"Martin," says the same eye-witness,
"is of middle height; his body is slender, emaciated by study and by cares; one can count almost all the bones; he stands in the prime of his age; his voice sounds clear and distinct ... however hard his opponent pressed him he maintained his calmness and his good nature, though in debate he sometimes used bitter words....
He carried a bunch of flowers in his hand, and when the discussion became hot he looked at it and smelt it."(169)
Eck"s intention was to force his opponent to make some declaration which would justify him in charging Luther with being a partisan of the mediaeval heretics, and especially of the Hussites. He continually led the debate away to the Waldensians, the followers of Wiclif, and the Bohemians. The audience swayed with a wave of excitement when Luther was gradually forced to admit that there might be some truth in some of the Hussite opinions:
"One thing I must tell which I myself heard in the Disputation, and which took place in the presence of Duke George, who came often to the Disputation and listened most attentively; once Dr.
Martin spoke these words to Dr. Eck when hard pressed about John Huss: "Dear Doctor, the Hussite opinions are not all wrong."
Thereupon said Duke George, so loudly that the whole audience heard, "G.o.d help us, the pestilence!" (Das walt, die Sucht), and he wagged his head and placed his arms akimbo. That I myself heard and saw, for I sat almost between his feet and those of Duke Barnim of Pomerania, who was then the Rector of Wittenberg."(170)
So far as the dialectic battle was concerned, Eck had been victorious. He had done what he had meant to do. He had made Luther declare himself. All that was now needed was a Papal Bull against Luther, and the world would be rid of another pestilent heretic. He had done what the more politic Milt.i.tz had wished to avoid. He had concentrated the attention of Germany on Luther, and had made him the central figure round which all the smouldering discontent could gather. As for Luther, he returned to Wittenberg full of melancholy forebodings. They did not prevent him preparing and publishing for the German people an account of the Disputation, which was eagerly read. His arguments had been historical rather than theological. He tried to show that the acknowledgment of the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome was barely four hundred years old in Western Europe, and that it did not exist in the East. The Greek Church, he said, was part of the Church of Christ, and it would have nothing to do with the Pope; the great Councils of the Early Christian centuries knew nothing about papal supremacy. Athanasius, Basil, the Gregories, Cyprian himself, had all taken Luther"s own position, and were heretics, according to Eck. Luther"s speeches at Leipzig laid the foundation of that modern historical criticism of inst.i.tutions which has gone so far in our own days.
In some respects the Leipzig Disputation was the most important point in the career of Luther. It made him see for the first time what lay in his opposition to Indulgences. It made the people see it also. His attack was no criticism, as he had at first thought, of a mere excrescence on the mediaeval ecclesiastical system. He had struck at its centre; at its ideas of a priestly mediation which denied the right of every believer to immediate entrance into the very presence of G.o.d. It was after the Disputation at Leipzig that the younger German Humanists rallied round Luther to a man; that the burghers saw that religion and opposition to priestly tyranny were not opposite things; and that there was room for an honest attempt to create a Germany for the Germans independent of Rome.
Luther found himself a new man after Leipzig, with a new freedom and wider sympathies. His depression fled. Sermons, pamphlets, letters from his tireless pen flooded the land, and were read eagerly by all cla.s.ses of the population.
-- 4. The Three Treatises.(171)
Three of these writings stand forth so pre-eminently that they deserve special notice: _The Liberty of a Christian Man_, _To the Christian n.o.bility of the German Nation_, and _On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church_. These three books are commonly called in Germany the _Three Great Reformation Treatises_, and the t.i.tle befits them well. They were all written during the year 1520, after three years spent in controversy, at a time when Luther felt that he had completely broken from Rome, and when he knew that he had nothing to expect from Rome but a sentence of excommunication. His teaching may have varied in details afterwards, but in all essential positions it remained what is to be found in these books.
The tract on _The Liberty of a Christian Man_, "a very small book so far as the paper is concerned," said Luther, "but one containing the whole sum of the Christian life," had a somewhat pathetic history. Milt.i.tz, hoping against hope that the Pope would not push things to extremities, had asked Luther to write out a short summary of his inmost beliefs and send it to His Holiness. Luther consented, and this little volume was the result. It has for preface Luther"s letter to Pope Leo X., which concludes thus: "I, in my poverty, have no other present to make you, nor do you need to be enriched by anything but a spiritual gift." It was probably the last of the three published (Oct. 1520), but it contains the principles which underlie the other two.
The booklet is a brief statement, free from all theological subtleties, of the priesthood of all believers which is a consequence of the fact of justification by faith alone. Its note of warning to Rome, and its educational value for pious people in the sixteenth century, consisted in its showing that the man who fears G.o.d and trusts in Him need not fear the priests nor the Church. The first part proves that every spiritual possession which a man has or can have must be traced back to his faith; if he has faith, he has all; if he has not faith, he has nothing. It is the possession of faith which gives liberty to a Christian man; G.o.d is with him, who can be against him?
"Here you will ask, "If all who are in the Church are priests, by what character are those whom we now call priests to be distinguished from the laity?" I reply, By the use of those words _priests_, _clergy_, _spiritual person_, _ecclesiastic_, an injustice has been done, since they have been transferred from the remaining body of Christians to those few who are now, by a hurtful custom, called ecclesiastics. For the Holy Scripture makes no distinction between them, except that those who are now boastfully called Popes, Bishops, and Lords, it calls ministers, servants, and stewards, who are to serve the rest in the ministry of the Word, for teaching the faith of Christ and the liberty of believers. For though it is true that we are all equally priests, yet cannot we, nor ought we if we could, all to minister and teach publicly."
The second part shows that everything that a Christian man does must come from his faith. It may be necessary to use all the ceremonies of divine service which past generations have found useful to promote the religious life; perhaps to fast and practise mortifications of the flesh; but if such things are to be really profitable, they must be kept in their proper place. They are good deeds not in the sense of making a man good, but as the signs of his faith; they are to be practised with joy because they are done for the sake of the G.o.d who has united Himself with man through Jesus Christ.
Nothing that Luther has written more clearly manifests that combination of revolutionary daring and wise conservatism which was characteristic of the man. There is no attempt to sweep away any ecclesiastical machinery, provided only it be kept in its proper place as a means to an end. But religious ceremonies are not an end in themselves; and if through human corruption and neglect of the plain precepts of G.o.d"s word they hinder instead of help the true growth of the soul, they ought to be swept away; and the fact that the soul of man needs absolutely nothing in the last resort but the word of G.o.d dwelling in him, gives men courage and calmness in demanding their reformation.
Luther applied those principles to the reformation of the Church in his book on the _Babylonian Captivity of the Church_ (Sept.-Oct. 1520). He subjected the elaborate sacramental system of the Church to a searching criticism, and concluded that there are only two, or perhaps three, scriptural sacraments-the Eucharist, Baptism, and Penance. He denounced the doctrine of Transubstantiation as a "monstrous phantom" which the Church of the first twelve centuries knew nothing about, and said that any endeavour to define the precise manner of Christ"s Presence in the sacrament is simply indecent curiosity. Perhaps the most important practical portion of the book deals with the topic of Christian marriage.
In no sphere of human life has the Roman Church done more harm by interfering with simple scriptural directions:
"What shall we say of those impious human laws by which this divinely appointed manner of life has been entangled and tossed up and down? Good G.o.d! it is horrible to look upon the temerity of the tyrants of Rome, who thus, according to their caprices, at one time annul marriages and at another time enforce them. Is the human race given over to their caprice for nothing but to be mocked and abused in every way, that these men may do what they please with it for the sake of their own fatal gains? ... And what do they sell? The shame of men and women, a merchandise worthy of these traffickers, who surpa.s.s all that is most sordid and most disgusting in their avarice and impiety."
Luther points out that there is a clear scriptural law on the degrees within which marriage is unlawful, and says that no human regulations ought to forbid marriages outside these degrees or permit them within. He also comes to the conclusion that divorce _a mensa et thoro_ is clearly permitted in Scripture; though he says that personally he hates divorce, and "prefers bigamy to it."
The appeal _To the Christian n.o.bility of the German Nation_ made the greatest immediate impression. It was written in haste, but must have been long thought over. Luther began the introduction on June 23rd (1520); the book was ready by the middle of August; and by the 18th, four thousand copies were in circulation throughout Germany, and the presses could not print fast enough for the demand. It was a call to all Germany to unite against Rome.
It was n.o.bly comprehensive: it grasped the whole situation, and summed up with vigour and clearness all the German grievances which had hitherto been stated separately and weakly; it brought forward every partial proposal of reform, however incomplete, and quickened it by setting it in its proper place in one combined scheme. All the parts were welded together by a simple and courageous faith, and made living by the moral earnestness which pervaded the whole.
Luther struck directly at the imaginary mysterious semi-supernatural power supposed to belong to the Church and the priesthood which had held Europe in awed submission for so many centuries. Reform had been impossible, the appeal said, because the walls behind which Rome lay entrenched had been left standing-walls of straw and paper, but in appearance formidable.
These sham fortifications are: the _Spiritual Power_ which is believed to be superior to the temporal power of kings and princes, the conception that _no one can interpret Scripture but the Pope_, the idea that _no one can summon a General Council but the Bishop of Rome_. These are the threefold lines of fortification behind which the Roman Curia has entrenched itself, and the German people has long believed that they are impregnable. Luther sets to work to demolish them.
The Romanists a.s.sert that the Pope, bishops, priests, and monks belong to and const.i.tute the _spiritual estate_, while princes, lords, artisans, and peasants are the _temporal estate_, which is subject to the spiritual. But this _spiritual estate_ is a mere delusion. The real _spiritual estate_ is the whole body of believers in Jesus Christ, and they are spiritual because Jesus has made all His followers priests to G.o.d and to His Christ.
A cobbler belongs to the _spiritual estate_ as truly as a bishop. The clergy are distinguished from the laity not by an indelible character imposed upon them in a divine mystery called ordination, but because they have been set apart to do a particular kind of work in the commonwealth.
If a Pope, bishop, priest, or monk neglects to do the work he is there to do, he deserves to be punished as much as a careless mason or tailor, and is as accountable to the civil authorities. The _spiritual priesthood of all believers_, the gift of the faith which justifies, has shattered the first and most formidable of these papal fortifications.
It is foolish to say that the _Pope alone can interpret Scripture_. If that were true, where is the need of Holy Scriptures at all?
"Let us burn them, and content ourselves with the unlearned gentlemen at Rome, in whom the Holy Ghost alone dwells, who, however, can dwell in pious souls only. If I had not read it, I could never have believed that the devil should have put forth such follies at Rome and find a following."
The Holy Scripture is open to all, and can be interpreted by all true believers who have the mind of Christ and approach the word of G.o.d humbly seeking enlightenment.
The third wall falls with the other two. It is nonsense to say that _the Pope alone can call a Council_. We are plainly taught in Scripture that if our brother offends we are to tell it to the Church; and if the Pope offends, and he often does, we can only obey Scripture by calling a Council. Every individual Christian has a right to do his best to have it summoned; the temporal powers are there to enforce his wishes; Emperors called General Councils in the earlier ages of the Church.
The straw and paper walls having been thus cleared away, Luther proceeds to state his indictment. There is in Rome one who calls himself the Vicar of Christ, and who lives in a state of singular resemblance to our Lord and to St. Peter, His apostle. For this man wears a triple crown (a single one does not content him), and keeps up such a state that he needs a larger personal revenue than the Emperor. He has surrounding him a number of men, called cardinals, whose only apparent use is that they serve to draw to themselves the revenues of the richest convents, endowments, and benefices in Europe, and spend the money thus obtained in keeping up the state of a great monarch in Rome. When it is impossible to seize the whole revenue of an ecclesiastical benefice, the Curia joins some ten or twenty together, and mulcts each in a good round sum for the benefit of the cardinal. Thus the priory of Wurzburg gives one thousand gulden yearly, and Bamberg, Mainz, and Trier pay their quotas. The papal court is enormous,-three thousand papal secretaries, and hangers-on innumerable; and all are waiting for German benefices, whose duties they never fulfil, as wolves wait for a flock of sheep. Germany pays more to the Curia than it gives to its own Emperor. Then look at the way Rome robs the whole German land. Long ago the Emperor permitted the Pope to take the half of the first year"s income from every benefice-the _Annates_-to provide for a war against the Turks. The money was never spent for the purpose destined; yet it has been regularly paid for a hundred years, and the Pope demands it as a regular and legitimate tax, and uses it to pay posts and offices at Rome.
"Whenever there is any pretence of fighting the Turk, they send out commissions for collecting money, and often proclaim Indulgences under the same pretext.... They think that we, Germans, will always remain such great fools, and that we will go on giving money to satisfy their unspeakable greed, though we see plainly that neither _Annates_ nor _Indulgence-money_ nor anything-not one farthing-goes against the Turks, but all goes into their bottomless sack, ... and all this is done in the name of Christ and of St. Peter."
The chicanery used to get possession of German benefices for officials of the Curia, the exactions on the bestowal of the _pallium_, the trafficking in exemptions and permissions to evade laws ecclesiastical and moral, are all trenchantly described. The most shameless are those connected with marriage. The Curial Court is described as a place
"where vows are annulled; where a monk gets leave to quit his cloister; where priests can enter the married life for money; where b.a.s.t.a.r.ds can become legitimate, and dishonour and shame may arrive at high honours, and all evil repute and disgrace is knighted and enn.o.bled; where a marriage is suffered that is in a forbidden degree, or has some other defect.... There is a buying and selling, a changing, bl.u.s.tering, and bargaining, cheating and lying, robbing and stealing, debauchery and villainy, and all kinds of contempt of G.o.d, that Antichrist himself could not reign worse."
The plan of reform sketched includes-the complete abolition of the power of the Pope over the State; the creation of a national German Church, with an ecclesiastical Council of its own to be the final court of appeal for Germany, and to represent the German Church as the Diet did the German State; some internal religious reforms, such as the limitation of the number of pilgrimages, which were destroying morality and creating a distaste for honest work; reductions in the mendicant orders and in the number of vagrants who thronged the roads, and were a scandal in the towns.
"It is of much more importance to consider what is necessary for the salvation of the common people than what St. Francis, or St.
Dominic, or St. Augustine, or any other man laid down, especially as things have not turned out as they expected."
He proposes the inspection of all convents and nunneries, and permission given to those who are dissatisfied with their monastic lives to return to the world; the limitation of ecclesiastical holy days, which are too often nothing but scenes of drunkenness, gluttony, and debauchery; a married priesthood, and an end put to the degrading concubinage of the German priests.
"We see how the priesthood is fallen, and how many a poor priest is enc.u.mbered with a woman and children, and burdened in his conscience, and no one does anything to help him, though he might very well be helped.... I will not conceal my honest counsel, nor withhold comfort from that unhappy crowd who now live in trouble with wife and children, and remain in shame with a heavy conscience, hearing their wife called a priest"s harlot, and their children b.a.s.t.a.r.ds.... I say that these two (who are minded in their hearts to live together in conjugal fidelity) are surely married before G.o.d."
The appeal concludes with some solemn words addressed to the luxury and licensed immorality of the German towns.
None of Luther"s writings produced such an instantaneous effect as this.
It was not the first programme urging common action in the interests of a united Germany, but it was the most complete, and was recognised to be so by all who were working for a Germany for the Germans.
The three "Reformation treatises" were the statement of Luther"s case laid before the people of the Fatherland, and were a very effectual antidote to the Papal Bull excommunicating him, which was ready for publication in Germany.