works are harmful to salvation ' is
a right, true and Christian one, taught and preached by Saints Paul
and Luther." 1559.

4 " Werke," Walch's ed., 24, p. 250.

LUTHER'S FAME 393

published at Wittenberg entitled " Epitaphium," celebrating
both the deceased and his grave :

" In mine own sweet Fatherland
I did die a death so grand.
At Wittenberg in peace I lie ;
To God be praise and thanks on high."

In it Luther tells how he had been sent by God that he
might —

" Before the trump of doom unmask that devil's child
The Antichrist, with fiendish sin defiled."

For ever and for ever it would remain true that

" Pope and Antichrist have sprung
From the wicked devil's dung."1

His grave was marked only by a stone let into the ground
bearing on it a metal plate with his name, the date and place
of his death, and his age.2

On a bronze memorial tablet in the wall was described in
Latin verse the dark night in which the world was plunged
under the Papacy, until at last Luther " once more made
known the Grace of Christ, and, moved by the Divine
inspiration (' Dei adflatu monitus ') and called by the Word
of God, had caused the new light of the Evangel to illuminate
the world." Like Paul his tongue had sent forth lightnings,
like John the Baptist he had shown to the world in its dark
ness the Saving Lamb of God, and also brought to light the
Tables of Moses, the Prophet of God, in their counter-
distinction from the Gospel. The altars had been purged of
the Roman idols. In reward for all this he had been exalted
by Christ to the stars in order that he might share in His
eternal joy.3 Beside the monument there was placed in the
following century a framed painting representing Luther in
the pulpit, pointing with his finger to the Crucified, while a

1 76., 21, p. 380.*

2 H. Lietzmann, "Zu Luthers Grabschrift," in " Zietschr. f. wiss.
Th.," 1911, p. 171 f., points out that as there can be no doubt that
Luther was born on Nov. 10, 1483, his age as given in the epitaph ANN.
LXIII M(enses) II D(ies)X is " quite wrong," but that the error can bo
explained by the fact that the writer or the workman transposed one of
the strokes from the months to the years ; it should read : ANN. LXII
M. Ill D. X.

3 Reprinted in Walch, 24, p. 250 ff. The poem begins : " Hie prope
Martini rursus victuri Lutheri."

394 LUTHER'S FAME

dragon with wide-open jaws was swallowing the Pope and
his helpers. On this painting the verses given above were
repeated.1

The Elector Johann Frederick had another memorial
tablet cast, but, owing to his defeat in the Schmalkalden
War, this was taken by his sons to Weimar and later, in 1571,
to Jena, where it was put up in the church of St. Michael.
On it, above the life-size figure of the deceased, stands the
verse : " Pestis cram vivus, moriens ero mors tua papa.'7
Other Latin verses at his feet state that, through him, the
great fraud had been exposed whereby godless Rome had
ensnared Christ's flock. Would that Christ would help the
orthodox school of Jena to vanquish the swarm of false
doctrines (of the New Believers) that was springing up now,
when the end of the world was so close.2

2. Luther's Memory among the Catholics.
The Question of His Greatness

A faithful Catholic visiting the Schlosskirchc at Witten
berg must necessarily have been assailed by thoughts much
at variance with the eulogistic language of the epitaph and
other expressions of Lutheran feeling. Let us suppose that
one of those zealous and cultured Catholics who had been
drawn by the attack on the olden religion into yet closer
sympathy with it had crossed the threshold of the church —
for instance a preacher such as Dr. Conrad Kling of Halle,
who in the midst of trials and slanders was seeking to save
the remnants of Catholicism,3 or a man like the historian
Wolfgang Mayer,4 or the learned and sharp-witted Kilian
Leib, Prior of Rebdorf,5 or one of the highly gifted women
of that day, for instance, Charity Pirkheimer, the sister of
the humanist and Superior of the struggling Poor Clares of
Nuremberg6 — what would have been the impressions called
forth by the building and the monument ?

The building itself recalled the oneness of the divine
edifice of the Church whose work it was to build up all the
regenerate into one body, without dissensions or divisions,

1 Walch, 24, p. 253 f.

2 Walch, 24, p. 258, commencing " Hcec erat effigies operosc facta
Luthero"

3 Vol. ii., p. 355 ; vol. v., p. 341. 4 Above, p. 29.

5 Vol. ii., p. 253 ; vol. iv., p. 354. 6 Vol. ii., p. 335.

LUTHER'S FAME 395

that oneness to which the Church in olden days, when barely
out of the hands of the persecutor, had borne witness at the
baptismal font of St. Peter's in Rome in the impressive
inscription : " One chair of Peter and one font of Baptism I"1
The pulpit of the Schlosskirche called to mind the com
mission given by the Divine Saviour to His Apostles and
their successors to baptise all nations and preach that
doctrine which He Himself was to preserve infallible by His
Presence " all days even to the end of the world." The
altar reminded the Catholic visitor of the eucharistic Sacra
ment and of the unbloody sacrifice formerly offered there.
The bare walls spoke of the iconoclastic storm against both
the images of the Saints and any living union of the faithful
on earth with the elect in heaven, while the elaborate monu
ments to the dead seemed to proclaim in these times of
excitement the peace in which those departed men had
passed away happy in the possession of the one olden faith.

This ecclesiastical unity — such would have been the
thought of the Catholic — has been shattered in our unhappy
age by the man whose remains are here honoured by his
followers, and not in order to reform, or improve, but rather
to replace the thousand-year-old heirloom of the Church by
a new faith and worship.

Even Luther's very monument re-echoed the menaces
pronounced by Luther upon Catholicism when he desecrated
what was most sacred for so many thousands, and laid rough
hands on the one consolation of their sorrowful lives.

The fierce announcement to Popery : " My death will be your
plague " fell from his lips not once but often. " Only after my
death will they feel the real Luther." "My life shall be their
hangman, my death shall be their devil!"2 "When I die I
shall become a spirit to plague the bishops, the priestlings and the
godless monks so greatly that a dead Luther will spell to them
more trouble than a thousand living ones."3

With the oft-repeated words : " Pestis eram vivus, inoriens
cro mors tua Papa,"* which are also engraved on his death mask
in the Luther-Halle at Wittenberg, he proclaimed that his death
would do more harm to the Papacy than his life ; as long as he
lived the Papists would benefit to some extent from his labours,
but, when he died, they would be deprived even of this. The

1 De Rossi, " Inscriptiones christ. Urbis Romse," 2, 1, p. 147.

2 Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 279 f. ; Erl. ed., 252, p. 8.

3 .Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 66.

4 K. L. Grubc, in the " KL.," 12a, Sp. 1720.

396 LUTHER'S FAME

threat, though grotesque, is quite in keeping with his belief in
himself. He says that it is he alone who is still holding back the
storm that is threatening to engulf all the Papists. He asks the
Catholics of Germany : "How if Luther's life were of so much
value in God's sight that, did he not live, not one of you would
be sure of your life or existence here below, so that his death
would be a misfortune to you all ? "l He even goes so far as to
prophesy : " One day they will cry : Oh, that Luther were still
living ! "2 He parades before the Catholics the services he had
rendered by resisting the fanatics and those who denied the
Sacrament ; the Catholics, so he says, would never have been
able to do so much. " They are ungrateful, of this will I speak
to them when I am dead. I have inveighed against them enough
in the ' Vermamlg,' but it is all of no use."3 "After my death
the Papists will see all the good I have done them, and in me the
saying will be fulfilled : ' He died justified of his sin.' "4

Thus in his half jesting, half serious fashion he proclaimed
himself a sort of defender and pillar of the Papacy. The idea did
not seem too strange to his friend Jonas to prevent him intro
ducing it into his funeral oration on Luther : " The Papists," he
says, " Canons, priestlings, monks and nuns would in years to
come wish that Dr. Luther still lived ; they would gladly obey
him, and, if they could, call him from the grave ; but their
chance is now gone."5

These great expectations and bold prophecies were as
little realised as that of the impending fall of the Papacy.

On the contrary the Papacy gathered strength, renewed
its youth from one decade to another and, though the
apostasy also grew, yet a gradual revival of the ancient
faith set in throughout the Catholic world. On the minds of
the faithful Catholics there remained, however, indelibly
stamped the gloomy recollection of the towering defiance
with which the Wittenberg professor and his secular allies
had sought to introduce an alien teaching and reform.

The inflexible will on which Luther so prided himself is
the sign manual of his personality. Nothing is so character
istic of Luther as his obstinate determination which yielded
to nothing, and the appalling pertinacity that ever drove
him on and never allowed him to retreat.

" No one, please God, shall awe me so long as I live ! "6

1 Weim. ed., 15, p. 254 ; Erl. ed., 242, p. 222.

2 Erl. ed., 65, p. 221. 3 Cordatus, " Tagebuch," p. 121.

4 Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 119. The Bible passage alluded to
(Horn, vi. 7) says rather that, in the man who is justified, the old man
being crucified with Christ is dead to sin.

5 " Werke," Walch's ed., 21, p. 383.*

' Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 74.

LUTHER'S DEFIANCE 397

To no other principle was he more faithful throughout his
life. Thus we hear him declaring :

" Good, then let us bid defiance in God's name ; whoever feels
compunction let him draw back ; whoever is afraid let him flee !
... I have brought Holy Scripture and the Word of God to
light as no other has done for a thousand years. I have done my
part. Your blood be upon your own heads and not on mine."1

" When we see and feel the world's wantonness, anger and
hate, let us learn to defy it," " to the disgust and annoyance of
the world." " This is an exalted defiance and an excellent
consolation." " Defiantly we boast : The Gospel that we preach
is not ours but our Lord Christ's."2

Luther defied not only " the world," i.e. his ecclesiastical
opponents and Catholicism generally, but also what he calls the
devil, i.e. the inner voice that reproached him ; he defied life and
death, Emperor and princes, and, to boot, his own followers.
Yet it was to him not so easy a task to defy the olden Church :
" Rather than anger the Christian Church, or say one word
against her, I would prefer to lose ten heads and to die ten times
over. And yet do it I must." " They tell us * the Christian
Church is where Popery is.' But no, Christ says, * My word shall
prevail and you shall obey me and listen to me alone, even should
you go cracked, mad and crazy over it.' "3

He was highly elated at the thought that the powerful protec
tors of the Church had "not been able to put him down."4 All
their success he regards as mere " devil's dung " ;6 the princes,
" the tyrants and men of great learning " might be incensed at
the blow he had dealt them, but, so he declares, for the defence
of his teaching he would have to give them " thirty blows more
to induce remorse and repentance."6 For " in this may God give
me no patience or meekness. Here I say No, No, No, so long as
I can move a finger, let it vex King, Kaiser, princes, devils and
whom it may." " In the matter of doctrine no one is great in
my sight, I look upon him as a mere soap-bubble, and even less ;
this there is no gainsaying." The same was to hold good of his
crass writing on the " Captive Will " : "I defy not only the
King [of England] and Erasmus, but also their God and all the
devils, fairly and rightly to dispose of that same booklet ! "7

" His enemies' anger and fury," so he declares when in this
mood, is to him " real joy and fun." He will force himself to be
of " good and cheerful heart " about their " baneful books."8

With frightful earnestness he warns the Catholic princes : "It
is the truth that you will go headlong to destruction ; I know

Weim. ed., 23, p. 36 ; Erl. ed., 30, p. 13.

16., Erl. ed., 49, p. 359 ff., 1538.

Weim. ed., 33, p. 626 f ; Erl. ed., 48, p. 358 f.

Schlaginhaufen, " Aufzeichn.," p. 10.

To Justus Jonas, Sep. 30, 1543, " Briefe," 5, p. 591.

Weim. ed., 23, p. 32 ; Er). ed., 30, p. 8.

Ib., p. 27 ff. = 2 ff. * 16., p. 27 = 3.

398 LUTHER'S DEFIANCE

that on the word will follow the deed and that you will perish.
. . . We have this consolation that we are not affrighted, even
should emperors, kings, princes, Pope and bishops fall in a heap
and kingdoms lie one on the top of the other."1 "What is a
prince or emperor, nay the whole world compared with the Word ?
They are but dung." k' Papacy, Empire and Grand Turk " mean
nothing to us. " Such is our defiance."2

In his scorn for those who vex him and write against him he is
determined to put out his horns," 3 He will be a " huntsman and
be after his quarry " ; I hunt the Pope, the cardinals, bishops,
canons and monks."4

Of the defiance of the " hard Saxon "6 not only the Papists but
the Court-lawyers and the theologians in his own camp had to
taste when they annoyed him. Not only did he oppose the
Papists, " cheerfully and confidently " condemning them to hell
and to " eat the devil's droppings," and rejoicing with a " good
conscience " at the impending destruction of these " slaves of
Satan " ;° but he had similar, nay even stronger words of
defiance ready for the " false teachers " amongst the New
Believers, to wit for the Swiss and for such as Agricola. When the
latter defended himself and said, " I too have a head," Luther
retorted : " And, please God, have I not one too." But with
such " stiff-necked " heretics " God was determined to torment
him so as the better to defy the Papists."7

A defiance so utterly overwhelming as Luther's the world
had never before seen. The Catholics were quite dumb
founded. Can we take it ill if they failed to admire this form
of Titanic greatness. A frightful greatness (perhaps it were
more accurate to say a great frightfulness) indeed lurked
behind Luther. Yet a Catholic would have had to throw over
all religious and moral standards before he could extol a
man as great simply on account of his strength of will,
determination, power of resistance, inflexibility and defiance.
Men felt that, after all, what was important was the aim
and the means used in pursuing it. If all that mattered was
merely the inflexibility of the will, this would have spelt an
" upsetting of all values " and the strong man, he who
towered above his fellows owing to his physical strength
and his power of bidding defiance to the world would become
the ideal of the human race.

Nor would a thoughtful Catholic contemporary have

> /&., 33, p. 630 = 48, p. 361. 2 lb., p. 634 f. = 365.

3 VVeim. ed. 10, 2, p. 105; Erl. eel. 28, p. 143.

4 Lauterbach, " Tagebuch," p. 54. a See above, vol. iv., p. 44.
8 To Lauterbach, Nov. 3, 1543, " Briefe," 5, p. 598.

7 Lauterbach, "Tagebuch," p. 119.

LUTHER'S GREATNESS 390

been much impressed by the modern eulogies of Luther's
defiance.

" Because he feared neither hell nor the devil, he stands out for
all time as the embodiment of human greatness " ; "in his
brave spirit there does not seem to have existed the faintest
shadow of the pallid fear of man." " In word and writing he is
the greatest demagogue of all the ages " ; " the sledgehammer
blows of his berserker fury and wild humour rained down on
every side."

" Since his road led to the goal, it must have been the right-
road, hence let critics hold their tongues."

" Such a master knew best what tone to adopt in order to sway
the nation."

" His is the wrath and fury of a hero. . . . Heroes and hero-
fury are inseparable."

Those who speak in this way admit that there were darker
sides to his picture ; they, however, insist that, in Luther we see,
with " the mighty will of the hero," " traits of the daemonic
greatness of a leader of history " " casting both light and
shadows." Luther " shook the world to its foundations." He
was a man " of mighty powers and dimensions." In the case of
almost all the really great men of history, not only their virtues,
but also their defects bear an heroic stamp." These defects are
simply the " reverse side of such a man's greatness."

It is to cherish too low an idea of greatness, not merely
according to the Christian but also according to the merely
natural standard, if strength of will or eventual success are
alone taken into account and the aim and whole moral
character of the work completely disregarded. In one sense
of the word Catholics have never been unwilling to grant
Luther a certain greatness, particularly as regards his
astounding mental gifts and his powers of work. Dollinger
was quite ready in his Catholic days to include " the son of
the peasant of Mohra amongst the great, nay, among the
greatest of men," though Dollinger qualifies the admission
by the words which immediately follow : " His disciples and
admirers were wont to console themselves with the ' heroic
spirit ' of the man, who was so intolerant of any limitations
or restrictions and who, dispensed by a kind of inspiration
from the observance of the moral law, could do things, which,
done by others, would have been immoral and criminal."1

There was no neutral vantage-ground from which to judge
of Luther's labours and his influence. Every thinking man
did so from the ethical standpoint, and the Catholic likewise
1 " Luther, eine Skizze," pp. 51, 57 ; " KL.," col. 330, 343.

400 LUTHER'S GREATNESS

from the standpoint of his Church. It is clear that Luther
must not be tested by the standard of profane greatness, but
by a religious one. It would be to do him rank injustice, and
he would have been the first to protest were we to consider
merely the force of his character and the extent of his
success, rather than his objects and his influence from the
moral and religious standpoint.

He represented himself to his Catholic contemporaries as
a divinely commissioned preacher ; in the name of the Lord
he called on them to forsake the Church of all the ages,
because he had come to proclaim afresh a forgotten Gospel.
Hence they were bound to examine the actual state of the
case and to probe for the moral signs which the words of
Christ and the Apostles had taught them to look for, and,
when they found the necessary religious qualities and moral
greatness wanting, who can blame them for not having gone
over to him ? With them it was not a question whether they
might admire in him a strong man, a Hercules or " super
man," but whether they were, at his bidding, to sever the
tie that had hitherto bound them to the Church, follow him
blindly, and commit their eternal salvation to his guidance.
Luther had never tired of urging : " No man shall quench
or thwart my teaching, it must have its way as it has
hitherto for it is not mine " (but God's).1 " I call myself
Ecclesiastes [the preacher] by the Grace of God. ... I am
certain that Christ Himself calls and regards me as such,
that He is my master, and that He will bear me witness on
the Last Day that it is not mine but His own Gospel
undefiled."2 It was this role of Evangelist that the better
class of opponents felt disposed to examine.

" Because you call yourself an evangelist and proclaimer
of the Gospel," so Duke George of Saxony wrote in his reply
to Luther, " it would have better beseemed you to punish
with mildness whatever abuses existed therein, and to
instruct the people kindly."3 On the contrary, so the Duke
urges, his behaviour is anything but that of an " evangelist,"
what with his passionate abuse and vituperation, and his

1 Dec. 22, 1525, to Duke George of Saxony (?), Erl. ed., 53, p. 340
(" Brief wechsel," 5, p. 281). Cp. Weim. ed., 7, p. 274 ; Erl. ed., 27,
p. 210, where the assertion also occurs that, my doctrine " is not mine
but God's." " because it is the very Gospel itself " (1521). The allusion
is of course to Galatians, i. 1 ff.

2 Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 105 f. ; Erl. ed., 28, p. 142 f.

3 " Luthers Werke," Erl. ed., 252, p. 159.

LUTHER'S GREATNESS 401

criminal breach of the public peace and religious unity :
14 Where peace and unity are not, there there is neither the
true faith, which indeed is not to be found in you."

It is worth while to consider what response would have
been awakened in the minds of serious Catholic visitors to
Luther's grave by his startling success.

Those who to-day claim unqualified " greatness " for
Luther are usually thinking of the astonishing success of his
undertaking, and of his influence and that of his labours on
posterity. They boast : " He tore his age from its moor
ings," " he reduced to ruins what for a thousand years had
been held in honour " ; "he gave a new trend to civilisation."

A man of insight could, however, explain otherwise many
of these effects.

The result of Luther's preaching was undoubtedly very
great. But, in the first place, this result was not solely due
to the efforts of one man but was rather the outcome of the
circumstances in which that man lived, the product of
divers factors in the history of the times.

His contemporaries saw full well that Luther, with his
fiery temperament, had merely assumed the direction of a
spirit that had long began to pervade the clergy, regular and
the secular, leading them to cast aside the duties of their
calling and to seek merely honours and emoluments. They
were also aware of the oppressive burden of abuses the
Church had to carry and of the far-reaching disorders in
public life. Society was now anxious to liberate itself from
the Church's tutelage which had grown irksome. Everyone
was conscious of the trend of the day towards freedom,
individuality and new outlooks. Both the Empire and the
olden idea of the Christian nations united as in one family
were in process of dissolution owing to political and social
trends quite independent of Luther's work. His con
temporaries saw with deep misgiving how Luther's new
doctrine and his innovations generally were strengthening
all these elements, and setting free others of a similar nature
which could not fail to help on his work. Nevertheless the
elements of unrest, without which he would have been
unable to achieve anything, were not of his making.1

1 Cp. the 18th-century Protestant historian, G. J. Planck, " Gesch.
der Entstehung des protestant. Lehrbegriffs/' I3, Leipsig, 1791, pp. 2,
• ' . 41*

VI — 2 D

402 LUTHER'S GREATNESS

We can still judge to-day, from the writings of those who
lived at that time, of the feelings, in some cases enthusiastic
in others full of fear, with which they listened to the Witten-
berger as he proclaimed war on all that was obsolete, or
demanded in fiery language the reform of the Church, for
which all were anxious.1 The more alluring and seductive
the very word " reformation," the more effective was the
help proffered for the overthrow of the Church under the
cloak of this watchword. In the field of learning there were
the humanists who had fallen foul of Catholic authority and
the spirit of the past ; in the lower strata of society there
were the peasants who aimed at bettering their position ;
among the burghers and in official circles hopes were enter
tained of an increase of authority at the expense of the
bishops, now regarded with ever-increasing jealousy ; finally
the nobles and knights were allured by the prospect of the
success of a revolt under the banner of the Evangel which
would redound to the advantage of their caste. What
chiefly brought Luther's star into the ascendant was, how
ever, the protection he obtained from the princes. Without
his Elector, without the Landgrave of Hesse, without the
allies of Schmalkalden, in a word, without political authority
on his side, all the force of his words would have availed
nothing, or at least would never have sufficed to enable him
to found a new Church. The Princes who helped to spread
his teaching and reformation saw the lands and privileges
of the Church falling into their lap, and what was even more,
the extension of their sphere of influence to the spiritual
domain where, so far, the Pope and the bishops had reigned
supreme.

Thus in his success those well versed in the conditions of
the times recognised for the most part only the working of
natural causes.

Luther, as all were aware, shortly after having been put
under the Ban was wont to say that the movement he had
begun was something so great and wonderful that it could
not but owe its success to the manifest intervention of God.
" It cannot be," he exclaimed in 1521, " that a man should
of himself be able to start such a work and carry it through."2
He was fond of saying he wished no earthly means to be

1 Above, vol. i., p. 45 ff.

2 Weim. ed., 8, p. 683 ; Erl. ed., 22, p. 53.

LUTHER'S GREATNESS 403

used for arriving at the goal. Yet, in this very statement of
1521, for instance, he refers " to the sermons and writings "
by which he had " begun " to disclose the Papists' " knavery
and trickery." His burning words indeed acted as a spark
flung on the inflammable material accumulating for so long.
Anyone aware of the condition of Germany and of the
artifices by which the author of the gigantic apostasy sought
to consolidate his position at Wittenberg by means of the
Court, and at the same time to excite the fanaticism of the
masses, would feel but little impressed by Luther's appeal to
the apparent simplicity of his writings and sermons, as being
out of all proportion to the unexampled success he attained.

He was indeed heard to say that he attributed everything
to the words and the divine power of Christ : " Look what
it has done in the few years that we have taught and written
such truths. How has the Papists' cloak shrunk and become
so short ! . . . What will it be when these words of Christ
have threshed with His Spirit for another two years?''1
These words were, however, spoken the year after the
publication of those fearfully violent writings : " On the
Popedom at Rome " (against Alvcld), " To the German
Nobility," " On the Babylonish Captivity," " On the
Freedom of a Christian Man " and " Against the Bulls of
End-Christ." When uttered, his seductive writing " On the
Monastic Vows " was already there to unbar the gates
through which crowds of doubtful helpers would flock to
join him.

Catholic polemics of that day, in order to demolish the
objection arising from the marvellous spread of Lutheran-
ism, set themselves to examine the relation between the
new dogmas and their dissemination. Luther's doctrine, as
they frequently pointed out, was bound to secure him a
large following.

In this particular it was easy enough to prove that it was
not merely the " greatness " of the man which drew such
crowds to him The persistent vaunting of the universal
priesthood, the right bestowed on all of judging of Scripture,
the abandoning of the outward and inward Word to the
feelings of the individual, the sweet preaching of a faith
which " no sin could harm," the denial of the merit of good
works, the assertion that, not they, but only faith was

1 Ib., p. 684=64.

404 LUTHER'S GREATNESS

required for salvation, and, not to speak of many other
points, his contemptuous and unjust strictures on the
Church and her doings, all this — human nature being what
it is — could not fail for a time to help the cause of the New
Evangel of freedom, and, under the conditions then prevail
ing, to assure it a real triumph.

This Evangel came upon Germany at a time when the
Church's life was in a state of decay, when the adequate
religious instruction of the young was neglected by the
Church, and when the dioceses were for the most part
governed by younger sons of princely or noble houses, who
were quite unfitted for their spiritual work. It is note
worthy that the defenders of the Church had very little
good to say of the bishops.1

Of the new preachers and promoters of Luther's Reforma
tion a large number was composed of apostate clergy and
escaped monks and nuns whom Luther had won over. It
was plain enough that it was no such " great and immortal "
work as he claimed, to have attracted such people to his
party thanks to theories which, while seeming to calm the
conscience, really flattered the senses, for instance, by what
he said on celibacy, vows and priestly ordination. " Do not
seek to deny that you are a man, with flesh and blood ;
hence leave God to judge between the valiant angel-like
heroes [those religious who were faithful to the Church] and
the sickly, despised sinners [whom they upbraided as
apostates].2 . . . Chastity is beyond healthy nature, let
alone sinful nature. . . . There is no enticement so bad as
these commands [of celibacy] and vows, forged by the devil
himself." Youthful religious were to be dragged out of their
monasteries as quickly as possible, and priests were to learn
that theirs was but a " Carnival ordination." " Holy Orders
are all jugglery and in God's sight they have no value."3

Hence contemporaries, considering events from the stand
point just described, must needs have told themselves that
Luther's success, unexpected and astounding as it was, could
not after all be laid down to the " greatness " of any one
single man.4

1 On the ecclesiastical and social disorders see above, vol. i. and ii.,
passim.

2 Weim. od., 10, 1, p. 707 ff. : Erl. ed., 102, p. 464 f. 3 Ib.

4 For Luther's strange idea that the rapid spread of his doctrine
was really a " miracle," see above, vol. iii., p. 156, etc.

LUTHER'S GREATNESS 405

What, moreover, must have been the thoughts of the
observer regarding the permanence of Luther's work who
lived to see the master's own Lutheranism falling to pieces,
according to the statements of his most zealous admirers,1
as soon as he was dead ? Luther himself almost seemed
ready to ring down the curtain on the premature termination
of the great tragedy of which he could not but despair.2

In the very year of Luther's death Cochlaeus passed in
review the havoc wrought in the Church, embodying his
observations in the work he had just finished and was to
publish three years later, viz. his " De Actis et Scriptis
Lutheri."

These pages seem still to tremble with the excitement of
the terrible period they describe. It is impressive to hear
this voice of the Catholic spokesman coming as it were from
Luther's tomb and telling of the devastation of the storm
raised by the Wittenberg professor. As Kawrerau says,
Cochlaeus himself could point to a life " which, year after
year, ever since 1521 had been devoted feverishly to the
ecclesiastical debates of the day in which he was so keenly
concerned and consumed in ceaseless controversy [with
Lutheranism]."3 The grey-headed scholar, " illuminated
and inspired as he was by the truest spirit of Christianity,"4
had once in 1533 declared : " Whatever I write now or at
any time against Luther, I write for the glory of God, the
service of the truth and the good of my neighbour. For I
believe firmly that Luther is a malicious liar, heretic and
rebel and I can find nothing but this in his books and in my
own conscience. ... I am not, however, bitter or hostile to
Luther personally, but merely to his wickedness and vices.
Were he to desist I would gladly go and fetch back so learned
a man from Rome or Compostella and give him my love
and my service."5

Cochlseus calls to mind first of all the course of public events in
Germany. At Ratisbon, where he was staying, the Diet of 1546

1 See, for instance, the passages from Aurifaber and Span^cnberg,
below, p. 416.

2 See above, vol. v., p. 393.

3 " Deutsche Literaturztng.," 1898, p. 1005.

4 M. Spahn, " J. Cochlaus," 1808, p. 90.

5 Cp. J. Schlecht, " Hist. Jahrb.," 19, 1898, p. 938, quoted from
Cochlaeus's " Vorrede zu Hertzog Georgs Entschuldigung," 1533.

406 LUTHER'S GREATNESS

was opened with great pomp by Charles V at the very time
Cochlaeus was penning the Preface to his work. He relates how
the same Kaiser had declared at the Diet of Worms in 1521 in
the edict against Luther that " his writings contain hardly any
thing but food for dissensions, schism, war, murder, robbery,
conflagrations, and a great apostasy of the Christians."1 " The
times are grave and perilous," so his warning had run : " Oh, that
they may not mean the disgrace of our country ! "2 Now, how
ever, Cochlaeus sees with grief that " Luther has brought nearly all
Germany into shame and confusion." " Our fatherland has lost
all its former beauty," he exclaims, " and its Imperial power is
shattered." He trembles at the sight of the dangers within and
without. 3

" The mischief caused by Luther's revolt is so great that it is
out of comparison worse than the effects of even the most unhappy
war. Never indeed in the whole of history have the miseries of
war caused such injury to Christendom as the blows dealt us by
this heresy." In its consequences it was worse than the triumphal
progress of Arianism in early Christian times. He instances the
Peasant Rebellion and the frightful destruction that followed in
its wake ; also the machinations of political alliances, hostile
alike to the Church and the State, the loosening of the common
bonds that unite the Christian peoples, and the decline of the
authority of the rulers, which was " attacked and dragged in the
mire by Luther and thus rendered contemptible in the eyes of the
masses."4

Even more loudly does he bewail the ruin of so many immortal
souls ; owing to Luther, countless numbers have been torn from
the bosom of the Mother Church, founded by Christ, and set on
the road to eternal damnation. No tears could suffice to bewail
this the greatest of all misfortunes. Piety has declined every
where and the new preaching of faith alone has lamed the practice
of good works. " From every class and calling the former zeal
for good works has fled." He also ruthlessly describes the effect
of Luther's doctrines and example 011 Catholics. " The clergy
no longer do their duty in celebrating the Sacrifice of the Mass
and reciting the Church's office and Hours ; to the monks and
nuns their Rule is no longer as sacred as it used to be. The
charity of the rich, the rulers, and the great has dried up, the
people no longer flock to divine worship, their respect for the
priesthood, their benevolence and pity for the poor are coining
to an end. Discipline and decorum are tottering everywhere and
have fared worst of all in our family life. We see about us a
dissolute younger generation, which, owing to Luther's suggestions
and his constant attacks on all authority ecclesiastical and
secular, has cast off all shame and restraint. On anyone ad
monishing them they retort with a falsely interpreted Bible text,

1 "De Actis," etc., Moguntiae, 1549, Preface.

2 Letter to Pirkheimer, Sep. 6, 1525. Quoted by Schlecht,
" Jahrb.," ib.

3 " De Actis," etc., p. 318. 4 Preface.

LUTHERAN QUARRELS 407

an invention of pure wantonness, such as ' increase and multiply,"
etc. So far have things already gone that virginity and continence
have become a matter of disgrace and suspicion." In even
darker colours does he paint the sad picture of the moral decline
among the Protestants : Morals are trampled under foot, reverence
and fear of God have been extinguished, obedience has become a
byword, boldness in sinning gains the upper hand and " freedom "
of the worst kind reigns supreme. *

Full of grief he comes at last to speak of the man who was
responsible for all this misery. Bugenhagen had boasted of
Luther's prophecy that, if in life he had been the Papacy's plague,
in death he would be its death. But the Papacy still lives and
will continue to live because Christ's promise stands. " Luther,
however, was the plague of our Germany during his lifetime . . .
and, alive or dead, he was his own plague and destruction."2

" Woe," so he concludes, " to his godless panegyrists who call
evil good and good evil, and confuse darkness with light, and
light with darkness ! "a

3. Luther's Fate in the First Struggles for his
Spiritual Heritage

Luther's reputation was to suffer a sudden and tragic blow
owing to the success of the Imperial arms in the War of
Schmalkalden.

Hardly had the grave closed over him than, in the
following year, after the battle of Miihlheim on April 24,
1547, won with the assistance of Duke Maurice of Saxony,
the Kaiser's troops entered Wittenberg. A notable change
took place in the public position of Lutheranism when the
vanquished Elector, Johann Frederick, was forced to resign
his electoral dignity in favour of Maurice and to follow the
Emperor as a captive. His abdication and the surrender of
his fortresses to the Emperor was signed by him on May 19
in Luther's own city of Wittenberg. The Landgrave of
Hesse too found himself forced at Halle to submit un
conditionally to the overlords of the Empire and to sec
Duke Henry of Brunswick released from captivity and
honoured by the Emperor in the same city.

The dreaded Schmalkalden League, Luther's shield and
protection for so many years, was, so to speak, annihilated
over night.

Luther's theological friends were also made to feel the
consequences. Flacius, after the taking of Wittenberg, fled

1 Ib. z " De Actis," p. 317. 3 " De Actis," p. 318.

408 LUTHERAN QUARRELS

for a time to Brunswick. George Major, Luther's intimate
friend and associate, also escaped, but returned later.
Amsdorf was obliged to give up the bishopric of Naumburg
of which he had assumed possession, hand it over to the
lawful Bishop Julius von Pllug, and hasten to Magdeburg,
the new stronghold of the Lutheran spirit.

It is true that Luther's cause soon recovered, at least
politically speaking, from the defeat it had suffered in the
War of Schmalkalden ; the wounds inflicted on it in the
theological quarrels among themselves of its own repre
sentatives were, however, more deep and lasting. Here
Luther's prediction was indeed fulfilled to the letter, viz.
that his pupils would be the ruin of his doctrines.

The Osiandric, Majorite, Adiaphoristic and Synergislic
Controversies

The theological warfare which followed on Luther's
decease opened with the Osiandric controversy which arose
from the modifications of Luther's idea of justification
introduced subsequent to 1549 by Andreas Osiander, pastor
and professor of theology at Konigsberg. After Osiander's
death in 1552 the struggle was carried on by the Court
preacher Johann Funk who held like views. Johann Brcnz
also defended Osiander's opinion, whereas Melanchthon,
Flacius Illyricus, Johann JSpinus, Joachim Westphal,
Joachim Morlin and others were opposed to it. Duke Albert
of Prussia was for a long time a patron of Osiander's doctrine,
but was persuaded later to alter his views, and his Court
preacher Funk did likewise. The old Lutherans, however,
continued the struggle against Funk and, in 1566, owing to
the charges brought against him by the Estates of abusing
his position and of having violently championed " heretical
doctrines," he was beheaded.1 Osiander, however, the
author of this new " heresy," had himself been by no means
wanting in Lutheran zeal where Catholics were concerned.
Already in 1549 he wrote a tract against the Interim
entitled : "On the new Idol and Antichrist at Babel," in
which he lashed those who " were sneaking back to Anti
christ under cover of the Interim."

The second, or Majorite controversy broke out at Witten
berg itself, and like the ones which followed was called forth

1 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " Engl. Trans, vii., p. 304.

LUTHERAN QUARRELS 409

by the opposition of the Lutheran zealots to any Melanch-
thonian modifications of Luther's doctrines. George Major,
professor at Wittenberg, and subsequently Superintendent
at Eisleben, backed by Justus Menius, Superintendent at
Gotha, had the courage to declare that works were necessary
for salvation, and that, without works, no one could be
saved. For this he and Menius were branded as " heretics "
by Flacius Illyricus, Nicholas Amsdorf, Johann Wigand,
Joachim Morlin and Alexius Praetorius. It was in the midst
of this passionate wrangle, which deeply agitated the ranks
of the preachers and disturbed the congregations, that
Amsdorf, with a determination and defiance equal to
Luther's own went to the extremes of publishing his tract
entitled " That the proposition l good works arc harmful to
salvation,' is a sound and Christian one."1 Flacius brought
a writing against Major to a close with the pious wish that
Christ would speedily crush the head of the serpent. Major,
the confidant of Luther whom he had once despatched to
attend the religious Conference at Ratisbon, was now obliged
to give in ; he made a shameful recantation. Menius, how
ever, was denounced to the preachers and people as a
" Papist," and, in spite of his weak compliance, was unable
to maintain his position against the inquisition put into
motion by the higher powers. Although he resigned his
office as Visitor and submitted patiently to a reprimand from
the Court, he was obliged to leave the land ; he besought
the sovereign in vain for protection against his theological
adversaries and freedom to communicate with the " dear
gentlemen " at Wittenberg. The Town Council of Gotha
was forbidden to give him a testimonial to the purity
of his doctrine, and he himself, in spite of his protest that he
was as much heir to Luther's doctrine as Flacius, was
summoned to take his trial before a sort of religious Synod
at Eisenach in 155G, which also ousted him from his Super-
intendency. "He died on Aug. 11, 1558, from the effects
of what he had undergone."2

1 See above, vol. iv., p. 475. Characteristic of Amsdorf is his assur
ance in the Preface to vol. i. of the Jena ed. of Luther's works (1555),
that Luther, whose books "could not be paid for with all the world's
goods and gold," was especially deserving of praise because he had
eradicated " the worst and most pernicious heresy that had ever
appeared on earth, viz. that good works are necessary for salvation."

2 Kawerau, " RE. f. prot. Th."3, Art. " Menius."

410 LUTHERAN QUARRELS

In the third great controversy, the Adiaphoristic, Flacius
Illyrieus behaved with great violence, indeed his extreme
Lutheran views were the cause of the quarrel which in itself
well illustrates the pettiness and acrimony of those con
cerned in it. The question under dispute was whether
certain " indifferent matters " (a3id</>opa) sanctioned in the
Augsburg Interim of 1547 might be allowed in Protestant
circles even though Luther during his lifetime had frowned
on them. Under the Elector Maurice the theologians and
Estates of the Saxon Electorate had answered in the affirma
tive. This answer embodied in the so-called " Leipzig
Interim," was firmly contradicted by Flacius. It is true
that what was in question was not only ceremonies, images,
hymns and such-like external things but also the rites of
Confirmation and Extreme Unction, and, in a certain sense,
the use of Penance, the celebration of a kind of Mass and the
veneration of Saints. Flacius was supported by Nicholas
Gallus, Johann Wigand, Nicholas Amsdorf, Joachim
Westphal, Caspar Aquila, Johann Aurifaber, Anton Otto
and Matthseus Judex. These poured forth a stream of
angry tracts against the opposite party, the Witten-
bergers, who, however, defended themselves with a will, viz.
against Melanchthon, Bugenhagen, George Major, and Paul
Eber, and their friends elsewhere, such as the Provost of
Magdeburg and Meissen, Prince George of Anhalt, Bernard
Ziegler and Johann Pfeffinger of Leipsig, Justus Menius of
Gotha, etc. Even the use of lights on the altar and of
surplices were to these zealots " Popish abominations " and
a sign of the abandoning of all that Luther had won ; they
even complained, though untruly, that the Wittenberg
theologians no longer declared the Pope to be Antichrist.1
Bugenhagen, Luther's right hand man at Wittenberg, had
to hear himself charged by Flacius, Amsdorf and Gallus with
having denied and falsified Luther's doctrines and with teach
ing something not far short of Popery. These Adiaphorists,
wrote Amsdorf, " in the name and under the semblance of the
Word of God, seek to persuade us to worship the Antichrist

'J- The only one of all the " reformers " who did not regard the Pope
as Antichrist was, according to R. Mumm (" Die Polemik des Martin
Chemnitz gegen das Konzil von Trient," Part I., p. 41), the Calvinist
theologian Zanchi. The latter, however, protested against such a
*' calumny," as he called it ; see Paulus, against Mumm, in the
'k Theolog. Revue," 1906, p. 17.

LUTHERAN QUARRELS 411

at Rome, the Whore of Babylon and the Beast on which she
is seated (Apoc. xvii.)." Such dangerous men he brands as
" belly servers " " who seek to make terms with the world."
He himself on the other hand was ready to meet the con
tempt of the world for the falling off in the number of
Luther's true followers, hence on the title-page of the new
edition of Luther's works, which he commenced when the
quarrel was at its height (1555), he printed the consoling
verses : " Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased the
Father to give you a Kingdom " (Luke xii. 32), and " In
the world you shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer,
I have overcome the world " (John xvi. 33). 1 Towards the
end of the Preface he consoles those who shared his way of
looking at things, and, as Luther had done before, he alludes
to the near end of the world, when everything would be
righted.

At the time when the private judgment Luther had
preached was thus bearing fruit we hear Melanchthon
groaning : " You see how many teachers are fighting
against us in our own Churches ; every day new foes spring
up, as it were, from the blood of the Titans]; gladly would
I leave these regions, nay, shake off my mortal coil, to
escape the fury of such men."2 Melanchthon too was
accused of indirectly promoting Popery. An obstinate
opponent of his was that very Johann Aurifaber who had
been present at Luther's death and who subsequently
published the Table-Talk. Melanchthon included him in
1550 among the " unlearned fanatics, men filled with
furious hate, lickspittles at the Court who seek to curry
favour with the populace," and with whom it was impossible
to come to any understanding.3 Aurifaber, like many others
of his party, was dismissed from his post as Court preacher
at Weimar, and, subsequently, when pastor at Erfurt, was
excommunicated on account of his teaching, particularly on
original sin. His opponents he persisted in charging with
Popery.

Against any relapse into Popery the Lutherans were well
guarded since 1555, by the Religious Peace of Augsburg and
its principle : " Cuius regio, illius et religio." This, however,

1 " Luthers Werke," Jena ed., vol. i., 1555.

2 To Ehrhard Schnepf, Nov. 10, 1553, " Corp. ref.," 8, p. 171.

3 " Corp. ref.," 8, p. 798.

412 LUTHERAN QUARRELS

produced no inward unity, rather the opposite. The war
among the theologians on account of the " adiaphora " still
went on in the Protestant camp. The hopes entertained of
the Protestant Convention at Coswig (1556) suffered ship
wreck owing to Melanchthon's disinclination to come to
terms. Nor did the Conference at Altenburg (1568) settle
things. It was not until 1577-1580 that the formulas of
Concord established a " modus vivendi " by leaving to each
individual Church the decision about the "adiaphora."
Flacius himself was compelled to leave Wittenberg early in
the controversy. He went to Magdeburg, but fell into
disgrace on account of his tendency to insist on the Church's
independence and had to go into exile to Ratisbon, Ant
werp, Frankfurt, Strasburg, wandering about from place to
place until, at last, he, Luther's most ardent champion, died
in want and poverty at Frankfurt-on-the-Main (1575).

With the Synergistic controversy the name of Flacius is
likewise very closely linked.

Here, however, the question on which minds were divided
was a vital one. Many refused to accept Luther's rigid
doctrine that, in Justification, the Holy Ghost worked on
man as on a senseless block. Johann Pfeffinger of Leipsig
agreed with Melanchthon in assuming some sort of co
operation (" synergia ") of the human will. In this he had
the Leipsig Interim on his side ; eventually Victorinus
Strigel of Jena, George Major, Paul Eber, Christian Lasius
and others also embraced this view. Against them stood
the zealots like Flacius and Amsdorf, the latter of whom
boldly attacked Pfeffinger 's " De libertate voluntatis " and
insisted on the unfreedom of the will. Certain of the theo
logians of Jena also distinguished themselves by their oppo
sition to the Synergists.

Flacius lllyricus went to great extremes in his antagonism to
JSynergism. He asserted that man was powerless by means of
free will to effect anything in the matter of his salvation because
kt original sin was a ' substance ' for otherwise holiness too would
not be a ' substance ' " ; the soul was by nature a mirror or
image of Satan ; it was itself original sin, and original sin was
no mere * accident.' It was impossible for Luther's doctrine to
be carried to its legitimate conclusion more ruthlessly than in
this theory of Flacius. " It was utter demonism, was this
doctrine of the substantial bedevilment of human nature."1 At

1 Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 14, p. 157.

LUTHERAN QUARRELS 413

this point, however, Luther's true friends drew back : Johann
Wigand and Tilman Hesshus, professors at Jena, withstood
Flacius, arguing that he was a traitor to Lutheranism and that
his teaching was Manichaean. Like some others Cyriacus Spangen-
berg, then Dean of Mansfeld, was accused of favouring Flacius
and of teaching that Satan had created man, that sin was baptised,
and that pregnant women bore within them young devils. As
was usual in such controversies, the people took an active share
in the quarrel.

When the Elector August of Saxony assumed the government
of the Duchy of Saxony, Hesshus and Wigand were deprived of
their offices and driven from the land. Nine Superintendents
and 102 preachers lost their posts at the same time. Hesshus
had already tasted exile as pastor of Magdeburg, when in 1562
the Town Council expelled him from the town with his wife
and child on account of his too emphatic enforcement of the
strictest Lutheranism.

Spangenberg too had to flee when the administrator of Madge-
burg called in the troops against the Flacian preachers. Cruel
measures were used to force the burghers to accept the doctrine
professed by the governor ; the bodies of relatives of the Count
of Mansfeld were even exhumed and reinterred in places un
tainted with " substantialist error."

Spangenberg 's fate was that of many faithful Lutherans.

Having made his escape to Thuringia disguised as a midwife
he there accepted a position as pastor, but was again driven out
in 1590 owing to the rigid views on original sin he had imbibed
from Luther. From that time he lived by his pen until his death
at Strasburg in 1604. He declared that he was suffering on
behalf of the articles on sin and righteousness, but that he was
determined to remain " a staunch old disciple of Luther's." The
behaviour of the Wittenberg theologians was a source of great
grief to Spangenberg : They have not only fallen away from
Luther's doctrine in ten or twelve articles, but also speak of him
in the most unseemly manner : " They call Luther a ' phil-
auticu*,' i.e. a man who thinks highly of no one but himself, and
whom nothing pleases but what he has himself said or done ;
item, a ' philonisticus ' and * eristicus,' a quarrelsome fellow who
always insisted he was in the right, believing no good of anyone,
yielding to no one, only seeking his own honour and unable to
endure that anyone else should be highly thought of." " His
books [so they say] contain things that are very Manichaean, and
others that resemble the old heresies."1

Nor was Spangenberg doing an injustice to the Wittenberg
professors when he charged them with having thrown
Luther over.

1 " Theander Lutherus, Vom werthen Gottes Manne D.M. Luther "
12.

414 CRYPTOCALVINISM

Cryptocalvinism

At the time when Flacianism was being suppressed by
force, a trend of opinion known as Cryptocalvinism had the
upper hand in the Saxon Electorate where it was causing
grave troubles. Such was the name given to the gradual
leavening of the pure Lutheran doctrine with elements
derived from Calvinism. In other Protestant districts on
German soil Calvinism took root openly, and cither sup
planted Luther's teaching, or prevented its springing up.
This was the case in the Palatinate, where the Elector
Frederick III exerted his influence in favour of Calvinism
with the help of the Calvinistic professors of Heidelberg
Caspar Olevian and Zacharias Ursinus. The Elector him
self told his son-in-law Johann Frederick of Saxony, that
though for more than forty years the " pure doctrine " of
the Evangel and the holy Word of God had been proclaimed,
" little amendment of life had followed," and, in ''excessive
eating and drinking, gambling, avarice, immorality, envy
and hatred we almost outdo the Papists."1 He also said
that it was not merely the lack of morality in Lutheranism
that prejudiced him against it, but that he had decided to
introduce Calvinism into his land because he had discovered
in Luther's writings many errors and contradictions which
he must remove, particularly in his views on the " bodily
presence of Christ " in the Sacrament of the Altar.2

The spirit of criticism which Luther had let loose in the Saxon
Electorate grew among some of the Cryptocalvinists into sceptic
ism, though they boasted of being great admirers of Luther. This
scepticism was first directed against the mystery of mysteries.
Luther's own uncertainty regarding the Sacrament of the Altar,
his halt mid-way, and his strange theory of the ubiquity of Christ,
were in themselves a challenge. Around Melanchthon there
grouped themselves at Wittenberg and Leipsig men, who, by a
prudent introduction of the Calvinistic view of the Supper
according to which Christ is only received spiritually, sought to
question at the same time two of Luther's pet dogmas, viz. the

1 A. Kluckhohn, " Brief e Friedrich des Frommen, Kurfiirsten von
der Pfalz," 1, p. 478.

2 Ib., p. 587. Of Luther's doctrine of the ubiquity of Christ's
human nature the Prince says, " it degrades the manhood of Christ and
makes it something so intangible that it exists in all stones, wood,
leaves, grass, apples, pears and in all that lives, also in the stinking
swine and, as someone had admitted to the old Landgrave, in the great
wine- tun at Stuttgart."

CRYPTOCALVINISM 415

indwelling of Christ in the Bread at the moment of reception
(Impanation) and the ubiquitous albeit spiritualised bodily
presence of Christ. Hardly six years had elapsed since Luther's
death when the Hamburg preacher, Joachim Westphal, strove to
set up a barrier against the threatening inroad of Crypto-
calvinism in his " Farrago Opinionum de Ccena Domini" (1552).
The Elector August, who assumed the reigns of government in the
Saxon Electorate (1553-1586), for quite twenty years of his reign
was entirely committed to Cryptocalvimsm. Among the theo
logians and Court officials who were responsible for his attitude
were, particularly, Melanchthon's son-in-law, Caspar Peucer,
Court physician to the Elector, the Court preacher Christian
Schutz, Johann Stossel, Superintendent of Pirna and Privy
Councillor Georg Craco, the most influential person in the
government of the Saxon Electorate. A " Corpus doctrince
Philippicum " was drawn up in 1560 from Melanchthon's writings
by these so-called " Philippists." In 1571 a Catechism appeared,
which, like the " Corpus " had the Elector's approval. The
doctrine it contained was endorsed by an assembly of theo
logians at Dresden in the same year, and it was intended to
enforce it as the true faith throughout the land.

As might have been expected, the opposition of the " Gnesio-
lutherans " against these doings in the Saxon Electorate, the
original home of Lutheranism, was very strong.

Protests were registered by Martin Chemnitz, the " aristarch
of Brunswick " as the opposite party called him, and by the Jena
theologians, as, for instance, Wigand, Hesshus, Johann Frederick
Ccelestinus and Timotheus Kirchner. At Jena the new system
was branded as a " fresh incursion of devilish spirit " and, in a
" Warning " against the Wittenbergers, it was stated : " They
want to make an end of Luther, that is to say, of his doctrine, and
at the same time to appear innocent of so doing."1 Similarly
in the following year, 1572, a writing entitled " Von den Fall-
stricken " declared : " They trample Luther's doctrine under
foot, laugh at it, ridicule it and anathematise it in the most
scandalous manner," etc.2 The Jena divines, so they asserted,
were alone in having the true unalloyed doctrine which they were
anxious to keep free from all the extravagances and errors of the
Pope, the Turks, blasphemers of the Sacrament, Schwenckfeldians,
Servetians, Arians, Antinomians, Interimists, Adiaphorists,
Synergists, Majorites, Enthusiasts, Anabaptists, Manichceans and
other sects. 3

1 Janssen, ib., 8, 175. 2 Janssen, ib., p. 176.

3 Janssen, ib., p. 176 f. Cp. the 1571 inscription under Luther's
memorial at Jena where the Latin verses on the founder of the
University run as follows :

" Esset ut hcec sanctce doctrince strenue custos
Condidit ad Sales pulcra fluenta scholam
Oit-cp- tumidos docto confunderet ore sophist as,
Nee sincret fahis dogmata vcra premi,
Sed quia mox cptcift mi nidi trahet rrr/ra rninam,
Pullutot errorum nunc nwnerosa seges, etc."

416 CRYPTOCALVINISM

The divergencies were so considerable and far-reaching, and
the falling away from Luther's doctrine so great, that Aurifaber,
who boasted of having closed the eyes of his immortal master and
of being soaked in his spirit, prefaced as follows the collection of
the Table-Talk, which he gave to the world in 1566 : " His
doctrine is now so despised, and, in the German lands men have
become so tired, weary and sick of it, that they no longer care to
hear his name mentioned, nor do they much esteem the testimony
of his books. It has come about that, if one wishes to find
Dr. Martin Luther's doctrine pure and unfalsified anywhere in
the German lands, one has to put on strong spectacles and look
very closely ; this is a dreadful thing to learn." Aurifaber has
this sole consolation, viz. that Luther, because he had foreseen
this state of things, had proved himself a " true prophet."1

Another writer speaks in the following terms of the decay of
Luther's doctrines and the utter contempt for his person : The
endless benefits Luther brought to Germany — of these the
author enumerates eighteen — those who now profess the Evangel
treat with the " most shocking and gruesome unthank," doing so
not merely by their " evil life " but by " scorning, decrying and
condemning " both his benefits and his faith. People refuse any
longer to follow the great teacher in his chief doctrines " about the
Law and the true knowledge of sin," " true justice," " the dis
tinction between Law and Gospel," and about the holy sacra
ments. " This worthy sendsman of God " meets with " shameful
contempt," nay, with something worse than contempt, seeing
that, " to boot, he is abused, reviled and defamed by most people,"
which " is all the more hard in that not only his person but also
the wholesome doctrine and divine truth revealed to us by
Luther the man of God, is too often contemptuously rejected by
the greater number." The author, in his concern, also fears that
as people were also bent on introducing changes in the language
" in a few years not much will be left of Luther's pure German
speech."8

At the Court at Dresden, however, the opposition to
the Cryptocalvinism described above gradually gathered
strength. Finally the Elector August, too, was won over,
partly on political, partly on theological grounds. As early
as 1573 August declared : "It would not take much to make
him send all the rogues to the devil,"3 and, on another
occasion that, " for the sake of three persons he would not
expose his lands to the harm wrought by the Sacramen-
tarians."4 When at last an unmistakably Calvinistic

1 " Tischreden," Eisleben, 1566, Preface.

2 Spangenberg, " Theander Lutherus," Preface.

3 V. E. Loscher, " Ausfiihrliche Historia motuum zwischen den
Evangelisch-Lutherischen und reformierten," 32, 1723-1724, p. 158.

4 H. Heppe, " Gesch. des deutsohen Prot, in den Jahren 1555-1581,"
2, Marburg, 1852, ff., p. 419 f.

CRYPTOCALVINISM 417

writing by Joachim Curseus on the Supper was published by
a Leipzig printer, known to be well disposed to the Witten-
berger party, the fury of the Elector broke loose and he
declared at a meeting at Torgau " The venomous plant must
now be torn up by the roots."1 In his name the so-called
Articles of Torgau denoting more or less a return to Luther's
doctrines were drawn up by an ecclesiastical court. All the
theologians who refused to subscribe to them were to be
" arrested." On this the Leipzig theologians all signed the
Articles, that they agreed in their hearts to all the things
contained in Luther's writings including his controversial
writings against the Heavenly Prophets and his " Kurtz
Bekentnis " on the Supper.2 Among the many Crypto-
calvinists who submitted without any protest was Nicholas
Selnecker, the editor of Luther's Table-Talk. In matters of
faith he followed the bidding of the secular authorities, and
on one occasion, wrote to the Elector that " he would gladly
crawl on hands and knees to Dresden only to escape the
suspicion which had been cast on him."3

Among the Wittenbergers, on the other hand, four theo
logians refused their assent : " Luther's books," they said,
" were not positive ; sometimes he wrote one way, some
times another ; besides which there were dirty spots and
objectionable things in his controversial writings."4 Such
was the opinion of Widebram, Pezel, Moller and, particularly,
Caspar Cruciger. The latter, a personal friend of Luther's,
called the Articles of Torgau " a medley of all sorts of things
which Luther himself, had he been alive, would not have
signed." His fate like that of the three others was removal
from his office and banishment from the country.

Of the four former favourites at Court Stossel the Superin
tendent though he craved pardon was kept a prisoner until
his death ; the Court-preacher Schtitz, in spite of his promise
to hold his tongue, was shut up in prison for twelve years ;
the Privy Councillor Craco was flung into the filthiest
dungeon of the Pleissenburg at Leipzig, tortured on the

1 L. Hutter, " Concordia concors," Wittenbergae, 1614, c. 8,
R. Calinich, " Kampf und Untergang des Melanchthonismus," Leipzig.
1866, p. 128 ff.

2 Janssen, "Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 8, p. 189 f.

3 G. J. Planck, " Gesch. der Entstehung, usw., dps prot. Lehrbegriffs,
vol. v., Part 2, Leipzig. 1781 ff., p. 600 f.

4 Janssen, ib., p. 190.

vr— 2 s

418 CRYPTOCALVINISM

rack for four hours and died with mangled limbs on a
miserable layer of straw (March 16, 1575). l Finally Peucer,
professor of medicine and history, who, owing to his influence,
had once controlled the University, because he declared he
would not " abjure the doctrine of the Sacrament that had
been rooted in his heart for thirty-three years and adopt
Luther's instead," was left pining in a damp, dirty dungeon
in the Pleissenburg and was constantly harried with injunc
tions " to desist from his devilish errors " and " not to fancy
himself wiser and more learned than His Highness the Elector
and his distinguished theologians, who had also searched
into and pondered over this Article [of the Sacrament]."2
He continued to languish in prison, after the death of his
wife, Magdalene, Melanchthon's daughter, sorrowing over
his motherless children, until after wellnigh twelve years of
captivity he was released at the instance of a prince. " The
behaviour of the Elector and Electress and their advisers
towards him gives us a glimpse into an abyss of injustice,
brutality and malice made all the more revolting by the
hypocritical religious cant and pretended zeal for the Church
under which they were disguised. In spite of all the
attempts made of old as well as later to excuse the course
of the so-called cryptocalvinistic controversies, it remains —
especially the case of Peucer — one of the darkest pages in
the annals of the Lutheran Church and of civilisation in the
16th Century."3

But the intolerance displayed by orthodoxy in that
struggle had been taught it by Luther. As has been shown
already, he had urged that, whoever advocated blasphemous
articles, even if not guilty of sedition, should be put to death
by the authorities ; the sovereign must take care that
" there is but one religion in each place " ; above all, such
was the opinion of his friends, — the sovereign should " put
a Christian bit in the mouth of all the clergy."4

1 Ib., p. 192. 2 Ib., p. 193.

3 Wagenmann, Art. " Peucer," " Allg. Deutsche Biographie," 25,
p. 555. An attempt has been made of recent years to exonerate Peucer
from the charge of pure Calvinism. This may possibly prove successful,
but his guilt lay in the fact that, " under the semblance of Lutheranism,
he abandoned Luther's Christology and his doctrine of the Supper and
advocated something so closely resembling Calvinism that it was easily
mistaken for it." Kawerau, " RE. f. prot. Th.,"3 Art. " Peucer."

* See above, vol. v., p 592 f.

CRYPTOCALVINISM 419

The so-called formula of concord (1580)

Owing partly to the wish of the secular authorities for
some clearer rule, partly to the sight of the confusion in
doctrine and the bad effects of the quarrels on faith, there
arose a widespread desire for greater unity based on some
new and thoroughly Lutheran formulary.

The Confession of Augsburg and the Apologia were found
insufficient ; they contained no decisions on the countless
controversies which had since sprung up. Thus it came
about that " one German province and town after another
attempted to satisfy its desire for unity of doctrine by means
of a confession of faith of its own. . . . This in itself, in view
of the dismemberment of Germany and the attitude of the
Emperor towards the reformation, would necessarily have
resulted in a splitting up of the Lutheran Church into count
less sects unless some means was found of counteracting
individualism and of uniting the Lutherans in one body."1

It was, however, the politicians, who, in their own
interests, were the chief promoters of union.

Elector August of Saxony wishful of achieving the desired
end " by means of a princely dictum " led the way in 1576
with the so-called Book of Torgau.

This work was drawn up by the theologians Jakob
Andrese, Martin Chemnitz, David Chytraeus, Andreas
Musculus and Wolfgang Korner. The Book of Torgau was
subsequently revised by Caspar Selnecker and reissued
under the title of the Book of Bergen (1577). It was hoped
that it would become the theological statute-book for all
the Protestant Churches ; the Protestant Estates of the
Empire were to accept it and it was proposed by the theo
logians that all the Lutheran preachers and school-teachers
should be required to give their assent to it."2

Selnecker supported this attempt by referring to the
Council of Trent which had been successfully concluded in
1563. They ought, so he said, at last to draw up a " common
body of doctrine " as an " evangelical counterblast to the
damnable " conciliabulum of Trent " ; he adds frankly
that this was essential, " in order to check the corruption of

1 J. A. Dorner, ** Gesch, der prot. Th.," (" Gesch. der Wissen-
schaften in Deutschland," vol. v.), Munich, 1867, p. 370 f.

2 Jansaen, ib. (Engl, Trans.) 8, p. 406.

420 CRYPTOCALVINISM

morals amongst the Evangelical people which was growing
worse and worse " ; at the same time he wished to see " a
united front against the idolatrous Popedom and its devilish
satellites the Jesuits, with all their verminous following."1

Hopes of preserving Luther's work by means of the new
Formula had risen high since Frederick, the zealous Calvin-
istic Elector of the Palatinate, had been called away by
death in Oct., 1576 ; his successor, the Elector Louis
held Lutheran views and was determined to make a stand
for Luthcranism.

In spite, however, of the latter's patronage, and notwith
standing the efforts of the Electors of Saxony and Branden
burg, the Formula, as Louis of the Palatinate sorrowfully
admitted, was not approved by even one-half of the
Protestant Princes and townships. One of the strongest
objectors was Landgrave William of Hesse. He did not
hesitate to abuse Luther's memory in the rudest language,
and asserted that the latter had written " contradictory
things."2

The Unionists, not satisfied with their partial success,
published on June 25, 1580, the " Formula Concordice"
consisting of an " Epitome " and a " Solida declaration This
document occupies an important place in the history of
Luther anism.

The doctrines of original sin, unfreedom, justification, the
Supper, the ubiquity of Christ and of the " communicatio
idiomatum " were taken as they had been by Luther,
though they are often stated with deliberate ambiguity.
Thrusts at Melanchthon, not to speak of Calvin, are found
more particularly in the " Declaration

The permanent rift with Calvinism was as strongly
emphasised, as that with the Papacy. One of the proposi
tions taken from the Articles of Schmalkalden ran : " All

1 Cp. " Beitrage zur evangel. Concordie," " Festschrift," etc., by
Chr. G., no place, 1717, p. 42 f. Janssen, ib., p. 413.

2 The Landgrave demanded, e.g. that it should be pointed out to
him where in Holy Scripture it was stated that the Body of Christ was
not in heaven, that the Virgin Mary did not bring forth like another
woman, or that the human nature of Christ was everywhere; "all
these are new-fangled dogmas, let them smear and daub them with
Luther's excrement as much as they please " ; " the poor old spoon
bill goose did not know what he was writing about." Report of the
envoys, in L. Hutter, " Concordia concors," 1614, p. 215*3. Janssen
ib., p. 420 f .

CRYPTOCALVINISM 421

Christians ought to shun the Pope and his members and
followers as the kingdom of Antichrist, and execrate it as
Christ has commanded."1

The cement, however, which was to bind together the
antagonistic Lutheran views and schools was not very
durable. The fact that " Melanchthon's memory had been
completely blotted out,"2 or that the Pope had been con
demned afresh, did not suffice to bring people together,
nor did much good come of the smoothing over, toning
down and evasions to which it had been necessary to have
recourse in the work in order to arrive at a written basis of
outward unity. Over and above all this it became known
that the Protestant Estates were at liberty to add printed
prefaces of their own to the Concord, in which they might,
if they chose, set forth their own theological position, and
thus interpret as they liked the text of the Concord, so long
as they did not interfere with the text itself.3 It was also
known that the father of the whole scheme, Jakob Andreae,
Inspector General of the churches of Saxony, had quite
openly made of the acceptance of the Formula a pure
formality and had told the Nurembergers who showed signs
of antipathy that all that was required was their signature,
and that this would not prevent their being and remaining
of the same opinion as before."4

The authors of the Concord, however, displayed such
mutual distrust, nay hatred of each other, as greatly to
obscure even the origin of the Concord and to raise but
scant hopes of its future success. Andrea? bewailed
Selnecker's '* diabolical tricks " ; he was very well aware
that the latter would be delighted were he (Andreae) strung
up on the gallows. Selnecker, on the other hand, complained
loudly of Andreae as a dishonest, egotistical man ; he
accused Andreae of calling him : " a damned rascal, a good-
for-nothing scoundrel, an arch- villain and a hellish thief."5
Andreae was equally severe in his censure of the church-
councillors and theologians for the part they took in the
matrimonial questions : " After a theologian had dealt with
marriage cases two years in the Consistory," he said, " he

1 " Symbol. Biicher,"10 ed. Miiller-Kolde, p. 702.

2 Heppe, " Gesch. des Prot.," 3, p. 1 lt>.
;3 76., 4, p. 150. Janssen, ib., p. 419.

4 Heppe, ib., 3, p. 299 ff. Jansseri, ib., p. 429.

5 Janssen, ib., p. 414 £.

422 CRYPTOCALVINISM

would by that time be well fitted to be appointed keeper of a
brothel." l We hear an echo of Luther in the coarse language
his followers were in the habit of using against each other.

In spite of all this the Concord constitutes the greatest
and most important step ever taken by Lutheranism to
define its position. The year 1580 gave to the Lutheran
Churches a certain definite status, though, among the
theologians, the controversies continued to rage as before.

The Concord itself, the supposed new palladium, became
a theological bone of contention. The following years were
taken up with wild quarrels about the Formula of Concord.
At Strasburg alone in three years the different parties
hurled against each other approximately forty screeds, full
of vulgar abuse, and the literary feuds had their aftermath
in the streets in the shape of hand-to-hand scuffles between
the students and the burghers. Even at Wittenberg the
quarrels went on.

The Calvinistie Count Palatine, Johann Casimir, notorious
for his bloody deeds on behalf of the French Huguenots,
instructed one of his theologians, Zacharias Ursinus, to
draw up the so-called " Neustadt Admonition " in which the
adherents of the Concord were accused of " making an idol of
Luther " ; it was a mere farce when the Concord professed to
subordinate his books to Holy Scripture, because in reality
they were exalted into a rule of faith and treated as the
standard of doctrine ; all subscribers to the Augsburg Con
fession were wont without exception to appeal to these
writings whatever their opinions were ; as a matter of fact,
owing to the errors, exaggerations and contradictions they
contained it was possible to quote passages from Luther's
writings in support of almost anything. His controversial
works, above all, had no claim to any authority, though it
was to these that the followers of the Concord preferred to
appeal. " Here, as his own followers must admit," so the
" Admonition " declares, " he had been carried away into
excitement and passion which exceeded all bounds and had
been guilty of assertions which contradicted his own earlier
declarations, and which he himself had often been under pres
sure obliged to withdraw or modify."2

1 Ib.y p. 415.

2 J. C. Johannsen, " Pfalzgraf Johann Kasimir und sein Kampf
gegen die Concordienformel," in Niedner's " Zeitschrift f. hist. Th.,"
31, 1861 (pp. 419-476), p. 461 ff. Janssen, ib., p. 436.

LUTHER'S CHURCHES 423

There was, however, a large party which did not make an
44 idol " of Luther, but openly rejected his teaching. It was
in this that Aurifaber saw a fulfilment of Luther's prophecy of
the coming extinction of his doctrine among his followers.
As early as 1566 he said that the master had not been wrong
in his idea, that 44 the Word of God had seldom persisted for
more than forty years in one place." " The holy man," he
goes on, 44 had frequently told the theologians and his table
companions that, though his teaching had thus far grown
and thriven, yet it would begin to dwindle and collapse when
its course was finished. And he had declared that his
doctrine had stood highest and been at its best at the Diet
of Augsburg, anno 1530. But that now it would go down
hill." That, as stated above, the Word of God seldom
persisted in one place for more than forty years he had
proved 44 by many examples " taken from the times of the
Judges, Kings and Prophets ; even the teaching of Christ
had not remained pure and free from error for longer 44 in
the land of the Jews, in Greece, Asia and elsewhere."1

4. Mutual Influence of the Two Camps. Growing Strength
of the Catholic Church

One cannot but recognise in the history of the 16th
century the religious influence indirectly exerted on one
another by Lutheranism and Catholicism, an influence
which indeed proved advantageous to both.

Luther's Churches

To begin with the phenomena grouped around the
Formula of Concord we may say, that the movement
towards greater religious unity, among the Lutherans was
largely stimulated by the brilliant and to Luther's adherents
quite unexpected example of Catholic unity resulting from
the religious struggle and particularly from the Council of
Trent. Selnecker had insisted that Protestants must
endeavour to produce an 44 evangelical counterblast " to Ca
tholic theology and the Council.2 In the case of many others
too, it was the harmony and united front of the Catholics

1 Aurifaber, " Tischreden," Eisleben, 1566, Cap. I. Cp. Erl. ed.,
57, p. 19, and " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 1. pp. 47, 48.

2 Above, p. 419.

424 LUTHER'S CHURCHES

at the Council of Trent that served as an incentive to create
a similar positive bond between their own Churches. Many
once more mooted the question of a Protestant General
Council, but others, as for instance Andreae, pointed out
how impossible this would be and what a danger it would
involve of even greater dissensions. It was also of advantage
to the Protestant writers on theology to have a clearly formu
lated statement of the Catholic doctrine set before them in
the definitions of a General Council and explained in the
" Roman Catechism." Though Luther had distorted
beyond recognition the Catholic doctrines he attacked, it
was less possible than formerly to doubt — after so solemn
a declaration — what the teaching of the despised Church was,
or, with a good conscience, to deny how alien to her was the
anti-Christian doctrine of which she had been accused.
Catholic polemics, too, who were growing both in numbers
and in strength, must necessarily have opened the eyes of
many to the interior continuity, the firm foundation and the
logical sequence of the Catholic propositions and, at least
in the case of the learned and unprejudiced, led them to
regret keenly the absence of clearness and logic on their own
side. The latter holds good in particular of the untenability
of the conciliatory Lutheran theology which sought to gloss
over all the contradictions and which had given rise to the
phantom of the Concordia.

" In the work of unifying Protestant theology," Janssen
justly writes, " no slight service was rendered by the
Catholic controversialists and apologists and also and
especially by the Tridentine Council and the Roman
Catechism. Those who opposed to the hurly-burly and
confusion of the new teaching the settled, uniform system
of a theology, harmonious and consistent in all its parts,
thereby made manifest to the dissentient theologians
the defects and the glaring discords which Protestant
ism presented both in its formal and material principles.
The sharply defined terminology and the wealth of specu
lative matter which they offered stood here also in very good
stead."1

This thought also reminds us of the great store of spiritual
treasure that Luther's Churches carried away with them
when they severed their connection with Mother Church.

1 i; Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), 14, p. 160 f.

LUTHER'S CHURCHES 425

Who can question that Luther bequeathed to his Churches
much of the heritage of mysteries which Christianity brought
to mankind ? Faith in the Holy Trinity ; in the Father as
Source of all being ; in the Eternal Son as the Redeemer and
Mediator ; in the Holy Spirit as the organ of sanctity ; again,
in the Incarnation, in Christ and His works, miracles and
Resurrection ; finally a firm belief in an eternal reward, in
the again-rising of every man and the everlasting life of the
just ; in short all the consoling articles of the Apostles'
Creed must be included amongst the treasures which Luther
not only took over from the olden Church but, in his own
fashion, even defended with warmth and energy against those
who differed from him.1

On Catholic principles we may broadmindedly admit that
countless well-meaning men since Luther's day have found
in the doctrine he preached the satisfaction of their religious
cravings. Very many erred and still err " in good faith "
and " with no stubbornness."2 But wherever there is good
faith and an honest conviction of having the best, there a
religious life is possible. " This the Catholic Church does
not deny when she claims to be the one ark of salvation.
One would think that this had been repeated often enough
to make any misapprehension impossible on the part of
Protestants. As to how far this result is due to the Protes
tant Churches and how far to the Grace of God which instils
into every willing heart peace and blessing, is no open
question seeing that the Grace of God alone is the foundation
of a truly religious life."3

But if, on the one hand, Lutheranism owes much to the
ancient Church, on the other, we cannot shut our eyes to
the fact that the revival in the Catholic Church during the
16th century was indirectly furthered by Luther and his
work.

1 H. Grauert, " P. Denifle, eiu Wort zum Gedachtnis," etc., p. ti :
" The strength and energy of Luther's personality it was that for
centuries kept wide circles of his followers true to the belief in the
Redeemer of the world, the God-man, Jesus Christ. With a practical
and highly significant inconsequence, for all his principles of freedom
Luther transmitted to his followers a relatively fixed doctrinal system,
and, with it, a summary of the articles of faith which have preserved
even to the present day a certain spiritual community of faith between
the believing Protestant world and Catholicism."

2 Words of Canisius in the passage quoted below, p. 429.

3 A. Ehrhard, " Der Katholizismus uud das 20ste. Jahrh,"12 1002,
p. 126.

426 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

Progress and Gains of Catholicism

There were Catholic contemporaries who pointed out that
the going over to Luther of many who were members of the
Church merely in name, and whose lives did not correspond
with her demands, had a wholesome effect on the Church's
body. This held good of the monasteries in particular. In
many places relief was felt and a revival of discipline became
possible when those, who had entered the religious life from
worldly motives, took their departure in order, as Luther
himself lamented, to seek greater comfort in the bosom of
the new Church. " God has purged His floor and separated
the chaff from the wheat," wrote the Cistercian Abbot,
Wolfgang Mayer.1 Augustine Alveld, the Franciscan,
portrayed with indignant words the evil lives of many
apostate monks and declared with relief that : " Those who
were of the same pack and lived among us have now, thanks
be to God, all of them run away from their convents and in
stitutions."2 In lesser degree the same was true of the laity.

*' Indirectly, though very much against his will, Luther
helped to promote the regeneration of the Catholic Church
by means of the Council of Trent."3 It was his apostasy
which made possible that gathering of the Bishops which
hitherto external obstacles, shortsightedness, indolence and
worldly aims had prevented.

Theological studies profited by the struggle with Pro
testantism. More attention was bestowed on the ques
tion of man's natural and supernatural equipment ; the
dangers with which the excessive spread of Nominalism
had threatened the doctrine of Grace were effectually
circumvented, and the indispensable need of Grace for any
work meritorious for heaven was more strongly emphasised.
Thus, on the whole, there was a gain which we must not
underrate, a new development of theological lore and a
clearer formulation of dogma on threatened points similar
to that which had resulted from the great controversies in
Patristic times.

Under the Divine guidance the Church also more than
made up for the numbers torn from her, by the rapid growth

1 " Votorum monast. Tutor," in Cod. lat. Monac., 2886, fol. 35'
Denifle, ib., I2, p. 9.

2 Lemmens, k' Pater Augustin von Alfclcl," 1899, p. 72. Denifle, ib.

3 Grauert, ib., p. 37.

PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 427

of her missions in distant parts of the world, where the
voyages of discovery and the conquest of the Western
Continent at the dawn of the new century gave rise to un
looked-for new opportunities ; this, too, at a time when
Lutheranism and the other Protestant sects were still
inclined to discountenance any universality and preferred
to remain strictly local and national.

Above all it is indisputable that the Catholic Church, in
order to emphasise her opposition to the so-called Evan
gelical freedom, devoted herself ever more assiduously to
promoting a true inward life of religion among the people,
the lower clergy and the bishops.

Whereas — at the close of the Middle Ages and dawn of
the new era — the Papacy had been too eager in the pursuit
of humanistic aims, had cultivated too exclusively merely
human ideals of art and learning, and at the same time had
become entangled in secular business and politics and was
altogether too worldly, after Luther's terrible attack on the
formalism of the Church the Popes devoted themselves more
and more to the real problems of the Kingdom of God,
summoned to their side better advisers in the shape of
Cardinals of strict morals, and introduced disciplinary new
regulations in the spirit of a St. Charles Borromeo. The
charge of shallowness brought against Catholic life was
not — so far as it was justified — made in vain. From the
new seminaries, from the sublime and saintly figures, who,
in greater numbers than ever before, set an example of
heroic virtue, and from the newly founded religious Orders
such as the Theatines (1524), Capuchins (1528), Somaschans
(1528), Barnabites (1530) and last but not least the Jesuits
(1534), a new spirit breathed through the Church's life and
revived once more the practice of prayer, self-denial and
neighbourly charity.

In this connection we need have no scruple in character
ising the " Spiritual Exercises " of St. Ignatius Loyola as a
phenomenon typical of the increasing religiousness of the
age. Many, particularly amongst the influential repre
sentatives of the Church in Germany, under the guidance of
such men as Pierre Favre, Peter Canisius and Claude Jaius,
found in them a new wellspring of love for the Church and
her aims.1

1 The " Exercises " were approved by Pope Paul 111 in 1540. Cp.
the " Regulae ad sentiendum vere, sicut debemus, in ecclesia militante,"

428 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

" To the Exercises, through which many of the great
German nobles went," so Pierre Favre wrote from Ratisbon,
44 almost all the good was due that was afterwards done in
Germany."1

The struggle with the apostasy called forth everywhere an
increase of intellectual activity on the part of the threatened
Church. Not only was theology deepened, but all the
cognate branches of learning were more sedulously cultivated.
44 I scarcely think," wrote the Jesuit, Peter Canisius, to the
General of his Order, speaking of religious writings, that
" Our Order could undertake or carry out any work that
would be more useful and more conducive to the general
welfare of the Church. Fresh writings on religious questions
make a great impression and are a source of immeasurable

which St. Ignatius appended as early as 1541 to the Exercises, reg. 1 and
13. Without naming the new heresy the author gives in these rules
practical hints as to how to counteract the spirit of the age. He urges
that all the commandments of the Church should be zealously upheld,
that the respect duo to the authorities both spiritual and temporal
should not be diminished by seditious public censure, since efforts
after reform were more effectual when carried out quietly ; also that
the traditional learning of the Church, Scholasticism and positive
studies should be held in honour ("a right understanding of Holy
Scripture and the saintly Doctors is of great advantage to the modern
theologians of the schools," etc, Reg. 11) ; prudence too should be
exercised in the matter of controversy, for instance, in sermons and
writings grace should not be exalted at the expense of free-will, or
faith emphasised so as to depreciate good works ; the motive of the
pure love of God should be recommended, but at the same time the
fear of punishment admitted, because a " childlike fear is pious and
holy and bound up with the love of Cod, whilst servile fear, if a man is
unable to rise any higher, at least helps him to forsake mortal sin and
to rise to a childlike fear." At the same time he recommends all the
usual Catholic devotions, not merely the frequent reception of the
sacraments but also the keeping of the feasts and fasts, the veneration
of relics, office in choir, processions, the use of lights and the beautifying
of the churches. Above all, in harmony with the spirit of the Exercises,
the interior virtues are extolled and vows, virginity and the inward and
outward works of penance recommended. Thus did the founder of the
Order, whose ideal was the extension of the Kingdom of Christ to tho
utmost limits, provide for the needs of the day. That the Jesuit
Order was founded in order to oppose Protestantism can only be
maintained by one who has not read the first pages of the Constitutions
of St. Ignatius.

1 " Memoriale b. Petri Fabri, primi S. Ignatii alumni," ed. M. Bouix,
Lut. Paris. 1873, p. 19. Cochlseus too wished to go through the
Exercises under Favre. The latter informs Ignatius in a letter from
Spires dated Jan. 23, 1541, that after he had discussed with Cochlaeus
the distinction between " scientia" and " sensus spiritualis " (enjoy
ment of the higher truths) the latter, " subridens ccelesti Icetitia," had
said ; '* gaudeo quod tandem magistri circa affectus inveniantur."
Braurisberger, " Canisii Epistulae," 1, p. 77 note 2.

PHOGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 420

comfort to the hard-pressed Catholics at a time when the
writings of the false teachers are disseminated far and wide
and cannot be exterminated."1 Canisius was, however, of
opinion that a simple exposition of the Catholic faith was
more in place than polemics ; he did not wish to see too
much heat and human passion in the writings : " We do not
heal the sick by such medicine but only make their case
worse " ;2 as he says in a memorandum : "In Germany
there are countless numbers who err in religion, but they do
not err from stubbornness or bitterness ; they err after the
manner of Germans who by nature are generally honest,
very ready to accept everything that they, born and bred in
the Lutheran heresies, have learnt, partly in schools, partly
in churches, partly by the writings of false teachers."3

There is a true saying of Erasmus's often quoted by Catholics :
" Just us it would be wrong to approve all that Luther writes, so,
too, it would be unjust, if, out of hatred for his person, we con
demned what is true or distorted what is right."4 "What writer
is so bad," he asks elsewhere, "that we do not find some good in
his writings ? "6 — What there was of good in his own and Luther's
writings was not without its effect on Catholicism. Some of their
censures of things Catholic were seen to be deserved, and, in the
course of time, were acted upon, at least in order to give opponents
less cause for fault-finding.

The following remarks of Erasmus also found an echo amongst
Catholic contemporaries and bear witness to the good which came
of the sad religious struggles : " Often have I pondered in my
own mind, whether, perchance, it had not pleased God to send a
strong physician to deal with the profound corruption of morals
in our day, who should heal by cutting and searing what was
incapable of remedy by means of medicines and bandages."' —
" May God, Who is wont to turn evil to good, so dispose matters,
that, from this strong and bitter medicine (' ex hoc violento

1 To Francis Borgia from Dillingen, Sep. 8, 1570. Janssen, 8, p. 241.
Canisius also pointed out to his General, Aquaviva, the necessity of
" publicly defending the Catholic truths with the pen and thus meeting
with prudence the demands of our day ; such a work was of no less im
portance than the conversion of the wild Indians." F. Sachinus, "De
vita Petri Canisii." Ingolstadii, 1616, p. 361 sq.

2 To the General of the Order, Lainez, April 22. 1559. Janssen, ib.,
p. 237. Braunsberger, ib., 2, 398.

3 Memo, for the General of the Order, Aquaviva, Janssen, ib., p. 235 f.

4 " Opp.," ed. Lugd., 3, col. 658 : " Ut insanum sit, omnia probare
quce scripsit aut scripturus sit Lutherus, ita non placet, odio auctoris
damnare quce vera sunt, ea depravare quce recta aunt."

6 Ib., 9, p. 1084, " Hyperaspistes," 1, 1 : " Qnis enim est tarn
scriptor, vt won aliquid admiftceat probandnm."
6 16., 10, col. 1251.

430 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

amaroque pharmaco ' ) with which Luther has purged the world,
as a body sick unto death, there may come some good for the
morals of Christians."1 — In 1524 he even went so far as to term
Luther a " necessary evil " which they must not even desire to
see removed.2 Yet Erasmus writes severely of him and ranks
him with the greatest foes of the people of God : God had chosen
to use Luther as a tool just as He had used the Pharaohs, the
Philistines, Nabuchodonosor and the Romans.3

That Luther wielded a wholesome rod was admitted even by
the Papal Legate Zacharias Ferreri in an admonition he addressed
to him in 1520 ; with such a scourge as this God from time to
time tried Christians in order to bring them to repentance. "If
you are a scourge, praised be the name of the Lord, if by this
wicked instrument He is leading us to a better mind, purifying
and purging us ! ... Is it astonishing if, even through you, we
are purified and cleansed ? Oh, that the Almighty would pour
on us ' clean water,' ' sprinkle us with hyssop ' and wash us ! "*

Thomas Murner, the Strasburg Franciscan, a man who was
wont to scourge the failings and abuses in the Church of his day
in very outspoken language, frankly admitted in a reply to
Luther's book " An den Adel " that much of the Wittenberg
monk's censure might be useful to those who wanted to put a
stop to immorality, and to abuses and obsolete ecclesiastical
customs and statutes. He even goes so far as to say to Luther :
" Where you speak the truth, there undoubtedly the Holy
Spirit speaks through you, for all truth is of God." He adds, how
ever, " Where you do not speak the truth, there assuredly the
devil speaks through you, he who is the father of lies." Speaking of
the pictures of Luther with the symbol of the dove, which even
then were common, in his satirical fashion, he suggests an im
provement : " They paint the Holy Spirit over your head as
though He were speaking through you. Now I learn for the first
time that the Holy Spirit can say silly things. ... I should
suggest that they paint over your head, the Holy Ghost on one'
side and the devil on the other, and, in the middle, the city of
Prague," (to symbolise the heresy of Hus of which he accused
Luther).6 Anxious as Murner was to see an end of the real
abuses which Luther censured, yet, in the true Catholic spirit,
he left to the ecclesiastical authorities the right and duty of
taking the initiative, and it was to them that he addressed his
urgent exhortations.

1 To the Emperor's brother Ferdinand, Nov. 20, 1524, ib., 3,
col. 826.

2 To Auerbach, Dec. 10, 1524, ib., col. 833.

s To Duke George of Saxony, Dec. 12, 1524, ib., col. 838.

4 May 20, 1520, " Hist. Jahrb.," 15, 1894, p. 378 (ed. J. Fijalyek).
On the last sentence cp. John viii. 21 and Ez. xxxvi. 25.

5 " An den grossmechtigsten. . . . Adel tiitscher Nation," etc.,
Strasburg, 1520 (anonymously published), Bl. K 1'. Murner attributes
the^contempt for the Ban to its abuse (D 4) and says, it would be better
were some of the precepts and ^ome of the numerous Church holidays
done away with (H I7),

PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 431

Cochlaeus is likewise unable to refrain from remarking that, in
Luther's writings, side by side with what is worthless there is
much that is good, in his exposition of Holy Scripture, in his
exhortations and also in his censures. For many men, and among
them some of high standing, believed [at first] that he was guided
by the Spirit of God and by zeal for virtue to remove the abuses
of the hypocrites, to amend morals to improve the education
of the clergy, and to promote in people's hearts the love and
worship of God."1 Cochlaeus points out how Luther had taught
his followers to steep themselves in the Bible, so that they gained
" so much skill and experience " that they had " no scruples in
disputing about the faith and the Gospel even with magisters and
doctors of Holy Scripture " ; they had been much more diligent
than the Catholics in learning by heart the Bible in its German
dress ; they were in the habit " of quoting Scripture more
than the priests and monks did, for which reason they accused
Catholics of being ignorant of it or not understanding it however
learned they might be as theologians " ; their teachers " quoted the
Greek and Hebrew texts, and the variant readings, scoffed at our
theologians when they were ignorant of these things and all
agreed in representing Luther as the best theologian in the world."
Cochlaeus also admits, that, in the field of historical criticism
Luther and his party were ahead of many Catholic preachers, who,
albeit in good faith, were fond of adducing " fables and tales
invented by men." He describes the zeal of the Protestant
printers, which far exceeded that of the Catholics, the " diligence,
care and money " lavished on the writings of their party, and
" how carefully and accurately they printed their books " ; apos
tates and escaped monks travelled far and wide through Germany,
peddling Lutheran writings " like booksellers."2 — It is notorious,
on the other hand, that the Catholic writers were hardly able to
find publishers. At Ingolstadt Cochlaeus managed to preserve
a Catholic printing press, which was in danger of being shut
down, and established a second at Mayence whence a large
number of good works issued. " Stress must be laid on the self-
sacrifice with which Cochlseus, after having by dint of many
privations amassed a sum of money for the publication of his
own writings, devoted it to the printing of the works of one of his
colleagues, being convinced that they would prove of greater
benefit to the common cause than his own productions."3

1 " De actis et scriptis Lutheri," p. 29. He adds, however, that the
good was often all sham.

2 Ib., p. 5osqq. German ed., Dillingen, 1611, p. 109 ff. Cp.
" Lutheri Colloq.," ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 146. " Nunc omnes artes illu#-
tratcs florescunt. So too God has now made us a present of the press,
prcecipue ad premendum papam" Cp. Janssen, " Hist, of the German
People " (Engl. Trans.), 14, pp. 498-533.

3 W. Friedensburg in the art. " Fortschritte in Kenntnis und
Verstandriis der Reformationsgesch." (" Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,"
No. 100, 1910, pp. 1-59), p. 40, where it is true, he says of Cochlaeus
that " Vanity as a rule played a great part in his character."

432 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

In all these particulars, in the study of Holy Scripture, in
the cultivation of historical and critical research among the
clergy, in the use of the vernacular and of the art of printing
for the instruction of the faithful, a real, though rather slow,
change for the better took place. Had it not been for the
misgivings felt even in the highest circles, and for a certain
amount of prejudice against anything new, due to the
fear of heresy, the gains doubtless would have been
even greater and more quickly secured. In all this the
Church owed much to Protestant example, for it was
the innovators wrho involuntarily pointed out better
methods of satisfying the spiritual needs of the new age,
and a more effectual way of exerting a religious influence
over the people.

Further examples of this arc to be found in the sermons
and in the catechism.

Clear-sighted Catholic contemporaries, like the worthy
Dominican preacher and writer Johann Mensing, comparing
the Bible preaching used and advocated by Luther with the
empty, vapid sermons in vogue among many of the Catholic
preachers were keenly conscious of what was lacking. At
the close of a book written in 1532 Mensing exhorts the
Catholic clergy to study Holy Writ and to make more use
of it in the pulpit : " There are some now who say that
Luther has driven the learned to Scripture. Would to God
it were true that our well-beloved masters and brothers,
the theologians, would turn their hearts wholly to Holy
Scripture and leave out those other questions which serve
no useful purpose. Some of them preach the laws and
canons of heathen doctors and poets which are of small help
to salvation, or they air their own opinions, and, where
Scripture and Holy Church or the witness of the olden
Doctors is not enough, reinforce them by incredible miracles,
whereas, with the aid of Holy Scripture, they ought to
endeavour to establish in men's hearts the fear of God, faith,
hope and charity, mildness and pity and such like." If they
learn something from the Lutherans in this then " we may
hope that God has permitted Luther's heresy for our good,
it being to our profit that such heresy has arisen, and, as
some declare, driven us to the Scriptures." Mensing wonders,
however, whether the dispersal of the monks, the plundering
of the convents and lack of stipends for learned theologians

PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 433

and preachers will not make study of any kind a difficult
matter for a long while to come.1

In the field of catechetical instruction it was clear that
Luther and his followers had given their attention very
skilfully to the young, the better to imbue the rising genera
tion with their doctrines. At the time of Luther's first
appearance, as recent research has established, in many
parts of Germany there was no regular, systematic religious
instruction of the young by the clergy or in the schools, but
the children were left to pick up what they could in the home
or from the public sermons.2 There were indeed regulations
in force for the priests and the schools, but they were not
acted upon. About the very elementary home instruction,
Cochlaeus had words of commendation in 1533. As they
were taken to the services and the sermons, the children had,
he says, " sucked in " their religion "as it were with their
mothers' milk, and this is still the case to-day amongst
Catholics."3 In his sermons published in 1510 Gabriel Bicl
asks for no more than that the parents should impart to
their children a knowledge of the things essential and
prepare them for their first communion.4

Luther, however, as our readers know, insisted that his
preachers must concern themselves directly with the
children.

He enjoined on them to preach from the pulpit at set
times, even daily if necessary, on the most elementary points
of doctrine, and again at home in the house to the children
and servants in the mornings and evenings ; if they wished
to make Christians of them these points would have to be
recited or read to them, " and this, not merely in such a way
that they learn to say the words by heart, but that they be
questioned on them one by one and made to say what each

1 " Vormeldunge der Unwarheit Lutherscher Clage," Frankfurt-on-
the-Oder, 1532.

2 Cp. for instance Falk, " Pfarramtliche Aufzeichnungen drs
Florentius Diel zu St. Christoph in Mainz, 1491-1518 " (" Erlauter-
ungen u. Erg. zu Janssen," vol. iv., Hft. 3). Falk, ib., p. 5 : " The
family was at that time responsible for the religious instruction of the
young." In many of the schools the Catechism was taught, but the
schools were not as yet generally attended.

3 Otto, " Joh. Cochlaus," Breslau, 1874, p. 3.

4 He only advises a *' consilium plebani " when the result of the
instructions to the Communicants was doubtful. *" Sermones,"
Hagenau, 1510, " De festivitatibus Christi," xix., " on Maundy
Thursday," " on preparation for communion,"

VI— 2 F

434 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

means and how they understand it."1 " Let no one think
himself above giving such instruction to the children or look
down upon it," he wrote ; " Christ, when He wished to train
up men, had to become a man, hence, if we are to train up
children, we must become children with them." At Witten
berg and elsewhere from 1528 onwards four sermons a week
for two weeks on end were preached on the Catechism four
times a year. When, seeing the importance of the matter,
Luther himself took the Catechism in hand he was so
anxious to make it popular and practical, that he first
published his " Smaller Catechism " (1529) in the form of
sheets to hang upon the wall (this method had been used
even before his day), and thus to act on the memory through
the eye.

It would, however, be historically incorrect to describe
Luther as the originator of the Catechism. Catholic
Catechisms, even illustrated ones, had existed before
Luther's time, having been printed not only in Germany
but also elsewhere. But, after the success attained by
Luther's Catechism, writers of Catholic Catechisms tried to
profit by his example. The best of these Catholic works was
the famous Catechism of Peter Canisius. It was first
printed in Vienna in 1555 under the title " Summa doctrince
Christianas " ; eighteen years later it had already been
translated into twelve different tongues.2 It is a work rich
in thought and positive matter where almost every word is
based on Holy Scripture or some utterance of the Fathers
and other ecclesiastical authority. Abbreviated editions, the
" Porous Catechismus " (Viennae, 1559), the " Institutiones "
(1561), and particularly the short German one : " The
Catechism or Sum of Christian Doctrine arranged in question
and answer for the simple," rendered it of greater use for the
common people.3 " Canisius's book," writes a Protestant
expert in pedagogics, " is a masterpiece of brevity, precision
and erudition ; in it one sees from beginning to end an

1 In the " Deudsche Messe," Weim. ed., 19, p. 70 ; Erl. ed., 22,
p. 232. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 50.

2 O. Braunsberger, " Entstehung und erste Entwicklung der
Katechismen des sel. Petrus Canisius" (" Erganzungshef te t zu den
Stimmen aus Maria-Laach," No. 57, 1893). Cp. J. Fijalyek, " Uber das
wahre Jahr der Erstlingsgabe des Grossen Katechismus des sel. Petrus
Canisius " in the " Hist. Jahrb.," 17, 189G, p. 804 ft'.

3 Published in 1556 as shown by N. Paulus, " Zeitaoh. f. kath. Th.,"
27, 1903, p. 172.

PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 435

endeavour to excel in style even the great Protestant proto
type " (viz. Luther's Catechism).1

Among the secular no less than among the regular clergy
work for the souls of the children continued to win new
friends. St. Ignatius of Loyola esteemed the teaching of the
Catechism so highly that he expressly made it a duty
incumbent on all members of his Order previous to their
making their profession. Lainez, his companion and
successor, when staying at Trent during the Council,
instructed the people and the small folk in the Catechism.
The Council itself impressed on the bishops in 1563 the duty
of seeing that the children in each parish received religious
instruction from the priest on Sundays and holidays.2

The spread of the new religion had at first been followed
by a lamentable decline in the educational system by no
means confined to those regions torn away from the old
faith.3 The Protestants were the first to recover their
balance, partly owing to Luther's vigorous appeals on
behalf of the schools, partly thanks to the active co-opera
tion of Melanchthon, who had great experience in this
sphere and on whom his co-religionists in consequence
bestowed the title of " Prceceptor Germanics" The methods
followed by the Lutherans were borrowed principally, as
indeed was only to be expected, from the treasure-house of
the humanists. Protestant effort was largely crowned with
success, especially since the old Catholic endowments of the
Grammar Schools, and some part of the income of the
sequestrated Church properties, were applied by the
sovereigns and townships to the erection and maintenance
of these new educational institutions.4

The Catholics indeed were angry to see that these flourish
ing schools were at the same time hotbeds of the New Faith.
They also lamented that, owing to the sad conditions of the
times, they themselves had fallen astern of the other party
in the matter of education. Their best leaders exhorted
them to take a lesson from their opponents and thus re
conquer the position the Catholic schools had lost. " With

1 K. Kehr, " Gesch. der Methodik des deutschen Volksunterrichts,"
1, 1877 f¥., p. 33.

2 Sess. 24, " De reform.," c. 4.

3 See Janssen, " Hist, of the German People " (Engl. Trans.), vol.
xiii., passim.

• Janssen, »&., p. 58 ff.

436 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

the spread and development of the Jesuit schools a change
came over the face of affairs."1 Before this Archbishop
Albert of Mayence had declared in 1541 that the Protes
tants were far ahead of Catholics in the matter of education
and were drawing all the youth of Germany into their
schools. In 1550 Julius Pflug, bishop of Naumburg-Zeitz,
wrote to Julius III : " The Protestant schools public as well
as private are in a flourishing condition ; ours are crumbling
into ruin ; the Protestants attract men by large salaries, we
do not do this." Already in 1538 George Wicel had
expressed his regret to Julius Pflug that so little was done
for the schools among the Catholics as compared with the
Protestants, and that already the want of men of learning
was being felt.2

To mention two other spheres in which Catholics received
a stimulus from Luther's example and work, we may call to
mind the German translation of the Bible and the German
hymns.

What was good in Luther's translation of the Bible was
very soon turned to account in Catholic circles. If Catholic
writers made use of Luther's translation in their own
editions, they probably excused themselves by arguing that
Luther himself was undoubtedly indebted to the Catholic
translations of the past. In the same way Luther had made
use of some of the old hymns of the Church, amended and
popularised them and published them as his own. Catholic
hymns in the German language there were already in plenty.
But, after 1524, when the first Protestant hymn-books made
their appearance, Catholics copied these efforts to collect
and improve on the originals, and the first Catholic hymn-
book brought out by Michael Vehe, Provost at Leipzig as
early as 1537, contained fifty-two hymns with forty-seven
tunes — though, strange to say, the old Catholic hymns were
given in the new Protestant version.3 A much bigger hymn-
book was that of Johann Leisentritt, a Dean (1567) ; it
contained in the first edition 250 hymns and 147 tunes. In
the following century hymns well known to be Protestant
but of which the words were orthodox were incorporated
without demur in the Catholic collections.

1 Janssen, ib.t p. 129.

2 See the statements of Albert of Mayence, of Pflug and WioH, in
Janssen, ib.. p. 58.

3 W. Baumker, in Wetzer and Welte's " KL.,'" I2, p. COG f.

PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 437

The Middle Ages had been too neglectful of positive studies,
particularly of history and languages, both of which are of
such vast importance to theology. Since the dawn of
humanism, however, a good beginning had been made, and
the need of meeting the demands of the new age was
recognised, as, in the domain of Biblical languages, the ex
ample of Faber Stapulensis and Jodocus Clichtoveus shows.1
The methods of the Protestants made further progress in this
field imperative.

In criticism and church-history, where much good work
had been done by the Protestants, Peter Canisius was one
of the first to suggest that it would be advisable to devote
more pains to the study and examination of the history of
the Papacy, since, as he wrote, our " people seem to be
still quite asleep " and unaware of all that had been done in
the opposite camp. He was anxious for books that should
be in no way inferior to those of the other side, and of which
" the style must be in keeping with the present method and
trend of scholarship."2 It is not as yet enough known
generally what great success crowned the labours of
Onuphrius Panvinius (1529-1568) the Augustinian Roman
antiquarian and historian, who was spurred on by the
labours of the Protestants, though even more by the
humanist traditions of his native country. Better known
is the Oratorian, Cardinal Baronius (1538-1607), whose
" Ecclesiastical Annals " unquestionably laid the foundation
of a new era in the writing of Church history.3

1 Cp. Denifle, I2, p. 287 ff.

2 To Cardinal Otto Truchsess (Dec. 7, 1560) (Cod. Vat. 0417) :
" Abundat Roma viris doctis et historiarum peritis. Magni profecto
re/erret, ex his deligi aliquem ad conscribendas pontificum vitas. Nunc
sectarii quce volunt effingunt, nobis plane stertentibus. ludicet Rma
D. V. quomodo succarri possit non modo prcesenti sed etiam sequenti
ccclesice. Ita de catechismis et postillis quoque dixerim, salvo semper
iudicio sapientium. Sed opus plane videtur, ut ad huius cetatis rationem
docendi modus accommodetur," etc. Cp. Braunsberger, " B. Petri
Canisii epist.," 3, p. 30, and Jos. Schmid, " Hist. Jahrb.," 17, 1896, p. 79.

3 And yet it would have been better had even Panvinius and
Baronius shown themselves more critical, particularly in dealing with
the Saints, relics, etc. The Council of Trent itself had been most urgent
in demanding the removal of false relics ; nor were preachers to be
allowed to relate untrue stories about the souls in Purgatory for filthy
lucre's sake (" incerta vel quce specie falsi laborant, evulgari etc tractari
lion permittant " ; Sess. 25 ; Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 983). The false
indulgences were among the abuses condemned by the Council of Trent
in the Decree " De indulgentiis " (Sess. 25) : " abusus qui in his
irrepserunt et quorum occasione insigne hoc indulgentiarum nomen au
hcBreticis blasphematur."

438 PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM

Good and useful work was done by some of the Protestant
scholars who edited the writings of the Fathers.

Thus Luther, for instance, encouraged Bugenhagen to
edit certain works of St. Athanasius on the Trinity and
himself wrote (1532) a Preface to them which is well worth
reading.1 The Patristic labours subsequently undertaken
by Catholics, even the great work of Marguerin de la Bigne,2
that forerunner of the French Maurists of the 17th century,
had their raison d'etre in the very ideas which Luther had set
forth in his above-mentioned Preface to Bugenhagen's work.

The worksorneness of the Catholic Church showed that
people were beginning to understand the new era and to
mould themselves to its requirements. " How can one
deny," asks Adolf Harnack, " that Catholicism, as soon as
it pulled itself together for the counter-reformation . . . was
for over a century in far closer touch with the new era than
Luther's Protestantism ? Hence the many converts from
Protestantism to Catholicism, particularly among learned
Protestants, down to the days of Queen Christina of Sweden
and even after."3

As for the ideas, however, which constituted the essence
of the religious innovations the Catholic Church could not
accept them short of being untrue to herself and betraying
what had been committed to her custody. Whereas she
gradually found a way to comply with all just demands for
betterment and progress, she was nevertheless obliged
relentlessly to close her ears to proposals for the subversion
of her dogma and the alteration of her constitution.

She steadfastly refused to make her own the new and
mistaken conception of the Church, of Bible interpretation,
of faith, justification and good works. In spite of the heart
rending sight of the growing apostasy around her, she kept
her eyes fixed on the promises of her Founder and remained
true to her olden conception of the Church as a visible
society controlled by Chief Pastors who are the vicars of
Christ.

Ulrich Zasius of Freiburg in Baden, one of the greatest

1 " Werke," Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 530 ff. ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7,
p. 523 sqq. Cp. " Brief wechsel," 9, p. 252 f.

\* " Bibliotheca sanctorum Patrum," Paris, 1575-79, in 9 folio
volumes.

* " Lehrb. der DG.," 34, p. 810.

PROGRESS OF CATHOLICISM 439

lawyers and humanists of the 16th century, who had for a
while dallied with some of the demands of the innovators,
afterwards repudiated as follows any idea of going over to
their side :

" I shall remain true to the doctrines and decisions of the
Church even should all the host of heaven command me other
wise." " Such an insult I will on no account offer to the Lord of
Truth as to believe He had deceived us for so many hundreds of
years " — by permitting the Church to fall into error in spite of
the promise that the Spirit of truth would always remain with her.

" For more than a thousand years the Church has taught us
by the voice of her Doctors who all take their stand on Holy
Scripture. But you twist the Gospel about as you please. Is
Luther then to be set above all the Doctors of the past ? Our
forefathers, who also were authorities and all the wise men, would
have called such a demand sheer madness." " You, however,
argue that the Spirit leads and guides you. But what sort of
Spirit is it that teaches you to scold and calumniate as you do ?
In the Epistle of James I have read on the contrary that wisdom
is peaceable and modest."

" Give me a man who renounces all earthly things, keeps all
the precepts of Christ, loves his enemies from his heart and does
them good, abuses none and is cheerful in adversity. Such a man
I will call worthy of the Evangel. But among the ranks of such
men you can scarcely reckon Luther."

" You are free to censure abuses, but is it right on their
account to throw the whole Church into confusion ? You blame
the whole for the misdeeds of some of its parts ; pleading the
defects you attack what is good and thus unsettle everything."
He too, so he tells his opponents, was at pains to go to the sources
of Faith, but he preferred the interpretation of Jerome, Augustine
and Chrysostom to theirs ; and, again, unable to control his
indignation, he exclaims : " What incredible arrogance is this
that one man should require his reading to be accounted better
than that of all the Fathers of the Church, nay, of the Church
herself and the whole of Christendom ? "x

When passions were at their height voices such as these
failed to secure a hearing. The deep chasm torn open by the
wanton act of one man could no longer be bridged over ; the
bond of religion that had hitherto united the German nation
had been rudely severed.

1 To Thomas Blaurer, Dec. 21, 1521, " Brief wechsel der Briidor
Ambr. und Thorn. Blaurer," 1, 1908, p. 42 ff.

440 LUTHER THE REFORMER

5. Luther as described by the Olden " Orthodox " Lutherans

It is a study that will well repay us to follow through the
history of Protestantism the changes that Luther's descrip
tion underwent. The awakened historical sense of the
present day has already led more than one critic to under
take this task, with a crop of interesting results.1

It would be a mistake to think that Luther's memory
survived anywhere among the orthodox Protestants with
that freshness and distinctness which the statements of
some of his old friends might lead us to expect. Of the
actual personality of the man no clear picture had been
transmitted. His words and deeds were commented on
according to the outlook of the different schools, needless to
say, always with a certain affection and admiration, but no
one troubled to leave to posterity a living picture of his
unique character as a whole.

Tracing the history of the Protestant representation of
Luther down to the present day three periods may be
distinguished, the so-called Orthodox one, the Pietistic and
Freethinking one that followed, and the last hundred years.
Orthodoxy, with its rigid attachment to the formularies of
Faith, with the assistance of the State was for a long while
able to suppress all contrary tendencies ; towards the middle
of the 18th century, however, the Pietists and, at the other
extreme, a free-thinking party also made their appearance on
the field.

Pietism was a reaction against the hard-and-fast doctrinal
system of an earlier age, which, clinging desperately to
Luther's doctrine of works, tended to be neglectful of the
Christian life and of the revival of morals. If Pietism
rather exaggerated the moral side of religion, the so-called
" Enlightenment " erred in another direction, setting out
as it did to vindicate the rights of reason and, in so doing,
making scant account of subordination to the truths of
Divine revelation.

On the whole, Orthodoxy retained a supernaturalist view

1 Cp. Horst Stephan, " Luther in den Wandlungen seiner Kirche,"
Giessen, 1907 ('* Stud, zur Gesch. des neueren Protestantismus,"
Hft. 1). This book has been largely utilised in what follows. Cp. J.
Schmidlin, " Luther im Luthertum," in the " Theol. Revue," 1908,
col. 441 ff. The words we quote in inverted commas without further
reference are from H. Stephan.

DEPICTED BY THE ORTHODOX 441

of Luther, though it was apt to assume different eolours
according to the leanings of the several schools.

Pietism, in its conception of his person, frankly throws
over the real Luther and seeks to " vindicate his spirit
against the claims of his more orthodox adherents."

The period of the enlightenment also presents a " sadly
distorted " picture of Luther ; it had " not the least com
prehension of his fiery spirit " and, as was its wont, was
" anxious to wipe out everything too distinctive."1

44 Misunderstood and disfigured ' beyond recognition,'
Luther steps over the threshold of the new era. But here
again misfortune awaits him : 4 Sectarians, Anabaptists,
Pietists, Democrats, Rationalists, Orthodox ' ... all these
set to work to improve upon the hero until they can stamp
him as their own."2 Finally, " the latest phase of theological
development spells a revision of the whole idea and apprecia
tion of Luther." In the consciousness of having far outrun
Luther on the road to a purely natural religion minus any
faith, people are beginning to " emphasise more strongly the
fact, that he was held captive in the bonds of medieval
feelings and ideas."3

44 Who really knows him ? " asked Adolf Harnack in 1883,
44 and who can be expected to know him ? People are
willing enough to worship him as what they wish him to be,
as the upholder of their own ideals ; but in their heart of
hearts, they feel that, after all, he was really quite different.
His character impresses all, but his convictions are left in
the background, or else are worked up into new and more
serviceable coin."4

Yet all these Protestant impressions of Luther, to be
examined more in detail below, however they may differ
have at least this much in common, that Luther must be
acclaimed as the great opponent of the authority of the
olden Church.

Maybe we shall come nearest to a correct picture of Luther
if we combine the modern view of his being a 44 medievalist "
with the olden orthodox claim that he was a Prophet of God.
Luther stood partly for the old supernaturalist Christianity,

1 Stephan ib., pp. 17, 34, 67. 2 Schmidlin, ib., col. 445.

3 Stephan, ib., p. 126.

4 " Martin Luther uiid seine Bedeutung fur die Wissenschaft mid
Bildung," Giessen, 1883. New ed. 1911, p. 4.

442 LUTHER THE REFORMER

partly for a new pseudo-supernaturalism ; so far those who
speak of his " mediae valism " are in the right. He himself,
however, summed up his own character in that of the God-
sent " Prophet of Germany," and divinely appointed
conqueror of Antichrist and the devil — a point which was
rightly emphasised by his orthodox followers.

To go back now to the various descriptions of Luther. The
Orthodox derived their idea of Luther from the oldest
traditions. In these there was a breath of the supernatural-
ism in which Luther's own view of himself was decked out,
of the inbreathing of the Spirit, of his mysterious struggles
with a power unseen, and of his divinely assured victory
over the Roman Babylon.

At the present day one marvels to see how cheerfully and
naively members of the old " orthodox " school were wont
to magnify the founder of their denomination on the lines
sketched out by Luther himself. All that interested them
was the teacher, Luther the theologian ; to them he
appeared a sort of " professor of divinity of heroic dimen
sions." In the century which followed his death it was the
custom to exalt him " into the region of the marvellous and
more-than-human." So fond were they of " depicting his
divine halo " that it became quite the usual thing to " set
Luther side by side with the olden Prophets and Apostles."

After Elias and John the Baptist, he is " the third Elias, who
makes ready the way against the return of Christ to Judgment."
He is the second Noe, the second Abraham, the second Samson,
the second Samuel, the second Jeremias, above all, he is the
second Moses who frees the people from their bondage ; the
Egyptian bondage, so some one computed had come to an end in
B.C. 1517 just as the Papal bondage reached its end in 1517 A.D.1

Holy Scripture, so the orthodox declared, points to Luther not
only where it speaks of the revelation and overthrow of Anti
christ (2 Thes. ii. 8), not merely where it proclaims that living
waters shall go out from Jerusalem (Zach. xiv. 8), but also in the
Apocalypse of John where we are told of the angel having the
eternal Gospel — flying through the midst of heaven to the mount
on which is seated the Lamb with 144,000 who bear His
name — " in order to preach it to them that sit upon the earth, to
every nation and tribe, and tongue and people " (Rev. xiv. 6).
That this angel was Luther is also plain from the fact that, if the
letters of the verse quoted are reckoned by their position in the
alphabet and then added together the number will be exactly the
same as that of the words (in German) : Martin Luther, Doctor

1 Stephan, ib., pp. 15, 18, 22.

DEPICTED BY THE ORTHODOX 443

of Holy Scripture, born at Eisleben, baptised on Martinmas-Day,
viz. 819 I1 In a sermon in 1676 the flight of the angel through
the midst of heaven is taken to signify the marvellously rapid
spread of Luther's Evangel, and the Gospel he preaches is termed
" eternal," because Luther's doctrine is found even in the
Fathers of the Church. 2

The story of Hus, the " swan," as prophetic of the coming of
Luther, was an integral part of the panyegyrics even of Mathesius
and Bugenhagen ; it served much the same purpose as the
statue of a monk with the inscription L.V.T.E.B.V.S., said to
have been erected by Kaiser Frederick Barbarossa.3

The recovery of Melanchthon and Myconius for whom Luther
had prayed so ardently became evident miracles. The preserva
tion of his picture in great fires was another miracle of frequent
recurrence. Splinters from a beam in his house, according to
Gottfried Arnold, the Pietist, in his Church-History, were deemed
an efficacious cure for toothache and other ills. Arnold calls this
a subtle form of idolatry. Leonard Hutter, who became pro
fessor at Wittenberg in 1596, learnedly set forth the proofs of
Luther's " being endowed with a ' spiritus vatidicus ' enabling
him to foresee many things of importance," though his prophetic
insight is chiefly confined by Hutter and others to his peculiar
divine gift for the interpretation of Holy Writ, or to his proclama
tion of the destruction of contemners of the Evangel. 4 Johannes
Klai (or Claius), the German grammarian and a zealous Lutheran,
expressed it as his opinion in 1578 that the German used by
Luther was so pure and beautiful that he could have learnt it only
by the special help of the Holy Ghost.5 Johannes Albertus
Fabricius collected, chiefly in the interests of the orthodox party,
the titles of the works dealing with Luther ; the bare lists of the
books setting forth the services he had rendered, the honourable
epithets bestowed on him, his eminent qualities, his miracles

1 Stephan, ib., p. 23 calls the prophecy on Luther (Rev. xiv. 6)
" that most frequently used from Styfel's time down to Loscher's
' Unschuldige Nachrichten.' "

2 Sermon of Reisner, pastor of Mittweida near Chemnitz, printed
1677. /&., p. 24. Joh. Alb. Fabricius appeals in his " Centifolium
Lutheranum " (Hamburg, 1728), p. 331, to Bugenhagen's funeral
oration on Luther where the passage is taken to refer to Luther, and
remarks quite seriously that Samuel Benedict Carpzov had seen in the
other two angels mentioned there Flacius Illyricus and Martin
Chemnitz.

3 In the " Centifolium Lutheranum " just mentioned, p. 339,
Fabricius quotes from Theophrastus Paracelsus, " Descriptio Carin-
thiae " (Argentor. 1616, p. 250), the inscription in question, said to be
in a church at Ingingen in Carinthia, to which some statues had been
presented by the Emperor. — The swan is mentioned in Bugenhagen'e
funeral address and in Mathesius, " Historien," p. 199.

4 Stephan, ib., p. 25. Cp. Hutter, " Compendium locorum theo-
logicorum," 1610, and " Concordia concors," 1614.

5 Stephan, ib., p. 21. Claius, "Grammatica Germanicse linguae, ex
bibliis Lutheri," etc., Lipsiae, 1678, Prsef.

444 LUTHER THE REFORMER

and his own prophecies and those of others, occupy many
pages.1

Even as late as 1872 Carl Frederick Kahnis, the Lutheran
theologian and professor at Leipzig, depicted Luther in his
" Deutsche Reformation " with all the olden traits. Luther's
doctrines he regarded as the true norm, though it was necessary
to understand and develop them. According to Kahnis the
young monk's experience with the devil in the refectory at night
and again at the Wartburg, were real assaults of the Evil One
on the chosen prophet of God, visible arid audible marks of the
hostility of Satan to the saviour of mankind, for Luther " was no
slave to fancy or excited feelings." " Maybe," so he says rather
incautiously, " no Father of the Church since the days of the
Apostles ever had to feel so keenly the power of Satan." The
prophecy of the " bare-foot monk " and the auguries of the
Eisenach Franciscan become matters of history, for had not
Luther himself appealed to them ? Even the tale of the Elector's
dream who saw the monk's pen stretching even to Rome and
blotting out everything there, rested, according to him, on
" history." As for the fallen Church of pre- Lutheran days, against
which his wonderful pen worked, it sinks into the abyss of its own
errors before the rising sun of Luther's new doctrine. 2

6. Luther as seen by the Pietists and Rationalists

Luther, as pictured to themselves by the Pietists, differed
widely from the Luther of the orthodox. To Pietists like
Spener, Luther's actual doctrine — regarded by them as
contradictory and wavering — appealed far less than certain
personal mystic traits of his. To them the inward struggles
of soul to which Luther ascribes his transition from despair
into the peace of the Gospel, his remarks on piety and the
interior life, his realisation of the universal priesthood, and
the breathing of the Spirit were very dear. They were less
enamoured of Luther's views on faith, the outward Word,
or the State- Government of the Church. At any rate, the
Pietists wove from the material at their disposal a new
Luther who was practically a counterpart of themselves.
They preferred to dwell on his earlier years, when Luther, as
Gottfried Arnold said in 1699 in his " Kirchen historic," yet
lived " in the Spirit," and before he had ended " in the
flesh " as he did later. They either said nothing of his
worldlier side or else openly censured it as the fruit of his
backsliding and later errors.

1 " Centifolium Lutheranum," p. 330 ft'.

2 " Gesch. der deutschen Reformation," 1, Leipzig, 1872, pp. 178,
179, 399.

AS SEEN BY THE PIETISTS 445

Arnold complains bitterly that things had gone so far after
Luther's death that he was called a " Saint " and a divine man,
and that he was made out to be the Angel foretold in the Apoca
lypse. Still he recognises in him " in a usual way," an " apostolic
mission " in so far as he had been the recipient of " a direct
inspiration, stimulus or divine gift." " At the first " he had
" indeed been mightily directed, and utilised as a divine tool " ;
at any rate up to the time of his breach with Carlstadt he could
boast of enjoying " the strength and illumination of the Spirit
which gave him on particular points and in difficult cases a rule
and true certainty." Only with such limitations will the historian
of Pietism accept Luther's epitaph at Wittenberg where mention
is made of the inbreathing of G od's spirit. l

Whereas the orthodox Lutherans, owing to the abiding influence
of Melanchthon's humanism, allowed the study of philosophy and
of the wisdom of the ancients, the Pietists at Leipzig, Giessen,
Stargard and elsewhere rejected all philosophy, appealing to
Luther who had spurned it as the offspring of that fool reason
which ought to be done away with ; Melanchthon, they urged,
had corrupted the faith by the admixture of Plato and Aristotle,
and, hence, had never been regarded by Luther " as a true, staunch
theologian, but rather as a cunning Aristotelian dialectician. "-

When other Lutherans taunted them with their separatist
tendencies so much at variance with Luther's view of the out
ward government of the Church by the State, the Pietists retorted
by appealing in defence of their conventicle system and so-called
" collegia pietatis," to Luther's Church- Apart of the True
Believers. They quoted those passages of the " Deudsche Messe
und Ordnung Gottis Diensts " (1526), where Luther lays stress
on the ideal kinship of those who earnestly desire to be Chris
tians, and characterises the services in the Church as worthless
for those who " are already Christians."3

" Thus quite a struggle raged around Luther's person.''4
Books appeared on the one side with sueh titles as
" Lutherus Antipietista " and on the other : " Luther the
precursor of Spencr who faithfully followed in the footsteps
of the former." Count L. von Zinzcndorf, with his Pietistic
leanings, claimed to be a perfect counterpart of Luther ; he
wished, as he said in 1749, to be " what Luther had been in
part, and what, according to the logical sequence from
given premises, he should and ought to have been." " The
Luther who still lives and teaches in Count von Zinzendorf,"

1 " Unparteiische Kirchenhistorie," Part II, Frankfurt, 1699-1700,
pp. 42, 45, 48. See the epitaph above, p. 393.

2 Zierold, rector at Stargard, quoted by Stephan, ib., p. 36.

:t See above, vol. v., p. 147 f. Cp. Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 16.
Stephan, ib.. p. 34, here rightly draws on Ritschl, " Gesch. des
Pietismus," * Stephan. ib., p. 34,

446 LUTHER THE REFORMER

was the title of a work by one of the latter's followers.
Things went so far that, in the controversies, it became
necessary to ask : Which Luther do you mean, the earlier or
the later ? Nor was even this sufficient, for Consistorialrat
J. A. Bengel of Wiirttemberg (f 1752) actually distinguished
three Luthers : " the first and the last," he said, " were all
right, but the middle one, owing to the heat of controversy,
was sometimes rather spoiled."1

Among the Protestant writers of the so-called " Enlighten
ment " we again find Luther under a different guise.

They disagreed with the Pietists' renunciation both of the
conclusions arrived at by reason and of worldly pleasures ;
in the latter respect they found in Luther a welcome advocate
of enjoyment of the good things of the world. His advocacy
of a cheerful addiction to earthly pleasures was summed up
by them in the saying attributed to him : Who loves not
women, wine and song, etc.2 On the other hand, by setting
Luther on a rationalist plane, they blotted out his essential
characteristics ; they showed no comprehension for his faith
though they were not disposed to minimise his labours for
the amendment of religion and for the bringing of light out
of darkness.

Gottfried Herder extols him, now as a church founder,
now as a writer, and yet again as a great German. Luther's
doctrines seem to him of comparatively small account, but
he is willing enough to depict him as a model of cheerful,
"strong, free, wholesome and exalted sensibility."3 He is
unsparing in his criticism of Luther's attacks on the Epistle
of James and adds : " The sphere of the Spirit of God is
wider than Luther's field of vision."4 In these circles critics
were disposed to be bolder and more outspoken than among
the orthodox and the Pietists ; they also found other things
to censure in Luther. Lessing condemns in the severest
language his vanity and irascibility : " O God, what a
terrible lesson to our pride," he exclaims, " and how much
do anger and revenge degrade even the best and holiest of
men."5 He nevertheless opines that Luther's faults had
been of service to him in his great task.

1 /&., pp. 35-38, 43. 2 See above, vol. iii., p. 293.

3 " Werke," ed. Suphan, 7, p. 258.

4 " Werke," ed. Suphan, 7, p. 500.

& " Rettungen des Lemnius und Cochlaus," 1754, Stephan, ib,,
p. 73. Cp. below, p. 448.

IN RATIONALIST EYES 447

Those few who really perused Luther's writings marvelled
at his extravagant ideas about his divine mission and
struggles with the devil, about the end of the world and
Antichrist. As a general rule, however, they conveniently
skipped all that Luther said against human reason and
had no eye for his energetic supernaturalisni and his in
sistence on the bare letter of Scripture."1

Among those infected with the rationalism of the age,
antagonism to Catholicism undoubtedly helped to shape
their view of Luther. They felt their whole outlook to be at
variance with that of Catholicism. Under these circum
stances it was natural that Luther should be depicted first
and foremost as the liberator from the Papacy ; in Luther
they recognised, not without some show of reason, " the
opponent of all outward authority, of everything Catholic
in every domain of the life of the mind "2 — an argument,
moreover, which occasionally they turned against the
Lutheran " Church " itself.

Thus was the dictator of Wittenberg, such as the Orthodox
knew him, transformed into a " champion of freedom " ; the
rationalists made his pen the vehicle of their own ideas.
Luther became the " herald of the Enlightenment." He
began what others were to carry on later. " A little longer,"
so one wrote in 1797, " and the heavenly light which Luther
only saw dimly as in a dream will stream in upon us in all
its brightness."3

The Berlin leader of this movement, A. F. Biisching, as early as
1748, said of himself that he had seen " Luther in his true great
ness and as known only to the few ; how, in matters of religion,
he had absolutely refused to depend on any man, but had relied
simply on his own insight and convictions and what had been
borne in upon him by diligent reading of the Bible."4 The Halle
editor of Luther's Works, J. G. Walch, vaunted among the other
services rendered by Luther that of having established freedom
of conscience ; in the eyes of Julius Wegscheider he was the
" libertatis cogitandi assertor " ; it was this which inclined even
Frederick II of Prussia to respect him, though otherwise he

1 Stephan, ib., p. 54. 2 Ib., p. 46.

3 In Nicolai, " Allg. deut. Bibliothek," 1797. G. Frank, " Luther
im Spiegel seiner Kirche " (" Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol.," 1905, p. 465 ff.),
p. 475.

4 Ritschl, " Gesch. des Pietismus," 2, p. 575. Stephan, ib., p. 58.
Ritschl adds that, according to this view (Biisching's), " religion was
a matter of the individual and only incidentally of the congregation."

448 LUTHER THE REFORMER

considered him a " furious monk " and a " barbarous writer." —
Those who thus credited Luther with tolerance " had no inkling
of the antithesis between this idea and the true Luther."1 His
wanton way of dealing with the Canon of Scripture was urged
against the Orthodox in defence of a more critical treatment of
Holy Writ. Lessing, referring to Luther's whole system of Bible
interpretation, wrote to J. M. Goeze, the chief pastor of St.
Catherine's church at Hamburg : " What greater authority had
Luther than any other Doctor of Divinity ? "2

Less dangerous to Lutheranism, and in itself harmless enough,
though quite characteristic of the age, was the discovery then
made, that Luther was the very personification of a public bene
factor and great servant of the State. The Leipzig Professor,
C. H. Wieland, described him as a " scholar to whom all were
indebted " ; Luther, he says, " unmasked obsolete prejudices and
opened up to his contemporaries in more than one direction fresh
prospects of a coming enlargement of the circle of human know
ledge. And this great man was a German."3 From the good
bourgeois point of view the fact that Luther had, as it was
thought, cultivated respect for the secular authorities was a great
feather in his cap. Such people readily shut their eyes to the
severity with which Luther had been wont to lash the rulers,
even the highest in the land, and to the fact that he had under
mined the very foundations of authority. The patriotic thought
that " this great man was a German " was made to cover all his
failings.

This sort of patriotism gradually produced a new pattern of
Luther, differing in many respects from the others. Particularly
after the outbreak of the great German wars of deliverance and
the burning enthusiasm for the Fatherland which they called forth
many felt that they could not sufficiently extol Luther as tho
great German, and a typical child of his beloved country.

Goethe repeatedly called Luther a " great man." But what,
above all, prepossessed him in his favour was, first, his " Struggle
against priestcraft and the hierarchy," and, then, his translation
of the Bible. " By him we have been freed from the fetters of
intellectual narrowness . . . and have once more the courage
to stand upright on God's earth and to realise our own divinely
endowed nature."4 The poet, himself a true child of liis age, had
no eye for the truths defended by Catholicism against Lutheran-
ism. In a letter to Knebel dated August 22, 1817, when the
centenary of Luther's promulgation of his Theses was being
celebrated far and wide, he said : " Between ourselves, the only
interesting thing in the whole business [the Reformation] is
Luther's character ; it is also the only thing that really impresses
the masses. All the rest is worthless trumpery of which we still
feel the burden to-day." As for the usual view of Luther he
characterises it as mythological.

1 Stephan's words, ib., p. 59,

2 Ib., p. 74 ; cp. ib., p. 72, Lessing's high opinion of Luther.

3 " Pantheon der Deutschen," 1, Chemnitz, 1794, p. 232,

4 Conversation with Eckermann, March 11, 1832.

IN MODERN EYES 449

7. The Modern Picture of Luther

In the so-called Romantic School the picture of Luther
tends to become as shifty as the character of the age.

The Romanticists, like the poets they were, were anxious,
as in other fields so also in respect of Luther, to make a
stand against the shallowness of the " Enlightenment."

Zacharias Werner, while still a Protestant, wrote in Luther's
honour his drama " Die Weihe der Kraft," and, then, as a
Catholic, the drama entitled " Die Weihe der Unkraft."

Novalis, who was deeply read in Luther's works, was of opinion
that he, like Protestantism itself, was something democratic ;
to him Luther appeared a " hothead." Disgusted with Lutheran-
ism and vaguely conscious of the beauty of the past he was
anxious to see the scattered faithful once more united in a new
Christianity. " Luther," so he wrote, " treated Christianity as
he liked, failed to recognise its spirit and introduced another
letter and another religion, viz. the sacred principle of the Bible
over all." A " fire from heaven " had indeed presided over the
commencement of his career ; later on, however, the source of
" holy inspiration had run dry " and worldliness gained the upper
hand in Luther.1

The religious spirit which had animated the Romanticists
and had led them to cast yearning eyes at the Middle Ages
was soon extinguished by the new criticism, historical and
Biblical, and by the spread of infidelity.

The latest efforts to portray Luther

Luther had now to submit to being criticised by scholars
who prided themselves on being dispassionate and were not
slow to pass judgment on the characteristics, whether actual
or imaginary, which they seemed to discover in him. What
the Gottingen Church-historian, Gottlieb Jakob Planck,
representing the so-called " Pragmatic " writers had begun
— much to the disgust of the then Luther devotees2 — was
pushed forward by many other Protestants. The lengths to
which independent criticism has gone of recent years is
emphasised in the Gottingen theologian, Paul de Lagardc.
Typical of his remarks is the following : " That great scold
Luther, who could see no further than the tips of his toes, by
his demagogy threw Germany into barbarism and dissen-

1 "Novalis' Schriften," 2, ed. Minor, Jena. 1907, p. 27 ff

2 See vol. i., p. xxxv, f,

VI — 2 G

450 LUTHER THE REFORMER

sion."1 It was particularly with Luther's " coarseness "
and tendency to indulge in vulgar abuse that the critics
were disposed to find fault. Some indeed were inclined to
excuse him. Hardly any other writer, however, in seeking
to exculpate Luther has used language so startling as that
of Adolf Hausrath the Heidelberg scholar who, in his Life of
Luther (1904), " thanks God for the barbarism of these
polemics," and goes so far as to say that, " since Luther's
road led to the goal it must have been the right one."2

Of the three comprehensive and most widely known
biographies of Luther, that of Hausrath depicts Luther
from the standpoint of a liberal divine. Here Luther
almost ceases to be a theologian, or at any rate the theo
logical problems amidst which Luther lived are scarcely even
mentioned. On the other hand, in the biography by
Theodore Kolde of Erlangen (2nd ed., 1893), the Wittenberg
professor again figures as a teacher ; his scholarly two-
volume work is positive in tendency and regards Luther as
a preacher of truth against the darkness of the Middle Ages
— which, however, the author has misunderstood and fails
to treat fairly. The third large modern work on Luther,
also in two volumes, is by the late Julius Kostlin of Halle
and Breslau ; a new edition was published in 1903 with the
collaboration of G. Kawerau ; here the picture of Luther
is a product of the so-called theology of compromise.3

1 Quoted by Franck, " Gesch. d. prot. Theol.," 4, p. 144.

2 " Luthers Leben," 1, p. xiii.

3 Of the legendary traits common in the popular literature on
Luther there is no lack in Kostlin's " Martin Luther." G. Kawerau,
who, after the author's death, finished the latest edition of the book
already in the press, would doubtless have depicted many things
differently had he had a free hand.

In the long discussion of Luther's monastic days his later utterances
are accepted implicitly without being submitted to criticism. Thus his
account of his penitential martyrdom, by which he even " endangered
his life," is taken at its face value, and so is his testimony to his own
saintliness. " Of any more evangelical conception of the road to
salvation, " Luther heard nothing at Erfurt, indeed there was " no
Christian preaching at all," etc., etc. " In the convent he was left
practically to himself." " The lax standard by which his scholastic
teachers judged of sin [the motions of concupiscence] did not alleviate
what he had to endure," viz. " the standard of the law." In the
theological lectures he heard nothing of " how, in the Man Christ, the
Godhead descends to us " ; on the contrary they led him to turn away
in terror from the Master and Judge. It was a cause of deep grief to
him that forgiveness was made " to depend on the worthiness arid the
works of the sinner himself," etc., etc. The Church gave him no

IN MODERN EYES 451

Wilhelm Maurenbrecher, professor of History at Bonn and
Leipzig, said truly in his " Studien " (1874), that the traditional
Luther " myth " the " stuff and rubbish " which the past had
looked upon as true history, deserved to be cleared away. He
traces back to Sleidanus the '* current 'fable convenue ' " about
Luther ; this writer, in the work he published in 1555, which

" insight into the meaning of the Mediatorship of Christ." Even at
Erfurt the Bible " had led him to see many errors in the Papal Church,"
but the most important thing was that, by means of this same Bible he
attained " by the gracious dispensation of God " to the " overthrow of
all proud self -righteousness." His flying for refuge simply to the
merciful Love of God became the salvation of the quiet, laborious,
struggling monk, whose destiny was to mould the world's history
(pp. 55, 60-66, 72, 75, 77 f.).

According to Kostlin Luther began " this attack on ecclesiastical
abuses straightforwardly, conscientiously, with moderation and
prudence" (1, 142). "At last he came forward from the 'corner'
where he would gladly have remained and entered upon the struggle "
(2, 626). During the struggle itself he was calm and peaceful, etc.,
" what would ensue he did not know, but committed it to Him Who
sits on High" (1, 354). This grand tranquillity was permanent with
him. " Of good courage, inwardly peaceful and confident, we see
Luther (after his marriage) living his new life " (738). Kostlin indeed
repeatedly mentions his inward struggles, but, according to him,
Luther conquers the burden of his temptations with " a bold faith "
(2, 178). " He warns his followers against the belief that the Papacy
was to be overthrown by the use of force " (1, 583). He also demands
that no constraint should be used in the " purely interior domain of
faith " ; the heretics were to " be resisted only by the Word," so long
at least as they did not "outwardly manifest" their errors (1, 584),
which, however, they nearly always did.

Luther's sovereign " merely looked on while the Word and the
Spirit did the work " (1, 603). Luther never " imposed on him either
the duty or the right to protect him and his work against Emperor and
Empire." " Never did he lend a hand to measures that might have
been of advantage to the furtherance of the evangelical cause, but
which would have militated against his principles " (2, 522).

No trace of false enthusiasm dominates Luther, but rather a " con
scientious sobriety " ; the passion that urges him on is merely " fiery
enthusiasm for the faith and his absolute confidence " (cp. 2, 517).

" It is from the religious foundations on which his life is based that
proceeds the freedom to which he has attained with regard to temporal
things, his joyousness in using them and the calmness with which he
renounces them and awaits what is better " (2, 512). " The faith with
which he embraces God, holds intercourse with Him and seeks strength
and victory through Him alone bears a character of childlike sim
plicity " (2, 513). It is a " bold faith," a courageous faith, that
animates him. " In heartfelt prayer lies for Luther all his strength"
(2, 514).

His " modesty as to his theological achievements " (2, 512) ought not
to be overlooked. He had no fears as to the permanency of his Evangel.
" That it was the Evangel of God for which he was working and that
He would not let His Evangel fall to the ground, of this he was quite
sure " etc. (2, 522).

At the time of his death " true religious interests were once more
paramount and Rome's domination, till then all-powerful, was for ever
shaken to its foundation " (2, 626).

452 LUTHER THE REFORMER

became a classic, had begun the process of " moderating and
toning down the theological colours " of Luther's picture, in such
a way as to make Luther the living expression of the " already
finished programme of the Protestant princes and theologians."
He lifted the author of the religious upheaval " out of his demo
cratic, revolutionary setting " and stamped him as a "model "
for theologians. Maurenbrecher, as a layman, is very frank in his
opinion as to the central question of Bible-interpretation : " It is
undoubtedly the right of every man at the present day to appeal
to Luther's own example, in favour of the unfettered freedom of
Bible-research. ' ' l

By an objective portrayal of his characteristics, Protestant
non-theologians such as Maurenbrecher have done good service,
particularly as regards the more secular side of Luther's picture.
The historian Onno Klopp was still a Protestant when, in 1857,
in his " Katholizismus, Protestantismus und Gewissensfreiheit in
Deutsehland," albeit recognising Luther's merits, he censured his
" boundless confidence in the infallibility of his own judgment " ;
the " unstable character of the new Church, so dependent on the
favour of princes " ; also the blind, idolatrous veneration of his
followers for him, especially the attitude of the " narrow-minded
Elector and his advisers who were ready to take all the morbid
drivel of a quarrelsome old man for the Word of God." And these
same authorities, so Onno Klopp declares, set up a new " Protes
tant Caesarean Popedom " which year by year became more
burdensome and oppressive.2 On the whole his portrait of
Luther is the reverse of flattering.

Had the writings of Leopold von Ranke and Carl Adolf Menzel
been as independent as Maurenbrecher 's or as broad-minded as
Klopp's, their picture of Luther would have been more true.
Even to-day, in spite of the abundance of works on the Reforma
tion period, an independent historian at home in all the profound
and detailed studies which have recently appeared, is still lacking
in Protestant circles ; hence a living picture of Luther's person
has not yet been painted.

As for the Protestant theologians they have, as a rule, not
contributed much to the portrait of Luther ; what they have
given us has been rather a sort of kaleidoscope of Luther's dogma ;
they busy themselves more with crumbs from his history than
with it as a whole. Dealing with some particular doctrine,
writing or action of his they have sketched, so to speak, only one
facet of his personality ; with the help of this they have, never
theless, built up a picture of the founder of Protestantism as he
seemed to them. Hence even the fundamental conception of
Luther's message, i.e. that whereby it differs essentially from
Catholicism has been very variously estimated. 3

1 " Stud, und Skizzen zur Gescli. der Ref.," Leipzig, 1874, Introd.
and pp. 208, 212 f.. 237. Cp. above, vol. i, p. xxix.

2 (Anonymous) Schaffhausen, 1857, pp. 104, 111, 113.

3 This was the opinion of H. Boehmer, ''Luther im Lichte der
neueren Forschung,"1 p. 115.

IN MODERN EYES 453

Protestant theologians of more " positive " leanings
have protested against the Rationalist views of those other
theologians who hold that Luther banished dogma from his
Christianity, and rediscovered Christianity " as a religion."1
They declare that, not only did he not abrogate dogma but
that he actually " revived and preserved " it. A religion
without dogma was unthinkable to him.2

It is true that these positive theologians who believe in
the existence of Lutheran " dogmas " are at variance when
it comes to stating clearly the actual dogmas which Luther
" revived," or in what his essential message consisted. Some
insist above all on the ethical side ; thanks to Luther there
came a " deeper understanding for the idiosyncracies of the
individual " than was the rule in mediaeval Christianity.

Where such inveterate differences of opinion prevailed
even the theology of conciliation was bound to fail. Rein-
hold Seeberg, the Berlin theologian, tried to promote some
sort of settlement in his " Grundwahrheiten der christlichen
Religion," a work " framed on the lines of the olden Gospel
and in the spirit of Paul and Luther which seeks to make the
Christian standpoint understood in wider circles." But his
scheme met with a poor reception ; the more orthodox
looked at it " askance, and, on the other hand, the pro
gressive party were only the more confirmed in their
antagonism."3

Several Protestant theologians of late years have com
pared Luther to St. Paul. This, for instance, was also done
by Walter Kohler of Zurich, a liberal theologian, who does not
hesitate to reprehend in Luther whatever he finds amiss, and
who also shows considerably more broad-mindedness than
many others in his appreciation of the works of Catholics.

The Janus-Picture of the Mediaeval and Modern Luther

Thanks to Deniile's work Luther's relation to the Middle
Ages is now more clearly seen. The need for bestowing
more attention than has hitherto been done on that side of
Luther's picture which belongs to the Middle Ages has been
strongly insisted on by another liberal theologian, viz.

1 See above, vol. v., p. 432 ff.

2 Cp. C. Stange, "Die altesten ethischen Disputationen Luthers,"
1900, p. vi. ff.

3 4th edition, 1900, Preface, p. vii. f.

454 LUTHER THE REFORMER

Ernst Troeltsch of Heidelberg. In Troeltsch's writings
Luther's features become to a great extent mediaeval. His
views on grace and faith, his ethics, his Churches, the stress
he lays on the Word — all this, in reality, is an echo of
Catholic times. All that forms the very being of Luther is
mediaeval and the Protestant traits arc merely the wrapping.1
With the belief in revelation, which he still retained, he had
been unable to rise above the hedge of the mediaeval way of
thought.

Troeltsch thus comes to the conclusion that the new era in
which we live did not commence with Luther but only some two
centuries ago, i.e. with the dawn of the Enlightenment. The
older Protestantism, no less than Luther himself, belongs to the
Middle Ages. Luther stuck fast in the Middle Ages chiefly
because he clung to the belief in the " supranatural," whereas the
modern world, thanks to a mathematico-mechanical natural
science, has done away with all that stands above nature.

Troeltsch also points out that Luther traces his conception of
the Evangel back to Paul, and not to Jesus as the New Theology
does ; also that he, like the earlier Protestantism, had not com
pletely shaken himself free of the mediaeval asceticism, and that
he held fast to the traditional doctrine of an original sin.

A Catholic writer has expressed himself more correctly on
Luther's false " supranaturalism," according to which God does
everything and man nothing : " The innermost kernel of his
doctrinal system was more ultra-mediaeval than the Middle Ages
themselves." " So far was he from desiring to make religion less
unworldly or less Christian, that, according to what he was
incessantly hammering into his hearers, man was to live himself
ever more and more into conscience and faith, into Christ and the
Gospel."2

Nevertheless the objection brought forward repeatedly of
recent years against the theory of Luther's mediaevalism is also
worthy of note ; it is urged that, particularly in the early years of
his tempestuous struggle, he threw off ideas which stamp him as
thoroughly modern.

F. Loofs, for instance, says : " His leading ideas include in them
a whole series of inferences which, however, he never followed up
to their logical conclusion. ... I may mention Luther's dislike
for all bare historical and dogmatic belief, the tendency he had
caught from Erasmus to criticise even the Canon, the distinction
he adumbrated between the message of salvation or ' Word of
God ' and the actual written word of Scripture. . . . Semler, who

1 Troeltsch, " Protestantisches Christ entum und Kirche in der
Neuzeit," in " Kultur der Gegenwart," 1, vol. iv.,2 ; Stephan, ib.,
p. 128f.

2 J. Schmidlin, " Das Luthertum als historische Erscheinung "
(" Wissenschaftl. Beilage der Germania," 1909, No. 15), pp. 117, 119.

IN MODERN EYES 455

has been styled the father of Rationalism, in his ' Abhandlung
vom freien Gebrauch des Kanons ' has not unjustly claimed
Luther as a forerunner . . . moreover, the services rendered by
Luther to the [liberal Protestant] theology of the 19th century in
many of its varied schools of thought cannot easily be over
looked."1

In these remarks there is doubtless much truth, and there are
facts which go to bear out the theory that Luther indeed stands in
close relations to the modern spirit. There can be no doubt that,
in Luther, we find mediaeval and modern features combined.
What is wanting is an organic connection between the two ; as
explained in the foregoing volumes it was only at the expense of
flagrant contradictions that he took over certain elements from the
past while rejecting others ; that he took one step forward
towards modern infidelity and another backwards. The ancient
figure of Janus with one face looking forward into the future and
the other back upon the past was harmonious, at least inasmuch
as the two faces were depicted as separate. In Luther, however,
the two faces are one, a fact which scarcely improves his physi
ognomy.

From the recent studies on Luther we can now see more
clearly than before that a " revision of the whole conception
and appreciation of Luther " is imperative in his own house
hold. But, in view of all the work already done, " is it not
high time for us to expect an estimate of the Reformation
as a whole which shall also be just to the whole Luther ? "
Stephan, who asks this question, answers it as follows :
14 We are still to-day in the midst of a new development that
started more than a century since from the contrast pre
sented by the different schools of thought."2

The " Religious " Reformer and the Hero of " Kultur "

Two other conceptions are in vogue at the present day,
which are in part a reaction against the rather over-bold
assertions sometimes made about Luther's mediaevalism.
Some have insisted that Luther is to be taken as a
" religious " teacher, without examining his actual doctrines
too narrowly. To others he appears in the light of the
founder of modern " Kultur," i.e. of civilisation in its widest
sense. Neither of these ideas can boast of being very clear,
nor have they met with any great success.

Those who regard Luther merely as a religious teacher practi
cally confine themselves to imputing to him the " religiousness "
of modern Protestantism as the inward force which moved him ;

1 " Leitfadeii der Dogmengesch.,"3 p. 535. 2 Stephan, ib., p. 09.

456 LUTHER THE REFORMER

albeit, maybe, in his teaching, he did not quite come up to the
modern standard. This was to all intents and purposes the view
of Albert Ritschl and his school. Luther, they declared, taught
first and foremost that both " piety and theology should rest on
the consciousness of having in Christ a Gracious God, thanks to
which consciousness we rise superior to the world with all its
goods and all its duties." With him " it was not a question of
denominations but simply one of religion." Ritschl, as another
Protestant not unjustly observed, " undoubtedly fell a victim to
the temptation " of " modernising " Luther.1 Moreover, whereas,
according to Ritschl, one of Luther's main achievements was his
introduction of a new view of the Church as an institution devoid
of legal jurisdiction, according to other Protestant scholars, it
was " chiefly in his views regarding the Church that Luther
remained under the spell of mediaeval thought."2 On the other
hand, some few have sought to make out Luther's religiousness
to have been simply ethical. Thus Wilhelm Wundt, the philo
sopher, declared that Luther had taught mankind no new
religion but only a new ethical system, which, however, was merely
an offshoot of the Renaissance. As against this we may set the
affirmation of Paul Wernle, viz. that neither Luther nor Lutheran-
ism had a system of ethics at all. 3

Recently, it is true, Luther's " religiousness " has been
described by a skilful pen as consisting in an interior union with
God, as something altogether " spiritual " " personal," as "a
sentiment bringing comfort to man's conscience."4 The truth is,
however, that the greatest minds, in mediaeval and still more in
patristic times, were also in favour of greater inwardness and
were against that sort of righteousness which consists merely of
words and works. This is a result borne in upon one by all the
research now being conducted with so much vigour into the views
prevalent in the Middle Ages and earlier.

Hence those who look upon Luther as a new preacher of
religion are compelled to paint the pre-Lutheran world as abso
lutely heathen. Luther, ** with his peasant's pick, relentlessly
attacked the vulgar polytheism of the people, the sublime
polytheism of public worship and dogma, and likewise the
pantheism of mysticism." But, even if we suppose that all these
dreadful things prevailed before Luther's coming, what did he
set up in their place ? He induced people, so it is said, to " seek
God and find Him in Jesus Christ the image of the fatherly
heart of God, to fear, love and hope in God above all things, to fix
our heart on God alone and there let it rest."5 — But this was
precisely what the olden mediaeval Church had sought to do,
hence, where is Luther's peculiarity ?

The state of the question to-day would almost seem to justify
the words of the famous Ernst Moritz Arndt in his " Ansichten
und Aussichten der teutschen Geschichte." He wrote in 1814 :

1 16., p. 110 ff. 2 Boehmer, ib., p. 120.

3 Ib., 2nd ed., p. 140. 4 Ib., 2nd ed., p. 153.

'° Boehmer, ib., p. 153.

IN MODERN EYES 457

" What Luther really taught and wished has hitherto been
understood only by the few ; his contemporaries failed to under
stand him, nor did he understand himself " ; but " he foresaw
that fiery, disembodied, formless Christianity that was to consist
of nothing more than fire and spirit." Arndt concludes with the
solemn words : " But peace be with thine ashes, thou great
German man, and may the earth hide thy shortcomings and
Christian charity thy faults."1

The aim of other modern thinkers is to breathe new life
into Luther by depicting him as the founder and the hero
of modern " Kultur." The conception of the author of
Protestantism as the fount and origin of all present-day
civilisation is certainly new and different from the earlier
portraitures we have thus far considered. In this picture
the " cultural " traits are put in so strong a light that his
44 religiousness " tends to vanish.

Modern civilisation is non-religious. It is perfectly true that
Luther materially contributed to the expulsion of religious
influences from the secular government and from public life in
general ; also that he intervened with a powerful hand to
promote the secularisation — that had already begun — and to
loosen the existing bond between the Church and the world. On
the other hand, it is quite wrong to shut one's eyes to the other
powerful factors at work both before him and in his day which
were also tending towards the civilisation of to-day with its
estrangement from the Church and preponderance of material
interests. Such a factor was the later Humanism. The whole
background of the time in which he lived and the seething ferment
that preceded the birth of the new world has been misunderstood.
His friends indeed point to the after-effects of his undertaking as
seen in the subsequent growth of education and scholarship ; also
to his attitude towards public morality ; to the services he
rendered to the German tongue ; even to the benefit which,
indirectly, accrued to agriculture, to the arts, to music, poetry,
etc. But, even if we are disposed to allow that an improvement
has taken place, it would be utterly unjust to blink the fact that
many other spiritual and material influences were at work in all
these spheres and were far more potent than Lutheranism. The
Lutheran territories were still in a state of servitude and general
backwardness when there passed over Germany a great wave of
civilisation that was partly of German partly of foreign and even
of Catholic growth. For the good that undoubtedly exists in
modern civilisation we have to thank partly the natural sciences,
which on their revival found a fertile soil even in Italy and France,
partly commerce in which, however, the South of Europe was as
active as any other region of the world, partly the arts, the

1 Stephan, ib., p. 93.

458 LUTHER THE REFORMER

best work being, however, cisalpine, partly the development of
the State and the army, which again is certainly no indigenous
product of Protestantism ; hence what we now know is the result
of a rivalry between varied influences and many countries. Then
again all those qualities which to-day give Germany so high a
place among the nations had existed in his countrymen long
before Luther's day ; such were their readi ness to appreciate the
good in others, their openness to outside ideas, their ability to
exploit foreign progress, their industry, their domesticity, their
tenacity in overcoming all obstacles, and their sober outlook.

Those who make Luther the hero of " Kultur " are also apt to
forget the sad ethical, social and political consequences of the
schism. To these Adolf Harnack referred plainly enough in a
lecture delivered in 1883: "We are well aware of what the
Reformation cost us Germans and still costs us. For ages it
delayed our political unity ; it brought on us the Thirty Years'
War ; it made it difficult for us to be just to the Church of the
Middle Ages, nay, even to the Church of Antiquity — we cannot
break with history without obscuring it — it brought upon us a
religious schism which still hinders our growth."1

If, however, we examine those elements of the new
" Kultur " which from the religious or moral standpoint are
somewhat questionable (though, amongst Protestant un
believers, writers are not wanting who are ready to justify
them) we meet with many indications which lead us back
to Luther. Yet, here again, on the other hand, there were
other great and far-reaching causes at work which account
for them, which have but little to do with Lutheranism.
Such were, for instance, the English Deism which reached
Germany by way of France and which helped to produce
the infidelity of the Enlightenment ; also the revolutionary
ideas of 1789 on liberty, the Rights of Man and the lawfulness
of rising in revolt, ideas to which the masses are still addicted;
then again the luxury that was imported from abroad ;
above all the inclination of the human heart everywhere to
sensuality, to egotism and to promote one's own standing
and temporal welfare even at the expense of one's neighbour.
These maladies to which human nature is prone have, by
various causes, been sadly aggravated in modern times.
How far Luther was responsible for some of these causes
should not be difficult to determine after all that has been
said above. At any rate his repudiation of authority in
religious matters, his new ideas on faith and good works, and,
again his whole system of subjectivism, were poor barriers

1 In the lecture quoted above, p. 441, n. 4.

IN MODERN EYES 459

against the inrush of those elements hostile to faith in God,
to Christianity and to ethics, which, in modern civilisation,
have a place side by side with much that is good.

Nietzsche laid it down that Luther was the first to free the
German people from Christianity by teaching them to be
un-Roman and to say : Here I stand, I cannot do other
wise.1 He was anxious to make Luther the patron of his
newest brand of " Kultur." But this new, antichristian and
atheistic " Kultur " is largely repudiated in Protestant
circles. Many, like Walter Kohler, refuse to admit that
Luther was in any sense the father of modern freethought ;
how could he have been, asks Kohler, since he would not
sanction any freedom of conscience, and did not even under
stand what such a thing was ? 2

Hence Luther makes a rather unsatisfactory " Hero of
Kultur." To depict him in this light his relations with the
more favourable side of " Kultur " have to be so much
exaggerated and distorted that one almost expects him, the
sworn opponent of " fool reason " and champion of the
" enslaved will," to leap from his grave in protest ; on the other
hand, it is quite impossible to claim Luther as an advocate
of that side of modern " Kultur " which is antagonistic to
religion and morality. Protestant authorities have also
protested against any claim being made on his behalf that he
at least abolished that " Kultur which was directed by the
Church " ; on the contrary, so they declare, the " Kultur "
for which he stood was in many respects " still tied up to the
one and only Church " and was quite " mediaeval in its
character."3 Thus, here again, a sort of dual picture,
painted partly in the gay colours of the present day, partly
in the sombre tints of the past.

A "Political" Luther ?— Conclusion

Over and above all the previous presentations of Luther
another strange portrait has recently appeared, which finds
admirers among lay historians and students of political
history. Here Luther's political traits are emphasised.
Houston Stewart Chamberlain, in his much-read work

1 " Frohliche Wissenschaft," Pocket edition, C, p. 202. Stephan,
ib., p. 120.

2 " Katholizismus und Reformation," 1905, p. 52 f.

3 W. KShler, " Theol. Literaturztng.," 1907, p. 303.

460 LUTHER THE REFORMER

" Grundlagen des 19 Jahrhunderts," insists on this view of
Luther, starting from the assumption which is beyond
question " that the separation from Rome for which Luther
fought with such passion all his life was in itself the greatest
political upheaval that could possibly occur. . . . However
pitiful the later history of the Reformation may have been,
still Luther's deed was an undying one for this reason, that
it rested on a firm political groundwork." Chamberlain
quite rightly makes much of Luther's attempt to link his
cause with that of the princes and with the German national
sentiment.

" Without the princes," says Chamberlain, " nothing could
have been done. Who seriously believes that the princes who
patronised the Reformation were inspired by or acted from
religious enthusiasm ? The fingers of one hand would be more
than enough on which to reckon up those of whom such a thing
holds good. Political interest and political ambition backed by
the awakening of national sentiment were the determining
factors." " Even in the later wars of religion the political
question was paramount." It was his desire to win over the
German statesmen that made Luther " speak so highly of the
' German nation ' and so disrespectfully of the Papists." That
was why he wrote, for instance : " For my Germans was I born,
them will I serve." He is " more a politician than a theologian."
" Luther is, above all. a political hero."

This portrait of the " political hero " is not one whit less one
sided than the others ; above all, the author, who has no under
standing for Christianity and the Church, fails also to see the so-
called "religious" side in Luther. It is true that political
motives often loomed so large in Luther's case and in that of the
princes who lent him their support as actually to obscure the
religious side of the struggle. Luther himself, however, was any
thing rather than a great politician on the world's stage. He had,
in fact, to quote a Protestant historian, woefully distorted and
imperfect views of the actual trend of human events, particularly
of the determining personalities and active factors in the politics
of that day. Never perhaps has a more childish diagnosis been
given than that contained in the advice of the Wittenberg theo
logian to his sovereigns about their attitude towards Charles V.1
The circumstance that he was deficient in political sense may
explain to some extent his mistakes and want of logic in this
sphere, but cannot excuse the masterful tone in which he so often
expresses himself on the public questions of the day. Then again
there was his changeableness. Resistance to the Kaiser, which
at one time he had declared unlawful, was advised by him later.
After he had handed over the rights of the Church to the lawyers
he turns on them and denounces them as his worst foes, who must

1 Cp. also H. Boehmer, ib.,1 p. 136.

IN MODERN EYES 461

be fought with every weapon for the sake of the independence of
the preachers. In the same way, in spite of the religious freedom
which he seemed at first to proclaim as a lasting principle for all
future government of Church and State, we find him making his
own that repellant intolerance, which, at last subsequent to
1530, led him to advocate the death-penalty for those who held
" sectarian " doctrines, or any that differed from his own.

Discouraged by the failure of all these attempts to
portray Luther others, at present, are inclined to deny him
any mark of distinction and, in particular, any creative
power, and depict him simply as the sum, or " product, of
existing historical forces." They emphasise strongly the
pre-existing factors and regard him less as a mover than as
one moved. This view, however, has also been stigmatised
by Protestants as " Mythological." They object that even
" the masses also have a certain share in the achievements
of genius," and that genius itself is but " a child of its
time."1

" The literary portraits of Luther," says the Protestant
author of " Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung," " are
all more or less unlike the original. They are not in the strict
sense of the word portraits at all but rather represent a type.
. . . Every age has to some degree altered the traditional
picture of the Reformer to make it fit its own ideals." " The
naive way of idealising which credits the hero of history
with our own ideals ... is still at work even at the present
day. If we cannot claim the whole Luther for ourselves, we
can at least claim a bit of Luther."

" In most of the popular Luther biographies of recent
times," the same author says, " all that is harsh and rude,
violent and demagogic, rough and crude in the physiognomy
of the Reformer has been obliterated."2

Adolf Harnack, also, seeks to discourage the practice of
" hero painting " ; he speaks unkindly of the common.,
" emotional pictures " of Luther as the reformer of civilisa
tion which are fabricated somehow or other with the help
of a select collection of artificial strokes. He adds : " The
reformer himself would not recognise such a picture as his."
" Such a thing would be to him," to quote an expression of
Luther's own, simply " a painted Luther."3

1 /&., p, 100 ; 2nd. ed., p. 139 f. 2 Ib., p. 10.

3 In the lecture mentioned above, p. 441, n. 4.

462 LUTHER THE REFORMER

To get as close as possible to the real Luther and not to
present a painted or fictitious one has been our constant
endeavour in the present work. We venture to hope that
the claims of objective history may be recognised even in a
field which trenches so closely on religious convictions.
There is so much that is purely historical and may be judged
quite apart from denominational considerations, so much
neutral ground where it is merely a question of facts. To
construct an opinion of one's own based on the incontro
vertible facts is open to everyone. We trust that the new
discussions that seem called for for a further sifting of facts
will be undertaken in all calm and in the dispassionate
temper befitting the historian. Should these volumes serve
as a stimulus in this direction, the author will feel that, by
this alone, he has achieved something great.

APPENDICES

XLI— APPENDIX I

LUTHEK'S WHITINGS AND THE EVENTS OF THE DAY ARRANGED
IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER

[The list in the original was compiled by Peter Sinthern, s.J. We
have retained it intact, save that here, as in the body of the work, we
give the title of each of Luther's German writings in the quaint spelling
of the earliest '' Urdruck " to which we had access. Note of tlii English
Editor.}

As the plan of the present work, as explained in the Introduction
(vol. i., pp. xxvii., xxxi.), did not allow of a strict chronological
order being followed, and as, moreover, many of Luther's
writings and not a few events of the day had to be passed over in
silence, the following list may be found both interesting and
useful.

Reference is made in it to all Luther's publications, even the
smaller ones, and the reader is told where they may be found,
either in the older Erlangen edition, or in the more recent Weimar
edition, so far as the latter goes. Such a catalogue forms the best
skeleton for Luther's history. The list is based on that given by
Kostlin (" Luther,"5 2, p. 718 ff.), slightly enlarged, for instance
by references to Luther's correspondence (in Enders, De Wette
and the Erlangen ed.), to his Disputations (as in Drews), and to
his sermons. Works which do not figure in the actual list for
each year but in the paragraph inset at the end, are those which,
though published during the year in question, were written
earlier. Some works apparently omitted in the list will be found
either in the Sermons or in the Correspondence of Luther.

The bringing into conjunction of Luther's writings with the
principal events of the years in which they saw the light will be
found of advantage, in that the two often mutually complete and
explain each other.

Till 1516- Accession of Pope Leo X, 1513 ; of Kaiser Maxi
milian I, 1493 ; of Frederick, Elector of Saxony, 1486 ; of
George, Duke of Saxony, 1500 ; of William IV, Duke of
Bavaria, 1508 ; of Joachim I, Elector of Brandenburg, 1499 ;
of Albert Archbishop of Mayence, 1514 ; of Scultetus, Bishop
of Brandenburg, 1507. — In 1502 foundation of the University
of Wittenberg. In 1503 death of Andreas Proles. Johann
Lang, professor (since 1511) at \Vittenberg goes (1515-16) back
to Erfurt. In 1510 Eck is appointed professor at Ingolstadt ;
VI— 2 H 4G5

466 APPENDIX I

Carls tadt wins his doctorate. In 1511, Amsdorf becomes a
licentiate in theology. In 1513, Spalatin is appointed Court-
chaplain and secretary to the Elector Frederick. In 1513-
1514, the attitude of the peasants becomes threatening. In 1515,
publication of the " Epistolse obscurorum virorum " of Crotus
Rubeanus, etc. — 1483, Nov. 10, Birth of Martin Luther. In
1497, he is sent to Magdeburg to the Brothers of the Common
Life. In 1498, he goes to Eisenach and, in 1501, to Erfurt. 1502,
he becomes a Baccalaureus. In 1505, he is made a Master and
enters the cloister (July 17). In 1506, he makes his vows ; his
first Mass (May 2 ?). He begins to study theology. In 1508, he
goes to Wittenberg to study ; his lectures on dialectics and
ethics. In 1509, he becomes a Baccalaureus biblicus (March 9) ;
late in the year he returns to Erfurt and becomes Sententiarius.
At the end of 1510 he goes to Rome and early in 1511 returns to
Germany ; " deserts to Staupitz " and removes again to Witten
berg. In 1512, the Cologne Chapter ; beginning of his friendship
with Lang and Eberbach ; his doctorate (Oct. 18) ; he succeeds
Staupitz as professor of Holy Scripture. In 1514 he takes
Reuchlin's side. In 1515 is made District-Vicar at the Chapter of
Gotha ; his discourse " Against the Little Saints." His opinions
become fixed whilst engaged on his Exposition of Romans (1515-
1516) ; echoes of the new doctrine in his sermons at Christmas.

1. 1510-1511. Marginal notes to the Sentences (Bks. i.— iii.)
and certain works of St. Augustine (publ. 1893). Weim. ed.,
9, pp. 2 ff., 28 ff.

2. 1513-1515. First lectures on the Psalms : " Dictata super
psalterium " (publ. 1743 and 1876, complete 1885). Weim.
ed., 3, pp. l(ll)-652 (ps. i.-lxxxiv.); 4, pp. 1-462 (ps. Ixxxv.-
cl.) ; 9, pp. 116-121 (ps. xli.).

3. 1514-1517. Sermons on the Lessons (in Latin) preached at
the monastery (publ. 1720). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 18(20)-141 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 1, pp. 41-214.

4. 1514-1520. Sermons (ed. Roth, 1886). Weim. ed., 4,
pp. 587(590)-717 ; 9, pp. 203(204) ; cp. " Opp. lat. var.,"
1, pp. 25-232.

5. 1515-1516. Lectures on Romans (ed. Joh. Ficker, 1908).

6. 1515 ? " Sermo prsescriptus prseposito in Litzka " (publ.
1708). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 8(10)-17 ; " Opp. lat var.," 1,
pp. 29-41.

Sermons, cp. Nos. 3, 4, 6. Letters, Enders, 1, pp. 4-27.
Erl. ed., 53, p. 1.

1516. Hermann von Wied becomes Archbishop of Cologne ;
Erasmus's " Colloquia " ; his first edition of the Greek New
Testament with a new Latin translation ; Lang as Prior of Erfurt.
— Luther's first mention of Tauler, in his " Commentary on
Romans " ; his mystical letters to Spenlein and Leiffer (April 8,
15) ; his quarrel with the Erfurt monks (June 16) ; his Catholic
sermon on Indulgences (July 27) ; his sermons against the " holy-
by-works " (July-Aug.) ; Opposition to his new theology at

APPENDIX I 467

Wittenberg and Erfurt (Sept.) ; back to Augustine ! (Oct. 19) ;
Carlstadt's Theses ; Luther busy on Galatians and Titus, 1516-
1517.

7. 1516-1517. " Decern prsecepta Wittembergensi prsedicata
populo " (publ. 1518). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 394(398)-521 ;
" Opp. lat. exeg.," 1, pp. 1-218.

8. (Sept.). " Qusestio de viribus et voluntate hominis sine
gratia " (Theses for Earth. Bernhardi : " Initium negocii
evangelici "). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 142(145)-151 ; " Opp. lat,
var.," 1, pp. 232(235)-255.

9. (Oct. 27, 1516-1517). "In Epistolam Pauli ad Galatas "
(Lectures, publ. 1519). Weim. ed., 2, pp. 436(451)-618.
Irmischer, 3, pp. 141—485.

10. 1st ed. of " Eyn geystlich edles Buchleynn " (the " Theologia
Deutsch "), with " Vor Rede." Weim. ed., 1, pp. 152(153) ;
Erl. ed., 63, p. 238.

Sermons, cp. Nos. 3, 4, 7. Letters, Enders, 1, pp. 28-78.

1517. Creation of 31 new Cardinals (July 1) ; ridicule of the
German Humanists ; Hutten settles in Germany ; his edition of
the " Donatio Constantini " ; "our" Erasmus (March 1)
publishes his paraphrases on the Epistles, and, later, on the
Gospels ; the old exegesis fares badly ; " De planctu ecclesiae "
reprinted at Lyons ; Tetzel visits Magdeburg, Halberstadt and
(in Oct.) Berlin ; Luther nails up his Latin Indulgence-Theses
(Oct. 31).

11. " Die sieben Puszpsalm mit deutscher Auszlegung nach dem
schrifftlichen Synne " (first personal work published by
Luther). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 154(158)-220 ; Erl. ed., 37,
pp. 345-442.

12. " Auslegung deutsch des Vater Unnser fuer dye einfeltigen
Leyen " (publ. by Agricola, and by Luther himself in 1518,
No.31).

13. Lectures on Hebrews (still unpublished).

14. " Disputatio contra scholasticam theologiam " (Theses for
Franz Giinther). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 221(224)-228 ; " Opp.
lat. var.," 1, pp. 315-321.

15. " Die zehen Gepot Gottes . . . mit einer kurtzen Aussle-
Tgung" (publ. 1518). Weim. ed., 1, pp. 247(250)-256 ;
|Erl. ed., 36, pp. 146-154.

16. .The 95 Indulgence-Theses: "Disputatio pro declaratione

virtutis indulgentiarum." Weim. ed., 1, pp. 229(233)-238 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 1, pp. 285-293.

Sermons, cp. Nos. 3, 4, 7. Letters, Enders, 1, pp. 79-137 ;
Erl. ed., 53, p. 1 f.

1518. Philip II Landgrave of Hesse (March 31) ; Sickingen and
his men desert the French for the Kaiser (May 16) ; Melanchthon
goes to Wittenberg (Aug. 25). — Early in 1518 Archbishop Albert
sends his report to Rome ; Tetzel's counter-theses (Jan. 18) ;
Leo X directs the Augustinian superiors to take steps ; the

468 APPENDIX I

Heidelberg Chapter and the Disputation in Luther's favour ;
Lang displaces Luther as District- Vicar ; charges formulated at
Rome against Luther as a spreader of heretical opinions (middle
of June) ; he is summoned to Rome (Aug. 7) ; the Augsburg trial
(Oct.) ; Papal Bull to defend the doctrine of Indulgences (Nov. 9) ;
Luther appeals to a General Council (Nov. 28) ; he discovers the
secret of the certainty of salvation.

17. " Eyn Sermon von dem Ablass und Gnade." Weim. ed., 1,
pp. 239(243)-246 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 4-8 ; " Opp. lat. var.,"

1, pp. 326-331.

18. " Resolutiones disputationum de indulgentiarum virtute."
Weim. ed., 1, pp. 522(525)-628 ; 9, pp. 171-175 ; " Opp.
lat. var./' 2, pp. 126-293.

19. " Sermo de pcenitentia." Weim. ed., 1, pp. 317(319)-324 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 1, pp. 331-340.

20. Theses for the Heidelberg Disputation (Leonard Beyer's).
Weim. ed., 1, pp. 350(353)-355 ; 9, pp. 160(161)-170 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 1, pp. 387-390.

21. " Asterisci Lutheri adv. Obeliscos Eckii " (publ. 1545).
Weim. ed., 1, pp. 278(281)-314 ; "Opp. lat. var.," 1,
pp. 410-456.

22. Preface to the complete ed. of " Eyn Deutsch Theologia."
Weim. ed., 1, pp. 374(378)-379 ; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 238-240 :
cp. No. 10.

23. " Eyn Freiheyt dess Sermons Bepstlichen Ablass und Gnad
belangend." Weim. ed., 1, pp. 380(383)-393 ; Erl. ed., 27,
pp. 10-25.

24. " Ausslegung des 109 Psalmen." Weim. ed., 1, pp. 687(689)-
710 ; 9, pp. 176-202 ; Erl. ed., 40, pp. 3-38.

25. " Ad dialogum Silvestri Prieriatis de po testate Papse
responsio." Weim. ed., 1, pp. 644(647)-686 ; " Opp. lat.
var.," 2, pp. 6-67.

26. "Sermo de virtute excommunicationis." Weim. ed., 1,
pp. 634(638)-643 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 1, 2, pp. 306-313.

27. " Sermo in festo S. Michaelis in arce Wimariensi " (publ.
1556). " Opp. lat. var.," 1, pp. 226-232.

28. " Acta Augustana." Weim. ed., 2, pp. l(6)-26 ; 9, p. 205 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 2, pp. 354-361, 367-392.

29. " Appellatio a Caietano ad Papam." Weim. ed., 2,
pp. 27(28)-33 ; " Opp. lat var.," 2, pp. 398-404.

30. " Appellatio ad futurum concilium universale." Weim. ed.,

2, pp. 34(36)-40 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 2, pp. 438-445.

31. " Auslegung deutsch des Vater Unnser fuer dye einfeltigen
Leyen." (Cp. No. 12.) Weim. ed., 2, pp. 74(80)-130 ; 9,
pp. 122(123)-159; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 159-227; 45, pp. 204-207.

32. " Sermo de triplici iustitia." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 41(43)-,47 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 2, pp. 322-329.

" Decem prsecepta," cp. No. 7. Brief explanation of the
Ten Commandments, cp. No. 15. Sermons, Erl. ed., 162,
pp. 3-33; cp. No. 4. Letters, Enders, 1, pp. 138-337; 5,
p. 1 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 3-5.

APPENDIX I 469

1519. Death of Maximilian I, Charles V succeeds him (June 28) ;
Ulrich becomes Duke of Wiirtemberg ; the " Onus ecclesise " of
B. Pirstinger of Chiemsee ; death of Tetzel (Aug. 11); Capito
becomes cathedral-preacher at Mayence ; Zwingli at Zurich
(Jan. 1) ; Oldecop visits Rome ; Miltitz calls on Luther (Jan.) ;
the Leipzig Disputations (June-July).

33. Preface to Prierias's " Replica." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 48(50)-
56 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 2, pp. 68-78.

34. *' Kurtz Unterweysung wie man beichten sol." Weim. ed.,
2, pp. 57(59)-65 ; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 245-253 (cp. No. 66).

35. " Unterricht auff etlich Artikell." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 66(69)-
73 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 3-9 ; 242, pp. 5-11.

36. " Eyn Sermon von der Betrachtung des heyligen Leydens
Christi." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 131(136)-142 ; Erl. ed., 11,
pp. 144-152; II2, pp. 154-163.

37. Commentary on Galatians, cp. No. 9.

38. 1519-1521. Second course of Lectures on the Psalms.
" Operationes in psalmos " (Ps. i.-xxii.). Weim. ed., 5,
pp. l(19)-673 ; " Opp. lat. exeg.," 14-16.

39. "Sermo de duplici iustitia." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 143(145)-
152 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 2, pp. 329-339.

40. " Disputatio et excusatio adv. criminationes Eccii." Weim.
ed., 2, pp. 153(158)-161 ; 9, pp. 206(207)-212 ; " Opp. lat.
var.," 3, pp. 12-17.

41. " Eyn Sermon von dem Elichen Standt." Original text,
Weim. ed., 9, pp. 213-220 ; Erl. ed., 16, pp. 150-158 ; 162,
pp. 50-57. Revised text, Weim. ed., 2, pp. 162(166)-! 71 ;
Erl. ed., 16, pp. 158-165 ; 162, pp. 60-67.

42. " Eyn kurtze Form des Pater Noster zu versteen unnd zu
betten." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 9(11)-19 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 21-32.

43. " Kurtze niitzliche ausslegung des Vatter Unsers fiirsich
und hindersich." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 20(21)-22 ; Erl. ed., 45,
p. 208-211.

44. " Eyn Sermon von dem Gepeet unnd Procession yn der
Creutz Wochen." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 172(175)-179 ; Erl. ed.,
20, pp. 290-296 ; 162, pp. 69-76.

45. " Eyn Sermon von dem Wucher." Weim. ed., 6, pp. l(3)-8 ;
Erl. ed., 20, pp. 122-127 ; 162, pp. 113-117.

46. " Resolutio super propositione sua (Lipsiensi) XIII de
potestate Papas." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 180(183)-240 ; " Opp.
lat. var.," 3, pp. 296-384.

47. " Scheda adv. Hochstraten," Weim. ed., 2, pp. 384(386)-
387 ; " Opp. lat var.," 2, pp. 295-297.

48. " Resolutiones super propositionibus Lipsiee disputatis."
Weim. ed., 2, pp. 388(391 )-435 ; "Opp. lat. var.," 3,
pp. 228-292.

49. " Tessaradecas consolatoria pro laborantibus et oneratis."
(publ. 1520). Weim. ed., 6, pp. 99(104)-134 ; "Opp. lat.
var.," 4, pp. 88-135.

50. " Contra maligiium loh. Eccii iudicium." Weim. ed., 2,
pp. 621(625)-654 ; " Opp. lat. var.," pp. 472-514.

470 APPENDIX I

51. " Ad segocerotem Emserianum additio." Weirn. ed., 2,

if pp. 655(658)-679 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 13-45.
52A" Sermon von dem Sacrament der Puss." Weini. ed., 2,
/pp. 709(713)-723 ; Erl. ed., 53, p. 30 f. ; 20, pp. 179-193 ;
S{ 162, pp. 35-48.

53. " Eyn Sermon von der Bereytung zurn Sterben." Weim.
ed., 2, pp. 680(684)-697 ; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 258-274 ; " Opp.
lat. var.," 3, pp. 453-473.

54. " Ad Eccium super expurgatione Ecciana." Weim. ed., 2,
pp. 698(700)-708 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 47-58.

55. " Eyn Sermon von dem heyligen hochwirdigen Sacrament
der Tauffe." Weim. ed., 2, pp. 724(727)-737 ; Erl. ed., 21,
pp. 229-244 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 3, pp. 398-410.

56. " Eyn Sermon von dem hochwirdigen Sacrament des
heyligen waren Leychnams Christi." Weim. ed., 2,
pp. 738(742)-758 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 28-50.

57. " Scholia in librum Genesios " (publ. 1893). Weim ed., 9,
pp. 329-415.

58. " Enarrationes epistolarum et evangeliorum quas postillas
vocant " (publ. 1893). Weim. ed., 9, pp. 415-676.

59. Latin Advent-postils (publ. 1521). Weim. ed., 7, pp.
458(463)-637.

Sermons, cp. No. 36, 41, 44, 52, 55-59. Letters, Enders, 1,
p. 338—2, p. 289 ; 5, pp. 4-8 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 5-34 ; 56,
pp. i.— vii.

1520. Suleiman II begins his career. The war in Hungary.
Coronation of Charles V at Aachen (Oct. 23). Hutten offers
Luther his own and Sickingen's protection ; his " Vadiscus " and
" Inspicientes " (April). Miinzer at Zwickau (May 17) ; Urban
Rhegius cathedral-preacher at Augsburg ; Link succeeds Staupitz
as General Vicar (Aug. 28). Eck goes to Rome ; the first Con
sistory against Luther (Jan. 9). The Stolpen decree of the Bishop
of Meissen (Jan. 24). Luther's letter to Charles V (Aug. 30) ; his
third and last epistle to Leo X (after Oct. 13). The Bull
" Exsurge " and its condemnation of 41 theses (June 15), pub
lished in Germany by Eck (in Sept.) and burnt by Luther (Dec.
10). Luther's open attack on the freedom of the will.

60. " Eyn Sermon von dem Bann." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 61(63)-75 ;
Erl. ed., 27, pp. 51-70.

61. " Eyn Sermon von dem Wucher." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 33(36)-
60 ; Erl. ed., 20, pp. 89-120 ; 162, pp. 79-110.

62. " Erklerung . . . etlicher Artickel yn seynem Sermon von
dem heyligen Sacrament." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 76(78)-83 ;
Erl. ed., 27, pp. 71-77.

63. " Antwort auff die Tzedel sso unter des Officials tzu Stolpen
Sigel ist aussgangen " ; " Ad Schedulam inhibitionis."
Weim ed., 6, pp. 135(136)-141, 142(144)-153 ; Erl. ed., 27,
pp. 78-84 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 138-151.

64. " Sermon von den guten Wercken." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 196
(202)-276 ; 9, pp. 226(229)-301 ; Erl. ed., 20, pp. 193-
290 ; 162, pp. 121-220.

APPENDIX I 471

05. " Responsio ad condeiimatioiiem doctrinaleii per Lovani-
cnses et Colonienses." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 170(174)-195 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 176-205.

06. "Confitendi ratio." Weim. ed., 6, 154(157)-109 ; "Opp.
lat. var.," 4, pp. 154-171 (cp. No. 34).

07. " Eyn kurcz Form der czehen Gepott. Eyn kurcz Form
dess Glaubens. Eyn kurcz Form dess Vatter Unssers."
Weim. ed., 7, pp. 194(204)-229 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 3-32.

08. " Von dem Bapstum tzu Rome wider dem hochberumpteii
Romanisten tzu Leiptzk " (i.e. Alveld). Weim. ed., 0,
pp. 277(285)-324 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 86-139.

09. " Epitoma responsionis Silv. Prieratis " with preface and
postface. Weim. ed., 6, pp. 325(328)-348 ; " Opp. lat.
var.," 2, pp. 79-108.

70. " An den christlicheii Adel deutscher Nation." Weirn. ed.,

6, pp. 381(404)-469 ; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 277-300,

71. " Eyn Sermon von dem newen Testament das ist von der
heyligen Messe." Weim. ed., 6, pp. 349(353)-378 ; Erl. ed.,
27, pp. 141-173.

72. " De captivitate babylonica ecclesise praeludium." Weim.
ed., 6, pp. 484(497)-573 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, pp. 16-118.

73. "Erbieten" (" Oblatio sive Protestatio "). Weim. ed., 6,
pp. 478(480)-481, 482-483; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 9-11 ; 242,
pp. 12-14 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, pp. 4-6 ; early draft of
same, Weim. ed., 6, pp. 476-478 ; 9, pp. 302-304 ; Erl. ed.,
24, pp. 12-14 ; 242, pp. 14-16.

74. Preface to " Adv. constitutionem de cleri coelibatu." Cp.
Weim. ed., 7, p. 677.

75. " Von den newen Eckischenn Bullen und Lugen." Weim.
ed., 6, pp. 576(579)-594 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 15-28; 242,
pp. 18-31.

76. " Von der Freyheyt eynes Christen Menschen." Weim. ed.,

7, pp. 12(20)-38 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 175-199.

77. Eyn Sendbrieff an den Bapst Leo. den czehenden." Weim.
ed., 7, pp. 1(3)-11 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 41-52.

78. " Epistola Lutheriana ad Leonem decimum." " Tractatua
de libertate Christiana." Weim. ed., 7, pp. 39(42)-73 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 219-255.

79. " Adv. execrabilem Antichrist! bullam." Weim. ed., 6
pp. 595(597)-612 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, pp. 134-153.

80. " Widder die Bullen des Endchrists." Weim. ed., 0,
pp. 613(614)-629 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 36-52 ; 242, pp. 39-55.

81. " Appellatio ad Concilium repetita." Weim. ed., 7,
pp. 74(75)-82 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, pp. 121-131.

82. " Appellation odder Beruffung . . . repetirt." Weim. ed.,
7, pp. 83(85)-90 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 30-35 ; 242, pp. 32-37.

83. "Das Magnificat verteuschet und ausgelegt " (publ. 1521).
Weim. ed., 7, pp. 538-604 ; Erl. ed., 45, pp. 212-290.

84. " Warumb des Bapsts und seyner Jungern Bucher . . .
vorbrant seyn." Weim. ed., 7, pp. 152-186 ; Erl. ed., 24,
pp. 152-164; 24 2, pp. 154-166; "Opp. lat. var.," 5,
pp. 257-270.

472 APPENDIX I

85. Assertio omnium articulorum per bullain clainnatorutn "
(publ. 1521). Weim. od., 7, pp. 91-151 ; " Opp. lat. var.,"
5, pp. 156-237.

Tessaradecas (cp. No. 40). Sermons (cp. No. 58). Letters,
Enders 2, p. 290—3, p. 37 ; Ed. ed., 53, pp. 34-53.

1521. First war between Charles V and Fran$ois I (lasting till
1526). Henry VIII publishes his " Assertio." Death of Leo X
(Dec. 1). Fall of Belgrad. Bugenhagen comes to Wittenberg
and Eberlin of Giinzburg goes to Ulm. The Bull " Decet Rom.
Pontif." is issued (Jan. 3). The Diet of Worms ; the " Grava-
nima " ; Aleander's discourse (Feb. 13). Luther is summoned
to the Diet (March 6), his sermon at Erfurt (April 7), his con
demnation by the Sorbonne (April 15), his arrival at Worms
(April 16) ; he refuses to recant (April 18) ; his stay at the
Wartburg (May 4, 1521-March 1, 1522) ; the sentence of out
lawry, May 8 (May 26). Carlstadt assails clerical celibacy ; the
turmoil at Erfurt (July) ; the Mass is abolished among the
Wittenberg Augustinians (Oct.). Luther busies himself with the
translation of the Bible (Dec. 1521-1534) ; Melanchthon's
Commonplace-Book (Dec.). Luther's secret visit to Wittenberg
(Dec. 3-11). Carlstadt introduces a new rite for the Supper
(Dec. 25). The Zwickau " prophets " come to Wittenberg.

86. " Grund vnd Vrsach aller Artickel ... so ... verdampt
seindt " Weim. ed., 7, pp. 299(308)-457 ; Erl. ed., 24,
pp. 53-150 ; 242, pp. 56-150.

87. " An den Bock zu Leyptzck." Weim. ed., 7, pp. 259(262)-
265 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 201-205.

88. " Auff des Bocks zu Leypczick Antwort." Weim. ed., 7,
pp. 266(271)-283 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 205-220.

89. " Unterricht der Beychtkinder ubir die vorpotten Bucher."
Weim. ed., 7, pp. 284(290)-298 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 203-209 ;
242, pp. 206-213.

90. " Auff das ubirchristlich, ubirgeystlich und ubirkunstlidi
Buch Bocks Emssers." Weim. ed. 7. pp. 614(621)-688 ;
Erl. ed., 27, pp. 221-308,

91. " Ad librum Ambrosii Catharini responsio," Weim. ed. 7.
pp. 698(704)-778 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, pp. 289-394.

92. " Responsio extemporaria acl articulos ex Babylonica et
Assertionibus excerptos." Weim. ed., 7, pp. 605(608 )-61 3 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 6, pp. 24-30.

93. " Eyn Sermon . . . am Griindornstag." Weim. ed., 7,
pp. 689(692)-697 ; Erl. ed., 17, pp. 65-72 ; 162, pp. 242-249.

94. " Deutsch Auszlegug des sieben ufi sechtzigste Psalm <"'•"
Weim. ed., 8, pp. l(14)-35 ; Erl. ed., 39, pp. 179-220.

95. "Von der Beicht ob der Bapst Macht habe zu gepieten."
Weim. ed., 8, pp. 129(138)-204 ; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 319-379.

96. Church-postils, Advent to Epiphany (publ. 1522). Weim.
ed., 10, 1, 1, pp. 1-728 ; Erl. ed., 7, 10 ; 72, 102.

97. " Eyn Kleyn Unterricht was man ynn den Euangeliis
suchen und gewartten soil." Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, pp( 8-18 ;
Erl. ed., 7, pp. 5-12 ; 72, pp. 6-13.

APPENDIX I 473

98. " Rationis Latomianae confutatio." Weim. ed., 8, pp. 36(43)-
128 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 5, pp. 395-521.

99. " Der sechs un dreyssigist Psalm." Weiin. ed., 8. pp. 205
(210)-240 ; Erl. ed., 38, pp. 373-396 ; 39, pp. 124-136.

100. " Eyn Urteyl der Theologen tzu Paris uber die Lero
Dr. Luthers. Eyn gegen Urteyl Dr. Luthers." Weim. ed.,
8, pp. 255(267)-312 ; 9, pp. 716(717)-761 ; Erl. ed., 27,
pp. 380-410.

101. " Evangelium von den tzehen Aussetzigen." Weim. ed., 8,
pp. 336(340)-397 ; Erl. ed., 17, pp. 146-176 ; 142, pp. 42-87 ;
162, pp. 259-291.

102. "Themata de votis." Weim. ed., 8, pp. 313(323)-335 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 344-360 ; 6, p. 235.

103. " Eyn Widderspruch seynis yrthiiss erczwungen durch den
. . . Herrn H. Emser." Weim. ed., 8, pp. 241(247)-254 ;
Erl. ed., 27, pp. 308-318.

104. " De votis monasticis " (publ. 1522). Weim. ed., 8,
pp. 564(573)-669 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, pp. 238-376.

105. " De abroganda missa privata " (publ. 1522). Weim. ed., 8,
pp. 398(411)-476 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, pp. 115-212.

106. " Vom Missbrauch der Messen " (publ. 1522). W^eim. ed., 8,
pp. 477(482)-563 ; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 28-141.

107. " Eyn trew Vormanung . . . sich zu vorhuten fur Auffruhr
und Emporung." Weim. ed., 8, pp. 670(676)-688 ; Erl. ed.,
22, pp. 43-59 ; 22 2, pp. 43-58.

108. Translation of the New Testament (publ. 1522).

The Magnificat, cp. No. 83. Latin Postils, cp. No. 59.
" Assertio omnium articulorum," cp. No. 85. Sermons,
cp. Nos. 58, 96 and Weim. ed., 7, pp. 792(795)-802 ; 9,
pp. 501-516 ; Erl. ed., 162, pp. 221-301. Letters, Enders, 3,
pp. 38-268 ; 53, pp. 55-103.

1522. Hadrian VI (Pope from Jan. 9, 1522, to Sept. 14, 1523).
Charles V goes to Spain, remaining there till 1529 ; the Diet of
Nuremberg (Dec.) ; the Turkish question, the "Centum grava
mina," the fall of Rhodes (Dec. 25). Iconoclastic riot at Witten
berg (Jan.) ; the Wittenberg Augustinians abolish their rule
about begging (Jan. 6) ; relics no longer to be exposed at the
Collegiate Church (April 16). Jonas (Feb. 22) and Bugenhagen
(Oct. 13) take wives. Luther returns from the Wartburg (March
1) ; his sermons against Carlstadt (March 9-16). Hartmuth von
Cronberg's missive ; Luther returns to Erfurt (Oct.). The
innovations forcibly introduced into Altenburg, Schwarzburg,
Eilcnburg, etc.

109. "Bulla Coanae Domini." WTeim. ed., 8, pp. 688(691 )-720 ;
Erl. ed., 24, pp. 165-202 ; 242, pp. 168-204.

110. " Acht Sermon" (Against Carlstadt). Weim. ed., 10, 3,
pp. 1-64 ; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 203-285.

111. " Von beider Gestallt des Sacramentes zu nehmen." Weim.
ed., 10, 2, pp. 1(11)-41 ; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 286-318.

474 APPENDIX I

112. " Eyn Missive an den erenvestenn Harttmutt vonn Croubcrg. ' '
Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 42(53)-60 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 120-128.

113. "Von Menschen leren tzu meyden." Weim. ed., 10, 2,
pp. 61(72)-92 ; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 330-343.

114. "Die erst Epistel Sanct Petri gepredigt und ausgelegt "
(publ. 1523). Weim. ed., 12, pp. 249(259)-399 ; Erl. ed., 51,
pp. 325-494.

115. " Wyder den falsch gena.ntten geystlichen Standt des Bapst
und der Bischoffen." Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 93(105)-158 ;
Erl. ed., 28, pp. 142-202.

116. " Bulle des Ecclesiasten tzu Wittenbergk." Weim. ed., 10, 2,
pp. 140-144 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 380-387 ; 242, pp. 214-220.

117. "Epistel odder Unterricht von den Heyligen an die Kirch
tzu Erffurdt." Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 159(164)-168 ; Erl. ed.,
53, pp. 139-144.

118. "Contra Henricum regem Anglise." Weim. ed., 10, 2,
pp. 175(180)-222 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, pp. 385-448.

119. " Antwort deutsch . . . auff Konig Henrichs von Engellaiid
Buch. Liigen thun myr nicht, Warheyt schew ich nicht."
Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 223(227)-262 ; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 344-387.

120. Latin letter to the Bohemian Estates. Weim. ed., 10, 2,
pp. 169(172)-174 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 144-148.

121. 1522-1523. Translation of the Old Testament (Pentateuch,
publ. 1523).

122. Preface to " Wesselii epistolse." Weim. ed., 10, 2,
pp. 310(316)-317 ; "Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 495-497.

123. Preface to " Gochii fragmenta." Weim. ed., 10, 2,
pp. 327(329)-330.

124. "Vom Eelichen Leben." Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp, 267(275)-
304 ; Erl. ed., 20, pp. 57-87 ; 162, pp. 510-541.

125. " Ain Betbiichhn." Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 331(375)— 482.

The German New Testament, cp. No. 108. Church-
Postils, cp. No. 96. " De votis monastic-is," cp. No. 104.
" De abroganda missa privata," cp. No. 105. Sermons,
Weim. ed., 10, 3, pp. 1-435 ; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 263-265 ; 162,
pp. 304-543. Letters, Enders, 3, p. 269—4, ^ 52 ; Erl. ed.,
53, pp. 103-157.

1523. Clement VII (Pope from Nov. 19, 1523, to Sept. 25, 1534).
In Sweden, Gustavus Vasa (f!560). In Denmark, Frederick I
(t!533). Edict of the Diet of Nuremberg (Feb. 8). The Lutherans
begin to form parishes apart. The innovations introduced into
Prussia. Luther has the Mass done away with at Wittenberg.
Two Augustinians of Lutheran sympathies are burnt at Antwerp.
Flight of Bora and the other Nimbschen nuns ; Lang's marriage.
End of the German Augustinians. Luther's illness. His inter
view with Carlstadt at Jena (Aug. 22). Link goes to Altenburg.
The attempt to establish a new order of things at Leisnig. Luther
drafts a constitution for the Churches of Bohemia.

126. " Die ander Epistel S. Petri und eyne S. Judas gepredigt und
ausgelegt " (1523-1524). Weim. ed., 14, pp. 1(13)-91 ;
Erl. ed., 52, pp. 213-287.

APPENDIX I 475

127. " Von Anbeten des Sacramets des heyligen Leychnams
Christi." Weim. ed., 11, pp. 417(431)-456 ; Erl. ed., 28,
pp. 389-421.

128. " Deuttung der czwo grewlicheri Figuren, Bapstesels czu
Rorn und Munchkalbs zu Freyberg ynn Meysszen funden
Philippus Melanchthon D. Martinus Luther." Weim. ed.,
11, pp. 357(368)-385 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 2-16.

129. " Adversus armatum virum Cokieum." Weim. ed., 11,
pp. 292(295)-306 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 44-60.

130. Various Sermons, etc. Weim. ed., 11, pp. 36-62.

131. " Von welltlicher Uberkeytt wie weytt man yhr Gehorsam
schuldig sey." Weim. ed., 11, pp. 229(245)-281 ; Erl. ed.,
22, pp. 60-105.

132. " Eyn Bepstlich Breve widder den Luther." Weim. ed., 11,
pp. 337(342)-356 ; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 411-420; "Opp. lat.
var.," 6, pp. 466-477.

133. " In Genesim Declamationes " (publ. 1527). Weim. ed.,
24 ; 14, pp. 94(97)-488 ; Erl. ed., 33, 34.

134. " Von Ordenung Gottes Dienst ynn der Gemeyne." Weim.
ed., 12, pp. 31(35)-37 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 153-156.

135. " Ursach und Anttwortt das Jungkfrawen Kloster gottlich
verlassen mugen." Weim. ed., 11, pp. 387(394) — 400; Erl.
ed., 29, pp. 34-42.

136. " Das eyn Christliche Versamlung odder Gemeyne . . .
Macht habe alle Lere zu urteylen." Weim. ed., 11,
pp. 401(408)-416 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 141-151.

137. " Das Jhesus Christus eyn geborner Jude sey." Weim. ed.,

11, pp. 307(3 14)-336 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 46-74.

138. "Das Tauff Buchlin Verdeutscht." Weim. ed., '12,
pp. 38(42)-48; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 158-166.

139. " Ordeniig eyns gemeynen Kastens." Weim. ed., 12,
pp. 1(11)-30 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 106-130.

140. " Widder die Verkerer und Felscher Keyseiiichs Mandats."
Weim. ed., 12, pp. 58(62)-67 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 182-190.

141. " Das siebedt Capitel S. Pauli zu den Corinthern aussgelegt."
Weim. ed., 12, pp. 88(92)-142 ; Erl. ed., 51, pp. 3-69.

142. 1523-1529. Latin translation of the Bible (publ. 1529).

143. Epistolary Recommendation of Johann Apel's " Defensio pro

suo coniugio." Weim. ed., 12, pp. 68(71)-72 ; " Opp. lat.
var.," 7, p. 500 ff.

144. Preface to the German translation of Lamprecht's (Lambert
of Avignon) " In regulam Minoritarum . . . Commentarii."
Weim. ed., 11, pp. 457(461) ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 498 sq.

145. Introduction to Savonarola's " Meditatio pia." Weim. ed.,

12, pp. 245(248) ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, p. 497 sq.

146. " Eyn Brieff an die Christen ym Nidder Land." Weim. ed.,
12, pp. 73(77)-80 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 180-182.

147. "Allen Christen zu Righe, Revell und Tarbthe [Dorpat]."
Weim. ed., 12, pp. 143(147)-150 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 190-194.

148 Hymns : " Nu freut euch liebe Christen gmein," " Ein
newes Lied wir heben an." Erl. ed., 56, pp. 309 f., 340 ff.

476 APPENDIX I

1-49. " De instituendis niinistris ecclesise." Weim. ed., 12,
pp. 160(169)-196 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 6, pp. 494-535.

150. " Eyn Sendtbrieff . . . an ein Christl. Gemain der Stat
Essling." Weim. ed., 12, pp. 151(154)-159 ; Erl. ed., 53,
pp. 213-217.

151. " Eyn trost Brieff an die Christen zu Augspurg." Weim. ed.,
12. pp. 221(224)-227 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 223-227.

152. ** An die Herrn Deutschs Ordens das sie falsche Keuscheyt
meyden und zur rechten ehlichen Keuscheyt greyffen."
Weim. ed., 12, pp. 228(232)244 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 17-33.

153. "Formula missae et communionis." Weim. ed., 12,
pp. 197(205)-220 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 1-20.

German Old Testament (1st part), cp. No. 121. Sermons
on the 1st Epistle of Peter, cp. No. 114. Other sermons,
Weim. ed., 11, 12 ; Erl. ed., 17 2, pp. 1-72. Letters, Enders,
4, pp. 53-272 ; 5, p. 8 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 158-230 ; 56,
pp. 166 f., vii. f.

1524, Diet of Nuremberg for the execution of the Edict of
Worms. Amsdorf introduces the Reformation into Magdeburg.
Miinzer sacks the chapel at Malderbach near Eisleben. The
Peasant War (beginning in June and lasting till the following
year). League of the South-German Catholic Estates entered into
at Ratisbon (July 6). Joh. Walther's " Spiritual Song-book."
Miinzer's "Well-grounded plea" in his own defence (Sept.).
Erasmus's " Diatribe " (Sept.). Catholic worship is forbidden at
Altenburg. Luther throws off the Augustinian habit (Dec.).

154. " An die Radherrn aller Stedte deutsches Lands das sie
christl. Schulen auffrichten und halten sollen." Weim. ed.,
15, pp. 9(27)-53 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 170-199.

155. Translation of the Old Testament (2nd part, from Josue to
Esther).

156. " Duae episcopates bullae super doctrina Lutherana et
Romana." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 141(146)-154 ; "Opp. lat.
var.," 7, pp. 63-73.

157. " Eyn Christlicher Trostbrieff an die Miltenberger." Weim.
ed., 15, pp. 54(69)-78 ; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 117-128.

158. Preface to Bugenhagen's " In librum psalmorum Interpre-
tatio." Weim. ed., 15, p. 1(8); "Opp. lat. var.," 7,
p. 502 sq.

159. " Eyn Geschicht wie Got eyiier Erbarn Kloster Jungfrawe
ausgelffen hat." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 79(86)-94 ; Erl. ed., 29,
pp. 103-113.

160. 1524-1526. " Praelectiones in Prophetas minores " (publ.
1526-1545). Weim. ed., 13, pp. 1-703 ; " Opp. lat. exeg.,"
24-28.

161. " Deuteronomium Mosi cum annotationibus " (publ. 1525).
Weim. ed., 14, pp. 489(497)-744 ; " Opp. lat. exeg.," 13,
pp. 5-351.

162. " Widder das blind und toll Verdamnis." Weim. ed., 15,
pp. 95(110)-140; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 76-92.

APPENDIX I 477

163. " Dass Elltern die Kinder zur Ehe nicht zwingen noch
hyndern." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 155(163)-169 ; Erl. ed., 53,
pp. 236-244.

164. " Zwey keyserliche uneynige und wydderwertige Gepott."
Weim. ed., 15, pp. 241(254)-278 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 210-237 ;
242, pp. 221-247.

165. " Der Psalter deutsch." Erl. ed., 37, pp. 107-249.

166. " Von Kauffshandlung und Wucher." Weim. ed,, 15,
pp. 279(293)— 322 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 200-226.

167. " Eyn Sermon von dem Wucher " (2nd edition, cp. No. 61).

168. " Widder den newen Abgott und allten Teuffel der zu
Meyssen sol erhaben werden." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 170(183)-
198 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 239-257 ; 242, pp. 250-268.

169. " Zwue Sermon auff das xv. und xvi. Capitel ynn der
Apostel Geschichte " (publ. 1526). Weim. ed., 15, p. 571-
622 ; Erl. ed., 17, pp. 223-253.

170. " Eyn Brieff an die Fiirsten zu Sachsen von dem auffrur-
ischen Geyst." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 199(210)-221 ; Erl. ed.,
53, pp. 256-268.

171. " Sendbrieff an die . . . Burgermeyster, Rhatt und gantze
Gemeyn der Stadt Miilhausen." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 230(238)-
240 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 253-255.

172. " Ain Senndbrief an den Wolgeb. Herren, Herren Barth
von Staremberg." Weim. ed., 18, pp. l(5)-7 ; Erl. ed., 53,
pp. 202-204.

173. " Geistliches Gesangbiichlein " (with 24 hymns by Luther)
Cp. Erl. ed., 56, p. 306 ff.

174. Sermons on Exodus (publ. in 1526, 1528, 1564, and, in full,
in 1899). Weim. ed., 16, pp. 1-646 ; Erl. ed., 33, pp. 3-21
("Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 75-112); 35, pp. 1-392; 36,
pp. 1-144.

175. German Old Testament (3rd and final part, without the
"Apocrypha").

176. " Von dem Grewel der Stillmesse so man den Canon nennet."
Weim. ed., 18, pp. 8(22)-36 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 114-133.

177. "Der 127. Psalm ausgelegt an die Christen zu Rigen ynn
Liffland." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 348(360)-379 ; Erl. ed., 41,
pp. 130-150 ; 53, p. 281.

178. "Eyn Brieff an die Christen zu Straspurg widder den
Schwermer Geyst." Weim. ed., 15, pp. 380(391 )-397 ;
Erl. ed., 53, pp. 270-277.

Sermons on the 2nd Epistle of Peter and on the Epistle
of Jude, cp. No. 126. Other Sermons, Weim. ed., 15,
pp. 398(409)-803 ; Erl. ed., 172, pp. 73-115. Letters,
Enders, 4, p. 273 to 5, p. 99 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 230-281.

1525. Charles V is victorious near Pavia (Feb. 24). Prussia
becomes a secular principality (April 10). Luther opposes the
so-called fanatics, Carlstadt and the rest. The massacre at
Weinsberg (April 16). Death of the Elector Frederick (May 5).
flohann succeeds him on the Saxon throne and reigns till 1532.
Miinzer is vanquished near Frankenhausen (May 15), The

478 APPENDIX I

Erfurt Articles. League of the North German Catholic princes,
meeting at Dessau (July 19). Link becomes preacher at Nurem
berg (Aug.). The Mayence assembly (Nov.). Eck's "Enchi
ridion." Carlstadt's humiliation. Luther's marriage (June 13).
He calls for the entire suppression of "idolatry" at Altenburg
(July 20). The Reformation is violently carried through in the
Saxon Electorate (Oct. 1). Interview with Schwenckfeld (Dec. 1).
Nuremberg openly comes over to Luther's side.

179. " Widder die hymelischeii Propheten." Weim. ed., 18,
pp. 37(62)-214 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 136-297.

180. "Von Bruder Henrico ynn Diedmar verbrand sampt dem
zehenden Psalmen ausgelegt." Weim. ed., 18, pp. 215(224)-
250 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 347-354 ; 27 2, pp. 400-426.

181. " Vorrede an den Leser von der Jubil Jars Bullen." Weim.
ed., 18, pp. 251(255)-269 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 298-318.

182. Sermons on 1 Timothy. Weim. ed., 17, 1, pp. 102-167 ;
Erl. ed., 51, pp. 276-324.

183. " Eyn christl. Schrift an Herrn Wolfgang Reissenbusch sich
ynn den Ehelichen Stand zubegeben." Weim. ed., 18,
pp. 270(275)-278 ; Erl. ed., 33, pp. 286-290.

184. " Ermanunge zum Fride auff die zwelff Artikel der Bawr-
schafft ynn Schwaben." Weim. ed., 18, pp. 279(291)-334 ;
Erl. ed., 24, pp. 259-286 ; 242, pp. 271-299.

185. "Vertrag zwischen dem 16'blichen Bund zu Schwaben und
den zweyen Hauffen der Bawrn am Bodensee und Algew."
Weim. ed., 18, pp. 335(336)-343 ; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 2-12.

186. " Wider die mordischen und reubischen Rotten der Bawren."
Weim. ed., 18, pp. 344(357)-361 ; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 288-294 ;
24 2, pp. 303-309.

187. " Eyn schrecklich Geschicht unnd Gericht Gottes uber
Thomas Miintzer." Weim. ed., 18, pp. 362(367)-374 ; Erl.
ed., 65, pp. 13-22.

188. "Eyn Sendebrieff von dem harten Buchlin widder die
Bauren." Weim. ed., 18, pp. 375(384)-401 ; Erl. ed., 24,
pp. 295-319 ; 242, pp. 310-334.

189. " Eyne Christliche Vormanung von eusserlichem Gottis
Dienste unde Eyntracht an die yn Lieffland." Weim. ed.,
18, pp. 412(417)-421 ; Erl. ed., 53. pp. 315-321.

190. Preface to Bodenstein's " Entschuldigung D. Andrea
Carls tats des falschen Namens der Auffrur." Weim. ed.,
18, pp. 431(436)-438 ; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 404-408.

191. Preface to Carlstadt's " Erklerung." Weim. ed., 18,
pp. 446(453)-466 ; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 408-410.

192. " Die sieben Buss Psalmen " (revised). Weim. ed., 18,
pp. 467(479)-550 ; Erl. ed., 37, pp. 344-442.

193. Notes to the 28 Articles of the Erfurt Council. Weim. ed.,
18, pp. 531(534)-540 ; Erl. ed., 56, pp. xii.-xviii. ; 65,
pp. 239-247.

194. " Radtschlag wie in der Christlichen Gemaine ain . . .
bestendigen Ordnung solle fiirgenommen und auffgericht
werden " (publ. 1526). Weim. ed., 19, pp. 436(440)-446 ;
Erl. ed., 262, pp. 2-8,

APPENDIX I 479

195. " De servo arbitrio." Weim. ed., 18, pp. 551(600)-787 ;
" Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 113(116)-368.

196. Church-Postils (2nd part), Epiphany to Easter. Erl. ed.,
8-11 ; 82-ll2.

197. " Deudsche Messe und Ordnung Gottis Diensts " (publ.
1526). Weim. ed., 19, pp. 44(70)-! 13 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 227-
244.

198. Hymn, " Jesaia dem Propheten das geschach." Erl. ed., 56,
p. 343.

199. " Epistel des Propheten Jesaia so man ynn der Christ-
messe lieset " (publ. 1526). Weim. ed., 19, pp. 126(131)-168 ;
Erl. ed., 15, pp. 65-110 ; 152, pp. 70-116.

" Annotationes in Deuteronomiam," cp. No. 161. Other
sermons, Weim. ed., 17, 1, pp. 1-507 ; Erl. ed., 17 2, pp. 116-
253. Letters, Enders, 5, pp. 100-297 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 281-
357 ; 56, pp. 168-170, viii.-xviii.

1526. The Diet of Augsburg demands (Jan. 9) an (Ecumenical
Council. Luther lays it down (Feb. 9) that, in [each locality
there must be but one doctrine. The new worship* in the Saxon
Electorate. The Electorate and Hesse enter into a league (at
Gotha, and, later, at Torgau, May 2). Lambert of Avignon
helps Philip of Hesse to introduce the innovations. The Kaiser
threatened by the League of Cognac (May 22). The Diet of
Spires (Aug. 27) tempers the Edict of Worms. The Battle of
Mohacs (Aug. 29). Charles V politically estranged from the Pope.
The " Hyperaspistes " of Erasmus.

200. " Das Bapstum mit seinen Gliederii gemalet und be-
schrieben." Weim. ed., 19, pp. l(6)-43 ; Erl. ed., 29,
pp. 360-378.

201. Sermons (publ. in full in 1898). Weim. ed., 20, pp. 204(212)-
591 ; Erl. ed., 172, pp. 254-267.

202. " Widder den . . . Radschlag der gantzen Meintzischen
Pfafferey." Weim. ed., 19, pp. 252(260)-282 ; Erl. ed., 65,
pp. 23-46.

203. "Der Prophet Jona aussgelegt." Weim. ed., 19, pp. 169
(185)-251 ; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 325-414.

204. " Sermon von dem Sacrament des Leibs und Bluts Christi
widder die Schwarmgeister." Weim. ed., 19, pp. 474(482)-
523 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 329-359.

205. Two Prefaces to the Swabian " Syngramma.'* Weim. ed.,

19, pp. 447(457)-461, 524(529)-530 ; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 108-
185.

206. " Antwort auff ettliche Fragen Closter Geliibd belangend."
Weim. ed., 19, pp. 283(287)-293 ; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 318-327.

207. " Der Prophet Habacuc ausgelegt." Weim. ed., 19,
pp. 336(345)-435 ; Erl. ed., 42, pp. 3-108.

208. " Das Tauffbuchlin verdeudscht auffs new zugericht."
Weim. ed., 19, pp. 531(537)-541 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 291-294.

209. " Annotationes in Ecclesiasten " (publ. 1532). Weim. ed.,

20, pp. 1(7)-203 ; " Opp. lat. exeg.," 21, pp. 1-266.

480 APPENDIX I

210. "Der 112. Psalm Davids . . . gepredigt." Weim. ed., 19,
pp. 294(297)-336 ; Erl. ed., 40, pp. 241-280.

211. " Vier trostliche Psalmen. . . . An die Konigyn zu Hungern
ausgelegt." Weim. ed., 19, pp. 542(552)-615 ; Erl. ed., 38,
pp. 370-453.

212. " Der Prophet Sacharja ausgelegt " (publ. 1528). Weim. ed.,
23, pp. 477(485)-664 ; Erl. ed., 42, pp. 109-362.

213. " Epistel aus dem Propheten Jeremia von Christus Reich "
(publ. 1527). Weim. ed., 20, pp. 549-561 ; Erl. ed., 41,
pp. 187-219.

214. " Ob Kriegsleutte auch ynn seligen Stande seyn kiinden."
Weim. ed., 19, pp. 618(623)-662 ; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 264-290.

" Deudsche Messe," cp. No. 197. Two sermons on Acts
xv., xvi., cp. No. 171. Sermon on Is. ix., cp. No. 199.
Lecture on Osee, cp. No. 160. Instruction on Moses, Weim.
ed., 16, pp. 363-394 ; Erl. ed., 33, pp. 3-21. Various
memoranda, cp. No. 194. Summer part of the Church-
Postils (Erl. ed., 8, 9, 11-14; 92, 112-142). Sermons, cp.
Nos. 201, 204, 210, 213. Letters, Enders, 5, p. 298 ff. ;
Erl. ed., 53, pp. 357-394.

1527. Second war between Charles V and Francois I (lasting till
1529). Henry the Eighth's plans for a divorce. Ferdinand I is
crowned at Prague as King of Bohemia (Feb. 24). Sack of Rome
(May 6-14). Peace between Charles V and Clement VII (Nov.).
Gustavus Vasa takes Luther's side. The Visitation of the Saxon
Electorate (lasting till 1529) and introduction of the office of
Superintendent. Emser's translation of the New Testament
(Dec.). Melanchthon in his " Commonplace Book " modifies his
teaching on Predestination. Luther falls ill ; beginning of his
worst " struggles of conscience." Commencement of the contro
versy with Zwingli, etc., on the Supper. Wittenberg is invaded
by the Plague.

215. " Das diese Wort Christi (Das ist mein Leib etce.) noch fest
stehen widder die Schwermgeister." Weim. ed., 23,
pp. 38(64)-320 ; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 16-150.

216. Translation of Isaias.

217. " Auff des Konigs zu Engelland Lesterschrift." Weim. ed.,
23, pp. 17(26)-37 ; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 2-14.

218. Sermons on Leviticus and Numbers (publ. 1902). Weim. ed.,
25, pp. 403(41 1)-522.

219. Preface to " Commentarius in Apocalypsirn ante centum
annos editus." Weim. ed., 26, pp. 121(123)-124 ; " Opp.
lat. var.," 7, pp. 506-508.

220. Preface to "Die Weissagunge Johannis Lichtenberger."
Weim. ed., 23, pp. 1(7)-12 ; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 250-258.

221. "In Esaiam scholia ex D.M.L. prselectionibus collecta "
(publ. 1532-1534). Weim. ed., 25, pp. 79(87)-401 ; " Opp.
lat. exeg.," 22, pp. 1-296.

222. " Ob man fur dem Sterben fliehen muge." Weim. ed., 23,
pp. 323(338)-386 ; Erl, ed., 22, pp. 318-341,

APPENDIX I 481

223. Lecture on the 1st Epistle of John (publ. 1708 and 1799).
Weim. ed., 20, pp. 592(599)-801.

224. " Trostunge un die Christen zu Halle uber Er Georgen yhres
Predigers Tod." Weim. ed., 23, pp. 390(401)-434 ; Erl. ed.,
22, pp. 295-316.

225. " Octonarius David " (Ps. xix.). Weim. ed., 23, pp. 435
(437)-442; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 93-115.

226. " Von Er Lenhard Keiser ynn Beyern umb des Evangelii
Willen verbrandt." Weim. ed., 23, pp. 443(445)-476.

227. " Ain feste Burg " (1528 ?). Erl. ed., 56, p. 343 f., see above,
vol. v., p. 549.

228. Lecture on Titus and Philemon (publ. 1902). Weim. ed., 25,
pp. l(6)-78.

Church-Postils, Summer part and conclusion, ed. Roth,
cp. Erl. ed., 15, 16 ; 152. Sermon on Jer. xxiii. 5-8, cp.
No. 213. Sermons on Genesis, cp. No. 133. Other Sermons,
Weim. ed., 23, pp. 665(682)-757 ; Erl. ed., 172, pp. 268-322.
Letters, Enders, 1, pp. 1-172 ; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 395-416 ;
56, pp. 170-176.

1528. The Pack negotiations. Anabaptists are threatened with
the death-penalty. Death of Albert Diirer (April 6) and Emser
(Nov. 8). Cochlseus, Court-chaplain to Duke George. Cruciger
and other friends come to Wittenberg. Letters of Hasenberg and
von der Heyden. Bugenhagen's work in Brunswick. Progress of
the Visitation of the Saxon Electorate. The " catechetical
sermons " at Wittenberg. Philip of Hesse's breach of the peace
and hostilities against Bamberg, Wiirzburg and Mayence. The
Turks threaten new inroads.

229. " Unterricht der Visitatorn an die Pharhern ym Kurfur-
stenthum zu Sachssen," etc. Weim. ed., 26, pp. 175(195)-
240 ; Erl. ed., 23, pp. 3-70.

230. "Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis." Weim. ed., 26,
pp. 241(261)-509 ; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 152-373.

231. " Ein Gesichte Bruder Clausen ynn Schweytz und seine
Deutunge." Weim. ed., 26, pp. 125(130)-136 ; Erl. ed., 63,
pp. 260-268.

232. Lecture on 1 Timothy (partly publ. 1797). Weim. ed., 26,
pp. 1(4)-120.

233. " Von der Widdertauffe an zween Pfarherrn." Weim. ed.,
26, pp. 137(144)-174; Erl. ed., 26, pp. 255-294; 26%
pp. 282-321.

234. " De digamia episcoporum propositiones." Weim. ed., 26,
pp. 510(517)-527 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 360-373.

235. New edition of the German Psalter ; cp. No. 165, 289.

236. Three series of sermons on the Catechism (publ. 1899).
Weim. ed., 30, 1, pp. 2-122.

237. " Vom Kriege widder die Tiircken " (publ. 1529). Weim. ed.
30, 2, pp. 81(107)-148 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 32-80.

238. " New-Zeittung von Leyptzig." " Ein newe Fabel Esopi
newlich verdeudscht gefunden." Weim. ed., 26, pp. 534
(539)-554 ; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 326-337,

vi— 2 i

482 APPENDIX I

239. "Von beider Gestalt cles Sacraments." Weim. ed., 26,
pp. 555(560)-618 ; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 374-426.

240. Week-day sermons on John xvi.-xx. (in part publ. 1530,
1557). Weim. ed., 28, pp. 31(42)-502 ; Erl. ed., 50,
pp. 1-441.

241. Week-day sermons on Mt. xi.-xv. Weim. ed., 28, pp. 1(4)-
30.

242. " Nachwort zu der Durchleuchtigen hochgebornen F.
Ursulen Hertzogin zu Monsterberg. Christliche Ursach
des verlassen Klosters zu Freyberg." Weim. ed., 26,
pp. 623(628)-633 ; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 132-169.

Exposition of the Ten Commandments, Weim. ed., 16,
pp. 394-528 ; Erl. ed., 36, pp. 1-144. Commentary on
Zacharias, cp. No. 212. Other Sermons, Weim. ed., 27, 28,
pp. 503-763. Letters, Enders, 6, p. 173-7, p. 38 ; Erl. ed.,
53, pp. 416-452 ; 54, pp. 1-60 ; 56, pp. 176-180, xix.

1529. Peace of Barcelona (June 29). Peace of the Ladies
(Cambrai, Aug. 5). Retreat of the Turks from Vienna (Oct. 14).
Diet of Spires. " Protest " of the Lutheran Estates (April 19).
They promise each other mutual support (April 22). Philip of
Hesse and Melanchthon seek a union with the Zwinglians ; the
Marburg Conference (Oct. 1-4). Luther submits to the Upper
German townships his so-called Schwabach Articles which are
rejected by Strasburg and Ulm at the Schwabach Conference
(Oct. 16). The same thing happens again at the Schmalkalden
Conference (Nov. 29) and spoils all prospect of an arrangement
with the South-Germans. Nuremberg alone stands true to the
union.

243. "Von heimliche und gestolen Brieffen." Weim. ed., 30,
2, pp. l(25)-48 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 2-30.

244. "Deudsch Catechismus." Weim. ed., 30, 1, pp. 123-238 ;
Erl. ed., 21, pp. 26-155.

245. " Der Kleine Catechismus fur die gemeine Pfarher und
Prediger." Weim. ed., 30, 1, pp. 239-425 ; Erl. ed., 21,
pp. 5-25.

246. " Ein Trawbiichlin fiir die einfeltigen Pfarherr." Weim. ed.,
30, 3, pp. 43(74)-80 ; Erl. ed., 23, pp. 208-213.

247. " Teiitsche Letaney " and " Latina Litania correcta."
Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. l(29)-42 ; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 360-366.

248. Preface to the " (Economia Christiana " of Justus Menius.
Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 49(60)-63 ; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 117-121 ;
63, pp. 277-282.

249. Translation of the Book of Wisdom.

250. Sermons on Deuteronomy (publ. 1564). Weim. ed., 28,
pp. 501(509)-763 ; Erl. ed., 36, pp. 164-411.

251. Preface to Melanchthon's Exposition of Colossians. Weim.
ed., 30, 2, pp. 64(68)-69 ; " Opp, lat. var.," 7, p. 492 sq.

252. Preface to Brentz's Commentary on Ecclesiastes. Weim.
ed., 26, pp. 619(621)-622 ; Erl ed., 54 p. 59 f.

APPENDIX I 483

253. Preface to Venatorius' " Ein kurtz Underricht den ster-
benden Menschen." Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 70(79)-80 ; Erl.
ed., 63, pp. 285-287.

254. The " Wittenberg Song-book " with new hymns and a
] >ref ace.

255. " Von Ehesachen " (publ. 1530). Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 198
(205)-248 ; Erl. ed., 23, pp. 93-154.

256. Marburg Conference and Articles. Weim. ed., 30, 3,
pp. 92(110)-171 ; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 88-91.

257. Articles of the Schwabach Convention. Weim. ed., 30, 3,
pp. 81(86)-91.

258. " Eine Heer-Predigt widder den Tiircken." Weim. ed., 30,
2, pp. 149(160)-197 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 81-121.

259. Scholia to Ps. cxviii. (to Eobanus Hessus).

Latin translation of the Bible, cp. No. 142. " Vom Kriege
widder die Tiircken," cp. No. 237. Sermons, cp. No. 240
and WTeim. ed., 29. Letters, Enders, 7, pp. 39-212 ; Erl. ed.,
54, pp. 60-121 ; 56, pp. 181, xix.-xxvii.

1530. Charles V is crowned Emperor at Bologna (Feb. 24).
Death of Willibald Pirkheimer and of Luther's father, Hans (Feb.).
The " Confessio tetrapolitana " of Strasburg, Constance, Lindau
and Memmingen (drawn up by Bucer and Capito). The Torgau
Articles (March). Diet of Augsburg (June 20-Nov. 19). Luther
at the Coburg (April 23-Oct. 4). At Torgau he begins to favour
the use of armed resistance to the Emperor (Oct.). The " Con
fessio Augustana " (June 25), the " Confutatio " and Melanch-
thon's " Apologia " (Sept.). Bucer at the Coburg (Sept. 25). The
warlike league planned by the Protesting Estates at the Schmal-
kalden Assembly (Dec. 22). Spread of the innovations in
Hungary.

260. Preface to Spengler's " Kurczer Auszuge aus den Bebst-
lichen Rechten." Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 215(219) ; Erl. ed.,
63, pp. 288-290.

261. Preface to "Libellus de ritu et moribus Turcarum." Weim.
ed., 30, 2, pp. 198(205)-208; "Opp.lat. var.," 7, pp. 514-519;
Erl. ed., 65, pp. 248-254.

262. New ed. of the New Testament.

263. Translation of Daniel.

264. Preface to " Der Widdertauffer Lere " of Justus Menius.
Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 209(21 1)-214 ; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 290-296.

265. Lecture on the Song of Songs (publ. 1538). " Opp. lat
exeg.," 21, pp. 273-368.

266. " Vermaniig an die geistlichen versamlet auff dem Reichstag
zu Augsburg." Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 237(268)-356 ; Erl. ed.,
24, pp. 330-379 ; 242, pp. 358-407.

267. (1530-1532). Translation of Jeremias, Ezechiel and the
Lesser Prophets.

268. "Das xxxviii. und xxxix. Capitel Hesechiel vom Gog."
Weim, ed., 30, 2, pp. 220(223)-236 ; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 220-231.

484 APPENDIX I

269. Twenty-one Sermons (publ. 1702). Weim. ed., 32, pp. 1-298;
Erl. ed., 172, pp. 323-472.

270. " Auff das Schreien etlicher Papisten uber die siebentzehen
Artickel." Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 183(186)-197 ; Erl. ed., 24,
pp. 321-329 ; 242, pp. 337-344.

271. " Das schone Confitemini " (Ps. cxviii.). Erl. ed., 41
pp. 2-19.

272. Short exposition of the first 25 Psalms (publ. 1548, and, in
full, 1559). Erl. ed., 38, pp. 1-275 ; " Opp. lat. exeg.," 17.

273. (1530 ?). German version of ^sop's Fables. Erl. ed., 64,
pp. 350-361.

274. " Etliche trostliehe Vermanungen . . . Mit diesen Spriichen
hat sich der heilige Man . . . getrostet." Weim. ed., 30, 2,
pp. 697(700)-710 ; Erl. ed., 23, pp. 155-162.

275. Reflections of the Holy Fathers, on how a Christian must
bear his cross with patience. Erl. ed., 64, pp. 298-300.

276. Glosses on the Decalogue. Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 357(358).

277. " Widderruff vom Fegefeur." Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 360(367)-
390 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 185-215.

278. " Ettlich Artickelstiick so M.L. erhalten wil, wider die
gantze Satans Schiile uii alle Pforten der Hellen." Weim.
ed., 30, 2, pp. 413(420)-427 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 373-
377 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 122-125.

279. " Predigt das man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle." Weim.
ed., 30, 2, pp. 508(517)-588 ; Erl. ed., 20, pp. 1-45 ; 172,
pp. 376-422.

280. " Brieff an den Cardinal Ertzbisschoff zu Mentz." Weim.
ed., 30, 2, pp. 391(397)-412 ; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 159-168.

281. " Der Ixxxii. Psalm ausgelegt." Erl. ed., 39, pp. 225-
264.

282. "Von den Schliisseln." Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 428(435)-507 ;
30, 3, pp. 584-588 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 126-184.

283. " Der hundert und siebenzehende Psalm ausgeleget." Erl.
ed., 40, pp. 281-328.

284. " Vermanung zum Sacrament des Leibs und Bluts unsers
Herrn." Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 589(595)-626 ; Erl. ed., 23,
pp. 163-207.

285. " Sendbrieff D.M.L. von Dolmetzschefi." Weim. ed., 30, 2,
pp. 627(632)-646 ; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 103-123.

286. " Der hundert und eilffte Psalm ausgelegt." Erl. ed., 40,
pp. 193-240.

287. Week-day sermons on Mt. v.-vii. (publ. 1532). Weim. ed.,
32, pp. 299-555 ; Erl. ed., 43, pp. 2-368.

288. Sermons on John vi. 26-viii. 38 (publ. 1564). Weim. ed., 33 ;
Erl. ed., 47, pp. 227-394 ; 48, pp. 1-410.

" Von Ehesachen," cp. No, 255. " Heer-Predigt widder
den Tiircken," cp. No. 258. Sermons on John xvii., cp.
No. 240. Letters, Enders, 7, p. 213-8, p. 334 ; Erl. ed., 54,
pp. 122-209 ; 56, pp. 181-183, xxvii.-xxix.

APPENDIX I 485

1531. Ferdinand becomes the German King (Jan. 5). League of
Schmalkalden (Feb. 27). Bavaria takes the field against Ferdi
nand (24 Oct.). Archbishop Albert stays at Halle (till 1540).
Melanchthon prepares for the press his " Confessio Aug." and its
" Apologia." Luther suggests to Henry VIII that bigamy would
be preferable to divorce (Sept. 3). England (1531-1545) is carried
into schism by Henry VIII. Zwinglian iconoclastic riots in
Swabia. Zwingli slain in Battle (Oct.1 1 1 ) is succeeded by Bullinger.
Luther's revision of his translation of the Psalms ; his memoranda
on the means of stamping out the Anabaptist movement (end
of Oct.).

289. New edition of the Psalms, cp. Nos. 165, 235.

290. " Auff das vermeint Keiserlich Edict ausgangen jm 1531
Jare." Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 321(331)-388, 583 ; Erl. ed.,
25, pp. 51-88 ; 252, pp. 50-88.

291. " Warnunge an seine lieben Deudschen." Weim. ed., 30, 3,
pp. 252(276)-320, 392-399 ; Erl. ed., 25, pp. 2-50 ; 252,
pp. 3-49 ; 65, p. 259 f .

292. " Widder den Meuchler zu Dresen gedriickt." Weim. ed.,
30, 3, pp. 413(446)-471 ; Erl. ed., 25, pp. 89-109 ; 252,
pp. 109-128.

293. " Commentarius (maior) in Epistolam ad Galatas " (publ.
1535). Weim. ed., 40, 1 (cap. i.-iv.) ; Irmischer, 1 ; 2 ; 3,
pp. 1-120.

294. "Exemplum theologise et doctrinae papisticse." Weim. ed.,
30, 3, pp. 494(496)-509 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 21-43.

295. Psalm cxlvii. (publ. 1532). Erl. ed., pp. 152-181.

296. " Enarratio psalmi xlii." " Opp. lat. exeg.," 17, pp. 234-238.

Sermons, Weim. ed., 34, 1, 2; Erl. ed., 182, pp. 1-135.
Letters, Enders, 8, pp. 335-9, p. 135 ; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 209-
265 ; 56, p. 183.

1532. The Turkish invasion of Hungary and Austria (June) ;
Suleiman II does not venture to attack Vienna. Elector Johann
dies and is succeeded by Johann Frederick (till 1547). Calvin
stays for a while in Geneva. The Nuremberg proposals for a
religious truce (June 23) are rejected by the Catholic Estates at
Ratisbon (July 2). Melanchthon thinks of leaving Wittenberg.

297. " Brieff von den Schleichern und Winckelpredigern." Weim.
ed., 30, 3, pp. 510(518)-527 ; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 214-226.

298. " An den Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fiirsten und
Herrn Herrn Albrechten Marggraffen zu Brandenburg."
Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 541(547)-553 ; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 281-289.

299. " Enarratio psalmorum ii. et xlv." (publ. 1533 and 1546).
"Opp. lat. exeg. " 18, pp. 1-127, 129-264.

300 " Enarratio psalmi li." (publ. 153'8). " Opp. lat. exeg.," 19,

pp. 1-154.
301. Preface to Bugenhagen's ed. of " Athanasii libri contra

idolatriam." Weim ed., 30, 3, pp. 528(530)-532 ; " Opp.

lat. var.," 7, pp. 523-525.

486 APPENDIX I

302. " Sumrnarien uber die Psalmen und Ursachen des Dolmet-
schens " (publ. 1533). Erl. ed., 37, pp. 254-339.

303. Sermon on Charity (1 Jo. iv. 16-21 ; publ. 1533). Weim.
ed., 36, pp. 416-477 ; Erl. ed., 19, pp. 358-412 ; 182,
pp. 304-311.

304. Translation of the Old-Testament " Apocrypha " (publ.
1533 f.).

305. Sermon on the sum total of the Christian life (1 Tim. 1, 5 ff.
publ. 1533). Weim. ed., 36, pp. 352-375; Erl. ed., 19,
pp. 296-328 ; 182, pp. 370-304.

306. (1532-1533). " Enarratio in psalmos graduales " (publ.
1540). " Opp. lat. exeg.,J) 19, pp. 157-289 ; 20, pp. 1-306.

307. " Brieff an die zu Franckfort am Meyn." Weim. ed., 30, 3,
pp. 554(558)-571 ; Erl. ed., 26, pp. 295-313 ; 262, pp. 372-
389.

308. (1532-1534). Home-sermons (Home-postils, ed. Veit
Dietrich, 1544 ; ed. Rorer, 1559). Weim. ed., 36, 37 ; Erl.
ed., 1-6 ; !2-32 (after Dietrich ; 42-62 (after Rorer).

Exposition of Ps. cxlvii., cp. No. 295. Translation of the
Prophets, cp. No. 267 Sermons on Mt. v.-vii., cp. No. 287.
''In Esaiam prophetam scholia," cp. No. 221. " Annota-
tiones in Ecclesiasten," cp. No. 209. Sermon on Numbers.
vi. 22-27, cp. No. 218. Other Sermons, Weim. ed., 36 ; Erl,
ed., 182, pp. 136-384. Letters, Enders, 9, pp. 136-258 ;
Erl. ed., 54, pp. 266-348 ; 56, pp. 184f.-187.

1533. Clement VII takes steps for the assembling of an (Ecu
menical Council (Jan.). The Schmalkaldeners refuse to hear of a
Council (June). Henry VIII weds Anne Boleyn (Jan). Progress
of Protestantism in the Duchy of Jiilich-Cleves, in Anhalt-
Kothen and Mecklenburg.

309. Sermons on 1 Cor. xv. (publ. 1534). Weim. ed., 36, pp. 649-
697 ; Erl. ed., 51, pp. 71-275.

310. " Verantwortung der auffgelegten Auffrur." Erl. ed., 31,
pp. 228-269.

311. " Die kleine An wort auff H. Georgen nehestes Buch. ' ' Weim.
ed., 31, pp. 270-307.

312. " Von der Winckelmesse und Pfaffen Weihe." Erl. ed., 31,
pp. 308-377.

313. Preface to the " Recheschafft des Glaubens " (of the
Bohemian Brethren). Erl. ed., 63, pp. 320-323.

314. Preface to Balth. Rhaida's reply to Wicel. Erl. ed., 63,
pp. 317-319.

" Summarien," cp. No. 302. " Brieff," etc., cp. No. 307.
Exposition of Ps. xlv., cp. 299. Sermon on 1 John iv.
16-21, cp. No. 303. Sermon on 1 Tim. i. 5 ff., cp. No. 305.
Translation of Sirach, cp. No. 304. Other Sermons, Weim.
ed., 37, pp. 1-248; Erl. ed., 192, pp. 1-102. Letters,
Enders, 9, pp. 259-370 ; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 1-35 ; 56,
pp. 185—191, xxix,— xxxv.

APPENDIX I 487

1534. Death of Clement VII (Sept. 25). Paul III (from Oct. 13,
1534-Nov. 10, 1549). Bull against Henry VIII (March 23). Act
of Supremacy is passed by the English Parliament (Nov. 3).
Ulrich of Wiirtemberg is reinstated by Philip of Hesse ; his treaty
with King Ferdinand signed at Baden (June 29). Reformation of
Anhalt (March) of Wiirtemberg (May) of Augsburg (July) of
Pomerania (Dec.). Carlstadt at Basle. Luther again attacks
Erasmus, the latter 's " Purgatio adv. epistolam noil sobriarn
Lutheri." Death of Cardinal Cajetan (Aug. 9). Strasburg the
centre of the Anabaptist movement. The Anabaptists' orgies at
Miinster (Feb., 1534, to June 25, 1535). First edition of
Calvin's " Institutio."

315. " Ein Brieff D. Mart. Luth. von seinem Buch der Winckel-
messen." Erl. ed., 31, pp. 378-391.

316. " Der Ixv. Psalm durch D.M.L. zu Dessaw . . . gepredigt."
Weim. ed., 37, pp. 425-451 ; Erl. ed., 39, pp. 137-177.

317. " Biblia das ist die gantze Heilige Schrift."

318. " Convocatio concilii liberi christiani " (of doubtful authen
ticity). Erl. ed., 31, pp. 411-416; " Opp. lat. var.," 7,
pp. 370-372.

319. " Praefatio in Antonii Corvini librum de Erasmi concordia."
" Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 526-531.

320. Preface to Urban Rhegius, " Widderlegung der Miinsterischen
newen . . . Bekentnus." Erl. ed., 63, pp. 332-336.

321. Preface to the " Newe Zeittung von Miinster." Erl. ed., 63,
pp. 336-341.

322. " Enarratio psalmi xc." " Opp. lat exeg.," 18, pp. 264-334.

323. Exposition of Psalm ci. Erl. ed., 39, pp. 266-364.

324. " Einfeltige Weise zu beten." Erl. ed., 23, pp. 215-238.

325. " Klagschrift der Vogel an D.M. Luther iiber seinem Diener
Wolfgang Sieberger." Erl. ed., 64, p. 347 f.

" Scholia in Esaiam," cp. No. 221. Sermons on 1 Cor.
xv., cp. No. 309. Further Sermons, Weim. ed., 37, pp. 249-
672. Letters, Enders, 9, pp. 371-10, p. 117 ; Erl, ed., 55,
pp. 36-81 ; 56, pp. 191-196.

1535. Growth of the Schmalkalden League after the accession
of Wiirtemberg. Death of Joachim I of Brandenburg (July 11).
Joachim II his successor (f!571) a friend of Luther's. Execution
of Sir Thomas More. Vergerio's interview with Luther (Nov. 7).
Amended edition of Melanchthon's Commonplace-Book. The
ordination-oath introduced at Wittenberg. The Schmalkalden
League is prolonged for ten years (Dec.). King Ferdinand to the
Emperor on Germany's downfall (Dec.).

326. Sermon on Infant-Baptism. Weim. ed., 37, pp. 258-293 ;
Erl. ed., 16, pp. 43-105 ; 192, pp. 103-167.

327. " Etliche Spruche Doc. Martini Luther wider das Concilium
Obstantiense (wolt sagen Constantiense)." Erl. ed., 31,
pp. 391-411.

328. (1535-1545). " Enarrationes in Genesim " (publ. 1544).
"Opp. lat. exeg.," 1-11.

488 APPENDIX II

329. Prefaces to Anton Corvinus's " Kurtze Ausslegung der
Euangelien . . . der Episteln." Erl. ed., 63, pp. 348-353.

330. Letter to the preachers of Soest. Erl. ed., 65, pp. 95-102.

331. (1535-1536). Sermons. Weim. ed., 41 ; Erl. ed., 192,
pp. 103-242.

332. Disputations, " de concilip Constantiensi " and for the
promotion of Hier. Weller, and Nic. Medler. " Opp. lat.
var.," 4, pp. 402-410, 377-389 ; Drews, pp. 1-3, 9-32.

333. Hymns : " Von Himel hoch " ; " Sie ist mir lieb " ; "All
Ehr und Lob soil Gottes seyn." Erl. ed., 56, pp. 348 f ., 350 f.

" Comment, in epist. ad Galatas," cp. No. 293. Sermons,
cp. No. 331. Letters, Enders, 10, pp. 118-282 ; Erl. ed., 55,
pp. 81-117 ; 56, pp. 196-198, xxxv. f.

1536. Third war between Charles V and Francois I (lasting till
1538). The Turkish peril. Denmark converted to Protestantism
(Aug.). The " Consilium de emendanda ecclesia " drafted by
Cardinals Pole, Contarini, Sadoleto and Caraffa. A General
Council is summoned (June 2) to meet at Mantua in 1537. Death
of Erasmus (July 12). Luther makes advances to Henry VIII
and admits the lawfulness of his divorce. Articles are drafted to
the object of inducing the King of England to make common cause
with the German Reformers. The Articles are thrown over by
Henry. The Wittenberg Concord (May). Luther endeavours to
win over Augsburg, Ulm and the Swiss. Bucer labours for a
union. Synods held by the Swiss at Basle and Bern (Sept., Nov.).
Memoranda of the Wittenberg theologians regarding the Council
(Aug.). Bull for the bettering of the City of Rome and the Papal
Court (Sept. 23). Calvin begins his work at Geneva.

334. Disputations : " De iustificatione," " De muliere peccatrice "
and "Contra missam privatam " (Jan. 14, 21, 29). " Opp.
lat. var.," 4, pp. 389-394, 398-402, 413 ; Drews, pp. 55-66,
66, 69-89.

335. Preface to Robert Barnes (Chaplain to Henry VIII), " De
vitis pontificum." " Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 533-536.

336. " Praefatio in tres epistolas Hussii." " Opp. lat. var.," 7,
p. 536 sq.

337. " Der xxiii. Psalm Auff ein Abend uber Tisch nach dem
Gratias ausgelegt." Erl. ed., 39, pp. 62-122.

338. Preface and Postscript to " Joan. Nannii Viterbensis, De
monarchia Papse." " Opp. lat. var.," 2, pp. 110-121.

339. Disputations for the promotion of Jakob Schenk and Philip
Moth. " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 417-419 ; Drews, pp. 100-109.

340. " Artickel so da hetten sollen auffs Concilion zu Mantua,"
etc. (publ. 1538). Erl. ed., 25, pp. 110-146 ; 252, pp. 169-205.

341. Disputation "Dehomine." "Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 413-416 ;
Drews, pp. 90-96.

" Enarratio " on Joel, Amos, Obedias, cp. No. 160.

Sermons. Weim. ed., 41, pp. 493-763 ; Erl. ed., 192,

pp. 243-259. Letters, Enders, 10, p. 283-11, p. 151 ; Erl.
ed., 55, pp. 117-167 ; 56, pp. 199-206, xxxvii. f.

APPENDIX I 489

1537. Ferdinand's defeat in Slavonia. Paul the Third's Bull on
the Turkish question (July 14). Bugenhagen helps in the con
version of Denmark to Protestantism. Luther's so-called
Schmalkalden Articles sent by him to the Elector (Jan. 3). The
Schmalkalden Meeting (Feb.). Luther is taken ill and returns
home. The Princes decide to have nothing to do with the Council.
They accept the Augsburg Confession and the " Apologia." The
Schmalkaldeners call on the King of France for help (March 5).
Melanchthon's " De po testate papse." Luther returns sound to
Wittenberg (March 14). Cordatus opposes Melanchthon. The
cleavage between Luther and Melanchthon is carefully veiled.
On Oct. 8 the Council is summoned to meet at Vicenza on May 1,

1538. Efforts of Bucer and others to promote a Protestant
Council. Luther's spiritual indisposition.

342. Sermon on Mt. iv. 1 ff. Erl. ed., 17, pp. 7-34 ; 192, pp. 260-
292.

343. " Die drey Symbola oder Bekentiiiss des Glaubens Chris ti
jnn der Kirchen eintrachtiglich gebraucht." Erl. ed., 23,
pp. 252-281.

344. (1537-1538). Exposition of John xiv.-xvi. (publ. 1538).
Weim. ed., 46, pp. 1-112; Erl. ed., 49, pp. 2-391; 50,
pp. 1-154.

345. Disputations of Peter Palladius and Tilemann Schnabel.
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 394-397 ; Drews, pp. 115-160.

346. Discourse at the promotion of Peter Palladius. " Opp. lat.
var.," 4, pp. 315-322.

347. " Disputatio de ccena magna (i.e. de veste nuptiali)." "Opp.
lat. var.," 4, p. 419 ; Drews, pp. 163-245.

348. (1537-1539). Exposition of John i.-iv. (publ. 1565 and
1847). Weim. ed., 46, p. 538 ff. ; Erl. ed., 45, pp. 291-422 ;
46, pp. 1-378 ; 47, pp. 1-226.

349. (1537-1539). Sermons on Mt. xviii. 24-xxiii. 23. Erl. ed.,
44 ; 45, pp. 1-203.

350. " Eines aus den hohen Artikeln des Bepstlichen Glaubens
genant Donatio Constantini." Erl. ed., 25, pp. 176-201 ;
25 2, pp. 207-232.

351. " Bulla papae Pauli " (publ. in " Zeitschr. fiir luth. Theol.,"
1876, p. 362 ff.).

352 Exposition of Ps. viii. (publ. 1572). Erl. ed., 39,
pp. 2-60.

353. Preface to " Ein alt Christlich Concilium . . . zu Gangra."
Erl. ed., 64, p. 57 f .

354. " Die Liigend von S. Johanne Chrysostomo an die Heiligen
Veter inn dem vermeinten Concilio zu Mantua." Erl. ed.,
25, pp. 202-218 ; 252, pp. 232-249.

355. Postscript to " Tres epistolte I. Hussii." "Opp. lat. var.,"
7, p. 536 sq.

356. " Praefatio in epistolas quasdam Hussii." Erl. ed., 65,
pp. 59-83 ; " Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 538-540.

357. First disputation against the Antinomians (Dec. 18). " Opp.
lat. var.," 4, pp. 420-427 ; Drews, pp. 249-333.

490 APPENDIX I

358. Hymns " Erhalt uns Herr bey deinem Wort," " Vater unser
im Himelreich." Erl. ed., 56, pp. 354, 351 f.

359. " Conciunculse cuidam amico prsescriptse." " Opp. lat.
var.," 7, pp. 374-433.

Further Sermons, Erl. ed., 192, pp. 260-466. Letters,
Enders, 11, pp. 152-320 ; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 167-195 ; 56,
pp. 206-208, xxxix. f.

1538. The Truce of Nice between the Kaiser and Francois 1
(June 15). Luther in conflict with the Antinoimanism of Agricola
(1537-1540). His quarrels with Lemnius, Schenk and Joh. von
Metzsch. His antagonism to Albert of Mayence. The assembly
of the Protestants at Brunswick (April 8). The Schmalkaldeners
enter into a league with Christian III of Denmark (April 9). They
send missions to the Kings of France and England (Aug., Oct.).
The strength of the League in Germany increases the danger of
a religious war. The Kaiser (aided by his vice-chancellor Held)
succeeds in inducing the Catholic princes to form the so-called
Holy Alliance at Nuremberg (June 10). Calvin is banished from
Geneva.

360. Revised edition of the " Unterricht," cp. No. 229.

361. " Ratschlag eins ausschus etlicher Cardinel," etc. Erl. ed.,
25, pp. 146-174 ; 252, pp. 251-278.

362. " I3rsefatio in librum S. Hieronymi ad Evagrium de po testate
papae." " Opp. lat. var.," 7, pp. 541-544.

363. "Brieff . . . wider die Sabbather." Erl. ed., 31, pp. 417-449.

364. " Der ex. Psalm Dixit Dominus gepredigt und ausgelegt."
Erl. ed., 40, pp. 39-192.

365. First answer to the " Epigrammata " of Simon Lemnius.
Erl. ed., 64, p. 323 f.

366. Second disputation against the Antinomians (Jan. 12).
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 427-430 ; Drews, pp. 336-418.

367. Third disputation against the Antinomians (Sept. 13).
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 436-441 ; Drews, pp. 423-484.

368. " Prsefatio in Confessionem Bohemorum." " Opp. lat. var.,"
7, pp. 548-551.

369. lk Wider den Bischoff zu Magdeburg Albrecht Cardinal."
Erl. ed., 32, pp. 15-59.

370. Preface to Rhau's " Symphonic." " Opp. lat. var.," 7,
pp. 551-554.

371. " Frau Musica," to Joh. Walther's " Lob und Preis der
Himlischen Kunst Musica." Erl. ed., 56, p. 295 f.

372. Sermons. Weim. ed., 46, pp. 113-537; Erl. ed., 20-, 1,
pp. 1-171.

The Schmalkalden Articles, cp. No. 340. yEsop's Fables,
cp. No. 273. The Three Creeds, cp. No. 343. Exposition of
Ps. li., cp. No. 300. Lecture on the Song of Songs, cp.
No. 265. Sermons on John xiv.-xvi., cp. No. 344. Further
Sermons, cp. Nos. 344, 348 f., 372. Letters, Enders, 11,
pp. 321-12, p. 61 ; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 195-216 ; 56, pp. 208-220,
xl.-xlv.

APPENDIX I 491

1539. Death of Duke George (April 17). Apostasy of Joachim II.
The Duchy of Saxony, the Electorate of Brandenburg, and
Livonia become Protestant. Memorandum of Luther and
Melanchthon to Elector Johann Frederick, in favour of armed
resistance. The Frankfurt meeting of the Protestants (April 19) ;
their decision not to appeal as yet to force and to promote a
simple conference rather than a Council ; a new mission dis
patched to England (April 29). The Protestant Visitation of the
Duchy of Saxony. Luther and his friends again at work (1539-
1541) revising the German Bible. The Consistories established
in the Saxon Electorate. The Hessian " Order of Church-
Discipline." In England, dissolution of the Monasteries. Luther's
disputation on the " Papal Werewolf " (May 9). He sanctions
the Bigamy of Philip II (Nov. 10).

373. "Wider die Antinomer." Erl. ed., 32, pp. 2-14.

374. " Von den Conclliis und Kirchen." Erl. ed., 25, pp. 219-388 ;
252, pp. 281-448.

375. Sermon at Leipzig on Jo. xiv. 23 ff. (publ. 1618). Erl. ed.,
202, 1, pp. 242-253.

37G. Disputation on Mt. xix. 21 (Vade, vende, etc.). " Opp. lat.
var.," 4, pp. 442-449 ; Drews, pp. 536-584.

377. Preface to Myconius's " Wie man die einfeltigen . . .
im Christenthumb unterrichteii sol." Erl. ed., 63,
p. 364 f.

378. Preface to a work of Moibanus, on Ps. xxix. Erl. ed., 63,
pp. 342-344.

379. Preface to German version of Galeatius Capella's " De bello
Mediolanensi seu rebus in Italia gestis." Erl. ed., 63,
pp. 354-357.

380. Disputation on " Verbum caro facturn est " (Jo. i. 14).
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 458-461 ; Drews, pp. 487-531.

381. Revision of the German Bible.

382. " An die Pfarherrn wider den Wucher zu predigen." Erl. ed.,
23, pp. 282-338.

383. Preface to the 1st part of his Collected German Works. Erl.
ed., 63, pp. 401-406.

384. Sermons. Erl. ed., 202, 1, pp. 172-264.

" Wider den Bischoff," cp. No. 369. Further Sermons,
cp. Nos. 348 f., 384. Letters, Enders, 12, pp. 62-334 ; Erl.
ed., 55, pp. 217-269 ; 56, pp. 221 ff., xlvi.-l.

1540. Death of Duke William IV of Bavaria. The Jesuits
approved by the Pope (Sept. 27) ; Pierre Favre in Germany.
Philip II of Hesse weds his second wife in Melanchthon 's presence
(March 4). Luther at the Conference of Eisenach (July 10).
Melanchthon 's " miraculous " cure at Weimar ; the " Confessio
variata." Meeting at Schmalkalden (March) ; Catholic worship
not to be tolerated. Presecution of Schwcnckfeld by the
Lutherans. Religious conferences at Hagenau (June) and Worms
(Nov. 25-Jan.). Agricola goes to Berlin to the Elector of Branden-

492 APPENDIX I

burg (Sept.). Morone the Papal Legate complains of the apathy
of the German Bishops.

385. Disputation " De divinitate et humanitate Christi " (Feb.
28). " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 461-466 ; Drews, pp. 586-610.

386. Preface to Robert Barnes's " Bekantnus des Glaubens . . .
verdeudscht." Erl. ed., 63, pp. 396-400.

387. New edition of the Winter part of the Church-Postils.

388. Disputation for the promotion of Joach. Morlin. " Opp. lat.
var.," 4, p. 411 sq. ; Drews, pp. 613-636.

"An die Pfarherrn," cp. No. 382. On the " psalmi
graduates," cp. No. 306. Sermons, Erl. ed., 20 2, 1, pp. 265-
512. Letters, Enders-Kawerau, 12, pp. 335-400 ; 13,
pp. 1-240 ; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 269-293 ; 56, pp. 223-227.

1541 The Turks secure their footing in Hungary. Naumburg
given over to the Protestants ; the Bishop-Elect, Julius von
Pflug shut out from his See by the Saxon Elector (Jan.). The
Archbishop of Cologne, Hermann von Wied is won over to
Protestantism. Accession of Maurice of Saxony (fl553). Philip
of Hesse comes to an understanding with Charles V. Jonas goes
to Halle to convert it to Protestantism ; Schenk at Leipzig.
Death of Carlstadt (Dec. 24). Religious conferences of Worms
(Jan.) and Ratisbon (April 27-May 22) ; Diet of Ratisbon and
Ratisbon Interim. The Catholic spokesmen : Eck, Julius von
Pflug and J. Gropper ; the Protestant : Melanchthon, Bucer and
Frederick Pistorius. Calvin in supreme power at Geneva (till
1564).

389. " Wider Hans Worst." Erl. ed., 26, pp. 2-75 ; 262,
pp. 21-93.

390. Preface to Ezechiel, explanation of the figure of the Temple.
Erl. ed., 63, pp. 64-74.

391. Exposition of Dan. xii. Erl. ed., 41, pp. 294-324.

392. " Vermanunge zum Gebet wider den Tiircken." Erl. ed.,
32, pp. 75-99.

393. Preface to Urban Rhegius's " Wider die gottlosen blutdur-
stigen Sauliten und Doegeten," etc. Erl. ed., 63, pp. 366-368.

394. Hymns : " Christ unser Herr zum Jordan kam," " Was
furchstu, Feind Herodes, seer." Erl. ed., 56, p. 353 ff.

Revised edition of the German Bible, cp. No. 385.
" Enarratio in Ps. xc.," cp. No. 322. Letters (Enders),
Kawerau, 13, pp. 241-395 ; De Wette, 5, pp. 326-420 ; 6,
pp. 279-294 ; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 294-343 ; 56, pp. 227-232.

1542. Fourth War of Charles V with Fran9ois I (lasting till
1544) ; Diet of Spires meets on Feb. 9 to vote supplies for the
war against the Turks. The Elector and Duke of Saxony fall out
over Wurzen (March) ; Luther's mediation ; his last will (Jan. 6).
Amsdorf is " consecrated " Bishop of Naumburg (Jan. 20).
A Bull dated May 22 summons the Council to assemble on Nov. 1

APPENDIX I 493

at Trent. The Schmalkaldeners are successful in their attack on
the Duchy of Brunswick (July). Bucer goes to Bonn to the
Elector Hermann von Wied (Dec.).

395. Tract against Bigamy (publ. 1749). Erl. ed., 65, pp. 206-213.

396. Disputation for the promotion of Joh. Macchabaeus Scotus
(Theses by Melanchthon). Drews, pp. 639-683.

397. " Exempel einen rechten Christlichen Bischoff zu weihen."
Erl. ed., 26, pp. 77-107 ; 262, pp. 94-128.

398. Disputation for the promotion of H. Schmedenstede. " Opp.
lat. var.," 4, pp. 452-455 ; Drews, pp. 686-698.

399. " Von den Jtiden und jren Liigen." Erl. ed., 32, pp. 100-
274.

400. Preface to " Verlegung des Alcoran Bruder Richard!
Prediger Ordens anno 1300." Erl. ed., 65, pp. 190-205.

401. Preface to " Barf user Mlinche Eulenspiegel und Alcoran."
Erl. ed., 63, pp. 373-376.

402. " Trost fur die Weibern welchen es ungerat gegangen ist mit
Kinder geberen." Erl. ed., 23, pp. 339-343.

403. Preface to the Hymn Book. Erl. ed., 56, pp. 299-306.

Comment, on Micheas, cp. No. 160. No sermons. Letters,
De Wette, 5, pp. 421-525 ; 6, pp. 294-343 ; Erl. ed., 56,
pp. 1-43, 232-238, li.-lvii.

1543. Diet of Nuremberg (Feb.). The Protestants refuse to vote
supplies for the Turkish War. The Emperor is victorious in his
campaign against the Duke of Cleves though the latter is sup
ported by the Elector of Saxony and by France (Aug., Sept.).
The Bishop of Miinster and Osnabriick connives at the introduc
tion of Lutheranism into his diocese. Canisius the first German
Jesuit (May 8). Death of Eck (Feb. 10). Schenk in Brandenburg ;
The Cologne Book of Reform drafted by Melanchthon and Bucer
is severely handled by Luther.

404. " Vom Schem Hamphoras." Erl. ed., 32, pp. 275-358.

405. " Von den Letzten Worten Dauids." Erl. ed., 37, pp. 2-103.

406. Disputation for the promotion of Joh. Marbach (Feb. 16).
Drews, pp. 701-707.

407. Disputation for the promotion of Fr. Bachofen and Hier.
Noppus. " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 466-470 ; Drews,
pp. 730-748.

408. Disputation for the promotion of Erasmus Alber. " Opp.
lat. var.," 4, pp. 473-476 ; Drews, pp. 750-752.

409. Lecture on Is. ix. (publ. 1546). " Opp. lat. exeg.," 23,
pp. 303-438.

410. Hymns : " Von Himel kam der Engel Schar," " Der du
bist drey in Einigkeit." Erl. ed., 56, pp. 357-558.

New edition of the German Bible, cp. No. 381. Church-
Postils, Summer part. Sermon, Erl. ed., 202, 1, pp. 513-523.
Letters, De Wette, 5, pp. 526-614, 6, pp. 343-559 ; Erl. ed.,
56, pp. 43-72, 238-242, lvii,-lxi.

494 APPENDIX I

1544. Peace of Crespy between the Kaiser and France (Sept. 18).
Diet at Spires (beginning in Feb. ). Concessions to the Protestants.
The Abschied of June 10 postpones the religious controversy to a
later Diet and " A free Christian Council within the German
Nation." The Pope's protest to the Kaiser (Aug. 24). Luther
again at daggers drawn with the lawyers (on the question of
secret espousals). The people of Cologne denounce their Arch
bishop to the Pope (Oct. 9). The theses of the Louvain theo
logians against Luther (Nov. 6). The Council is yet again
summoned (Nov. 19, to meet on March 15, 1545) to avert the
schism and the inroads of the Turks.

411. Lecture on Is. liii. (publ. 1550). " Opp. lat. exeg.," 23,
pp. 443-536.

412. Disputation for the promotion of Theod. Fabricius and
Stanislaus Rapagelanus (Melanchthon's Theses). Drews,
pp. 756-781.

413. " Kurtz Bekentnis vom heiligen Sacrament." Erl. ed., 32,
pp. 397-425.

414. Sermon at the Dedication of the Castle-church at Torgau.
Erl. ed., 17, pp. 239-262 ; 202, 2, pp. 215-243.

415. Disputation for the promotion of George Major and Joh.
Faber. " Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 470-473 ; Drews, pp. 784-
830.

Home-Postils, cp. No. 308. " Enarratio in I. librum
Mosis," cp. No. 328. Sermons, Erl. ed., 202, 2, pp. 1-266.
Letters, De Wette, 5, pp. 615-709 ; 6, pp. 359-367 ; Erl. ed.,
56, pp. 72-122, 242-244.

1545. Diet of Worms. The Abschied hints at a religious confer
ence and the imminent danger of a War of Religion. George, the
Protestant Prince of Anhalt, is " consecrated as Evangelical
Bishop " of Merseburg (Aug. 2). The " Wittenberg Reformation "
(Jan.). The final edition of the German Bible. " Popery
Pictured." Luther goes in disgust to Leipzig (July, Aug.). Goes
as arbiter to Mansfeld (Oct.). Duke Henry of Brunswick is taken
prisoner by the Schmalkaldeiiers (Oct. 20). A final Bull of Dec. 4
convokes the Council to Trent for Dec. 13, where it is opened
in the presence of 34 Fathers qualified to vote. The Schmalkal-
deners' meeting (Dec. 15) at Frankfurt to devise a counterblast.
Death of Spalatin (Jan. 16) and of Albert of Mayence (Sept. 24).

416. " Wider das Bapstum zu Rom vom Teuffel gestifft." Erl.
ed., 26, pp. 110-228 ; 262, pp. 131, 251.

417. Verses to Cranach's cuts in the " Abbildung des Bapstum."

418. " Wellische Liigenschrifft von Doctoris Martini Luthers
Todt zu Rom ausgangen." Erl. ed., 32, pp. 426-430.

419. " Bapst Trew Hadriani iiii und Alexanders iii gegen Keyser
Friderichen Barbarossa geubt." Erl. ed., 32, pp. 359-396.

420. Disputation for the promotion of Peter Hegemon (July 3).
" Opp. lat. var.," 4, pp. 476-480 ; Drews, pp. 833-903.

APPENDIX I 495

421. " Wider die xxxii Artikel der Teologisten von Loven." Erl.
ed., 65, pp. 170-178.

422. " Articuli a magistris nostris Lovaniensibus editi." " Opp.
lat. var.," 4, pp. 480-492.

423. " An Kurfursten zu Sachsen und Landgraven zu Hesse von
dem gefangenen H. von Brunswig." Erl. ed., 26, pp. 229-
253 ; 262, pp. 254-281.

424. Preface to the new edition of the " Unterricht " (No. 360).

425. Preface to the first vol. of his " Opera Latina." " Opp. lat.
var.," 1, pp. 15-24.

German Bible, new ed., cp. No. 381. " Enarratio in
Hoseam prophetam," cp. No. 160. Sermons, Erl. ed., 202,
2, pp. 267-454. Letters, De Wette, 5, pp. 710-772 ; 6,
pp. 368-413 ; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 122-147, 244, xli.-lxv.

1546. The Diet opens at Ratisbon (March 29) without the
Schmalkalden Leaguers. Luther's last journey to Mansfeld (Jan.
23). His death at Eisleben (Feb. 18) and burial at Wittenberg
(Feb. 22). — Treaty between the Kaiser and King Ferdinand, and
Duke William of Bavaria in view of the eventual war (June 7).
The Kaiser also makes an alliance with the Pope (June 7) and
comes to an agreement with Maurice of Saxony (June 19).
Schartlin as commander of the South German townships begins
hostilities at Fiissen (July 9). Outlawry of Elector Johann
Frederick of Saxony and of Landgrave Philip of Hesse (July 20).
The Schmalkalden War (ending in the Kaiser's victory at
Muhlberg, April 24, 1547).

426. Sermons. Erl. ed., 202, 2, pp. 455-574.

Letters, De Wette, 5, pp. 773-801 ; 6, p. 413 f. ; Erl. ed.,
56, pp. 147-165.

XLII-APPENDIX II

ADDITIONS AND EMENDATIONS

[In the following Appendix we have ruthlessly excised all that
seemed to us merely personal and to have no direct bearing on Luther.
Many of the smaller emendations have already been incorporated in
their proper place in the body of this translation. Note of the English
Editor.]

1-2. Luther's Visit to Rome

The Scala Santa : According to Paul Luther, when his father
" was about to say the usual preces graduates in scala Lateranensi,
there suddenly came into his mind the text of Habacuc ' the just
shall live by his faith,' whereupon he refrained from his prayer."
As we pointed out in vol. i., p. 33, it is most unlikely that Luther
should, at this time, have seen this text in such a light. Moreover,
as it now turns out, Luther actually did perform the usual
devotions at the Scala Santa. It is to G. Buchwald (" Zeitschr. f.
Kirchengesch.," 1911, p. 606 ff.) that we are indebted for a
quotation from a yet unpublished sermon of Luther's own, which
shows that he conformed to the common usage and ascended the
famous steps on his knees : "I climbed the stairs of Pilate,
orabam quolibet gradu pater noster. Erat enim persuasio, qui sic
oraret redimeret animam. Sed in fastigium veniens cogitabam :
quis scit an sit verum ? Non valet ista oratio, etc."

As for the doubt expressed in the latter portion of the text, it
seems at variance with Luther's general credulity in those early
days. On the other hand, it is by no means unlikely that the
scepticism of the Renaissance suggested a doubt to Luther's
mind regarding this supposed trophy of Christ's Passion.

The projected General Confession : In " Colloq.," ed. Bindseil
(3, p. 169, n. 33), Luther says : " Causa profectionis mece erat
confessio, quam volebam a pueritia usque texere, et pietatem exercere.
Erphordice talem con/essionem bis habui. Sed homines indoctis-
simos Romce inveni, qui me plus offendebant quam cedificabant "
(cp. Mathesius, " Tischreden," ed. Kroker, p. 414). In this text
it is to be noted that Luther falsely makes out the main object
of his journey to Rome to have been his proposed general con
fession, and his progress in piety. The truth is that he went there
first and foremost for the business of his Order. That the general

496

APPENDIX II 497

confession was probably never made may be inferred from
Luther's use of the word " sed " in the above text (cp. vol. i.,
pp. 30-31).

Oldecop's account of Luther's petition to be secularised : (Against
Kawerau, " Schriften d. Vereins f. Reformationsgesch.," 1912).
Though but little notice has hitherto been taken of Oldecop's
narrative, yet there is no solid ground for distrusting it. As we
were careful to point out (vol. i., p. 36, n. 1), he was indeed wrong
in saying that Luther had gone to Rome without his superiors'
authorisation, for the journey was at least authorised by the
seven priories whose representative Luther was. Luther had,
however, no authorisation to seek secularisation, nor was his
mission countenanced by the minister-general of the Augustinians.
This may have led Oldecop to suppose that his whole undertaking
was unauthorised. Regarding Jacob, the Jew mentioned in
Oldecop's account, Kawerau (ib., p. 36) makes out a likely case
for distinguishing him from his German homonym with whom
(vol. i., p. 37, n. 1) we tentatively identified him.

The outcome for the Order of Luther's visit to Rome : Under the
title " Aus den Actis generalatus .^Egidii Viler biensis," G.
Kawerau has published in the " Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch." (1911,
p. 603 ff.) a few short extracts from a MS. in the Royal Berlin
Library. One of these seems to bear on Luther's mission from
the seven priories opposed to Staupitz : " M DXI. Jan. Appellare
ex legibus Germani prohibentur. Ut res germance ad amorem et
integram obedientiam redigerentur, Fr. Joh. Oermanus ad vicarium
missus est." Hence Luther's appeal was prohibited, nor had his
mission the slightest support from yEgidius of Viterbo the
minister-general. That, on the contrary, he was opposed to the
movement then afoot against Staupitz, is also clear from the
expression he uses on March 18, 1511, viz. that " obedience to the
Order and its head " must be reintroduced into the German
Congregation. At any earlier date (May 1, 1510) we are told that
Staupitz himself had come to Rome " [Gei'manicce] congregationis
colla religionis iugo subiecturus." His visit, however, had nothing
to do with the matter of the seven priories, but concerned the
general discipline of the Congregation.

3. Luther's conception of "Observance" and his conflict
with his brother friars

What we said of Luther's early antagonism to the Observantines
in his Order has been very diversely appreciated by Protestant
experts. Kawerau and Scheel, for instance, are of opinion that
no proof is forthcoming of the continuance of the conflict between
Observantines and Conventuals. On the other hand, A. Harnack,
K. A. Meissinger and W. Braun hold that the persistence of the
conflict has been made out and that it really formed one of the
starting-points of Luther's new conception of faith. Modesty,
vi— 2 K

498 APPENDIX II

however, dictates a protest on our part against being considered
the inventor of this explanation, for it had, even previously, been
suggested by Protestant scholars (cp. vol. i., p. 200, n. 3), though
they may not have used it to such purpose. Again, a word of
warning must be uttered against the supposition that, for instance
as late as 1515-1516, there was still in Luther's Congregation a
clear-cut division between those devoted to the "observance"
and the others who inclined to " Conventualism." Of such a
schism we hear no more after the Cologne Chapter of 1512.
Nevertheless, that the partisan spirit that had once led to the
appeal of the seven priories still smouldered, so much at least
seems obvious from those addresses and writings of Luther in
which he trounces the Pharisaism of certain members of his
Congregation and their attachment to their statutes, privileges
and exemptions. It must not be lost to sight that the Congrega
tion to which Luther belonged was in name and fact an " observan-
tine " one, having been founded to promote the stricter observance
of the Augustinian Rule ; for this reason it was exempted from
the jurisdiction of the German Provincial of the Order and
placed directly under the Roman minister-general, whose repre
sentative in Germany was the Vicar.

Regarding the mediaeval cleavage of several of the Orders into
Observari tines and Conventuals we must be on our guard against
flying to the conclusion that all mere Conventuals were necessarily
slack in the performance of their duties. This was by no means
the case ; in many localities the Franciscan Observantines, e.g.
were scarcely more zealous than the Franciscan Conventuals,
though the latter had at an early date mitigated their rule of
poverty ; much the same held good among the Dominicans,
Servites and Carmelites. In the event, so far as the Augustinians
are concerned, the Saxon Observantines, for all their " observ
ance," were among the first to fall before the storm let loose from
Wittenberg, whereas the German Conventuals, under such
worthy provincials as Trager and Hoffmeister, showed themselves
better able to cope with the innovations. The Dominican
Conventuals under a Vicar like Johann Faber also furnished
several protagonists of the faith.

In view of the doubts raised in certain quarters we shall now
submit to a closer scrutiny Luther's utterances on the question of
the " observance."

On one occasion Luther complains of those who made so small
account of obedience, though this virtue was the very soul of
good works :

" Tales hodie esse timendum est omnes observant es et exemptos sive
privilegiatos ; qui quid noceant ecclesise nonduni apparuit, licet
factum sit ; apparebit autem tempore suo. Quserimus autem. ciir sic
oximi sibi et dispensari in obedientia velint. Dicunt proptcr vitam
regularem. Sed haec est lux angeli Satanae."

Obedience is something which cannot be dispensed (non e.r-
imilnlis, " Werke," Weim. ed., 3, p. 155 ; O, School, " Dokumento

APPENDIX II 499

zu Luthers Entwicklung," 1911, p. 74 f. ; above, vol. i., p. 68 f.).
Truth, so Luther argues, hides its face from the unwise and the
particularist :

" Sic etiam omnibus superbis contingit et pertinacibus, superstitiosis,
rebellibus et inobedientibus, atque ut tirneo et observantibus nostris,
qui sub specie regularis vitae incurrunt inobedientiam et rebellionem."
(VVeim. ed., 4, p. 83 ; above, vol. i., p. 69.)

In the former text he was speaking of " all Observantines,"
here he speaks of "ours," presumably, of the more zealous
Augustinians. These *' observantes " are the same opponents
whom he goes on to describe as " superbi in sanctitate et obser
vantia t qui destruunt humilitatem et obedientiam." The real
meaning here of the words " observantia " and " observare " can
scarcely escape the reader, particularly when Luther couples this
" observance " with disobedience to superiors. Thus he says :

" Nostris temporibus est pugna cum hypocritis et falsis fratribus, qui
de bonitate fidei pugnant, quam sibi arrogant, per observantias suas
iactantes suam saiictitatem." (76., 4, p. 312.)

" Observantia " means of course outward practices, but there
can be little doubt that the word is here used in the more exclusive
sense defined in the text first quoted. Thus he denounces those
who defend their own " traditiones et leges," which " usque hodie
statuere conantur " ; those who busy themselves about cere
monies and the " vanitas dbservantice exterioris " ; he several
times repeats the " usque hodie," as though to show that the
practices he had in view were present ones. (Cp. Weim. ed., 3,
p. 61.)

It must be borne in mind that Luther delivered his Lectures on
the Psalms (in which most of the texts in question are found) to an
audience composed in the main of young Augustinians sent by the
various priories to prosecute their studies at Wittenberg. Some
of these may well have brought with them some of those stricter
ideas which the seven " Observantine " priories had once
championed against Staupitz. To one, who, as Luther now was,
was against such ideas, it was an easy matter, even though in
itself wrong, to make the question one of obedience, by urging
either that their exemption from the jurisdiction of the Provincial
was irregular, or that Staupitz had now abandoned his one-time
projects.

Luther charges the other faction, not only with disobedience,
but also with pigheadedness, e.g. in refusing to conform to the
usages of the other priories, and in laying such stress on their own
customs and institutions.

" Nunc quam multi sunt, qui sibi spiritualissimi videntur et tamen
sunt sanguinicissimi, ut sic dixerim, verissimique Idumaei. Hi scilicet
qui suas professiones, suum ordinem, suos sanctos, sua instituta ita
venerantur et eft'erunt, ut omnium aliorum vel obfuscent vel nihil ipsi
curent, satis carnaliter suos patres observantes et iactantes ; [such was
the New Judaism of those), qui suos conveiitus, suum ordinern ideo
laudant et ideo aliis pnestare volunt ac nullo rnodo doceri, quia magnos
ot sanctos viros habuerunt, quorum titulum, nomen et habitum gestant ,

500 APPENDIX II

. . . O furor late regnans hodie ! Ita mine pene fit, ut quilibet con-
ventus contemnat alterius mores acceptare adeo superbe, ut sibi
dedecus putet, si ab alio, quam a se ipso doceatur aut recipiat. Hsec
vera superbia est ludseorum et hsereticorum, in quo et nos heu infelices
comprehendimur. Quia cum in nullo similes patribus nostris simus,
solum de nomine et gloria eorum contra invicem contendimus et
superbimus." (Ib., 3, p. 332.)

Though what Luther here says might be applied to other
religious Orders, yet it seems more natural to take it as referring
chiefly to what was going on in his own.

Luther's then Conception of Cloistral Life and Religious Mendi
cancy : Luther spoke very plainly about that part of the Rule
which enjoined mendicancy ; as Conventuals no less than
Observantines were bound to observe this enactment it follows
that Luther's attack was directed, not so much against the
Observantines as such, as against any attempt seriously to put
in practice the Evangelical Counsels. Thus, in the passage quoted
above (vol. i., p. 71) he says : " O mendicantes, mendicantes,
mendicantes ! At excusat forte quod elemosynas propter Deum
recipitis et verbum Dei ac omnia gratis rependitis. Esto sane. Vos
videritis." (Weim. ed., 3, p. 425.) Here, it is true, he is speaking
of the abuses to which the system led, yet he is also annoyed that
their vow of poverty should be the motive of their preaching :
" H orribilis furor et cceca miseria, quod nunc nonnisi ex necessitate
evangelizamus. ' '

Now, though these hasty words were open to a perfectly sound
interpretation, yet their effect must have been to arouse a certain
contempt for their calling in the minds of the young men to whom
they were spoken. At any rate Luther had then not yet lost his
esteem for the religious life, particularly as an incentive to
humility and general Godliness. (See vol. i., p. 218 f.)

It is scarcely necessary to say that the fact that, in 1518 (at
Augsburg), Staupitz released Luther "from the observance"
has nothing whatever to do with the question in hand. Luther
says : "me absolvit ab observantia et regula ordinis." (Weim. ed.,
of the Table-Talk, 1, p. 96.) All that his superior did was to
dispense him from his obligation of carrying out outwardly the
rule of the Order, e.g. from dressing as a monk, etc. Even had
Luther been a Conventual he could still have spoken thus of his
having been absolved from the " observance." It may be that
Staupitz, for his own freedom of action, also absolved Luther
from his duty of obedience to him as Vicar. Even so, however,
Luther remained an Augustinian, returned to his monastery, wrote
on behalf of the vows, and, long after, still continued to wear the
Augustinian habit.

One notice brought to light from the Weimar archives and
published by Kawerau (loc. cit.t p. 68) is of interest. It deals with
the practices of the severer Observantine priories (about the year
1489) with which the laxer members were later to find fault.
Among their practices was that of " not speaking at meal-time

APPENDIX II 501

but of listening to a reader, of fasting from All Hallows till
Christmas (in addition to the other fasts), of singing Matins every
night, of abstaining from food and drink outside of meal-time,
and of holding a Chapter every Friday with public admission of
shortcomings and imposition of penance."

4. Attack upon the "Self-righteous"

In 1516 Luther presided at Bernhardi's Disputation, " De
viribus et voluntate hominis sine gratia." (Above, vol. i., p. 310 f.)
In the letter to Lang about it he says that Bernhardi had held
the debate " motus oblatratorum lectionum mearum garritu." Some
opinions therein put forward had much scandalised the adherents
of Gabriel Biel (" cum et mei [Gabrielistce] vehementer hucusque
mirentur "), but, at any rate, the Disputation had served its
purpose ("ad obstruendum ora garrientium vel ad audiendum
indicium aliorum "). He goes on to speak of the offence his denial
of the authenticity of the tract " De vera et falsa pcenitentia "-
hitherto ascribed to St. Augustine — had given at Wittenberg
("sane gravius offendi omnes "). Mathesius (above, vol. i.,
p. 304) also alludes to the opposition he encountered about this
time among his brethren. At any rate a few months later Luther
could triumphantly tell Lang :

" Theologia nostra et S. Angus tinus prospere procedunt et regnant in
nostra universitate, Deo operante. . . . Mire fastidiuntur lectiones
senteiitiariae, nee est ut quis sibi auditores sperare possit, nisi theo-
logiani hanc . . . velit profited."

Before this, the young Professor (at Christmas, 1515) had told
his hearers, that, just as the Prophets, wise men and scribes had
been persecuted, so he was being persecuted now :

" Sed state firmiter, neque moveatur ullus contradictionibus ; sic enim
oportet fieri. Prophetse, Sapientes, Scribae, dum mittuntur ad iustos,
sanctos, pios, non recipiuntur ab ipsis sed occiduntur."

The supposed " saints " he goes on to describe in their true
character. What they were bent on persecuting was really Grace,
viz. what he preaches under the figure of " Christ our mother-
hen " :

" Superbi semper contra iustitiam Dei pugnant et stultitiam sestimant,
quac sapientia [sic] eis mittitur ; similiter veritas eis mendaciuiii
videtur. lino persequuntur et occidunt eos, qui veritatem dicunt. Sic
eiiiin et ego semper prsedico do Christo, yallina nostra. Efiicitur iiiihi
errans et falsum dictum : ' Vult Dominus esse gallina nostra ad salutem,
sed nos nolumus' . . . Nolunt audire, quod iustitise eorum peccata
sint, quse gallina egeant, imo quod peius est, versi in vultures etiam
ipsialios a gallina rapere nituntur et persequuntur reliquos pullos. . . .
Sicut ludsei . . . iustitiam statuentes quod sibi placuit, ita isti hoc
gratiam vocant quod ipsi somniant." (Weim. ed., 1, p. 31.)

A few pages further on, the new Lutheran teaching .on Grace is
clearly seen in its process of growth :

" Ecce impossibilis est lex propter carriem ; verumtamen Christus
impletionem suam nobis impertit, dum se ipsum gallinam nobis

502 APPENDIX II

exhibot, ut sub alas eius confugiamus et per eius impletionem nos
quoque legem impleamus. O dulcis gallina, o beatos pullos huius
gallinse ! " (P. 35.)

To the " vultures," i.e. his opponents, he returns again in the
same lectures. They build only on their " sapientia carnis "
when they set out to gain what they consider to be virtue and the
gifts of grace. (Weim. ed., 1, pp. 61, 62, 70.)

*' In liis maxime pereuiit [peccant ?] haeretici et superbi, duni ea
pertinaciter diligunt, quasi ideo Deum diligant, quia hsec diligunt.
Inde enim zelant et furiunt, ubi reprehenduntur in istis, et defendant
se ac zeluni Dei sine scientia exercent. . . . Quantumlibet sapiant et
bene vivant, recte adhuc de sapientia carnis vivere dicendi sunt. . . .
Servi [superbi ?] sine timore et occultissime superbi. . . . Talis est
stultitia hypocritarum de virtutibus et gratiis Dei. praesumentium se
esse integros et iustos."

A trace of the antagonism within the Order is also found in the
notes of the sermons preached in the summer of 1516. On July G,
Luther speaks of the greatest plague now rampant in the Church :
"' Prosequimur, quse incepimus, iiam singularem illi tractatum quau-unt,
cum non sit hodie pestis maior per ecclesiam ista peste hominum, qui
dicunt, ' bonum oportet facere,' nescire volentes, quid sit bonum vel
inalum. Sunt enim inimici crucis Christi i.e. bonorum Dei."

As we know, his theology was professedly the " theology of the
cross." As for his foes, lay, clerical or monastic, their outward
works were but the lamb-skins concealing the wolves beneath :
" Ad alia vocati, quam quae ipsi elegerunt, difficiles imo rebelles sunt et
coiitrarii, impatientes, [inclinati] detrahere ac iudicare, alios negligere.
contentiosi, opmiosae cervicis, indomiti sensus, ideo non pacifici,
brevianimes, immansueti, duri, crudi. Hsec vitia et opera interioris
hominis ovina vestt, contegunt, i.e. actionibus, oblationibus, gestu,
ceremoniis corporalibus, ita ut et sibi et aliis simplicibus boni et iusti
videantur."

On July 27 he speaks of the " darts " which the foes let fly from
their ambush at those who are right of heart.

" Hsec ideo iam commemoro, quia iam accedo ad subtiliores homines
ct invisibiles transgressores prsecepti Dei et in abscondito peccantes et
sagittantes eos qui recte sint corde."

In another sermon preached on the same day, speaking of the
Pharisee and the Publican, he says :

" Credo quod pauci timeaiit se pharisaao similes esse quern odiunt ; sed
ego scio, quod plures ei similes sint. . . . Non prsesumamus securi,
quod publicano similes simus."

In this sentence, and elsewhere, stress should not be laid on the
use of the first person plural, as it is merely a rhetorical embellish
ment. The Pharisee is the self-righteous man ; he bears " idolum
iustitice suce in corde statutum " ; he refuses to be accounted a
sinner, hence :

*' incurrit in Christum, qui omnes peccatores suscepit in se. Et ideo
Christus iudicatur, accusatur, mordetur, quandocunque peccator
quicuuque accusatur, etc. Qui autem Christum iudicat, suum iudicem
iudicat, Deum violenter negat. Vide quo perveniat furens et insipicns
superbia."

APPENDIX II 503

This indeed, in itself, is all capable of a perfectly orthodox
interpretation, not, however, if we take it in conjunction with all
the circumstances. On Aug. 3, the preacher again inveighs
against the " sensuales iustitiarii." who hang on their works and
observances : This is to remain

"... pueri abecedarii in isto statu ; sed hcu qua-m plurimi hodie in illis
indurantur, quia hsec put ant esse seria, et magna ca sostimant. [Tamen]
(j[ui Spiritu Dei aguntur, ubi didicerint exterioris hominis disciplinas,
non eas niultum curant nisi ut prseludium."

True piety on the other hand consisted in allowing oneself to
be ridden by God. The man of God

41 vadit quocumque eum Dominus suus equitat ; iiunquam scit quo
vadat, plus agitur quam agit, semper it et quomodocunque per aquarn,
per lutum, per imbrem, per nivem, ventum, etc. Tales sunt homines
Dei, qui Spiritu Dei aguntur."

The " holy-by-works " soil themselves with the seven deadly
sins of the spirit. Hence, let us not befoul ourselves by making
a rock of the " opera iustitice." Let us leave that sort of thing to
beginners to whom indeed we may teach

'' multis bonis operibus exercere et a malis abstinere secundum sen-
sibilem hominem, ut sunt [sic] ieiunare, vigilare, orare, laborare,
misereri, servire, obsequi, etc."

These words must have been addressed to men with some
theological training, for, in this discourse, Luther dilates at some
length on a text of Alexander of Hales ; doubtless those present
were members of his Order ; but what then must we think of the
teacher who thus proclaims a freedom from all the observances
and traditional rules by which his fellow-monks were bound ?
Luther's point of view was one, which, if adopted, spelt the end
not only of the Observantines but even of Conventualism. Hence
it is no wonder that it caused murmuring.

5. The collapse of the Augustinian Congregation

The fifth Council of the Lateran took measures against many
abuses which had crept in among the mendicant Orders, par
ticularly among the Hermits of St. Augustine. As we know, the
German Congregation under Staupitz and with Luther as Rural
Vicar was no better off than the other branches. It is from June
30, 1516, i.e. during the period of Luther's " vicariate " that we
find a curious note in the " Acta Generalatus ^Egidii Viterbiensis."
(Above, p. 497.)

" Universo ordini significamus bellum nobis indictum ab episcopis in
coiicilio Lateranensi, ob idque nos reformationem indicimus omnibus
monasteriis." [Cp. 2 Jan., 1517]. " Religioni universse quaecunque in
concilio acta sunt contra mendicantes per litteras longissimas signifi
camus et reformationem exactissimam indicimus."

In thus doing the Minister-General's intention, to judge by the
few scraps his Acts contain, was to bring back his people " ad
communem vitam." No doubt too many dispensations had been
given for the sake of making study easier, or for other reasons.

504 APPENDIX II

The reader may remember the incident (above, vol. i., p. 297, in. 1)
of Gabriel Zwilling's being sent to Erfurt and the words used by
Luther in his letter to Lang. Zwilling, who, after leaving the
Augustinians, became one of the Zwickau " Prophets " but after
wards accepted an appointment as Lutheran minister at Torgau,
had joined the Augustinians in 1502 and matriculated at Witten
berg University in 1512 ; hence he had already been sixteen years
an Augustinian at the time when Luther wrote that he had
" not yet seen or learnt the rites and usages of the Order." Does
not this seem to prove that the Rule must have been greatly
relaxed and that too many exceptions were allowed in the
common way of life ? Luther himself, as we know, had been
dispensed in his student-days from attending Matins and had
been assigned a serving-brother ; this is proved by the manu
script notes of the Table-Talk made by Rorer. " (Staupitzius)
absolvit eum a matutinis et addidit fratrem famulum." (Kroker,
" Archiv fiir Reformationsgesch.," 1908, p. 370.) It has indeed
been urged that Zwilling's ignorance of the " rites " was due to
the smallness of the Wittenberg monastery. But, as Luther wrote
to Lang on Oct. 26, 1516, the house contained " twenty- two
priests, twelve students, and, in all, forty-one persons." (" Brief -
wechsel," 1, p. 67). This was surely enough to allow of the
carrying out of the " rites and usages of the Order." Zwilling,
moreover, was sent to Erfurt, not only to get a better insight into
the ways of the Order, but, mainly, to learn Greek : " Ut et ipse
et alii quam optime, i.e. christianiter, yrcecisent."

6. The Tower Incident (vol. I, pp. 388-400)

To avoid giving unnecessary offence we did not unduly insist
on the locality in which Luther professed to have received his
chief revelation. To have suppressed all mention of the locality
would, however, have been wrong seeing that the circumstance
of place is here so closely bound up with the historicity of the
event. We, however, confined ourselves to a bald statement and
explanation of what is found in the sources, and chose the most
discreet heading possible for the section in question. In spite of
this, Adolf Harnack (" Theol. Literaturztng.," 1911, p. 302),
dealing with our first volume, informed his readers that, on this
point, we had made our own "the olden fashion of vulgar
Catholic polemics " and had made of the " locality a capital
question," no doubt in the hope that Catholic readers would take
the matter very much as the olden Christians took Anus's death
in the closet. Needless to say, what Harnack wrote was repeated
and aggravated by the lesser lights of German Protestantism.
The truest remark, however, made by Harnack in this connection,
is that, the actual " locality in which Luther first glimpsed this
thought is of small importance," and that, even had I made out
my case, " what would it really matter ? "

As to our authorities the chief one is Johann Schlaginhaufen's
notes of Luther's Table-Talk in which the words are related as
having been spoken some time between July and Sept., 1532.

APPENDIX II 505

The forms in which Luther's utterance has been handed down :
The friends who, in 1532, either habitually or occasionally,
attended at Luther's parties and noted down his sayings were
three in number, viz. Schlagiiihaufen, Cordatus and Veit Dietrich.
The (yet unpublished) notes of the last as given in the Nuremberg
MS. contain nothing about this utterance. From Cordatus we
have the version given below as No. III. But, according to
Preger, the editor of Schlaginhaufen, Cordatus " at this time was
no longer at Wittenberg " ; if this be true, then what he says on
the subject must have come to him at second hand, though,
otherwise, his notes contain much valuable first-hand information.
Nevertheless both Preger and Kroker, two experts on the Table-
Talk, are at one in arguing that an attentive comparison of
Cordatus's notes with those of the other guests, proves that
Cordatus not seldom fails to keep closely enough to Luther's
actual words and sometimes misses his real meaning, which is
less so the case with Schlaginhaufen. As for Lauterbach, as
Kawerau points out, he was not at that time a regular visitor at
Luther's house, though we several times hear of his being present
at the Table-Talk. It is more than doubtful whether his version
of the utterance in question (given below as IV) was taken down
from Luther's lips. Moreover his notes, as printed by Bindseil,
often show traces of subsequent correction.

In Schlaginhaufen, on the other hand, we find throughout
first-hand matter, the freshness, disorder, and even faulty
grammar, showing how little it has been touched up by the
collector's hand. He was a personal friend of Luther's, and,
whilst awaiting a call to the ministry, stayed at the latter's house
from November, 1531, where he was always present at the evening
repast. Luther was aware that he was taking notes of the
conversations, and, on one occasion (Preger, p. 82) particularly
requested him to put down something. He was comforted in his
anxieties by Luther (above, vol. v., p. 327), nor, when he left
Wittenberg at the end of 1532 to become minister at Zahna, did
he break his friendly relations with Luther. He quitted Zahna in
Dec., 1533, and took over the charge of Kothen.

The notes of Schlaginhaufen made public by Preger in 1888 are
riot in his own handwriting. The Munich codex (Clm. 943) used
by Preger is rather the copy made by some unknown person
about 1551, written with a hasty hand, and (as we were able to
convince ourselves by personal inspection) by one, who, in places,
could not quite decipher the original (now lost). There are,
however, three other versions of Schlaginhaufen's notes of the
utterance under consideration : That of Khummer (mentioned
above, vol. i., p. 396), that made in 1550 by George Steinhart,
minister in the Chemnitz superintendency, and that of Rorer,
which, thanks to E. Kroker the Leipzig city-librarian, we are now
able to give. That of Steinhart is found bound up in a Munich
codex entitled "Dicta et facta Lutheri et aliorum." (Clm. 939,
f., 10.) Steinhart evidently made diligent use of the papers left
by Schlaginhaufen, Lauterbach and others. Generally speaking,
his work is well done. Steinhart's rendering of the utterance in

506

APPENDIX II

question agrees word for word witli that of Khummer, though
they both differ from the Munich copy published by Preger and
show it to be lacking in some respects. Rorer's text V, in many
ways, stands by itself.

Khummer had fled from Austria on account of his Lutheran
leanings and gone to Wittenberg, where he matriculated on
May 11, 1529. He was then a fellow-student of Lauterbach. He
is supposed to have been given by Luther (between 1541 and
1545) charge of the parish of Ortrand, where he still was in 1555
when the Visitors gave a good account of him. His collection,
now in the Royal Dresden Library, contains a copy (not all in his
own handwriting) made in 1554 from Lauterbach's Diary (1538),
and, further, in the second part, this time all in his own hand
writing, copies of many things said by Luther at table. " We
shall not be far wrong," says Seidemann (p. x.), " if we surmise
that Khummer obtained his version from Pirna [where Lauter
bach had been superintendent since 1539]." Below we give his
version as printed in Seidemann (p. 81, n.) :

Luther's words as they were heard by Schlaginhaufen :

I. Copies of Steinhart (1550)
and Khummer (1554) :

" Haec vocabula iustus et iustitia
dei erant niihi fulmeii in consci-
entia. Mox reddebar pavidus
auditor. Iustus, ergo puriit. Sed
cum sernel in hac turri speculabar
de istis vocabulis Iustus ex fide
vivit, iustitia dei, mox cogit-
averam, [Steinhart: cogitabam] si
vivere debemus iusti ex fide et
iustitia dei debet esse ad salutem
omni credenti, mox erigebatur
mihi animus. Ergo iustitia dei est,
quse nos iustificat et salvat. Et
facta simt mihi hsec verba iucun-
diora, Dise khunst hat mir der
heilig geist aiiff diser cloaca aiiff
dem Thorm (ein)gegeben."1

II. Anonymous Copy of
(Preger) 1551 :

" Hsec vocabula : iustus et
iustitia erant mihi fulmen in con-
scientia. Mox reddebar pavidus
auditis : Iustus — ergo puniet, Ius
tus ex fide vivit, Iustitia dei
revelatur sine lege. Mox cogita
bam, si vivere debemus ex fide
et si iustitia dei debet essc ad
salutem omni credenti, mox erige
batur mihi animus : ergo iustitia
dei est, quo nos iustificat et salvat,
et facta simt mihi haec verba
iucuridiora. Dise kunst hatt mir
d[er] S[piritus] S[anctus] auf diss
Cl. eingeben."

Here the identical text of Khummer and Steinhart (I) supplies
certain missing parts in text II, and, as it is the more understand
able of the two, is more likely to represent the earlier form of
Schlaginhaufen 's rendering. Thus in text II, line 1-2, the word
" Dei " after " iustitia " is wrongly omitted ; so also, the words
" Sed cum semel in hac turri speculabar de istis vocabulis," or
others to that effect, are required to introduce the " mox cogi
tabam " a few lines below. Read alone the " Iustus ex fide," as in
II, is not intelligible. In both I and II there is, on the other

1 " With this knowledge the Holy Ghost inspired me in this cloaca
on the tower."

APPENDIX II 507

hand, an omission, viz. after the words " mnni credenti " which
III, IV and V seek to supply each in their own \vay. Here we
shall not be far wrong in assuming the omission to have been the
fault of the lost original of Schlaginhaufen of which they made
use. The fact that No. I here refrains from completing the
passage is in itself a testimony to its copyist's integrity. Again,
in the Steinhart-Khummer version, the final allusion in the
German words at the end to the " Thorm " (tower) brings us back
to the " turris " mentioned earlier. Now, what is noteworthy, is
that, at the conclusion of this version which seems the better of
the pair, the word " cloaca " is spelt out in full (as it also is below,
in Rorer's copy).

In II, however, we find only the abbreviation " Cl." Now, in
the MS. followed by the editor of text II, though we find a large
number of abbreviations, they are merely the ones in use in those
times. " Cl.," however, is a most singular one, and, were it not
explained by other texts, would be very difficult to understand.
Why then is it used ? It can hardly be merely from the desire to
avoid using any word in the least offensive to innocent ears, for,
elsewhere, in the same pages (e.g. in Preger's edition, Nos. 364,
366, 375) the coarsest words are written out in full without the
slightest scruple. Hence in this connection the copyist must have
had a special reason to avoid spelling out so comparatively harm
less a word.

The remaining texts are those of Cordatus, Lauterbach and
Rorer.

Cordatus was assigned too high a place by his modern editor,
Wrampelmeyer (1885). He had, indeed, his merits, but, as
Preger points out, an inspection of the many items he took from
Schlaginhaufen shows him to have been careless and often
mistaken. Moreover, he has wantonly altered the order of the
utterances instead of retaining Schlaginhaufen's chronological one.
Those utterances which he had not heard himself (such as the one
in question) have naturally suffered most at his hands. As for
Lauterbach's so-called " Colloquia " preserved at Gotha (ed. H. E.
Bindseil), it also betrays signs of being a revision and rearrange
ment of matter collected together or heard personally by this
most industrious of all the compilers of Luther's sayings. Whether
Lauterbach was actually present on the occasion in question
cannot be told, but it seems scarcely likely that he was if we
compare his account carefully with that of Schlaginhaufen. On
Rorer's connection with Schlaginhaufen, see Kroker, " Archiv
fur Reformationsgesch.," 7, 1910, p. 56 ff.

508

APPENDIX II

Luther's words in the revised form :

c.

1559

IV. Lauterbach
(Bindseil, 1, p. 52) :

" Nam hsec verba iustus et ius-
titia Dei erant mihi fulmen in
consciencia, quibus auditis expa-
vescebam. Si Deus est iustus,
ergo puniet. Sed Dei gratia cum
semel in hac turri et hypocausto
specularer de istis vocabulis Iustus
ex fide vivit et lustitia Dei, mox
cogitabam : Si vivere debemus
iusti ex fide et iustitia Dei debet
esse ad salutem omni credenti, non
erit meritum nostrum, sed miseri-
cordia Dei. Ita erigebatur animus
meus. Nam iustitia Dei est qua
nos iustificamur et salvamur per
Christum, et ilia verba facta sunt
mihi iucundiora. Die Schriefft hat
mir der heilige geist in diesem
thuen [thurm] offenbaret."

III. Cordatus 1537 (Wram-
pelmeyer, p. 423, No. 1571) :

" Haec vocabula iustus et ius-
ticia in papatu fulmen mihi erant
conscientia, et ad solum auditum
terrebant me. Sed cum semel in
hac turri (in qua secretus locus
erat monachorum) specularer de
istis vocabulis Iustus ex fide vivit
et lusticia dei, etc. obiter veiiiebat
in mentem : Si vivere debemus
iusti fide propter iusticiam et ilia
iusticia Dei est ad salutem omni
credenti, ergo ex fide est iusticia
et ex iusticia vita. Et erigebatur
mihi conscientia mea et animus
meus, et certusreddebar, iusticiam
dei esse quae nos iustificaret et
salvaret. Ac statim fiebant mihi
haec verba dulcia et iucunda verba.
Diesze kunst hatt mir der heilige
geist auff diesem thurm geben."

V. Rorer (Jena, Bos. q. 24 s, Bl. 117', 118) :

" Vocabula haec iustus, misericordia erant mihi in conscientia
tristitia. Nam his auditis mox incutiebatur terror : Si Deus est iustus,
ergo puniet, etc. Cum autem diligentius cogitarem de significatione et
iam incideret locus Hab. 2 : Iustus ex fide vivet, item lustitia Dei
revelatur sine lege, coepi mutare seiitentiam : Si vivere debemus ex
fide, et si iustitia Dei est ad salutem omni credenti, non terrent, sed
maxime consolaiitur peccatores hi loci. Ita confirmatus cogitavi certo
iustitiam Dei esse, non qua punit peccatores, sed qua iustificat et
salvos (salvat) peccatores poemteiitiam agentes. Diese Kunst hat mir
der Geist Gottes auf dieser cloaca [in horto] eingeben."

It will be noticed that III and IV resemble each other and both
conclude with a mention of the tower (as in Schlaginhaufen I).
At the beginning, however, each adds a few words of his own not
found in Schlaginhaufen. Cordatus adds a parenthesis about
the " locus secretus," i.e. privy (whether the marks of parenthesis
are merely the work of the editor we cannot say, nor whether the
parenthetic sentence is supposed to represent Luther's actual
words or is an explanation given by Cordatus himself). At any
rate the words really add nothing new to Schlaginhaufen's
account, if we bear in mind the latter's allusion at the end to the
" cloaca " and the fact that Cordatus omits to refer to this place
at the end of his account. Hence we seem to have a simple
transposition. As to why Cordatus should have transposed the
words, we may not unreasonably conjecture that, in his estima
tion, they stood in the earlier form in too unpleasant proximity
with the reception of the revelation.

Lauterbach's text, even if we overlook the words it adds after
" credenti," betrays an effort after literary polish ; it can scarcely

APPENDIX II 509

be an independent account and most likely rests on Schlagin-
haufen. One allusion is, however, of importance, viz. the words
" in hac turri et [in Rebenstock's version : vel] hypocausto "
which here replace the mention of the cloaca or privy. Here the
" hypocaustum " signifies either a heating apparatus or a heated
room.

In Rorer the whole text has been still further polished up. He
agrees with II in leaving out the " in hac turri," but, with I, in
introducing the " cloaca " at the end. The words " in horto "
which are inserted in his handwriting just above would seem to
be his own addition due to his knowledge of the spot (the tower
really stood partly in the garden).

Other interpretations of the texts in question : Kawerau (p. 62 f.)
takes Lauterbach's " hypocaustum " to refer to Luther's work
room in the tower, which Luther had retained since his monkish
years and from which " he stormed the Papacy." Unfortunately,
in the references given by Kawerau, we find no allusion to any
such prolonged residence in a room in the tower.

Luther himself once casually alludes to two different " hypo-
causta " (or warmed rooms) in the monastery. According to a
letter dated in Nov., 1527 (" Brief wechsel," 6, p. 117), whilst the
Plague was raging, he put up his ailing son Hans in " meo hypo-
causto," whilst the wife of Augustine Schurf, the professor of
medicine, when she was supposed to have contracted the malady,
was also accommodated in a "hypocaustum" of her own. For
another sick lady, Margareta von Mochau, he found room " in
hybernaculo nostro usitato" and, with his family, took up his own
lodgings " in anteriore magna aula." Hans's " hypocaustum "
was probably the traditional room furnished with a stove still
shown to-day as Luther's (Kostlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 491). Un
fortunately this room is not near the town- wall, or the tower, but
on the opposite side of the building. There is another allusion
elsewhere (Feb. 14, 1546, " Brief e," 5, p. 791) to a "hypo
caustum," but, there again, no reference is made to its being
situated in the tower.

An undated saying in Aurifaber's German Table-Talk, in which
Luther expresses a fear for the future of his " poor little room "
" from which I stormed the Pope " (Erl. ed., 62, p. 209 ; Forste-
mann, 4, p. 474) might refer to any room. As a monk Luther is
not likely to have had a warmed cell of his own but merely the
use of the common-room of the community. He himself speaks
of what he suffered from the cold (above, p. 194) ; elsewhere he
tells us of the noise once made by the devil " in the chimney " of
the refectory (above, p. 125) to which Luther had betaken him
self to prepare his lecture, presumably for the sake of more
warmth.

In vol. i. (p. 397) we perhaps too hastily assumed the " necessary
building " to have been a privy which Luther, in 1519, asked
permission to erect. It may even have been the " pleasant room
overlooking the water " in which Luther " drank and made
merry " — to the great disgust of the fanatic Ickelsamer. (See
above, vol. iii.} p. 302.) Being new it would no doubt have been

510 APPENDIX II

" pleasant " and no doubt, too, it also had a fire-place. It may
be conjectured that, possibly Lauterbach, with his allusion to
the " tower " and the " hypocaustum " was intending to suggest
this room as the scene of the revelation rather than the more
ignoble locality of which Cordatus speaks.

Others have sought to escape the disagreeable meaning of the
text in other ways. Wrampelmeyer interpreted it figuratively :
The tower was Popery and the " hypocaustum " Luther's spiritual
" sweat bath." Preger did much the same and even more. He
says : "I hold that ' CJ.,' from which abbreviation the other
readings seem to have sprung [!], stands for ' Capitel ' [i.e.
chapter]." Even Harnack inclines to this latter view. The
meaning would then be : " This art the Holy Ghost revealed
unto me on this chapter " (of the Epistle to the Romans). But,
apart from the clumsiness of such a construction, as it was
pointed out by Kawerau, such an abbreviation as " Cl." for
" capitel " or " capitulum " is unheard of. With even less reason
Sclieel tentatively makes the suggestion to read " Cl." as
" claustrum," or " cella."

Kawerau admits that " Cl." stands for " cloaca," but he urges
that it arose through a misunderstanding on Schlaginhaufen's
part of Cordatus's " secretus locus " — as though Schlaginhaufen
was likely to depend on second-hand information regarding an
utterance he had heard himself.

Kawerau further points out, that the locality in which the
revelation was received is, after all, of no great moment, that
" the stable at Bethlehem was not unworthy of witnessing God's
revelation in Christ " ; Scheel, likewise, asks whether all Chris
tians, even those of the Roman persuasion, do not believe that
God is present everywhere ? They certainly do, and nothing
could have been further from our intentions than any wish to
prejudice the case by making the locality of the incident a
" capital question." Had Luther received his supposed revelation
on Mount Thabor, or on Sinai, or before the altar of the Schloss-
kirche we can assure our critics that we should have faithfully
recorded the testimonies with the same regard for historical truth.

7. The Indulgence-Theses

In vol. i. (p. 332) and vol. ii. (p. 16) we insinuated that Luther
wilfully concealed the true character of his 95 Theses. Whereas,
in reality, his system had no room for Indulgences at all, in
the Theses he chose to veil his opinions under an hypothetical
form. It has, however, been objected that Luther's letters to
Spalatin and to Scheurl, of Feb. 15 and March 5, 1518, prove
that his views were not yet fixed.

But this is scarcely a true presentment of the case. In his
private letter to Spalatin he openly brands Indulgences as an
" illusion."

" Dicam primum tibi soli et amicis nostris, donee res publicetur, niihi
in indulgentiis hodie videri aon esse nisi aiiimarum illusionem et nihil
prorsus utiles esse nisi stertentibus et pigris in via Christi. , . . Huius

APPENDIX II 511

illusionis sustollendae gratia ego veritatis amore in cum disputationis
periculosum labyrinthum dedi me ipsum."

He tells Spalatin not to bother about gaining Indulgences but
rather to give his money to the poor, otherwise he will deserve
the wrath of God. All would be demonstrated in the forthcoming
" Resolutiones " ; only the " ipsa rudiores ruditate " still assail
him as a heretic, etc. (" Brief wechsel," 1, p. 155.) From these
words his true opinion emerges clearly enough, in spite of the
previous ones : " Hcec res in dubio adhuc pendet et mea disputatio
inter calumnias fluctuat," and in spite, too, of his assurance to the
Court-preacher, that he had not the slightest wish to bring the
Prince under any suspicion of being unfriendly to the Church.

As to the letter sent a fortnight later to Scheurl at Nuremberg,
the historian must bear in mind the effect it was calculated by
Luther to produce at Nuremberg, where some were evidently
inclined to find fault with the Theses. In this letter, just as he
does in his letter to Bishop Scultetus (above, vol. ii., p. 1C) Luther
makes out the Theses to be quite innocent, almost impartial, and,
moreover, in no wise intended for the outside public. They were
to be the subject-matter of a Disputation, " ut multorum iudicio
vel damnatce abolerentur vel probatce ederentur." He is sorry now
that they were made so public. " Sunt enim nonnulla mihi
dubia, longeque aliter et certius qucedam asseruissem vel omisissem,
si id [their publication] futurum sperassem." He also adds :
"' Mihi sane non est dvbium, decipi populum, non per indulyentias,
sed usum earum " (" Brief wechsel, " 1, p. 166.) Here he seeks to
depict his downright antagonism to Indulgences as such, as
merely directed against their abuse.

8. The Temptations at the Wartburg

Luther writes to Melanchthon (July 13, 1521) : " Carnis mece
indomitce uror magnis ignibus ; summa, qui fervere spiritu debeo,
ferveo carne, libidine, pigritia, otio." He adds that for a whole
week he had been " tentationibus carnis vexatus," and concludes :
" Ora pro me, peccatis enim immergor in hac solitudine." In his
letter of Nov. 1, 1521, to Nic. Gerbel, the temptations are also
alluded to, but less clearly qualified.

'; Mille credas me satanibus obiectum in hac otiosa solitudine. Tanto
est facilius adversus incarnatum diabolum, id est adversus homines,
quam adversus spiritualia nequitise in coelestibus pugnare. Ssopins
ego cado, sed sustentat me rursus dextra excelsi."

Though, in the former text, there is undoubtedly an element of
exaggeration (as we pointed out, vol. ii., p. 88), yet there can be
no question that his main complaint relates to temptations of the
flesh and that it is in their regard that he asks for prayers of his
friends.

9. Prayer at the Wartburg

Against us it has been said that we were too disposed to make
of Luther a " prayerless " man. One critic, in proof of Luther's
prayerfulness, points out that, in his Wartburg letters, Luther

512 APPENDIX II

uses the word " Amen " no less than thirteen times in the text,
apart from its use at the end of the letters. Now, in all the
Epistles of St. Paul — which cover far more paper than these
Wartburg letters — the word " Amen " occurs in the text only
eleven times. But, notoriously, Luther was accustomed to use
this word in rather unusual connections, as he does for instance
when speaking of the wife of the " theologus coniugatus " Johann
Agricola (" Dominus det, ut uteri onus feliciter exponat. Amen."
" Brief wechsel," 3, p. 151).

Moreover, Luther's prayers were very peculiar. We hear
nothing of his having used his enforced stay at the Wartburg
to ask of God whether the path he had chosen was the right one,
and for the grace to carry out, not his own will, but that of God.
In the interests of his new doctrine, he is, however, " paratus ire
quo Dominus volet, sive ad vos sive alio." (" Brief wechsel," 3,
p. 193.) He asks a friend to pray " ut non deficiat fides mea in
Domino" i.e. that his views may not change (ib., p. 214) ; " com-
menda, quceso, tuis orationibus Deo causam nostram. (76., p. 324.)
Elsewhere he writes :

'' Benedictus Deus, qui nobis earn non solum dedit colluctationem
adversus spiritualia nequitise, rnsuper revelavit nobis, non esse carnem
aut sanguineni, a quibus oppugnamvir in ista causa. . . . Satan furit in
sapient ibus et iustis suis. . . ."

above all, in Emser, whom lie calls a " vas diaboli proprie
obsessum" (Ib., 3, p. 197.)

10. Luther's state during his stay at the Coburg

In addition to the troubles mentioned in vol. ii., p. 390, which
tended to depress Luther at the Coburg there were yet others.
He felt keenly the separation from his family and from those
with whom he had been accustomed to work. His father's death
was also a cause of sadness to him. Finally the difficulties of
corresponding with his friends at Augsburg were responsible for
his being often in a state of uncertainty as to what was going on
at the Diet.

11. Luther's moral character

Exception has been taken to our interpretation (vol. ii., p. 161,
n. 1) of a certain utterance of Luther's. In the " Comment, on
Galat.," 1, p. 107 sq., he says :

" zelavi pro papisticis legibus . . . coiiatus sum eas praestare plus
inedia, vigiliis, etc, . . . Bono zelo et ad gloriam Dei feci . . . [Yet]
in monachatu Christum quotidie crucifixi et falsa mea fiducia, quse
turn perpetuo adhaerebat mini, blasphemavi. Externe non eram sicut
ceteri homines, raptores, iniusti, adulteri, sed servabam castitatem,
obedientiam et paupertatem, denique totus eram deditus ieiuniis,
vigiliis, etc. Interim tamen sub ista sanctitate et fiducia iustitise
proprise alebam . . . odium et blasphemiam Dei."

But, in these words written in his old age, he is not witnessing to
his virtuous life in former days, but, on the contrary, he is
striving to show that, for all its outward propriety, it was the

APPENDIX II 513

merest blasphemy. Moreover, the words " servabam . . . obedi-
entiam," etc., cannot be taken too literally, as Luther himself
elsewhere admits that he was careless about the Office, though
this was a matter on which the Rule was very severe. A more
appropriate self-justification would be the utterance recorded in
Veit Dietrich's MS. of the Table-Talk (Bl. 83) which begins :
" Monachus ego non sensi multam libidinem."

A man's speech is in some sense an index to his character. Our
volumes teem with samples of the filthy expressions to which
Luther was addicted. No theologian or preacher had hitherto
dared to speak as he did ; the Franciscans Johann Pauli and
Thomas Murner — albeit by no means too particular — certainly
cannot compare with Luther on this score. Moreover, it should
not be forgotten that Luther uses such language chiefly as a
weapon against his Catholic foes without, and the Protestant
" sectarians " within. In his polemics, insults and foul speaking
go hand in hand, and the greater his wrath the fouler his speech.

In connection with one instance of his use of unseemly com
parisons when (above, vol. ii., p. 144) we spoke of his allusion to
the " Bride of Orlamiinde " we were not aware that — as Kawerau
now points out — Staupitz, his old superior, had described in very
free language the nature of the union between the soul and her
divine Bridegroom. ("Von der endlichen Vollziehung ewiger
Fursehuiig," 1516.) Such mystical effusions were very apt to be
misinterpreted by the unlearned fanatics, whom Luther ridicules.

12. Luther's views on lies

That Luther believed in the permissibility of " lies of con
venience " is fairly evident. (Cp. above, vol. iv., p. 108 ff.) The
" mendacium officiosum " is an " honestum et pium mendacium " ;
it is useful and wholesome ; " si hoc peccatum esset, ut non puto,
etc." In " Opp. lat. exeg.," 6, p. 289, speaking of Isaac's state
ment that Rebecca was his sister, he says : " non est peccatum,
sed est officiosum mendacium." But, if it be no sin, then, pre
sumably, it is allowed.

It is true that Luther speaks of Isaac's untruth as an
" infirmitas," but, by this, he does not mean a "venial sin,"
rather he is alluding to the " infirmitas fidei," which, in Isaac's case
was the cause of his untruth. Hence Isaac's untruth, according
to Luther, comes under the category of the

'• mendacium officiosum, quo saluti, famas corporis [corpori ?] vel
aniinae consulitur ; e contra perniciosum (mendacium) petit ista ornnia.
sicut ofliciosum defendit [quod est] pulcherrima defensio contra
periculum animse, corporis, rerum."

Hence the " mendacium, officiosum," far from being a sin, is an
" officium caritatis" i.e. to tell one is " servare, non transgredi,
prcEcepta Dei." (Ib., p. 288 sq.)

Even another text which has been quoted to the opposite
effect must mean much the same. Luther says :

VI — 2 L

514 APPENDIX II

quod non off endatur Deus, sive constanter confitearis, id quod heroicum
est, sive infirmus sis ; dissimulat enim et connivet. Atque ex eo
perspicimus nos habere propitium Deum, qui potest ignoscere et con-
nivere ad infirmitates nostras, remittere peccata, tantum non perniciose
mentiamur . . . nee proprie sed sequivoce et abusive mendacium
dicitur quia est pulcherrima defensio contra periculum animae corporis
et rerum." (Ib., p. 288.)

Here the word " peccata " cannot well include such untruths
since he distinctly affirms that such " infirmities " "do not
offend God."

Moreover, since, as we know, Luther admits no distinction
between mortal and venial sins, holds that all sins " ex natura et
substantia peccati " are equal, and makes no allowance for
" parvitas materice," it follows that, even if such untruths as those
of Isaac, the Egyptian midwife, etc., are " infirmities," yet, since
they are not mortal, they are not sins at all.

In " Opp. lat. exeg.," 3, pp. 140-143, Luther distinguishes the
" iocosum mendacium " — which is merely a " grammaticum
peccatum " — and the " officiosum mendacium " — such as was
Christ's on the road to Emaus — from the true lie : " Revera
unum tantum mendacii genus est, quod nocet proximo."

That Luther himself quite realised the novelty of his teaching,
comes out clearly enough in the fragmentary notes of a sermon
preached on Jan. 5, 1528, i.e. on the eve of the feast of the Three
Kings. The reporter's notes are as usual partly in Latin partly
in the vernacular.

" Hujusmodi officiosa mendacia, charitable lies, in which I lie for
someone else's sake, non incommodat, but rather does him a service.
Sic filia Saul. . . . Illi [magi] mentiuntur, quia sciunt eius object to be
murderous, et tamen non est mendacium. quia quando aliquid loquor
ex bono corde, non est. . . . Ergo mendacium [est] quando my heart
is bad and false erga proximum. ... Si etiam seduxissem [misled
others], how I should rejoice over my trickery, si ita ad salutem
seducerem homines. . . . Monachi in totum volunt dici veritatem.
Sed audistis, etc." (Weim. ed., 27, p. 12.)

Hence, as the concluding words show, Luther was of opinion
that the " monks " went too far in insisting on the truth every
where.

Elsewhere Luther is disposed to follow the teaching of his
Nominalist masters and to see in certain apparent lies (e.g. in
that told by Abraham about his "sister" Sara) the result of
divine inspiration. (Cp. "Opp. lat. exeg.," 3, p. 142 sq.) "Hoc
ipsum consilium ex fide firmissima et ex Spiritu Sancto fuisse
profectum iudicem." Abraham was moved by the Holy Ghost to
take steps to save his person and thus ensure the fulfilment of the
Divine promises made to his posterity. " Quce fiunt ad gloriam
Dei et verbum eius ornandum et commendandum, hcec recte fiunt et
merito laudantur."

Gabriel Biel, a representative Nominalist, admits that a sort of
inspiration may sometimes make lawful what God has forbidden :
He says, e.g. :

APPENDIX II 515

" Nam lex [non mentiendi] quantum ad id, ubi concurrit familiare
consilium Spiritus Sancti, per ipsum Spiritus Sancti consilium
revocatur, et ita non erit contra conclusionem et, ubicunque cum
mendacio, secundo modo accepto, concurrit consilium Spiritus Sancti,
ibi excusatur a peccato ; et per hoc multa inendacia excusari possent."
(In III Sent. dist. 38, q. unica.)

Biel appeals to St. Augustine's excuse of Jacob's He to his
father Isaac, and then proceeds to justify it on Nominalist
grounds ; the " potentia Dei absoluta " can make lies lawful ; by
virtue of this " potentia " the Holy Crhost, in such inspired cases,
can suspend for the while the prohibition. Biel himself had only
the Old Testament instances in view, but the theory was a
dangerous one.

13. Luther's lack of the missionary spirit

Walter Kohler in his article " Reformation und Mission " (in
the Swiss " Theologische Zeitschrift," 1911, pp. 49-60) seeks to
find the reason for the Reformers' lack of interest in the Missions.
(See above, vol.iii., p. 213 ff.) It cannot be simply because they
were too busy with Rome, for this might indeed explain their
not sending out missionaries but not the fact that even the
thought of so doing never occurred to them. Yet a movement
which professed to be Evangelical and to take as its standard the
Apostolic Church should surely have concerned itself more about
the heathen.

Against those who argue that the absence of missionary effort
was due to Luther's eschatological expectations and his belief
in the nearness of the Last Day, Kohler points out that the teach
ing of history rather shows that such expectations, far from
hindering, tend to promote missionary work. He alludes, for
instance, to the rapid spread of Christianity at a time when the
Second Coming was thought so near. He might also have referred
to the case of St. Gregory the Great, who, though he believed the
end of the world to be imminent, did not scruple to send his
missionaries to England.

Others have said that the Reformers had no knowledge of the
number of the heathen. But, as Kohler urges, though their
knowledge was small compared with ours, yet they \vere not
wholly ignorant of the state of things. They had at least heard
of the discovery of America, as we see, for instance, from a
sermon of Luther (Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 21), where he says :
" Quite recently many islands and lands have been found, to
which, so far, in fifteen hundred years, nothing of this grace (of
the Gospel) has been proclaimed."

The real reason is found by Kohler in the exegesis and theology
of the Reformers : Luther, for instance, opined that the Apostles
alone had been commanded to carry the Gospel throughout the
world. He also followed the olden view that the Apostles had
actually preached the Gospel to the very ends of the earth. Hence,
since Apostolic times, no one is any longer under any obligation
to preach Christ everywhere ; we are now no longer apostles, but
merely parish-priests.

516 APPENDIX II

His theology also comes into play in this. For God alone calls
men to faith and salvation ; He it is Who assembles His elect
from among the heathen. But if it is God alone who arouses the
faith in helpless man, then organised activity is useless. True to
his principles the Reformer left the conversion of the heathen in
the hands of God. To him an organised mission would have
seemed to partake of the evil nature of work-service.

14. Notes

In vol. iv., p. 90 the author rather too hastily expresses wonder
that Luther should have spoken of Pope Alexander VI as an
" unbelieving Marane." Luther, however, in so doing was merely
re-echoing what had been said in Rome. Cp. Pastor, " History
of the Popes " (Engl. Trans., vol. vi., p. 137) : " When Julius II,
who was an implacable enemy of the Borgia, occupied the Papal
Chair, it became usual to speak of Alexander as a ' Marana.' '
Cp. also, ib., p. 217 f. " His [Julius's] dislike for this family was
so strong that on the 26th of November, 1507, he announced
that he would no longer inhabit the Appartamento Borgia, as
he could not bear to be constantly reminded by the fresco
portraits of Alexander of 'those Marailas of cursed memory.' "
(Note of the English Editor.)

In connection with the bishopric of Meissen (above, vol. v.,
p. 200 ff., etc.) we may quote a few words from the correspond
ence of its occupant. They will show how the Bishops, while
taking no steps themselves, were vexed with the Pope and Kaiser
for doing so little to obviate the danger to religion. Johann vori
Maltitz, Bishop of Meissen, wrote on Oct. 16, 1540, as follows to
Johann Fabri, Bishop of Vienna (Cardauns, " Nuntiaturberichte,"
6, p. 233) :

" Nihil imprimitur contra hanc sectam [Lutheranam] nee quisquam
tale quid vendere audet, nam cum magna potentia regunt, quibus
contra ne mutire quisquam aliquid audet, et quidquid visitatores et
Lutherus in rebus spiritualibus ordinant, id exequi et servari per omnes
debet et episcopi mandata nihil efficiunt."

On Dec. 10, 1540, he wrote to the same correspondent :

" Martini Lutheri secta egregie suum processum habet quotidieque
augetur ; timeo iram Dei super papam, Caes. ac Regiam Mtein, quod
eorum temporibus ac regimiiie religionem ita decrescere supprimique
patiuntur, et Sti S. Maiestatibusque illorum iocose objicietur, esse
adhuc pios aliquot homines, qui obedientes essent, si modo haberent,
qui eos ita defeiideret. Videmus autem. quod quicquid Lutherani
praesumunt, id patitur et locum habet et quod plures religionis sectae
efflagitantur ac dantur quam obedientiae (sic). Misnise adhuc nulla
divina exequi audemus. Intrusus est nobis vi in nostram ecclesiam
quidam Lutheranus concionator. . . . Sane ferme in omnibus locis
male agitur quantum ad religionem." (Ib., p. 237 f.)

INDEX

In this Index "L." stands for "Luther.

Abailard, i. 401

Abbots, Prince-, ii. 120, iii. 262 f.

Abel, i. 43

Abortions. See Misbirths

Abraham, iv. 109, 111, 156, v.
124, 413, vi. 74; "I am A.,"
iii. 273 ; his " lie," iv. 109, 113,
v. 501, vi. 514 ; his idolatry,
iii. 192, v. 124

Absolution. See Confession

Abstinence. See Fasts

Abuses in the Church, i. 26, 45 ft'.,
53, 70, 84, 123 f., 130 ft'., 226 ff.,
272, 325, 350 f., ii. 3, 123ft'.,
127, 190 ff., 222, 312 f., 338, v.
120 f., vi. 404

Abusive language, i. 69, 72, 83,
209 f., 284, ii. 152 ff., 396, iii.
172, iv. 188 f., 192, 300, 306-
326, 365, 370. v. 88, 116, 342,
383 f., 395, 398 f., 411 f., vi.
109, 214 f. ; shocks Bullinger,
v. 409 ; Melaiichthon, iii. 364 f.;
Zwingli, iii. 380. See Unseemli
ness

Acceptation, i. 155. See Imputa
tion

Aceolti, P., ii. 46

Acta Augustaiia, i. 359

Activity. See Work

Actual sin. See Sin

Actus matrimonialis, iv. 137,
151 f., v. 48

Adam, ii. 271, 282 f.
- Melchior, v. 271 f.

Adiaphora, v. 263, vi. 410 ff.

Adrian. See Hadrian

Adulteration of wine, iii. 297, 313

Adultery, ii. 33, iii. 245, 247
254 ff., iv. 158 f., 165, 208,
v. 25

j^Egidius Komaiius, i. 13, 129
— Viterbiensis, vi. 497, 503

^Epinus, J., vi. 82, 408

^Esop's Fables, iv. 246, vi. 16 1L,

368 f. " A New F.," iv. 177
Agnus Dei, iv. 123
Agonies. See Temptations
Agony in the Garden, v. 363
Agricola, George, ii. 242, iii. 304
— • Johann, as L.'s helper, v. 181,
563, n. ; against L., ii. 370, iii.
301 f., iv. 100, 309, vi. 280 f. ;
L. on A., iii. 219, 278, 400, 407,
475, v. 15, 25, 238, 276, vi.
281, 289, 343, 354, 398; and
Bugenhagen, v. 275 ; and Bora,
iii. 216, v. 21 ; and Jonas, iii.
414 ; and Melanchthon, iii. 444,
v. 22. See Antinomiaiis

— Stephen, iv. 514

— Wolfgang, iii. 284 ff.

Ailly, Cardinal P. d', i. 13, 132,
141, 155, 157, 161 f., 243

Ailments : apoplexy, vi. 107,
376 ff., 379 f. ; calculus, ii. 161,
iii. 434 f., v. 348, vi. 109, 341,
345 ; catarrh, iii. 297, vi. 109 ;
constipation, ii. 81 f., 95, 164, n.,
vi. 109, 177 ; ear-trouble, ii.
161, v. 236, vi. 104, 106 ff. ;
epilepsy ?, i. 17, vi. 101 ; eye-
trouble, iv. 261 ; fainting-fits,
i. 16 f., ii. 170, vi. 103 ff., 373;
giddiness, i. 278, ii. 161, vi. 106 ;
gout?, ii. 162, n., vi. 176 f. ;
headache, etc., ii. 161, iii. 124,
299, 317 f., v. 346, vi. 130, 170,
341, 371 ; heart-trouble, vi.
100 f., 103, 178, 341, 376 f. ;
hemorrhoids, vi. 109, 177 ;
influenza, vi. 110; insanity?
iii. 136, iv. 183, 353, n., vi. 170-
186 ; nerve-trouble, ii. 390, iii.
299, 317, v. 226, vi. 105 ff., Ill ;
running wound, vi. 109, 132 f. ;
sleeplessness, ii. 163, iii. 305 f.,
310 ; sweat (English), vi. 109 ;

517

518

INDEX

syphilis ?, i. 37, ii. 161 ff. ;

tears as a relief, vi. 104, 108,

132, 169 ; vomiting, iii. 300 f.

See Pessimism, Temptations
Alber, Erasmus, iii. 402, 409, iv.

74, 357, vi. 493
Albert of Brandenburg, v. 220

— Mansfeld, ii. 137, 289 f., vi.
350 f., 372, 379 f.

— Mayence ; concern in the |
Indulgence, i. 328, 348 ff . ; L.
invites him to wed, ii. 141, 205 ; j
attacks him, ii. 6, 70, 214 f., j
iv. 98, 292, 319 f., v. 307 f., vi.
188, 350 ; his " relics," iv. 292,
v. 307 f. ; A. and Erasmus, ii. j
248 ; arid Lemnius, vi. 287 ;
and Melanchthon, iii. 370 ; and j
Schonitz, iv. 319 f., v. 106;
and Erfurt, ii. 354 f., 359 f. ;
residence, vi. 485 ; on the |
schools, vi. 436

- Prussia, ii. 223, iii. 423, iv. 196,

vi. 253, 408

Albertinus, M., v. 271, vi. 382, n.
Albertus, L., iv. 226

— Magnus, i. 162
Albrecht, B., v. 295
Alderspach, vi. 29 f .
Aleander, ii. 6, 61, 71, 78 f., 256,

iii. 303, iv. 355, 357
Alemann, A., ii. 139, 141
Alexander III, iv. 109 f., v. 424, i

vi. 494

— VI, i. 55, iv. 90 (cp. correction,
vi. 516)

— of Hales, i. 162, vi. 503
Alfeld. See Alvold
Allstedt, ii. 364, iv. 172
Alms. See Poor-Relief
Altenburg, ii. 314 ff., vi. 49, 52,

240

Alveld, i. 366, ii. 11, iii. 145, iv.
288, v. 124, 307, 520, vi. 426

Ambiguity. See Dishonesty

Ambrose, St., iii. 250, iv. 335, v.
586 ; pseudo-, iv. 174 f., 177

Amen, L.'suse of the word, vi. 511.
See Pope-Ass

Amerbach, B. and V., iv. 183, 364,
vi. 170

America, vi. 515

Amsdorf, N., as L.'s henchman, i.
39, 91, 278, 304, 311, ii. 169,
iii. 405 ; against good works,
iv. 475, vi. 392 ; matrimonial
agent, ii. 137, 139 ; dealings
with spirits, v. 282, 315 f. ;

"consecration," v. 191 ff. ;
edits L.'s works, ii. 55 ; coarse
ness, iii. 336 ; quarrels, vi.
409 ff . ; and Agricola, v. 20 ;
and Erasmus, iv. 181 f. ; and
Melanchthon, iii. 366, v. 257 ;
ejected from his bishopric, vi.
1-08

Anabaptists : their rise, iii. 418 f. ;
effect on L., ii, 93, vi. 75 f., 86,
312 ; Melanchthon denies their
existence, iii. 374, iv. 113 ; L.
attacks them, ii. 363 ff., iii.
419 ; appeals to tradition, iv.
488 ; condemns them to death,
ii. 365 f., v. 349, vi. 249, 275;
their strictures on L., ii. 130,
367 f., 377, iii. 275. See
Fanatics, Munzer

Andreae, J., iv. 200, vi. 275, 419,
421, 424

Angels, v. 381, 395, vi. 127 f., 131 ;
A. guardian, i. 19, v. 279 f.,
297, 309, 327, vi. 374 ; visions
of A. Sec Ghosts

Anger. See Passion

Anhalt, Adolf of, i. 22

— Johann, vi, 226. See Wolfgang,
etc.

Anne, devotion to St., i. 4, iv. 140,
vi. 223

Anointing, Last, iii. 7, vi. 410

Antichrist, i. 359, 385, ii. 13, 56 f.,
80, 260, iii. 142-148, 355, 431,
436, 439, iv. 81 f., v. 243 f., 420,
vi. 154 f. See Pope

Antinomians. ii. 289, iv. 245, 475,
v. 15 ff., 158 f., vi. 279 f. See
Agricola

Antwerp, ii. 167, v. 172, vi. 43

Apel, J., ii. 174, 183

Apocalypse, v. 521 f.

Apocalyptics, ii. 103, iii. 84, 92 f.,
140-152, iv. 296, 313 f.

Apocrypha, v. 497, 521 f. See
Bible (Canon)

Apostasy, i. 62 ff., 120 f., 258 f.,
385 ff. : concealment of, i.
146 ff., ii. 15 ff. ; later descrip
tion of, vi. 187-205

Apostate monks and priests, ii.
115rr., 123 ff., 138, 317 ff.,
342

Apostles described, iii. 191 f., v.
124 ; L.'s belief about them, vi.
515

Apothecaries, i. 245, v. 235. See
Landau

INDEX

519

Apparitions. See Ghosts
Appeal to Pope, i. 258 ; to

Council, i. 356, 359, iii. 432 f.,

443, v. 376 f.
Appearance of L., i. 279, ii. 157 ff.,

iii. 428 f., iv. 230. See Dress,

Eyes, Portrait
Apriolus. See Eberliii
Aqiiila, C., iii. 366, vi. 410
Aquinas, i. 85, 131, 137, 141 f.,

150, 162 f., 243 f., 270, 370, iii.

143, vi. 236
Arcimboldi, i. 344, 352
Argula, ii. 173
Aristotle, i. 22, 77, 85 f., 127,

136 f., 149 ff., 159, 211 f., 244,

305, 313, 339, 370, ii. 269, iii.
143, iv. 102, 336, 346, v. 50, 113,
390, 518, vi. 20 f., 235

Arndt, E. M., vi. 456 f.

Arnold, G., iii. 138, iv. 205, vi.

443 ff.

Arnold!, B. See Usingen
— F., ii. 392, 396, iv. 101, 191,

306, 355, iv. 267
Arnstadt, iv. 15, vi. 139

Art, works of, ii. 351 f., iv. 198 f.,
v. 203-224

Asceticism, v. 87. See Mortifica
tion

Astrology, ii. 168, iii. 118, 166,
356, iv. 267. See Superstition

Athanasius, i. 10, ii. 398 f., vi.
206, 438

Attrition, i. 292 ff . See Contrition .

Augsburg, Diets of, i. 340 f., ii.
284 f., 383 ff., iii. 65, 123, 328-
343, 420 f. ; trial of L., i. 66,
340, 355-359, 384 f., ii. 39, 367,
iv. 388, vi. 190, 299; Con
fession, ii. 384, iii. 329 ff., vi. 281

August of Saxony, iv. 209, vi. 413,
415-419

Augustine, St., i. 12, 23 f., 76 f.,
90 f., 92, 204, 210 f., 250, 305 f.,
400 f., ii. 225 f., 233 f., iv.
108 ff., 331, 335, 439 f. ; pseudo-
A., i, 311 f, vi. 501, 515 ; L. and
Melanchthon disagree with A.,
iii. 333, vi. 336 ; on works, iv.
457-464

Augustinians, i. 4 f., 9 f., 28 f.,
68, 81 f., 147, 262 ff., 297 ff.,
315 f., ii. 89, 334, 337; vi.
473 f., 498-504; Rule of, vi.
202 f . ; and Dominicans, i. 105

Aurifaber, J., i. 184, ii. 289, iii.
218, 224, 230, 239, iv. 269, v.

30, vi. 372, 387, 391, 410 f., 416,
423

Aurogallus, M., v. 496 f., 499
Authority, ecclesiastical, ii. 31,
73, 74 f., vi. 163 f. ; secular
A., ii. 294-312 ; " A." instead
of State, v. 584; L.'s changes
of view about, ii. 196-211, 346 ;
contradictions, v. 601 ; has
nothing to do with the Church,
v. 55 ; yet must uphold
Lutheranism, v. 56. See Free
dom

Babel, ii. 34, v. 171, vi. 315
Babylon, Roman, ii. 13, 19 f., 56
Babylonian captivity, ii. 20, 27,

37, iii. 146, 407, iv. 510, vi. 302
Bachmann, P., iii. 63, iv. 100,

352 f., v. 123
Bachofen, Fr., vi. 493
Backsliding, i. 289
Balaam, iv. 337
Balduin, F., v. 295
Bamberger, P., ii. 345
Banishment. See Intolerance
Baptism, infant, ii. 97, 372 f., iii.

277, 391, 395, 421, iv. 487 ff.,

v. 292, 462, vi. 166 ; of Jews,

v. 412 f . ; is a sacrament, ii.

27 ; mark of the Church, vi.

294; B. and original sin, v. 451;

optional?, iii. 11, iv. 488 ff. ;

works through faith, i. 364, iv.

486 f., vi. 310 ; lost by L., vi.

197
Barnes, R., iii. 260, 428, iv. 3 f.,

8, lift., vi. 488, 492
Barnim XI, Duke, vi. 61
Baronius, C., vi. 437
Basle, ii. 422, vi. 38, 272
Baumgartner, H., ii. 138 f., iii.

327, 337, iv. 222
Bawdy houses. See Brothels
Beer, ii. 22, iii. 208 f., 219, 294 ff .,

304, 306 f., 313 ff., 317, v. 354,

364, vi. 373
Beger, L., iv. 71
Beggars, v. 562, vi. 42 ff., 55. See

Mendicancy
Beier. See Beyer
Belief. See Faith
Bellarmin, i. 91, vi. 294, 323, 384 f.
Beltzius, iv. 219 ff.
Benevolence. See Generosity,

Poor-relief, Students
Bennet, iv. 7

520

INDKX

Benno, St., v. 123 ff., vi. 243 f.
Bergen, Book of, vi. 419
Berlepsch (Berlips), ii. 95, vi.

124 f.
Bernard, St., i. 18, 84, 88, 181,

243, hi. 176, v. 91 ; his " perdite

vixi," iv. 88 f.
— the Jew, iii. 301
Berndt, A., iii. 216
Bernhardi, B., i. 65, 310 ff.
Berthold of Chiemsee, iv. 356

— Ratisbon, v. 77
Besler, iv. 221

Besold, H., iii. 218, 221, vi. 360
Beyer, C., iv. 282, vi. 358 f.

— L., i. 66, 316 ff., 334, iv. 222,
v. 353, vi. 263

— M., iv. 43
Beza, T., 278

Bible, olden editions and transla
tions, i. 14, 28, v. 542 ff . ;
looked down upon by Nominal
ists, i. 134 f . ; a " heretics'
book," iv. 396; "Bible,
Bubble," ii. 365, 370 f . ; Canon,
iv. 400 ff., 505, v. 436 f., 521 ff. ;
inspiration, iv. 398 ff., v. 437 f . ;
interpretation, ii. 235 ff ., iv.
387-431 ; see Anabaptists,
Sacramentarians, etc. ; L.'s
translations, iv. 242 f., v. 494-
546 ; Revised B., v. 523 ff. ;
"B. alone," iv. 387-405;
Lutherans' use of the B., vi.
431 f. ; the " paper idol," vi.
271. See Word

Bibliaiider, v. 421

Bibra, L. von, i. 334

Bidembach (brothers), iv. 221

Biel, G., i. 13, 91, 125, 132, 135,
140 ff., 151, 224, 243, 311, 345,
iv. 119, 440, 508, 516 f., vi. 433,
514 f.

Bigamy, ii. 33. Sec Henry VIII,
Philip II, Leprosy

Billicanus, i. 316, iii. 447

Bing, S., iv. 15

Bishops, Catholic, i. 46 ff., 224 f.,
281, ii. 28, 101, 103, 114, 193,
210 f., 301, 387 f., iii. 440,
v. 101, vi. 324, 404, 493 ;
Lutheran, iii. 428, iv. 126, v.
191, n., 602, vi. 315, 356 ;
L.'s offer to the B., iii. 330,
337 f., 343, 439 f., v. 190-198,
329, 386, 601, vi. 239 ; only B.
are forbidden to have several
wives, iv. 28

Blasphemy, utterances savouring
of, iv. 292, 344, v. 198, 233,
310, n., 407 ; B. to be punished
by death, iii. 71, 358, iv. 266,
vi. 259. See Idolatry, Tempta
tions

Blaurer (brothers), i. xvii, ii. 153,
155, 157, iii. 304, 433, iv. 6, 116,
196 f., 323, vi. 278

Bock, H., vi. 265, 313

Bohemian Brethren, ii. 25, iii.

152, vi. 316
| Bolsec, J., vi. 385

Bomhauer, i. 244

Bonaventure, St., i. 84, 181 f., 346,
iii. 176, 261

Boniface VIII, i. 339, v. 584

Bonn, H., v. 166

Books, on forbidden, ii. 58 f.
j Bora, Cath. von, flight from
nunnery and marriage, ii. 135,
138, 141, 173-188 ; brews the
beer, iii. 313 ; " too rude," ii.
379, iii. 229, v. 83 ; " go back
to the convent," iii. 268 ; gifts
from sovereigns, ii. 139, iv. 8,
26 ; after L.'s death, vi. 346 ;
and Agricola, iii. 216, v. 21 ;
and Cruciger, vi. 359 ; in
Letters, iv. 281 f., v. 199, 308 f.,
vi. 369, 372 f. ; Legends, iii.
281 f., v. 372 ; and Melanch-
thon's wife, iii. 365. See Will,
L.'s last

Bonier, C., ii. 258

Bose, M. A. J., v. 271

Bossuet, iv. 71

Bozius, T., vi. 381

Brandenburg, iv. 195, v. 408

Brant, S., iii. 152, v. 540

Braun, J., i. 15, 127, vi. 206

Brenz, J., i. 316, iii. 50, 405, iv.
5 f., 167, 459 f., vi. 257, 408,
482

Brethren of the Common Life, i.
5, 46, vi. 35

Breviary, i. 127, 225, 269, 275-279.
ii. 126, iii. 114, v. 316, vi. 200 f.

Briesmami, J., iv. 155, v. 152

Brothels, ii. 359, iii. 122, 227 f.,
iv. 176, 229. See Prostitutes

Brack, C., vi. 40 f.

— G., iii. 87, 123, 216, iv. 36, 40,
44, v. 197, 201, 385, 590, vi.
372, 385 f .

Brulefer, S., iv. 120

Brunswick, ii. 215, iii. 408, v. 167,
217, 394 f., vi. 35, 276 f.

INDEX

521

Bucer, M., joins L., i. 310 ; dis
agrees with L., iv. 99 f., v. 237,
vi. 354 ; denies sacramental
presence, iii. 354, iv. 498, v.
268 ; shocked at L.'s lan
guage, ii. 155, iii. 417, iv.
326 ; intolerance, vi. 271, 277 f.;
in favour of a Protestant
Council, v. 176 ; serves Land
grave Philip as adviser in the
bigamy, iv. 15-62 ; suggests a
lie, iv. 114 ; at Cologne, v. 166 ;
at Strasburg, vi. 46 ; agrees
with Calvin, v. 399 f . ; against
Schnepf, iv. 198 ; allows 12%
interest, vi. 98 ; a mediator, iii.
383, 417, 420 11, 446 f., v. 172

Buchholzer, G., v. 313

Buchner, A., vi. 392

Bugenhagen, J., friendship with
L., iii. 404-413, 432, v. 22, 173,
175, 262, 328, 335, n., vi. 326,
347, 364; at L.'s wedding, ii. 174 ;
untruthfulness, iii. 74 ; coarse
ness, iii. 178, 229 f., v. 304;
il cardinal, "iii. 427 ; " ordains"
pastors, vi. 265, 313 f.; dis
agreement with L., iv. 239, vi.
353 ; parish-priest of Witten
berg, ii. 174, iv. 231, 273, v. 136 ;
L.'s confessor, iii. 437, iv. 249,
v. 333, vi. 103 ; panegyric
on L., vi. 387 f., 443 ; intoler
ance, vi. 273 ; is called a
Papist, vi. 410 ; literary work,
ii. 118, 399, v. 489. 499 ; vi.
438, 476 ; missionary work, ii.
323, v. 167, 217 ; poor-relief, vi.
57 f .

Bullinger, H., his intolerance, vi.
271, 278 ; indignant with L., iii.
277, 417, iv. 325, v. 115, 409;
on L. as translator, v. 520, 523 ;
on the bigamy, iv. 10, n., 43, 68

Burer, A., ii. 157, iv. 269

Burgos, P. of, i. 243, 401, v. 411

Burkhard, iv. 11

Burning of the Bull, ii. 51, 54, vi.
381

Biittner, W., v. 295

Butz, P., vi. 271

Cahera, G., ii. 112

Cajetan, Cardinal, 340 f., 344,

357, 384, iv. 86, 302, vi. 487 ;

on polygamy, iii. 261
Calculus. See Ailments

Calixt, G., iv. 310

Calixtines, ii. 112

Call. See Mission

Calovius, A., iii. 138

Calumnies : on olden Church, i.
79, 271, 283, 394, iv. 80-98,
102 f., 117-134, v. 485, vi. 199 ;
on the Popes, iv. 90 f. [amend
according to vi. 516] ; on
Erasmus, ii, 251, 294, iii. 135 ;
on others, iv. 86, v. 106 f.

Calvin, relations with L., v. 399-
402 ; as an organiser, iv. 280,
n. ; " agonies," v. 75 ; pre-
destinarianism, ii. 268, 271, iii.
189, 350 ; vocation, iii. 140, n. ;
intolerance, iii. 258 ; on the
Supper, iii. 354, 446 ff., v. 264 ;
end justifies the means, iv. Ill,
n. ; at Geneva, vi. 488, 490, 492 ;
Calvinism, vi. 414

Camerarius, J., relations with L.,
ii. 256, iv. 220 f ., vi. 348 ; with
Melanchthon, ii. 145 ff., iii. 357,
364, iv. 61 f., 209, vi. 6, 37 ; as
editor, ii. 176ff., 180

Campanus, J., ii. 376, 378, 398,
iii. 403, vi. 251, 284

Campeggio, L., ii. 380, 392, iii.
334 ff.

Candles, ii. 321, v. 147, 282, vi. 410

Canisius, P., ii. 253, iii. 238, 376,
iv. 385 f., v. 264, 296 f., vi. 323,
384, 427 ff., 434, 437

Canon. See Bible, Mass

Canon Law, i. 227, v. 183, 601,
vi. 21, 188f. See Lawyers

Canonisation, v. 122f.

Canus, M., vi. 323

Capella, Galeatius, vi. 491

Capito, W., relations with L., ii.
6 f. ; against L., ii. 242, iv. 99,
vi. 280 ; on bigamy, iv. 6,
10, n. ; intolerance, vi. 277 f. ;
despair, iv. 220 ; dishonesty,
iv. 115; relief of poor, vi.
46

Caraccioli, M., ii. 6

Caraffa, vi. 488

Cardinals, iii. 427 f., 443, n., v.
108 f.

Caricatures, in the German Bible,
v. 528 ; in "Popery Pictured,"
in " Das Bapstum mit seinen
Gliedern," in the " Passional
Christi et Antichristi," v. 421-
426

Carlowitz, iv. 69, v. 252

522

INDEX

Carlstadt, A. B. von, friendship
with L., i. 40, 304, 362 f. ; takes
side of the Zwickau Prophets,
ii. 97-100 ; against L., iii. 183,
iv. 336 ; against images, v.
208 ; Real Presence, iv. 493 ;
sacraments, iv. 486 ; saint-
worship, ii. 345 ; vows, ii. 83 f . ;
011 Epistle of James, v. 523 ;
L. against him, i. 14, 91, 97,
101, ii. 154, 166, 374, iii. 4 121,
154, 177, 385-400, 409, 424,
iv. 87, 308, v. 104, 399, vi. 280,
289. Cp. vi. p. 478

Carpi, A. P., ii. 256

Carpzov, B., v. 264, 295, vi 443, n.

Carthusians, ii. 335. See Lening

Casel, G., v. 127

Casimir of Brandenburg, v. 317

Cassian, iv. 110

Catechism, ii. 119, iv. 233 ff., v.
483-494, vi. 263, 433 ff.

Catharinus, A., ii. 57, iii. 142, 276,
279, 303, vi. 323

Catherine of Alexandria, St., iv.

246
- Aragon, iv. 3

— Bologna (and Genoa, SS.), i. i
173

Catholic, L.'s Church C., ii. 108, j
iii. 368

Catholics, act against their con
science, iii. 90, vi. 284 ; cannot
pray, v. 88 ; have a beam in j
their eye, vi. 332 ; know L. to |
be in the right, ii. 70. See
Calumnies, Church, Intolerance

Cato, vi. 16, 18

Catullus, vi. 18

Celibacy, clergy's disregard for j
the law, i. 50 ; assailed by L., j
i. 120, 276, ii. 83-87, 115-129, \
iii. 246-251, 262, iv. 87, 147-
150, v. 112. See Marriage,
Preachers, Vows

Celichius, A., iv. 223

Celtes, C., vi. 45

Centuriators, Magdeburg, vi. 313.
See Flacius

Certainty, need of, i. 308, ii. 368,
iii. 9, 47 f., 112, 140-141, notes,
146, 159, iv. 440 ff., v. 25-43,
323, vi. 283 ff ., 302 ; our lack
of C., i. 95, 97, 207 ff.

Chalice, ii. 99, 110, 321, iii. 10, 371,
v. 216

Chamberlain, Houston Stewart.
vi. 459 f .

Chancery, German, iv. 244

Changelings, v. 292, vi. 140 ; L.
a C. ?, iv. 358

Charity. See Love of God and
Poor-relief

Charles V, L. to, or on, C., ii. 20,
69, iii, 105, n., iv. 270 ; at
Worms, ii. 61 ff. ; against L.,
i. 340, ii. 79 ; and Erasmus, ii.
256 ; Hermann von Wied, v.
166 ; Josel of Rosheim, v. 409 ;
Landgrave Philip, iv. 21 f., 68,
v. 396 ; the Schmalkalden
League, iii. 430 ; the Council,
iii. 424 f ., v. 380 ; the Turks,
iii. 88 f. See also Appendix I
passim

Chastity, Catholic teaching and
practice, ii. 120 f., 128 f., iv.
133, 135, 138 ; in L.'s view, i.
259, 362, iii. 243 f., iv. 147 f.,
473 f., vi. 404 ; L.'s C., i. 7, 19 ;
Melarichthon on C., iii. 325 ;
temptations against, i. 287, ii.
86, 161, n., vi. 118 f. See
Celibacy

Chemnitz, M., vi. 313, 415, 419,
443, n.

Children, L/s, iii. 215 f., 232,
280 f., 428, iv. 265, v. 108, 226,
230, vi. 31, 373, 378 f. Sec
Luther (Hans, etc.)

Chrism, iv. 519, v. 101, 195

Christ, Divinity of, iv. 238 ff., v.
412 ; almost forgotten, ii. 245 ;
darkened by Aristotle, i. 137 ;
formerly unknown, i. 135, 282,
320, ii. 92 ; known only as the
Judge, i. 391, ii. 281, iv. 103 ;
who did not die for our sins, vi.
245, 260 ; the " weak " C., ii.
385, iii. 191, v. 227 ; His Body
omnipresent, iii. 396, iv. 495 f.,
vi. 253 f., 414 f. ; sole content
of Scripture, v. 541 ; His
preaching in Hell, v. 48 ; His
"lie," vi. 514 ; " C. our hen,"
i. 80, vi. 372, 501 f. Sec
Faith

Christian III of Denmark, ii. 139,
iii. 413, iv. 75

Christians, L.'s title for his
followers, ii. 108, 345, v. 172,
518 ; what C. must do, iii. 52,
60, 69, 79, 81, v. 44 f., vi. 80,
n. ; need no divine worship, vi.
147 f. ; nor government, v.
572 f. ; they are few, iii. 24 f.,

INDEX

523

vi. 292 f. See Church- Apart,
Evangelicals, Temptations,
Worship

Christina, Landgravine, iv. 14,
18 f., 24, 69

Chronology of the world, iii. 147,
vi. 349

Chrysostom, St. J., i. 243, iv.
335

Church, iii. 22-38, vi. 290-340 ;
to be esteemed, i. 223 ff., 337, iv.
406, 410, 488 ; L.'s view con
nected with Wiclif's and Hus's?,
i. 106, vi. 299; visibility, ii.
304, iii. 28 ; criticised by
moderns, v. 465 ff . ; my
Churches, v. 173, vi. 314, 356 ;
marks of the C., vi. 293-297,
327 ; Church- Apart of the true
Believers, ii. 104, 111, 304, ii.
25 f., v. 133-140; Church
property, ii. 318, 327, iii. 33-38,
68, 234, 440, v. 203 ff., vi: 51,
61. See Infallibility

Chytracus, iv. 461, vi. 419

Cicero, i. 8, vi. 17, 376

Circumcision, iii. 256

Cistercians, See Mayer

Civilisation, L. founder of modern,
vi. 457 ff .

Claius, J., v. 505, vi. 443

Clandestinity. See Marriage

Classics, vi. 16 f.

Clavasio, A. de, ii. 51

Clemanges, N. of, i. 50

Clement IV, iv. 89, v. 424

— VI, i. 134
- VII, ii. 392, iii. 424 f., iv. 6

Clergy, i. 46-53, 57, 283 f., iv.
127 ff., 169 f., v. 485

Cleve, W. von, v. 396

Clichtoveus, J., iv. 152, n., 353, n.,
vi. 437

Cloaca, i. 393, vi. 504-510

Clothes. See Dress

Coarseness. See Unseemliness

Coburg, ii. 95, 384 ff., 389 ff., iii.
87 f., 123, 175, 299, iv. 313, v.
98, 117, 346, 497, vi. 106,
512

Cochlseus, with Luther at Worms
ii. 65, vi. 135, 143 f. ; on L., i
17, 24, 30, iii. 303, iv. 92, 354
358, vi. 431 ; L. on C., v. 182
303 ; C. on Melaiichthon, v
267 ; literary work, ii. 196, 212
iii. 63, 86, 276, n., iv. 380 ff.
522, v. 591, vi. 405 ff. ; lan

guage, ii. 150 ; and the
Jesuits, vi. 428, n. ; death, vi.
384

Coelesthius, J. F., vi. 415

Ccelius, M., vi. 132, 374, 377 ff.,
387 f.

Coler, M., vi. 255

Cologne, i. 42, v. 166, 233 ; L. at
C.,iv. 171, n. ; Book of Reform,
iii. 354, 447

Combats, spiritual. See Tempta
tions

Commandments, Ten, " unknown
to Catholics," vi. 200 ; in L.'s
Catechism, v. 485 ; a bad law,
i. 313 ; not to be dwelt on, iii.
175, 226, 394, v. 454 ; sermons
on the, i. 361 ; C. do not justify,
i. 43 ; need not be kept, ii. 28 f .,
iv. 454 ; indeed cannot, i. 100,
144, 189, 207, 339 ; hurtful to
salvation, i. 317 ; their object,
i. 287 f., ii. 271 f. ; C. of the
Church, v. 46, 246, vi. 316;
L.'s unwillingness to impose C.
and precepts, v. 85 f., 139, 142,
147, 179, 484. See Counsels

Commerce. See Merchants

Communicatio idiomatum, iv. 240,
v. 456, vi. 420

Communion, under both kinds, ii.
99, 321, iii. 10, 330, 335, iv. 525,
vi. 279, n. ; of the sick, v. 464.
See Eucharist, Mass, Supper

Compostella, iv. 105, vi. 405

Concords (various Protestant), iii.
330 f., 421 f., 434, 436, 441, 447,
v. 176, 259, vi. 412, 419-423

Concubinage, among the German
clergy, i. 50 f . ; recommended
by L. to the members of the
Teutonic Order, iii. 262 f . ; the
Landgrave's " concubine," iv.
28, 40, 52

Concupiscence, i. 141, 207 ff. ;
all-powerful, i. 73 f., 110-117;
destroys freedom, ii. 278 f . ; is
a sin, i. 99, 203, 210, ii. 150, vi.
365; identical with original sin,
i. 98

Concurrence, Divine, i. 144, 153 f.,
ii. 233

Conduct, L.'s safe, i. 334, ii. 62,
66 ff., 69, 367, iv. 85, vi. 188

Confession, i. 10, 99, 208 ff., 290-
296, 250, 380, n., 384 f., ii. 59 f.,
99, iii. 10, 210, 324, 410, 421,
437, iv. 21, 30-39, 248-256, v.

524

INDEX

74, 315, 320, vi. 340, 374, 496 f. !
See Penance

Confirmation, vi. 410

Congregational Churches, ii. 98- :
114, iii. 22-43

Conjugal due, rendering the, a sin, \
iv. 152. See Marriage

Conradin, iv. 89, v. 424

Consanguinity, iv. 156 f.

Conscience, iv. 56 f . ; the only
true C. is that which agrees with
L.'s, v. 66-78 ; all the Luther- ;
an's troubles of C. must be from •
the devil, v. 328 ft'., 339, 355 f. ; i
struggles of C., see Temptations; ;
freedom of C., see Intolerance ; |
see also Synteresis

Consecration. See Ordination

Consistories, iii. 29, v. 179-185, !
601 f., vi. 314, 356

Constance, Council of, i. 364, ii. i
232, iii. 426. iv. 287

Constaiitine, ii. 309, iii. 71, v. 229, i
594 ; Donation of C., iii. 145, |
vi. 489

Constipation. See Ailments

Consubstantiation, i. 162, ii. 320,
iii. 380, iv. 495 f., v. 463, vi. 415

Contarini, C., ii. 78, iii. 429, iv.
69, 359, vi. 488

Contelori, F., i. 354

Contingent things, i. 193. See
Necessity

Contradictions : the Schoolmen
admitted grace, and didn't, i.
150 ; the monks were, and were
not, zealous, i. 271 ; death was
a reason why L. should, and
should not, marry, ii. 181 ; the
Bible errs, and does not, iv,
418 ; God is, and is not, author
of evil, ii. 281 f. ; hell can, and
can't, bo escaped by those pre
destined, i. 192 ; works are, and
are not, called for, i. 255, iv.
447, v. 454 f . ; Scripture is, and
is not, sole rule of faith, iv.
415 ff. ; God alone does all, i.
255 ; yet man must prepare for
Grace, i. 213 ; freedom of
judgment and yet binding
creeds, iii. 3 ; continence pos
sible, and impossible, iii. 243 f . ;
repentance out of fear, good,
and yet evil, i. 293 ; armed
resistance lawful,and not lawful,
v. 55 f., 58 f. ; Church has, and
has not, any power of her own.

ii. 295ft., v. 597 ff., vi. 329;
for money lent money may, and
may not, be taken, vi. 91 f . ; on
the Eucharist, v. 464. See
Councils, Opposition

Contrition, not necessary for
justification, iv. 433 f . (but cp.
iv. 438 f. and v. 15) ; nor for
confession, iii. 210 ; what C. is,
i. 290-296, v. 12, 310, n.

Controversy. See Polemics

Conventuals, vi. 498. See Obser-
vantines

Conviction. See Certainty

Copernicus, iii. 100, vi. 25

Copes. See Vestments

Cordatus, C., i. xvii., 395, iii.
178 f., 218, 225, 228, 231, n.,
294, 369, 371, 377, 414, 434, iv.
269, 461, vi. 391, 505 ff.

Cordus, E., ii. 125, 220, 256, 342,
iv. 176, vi. 28

Corpulence, ii. 157, iii. 296, 309

Corvinus, A., iii. 218, iv. 14, 25,
28, 74, 184, vi. 487 f.

Coster, F., vi. 385

Cotta, K. and U., i. 5, iii. 288 f .

Councils, (Ecumenical, L. appeals
to one, i. 359 ; cannot err, i.
339 ; can err, i. 364, v. 378, vi.
299 ; a " Christian " C., ii. 50 ;
Rome's efforts to assemble a
Council, iii. 424-429 ; a free
German C., v. 379 ; the pro
jected Protestant Council, iii.
432 f., 441, v. 170, 175-179, vi.
424. See Constance, Trent, etc.

Counsels, Evangelical, vi. 89 ;
are really commands, ii. 166,

299, v. 46 ff., 56-60, vi. 80, n.,
89 ; with the exception of
chastity, ii. 166. See Law

Courage, ii. 27, 76 f., 367, v. 131
Craco, C., vi. 415, 417
Cranach, Lucas (the Elder and
Younger), ii, 158 f., 174, iii.

300, v. 224, 422 f., 425, 429,
495 f., 498, 519, 528

Cranmer, iv. 10, n.

Creed, iv. 415, 483, v. 360, 473,

485 f., 554
Cricius, A., iii. 370
Critical acumen, i. 90 f., 181,

282 f., 311 f., iv. 174 f., 177,

246, v. 153, 474, 522, vi. 335.

See Apocrypha
Cromwell, iv. 12
Cronberg, H. von, ii. 325 f .

INDEX

525

Cross, sign of the, iii. 83, 435 ;

mystic particles of the C., i. 88.

See Crucifix, Theology of the C.
Crotus Rubeanus, i. 4f., 7, 403,

ii. 3f., 62, 256, iii. 403, vi. 28, 31
Crucifix, iii. 84, 132, v. 212, vi.

197, 225, 335 ; taken to bed by

nuns, iv. 106
Cruciger, C., iii. 171, 371, 377,

433 f., iv. 194, 299, v. 22, 237, i

262, 270 f., 499, vi. 5, 346, 359, !

364, 417

Crusades, iii. 81, 83
Cryptocalvinism, vi. 414-423
Culsamer, J., ii. 344
Curseus, J., vi. 417
Curia, iii. 128. See Rome
Curses, i. 209, ii. 13, iv. 295-305. |

See Maledictory prayer
Cusa, N. of, i. 50
Cyprian, i. 243, iii. 250, vi. 339

Daniel, ii. 57, iii. 84, 141 f.,
148, iv. 134, 315

Dantiscus, iv. 274, n., 357

Dantzig, v. 216

David, v. 300, 579 f ., vi. 253

Day, The. See Last Day

Deacons, Lutheran, vi. 57, 265

Death, vi. 376-386; Italian |
pamphlet on L.'s death, vi.
371 ; L.'s wish to die, vi. 107,
341 ; best d. for Pope and his
cardinals, v. 383 f. See Oppo- i
nents

Decalogue. See Commandments

Deceit. See Dishonesty

Decretals, i. 367, ii. 51, iv. 303, vi. i
338

Defiance, ii. 52, iii. 21, 394, iv. 317, i
416, 511, v. 369, vi. 168 f., 318, !
396-403

Degree, academical, i. 21, 58,
127 ff., 285, ii. 130, 362, vi. 466.
See Doctorate

Demonology, ii. 389 f., v. 275-305, i
427, vi. Ill

Denmark, ii. 323, iii. 412 f., vi.
247, 273

Depression. See Pessimism

Desertion, ground for divorce, iii. !
252 ff., 257

Despair, L.'s reason for becoming
a monk, i. 4, vi. 224 ; neces
sary, i. 191. See Fear, Tempta
tions

Dessau, League of, ii. 213

Determinism, i. 116, 183, n., ii.
227, 241, 266, 284, 288

Dettigkofer, D., iv. 75

Deuterocanonical Books. Sec
Apocrypha

Devils, v. 275-305, vi. 122-140 ;
white d., ii. 348 ; attend L.'s
funeral, vi. 385 ; " as many
devils as tiles on the roofs," ii.
62, 367 ; Devil holds the Jews
captive, v. 406 f. ; is a poisoner,
v. 235 ; a good dialectician, ii.
379 ; kidnaps people, vi. 383 ;
lives in the water, vi. 372 ; L.'s
vocation, from the d. ? i. 16,
ii. 86 ; cause of L.'s ailments,
iii. 317 f., vi. Ill; sorely
wounded by L., iii. 122 ; the d.
as L.'s father, iv. 358 ; the d.'s
embassy, v. 98, n. See Exor
cism, Ghosts, Possession, Satan

Didymus Faventinus, vi. 26

Diet, L'.s, iii. 211, 305, 309 f., 317 f.

Dietenberger, J., ii. 222, iv. 101,
355, 383, v. 520

Dietrich, V. (Theodoricus Vitus),
iii. 58, 216, 218, 317, iv. 12, 180,
vi. 130, 250, 391, 505 ff.

Diller, M., vi. 275

Dionysius " the Areopagite," i.
181

Diplomacy, i. 365, ii. 15, 21 f., 55,
58 f., 100, 109 f., 295 f., 302 f.,
321, 365 f., iii. 331, n., iv. 6. 39,
97, n., vi. 325-340

Discipline, Church, i. 57, v. 388.
See Clergy and Preachers

Diseases. See Ailments

Dishonesty, i. 335 f., ii. 15-25, 49,
385 ff., 392, iv. 41, v. Ill, 537 f.
See Gospel-proviso, Lies

Dispensations, Papal, i. 271, iv. 3,
5, 18, 20, 156, 319, vi. 497 ;
Luther's, i. 9, 358, iv. 30, 38, n..
vi. 500, 504

Disputations, i. 310-320, 362-365,
vi. 21 ; early disputatiousness,
i. 58 ff.

Distractions, need of, iii. 179, v.
353 f .

Divorce, ii. 33, 149, iii. 252-258,
iv. 3-13, 156 ff. See Pauline
privilege

Doctor, Doctorate, i. 33, 38, 78,
281, ii. 375, iii. 157 f., 297,
315 f., 320, 369. n.. 391, iv. 227,
344, 346, v. 103 f., 304, 384. 510.
n., vi. 375 ; " A great Doctor,''

526

INDEX

i. 20, iii. 177, iv. 330. See

Degree

Doliatoris, J., ii. 339
Domestic life, iii. 215 if., iv. 280 ff.

See Family
Dominicans, i. 39, 105, 103, 179,

337, 339, 370 f., ii. 12, iv. 383.

See Cajetan, Tetzel, etc.
Doubts, ii. 79 f., iii. 112, iv. 218-

227. See Temptations
Down-heartedness. See Pessimism
Draco, J., ii. 124
Draconites, J., ii. 256
Dreams, v. 352, vi. 149, 444
Dress, L.'s,i. 9, 276 f., 285 f., ii. 78,

iii. 428, iv. 74
Dressel, M., i. 266 f.
Dringenberg, L., vi. 34
Drink, ii. 87, 94, 131, iii. 294-318.

See Beer, Wine
Dimgersheim, i. 24, 26, 168, ii.

145 f.. 186, iii. 275, iv. 335, vi.

101
Diirer, A., ii. 40-44, 127, 158,

244, n.. iii. 137

Ear-discharge. See Ailments
Eber, P., vi. 275, 410, 412
Eberbach, P. See Petreius
Eberlin, J., ii. 124, 129, 162 ff.,

189, 354 f., v. 215, vi. 62
Ebner, H., ii. 334
Ecclesiastes by the Grace of God,

ii. 102, 345,'iv. 329, vi. 400
Eck, J., relations with L., i. 262 ff .,

313, iv. 388 ; attacks L., i. 336, ii.

147, iv. 86, 101, 377 ff. ; literary

work, iv. 457, 502, 513, v. 456,

520, vi. 87, 323 ; L. on E., i.

179, 336, ii. 49, 51, 70, iii. 114,

iv. 86, 182, 287, 301 f., 319, v.

110, 282, 473 ; E. in Rome, ii.

45 f. ; E. and Emser, ii. 222 ;

and Pirkheim'er, ii., 39 ; and

Melanchthon, iii. 446, v. 267 ;

his death, vi. 383
Eekhard, iii. 163
Eckhart, Master, i. 172
Economics. See Usury
Edemberger, L., ii. 170
Education, L.'s, defects of, i.

126 ff. ; of children, i. 362, v.

280. See Schools
Egranus, iii. 384 f., 402 f., iv. 360,

v. 42, vi. 289
Ehem, C., vi. 271
Ehrhardt, J., vi. 78

! Eilenburg, ii. 319
' Eisenach, i. 5, ii. 68, iii. 288, 421,
vi. 125, 276 ; Conference, iv.
50-55
Eisleben, i. 5, 262, iii. 159, iv. 361,

497, v. 30 ff., vi. 5, 372 ff .
! Election. See Predestination,

Vicar

Eleutherius, i. 314
Elevation of the Elements, iii.
393 f., iv. 195, n., 239 f., v. 153,
397, vi. 353

Elias, the New, ii. 129, 163 f., 189,
iii. 141, 165, 322, iv. 348 f., v.
426, vi. 347, 391, 442
Elisabeth, Palsgravine, iv. 70
— of Rochlitz, iv. 16, 24, 27, 201
i Eliseus, his trick, iv. 113

Eloquence, iii. 103. See Rhetoric
I Emotion, value of, iii. 179

Emperor. See Kaiser
! Emser, H., relations with L., i. 8,
27, 371 ff. ; against L., i. 79,
346, 366, ii. 14, 220 ff., iii. 127,
iv. 324, 354, 376 ; L. against E.,
ii. 13, 51, iv. 182, 288, v. 307,
541, vi. 383, 512 ; literary work,
v. 123, 517, 519, 531 ; E. and
Melanchthon, vi. 26
End, justifies the means, ii. 156,
iv. 110, n., vi. 92, 399; of
World. See Last Day
; Epicure, Epicureans, v. 116, 173
I Epicureans. See Erasmus, Papists,

Rome

Epilepsy. See Ailments
Episcopate. See Bishops
Epistolse obscurorum virorum, i.

6 f., 42, 91 f., ii. 3 f.
Epitaph, L.'s, ii. 159, vi. 377, 393
Equivocation, iv. 28 f., 51. See

Dishonesty

Erasmus, secularised, i. 36 ;
edition of New Testament, i.
242 f., v. 510, vi. 454, 467 ;
" Colloquia," iii. 443 f., vi. 16,
38 ; for L., i. xxx., ii. 3, 9 ;
alleged saying, vi. 390 ; against
L., ii. 126, 154, 242-294, iii.
173, iv. 179-186, 325, 353, v.
115f., vi. 32, 36, 170, 429 f. ;
on L.'s marriage, ii. 180 ;
blames L. for the Peasant War,
ii. 212 ; L. on E., i. 43, 92, ii.
219, 223, 267, iii. 135, 208, 403,
iv. 91, 100 f., 287, 329, v. 456, vi.
397, 429 f. ; E. and Charles V,
ii. 256 ; and Diirer, ii. 41 ; and

INDEX

527

Ferdinand I, ii. 249, vi. 429 f. ;
and Duke George, ii. 246, 261 ;
and Melanchthon, iii. 320, 346,
366, 369, 376, 443 f., v. 268 ;
and Stadion, v. 273 ; and Vives,
vi. 44

Erbe, F., vi. 255

Erfurt, i. 3, 6, 21, 58 f., 263, 312,
363, ii, 62 f., 336-362, v. 213 ff.,
vi. 27 f., 326 f.

Ericeus, iii. 436, n.

Eschatology. See Apocalyptics,
Last Day

Eschwege, iv. 38

Esdras, ii. 235

Esther, iii. 253 ; Book of E., v.
521

Ethics, iii. 200 f., v. 3-164, vi. 453;
in Occamisni, i. 157. See Works

Eucharist, iii. 380-384, 393 ff.,
444 f., iv. 250 f., 492-499, v. 74,
149, 462-465 ; is a sacrament,
ii. 27 ; to be adored, iv. 239 f .,
vi. 353 ; not to be reserved, ii.
320 f., v. 222. See Communion,
Consubstantiation, Elevation,
Mass, Supper, Zwinglians

Eusebius, v. 411

Eustochium, ii. 121, iii. 243

Eutychianism, v. 81

Evangel. See Gospel

Evangelical Church Evangelicals,
ii. 108, iii. 96, 301, iv. 21, 210,
311, v. 230. See Christians

Exaggeration, i. 57, 124, 244, 283,
iv. 343 f., vi. 22, 200, 216 f.

Excommunication, Church's use
of, against L., ii. 19 f., 45-52,
90 ; L. against E., i. 24 f., 51 f.,
54, 66,, 337, 371, ii. 231 f., iii.
120, 146, iv. 85 f., 320, v. 122;
L.'s own use of E., ii. 335, iii.
324, iv. 209 f., 216 f., 245, v. 19,
139 f., 143, 148, 186 ff., 603, vi.
263, 293, 316

Exegesis. See Bible interpreta
tion

Exemption, i. 283. See Dispensa
tions

Exorcism, iii. 411, vi. 137-140

Expectants, iv. 339

Experience, inward, i. 159, 170,
241 f., 323, 377, 380, ii. 233, 11.,
277, iv. 391 ff., v. 7, 81, 161 f.,
vi. 127, 192, 234

Exsurge Domirie, ii. 47

Extra ecclesiam. See Salvation

Extreme Unction, iii. 7, vi. 410

Eyb, A. von, iv. 136

Eyes, L.'s., i. 86, 279, ii. 158 f., iv.

357 f .
Ezechiel, iii. 84, 88

Faber (J.) Stapulensis, i. 63, 92,
243, vi. 437

— J., vi. 494

— J., vi. 498

— (or Fabri), J., of Vienna, ii.
135, iii. 194, 335, 416, iv. 302,

383, 514, v. 266, 529, vi. 323,

384, 516

— P., See Favre

Fabricius, J., iii. 292, vi. 443
- T., vi. 494

Facienti quod est in se, etc., i. 144,
205, n.

Fainting-fits. See Ailments

Faith, L. begins to make more of
F. than of works, i. 72 f., 121,
133, 221 ; what F. means to
L., ii. 34, iii. 352 f., v. 38ft'.,
444-449 ; true F. is humility,
i. 219, 252 f. ; it comprises the
" fides historica," i. 76, 377, iii.
14 f., 415, iv. 413 ff., 432 f. ; and
all the elements of Christianity,
ii. 72, iii. 13 f. ; such F. is
either complete or non-existent,
i. 253, iii. 384, 424, v. 398 ; F.
as a mere assent, iii. 18 ; iv.
432 f. ; articles of F., iv. 414 f. ;
justification, due to Fiducial F.,
i. 377-400, iv. 431-449 ; which
is the one thing necessary, iii.
180-186 ; and is produced by
God alone, ii. 290, n. ; this F. is
weak even in L. himself, iii.
201 ff., 415, iv. 275, 441 f., v.
74 f., 130, 357-368; this F. is
Saving F., i. 261, 385 ; it in
cludes the love of God, v. 41 f.,
477 (but, cp. i. 308, also excludes
it), yet is no " fides formata
caritate " which is a " thing
accursed," i. 209, iii. 329, v. 12 ;
" by F. alone," v. 515 ; criti
cised by Schwenckfeld, v. 160 f.;
Rule of F., iv. 482 ff. ; " vera
fides," i. 170. See Reason

False charges. See Legends

Family, L.'s, iii, 42, iv. 232 f., v.
558 f., 561. See Domestic life

Fanatics, origin, ii. 97 ff. ; they
force L. to reconsider his theory
of the worthlessness of works, iv.

528

INDEX

474 ; and to insist on the rights
of the authorities, v. 569 f . ;
why don't they perform
miracles ? vi. 151 f. ; L.'s
attack on them, ii. 167, 363-
379. See Anabaptists, Carl-
stadt, etc.

Farel, Guil., v. 167

Fasting, i. 227, 339, iii. 226 f., 309,
428, v. 87 ff., 355, vi. 321. See
Mortification, Penance

Fatalism, ii. 263. See Pessimism

Fathers of the Church, iv. 410 ;
Erasmus's work, ii. 243, 253 ;
L. demands a return to them,
i. 138, 320 (See Augustine) ;
yet he dislikes their praise of
chastity, ii. 120 f. ; their belief
in free will, ii. 287 ; and their
ignorance of faith alone, iv.
335 ; nevertheless they may be
appealed to, iii. 380 f ., iv. 409 f.,
415, vi. 336. See Tradition

Faust, Dr., v. 241

Favre, P., iv. 385 f., vi. 427 f.

Fear of God's judgments, i. 125,
251, 294 f., 318, iv. 433, 455,
462, v. 22 f .

Feasts. See Holidays

Feige, J., iv. 41, 54, 69, 113

Ferber, G., iii. 286 f .

Ferdinand I (Archduke, King and
Kaiser), ii. 132, 215, 380, iii. 89,
276, 303, 437, iv. 162, 285, v.
404, vi. 480, 485, 487, 489

Ferinarius, J., v. 193

Ferreri, L., iii. 173 f., vi. 430

Festivals. See Holidays

Finance, Papal, i. 51 f., 54, 347 ff.

Findling, J., iii. 171 f.

Fischart, v. 295

Fischer, C., vi. 61

— J., vi. 265, 314

Fisher, Bp. of Rochester, iii. 70,
428, iv. 9, v. 110, vi. 246

Flacius Illyricus, ii. 361, iii. 446,
iv. 514, v. 219, 263, 426, vi. 40,
207, 391 f., 407 ff., 412 f., 443, n.

Flasch, S., iv. 160

Fliesbach, C., vi. 61

Florence, hospitals, iv. 481 ; tale,
v. 318

Florentina, the runaway nun, iii.
159 f.

Fomes peccati. See Concupis
cence

Fontaine, S., vi. 385

Forchheim, ii. 345

Forgiveness of sins, i. 10 ; a
covering over, i. 99 f., v. 6 f. ;
not an actual removal, i. 208,
210 f., iii. 182, v. 37; St.
Augustine's view, iv. 462 ;
comes through faith in Christ,
i. 115, iii. 183, 192 f. ; believer
sins not in doing evil, i. 208,
iii. 180 f. ; article of F. is
fundamental, vi. 166, n. . chief
article of the creed, v. 95. See
Confession, Contrition, Faith,
Sin

Formal principle. See Bible alone

Forstemius, v. 500

Forster, vi. 271

Fortenagel, L., ii. 158

Fox, Bp. of Hereford, iv. 10

Franciscans, ii. 128, 254, iii. 166,
172, vi. 247

Francis I., ii, 168, iii. 424, iv. 69,
76, vi. 472, 480, 488, 490, 492

Frank, S., v. 83, 190, vi. 271, 289

Frankenhausen, ii. 365

Frankfurt on Main, iii. 71, v. 377,
400, vi, 35, 61

Oder, vi. 29, 41

Franz, W., iv. 469

Frederick Barbarossa, v. 424, vi.
443, 494

— II of Prussia, vi. 447 f .

— the Wise of Saxony, his char
acter, iv. 205 f . ; praised by L.,
ii. 7 i., 91, 101, iii. 167 f. ; his
familiarity, v. 311 ; passion for
relics, i. 284 f., 327 ; receives
the Golden Rose, i. 365, n. ;
L.'s strictures on F., i. 81 ; F.
protects L., i. 334, 340 f., 355,
ii. 67 ; restrains him, v. 587 ;
hinders his marriage ?, ii. 183 ;
F. and Carlstadt, ii. 97 f. ; and
Erasmus, ii. 246 ; and Spalatin,
ii. 23

-III of the Palatinate, vi. 414,
420

Freedom of the Gospel, i. 229, 251,
ii. 27 ff., 34, 84-87, 241, iii. 9,
v. 476 f ., vi. 447. See Intolerance

Will, i. 100, 204 ff., 207,

318 f., ii. 223-294, iii. 349 f. ;
in Augustine, iv. 458 f . ; ac
cording to Calvin, v. 400 f . ;
Melanchthon, iii. 346 ff., iv. 436,
v. 258, vi. 152 f. ; Schwenck-
feld, v. 159. See Determinism

Free-thought, L. the herald of ?,
iii. 109

INDEX

529

Friars. See Monks
Friedrich, A., vi. 133
Froschel, S., v. 188, 280, vi. 137
Fugger family, i. 328, 348 ff., 352,

vi. 83

Funk, J., vi. 408
Furtenbach, B., vi. 82

Galatians, commentary on, i. 64,

66, 306-310, 386, v. 292
Gallicanism, i. 164
Gallows grief, i. 292. See Fear of

God's judgments
Gallus, iv., vi. 410
Gangra, Council, vi. 489
Gantner, J., vi. 271
Gebhard of Mansfeld, iii. 64
Geiler of Kaysersberg, ii. 151, iv.

135, v. 290, vi. 46
Generosity, iv. 270 ff .
Genesis, commentary on, i. 395, iv.

14

Geneva, iii. 448. See Calvin
George, "Junker," ii. 81, 159

— of Anhalt, iii. 215, v. 167, 192,
vi. 347, 366, v. 192

— of Brandenburg, ii. 384, iii. 50,
62, 314, vi. 263

— Saxony, iv. 187-193 ; L.'s
mystical advice to G., i. 228,
242 ; preaches before him, i.
334, 369 f . ; at the Leipzig
Disputation, i. 362 ff. ; L.'s
rage with him, ii. 396 f., iii. 121,
iv. 287, 302 f., vi. 243; G.
against L., ii. 395 f., iii. 275, iv.
101 f., 159, 192 f., 322, v. 171,
vi. 400 f . ; G.'s severity to
peccant clergy, iv. 158 ; G. and
Arnoldi, ii. 392 ; and Erasmus,
ii. 246, 261 ; and the " Leipzig
poets," iv. 173 ff. ; and Wicel,
iv. 362 ; G.'s sons, iv. 163 ; his
death, iv. 27, 194, 302

Gerbel, N., ii. 83

Gerhard, J., iii. 138

Gerhoch of Reichersberg, v. 553

German, Council, v. 379, 382 ;
G. language a barbarous one, v.
497 ; L.'s influence on G., iii.
103, v. 504-510, vi. 15, 416,
443 ; makes unseemliness
popular, iii. 239 ; G. national
ism, i. 403, ii. 10, 26, iii. 93-108,
v. 129, vi. 390 f ., 446, 448, 457,
460 f. ; G. theology, i. 66, 87, 177,
180 f., 230, 237, 345, ii. 145. 225

Germans, L.'s unflattering de
scriptions, v. 534, vi. 4, 72. See
Italians, Prophet of the G., etc.

Gerson, J., i. 13, 84, 134, 142, 159,
173, 179 f., 233, 243, iii. 179, v.
91, vi. 202

Getelen, A. von, iv. 383

Ghinucci, G., i. 338

Ghost, egg and feathers of the
Holy, iv. 292. See Spirit

Ghosts, etc., i. 19, 176, ii. 81 f.,
95 f., 167, 389 f., iii. 118, 160,
356 f., iv. 315, v. 283 f., 346, vi.
122-140; L.'s ghost, iv. 300.
See Devils

Giddiness. See Ailments

Giengarius, ii. 164

Gifts to L., i. 285 f., iii. 304,
314 f., iv. 8, 10, 26, 271. See
Talents

Glareanus, H., vi. 31

Glatz, C., ii. 139, 174, n.

Gleichen, E. von, iv. 20

Glosses, i. 62 f., iii. 398

Gluttony, ii. 87, 94. See Diet

Gnesiolutherans, iii. 375, vi. 415

God : the Hidden G., i. 161, ii.
239, 268 ff., 284, iii. 190; G.
"in se " and "quoad nos," v.
441 f . ; Occam's view that His
existence is not demonstrable, i.
158, 161 ; shared by Melanch-
thon, v. 269 ; " falsehood " of
the Catholic opinion of G., i.
190, 301, ii. 269 f., 284; L.'s
gloomy conception of G., i.
113, 116, 187-197, 381 ; fear of
G.'s judgments, i. 10, 189, n.,
294 f., 393, v. 473 ; G. is not
bound by justice, i. 196 f., ii.
292 f ., n. ; , commands im
possibilities, i. 144, 188 f.;
works evil in the wicked, ii.
233, 270, 282, iii. 190. See
Will

Godelmann, J. G., v. 295

Goethe, vi. 448

Golhart, J., vi. 265

Good intention, works, etc. See
Intention, Works

Gospel, rediscovered by L., i.
393 f.; "my G.," iv. 334;
content of the G., iii. 186 ; G.
existed before Christ, v. 8 ;
rule of G. quite distinct from
worldly rule, v. 564 f. ; Gospel-
proviso, ii. 384 f., iii. 330, 338.
343, iv. 96, See. Law

530

INDEX

Gotha, i. 69 f., 262, vi. 326, 409

Gout. See Ailments

Government. See Authority

Grace, semi-Pelagian stamp of
Occam's teaching, i. 132, 141 ff.,
311, vi. 426 ; exaggerated by
L., i. 151 ft. ; need of G., 72 ft'.,
83 ; means of G., v. 461 f. ;
actual grace, v. 36 ; G. and
predestination, i. 204 ff., ii.
229 ; preparation for G., i. 75,
144 f., ii. 226, iii. 210 ; Catholics
never know whether they are
in G., vi. 193. See Justification

Granvell, iv. 369

Grater, J., v. 295

Gratian, i. 91, 311, ii. 51

Gravamina nationis Germanicse,
i. 52 f., ii. 66, 77, iii. 98

Great man, a, iv. 260, 330, vi.
211 f., 448, 457; a G. theo
logian, vi. 349 ; see Doctor,
Megalomania ; Greatness, vi.
398-407

Grebel, C., ii. 370 f.

Greek, i. 28, 128, ii. 235, v. 494,
509 f., 606, vi. 12, 19, 36, 38,
431, 504 ; G. orthodox, ii. 13,
v. 175

Grefenstein, J., i. 25

Gregorian chant, ii. 171. See
Hymns

Gregory I, iv. 335, 464, 525, v.
252, vi. 515

— VII, iv. 110, n., v. 424, n.

— of Rimini, i. 143 f., 159
Greiffenklau, R. von, ii. 65, vi. 383
Greser, D., vi. 61

Groote, G., i. 88, 173
Gropper, J., vi. 492
Gross, C., iii. 218, n.

— E., iv. 128 f., 136
Grynseus, S., iv. 10, n.
Gualther, R., iv. 10, n., 68
Guidiccione, G., iii. 425
Giinther, i. 65, 312, vi. 216
Guttel, C., v. 19
Gymnasia, vi. 20

Haarlem, whale of, iii. 148
Habit, supernatural, i. 155 f. See

Virtue

Hadrian IV, v. 424, n., vi. 494
- VI, i. 55, ii. 39, 165, iv. 371
Hagenau conference, v. 400
Hagiolatry. See Saint-worship
Halberstadt, v. 220

Halle, v. 165, 219, vi. 272, 381,
384 f., 407

Hallucinations, ii. 81, vi. 129 ff.,
172-186

Halo. See Portraits

Hamburg, iii. 408, v. 218

Hamelmann, H., iv. 223

Hammelburg treaty, ii. 360

Hamster, Hans, vi. 255

Haner, J., iv. 470 f .

Hardenberg, A. R., iv. 497

Harnack, A., on L., i. 398, ii. 72,
iv. 483 f., v. 432-469, vi. 63,
441

Hasenberg, J., iv. 173 ff., v. 519

Hass, J., i. 344

Hatred, of God, i. 389 ; resigna
tion to God's H., i. 238; L.'s
H. for his foes, iii. 172, 412, 434,
iv. 508, v. 98-116, 429

Haubitz, A. von, v. 591

Hausen, vi. 288

Hausmann, N., ii. 135, 205, 387,
iv. 219, v. 140, 590

Health. See Ailments

Heathen, salvation of ancient, v.
48 ; their virtues, vices, i. 101,
v. 50. See Missions

Hebrew, i. 28, 35, 128, iv. 46, v.
410, 413, 428, 494 f., 510 ff.,
533, vi. 19, 36, 431. See Jews

Hebrews, commentary on Epistle
to the, i. 64, 251, 260 ff., 306,
378 ; Pauline authorship denied,
v. 521

I Hecker, G., i. 355
I Hedio, C., ii. 193 f., vi. 46, 58, 278
i Hegemon, P., vi. 494

Hegius, A., vi. 34

Heidelberg Chapter, i. 298, 334,
v. 13; Disputation, i. 115,
315 ff., 334, 379, ii. 230; Uni
versity, iii. 291, vi. 29, 40,
414

Heintz, P., iii. 411

Hel, C., vi. 271
i Held, G., iii. 215

- M., vi. 490
I Helding, M., iv. 223, 384, v. 21

Helfenstein, U. von, ii. 131

Hell, predestination to, i. 102, 307,
312 f., 317, ii. 227, 239, 268, iii.
329, v. 5, 438, 441 ; according
to Calvin, v. 400 ; Mosellanus,
ii. 242 ; Melanchthon, iii. 347 ;
Schwenckfeld, v. 159 ; resigna
tion to H., i. 174, 190. 192,
237 ff., 376, vi. 220

INDEX

531

Heller, S., iii. 314

Hemorrhoids. See Ailments.

Hen. See Christ

Hendriks-Hoen, C., iv. 493

Henry VIII, L. and the divorce, \
iii. 255, 260, iv. 3-13, vi. 488 ;
approval of H.'s cruelty, iii. 70,
428, v. 110; L.'s rudeness to H.,
ii. 152 f., 211, iv. 302, 391 ; H.
and Erasmus, ii. 259 ; and i
Melanchthon, iii. 357, 373 f. ; j
and the Schmalkaldeii League,
iii. 65

— of Brunswick, iii. 124, 270 f.,
iv. 63-71, 97 ff., 288, 293 f., v.
167, 236, 394 f., vi. 349, 407

— Saxony, iv. 27, 194, v. 124 f.,
vi. 243, 255

Herborn, N., ii. 254

Herder, G., vi. 446

Heretics, in L.'s fold, ii. 74, 379,
iii. 398, iv. 245, v. 169 ff., 238 f.,
349, vi. 288 f., 343, 351 ff.,
364 f., 398, 415 f.; on H., i.
225, n. ; H. all begin by doubt
ing one article, i. 253, iii. 384,
424, v. 398 ; the ways of H., vi.
280-289 ; their vanity, i. 225,
324, vi. 164 ; obstinacy, i. 253,
v. 349 ; H. are the devil's
dwelling-place, v. 284 ; not to
be punished, ii. 301 ; and yet
to be punished severely. See
Intolerance, Zwinglians.

Herolt, J., iv. 120, 128

Hersfeld, ii. 68

Hervagius, iv. 183

Hesse, iv. 210 f., v. 141 f., 188,
408

Hesshusen, T., iv. 323, vi. 413,
415

Hessus, Eobanus, joins L., ii. 3
43, 62, 256 ; fanaticism, ii. 355 ;
at Nuremberg, vi. 6 ; on run
away monks, ii. 124 f. ; on the
decay of learning, vi. 27 f., 37,
79 ; and of morals, ii. 342, 349 f .

Heyden, J. von der, ii. 188, iv.
173 ff., v. 592

Heydenreich, C., i. 393, iii. 221

Hierarchy. See Bishops

Hilary of Poitiers, iii. 381, iv. 110

Hildesheim, v. 218 f.

Hilten, J., iii. 166

Hindrances. See Impediments

History, study of, vi. 4, 19, 36,
437

Hoft, H. von, ii, 351, 353 f.

Hoffmann, C., iv. 355
Hoffmeister, J., iv. 114 f., 352, vi.

384-498

Hofmami, M., v. 151
Hohenzollerns. See Albert,

Joachim, of Brandenburg
Holbein, ii. 158
Holidays, i. 227, ii. 253, vi.

430, n.
Holiness, as a mark of the Church,

vi. 296, 330, 332 f.
Holkot, R., iv. 137
Hollen, G., vi. 68
Holler, J. L., v. 521
Holy monk, L. a, vi. 194 f.
Holzhauseri, H. von, ii. 184
Homberg, synod, v. 141
Home. See Domestic life, Postils
Homoousios, iv. 240
Hondorf, A., v. 295
Honesty (in Bible-translation), v.

513 ff. See Truthfulness
Honstein, W. von, i. 228
Hoogstraaten, ii. 14, iv. 302. 38.",,

vi. 383

Hope. See Faith (Fiducial)
Horn, A., ii. 361, n.
Horns, L.'s, v. 109, vi. 398
Hosius, S., i. 105, n., vi. 385
Hospitals, iv. 480 f .
Hoyer of Mansfeld, ii. 79, 131 f.,

iii. 276, 303, 312
Hubmaier, B., ii. 365
Huguenots, vi. 422
Humanism, i. 6 ff., 40-44, 91 f.,

ii. 3-9, vi. 30 f. See Erasmus,

etc.
Humility, source of justification,

i. 214-219, 258 ; L.'s H., ii. 16 f .,

21, 366, iv. 273 f., 277, 327ft1.,

347, v. 114, vi. 209-212
Humour, i. 277, ii. 140-145, 183 f.,

iii. 281, 306, iv. 104, 257, 279.

303, v. 306-318, vi. 350, 373 f.
Hundelshausen, H. von, iv. 25
Hungary, iii. 89, vi. 480, 483
Hus, J., i. 25 f., 106 ff., 356, 364,

iii. 143 f., 155, 165, iv. 188, 317,

330, 417, n., v. 243, 389, 425,

vi. 443
Hutten, U. von, i. 403, ii. 4-10,

54, 66 f., 248, vi. 467, 470
Hutter, L., vi. 443
Huttner, A., v. 215
Hymns, i. 278, n., v. 223, 342 f.,

546-556, vi. 436
Hyperius, A., iv. 468 f., vi. 58
Hypocrisy. See Dishonesty

.532

INDEX

Ickelsamer, V., ii. 126 f., 130, 377,
iii. 170, 302, iv. 337, v. 115

Icoiioelasm. See Image-worship

Idol, L. made into an, iv. 70, vi.
422

Idolatry, to stand by one's
statutes, i. 72 ; to look on God
as the Judge, i. 390 f . ; to
honour Mary, iv. 502 f . ; to say
Mass, iv. 507, n. ; to pray, i.
309 ; L.'s gainsayers are all
idolaters, ii. 316, 329, 364, v.
113. See Intolerance, Saint-
worship

Ignatius of Antioch, iii. 381

— Loyola, vi. 384, 427 f., 435

Illnesses. See Ailments

Illuminism. See Rationalism

Image-worship, iconoclastic riots,
etc., ii. 97 ff., 244 f., iii. 391 ft'.,
iv. 411, v. 202 ff., 207-224

Immaculate conception, iv. 238

Immoral, L. ? i. 26 f., Ill, iii.
273-294

Impanation. See Consubstantia-
tion

Impediments, matrimonial, ii. 33,
150, 187, iii. 257 ff., iv. 10,
156 ff.

Impotence, ground for Divorce,
iii. 255. See Marriage

Impropriety. See Unseemliness

Imputation, i. 94 f., 155 ff . ; a
nominalist view, i. 75, 122, 133,
161 ; L.'s peculiar conception
of it, i. 74, 94, 117, 191, 212,
214 f., 219, 290. See Justifica
tion

Incense, v. 147

Inconsistencies. See Contradic
tions

Incubi, iv. 358 f., v. 286. See
Possessed

Indulgences, L.'s earlier views on,
i. 35, 75, 324 ; the quarrel with
Tetzel, i. 325-356, vi. 510 ;
other attacks on I., i. 70 f., 149,
227, 260, 284, 296 f ., ii. 16, iv.
372 f., v. 472

Infallibility of the Church, ac
knowledged, i. 162, 323, ii. 50,
vi. 253 ; denied, ii. 301 ; L.'s
own, ii. 375 f., vi. 256 f. See
Pope

Infant. See Baptism

Infidelity. See Unbelief
Informers, L.'s, about Roman
matters, i. 348 f., ii. 27, v. 382

Ingolstadt, vi. 431

Inkpot legend, ii. 96

Innocent III, i. 162, ii. 522

— VIII, v. 296

Inquisition, the Saxon, ii. 332, iv.
409, v. 592 f., vi. 241 f., 264 ff.

Insanity. See Ailments

Inspiration, L.'s, ii. 93 f., iii. 137 f .
See Bible, Spirit

Intemperance. See Drink

Intention ("intentio bona"), i.
177, 190, 202, 205, 277 f., ii. 241

Interest, vi. 79-98

Interim, iii. 375 f . See Leipzig,
Ratisbon

Intermarriage of nobles, vi. 71

Intolerance, L.'s, ii. 72, 318, 331 f.,
335, iii. 357 ff., 393, 409, 439,
447, iv. 512, v. 567, 577, 592.
vi. 237-280, 408 f. See Blas
phemy, Carlstadt. etc., Jews,
etc.

Irrationalism, iii. 8

Isaac's untruth, vi. 513

Italians, i. 54, 356, 339, ii. 5,
iii. 94, 96 f., 130, iv. 320, v. 391

Iwanek, G., v. 373

Jacob's lie to Isaac, vi. 515

— the Jew, i. 35 f., vi. 497
Jaius, C., iii. 376, vi. 427
James, Epistle of, ii. 32, iv. 277,

389, 474, v. 522 f., vi. 446
Jena, iii. 385 f., v. 236, vi. 40, 412,

415

Jeremias, L. a new, vi. 161 f., 442
Jerome, St., i. 92, ii. 121 ff., iii.

243 f., iv. 164, 331, 335, v. 284,

vi. 413, 530
Jests. See Humour
Jews, iii. 235, n., 281, 289 f., iv.

265 f., 284-288, 296, v. 30 f.,

115, 283, 298, 402-417, vi. 78,

262, 373 f.
Joachim of Anhalt, v. 313

— I of Brandenburg, i. 349, ii. 214,
iv. 302, v. 282

— II, iii. 71 ff., iv. 195, v. 20, 313,
vi. 61, 76

Joachimstal, iii. 402, vi. 389

Job, iv. 266, v. 497

Johann the Constant, of Saxony,
relations with L., ii. 240, 345,
iii. 35, iv. 206 f., 316, v. 496 ;
furthers L.'s cause, ii. 214, 331,
v. 144, 576, 579, 587; on
resistance to the Kaiser, ii. 382,

INDEX

533

iii. 49, 51, 54, 325 f. ; and
Erfurt, ii. 359 ; one of the
'' Protesters," ii. 384 ; moral !
character, iv. 206 ; not strong, j
iii. 37 f . ; temperate, iii. 307 ; j
intolerance, vi. 241, 255 ft.,
274 f.

— Casimir, iv. 70, vi. 422

— Frederick, L. dedicates to him j
his Magnificat, v. 480 ; opinion i
of Henry VIII, iv. 11 ; and the
Turkish War, iii. 87, 90 ; and j
resistance to the Kaiser, iii. 70 ;
rude behaviour to the Legate, i
iii. 441 ; interference at Naum- i
burg, v. 165 f. ; invites L. to !
draft his Schmalkalden Articles, j
iii. 431 f. ; intolerance, v. 403, '
vi. 274 f . ; and the Landgrave's ;
bigamy, iv. 22 f., 27 ; relations
with L., vi. 341, 347, 394;
sometimes has a drop too much, j
iii. 307, n. ; a sodomite, iv. 60, !
202 ft. ; his moral character, j
iii. 268, iv. 202 ff., 207; is '
deposed, vi. 407

John the Baptist, L. a new, vi. 442

Jokes. See Humour

Jonas, J., close relationship with
L., ii. 174, 387, iii. 44, 52, 55,
57, 70, 300 f., 348, 367, 413-416,
432, v. 138, 175, 197, 231, 333,
vi. 222, 326, 372 ff. ; translates
L.'s works into Latin, ii. 264,
iv. 521 f., v. 382, 403 f. ; help
in the German Bible, v. 499 f. ;
missionary work, iv. 194, v.
124 f., 165, vi. 273 f. ; assists at
ordinations, vi. 314, 347 ; pro
motes the Consistories, iii. 31,
v. 181, 183 f. ; acts as judge
iii. 171, 401 f., v. 20, vi. 281
fanaticism, iii. 131,iv.299, 510 f.
a misunderstanding with L., v
107 ; his writing paper, ii. 144
his melancholy, iv. 219 ; and
the bigamy, iv. 26, 36, 43 ; and
Wicel, v. 43 ; present at L.'s
death, his panegyric, iv. 244,
348, vi. 373, 380 f., 387 f ., 396
- Prophet, v. 532

Jordan of Saxony, vi. 236

Jorger, D., vi. 92

Josel of Rosheim, v. 403, 408 f .

Jovian, iii. 41, vi. 355

Jubilee Year, vi. 86

Judae, L., iii. 227, 302, 417

Judas, ii. 282, iii. 190, v. 352

Jude, epistle of, v. 522

Judex, M., vi. 410

Judge. See Christ

Judgment. See God, Last Day

Julius II, i. 55, 228, 339, 351, vi.
516

— Ill, vi. 436

Juncker, C., iii. 292, vi. 289, n.

Justice, of God, i. 391, 388-402,
iv. 93 f., vi. 190 ; human J., i.
150 ; the twofold and three
fold " justice," i. 387 ; natural
and supernatural, v. 49-52 ;
" justice " becomes " piety," v.
514 ; commutative, v. 58,
117 ff. ; reaching of J., i. 71 ff.,
vi. 195 ; " formalis justitia," iv.
460. See Justification

Justification, according to L., iv.
432-449, v. 453-461 ; consists
in a being declared just, i.
213 ff. ; the fear of its absence
is the sign of its presence, i.
218, 302 ; is ever doubtful, i.
97 ; preparation for, i. 213 f. ;
its preaching makes the congre
gation snore, iv. 232. See
Certainty, Faith, Grace. Hu
mility, Imputation

Justinian, ii. 269, vi. 91

Justitiarii, i. 148, 199 ff., iv. 170

Juvenal, vi. 18

Kaiser, iii. 48-^4. Sec Charles V,

etc., Resistance
Kalteisen, H., i. 346
Karg, G., iii. 171, vi. 275
Kaufmann, F., iii. 217, vi. 358

— M., iii. 216 f., v. 344
Kauxdorf, A., ii. 319
Kern, J., iv. 172 f.

Kessler, J., ii, 157 ff., iv. 268,
357 f.

Khummer, C., i. 396, vi. 505 ff.

Kingdom of God v. Kingdom of
the World, ii. 297 ; consists in
forgiveness of sins, iv. 448

Kirchner, T., vi. 415

Kleindienst, B., iv. 95, 101

Kliefoth, v. 150

Kling, C., ii. 355, v. 341, vi. 326

— M., iv. 289, vi. 356
Klingenbeyl, S., vi. 157, n.
Kneusel, B., v. 203

Knights, ii. 26, 56, 66 f., 197, vi.
402 ; Teutonic, ii. 120, 223, iii.
16, 262, iv. 196

534

INDEX

Koch, V., vi. 4

Kohlhase, Hans, v. 117-119

Kokeritz, C. von, iii. 72

Kolb, F., iv. 493

Kollin, C., ii. 154, iv. 383

Konigsberg, v. 216, vi. 41, 408

Koppe, L., ii. 136

Koran, v. 419, 421

Korner, W., vi. 419

Koss, J., iv. 303 f.

Kotteritz, S. von, vi. 49

Krafft, U., iii. 238

Kraft, A., ii. 256, iv. 25

Kramer, M., iv. 158, 208, 11.

Krapp, C., iii. 365

Kraus, J., v. 373

Krautwald, V., v. 79

Krug, N., v. 295

Kultur. See Civilisation

Lagarde, P. de, v. 512, vi. 449

Lainez, vi. 90, 435

Laing, J., vi. 385

Laity, i. 281, ii. 103, v. 178. See

Clergy

Lamb of God, iv. 123, 517
Lambert, Fr., of Avignon, ii. 137,

v. 141 f., vi. 8, 475, 479
Landau, J., iii. 304, vi. 376, n.,

379 f.

Lang, J., at Erfurt, i. 40 ; rela-
*» tioiis with the Humanists, i. 28,
Sfii. 256 ; love for mysticism, i.
jjM, 84, 169, 264 f., 280; L.'s
•^ right hand man, i. 7, 265 f ., ii.
^342, vi. 114, 116, 118; trans-
'jllates Matthew, v. 546 ; suc-
HJeeeds L. as Augustinian Vicar,
;^i. 315, 334; promotes the
^apostasy of Erfurt, ii. 337,

* 340 ; causes scandal, ii. 123,
~i& 355 ; intolerance, ii. 354 ; diffi-
„ culties with his flock, vi. 326 ff.

- P., i. 353

Langen, R. von, vi. 34
Language, L.'s, advantages, iii.

103, iv. 242 ff. ; defects, ii.
153 f., 198, iii. 172. See
Abusive L., German L., Un
seemliness

Languages, vi. 3, 12, 15, 25 f., 83,
436 f.

Lasco, vi. 58

Lasius, C., vi. 412

Last Day, v. 241-252 ; will come
in less than a century (v. 393)
now that L. has shown up the

Roman Antichrist, ii. 56, 103,
iii. 147 ; signs of its nearness,
ii. 168, 200 f. ; among them the
prevalence of syphilis, ii. 162 ;
and of melancholy, iv. 224 ;
also the bad morals of the New
Believers, iii. 165, iv. 218, v.

180 ; the dissensions rampant
among them, v. 170f. ; the
inroads of the Turks, iii. 82, 84,
88, 92, v. 418 ; its expectation
a ground for L.'s marriage, ii.

181 ; as an explanation of his
lack of missionary zeal, vi.
515 ; does not prove L. a
man of strong faith, v. 361 ;
its pathological character, vi.
154

Lateran Councils, i. 162, vi. 34,
503

Latin, iii. 396, 428, v. 146, 508

Latomus, iv. 329, vi. 384, 473.
See Louvain

Lauterbach, A., i. xx., 394, iii.
163, 218 ff., 223, 230, v. 169,
188, iv, 342, 391, 505 ff.

Lauterbecken, G., vi. 98

Lauze, W., iv. 202

Law and Gospel, iv. 459, v. 7-14,
24, 323, 451 ; hard to distin
guish, ii. 375, iv. 227, vi. 204 f . ;
mosaic L., iii. 387, 394 f. See
Antinomians, Commandments,
Natural L., Schwenckfeld

Lawyers, attacked by L., i. 202,
iii. 39 ff., 56 f., 233, 411, iv.
228 ff., v. 207, 293 ff., vi. 355-
361

Learning. See Schools

Legends, L.'s, about his early life,
vi. 187-236 ; about the olden
Church, iv. 116-178 ; Legends
about L., i. Ill, n., ii. 69-74,
94 ff., iii. 278-294, v. 367-374,
vi. 381-386 ; Legends of the
Saints. See Critical acumen

Leib, K., ii. 39, 253, iv. 354

Leiffer, G., i. 88, 274

Leipzig Disputation, i. 362 ff. ;
Interim, iii. 375, v. 263, vi. 410,
412 ; University, vi. 29 ; L.'s
last visit, vi. 348

Leisentritt, J., vi. 436

Leisnig, v. 136 ff., 142, vi. 49 ff.

Lemnius, S., ii. 188, iii. 233 f.,
274, 297, 302, iv. 292, vi.
287 ff.

Lening, J., iv. 24 f., 65 ff., 201

INDEX

535

Leo X, and Albert of Mayence, i.
348-354 ; takes steps against
Luther, i. 333, 341, ii. 45 ; his
Bulls, if. 39, 52 f. ; Luther's
letter, i. 335, 340, ii. 17 if., 30,
vi. 218

Leprosy, ground for bigamy or
divorce, iii. 255, iv. 20

Lessing, vi. 446, 448

Leyser, P., iv. 469

Libraries, v. 215, vi. 19

Lichtenberg, ii. 317

Lichtenberger, J., iii. 167, iv.
330

Liege, vi. 35

Lies, iv. 28 f., 51, 55, 80-178, vi.
191, 513 fi. See Abraham, etc,.
Dishonesty

Lights. See Candles

Liguori, v. 469, n.

Lindanus, W., vi. 385

Link, W., Luther's intimate, i. 40, !
264, 359, ii. 184, iii. 54, 60, 121, I
n., 143 f., 424, iv. 96, v. 516;
resigns his office as General
Vicar and goes to Altenburg, i.
315 f., vi. 49, 52, 242; at
Nuremberg, ii. 335 f., v. 172 f.,
186 ; his temptations, v. 338 f.

Litany, iii. 412, vi. 482

Liturgy. See Worship

Lochau, v., 251

Locher, J., iii. 152

Lombard, Peter, i. 12, 22, 86, 91,
98, 150, 243, 305, 311, 410,
vi. 21

Loscher, T., vi. 316

Lotichius, N., v. 295

Lotther (or Lother), the printer,
ii. 367, v. 498

Louis of Bavaria, ii. 380, iii.
430

— the Palatinate, vi. 420

Louvain, the town, vi. 35, 38, 43 ;
the theologians, ii. 46, vi. 328,
348 f . See Latomus

Love of God, perfect, i. 158, 172,
191, 194, 236, 238 f., 308, v.
33 f . ; imperfect is mere ego
tism, i. 251 ; required together
with faith for justification, i.
207, ii. 240. See Faith. Love of
one's neighbour, see Poor-relief

Liibeck, iii. 64 f., 408, 410

Ludel, T., iii. 285

Ludicke, J., iii. 72

Luft (Lufft), Hans, the printer, v.
498, 502

Liineburg, ii. 384, vi. 276
Lupinus, P., i. 304, iii. 389
Luscinius, O., iv. 471, vi. 31
Lute-playing, i. 7, ii. 131, 157, iii.

288

Luther, spelling of the name. i. 6,
264 ; Hans, the father, i, 5,
15 f., 19, 25, ii. 86, 182, 216,
iii. 308, iv. 265, v. 230, vi.
182 f., 224 ; Hans, the son, iii.
216, iv. 181, vi. 346, 368, 371,
509 ; Catherine L., see Bora,
James L., v. 108 ; Paul L., i.
33, vi. 378 f., 496. See Children
Lutherans, ii. 108, vi. 476. Sec

Christians
Lutz, R., v. 296
Lycosthenes, C., iii. 152
Lyra, N., of, i. 92, 243, 401, ii.
237, v. 413, 535

Macarius, St., ii. 379
— Magnes, iii. 381
Macchiavelli, vi. 57
Machabees, 2nd Book, iv. 505 f .
Madness, is from the devil, v. 280.

See Ailments (Insanity)
Magdeburg, i. 5, iii. 64, 442, v.

219 f., 236, vi. 5, 35, 408,

413

Magdeburgius, J., iv. 225
Magenbuch, J., ii. 162 f., iv. 349
Magi, their lie to Herod, vi. 514.

See Three Kings
Magic, v. 240 f ., 277, 284 f. See

Superstition, Witches. M. in the

sacraments, i. 248
Magnus of Mecklenburg, iii. 371
Major, G., v. 262, 265, vi. 272,

364, 408 ff., 412, 494
Maladies. See Ailments
Maledictory prayer, iii. 172, 208,

437 f., v. 94. See Curses
Malipiero, iii. 152
Malsburg, H. von der, iv. 25
Maltitz, J. von, vi. 516
Malvasiari wine, ii. 131, iii. 297
Man. See Great M.
Mania. See Madness
Manichaeans, ii. 376, iii. 259, vi.

413, 415
Mansfeld, i. 5, ii. 131, iv. 165, vi.

132, 350 f.
Mantel, J., iv. 210
Mantua, Council, iii. 425, 428 f.,

vi. 488
Marbach, J., vi. 275, vi. 493

536

INDEX

Marburg, archives, iii. 51 ; Con
ference, ii. 334, 390, iii. 328,
342, 381, 382 f., 416, v. 340,
531 f. ; University, vi. 40

Marcion, i. 300

Marcolfus, iii. 268, iv. 45 f .

Margaritha, A., v. 411

Marguerin de la Bigne, vi. 438

Marienwerder, v. 216

Marquard, iv. 120

Marriage, iii. 241-273, 324 f., iv.
129-178 ; L.'s charges against
the Papists, v. 112, vi. 232 ; did
he better it ? ii. 148 ff., v. 283 ;
M. secularised, iii, 38-42 ; a
remedy against fornication, ii.
116ft, 142, vi. 166; impedi
ments, iii. 290 f. ; is com
manded, ii. 166 ; clandestine
M., ii. 120, 149, n., iii. 39 ff,
iv. 289 f., vi. 355-359; with
brother of impotent man, ii.
33 f. ; exchange of wives, iv.
160. See Actus matrimonialis,
Bigamy, Divorce, Impediments,
Intermarriage, Leprosy, Sacra
ments, Women, L.'s M., see
Wedding

Marschalk, i. 263

Marsupino, v. 382

Martial, vi. 18

Maty, Virgin. L. on honour paid
to the, iv. 235-238, 500-503, v.
146, 476 ; conceived without
sin, iv. 238, n. ; her virginity, v.
446 ; on the Hail M., iv. 502,
v. 478, 480, 517. Sec Saint-
worship

Mascov, G., i. 83, 267 f.

Mass, iv. 506-527 ; L.'s first M.,
i. 15, 125 f., iv. 170, vi. 100,
226 ; how quickly Masses are
said in Rome, i. 35 ; last M., ii.

88 ; early distaste for, i. 275 f.,
iv. 124 f., vi. 196 f. ; insults, i.
27 f., ii. 166, iii. 130, 227, 305 ;
Masses for dead bring in money,
iii. 439, iv. 513 f.; M. sup
pressed, ii. 311, 320 f., 327 f.;
against the Canon, ii. 330, v.
154 ; the " winklemass," ii. 88,
iv. 518-523 ; not a sacrifice, ii.

89 f., 320, 385, iv. 506-518, v.
150, 439 ; yet L. calls it the
" sacrificium eucharisticum," v.
149, 464 ; M. is quietly changed
into Communion-service, ii.
98 f., v. 145 ff., 150 ; " Formula

missae," v. 135, 145, 546 ;
German M., v. 139, 146, vi. 445.
See Eucharist

Material principle. Sec Faith,
Justification

Mathesius, J., relations with L.
iii. 312, iv. 269 ; enthusiasm, v.
364, 488, vi. 389 f . ; " His-
torieii," i. xx., vi. 389 f., 443 ;
on his Catholic days, v. 490, n. ;
on Tetzel, iv. 84 ; on Egranus,
iii. 402 f. ; Frau Cotta, iii. 288 ;
on the beginning of the Gospel-
business, i. 303 f., 393 ; on the
ghosts, etc., vi. 123 ; on L.'s
prophecies, iii. 164 ; on L.'s
habit of taking a sip at night,
iii. 305 f., 310 ; on the German
Bible, v. 499 f. ; on the Table-
Talk, iii. 218 f., 222, 228, 232,
239, iv. 43 f., v. 170; and the
song for driving out Antichrist,
v. 555 f . ; his melancholy, iv.
222, v. 363 f., vi. 150 f.

Maupis, F., vi. 346

Maurice of Saxony, iv. 315, v. 125.
167, 200 ff., 252, vi. 347, 407,
410

Maximilian I of Bavaria, ii. 43

— I, Kaiser, i. 340

Mayence, ii. 6, 214 f., v. 221, vi.
431

Mayer, W., vi. 29, 426

Mayron, F., i. 346

Mechanical system of grace, i.
156, 308, ii. 274, n., 284

Mechler, yE., ii. 345, 354

Meckbach, J., iv. 69

Medals, vi. 389

Medecines, spoilt by the devil, v.
283. See Physicians

Meder, v. 295

Medievalism, L.'s, vi. 440-444.
453 ff .

Medici, Guilio dei, ii. 46

Mediocrity standardised, i. 71 f.,
iii. 211 f., 311 f., v. 124

Medler, N., v. 165, 194, vi. 346,
488

Medmann, P., v. 166

Megalomania, iv. 327-350, v.
110 f., 389 ff., 530-533, vi.
161 ff., 284 f., 361, 398-406.
See Doctor, Great man

Meinhardi, A. von, i. 40, n., iv. 141

Meirisch, M., i. 144, iv. 160

Meissen, iv. 86, v. 123, 200 ff., vi.
243

INDEX

537

Melancholy, iii. 402, 416, iv. 210,
218-227, v. 305, vi. 170, 221,
227

Melanchthon, Ph., character and
work, iii. 319-378, 438-449, v.
252-275 ; acts as intermediary
between the Knights and L., ii.
5 ; pictured with L., vi. 389, n. ;
and alone, ii. 158 ; enthusiasm
for L., i. 303, iii. 165, iv. 269,
357 ; his " Passional," v. 425 ;
" Pope- Ass," iii. 150 ff. ; his
Commonplace-Book, ii. 239,
282, n., 287 f., iv. 498, v. 4 ;
Instructions for the Visitors, v.
591 ; panegyric on L., v. 262,
vi. 387; Vita Lutheri, i. 17 f.,
303 ; helps in the German
Bible, v. 495 ff. ; favours the
fanatics, ii. 99 ; comparative
moderation, iii. 134 ; criticises
L.'s teaching, v. 460 f. ; drops
predestinarianism, ii. 239, 268,
287, 11., iv. 435 f., vi. 152 f. ;
on the Law, v. 17 ; penance, v.
452 f . ; need of good works, iv.
476 ; Eucharist, iii. 424, v.
465; finds fault with L.'s
language, ii. 144 f., 155, 176 ff.,
iii. 240, 276 f. ; M.'s melancholy,
ii. 167, iii. 201, iv. 219 ; belief
in astrology, ii. 168, iii. 306 ;
superstition, ii. 390, v. 240 ;
dances occasionally, iii. 303 ;
on the Virgin Mary, iv. 502 ;
strictures 011 the Universities,
vi. 26 ; and Agricola, v. 15, 20 ;
and Amerbach, iv. 364 ; and
Amsdorf, v. 193 ; and Bucer,
iii. 421 ; and Calvin, v. 401 ;
and Cordatus, iv. 461 ; and
Erasmus, ii. 248 f., 262, iv. 183 ;
and Henry VIII, iv. 10 f.; his
daughter, vi. 418 ; and Lemnius,
vi. 287 ; as an educationalist,
iii. 391, vi. 5 f., 9, 13, n., 16 f.,
18, 21, 26, 38, 435 ; his
students' lack of discipline, v.
157, 247 ; his hopes of a
Protestant Council, v. 170,
I75f. ; his leading place in
Lutheranism, v. 173, 183 ;
ordains ministers, vi. 265, 314 ;
intolerance, ii. 203, iv. 9, v. 20,
22 f., 82, vi. 251 f., 269 f. ;
truthfulness, ii. 386 f., iv. 112 f. ;
misrepresents Augustine, i.
305 f., iv. 459; thwarts L.'s

Schmalkalden Articles, iii. 432 ;
armed resistance, iii. 59 ; the
Landgrave's bigamy (iv. 13-79)
is the cause of an indisposition,
iii. 268, iv. 144 ; miraculously
cured by L., iii. 162, iv. 48 ;
is sometimes suspected by L.,
v. 237, vi. 345 ; plans to leave
Wittenberg, vi. 347, 352 f . ; at
Mansfeld, vi. 350 f . See Crypto-
calvinism, Peccafortiter, Syner-
gism

Melander, D., iv. 24 f., 157, 201,
251

Memmingen, iii. 64, 421

Mendicancy, i. 71, 270, ii. 337, vi.
473, 500. See Beggars

Menius, J., ii. 256, iii. 68, 421, iv.
66 f., 74, 203, v. 282, vi. 276,
391, 409 f., 482 f.

Mensing, J., i. 79, iii. 195, iv.
121, 160, 303, 385, vi. 330, n.,
432

Merchants, v. 157, vi. 6, 79-86

Merit, i. 75, 102, 119, 143, 157, 179.
iv. 449, v. 8 f., 459 f. ; of Christ,
i. 71 f.

Merseburg, v. 167, 219, vi. 347

Metz, v. 167, 396

Metzsch, Hans, ii. 169, iii. 426, iv.
216, 245, v. 118, 187 f., 312, vi.
22

-Jos. L., vi. 262

Meyer, P., ii. 327

Michel's lie, iv. 109

Micyllus, vi. 36

Middle Ages, L.'s misrepresenta
tions of the, iv. 116-178. Sec
Medievalism

Military service, iv. 247

Milsuiigen, iv. 18

Miltitz, C. von, i. 341 f., 348, 365,
ii. 18, 86, vi. 190, 307

Mind, L.'s, vi. 156-186

Ministers, Ministry, ii. 107-111,
113 f., iv. 126, vi. 311; their
choice, ii. 112, 192, 358, vi. 599 ;
their support, iii. 34. Sec
Ordinations, Preachers, Priests

Minkwitz, J. von, v. 220

Miracles, ii. 63, iii. 117, 153-102,
v. 288, 313, vi. 164 f., 191,
285 f., 443. See Fanatics,
Melanchthon, Monk-Calf

Misbirths, iii. 152 ; consolation
for women suffering M., iv. 248

Misrepresentation^. See Calum
nies, Legends

538

INDEX

Mission, L.'s, i . 37, 74, 91 ff., iii.

109-168, iv. 313-318, 391, v.

321 ff., vi. 161-166, 283 f ., 285 f.

See Certainty, Revelation, Voca
tion
Missions, foreign, iii. 213 ft'., v.

249, vi. 427, 515
Misson, M., iii. 292
Mochau, M., von, vi. 509
Modern spirit, L. and the, ii. 72,

iii. 19, vi. 454 f.
Modesty. See Humility
Mohacz, iii. 89
Mohammed, iv. 6, v. 479. See

Koran, Turks

Mohr, G., iv. 219, vi. 346, 349
Mohra, i. 5, 16
Moibanus, A., vi. 491
Moller, H.. vi. 417
Monastery, L. in the, i. 3-34, iii.

114 ; his legend, vi. 187-236.

See Wittenberg
Money, vi. 84, 87 f .
Monk-Calf, ii. 57, iii. 149 f ., 355 f.,

v. 244, 310. vi. 155
Monkeys, v. 286
Monks, what their name comes

from, iv. 161 ; L. on M. and

friars, i. 270 f., ii. 138, iii. 228,

v. 113 f., vi. 514. See Apostate

M., Spectre M., Vows
Monsterberg, U. von, vi. 482
Morality. See Ethics, L.'s morals,

vi. 512

Moravia, v. 403 f .
Morbid trains of thought, vi. 141-

182, 224 ff.
More, Sir Th., ii. 244, n., iii. 70,

237, iv. 9, 284, v. 110, vi. 246
Morlin, J., vi. 408, 492
Morone, J.. iv. 28, vi. 492
Mortal sins, all breaches of the

Rules, i. 15, iv. 105, n. See

Scapular, Sin
Mortification, i. 191, 235, iii. 211,

v. 31, 86, 92, 481, vi. 235. Sec

Penance

Mosaism. Set-- Law, Mosaic
Mosellamis, P., ii. 242, iv. 269,

vi. 16
Moses, i. 179, ii. 221, v. 236 ; to

be slain, v. 324 ; a German M.,

vi. 442 ; a second M., vi. 442 ;

"relics" of, iv. 292
Moth, Ph., vi. 488
Motives, v. 34
MoumVjoy, ii. 251
Muhlberg, vi. 407

Miihlhausen, ii. 167, 364 f., iii. 422

Muller, C., ii. 208, iii. 296, 315 f.,
iv. 361

Munch, J., vi. 385

Munich, ii. 172

Minister, ii. 365, iii. 419, v. 166,
173, vi. 35

-S., v. 411, 413, 532, 535

Miinzer, Th., ii. 200-207, 363-
378 ; at Allstedt, iv. 172 ; at
Zwickau, iii. 402 ; L.'s rival, iii.
4 ; won't work miracles, iii.
154, vi. 285; his "presump
tion," iii. 389 f., vi. 152; his
" sins," iii. 177 ; preaches
against the two popes, of Rome
and Wittenberg, iv. 309, 337,
vi. 281 ; his defence, ii. 130,
iii. 275, 302, iv. 100 ; is doomed,
iii. 384

Murmellius, J., vi. 34

Murner, Th., ii. 154, iv. 376, 384,
vi. 430, 513

Musa, A., ii. 345, iv. 222, v. 174,
363

Musseus, S., iv. 220

Musculus, A., vi. 61, 419

— W., iii. 300, vi. 277

Music, i. 8, ii. 170 ff., iii. 66 f.,
iv. 256 f., v. 223, 302, 547 f.,
551 1, 554, vi. 19

Mutian, R., i. 7, 28, 41, ii. 3, 243,
iii. 287, vi. 31, 350, 387

Myconius, F., iii. 62, 162, 166, 421,
iv. 84, 200, vi. 123, 265, 326,
341, 491

- O., iv. 198

Mylius, G., i. 33

Mysticism, i. 160, 165-183, 268 ;
German M., i. 84, 87 f ., ii. 275,
n. ; mystic pangs of hell, i. 231-
240, vi. 102, 115ff. ; was L. a
mystic ? i. 89, n., v. 476 ; some
mystic effusions, i. 82-90, 230-
240, 280 ff., 318, v. 32 f., 198 476

Namur, vi. 43

Nannius, J., vi. 488

Nathin, J., i. 4, 13, 17, 22, 58, 128,
ii. 337, 361, n.. iv. 354, vi.
101, n.

Nationalism. See German N.

Natural virtues, see Virtue ; N.
order, v. 49-52 ; N. law, i. 141,
143 f. ; thunderstorms, etc.,
not N., v. 286 ; Nature and
Grace, i. 204

INDEX

539

Naumburg, iii. 375, v. 165 f.,
192 ff., vi. 328, 408

Nausea, F., iv. 383

Necessity, all takes place of. ii.
227, 290, v. 53 ; N. knows no
law, iii. 90

Neobulus, H. See Leiiing

Neoplatonism, i. 76, 174

Nerve trouble. See Ailments

Neustadt Admonition, vi. 422

Nicene Council, iii. 157, iv. 240,
vi. 314

Nider, J., i. 48

Nietzsche, vi. 459

Nigrinus, iv. 324

Nimbschen. See Nuns

Nimbus. See Portraits

Nobility, ii. 3 ff., 26 ff., 199, 216,
vi. 71 f., 402

Noe, L. a new N., vi. 388, 442

Nominalism, i. 130 ff., ii. 275, 11. ;
Nominalists on lies, vi. 514 f. ;
Semi-Pelagianism of the, vi.
426. See Occam, etc.

Noppus, J., vi. 493

Nordhauseii, v. 236, vi. 276

Nossenus, M., ii. 342

Novalis, vi. 449

Nuns, apostate, of Nimbschen,
etc., ii. 135-148, 177 f., 282;
their fate, iv. 172ff., 175f. ;
persecution of the faithful ones,
vi. 276 f., 278 f. ; two newly
" cursed " N., vi. 343

Nuremberg, ii. 334 ff., v. 172 f.,
186, 223, 255 ; Town-Council,
ii. 335, iii. 59 ff. ; Diets of N.,
ii. 189, 334, 380, iii. 76 ; Poor-
relief, vi. 46 ; Schools, vi. 5 f.,
35 ff. ; tolerance, vi. 270 f .

Oaths, lawful to take, v. 570
Obedience, ii. 15 ff., 308 ff., iii.

172, vi. 498 f.
Obser van tines and Conventuals,

i. 28-38, 67-78, 81 f., 147,

198 ff., 255, 262 f., 267, 298, vi.

497-503

Obstinacy. See Defiance
Occam, Occamism, i. 13, 84 ff .,

120, 130-165, 171, 191, 204 f.,

212, 216, 243, iv. 417, n., v. 51.

See Nominalism
CEcolampadius, J., takes Zwingli's

side, iii. 409, n., v. 79 ; wants

to establish synods, v. 176 ;

opposes the bigamy, iv. 6, 10,

n. ; (E. on L.. iv. 99 ; L. on (E.,

ii. 254, iii. 389, 403, 424, iv. 87,

308, v. 105, 447, vi. 278, 281,

284, 289
Office. See Breviary, Calling,

Ministry

Oils. See Anointing, Chrism
Oldecop, J., 24, 29, 35 f., 304,

332, 361, iv. 229, 429, v. 218,

vi. 222, 385, 497
Olevian, C., vi. 414
Olmiitz, W. von., iii. 152
Omnipresence. See Christ
Opponents, awful death of L.'s,

iv. 302, 304, vi. 161, 191, 383 f. ;

See Catholics, Heretics
Opposition, a sign that one is in

the right, i. 253
Orders, Holy, all " jugglery," vi.

404 ; " donkey-smearing," v.

101
Ordinations, Lutheran, ii. 112,

iii. 428, v. 101, 190-197, vi.

264 f., 313 f., 347, 374
Ordo matrimonialis, iv. 129 f.
Organs, ii. 227, v. 148
i Origen, iv. 110, 331
Original sin, i. 74 f., 92, 99, 140 f.,

203 f., 210, ii. 250, v. 6, 37, 438,

450, 487, vi. 41 2 f., 420. Sec

Concupiscence, Grace
Orlamiinde, iii. 256, 385
Orthodox side, L.'s, ii. 399, iv.

239 ff., 526 f. ; O. Lutheran-
ism, vi. 440-444
Ortiz, iv. 386
Ortwin de Graes, i. 42
Osiander, A., ii. 334, iii. 434, 444,

iv. 9, 29, 223, v. 170, 257, 410,

531, vi. 408 f.
Osnabruck, v. 166
Ossitz, vi. 137
Ostermayer, W., i. 127
Ostia, v. 109, 384
Otto I, Kaiser, v. 220
— A., vi. 410
Our Father, the, i. 65, 361, ii, 240,

v. 94, 124, 473, 476, 478, 485
Outlawry, L.'s, ii. 45
Overwork, i. 267. See Work

Pack, O. von, iii. 48 f., 326, v. 343
Pagans. See Heathen
Pagninus, S., v. 535
Palladius, P., iii. 413, n., vi. 273,

489
Pallavicini, S., iv. 259

540

INDEX

Palpitations. See. Ailments
Paltz, J., i. 13, 105, 224, 243, 272 f.

327, n., 345

Palude, P. de, i. 346, iii. 261
Pantheism, i. 166, 172, 178, ii.

284, vi. 456
Panviiiius, (X, vi. 437
Papacy. Sec Pope, Popedom
Papists are murderers, iii. 130 ff.,
414 ; Cains and devils, iii. 43 ;
fattening pigs, iv. 288 ; as bad
as Turks, iii. 91 f., vi. 155 ;
abnormal nature of L.'s views
of the P., vi. 156 ff.
Pappus, H., iv. 100
Parents, L.'s, i. 5, v. 294, vi. 223.

See Luther, Hans
Paris, University of, i. 363, v. 279,

vi. 37, 349, 472
Parrots, v. 286
Pastors. See Ministers
Pathology. See Ailments
Patmos (the Wartburg), ii. 91
Patriarchs, iii. 259, iv. 4, vi. 74,

85. See Prince

Patriotism. See German national
ism

Paul, St., as L.'s mainstay, i. 94,
140, 179 ; Paul rather than
Jesus, iii. 169, vi. 453 f. ; his
failings, ii. 289, v. 360, 362 f.,
393 ; L. a new P., iii. 165, v.
517 f. ; like P., iii. 119, iv. 273

— Ill, Pope, ii. 250, iii. 420, 425,
427, 443, iv. 90, v. 168, 234 f.,
380, 382, vi. 427, n.

Pauli, B., v. 22

— J., vi. 513

— S., iv. 225 f .

Pauline privilege, ii. 33, iii, 254

Pazmany, P., vi. 385

Peasants, ii. 180, 189-219, 350,
353, 356 f., iii. 323 f., v. 181,
588, vi. 70-74, 76, 84, 406

Pecca f ortiter, iii. 195-199, vi. 166

Pelagianism, i. 91 ff., 190, 199,
205 f., 287, ii. 225, 232, 293, n.
See Grace

Pelargus, A., iv. 383

Pelayo, A., i. 55

Pellicanus, C., iii. 383 f .

Penance, i. 65 f., 90 f., 119, 290,
292-296, 31 If., iii. 176, 184 ff.,
212, 323, iv. 460, 491, v. 23 f.,
452 f ; the sacrament, ii. 27,
iii. 338, iv. 249, 491 f., v. 462.
See Confession, Contrition,
Satisfaction

Perfection, reputed to be found
only in the cloistral "state of
P.," i. 85,ii., iv. 130 f., 133;
L.'s idea of P., i. 166, v. 43,
84 ff., 439 ; his own efforts, iii.
187-193. See Counsels

Perrenoti, N., v. 382

Perusco, M. de, i. 338

Pessimism, i. 126, 289, iii. 24, 84,
98 f., 123, 190 f., v. 130, 225-
234, 241

Pessler ii. 334

Pestel, P., vi. 255, 267

Pestilence. See Plague

Peter, thou art, v. 518, vi. 338 ff. ;
L. like P., v. 340 ; P.'s denial,
iii. 182 ; second epistle of, v.
522 ; the legend of P., iv. 264

Petreius, i. 28

Peucer, C., vi. 415, 418

Peutinger, C., ii. 76, vi. 45, 271

Pezel, C., vi. 417

Pfeffinger, J., vi. 76, 347, 410, 412

Pfeifer. H.. ii, 364, 373

Pflug, J. von, iv. 69, v. 21, 165,
191, 197, vi. 39, n., 408, 436, 492

Pharisees, i. 82, iv. 45

Philip II, Landgrave of Hesse, a
patron of the new religion, ii.
216, 388, iii. 64, 72, 340, v.
201 f., 576 ; inclines to the
Church-apart, v. 141 ff. ; to
Zwinglianism, ii, 333 f., iii. 327,
337, 383, 445, v. 172 ; refuses
help against the Turks, iii. 87 ;
stands for resistance against
the Kaiser, iii. 50 ; and carries
L. with him, iii. 54 ff . ; raid on
Wurtemberg, iii. 67 f. ; and
Brunswick, v. 394 ff . ; makes
a secret covenant with the
Kaiser, v. 396 ; vanquished by
the latter, vi. 407 ; favours a
Protestant Council, v. 175 ; his
bigamy, iv. 13-79, 209 ; sends
L. a barrel of wine, iii. 314 ; and
Melanchthon, iii. 373 ; his
morality, iv. 201, 71 f. ; in
tolerance, vi. 256, 258, 272

Philippists, iii. 375, vi. 415

Philosophy, i. 22, 136, 158 f., 244
f., 281, 320, v. 440 ff., 445, vi.
18, 20 f., 445. See Aristotle

Phocas, iii. 93, iv. 297

Phormioii, vi. 82

Physicians, iii. 211, v. 203, 281,
283, vi. 7, 21, 378 ff. See Rat-
zeberger, Rychardus

INDEX

541

Picards, i. 34, 106 f., ii. 186
Pictures. See Images, Portraits
Pietism, v. 173, vi. 63, 440, 444 f. j
Pighius, A., v. 75, vi. 384
Pilgrimages, i. 46, 124, v. 212, 288,

vi. 68

Pirata, A., iv. 383
Pirkheimer, C., ii. 334 f .
— W., ii. 39 f., 43, 67, 127, 256,

iv. 353, 453, 471, v. 431, vi.

37

Pirna, vi. 415
Pirstinger, B., i. 48, 344 f.
Pistorius, F., ii. 131, vi. 275, 290,

n., 492
Plague, i. 265, iv. 248, 272 f., v.

337, vi. 509; "the Pope's

Plague," iii. 435, v. 102, vi. 370,

377, 389, 394 f ., 407
Planck, J., i. xi. f., iii. 174, vi.

449

Planitz, Hans von der, v. 591
Plantsch, M., v. 290
Plassen, C., van der, iv. 368
Plato, L.'s guest, iii. 218, 232
Plautus, vi. 16, 18
Plenaries, iv. 135
Poison, iii. 116, v. 235 f.
Pole, Cardinal, vi. 488
Polemics, iv. 283-350, v. 375-431.

See Calumnies, Lies, Unseemli
ness

Polenz, G. von. iv. 96 f., 155
Poliander, vi. 37
Politician, L. a P. ? vi. 459 ff.
Pollich, M., i. 39, 86, iv. 258 f., 357
Pokier, Hans, iii. 217, 307
Poltergeists. See Ghosts
Polygamy, iii. 259 ff., 268, iv. 3 ff.,

146, v. 72, vi. 86. See Philip II,

his bigamy
Polygranus, F., i. 345
Pomeranus. See Bugenhagen
Po miners felden, L. von, ii. 215
Ponikau, iii. 435
Pontanus. See Briick, G.
Poor-Relief, vi. 42-65 ; in olden

times, iv. 477-481 ; L.'s merits,
v. 26, 117, 562 ; bad effects, v.
205

Pope of Rome, Popedom, iii.
128 ff., iv. 295-305, v. 381-389 ;
acknowledged by L., i. 34 f.,
324 ; " papa, papa ! " ii. 347 ;
not infallible, ii. 50 ; P. flings
about indulgences, i. 70 ; early
blame for Julius II, i. 228 ; and
Leo X, i. 348; what the P.

teaches, vi. 337 f. ; P. oppresses
the Germans, iii. 96 ff., 105 f. ;
presumes to decide on matters
of faith, iii. 130 ; not head of
Christendom, v. 383 ; insti
tuted by the devil, vi. 190 ;
attacked in. his very marrow,
ii. 260 ; is adored as God, iii.
130 ; Popes are seducers, i.
227 ; the Pope- Ass, iii. 150 ff.,
355 ; worse than the Turk, i.
359, iii. 72, 79, 82, 86, n., 91 f.,
126, iv. 164, v. 416 ; " Popery
pictured," v. 421-431. See
Antichrist, Infallibility, Peter,
Plague, Rome, Werewolf
— of Wittenberg, L. a new P., iii.
277 (Judae) ; has set up a
new Papal chair, ii. 130, 377
(Ickelsamer) ; has taken the
P.'s place (iv. 337) ; is a new
P. (vi. 281) who bestows
church-property on the princes,
ii. 377 (Munzer) ; " pseudo-
papa," ii. 163, n.,; " I am your
P.," v. 231 ; P. of Germany,
vi. 77 ; " called by God to be
an antipope," ii. 54, iii. 110 ;
" ego sum papa," v. 191, n., vi.
315 ; " the German P.," iii.
427, vi. 77 ; a Csesarean pope-
dom, vi. 452

Porchetus de Salvaticis, v. 411
Portents, iii. 148-152, v. 239. See

Astrology

Portraits, L.'s vi. 389, 393 f., 430,
443 ; depicted with a halo, ii.
66. See Appearance
Possessed, L. P. ? ii. 68, 392, 396,
iii. 127, 429, iv. 352-360, vi.
112 ; Agricola P., v. 22 ; Carl-
stadt, iii. 390 f. ; Schwenckfeld.
v. 83 ; other cases, ii. 289, 376.
iii. 148 ; calm of the P. at L.'s
funeral, vi. 385 ; in the P. the
devil takes the soul's place, v
281, n., 292

Postils, Church-P., ii. 119, iii. 151,
v. 158, 473 f., 480; Home-P.,
iv. 217, 232, v. 470
Powers, natural, made too much
of by the Nominalists, i. 132 ;
and too little of by L., i. 65,
74 f.. 100 f., 117, 133, 140, 160,
310 ff., iv. 229. See Deter
minism

Prsetorius, Alexius, vi. 409
— Anton, vi, 61

542

INDEX

Prague, ii. 112

Prateolus, vi. 385, 409

Prayer, true P. L.'s " discovery,"
iii. 345 ; P. arises from Faith,
v. 27 ; his opponents don't
pray, iii. 399 ; how monks pray
in choir, i. 277 ; P. is necessary,
i. 35, 153, 235, 279, ii. 349;
how to pray, v. 478 ff . ; P.
decried, i. 68, iii. 205 ; all P.
petition, v. 87 ; L.'s P., ii. 87,
iii. 206 ff., 365, 410, 435, iv.
275-278, v. 94, 199, vi. 232 f.,
235, 511 f. ; power of L.'s P.,
iii. 113, 162, 209, 11., iv. 267, v,
313, vi. 161 f., 391, 3951;
Catholics' P., i. 390, iii. 131 f ;
'' Pray Maurice to death," iv.
315. See Breviary, Maledictory
P.

Preachers, even " millers' maids "
(iv. 389) can expound Scrip
ture, yet true P. are only those
"in office," iv. 126, vi. 250, n.,
315 ; best unmarried, iii. 248 ;
L.'s complaints about the P.,
ii. 123, 127 ; preach faith and
decry good works, iv. 466 ff . ;
011 the faults of others, ii. 344,
iii. 323 f ., iv. 323 f. ; preach
violence, ii. 323 f., 340 f., 354 f.,
iv. 514 ; responsible for
breaches of wedlock, iv. 158,
160, 165 ff., 172 f., 201, 208;
seek only an income and a wife,
ii. 126, vi. 32 ; scorned by the
people, iii. 34, iv. 209, 211,
218, 478, n., v. 182, 249, vi. 77,
326, 343. See Ministers, Priest
hood

Precepts. See Commandments

Predestination, i. 74, n., 183, 187-
198, 208, 238, 313, 369, ii, 268-
294, iii. 189, 347, iv. 434, 447,
v. 159, 438 ; doubts concerning
P., i. 19, 124 f., 161, 190 f., 376,
vi. 219, 221. See Determinism,
Hell

Predictions. See Prophecies

Presents. See Gifts

Prices, high, vi. 77, 84 f.

Pride, i. 123, 279, 287, ii. 54, 130,
221, 368, iii. 200, 389, iv. 332,
n., v. llOf. ; according to L.
source of all heretical pravity,
i. 287, 324, ii. 376

Prierias. S., i. 66, 163, 338 ff., 366,
ii. 12 f,, iii. 145, iv. 373 ff.

Priesthood, the olden P. a wall

between man and God, iv. 123,

126, 516 ; the new P. universal,

all being priests though not

preachers, ii. 31, 35, 89, 106,

113 f., 193, 211, 304, iii. 12, 15,

iv. 455, 516, v. 160, vi. 250, n.,

303 f., 306, 311, 403. See

Apostates, Preachers
Primacy, Roman, dates only from

Phocas, iii. 93. See Peter
Prince, as patriarch, v. 579-584 ;

as bishop, vi. 322 ; as chief

member of the Church, v. 144 ;

as supreme head, v. 590 ; his

duties, v. 568 ff. ; P. and

Christian two different things.

iii. 60, 69, 81, v. 55 f. ; L.'s

treatment of the princes, ii.

305 ff., iii. 24, iv. 290-294. See

Authority, secular
Printers, printing-press, ii. 52 f.,

iv. 365, 381, v. 558, 560, vi. 431.

See Lotther, Lufft
Private judgment. See Bible

interpretation
Probst, J., ii. 346, iii. 300, iv. 160,

v. 195, vi. 349
Processions, whether right, iv.

239, v. 313, 464, vi. 353, n.
Professor, L. as University P., iv.

228 ff .
Proles, A., i. 29, 46, 107, 297. iv.

119, vi. 68
Prophecies, L.'s, iii. 155, 163-168,

iv. 13, v. 169-174, vi. 416, 443 f.;

P. fulfilled in L., iii. 165ft1.,

396 f., iv. 330
Prophet, L. a, vi. 306, 391 ; P. of

the Germans, iii. 96, iv. 329,

vi. 389 f ., 442. See Fanatics
Prostitutes, iii. 243, iv. 148, 215 f.,

227, v. 109, 231. See Brothels
Protest of Spires, ii. 381
Protestants. See Christians
Proverbs, iii. 104, iv. 246
Proviso. See Gospel-P.
Prussia, iv. 196, v. 216, 286
Psalms, commentaries and lectures

on the, i. 63, 67-77, 119, 285,

361, 386
Psychology of L.'s abuse, iv. 30G-

326 ; of his development, vi.

112-123 ; of his humour, v.

319 ff.
Purgatory, i. 75, 179, 324, 343, iii.

329, iv. 504 ff., v. 283, 299, 438,

vi, 484

INDEX

543

Qualitas, " Christ my Q.," iv.

460 ; concupiscence a Q. ? i. 141
Quare. See Reason
Quarrelsomeness, i. 79
Quietism, i. 83, 167, 221 f., 231 f.,

ii. 225, iii. 210, v. 45, 86 f. See

Mysticism

Rabbis, v. 407, 414, 533. See Jews

Rabe, A. See Corvinus

— L., v. 106

Rapagelanus, S., vi. 494

Ratichius, W., vi. 9

Rationalism, v. 269, vi. 440,
446 ff. See Zwiiiglianism

Ratisbon, vi. 47, 412 ; confer
ences and Interim, iii. 446, v.
274, 379 f . ; Diet, vi. 495

Ratzeberger, M., ii. 82, 170, iii.
74, 288, 309, vi. 103, 123, 132,
344, 347, 364, 377

Rauchhaupt, v. 239

Reaction, iii. 3-21. See Anti-
nomians, Fanatics, Peasants

Reason, L.'s antipathy for, i. 132,
158, 216, iii. 8, 21, 203, 210,
321, v. 4. 440, vi. 25, 364; ,
leads him to deny freedom, ii. ;
279 f. ; to require faith of
infants brought for baptism, ii. \
373 ; " quare " comes from the :
devil, ii. 378 ; R. a devil's
whore, vi. 364 f. See Philo- !
sophy

Reform, need of R., ii. 222 ; j
desired by all, vi. 402 ; Roman
proposals for R., iii. 443. See \
Humanism

Reformation, v. 119-132; its
birth-hour, i. 23 ; " from the
monk's melancholy sprang the
R.," vi. 176 ; usual idea of it !
" mythological," vi. 448 ; the j
" peasant-rising of the spirit,"
iii. 19 ; a " remedy for the
future," ii. 249, 257

Reformer, L. a R. ? iii. 236 f ., 273, ]
vi. 401 ff.

Regeneration, iii. 271. See Justi- I
fication

Reginald, W., vi. 385

Rehlinger, J., vi. 271

Reichenbach, ii. 138

Reinholdt, v. 218

Reisner, vi. 443

Reissenbusch, ii. 116 ff., 319 f.

Relaxation, weekly, iii. 307

Relics, i. 235, 284 f., ii. 245, 327 ;
L.'s list of R., iv. 292 ; L.'s R.,
vi. 443

Religious teacher ? L. a, vi.
455 f. See Blasphemy, Quiet
ism ; R. War, see Resistance

Rellach, J., v. 543

Remission. See Forgiveness

Resignation. See Hell

Resistance, armed R. against the
Kaiser, ii. 309 f., iii. 43-7(>,
95, 431 ff.

Responsibility, ii. 79 f., 125, 272,
iii. 438, v. 373 ff., vi. 162, 171,
228, 406 f .

Retractations, v. 23 f ., vi. 260, 308

Reuchlin, J., i. 42, iii. 320

Reutlingen, ii. 384, iii. 64, 421,
v. 80 ~

Reval, vi. 265, 313

Revelation, L.'s, i. 377 f., 393,
397 ff., ii. 91, 114, 153, iii. 110ft.,
119, vi. 141-171, 387 f. See
Faith, Mission

Reward. See Merit

Rhaide, B., iv. 25, vi. 486

Rhau, G., ii. 170

Rhegius, U., iv. 165, 467 f., vi. 58,
276, 487, 492

Rhetoric, iv. 342-350, vi. 200

Richardus, v. 419

Riesenburg, v. 216

Riga, vi. 475

Righteousness. See Justice

Rings, L.'s, iii. 302, 428

Ritschl, A., v. 28, vi. 456

Ritual, iv. 223, 296, v. 313. See
Worship

Rivander, Z., iv. 222

Rivius, J., iv. 165, 470

Rochlitz, E. von, iv. 16, 24, 27,
201

Romans, Commentary on, i. 93-
102, 184-260, iv. 422, 426

Romanticists, vi. 449

Rome, a heathen place, i. 286 ;
where nothing is believed, iv.
102, 296 ; though seat of the
martyrs, vi. 307 ; abode of
Antichrist, i. 359 ; where
Erasmus learnt unbelief, iii.
135 ; a good thing if attacked
by Turks, iii. 92 ; L's visit to
R., i. 29 ff., vi. 188, 496 f. ;
union with R. not necessary, ii.
9. See, Babylon, Pope, I'ope-
Ass

Rorarius, T., vi. 01

544

INDEX

Rorer, G., iii. 218, iv. 498, v. 101,
499 ff., vi. 281, 391, 505 ff.

Rosary, i. 119, v. 248 j

Rose, golden, i. 305, 11.

Rosheim. »8'ep Josel

Rosiria, iii. 217, 281, v. 107 f., i
235, vi. 369

Rostock, iii. 371, vi. 29, 61

Roteiiburg, iv. 25

Roth, S., iv. 99, v. 158

Rothenburg, ii. 167, iii. 387

Roting, M., vi. 6

Rubeamis. See Crotus

Rudolstadt, vi. 265, 314

Ruhel, ii. 142, 204, 206

Ruler. See- Prince

Rungius, P., vi. 275

Ruysbroek, J., i. 173

Rychardus, W., ii. 162 ff., iv. 349

Sabbatarians, v. 403 f .

Sabbath-Sunday, iii. 394 f . ; Sab
bath of the soul. v. 86 f. See
Quietism

Sabellicus, iv. 89

Sabinus, G., ii. 390, iii. 362

Sachs, Hans, v. 223

Sachse, M., iv. 222

Sacrament, see Supper; Sacra-
mentarians, see Zwinglians

Sacraments, i. 27, 37, ii. 59, 389,
iii. 262 f., iv. 146, 486-500, v.
438 f,. 461 f. ; may be received
or not, iii. 10 ; preparation for,
iii. 209 f . ; depend on faith of
the receiver, i. 357, vi. 310 ; are
marks of the true Church, vi.
295, 309 ; L.'s doctrine of the
S. criticised, v. 461-465 ;
marriage is a S., iv. 146, 149 ;
is not, iii. 262 ff . ; not even
with the Papists, iv. 134 ; a
merdiferous S., iv. 163. See
Baptism, etc.

Sacrifice. See Mass

Sadoleto, J., iii. 335. 443, v. 401,
vi. 488

Sailer, G., iv. 15, 65

Sainctes, C. de, vi. 386

St. Gall, iii. 422

Saint, use of the word by L., i. 82,
ii. 217, n., iii. 187 f . ; L. a S.,
ii. 396, iii. 154, 169, vi. 389, 392,
445. See Sanctus ; " S. L.," vi.
391, see Portraits

Saints, what the S. did a dog or
pig could do, iii. 227 ; frailty of

the S., iii. 191 f. ; the " little
S.," see Observantines ; legends
of the S.. i. 124, 282, iv. 246, v.
1531, 474, vi. 335, 437, n. ;
worship of the S., abuses in,
i. 46, 361 ; assailed by Erasmus,
ii. 245 ; L.'s attitude, iv. 499-
503; Mary made into a goddess
iv. 237 ; and adored, 502 f ; on
canonisation, v. 122 f.; sup
pression of feast-days, v. 146 ;
reintroduction mooted, vi. 410

Sala. B., von i. 370

Salat, Hans, iv. 324

Sale, A. and M. von der, iv. 14, 16,
24 ff., 69 f.

Salvation, " outside of the Church
no S.," vi. 297, 425. See
Certainty, Faith, Grace, Hell,
Humility, Justification

Salzburg, iii. 430

Sam, C., iii. 277

Samson, v. 382; a "second S.."
iv. 338, vi. 442

Sanctity. See Holiness

Sanctus Domini, ii. 51, 11., vi.
389, n.

Sapidus, J., vi. 271

Sarcerius, E.. iv. 71, 165, 222, vi.
61

Satan, L. reads his thoughts, vi.
154 ; buffets, etc. of S., vi.
160f., Ill ; the prince of this
world, ii. 273, iii. 190 f. See.
Devil

Satire. See Humour

Satisfaction, i. 75, 288, 296. See
Penance

Saur, A., v. 295

Savonarola, vi. 475

Saxo, J., iii. 412

Saxon, " I am a hard S.," iv. 44,
vi. 398

Saxony, v. 219, vi. 8 ; Duchy of,
iii. 416, iv. 194 ft'., v. 124 ff. ;
Electorate of, ii. 327-334, iii.
33 ff., iv. 202-210, v. 181, 296,
vi. 241 f., 254 f., 414; chief
playground of the demons, v.
286

Scala Santa, i. 33, vi. 496

Scapular, mortal sin to leave cell
without one's, iv. 94, vi. 200

Scepticism, utterances savouring
of, iii. 415, v. 360 f., 501 ; L.'s
promotion of S., ii. 32, 253, iii.
18. See Rationalism

Schade. See Mosellanus

INDEX

545

Schaffhausen, iii. 422

Schalbe, C., i. 7

Schartlin von Burtenbach, v. 219

Schatzgeyer, C., ii. 128, iii. 237,

iv. 131, 353, n., 384
Schauenberg, S. von, ii. 5, 9, 27, iv.

83

Schelhorn, vi. 288
Schem Hamphoras. See Jews
Schenk, J., iii. 371, 401 f., 414, iv.

309, v. 16, 237 f., vi. 273, 280,

285, 488

— zu Schweinsberg, R., iv. 25, 38
Scheurl, C., i. 40, n., 304 f., 313,

361, ii. 149, iv. 141, 429, vi. 31,
212 f., 510 f.

Schlaginhaufen, J., i. xxiii., 393,
iii. 177, 218 f., 225, 231, 287,
383, iv. 180, 226 f., v. 323, vi.
504-510 ; his fainting-fit, v.
326 ff.

Schlahinhauffen, iii. 286 f.

Schleupner, D., ii. 334

Schlick, S. von, ii. 70

Schmalkalden, Conventions, iii.
58 f., 123, 430-441, v. 82, 175,
376, vi. 272 ; League iii. 62,
64-68, 71, iv. 8f., 11, v. 185,
394 f. ; War, v. 219, 252, vi.
274, 375, 407

Schmaltz, iii. 83

Schmedenstede, H., vi. 493

Schnabel, T., v. 142, vi. 51, 489

Schnauss, C., iii. 416

Schnepf, E., i. 316, iv. 29, 197, 461

Schoffer, J., v. 543

Scholasticism, L.'s relations with,
i. 22 f., 84 ff., 130-164, 208, 243,
320, 357, iv. 92, v. 50, 59. See
Aquinas, Louvain, Nominalists

Schonfeld, A. von, ii. 139, 141

Schonitz, Hans von, v. 106 f.

Schools, vi. 3-41 ; school-punish
ments, i. 5 ; L's concern for the
S., iv. 247, 264 f., v. 386, 562 ;
decline of the S., iv. 208, vi.
367, 435 f. See JEsop, Greek,
etc.

Schott, F., v. 117

Schud, G., iv. 10

Schultheiss, W., vi. 271

Schurf, A., vi. 509

— H., i. 304, ii. 99, 176, iii. 407,
iv. 289, v. 591, vi. 356 ff.

Schxitz, C., vi. 415, 417
Schwabach Articles, v. 340, vi.

309
Schwabisch-Hall, vi. 275

vi— 2 N

Schwarzburg, ii. 318

Schweiniz, iii. 300

Schwenckfeld, C., v. 78-84, 155-
164 ; L's interview with S., v.
138 f. ; L. on S., ii. 376, 379,
iii, 409, n., v. 276, 397, vi. 272,
289 ; " Stinkfield," iii. 424

Scotus, Duns, i. 22, 86, 91, 130,
142, 146, 243, 311, iv. 120

— J. M., vi. 493

Scribonius, G. A., v. 295

Scripture. See Bible

Scruples, i. 11, 15, 110, 124 f., iii.
180, n., vi. 203, 219

Scultetus, H., i. 228, 332, 336, ii.
16 ff ., iv. 82

Seckendorf, i. xxiii.

Sects, Sectarians. See Heretics

Secular, calling, iv. 127-131, v. 55-
60, 561, vi. 65-98. See Au
thority, Clergy

Secularisation. See Church-pro
perty, Marriage

Sedulius, H., iv. 178, vi. 382

Self-denial. See Mortification

Self -righteousness. See Works,
holiness by

Selnecker, N., iii. 445, iv. 220, 225,
vi. 62, 391, 417, 419, 421

Senfl, L., ii. 171 f., iii. 66
i Sepulchre, the Holy, ii. 91, iii.

167 f.
1 Serarius, N., vi. 136, n.

Serfdom, ii. 217, vi. 74

Sermons, in Catholic times, i.
78 ff., iv. 136, v. 153 f., vi. 432 ;
see Geiler, etc. ; L.'s S., iv.
230 ff. ; notes of his S., ii. 149,
n. ; place of the Sermon in
Lutheran service, v. 152 f. See
Preachers

Servetus, iii. 358, vi. 266, 269,
272, 275

Service. See Worship

Sic volo sic iubeo, iv. 346, v. 517,
vi. 156, 166

Sickell, J., vi. 377, n.

Sickingen, F. von, ii. 4, 9, 67, 69,
93, 326, v. 240, vi. 467

Sickness. See Ailments

Sidonie of Saxony, iv. 22

Sieberger, W., vi. 487

Silvius, P., iii. 429, iv. 178, 356,
358 f.

Simony, i. 328, 350 f.

Sin, the burden of past sins, i.
10 ff., 18 ; need of finding a
gracious God, i. 108 f. ; L.'s

546

INDEX

teaching on S., i. 209 ff., iii.
180-188 ; all done without
grace is S., ii. 229 ; wicked man
sins in doing good, i. 318 f. ; all
man's deeds are mortal sins, i.
101, 203 ; no distinction
between mortal and venial S.,
i. 102, iv. 459, vi. 514 ; murder,
adultery, etc., are small sins, v.
305 ; the marriage-rite a S., iv.
152 ; does God will S. ? i.
188 f. ; man's will all turned to
S., ii. 287 ; actual S., i. 99, 224,
v. 438 ; we should gladly be
sinners, i. 73, 88 f., 186, iii. 177 ;
and cast our sins on Christ, v.
12 ; it is good to commit a S.,
ii. 339, iii. 175 ff. ; " doing good
we sin," i. 101 ; L. rebukes S.,
v. 31 ff. ; biggest S. (saying
Mass), iii. 410 ; " daily " S., iii.
309. See Concupiscence, Con
trition, Forgiveness, Justifica
tion, Original S., Pecca fortiter,
Scapular

Siricius, M., iv. 70

Sittardus, M., iii. 195, 238, iv. 383

Slander, i. 69. See Calumnies

Sleeplessness. See Ailments ;
Sleep-walkers, v. 283

Sleidanus, J., ii. 196, iii. 239, vi.
451

Social work, L.'s, v. 561-564

Sodom, see Wittenberg ; Sodom- i
ite. See Johann of Saxony

Sola fides, see Faith ; interpola
tion of "sola," iv. 345 f., v.
513 f.

Soli Deo (to the Sun-God), vi. 350

Solida Declaratio, vi. 420

Solitude, to be avoided, v. 93, 302 j

Solomon's, Temple, v. 501 ; wives,
iv. 161 f.

Somnambulists, v. 283

Sophists, i. 23. See Scholastics

Sorbonne. See Paris

Sorcery. See Devil, Superstition,
Witches

Sovereign. See Prince

Spalatin, G., L.'s intimate, i. 7,
42, ii. 58, iii. 38, n., 113 f., 144 f.,
269, v. 110, vi. 510 ; his friend
at Court, i. 263 f ., 358, 368, ii.
19, 23, iii. 78, 301, vi. 241 ; j
helps in the German Bible, v. !
495 ; marriage matters, ii. 137, j
140, 173 ; intolerance, ii. 331, j
v. 145, 593, vi. 240, 274 ; mis- i

sionary work, ii. 316, v. 124 f. ;
becomes a victim to melancholy,
iii. 197, iv. 219 f., v. 362 ; con
soled by L., v. 330; the tale
about his parents, iii. 284-287

Spangenberg, C., iii. 209, n., iv.
269, v. 174, 300, 426, vi. 62,
134 f., 276, 391, 413

— J. von, ii. 361, n., vi. 391

Spectre-monks of Spires, ii. 389 f.,
vi. 209

Spee, F. von, v. 295

Spener, vi. 444

Spengler, L., ii. 334, 385, iii. 50,
58 ff., vi. 7, 36, 250, 483

Spenlein, G., i. 88 ff., 177, 263

Speratus, v. 190

Spires, i. 214, v. 221 ; Diets, ii.
380 ff., iii. 49, 86, 88, 327, v.
168, 396

Spirit, iii. 382, 397 f., iv. 309, 314,
387-419, v. 73. See Synteresis,
Bible S., see Word

Stadion, v. 273

Stangwald, vi. 391

Staphylus, F., iv. 167, vi. 137,
312 f., 384

Stapleton, T., vi. 323

Stapulensis. See Faber

Staremberg, B. von, vi. 477

State, L. and the S., v. 559 ff.,
568-579, 582, 585 ; S. Church,
iii. 29-33. See Consistories,
Intolerance, Prince

Statues. See Images

Staupitz, J., theological deficien
cies, i. 129 ; his aims in the
Order, i. 29 ; L. " falls away "
to S., i. 38 ; esteem for and
rapid promotion of L., i. 11 f.,
14, 19 ff., 127, 160, 262, 295-
299, 340, v. 63, vi. 212 f., 228 ;
advice to L., i. 16 ; on Hus, i.
107 f., iii. 144 ; at Heidelberg,
i. 315 f. ; " your works are read
in houses of ill-fame," ii. 151,
iii. 122 ; proposed for a bishop
ric, i. 57 ; dispenses L., i. 358,
vi. 500, 504 ; his sister, ii. 137 ;
the prophecy, iii. 165 ; an
enemy of the popedom ? i. 326,
vi. 189 ; visit to Rome, vi. 497 ;
on the soul and her bridegroom,
vi. 513

Stein, W., v. 194, vi. 86

Steinbach, W., i. 345

Steindorf, J., vi. 255

Steinhart, G., vi. 505 f.

INDEX

547

Stiefel, M., ii. 376, iii. 389, v.
250 f ., vi. 285

Stolberg, L. von, v. 211

Stolpen, v. 125

Stoltz, J., iii. 218

Storch, N., vi. 152

Stossel, J., vi. 415, 417

Stoutness. See Corpulence

Stralsund, v. 216

Strasburg, ii. 382, iii. 386 f., 421,
v. 409, vi. 46, 278, 412, 422

Strauss, J., iii. 409, n.

Strigel, V., iv. 222, vi. 412

Strobel, C. G., v. 271

Stiibner, M., vi. 285

Students, L.'s care for, iii. 296 f.,
iv. 228 ff., vi. 367 ; lack of
discipline, ii. 51 f., v. 157, 247,
vi. 30, 37, 41. See Melanchthon

Stuhlweissenburg, v. 227

Sturm, Jakob, iv. 75

— Job., vi. 255

Sturz, G., ii. 350, v. 495

Stuttgart, vi. 38, 275

Stiitzel, ii. 334

Suarez, v. 375, n.

Subjectivism, i. 223 ff., 367, ii.
31 ff., 73, iii. 18 f., 81, 128, vi.
334, 458

Sublitz, vi. 122

Suevus, S., iv. 224, n.

Suicide, a work of the devil, v.
281 f. ; increase in Lutheran-
ism, iv. 222 f., v. 240 ; L.'s
temptations to commit S., v.
352 f . ; and the baseless tale
that he did, vi. 379, 381 f.

Suleiman II, iii. 76, 81, 88, 92, vi.
485 ; inquires after L., iii. 83

Sunday. See Sabbath-S.

Superintendents, iii. 30, 324, v.
190, 595, vi. 10

Supernatural, order, v. 49-52 ;
L.'s view of the S., i. 132, 157.
See Justification

Superstition, ii. 103, 167 f., 389,
iii. 118, 148-152, 229 f., 355 ff.,
410 f., v. 239 ff., 276 f., 428.
See Astrology, Changelings,
Demonology, Last Day,
Witches

Supper, Lord's, the new rite, ii.
109 f. ; S. versus Sermon, v.
152 f. ; abuse of the, iii. 304, v.
163 ; examination of those who
partake, v. 134 f. ; no S. with
out communicants, v. 152 ;
L.'s last attendance at the S.,

vi. 374. See Cryptocalvinism,
Eucharist
Surgant, J., v. 491
: Surplice. See Vestments
j Suso, H., i. 173
I Sutel, J., iii. 163
Sweden, vi. 474, 480
Sylvius. See Silvius
Synergism, ii. 287 ff., iii. 349 f.,

v. 53 f., 263, 454, vi. 412 ff.
Synteresis, i. 75, 114, 233 f., ii.

227 f . See Conscience
Syphilis, i. 37. See Ailments

Table-Talk, iii. 217-241, iv. 262-
268, vi. 504-510 ; L.'s words
softened in the German T.-T.,
iii. 179, n. ; reasons for its
publication, vi. 390 f . ; on the
" good drink," iii. 305 ff. ; the
bigamy, iv. 43-49 ; the Mass,
iv. 523 f. ; end of the world, v.
247 ff. ; Antichrist, vi. 155. See
Aurifaber, Cordatus, etc.

Tagler, U., iv. 172

Talents, i. 24, iii. 217, iv. 257 ff.,
327 ff., v. 475 f., 482 f., vi. Ill

Talmud, iv. 285. See Jews

Tauler, J., i. 84, 87, 122, 166-174,
178-183, 232 ff., 237, 243, 273 f.,
299, 381, ii. 145, 372, vi. 115 ff.,
215

Taxes, iv. 291. See Tithes

Temptations, of the flesh, i. 18 f.,
275, 287 f., ii. 82 f., 94 f., vi.
118, 120 f., 511 ; to blasphemy,
i. 194, ii. 122 ; T. against faith, i.
25 f ., 124, v. 362 f. ; to despair,
i. 19, 376, ii. 276, v. 361 ;
"struggles and T.," etc., v.
319-375, vi. 98-122, 150-154;
due to remembrance of past
sins, v. 303 ; to uncertainty
whether his teaching be true,
iii. 178, 202 ; such T. are
exalted ones, ii. 121 ; make
good Bible-interpreters, iii. 119,
v. 390, 532, vi. 149 ; make one
humble, iii. 389 ; are God's own
seal on L.'s work, iii. 119; a
mark of the true Christian, vi.
294 f . ; drink, a good remedy,
iii. 306

Terence, iv. 47, 61, 186, 217, vi.

16, 18 f., 235

j Tetrapolitana, Confessio, iii. 444,
iv. 199

548

INDEX

Tetzel, J., i. 105, 163, 314, 320,
325-330, 341-347, 352, iv. 84,
372, 390, vi. 188 f.
Teutleben, C., von ii. 21
Teutonic Knights. See Knights
Thann, E. von der, iv. 25, 40 f.
Theocracy, v. 580-584, vi. 57
Theology, speculative T., v. 440 ff .;
T. of the Cross, i. 174, 191.
234 f., 270, 319, 332, ii. 146,
234, vi. 1 1 6. See Scholasticism ;
" deeper " T., see Mysticism
Thesaurus ecclesise, i. 70, 75, 357.
See Indulgence, Mass, Purga
tory

Thomae, M., vi. 151
Thomas of Aquin, see Aquinas ;
Thomists, i. 162 f., 243, 271,

339, 370. See Aristotle
Three Kings, i. 174, iv. 171. See

Magi

Thuringia, v. 21
Timothy, v. 328

Tithes, ii. 193, 221, vi. 85 f., 94 f.
Titillationes, ii. 94
Titles. See Doctor, Ecclesiastes,

Pope (of Wittenberg), Prophet,

etc.

Titus, 64, 306, 386
Tobogganing, vi. 373
Tolerance, L. the herald of T. ?

iii. 109, v. 558, vi. 266 f., 448.

See Intolerance
Tomb, L.'s, vi. 387 ff., 392 ft
Tonsure, i. 120, 276, v. 113, 515
Torgau, ii. 215, iii. 55 ff., v. 183,

340, vi. 108 ; T. Articles, vi.
417 ; Book of T., vi. 419

Tower-incident, i. 388-400
Tradition, not the same as the
personal views of the Fathers,
vi. 336 ; is the common usage
of the Churches, vi. 253, 309 ;
scorned, iv. 420 f. ; thrown
over, v. 437 f. ; and yet ap
pealed to, iii. 395 f., iv. 409 f.,
494 ; v. 399, 462. See Fathers
Training. See Education
Translations, iii. 413 f., 416. See

Bible, etc.

Transubstantiation, i. 161 f., iii.
329, 382, n., 445 f. See Con-
substantiation
Transylvania, v. 167
Treasure. See Thesaurus
Trent, Council of, indirectly
brought about by L., vi. 426 ;
steps towards its assembling,

iii. 424 ff., vi. 492, 494; its
doings, v. 387 ff . ; on relics,
etc., vi. 437 ; the Catechism,
vi. 435 ; not fair to judge L.
everywhere by its standard, i.
224 ; L. on the Council, iv.
339 f., v. 376-394, 429, vi. 344,
364, 375 ; its reaction on the
Protestants, vi. 419 f., 423 f.

Treptow, iii. 407

Treves, v. 221

Trinity, ii. 397 ff., iv. 240 f., 488 f.

Trithemius, J., i. 48, 91

Trump of doom, iv. 329, v. 239,
vi. 344

Trutfetter, J., i. 6, 137, 311, 320,
343, iv. 356

Truthfulness, v. 111. See Calum
nies, Lies

Tubingen, iii. 430, vi. 38

Turks, iii. 76-93, iv. 247, v. 417-
421 ; a sign of the Last Day, v.
227 ; L.'s fear, v. 167 ; L. does
little to help the defence, ii.
383, iii. 70 f., 94 f., 214, v. 129,
231 ; T. and Pope, etc., ii. 324,
v. 234 ; T. and Evangelicals,
iv. 20, v. 197, 234, 417-421,
479 ; Embassy to the T., v.
234, vi. 344 f . See Appendix I,
passim

Tyrants, world cannot get on
without, iii. 147 ; assassination
of T., ii. 199, iii. 357, iv. 12, vi.
269

Ubiquity. See Christ

Ulenberg, C., i. xxiv., ii. 131, iv.
243, 262, n., vi. 268

Ulm, ii. 382, iii. 64, 421, vi. 272,
278

Ulrich of Augsburg, S., iii. 250,
iv. 89 f .

— Wiirtemberg, iii. 58, 67 f., iv.
196 ff.

Ulscenius, vi. 52, n.

Unbelief, L.'s occasional U., v.
373 ; the worst of sins, iii. 177 ;
" Catholic U.," i. 326, 390, 395 ;
lack of fiducial faith constitutes
U., vi. 193 f. See Faith, Rome

Undermark, M., iv. 383

Universities, appealed to, ii. 21,
iv. 6 ; unmarried Fellows at
the, iv. 154 ; derided, ii. 80,
347, iii. 143, iv. 336, vi. 24 f.,
33 ; decline of the U. due to L.,

INDEX

549

ii. 340 f ., 358 f., vi. 27 f. ; the
new U., vi. 38. See Paris, etc.

Unseemliness of L.'s language,
specimens of the, i. 245, ii.
117 f., 121, 144 ff., iii. 226, 229-
241, 251, 264-273, 399, 403,
426, iv. 45, 64, 106, 143, 148,
153 f., 161-164, 177, 285ft,
2951, 305, 318-322, v. 115,
196, 229, 238, 397, 406 f., 421-
431, vi. 72, 254, 336, 338, 349,
363 f., 513. (See Abusive language

Urban, vi. 383

Ursinus, Z., vi. 414, 422

Usingen, B. A. von, L.'s pro
fessor, i. 6, 14 ; suspicious of
Aristotle, i. 136 f. ; the " best
Paraclete," i. 10, vi. 206;
traces in the Comm. on Romans,
i. 243 ; U. on the two " fac
tions," i. 147 ; opposes L., i.
311, ii. 342 ff., 350 ; L.'s treat
ment of U., ii. 337, 347, 361, n.

Usury and interest, iii. 104, iv.
216, 266, v. 479, 562, vi. 78, n.,
81-98

Utilitarianism, vi. 23

Utraquists of Prague, ii. 9, 112

Vadian, J., iv. 100

Valla, L., ii. 286, iii. 145

Vasa, G., vi. 480

Vehe, M., iii. 238, iv. 383, vi.
436

Venatorius, T., ii. 43, vi. 483

Venial sin. See Sin

Venice, i. 228, iii. 430, v. 167

Vergerio, P. JP., iii. 70, 425-430, !
iv. 358 f., 485, v. 391

Vestments, ii. 323, iii. 393, 413, !
iv. 511, v. 147, 220, 222, 313,
vi. 410

Vicar, District, L. elected, i. 69 ; |
doings as D. V., i. 88 ff., 124, I
262-268, 297 f., 315 f., 333 f.

Viccius, J., ii. 27

Vienna, iii. 81, 88, 383

Vio, T. de, ii. 46

Violence, of language, ii. 11, 13 f., I
iii. 365 f., 444, iv. 306 f., vi. '
108 f., 112; V. advocated, ii.
55, iii. 127. Violent measures,
see Intolerance

Virgil, vi. 17 f., 376

Virgin, Blessed, see Mary ; Virgin-
Birth, iv. 241, vi. 420, n. ; L.
a V., ii. 143

Virginity, iii. 244, iv. 147 f. See
Chastity

Virtue, no infused V., v. 35 ; no
efforts to be made after V., i.
83, iii. 187 ff. ; the conception
of V. altered, iv. 459 ; natural
V. is no V. but rather vice, i.
101, 160, V. is not a real
" habit " nor a " quality," i.
149 f., 209-213, 216 ; L.'s new
view of V., iii. 200-217 ; its
defects, v. 84 ff. See Qualitas

Vischer, S., vi. 61

Visions. See Ghost

Visitations, ii. 113, 223, 299, n.,
332, iii. 34, 323, iv. 207 ff., v.
588-597, vi. 241 f.

Vitalis, F., iii. 152

Vives, J. L., vi. 44, 58

Vocation, L.'s V. to the monastic
state, i. 18 f., 25, 167, 297 f. See
Mission, Secular calling

Volta, G. della, i. 333

Vows, according to Erasmus, ii.
245; Melanchthon, iii. 325,
330, 360, 439 ; according to L.,
i. 269 f. ; L.'s attack on V., i.
120, ii. 83-87, 115ff. ; en
courages others to break their,
ii. 116 ff., 139 f., 142, 169; L.'s
own V., i. 12, ii. 86, vi. 205 ff.,
222 f . See Chastity

Vulgarity. See Unseemliness

Wages, high, vi. 84 (iii. 291)

Walch, J. G., iii. 138, 164, 222,
vi. 447

Waldensians, iv. 417, n.

Waldschmidt, B., v. 295

Walther, J., ii. 334, iv. 256, v.
547

— R., vi. 40

Wanckel, M., v. 421

War, legitimacy of, iv. 299 ; evil
of, v. 282. See Julius II, Peas
ants, Resistance, Turks

Warsager, J., iv. 64, n.

Wartburg, stay at the, ii. 79-96,
368 ; temptations, ii. 88, iii.
196, vi. 511 ; apparitions, etc.,
vi. 123 f., 134 ; beginning of the
German Bible, v. 494, 544 ;
effect on L. of his stay, iii. 5 f.,
120 f.

Water, Holy, iii. 266

Wealth, on whom bestowed, iv.
265

550

INDEX

Wedding, L.'s, ii. 173-189; his
thoughts before it, ii. 86 f.,
118 f., 139 ff., 147 f., 169 f.,
218 f., vi. 208 ; a " Joseph's
marriage," ii. 142 ; after-
allusions to his W., iii. 269 ;
"good days," iii. 178, v. 328,
vi. 208 ; a means of escaping
temptations, vi. 209 ; God's
own work, vi. 162 ; not recog
nised by the lawyers, iii. 42,
vi. 341, 355. See Bora, Mar
riage

Wegscheider, J., vi. 447

Weida, M., of, iii. 238, iv. 128,
136

Weier, M., ii. 323

Weimar, iii. 70, iv. 23, 44 f., 48,
vi. 9

Weinsberg, ii. 198, vi. 477

Weislinger, N., ii. 131

Weller, A., iv. 206

— Hier., iii. 175 ff., 196, 218,
221, 306, iv. 219, 244, 269, v.
329, vi. 488

Werdenberg, Hans von, iii. 292
Werewolf, the Papal, iv. 298, v.

384, vi. 244 f., 491
Werner, Hans, iv. 197

— Z., vi. 449
Wesenberg, vi. 61
Wessel, J., vi. 474
Westphal, J., vi. 408, 410, 415
Whale. See Haarlem

Whore, use of the word, iii. 270 f .
Wicel, G., i. 16, iii. 403, 416, iv.

160, 165 f., 181 f., 361 ff., 471,

v. 43, 379, 436
Wiclif, i. 106, 108, n., ii. 232, 286,

n., iv. 417, n., v. 243, vi. 26
Widebram, F., vi. 417
Widerstett, ii. 137
Wied, H. von, v. 166, vi. 492 f.
Wieland, vi. 448
Wife, terrible to die without a W.,

iii. 242 f. See Bishop, Bora,

Marriage, Women
Wigand, J., vi. 409 f., 413, 415
Wild, J., iii. 238, iv. 366
Wilde, S., iv. 99
Will of God, reason why things

are good and evil, i. 157, 212,

see God (the hidden); Will

(human), see Freedom ; L.'s

strong Will, iii. 112, iv. 259,

vi. 396. See Defiance
Will, Last W. and Testament, iii.

42 f., 435 f., iv. 207, 281, 329

William of Bavaria, ii. 171 f., 380,
iii. 66, 430, iv. 367

— II, of Hesse, iv. 45, 61

— IV, iv. 70, vi. 420
Wimpfeling, J., i. 24, 48, 52, iii.

238, iv. 169, vi. 18, 34, 214

Wimpina, C., i. 344, iv. 303,
384

Winand, i. 12

Wine, iii. 293, 301, 304, 307, 310,
314, iv. 26, 171, vi. 446

Winistede, J., vi. 61

Winther, J., iv. 25

Witches, L. and the, iii. 230,
356 f., v. 187, 241 f., 276 f., 289-
297, 304

Wittenberg, L. goes to W., i. 21 ;
dislike for, iv. 215 f., vi. 345 ff. ;
" compelled by God " to go
thither, iii. 114; the escaped
nuns at W., ii. 136 ff. ; con
version of the town, ii. 327 ff.,
vi. 240 f . ; Bugenhagen made
parish-priest, iii. 407 ; sup
pression of the Mass, ii. 90 f.,
iv. 510 f. ; " Church of W.,"
"School of W.," v. 384, vi.
314 f. ; morals, iv. 209 f., 215-
218, v. 247, vi. 77 ; the students
vi. 367 ; hasty marriages, vi.
358 ; the Black Monastery, i.
297, n., iii. 218, 282 f., v. 203 f.,
207, 346, vi. 509 ; Elster Gate,
ii. 51, 54, vi. 381 ; Parish
church, ii. 98, iv. 286 ; Uni
versity, i. 38 f. See Melanch-
thon, Pope (of Wittenberg),
Zwingli

Wolferinus, vi. 354

Wolfframsdorff, J. F. von, iii. 292

Wolfgang of Anhalt, ii. 384, iii.
64, vi. 380 f .

Wollin, iii. 407

Women, status of, iii. 233, 267,
iv. 132-178 ; advice of L.'s
director, vi. 206, n. ; degraded
by L., iii. 253 ; " plenty of
wives and children few," iii.
291 ; " who loves not woman,
wine and song," iii. 293 f. ;
" a woman's love," iii. 289. See
Marriage

Word, the inner W. (i.e. spirit),
i. 229, 299, iv. 397 f. ; replaced
by the outward W. (i.e. letter),
iii. 397 f., iv. 408-411, v. 161,
164, vi. 149 ; the divine W. in
the Sermon and the Eucharist,

INDEX

551

v. 153 ; the W. of truth, i. 83.
See Bible, Revelations, Tempta
tions

Work, L.'s power for work. i. 267,
274 f., ii. 52 f., 87 f., 97 f., 134,
160, 223, iii. 117, 298 f., iv.

^'260 f., v. 497 ff., vi. 342, 348

Works, good, iv. 449—481, v. 38-
43 ; L.'s dislike for, i. 43, 62,
118ff., 167, 208, ii. 348 f., v.
45 ; reason for his apostasy, i.
117 ff., vi. 189 ; natural G. W.
non-existent, i. 92 ; probably
all of them mortal sins, i. 317 ;
G. W. are mere Mosaism, i. 251 ;
the Catholic " Holiness-by-
works," i. 67, 71, 108, 182 ; the
only goodness in W. is imputed
goodness, i. 212; truly G. W.
are found only in those justified
by faith, i. 215 ; in these all
works are G. W., ii. 36, n. ;
whereas in others all are sins, v.
47 f . ; the best of G. W. is
fiducial faith, v. 85 ; L.'s teach
ing on G. W. helps on his cause,
vi. 403 f . See Commandments,
Concurrence, Counsels, Ethics,
Law, Merit, Synergism

World, L. against the W. and the
W. against L., vi. 271 ; W. and
Christianity, v. 55 f . ; end of W.
See Last Day ; see also Secular
Calling

Worms, L. at the Diet of, ii. 57 f.,
61-79, 132, 324, 367, iii. 209, n.,
iv. 85, 355, vi. 105 ; Edict of W.,
ii. 380 f .

Worship, L.'s charges against
Catholic W., i. 283, ii. 354 f.,
iii. 46, v. 46, 439, vi. 242-245 ;
true W. consists of faith, praise
and thanks, v. 44 ; public W.,
v. 145-154, 466 ; not meant for
"Christians," v. 466, vi. 445,
n. ; must be free, i. 252 ; the
new form of W., ii. 97 f., 320 f. ;
to be in Latin, iii. 396 ; v. 146 ;
or in Greek, or Hebrew, iv. 280 ;

to be settled by the Govern
ment, vi. 263. See Ritual

Wiirtemberg, iii. 67 f., iv. 46 ,53,
196-201

Wurzburg, v. 220, vi. 47

Wurzen, v. 200, 202

Ypres, vi. 43 f .

Zachariae, J., i. 107

Zanchi, vi. 410, n.

Zasius, U., ii. 39, 211 f., 244, n.,
256, 261, iv. 336, 360, vi. 31,
438 f.

Zeitz, v. 193, iv. 346

Zell, M., ii. 153, vi. 278

Zerbst, v. 189, 218, vi. 266

Ziegler, B., v. 500, vi. 410

— J., ii. 133, iii. 303, vi. 271

Zinzendorf, vi. 445

Ziska, iii. 96

Zoch, L., iv. 349

Zulsdorf, vi. 346

Zurich, iii. 422 ff., 447

Zwickau, ii. 97, 99, 205, iii. 234,
402, vi. 34 f., 255, 263, 266

Zwilling, G., i. 297, n., ii. 98,
314 ft, 336, iii. 121, vi. 504

Zwingli, U., an Erasmian, ii. 248 ;
yet a predestinarian, iii. 189 ;
an iconoclast, v. 208, 222 ;
rationalist, i. 175 ; intolerance,
vi. 278 ; stands up for the
Epistle of James, v. 523 ;
against the bigamy, iv. 10, n. ;
relations with L., iii. 379-385 ;
L.'s jealousy, ii. 376, iii. 65, 177,
389, iv. 87, 308 ff., 410 f ., 493 f .,
v. 104, 231, 531 f., vi. 108, 280,
289, 352 ; Wittenberg Concord,
iii. 417-424 ; Z. on L., iii. 277.
See Marburg Conference, Philip

Zwinglians, Sacramentarians, etc.,
ii. 223, iii. 67, 327 f ., 379-385,
409, 424, v. 76, 79 f., 104 f., 169,
231, 397 ff., 465, vi. 289, 316,
351 f., 396. See Supper

Zwolle, vi. 35

PRINTED BY

WM. BUENDON AND SON. LTD..
PLYMOUTH. ENGLAND.

Grisar, Hartmann.
Luther.

BR
325
.08
v.6