of conduct it is not impossible to discover. The obnoxious theory was first proposed by Carlstadt, an enthusiast and fanatic who had given Luther infinite trouble; and it was defended by him through a weak device of exegesis. It was associated in Luther's mind with the extreme spiritualism, or the subjective tendency, which undervalued and tended to sweep away the objective means of grace, the Word as well as the sacraments, and to substitute for them a special illumination or inspiration from the Spirit. The Word and the Sacraments Luther had made the criteria of the Church. On upholding them in their just place, everything that distinguished his reform from enthusiasm or rationalism depended. He had never thought of forsaking the dogmatic system of Latin Christianity in its earlier and purer days, and he looked with alarm on what struck him as a rationalistic innovation. Besides, over and above all these considerations, the real objective presence of Christ in his human nature, was a belief that had taken a deep hold of his imagination and feelings. He had been tempted to give to the text "this is my body ". a looser, more figurative meaning; but the text, he declared, was too strong for him. He must take it just as it reads. The truth is that his religious feelings were intertwined with the literal interpretation. Being immovably and on such grounds established in his opinion, he would have no fellowship with such as rejected it. They denied, as he considered,

1 Luther was in the habit of stigmatizing the Zwinglians as "schwärmer." This seems at first inapposite, even as a term of opprobrium. But Luther would hold fast to the objective Word and the objective sacraments. As the truth was in the Word when it entered the ear even of the unbeliever; as it was the Word of God, however it might be received; so was Christ in the sacramental elements, whatever the beliefs or feelings of the recipient might be. The sacrament was complete, independently of the character of the recipient, not less than of the character of the minister. It owed its completeness to the divine institution: just as the rays of the sun are the same, whether they fall upon the eye that can see or upon the blind. In a word, Luther felt strongly that the Zwinglians attributed too much to the subjective factor, to faith, and thus sacrificed the grand objective character of the means of grace - doing by the sacraments what the enthusiasts did by the Scriptures.

THE EUCHARISTIC CONTROVERSY.

151 an article of the Christian faith, a precious fact of Christian experience. The union of the believer with Christ -the unio mystica - is a theme on which he has written more impressively, perhaps, than upon any other topic of Christian doctrine. Philosophical objections counted for nothing with him against the intuitions of the ethical or religious nature. He was profoundly sensible that the truths of religion transcend the limits of the understanding. Difficulties raised by the mere understanding, in however plausible form they might be presented, he considered to be really superficial. Yet, in defending his own view he sometimes condescended to fight with weapons of philosophy which he had drawn in earlier days from the tomes of Occam.

Of course the most urgent exertions would be made to heal a schism that threatened to breed great disasters to the Protestant cause. Not only was it a scandal of which the Roman Catholic party would only be too happy to make an abundant use, but it distracted the counsels and tended to paralyze the physical strength of the Protestant interest. The theologian who was most industrious in the work of bringing about a union, was Martin Bucer, who from his position at Strasburg was well situated with reference to both of the contending parties, and who was uncommonly ingenious at framing compromises, or at devising formulas sufficiently ambiguous to cover dissonant opinions. Rude and violent though Luther sometimes was, he was always utterly honest and outspoken, and for this reason proved on some occasions unmanageable; and Zwingle, earnest as was his desire for peace, was too sincere and self-respecting to hide his opinion under equivocal phråseology. At least, when it was openly attacked, he would as openly stand for its defense. Of the princes who were active in efforts to pacify the opposing schools and bring

1 Passages from Luther on this subject may be read in Dorner, Entwicklungs gsch. d. Lehre v. d. Person Christ., ii. 510 seq.

them upon some common ground, Philip, the Landgrave of Hesse, was most conspicuous. The most memorable attempt of this sort was the Conference at Marburg in 1529, where the Swiss theologians met Luther and Melancthon. The former accommodated themselves to the views of the Lutherans on the subject of original sin, and on some other points respecting which their orthodoxy had been questioned. The only point of difference was the Eucharist; but here the difference proved irreconcilable. The Landgrave arranged that private conferences should first be held between Ecolampadius and Luther, and between Melancthon and Zwingle; Zwingle and Luther being thus kept apart, and each put by the side of a theologian of mild and conciliatory temper. But the experiment was fruitless. No more could an agreement be reached when all were assembled with the Landgrave and a select company of spectators. The theologians sat by a table, the Saxons on one side and the Swiss opposite them. Luther wrote upon the table with chalk his text, "hoc est meum corpus -and refused to budge an iota from the literal sense. But his opponents would not admit the actual presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament, or that his body is received by unbelievers. Finally, when it was evident that no common ground could be reached, Zwingle, with tears in his eyes, offered the hand of fraternal fellowship to Luther. But this Luther refused to take, not willing, says Ranke, to recognize them as of the same communion. But more was meant by this refusal; Luther would regard the Swiss as friends, but such was the influence of his dogmatic system over his feelings, that he could not bring himself to regard them as Christian brethren. Luther and Melancthon at this time appear to have supposed that an agreement in every article of belief is the necessary condition of Christian fellowship. Both parties engaged to be friendly to one another, and to abstain from irritating

THE EUCHARISTIC CONTROVERSY.

153

language. They signed in common fourteen articles of faith relating to the great points of Christian doctrine, and promised to exercise toward one another all the charity which is consistent with a good conscience. There was a considerable time during which the sentiments and language of Luther in relation to the Sacramentarians, were greatly softened. In particular was this the case while he was at Coburg, during the sessions of the Diet of Augsburg. The imperial cities of Southern Germany, by the agency of the indefatigable Bucer, although they sympathized with the Zwinglian doctrine, were admitted. to the league of Smalcald. In 1536 the most distinguished theologians of Upper Germany joined Luther and his followers in subscribing to the Wittenberg Concord, which expressed, with slight reservations, the Lutheran view. But the Swiss adherents of Zwingle refused to sanction this creed. In 1543, the publication of Zwingle's writings by his son-in-law, Gualter, with an apologetic essay from his pen, once more roused the ire of Luther, and he began again to denounce the Zwinglians and their doctrine in the former vituperative strain.2

1 It is asserted that the body and blood of Christ are truly present, and offered in the sacrament, and are received even by the "unworthy." Bucer distinguished between the "unworthy " and "godless." On this agreement see the article "Wittenberger Concordie," in Herzog's Real-Encycl., and Gieseler, III. iv. 1, § 7.

2 The story that Luther, shortly before his death, acknowledged to Melancthon that he had gone too far in the sacramental controversy, is given, for example, by Christoffel, i. 331. It is a fiction: see Galle, Versuch einer Characteristik Melancthons als Theologen, etc., p. 433. Luther and Melancthon depended very much for their information on Swiss affairs upon travellers and students, and had an imperfect conception of the real character of Zwingle's services to reform. Neither of the disputants at Marburg fully grasped the opinion of the other. The Zwinglians often understood Luther to hold to a local přesence, whereas the Lutheran doctrine rests upon the idea of a spiritualizing of the human nature of Christ, of an effect wrought upon it by its relation to Divinity, so that it no longer fills space or is fettered by spatial relations. The state of Luther's health, and the particular circumstances under which he wrote, affected his tone respecting Zwingle. There was a certain bluntness in Zwingle which was offensive to Luther, and was interpreted by him as personal disrespect. Zwingle's letter to Luther (April, 1527; Zwing. Opera, viii, 39),

We turn now to the catastrophe of the Swiss Reformation. There was a growing hostility between the five mountain cantons that remained Catholic and the cities in which Protestantism had been established. The Catholic cantons entered into a league with Ferdinand of Austria. Protestant preachers who fell into the hands of the Catholics were put to death. The new doctrine was suppressed within their limits. The districts that belonged in common to the several cantons furnished the occasion for bitter controversy. At length Zurich took up arms, and without bloodshed forced the five cantons to tear up the compact with Austria, to concede that each government should be free to decide for itself upon the religious question, and to pay the costs of the projected war. The behavior of the five cantons, however, was not improved. Their threatening attitude led Zurich to form alliances with the city of Strasburg and the Landgrave of Hesse. The force of the Protestants, apart from foreign help, was greater than that of their adversaries. Zwingle recommended bold measures. He thought that the constitution of the Swiss Confederacy should be changed, so that the preponderance might be given to the cities where it justly belonged, and taken from the mountain districts which had so shamefully misused their power. The chief demands that were really made, were that the Protestant doctrine, which was prohowever it may have been provoked, was adapted to irritate the Saxon reformer. Referring to it, Luther speaks of the "Helvetica ferocia" of his opponent (to Spalatin, May 31, 1527; De Wette, iii. 182). In a letter to Bullinger (May 14, 1538; De Wette, v. 3), he speaks kindly of Zwingle: "Libere enim dicam: Zwinglium, postquam Marpurgi mihi visus et auditus est, virum optimum esse judicavi, sicut et Ecolampadium," etc. He speaks of the grief he had experienced at Zwingle's death. But when his displeasure was excited, he wrote in a different spirit. See, for example, a letter to Wenc. Ink (January 3, 1532, De Wette, iv. 331). But Zwingle, in the Fidei Ratio- -the creed which he presented at Augsburg - had described Luther's opinion as the tenet of those "who look back to the flesh-pots of Egypt: "Qui adollas Ægyptiacas respectant an aspersion as unjust as it was irritating (Rat. Fid., 8). Luther's latest ebullition, occasioned by the intelligence that the Swiss were denouncing him, is in a letter to Jac. Probst (January 17, 1546; De Wette, v. 777).