embraced with his whole soul a truth which he knew to be in the Scriptures, but where it would lead him he could not anticipate. He was still an obedient son of the Church. His theses were propositions for dispute; they concluded with the sincere and soleinn declaration that he affirmed nothing, but left everything to the judgment of the Church. What he would do in case the Church should declare against him, and forbid him to teach what he knew to be the Gospel; what course he would take when the alternative should be presented of giving up a truth which stood in letters of light on the page of Scripture and had imprinted itself on his soul, or of renouncing an allegiance in which he had grown up, the obligation to which he had never found occasion to doubt - this was a question which did not occur to him. This portion of the career of Luther is intelligible only when we remember that the incompatibleness of the traditional view of Church authority with his interpretation of the Gospel was something that he discovered by degrees, and that was forced upon him by the actual treatment which his doctrine received from the ecclesiastical rulers. Nothing but his intense, living belief respecting the nature of the Gospel could have sufficed to neutralize and at last overcome his established deference for Church superiors. "O!" he exclaims, "with what anxiety and labor, with what searching of the Scriptures, have I justified myself in conscience, in standing up alone against the Pope!" The theses were designed to subserve an immediate, local end, but they kindled a commotion over all Germany. Both the religious and political opponents of the trade in indulgences greeted so able and gallant a spokesman. "No one," says Luther, "would bell the cats; Leo X., covering the Resolutiones of the theses, he says, in connection with other expressions of spiritual allegiance: "Vocem tuam, vocem Christi, in te præsidentis et loquentis agnoscam." De Wette, i. 122. 1 "Et fovebat me utcumque aura ista popularis, quod invisæ jam essent omnibus artes et Romanationes illæ, quibus totum orbem impleverant et fatigaverant." Præf. Operum (1545). for the heresy-masters of the Preaching Order had driven all the world to terror by their fires."1 "Thanks be to God," exclaimed Reuchlin, "the monks have now found a man who will give them such full employment that they will be glad to leave my old age to pass away in peace."2 Maximilian was not sorry to see the theses appear. Erasmus was at heart glad that a new and vigorous antagonist of superstition had stepped into the arena. But opponents quickly appeared; Sylvester Prierias, Master of the Palace at Rome, offended that his Dominican order should meet with a rebuff from so insignificant a quarter; Tetzel himself, whose counter-theses gained for him at once a doctorate; Dr. John Eck, an expert, wellread, ambitious theological disputant, who welcomed so fair an occasion to signalize himself.3 Luther left none of them unanswered. Their appeals to human authority led him to plant himself more distinctly on the Scriptures; and the defense of the detestable practices which he had assailed, inflamed his indignation still more against them. Then follows his summons to Rome, which is modified, at the request of his noble-hearted protector, Frederic the Wise, whom Leo X., for political reasons, was anxious at that moment to conciliate, into a summons to Augsburg to meet the legate, Cajetan (1518). Luther found him supercilious, " a complete Italian and Thomist," who would have no discussion, and whose requirement that Luther should retract his opinions, was met with a civil but decided refusal. "I will not," wrote Luther to Carlstadt, "become a heretic by denying the truth by which I became a Christian: sooner will I die, be burnt, be banished, be anathematized."4 He left the cardinal, to whom his dark, glistening eyes were nowise agreeable, and appealed from the Pope ill-informed to the same bet 1 Gieseler, IV. i. 1, § 1, n. 16. 2 Waddington, History of the Reformation, i. 98. 8 These documents are in Lüscher, Reformationsacten, ii. THE LEIPSIC DISPUTATION. 97 ter-informed. When a bull was issued from Rome, asserting the doctrine as to indulgences, which Luther had impugned, he published his appeal from the Pope to a general council. Still he looked for a recognition of the truth from the authorities of the Church. Miltitz, the second messenger from the papal court, a Saxon by birth, conciliatory in manner, and professing a sympathy with Luther in his hatred of the worst abuses of the vendors of indulgences, actually persuaded him to abstain from further combat on the subject, provided his opponents would also remain silent.2 But this truce was quickly broken by the challenge of Eck to a public disputation on free-will and grace, topics on which he had before debated with Carlstadt, one of the theological professors at Wittenberg; and by the programme which Eck put forth, much to the surprise of Luther, in which his opinions were directly assailed. In the open wagon which conveyed Luther to Leipsic to attend the disputation, there sat by his side Philip Melancthon, a young man of twenty-two, of precocious talents and ripe scholarship, whom his grand-uncle, Reuchlin, had recommended to the Elector as Professor of Greek, and sent to Wittenberg with a glowing prophecy of the eminence that awaited him.3 At the age of twenty his powers and his scholarship were alike mature. Unlike Luther in his temperament, they 1 Letter to Cajetan (Oct. 18, 1518), De Wette, i. 164. 2 Luther did not believe in the sincerity of Miltitz's warm demonstrations. He speaks of his "Italities and simulations" "Italitates et simulationes." Letter to Staupitz (Feb. 20, 1519), De Wette, i. 281. See also the Letter to Egranus (Feb. 2, 1519), De Wette, i. 216. 3 Reuchlin to Melancthon, Corpus Ref., i. 33. Reuchlin applies to him the promise to Abraham (Gen. xii.): "Ita mihi præsagit animus, ita spero futurum de te, mi Philippe, meum opus et meum solatium." Melancthon's original name was Schwarzerd, which, according to the prevailing custom, he rendered into Greek. To render proper names into Greek or Latin was usual with scholars. Thus Hausschein became Ecolampadius; Schneider-i. e., Kornschneider was transformed into Agricola. Johannes Krachemberger wrote to Reuchlin to furnish him with a Greek equivalent for his not very euphonious name. Von Raumer, Geschichte der Pædagogik, i. 129. were the counterparts of each other. Melancthon found rest and support in the robust nature, the intrepid spirit of Luther; Luther admired, in turn, the fine but cautious intellect, and the exact and ample learning of Melancthon. Each lent to the other the most effective assistance. So intimate is their friendship that Luther dares to get hold of the manuscript commentaries of his young associate, whose modesty kept them from the press, and to send them, without the author's knowledge, to the printer.1 "This little Greek," said Luther, "surpasses me in theology, too." By his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Melancthon laid the foundation of the Protestant exegesis; and his doctrinal treatise, the "Loci Communes," won for him a like distinction in this department of theology. The disputation at Leipsic went on for a week between Carlstadt and Eck, on the intricate themes of free-will and grace, in which the former defended the Augustinian and the latter the semi-Pelagian side, and in which the fluency and adroitness of Eck shone to advantage in comparison with his less facile adversary. Then Luther ascended the platform. He was in the prime of life, in his thirty-sixth year, of middling height, at that time thin in person, and with a clear, melodious voice. It is a fact not without interest that he carried in his hand a nosegay of flowers.2 He took delight in nature—in the sky, the blossoms, and birds. In the midst of his great conflict he would turn for recreation to his garden, and correspond with his friends about the seeds and utensils that he wanted to procure for it.3 At home and with his friends he was full 1 Letter to Melancthon, De Wette, ii. 238. See also ii. 303. 2 For an interesting description of Luther, as he appeared in this Disputation, from the pen of Petrus Mosellanus, see Waddington, i. 130. See also Ranke, Deutsch. Gsch., i. 281. It lasted from June 27, to July 16, 1519. 3" While Satan with his members is raging, I will laugh at him and will attend to my gardens, that is, the blessings of the Creator, and enjoy them, praising him. Letter to Wenc. Link. (Dec. 1525), De Wette, iii. 58. See, also, iii. 172. THE LEIPSIC DISPUTATION. 99 of humor, was enthusiastically fond of music, and played with skill on the lute and the flute; in his natural constitution the very opposite of an ascetic. His powerful mind for he was, probably, the ablest man of his time - was connected with a child-like freshness of feeling, and a large, generous sympathy with human nature in all its innocent manifestations. Standing before Duke George, who proved to be a decided enemy of the Reformation, and before the auditory who sat with him, Luther discussed with his opponent the primacy of the Pope. In the course of the colloquy he declared that the headship of the Pope is not indispensable; that the Oriental Church is a true Church, without the Pope; that the primacy is of human and not of divine appointment. Startling as these propositions were, they were less so than was his avowal, in response to an inquiry, that among the articles for which John Huss had been condemned at the Council of Constance, there were some that were thoroughly Christian and evangelical. A feeling of amazement ran through the assembly, and an audible expression of surprise and anger broke from the lips of the Duke.2 The Disputation at Leipsic, by stimulating Luther to further studies into the origin of the Papacy and into the character of Huss and of his opinions, brought his mind to a more decided renunciation of human authority, and to a growing suspicion that the papal rule was a usurpation in the Church and a hateful tyranny.3 Up to this time his attempt had been to influence the ecclesiastical rulers; now he turned to the people. His "Address to 1 But he was abstemious in food and drink; "valde modici cibi et potus," says Melancthon. Often for many consecutive days he would take only a little bread and fish. Vita Lutheri, v. 2 Ranke, i. 279 seq. Before the Disputation at Leipsic, he wrote to Spalatin (March 13, 1519): "Verso et decreta Pontificium, pro mea disputatione, et (in aurem tibi loquor) nescio an Papa sit Antichristus ipse vel apostolus ejus: adeo misere corrumpitur et crucifigitur Christus (id est veritas) ab eo in decretis." De Wette, i. 238. |