HOME ARTICLES & COMMENTARY: TOC: The Rise of Church-State Alliances: Imperial Edicts & Church Councils: 306-565 The Rise of Protestant Alliances of Church and State: Ulrich Zwingli and the Reformation in Switzerland to 1531 The Constitution and the Commandments The Classical Temple Architecture of Washington, DC A History of Religious Tests: 312 to 1961 American Founders on Church-State Alliances The Bible and the Quran: A Scriptural Comparison Religion and Women's Suffrage Religious Tradition and Interracial Marriages Slavery and the Churches Gays & Social Conservatism as a Coercive Tool of the State Einstein's Religion The Changing Religious Identification of America Moral Hypocrisy in the Bible Belt Ring Species, Evolution and why Intelligent Design isn't science. Who am I : Why this project? : Contact me INFO & EYE OPENERS FROM OTHERS: Court Holdings on Church and State Historical Revisionism: On David Barton's Christian Nation Biblical Archeology Review Special: Captivity, Exodus, and Conquest Sexual Orientation in Nature The Biological Basis of Morality by Edward O. Wilson MEDUSA HEADWEAR  Buy High Quality PolarTech 200 Fleece Headwear From the Author | At the age of seventeen Luther enrolled at the University of Erfurt. Founded in 1392, Erfurt had become Germany's most famous school, and one of the three most important universities in Europe at the time. The other two were Italian universities in Bologne and Padua. Hans Luther had prospered so he intended Martin to go into the field of law. Erfurt's academic atmosphere was of a moderate and non-threatening sort with some ideological compromises in its Scholasticism. Scholasticism was shifting from Realism to Nominalism, from Plato to Aristotle. Erfurt's nominalist leaning philosophy was due to the influence of William of Occam (1288-1348). Nominalism had been made fashionable at Erfurt by Gabriel Biel(1425-1495). Briel was influenced by Nicholas Lyra (1270-1349), who sought reform from within the church. Lyra wanted some reform but remained very careful with his words, saying "I protest that I do not intend to assert or determine anything that has not been manifestly determined by Sacred Scripture or by the authority of the Church... Wherefore I submit all I have said or shall say to the correction of Holy Mother Church and of all learned men..." Very important to Erfurt's scholastic philosophy was the influence of Biel's contemporary, the famed scholar and traveler, Wessel Gansfort. Having influencial voices such as Peter Abelard (1079-1142), Bonaventura (1221-1272), Thomas Aquinas (1227-1274), andDuns Scotus (1266-1308), Scholasticism boldly attempted to marry reason and faith. (At odds with this endeavor were those who said this application of reason diminished the power of faith; faith isn't supposed to be reasonable.) With scholasticism being such an important prerequisite for the study of law, Luther devoted minimal time to classical learning and showed little interest in attending the university's humanist lectures. Unlike Zwingli, Luther was not part of, nor did he wish to be, a part of the university culture's humanist movement. At this stage of the Reformation, Luther attacked the abuses of the church, so to many northern renaissance humanists of the time, he was considered a very welcome ally. Catholic theologian and historian James MacCaffrey makes the claim, "He studied little if anything of the works of the early Fathers, and never learned to appreciate Scholasticism as expounded by its greatest masters, St. Thomas or St. Bonaventure. His knowledge of Scholastic Theology was derived mainly from the works of the rebel friar William of Occam." Being a Catholic writer who was clearly contemptuous about the reformation, it is understandable why he would connect the troublemaker Luther to William of Occam. William was a jagged thorn in the Papal side, attacking everything from the supremacy of the Papacy and the authority of general councils to the existence of universals. In the medieval schoolmen's Christianization of Socrates' and Plato's philosophical realism, universals were the prequisite 'supernatural' blueprints that existed before they became the matter of nature. Scholasticism was of paramount importance at the university and Occam's conceptualist brand of philosophical nominalism had triumphed at Erfurt, too. William of Occam also attacked the popular 'ontological argument for the existence of God' as lacking intellectual coherence. On Luther's readings, the historian Hartmann Grisar of the Jesuit order is a bit kinder in his assessment of Luther, writing "As a student, Luther devoted himself with great zest to the various branches of philosophy, and, carried away by the spirit of the Humanists, in his private time he studied the Latin classics, more particularly Cicero, Virgil, Livy, Ovid, also Terence, Juvenal, Horace and Plautus.". The truth is probably somewhere between MaCaffrey's and Grisar. Luther and the humanists had a short honeymoon; Luther was no humanist in any sense of the word. To begin with, Augustine Christianity and humanism had very little in common; one's intellectual pursuits were limited by religious dogma while the other was willing to challenge unseemly ideas. One degraded humanity while the other sought some respect for human dignity, knowledge and perspective. One heard it through the gravevine and believed without question, the other wanted to make up its own mind after reviewing the facts. One looked disproportionately to another life while the other was passionate about everything important in this one. One struggled with gloom, the other saw bright possibilities of human excellence amidst the 'sin'. A Christian fundamentalist emailer who took offense regarding my views on history's church-state alliances once told me "There is absolutely nothing good in you, or me, or anyone else for that matter." This doctrine of worthlessness is the viewpoint of the Bible and the Quran; of Paul, of Augustine, of John Chrysostom, of Cyril of Alexander, and certainly of Martin Luther. To the majority of the humanist party, it seemed both irrational and unwarranted, objectionable and rephrehensible, to trash God's gift of existence and the advancement of knowledge pertaining to it. To the Augustinian school of salvation desperation, life was like a plague; to the humanists, life was an opportunity and a chance to benefit and overcome through the advancedment of knowledge, arts, and sciences. Being equipped with such a focused determination towards his academic studies we shouldn't be surprised that Luther achieved his Bachelor degree in one year instead of the usual two. Soon, in 1505, he received a Masters in Arts and then, according to his father's wishes, enrolled in the university's law school. All was going as planned. It was at this time that he first began to lecture as a professor on the ethics and physics of Aristotle. These studies were part of the branch of medieval scholasticism that had abandoned Plato's forms, medievally known as universals. With philosophical realism, treeness was more real than trees; treeness was/is eternal while individual trees just come and go. Trees could not exist without the universal of treeness. Treeness existed before the first tree; treeness existed before the universe was created. Nominalists and conceptualists dissented, claiming universals were only names and abstract concepts that did not exist outside of the mind; just labels for our conveniences. Even though nominalists were men of deep faith, nominalism was perceived by the religious conservatives of the times as boiling down to the evils of materialism. Nominalists were also associated by the conservative traditionalists with anti-papal parties, so, like all threats to religious orthodoxy, the challengers had to be silenced. Going beyond blacklists, nominalism was even outlawed in thirteenth century Paris by Louis XI, leading some to believe this is why Wessel Gansfort and others fled the city. The University of Erfurt was done a great favor by Louis XI. |
Staupitz was born in 1460 in the town of Motterwitz. After entering the University of Munich, he joined the Augustine Order. Soon, he relocated to the University of Tubingen, one of Germany's five classical university towns of the time. In Tubingen he continued his education, where he earned his Doctorate in Theology in 1500. Soon thereafter, he was appointed Dean of Theology at the University of Wittenberg during its founding years. Then he was elected Vicar-General of the German Congregation of Augustinians. In 1512 he resigned his posts at Wittenberg and moved to southern Germany. As Vicar of the Augustinians, he spent those years organizing and leading the Augustine monasteries.
It was Staupitz's intent to remedy Luther's continuing misery and self-doubt. The vicar took a fatherly interest in his condition and his monastery brothers expressed like support by giving him a Latin Bible, a rather rare possession in the early sixteenth century. To Staupitz, a devout Catholic, Rome's Christianity was still too Pelagian; it's sacramental system was one of works, not grace. With Pelagianism and Catholic orthodoxy, one earned eternal salvation through the rituals, sacraments, vows,fasts, pilgrimages, celibacy, and other good works. Luther felt he could never do enough to obtain salvation and lived in continual doom and gloom. Augustine had a very pessimistic view of human nature which had offended the more works oriented Pelagians. The Fifth century's Pelagians believed in requiring high moral conduct and good works for salvation. Luther adopted Augustine's dark view of humanity; since there is nothing inherently virtuous or good about man or anything he does, he needs God's grace and salvation thru the work of Christ. This was Augustine's City of God. So beginning at the dawn of the European Renassance, humanists began packing up and leaving for the city of man. To the renaissance thinkers, and those who sought change from within, the city of God was corrupt and unscriptural, it stifled learning and fought progress. Of Augustine's doctrine of Predestination, it frightened Luther, countering the contemporary notions of free will and self determination. Staupitz was so concerned about Martin's well-being, he recommended a transfer to the Wittenberg monastery and a position at the University of Wittenberg.
The University of Wittenberg was founded in 1502 by the benevolent German noble, Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony. With the transfer approved, Luther settled into university life in Wittenberg; first by teaching the logic and physics of Aristotle, and then as a professor of Theology. Alongside teaching, he began to preach at a small chapel in the town when its preacher became ill. All the while, Staupitz stroked Luther with encouragements when he could, telling him the passion of Christ had atoned for the sinful nature of man. It was here in Wittenberg, a town "Beyond measure drunken, rude and given to revelry". (Durant) that Luther discovered the rebellious writings of Czech reformer John Huss.
With Staupitz's support, Luther succeeded him as the local vicar-general for the Augustinians. With the university prospering and the lecture halls packed, Elector Frederick was excited that his university's rising star was chosen for the position. At this time in Luther's journey from orthodoxy he began to see clear differences between orthodox positions and his own developing theology. This ideological shift caused him to begin discarding the language of Aristotlean Scholasticism. Soon, he would be attacking Aristotle and scholasticism altogether; realism and nominalism alike. Such things were useless dross to Luther. The brotherhood at Wittenberg did not always agree with their vicar or his aggressive methods but they enjoyed their close proximity to the rising star.
His first theology lectures were on Psalms and he was a university favorite, his bold personality attracting eager and attentive students. It was in these first years after his trip to Rome that Luther's ideas journeyed away from orthodoxy. In May of 1515 Luther began a long series of lectures on Paul's letters to the Romans. After Romans, Luther did lecture series on the letters to the Galatians and the Hebrews. Luther's life as a reformer has begun and quite like Erasmus and the humanist camp, he remained a Catholic committed to change from within. For now. Seeping into his theology were the ramifications of Paul's claim that "the just shall live by faith". Like Zwingli in Switzerland, he had no idea what kind of journey he had embarked on. Within both Zwinglian and Lutheran revolutions, the rise of nationalism coupled with the doctrine of justification meant big troubles for the Roman church. While Zwingli's rejection of Catholicism's Pelagianism seems to come from his humanist education, Luther could have been partly addressing his own inner wars.
Below is the text of this Papal indulgence as found on page 268 of Will Durant's Heroes of History:
"May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy upon thee and absolve thee by the merits of his holy passion! And I, by his authority, that of his blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and of the most holy Pope, granted and committed to me in these parts, do absolve thee, first, from all ecclesiastic censures, in whatever manner they have been incurred; then from all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they may be, even from such as are reserved for the cognizance of the Holy See, and as far as the keys of the holy church extend. I remit to you all punishment which you deserve in purgatory on their account, and I restore you to the holy sacrament of the church, to the unity of the faithful, and to that innocence and purity which you possessed at baptism; so that when you die the gates of punishment shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delights shall be opened; and if you shall not die at present, this grace shall remain in full force when you are at the point of death. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." .
"At least from the 13th century there were seven electors, including three spiritual ones — the Archbishop of Mainz, the Archbishop of Trier, and the Archbishop of Cologne — and four lay ones — the King of Bohemia, the Count Palatine of the Rhine, the Duke of Saxony, and the Margrave of Brandenburg. The last three were also known as the Elector Palatine, the Elector of Saxony, and the Elector of Brandenburg respectively. Only six of the electors, however, had the right to sit at ordinary meetings: The King of Bohemia, who was in fact not a prince of the Empire but a neighboring and independent monarch, might vote at an imperial election, but was allowed on no other occasion to meddle in the affairs of the Empire."
Albert didn't need to be firstborn to become influential and powerful in the affairs of both church and state. Known also as Albert IV of Brandenburg, he became the Archbishop of Magdeburg and the administrator of the Diocese of Halberstadt at 23 years old. At 24 the bishop secured the Electorship of Mainze. Four years later in 1518 he became a Cardinal. In the Pontiff's Cardinal College he would be known as Cardinal Albrecht von Hohenzollern - Albert of Hohenzollern. Although from a family of privilege and power, his rise had still been very expensive. In his attempt to pay of huge debts, Albert had made a deal with the Pope to oversee the sale of the Basilica indulgences in Germany. Albert was deeply in debt because it had cost him so much money to acquire the Pallium of the See of Mainz. The Bishop had borrowed tens of thousands of Florins for the Pallium from the wealthy German industrialist and banker, Jacob Fugger the Rich. The banker and the Pope required that a Fugger representative be along, responsible for taking care of the accounting and the cash box.
The Pallium was a simple yet elegant liturgical vestment worn over the shoulders. It signified papal authority. It is the western European church's version of the Omophorion of the Byzantine Christian tradition. Going back to around the fifth and sixth centuries, it was supposedly worn only by the Pope at first. The Pallium was eventually bestowed by the Pope upon the metropolitans of the Church. These were the bishops of major Sees like Cologne and Mainz in Germany; of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem. As a symbol of Papal authority, those who wore it declared their unity with the Pope and orthodoxy of the church. A bishop could not undertake any jurisdictional duties in a See unless he had personally acquired the Pallium. He had to petition for it, make a declaration of faith, and pay handsomely for it by way of a tribute. Popes made millions; bankers like the Fuggers prospered in their alliance with the church and state partnerships. Acquiring the Pallium was of great significance in the alliances of church and state found in the Holy Roman Empire. Of the seven electors, three were Archbishops of the Sees of Mainz, Cologne and Trier. The electoral college had been fashioned in the first place as an alliance of church and state with three ecclesiastical princes, three secular princes and the King of Bohemia. Since Bohemia was not part of the Holy Roman Empire, its King had limited powers. Due to this church and state arrangement, princes of the church were the highest civil authorities in many realms. By wearing the Pallium, these electors declared unity with Rome so in effect, the Papacy had significant authority regarding who would be elected as the Holy Roman Emperor.
In his deal with Rome, Albert would be able to keep a portion of the proceeds towards his debt payments. In his own regions of authority, he would keep half the collection. For the groundwork, Albert commissioned Johann Tetzel, a well known Dominican preacher already experienced with selling indulgences in Germany. Tetzel had also been an inquisitor in Poland having been appointed at the time by the Cajetan, a man the Pope would use in hopes of silencing Luther
Tetzel wasn't the only target of reformers against indulgences. Just over the southern border in Zurich, Switzerland, the same scenario was playing out as the classically educated rebel Ulrich Zwingli preached and published against Switzerland's indulgence commissioner, the Dominican Bernardin Samson. While Tetzel was successful in Halberstadt, Magdeburg and Leipzig, Saxony's Elector Frederick the Wise banned him from entering Saxony. Urged on by Albert of Mainz's brother and Elector, Joachim of Brandenburg and Duke George of Albertine Saxony, Tetzel sold indulgences to Frederick's Saxons at the border towns of Zerbst and Jizterbogk. In Switzerland, similar events transpired. After Zwingli was elected to head the Great Minster Cathedral, school and society in December of 1518, he succeeded in persuading Zurich's magistrates to ban the sale of indulgences in Zurich's territories. Under pressure and the prospect of failure, the Pope then recalled Samson, ending his mission.
Luther was convinced that indulgences were dangerous to the people's spiritual health because it taught them that one could buy salvation. Hell waited for those who held these beliefs. To Luther, indulgences were Papal tickets in the holy trade business. Contributing to the furor, indulgences unnecessarily increased poverty. Instead of taking care of one's family, men were duped into passing on their meager earnings to the papacy in hopes of a better life after death. As with England and Switzerland, indulgences added fuel to the rising nationalism because of the continuous draining of national wealth into the coffers of both Rome and the bankers. After becoming furious over the contents of Tetzel's sermons and the letter of recommendation he carried from Archbishop Albert, Luther's friends encouraged him to join the frey. Luther's call to German patriots to fight church abuses aroused the nation quickly.
To get a picture of what infuriated reform minded Christians, Will Durant writes of Tetzel's circus (Reformation, p338):
"Usually, on these missions, he received the aid of the local clergy: when he entered a town a procession of priests, magistrates and pious laity welcomed him with banners, candles, and song, and bore the bull of indulgence aloft on a velvet or golden cushion, while church bells pealed and organs played. So propped, Tetzel offered, in an impressive formula, a plenary indulgence to those who would penitently confess their sins and contribute accordingly to their means to the building a new St. Peter's". Oswald Myconius, an associate of Erasmus in Basel and Zwingli in Zurich, remarked after hearing Tetzel firsthand in 1517 (See Hull):
"It is incredible what this ignorant monk said and preached. He gave sealed letters that even the sins which a man was intending to commit would be forgiven-!! The pope he said had more power than all the Apostles, all the angels and saints, more even than the Virgin Mary herself; for these were all subject to Christ, but the pope was equal to Christ".
In July, Duke George of Albertine Saxony??? invited Luther to preach in Dresden. He had heard of the rising star of Wittenberg amidst the religious controversies. Luther argued for more acceptance of the merits of Christ to assure a believer's salvation. The Duke was thoroughly opposed to the liberality of Luther's ideas. George argued that such a doctrine would only make the people 'presumptuous and mutinous'; he claimed it would lead to reckless anarchy. This was an old line of thought. Throughout Christendom's history of church-state alliances, religious liberty was considered to be a recipe for anarchy and disorder. Fourth century historian Eusebius wrote in the third chapter of his Oration in Praise of Constantine that "Surely monarchy far transcends every other constitution and form of power: democratic equality of power, which is its opposite, may rather be described as anarchy and disorder." In the period after hearing Luther, the Duke became an ardent defender of orthodoxy. George was concerned about the degree of independence were allowed. Just as Emperor Theodosius the Great thought, religious freedom was considered a prescription for undermining public order.
With Johann Tetzel's circus marching throughout Germany, Martin Luther was ready to strike. On October 31, 1517 he nailed his Ninety-five Theses to Castle Church door. As I noted previously, The church door was a town and university bulletin board commonly used for proclamations, invitations, and important messages in this university village. Karlstadt had already caused a stir when he posted his anti-indulgence theses in May. Being academic tradition, none were surprised to philosophical and/or religious ideas posted for open debate within the community. What was a surprise was the content's reception by the students, faculty and common folk. Karlstadt, Luther and Zwingli broke ground for the building of the religious revolution of the sixteenth century. When translated from Latin to German, the university press couldn't keep up with the demand for copies of Luther's theses. Stirring up the people were these unconventional claims against the legitimacy of Papal indulgences.
- Indulgences can only remit penalties imposed by church, not God
- God only can remit guilt and punishment
- God only can shorten or negate the penalties of purgatory
- God recognizes only true repentance in granting pardons
At one point Luther wrote to George Spalatin, Elector Frederick's chaplain, secretary and family tutor, suggesting that the German leaders should unite in preventing compulsory extradition of citizens to stand in Rome whenever the Pope demands. The Papacy had a hold on German money and German people. Although deeply Catholic, Frederick the Wise saw this kind of policy as one of endless foreign intervention and draining of Germany's wealth into Rome. To patriots, the Pope's demands were assaults upon German sovereignty and German citizens. This wasn't a new idea. The Hussites had followed the reformer Johann Huss (Jan Hus) on Bohemian Czech patriotism as part of his religious revolt of the fifteenth century.
Back in the fourth century when the Nicenes got Constantine to side with their party, Arianist Christians were then persecuted and their churches were confiscated. Constantine issued a letter to the clergy all around the empire telling them to change or lose their church. Later, Constantine's edict authorized capturing and executing Arius and burning his writings. Arius was never apprehended but his writings were burned everywhere Nicene Christians had the political allies. The historian Eusebius boasts how the writings of heretics had been extirpated from history. Conversely, when Arianists had sympathetic rulers such as fourth century Emperors Constantius, son of Constantine, and Valens, Nicenes were oppressed and their churches made Arianist. Arianists did what Nicenes did. The same kind of enmity has existed for over a thousand years between Sunni and Shiite Muslim. Protestant-Catholic conflicts are only half as old as Muslim sectarianism. It is not democracy that changed this in the west; over the centuries it was the growing respect of liberties of conscience regardless of the government. This brought the west the renaissance period, the reformation, the scientific revolution and the seventeenth century enlightenment that influenced the genesis and growth of the United States Constitution. In the very dictatorial Roman Empire before its Christianization, the vast majority of its citizens could worship as they pleased. Religious diversity was a social glue in the public order. It lent to live and let live in religious matters. Religious strife not a constant commonplace in its realms as it would be after its Christianization. The empire had very few beefs with religions except Persian Manicheanism, Druids and Christians. Each has their own peculiar reason why it was targeted.
The main reason why Rome persecuted Christians was because their teachings sought to undermine a long established tradition of public order by attacking all the other people's religions as untruthful. In the canons of the Council of Elvira, it is made an offense to marry a pagan, Jew or heretic Arianist. Roman leaders knew that as long as the people put Rome first, allowing the vast majority have whatever religion they chose helped stabilize Rome's vastly diverse empire. Christians denied the legitimacy of any religion but theirs. There were not many paths; there was only one. The rest be damned. That really grated senators and emperors alike, especially the religious conservatives in the government. Manicheans were more likely persecuted due to Rome and Persia's constant warring over the centuries. It was probably a matter of nationalism, not their actual religion. Manicheanism was a Persian religion. Manicheans were then violently persecuted by the Christian powers of church and state, being threatened, exiled and stalked continually all over North Africa, Italy and Gaul. Eventually, Christians were the authorities in the empire.
When copies of Wimpina's anti-theses arrived in Wittenberg, it caused a ruckus among the students. Students and other dissenters seized eight hundred copies and burned them in the town square. A combustible situation indeed! The reply of those accused of burning Wimpina's theses was that this was retaliation for the condemnation and burning of Luther's works. Fearing for his life due to the possibilities of mob violence in a variety of places, Tetzel quit the indulgence trade and went into hiding in a Leipzig Dominican monastery. He died there in the Summer of 1519. In the stridency of this controversy, he was villainized the most for promising forgiveness for the sins intended in the future.
The Reuchlin constroversy began in 1509 when the converted Jew Johann Pfefferkorn's succeeeded in obtaining imperial authority to confiscate Jewish books. When Reuchlin was asked by Emperor Maximilian for advice on the issue, he managed to change the emperor's mind. Johann Reuchlin was an highly esteemed humanist and a Greek and Hebrew scholar second only to Erasmus in skill and reputation. In his Augenspiegel, Reuchlin artfully trashed Pfefferkorn's book that claimed Reuchlin took bribes from Jews. By attacking the notions of those who thought the first step in converting Jews was to confiscate their books, Reuchlin made many enemies in the mendicant orders, especially the Dominicans. Christians had confiscated or burned pagan literature and now, once again in Christian history, it was the Jews' turn. Like Erasmus, Reuchlin had written scathing satire regarding monkish religion. An inquisitor at heart, it was Hoogstraten who sought and obtained an imperial decree in October of 1512 to burn Reuchlin's offending book. Although Reuchlin eventually won these battles in the highest places of both church and state, Hoogstraten received little punishment. Monastery life had been under assault since the times of Emperor Justinian when writers accused monks as serving no good purpose. To these writers, these monks were on welfare for no good reason and they tended to mob violence when angered.
Then there was the unstoppable fire of Girilamo Aleandro (also called Aleander). Moderates like Erasmus were already sorely disappointed by the harsh rhetoric of Luther's opponents but Aleandro's angry accusations and tirades served only to increase the controversies and the dangers. In the long run he was one of Luther's toughest opponents among the powerful church, state and university elites. Born in 1480 in the Venice region, his education included the University of Venice where he became acquainted with the genius of Erasmus and of Aldus Manutius, a true Italian Renaissance thinker. Like Johann Eck, even at a young age, Aleander was considered one of the most educated men of the times. Luther had his work cut out for him by the best and brightest that orthodoxy could muster. In 1508 he was then invited by French King Louis XII to become Professor of 'Belles Lettres' at the University of Paris. He also served as the rector of the university for a time and also taught Greek. His next job was in service to the Prince-Bishop Eberhard of Leige, another bishop who was the highest civil authority of the city. Later in service to the bishop on a mission to Rome, Pope Leo X noticed his genius and retained him as an advisor. In 1519 he was offered the job of Librarian of the Vatican.
After Prierias' Dialogue about the Power of the Pope came Obelisks by Johann Eck (1486–1543), which was intended to be a private opinion for the Bishop of Eicbstadt but eventually found its way unintentionally to Luther. Born Johann Maier in Eck, in the Swabian region of southwestern Germany, he rose to become one of Rome's most erudite and accomplished public debaters. At twelve he began his education at the University of Heidelberg. He quickly moved on, receiving more education at the universities in Tubingen, Cologne, and Frieburg. He was awarded his Masters in Art in Frieburg in 1501. Ordained in 1508, he earned his doctorate in theology two years later. While concentrating on his major studies in religion and philosophy, he also attended classes in civil law, physics, mathematics, and geography. A voracious learner, Eck took up studies in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew when he became interested in humanist thought. Eck was a highly educated man; a man rarely matched in debate. Even as a young man, Eck was considered by his university peers as one the most knowledgeable of men alive. To the Curia, Johann Eck simply didn't lose debates regarding religious controversies. Being Pro-Chancellor of the University of Ingolstadt from 1512 to his death in 1543, the university's religious politics never steered far from the wishes of Rome. Eck not only played a significant part in the German Reformation, he soon became an major participant in opposing the reformations in the Swiss Cantons of Zurich, Basel, and Berne. With Zwingli clobbering his orthodox opponents in the religious disputations around Zurich, Eck sought to face off with him.
Luther and Eck were actually friends at the time. Luther was upset by the ferocity of his so-called friend and soon replied with Asterisks, which not only countered Eck but was also a publication full of personal attacks. In the religious tract wars of the sixteenth century, personal invectives, defamation, and derision were the norm. Luther noted in March of 1518 in a letter to his friend John Silvius Egranus in Zwickau, "In his Obelisks he calls me a fanatic Hussite, heretical, seditious, insolent and rash, not to mention such slight abuse as that I am dreaming, clumsy, unlearned, and a despiser of the Pope. In short the book is nothing but the foulest abuse, expressly mentioning my name and directed against my Theses. It is nothing less than the malice and envy of a maniac. I would have swallowed this sop for Cerberus [mythical three-headed dog guarding the less hospitable regions of the underworld], but my friends compelled me to answer it".
For more examples laden with invectives, take a look at Pope Leo I's (also Pope Leo the Great) letters to and from Emperor Marcianus regarding heretics in the middle of the fifth century. See Emperor Marcianus, Pope Leo and the Council of Chalcedon. Earlier, the imperial decree of Theodosius the Great outlawing Arianism and other heresies labeled their adherents as "demented and insane". See Theodosius the Great and the Church)
While Luther was away at the conference, the energetic Archdeacon of Wittenberg, Karlstadt, began to rock the boat again by publishing over 400 theses defending Luther and repudiating Eck's Obelisks. Karlstadt made some daring claims on top of his opposition to indulgences. He claimed scriptural authority to be supreme over papal decrees and church canon. He saw some books as being more authoritative than others. Among the first to do so, he doubted that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. Furthermore, he suspected that the Book of Revelations probably wasn't canonical at all. In these claims, the revolutionary Karlstadt exhibited some of the first signs of 'higher criticism'. Eck would have none of it and sought a public disputation with Karlstadt.
In the early years of the United States, Thomas Jefferson said something akin to that about the Book of Revelations, also called The Apocalypse,. In a Letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825, he wrote, "It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it, and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams."
With the benevolent Elector Frederick, educators, nobles, and the people at large at odds with the Papacy's intrusive tactics, the Pope backed off on a Roman venue in which to question Luther. Instead, the inquiry was moved to the German town of Augsburg before Cardinal Cajetan, the Papal Legate to the Federal Diet. Since there was a diet in progress there, it was a simple and effective alternative. Under pressure from Frederick the Wise and other important German voices, the emperor also promised and delivered a written imperial promise of safe conduct and passage to Augsburg. Pope Leo X was moderate in his approach to Luther, too. Part of Frederick's pull in this matter was due to the fact that the leader of Saxony was one of the seven imperial electors of the electoral college which elects the emperor. Furthermore, Pope Leo X thought it smart to stay in the good graces of the elector; Leo was correct in his judgment because Emperor Maximilian died less than two months later. A new Emperor was about to be elected and the Pope wanted influence in this process.
The prelate Cajetan was no lightweight in the ring. This is the same Cajetan, as master-general, who appointed Johann Tetzel inquisitor in Poland and then in Saxony. Born Tommaso de Gaetani Cajetan in 1469, he went against his father's wishes and joined the Dominican Order at fifteen or sixteen. Another boy wonder while in college, Cajetan began his university studies at Bologna and finished them at the famed University at Padua in 1491 where he settled into a teaching career. In 1494, he moved on with his appointment as University Chair of Thomistic Studies at Pavia where he eventually became Professor of Thomist Theology in 1497. It was around this time he participated in a disputation with the famed renaissance humanist Pico de Mirandola. Moving on again in 1499, he taught in Milan. In 1501, Cajetan was "called" to Rome to serve as Procurator-General of the Dominicans where he served until 1507 when he is elevated by the Pope to Vicar-General of the Dominicans. With this new authority, it is Cajetan who first sent the Dominicans to the Americas to convert the indigenous population. Cajetan's rise continued when Pope Leo X consecrated him Cardinal. But philosophically, Cajetan was a moderate, even liberal, compared to men such as Eck, Prierias and Aleandro. He was liberal enough that some of his Neothomist writings were later fiercely attacked by arch-conservatives; some even removed from his own works. He shared many of Erasmus' views that humanism and the church could coexist peacefully and benefit from each other. But like Erasmus, he unreservedly held that any church reformation undertaken should be done from within the church.
Luther and Cajetan met October 10-12, 1518. The meeting was futile; their conversation continually escalated to angry shouting matches. Cajetan wanted a pledge from Luther never to disturb the peace of the Church again but Luther refused to accept the Cardinal's stipulations on what disturbing the church meant. It meant silence as far as Martin was concerned. Due to Cajetan's wish to apprehend Luther and deliver him to Rome, scrapping any promise of safe passage to and from Augsburg, Luther departed secretly at night. Luther knew his enemies; Cajetan had been empowered by Rome to detain and bring Luther to Rome for more examination; an inquisition. As soon as he returned to Wittenberg he wrote an answer to Cardinal Cajetan titled, From the Pope badly Informed to the Pope to be Better Informed. Luther also wrote a record of the proceeding for the German people; Acta Augustana. This was a brilliant formula to keep the common folk informed of the situation. Immediately we can see that Luther was politically and socially more intelligent than his adversaries; he was a man of the people. The strategy of his opponents was to write for the educated who made the political and religious decisions. The common people were not considered worthy enough for such discussions. The educated and the Papacy would make the decisions for them. As the insulated men of orthodoxy wrote back and forth, Luther's tract's brought more support from all classes; lesser knights, secular princes, reform minded clergy, peasants, artisans, students, and of course, the humanist camp. Our pious professor is being abused, all he wanted was a scholarly discussion!
"It is a miracle to me by what fate it has come about that this single Disputation of mine should, more than any other, of mine or of any of the teachers, have gone out into very nearly the whole land. It was made public at our University and for our University only, and it was made public in such wise that I cannot believe it has become known to all men. For it is a set of theses, not doctrines or dogmas, and they are put, according to custom, in an obscure and enigmatic way." (Luther's letter to the Pope)
Cajetan then pressed Elector Frederick to hand Luther over. This was thoroughly discouraged by Luther's superior Staupitz, and Frederick's closest advisor Spalatin, who were helpful in persuading the Elector to make this a German affair, which was where Frederick's heart was anyway. Letters from his university's professors also supported Luther's 'German' rights. As far as Frederick and his subjects were concerned, there could be no trial anywhere but in Germany. With this, Saxony slipped from the Papacy's control. There was nobody more Catholic than Frederick the Wise but he was a German patriot, too.
Urged on by a frustrated and determined Cajetan, Pope Leo X issued the church's reply to Luther's disputations in the form of a Papal Bull on November 9, 1518. The Bull Cum Postquam defined and defended the church's use of indulgences. Stopping short of any punishment, the bull declared 'certain monk's' theses were condemned because they were contrary to church teachngs. Cajetan knew there was no official statement on the nature of indulgences, so it would be hard to convict Luther of a heresy the church had not defined well. Cajetan drew up some points and Leo ageed it was a good idea. With this declaration, the door to condemnation flew open. Soon afterward in that November, Luther responded to Leo's Bull. What Luther appealed for was a church council to decide the issue. With his opponents touting papal supremacy at every turn, this had little effect. Rome had spoken and continued to lay the groundwork for Luther's condemnation.
But could they get past the German people? In early January of 1519, Pope Leo had taken his next step towards condemning Luther and influencing Frederick by commissioning the Dominican Prior Charles von Miltitz as Papal Nuncio to present Frederick with the highly prized Golden Rose. Miltitz, also a Saxon, was a close friend of George Spalatin, Elector Frederick's court chaplain, private secretary, family tutor, and librarian. Spalatin was also the Saxon court's liaison to the Papacy and Frederick's most influential advisor. Miltitz was instructed to meet with Luther and carefully bring the "child of Satan" back to obedience. If this strategy failed, he was to persuade Frederick to hand Luther over to the authorities. If these strategies didn't work, he had the power to ban all sacraments by interdict in Germany except Baptism and Extreme Unction. Emperor Maximilian made clear that Miltitz was to conduct himself in a manner that would not offend such an important person as the Elector. Maximilian supported the church's attempts to silence Luther but the strategy had to be carried out with great care when it came to Prince Frederick the Wise. Then the emperor died.
With such an important imperial election at hand, the attention of the secular and religious authorities temporarily shifted away from the heretics. The attention given the invading Turks in the east had already given the reformation some breathing room and this offered more. This intermission in the church's efforts to put the ban of the empire upon Luther gave the reformation more time to become entrenched in Germany and Switzerland. The business of electing a Holy Roman Emperor took precedence. With the elector being so protective of Saxony's star, Luther now had more time and liberty to spread the reformation - and he used them well.
After all the bribes, back room deals, and borrowing huge sums for campaign money from the wealthy bankers, the Fuggers, the grandson of Emperor Maximilian - King Charles I of Spain - was elected. Charles was also the grandson of Spain's King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella and the son of her daughter Joanna the Mad ('crazy Jane') and Philip the Handsome. Beyond his Spanish hereditary domains Charles' rule extended over areas now called Belgium and Holland. This was achieved in no small part by the support of Elector Frederick of Saxony. During this interim, Charles needed Elector Frederick so he was very careful in how he treated this powerful and benevolent Prince-Elector of Saxony. Part of the deal was that no German could be condemned without a trial. The promise stalled the efforts of those seeking to silence Luther and Frederick became a thorn in the side of both the imperial court and the Roman authorities.
When Miltitz finally arrived in Saxony he was sorely amazed to find the acceptance of Luther's ideas was far more widespread and popular than he imagined possible. Things had gotten way out of hand and insulated Rome was facing far more serious problems than they were aware of. More than half of Mititz's friends in Augsburg and Nuremberg sided with Luther; half of the German countryside was hostile to Rome. In Saxony itself, opposition to Rome was so widespread that he chose to dress in a way that hid his papal commission. Miltitz's discussions with Luther were held in Spalatin's residence. A sort of truce was in fact agreed to; Luther would be quiet on indulgences if his opponent's would do the same about his theses. Luther also agree to write a submissive letter to the pope acknowledging the usefulness of prayers to saints, the reality of purgatory, and the benefits of indulgences. The letter was never sent because Miltitz thought it came up short. One has to wonder what Luther wrote regarding the 'benefits of indulgences'. After receiving Miltitz's report, the Curia was very displeased with Miltitz's solution. They wanted no truce and preferred to loose Johann Eck upon the heretic. Obtaining a recantation and putting the heresy to rest was the only acceptable solution. Miltitz had been empowered to use force and chose compromise.
Around the countryside, in the city, and among the educated there was tremendous excitement. Nobles, magistrates, and the clergy; peasants, scholars and students alike knew this disputation was historic. Rules were made and those entrusted with recording the minutes of the debates were to submit their final document to the specified Universities for a verdict. This was an alliance of Church, State and certain universities favorable to the Roman church.
Luther and Karlstadt made their journey surrounded by 200 armed students and volunteers because they were journeying into 'hostile territory'. Even at the inn's and taverns on the way, there were armed gaurds stationed in ways to prevent violence. Eck debated Karlstadt in the first days. Eck was a much better debater and left Karlstadt at a loss, especially when he won a decision prohibiting Karlstadt from bringing his books and references. Eck beat him badly in the eyes of the traditionalists on the issue of the doctrine of justification by faith by making the point that it takes some kind of act of the will, from the conscience, to accept the grace of God through Jesus Christ. Then Eck and Luther met for their public disputation. Eck skillfully maneuvered Luther to admit that many of John Huss' doctrines were correct. That was all that was needed as far as the authorities were concerned for the inquisition of Luther to be stepped up.
Luther then wrote an account for the ordinary folk of his day. Humanists still saw him as a champion but the romance would be short-lived as Luther's anti-intellectual side eventually revealed itself. Erasmus and the humanists initially saw Luther as a champion of liberty against the obscurantists of scholasticism but eventually saw the Lutherans as foes of learning. Previous to this debate, Erasmus had written to the Elector Frederick that advised him to protect Luther because the inquisition against Luther was really a conservative conspiracy against humanistic learning. One good example of Luther's conservative attitude about renaissance learning is from hisTable Talk, saying "There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must needs invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth.".
Eventually, the Catholic church admitted many of its mistakes and now the right wing Protestant and non-denominational churches have taken over as the misguided voices who fight science. The divide between the present Catholic respect for science and the right wing of both Protestants and Muslims is wide and deep. Catholics are now the modernists while the Protestants remain the medievalists. An example is a conference in 2000 organized by the Templeton Foundation that barred creationists from their gathering. The conference discussed the place of science and religion in life but the organizers did not consider creationism as a scientific hypothesis. To defend their positions, in February of 2007 the foundation wrote a letter to both the Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal, declaring, "We do not believe that the science underpinning the intelligent-design movement is sound, we do not support research or programs that deny large areas of well-documented scientific knowledge, and the foundation is a nonpolitical entity and does not engage in or support political movements."
Continuing his attack on Luther in March of 1520, Eck traveled to Rome to impress upon the Pope the gravity of the situation. With the Pope's authority, Eck and Prierias crafted the Bull of Luther's excommunication in January which would be issued later on June 15, 1520. Prierias then published his Epitome of a Reply to Martin Luther in which he again defended the supreme autocratic authority of the Pope in all matters of the church. Luther then used Epitome against the Papacy by printing it himself, with his own introductions and comments, in order to prove exactly what he was talking about.
"First, when pressed by the temporal power, they have made decrees and said that the temporal power has no jurisdiction over them, but, on the other hand, that the spiritual is above the temporal power. Second, when the attempt is made to reprove them out of the Scriptures, they raise the objection that the interpretation of the Scriptures belongs to no one except the pope. Third, if threatened with a council, they answer with the fable that no one can call a council but the pope."
The first wall Luther mentions has its roots in decrees begun by the Emperor Constantine which decreed the support of the Holy Catholic Church and then created a separate court for the clergy run by and for the clergy. The way the church handled the pedophilia crisis is an example of this age-long claim of superiority and exemption from the law. This went on for centuries; only as the Renaissance approached did the civil government begin to gain capital in their alliance with the church. The peak of its power was probably around the beginning of the twelfth century. With nationalism, literacy, art, architecture, and science rising, the church was left with only trying to slow down the process of its loss of authority.
To bring down these protective walls Luther proposed, "On this account the Christian temporal power should exercise its office without let or hindrance, regardless whether it be pope, bishop or priest whom it affects; whoever is guilty, let him suffer. All that the canon law has said to the contrary is sheer invention of Roman presumption. For Thus saith St. Paul to all Christians: Roman 13:1, 4 "Let every soul (I take that to mean the pope's soul also) be subject unto the higher powers; for they bear not the sword in vain, but are the ministers of God for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well." St. Peter also says: 1 Peter 2:13, 15 "Submit yourselves unto every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, for so is the will of God" He has also prophesied that such men shall come as will despise the temporal authorities; and this has come to pass through the canon law." . . . . " Even the Council of Nicaea -- the most famous of all-was neither called nor confirmed by the Bishop of Rome, but by the Emperor Constantine,[27] and many other emperors after him did the like, yet these councils were the most Christian of all".. (SeeThe Rise of Church-State Alliances: 306-565CE)
In Luther's Letter to the German Nobility, he proposed, after regarding their lives of wealth, gluttony, and drunkenness instead of charity and piety, "Above all, we should drive out of German lands the papal legates with their "faculties," which they sell us for large sums of money, though that is sheer knavery. For example, in return for money they legalize unjust gains, dissolve oaths, vows and agreements, break and teach men to break the faith and fealty which they have pledged to one another; and they say the pope has the authority to do this. It is the evil Spirit who bids them say this. Thus they sell us a doctrine of devils, and take money for teaching us sin and leading us to hell." Christendom is a captive of Rome. Sheer knavery!
Luther wanted a national church that was free of Rome which would be centered at the See of Mainz. The Archbishopric, was home to the presiding officer of the Empire's electoral college, the Archbishop of Mainz. Mainz was the transalpine Holy See which had the most standing of all the Sees in Germany.
The second publication, coming out in October, was titled Prelude to the Babylonian Captivity of the Church In this work, Luther examined the Roman church's sacraments, declaring Confirmation, Marriage, 'Holy Orders', and Extreme Unction to be inventions of the church and were not scripturally supported. Luther trashed Mendicant orders ('Monkery') as wasteful and useless. On marriage He reminded people that we were warned in the scriptures that those who oppose marriage will come forth. (The assault on Marriage had started in 386 by Pope Siricius' decree forbidding not only marriage to the clergy, but sexual relations between the clergy and their wives.) To Luther the Pope was the anti-Christ and evil had been done when the cup was taken from the laity for the Lord's Supper. In Luther's view, only the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper were supported in the Bible.
In the Babylonian Captivity, Luther clearly defended a liberal view of marriage that trashes marriage doctrine going back as far as the Council of Elvira held in the first decade of the Fourth Century.
"The marriage of the ancients was no less sacred than ours, nor are those of unbelievers less true" ...."Just as I may eat, drink, walk ...and do business with a heathen, a Jew, a Turk, or a heretic, so also I may marry any of them" ...."Do not give heed to the fool's law which forbids this ... a heathen is just as much a man or a woman created by God as St. Peter, St. Paul, or St. Lucy."
Printing was around 75 years old and it had caused revolutions in thinking; first in the late Renaissance and now with its offspring, the Reformation. Now with Latin being translated and printed in German, printers kept selling out and printing more. Printers couldn't keep up with the Letter to the German Nobility. It put forth a whole new paradigm of church and state in Germany for Germany. With the power of the press, more people became involved and naturally, tract wars and debates erupted.
One such participant was the angry satirist Thomas Murner, a Franciscan monk and a sworn enemy of the reformations in both Germany and Switzerland. Although Murner was rational enough to side with Reuchlin during that controversy, he spun out wildly regarding Luther, Zwingli, and the reformers of Basel and Berne. Thinking he had a winning idea, he translated 'Baylonian Captivity' to German and printed it to be spread far and wide. Murner was thoroughly convinced the people would see the errors of Luther's ways but it backfired, bringing more conversions to the reformed side. The 'Babylonian Captivity' caused a great stir and lost some who sought compromises but as a whole it helped the reformation in moving forward. Many of Martin's friends and associates asked him to tone it down just as they did Ulrich von Hutten, who saw nationalism and religious revolution riding into battle side-by-side. Hutten was a near equal to Luther in his writing talents and both were well educated, using invectives and mockery in very colorful ways. This dual focus of religion and nationalistic social justice was not Luther's plan at all. He preferred a conservative approach, step by step, to include the magistrates as the way to bring the reformed party into poweer in Germany. This was the same strategy used by theSwiss Reformation's Ulrich Zwingli during this same period.
With the Babylonian Captivity, "He thereby aroused a fiercer storm than by any possible attack on open and apparent abuses. Glapion, the father confessor of Charles V., who up to this point had been in favor of conciliation, declared that he felt now as though he had been scourged and pummeled from head to foot. Erasmus of Rotterdam, too, anxious as he was to reform certain abuses, turned coldly away and definitely declared for the old doctrines; while no less a person than Henry VIII. of England took up his royal pen against the bold iconoclast, and wielded it with such effect that he gained from the church the title of " Defender of the Faith." (From A Short History of Germany, page 273 By Ernest Flagg Henderson)
In November, Luther published a Treatise titled Concerning Christian Liberty. With the copy he sent to Pope Leo X, he included a Letter to the Pontiff. Needless to say, none of these writings went over very well in Catholic circles. The Catholic Historian James Macaffrey sums up the Catholic point of view in Chapter Two of hisHistory of the Catholic Church: "In his Address to the Nobles of Germany, in his works On the Mass, On the Improvement of Christian Morality, and On the Babylonian Captivity, he proclaimed himself a political as well as a religious revolutionary. There was no longer any concealment or equivocation. The veil was lifted at last, and Luther stood forth to the world as the declared enemy of the Church and the Pope, the champion of the Bible as the sole rule of faith, and the defender of individual judgment as its only interpreter. In these works he rejected the Mass, Transubstantiation, vows of chastity, pilgrimages, fasts, the Sacraments, the powers of the priesthood, and the jurisdiction and supremacy of the Pope. With such a man there could be no longer any question of leniency or of compromise. The issues at stake, namely, whether the wild and impassioned assertions of a rebel monk should be accepted in preference to the teaching of Christ’s Church, ought to have been apparent to every thinking man; and yet so blinded were some of his contemporaries by their sympathy with the Humanists as against the Theologians, that even still they forced themselves to believe Luther sought only for reform."
Finally, if Luther and his band were willing to quit disturbing the peace of the church, they must have legal documents to prove this. Church and State allied in seeking books to burn and also prohibiting freedoms of the press, speech and conscience. The new Emperor had been distracted by problems in Spain and had not made his trip to Germany yet - but while in the Netherlands, Aleandro caught up with him and convinced him to put his full imperial weight behind the Papal Bull. Luther was now under the ban and condemned in all of Charles hereditary domains. The Holy Roman Empire of Germany was another matter entirely. The emperor promised Elector Frederick that no German would be condemned without a German trial. On top of that restriction, the German Diet wrote to Charles and required that any decree he made would have to pass muster before them before it was promulgated and enacted.
Eventually, after receiving the Exsurge Domine Bull on October 10, Luther replied with his fiery Against the Execrable Bull of the Antichrist. Luther was certain, and rightly so, that the Bull was authored by "that man of lies, dissimulation, errors, and heresy, that monster John Eck. The suspicion was further increased when it was said that Eck was the apostle of the bull. Indeed the sty1e and the spittle all point to Eck. True, it is not impossible that where Eck is the apostle there one should find the kingdom of Antichrist. . . I call upon you to renounce your diabolical blasphemy and audacious impiety, and, if you will not, we shall all hold your seat as possessed and oppressed by Satan, the damned seat of Antichrist.."
In April of 1520 Hutten eagerly joined the tract war by publishing the first of two 'Gesprache' or 'Verse Dialogues'. In it, he raged "Against the poison which exudes from the heart of the Pope there is no antidote; his protecting shield is a sure refuge when all other forms of imposture — stratagem, deceit, trickery, cunning, and artifice — have failed. The Pope is a bandit chief, and his gang bears the name of the Church. . . Rome is a sea of impurity, a mire of filth, a bottomless sink of iniquity: should we not flock from all quarters to compass the destruction of this common curse of humanity? Should we not set all our sail, saddle all our horses, let loose sword and fire?"
In the Summer of 1520, Karlstadt published 'De Canonics Scripturis Libellus'. In it he claimed Scriptural authority to be superior over Popes, councils and traditions. The scriptural authority of the Gospels stood above that of the Epistles of St. Paul. Karlstadt also expressed serious doubts about Moses' generally accepted authorship of the Pentateuch. This revolutionary thinker also claimed the Gospels' authority had been tainted by man's hand over time. With these critiques, Karlstadt raised the issue of fallibility regarding scripture, the Papacy and the councils. But critical thinking had its limits here, too. He then weakened his argument by accepting the authenticity and authority of Biblical books according to early traditions.
Unlike Karlstadt's model which gave the highest scriptural authority to the Gospels, Luther's reformation became Pauline, hence Augustine and predestinarian, with a steady dose of guilt and that that old-time religious wrath. The young John Calvin, in university studies at this very time, will in a the coming years become a great predestinarian evangelist reformer in Geneva. His brand of the reformation would become the religion of the Scotts and would eventually wield a mighty influence during the five decades reign of Queen Elizabeth I. The religious settlers of Plymouth, Massachusetts in 1620 were predestinarians who had come into bad favor with the Church of England over 'icons and pomp'. To these folk, the Anglican church had changed very little from the church it replaced as national church. These Puritans were seeking true reform; strip the churches, remove the idols and altar, paint the walls over, pass the cup to the laity. It was King Henry VIII's intention to keep the church as it was but to kick Rome out of it. Nationalism was one of the engines driving religious revolt. In the late 1530's Henry VIII did exactly what Luther, Hutten, and Zwingli did; the government takeover of churches and monasteries. This was a nationalist endeavor to rid the nations of Papal interferences. Behind the state's primacy in the church-state alliance were the beliefs of the chief theologians of course. This was a change of roles in the church-state relationships since the times ofPope Gregory I but the results were the same; discrimination and persecution for the infidels. Down south in Zwingli's Swiss Reformation at Zurich, the state would run the churches and pay the salaries of the clergy. Fueling both social and religious revolt, the lack of national sovereignty was becoming a highly charged matter for Germany, Switzerland and England.
Martin didn't read the Bull until October, but had already made his intentions known in a July 10 letter to Spalatan after rumors flew about. "My die is cast; I despise the fury and favor of Rome; I will never be reconciled to them nor commune with them. Let them condemn and burn my books. On my side, unless all the fire goes out, I will condemn and publicly burn the whole papal law, that swamp of heresies". See Preserved Smith's Life and Letters of Martin Luther. On the July 18 students at Erfurt ripped up every copy of the Bull they could find and threw them in the mud or the river. Erfurt's University officials ignored the matter. At Leipzig's university much of the same happened.
On December 10, Melanchthon posted an invitation to students and colleagues to watch Luther burn the Bull. "Let whosoever adheres to the truth of the gospel be present at nine o'clock at the church of the Holy Cross outside the walls, where the impious books of papal decrees and scholastic theology will be burnt according to ancient and apostolic usage, inasmuch as the boldness of the enemies of the gospel has waxed so great that they daily burn the evangelic books of Luther. Come, pious and zealous youth, to this pious and religious spectacle, for perchance now is the time when the Antichrist must be revealed!" (See Smith Life and Letters)In the evening after a pyre had been built outside the city but near the Elster Gate, Melanchthon lit the fires and Luther proceeded to burn the entire Canon Law, Papal decretals and the Bull. Students joined in by burning books by the scholastics they found abominable. And a good time was had by all as the fire burned well into the evening. The church then had no choice but to carry through with threats of excommunication. I am sure the German beer at the bonfire was enjoyed by all.
Well into the first year after Emperor Maximilian's death, Charles finally made the trip to Germany to be crowned King of the Romans on October 23 at the Imperial Cathedral in Aachen, Charlemagne's capital from 792-814. This beautiful cathedral hosted the coronations of thirty Kings and twelve Queens beginning in 936. In becoming King or Queen, each and every monarch fortified the alliance of church and state by reciting a coronation oath of allegiance to the Holy Catholic Church. An institution in place since late antiquity and first banned in the United States by the third clause of Article VI of the Constitution, it was administered by the the Prince-Elector and Archbishop of Cologne:
"Will you hold and guard by all proper means the sacred faith as handed down to Catholic men?"
"I will."
"Will you be the faithful shield and protector of Holy Church and her servants?"
"I will"
"Will you uphold and recover those rights of the realm and possessions of the Empire that have been unlawfully usurped?"
"I will."
"Will you protect the poor, the fatherless, and the widowed?"
"I will."
"Will you pay due submission to the Roman Pontiff and the Holy Roman Church?"
"I will."
When the Diet of Worms was ordered, Ulrich von Hutten was still in hiding but he still planned to impact both ecclesiastic and secular dignitaries of the Diet. The Wurtenburg prince had been deposed back in 1518 and at this time he was hiding in Sickingen's Castle Ebernburg. The future Strasbourg reformer Martin Bucerwas also in attendance. All eyes were turned towards Worms. In Hutten's first communication to them he wrote,
"I will convince those who do not now approve by perpetual admonitions. I have no fear of the consequences, but am determined either to ruin you or to perish with a good conscience. So long as you persecute Luther and his followers I proclaim myself your implacable foe. You may take my life, but you cannot blot out my services to my country. You may arrest what is in progress, but you cannot undo what is done, nor extinguish the memory of a life with the life itself. They will gain nothing by putting Luther down./If this movement is quelled another will arise. For it does not all depend on two men: know that there are many Luthers and many Huttens. And if anything happen to us it will be all the worse for you, for then the champions of liberty will combine with the avengers of innocence." (See Ulrich von Hutten by David Friedrich Strauss.) Furthermore, spies of the state were monitoring the German press, ready to shut them down quickly by coercion if they should publish heretical tracts.
Hutten had also written Elector Frederick, advising that a secular takeover of the churches would provide a great deal of capital for the people of Germany instead of filling the coffers of Rome. Liberty from Rome must be achieved! This secularization of church property was eventually common in all the lands that went the way of the Reformation. Hutten expressed the question posed by millions of Europeans: "Why does the Pope live better than any King? . . Its time to end the appropriation of German benefices by Italian clergy. . . [the] Swarm of Vermin holding sinecures in Rome, while doing nothing, and living on German money."
Swiss reformers and nationalists shared the same sentiments. Writing in the Letter to German Nobility: Part II: Abuses to Be Discussed in Councils Luther asks,"How comes it that we Germans must put up with such robbery and such extortion of our property, at the hands of the pope? If the Kingdom of France has prevented it, why do we Germans let them make such fools and apes of us? It would all be more bearable if in this way they only stole our property; but they lay waste the churches and rob Christ's sheep of their pious shepherds, and destroy the worship and the Word of God. Even if there were not a single cardinal, the Church would not go under. As it is they do nothing for the good of Christendom; they only wrangle about the incomes of bishoprics and prelacies, and that any robber could do."
When they finally reached the issue of Luther's heresies on February 13, Aleandro proceeded to present the papacy's case against Luther's outlawry from his denial of all but two of the sacraments. After a three hour speech, the Diet wasn't convinced and insisted upon Luther being summoned to speak for himself. Although the emperor and the church wished to condemn him outright, the Diet's insistence and the Emperor's promise to Elector Frederick carried the day. On top of that bruising, Aleandro was no longer safe in public, claiming that 90% of Germans were angry at the authorities and the other 10% screamed "death to the Papacy!". In such a stressful climate, many officials of the Papacy feared for their own safety so they changed their attire while in public. Leaders of church and state began to fear a violent uprising against the clergy. This fear was warranted because Hutten and the knight Sickingen actually conspired to kidnap Aleandro. There were no police departments in those days do people were always vulnerable. After Aleandro's speech, Hutten's fury and invective only increased. In early March Aleandro was again allowed to speak and urged to the Diet to condemn Luther because he not only attacked the sacraments but repeated the Hussite heresy. This speech was really a repeat of his three hour harangue in February. Aleandro obtained his first positive results when the Universities of Cologne, Louvaine and Paris (the Sorbonne) condemned Luther the day before he finally arrived. The theological faculties of these universities branded Luther "as an arch-heretic who had renewed and intensified the blasphemous errors of the Manichaeans, Hussites, Beghards, Cathari, Waldenses, Ebionites, Arians, etc, and who should be destroyed by fire rather than refuted by arguments." (See Philip Schaff)
Finally, after plenty of political and ecclesiastical wrangling, the emperor sent a letter to Luther on March 3 to appear before the diet within twenty-one days. The emperor granted him safe conduct, telling him that he had no reason to fear. While Elector Frederick and Landgrave Philip of Hesse also added their letters for their own domains. The Landgrave was also a confidant and friend of Ulrich Zwingli, the leader of Switzerland's religious revolt. Previously, on January 3, 1521, three weeks before the Diet convened, a Bull of Excommunication titled Decet Pontificum Romanum had been prepared by the hand of Aleandro by order of the Pope. Aleandro had already convinced Charles to proclaim the Papal Bull as the law of the land in his hereditary domains in Spain and the low countries and here was his chance to extend the ban on Luther. But in the Holy Roman Empire, imperial decrees had to pass through the scrutiny of the imperial Diet which was quick to remind the twenty year old Charles of this. Aleandro expected eventual condemnation throughout the empire but he soon became disillusioned with Charles as he took his time. The Emperor was also notified by the Diet that no edict can be published without the Diet's ratification.
With the promise of safe-conduct, Luther agreed to present himself before the Diet regarding his doctrines. Many of his friends opposed the trip as a trap, reminding him of Emperor Sigismund's broken promise of safe-conduct to Johann Huss. Huss and then Jerome of Prague were tried by the Council of Constance and executed by the state at the burning stake. Luther's friends were suspicious and for sound reasons; Aleandro was already at work trying to persuade the authorities, including Elector Frederick to break the promise. With no police forces during the middle ages, murder rates were at least ten times what modern societies have to contend with. With no police force, all the religon in the world could not keep people safe. Also at this time at this time, Adrian of Utrecht, Cardinal of Tortosa, Spain, and tutor of Charles in his minority, begged Charles to break the safe-conduct promise, arrest Luther and pack him off to Rome for trial.
Many princes and nobles in the Diet were also interested in addressing Papal abuses in Germany. Called Centum Gravamina, the document laid out the multiple abuses of the Roman church. Even the fervent Catholic Duke George appealed to Charles for an airing of these grievances but the Emperor refused to mix the issues even though he agreed with some of the complaints. That would have to be addressed at another time.
LUTHER LEAVES FOR WORMS
Although feeling ill at the time, Luther left for Worms on April 2. On the way thru Erfurt he was given a heroes welcome and celebrations ensued. German beer for everyone! Although his caravan being led by an imperial herald and marshal, he preached and was hailed as a savior of the faith in towns along the way. When Luther arrived on the 16th, Spalatin was waiting for him on the outskirts of town. Fearing for Luther's life, he begged him to return to Wittenberg. Luther was steadfast. Then a band of knights rode out to the outskirts to meet and escort him safely to his quarters in Worms. According to Aleandro's account, Luther was immediately welcomed and surrounded by two thousand curious and excited onlookers.On April 17, Luther presented himself before church and state; the Diet, the Emperor, electors, nobles, burghers, magistrates, and prelates. Several thousand excited people filled the building, the surroundings and the streets. The English Ambassador Tonstall who was there wrote, "the Germans everywhere are so addicted to Luther, that, rather than he should be oppressed by the Pope’s authority, a hundred thousand of the people will sacrifice their lives." See History of the reformation in Germany by Leopold von Ranke.
Another Johann Eck, a lawyer who is an official of the Elector and Archbishop of Treves (also Trier) was under the orders of the Pope to manage Luther's prosecution and conviction. He began by asking Luther if the books on the table were his and did he stand by their teachings? Wisely, Luther asked for a day to prepare his defense and the Diet had no problem with that and Charles granted him a day so Luther retired to his quarters. In the evening, Luther received a message of support from Hutten and some Diet members secretly visited to encourage him. Others pleaded with him to make peace with the church but Luther stood his ground. The elderly Duke Eric of Brunswick brought him a large pitcher Eimbeck beer, a popular lite beer of the day. Landgrave Philip of Hesse came by to cheer him up. The next day, the hall was bursting with people eager to see history in the making; none took their seats as all looked to the staging area. The people, rich and poor, knew this was a momentous and revolutionary event. The question was asked once again; are these your works and will you repudiate them in wholly or partly? (Please excuse the lack of brevity here) Luther opened, "Most Serene Lord Emperor, Most Illustrious Princes, Most Gracious Lords . . . I beseech you to grant a gracious hearing to my plea, which, I trust, will be a plea of justice and truth; and if through my inexperience I neglect to give to any their proper titles or in any way offend against the etiquette of the court in my manners or behavior, be kind enough to forgive me, I beg, since I am a man who has spent his life not in courts but in the cells of a monastery; a man who can say of himself only this, that to this day I have thought and written in simplicity of heart, solely with a view to the glory of God and the pure instruction of Christ's faithful people....Your Imperial Majesty and Your Lordships: I ask you to observe that my books are not all of the same kind."
"There are some in which I have dealt with piety in faith and morals with such simplicity and so agreeably with the Gospels that my adversaries themselves are compelled to admit them useful, harmless, and clearly worth reading by a Christian. Even the Bull, harsh and cruel though it is, makes some of my books harmless, although it condemns them also, by a judgment downright monstrous. If I should begin to recant here, what, I beseech you, would I be doing but condemning alone among mortals, that truth which is admitted by friends and foes alike, in an unaided struggle against universal consent?"
"The second kind consists in those writings leveled against the papacy and the doctrine of the papists, as against those who by their wicked doctrines and precedents have laid waste Christendom by doing harm to the souls and the bodies of men. No one can either deny or conceal this, for universal experience and world-wide grievances are witnesses to the fact that through the Pope's laws and through man-made teachings the consciences of the faithful have been most pitifully ensnared, troubled, and racked in torment, and also that their goods and possessions have been devoured (especially amongst this famous German nation) by unbelievable tyranny, and are to this day being devoured without end in shameful fashion; and that thought they themselves by their own laws take care to provide that the Pope's laws and doctrines which are contrary to the Gospel or the teachings of the Fathers are to be considered as erroneous and reprobate. If then I recant these, the only effect will be to add strength to such tyranny, to open not the windows but the main doors to such blasphemy, which will thereupon stalk farther and more widely than it has hitherto dared. . . ."
"The third kind consists of those books which I have written against private individuals, so-called; against those, that is, who have exerted themselves in defense of the Roman tyranny and to the overthrow of that piety which I have taught. I confess that I have been more harsh against them than befits my religious vows and my profession. For I do not make myself out to be any kind of saint, nor am I now contending about my conduct but about Christian doctrine. But it is not in my power to recant them, because that recantation would give that tyranny and blasphemy and occasion to lord it over those whom I defend and to rage against God's people more violently than ever."
"However, since I am a man and not God, I cannot provide my writings with any other defense than that which my Lord Jesus Christ provided for His teaching. When He had been interrogated concerning His teaching before Annas and had received a buffet from a servant, He said: "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil." If the Lord Himself, who knew that He could not err, did not refuse to listen to witness against His teaching, even from a worthless slave, how much more ought I, scum that I am, capable of naught but error, to seek and to wait for any who may wish to bear witness against my teaching."
"And so, through the mercy of God, I ask Your Imperial Majesty, and Your Illustrious Lordships, or anyone of any degree, to defeat them by the writings of the Prophets or by the Gospels; for I shall be most ready, if I be better instructed, to recant any error, and I shall be the first in casting my writings into the fire. I have been reminded of the dissensions which my teaching engenders. I can only answer in the words of our Lord. 'I came not to bring peace but a sword.' If our God is so severe, let us beware less we release a deluge of wars, lest the reign of our noble youth, Charles, be inauspicious. Take warning from the examples of Pharoah, the King of Babylon, and the kings of Israel. God is who confounds the wise. I must walk in the fear of the Lord. I say this not to chide but because I cannot escape my duty to my Germans. I commend myself to your Majesty. May you not suffer my adversaries to make you ill disposed to me without cause. I have spoken."
The able prosecutor Eck pounced right away. "Martin, you have not sufficiently distinguished your works. The earlier were bad and the latter worse. Your plea to be heard from the Scripture is the one always made by heretics. You do nothing but renew the errors of Wyclif and Hus. How will the Jews, how will the Turks, exult to hear Christians discussing whether they have been wrong all these years! Martin, how can you assume that you are the only one to understand the sense of Scripture? Would you put your judgment above that of so many famous men and claim that you know more than they all? You have no right to call into question the most holy orthodox faith, instituted by Christ the perfect lawgiver, proclaimed throughout the world by the apostles, sealed by the red blood of martyrs, confirmed by the sacred councils, defined by the Church in which all our fathers believed until death and gave us as an inheritance, and which now we are forbidden by the pope and the emperor to discuss lest there be no end of debate. I ask you, Martin--answer candidly and without horns--do you or do you not repudiate your books and the errors which they contain?"
Luther was also ready, making a clear and rational argument; a case for scriptural supremacy and a right to private judgment. This was similar to the Anabaptist belief in which a person had the right to interpret scripture 'according to his own light'. This was an earth shaking step towards the liberties of conscience.
"Your Imperial Majesty and Your Lordships demand a simple answer. Here it is, plain and unvarnished. Unless I am convicted of error by the testimony of Scripture or (since I put no trust in the unsupported authority of Pope or councils, since it is plain that they have often erred and often contradicted themselves) by manifest reasoning, I stand convicted [convinced] by the Scriptures to which I have appealed, and my conscience is taken captive by God's word, I cannot and will not recant anything, for to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us. On this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen." )From Luther's Account.)
Charles believed having a freedom to interpret the scriptures would erode social order. This kind of thinking goes way back. The fourth century Christian historian Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, praised Constantine's monarchal type of government as being superior to the 'anarchy and chaos' of democracy. Several Christian emperors of late antiquity outlawed discussion of controversial religious ideas. Constantine and Theodosius the Great with the Arianists; Marcianus and Leo with the Monophysites Christologies. See The Rise of Church-State Alliances 306-565: Imperial Decrees and Church Councils: Emperors Constantine through Justinian. Before anyone made anymore headway in the discussion at Worms, the Emperor jumped in and claimed that since Luther denied the legitimacy of councils, he had heard enough. This line of thought horrified the devoutly Catholic Emperor who was just out of his teenage years. Elector Frederick marveled on 'how excellent' Martin handled the situation but that "Martin’s cause is in a bad state: he will be persecuted; not only Annas and Caiaphas, but also Pilate and Herod, are against him."
That evening the elements of resistance made their appearance under the cover of darkness. Signs were posted all about and on the roads bearing the peasant's clog, the symbol of peasant revolution and social justice. One placard at the town hall threatened the use of 400 knights and 8000 soldiers against the enemies of Luther. In the Emperor's quarters a note was found with the passage from Ecclesiastes 10:16, "Woe to the nation whose king is a child". This truly frightened both civil and ecclesiastic authorities because there had been several violent but short-lived peasant revolts in the region's recent past.
Not only was the young, devoted Catholic emperor disturbed by Luther's rejection of the legitimacy of church councils and most of the sacraments, he was clearly shaken by the prospect of a violent peasant uprising. But shrink he did not. Charles then met with the Electors and presented his own hand written declaration of faith.
"I am descended from a long line of Christian emperors of this noble German nation, and of the Catholic kings of Spain, the archdukes of Austria, and the dukes of Burgundy. They were all faithful to the death to the Church of Rome, and they defended the Catholic faith and the honor of God. I have resolved to follow in their steps. A single friar who goes counter to all Christianity for a thousand years must be wrong. Therefore I am resolved to stake my lands, my friends, my body, my blood, my life, and my soul. Not only I, but you of this noble German nation, would be forever disgraced if by our negligence not only heresy but the very suspicion of heresy were to survive. After having heard yesterday the obstinate defense of Luther, I regret that I have so long delayed in proceeding against him and his false teaching. I will have no more to do with him. . . . I will proceed against him as a notorious heretic, and ask you to declare yourselves as you promised me". (See Here I Stand, Roland Bainton)
Four of the six Electors agreed to declare with Charles. Saxony Elector Frederick the Wise and the moderate Elector Ludwig of the Palatinate abstained. Charles was determined to stand up to the threats to the Catholic faith and to wipe out Luther's revival of the Bohemian heresy. The fear was warranted because revolution was in the air. War was in the making as social and religious causes would soon combine first in the Knights war of 1522 and then with the horrific, incomprehensible, and inhumane violence on both sides with the Peasants War of 1524. The toll was 100,000 dead in a year. Here was a violent social justice movement mixed with German nationalism and religion against the capitalists, the nobles, the monarchy, and the clergy. This socialist uprising of the people against their oppressive leaders occurred three centuries before Karl Marx flirted on and off with violent proletarian uprisings. (See the Twelve Articles of the Peasants of 1524 for an idea of what the peasants were concerned with.)
Due to the potentially dangerous state of affairs in both the cities and the countryside, Charles appointed a committee to resolve the problem. Luther met with the secular and religious authorities into the first week of May. As could be expected, the impatient and conniving legate Aleandro protested the delay in condemning Luther. His job was to obtain condemnation by any means and as fast as possible. Nothing was achieved so Martin asked permission of the Emperor to leave the Diet. There was to be no recantation. Charles gave him a letter of safe conduct, with a strict prohibition of preaching or writing on the way home. After all,he would be in an entourage under the protection of an imperial marshal and his personnel. Aleandro had previously tried to convince Elector Frederick to apprehend Luther and turn him in; Cardinal Adrian of Utrecht (also the next Pope), the Emperor's childhood tutor and future Pope, worked to convince Charles to break his promise. Aleandro now believed Luther would try to escape to Bohemia so agents of the papacy were placed at the borders. But Emperor Charles V refused to repeat the behavior of Emperor Sigismund at the Council of Constance when he broke his sacred promise of safe conduct to reformer John Huss, which led to his burning at the stake. Jerome of Prague followed him to his death soon afterward.
And so Martin Luther left the Diet of Worms. But before Luther's departure from Worms, Frederick convinced a reluctant Luther to let his soldiers snatch him away to a secret location as he was en route with the imperial herald and retinue to Wittenberg. Frederick's men then feigned an ambush and covertly took Luther to one of Frederick's castles in Wartburg. Frederick didn't even want to know where he will be taken at first which probably means Luther didn't know either. When ambushed on the way, Luther himself would not know if he was safe because the plans were known by only a select few.
NEXT: Coming Soon: Part 2: From the Wartburg Castle and the Edict of Worms to the Protestant Alliances of Church and State.
No comments:
Post a Comment