![\"Luther-29\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2017\/11\/Luther-29.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
(6-11-08)<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s briefly review the relevant timeline and background for these events. Martin Luther tacked up his\u00a095 Theses\u00a0in Wittenberg, Saxony on\u00a031 October 1517. This is almost universally considered the beginning of the Protestant \u201cReformation\u201d. The papal bull\u00a0Exsurge Domine<\/em>\u00a0was issued by Pope Leo X on\u00a015 June 1520, and demanded that Luther retract 41 errors: some from the 95 Theses, and others from subsequent works.<\/p>\n Luther completed his treatise,\u00a0To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation<\/em>\u00a0by\u00a023 June 1520. It was published in Wittenberg on\u00a018 August 1520.\u00a0The Babylonian Captivity of the Church<\/em>\u00a0was published on\u00a06 October 1520.<\/p>\n Exsurge Domine<\/em>\u00a0reached Luther on\u00a010 October 1520.\u00a0The Freedom of a Christian<\/em>\u00a0was published in\u00a0early November 1520. Luther was given sixty days, until\u00a010 December 1520 to recant. Of course he did not, and instead burned the bull along with the Canon Law, in Wittenberg, on this very day. Thus, he was excommunicated in the bull\u00a0Decet Romanum Pontificem<\/i>\u00a0on\u00a03 January 1521. Luther appeared at the\u00a0Diet of Worms\u00a0on\u00a016-17 April 1521\u00a0(the famous \u201cHere I stand\u201d speech). The Edict of Worms was issued on\u00a025 May 1521\u00a0by Emperor Charles V. Luther was declared an outlaw and heretic, and his writings were banned.<\/p>\n It is understood that a distinction has often been made (by Luther and other Protestants) between the man and the office of the papacy to some extent. Catholics respect the office, and usually, the men who occupy it, though not the relatively few\u00a0\u201cbad popes\u201d\u00a0who besmirched and scandalized it. For Luther it was roughly the opposite: he disrespected the\u00a0office\u00a0of the papacy as the \u201cAntichrist\u201d but seems to have had a measure of respect for the man\u00a0Leo X\u00a0who occupied it from\u00a08 March 1513\u00a0till his death on\u00a01 December 1521. Or\u00a0did\u00a0he? I leave the judgment and interpretation of the anomalies in his utterances on the subject below to my readers.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Blue<\/span>\u00a0highlighting indicates a \u201cCatholic-sounding\u201d Luther;\u00a0red<\/span>\u00a0indicates the Protestant protester.<\/p>\n * * * * *<\/p>\n To Pope Leo X: 30 May 1518<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [from:\u00a0The Letters of Martin Luther<\/em>, Margaret A. Currie, London: Macmillan & Co., 1908, 28-31]<\/p>\n Martin Luther, Augustinian monk,\u00a0desires everlasting salvation to the Most Holy Father, Leo X<\/span>. I know,\u00a0most holy father<\/span>, that evil reports are being spread about me, some friends having vilified me to\u00a0your Holiness<\/span>, as if I were trying to\u00a0belittle the power of the Keys and of the Supreme Pontiff<\/span>, therefore I am being accused of being a heretic, a renegade, and a thousand other ill names are being hurled at me, enough to make my ears tingle and my eyes start in my head, but my one source of confidence is an innocent conscience. But all this is nothing new, for I am decorated with such marks of distinction in our own land, by those honourable and straightforward people who are themselves afflicted with the worst of consciences. But,\u00a0most holy father<\/span>, I must hasten to the point,\u00a0hoping your Holiness<\/span> will graciously listen to me, for I am as awkward as a child.<\/p>\n Some time ago the preaching of the apostolic jubilee of the Indulgences was begun, and soon made such headway that these preachers thought they could say what they wished, under\u00a0the shelter of your Holiness\u2019s name<\/span>, alarming the people at such malicious, heretical lies being proclaimed to the derision of the spiritual powers. And, not satisfied with pouring out their venom, they have disseminated the little book in which their malicious lies are confirmed, binding the father confessors by oath to inculcate those lies upon their people. I shall not enlarge upon the disgraceful greed, which can never be satisfied, with which every syllable of this tiny book reeks. This is true, and no one can shut his eyes to the scandal, for it is manifest in the book. And they continue to lead the people captive with their vain consolation, plucking, as the prophet Micah says, \u201d their skin from off them, and their flesh from off\u201d their bones,\u201d while they wallow in abundance themselves. They use\u00a0your Holiness\u2019s name<\/span>\u00a0to allay the uproar they cause, and threaten them with fire and sword, and the ignominy of being called heretics ; nay, one can scarcely believe the wiles they use to cause confusion among the people. Complaints are universal as to the greed of the priests, while\u00a0the power of the Keys and the Pope is being evil spoken of in Germany. And when I heard of such things I burned with zeal for the honour of Christ<\/span>, or, if some will have it so, the young blood within me boiled ; and yet I felt it did not behove me to do anything in the matter except to\u00a0draw the attention of some prelates to the abuses<\/span>. Some acted upon the hint, but others derided it, and interpreted it in various ways. For the dread of\u00a0your Holiness\u2019s name<\/span>, and the threat of being placed under the ban, was all-powerful. At length I thought it best not to be harsh, but oppose them by throwing doubts upon their doctrines, preparatory to a disputation upon them.\u00a0So I threw down the gauntlet to the learned by issuing my theses<\/span>, and asking them to discuss them, either by word of mouth, or in writing, which is a well- known fact.<\/p>\n From this,\u00a0most holy father<\/span>, has\u00a0such a fire been kindled, that, to judge from the hue and cry, one would think the whole world had been set ablaze.<\/span> And perhaps this is because I, through\u00a0your Holiness\u2019s apostolic authority<\/span>, am a doctor of theology and they do not wish to admit that I am entitled, according to the usage of all universities in Christendom, openly to discuss, not only Indulgences, but many higher doctrines, such as Divine Power, Forgiveness, and Mercy. Now, what shall I do?\u00a0I cannot retract, and I see what jealousy and hatred I have roused through the explanation of my theses.<\/span> Besides, I am most unwilling to leave my corner only to hear harsh judgments against myself, but also because I am a stupid dunderhead in this learned age, and too ignorant to deal with such weighty matters. For, in these golden times, when the number of the learned is daily increasing, and arts and sciences are flourishing, not to speak of the Greek and Hebrew tongues, so that even a Cicero were he now alive would creep into a corner, although he never feared light and publicity, sheer necessity alone drives me to cackle as a goose among swans. So, to reconcile my opponents if possible, and satisfy the expectations of many, I let in the light of day upon my thoughts, which you can see in\u00a0my explanation of my propositions on Indulgences<\/span>. I made them public that I might have the protection of\u00a0your Holiness\u2019s name, and find refuge beneath the shadow of your wings. So all may see from this\u00a0how I esteem the spiritual power, and honour the dignity of the Keys.<\/span> For, if I were such as they say, and had not held a public discussion on the subject, which every doctor is entitled to do, then assuredly his Serene Highness Frederick, Elector of Saxony, who is an ardent lover of Christian and apostolic truth, would not have suffered such a dangerous person in his University of Wittenberg. And also, the beloved and learned doctors and magisters of our University, who cleave firmly to our religion, would certainly have expelled me from their midst. And\u00a0is it not strange that my enemies not only try to convict me of sin and put me to shame, but also the Elector, and the whole University?<\/span>\u00a0Therefore, most holy father, I prostrate myself at your feet, placing myself and all I am and have at your disposal, to be dealt with as you see fit. My cause hangs on the will of your Holiness, by whose verdict I shall either save or lose my life. Come what may, I shall recognise the voice of your Holiness to be that of Christ, speaking through you.\u00a0<\/span>If I merit death, I do not refuse to die, for \u201d the earth is the Lord\u2019s,\u201d and all that is therein, to whom be praise to all eternity ! Amen. May He preserve your Holiness to life eternal.<\/p>\n To Johann von Staupitz: 30 May 1518<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [In Currie,\u00a027]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n I beseech you to forward my poor \u201cResolutiones\u201d to the\u00a0good Pope Leo X<\/span>., so that they may plead my cause with\u00a0His Holiness<\/span>, against the wicked intrigues of evil-disposed persons . . .\u00a0I expect to receive Christ\u2019s verdict through the Papal throne.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n [From: Preserved Smith,\u00a0The Life and Letters of Martin Luther<\/em>, Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2nd edition, 1914, 52-53]<\/p>\n I confess, as I have before confessed, that\u00a0I was assuredly unwise and too bitter, and too irreverent to the name of the Pope\u00a0. . .<\/span><\/p>\n I humbly implore your Reverence to deign to refer this case to our Most Holy Lord Leo X, that these doubts may be settled by the Church, so that he may either compel a just withdrawal of my propositions or else their just affirmation. I wish only to follow the Church\u00a0. . .<\/span><\/p>\n To Wenceslaus Link: December 11, 1518<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [From:\u00a0Henry O\u2019Connor, S. J.:\u00a0Luther\u2019s Own Statements Concerning His Teaching and Its Results<\/em>, New York: Benzinger Brothers, 1884, second edition, 9; primary source: De Wette, I, 193]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n 12th Proposition Directed Against Johann Eck: Late 1518<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n [Smith, 59]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n The assertion that the Roman Church is superior to all other Churches is proved only by weak and vain (frigidis<\/em>) papal decrees of the last four hundred years, against which militate the accredited history of eleven hundred years, the Bible, and the decree of the Nicene Council, the holiest of all councils.<\/span><\/p>\n To the Elector Frederick of Saxony:\u00a0January 5 or 6, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Currie, 39-41]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n In addition, I shall issue a pamphlet\u00a0exhorting the people to cleave to the Roman Church, and be obedient and respectful, and not consider this writing as tending to disgrace the Holy Roman Church, but rather to exalt her.<\/span> . . .\u00a0But I fear the Pope will not put up with a judge, and I, too, will not put up with the Pope\u2019s verdict.<\/span><\/p>\n [Smith, 55]<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Charles von Miltitz yesterday pointed out with care\u00a0the crimes I had committed against the Roman Church, and I humbly promised to make what amends I could\u00a0. . .<\/span><\/p>\n First,\u00a0I agreed to let the matter alone henceforth<\/span>, until it bleeds to death by itself, provided my opponents also keep silence . . .<\/p>\n Secondly, I agreed to write to\u00a0his Holiness the Pope, humbly submitting and recognizing that I had been too hot and hasty, though I never meant to do aught against the Holy Roman Church<\/span>,\u00a0but only as her true son to attack the scandalous preaching whereby she is made a mockery, a byword, a stumbling-block, and an offence to the people.<\/span><\/p>\n Thirdly, I promised to send out a paper\u00a0admonishing every one to follow the Roman Church, obey and honor her, and explaining that my writings were not to be understood in a sense damaging to her\u00a0. . .<\/span><\/p>\n But I fear the Pope will allow no other judge but himself, nor can I tolerate his judgment; if the present plan fails, we shall have to go through the farce of the Pope writing a text and my writing the commentary.<\/span> That would do no good.<\/p>\n To the Elector Frederick of Saxony:\u00a0January 6 or 7, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Smith, 56-57]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Miltitz will write to the Pope at once, informing him how things stand, and asking him to\u00a0recommend the matter to some learned bishop, who will hear and point out the errors I am to recant. For when I have learned my mistakes, I will gladly withdraw them, and do nothing to impair the honor and power of the Roman Church.<\/span><\/p>\n [Currie, 42]<\/p>\n But from henceforth\u00a0I must proceed in earnest against the Roman Pontiff and Romish pride.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n To Georg Spalatin: February 24, 1519 (Letter No. 1)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Smith, 60-61]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n To Georg Spalatin: February 24, 1519 (Letter No. 2)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Smith, 61-62]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n I deny that the Roman Church is superior to all Churches<\/span>, but not that she is our superior, as she now is\u00a0de facto<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n An Instruction on Certain Articles: Late February 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Smith states (p. 56): \u201cIn fulfillment of\u00a0the third proposition in the first day\u2019s interview [with Miltitz], he published\u00a0An Instruction on Certain Articles.\u201d The work is mentioned in\u00a0Works of Martin Luther: With Introductions and Notes\u00a0(Henry Eyster Jacobs and Adolph Spaeth, published in 1915 in Philadephia by A.J. Holman Co.), as dating from 1519: \u201c. . . Instruction concerning certain Articles, which might be ascribed and imputed to him by his adversaries . . .\u201d (p. 176). It is also alluded to (with the title as I have it in green, above) in Michael A. Mullett\u2019s book,\u00a0Martin Luther\u00a0<\/em>(Routledge: 2004), on\u00a0p. 94. James Isaac Good,\u00a0The Reformed Reformation<\/em>\u00a0(Heidelberg Press, 1916), on\u00a0p. 70, notes it as well.]<\/p>\n [From: J.H. Merle D\u2019Aubigne,\u00a0History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century<\/em>, 1835; translated into English in 1846,\u00a0Book Five, Chapter One]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Yet he still felt esteem for the ancient Church of Rome, and had no thought of separating from it. \u201cThat the Roman Church,\u201d<\/span> said he in the explanation which he had promised Miltitz to publish, \u201cis honored by God above all others, is what we cannot doubt. Saint Peter, Saint Paul, forty-six popes, many hundreds of thousands of martyrs, have shed their blood in its bosom, and have overcome hell and the world, so that God\u2019s eye regards it with especial favor. Although everything is now in a very wretched state there, this is not a sufficient reason for separating from it. On the contrary, the worse things are going on within it, the more should we cling to it; for it is not by separation that we shall make it better. We must not desert God on account of the devil; or abandon the children of God who are still in the Roman communion, because of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, there is no evil that should destroy charity or break the bond of union. For charity can do all things, and to unity nothing is difficult.\u201d<\/span> [Opp. L. 17:224]<\/p>\n [Rupp, 65-66; he calls it simply \u201cArticles\u201d]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n The Roman Church is honoured by God above all others, by the undoubted fact that SS. Peter and Paul, 46 Popes and many hundreds of thousands of martyrs have shed their blood there . . . if unfortunately there are such things in Rome as might be improved, there neither is, nor can be any reason that one should tear oneself away from the Church in schism. Rather, the worse things become, the more a man should help and cling to her, for by schism and contempt nothing can be mended.<\/span>\u00a0[WA 2.72]<\/p>\n [Henry Eyster Jacobs,\u00a0Martin Luther, the Hero of the Reformation<\/em>, New York: G.P. Putnam\u2019s Sons, 1902,\u00a0p. 128\u00a0(after citing the above section) ]<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n<\/div>\n But as to the power and sovereignty of the Roman See, and as to how far it extends, the learned must decide.<\/span><\/p>\n To Pope Leo X: March 3, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [Smith (p. 55) writes about this letter: \u201cLuther drew up a very humble letter to the Pope, but as it did not satisfy Miltitz he never sent it.\u201d This letter is dated March 3, 1519 in Currie (pp. 43-44) and O\u2019Connor (pp. 9-10) ]<\/p>\n [From\u00a0Luther\u2019s Works<\/em>, edited by Jaroslav Pelikan et al, Vol. 48: 100-102]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Most Holy Father: Necessity again forces me, the lowest of all men and dust of the earth, to address myself to Your Holiness and August Majesty. May Your Holiness therefore be most gracious and deign to lend your ears in a fatherly fashion for a short time, and willingly listen to the bleating of this, your little sheep, for you truly stand in the place of Christ.<\/span><\/p>\n The honorable Sir Charles Miltitz, chamber secretary to\u00a0Your Holiness<\/span>, has been with us. In the presence of the Most Illustrious Sovereign Frederick\u00a0he very harshly accused me in the name of Your Holiness of lacking respect for and being rash toward the Roman church and Your Holiness, and demanded satisfaction for this. Hearing this, I was deeply grieved that my most loyal service has had such an unhappy outcome and that what I had undertaken-to guard the honor of the Roman church-had resulted in disgrace and was suspected of all wickedness, even so far as the head of the church was concerned. But what am I to do, Most Holy Father? I do not know what to do further: I cannot bear the power of your wrath, and I do not know of any means to escape it.<\/span>\u00a0The demand is made that I recant my theses.<\/span>\u00a0If such a revocation could accomplish what I was attempting to do with my theses, I would issue it without hesitation.<\/span>\u00a0Now, however, through the antagonism and pressure of enemies, my writings are spread farther than I ever had expected and are so deeply rooted in the hearts of so many people that I am not in the position to revoke them. In addition since our Germany prospers wonderfully today with men of talent, learning, and judgment, I realize that I cannot, under any circumstances, recant anything\u00a0<\/span>if I want to honor the Roman church-and this has to be my primary concern. Such a recanting would accomplish nothing but to defile the Roman church more and more and bring it into the mouths of the people as something that should be accused.<\/span>\u00a0See,\u00a0Father,<\/span> those whom I have opposed have inflicted this injury and virtual ignominy on the Roman church among us. With their most insipid sermons, preached in the name of\u00a0Your Holiness<\/span>, they have cultivated only the most shameful avarice and have substituted for sanctification the vile and abominable Egyptian scandal. And as if that had not been bad enough, they accuse me before\u00a0Your Holiness<\/span>-me, who opposed their tremendous monstrosities-of being the author of the temerity which is theirs.<\/p>\n Most Holy Father, before God and all his creation, I testify that I have never wanted, nor do I today want, to touch in any way the authority of the Roman church and of Your Holiness or demolish it by any craftiness. On the contrary I confess the authority of this church to be supreme over all, and that nothing, be it in heaven or on earth, is to be preferred to it, save the one Jesus Christ who is Lord of all-nor should Your Holiness believe the schemers who claim otherwise, plotting evil against this Martin.<\/span><\/p>\n Since in this case I can do only one thing, I shall most willingly promise Your Holiness that in the future I shall leave this matter of indulgences alone, and will be completely silent concerning it\u00a0<\/span>(if [my enemies] also stop their vain and bombastic speeches).\u00a0In addition I shall publish something for the common people to make them understand that they should truly honor the Roman church, and influence them to do so. [I shall tell them] not to blame the church for the rashness of [those indulgence preachers], nor to imitate my sharp words against the Roman church, which I have used-or rather misused-against those clowns, and with which I have gone too far.\u00a0Perhaps by the grace of God the discord which has arisen may finally be quieted by such an effort. I strive for only one thing: that the Roman church, our Mother, be not polluted\u00a0<\/span>by the filth of unsuitable avarice, and that the people be not led astray into error and taught to prefer indulgences to works of love.<\/span> All the other things I consider of less importance, since they are matters of indifference. If I can do anything else, or if I discover that there is something else I can do, I will certainly be most ready to do it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n To Georg Spalatin: March 5, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [From: Gordon Rupp,\u00a0Luther\u2019s Progress to the Diet of Worms<\/em>, New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1964 (orig. 1951), p. 66 ]<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n To the Elector Frederick of Saxony:\u00a0March 13, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Currie, 44-45]<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n For although in my disputation with Eck I shall have to\u00a0dispute the assertion that the Church of Rome is superior to all others<\/span>, I shall do so with the reservation of full submission and obedience to the Holy See.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n To Georg Spalatin: March 13, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [O\u2019Connor, 10]<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n I am also looking over the decrees of the Popes for my disputation, and . . .\u00a0I do not know, whether the Pope is Antichrist himself or his Apostle: so miserably is Christ (that is, truth) corrupted and crucified by him in the decrees.<\/span><\/p>\n [Rupp, 66-67]<\/p>\n I don\u2019t know whether the Pope is Antichrist himself, or only his apostle, so grievously is Christ, i.e. Truth, manhandled and crucified by him in these decretals.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Resolutions\u00a0<\/em>(Or,\u00a0Resolutiones<\/em>): May 30, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [Rupp writes (p. 65): \u201cIn an almost casual aside, in the course of his\u00a0Resolutions, Luther had suggested that, in the time of Gregory I, the Roman Church was not over all other churches (non erat super alias ecclesias<\/em>). [WA 1.571]<\/p>\n [Heinrich Boehmer,\u00a0Road To Reformation: Martin Luther to the Year 1521<\/em>, Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1946, 212-214]<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cAt the same time Luther was also putting finishing touches on the work which, on Staupitz\u2019 advice, he was to present to Pope Leo X as a proof of his orthodoxy and loyalty to the Holy See\u2014the Resolutions. On May 30 he was able to send a fair copy, accompanied by a letter to the pope, to Staupitz for forwarding. We still possess one page of the rough draft of this letter written in his own hand, which sheds an interesting light upon the state of his mind at this time. In the draft he writes that he turned to the pope only in order to show the German inquisitors (that is, Tetzel and his fellow Dominicans) that he was not afraid of them. \u2018I know that man can think of nothing unless it be given to him from above. But least of all can that be said of the pope, of whom it is written: The king\u2019s heart is in the hand of the Lord. Therefore, Holy Father, I lay my work at your feet in all confidence. Whatever your decision may be, it will in any case have its origin in Jesus, without whom you cannot propose or speak anything. If you condemn my book to be burned, I will say: As it has pleased the Lord, so it has happened. If you command that it be preserved, I will say: Praise be to God!\u00a0<\/span>I lose nothing if it is burned, and I gain nothing if it is not burned. Christ does not need me. He can raise up children from the very stones and destroy mountains in the twinkling of an eye. This, my faith in my Lord Jesus Christ, is enough for me. May He, the Lord, preserve you and lead you, not according to your pleasure or that of any other man, but according to His will, which alone is good and to be praised eternally. Amen.\u2019<\/p>\n \u201cIn the fair copy the long section dealing with the insolent boasting and threatening of the German inquisitors, primarily Tetzel, with the name and the power of the pope, has been entirely omitted. However, instead of the declaration that it was immaterial to him what the pope did with his book, the fair copy now reads: \u2018For my own protection I let my book go out under the protection of your name,\u00a0Holy Father<\/span>, so that all well-meaning readers may know with what pure intentions I have sought to fathom the nature of ecclesiastical power and\u00a0what reverence I hold toward the power of the keys<\/span>. If I were as they describe me, the illustrious Elector Frederick of Saxony certainly would not suffer such a pestiferous boil in his university, for he is probably the greatest zealot for Catholic truth there is at the present time. Nor would the exceedingly intelligent and very diligent men of this university have tolerated me.\u00a0Therefore, Most Holy Father, I cast myself at your feet with all that I am and possess. Raise me up or slay me, summon me hither or thither, approve me or reprove me as you please. I will listen to your voice as the voice of Christ reigning and speaking in you.<\/span>\u00a0If I have deserved death, I shall not refuse to die. For the earth is the Lord\u2019s and the fullness thereof; blessed be He forever. Amen.\u2019<\/p>\n \u201cThus in the fair copy he completely changed the conclusion of the letter. All expressions which were peculiarly indicative of his state of mind during these days he struck out and substituted phrases expressed in the conventional, curialistic style. Thus the whole letter, instead of being an open avowal of his inner independence of all human authorities, has now become a profession of his absolute subjection to the authority of the pope. Yet he permitted to remain one sentence which is altogether at odds with the new conclusion; \u201cI cannot recant.\u201d<\/span> Can we make him alone responsible for these changes which are so completely contradictory to the convictions which he elsewhere expressed so frankly and freely? No! The reference to the Catholic zeal of the Elector, which is altogether lacking in the first draft, betrays the hand of a courtier who was more familiar with the style of the Curia than was Luther. This courtier can have been none other than his friend Spalatin, who on later occasions was frequently obliged, generally at the command of the Elector, to cast into court language such high official letters and documents before they were forwarded. This is not to say that the Elector already had a hand in the matter in this instance. It is quite possible that Spalatin rendered him this friendly service on his own risk and responsibility.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Leipzig Debate With Johann Eck: \u201cPapal\u201d Portion From July 4-5, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n [in Roland H. Bainton,\u00a0Here I Stand<\/em>, New York: New American \/ Mentor, 1950, 88-89]<\/p>\n Even if there were ten popes or a thousand popes there would be no schism. The unity of Christendom could be preserved under numerous heads just as the separated nations under different sovereigns dwell in concord. . . .<\/span><\/p>\n I repulse the charge of Bohemianism. I have never approved of their schism.<\/span>\u00a0Even though they had divine right on their side<\/span>, they ought not to have withdrawn from the Church, because the highest divine right is unity and charity.<\/span><\/p>\n [D\u2019Aubigne,\u00a0Book V, Chapter Five]<\/p>\n At seven in the morning the two disputants were in their pulpits, surrounded by a numerous and attentive assembly.<\/p>\n Luther stood up, and with a necessary precaution, he said modestly:<\/p>\n \u201cIn the name of the Lord, Amen! I declare that\u00a0the respect I bear to the sovereign pontiff\u00a0would have prevented my entering upon this discussion, if the excellent Dr. Eck had not dragged me into it.<\/span>\u201d<\/p>\n Eck. \u2014 \u201cIn thy name, gentle Jesus! before descending into the lists, I protest before you, most noble lords, that all that I may say is in submission to the judgment of the first of all sees, and of him who is its possessor.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n After a brief silence, Eck continued:<\/p>\n \u201cThere is in the Church of God a primacy that cometh from Christ himself. The Church militant was formed in the image of the Church triumphant. Now, the latter is a monarchy in which the hierarchy ascends step by step up to God, its sole chief. For this reason Christ has established a similar order upon earth. What a monster the Church would be if it were without a head!\u201d2<\/p>\n Luther, turning towards the assembly. \u2014\u00a0\u201cWhen Dr. Eck declares that the universal Church must have a head, he says well. If there is any one among us who maintains the contrary, let him stand up! As for me, it is no concern of mine.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Eck. \u2014 \u201cIf the Church militant has never been without a head, I should like to know who it can be, if not the Roman pontiff?\u201d<\/p>\n Luther. \u2014 \u201cThe head of the Church militant is Christ himself, and not a man. I believe this on the testimony of God\u2019s Word.\u00a0<\/span>He must reign, says Scripture, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. Let us not listen to those who banish Christ to the Church triumphant in heaven. His kingdom is a kingdom of faith.\u00a0We cannot see our Head<\/span>, and yet we have one.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Eck, who did not consider himself beaten, had recourse to other arguments, and resumed:<\/p>\n \u201cIt is from Rome, according to Saint Cyprian, that sacerdotal unity has proceeded.\u201d<\/p>\n Luther. \u2014 \u201cFor the Western Church, I grant it. But is not this same Roman Church the offspring of that of Jerusalem? It is the latter, properly speaking, that is the nursing-mother of all the churches.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Eck. \u2014 \u201cSaint Jerome declares that if an extraordinary power, superior to all others, were not given to the pope, there would be in the churches as many sects as there were pontiffs.\u201d<\/p>\n Luther. \u2014 \u201cGiven: that is to say, if all the rest of believers consent to it, this power might be conceded to the chief pontiff by human right. And I will not deny, that if all the believers in the world agree in recognizing as first and supreme pontiff either the Bishop of Rome, or of Paris, or of Magdeburg, we should acknowledge him as such from the respect due to this general agreement of the Church; but that has never been seen yet, and never will be seen. Even in our own days, does not the Greek Church refuse its assent to Rome?\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Luther was at that time prepared to acknowledge the pope as chief magistrate of the Church, freely elected by it; but he denied that he was pope of Divine right. It was not till much later that he denied that submission was in any way due to him: and this step he was led to take by the Leipsic disputation. . . .<\/p>\n Eck replied by one of those subtle distinctions that were so familiar to him:<\/p>\n \u201cThe bishop of Rome, if you will have it so, is not universal bishop, but bishop of the universal Church.\u201d<\/p>\n Luther. \u2014 \u201cI shall make no reply to this: let our hearers form their own opinion of it.\u201d \u2014 \u201cCertainly,\u201d added he directly, \u201cthis is an explanation very worthy of a theologian, and calculated to satisfy a disputant who thirsts for glory. It is not for nothing, is seems, that I have remained at great expense at Leipsic, since\u00a0I have learnt that the pope is not, in truth, the universal bishop, but the bishop of the universal Church!\u201d . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Luther. \u2014\u00a0I do not like and I never shall like a schism. Since on their own authority the Bohemians have separated from our unity, they have done wrong, even if the Divine right had pronounced in favour of their doctrines; for the supreme Divine right is charity and oneness of mind.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n [Latin translation: Nunquam mihi placuit, nec in aeternum placebit quodcunque schisma. Cum supremum jus divinum sit charitas et unitas spiritus<\/em>. From: L. Opp. Lat. 1:250.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Using an\u00a0online Latin dictionary<\/a>, I shall translate Luther\u2019s words about schism:<\/p>\n\nTo Cardinal Cajetan: October 17, 1518<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n\n\nI will send you my playful remarks (nugas<\/em>), so that you may see, whether I am right in guessing, that\u00a0the true Antichrist, according to Paul, reigns in the Roman Court: I think I am able to prove that he (the Pope) is now worse than the Turks.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\nTo Christoph Schuerl: February 20, 1519<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n\n\nI repress much for the sake of the Elector and university which otherwise I should pour out against that spoiler of the Bible and the Church, Rome, or rather Babylon. For the truth of the Scripture and of the Church cannot be spoken, dear Spalatin, without offending that beast. Do not therefore hope that I shall be quiet or safe in future unless you wish me to give up theology altogether.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n\n<\/div>\nI was never of a mind to desert the Apostolic See . . . I am quite content that he should be called, and in fact be \u201cLord\u201d.<\/span>\u00a0What is that to me? I know that the Grand Turk\u00a0should be honoured<\/span><\/span> and that he wields his authority by the grace of God, because it is certain that he could have no power unless God willed it.\u00a0<\/span>[WA. Br. 1.356.8]<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n