easy to make a distinction between the Romish church and the Romish court. Among the people at large, attention to blemishes in the church, and the desire for reforms, became more general. And even among the higher clergy of Germany, some men arose who not only chimed in with the general complaints, but, in their sphere, actually attempted reforms; while others, through shame, were at least silent. John, bishop of Meissen, of the Salhausic family, one of the most noble and pious bishops which Germany then had, absolutely refused to tolerate any indulgence-preacher in his diocese, although he was complained of at Rome for it ;* and Lorenzo of Bibra, bishop of Würtsburg, gave Luther's first attempts at reformation, his bold and decided approbation, while he pressingly admonished the elector, by no means to send away the pious man, (as he called Luther,) who was most unrighteously persecuted by his adversaries.†

Such was the state of things, when Luther's theses against indulgences, were first published in Germany. Probably their appearance could not have occurred at a more propitious mo

ment.

It is therefore at once obvious, how many reasons Luther could here find, to quiet his mind in regard to the consequences he might bring on himself; or rather, how natural it was, that he should at first think of just no consequences at all in the case. Hence it can best be explained, how it came to pass, that Luther was frightened at these very consequences, when they began to develop themselves. It was, indeed, merely for a moment; but still he was mightily troubled. For, as he had thought of no such consequences, he was prepared for none; and his courage sunk so much the sooner, when these were developed, and this became the more apparent, only because he had not believed any special courage would be needful for his undertaking.

In an inconceivably short time, the theses were spread in all the countries of Germany, and Luther's name was universally known. They were not, indeed, received with the loud applause of admiration, which so rarely attends real merit; nor was his name stared at as a prodigy that powerfully attracted the expectation of the age. But the propositions made the

* See Chytrii Neue Sachsenchronik. Leipsic, 1597. B. II. p. 69. + Seckendorf, l. c. p. 29, from Spalatin's Life of Frederic the Wise. "In less than ten days," says Myconius, "the propositions flew through all Germany; and through nearly all Christendom within four weeks."

deeper impression in secret, the longer the heads and the hearts of the people had been prepared for them.* The seed fell on good ground, which was already prepared to receive it; and it was only a part of the enlightened men of the nation, that silently wondered at the boldness of the monk who ventured to sow it in open day. Several of these, indeed, only approved in their heart this boldness, for which they had not sufficient courage themselves; and were kept back from giving their public approbation, merely for that reason. Others, on the contrary, were not afraid to encourage Luther by their applause ; but were prevented from doing so perhaps simply because they could not value his boldness, as did the other class, and could not, like them overlook the possible consequences of his undertaking. But this, as has just been shown, did not immediately succeed as Luther had calculated; and this now frightened him. The frank-hearted man had not only hoped for the approbation, but had expected the efficient support of those who alone could adequately support him; that is, that the bishops, or at least the most respectable literati of the nation, would openly unite with him, and shield him by their accession, from the hatred of the enraged Dominicans, which he must indeed. have foreseen. And this hope failed him. Some bishops, even such as he had esteemed truly pious men, openly expressed their disapprobation of his undertaking; which those, who judged most favorably of it, called well-meant rashness. Some of the most distinguished scholars of the nation, were at least si

Erasmi Epp. XV. 15. “No one was ignorant, that the church was borne down by tyranny and ceremonies and human decrees, invented for the sake of gain. And now, many were either desiring or seeking a remedy."

est.

Here, again, Erasmus is our most credible witness; and the following passage from a letter written to a cardinal, is one of his strong"I saw that each one, in proportion as his own morals were good and his piety evangelical, was the less hostile to Luther. His life, too, was commended by those who could not endure his doctrine. But as to the spirit of the man, of which God only can judge with certainty, I prefer, as is right, to think well rather than ill. Finally, the world, as though now tired of the doctrine that pressed too strongly for the little inventions and institutions of men, appeared to thirst for that pure and living draught, derived from evangelic and apostolic veins. To this especially, he seemed to me both formed by nature and excited by study." Erasini Epp. XIV. I. n. 650.

lent; and among these, were not only the Erasmuses, but also the Staupitzes. But the approbation of judicious individuals, a Spalatin or a John Langen, could no longer quiet him, when, dejected through disappointed expectations, he even relapsed again into some doubts which he thought he had conquered, and believed he had the authority of the whole church against him, because her chiefs had condemned him, and her teachers were silent. He himself depicts the contest which these doubts cost him, more impressively than any other hand could describe it, and states, that under them, all his courage had well nigh failed him. But, fortunately for the truth, what his friends did not venture to do, his enemies and theirs accomplished. In view of his opponents, who now publicly declared against him, all that decision, which had at first subdued his scruples, again awoke in Luther's soul.

It was not long, before Tetzel put forth his anti-theses against Luther's theses, which he proposed publicly to defend at Frankfort on the Oder. They were anti-theses, in the appropriate sense, in which was maintained, for the most part, simply

* "What, or in what manner, my heart endured and stood it out, for the first and the second year, and in whatever humility, I would almost say despair, I floated, ah! those careless souls then little knew, who afterwards attacked the pope's majesty with great pride and audacity; although with all their art, they would not have been able to bend the pope a single hair, if Christ, through me, his weak and unworthy instrument, had not already gashed him with an incurable wound. But, while they were gazing at me, and left me alone in the danger, I was not so light-hearted, confident, and certain of the cause; for I knew but little of what, thank God, I now know. Many pious men were then found, who took great pleasure in my propositions, and held to many of them. But it was impossible for me to regard and acknowledge them as members of the church, endowed with the Holy Ghost. I looked only on the pope, the cardinals, the bishops, the jurists, the monks, the priests. Thence I expected the spirit. And when I had, through the Scriptures, overcome all the arguments that lay in my way, I at last, with much anxiety, care, and labor, by the grace of Christ, scarcely overcame this remaining one, namely, that we ought to hear the church. For, I regarded the pope's church as the true church, with much greater earnestness and real veneration, (and that from the heart,) than do these pernicious and blasphemous perverters, who now highly extol the pope's church in opposition to me." T. I. 4, 5.

the antithesis to what Luther had espoused. In the first ten, were explained the penances and punishments which could be remitted by means of indulgences, and the effect of indulgences was extended over all; but yet, according to the fourteenth of these counter theses, those punishments are excepted which may be regarded as aids and preservatives against the sin for which, according to the sixteenth, there should be works of satisfaction. According to the thirtieth and thirty-first, the smallest degree of repentance, which may occur even at the end of life, is sufficient for the pardon of sins, and the eternal punishishment is changed into a temporary one; but from just this position, the conclusion is drawn in the thirty-third proposition, that they act like mad men, who prevent such people from procuring indulgences, because, on account of the shortness of the time, such terrible punishments may be inflicted on the dead as we ought speedily to relieve through plenary indulgence. Luther's proposition, that the dying make full satisfaction by their very death, and are dead to the law of the canon, from whose penalties they thus become released, was directly denied by Tetzel, in the thirty-fourth and thirty-ninth; and his conjectures on the condition of souls in purgatory, were exhibited as errors. See fortieth to forty-third. The whole view which Luther had presented of indulgences, was denounced as false, namely, that the pope can thereby remit no other penalties but barely those which himself has imposed according to his own judgment or according to the canon law; and that, in all other cases, he could forgive sins in no other sense than that of declaring and confirming what may be forgiven by God (45). It was also expressly affirmed, that through the papal indulgence, all penalties without exception are remitted, even those in purgatory which, according to the canon, ought to have been expiated before in this life. The doctrine of the indulgence-preachers, that others can procure effectual indulgence for their friends in purgatory, without holding repentance and sorrow necessary, was confirmed, (64); but, on the contrary, (65), Luther's doctrine was rejected, that every Christian that has true repentance and sorrow for his sins, has full remission of all pain and guilt,

Few readers will need to be informed, that what are termed indulgences, were either a pardon for past or a license for future sins, as the case might require; and were therefore procured for the dead as well as for the living.—TR.

without any indulgence. It was taught (90-94), that the treasure of the church, whence the pope takes his indulgence, consists of the merits of Christ and the saints; and that the keys of the church are not included, but that the merits of Christ and the saints effect a speedy and perfect satisfaction, without the least remission, and without the pope's application and conveyance. Therefore to maintain (it was finally said, 98)," that the treasure of indulgences is a net to catch people's money, is utterly an ungodly error."

With these anti-theses, in part very severe, Tetzel did not content himself, but published a separate confutation of Luther's sermon on indulgence, in which the effect of indulgences was still more strongly affirmed, and, in very definite terms, extended to all penalties affixed by divine justice to sin.* But his whole fury against Luther, he poured forth in other anti-theses, which came out soon after this confutation. This second set of anti-theses (which betrayed the bitterest monkish hatred, and, written in the true Dominican spirit of an inquisitor, were directed particularly, not against Luther's doctrine, but against his person), first excited the whole indignation of the Wittenberg doctor, and diverted the contest from the first object, inasmuch as they turned it to the doctrine of the authority and the power of the pope, and thus made it more dangerous for both parties, as they made it the more vehement. On account of the connexion with the following history, at least the most striking of them must here be quoted.

3. Christians should be taught, that the pope, by the height of his power, is above the whole universal church and councils, and that his commands should be obeyed with all submission.

4. Christians, etc. that the pope alone has authority to curtail and decide in all matters of christian faith; that he alone, and no one else, has the power to explain the meaning of holy

* Luther's sermon on indulgence, T. I. Lat. Jen. 11. Ger. I. 46. and Tetzel's refutation, Losch. Doc. I. 484-503. In this refutation, Luther was no more inentioned than in the first theses; but Tetzel surrounded himself with arch-heretics, heretics, pernicious persons, and seducers, and would leave the kind intelligent reader to guess to whom these names belonged.

These were indeed printed in 1517, but first publicly discussed at Frankfort, Jan. 20, 1518. Lösch. Doc. I. 503. They are found, T. I. Jen. Lat. p. 7. and Ger. I. 16.