very docility is a disobedience or a sin. The only struggle possible is between the two riders, God and the devil, who dispute the momentary possession of the steed. And then is fulfilled the saying of the Psalmist: 'I am become like a beast of burden.”’ "Let the Christian then know," he continues, "that God foresees nothing contingently; but that He foresees, proposes, and acts from his eternal and immutable will. This is the thunderbolt that shatters and destroys free-will. Hence it comes to pass, that whatever happens, happens. according to the irreversible decrees of God. Therefore, necessity, not free-will, is the controlling principle of our conduct. God is the Author of what is evil in us, as well as of what is good; and as He bestows happiness on those who merit it not, so also does He damn others who do not deserve their fate."

The groundwork of Luther's whole system, as Plank very justly observes, is the assumed slavery of the human will, and we find him writing to Capito, in 1537: "Let all my writings perish, if only my work On Slave-Will' and my catechisms be preserved." Even the "Formula Concordia," or book of Lutheran symbols of faith, gives Luther the same distinction. "Luther," it says, "has given a solid and beautiful explanation of this subject (human will) in his work 'On Slave-Will.' "Hoc negotium in libro de servo arbitrio

egregie et solide explicuit."

This champion of free-inquiry was obliged to go whither the logical deductions of his system would lead him, and he did not halt at difficulties. There were Scripture texts plainly against his theory of the inherent slavery of the human will; but even these he set aside by an ipse-dixit, distorting them from their natural sense and obvious meaning, by blasphemously asserting that God, when inspiring the passages in question, was playfully mendacious, secretly meaning just the reverse of what He openly revealed; and that the Apostles, when speaking of human will and actions, gave way to an impulse of unseemly levity, and used words in an ironical sense."

The quiet of Erasmus' life was again broken in upon. Luther's bold assertion and defiant sense of error again called forth the powers of his intellect and the resources of his learning. He wrote a second work against the heresiarch, entitled the "Hyperaspistes," in which, with more severity of tone and incisive brilliancy of style than he had formerly employed, he mercilessly exposed the wilful ignorance of Luther and his criminal waywardness. The latter, deeming it

'Lutheri opera Latina, Jenæ, T. III., fols. 170, 171, 177, 207. Witt. Germ. fols., 531 b, 535 a. (TR.)

"To do," said Luther, "means to believe-to keep the law by faith. The passage in Matthew, Do this and thou shalt live,' signifies: Believe this and thou shalt live. The words 'Do this' have an ironical sense, as if our Lord would say: Thou wilt do it tomorrow, but not to-day; only make an attempt to keep the commandments, and the trial will teach thee the ignominy of thy failure." Walch, Luther's Works, Vol. VIII. p. 2147.

Hyperaspistes, Diatr. adv. servum aro. Luth., Pt. II., p. 526 sq. (Opp. ed. Cleric., T. X., p. 1249). Cf. on this controversy, Riffel, Vol. II., pp. 250-208

REESE LIBRARY

CF THE

!TY

imprudent to provoke further discussion, addressed a letter to Erasmus, artfully flattering the scholar, and feigning sorrow for having gone beyond the limits of polemical courtesy. The flattering letter has been lost, and the character of its contents is known only from the reply of Erasmus. Erasmus had not been more brutally treated than others. Luther's language to the Bishop of Meissen, as well as to Emser and Doctor Eck, and to the theological faculties of Louvain and Paris, had been equally violent and abusive; and as we shall see further on, when we come to speak of his disputation with Carlstadt on the Lord's Supper, he did not forget his art as time went on.

In the midst of these conflicts, and while the disastrous War of the Peasants was still going on, Luther, now grown corpulent and rubicund, threw off the monastic habit (December, 1524), and a few months later (June 13, 1525) married Catharine Bora, to the great astonishment of his friends, whom he had not apprised of his intention. Catharine had been a nun in the Cistercian convent of Nimptschen, near Grimma, in Saxony, afterwards broken up; but tiring of a religious life, into which she had been reluctantly forced by her parents, she invoked the good offices of Luther, who sent Bernard Koppe, a citizen of Torgau, to her relief. This young man one night forced the doors of the convent, secured Catharine, who, by precon certed arrangement, was expecting him, and hurried her away to Wittenberg. She is described as disagreeable, imperious, and haughty, "but as much beloved by Luther as the Epistle to the Galatians, and more acceptable to him than the possession of the Kingdom of France or the Republic of Venice." This step was thought hasty and inconsiderate by his friends; and even Melanchthon, in a letter to Camerarius, confesses that the announcement of the event surprised and disquieted him not a little. Luther's enemies had a hearty laugh "It was thought," said Erasmus, "that Luther was the hero of a tragedy; but, for my own part, I regard him as playing the chief character in a comedy, which has ended, as every comedy ends, in a marriage." Luther himself said he took the step "to encourage the Cardinal Elector of Mentz, cousin to the apostate Grand Master of the Teutonic Order, who could hardly hesitate to follow so illustrious an example.'

§ 310. Organization of the Lutheran Church in Hesse and Saxony. Riffel, Vol. II., pp. 1-126, where this subject is exhaustively treated.

As time went on, it became quite clear, from the character and scope of the questions discussed by the sectaries, that a deadly blow

1 Epp. (ed. Cleric.) XXI., 28: "Optarem tibi (Luth.) meliorem mentem, nisi tua tibi tam valde placeret. Mihi optabis quod voles, modo ne tuam mentem, nisi Dominus istam mutaverit.'

3

Conf. Riffel, Vol. I., pp. 108-111.

Engelhard, Lucifer Wittebergensis; or, Catharine von Bora, Landshut, 1749, 2 vols. vols. Beste, Catharine von Bora, Halle. 1843.

the Morning Star, i. e., Complete Life of Walch, Catharine von Bore, Halle, 1751, 2 Meurer, Catharine Luther, Dresden, 1854.

was being aimed, not only at the dogmatic teaching and internal constitution of the Church, but at her external organisation as well. Luther had already made some progress in this direction, and while he had succeeded in abolishing episcopal jurisdiction in countries where the principles of the Reformation had taken root, he had as yet failed to put any other form of ecclesiastical government in its place. The question then naturally arose as to the character and limits of the jurisdiction to be exercised by ecclesiastical superiors. Luther wished Canon Law' swept from the face of the earth, and, in his intemperate zeal and fanatical haste to do away with it for ever, had pitched a copy of it into the flames, together with the papal bull of excommunication. By this act he drew upon himself the violent hostility of the "Jurists," who taunted him with introducing novel and exceptionably lax principles on marriage, which they held to be the sacred bond alike of the family and the State, but which he denied to be in any sense a sacrament, and regarded as simply an affair of expediency and business, falling within the same category as eating and drinking, buying and selling. To provide a remedy for these difficulties, Philip, the young Landgrave of Hesse, Luther's most zealous partisan since the death of the elector, Frederic the Wise of Saxony, convoked a synod to convene at Homburg, in October, 1526. The leading spirit in this synod was the apostate Minorite monk, Lambert of Avignon († 1530), who, in a very eloquent speech, recommended the adoption of a synodal constitution, based upon democratic principles, and granting to each congregation full control of its own ecclesiastical discipline. As the Landgrave plainly saw that this plan would secure him pecuniary advantages and great political influence, he did not hesitate to adopt it; and as it had among its advocates, besides the eloquent Minorite, Adam Krafft, the court chaplain, he at once gave orders to have it carried into effect.

3

Cf. the exceedingly beautiful and touching remark on this event, by Surius, Ad. an., 1525. Cf. Defence of Simon Lemnius, by Lessing, in his seventh and eighth letters (Complete Works of Literature and Theology, Carlsruhe edit., Pt. IV., pp. 29-37).

'His saying was: Purus canonista est magnus asinista.

See his famous “Sermon on Marriage” (1526), in the Jena ed., Pt. II., fol. 151, where the following passages are found. (The requirements of our language will not admit of a translation.) (TR.) "Quid," he asks, "si mulieri ad rem aptæ contingat maritus impotens ?" And he replies: "Ecce, mi marite, debitam mihi benevolentiam praestare non potes, meque et inutile corpus decepisti. Fave, quæso, ut cum fratre tuo aut proxime tibi sanguine juncto occultum matrimonium paciscar, sic ut nomen habeas, ne res tuæ in alienos perveniant.

"Perrexi porro maritum debere in ea re assentire uxori, eique debitam benevolentiam spemque sobolis eo pacto reddere. Quod si remuat, ipsa clandestina fuga saluti suæ consulat et in aliam profecta terram, alii etiam nubat."

And again (fols. 156, 168): “If the wife refuse, call in the serving-maid. If she, too, refuse the marriage-duty, send her away, and in the room of Vashti put Esther, after the example of King Ahasuerus."

Luther was still more indulgent to princes. See Walch, Luther's Works, Pt. XXII., p. 1726. Cf. Luther's Marriage-code, particularly where he treats of the objects of matrimony and the impediments to divorce (Histor. Polit. Papers, Vol. XI., pp. 410-435).— Dollinger, the Reformation, Vol. II., pp. 427 sq. and 623 sq.

Cf. Riffel, L. c., Vol. II., pp. 76-126, On the Introduction of the New Doctrines into Hesse. Hassenkamp, Ch. H. of Hesse from the Reform., Marburg, 1853.

John the Constant, the new Elector of Saxony, while fully in sympathy with the Lutheran movement, was less prompt in action than Philip of Hesse. In consequence, the pastors throughout his dominions took the initiative, and requested him to introduce for the government of the various churches a system similar to that already adopted in Hesse. He at length consented to introduce the system of Parochial Visitation suggested by Luther. Melanchthon embodied the main features of this plan in a Formulary, or Book of Visitation,' containing a short Confession of the Evangelical faith. In this way, the several churches, though each was independent of all the others, preserved a sort of outward uniformity. The elector appointed a commission, consisting of laymen and ecclesiastics, by whom preachers were set over the various parishes, and the ancient ecclesiastical foundations abolished. In 1527 and 1528, a visitation of the various churches was made by a commission of four, composed of theologians and jurists. Officers called Superintendents, exercised a general supervision over all ecclesiastical affairs, and decided matrimonial cases; but the reigning prince was ex officio the supreme authority in whatever related to church government.

In the course of the visitation of 1527 and 1528, Luther discovered that both clergy and people had but scant religious information, and fully alive to the paramount importance of instructing the young as a means of giving stability and permanence to his work, without which all others would be futile, he published, in 1529, two catechisms, a larger and a smaller, written in clear, plain language, intelligible alike to old and young."

Such was the origin of the collegiate and territorial ecclesiastical organisation of Saxony, which replaced the ancient hierarchical and papal government, and became the model for the Lutheran churches of every other country. These changes were greatly accelerated by the irresolute and vacillating policy pursued by the Diets of which we are about to speak, and henceforth princes favourably disposed to Lutheranism might have no fear of following their inclinations, or giving the most practical expressions to their sympathies.

§ 311. Diets of Spire (1526, 1529).

According to the agreement entered into by the Catholic and Protestant princes' at the Diet of Nürnberg, the States assembled at Spire in 1526.4 The emperor was engaged in a harassing and protracted war, and the Archduke Ferdinand was wholly occupied in re

1Instruction for the Parochial Visitors (Lat., 1527), with Luther's preface, Wittenberg, 1528, 4to. German and Latin edit., by Strobel, Altdorf, 1777. Edited, with a hist introd. and explanatory notes, by Weber, Schlüchtern, 1844. Of. Riffel, Vol. II, pp. 52-61. • Walch, Vol. X., p. 2 sq. Cf. Augusti, Hist. and Critical Introduct. to the two great Catechisms, Elberfeld, 1824.

pelling the advance of the Turks, who were seriously threatening Hungary. The Lutheran princes were in consequence bold and defiant, and seemed to have been more or less influenced by the impious assertion of Luther, that "to fight against the Turks is to resist God, whose instruments they are in chastising our iniquities." When they appeared at the Diet, they showed the complete and thorough discipline of an organized religious party, were exacting in their demands, and menacing in their speech and conduct. Under the circumstances, they had matters pretty much their own way, and extorted from the Diet the following concessions:-" 1. Until such time as an œcumenical council should convene, each State was at liberty to act in regard to the Edict of Worms as in its judgment seemed best, and to be responsible for such action to God and the emperor. 2. Each prince was bound to furnish aid against the Turks at the earliest possible moment." The latter provision came too late. Louis, King of Hungary, had been defeated by Soliman, near Mohacz, August 29, 1526, and perished in the morasses. His crown was inherited by the Archduke Ferdinand of Austria.

The Lutheran princes, regardless of the engagements entered into in this Diet, began immediately to make preparations for an aggressive war, from which both Luther and Melanchthon attempted in vain to dissuade them, by telling them that "the word of God and his work were their own defence, and stood in no need of human aid; they were strong enough of themselves to repel every assault of their enemies." The Lutheran princes, however, became daily more and more settled in their determination to take up arms; but, as if their own resolution were not sufficient to drive them forward, it received a fresh and violent impulse from another quarter. Otho von Pack, the wicked and unscrupulous chancellor of Duke George of Saxony, sent a forged document to the Landgrave of Hesse, purporting to be a copy of an alliance entered into at Breslau by his master with Ferdinand of Austria and the German bishops for the subjugation of the Lutheran princes, and the division of their States among the conquerors. That the instrument was a fabrication, was plain enough; but there were not wanting evil-disposed persons to give currency and credit to its contents, and Luther was especially rejoiced at the opportunity it afforded him of damaging in the public estimation the character of Duke George, whom he regarded as his personal enemy. In the course of a correspondence carried on some time later between the Landgrave of Hesse and his father-in-law, Duke George of Saxony, the former admitted that he had been practised upon; but the admission came too late to correct the evil-the story had gone abroad and done its work, in widening and deepening the breach between the two parties. This was evident when, in 1529, the States of the empire again convened at Spire, for the double purpose of adjusting religious

1Sleidan, Lib. VI.; Kapp, Gleanings, etc., Pt. II., p. 680; Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 214. 'Cf. the detailed account of Riffel, Vol. I., pp. 371-376, note 1; Vol. II., p. 356 sq.