[175] See above, p. 190.
[176] The so-called _character indelebilis_, the peculiar gift of ordination, so that "once a priest, always a priest." See above, p.
68, note 5.
[177] See above, pp. 178 ff.
[178] The stated daily prayers, fixed by canon, of the clergy. The seven hours are respectively: matins (including noctums and lauds), prime, tierce, s.e.xt, nones, vespers, and compline.
[179] Comp. above, p. 69. The fullest development of Luther"s doctrine of the spiritual priesthood of believers is to be found in his writings against Emser, especially _Auf das uberchristliche, ubergeistliche und uberkunstliche Buch Bock Emsers Antwort_, 1521.
[180] On the last sentence see above, pp. 251 f.
[181] See p. 278, note 1.
[182] See above, p. 92.
[183] See above, p. 280.
[184] See above, p. 185.
[185] See above, p. 213.
[186] Covers for the chalice.
[187] This promise was fulfilled in the Liberty of a Christian Man.
[188] Thus Erasmus: _Fieri potest ut nomen commune c.u.m apostolo praebuerit occasionem ut haec epistola lacobo apostolo ascriberetur, c.u.m uerit alterius cuiusdam Iacobi._--Moffatt, _Introduction to the Lit. of the N. T._, p. 472.
[189] See above, p. 275.
[190] Comp. above, p. 171.
[191] See above, p. 285.
[192] See above, p. 226.
[193] See above, p. 275.
[194] See above, p. 226.
[195] See above, p. 177.
[196] See above, pp. 220 f.
[197] The _res sacramenti_. See above, p. 182, note 2.
[198] Vergil"s _Eclogues_, VIII, 63.
[199] See Introduction, p. 168.
[200] The remainder of Luther"s "recantation" was the _De libertate_.
In the letter to the pope, which accompanied it, he gave ample proof of his obedience.
[201] The eighth stanza of Coehus Sedulius" _Hymnus acrostichis totam vitam Christi continens_ (beginning, _A solis ortus cardine_), of the fifth century. Stanzas 8, 9, 11 and 13 were used as an Epiphany hymn, which Luther translated on December 12, 1541,--"Was furchtst du, Feind Herodes, sehr." The above translation is taken from _Hymns Ancient and Modern_, No. 60.
A TREATISE ON CHRISTIAN LIBERTY WITH A LETTER TO POPE LEO X
1520
INTRODUCTION
The Letter to the Pope, like an earlier letter dated March 3, 1519, was written at the suggestion of Carl von Milt.i.tz. Sent to Germany to bring Luther to Rome, this German diplomat knew German conditions and to some extent sympathized with Luther"s denunciation of Tetzel and the sellers of indulgences. He preferred, therefore, to try to settle the controversy and to leave Luther in Germany. Although the pope insisted that Luther must come to Rome and recant, Milt.i.tz arranged for a hearing of the case before a German bishop. Evidently Milt.i.tz was far too optimistic in his representations both to Luther and to the pope. The pope, in a writing dated March 29, 1519, spoke in friendly terms to Luther, and urged him to come to Rome immediately and to make his recantation there. Luther, in the letter dated March 3, 1519, writes in most humble language to the pope, but declares it impossible for him to recant what he had written in the XCV Theses.
The pope"s letter did not reach Luther; Luther"s letter was not forwarded to the pope.
Luther had promised to keep silent if his opponents would do the same, and had devoted himself to the study of the Scriptures. John Eck, however, had no such occupation to keep him from controversy, and Luther was not averse to a debate. At the Leipzig disputation, June 27-July 15, 1519, Luther learned more of the logical implications of his position. The plan of Milt.i.tz had failed, but he would not be discouraged.
When Milt.i.tz went to Germany, it was under the pretence of a mission "to deliver to his elector the papal golden rose, which the latter had coveted in vain for two years."[1] Now he decided to go in person to Augsburg, where it had been deposited with the Fuggers, and present it to Frederick. This also gave an opportunity for a second meeting with Luther at Liebwierde, October 9, 1519. Luther, although placing little confidence in Milt.i.tz, consented to argue his case before the archbishop of Treves. The plan failed, partly because there was no citation for Luther to appear, partly because the Elector would not allow Luther to go without proper safe-conduct, and partly because Milt.i.tz had not tried to prevent Luther"s opponents from challenging him.
In spite of the evident lack of confidence on both sides, and in spite of Luther"s constant progress in opposition to the Roman Church, Milt.i.tz insisted that "the case is not as black as we priests make it," even when a papal bull was issued against Luther on June 15, 1520. On August 28th Milt.i.tz attended a meeting of the Augustinian monks in Eisleben, and obtained their promise that Luther should be requested to write a letter to the pope a.s.suring him that he had never attacked the pope"s person. On September 11th Luther reported to Spalatin what he had done, and said that, although neither he nor his fellow-monks had any confidence in the plan, he would do Milt.i.tz the favor of writing such a letter. This promise seemed meaningless to him after the bull against him had been published. The papal bull had been obtained by Eck, whom Milt.i.tz now considered to be subst.i.tuted for himself in dealing with Luther, in spite of the authority he had received. That the bull was ignored in some places and despised in others, pleased him and gave him new courage. There might, after all, be some chance for him to make use of his diplomatic skill.
Again he invited Luther to meet him in Lichtenberg. They met in the monastery of St. Anthony on October 12th, and Luther renewed his promise to write to the pope, to send the letter within twelve days, and to date it back to September 6th, that the appearance of intimidation by the papal bull might be avoided. It was agreed that Luther should send with the letter an historical account of his difficulties with the Roman Church which would show that Eck was the chief instigator, and that Luther had been forced to take the positions he defended. In writing, however, the historical review became a part of the letter, and a treatise of far different tone was sent as a gift to the pope, and as an evidence of the kind of work Luther would prefer to do if his opponents permitted him to choose--the Treatise on Christian Liberty.
It is again a question whether the pope received this letter. It has been an interesting speculation for more than one writer, what the thoughts and feelings of Leo the Tenth might have been if he did receive and read it. Schaff traces the progress of Luther in the three letters he wrote to the pope: "In his first letter to the pope, 1518, Luther had thrown himself at his feet as an obedient son of the vicar of Christ; in his second letter, 1519, he still had addressed him as a humble subject, yet refusing to recant his conscientious convictions; in his third and last letter he addressed him as an equal, speaking to him with great respect for his personal character even beyond his deserts, but denouncing in the severest terms the Roman See, and comparing him to a lamb among wolves, and to Daniel in the den of lions."[2] If the pope ever read it, "it must have filled him with mingled feelings of indignation and disgust."
We may go even farther. Luther thinks of St. Bernard"s att.i.tude toward Pope Eugene, and Bernard was Eugene"s superior in the Cistercian order and had been looked up to as "father." Luther writes as a father confessor to a friend in trouble, and might have quoted Bernard"s words: "I grieve with you. I should say, I grieve with you if, indeed, you also grieve. Otherwise I should have rather said, I grieve for you; because that is not grieving with another when there is none who grieves. Therefore if you grieve, I grieve with you; if not, still I grieve, and then most of all, knowing that the member which is without feeling is the farther removed from health and that the sick man who does not feel his sickness is in the greater danger."[3]
The pope was a humanist, not a spiritually minded priest; we may, therefore, believe that Charles Beard is not far wrong in his estimate of the possible effect of this letter upon him: "If Giovanni de Medici, the head of a house which had long come to consider itself princely, and the occupant of the Fisherman"s chair, when it claimed to be the highest of earthly thrones, read this bold apostrophe, addressed to him by a "peasant and a peasant"s son," he must have thought him mad with conceit and vanity. He was incapable of being touched by the moral n.o.bleness of the appeal, and so audacious a contempt of merely social distinctions the world has rarely seen."[4]
After the mighty thunder of the Address to the Christian n.o.bility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, the Treatise on the Liberty of a Christian Man is, indeed, like a still, small voice. Luther himself says: "Unless I am deceived, it is the whole of Christian living in a brief form." Perhaps we may trace here also the influence of St.
Bernard"s _De Consideratione_, which was written as a devotional book for the pope and was a manual of Christian living for the pope, as this is a manual of Christian living or all Christians.
It has been rather difficult for the enemies of Luther to find much fault with this book. The Catholic historians, Janssen and Hergenrother, do not mention it. Grisar characteristically devotes a little s.p.a.ce to each of the three great writings of 1520, and considers the book on Christian Liberty as the most mischievous of them all. "It does, indeed, frequently bring its false thoughts in the form of that mystical, heart-searching style which Luther learned from older German models."[5] The French Catholic, Leon Cristiani, is far more generous in his estimate: "A truly religious spirit breathes in these pages. Provoking polemic is almost entirely avoided. Here one finds again the inspiration of the great mystics of the Middle Ages.
Does not the "Imitation" continually describe the powerlessness of man when left to himself, the infinite mercy of G.o.d, the great benefit of the redemption of Christ? Does it not preach the necessity of doing all things through love, nothing of necessity? He is not a true Christian who would venture to disapprove the pa.s.sages in which Luther speaks so eloquently of the goodness of G.o.d, of the grat.i.tude which it should inspire in us, of the spontaneity which should mark our obedience, of the desire of imitating Christ which should inspire us."[6]
Protestants consider this book "perhaps the most beautiful of Luther"s writings, the result of religious contemplation rather than of theological labor."[7] "It takes rank with the best books of Luther, and rises far above the angry controversies of his age, during which he composed it, in the full possession of the positive truth and peace of the religion of Christ."[8] The clear presentation of the thought of the liberty of a Christian man occurs at the close of the Tessaradecas.[9] In the Babylonian Captivity Luther had promised to publish a treatise on the subject after he had seen the effect of that treatise.[10] But the promise to send a treatise to the pope gave him an earlier opportunity, so that barely a month and a half intervened between the publication of the Captivity, October 6th, and that of the Liberty, middle of November. The German, although a translation in part and in part an abbreviation and rewriting of the Latin, appeared first, before November 16th. The publisher, seeing his opportunity, had, however, issued the Letter to the Pope in German separately before November 4th,[11] so that a new dedicatory letter, addressed to Hieronymus Mulphordt (Muhlpfort), of Zwickau, was prefixed to the German edition.
Our translation is made from the Latin, although the German has been compared wherever it is a real translation.
Two translations into English appeared in the sixteenth century: one printed by John Byddell before 1544, the translation being, according to Preserved Smith,[12] by John Tewkesbury; the other, prepared by James Bell and printed by Ralph Newbery and H. Bynneman, in 1579.
Unfortunately, neither of these was accessible to the present translators. Modern translations, into English by Wace and Buchheim, and into German by Lemme, have been consulted.
W. A. LAMBERT.
South Bethlehem, PA.