Manual of universal church history.
Manual of universal church history.
Alzog, Johannes Baptist, 1808-1878., Pabisch, Francis Joseph, tr. d 1879,, Byrne, Thomas Sebastian, joint tr. 1841-1923,

Page  [unnumbered]

Page  [unnumbered]

Page  [unnumbered]

Page  [unnumbered]

Page  I MANUAL OF Universal Church History.;BY THE REV. DR. JOHN ALZOG, Professor of Theology at the University of Freiberg. TRANSLATED, WITH ADDITIONS, FROM THE NINTH AND LAST GERMAN EDITION, BY F. J. PABISCH, Doctor of Theology, of Canon and of Civil Lazw, President of the Provinciat Seminary of Mount St. 1Mary's of the West, Cincinnati, O. AND Rev. THOS. S. BYRNE, Professor at Mount St. Mlary's Seminary. In Three Volumes. WITH CHRONOLIGICAL TABLES AND ECCLESIASTICO-GROGRAPHI CAL MAPS. VOL UME SII. CINCINNATI, O. ROBERT CLARKE & CO. 1878.

Page  II Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1878, by ROBERT CLARKE & CO., In the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. Stereotyped by CAMPBELL & CO., Cincinnati.

Page  III PREFACE. WE take pleasure in congratulating Rev. Doctor Pabisch, President of St. Mary's Seminary, and Rev. Thomas S. Byrne,. on the completion of their great work, the translation into English of the Manual of Universal Church History, by Rev. Dr. John Alzog, Professor of Theology in the University of Freiburg, Brisgan, Baden. The "Additions" and Notes appended to this confessedly great work by our American translators give it, in the judgment of Catholic and non-Catholic readers and scholars, a character of originality, and stamp it as worthy of taking rank with the best productions on the important subject of which it treats, and of supplying a want which, we say it with due reverence, our best historians, or biographers, or hagiographers have, for various reasons and circumstances, left unsatisfied. It has been unwisely said that an historian, in order to be truthful, just, and reliable, should have neither country nor religion, or that he should be entirely free from prejudice. As well might it be exacted, that he should not be a human being. A Catholic is required by his holy faith to be just and truthful in all his dealings with his fellow man. Ile knows that his religion, the work of God, has no need of the support or advocacy of falsehood, which it spurns and condemns. The inspired writers of the Old and New Testament have set Church Historians the example, which they follow, of stating the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth-no suppression, no concealment, no reticence. If we disclaim the guidance of writers of the highest note, when we detect them perverting the facts of history, or seeking to substitute for them their own opinions or fancies, their errors (iii)

Page  IV iv Preface. and prejudices, we turn with confilence and joy to writers like Alzog, who, " nullius adstrictus jurare in verba magistri," speaks out what he honestly believes to be the truth, in Posen, in Freiburg, and in Rome. We long since read a learned work, in French, called "Pr6jugts l6gitimes." We were then, we are now, convinced that its teachings are sound. We are, if we must use the word, "prejudiced" in favor of the heavenly lessons taught us in the Bible atnd in our Catechism. For the self same reason, we trust the knowledge communicated to us in a good Church Ilistory by men who have read and conscientiously pondered on every work on the subject, from the first, the Acts of the Apostles, to those of the Greek and Latin Fathers-our earliest and latest writersand who have had access to the best libraries at home and abroad, who have, in Rome, in Germany, and elsewhere, dispassionately weighed the criticisms of learned men on the narratives of all shades of opinion and belief, who have spent their lives in discussing the events connected with the Church's eventful history, since the birth of Christ and previously. If the whole people of God, the Jews of old, are-what can be said of no other people-witnesses and custodians of the truth of divine revelation, we can, without fear of error or contradiction, say that the stupendous effects of the nission of the Catholic Church, are as clear and unmistakable as those of IIoly Scripture. Neitlher Genesis nor the HIeavens more evidently proclaim the work of God, the glory of God. In presenting this wondrous tableau of the work of God in the Church, and by the Church, which God founded fir this purpose, the translators (and we say, to a considerable extent, the authors) of these nmost precious volumes-too large, it has been said, for use in Ecclesastical Seminaries, but which can easily be subdivided-have presented to American students a unique work, that is one the like of which we have not seen before in use, or in our libraries.

Page  V Preface. v It is not for their own praise, but to inspire readers and students with confidence, that Rev. Dr. Pabisch and Rev. Thos. S. Byrne, who have labored so generously, so strenuously, at this most valuable production, have been induced to publish the unsolicited notices thereof which have been taken by the press in America and Europe, for which they are duly thankful. To the publishers we can not sufficiently express our obligations for the generous and able manner in which, regardless of expense, they have presented this History to the public. It is hardly necessary we should suggest that a work of this magnitude has involved proportionable expense. To cover this expense, we need a liberal patronage for the History, especially from the reverend clergy and from serious students generally. The work is not intended for the public at large, but for students and scholars. And yet, we can not forbear from reminding all that Church History is an Encyclopaedia. It is intimately connected with the history of the entire human race. As the idea of Bossuet's Universal History originated in the desire of that truly great man to show to the world how God designed that the progress and development of the nations of the earth were to proceed, if not pari passu, at least side by side, with the propagation of the Gospel and the Church, it follows that neither is to be an isolated fact-that the providence of God, the divine administration of human governments and events, is to be adored, as it is manifested in both orders; and thus, that on earth, as in Heaven, in the State, as in the Church, God is all in all. t J. B. PURCELL, Archbishop of Cincinnati. MOUNT ST. MARY'S OF THE WEST, FEAST OF OUR LADY OF MOUNT CARMEL, A. D. 1878.

Page  VI

Page  VII TO THE READER. AFTER six years of ceaseless labor the translators and editors of Dr. Alzog's Universal Church History have the satisfaction of presenting the work complete to their subscribers and to the general public. They feel confident that they have not only redeemed their plighted faith with their kind patrons, but given them a great deal more than they had first intended to do. Their work is not a mere rendition of the original text, but a homogeneous enlargement, suited to the, wants of the civilized world, now headed by the Englishspeaking community. Whilst the revered German author, the late Dr. Alzog, was followed with scrupulous fidelity throughout the work, and his own amendments down to our own day faithfully embodied in this volume, a due regard to the ninety millions of English-speaking Christians required a fuller and more independent treatment of our own ecclesiastical affairs, and hence the Church HIistory of America,. Great Britain, and Ireland, and the history of the Vatican Council, and of Christian Missions, both Catholic and Protestant, had to be rewritten. As in the two preceding volumes, so also in this, synoptical tables of the leading events and of Councils were added to the original. As to an essential improvement upon the original we point to the Ecclesiastical Maps, gratuitously superadlded to the Manual of Universal Church IIistory. Ten months of patient labor on the part of the constructor and engraver of the maps were required for their completion. The maps, subordinate one to the other, are not only illustrative of the present manual, but, moreover, supply welcome information to every(vii)

Page  VIII viii To the Reader. student of ecclesiastical history, geography, and statistics. TThe information concerning the hierarchical organization of the Catholic World is absolutely complete; the localities of all the higher educational establishments of the Catholic Church in America, and of the universities in Europe, have been carefully pointed out; and the circumscription of all the dioceses of North America has been accurately traced. Want of space, however, precluded the possibility of being equally full in giving similar information concerning other parts of the world. It will be seen that foreign missions, both Cath-,lic and Protestant, have received such attention in these,maps as the paramount importance of the subject obviously demands. The latest edition of the Gerarchia Cattolica (Rome, 1878); the American Catholic Almanac of 1878; James Neher's Ecclesiastical Geography and Statistics; Dr. Grundemann's General Missionary Atlas; A. K. Johnston's National Atlas of Geography, Black's Modern Atlas, and Gray's Atlas of the United States, besides many other sources of information have been extensively used in the preparation of these hierarchical, hiero-scholastic, and Christian Missionary Maps. The topography of the " Orthodox " Greek Church is complete for all countries except the Turkish Empire; and even there, seventy-two sees out of ninety-three in Turkey Proper in Europe, and the patriarchates, with the chief metropolitan sees in Turkey in Asia, have been located. Thle number of bishoprics belonging to each patriarchate has also been given. Of the Protestant Episcopal sees some are indicated in the maps, and the remainder given in the table at p. 1092. Thie Catholic sees whose suppression was occasioned by the Reformation have also been specified. THE TRANSLATORS.

Page  IX SYNOPTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE THIRD VOLUME. THIRD PERIOD. FROM THE WESTERN SCHISM BY LUTHER DOWN TO OUIJR OWN TIMES (1517-1878). FIRST EPOCH. From the Rise of Protestantism to the Treaty of Westphalia (1517-1648). PAGE. 298. Sources-Works by Protestants and Catholics-General Character of this Period...................................... 1 CHAPTER I. Religious M1ovements in Germany and Switzerland. j 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences-His First Adversaries...... 6 300. Negotiation between Rome and Luther-Disputation at LeiFsigEck, Emser, Carlstadt, and Melanchthon................................. 18 301. Affinity of Luther's Religious System to the Code of the Robber Knights and the Principles of Paganism.................................. 26 302. Luther's Condemnation-Publication of the Bull of Excommunication................................................................................. 33 303. The Diet of Worms, 1521-Luther at Wartburg......................... 36 304. Death of Leo X.-His Character............................... 43 305. The Diet of Niirnberg, 1522.................................................... 44 306. Efforts of Melanchthon and Luther to spread the New Teachings... 47 307. The Diet of Niirnberg, 1524.................................................... 50 308. Disorders at Wittenberg, caused by Carlstadt-The Anabaptists and the Peasants' War.............................................. 52 309. Henry VIII., King of England, and Erasmus oppose LutherMarriage of Luther............................................................... 61 310. Organizaton of the Lutheran Church in Hesse and Saxony........... 6$ 311. Diets of Spire (1526, 1529).................................... 71 312. Diet of Augsburg, 15.30-Augsburg Confession-Catholic Refutation-Recess of the Diet....................................................... 76 (ix)

Page  X I:x Contents. PAGE_ # 313. Zwingli and Oecolampadius....................................................... 87 314. Zwingli's System..................................................................... 98 315. The Sacramentarian Controversy............................................ 101 316. Progress of Protestantism in Germany until the Interim of Ratisbon (1541).......................................................................... 109 317. The Anabaptists at Muinster —Bigamy of the landgrave, Phlip of Hesse.......................................................................... 115 318. Fresh Acts of Violence by Protestants-Renewed attempts to Adjust Religious Difficulties...................................................... 121 319. Death of Luther-His Public Character.................................... 126 320. The Schmalkaldic War-Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555)Resignation and Death of Charles V............................... 133 321. Calvin and his Reform at Geneva-Beza...................................... 143 322. Calvin's System................................................ 150 CHAPTER II. Propagation of Protestantism in Europe. # 323. Protestantism in Prussia......................................................... 156 324. " " Silesia............................................ 159 325. " " Poland......................................... 164 326. " " Livonia, Courland, Esthonia, Hungary, and Transylvania............................................ 171 327. " " Sweden........................................................ 175 328. " " Denmark, Norway, and Iceland........................ 188 329. " " England....................................................... 191 330. " " Scotland...................................................... 228 331. " " Ireland.................................................... 235 332. " " France........................................................ 269 333. " " the Netherlands........................................ 284 334. General Causes of the Rapid Spread of Protestantism.................. 291 CHAPTER III. Continuation of the History of Protestantism-Its Internal Dissensionls. i 335. General Characteristics of I'rotestantism........................ 298 336. The Protestant Clergy-Their Rlights-Their Relations to the State-Episcopal, Territorial, and C'ollgiate Stystem..................... 302 337. Worship and Discipline......................................................... 305 338. Protestant Exegetics.............................................................. 309 389. Mystics and Visionaries......................................................... 312 340. Controversies within the Reformed and Lutheran Churches.......... 315 341. Sects among the Protestants..................................................... 331 CHAPTER IV. History of the Catholic Church. 342. Summary............................................................................ 339 843. The Ecumenical Council of Trent...................................... 340 844. Other Popes of this Epoch....................................................... 360

Page  XI Contents. xi PAGE. 8345a. The Papacy......................................................................... 368 345b. The Secular and Regular Clergy-Revival of Synods.................. 370 346. The Order of the Jesuits....................................................... 373 347. Labors of the Jesuits............................................................. 381 348. The Other Orders................................................... 386 349. Foreign Missions.................................................. 401 350. Theological Science in the Catholic Church................................ 411 351. New Controversies on Grace-Brius, AMolina, Jansenius................. 424 352. Art still in the Service of the Church......................................... 431 353. Religious Life................................................ 437 CHAPT]ER V. Relation of Catholics to Protestants.: 354. Attempts at Reconciliation................................. 442 355. The l' hirty Years' War..................................................... 447 356. The Peace of Westphalia........................................................ 455 CHAPTER VI. The Greek Church. 8 357. The Greek Church under the Turks.......................................... 461 358. Relations of the Greek Church to the Lutheran, Calvinist, and Catholic Churches................................................................ 463 359. The Graeco-Russian Church under its own Patriarchs.................. 468 360. The Monophysites and Nestorians............................................ 472 SECOND EPOCH. From the Peace of Westphalia down to Modern Times (1648-1878). PART FIRST. From the Peace of Westphalia to the French Revolution (1789). I; 361. Sources and Works-Summary.......................................... 476 CHAPTER I. History of the Catholic Church. 62, Popes of the Seventeenth Century................................... 478 363. Popes of the Eighteenth Century............................................ 485 364. The Gallican Church-Gallican Liberties.4....................... 497 365. Jansenism —Case of Conscience-Quesnel-Schism of Utrecht.......... 500 366. Quietism-Molinos, Guyon, FKnlon............................................. 510 367. Literature of the Gallican Church.......................................... 517 368. Decline of Religious and Theological Science in France-Influence of the Free-thinkers of England............................................. 522 869. The Catholic Church in Italy and Spain............................... 531 370. The Catholic Church in Germany...................................... 536 871. Literary Activity-Unbelief-Superstition in Germany............ 548.372. Political and Religious Disturbances in Poland.........................58

Page  XII xii Contents. PAGE, 6 378a. The Suppression of the Society of Jesus.................................... 662 373b. Worship and Discipline from the Sixteenth Century.................. 672 374. Spread of Christianity............................................................. 576 CHAPTER II. History of Protestantism,. & 375. On the Constitution of the Protestant Churches and their Relations to the State-The Collegial System.......................................... 585 376. Dogma and Theologians........................................................... 687 377. Abandonment of Symbols as Rules of Dogmatic Belief-Influence of Modern Philosophy and its Consequences.......................... 592878. Biblical Theologians-The False Enlightenment of NeologismClassical Literature of Germany............................................. 598 879. The Herrnhutters.................................................... 606 380. The Quakers.............................. 608 381. The Methodists............................... 610 382. The Swedenborgians or Church of the New Jerusalem................ 614 383. Protestant Missions......................66....................................... 616 884. Relations of Catholics to Protestants.......................................... 618 885. The Russian Church under the Permanent Synod........................ 622, PART SECOND. From the French Revolution down to Our Own Day (1789-1878). j 386. General Literature-Importance of Modern Church History........... 626 CHAPTER I. History of the Catholic Church. 8 387. The French National Assembly (La Constituante), 1789-1791......... 629 388. Legislative Assembly-N ational Convention-Directory-Consulate-Theophilanthropists......................................................... 642 889. The Roman Republic-Pius VI.; he dies in exile......................... 650 890. Pontificate of Pius VII.-French Empire.................................... 652 391. Disagreement between the Pope and the Emperor........................ 664 392. Sad Condition of the Church in Germany, Italy, and Spain........... 675 893. The Restoration...................................................................... 681 394. Rehabilitation of the Pope-Re-establishment of the Jesuits......... 683 895. Reorganization of the Catholic Church in Sardinia and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies...................................................... 687 396. The Catholic Church in Germany-Congress of Vienna............... 688 397. Pontificate of Leo XII. and Pius VIIL....................................... 691 398. Pontificate of Gregory XVI. (1831-1846)................................ 694 399. The Catholic Church in France under the Bourbons..................... 699 400. Continuation - The Catholic Church in France under Louis Philippe............................................................................. 706 401. The Catholic Church in Spain.................................................. 715 402. The Catholic Church in Portugal............................................. 722.

Page  XIII Contents. xiii PAGE. 403. New Birth of the Church in Great Britain and Ireland................. 725 404. The Catholic Church in Belgium and Holland............................. 738 405. The Catholic Church in Switzerland..................................... 744 406. The Catholic Church in Austria............................................. 752 407. The Catholic Church in Bavaria................................ 757 408. The Catholic Church in Prussia....................................... 762 409. The Ecclesiastical Province of the Upper Rhine.......................... 771 410. The Catholic Church in Russia................................................. 779 THE PONTIFICATE OF PIUS IX. 411. His Political Activity............................................................. 782 412. His Energy in Ecclesiastical Affairs........................................... 791 413a and b. The Twentieth Ecumrenical Council of the Vatican and its Immediate Consequences.................................................... 802, 815 414. Revival of Religion in different Countries since 1846-In Portugal and Spain................................... 829 415. In France.................................................................. 834 416. In Belgium and Holland............................... 843 417. In Great Britain and Ireland................................................... 847 418. In Germany and Switzerland................................................ 863 419. Catholic Literature in Germany since the Opening of the Nineteenth Century.................................................................... 885 420. Activity of the Catholics of Germany in the Field of Speculative Theology............................................................................ 900 421. Sects in Germany.................................................................... 910 422. The Catholic Church in Russia and Poland............................... 918 423. The Missions of the Catholic Church....................................... 921 CHAPTER II. History of Protestantism. SECTION FIRST. History of Theology and of the Church in Germany. a 424. Futile Efforts to Preserve the Symbols of Protestantism.............. 965 425. Influence of Modern Philosophy................................................ 970 426. The Ultimate Results of the Free Interpretation of Holy Scriptures................................................................................... 975 427. The Theology of Compromise and Independent Theology............. 978 428. Revival of Lutheranism-Modern Orthodoxy.............................. 984 429. The More Important Religious Movements in Germany: (a.) In Prussia; (b.) Outside of Prussia............................. 989, 991 4830. Religious and Charitable Societies........................................ 992 SECTION SECOND. History of Protestantism Outside of Germany. 431. Protestantism in Denmark, Sweden, Holland, France, Great Britain, and America............................................................. 994

Page  XIV xiv Contents. PAGE. # 432. Enumeration of Sects, Ancient and Modern.............................. 1003 433. Protestant Missions and Bible Societies........................... 1006 434. Respective Situation of Catholics and Protestants....................... 1015 435. Conclusion..................................... i.............................. 1025 I. Chronological Table of Popes and Emperors................................ 1031 II. Cllronological Table of Principal Personages and Events.............. 1033 III. Chronological Table of Councils................................................. 1046 IV. General Index..................................................................... 1051 V. Table of Indian Tribes of the U. S............................................. 1091 VI. Table of Protestant Episcopal Sees out of the United Kingdom...... 1092 VII. Ecclesiastical Maps.

Page  1 THIRD PERIOD. FROM THE WESTERN SCHISM BY LUTHER DOWN TO OUR OWN TIMES (1517-1878). FIRST EPOCIH. FROM THE RISE OF PROTESTANTISM TO ITS POLITICAL RECOGNITION BY THE TREATY OF WESTPHALIA (1517-1648). ~ 298. Sotrees. Works. General Clharacter of This Period. A. POLITICAL SOURCES AND WOREKS..-I. Guicciardini, see Bibliography heading ] 265.-P. Jovio, Hist. sui temp. (1498-1513; 1521-27). Flor., 1550 sq., 2 T. f. Adriani, Ist. de suoi tempi (1536-74). Flor. 1583 f.; de T/ou, IIist. sui temp. (1543-1607). Frcf. 1625, 4 T. f., and oftener. Notationes in Thuani historiarum libros, auctore Joh. Gallo J. C. (Jean Machault, S. J.), Ingolstad. 16241, 4to. Goldast., Impp. Rom., Francof. 1607, fol., and Const. impp. Rom. Frcf. 1615, 3 T. f. Koch, Collection of the Recesses of the Empire, Frkft. 17 47, 4 v. f. II. Robertson, Hist. of the Reign of the Emperor Charles V., London, 1769, 3 T. 4to. This is the most valuable of his works. TTgn. Schmidt, Hist. of the Germans, Ulm and Vienna. 1775 sq., Pts. V.-XI. tFrederic veon Buchholz, Ferdinand I., Vienna,' 1832-8, 9 vols. tHurter, Ferdinand II., Schaffh. 1850 sq. Raumer, Hist. of Europe from the End of the Fifteenth Century, Lps. 1832 sq., 7 vols. tGesare Cant~i, Vols. IX. and X. tJbrg, Germany during the Period of Revolutions, 1522-26, from diplomatic correspondence, Freiburg, 1851. The special histories of the several countries in the collections of lleesren and Ukert are to be quoted in the proper places. B. RELIGIOUS SOURCES AND WORKS.-a. Protestant: The biographies and works of Luther, Melanlchthon, and of Zwinglius and Calvin, together with those of their most important partisans in Germany and Switzerland. (The Lives and select writings of the Founders of the Refornmed Church, Elberfeld, 185763, in 10 vols.; of the Lutheran Church, ibid., 1861 sq., 8 vols.) Add to these the following collections: Lbscher, Complete Acts of the Reformation (151719), Lps. 1720 sq., 3 vols. 4to. Kapp, Supplements to the important Documents of the Hist. of the Reformation, Lps. 1727 sq., 4 vols. Strobel, Mliscellanea, Nurnberg, 1778 sq., six numbers, and Literary Essays, 1784 sq., 2 and 5 vols. Wagenseil, Essays on the History of the Reformation, Lps. 1829. Seidemarn,. The Times of the Reformation in Saxony, Dresden, 1846 sq., 2 small vols. Johannsen, Development of the Spirit of Protestantism, or Collection of Important Documents on the Edict of Worms and the Protestation of Spire, Copenhagen, 1830. Neudecker, Documents on the Times of the Reformation, VOL. HI 1

Page  2 49 Period 3. Epoch 1. Cassel, 1836, and Authentic Acts, Nuirnberg, 1838. tDr. Laemmer, Analecta Romana, or Researches on Ecclesiastical History in Roman Libraries and Archives, Schaffhausen, 1861. The same, Monumenta Vaticana hist. eccles. salec. XVI., Friburg. 1861; the same, Supplements to the Ch. H. of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Frbg. 1863; the same, Meletematum Romanor. Mlantissa, Ratisb. 1875. Dollinyer, Supplements to the Political, Ecclesiastical, and Educational History of the Sixteenth Century, Munich, 1865, 2 vols. Christian Scheuels's Letter-book, or Supplements to the Hist. of the Reformation, published by Baron von Roden and Knaackc, Potsdam, 1867-72, 2 vols. Spalatini, Annales Reformationis (to 1543), ed. by Cyprian, Lps. 1768. A new ed. of all his works, by Chr. G. Nceudecker and L. Preller, Jena, 1851 sq. Sleidanus (Professor of Jurisprudence at Strasburg, t 1556), Comment. de statu relig. et reip. Carol. V. Caes. Argentorati, 1555, completed in 1556, and continued down to the year 1564. Londorpius, Francof. 1619, III. T. 4to, multis annotationibus illustrata a Chr. Car. (toward the end), Frcf. 1785, III. T. 8vo. Hiortteder, Reflections on the Causes of the war wa-ged in Germany againlst the League *of Schmalkald (to 1555), Frankft. 1617 sq., 2 vols. f. Von der tHardt, lTist. litt. reform., Frcf. et Lps. 1717 fol. Frid. MIyeconii (Superintendent of Gotha, t 1546) Hist. reformationis (1518-42), published from the manuscript of the author and illustrated in a preface by 1E. S. Cyprian. Another edition appeared at Lps. in 1718. Seckewdorf (t 1692), Comment. hist. et apol. de Lutheranismo, Frcf. et Lps. (1688) i692, fol. (against the Jesuit, Mlaiasbourq). J. Iasncge, Hist. de la rel. des 6glises r6form6es (Rotterd. 1690, 2 vols. 12mo.), La Haye, 1725, 2 vois. 4to. (against Bossuet). Hottingyer, Hist. of the Helvetic Church, Zurich, 1708 sq., 4 vols. 4to. Ruchat, Hist. de la rbforme de la Suisse, Genkve, 1727 sq., 6 vols. 12mo. Beausobre, Hist. de la r6forme (to 1530), Berlin, 1785, 3 vols.:Planck, Hist. of the Rise, the Variations, and the Formation of Protestant Dolgmatics until the Formula of Concord, Lps. 1791-1800, 6 vols. "Dr. Lasnmet, Pre-Tridentine Catholic Theology in the Age of the Reformation, Berlin, 1858. MIarheinecke, Hist. of the Reformation in Germany down to 1535 (1817, 2 vols.), 1831 sq. 4 vols. (Epitome of Seckendorff). *C. A. 3IMezel (t 1855), Modern Hist. of the Germans, from the Reformation to the Act of the German Confederacy, Breslau, 1826-48, 12 vols. (In the preface to the second, third, and fourth volumes, the author complains of the wild passion of Marheinecke), 2d ed., Breslau, 1854-55, in 6 vols. Ranke, Hist. of Germany during the Age of the Reformation, Berlin, 1839, 5 vols., four editions; the last in'Complete Torkls,;' Lps. 1867 sq., Vol. I.-VI. (Cf. Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. IV., p. 540-557; p. 654-668,) and Vienna Annuary, 1841, Vols. 93-96. Villiers, Essai sur l'esprit et l'influence de la r6forme de Luther, Paris, 1802. Schr'cklh, Ch. H. since the Reformation, Lps. 1804-12, 10 parts (parts 9 and 10 by Tzschirner). (TR.) Ha'user, Hist. of the Age of the Reformation, ed. by Onzcken, Berlin, 1868. Hagenbach, Lectures on the Nature and History of the Reformation, Lps. 1834-43, 6 vols. (down to most recent times); fourth revised edition, Lps. 1870-72, of his Hist. of the Church, Vols. III.-VII. The Hist. of the Church in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, in vols. VI. and VII., is an English transl. by J. 1F. Hurst, D.D., New York, 1869. (TR.) Hagen, The Literary and Religious Situation of Germany during the Age of the Reformation, Erlangen, 1841.sq., 3 vols. Dorner, Hist. of Protestant Theology, principally in Germany, Munich, 1867. Schenkel, The Essence of Protestantism, Schaffhausen,

Page  3 ~ 298. Sources- Works-General Character of this Period. 3 1844-51, 3 vols. Merle d'Aub'ignd, Histoire de la Reformation au seizibme siecle (1835-1869), or Hist. of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. More than 300,000 copies of the English translation have been sold in Great Britain and America. It is written with the utmost vivacity, is undoubtedly picturesque, and sometimes even eloquent; but the work has been censured by adverse critics as one-sided, pretentious, and bigoted. Archbp. Spalding called him an arch-perverter of history. Among 1I. D.'s other historical productions areLe Luth6ranisme et la RMforme, Paris, 1844; Le Protecteur, ou la RP6publique d'Angleterre aux Jours de Cromwell (1848). (TR.) Chas. P. KIrauth (D.D., Prof. in the Evang. Lutheran Theological Seminary, etc., in the University of Pennsylvania.) The Conservative Reformation and its Theology, Philadelphia, 1871. (TR.) P. WoRKs BY CATHOLICS.-Surius (Carthusian of Cologne, t 1578), Chronicon ab a. 1500 usque 1566, Colon. 1567, continued to 1573 and often published (against Sleidanus). Simedon Fontaine, Histoire catholique de nostre tems touchant l'estat de la religion chr6tienne, contre l'histoire de J. Sleidan, Anvers, 1558. Roveri Pontani (Carmelite of Brussels) Vera narratio rerum ab a. 1500 usque ad a. 1559, in republica christiana memorabilium, Colon. 1.559 f. (ochlaeus (Canon of Frankfurt on the Main, Mentz, Vienna, and Breslau, t 1552), Commont. de actis et scriptis Lutheri, Mogunt. 1549. Cf. M. de Weldige-Cremer, De Joan. Cochlaei vita et scriptis, Monast. 1865. Otto (of lBreslau), Cochlaeus as a Humanist and His Colloquy with Luther (Austrian Quarterly of Cath. Theol., year 1866, nro. 1). Ulenberg (at first Protestant and student at Wittenberg, then Catholic, t as parish priest at Cologne, 1597), Vitae haeresiarcharum Luth., Melanchth., Majoris, Illyrici, Osiandri. Ejusdem, Causae graves et justae, cur Catholicis in communione veteris ejusque veri Christianismi constanter usque ad vitae finem permanendum sit, etc., Colon. 1589. Cf. the article, "'AntiReformers of the Sixteenth Century," in Aschbach's Eccl. Cyclop., Vol. I.; Raynaldi, Continuatio annal. Baronii, and the historians of the Council of Trent, Paolo Sarpi and Pallavicini.'Bossuet, Hist. des variations des 6glises protestantes, Paris, 1688, 2 vols. 4to; 1734, 4 vols. (in the new edit. of Bossuet's works, Paris, 1836, Vols. V. and VI., with the defense against Jurieu and Basnage). Eng. transl., Antwerp, 1742, 2 vols.; New York, 1850, 2 vols. (TR.) Maimbourg, S. J., Hist. du Luthdranisme, Paris, 1680, 4 vols. The same, Hist. du Calvinisme, Paris, 1682. Varillas, Hist. des R6volutions arrivees dans l'Europe en matiare de Religion; 2d edit., Amst. 1689-90, 6 vols. 5'Riffe, Christian Ch. H. from the great Schism to our own Days, Vol. I., Mentz (1841) 1844 (to the end of the War of the Peasants); Voi. II., 1842 (to the Peace of Religion, 1555); Vol. III. (Zwinglius in Switzerland). tBoost, The Reformation of Germany, Ratisbon, 1845. — Ddllinger, The Reformation, its internal Developments and Effects (according- to the testimony of Protestants), Ratisbon, 1846 sq., 3 vols.; 2d revised and augm. edit., Ratisbon, 1848. (TR.) (5E. von Jarcke), Studies and Sketches of the Hist. of the Reformation, Schaffhausen, 1846. t lVerner, Hist. of Cath. Theol. in Germany, Munich, 1866. Among the Manuals of Ch. Ht., we mention, especially, *D'llinger, Vol. II., Pt. II., being a continuation of Hortig, Landshut, 1828, and'-itter, 6th ed., Vol. II., down to recent times. tPal-na, h. e., T. IV., Rom. 1846. Dr. F. X. Kraus, Text-book of Modern Ch. H. (being Vol. III. of his entire work), Treves, 1875.

Page  4 4 Period 3. Epoch 1. GENERAL CHARACTER OF THIS PERIOD. This period has its own peculiar characteristics, which impress upon it features essentially different from those of the preceding one. These are: 1. In general, a complete severance of the close alliance formerly existing between Church and State; and, in particular, an irreparable rupture between the Papacy and the Empire, of which there were many and unmistakable indications as early as the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 2. A sundering of the bond of unity by faith, giving rise in the countries of Christian Europe, heretofore united and professing but one religion, to three distinct religious bodiesviz., Lutheran, Reformed or Calvinistic, and Anglican, not to speak of countless minor sects-all wholly external to and in revolt against the Catholic Church, whose numbers were greatly diminished by their apostasy. 3. Hence, once the exclusive importance attached to faith by the early reformers had been rejected, the steady hold which religious truths had on men's minds was shaken, and the religious view of life and tone of science, so characteristic of the preceding period, were superseded among Protestants by a so-called Humanism, and, through the consistent development of the latter, by an infidel, worldly, and anti-Christian spirit. 4. Again, this religious schism alienated science from religion; profaned the sanctity of domestic life; inaugurated a spirit of controversy which not unfrequently carried disputants to unseemly excesses; engendered ceaseless strifes; and called forth feelings of mutual distrust and estrangement.' 5. Finally, the schism was the cause and occasion of political revolutions so violent and far-reaching, that, in many countries, the introduction of Protestantism was accompanied by a change of dynasty, and in Poland and Ireland by a loss of national independence. Modern, like ancient and mediseval Church History, is 1On the influence of the schism on literature, see *Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. XIX., year 1847, in three articles.

Page  5 ~ 298. General Character of this Period.,divided into two epochs-the first embracing the interval between 1517 and 1648, and the second that between the Treaty of Westphalia and our own day. To give a full and spirited exposition of the events of the first epoch, it will be convenient to make the pseudo-ecclesiastical reform of Luther, which was in fact the mainspring of the religious and political commotions that took place in the interval, the cardinal fact, to which all others are to be more or less directly referred. Hence, it will be necessary to trace the history of this pseudo-reform in its origin, progress, and development; to watch the course of the hitherto dominant Catholic Church; to observe her policy, movements, counter-movements, and the fresh display of her energies; and, finally, to note the relations of the various sects to each other. The reasons for so arranging the subject-matter of the first epoch of this period that the history of Protestantism will for the time be brought forward with greater prominence than that of the Catholic Church, will be obvious from the above considerations. In the second,epoch, an order just the reverse of this will be followed.

Page  6 CHAPTER I. RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN GERMANY AND SWITZERLAND. A. —TO THE E FORMAL SEPARATION OF PROTESTANTS, OF WHICH THE CONFESSION OF AtUGSBURG WAS THE OCCASION (1517-1530). ~ 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. Luther's works, in Latin, Vit. 1545 sq., 7 vols. folio; Jena, 1556-58, 4 vols. fol.; in German, Wittenberg, 1539 sq., 12 vols. fol.; Jena, 1555 sq., 8 vols. fol. Moreover, two Supplementary vols. by Aurifaber, Eisleben, 1564 and'65. Exclusively German writings of Luther are found in the edition of Sa~gittarius, published at Altenburg 1661-64, 10 vols. Supplementary volume to all former editions (by Zeidler), Halle, 1702; Lps. edit., 1729-40, in 22 vols. fol.; the Halle edition, by J. G. Walch, 1740-50, 24 pts. 4to. (Only the German translation of the Latin works is given in the last two editions). Edition in both original languages by Plochmann and Irmischer, Erlangen, 1826-56, 67 vols. Conf. Irmischer, A brief History of the complete edition of Luther's works (Periodical for Protestantisni and Church, 1850, nro. 1). Luther's letters, circulars, and memoirs, edited by de TVette, Berlin, 1825-28, 5 pts. Supplement thereto, by Dr. Burkhardt, Lps. 1866. MIelanchthon, Hist. de vita et actis Lutheri, Vit. 1546; ed. Augusti, Vratisl. 1817. In addition to these works, one may also consult the biographies of Luther, by Cochlaeus, Ulenberg, and in modern times, Uckert, Gotha, 1817, 2 vols.; Pfizer (who idolizes his hero), Stuttg. 1836; Schenkel, The Reformers (Luther, Zwinglius, Calvin, and Melanchthon), Wiesbaden, 1856. Jiargens, Luther from his birth until the controversy on Indulgences, Lps. 1846, 4 vols., to be compared with Audin, Hist. de la vie, des 6crits et des doctrines de Martin Luther, Paris, 1839, 2 vols.; ed. I1ime., Paris, 1841; Engl. ed., Life of Luther, transl. by Bp. J. M. McGill, Philadelphia, 1841, 2 vols.; also by W. B. TuLrnbull, Germ. ed., Augsb. 1843. (It contains many things incorrect and inexact.) "Luther's work and Luther's works,:' in the "Catholic" of A. D. 1827, by J. von Gorres. Cf. von Sybel, Journal of History, New Phenomena of Lu-'theran Literature, Vol. 27, year 1872.-TR. adds: The Reformatory Writings of Dr. Martin Luther, by Zimmermann; the Life of Martin Luther, Related fiom Original Authorities, with sixteen engravings, by Moritz Meurer. Engl. transl. by a Pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, 8vo., New York, Ludwig & Co. The Life of Martin Luther, Gathered from his own Writings, by M. Michelet; transl. by G. H. Smith, F. G. S., New York. The Table Talk (Tischreden), or Familiar Discourse of Martin Luther; transl. by Win. Hazlitt, Esq., London. *Freiburg, Eccl. Cyclopaed., art. "Luther," by Dollinger. To the elements of political strife, which seriously threat(6)

Page  7 ~ 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. 7 ened the peace of Europe at the close of the last period, religious difficulties at once grave and numerous, and containing the germs of incalculable mischief' in the near future, were now added. Everything combined to weaken the great influence formerly exercised by the Popes in European affairs, of which it will be sufficient to instance the papal schism, the unhappy events that took place at the Councils of Constance and Basle, or were occasioned by their action, and, finally, the worldly lives and taste for war which characterized some of the chief pastors of the Church. Although the warlike and chivalrous Emperor MaximTrilian had succeeded in establishing (1495) public peace in many of the German states, and had secure(l its maintenance by the institution of the Imperial Chamber (the supreme court of the German Empire), his authority was nevertheless too much enfeebled to enable him to act energetically and decisively in critical emerngencies occurring either within or without his empire. Cities asserted their freedom and grew in wealth and prosperity; the nobility drew out a painful existence in ignorance and poverty; and the bulk of the people, constantly oppressed, were ready at any moment to rise in open rebellion. The cavaliers, warriors by profession and never content but when in the midst of its excitements, felt the restraints of law and order, longed for the return of the days when might was right, and impatiently awaited a favorable opportunity to draw their swords, and deal a decisive and fatal blow against the domination of princes and the authority of priests. War came at last. On the one hand, the call of Charles, grandson of Maximilian (by Philip the Fair) to the throne of Spain (1516), and shortly after (1519) to the imperial crown and succession in Austria, had excited the jealousy of France and her young and ambitious king, Francis I., (1515) against the House of Hlapsburg; and on the other, Austria, Germany, and Hungary in the East were seriously threatened by the alarming advance of Turkish 1Cf. Moehler's Essay on the Situation of the Church in the fifteenth century and at the beginning of the sixteenth (Complete Works, Vol. II.); and Groene, Situation of the German Church before the Reformation, in the Tuebing. Quart., year 1862, nro. 1, p. 84-138, who, however, arrives at a somewhat different conclusion.

Page  8 8 Period 3. Epoch 1.- Chapter 1. domination. In the midst of these grave religious and political complications, accompanied in France, Spain, and England by the triumph of royalty and the decline of the nobility, and in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, where the aristocracy of the clergy and the nobles was particularly powerful, by iniportant limitations of the royal power and prerogative, it was plain that one of two things would inevitably come about. Either some great man gifted with strength of character and a talent for organization and government, and having the interest of Church and State sincerely at heart, would arise to avert the impending danger, by allaying conflicting passions through the operation of existing authority and the agency of institutions called into being with the special view of meeting the exigencies of the moment; or, in the absence of one possessing these qualifications, the world should be prepared to behold a rash and daring.man inconsiderately flinging from him the brand that would surely kindle the long-threatened conflagration, evoke ferocious passions, and lead to bloody conflicts and political revolutions. The first to come forward to raise his hand against the religious and social faic, and deal it a blow under which it reeled, was Martin Luther. Martin Luther was born at Eisleben, in Saxony, November 10, 1483, of poor but respectable parents. Shortly after Martiin's birth, his father quitted Eisleben, and moved to Mansfeld, whose citizens rewarded his many virtues by conferring upon him an office of public trust. Martin was early taught to read and write, and formed to the practices of Christian virtue. Possessing a fine voice and correct ear, he was received among the choir boys of the school, and, his parents being too poor to defray the expenses of a liberal education, he, as was the custom in Germany, went about singing at the windows of the wealthy to procure a pittance to enable him to prosecute his studies. Ie was sent, at the age of fourteen, to the Franciscan school at Magdeburg, where he received his tuition free, and was barely able to pay his board with the paltry sums flung to him from the windows under which he sang. After passing a year of this precarious existence, he went to Eisenach, where he was

Page  9 ~ 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. 9 more fortunate. Passing down one of the principal streets -of the city, he stopped before a house whose size and elegance bespoke the wealth of the inmates, and began'to sing. A lady appeared at the window, and, charmed by the quality of the young scholar's voice and the expression of his singing, threw him some coins, and invited him in. Ascendilng the stairs, Martin was affectionately received by the lady, and invited to partake of her hospitality. This was Ursula Cotta, who continued a second mother to the young wanderer while he remained in her house. Martin now pursued his studies vigorously under the monks, and had as his professor of grammar, rhetoric, and poetry, the celebrated J. Trebonius, rector of the monastery of Discalced Carmelites. At the age of sixteen, he had mastered the Latin tongue. In 1501, his father, who had become a master miner, and whose circumstances were consequently materially improved, sent him to the University of Erfurt with a view to have him study law. The legal profession, however, does not seem to have been much to Martin's taste; for, instead of law, he ardently applied himself to the study of the dialectics of the Nominalists and to the Latin classics. In 1505, he took his degree of master of arts and opened a course of lectures on the Physics and Ethics of Aristotle.' These studies, however, were wholly inadequate to give peace and quiet to Luther's restless and religious mind.:Naturally disposed to take an extreme view of everything, and horrified by the sudden death of his young friend Alexis, who was struck dead at his side by lightning, he at once closed the writings of Aristotle, and, without even taking leave of his fellow-students, quitted the University on the night of July 17, and going directly to the Augustinian Convent of Erfurt, "to dedicate himself to God," was kindly received by the monks. His father, ambitious to see his son a learned professor of law and to cut a figure in the world, wrote him an angry letter deprecating his course. During the early part 1 tKampschulte, The University of Erfurt and its Relation to Humanism and the Reformation, Treves, 1858-62, two pts.; idem, De Georgio Wicelio, Bonnae, 1856; de Joanne Croto Robiano, Bonnae, 1862.

Page  10 10 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. of his noviciate, hewas made to perform the menial offices of the monastery; but from these he was, after a time, relieved, throdgh the intercession of friends, and in 1507, d'espite the remonstrances of his father and others, made his profession, and took priest's orders. IHe was so greatly agitated while saying his first Mass, that he would have left off at the Canon and come down from the Altar, had not the prior prevented hlim. Yet he tells us himself that there was no more pious and faithful priest than he, and, though subject to fits of melancholy, he roused and comforted his troubled spirit by reading passages of Holy Writ pointed out to him by his brethren and superiors. Luther learned that the monks, far from being unfamiliar with the Scriptures, possessed many copies of them in their library, and, instead of preventing him from reading them, encouraged him to make them his chief study.l IHe followed their advice, applying himself specially to the studly of the commentaries of Nicholas de Lyra. Dr. John Staupitz,2 Provincial of the Augustinians of Meissen and Thuringia, who had directed Luther's attention to the works of St. Augustine, was so pleased with his aptitude and proficiency, that' he recommended him to Frederic the Wise, Prince-elector of Saxony, who was then casting about for professors for his new University of Wittenberg. Itere he first (1508) taught dialectics, and having taken his first degree, or baccalaureate, in theology, gave lectures in this branch also. At the earnest request of Dr. Staupitz, but much against his own will, he consented to take upon him the formidable office of preaching the Gospel. The learning, quick intelligence, and piety of Luther specially commended him to his superiors, and pointed him out as one well fitted to undertake important offices of trust. Hence he, with another brother, was selected to visit Rome in 1510, for the purpose of transacting some business relating to his Order. Coming in view of Rome, he fell on his knees and cried out, "Hail Rome, Holy City, thrice sanctified by the 1 Isuther's Works, Vol. XXI., p. 21; M-leurer, p. 25. (TR.) 2Joannis Staupitii opera, quae reperiri potuerunt omnia, ed. Knaake, Potisdam. 1867. Cf. also -:Pasfg (Superintendent of Schneeberg), John VI., Bp. of Meissen, Lps. 1867.

Page  11 ~ 299.. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. 11 blood of martyrs." His heart glowed with holy fervor as he visited the shrines and sanctuaries of -the Eternal City, and "he almost regretted that his parents were not already dead that he might, by saying Masses, reciting prayers, and doing good works, deliver their souls from purgatory." He was, however, particularly scandalized on hearing that many of the Roman ecclesiastics were infected with a spirit of unbelief. On his return to Germany, he was declared licentiate of Sacred Theology on the feast of St. Luke, October 18, 1512, and the day following, during the ringing of the great bell of All Saints' Church, which was prescribed by the statutes of the University, invested with the insignia of the doctorate. Speaking of this event, Luther himself says: "I was obliged to take the degree of doctor, and to promise under oath that I would preach the Holy Scriptures, which are very dear to me, faithfully and without adulteration."' The better to fit himself to become an efficient professor of Holy Scripture, or, as some say, from motives of vanity, he was at special pains to acquire a thorough knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, so necessary as aids to gain the true sense of the Psalter and Epistles of St. Paul to the BRomans and the Galatians. Even at this early age he had already embraced, in a confused way, the doctrine that good works are wholly worthless, and that faith alone is all sufficient for salvation. It was at this time that indulgences were published in Germany by the authority of the munificent and splendid Leo X., the proceeds of which were to be applied to the building of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, commenced by Julius II.2 The office of publishing3 the indulgences was given to the Elector Albert, a prince of the House of Brandenburg, Archbishop of.Mentz and Magdeburg, and administrator of the diocese of Halberstadt, who was as extravagant and as fond of magnificent displays as Leo himself. lLuther's Works, XX., p. 336; Melanch., in vita, p. 13; Meurer, p. 33. 2The bull in von der Hardt, 1. c., T. IV., p. 4. 3tHennes, Albert of Brandenburg, Archbp. of Mentz and Magdeburg, Mlentz, 1858. Jac. May, Albert II., Elector, Cardinal, and Archbishop, together with. eighty-two documents and appendices, Munich, 1866.

Page  12 12 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Albert selected the Dominican Tetzel of Leipsic to preach the indulgences to the people of his dioceses. A ripe scholar and a fine popular speaker, Tetzel proclaimed the efficacy of indulgences in language at once ardent and energetic,' which, while at times sufficiently offensive to call forth expressions of hostility against both the man and his mission, was by no means so intemperate or extravagant as his enemies would have us believe. As the civil and ecclesiastical authorities had but recently enacted measures restricting the sale of indulgences, the recent publication of them gave no little offense. In the year 1500, the electoral princes entered a protest against their publication, and enacted in 1510 that sums of money arising from this source should not be sent out of the country. The Emperor Maximilian was at special pains to see that the latter provision was faithfully executed. John, Bishop of Meissen, had also issued a prohibition, cautioning any one in his diocese against receiving the preachers of' indulgences; and a similar prohibition had been published in the diocese of Con1Against the boundless misrepresentations and unscrupulous fabrications in the early biographies of Tetzel, put into circulation by such men as Hecht, Vitemb. 1717; Vogel, Lps. 1717 and 1727, and Hoffmann, 1844, cf. eCorrespondence of two Catholics on the Controversy between Tetzel and Luther on Indulgences, Frankfort on the Main, 1817; tG-Groene, Tetzel and Luther, or a Biography and Vindication of Dr. Tetzel, Preacher of Indulgences, 2d ed., Soest, 1860. Moreover, Tetzel in his Instruction to Parish Priests (Oct. 31, 1517) expressly prescribed that "whosoever, having confessed and being penitent (confessus et contritus), shall bring alms (eleemosynam, i. e. for this special purpose), shall obtain remission of temporal and canonical punishment." See Loescher 1. c., I., 414, and the ordinary formula of absolution which the Lutheran Seckendorf himself (Hist. Lutheranismi, lib. II., sect. 6, gives in the following terms: "Misereatur tui Dominus noster Jesus Christus, per merita suae sanctissimae passionis te absolvat et ego auctoritate ejusdem et beatorum Petri et Pauli Apostolorum et sanctissimi domini nostri papae mihi concessa et in hac parte mihi commissa te absolvo: primo ab omnibus censurfs a te quomodolibet incursis, deinde ab omnibus peccatis, delictis et excessibus - - etiam sedi Apostolicae reservatis, in quantum claves sanctae matris ecclesiae se extendunt, rernittendo tibi per plenariam indulgentiain omnem poenam in purgatorio pro praemissis debitam, et restituo te sanctis sacramentis ecclesiae et unitati fidelium ac innocentiae et puritati, in qua eras, quando baptizatus fuisti, etc. In nomine P., F., et Spiritus Scti. Amen. 2 See Vol. II., p. 869, note 2.

Page  13 ~ 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. 13 stance. Luther was, therefore, not the first to protest against the flagrant abuses incident to putting indulgences on sale; but had he been, no blame could have attached to him, for he would have been only exercising a right which he had in virtue of his offices of preacher, confessor, and doctor of theology. So also, when, by the advice of his friends, he affixed his famous ninety-five propositions to the doors of the church attached to the castle of Wittenberg, on the Vigil of All Saints (October 31, 1517), he did no more than what was sanctioned by the usage of that age. It would seem that he might claim the greater right to do so, inasmuch as he openly proclaimed the doctrine of indulgences, saying in his seventyfirst proposition: " Whosoever speaks against the truths of papal indulgences, let him be anathema;" and protested that it was not his wish or purpose to say aught against Holy Writ, or the teachings of the Popes and the Fathers of the Church. No faullt, therefore, could be found with him for having denounced whatever was really extravagant and excessive in the preaching of indulgences, and for having called for some authoritative settlement of the question, of which, as he afterward confessed, "he. knew no more at that time than those who came to inquire of him."' That he was sadly in need of some elementary instruction on the nature of indulgences, their conditions and effects, is painfully evident from the grotesque character and intemperate language of many of his propositions.2 Luther's fuindamental principle, more fully and distinctly drawn out as years went on —viz., that " God alone, indcpendently of human exertion, is all in all 1 In Loescher, Complete Acts of the Reformation, Pt. I., p. 367 sq., and in the editions of Luther's Works, e. g. that of Jena, Pt. I., Altenburg, Vol. I.; that of fValch, Vol. XVIII., p. 255 sq. The above passage was transcribed literally by Ranke from the original text preserved in the royal library of Berlin, and pub'ished in his Complete Works, Vol. VI., p. 80-85. 2In his twenty-ninth proposition, Luther asks: "Who knows if every soul would desire to be delivered from purgatory?" Again, in his eighty-second:,'Why does not the Pope, since he may open heaven to so many for a few wretched florins, of his sacred charity empty purgatory of the suffering souls confined there?" Moreover, while some of the propositions affirm that indulgences are useless and harmful, others affirm that they should not be made light of. Among the most objectionable propositions are the thirty-sixth, according to which whosoever is truly sorry for his sins receives remission

Page  14 14 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. in the affair of man's salvation "-was substantially contained, and but thinly disguised, in these propositions. Failing to detect thi~ latent poison, many loudly applauded his course, and among them the Bishop of Wfirzbulg,' who, in a letter to the Elector, Frederic the Wise, begged that prince to take Luther under his protection, and shield him from his enemies. Luther wrote to the Archbishop of Mentz, praying him to mark out the proper course to be followed in the affair of indulgences, that their publication might be made in a manner at once becoming and lawful; but in failing to wait an answer, he indicated a disposition to subvert established order, and set law at defiance. On the other hand, the Archbishop canll not be held entirely blameless; for, in writing to Luther after the latter had begun to make a stir in the world, he said:2 "As yet I have not found time to read your writings, or even to glance through them; I leave the judgment on the questions raised in them to my superiors in rank and di.qnity. I have learned, however, with sincere sorrow and no little displeasure, that grave. doctors engage in heated controversy concerning such trivial questions as the Pope's power; whether he holds his office of Head of the Church by Divine or human authority; whether or no man enjoys free will; and similar pOints, concerning which no earnest Christian gives himself very much concern." IIe had, however, submitted the affair to the arbitration of the theological faculty of Leipsig.3 The great applause that greeted the appearance of Luther's propositions revealed the intense indignation everywhere of them and the punishment due to them; the fifth and twentieth, which declare that the Pope can remit only such penalties as are imposed by himself or the Church, but not those imposed by God; the eighth, tenth, and thirtieth, which restrict canonical penalties to the living, thereby exempting the dead from such hardship, and denying their need of indulgences; and the fiftyeighth, which denies that the treasures of the Church, whence indulgences are drawn, are the merits of Christ and his Saints. Cf. the scathing criticism of the propositions in Riffel, Vol. I., p. 32 sq.; 2d ed., p. 65 sq. 1,Surius, ad an. 1517, declares: "In ipsis hujus tragoediae initiis visus est Lutherus etiam plerisque viris gravibus et eruditis non pessimo zelo moveri planeque nihil spectare aliud, quam ecclesiae reformationemr." Cf. Erasrm., epp. lib. XVIII., p. 736. 2 Luther's Works, apud Walch, Pt. XV., p. 1640. sSee Wiedemann, John Eck, p. 85.

Page  15 ~ 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. 15 evoked by the abuse of indulgences. Within the short interval of two months, they were known in almost every country of Europe. Many written replies to them were at once put forth, the first being the Three Days Labor (Tridui labor) of the Roman Domninican, Syleester Prierias (Mayister Sacri Palatii), in iwhich the claims advanced in behalf of the papal power' were in a measure excessive. Tetzel followed with a refutation of Luther, entitled " On Indulgences and Grace," written in German, and published simultaneously with the theses of the Reformer. In a disputation undertaken by the same writer at the University of Frankfurt on the Oder,2 on the occasion of his taking the degree of licentiate in theology, and under the presidency of the Dominican monk, Conrad Koch, better known as Conrad Wimpina, he defended one hundred and six propositions, controverting the errors of Luther with such marked ability as to demonstrate beyond all doubt that he thoroughly understood the Catholic teaching on indulgences, was an excellent theologian, and possessed a well trained and cultivated mind. The burden of these propositions was to show that confession and satisfaction (confessio et satisfactio) are conditions absolutely necessary to the full remission of sins in the sacrament of penance. Indulgences, by which the vindictive canonical punishments due to sin are remitted, have to do with satisfaction only, and have no connection with medicinal penitence, or remedies for keeping the passions in check, which must be applied by the penitent himself.3 Finally, as early as January 20, 1518, Tetzel was again at the University of Frankfurt, on the occasion of taking his Dialogus in praesumtuosas Lutheri conclusiones de potestate Papae (1517), apud Loescher, Pt. II., p. 12 sq. 2*-tMitteirmniller, Conrad Wimpina, in the Periodical "The Catholic," year 1869, Vol. I., p. 641-681; Vol. II.,-p. 129-165. WRimpina, a native of Buchen, and buried in the Franconian Benedictine monastery of Airorbach, possessed an almost cyclopaedical knowledge of the current learning of his age, and could, when occasion demanded, turn it to excellent account in debate. 3 Lebernzann, Institut. theolog., ed. V., T. V., p. 195: " Id etiam observandum est, quod poenitentiae injungantur non tantum in vindictam peccati, sed etiam tanquam remedia ad coercendas cupiditates et curandam animi infirmitatem ex peccatis contractam. Sed ab hac medicinalipoenitentia non eximunt indulgentiae."

Page  16 16 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. degree of doctorate in theology,' defending fifty propositions in. support of papal power. Among the adversaries of Luther was Dr. John Eck, Vicechancellor of the University of Ingolstadt. During his stay at the Universities of HTeidelberg, Tiibingen, Cologne, and Freiburg, he had stored away vast treasures of philosophical and theological learning, which his rugged constitution, his vigorous, acute and versatile intellect enabled him to turn to the best practical account.2 At the request of the Bishop of Eichstddt, where he held a canonry, he sent to the former a copy of Luther's theses, with the objectionable propositions marked with obelisks,3 and refuted in marginal notes. This communication, which was supposed to be of a private character, was published in the beginning of Lent, 1518, without previous knowledge on the part of its author, and against his will. Four years later (1522), llochstraten, a Dominican of Cologne, to whom a contest with Reuchlin had given some notoriety, also entered the lists against Luther,4 whom he combated in several works, particularly after the year 1526. Hochstraten and his colleagues were indiscreet in their mode of attack, for, instead of confining themselves to the question at issue, they went aside from their main purpose to take a fling at the Humanists, whom they charged with being at the bottoml of all the trouble, singling out Erasmras for special animadversion.- Such irrelevant advocacy of their cause 1 Both the theses of Luther and the counter-theses of Tetzel, apud Loscher, 1. c., Pt. I., p. 484 sq.; 504 sq. Cf. Ri/tel, Vol. I., p. 36 sq.; 2d ed., p. 71 sq. 2Luther had previously borne him witness, that he was an "insignis vereque ingeniosae eruditionis et eruditi ingenii homo" (de Wette, Luther's Letters, Vol. I., p. 59). t" IWiedemann, Dr. John Eck, Professor in the University of Ingolstadt, Vienna, 1865. Cf. also t-:Mlleuser, in the Catholic Journal of Science and Art, Year III., Cologne, 1846. 3Apud Loescher, Pt. I-I., p. 64 sq. 4Cum divo Augustino colloquia contra enormes atque perversos Martini Lutheri errores, Colon. 1522. On all the Catholic adversaries of Luther, cf. Dr. Ldmmer, The Pre-Tridentine Catholic Theology of the Age of the Reformation, Berlin, 1858, p. 1-17. 5"Erasmus," they said, "laid the egg, and Luther hatched it. The heresy is wholly the work of Greek scholars and polished rhetoricians." Erasmus at first contented himself with an apologetic defense. He wrote to Hochstraten: "Haec studia non obscurant theologicam dignitatem, sed illustrant, non oppugnant, sed

Page  17 ~ 299. Luther's Manifest against Indulgences. 17 roused and embittered their adversaries, and harmed only themselves and the great truths they were upholding.l Luther threw himself with all his wonted energy and vehemence into the thick of the fight, and in an incredibly short time lhad written replies to all his assailants. His reply, entitled the Asterisks2 (Asterisci), to the Obelisks (Obelisci) of Eck, abounds in intemperate invective and unseemly abuse,3 is frequetitly contradictory in its assertions, and is sing nlarly sutbversive of t/he faith of the Ch2urch. Luther had some time previously, in a discussicn which took place in the Augustiniani Convelnt of IIeidelberg (April, 1518), avowed the antifamulantur" (v. d. tHardt, Hist. lit. reformationis II., 13.) But he subsequently maligned the inquisitors. He said: "Olim haereticus habebatur, qui dissentiebat ab evangeliis, ab articulis fidei, aut his, quae cumr his parem obtinent auctoritatern; - nunc quidquid non placet, quidquid non intelligunt, haeresis est. Graece scire haeresis est, expolite loqui haeresis est, quidquid ipsi non faciunt, haeresis est." Epp. lib. XII., p. 403. i Erasmus, quoted by Seckendorf, says apropos of the method of IIochstraten: " Nulla res magis conciliavit omnium favorem Luthero," and of Prierias: "Scripsit Prierias. sed ita tamen ut causam indulgentiarum fecerit deterioren." 2Both are given in LBscher, Vol. II., p. 62 sq., and 333 sq.; Vol. III., p. 660 sq. Lutheri Opp. Latin., Jenae, T. I. 3 Cf. Riffel, Vol. I., 2d ed., p. 73 sq. Speaking of Sylvester Prierias, ex gr., he says: "His pamphlet is the incoherent and furious raving of the very Devil, whose tool Prierias is. It is replete, from beginning to end, with abominable and horrible blasphemies, and I make no doubt that its libelous utterances issued from. the mouth of Satan, in the very center of hell.... Should the Pope and the Cardinals refuse to impose silence on this impudent and infernal blasphemer, I shall break with the Church of Rome, and brand her, the Pope, and the Cardinals as the abomination of desolation.... Away with thee, thou infamous, accursed, and blasphemous Rome, the anger of God is at length come upon thee.... Since we hang thieves, put murderers to the sword, a-Ind consign heretics to the flames, why do we not rather pursue with every manner of weapon these pestiferous teachers of perdition, the Pope, the Cardinals, and the Bishops, and the whole horde of the Roman Sodom,... and wash our hands in their blood? Nor is this their adequate punishment... they must suffer eternally in hell." These fragments will give an idea of Luther's method of meeting his opponents. Ranke, speaking of this literary tilt, says: "I owever contemptible and easy of refutation the pamphlet of Prierias may have seemed to Luther, he nevertheless still kept a check upon his speech, biding his tinme, not wishiing to draw upon himself the enmity of the Curia." Germ. Hist. of theAge of the Reformation, Vol. I., p. 320; Complete Works, Vol. I., p. 213. VOL. III-2

Page  18 18 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Catholic propositions which he afterward maintained,1 and:succeeded in gaining Bucer over to his cause. Dr. Andrew Bodenstein, who took the name of Carlstadt fiom his birthplace,2 declared in his favor at Wittenberg. The various polemical writings which the occasion called forth, fixed public attention upon the principles of Christian anthropology, which, as history proves, may lead to the gravest errors when approached and discussed in any other than a calm and reverential frame of mind. ~ 300. Negotiation between orome and Luther-Disputation at Leipsig-Eck, Emser, and Melanchthon. Leo X., learning the condition of affairs in Germany, appointed temporarily the learned Venetian, Gabriel, the then pro-magister of the Augustinian Hermits, to the vacant office of generalship of the Order (1518). The Pope, led astray by the belief that the whole trouble was no more than what (cochltaeIs3 said it was-a rivalry between two religious Orders and a quarrel among a few monks-instructed Gabriel, acting in his official capacity of General of the Order, to remind Luther of his vow of obedience, and in virtue of it to lay upon him the obligation of keeping silence. Iie was further instructed to do all he could to have the Elector, Frederic the Wise, set his face against Luther, and oppose his designs. The Emperor Maximilian, more penetrating and far-seeing than the Pope, called attention, in words of weighty import, to the dangers and gravity of the threatening struggle. "In a little time," he foretold, "private opinion and the folly of Luther's Works in Walch, Pt. XVIII., pp. 66 sq. 2Previously to the appearance of Luther's Asterisci, Carlstadt had written the Apologeticae (onclusiones, embracing one hundred and seventy propositions. He also wrote, in answer to Eck's apology of the Obelisci, the Defensio adv. Jo. Eckii monomachiam. in Ldscher, Pt. II. 3Cf. the Defense of Cochlaeus by Lessing, but Jn a small matter only (Complete Works, edited by Lachmann, Berlin, 1838, sq., Vol. IV., p. 87-101). Otto, Cochlaeus as a Humanist. See also the defense of Pope Leo against Ban-. dello's report, that the Pope had at first viewed this cause as a trifling matter, in the Breslau Review of Catholic Theology, ed. by Ritter, 1832, nros. I. and II.

Page  19 ~ 300. Negotiation between Rome and Luther, etc. 19 man will be set up in place of the truths of tradition, and the principles underlying the scheme of salvation."' The theses and their defense sent by Luther to Pope Leo X.,2 accompanied with a letter humbly begging the favor of an investigation, and expressing his pacific intentions and his readiness to make an unconditional surrender of his own will to that of his superiors,3 are the first act in a long drama of hypocritical professions. At the close of this letter, he said: "Hence, Most Holy Father, I cast myself at thy feet, with all that I have and am. Give life, or take it; call, recall, approve, reprove; your voice is that of Christ, who presides and speaks in you." To Staupitz, he wrote' in the same tenor.4 Leo appointed a court to try the case, and cited (August 7, 1518) Luther to appear at Rome within sixty days and answer the charges against him. The Elector Frederic interposed his good offices, and at his request Pope Leo consented that Luther, instead of journeying to Rome, should come before the imperial diet of Augsburg, and have a conference with the Papal Legate, Cardinal Cajetan, one of the most learned theologians of his age. In the early days of October, 1518, Luther, accompanied by some friends, entered Augsburg, and, fortified with a safe conduct from the Emperor Maximilian and the municipal authorities, presented himself before the Cardinal, who received him kindly, and was disposed to treat him with all possible tenderness. The Legate, having instructions to demand an unconditional retraction, refused to engage in controversy with Luther, who, claiming that he had said nothing contrary to the Holy Scriptures, to the teaching of the Church, the decrees of Popes, and the dictates of right reason,5 was anxious to enter into a discussion for the purpose of defending his statement on Biblical authority. He nevertheless consented to subscribe to the following declaration: " I, Martin Luther, of the Order of St. Augustine, do l Raynaldus ad an. 1518, nro. 90. 2Resolutiones disput. de virt. indulgg. (Ldscher, Vol. II., p. 183 sq.) (TR.) 3 De lVette, Vol. 1, p. 119. (TR.) 4 In Ldscher, Pt. II., p. 176; and Meurer, p. 68. (TR.) 5 Luther's German Works, Jena ed., Pt. 1., fol. 107-136.

Page  20 20 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. reverence and obey the Roman Church in every word and deed, whether in time past, present, or future; and should I have said anything contrary to this profession or in a different sense, I desire that such speech shall be regarded as if never spoken."' Apprehensive of arrest and imprisonment, he, on the 20th of October, stealthily escaped from the city, and, liking himself to Isaias and St. Paul, "appealed.from the Pope ill informed to the Pope better instructed" (a papa male informato ad papam melius informandum.). That no one " might have a pretext to plead ignorance of the true teaching of the Roman Church on indulgences,"2 Leo, in a bull issued November 9, 1518, and beginning Cum postquam, gave the fullest instruction on the doctrine, and threatened such as should gainsay it with excommunication latae sententiae. About the same time, the Pope sent the accormplished Saxon, Charles of Millitz, to Germany, for the twofold purpose of decorating the Elector Frederic with the golden rose and the securing him in the interest of the HIoly See; and of restraining Luther by peaceful measures until such time as the German bishops should have put an end to the quarrel. The Apostolic nuncio while traveling through Germany heard much complaint of the evil effects of Tetzel's preaching, and in consequence sharply rebuked the Dominican for indiscreet zeal. Tetzel took the reprimand so much I Luther's WVorks, Altenburg ed., Pt. I., p. 132. 2 In L'dscher, Vol. II., p. 493 sq. WTalch's ed. of Luther's Works, Pt. XV., p. 756 sq. In this Bull, it is said: "'Romanum Pontificem - potestate clavium, quarum est aperire tollendo illius in Christi fidelibus impedimenta, culpam scil. et poenam pro actualibus peccatis debitam, culpam quidem mediante sacramento poenitentiae, poenam vero temporalem pro actualibus peccatis secundum divinamn justitiam debitam mediante ecclesiastica indulgentia, posse pro rationalibus causis concedere eisdem Christi fidelibus, - sive in hac vita sint, sive in purgatorio, indulgentias ex superabundantia meritorum Jesu Christi et Sanctorum, ac tam pro vivis quam pro defunctis - thesaurum meritorum Jesu Christi et Sanctorum dispensare, per modum absolutionis indulgentiamr ipsam conferre, vel per modurn suffragii illam transferre consuevisse. Ac propterea oinnes tam vivos quam defunctos, qui veracitur omnes indulgentias hujusmodi consecuti fuerint, a tanta temporali poena secundum divinam justitiam pro peccatis suis actualibus debita liberari, quanta concessae et acquisitae indulgentiae aequivalet." This authoritative instruction perfectly agrees with the doctrines of the Scholastics, given above, pp. 798, 799; notes 2, 3; 1, 2.

Page  21 ~ 300. Negotiation between Rome and Luther, etc. 21 to heart that he withdrew to a monastery, fell sick, and died, it is said, of grief, July 14, 1519. Miltitz was far more considerate in his treatment of his Saxon countryman, the author of the new teaching, and was deluded into the belief that his mnission had been successful. The two had an interview at Alteiibarg (January 5, 1519), and Luther agreed to leave off preaching and live quietly if his adversaries would do likewise; to induce the people to continue obedient to the Holy See; to instruct them by letter in the orthodox sense on the veneration of the Saints, on indulgences, purgatory, the Conimandments of God, and the authority of the Pope; ard, finally, to write to his Holiness in the spirit of a docile child. In a letter dated March 3, 1519, Luther wrote to the Pope as follows: "I have been unnecessarily, excessively, and abusively severe in my treatment of those empty babblers. I had only one end in view, viz: to prevent Our Mother, the Roman Church, from being soiled by the filth of another's avarice; and the faithful from being led into error, and learning to set indulgences before charity. Now, Most Holy Father, I protest before God and His creatures that it has never been my purpose, nor is it novw, to do aught that might tend to weaken or overthrow the authority of the Roman Church or that of your Holiness; nay, more, I confess that the power of this Church is above all things; that nothing in Hetaven or on earth is to be set before it, Jesus alone the Lord of all excepted." That Luther was playing the part of' a contemptible hypocrite, and did not nmeun a word of what he wrote to the Pope, is evident from a private letter written to his friend Spalatinus just nine days later (March 12).1 "I whisper it to you," he writes, "in sooth I know not whether the Pope is Antichrist or his apostle." The opponents of Luther, and notably Dr. Eck, withlout fully appreciating the consequences of their step, brought on a public discussion previously to the meeting of the German bishops in conference. Some who dreaded the agitation which a discussion of this character would certainly occasion, had their fears set at rest by the splendid reputation enjoyed by 1De lWette, Tom. I., p. 239. (TB.)

Page  22 22 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Eck' for ability and learning, and looked forward to a complete triumph. After the manner of the age, the subjectmatter to be discussed was thrown into the form of theses.2 The parties to the disputation, which took place in the hall of the Castle of Pleissenburg, at Leipsiq, in the presence of Duke George of Saxony and a highly cultivated audience, and continued for two weeks together, were, on the one hand, Luther and Carlstadt, assisted by the professors of the University of Wittenberg, and on the other Eck and the professors of the Universities of Cologne, Louvain, and Leipsig. The chief propositions discussed were the docttine of the condition of man after the fall; of free will and grace; of penance and indulqences; and of the primacy of the Church of Rome. Caristadt,3 who had been challenged by Eck, spoke first, maintaining that man of himself is incapable of doing any good work, and that even when in the state of grace his works are wholly destitute of merit.4 This champion, who had placed the doctor's cap on Luther's head, suffered an ignominious defeat, and after a week's discussion was forced to yield his place to his disciple.5 The question of the primacy of the Pope came next under 1 Eccii Epp. Ep. de rat. studior. suor. Ingol. 154, 4to. (Strobel, MIisc. H. III., p. 95 sq.) F. Koygermund, Erneu. Andenken, Vol. I., p. 251 sq. (TR.) 2 Among the most remarkable of these are the following: I. Man sins daily, and also daily repents, according to the precept of Our Lord: Do penance. None but a just man (Eck) is exempt from this rule, he having no need of penance. II. To deny that man sins in doing good, or that every sin is of its nature mortal, or, if venial, so only by the mercy of God, is all one with discarding Paul and Christ. VII. To assert thatfree will is the arbiter of good or evil actions, or to deny that justification depends onfaith alone, is silly nonsense. XI. To affirm that indulgences are beneficial to Christians, or that they do not imply rather an absence of good works, is madness. Carlstadt asserted in his VI. and VIII. theses that daily venial sins, like mortal, work eternal damnation. 3 His real name was Andrew of Bodenstein; he took that of Carlstadt from his birthplace, in Franconia. Using the initials of these three words, Melanchthon called him the bad A B C. 4 A. G. Diekhoff, de Carolost. Luth. de servo arbitrio doctrinae defensore, Gott. 1850. (TR.) 6 Lifo of M. Luther, by Audin, Phil. 1841, p. 97; London, 1854, Vol. I, p. 182.

Page  23 ~ 300. Negotiation between' Rome and Luther, etc. 23 discussion, and Luther, in replying to Eck's argument for its divine origin, said that it rested only on human authority, and that of the passage fromn St. Matthew xvi. 18, the words, "Thou art Peter," were addressed to the Apostle; and those immediately following-viz: " And upon this rock I will build My Church " —applied to Christ. In the matter of jurisdiction, he went on to explain, the Pope has no advantage over the Archbishop of Magdeburg or the Bishop of Paris, and whatever supremacy he may enjoy is derived entirely from the sovereign will of the people. Ile is indeed, he added, the head of the Apostolic College, and has a primacy of honor, butt not of jurisdiction. Eck's superiority over his adversaries in knowledge, dialectical skill, and readiness and felicity of speech, secured him a brilliant triumph, and elicited the hearty applause of his hearers.l In the course of the discussion, Luther had explicitly maintained that faith alone, independently of good works, suffices for salvation; and when confronted with conflicting passages from the Epistle of St. James, called in question the authenticity of this Epistle; denied human free will, the primacy of the Pope, and the inerrancy of Ecumenical Councils. The opinions advanced and advocated by him so nearly resembled the Hussite propositions branded as heretical by the Council of Constance, that the Duke of Saxony, startled by their boldness, hastily put an end to the discussion, remarking, " Here indeed is afruitful source of danger." 2 ILutheri ep. ad Spalat.: "Interim tamen ille placet, triumphat et regnat: sed donec ediderimus nos nostra. Nam quia male disputatum est, edam resolutiones denuo. - Lipsienses sane nos neque salutarunt neque visitarunt ac veluti hostes invisissimos habuerunt, illum comitabantur, adhaerebant, convivabantur, invitabant, denique tunica donaverunt et schamlotum addiderunt, curn ipso spaciatum equitaverunt, breviter, quidquid potuerunt, in nostram injuriam tentaverunt." Acta colloq. Lips. (between Eck, Melanchthon, Cellarius, and Carlstadt, many rejoinders, etc.) in Lbscher, Vol. III., p. 203 sq. Watch, Vol. XV., p. 954 sq. Seidenmann, The Leipsig Disputation, A. D. 1519, from hitherto unexplored sources, Dresden, 1843. 2The official report of this disputation is in Lbscher, Vol. III., p. 203-558; Walch, Works of Luther, Vol. XV., p. 998 sq., and in de Wette, Letters of Luther, Vol. I. Cf. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 80-94; 2d ed., p. 134 sq. Wiedemann, John Eck, p. 75-139; and "The Catholic," year 1872, in several articles from September onward.

Page  24 24 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. A new adversary to Luther, but less formidable than Eck, now came forth in the person of Jerome Emser of Leipsig, a licentiate, of canon law, and private secretary to Duke George of Saxony. He was an excellent scholar, possessed a good knowledge of the ancient and Oriental languages, was brilliant and caustic in repartee, and withal a man of extraordinary erudition.' By mutual agreement, their discussion was to be reported, collected, and sent to the Universities of IElfurt and Paris, whose authorities were to decide on the merits of the respective arguments, and, pending the decision, no aggressive steps were to be taken by either side. Luther and his friends disregarded the pledge, and a fresh controversial war broke out. Notwithstanding that Luther had been completely beaten in the great disputation in the Pleissenburg at Leipsig, he gained the solid advantage of giving publicity to his cause, and heightening its importance in the estimation of the populace. The questions in dispute were now in every mouth. It was in the theological congress that Luther gained to his side the most important of his disciples. This was Philip Melanchthon (" Schwarzerdl," i. e. Blackearth).2 His father was a skilled armorer of Bretten, in the Palatinate of the Rhine, where Philip was born February 16, 1497, and the famous Reuchlin 1 IieMron. Erser, De disputatione Lipsiensi quantum ad Boemos obitcr deflexa est, in August, 1519. In answer to Luther's Ad Aegocerotem Emserianum M. Lutheri responsio, Emser wrote A venatione Lutheriana Aegocerotis assertio in November, 1518 (Lutheri opp. lat. Jen., T. I., Lbschcr, Vol. III.) WVhy the interpretation of Luther had been forbidden to the common people (sc; because it contained fourteen hundred lies and heretical errors.) Lps. 1523. German translation of the New Testament, Dresden, 1527; Assertio Missae; De Canone Missae; and sti 1 earlier, De vita et miraculis S. Bennonis. Cf. the Aschbach and Fireiburg Cyclopacdias, art. "Emser." 2lIclanechthon. Opp., Basil. 1541 sq., 5 T. in fol., recensuit Peucer, Vitenbergae, 1562 sq., 4 T. fol., and commenced in the Corpus Reformator., ed. Bretschneider, T. I.-X., Melanchthon. opp., Hal. 1834-42, 4to. - Ca.merarius, de Ph. 31el. ortu,.totius vitae curric. et morte narratio, Lps. 1566, ed. Augusti, Vrat. 1817. nlatthes, The Life of Philip -Melanchthon, from the Sources, Altenburg, 1841; 2d ed. 1846. Galle, Melanchthon considered as a Theologian, an'd the Development of his doctrine, Halle, 1840. ITeppe, 2d ed., Marburg, 1860. Planck, Mlelanchthon, praeceptor Germ., iNordl. 1860. C. Schmidt, Life and select Writings of Melanchthon, Elberfeld, 1861.

Page  25 ~ 300. Negotiation between Rome and Luther, etc. 25 was his uncle. After making an excellent course of preparatory studies at Pforzheim and afterward at Heidelberg, where he took the degree of Batchelor of Philosophy in 1512, he went in the same year to Tiibingen, completed his scientific studies, and in 1513 published a Greek grammar, took his degree of Master of Arts in 1514, and began to give lectures on the classics and Aristotelian philosophy. He was accounted a literary prodigy, and his name and accomplishments were the theme of every tongue. More gentle, moderate, and prudent than Luther, he lacked his master's energy, strength of character, depth of feeling, magnetic influence, and vigor of speech. Still, lie rendered very essential service to Luther, who was not unfrequently guided by his counsels. When a little more than twenty-one years of age (August 29, 1518), he was appointed, through the tecommendation of Erasmius, professor of Greek language and literature at Wittenberg. An intimacy soon sprung up between himself and Luther, for whom he had always great respect, and in whose defense he wrote an apology.' Elated with the adulation of his young friend, and encouraged by the Hlussites, with whom he had lately opened a correspondence,2 Luther soon forgot his humiliating defeat at Leipsic, put aside all disguise, stifled any lingering feelings of reverence for the Church of Rome, and laid bare to the world a-heart which had so long nourished a fierce and fiery spirit of revolt. It had been agreed that the arguments advanced by both sides in the Leipsig disputation should be subniitted before publication to the judgment of the theological faculties of the Universities of Paris, Louvain, and Cologne. The decisions, rendered in the months of August and November, 1519, were adverse to Luther; his teaching was unanimously condemned. Immediately on learning the result, he poured forth upon the members of these faculties, whom but a little while 1 Defensio Melanchthonis contra Eccium, prof. theologiae. Melanchthon either forgot or disregarded the promise of his master, and published at Wittenberg a letter, addressed to (Ecolampadius, giving a summary of the discussion at Leipsig, but at the same time recognizing the fine talents of Eck. Audin, 1. c., p. 106 (Phil., 1841); Eng. ed., (London, 1854), Vol. I., p. 209. (TR.) 2Loscher, Vol. III., p. 699 sq. Cf. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 88 sq.; 2d ed., p. 151 sq.

Page  26 26 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. before he had called his masters in theology, a torrent of savage and abusive invective.' The movements of Miltitz could not keep pace with the impetuous energy of Luther, who, wearying of the Nuncio's tardiness, dispatched to Leo a letter, dated October 11, 1520, accompanied with his treatise on Christian Liberty, dedicated to the Pope. In this letter, he pours out all -the venom of his soul against Rome, and flings the coarsest insults at the Pope. Here is a specimen: "It were a blessing for you (Leo) to lay down the office of the Papacy, which only your most depraved enemies can exultingly represent as an honor, and live upon the trifling income of a priest or your hereditary fortune. Only children of perdition, like Judas Iscariot and his imitators, should revel in the honors of which you are the object."2 The coarse, indecent tone of this letter would of itself have justified the sentence, already passed upon Luther through the representations of Eck, if it had been more severe than it was. Luther, anticipating the blow and fearing its consequences, had recourse to his usual cunning and dexterity when such calamities impended, and sought to rob the papal condemnation of its terrors in the eyes of the people by largely circulating his Sermon on Excommunication. ~ 301. Fresh Writings of Luther-Affinity of His Religious System to the Code of the lobber Knights and the Principles of Paganism. Moehler, Symbolism (1832), 6th ed., Mentz, 1843, Engl. transl. tHilgers, Theology of Symbolism, Bonn, 1841. Ri/fel, 2d ed., Vol. I., p. 28 sq. Staudenm.aier, Philos. of Christianity, Vol. I., p. 684 sq. Stockl, Hist. of the Philosophy of the M. A., Vol. III., p. 477 sq. Cf. also "Luther, considered as the solution of a psychological problem" (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vols. II. and III.) Vorreiter, Luther's struggle with the anti-Christian principles of the Revolution, Halle, 1861. Luther had not yet formally declared his opposition to the Church; but he soon spoke out emphatically and unmistakably against both her and her authority. During the years 1 Luther's Works, Walch's ed., Vol. XV., p. 1598 sq. 2 Luther's Works, Walch's ed., Vol. XV., p. 934 sq.; de lWette, Vol. I., p. 497 sq. Cf. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 151 sq.; 2d ed., p. 221 sq.

Page  27 ~ 301. Luther's Religious System and Robber Knights, etc. 27 1520 and 1521, he displayed an astonishing literary activity. It would seem that he would have the world bow to his ipse dixit. He would brook no contradiction; whoever would set himself against him must be prepared for a death-struggle; he spared no one. His religious system was a pantheistical mysticisrn-not indeed the outcome of his controversy on indulgences, but the result of his youthful stubbornness and perversity, and of his subsequent wayward and erratic religious exercises. It combined in one complex organism the errors of the Gnostics, Cathari, Waldenses; of the Breihren and Sisters of the Free Spirit, and the Apostolic Brethren; of Amalric of Bena, Master Eckhart, Wickliffe, Huss, and the author of the " German Theology," who, all of them, because they were sectaries, have been represented by Protestant authors as the forerunners of the pseudo-PReformers.l Such is the system which, it was claimed, has its full and adequate sanction in Holy Scripture. It teaches that the Bible is the only source of faith; ascribes to it the completest inspiration, extending to every word, and invests the reading of it with a quasi-sacramental character. Its leading tenets were the following: Human nature has been wholly corrupted by original sin, and hence main is born without a trace of freedom. Whatever he does, be it good or ill, is not his own, but God's work. Faith alone works justification, and man is saved by confidently believing that God, who covereth sins and doth not impute them to man (Ps. xxxi. 1, 2), will pardon him. This proposition is one wonderfully fruitful in consequences, inasmuch as it secures man a full pardon of his sins, and an unconditional release from the punishment due to them. Its scope is so comprehensive, and its conditions so easy, that no Pope has ever pretended to lay claim to anything at all com. parable to it.2 The hierarchy and the priesthood are unneces1 The name of Reformer was first applied to these men by Luther in his preface to the German Theology. It was also adopted by Flacius Illyricus, Catalog. testium veritatis. G. Arnold, Historia et descriptio theol. myst., Francof. 1702, p. 306; Flathe, Hist. of the forerunners of the Reformation, etc. 2 When charged with having arbitrarily introduced the word sola into Rome iii. 28, he made the following defense: -" Should your Pope give himself any useless annoyance about the word sola, you may promptly reply: It is the will

Page  28 28 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. sary, and exterior worship is useless. To clothe one's body in sacred and priestly garments; to be bodily present in church and busy oneself about holy things; to pray, to fast, to keep watch, or to go through other good works of any sort whatever to the end of time, all these avail the soul nothing. All Sacraments, excepting Baptism, Iloly Euncharist, and Penance, are rejected, and even these if withheld may be supplied by faith.' There is a universal priesthood; every Christian may assume that office; there is no need of a special body of men set apart and ordained to dispense the mysteries of God, and, as a consequence, no visible Church or special means established by God whereby man may work out his salvation.2 The idea of a universal priesthood, so flattering to the bulk of the people, was set forth with special prominence and emphasis in his more inflammatory writings, such as the "Adof Dr. Martin Luther that it should be so. He says that'Pope and jackass are synonymous terms.' We are the masters of the papists, not their schoolboys and disciples, and will not be dictated to by them.'" (Altona ed., T. V., fol. 2690.)"As many as believe in Christ, be they as numerous and wicked as may be, will be neither responsible for their works nor condemned on account of them.""Unbelief is the only sin man can be guilty of; whenever the name of sin is applied to other acts, it is a misnomer; such acts are of a piece with those of little Johnny or Maudlin, when they retire to a corner to relieve nature; people may laugh at them, but will add-well done."-" In this way does faith destroy any bad odor our filth may emit" (Family Bible with Commentary, Jena ed., 1565; Sermon on the text: "So much hath God loved the world").-"Provided one have faith, adultery is no sin; but should one be destitute of faith, even though he honor God, he is guilty of a wholly idolatrous act." 1 "Let all men be free as to the Sacraments; if' one does not wish to be baptized, he need not; he may, if le likes, refuse to receive the Sacraments; he has authority from God not to confess, if he dislikes to do so" (Treatise on Confession). In the early days of his career as a reformer, Luther certainly held that the Sacraments are optional; he, however, retracted this teaching, after Carlstadt had pushed his principles to their legitimate conclusions. 2' All Christians enjoy in common the spiritual priesthood, and may take on them the office of preaching in its true sense; we are all priests in Christ; all have power and authority to judge.-Every Christian is a father, a confessor of the heavenly ordained confession, an office which the Pope arrogates to himself, as he also does in the matter of the keys, the episcopate, and everything' elseoh the Robber! Nay, I will go still further, and say, let no one secretly confess to a priest as such, but as to one like himself, as to a brother and a Chris-.tian."

Page  29 ~ 301. Luther's Religious System and Robber Knights, etc. 29 dress to the Christian Nobles of Germany," "On the Improvement of Christian Morality," "On the Babylonish Capticity of the Church," addressed to the clergy, and on "Christian Liberty," addressed to the laity. In these he called upon the Emperor to subvert the power of the Pope, to confiscate for his own use investitures and the goods of the Church, to do away with ecclesiastical feasts and holidays, and, finally, to abolish Masses for the dead; for the latter, he said, were designed to supply the means of " feasting and revelry." Luther was encouraged to put forward these startling doctrines in bold and aggressive language by the powerful Knights of the Emnpire, who, he said, in the fatalistic language so accordant with his views, were sent of Ileaven for his defense.l He was now in bad company, and, quite contrary to his deep religious convictions and feelings, found himself obliged to fall in with the views of men who were pagan at heart, and whose ultimate aims were diametrically opposed to his own. One of these was Ulrich von lHutten,2 the descendant of an ancient and knightly house in Franconia. Destined by his parents for the ecclesiastical state, he swas sent to the cloister-school of Fulda, and, catching the spirit of the age, applied himself with enthusiastic fervor to the study of the pagan classics. He became a fine classical scholar, but at the expense of his faith and his virtue. He fled from the monastery; led for many years a life of shameless debauchery, and, disregardful of the commonest rules of decency, which even a libertine respects, gave a detailed account in elegant Latin verse of the progress of a loathsome disease brought on by his excesses. By turn a soldier, a pamphleteer, and a poet; always 1Luther returned the following answer to a letter of Sylvester of Schaumburg: "Quod ut non contemno, ita nolo nisi Christo protectore niti, qui forte et hune ei spiritum (of assisting him) dedit." De Wette, Vol. I., p. 448. 20pp. ed. "'Boecking, Lips. 1859 sq. IWeislinger, Huttenus delarvatus, Constantiae, 1730. Panzer, Ulrich of Hutten with reference to literature, Niirnberg, 1798. David Strauss, Ulrich of Hutten, Lps. 1858 sq., 3 vols. Cf. Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. 45. Meiners, Biography of celebrated men in the times of the Renaissance, Zurich, 1796-97, 3 vols. He likewise speaks of Froncis of Sickineqen (Vol. III.); cf. Hub. Leodii lib. de rebus gestis et calamitoso obitu Fr. de Sickingen (Freher, T. III., p. 295). C. Ferd. Meyer (of Zuirich), The last days of Hutten's Life, being " a work of fiction," Lps. 1872.

Page  30 -30 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. dreaded and sometimes admired; ever seeking out an occasion to display his powers, he was glad when an opportunity was given him of taking part in the quarrel between Reuchlin and Pfefferkorn. Words failed him to express his fulsome praises of the former, or to adequately convey the torrent of invective and libelous abuse which he belched forth against the latter, and applied indiscriminately to the whole body of the clergy (Triumphus Caplnonis). Besides openly and publicly proclaiming that he was in league with twenty freethinkers for the avowed purpose of extirpating the monks, this vaunted advocate of liberty and humanity did not blush to detail, with a refinement of cruelty that would have chilled the heart of a headsman, the tortures and manner of death it would gladden his soul to see the baptized Jew Pfefferkorn undergo, and for no other reason than because the latter had been the first to call the attention of the Church to certain Hebrew books of a dangerous tendency. Like Luther, he shortly left off the use of the Latin, a language which he had hitherto employed, and in its place substituted the German, as a more convenient and efficient vehicle for revolutionizing thoughts. "It has been my wont," he said, "in the past to employ the Latin language exclusively; but in so doing I reached only a few, whereas I now-appeal to my country." He closed his life on the island of Ufenau, in the Lake of Ziirich. The work, which gave special notoriety to this league, was the pamphlet entitled ".Epistolae virorum obscurorum,"l directed against the monks, published together with Lorenzo Valla's book "1On the Fictitious Donation of Constantine the Great to Pope Sylvester," and preceded by an ironical dedication to Pope Leo X.2 These caustic satires and malignant lampoons, containing offensive and obscene illustrations by the celebrated Luke Cranach, were openly offered for sale at the church-doors side by side with books of devotion.3 No means 1 See Vol. II., p. 1010, note 2. 2 Conf. Kampschulte, The University of Erfurt, Pt. I., p. 192-226. 3 Satires and Pasquinades of the age of the Reformation, published by Oscar Schade, Hanov. 1856-58, 3.vols. Unpleasant for many a Protestant: Dr. Thomas Mlurner (Franciscan of Strasburg's) Poem of the Great Lutheran Fool, published by Dr. Henry Kurz, Ziirich, i848. Vilmar, in his History of German

Page  31 ~ 301. Luther's Religious System and Robber Knights, etc. 31 were neglected by Hutten and his party for the accomplishment of their purposes. To give the monks a more complete overthrow, they sought the alliance of princes. " We must," said HIutten in a letter to Pirkheimer, "employ every means to gain them; we must never leave off pressing our suit; we must accept from them offices public and private, for it is thus jurists and theologians secure and retain their favor." Hence we see that previously to Luther's expulsion from the Church, a league had been formed, having nothing in common with the pseudo-mystical tendencies of the so-called reformer; but, on the contrary, wholly 1pagan in character, and representing a radically materialistic reaction against the Church, her religious system, and her deposit of revealed truths.' There was but one bond that could unite these parties, whose principles, at least in their origin, were diametrically opposedthe one claiming to be purely spiritual, and the other known to be essentially materialistic in its aims-and that was the common bond of hatred against the Church. Hutten, by birth a Knight of the Empire, well knew how to excite in the hearts of the nobles, who, though they had long plundered the property of the Church, had never ventured to resist her authority, a spirit of hatred against the clergy as violent as had ever been entertained by the Humanists and philologists. The warlike habits of these knights had obliterated every principle of justice from their minds, and stifled every humane feeling. Their masxim was: "To ride and to rob is no shame; the best in the land do the same." They also ingenuously professed to believe that the wealth of such low fellows as commercial men was the lawful plunder of nobles. All these distinguishing characteristics of the nobility of the Empire were combined and obtained their fullest expression in Francis qf Sickingen, a most complete specimen of the degeneracy into which the chivalry of the age had fallen. Putting aside all restraints to the widest Literature, says of it: "It is the most important satirical writing that ever appeared on the Reformation." 1The articles: Luther's alliance with the Aristocracy of the Empire, and preparations for the war of Sickingen. (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. IV., p. 465-482; p. 577-593; p. 669-678; p. 725-732.)

Page  32 32 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. freedom of action, his conduct was no longer the result of that exalted standard of virtue, which, in preceding ages, where chivalry, whether in the service of the Church or the Empire, was wholly devoted to the interests and advancement of truth, justice, and religion, was its crowning glory. His aims were selfish, and his motives sordid. He w.as ever ready to draw his sword in the most iniquitous of causes when such gave promise of pecuniary reward. His ability as a military leader recommended him to Francis I. and Charles V., who were at times rivals for his services. He was, by turn, under the ban of the Empire as a disturber of the public peace, and high in the imperial favor as a commander of armies. To the materialforce, of which he was the representative, inveterately and persistently hostile to public order, did Luther address himself. Sickingen, however, cared as little as Hutten for the religious opinions of Luther. He encouraged the controversy on indulgences, and favored the revolt against the Church to which it led, only because these supplied an occasion to work mischief and furnished a means of inciting the masses to rebellion, thereby bringing about the revolution he was meditating against the Empire. Although an agitator, a revolutionist, and a disturber of the public peace, he was never in sympathy with Luther, and continued to the last steadfast in his fidelity to the Catholic Church. At his prayer, Albert, Archbishop of Mentz, by an instrument, dated May 10, 1520, authorized the erection and endowment of a chapel, and granted an indulgence of forty days to all who should visit it. He had also the intention, in 1519, of founding a Franciscan convent, but was driven from his purpose by the sneers of Hutten. Though Hutten's caustic raillery might deter Sickingen from founding a religious house, his influence could not draw him to the cause of Luther. "Who is he," was his reply to the suggestion, "that dares attempt to overthrow institutions which have survived to the present day? If such there be, and he have the requisite courage for the undertaking, does he not lack the power?"

Page  33 ~ 302. Luther's Condemnation. 33 ~ 302. Luther's Condemnation. Shortly after the close of the disputation of Leipsig, Dr. Eck set out for Rome, in order by his presence to urge Leo to take more prompt and decisive measures than might be looked for from the dilatory and over-cautious policy of Mliltitz. He had many difficulties to face and much opposition to overcome in the Consistory, but his appeals and representations were in the end successful. The bull, "Exssarge Domirne et jucdica causam tuam,"' was issued June 15, 1520, in which forty-one propositions, extracted from the writings of Luther, were condemned, his works ordered to be burnt wherever found, and be himself excommunicated if he should not have retracted at the expiration of sixty (lays. The Pope exhorted and prayed him and his followers by the Blood of Christ, shed for the redemption of man and the foundation of the Church, to cease to disturb the peace of the Spouse of Christ, to destroy her unity, and outrage her sacred and unchangeable truths. But should he disregard these entreaties, refuse to avail himself of this paternal kindness and tenderness, and persist in his errors, he was declared excommunicate, liable to the penalties attached to the crime of heresy, and all Christian princes were instructed to apprehend him and send him to Rome. The execution of this bull was given to the Papal Legates, Carraccioli and Aleandro, and to these Dr. Eck was joined. That one like Eck, holding no superior rank as a, churchman, should have been *made a member of this commission, of itself gave no little offense. But apart from this, he had been and was still Luther's most formidable and implacable enemy; and he was now the bearer of his sentence. iThis bull, composed by Card. Ascolti, is written in pure. graceful, and elegant Latinity. Audin, 1. c., London, 1854, Vol. I., p. 224. It is given in Harduin, Collectio cone., T. IX., p. 1891; in Coquellinus, Bullarium, T. III.. Pt. III., p. 487 sq. Raynald. ad an. 1520; Concil. Trid. ed., Lps. 1842, p. 270-72. In German, with the carping observations of Htutten; in WFalch, Vol. XV., p. 1691 sq. Luther wrote against this bull: Reasons and Causes in favor of all those who have been unjustly condemned by the Roman Bull, Germ. Works, Jena. ed., Pt. I., p. 400-432. VOL. III-3

Page  34 34 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Luther considered that, under the circumstances, the acceptance by him of so ungracious an office, was clear evidence of personal vindictiveness. His own condemnation coming to him through such a source he regarded, says Pallavicini, as a stealthy stab from the poniard of a malignant foe, rather than a lawfully authorized blow from a Roman lictor's ax. Hence, to represent Eck's successful journey beyond the Alps as undertaken from motives of revenge, and as being in some sort an encroachment upon the rights of the German bishops, was not a difficult task. Moreover, it is said, that Eck of hiis own authority extended the excommunication to many of Luther's adherents, and among them Carlstadt and Dolcius, professors at Wittenberg; Pirkheimer and Speigler, councillors of Niirnberg; and Adelmannsfelden, a nobleman and canon of Augsburg. The last circumstance put many obstacles in the way of publishing the bull and carrying its instructions into execution, particularly in districts where public feeling ran high. Luther, with his usual dexterity, hastened to counteract the effect it might have upon the public mind, by publishing his pamphlet 0n the Newi Eckian Bttlls.l Eck was insulted at Leipsig, and forced to seek safety in flight, and the Papal bull was made the jest of the populace. Similar outbreaks took place at Erfurt. But at Mlentz, Cologne, ITalberstadt, Freisingen, Eichstaedt, Merseburg, Meissen, Brandenburg, and other places, the bull was published, and Luther's writings burnt. The Elector of Saxony ordered Luther to communicate once more with the Pope. Luther complied, but his tone was far from conciliatory. Ile forwarded to Leo his pamphlet On the New Eckian Bulls, accompanied with his discourse on Christian Liberty. Charles V., son of Philip the Fair, who, when only twenty years.of age, and after a sharp contest with foreign competitors, had succeeded his grandfather Maximilian as Emperor, besides having inherited the ancient attachment of the HIouse of Hapsburg to the traditional teachings of the Church, had received strong religious impressions from his preceptor, Adrian of Utrecht, whom he afterward was in1In Riffel (2d ed.), Vol. I., p. 242; 1st ed., Vol. I., p. 170 sq.

Page  35 ~ 302. Luther's Condemnation. 35 strumental in raising to the papal throne.l After his coronation at Aix-la-Chapelle (October 22, 1520), the bull excommunicating Luther was placed in his hands by the Legates Carraccioli and Aleandro. Luther was as yet uncertain as to the trtnper of the new Emperor and the course he would pursue. Hoping to secure his good will, he addressed him a most humble letter,2 in which, among other things, he stated that in publishing his pamphlets he had no aim in viewv other than to brush away superstitious notions and the delusions of human tradition, and establish in their stead the truths of the Gospel. And for this, he went on to say, have I endured these three years the angry abuse of men and every sort of evil.. He concluded by stating that he had in vain sued for mercy and implored pardon; his enemies had made up their minds to it that the Gospel, Divine truth, and himself should perish together; to avert so great an evil, lie, like Athanasius of old, invoked the Emperor's protection. The Elector of Saxony, who had come as far as the Rhine to welcome the Emperor on his arrival, had a conference with Erasmus at Cologne, in the course of which the latter gave it as his opinion that Luther's fault chiefly consisted in his having aimed a blow at the tiara of the Pope and the bellies of the monks. The judgment had certainly the merit of being brief and pointed; but to be merry on so grave and momentous a subject was unseemly, and little to the credit of Erasmus. Nevertheless, on the strength of it, the Elector de-'Lang, Correspondence of Emperor Charles V., published from the Royal Library and the Biblioth5que de Bourgoigne, at Brussels, LIps. 1844 sq., 6 vols. Heine, Letters addressed to Charles V. (1530-32) by his Father Confessor, from the Spanish Royal archives at Simancas, Brl. 1848. Autobiogratphy of Charles V. in a Portuguese translation, rediscovered at Brussels by Kervin de Letenhove. German, by IVarnkoenig, Brussels, 1862. Conf. Hist. and Political Papers, Vol. 50, p. 857 sq., and Ranke, Complete Works, Vol. VI., p. 73 sq. Robertson, History of the Reign of the Emperor Charles V., Edinburgh, 1769; Vienna, 1787, 4 vols. Favorable portraiture of Charles V., in Raumer, Hist. of Europe from the end of the fifteenth century, Vol. I., passim, particularly p. 580-586; rather unfavorable because partial representation by Alaurenbrech/er, Charles V. and the German Protestants from 1545 to 1555, together with an appendix of documents drawn from the Spanish archives of Simancas, Duisseldorf, 1865. Conf. Reusch, Review of Theology, Bonn, 1866, p. 817-824. 21n Walch, Luther's Works, Vol. XV., p. 1636. Cf. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 103 sq.

Page  36 36 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. manded that the Legates should submit the whole matter for examination to a court, composed of sober, religious, and impartial men; and that Luther's teachings should be disproved by authority of Scripture. Luther, now spurning papal prohibitions, and notably that of Paul II. in the bull Exsecrabilis, and without waiting for an answer firom Leo, appealed (November 17, 1520), on the authority of the decrees of Constance, declaring a Council superior to the Pope, from the IIoly See to an Ecumenical Synod; after having previously published, on the 4th of the same month, his violent protest "Against the Execrable Bull of Antichrist." Not content with these bold and aggressive acts, he went still further, and on December 10, 1520, having called together the students of the University and the inhabitants of Wittenberg at the Elster or Eastern Gate of the city, where fagots had been heaped up, ready to set fire to, he appeared bearing the bull of Leo, printed in characters large enough to be seen by all present. The Body of Canon Law, many scholastic and casuistical works, the controversial writings of Eck (the Chrysoprasus, etc.) and Emnser, were first cast into the flames,1 after which Luther flung the Pope's bull into the pile, exclaiming: " Thou hast disturbed the Lord's Hioly One, therefore shalt thou be consigned to fire eternal." As Luther had already given public notice by posters of what he intended to do with the bull, now that the work was accomplished, he hastened to announce his triumph to Spalatinus.2 On the following day, he addressed the students, saying: "It is now full time that the Pope himself were burned. My meaning is," he went on to say, "that the Papal Chair, its false teachings and abominations, should be committed to the flames." The Emperor, sensible that matters were going from bad to worse, convoked his first diet at Worms. ~ 303. The Diet of Worms, 1521-Luther at Wartburg. Cochlaeus (Col., 1568), p. 55 sq. Pallavicdni, Hist. cone. Trid., lib. I., c. 25. Sarpi, Hist. cone. Trid., lib. I., c. 21 sq. - Acta Lutheri in conciliis Vormat. 1Audin, 1. c. (London, 1854), Vol. I., p. 234. (TR.) 2 Lutheri ep. ad Spalat.: "Impossibile est enim salvos fieri, qui huic bullae foverunt aut non repugnarunt" (De Wette, Vol. I, p. 522).

Page  37 ~ 303. The Diet of Worms, 1521-Luther at Wartburg. 37 ed. Policarius, Vit., 1546 (Luth. opp. lat. Jenae, T. II., p. 436 sq. German Works, Jena ed., Pt. I.. p. 432-463). Raynald. ad an. 1521. WYalz, The Diet of Worms, 1521 (Researches on German Hist. VIII., 21-44); Friedrich, The Diet at Worms, 1521, according to letters of Aleander (in the Debates of the Royal Acad. of Sciences of Bavaria, Class III., Vol. XI., year 1870, sect. 3). Riffel, Vol. I., 2d ed., p. 224 sq. The Emperor had at first intended to summon Luther before the diet. Aleandro objected, because, to submit to the discussion of a secular court questions which had been already disposed of by the Holy See, and their author excommuni-'cated, he regarded as disgraceful. His words had much weight in Germany, because, though a Lombard by birth, he was popularly believed to be a German; and his lectures in Paris on Greek literature and Ausonius, delivered before two thousand hearers, had given him name and influence with the Humanists. Ile demanded that the pi-ovisions of the bull against Luther should be fully carried out (January 3, 1521). The evil effects of centr'alizing all ecclesiastical authority in Rome, on the one hand, and on the other, of leaving off holding ecclesiastical synods in Germany, before which the questions raised by Luther sho(uld have been brought, were now painfully apparent.' The Emperor was not fully alive to the scope and importance of the questions involved in the coitroversy until after the Legate had clearly pointed out that Luther's attitude toward the Holy See threatened, not only the stability of the Church, but the very existence of the Empire and the well-being of society. The States, however, refused to yield to Aleandro's demand; for having themselves brought forward one hundred and one Grievances (Gravaamina) touching abuses in ecclesiastical affairs,2 they were unwilling to condemn Luther without a hearing. Moreover, George, Duke of Saxony, a deterniined enemy of Luther's, brought before the diet twelve specific complaints, including some against the abuse of indulgences and the lax morals of the clergy. lie also strenuously advocated the holding of an Ecumenical Council. Luther, in the meantime, ordered his conduct to suit the circumstances, now professing himself humble and submis-'Cf. Wiedemann, John Eck, p. 137 and p. 385. 2 Walch, Luther's Works, Vol. XV., p. 2058 sq.

Page  38 88 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. sive, and again haughtily proclaiming his intention of holding out against all opposition. Influenced more by the Emperor's safe-conduct and the assistance promised friom another quarter, than by reliance on Divine aid, he finally nlade up his mind to go to Worms, where he arrived April 16. Under the circumstances, it required no special tax upon his courage to write to Spalatinus, as if apprehensive of the fate of IIuss: "Yes, I shall go to Worms, even if there were as many devils there as there are tiles on the roofs of Wittenberg." Luther went before the imperial diet, where the Emperor was present, on the 17th and 18th of April. On the former of these days, John von Eck, Chancellor to the Archbishop of Treves, pointing to close upon twenty volumes placed upon a table near by, asked Luther, first, if he acknowledged himself the author of these writings published under his name; and, secondly, if he was willing to retract the teachings contained therein. After hearing the titles of the books read, Luther, in answer to the first question, admitted their authorship, but requested time for consideration before answering the second. A day was given him to prepare his reply, and on the morrow the Chancellor again asked him if he would retract. Luther was evasive. The Chancellor pressed for a categorical answer. "Will you or will you not retract?" said he, addressing him. Lulther replied: "Inasmuch as it is certain that both Popes and Councils have time and again fallen into error, and denied at one time what they had affirmed at another, I can not bring myself to put faith in them. My conscience is captive to the words of God, and unless I shall be convicted of error by Scripture proof or by plain reason, I neither can nor will retract anything. God help me. Amen."' At a subsequent conference, Dr. John von Eck, the Chancellor, and Cochlaeus, Dean of the Church of the Holy Virgin at Frankfort, pointed out to Luther that he was inconsistent and ex-parte in his appeal to Holy Scripture-first, because he would accept no rule of interpretation but his own private judgment, and, next, because of arbitrarily rejecting certain 1The dramatic words hitherto attributed to him: " Here I stand, how else can I act?" are a later addition. Cf. Burkhardt, Studies and Criticisms, 1869, nro. 3.

Page  39 ~ 303. The Diet of V"or Ms, 1521-Luther at Wartburg. 39 Books, he had virtually called in question the authority of all.' They further reminded him that the authors of every heresy that had rent the Church from the earliest days to their own, had sought in Scripture the justification of their errors. But their arguments and the entreaties of Coehlaeals, who visited him privately some days later, were all to no purpose. "Even if I should retract," said he, "the oth/rs (HIlum:nists), men far more learned than mrlyself, would not keep silence, or cease to carry on the work."2 A committee, composed of princes and bishops, and including, besides oth-'This is the style in which Luther speaks of the Pentateuch: "WVe have no wish either to see or hear MIoses. Let us leave 3Moses to the Jews, to whom he was given to serve as a Mirror of Saxony; he has nothing in common with Pagans and Christians, and we should take no notice of him. Just as France esteems the Mirror of Saxony only in so far as it is the expression of natural law, so also the Mosaic legislation, thoughl admirably suited to the Jews, has no binding force whatever as regards ourselves. Moses is the prince and exemplar of all executioners; in striking terror into the hearts ofl men, in inflicting torture, and in tyrannizing, he is without a rival."... Of Ecclesiastes, the Heresiarch says: *" This book should be more complete; it is mutilated; it is like a cavalier riding without boots or spurs; just as I used to do while I was still a monk."... Of Judith and Tobias: " As it seems to me, Judith is a tragedy, in which the end of all tyrants may be learned. As to Tobias, it is a comedy, in which there is a great deal of talk about women. It contains many amusing and silly stories."... Of Ecclesiasticus: " The author of this book is an excellent expounder of the Law, or a Jurist; he also gives good precepts for exterior deportment; but he is not a prophet, and knows simply nothing about Christ."... Of the Second Machabees: "I have so great an aversion to this book and that of Esther, that I almost wish they did not exist; they are full of observances characteristically Jewish and of Pagan abominations."... Of the Four Gospels: "'The first three speak of the works of Our Lord rather than of His oral teaching; that of St. John is the only sympathetic, the only true Gospel; and should be undoubtedly preferred to the others. In lile manner, the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Paul are superior to the first three Gospels."'... Of the Epistles to the Hebrews: "It need not surprise one to find here bits of wood, hay, and straw.'... Of the Epistle of St. James: " Compared with the Epistles of St. Paul, this is in truth an epistle of straw; it contains absolutely nothing to remind one of the style of the Gospel."... Of the Apocalypse:' There are many things objectionable in this book. To my mind, it bears upon it no marks of an Apostolic or prophetic character. It is not the habit of the Apostles to speak in metaphors; on the contrary, when they utter a prophecy, they do so in clear and precise terms. Every one may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it." 2 Dr. Otto, The Conference of Cochlaeus with Luther at Worms, 1521 (Austr. Quart. of Theol. 1866, nro. 1).-Henne-s, Luther's Sojourn at Worms, Mentz, 1868.

Page  40 40 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. ers, Drs. Eck and Cochlaeus, advised Luther to submit to the judgment of a general council; but the monk was inexorable. To the Archbishop of Treves, Richard vron Greifenklau, who requested him to suggest his own method of adjusting matters, he replied by quoting the words of Gamaliel: " If this work be of man, it will come to naught; but if it be of God, ye can not overthrow it." Apart fromn his obstinate adherence to his errors, and his rejection of every overture looking toward an authoritative decision, Luther had given much offense by his bibulous habits and his unseemly familiarities with females;1 and, on the day after his conference with the Archbishop of Treves (April 26), being provided with a safe-conduct for twenty-one days, was ordered to quit Worms. His ostensible destination was Wittenberg; but while on his way, and probably by preconcerted arrangement2 between himself and the Elector of Saxony, he was set upon by five masked and armed men, seized and carried away a willing prisoner to the Castle of Wartburg, near Eisenach, where he remained from May, 1521, till March 8, 1522, living incognito under the assumed name of Younker George, and dressed as a knight. On the 26th of May, when many of the States had already, as it seemls unadvisedly, withdrawn firom the diet, an imperial decree drawn up by Aleandro, and dated May 8th, placing Luther under the ban of the Empire, was si2gned by the Emperor, and officially promulgated. It would appear that Luther courted this sentence, for previously to its promulgation he boastfully declared, that "If Buss had been a heretic, he himself was surely ten times as great a'one." The decree commanded all persons, under severe penalties, to refuse hospitality to Luther; to seize his person, and deliver him up to the officers of the Empire, and to commit his writings to the flames.3 On the Imperial Chamber of Niirnberg was laid the duty of seeing to it that the various provisions of the sentence were carried into effect. It was now very generally believed that there was an end of' the heresy; that the last act of the tragedy had been performed: but a 1Conf. below, { 319, the letter of Count Hoyer of Mansfeld, written 1522. 2See Luther's Letters, in de Wette, Vol. II., pp. 3, 7, 89. 3Cf. Rifel, 1st ed., Vol. I., pp. 213-217; 2d ed., Vol. I., pp. 290-294.

Page  41 ~ 303. The Diet of Worms, 1521 — Luther at Wartburg. 41 few far-seeing men thought otherwise, and predicted that the storm, far from having spent itself, was still gathering strength. "There is, as some think, an end of the tragedy," wrote the Spanish courtier, Alphonso Valdez,l to his friend Peter Martyr; "but as for myself, I am fully convinced that the play is only opening, for the Germans are highly incensed against the Holy See." In a strong rescript sent to the States of the Empire, bearing the date of April 19, 1521, the Emperor had expressed his determination to oppose a powerful resistance to the religious tendencies in Germany; but this was in the existing circumstances impossible, for the civil discords of Spain and the desperate war he was then waging against France called forth his best energies and claimed his undivided attention. Hence, beyond the limits of the Emperor's own states and those of his brother, Ferdinand, and of the Elector of Brandenburg, the Duke of Bavaria, Duke George of Saxony, and a few ecclesiastical princes, the edict of Worms was but feebly executed, if at all. It was coldly received by the representatives of the States of Germany, who had been industriously taught to believe that this theological quarrel was no more than a struggle against Rome, in the destruction of whose claims they fancied they saw the realization of wild dreams and delusive hopes. A number of propositions extracted from the works of Luther were condemned by the Faculty of the Sorbonne, at Paris,2 and by others of lesser note, and refuted by Henry V1II.3 of England; but owing to the preoccupation of men's 1Habes hujus tragoediae, ut quidam volunt, fineme, ut egomet mihi persuadeo, non finem sed initium; nam video Germanorum animos graviter in sedem Romanam concitari. (ep. ad Petr. Martyr.) for other letters of A. Valdez, see Lessing supra. When the Papal Legate, Chieregati, remarked that if H1ungary should be lost, Germany would also pass under the yoke of the Turk, the malcontents replied: "We had much rather be under the Turk than under you, who are the last and greatest of God's enemies, and are the very slave of abomination." 2Condemnatio doctr. Luther. per facultatem Paris, in le Plat, Monumenta ad hist. Cone. Trid. spect., T. II., p. 98 sq. 3Against Luther's Discourse: On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church: Adsertio septem sacramentorum adversus Martinum Lutherum, Londini, 1521

Page  42 42 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. minds with the momentous events just related, these acts produced little, if any, influence upon public opinion. To his royal opponents and the Universities, Luther replied in language of coarse vulgarity and abusive invective.' TLle admirable criticism of the heresiarch's teaching by Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, for the same reason, received but scant attention.2 Luther's Sojourn at Wartburg ("Patmos"). While Luther remained at the fortress of Wartburg, where, as it was paradoxically expressed, "he was a willing prisoner against his will," he was withdrawnl from the baneful influence of Ulrich von H-Iutten, and might, with some effort, have been brought to think seriously upon his conduct, and view with some misgiving the terrible nature of the enterprise in which he was engaged. Iis bodily ailments and the stings of conscience not unfrequently drove him to the very brink of despair. Speaking of his feelings at this time, he says: " My heart beat with fear, and I asked myself the questions: Is wisdom thy exclusive gift? Are all others in error, and have they been so these many years? What if thou thyself art in error, leading others astray, to be damned eternally? By whom art thou commissioned to preach the Gospel, by whom callel?" Luther failed to recognize these misgivings as Divine warnings; he regarded them as assaults and temptations of the Devil, who, he said, uell understood the art of frightening one by the remembrance of one's past sins. He frequently had visions, in which demons flitted like specters across his heated imagination. The recital of them is frequently ludicrous and trifling, but they themselves play an important part in his life. By habitually yielding to their influence, he finally brought himself to indulge the pleasing delusion that the Catholic Church was the detestable kingdom of Antichrist, and the heritage of God's anger; that he himself was John the Evangelist banished by Domitian to the island of Patmos, a second Paul, or Isaias; and Melanchthon another Jeremias.'Cf Ryfel, 1st ed., Vol. I., p. 109-110; 2d ed., p. 179-181. 2Assertionis Lutheranae confutatio. 1523. Conf. Dr. Laemmer, 1. c., p. 14-20.

Page  43 ~ 304. Death of Leo X.-His Character. 43 His trials, though numerous and severe, were wholly unproductive of good. While at Wartburg, he often indulged in the pleasures of the chase; but the bulk of his time was given to making a translation of the Bible into German, so worded as to fit his own system of belief.1 He maintained an active correspondence with his friends, and continued to still exert, through his letters and other writings, the baneful influence which his presence had inspired. It was at this time that lie wrote his inflammatory and mischievous pamphlets "Agyia st the Idol of Halle" (the Archbishop of Mentz); "On Monastic Vows;" and "On the Abuse of Masses" —the first of which hededicated to his father, and the last to the Augustinians of Wittenberg.' ~ 304. Death of Leo X. —His Character. Laemmer, Monument. Vaticana, p. 3-10; for bibliography, see V. II., p. 922, n. 3. Audin, in his Life of Luther, ch. XVI., where he describes the court of Leo X. Ranke, Ecclesiastical and Political Hist. of the Popes in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, 4th ed., Brl. 1854, Vol. I., p. 80 sq. Engl. transl., Philad. 1841, 1844; New York, 1845; London, 1852. (TR.) In putting an estimate upon the character of Leo X., determining the degree of authority he exercised, and the influence of his pontificate, it should be borne in mind that he abolished the Pragmatic Sanction in France;3 brought the Lateran Council to a close (1517); and, through his representatives, Cajetan and Miltitz, set on foot negotiations in regard to Luther. Neither should his attitude toward the Emperor, Charles V., and his ambitious rival, Francis I., be overlooked. In his relations to these princes, he was bold, alert, and politic; now throwing the weight of his influence on the side of the one, and now of the other, as each in turn was superior in council or victorious in battle; always more intent on securing the possession of a province than in promoting the wellbeing of the Church. To. artists and scholars he was magnanimous, noble, and generous; patronizing them, not from 1D6llinger, The Reformation, Vol. III., p. 139 sq. 2RK/el, Vol. I., 2d ed., p. 329 sq. 8See Vol. Il., p. 921.

Page  44 44 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. feelings of vanity, but from taste and conviction, and as one having a practical and thorough knowledge of what he was doing, and why he did it. The age of Augustus seemed to have again dawned upon Rome. More devoted to art thlan to the duties of his offices-more enamored of the charms of elegant literature than of the chaste beauty of Christian virtue-Leo pursued toward Luther a policy at once halting and ineffective. Regarding religion himself as a matter of only secondary importance, he could but ill comprehend how others should bear trials for its sake, and expose themselves to countless dangers in pushing forward its interests. His pontificate, though one of the most brilliant, was by no means the most happy, in the history of the Church. His lavish extravagance occasioned in great part the disastrous controversies of the age, and was a source of no little embarrassment to his successors in the Papacy. He died December 1, 1521. ~ 305. The Diet of Viirnberg convoked for September 1, and opened November, 1522. Raynald. Ann. ad an. 1522. Menzel, 1. c., Pt. I., p. 105 sq. TMalch, Works of Luther, Vol. XV., p. 2504 sq. Correspondence of Pope Hadrian VI. with Erasmus (translated fr. the Latin), Frankfurt, 1849. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 378 sq. The primary object this Diet had in view in assembling was to provide measures to repel a threatened invasion by the Turks. But as Luther had returned to Wittenberg (1522), Hadrian VI,' formerly preceptor to Charles V. and now Pope, thinking'the present occasion a favorable one for putting an end to the existing religious controversies, resolved to turn it to the best account. The character of Hadrian was quite the reverse of that of his predecessor, Leo X. Sincerely anld deeply religious, a true priest, of simple tastes and grave manners, he had in a certain sense a horror of the art treasures of ancient Rome, regarding them as in a measure tending to revive the idols of Paganism. His dislike of them, which was emphatic I Hoefer,, Election and Accession of Pope Hadrian VI. to the Throne, Vienna, 1873; Bauer, Hadrian VI., being a picture of Life of the Age of the Reformation, Heidelberg, 1876.

Page  45 ~ 305. The Diet of Niirnberg Convoked and Opened. 45 and outspoken, gave great offense to the- Romans, who, besides taking an enthusiastic pride in the reign of Leo X., had financial reasons for encouraging the love of pagan art which that reign had called forth. The oft-repeated words of Hadrian, that "he would have priests for the adornment of churches, not churches for the adornment of priests," expressed a line of action with which the Romans had little or no sympathy. The growing discontent reached its height when the Pope, through his legate, Chieregati, Bishop of Teramo, publicly proclaimed at the Diet of Niirnberg, that, "impelled alike by inclination and duty, he would put forth his best energies to bring about all needful reforms, beginning with the papal household, the primary source of the evils afflicting the Church, to the end, that, as corruption had infected high and low, all might mend their lives and make sure their salvation." But while thus frankly avowing the faults of the papacy, and promising the correction of these and other abuses, the Pope soon learned that it was not in his power to hasten the march of events, or to shorten the time necessary to such a work. Fully persuaded that only the ignorant could be led astray by the crude and irrational teachings of Luther,l and that the revolt against the old faith was to be mainly ascribed to the burdens and hardships endured by the bulk of the people, he entertained the hope that this frank avowal of the existence of evil and the promise of its correction, coming from the common father of Christendom, would have the effect of allaying popular discontent, of conciliating and inspiring confidence in the minds of all. In this frame of mind, he pressed the Diet to take prompt and vigorous 1In a letter written by him while yet a cardinal, he said, speaking of Luther: "Qui sane tam rudes et palpabiles haereses mihi prae se ferre videtur, ut ne discipulus quidem theologiae ac prima ejus limina ingressus ita labi merito potuisset.... Miror valde, quod homo, tam manifeste tamque pertinaciter in fide errans et suas haereses somniaque diffundens, impune errare et alios in perniciosissimos errores trahere impune sinitur." (Burmanni Analecta hist. de Hadr. VI., Traj. 1727, 4to., p. 447.) This judgment was based on the works of Luther published in Latin. His numerous works in German were still more calculated to lead minds astray and incite rebellion. (Vide supra, p. 30.).. Syntagma doctrinae theologicae Adriani VI., ed. Reusens, Lovanii, 1862; ejusdem, Anecdota de vita et scriptis Adriani, Lov. 1862.

Page  46 46 Period 3.. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. measures against Luther; "for," said he, with prophetic foresight, "the revolt, now directed against the spiritual authority, will shortly deal a blow at the temporal also." The words of the Pontiff were ill-received by the Diet, and his warning unheeded; his frank avowal of the shortcomings of the papacy gave occa.sion to exhibitions of unseemly triumph, and his promise of reform was interpreted as an acceptance of defeat. The hundred and one grievances against the Holy See were again taken up; and the convocation of an ecumenical council, to convene in some city of Germany, imperiously demanded; which should, in the first instance, provide for the general well-being of the Church, and, this accomplished, settle the Lutheran controversy. Thus far, said the assembled States, it has been found impossible to enforce the edict placing Luther under ban of the Empire, from fear of a popular insurrection. IHowever, they falteringly added, every effort will he put forth to prevent the propagation, either orally or in writing, of the new doctrines, until such time as the council shall have convened; and to sustain the authority of such bishops as shall punish married ecclesiastics with canonical penalties. The Nuncio, clearly perceiving that the temper of the States was hostile to Rome, and mortified at the ill success of his mission, withdrew from the Diet; and IIadrian, equally cognizant of their sinister designs, gave expression to his sorrow in words of reproachful tenderness, in which, while laying bare the deep and intense grief that crushed his paternal heart,l he seemed to take upon himself the responsibility of all the faults committed by his predecessors. Hadrian, however, did more than utter words of complaint. Desirous of putting an end to the system of wasteful extravagance that lhad grown up under his predecessors, he dismissed a large number of useless functionaries, thereby exciting against himself a spirit of intense hostility. To add to the bitterness of his grief, he learned that his efforts to defend the island of Rhodes (December 25, 1522) against the assaults of the Turks, had proved unsuccess1Letters to the Elector of Saxony; to the cities of Breslau and Bamberg -Conf. Raynald. ad an. 1523, nros. 73-86.

Page  47 ~ 306. Melanchthon, Luther, and their New Teachings. 47 ful. The disastrous issue of all his most cherished projects was too much for the tender heart of the holy Pontiff, and lihe gradually sunk under the weight of accumulated sorrows. "H'i ow sad," said he in his last moments, "is the condition of a Pope who would do good, but can not." On the very day of his death (Septeniber 14, 1523), the Romans gave expression to unseemly joy, in a coarse inscription placed above the door of his attending physician.l He was entombed in Santa Maria dell' Anima, the national church of the Germans. At the right of the choir stands a noble sepulchral monument erected to his memory. It was executed by Michaelangelo of Siena and Nicolas Tribolo of Florence, after the designs of Badassare Peruzzi. ~ 306. Efforts of Mclanchthon and Luther to Spread the New Teachings. In 1521, after the close of the Diet of Worms, Melanchthon published his Hypotyposes theologicae, seu Loci communes rerum theologicarum, setting forth, with studious brevitv and with great beauty of language, a fill account of Luther's teachings.2 He vehemently assailed the doctrine of human fieewill, stating that "in spiritual affairs the intellect and reason of man are wholly in the dark" (quod hominis intellectus ratioque in rebus spiritualibus prorsus est caeca). "The adultery of David," said he, "alld the betrayal of Judas are as much the work of God as the calling of Paul."3 Besides advocating'Liberatori Patriae, S. P. Q. R. —The epitaph composed by his friends, and inscribed on his tomb, does him justice. " Here lies Hadrian VI., who held that to rule is the greatest of misfortunes." So also another, composed by aL Hollander, and inscribed on his cenotaph: Alas! how greatly are the efibrts of the very best men colored by the character of their age." "Proh dolor. quantum refert in quae tempora vel optimi cujusque virtus incidat." 2Prima ed., Vit. 1521, 4to., and oftener; ed. Augusti, Lps. 1821. 3He says in his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans: "iHaec sit certa sententia, a Deo fieri omnia, tam bona quam mala. Nos dicimus, non solum permittere Deum creaturis, ut operentur, sed ipsum omnia proprie agere, ut sicut fatentur, proprium Dei opus fuisse Pauli vocationem, ita fateantur, opera Dei propria esse, sive quae media vocantur, ut cornedere, sive quae mala sunt, ut Davidis adulterium; constat enim Deum omnia facere, non permissive sed potenter, i. e. ut sit ejus proprium opus Judae proditio, sicut Pauli vocatio."

Page  48 48 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. predestination in the most extreme and rigid sense, he claims for man an individual and immediate inspiration. As Luther had formerly declaimed in the universities against the philosophy and methods of Aristotle, so Melanchthon now expressed a wish to see the works of Plato swept fioom the face of the earth. To carry out literally the words of Scripture, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread," he bound himself as an apprentice to a master baker. Moreover, Mlelanchthon frequently expressed his hearty contempt of the very ablest ecclesiastical writers, of whom, it would be small praise to say that they were preeminently his superiors in intellectual endowments and depth of thought. Melanchthon opens his doctrinal exposition abruptly with predestination, and then goes on to discuss the other dogmas in dispute in a series of propositions, each independent of' the other, and having no essential connection as integral parts of a consistent system. He even goes so far as to state that a Christian need know no more than the existence "of la.w, of grace, and of sin and its power for evil " (vim peccali, leqem, gratiam). The doctrines of free-will, grace, and predestination, while playing so important a part in the scheme of faith and justification, are treated with special fullness. In subsequent editions o' his work, he gave an exposition of' the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, professing to ground his statements on the utterances of the first six ecumenical councils.l Dr. Eck promptly published, as a reply to this work,. his "En chiridion locorum communium." As Melanchthon's doctrinal exposition had been addressed exclusively to the learned, Luther undertook to perform a similar work for the more illiterate, by translating, nlostly from thle original text, the New Testament into the vulgar (Chemnit. loci theol., ed. Leyser 1615, Pt. I., p. 173.) In the later editions of Melanchthon's Commentary, this passage was omitted.'Luther, writing of this work, says: " It is a charming and noble book, and deserves to live forever." And again:'Nothing better has been written since the days' of the Apostles." Non solum immortalitate, sed etiam canone ecclesiastico dignum. On the other hand, Strobel, in his Literary History of Philip Melanchthon's Loci theologici (Altenburg and Niirnberg, 1776-1782), shows that this dogmatical work underwent subsequent variations, both as to matter and form.

Page  49 ~ 306. Melanchthon, Luther, and their New 7a'eccings. 49 tongue. This translation, before being published, was revised by hlimself and Melanchthon conjointly. Translations of the various books of the Old Testament, in which he also availed himself of the critical judgment of his friends, subsequently appeared.l Luther now had the effrontery to make the silly boast that he was the first to drag the Bible forth from beneath the dusty benches of the schools, an assumption which even Zwinglius some time later indignantly denied. "Youl are unjust," said he, "in putting forth this boastful claim; you forget that we have gained a knowledge of the Sacred Scriptures through the translations of others. To mention a few, there is Erasmus in our own day; Valla, a few years earlier; and the pious Reuchlin and Pelican, in the absence of whose labors, neither you nor others could have accomplished the great work. But I will be merciffil, my dear Luther, although I should not; for the impudent boasting thlat pervades your books, your letters, and your discourses, merits the severest chastisement. You are very well aware, with all your blustering, that, previously to your time, there existed a host of scholars, who, in biblical knowledge and philological attainments, were incomparably your superiors." Luther, in replying to those who objected that the indiscriminate reading of the Bible was dangerous, said: " Should any one attack you, saying:- the Bible is obscure, or it should be read with the aid of the commentaries of the Fathers, you will reply: this is not true, for there never existed on earth a book more easily intelligible than the Bible."'Last ed. with Luther's corrections, 1546. Luther's Sendbr. v. Dollmetshen der IH. S. ( Walch, Vol. XXI., p. 316 sq.) Mathesius, Thirteen Sermons.-Panzer, H-list. of Transl. of the Bible, Nfirnberg (1783) 1791. Marheinecke, Services rendered to the cause of Religion by Translations of the Bible, 13 vl., 1815. II. Schott, Hist. of Transl. of the Bible, Lps. 1835. G. W. Hopf, Criticism of Luther's German Version of the Bible. Niirnberg, 1847. See Audin, Life of Luther, ch. XXIV. (TR.) VOL. III-4

Page  50 50 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. ~ 307. The Diet of Niirnberg. Laemmer, Monum. Vatic., p. 11 sq.-Pallavicini, Hist. Conc. Trid., lib. II., c. 10. Raynald., ad an. 1524. Ranke, Roman Popes, Vol. I., p. 99-129. Clement VII. (:November 19, 1523-1534), the successor to Pope Hadrian, was a HIumanist, and the friend of Erasmus. Prudent, considerate, and fair-minded, he exercised great circumspection in whatever he did, always weighing scrupulously every measure, in its various relations and adjuncts, before proceeding to act. This habit of caution drew upon him the imputation of acting, not as one who sees his way clearly before him, and then goes resolutely forward, but as one having an ulterior purpose iii view, and making his approaches to it by a circuitous route.' He was not long in making up his mind that the religious troubles in Germany demanded a prompt and vigorous treatment, and to this end he sent his legate, Campeggio, to the Diet of Niirnberg. When the papal legate had entered Germany. he became fully convinced, from the signs he saw about him onl every side, that the people were hostile and evilly disposed toward the Pope. Arriving at the Diet, he was not a little surprised to find that Frederic, Elector of Saxony, the chief protector of Lutheranism, to whom he carried an affectionate letter from the Pope, and whom he had hoped to win back to the Catholic faith by his persuasive eloquence, was no longer there. The statement of the legate that the Pope reg.arided the "Centum Gravamina" as a flabricatioll of the enemies of the IIoly See, rather than an honest expression of the true sentiments of the German people, produced a violent outburst of indignation from the States present in t/he Diet. The most the legate could obtain was a promise that, in the interval between the adjournment of the present and the assembling of the next Diet at Spire,2 on the coming feast of St. Martin, the States would do what they could toward en-' Cf. the character of Clement VII. as drawn by Contarini in Ranke's Suppl. to the Roman Popes, Vol. III., pp. 25, 26. 2The Recess of April 18, 1524, in Liinig's Archives of the Empire, P. gen.,cont. I., p. 445. Walch, Vol. XV., p. 2674.

Page  51 ~ 307. The Diet of Niirnberg. 51 forcing the edict of Worms; would submit the Grievances ngainst the Court of Rome to the judgment of certain wise and experienced men, and have them again examined and liscussed at Spire; and that all magistrates would exert themselves to prevent the publication and distribution of writings injurious to the Holy See. The action of the States was equivocal and insulting, and called forth the indignant protest of Clement VII. They make a jest of the imperial authority, said he, and, in refusing to enforce the Edict of Worms, compromise the rights of the Emperor far more than the dignity of the Apostolic See.' The Emperor, viewing their action in the same light, commanded them to strictly enforce the Edict of Worms against Luther, the second Mohammed, under penalty of incurring the guilt of high treason, and being placed under the ban of the Eimpire. Although the action of the Diet was, for many reasons, offensive to both the Pope and the Emperor, it was hardly less so to Luther. His vanity was wounded, and he bitterly complained, that, after having undertaken an enterprise of unusual difficulty -and danger, he now received only the reward of ingratitude for his pains. The opponents of Luther, now fully aroused and startled by the frightful consequences to which his teaching and revolt2 would lead in practical life, prepared to take more decisive measures against him. The papal legate endeavored to adjust the differences between Austria and Bavaria, each suspicious of the ambitious designs of the other, and finally succeeded in effecting an alliance at Ratisbon (June 5, 1524) between the Archduke Ferdinand of Austria and the Dukes William and Louis of Bavaria, to which twelve bishops of Southern Germany were also partners. The imnmiediate object of this alliance was to protect the interests and institutions of the Catholic Church, and to enforce the edicts of Worms and Nuirnberg. It was resolved that priests who should marry, should be canonically punished; that young Germans should be forbidden to make their studies at Wittenberg; and that a vigorous opposition should be made to 1Cf. Raynald. ad an. 1524, nro. 15 sq. 2See following paragraph.

Page  52 52 Period 3. Epoch 1., Chapter 1. whatever tended to propagate heresy. The opponents of Luther agreed upon a similar line of action at Dessau, in Northern Germany. On the other hand, the Landgrave, Philip of lfesse, drew to his party the new Elector of Saxony, John the Constant (May 5, 1525), whom he induced to sign a treaty of alliance, concluded at Torgau, May 4, 1526, by which the Protestant princes boulnd themselves to defend the principles and uphold the interests of Lutheranism in their respective States-Jeckleneburqcg, Anhalt, Mansfeld, Prussia; and the cities of Brunswick and Magdeburg shortly after joined this alliance. In this way was the line of separation drawn between Catholic and Protestant Germany.1 If there was ever a time when it was to the interest of the Pope to closely ally himself to the Emperor, it was now; for Charles V., and he alone, was able and willing to maintain the Catholic Church in Germany. But unfortunately Clement failed to appreciate his opportunity, and imprudently published a brief hostile to the interests of Charles,2 and entered into an alliance with Francis I. The consequences of his action were disastrous. The Emperor's forces besieged Rome on two different occasions, stormed and plundered the city, made the Pope prisoner, and offered many indignities to his person (May 6, 1527). ~ 308. The New Teachings and Their Practical Consequences — Disorders at Wittenberg Caused by Carlstadt —The Anabaptists and the Peasants' War. The teachings of Luther soon found their way from his writings into the practical affairs of life. From his height at Wartburg, he flung down among the people his pamphlets on "Monastic Vows" and "The Abuse of Masses." 3 Bartholo1 The limits of the territory included by the Protestant and Catholic alliances may be seen in Wedell's Historical and Geographical Atlas, on map XVIII., b. 2See in Raynald. ad an. 1526, n. 6; also, a defense of the Emperor, in Goldasti Polit. Imp., Pt. XXII., pp. 990 sq.; also, a partial defense in Raynald., l.c., n. 22. 3 Walch, Vol. XIX., pp. 1304 sq. and 1808 sq.-Cf. Rffel, 1st ed., Vol. I., pp. 263-267; 2d ed., pp. 345-350. Luther said, in praise of the former of these two treatises, that, compared with the works he had hitherto written, it was (liber) "munitissimus et quod ausim gloriari invictus."

Page  53 ~ 308. The New Teachings-Disorders at Wittenberg, etc. 53 mew Bernhardi, a priest of the town of IKemberg, startled the world by openly taking a wife.' The Augustinian friars of Wittenberg, Luther's brothers in religion, (leclared their Vows and the Rules of their Order nuli and void. Luther had told them, in his pamphlet "On Monastic Vows," that such restrictions were contrary to the command of God; that monasticism itself was a revolt against Christ; and that, hence, monasteries should be burnt with fire, pitch, and brimstone, and utterly swept from the face of the earth, like Sodom and Gomorrah of old. At Wittenberg, Carlstadt, at the head of a fanatical mob, went about demolishing altars, overturning statues, and destroying pictures and sacred images; and, to put the crown on his sacrilegious conduct, administered the Lord's Supper to all who chose to approach, whether in the state of grace or not; and introduced the use of the German language in religious services. Similar scenes were enacted at Zwieckau, where in,fant baptism was rejected, on the ground that it had no more sanction in Holy Writ than other doctrines discarded by Luther on the same plea; for it is written, "Whosoever shall believe and be baptized, shall be saved." Hence, they said, as valid baptism could not be conferred until persons had attained the use of reason, it was plain adults should be rebaptized. Nicholas Storch, a native of Zwickau, after gathering about him a number of immediate followers, consisting of twelve apostles and seventy disciples, proceeded with the former to Wittenberg, where he preached to the people, and proclaimed himself a prophet of God. Melanchthon himself did not see his way clear out of the difficulties proposed by these "visionary prophets" against infant baptism, and for a time seemed to think that their doctrine, inasmuch as it had a Scripture sanction, might be conscientiously accepted. But some time after, disgusted with the excesses of the Anabaptists, he also rejectedl theil teachings. His defection was, in part at least, compensated by the accession to their ranks of Carlstadt, Martin Cellarius,'J. G. G. olter, Prima gloria Clerogamiae restitutae Luthero vindicata, N eostad. ad 0. 1767, 41o.

Page  54 54 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. a friend of Melanchthon's, the mnonk Didymus, and others. Didymus, in his sermons, warned parents against allowing their children to pursue profane studies; and Carlstadt, carrying his zeal against all human science still further, cast into the flames the text-books brought to him by students from, all quarters, giving as his reason for so doing that henceforth the Bible alone should be read among men. Under pretext of following the precept of Our Lord in Matthew xi. 25: "I give thanks to Thee, O Father, because Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones," he went through the streets of Wittenberg, Bible in hand, stopping the passers-by, and, entering the workshops, interrupted the artisans, to ask the meaning of difficult passages, as from persons whose minds had not yet been warped by the sophistry of science. The students passed beyond the control of the authorities, andi it was feared the University would be closed. Even the heresiarchs were startled at the excesses to which their teachings had led, and began to grow uneasy, lest they might serve as a pretext to Duke George of Saxony for putting a stop to any further attempts at reforming the Church. Luther took alarm at the violence of Carlstadt's conduct, and wrote from Wartburg: 1"You have entered this conflict inconsiderately, and without method; you have thrown everything into confusion; your proceedings are without warrant or reason. I may as well let you know what I think of the business. I am disgusted. If affairs have a disastrous issue, I shall not answer for it. You have not sought my counsel before entering upon the undertaking, (?!) and you will now see to it that you get on without me. What has been done, has been ill done, though Carlstadt may affirm over and over that you are right in acting as you do." In vain did Luther, at the instance of Melanchthon, write to them to prove the spirits before receiving their prophecies; the disorders went on. His friends wrote to him from Wittenberg, saying, "Come, or we perish." Frederic the Wise advised him not to leave Wartburg Castle. Luther left his Patmos March 8, and arrived at Wittenberg on Good Friday, 1522. Shortly before leaving Wart

Page  55 ~ 308. The New Teachings —Disorders at Wittenberg, etc. 55 burg, Luther wrote to the Elector:' "Be it known to Your Highness that I go to Wittenberg under the protection of a providence stronger than that of princes and electors. I have no need of your support, but you have of mine; it will be of advantage to you," etc. Scarcely had he arrived at Wittenberg, when, ascending the pulpit, he began "to rap these visionaries on the snout." For eight days together, or during the whole of Easter-week, he declaimed, in a series of mnasterly discourses, against those fanatical leaders and barbarous iconoclasts. "All violent anid untimely measures," said he, " employed to hasten the moment for a cleorer understanding of religion, are eq tally opposed to the Gospel and to Christian charity. External changes in ecclesiastical affairs should be intro(/uced only after men's minds have been convinced of the necessity of such changes." Luther was now in a position to see the practical workings of his own teaching and the faithful reproduction of his own conduct, and for the moment he seemed' startled by thle vision. But rapidly recovering himself, he again dashed headlong into just such violent and revolutionary conduct as he had attempted to suppress, again declaiming like a maniac against religious vows.2 "It is all one," said he, with shameless effrontery, "whether one says to God: I promise never to leave off offending Thee; or whether one says: I promise to live always chaste and poor that I may lead a just and holy life. The day has come," he continued, " not only to abolish forever those unnatural vows, but to punish, with all the rigor of the law, such as make them; to destroy convents, abbeys, priories, and monasteries, and in this way prevent them ever again being uttered." Luther's words found a responsive echo in the hearts of the depraved. Troops of monks deserted their convents, took wives, and became ardent Lutherans. It was soon plain to Luther that these reprobate monks, acting from carnal and lustful impulses, "singularly corrupted the good odor of the'De Wette, Luther's Letters, Vol. II., p. 137 sq. 2Short Epilogue against Vows and Religious Life in Monasteries, in Walch, Vol. XlX., p. 797.

Page  56 56 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Gospel." The spirit of revolt once evoked brooks no control. Luther himself rode the crest of the wave. Like Carlstadt, his former master, he gathered all his strength for an effort to abolish the Mass. To him the ever-renewing Sacrifice wras a horror. "Your only purpose in retaining the Mass," said lihe reproachfully to the Collegiate Chapter of Wittenberg. which had resisted his appeals," is to have always at hand a conrlenient pretext for starting new sects and opening fresh schisims." The irmpious rage of his adherents outran his own. "' These priests, these mumblers of Masses," they cried out in their impotent fury, "deserve death quite as richly as the profane blasphemers who curse God and His Saints on the public thoroughfares." By the use of violent means like these did Luther finally succeed in abolishing the Canon of the Mass (November, 1525); he retained only the Elevation. Thle influence of Luther's works, and particularly of those written in the vernacular, was not confined to priests and monks alone; it extended to the bulk of the people as well. Borne down by the weight of political oppression, they listened with feelings of enthusiastic and fanatical approbation to the ideas of Gospel freedom, so glowingly set forth by the new preachers. " I behold them comling from these sermons," said Erasmus, "with threatening looks, and eyes darting fire, as men carried beyond thenmselves by the fiery discourses to which they have just listened. These followers of the Gospel are ever ready for a conflict of some kind; whether Nwith polemical or martial weapons, it matters little." Luther called upon the people to cast off the yoke laid upon them by the priests and monks. Following his advice, the peasants refused to pay the customary taxes to bishops and monasteries. They interpreted Gospel freedom to mean a sanction authorizing them to disregard whatever was disagreeable or irksome, and to rebel against princes, particularly such as remained faithful to the Church. These they were taught to look upon as tyrants and enemies to Gospel truth. While Luther's work on "Christian Liberty," which had been scattered throughout the whole of Germany, prepared the way for revolt, his treatise on "The Secular Magistracy" (1523) formally advocated the abolition of all authority what

Page  57 ~ 308. The New Teachings — The Peasants' War. 57 ever, whether ecclesiastical or political.' The peasantry, inflamed by the fanatical teachings and fiery appeals of the sectaries, rather than driven to excess by the tyranny and extortions of feudal lords, rose in open and organized rebellion. In a manifesto, consisting of twelve articles,2 based upon texts drawn from the writings of Luther, the peasants claimed, first of all, the right of appointing and removing at will their ministers of the Gospel. The insurrection rapidly spread over Suabia, the Black Forest, the Palatirnate, Franconia, Thuringia, and Saxony. The peasants, assembling in large bodies, wxould proceed to plunder and burn convents, demolish the strongholds of the nobility, and commit every sort of outrage and atrocity. Thomas Miinzer, the leader of the sect of "Conquering Anabaptists" in Thuringia, preached a doctrine of political equality and freedom far more comprehensible to the illiterate peasantry than the religious equality and freedom advocated by Luther. After being driven out of Altstadt, where he had incited the citizens to rebel against the civil magistrates by his revolutionary harangues, and had put himself at the head of mobs that went about demolishing Catholic chapels and overturning Catholic altars, he received an appointment as pastor in the town of Miihlhausen. Here again he headed a formidable insurrection against the civil authorities; styled himself a prophet, and signed himself" Miiizer, the bearer of the sword of Gideon;" proclaimed the natural equality of all mnen, a community of goods, the abolition of every sort of authority, and the establishment of a new "Kingdom of God," composed solely of the just. Everywhere illiterate peasants might be seen taking upon themselves the office of preaching, for they had been told that 1 The following extract from this treatise will indicate its drift: " Should some one say: Since (according to Luther) there is to be no sword among Christians, how are they to be made responsible for their external acts? Surely there must be some representative of sovereign authority among them. Answer such one that no sovereign authority should exist among Christians; each should be subject to the other, according to the words of Paul, Rom. xii.:' In honor preventing one another;' and again: I. Peter ii.:'Be ye subject to every human creature;''honor all men."'" 2Cf. Alfred Stern, Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Suabian Peasants.

Page  58 58 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. any one might,announce the word of God. They besought Luther, now that he had, by the weapon of Holy Scripture,. set at defiance every-human power artd authority, to undertake the defense of their cause. Luther was at first extremely embarrassed by this appeal, but finally sent them an answer in the form of an exhortations, addressed alike to princes and peasants, whom he styled respectively "My dear Sirs and Brothers." With his accustomed dishonesty and dexterity, he shifted the responsibility of the peasants' insurrection, from where it properly belonged, to the bishops and Catholie princes,' "who," he said, " never wearied of crying out against the Gospel." As might have been foreseen, his exhortation was without effect. The peasants grew daily more bold and insolent, and their devastations and enormities more atrocious. At Weinsberg, they forced seventy knights to commit suicide, by throwing themselves against spears held before them. When Luther's enemies sarcastically taunted him with being an accomplished hand at kindling a conflagration, but an indifferent one at putting out the flames, he published a paniphlet against "those pillaging and murdering peasants." "Strike," said he to the princes, "strike, slay, front and rear; nothing is more devilish than sedition; it is a mad dog that bites you if you do not destroy it. There must be no sleep, no patience, no mercy; they are the children of the devil." Such was his speech in assailing those poor, deluded peasants, who had 1117alch, Vol. XVI., p. 5 sq.; Vol. XXI., p. 149; concerning various districts of the country of Baden, see Mone, Sources of the History of Baden, Carlsruhe, 1848 sq., Vol. II., 4to. Sartorius, Essay of a Hist. of the "Peasants' War," Berlin, 1795. WVachsmuth, "The Peasants' War," Lps. 1834. Zimmermann, A General Hist. of the Great Peasants' War, Stuttg. 1843, 3 vols. Bensen, Hist. of the Peasants' War in East Franconia, written from the sources, Erlangen, 1840. Cornelius, Studies on the Hist. of the Peasants' War, AMunich, 1862; Schreiber, The Peasants' WVar in Germany, Freiburg, 1864. Jsr#g, Germany during the Revolutionary Period from 1522-1526, Freiburg, 1851. Cf. also the following Essays: Causes of the Peasants' War in Germany (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. VI., p. 321 sq.); The Breaking out of the Peasants' War, its character, and the actors therein (I. c., p. 449-409); Defensive operations against the Peasants (ibid., p. 627-644); IManifestoes and Scheme of Constitution of the Peasants (ibid., p. 641-664); Bearing of Luther during the Peasants' War (1. c., Vol. VII., p. 170-192); see also Riffel, Vol. I., p. 412-479; 2d ed., Vol. I., p. 508-581.

Page  59 ~ 308.'he New Teachings —The Peasants' War. 59 done no more than practically carry out his own principles. They were to be subdued by the strong hand of authority, and to receive no sympathy, no mercy, from their victorious conquerors. It is computed that a hundred thousand men fell in battle during the Peasants' War, and of this immense loss of life Luther took the responsibility. "I, Martin Luther," said.he, "have shed the blood of the rebellious peasants; for I commanded them to be killed. Their blood is indeed upon my head; but," he blasphemously added, "Iput it upon the Lord God, by whose command I spoke."' JMelanchthon's connection with the Peasants' War is still more strange. Although more discreet and temperate than Luther, it is nevertheless undeniable that the benignant mildness popularly ascribed to him had in it a large admixture of violent passion and vindictive rancor, and he was therefore not long in following in the footsteps of his master. Replying to Prince Louis, Count Palatine of the Rhine, who, being desirous to prevent the further effusion of the blood of his people and to restore order, had asked his opinion as a theologian on'the peasants' manifesto of the Twelve Articles (1525), he said that "it was his settled conviction that the Germans had been granted a great deal more freedom than was beneficial to people so rude and uncultured."' lie also taught that the just rights of the peasantry might be legally violated. "As governments can do no wrong," said he, "they may confiscate the communal lands and forests, and no one has a right to complain; they may confiscate the wealth of churches, and apply it to secular uses, and no resistance should be made. The Germans should submit to the grievance as did the Jews of old when the Romans plundered their temple." "Thus," says Bensen,3 "while the Catholic Church has never sanctioned, at least in theory, the oppression practiced by prelates and nobles, and has ever defended-sometimes successfully, but always obstinately-the rights of individuals Luther's Table-Talk, Eisleben ed., p. 276. Cf. t'*Friedrich, Astrology and the Reformation; or, the Astrologers as the Preachers of the Reformation and Authors of the Peasants' War, Munich, 1864. 2Dollinger, The Reformation, Vol. I., p. 371 sq. 31. c., ~ 19.

Page  60 ,60 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. and nations against even Emperors themselves; the evangelical reformers are justly reproached with having been the first to teach and to preach the doctrine of servile submission and the right of the stronger to the Germans." By the advice of Luther and Melanchthon, Philip, Landgrave of Hesse; Henry, Duke of Brunswick; and George, Duke of Saxony, took the field against the peasants, and very nearly annihilated their numerous army at the battle of Miihlhausen, fo)ught May 15, 1525. Miinzer was taken prisoner, and, after submitting to a wearisomle investigation and enduring painful torture, was beheaded. In the presence of death, and when about to meet his God, he abjured his errors, and professed that he wished to die an obedient and repentant son of the Church he had so often and so violently outraged. He besought the princes to deal clemently and mercifully with the peasants, and exhorted these to render a proper obedience to constituted authorities.' Luther was now the object of universal execration; for while the principles set forth in his works openly favored revolt, and tended to stir up sedition, he had counseled princes 2 to destroy with fire and sword poor peasants who were only carrying out in practice what he advocated in theory. Of the thirty articles, in which the peasants set forth their grievances, some were copied literally from his German writings, and demanded exemption from all taxes, the abolition of the seigneurial courts, the discontinuance of the payment of tithes and other dues, and the right of every parish to appoint and remove their ministers at will; while the twenty-eighth avowed open hostility to all his adversaries. 1 Seidemann, Thomas Mtinzer, being a biography written from the sources found in the State Archives of the Kingdom of Saxony, Dresden and lips. 1842. Cf. Hist. and Polit. Papers, art. "Thornas MIidbzer,' Vol. VII., p. 288256; 310-320. Rifel, Vol. I., p. 479-522; 2d ed., p. 581-632. Schmidt, Justus Menius, the Reformer of Thuringia, Lps. 1867. 2 Thomas Miinzer had already violently assailed Luther, in replying to the harsh language employed by the latter against the peasants. He styled him "an ambitious and deceitful scribbler, a proud fool, a shameless monk, a doctor of lies, an accomplished buffoon, the Pope of Wittenberg, the impious and carnal man of Wittenberg," etc.

Page  61 ~ 309. Henry VllI. and Erasmus Oppose Luther. 61 Even Erasmus rebuked Luther for the course he had pursued. "We are now gathering," said he, "the firuits of your teaching. You say indeed that the word of God should, of its nature, bear very different fruit. Well, in my opinion, that greatly depends on the manner in which it is preached. You disclaim any connection Mwith the insurgents, while they regard you as their parent, and the author and expounder of their principles. It is notorious that persons who have God's word constantly in their mouth, have stirred up the most frightful insurrections." Neither should it be forgotten that, even as early as the year 1522, Luther wrote exultingly to his friend Link, at Wittenberg: "The people are everywhere rising; their eyes are at length opened; they will no longer suffer themselves to be cruelly oppressed." In 1526, Luther's tone had changed; he wTas no longer, what he first proclaimed himself, the champion of the people; from this time forth he was the apologist of power, and the friend and counselor of princes. ~ 309. Henry VIIL., King of England, and Erasmus Oppose Luther-Marriage of Luther. Cf.!*Kerker, Erasmus and his Theological Point of View (Tuibingen Theological Quart. Review, 1859, n. 7). Henry VIII., King of England, formally ranged himself among the enemies of Luther. He was irritated and alarmed by the reformer's revolutionary schemes, as set forth in "l'he Captivity of the Church in Babylon." Among other startling assertions, it was there stated that the Papacy, far from being of Divine origin, was an anomaly in church government, and an insufferable usurpation; that it had distorted many of the truths of primitive revelation, and had been instrumental in reducing the Church to the condition of captivity, in which the Daughter of Sion now mourned. Henry, first of all, addressed a letter to the Emperor and to Louis the Elector Palatine, dated May, 1521, requesting them to silence Luther, and eradicate his teaching.l The crowned theologian, 1Walch, Luther's Works, Vol. XIX., p. 153 sq.

Page  62 432 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. wvho, had his brother Arth'ur lived, might have filled one of the archiepiscopal sees of England, entered a little later on the field of polemics against the Saxon monk. Closeted with his chancellor, the Archbishop of York; with Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, and other prelates,' he wrote the "Defense of the Sevcn Sacraments against Doctor Martin Luther," in which he triumphantly refuted every false statement and defective argument of his adversary. Following the line of reasoning pursue(l in a former age by Tertullian, he demonstrated that papal authority and the power of the keys had been, at all times and everywhere, recognized by Christians; defended the Mass as the great central act of Christian worship, and established its character as a sacrifice; and, going through the list of the reformer's errors, gave complete and irrefragable answers to them all.'Toward the close of the Defense, Henry sums up Luther's character. "This petty doctor," says he, " this grotesque saint, this pretender to learning,2 in the pride of his self-constituted authority, spurns the most venerable doctors the world has known, tbhe most exalted saints, and the most distinguished biblical scholars." "What profit," he presently continues, "can come of a contest with Luther, who is of nobody's opinion, who does not understand himself; who denies what he has once affirmed, and affirms what he has already denied? He is a shameless scribbler, who sets himself above all laws, despises our venerable teachers, and, in the fullness of his pride, ridicules the learning of the age; who insults the majesty of pontif's, outrages traditions, dogmas, manners, canons, faith, and the Church herself, which, he professes, exists nowhere outside of two or three Innovators, of whom he has constituted himself the leader."3 But Henry was not content to use invincible reasoning alone; he had recourse to wit, sarcasm, and such popular arguments as would place the contradictions of his adversary in the fullest light. His Audlin, Life of Luther, London, 1854, Vol. II., p. 50. (Tra.) 2 Doctorculus, sanctulus, eruditulus. Adsertio VII. Sacram. adv. Luther., Lond. 1521, pp. 97, 98. Walch, Vol. XIX., p. 158. See above, p. 42, note 2. Cf. Rffel, Vol. I., p. 342-371; 2d ed., p. 433 sq., where is likewise described Luther's attitude over against Duke George of Saxony.

Page  63 ~ 309. Henry VIII. and Erasnmus Oppose Luther. 63 brilliant polemics won for him from Pope Clement the title of "Defender of the Faith" (Defensor _Fidei), a distinction which placed him on a plane with the great Catholic sovereigns of Europe, and which he had long desired to possess. It should be remarked that the "Defense" of the royal theologian, although possessing considerable merit, was vastly overrated by the King's admirers, who politely assured him that it was quite equal to anything St. Augustine had written. Luther was prompt with his reply. He styled himself "Luther, by the grace of God, Ecclesiastes of Wittenberg." The production is a model of vulgarity and indecency.' Henry did not pursue further this method of warfare; he had recourse to diplomacy, where he hoped to be more successful. In the sequel of his controversy with the royal champion, whose political influence proved more efficient than his theological learning, Luther showed himself to be the most vile of hypocrites. Perceiving that a rupture was imminent between Henry VIII. and the Holy See, and desirous to secure the good offices of that prince in a conflict against a common enemy, he addressed him a letter couched in words of fulsome adulation, and conveying an apology for former insults. But Henry was not so easily mollified; a remembrance of unforgiven wrongs still dwelt in his memory, and he took advantage of this opportunity to publicly expose the duplicity of Luther, and to hold him tip to the sneers and derision of the world.2 The distinguished scholar, Erasmus, had early excited the indignation of the monks by his sarcastic flings at their shortcomings, and by his unsparing freedom in criticising the existing ecclesiastical abuses. Indulging the hope that Luther's effort~ might prove effectual in bringing about a reform in 1Luther called Henry "a crowned ass, a liar, a varlet, an idiot, a sniveling sophist, a swine of the Thomist herd. Courage, you swine; burn me if you dare. Henry and the Pope," he said, "are equally legitimate; the Pope has stolen his tiara, and the King of England his crown, which accounts for their rubbing each other like two mules., Thou art a blasphemer, not a king; thou hast a royal jawbone, nothing more; Henry, thou art a fool," etc. 2De Wette, Vol. III., p. 23 sq. Walch, Vol. XIX., p. 468 sq. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 355; 2d ed., p. 446 sq.

Page  64 64 Period 3. - Epoch 1. Chapter 1. the Church, he had, like George Wicel, Cocnlaeus, Willibald Pirkheimner, and Ulric Zasius, at first expressed sympathy with the reformer,' and insisted on giving him a trial before condemning him. Luther, on his part, was anxious to secure the friendship of Erasmus, and took occasion to inform him that he had a high esteem of his character, and regarded him as "the glory and hope of Germany, and a man of transceldent learning and genius." But Erasmus and his friends, perceiving that Luther's policy retarded, instead of accelerating, true reform; exposed the truth, which, it was said, would be purified of all error, to the wranglings of an ignorant multitude;2 and everywhere encouraged disorder and tumult, threatening schism in the Church and anarchy in the Empire, instantly took alarmn, and severed their connection with the party of the reformer. The apprehensions of Erasmus were all the more keen and intense, inasmuch as he was fully capable of appreciating the splendid talents of Luther. "Would to God," he wrote to Duke George of Saxony, " that there was less merit in the writings of Luther, or that they were not so utterly marred by his extreme malice." There was a general wish to see Erasmus take part in the controversy, as every one knew the weight his name and in-:fuence would carry with them. Princes and prelates, and even Pope Hadrian,' besought him to come forth from his peaceful retirement, to give over for a time the pleasures and attractions of literary pursuits, and take up the defense of the Church. IIe reluctantly yielded, but not until he could no longer decently hold back. Hle began by showing the untenableness of the underlying principles of Lutheranism"not," says a Protestant writer,4 " as a blind defender of the Roman Court, nor as one having a superstitious reverence for'Dbllinger, The Reformation, Vol. I., p. 1-186. 2The opinion of Erasmus is given in his "De amicabili Ecclesiae concordia." Cf. Esch on Erasmus (Raumer's Hist. Manual for 1843). 3Epist. Erasmi, Ep. 639. Sentiments of Erasmus of Rotterdam, Cologne, 1638, pp. 26, 27. Audin, Life of Luther, London, 1854, Vol. II., c. IV. (TR.) 4Planck, History of Protestant Dogmatics, Vol. II., p. 112.-Cf. especially the points of comparison as drawn by Zasius, a contemporary of the reformers. and to be found in Dbllinger, Hist. of the Ref., Vol. I., p. 177-179. —Riffel, Vol II., p. 251-298.

Page  65 ~ 309. Erasmus Opposes Luther. 65 consecrated prejudices, nor yet as a personal enemy of Luther's, but as a peaceful opponent of his opinions, and as ene who states his doubts and puts forth his views with the modesty of a scholar and the dignity of an independent thinker." In the first place, he showed that Luther, in quoting Scripture againist free-will, had done so to no purpose, and then proceeded to establish the doctrine from the very same source.! Luther rnade haste to reply, and employed against his antacgonist all the brutal ribaldry that characterized his answer to Henry VTIII.2 This voullted( championl of intellectual frieedon-. comes forward and says boldly, that humman will is a slate, doing what it does at the bidding of a master. This, he says, is its characteristic since the fall, and to leave no doubt as to his meaningo, he compares it now to Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt; now to the'trunk of a tree; and, again, to a shapeless block of stone, which sees not, hears not, and has lost all sense of feeling.3 He advocates and defends the following propositions, asserting a fatalism more in harmony nwith the degrading teachings of the Koran than the Divine truth of the Gospel, which Mr. Lessing has characterized as more bestial thran human, and nothing short of a frightful blasphemy.4 Man, says Luther, is like a horse. "Does God leap into the saddle? The horse is obedient, and accommodates itself to every movement of the rider, and goes whither he wills it. Does God throw down the reins? Then Satan leaps upon the back of the animal, which bends, goes, and submits to the spurs and caprices of its new rider. The will can not'De libero arbitrio diatribe, 1524, written with much care, yet wanling in the dogmatic precision so conspicuously absent from all the author's works ( Yatlch, Vol. XVIlI., pp. 19, 62). 2 Luther calls Erasmus a Pyrrhonian, an unbeliever, and a disciple of Lucian, a blasphemer and an atheist, having within him a sow of the Epicurean herd. -3 De servo arbitrio ad Erasm., 1526 ( JValch, Vol. XVIII., pp. 20, 50). Luther's work on Slave-Will went through ten editions. Audin, Life of Luther, London, 1854, Vol. II., ch. VII. 4Lessing puts these words into the mouth of a Lutheran: "Speak not to me of free-will; I am an honest Lutheran, and will persist in holding that man is destitute of free-will, though the error be bestial rather than human, and have the character of a blasphemy." (On the Doctrine of Spinoza.) VOL. II -5

Page  66 .66 -Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. choose its rider, and can not kick against the spur that pricks it. It must get on, and its 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 ill us, as well as of what is good; and as IHe bestows happiness on those who merit it not, so also does lie damn others who do not deserve their fate."l 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 15387 "Let all my wlritings perish, if only my work'On Slave-Will' and my catechisms be preserved." Even the "Formula Conecordiae," or book of Lutheran symbols of faith, gives Luther the same distinction. "Luther," it says, "has given a solid and beautifiul explanation of this subject (human will) in his work O11 Slave-Will." "HBoc negotium in libro de servo arbitrio... egreyie et solide explicuit." This chanlpion of free-inquiry was obliged to go whither the logical deductions of his system would lead him, anld he did not halt at difficulties. There were Scripture texts plainly against his theory of the inherent slavery of the hluman 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'Lutberi opera Latina, Jenae, T. III., fols. 170, 171, 177, 207. Witt. Germ. bols., 534 b, 535 a. (TR.)

Page  67 ~ 309. Erasmus Opposes Luther —Luther's Marriage. 67 an impulse of unseemly levity, and used words in an ironical 2sense.' The quiet of Erasmus' life was again broken in upon. Luther's bold assertion and defiant defense 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," 2 in which, with more severity of tone and incisive brilliancy of style than he had formerly employed, he mercilessly exposed the willful ignorance of Luther and his criminal waywardness. The latter, deeming it 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 Ernser and Doctor Eck, and to the theological faculties of Louvain and Paris,4 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 1"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 to-morrow, but not to-day; only make an attempt to keep the commandments, and the trial will teach thee the ignominy of thy failure." JIValch, Luther's Works, Vol. VIII., p. 2147. 2Hyperaspistes, diatr. adv. servum arb. Luth., Pt. II., p. 526 sq. (Opp. ed. Cleric., T. X., p. 1249). Cf. on this controversy, Riffel, Vol. II., p. 250-298. 3Epp. (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." 4Conf. Riffel, Vol. I., p. 108-111.

Page  68 68 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Grimma, in Saxony, afterward 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 K5ppe, a citizen of Torgau, to her relief. This young man one night forced the doors of the convent, secured Catharine, who, by preconcerted 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., p. 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 was being aimed, not only at the dogmatic teaching and internal constitution of the Church, but at her external organization as well. Luther had already made some progress in this directioni and while he had succeeded in abolishing episcopal jurisdiction in countries where the principles 1Engelhard, Lucifer Wittebergensis; or, the Morning Star, i. e. Complete Life of Catharine von Bora, Landshut, 1749, 2 vols. TWalch, Catharine von Bore, Halle, 1751, 2 vols. Beste, Catharine von Bora, Halle, 1843. Meurer, Catharine Luther, Dresden, 1854. Cf. the exceedingly beautiful and touching remark on this event, by Surius, ad an. 1525. Cf. Defense of Simon Lemnius, by Lessing, in his seventh and eighth letters (Complete Works of Literature and Theology, Carlsruhe edit., Pt. IV., p. 29-37).

Page  69 ~ 310. Organization of the Lutheran Church in Hesse, etc. 69 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 forever, had pitched a copy of it into the flames, together with the papal bull of excomnmunication. 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,2 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, failling 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 (t 1530), who, in a very eloquent speech, recommended the adoption of a synodal constitution, based upon 1EHis saying was: Purus canonista est magnus asinista. 2See 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.) (Ta.). "Quid," he asks, "si mulieri ad rem aptae contingat maritus impotens?" And he replies: "Ecce, mi marite, debitam mihi benevolentiam praestare non potes, meque et inutile corpus decepisti. Fave, quaeso, ut cum fratre tuo aut proxime tibi sanguine juncto occultum matrimonium paciscar, sic ut nomen habeas, ne res tuae in alienos perveniant. " Perrexi porro maritum debere in ea re assentire uxori, eique debitam benevolentiam spemque sobolis eo pacto reddere. Quod si renuat, ipsa clandestina fuga saluti suae consulat et ini aliam profecta terrain, 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 Watlch, 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., p. 410-435).-Dollinger, The Reformation, Vol. II., pp. 427 sq. and 4623 sq.

Page  70 70 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. 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.l 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,2 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. Illn 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 1 Cf. Riffel, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 76-126, On the Introduction of the New Doctrines into Hesse. Hassenkamp, Ch. H. of Hesse from the Reform., Marburg, 1853. 2Instruction 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, Schliichtern, 1844. Cf. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 52-61.

Page  71 ~ 311. Diets of Spire (1526, 1529). 71 futile, he published in 1529 two catechisms, a larger and a smaller, written in clear, plain language, intelligible alike to old and young.l Such was the origin of the collegiate and territorial ecclesiastical organization 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 favorably disposed to Lutheranism might have no fear of following their inclinations, or giving the most. practical expression to their sympathies. ~ 311. Diets of Spire (1526, 1529). According to the agreement entered into by the Catholic and Protestant princes2 at the Diet of Niirenberg, the States assembled at Spire in 1526.3 The Emperor was engaged in a harassing and protracted war, and the Archduke Ferdinand was wholly occupied in repelling 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 ecumenical 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 1lyalch, Vol. X., p. 2 sq. Cf. Augusti, Hist. and Critical Introduct. to the two great catechisms, Elberfeld, 1824. 2 See ~ 307. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 350 sq.

Page  72 72 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. 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 defense, 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 HIesse, 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 evilly-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.2 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 practiced upon; but the admission came too late to correct the evilthe 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 con1Slefdan., lib. VI.; Kapp, Gleanings, etc., Pt. II., p. 680; Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 214. 2 Cf. the detailed account of Riffel, Vol. I., p. 371-376, note 1; Vol. II., p. 356 sq.

Page  73 ~ 311. Diets of Spire (1526, 1529)-Lutherans Protest. 73 vened at Spire, for the double purpose of adjusting religious difficulties and providing measures against the Turks,' who had already advanced in formidable numbers as far as Vienna, and were repulsed only by the heroism of the garrison and the gallantry of the citizens of the German capital. The Lutheran princes were accompanied to the Diet by their own chaplains, and each celebrated divine worship after his own fashion. The Catholic princes submitted as the basis of settlement very fair and moderate propositions, being substantially the same as the articles accepted by both parties three years before. These stipulated that "the Edict of Worms should be maintained in the States in which it had been already received, but that the others might retain the new doctrines until the assembling of an ecumenical council, because it would be dangerous to abolish them; that in the meantime no one should be permitted to preach against the Sacrament of the Altar; that the Mass should not be abolished where it was still celebrated, and, where it had been already abolished, no one should be molested for hearing or celebrating it in private; and, finally, that the ministers of the Church should preach the Gospel according to the Church's received interpretation, and should carefully avoid touching controverted questions, concerning which the decision of the council should be awaited." These propositions were certainly just and conciliatory, but the Lutheran princes thought otherwise, and on April 19, 1529, they solemnly protested against them, whence their name, Protestants, which they have ever since retained, and their only bond of unity from that day to this has been a common protest against the Catholic Church. Claimiing to be the exclusive heirs of the true religion, and the only members of the one saving Church of Christ, they maintained that the Mass, being plainlyfrom the words of Holy Writ an idolatrous act of worship, could not, and ought not, be tolerated.2 They, more1See the Acts in Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 328-429. 2It was to show how "un-Catholic is such unity against the Catholic Church, and to expose the spirit of disunion among Protestants themselves," that WeisZinger wrote his "Friss Vogel oder stirb," i. e. "Neck or Noth'ing," Strasburg, 1726. It is not likely these gentlemen were so oppressed with scruples of con

Page  74 74;Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. over, sent a copy of their protest to the Emperor, who was then at Bologna. Charles V., having conquered France and Italy, concluded peace with Pope Clement VII., June 20, 1529, at Barcelona, and shortly after, at Cambrai, with Francis I. On the 24th of the following February, he received the imperial crown from the hands of the Pope, at Bologna. As has been stated, the Lutheran princes, some time previous to this event, sent their protest to Charles, who stated, in reply, that "the Catholics were quite as-little disposed as the Protestants to act against their consciences and their faith, and longed quite as ardently as they for the convening of an ecumenical council, which, they had, every reason to hope, would be a source of glory to God, of peace to Christian princes, and of every manner of good to Christendom; but," he said in conclusion, "until such time as the council should convene, he wished the Protestant States to strictly enforce the decisions of the Diet." The deputies, having formally protested against the Emperor's action, were by his order cast into prison, whence they were shortly after released. On the 21st of January, 1530, the Emperor convoked another Diet, to convene at Augsburg, at which he promised to be present in person, and give a hearing to both parties, and expressed the hope that all would lay aside controversial rancor and bitterness, and unite their efforts for the common weal of Christendom. Owing to the unusual outburst of violence which acconmpanied the renewal of the controversy on the Lord's Supper, the condition of the Protestants grew daily more critical. The wide divergence of opinion on this question between Luther and Zwinglius was prominently brought out in the Seventeen Articles, so called, of Schwabach and Tor gau, embodying the teaching of the former.' Philip, Landgrave of Jiesse, dreading fresh disturbances among his own people, arrangedfor a con0ference at Marburg (October 1, 1529) between the two chamnpions, which, to his great disappointment, instead of bringing science as they would have us believe, for they protested against the decision of the Diet of Spire, in 1526, prohibiting the dissemination of the teachings of the Sacramentarians, whom Luther now pronounced the greatest of scourges, and persecuted accordingly.' Cf. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 375 sq.

Page  75 ~ 312. Diet of Augsburg, 1530, etc. 75 them nearer to each other, drove them farther asunder. " You do not at least refuse to regard us as brethren," said Zwinglius at the close of the disputation, "for we desire to die in the communion of Wittenberg?" "No, no," replied Luther; "cursed be such an alliance; begone, you are possessed of another spirit than ours."' "The Zwinglians," he added, "are a set of diabolical fanatics; they have a legion of devils in their hearts, and are wholly in their power."2 After these outbursts, Luther said, in a spirit of considerate forbearance, that he still retained for them feelings of Christian charity, which, he explained, he entertained toward all men! Melanchthon now felt that he had committed a blunder in *opposing, at the Diet of Spire, the measures directed against the Sacramentarians, and bitterly regretted his folly. The conviction was strong upon him that he had, by his conduct on that occasion, contributed not a little toward the dissemination of the errors of Zwinglius. ~ 312. Diet of Augsburg, 1530 — Religious Peace of Niirnberg, 1532. Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 374 sq. Fbrstemann, Documents supplementary toward the Hist. of the Diet of Augsburg, Halle, 1834 sq., 2 vols. Coelestini, Hist. comitiorum Augustae celebratorum, Francofurti ad Viadrum, (1577) 1597. Chytraeus, Hist. of the Confession of Augsburg, PRostock, 1576. Saliq, Hist. of the Augsburg Confession, Halle, 1733 sq., 3 Pts.; the same ed. by Pfaf; Stuttg. 1830; by Fickenscher, Niirnberg, 1830. Pallavicini, Hist. Cone. Trid., lib. III., cap. 3. Cf. Hase, Libri symbolici Evangelicorum, Lps. 1837. Mrenzel, loco cit., Vol. I., p. 335 sq. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 378-441, on the Diet of Augsburg, and p. 442-519, on the Protestant League and the religious peace of Nuirnberg. The Emperor did not arrive at Augsburg until the 15th of June. The following day, being the Feast of the Blessed Sacrament, was the occasion of fresh difficulties, as the Protestant princes peremptorily refused to join the procession, which always takes place on that day, or in any way to participate in the religious ceremonies. The Emperor requested the Protestant princes to lay before him a written confession of their faith and an enumeration of the abuses which they 1 Erasmi Ep. ad Cochlaeum. (TR.) 2Schmnitt, The Religious Conference at Marburg, Marburg, 1840.

Page  76 76 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. refused to accept. The preparation of the document was committed to Melanchthon, who, following the Seventeen Articles of Schwabach or Torga.u as his guide and basis, composed what has since been known as the Augsburg Confession, or Symbol of Faith (Confessio Augustana).l Luther gave it his fullest approval. "I am quite pleased," he says, "with the document; I see nothing in it that requires either changing or mending. I could not myself have written it, having neither the sweetness of temper nor self-restraint necessary to the task." It consisted of an introduction, or preamble, and two parts-the first being an exposition of what its authors believed, in twenty-one articles, based upon the Apostolic and Nicene Symbols; and the second, an enumeration of the so-called abuses, in seven articles.2 Among the 1While the Diet was still in session, this Confession went through many editions, and each contained fresh alterations, of which Melanchthon knew nothing. In 1530, he published a new edition of it, adding a preface, in which he says: " Nunc emzittimus probe et diligenter descriptam confessionem ex exemplari bonaefidei; " and in the following year he added a defense of it. A new edition of the Augsburg Confession of 1530 was published at Leipsig in 1845. Shortly after the Diet, Melanchthon began to make some alterations and recast the expressions, and in 1540 published a new edition under the title of Confessio variata, containing important changes and additions, chiefly in reference to the Lord's Supper, with a view to harmonize the teachings of the Lutherans and Calvinists. These alterations were subsequently the occasion of no little controversy, inasmuch as they were repudiated by the orthodox Lutherans, who refused to depart from the doctrine.of the Invariata Confessio Augustana, while the reformed party held with equal tenacity to the'Colnfessio variata. It is by no means certain that the Confession generally accepted by Lutherans is identical with the Unaltered Augsburg Confession, for the copies found in the various archives are at variance with each other, and the original Latin and German copies laid before the Diet have been either lost, or slumber in the library of either Rome or Madrid. Cf. Ilase, Libri symbol., varietas variatae confessionis, in Prolegom., P. XII.-LXI. 2Not twelve articles, as the French translator of Alzog, and Abb6 Darras, who copied from him, erroneously state. The twenty-one articles are: 1. Of God; 2. Of Original Sin; 3. Of the Son of God; 4. Of Justification; 5. Of Preaching; 6. Of New Obedience; 7 and 8. Of the Church; 9. Of Baptism; 10. Of the Lord's Supper; 11. Of Confession; 12. Of Penance; 13. Of the Use 6f Sacraments; 14. Of Church Government; 15. Of Church Order; 16. Of Secular Government; 17. Of Christ's Second Coming to Judgment; 18. Of FreeWill; 19. Of the Cause of Sin; 20. Of Faith and Good Works; 21. Of the Worship of Saints. The second and more practical part, which is carried out at greater length, contains seven articles on disputed points: 22. On the Two

Page  77 ~ 312. Diet qf Augsburg, 1530, etc. 77 abuses were included Communion under one kind, private Masses, the celibacy of the clergy, monastic vows, the distinction of meats for days of abstinence, auricular confession, and the ecclesiastical hierarchy as a system qof church government. The first part, which contained Luther's doctrines clothed in graceful, conciliatinco, and insidious language,l was carefully and artfully written, the object being to give the least possible prominence to distinctively Lutheran principles, and the greatest to points held in common by Catholics and Protestants. But with all his care and skill, Melanchthon could not clothe error in the vesture of truth; the heresies of the Saxon monk could not be concealed, the chief of which were the following: 1. That original sin has wholly incapacitated man for doing good; 2. That justification depends on faith alone; 3. That "free-will is to be acknowledged in all men who have the use of reason; not, however, in affairs relating to God, which can be neither begun nor completed without Him; but only inl affairs relating to the present life and the duties of civil society."2 As regards faith and good works, the teaching Kinds of the Sacrament; 23. Of the Marriage of Priests; 24. Of the Mass. 25. Of Confession; 26. Of Distinctions of Meat; 27. Of Conventual Vows; 28. Of the Authority of Bishops. Chambers' Cyclop., art. "Augsburg Confession." (TB.) IAs is well known, the utterances of Luther in regard to faith, made both at an earlier and a later period of his life (see p. 27), are insanely blasphemous. In the course of a letter, written to Melanchthon from the Castle of Wartburg, in 1521, he says: " Esto peccator et pecca fortiter; sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo, qui victor est peccati, mortis et mundi: peccandum est, quamdiu hie sumus.... Sufficit quod agnovimus per divitias gloriae Dei agnum, qui toilit peccata mundi, ab hoc non avellet nos peccatum, etiamsi millies uno die fornicemus aut occidamus." (Lutheri epp. a Joan. Aurifabro cell., Jen. 1556, 4to., T. I., p. 545.) The (confess. Auqustan., artic. IV., de justificatione, on the other hand, says: " Item docent, quod hlomines non possint justificari coram Deo propriis viribus, meritis aut operibus, sed gratis justificentur propter Christuim pJer fidem, cum credunt se in gratiam recipi et peccata remitti propter Christumn, qui sua morte pro nostris peccatis satisfecit." (Hase, 1. c., p. 10.) According to this passage, faith appears to be the fastigium; whilst, according to the Catholic idea, it is the initium, radix, fundanzentu?nm omnis justificationis. Justifical,ion, according to Lutheran doctrine, covers' sin; God simply declares man just. According to Catholic doctrine, justification is worked out, since its conditions are abolitio peccati and renovatio seu sanctificatio interioris hominis. 2Audin, Life of Luther, London, 1857, Vol. II., p. 334. (TR.)

Page  78 78 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. and practice of the Catholic Church were grossly misrepresented; for, it was said, whereas, on the one hand, her members were not heretofore required to have faith; on the other, they were obliged to perform all sorts of external works of piety, such as reciting beads, making pilgrimages, and the like; 4. That the (hurch, properly defined, is the assembly of the saints, among whom the Gospel is preached in its purity, and the Sacraments (of which five were thoughtfully abolished by the saints) are rightly administered; 5. That the confession of mortal sins to a priest is not necessary or obligatory; and that absolution consists in declaring siins remitted, though they are not in fact so remitted; 6. That the veneration and invocation of Saints are unlawful practices, and must be discarded; 7. And, finally, that tranrsubstantiation does not take place in the Sacrament of the Altar. A difficulty now arose as to the public reading of the Confession in the Diet. The Protestant princes, who had severally signed it, contended against the Catholic princes, that, in fairness, it should be read; and, against the Emperor, that, if read at all, it should be read in Germart, and not in Latin. They were successful in both instances, and the Confession was publicly read in German by Bayer, one of the two clhancellors of the Elector of Saxony, during the afternoon session of June 25, he-ld in the chapel of the imperial palace. C(ampegygio, the Papal Legate, was absent. The rea.ling occupied two hours, and the powerful effect it produced was, in a large measure, due to the rich, sonorous voice of Bayer, and to his distinct articulation and the musical cadence of his periods. Having finished, he handed the Confession to the Emperor, who submitted it for examination to Eel,, Conrad Vrimpina, Cochlaeus, John Faber,' and others of the Catholic theologians present in the Diet. They not only pointed out the errors it contained, but showed, by placing passages of it beside extracts taken from the writings of Luther, that it did not fairly represent his teachings; that it concealed, under an insidious and graceful phraseology, those most offensive to Catholic I Faber was a Dominican, and at this time first Vicar General of the Bishop of Constance, Provost of Ofen, and Court-chaplain to King Ferdinand.

Page  79 ~ 312. Diet of Augsburg, 1530, etc. 79 ears, and gave marked prominence to those against which no exception could be taken. Of course, the Catholic theologians, in replying to the Confession, could not be wholly unmindful of the disasters which the principles of the Reformers had already brought upon Germany, or entirely divest themselves of the bitter feelings of indignation which in consequence naturally filled their minds. These feelings, in a measure, found expression in their answer, which, besides being occasionally intemperate, was severely caustic and irouical, and on this account not quite acceptable to the Emperor and the Catholic princes, who advised that the matter be again taken under consideration, and a fresh answer. prepared. After the first fire of indignation had burnt out, the Catholic theologians, returning to a better sense, saw the need of keeping their temper, and the prudence of observing in their answver a strictly judicial calm. Under the influence of these convictions, they again set themselves to the worvik of examining the Confession. Each article was singly taken up, discussed, and analyzed, according to the rigorous rules of logic, and then a dispassionate judgment as to its merits or demerits was passed. Luther's teachings were examined in the light of Catholic tradition, and it was shown in what they harmonized with Catholic faith, and where and how far they diverged from it. Such was the character of the Confutation of the Augqsburg Confession (Confutatio Confessionis Augustanae) as finally agreed upon, and read in a public session of the Diet, held August 3d, and with which the Emperor and the Catholic princes expressed themselves fully satisfied. The Protestant princes were commanded to disclaim their errors, and return to the allegiance of the ancient faith, and "should you refuse," the Emperor added, "we shall regard it a conscientious duty to proceed as our coronation oath and our office of protector of Holy Church require."' This declaration 1 These two writings, in Latin and German, have been published and reviewed in "The Catholic," 1828 and 1829; also in Lat. and Germ., with an Introd. by Canon Kieser of the Chapter of Freiburg, Ratisbon, 1845. Cf. Laemmer, AnteTridentine Theology, p. 43 sq. tBinterim, The Diet of Augsburg, 1530, and the sentiments expressed by William, Duke of Bavaria, and Stadion, Bishop of Augsburg, concerning the Lutheran Confession, Dfisseldorf, 1844. The former

Page  80 80 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. roused the indignant displeasure of the Protestant princes. Philip of IHesse, dissatisfied with the vacillating timidity of Melanchthon, excited general alarm by abruptly breaking off the transactions, lately entered upon between the princes and the bishops, and suddenly quitting' Augsburg. Charles V. now ordered the controverted points to be discussed in his presence, and appointed seven Protestants and an equal number of Catholics to put forward and defend the views of their respective parties. Of these seven, three were theologians, two princes, and two jurists. On the Catholic side, the theologians were Eeck, Wimpina, and Cochilaeus; the princes. Stadion, Prince-bishop of Angsburg, ald llenry, DuLke of Brunswick; thejurists, Bernard Hagen, chancellor to the Archbishop of Cologne, and Jerome Vehus, the chancellor of Baden: on the Protestant side, the jurists were Dr. George Briick and Dr. Sebastian Haller, the former chancellor to the Elector of Saxony, and the latter to the Margrave of Brandenburg; the princes, John Frederic, crown-prince of Saxony, and George, Mlargrave of Brandenburg; the theologians, Melanchthonp,' Brenz, preacher of Hall, in Suabia, and Schnepf, court-chaplain to the Landgrave of Hesse. These theological commissions came to a satisfactory understanding with each other on the questions of oriqinal sin, justification, the eorstituent parts of penance, the Lord's Supper, and the veneration of the Saints. A select commission was next appointed, consisting of Eck and Melanchthon and four jurists, two for each party, who took up the discussion of Conimunion under both kinds. The Catholic theologians promised to obtain for Germany the same concessions that had been granted to the Hussites, provided the other points in dispute could be adjusted to the satisfacis represented as having said: "If I correctly understand the issues, the Lutherans stand firmly upon: the Scriptures, and we by the side of them;" and the latter as having solemnly declared, that "all that had been read before them (i. e. Augsburg Confession) was pure and undeniable truth; " but be this as it may. it is quite certain that George, the Protestant Duke of Brandenburg, having openly affirmed, after the reading of the Confession, that he would willingly have his head struck off in defense of it, the Emperor replied with his usual composure: "No head no head!"-' lSpiecker, Melanchthon at the Diet of Augsburg, 1630 (Review of Positive Theology, 1845, Pt. I., p. 98 sq.)

Page  81 ~ 312. Diet of Augsburg, 1530, etc. 81 tion of all. Apart from the Mass, celibacy, and episcopal jurisdiction, on which both parties were in hopeless disagreement, there remained still other differences, the settlement of which, even if it had been effected, could not have been other than momentary and illusory. If the importance of unity could be overrated, it would be difficult to understand why the Catholic theologians put forth so great efforts to secure it; the more so, since its realization seemed next to impossible, inasmuch as the principles from which each party started were as completely opposed to each other as light is to darkness. " For," as PallaCicini forcibly observes, " Catholic faith rests upon a principle. one and indivisible, viz: the aathority of the ijfcallible Church; to make the smallest concession here would be to surrender the whole ground: what is one and indivisible stands as a whole, or falls as a whole." But these considerations, though an inseparable obstacle to any concessi.ons on the part of Catholics, had no similar import or force with Protestants, who daily yielded one point after another, thus conclusively demonstrating that the immutable dogmas of faith were after all but a trifling matter to them, and by no means the primary cause of their revolt. Melanchthon was not unwilling to have even episcopal rights and prerogatives retained. ",How," said he, "shall we dare be so bold as to deprive bishops of their authority, if only they continue to teach sound doctrine? Will you have nme speak out my mind? Well, then, I should like to give them back their episcopal power and spiritual administration. Were theChurch destitute of a governing power," he candidly confesses, "' we should languish under a tyranny, compared with which that of which we are just rid would be more tolerable." In a letter bearing the date of July 6, and addressed to Campeggio, the Papal Legate, he is still more outspoken, expressing his wish to have the Roman Pontiff retain his office of Head of the Church, which he continued to do —not, however, from a desire to comply with Melanchthon's request. "We have no doctrine," says this reformer in a candid mood, "other than that of the Roman Church. If she consent to dispense to us those treasures of good-will, of which she is so, VOL. IIi-6

Page  82 .82 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. lavish to her other children, and to overlook certain matters -of trivial importance, and avert her eyes from others-which, though we should wish it ever so sincerely, can not now be changed or mended-we will yield her a prompt and ready obedlience. We hold in honor the Pope of Rome and the whole constitution of the Church, and are prepared to cast ourselves at the feet of the Roman Pontiff once we have the assurance that he will not repel us. Why should he refuse to hear our suppliant prayer, when unity may be so easily restored? The obstacles in the way of a sincere reconciliation are only differences of opinion, so trifling that even the canons do not require complete harmony as a condition of unity with the Church."' These pacific words startled the friends of Melanchthon, and the cities, prominent in their advocacy of Lutheranism, and notably Niirnberg, addressed him words of stinging rebuke, of which he bitterly complained. "You can hardly imagine," he wrote to Luther,' how odious my efforts to restore jurisdiction to bishops have rendered me to the people of Niirnberg and many others."2 "4Their disposition to find fault," he added, "plainly shows thc:t they are more intent on gaining their private ends, than on securing the success of the Gospel." Luther, being under ban of the Empire, could not participate in the Diet of Augsburg, and in consequence took up his residence at Coburg, where he was within convenient distance to be consulted on any important matter that came up, and to encourage his disciples when their spirit failed them. Displeased at the course pursued by Melanchthon, he sharply reproved him, saying: " I will hear of no attempt to bring about unity of doctrine, inasmuch as such unity is impossible until the Pope consent to put away the surroundings 1 Melanchthon's ep. ad Camerarium, pp. 148 and 151. Cf. Coelest. Ilist. August. Confess., T. III., fol. 18, in the resum6. of Raynald. ad an. 1530, nro. 83. Palla-.. vicini, 1. c., lib. III., c. 3. 2I Valch, Works of Luther, Vol. XVI., p. 1793. Cf. with this letter of Sept. 1st that of August 28th, ibid., p. 1755: "The imperial cities are violently incensed against episcopal authority. It would seem that their one aim is to be despotic in governing and licentious in morals, they take so little accourt of religion or its teachings."

Page  83 ~ 312. Diet of Augsburg, 1530, etc. 83 of the papacy. You will bring disaster upon the whole business by your ceaseless quibbling and interminable concessions. These Catholics adroitly spread snares for our feet, which we must watchfully avoid." 1 Had Melanchthon been as honest as he was sincere in his convictions, and as courageous as he was timid, he might at this time have broken once for all with Protestantism; but being under the powerful influence of Luther's superior mind, lie ignobly consented to do as the latter bade him. So, instead of following up and pressing his efforts to bring about a reconciliation, he prepared and publislhed his "Apology for the Augsburg Confession," which was intended to be an answer to the Confutation of the Catholic theologians. The Protestant princes laid a copy of the "Apology" before the Emperor, who rejected both it and the Confession; but by nmany of the Protestants the former was held to be of equal authority with the latter. On the other hand, the four cities specially attached to the teachings of Zwinglius —viz: Strasburg, Constance, Lindoau, and Memmingen-produced a confession of faith, known as the " Confessio Tetrapolitana," embodying their special tenets; while Zwitiglius produced another of his own, giving special prominence to the poin-ts on which his opinions were in conflict with those of Luther on the Lord's Supper. Melanchthon was so utterly amazed at the boldness of Zwinglius in daring to exercise the common right of all reformers, that, in writing to one of his friends, he accounted for it by saying that "he had certainly gone mad." 1In this letter, which bears the date of August 28 (de Wette, Vol. IV., p. 156), he uses the strange language, underscored in the following passage, which has been so frequently quoted against him: "Ego in tani crassis insidiis forte nimis securus sum, sciens, vos nihil posse ibi committere, nisi forte peccatum in personas nostras, ut perfidi et inconstantes arguamur. Sed quid postea? Causa et constantia et veritate facile corrigatur. Quamquam nolim hoc contingere, tamen sic loquor, ut si qua contingeret, non esset desperandum. I3aon si vim evaserimus, pace obtenta, dols (mendacia) ac lapsus nostros f(lcile esmendoabimus, quoniam regnat super nos misericordia ejus." The word mendacia is found in C/hytraeus (born February 26, 1530), Hist. Aug. Conf., Francof. 1578. p. 295; Coelestini Hist., loco cit.,''. II., fol. 24. But Veesenineyer, in his Review of Luther's Letters, attacks' it, p. 31, and Gieseler rejects it altogether (Text-book of Ch. H., Vol. III., Pt. 1, p. 265). (Doller) Luther's Catholic Monument, Frankfurt, 1817, p. 309 sq. Sce Riffel, Vol. II., p. 422 sq.

Page  84 84 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. After many more equally fruitless attempts to bring about a reconciliation, the Emperor, on the 22d of Septenlber, the day previous to that fixed for the departure of the Elector of Saxony, published an edict, in which he stated, among other things, that " the Protestants have been refuted by sound and irrefragable arguments drawn from Holy Scripture." "To deny free-will," he went on to say, "and to affirm that faith without works avails for man's salvation, is to assert what is absurdly erroneous; for, as we very well know from past experience, were such doctrines to prevail, all true morality would perish from the earth. But that the Protestants may have sufficient time to consider their future course of action, we grant them from this to the 15th of April of next year for consideration." On the following day, Joachini, Elector of Brandenburg, speaking in the Emperor's name, addressed the Evangelic princes and deputies of the Protestant cities' as follows: "His Majesty is extremely amazed at your. persisting in the assertion that your doctrines are based on hIoly Scripture. Were your assertion true, then would it follow that His Majesty's ancestors, including so many Kings and Emperors, as well as the ancestors of the Elector of Saxony, were heretics! There is no warrant in the Gospels, or elsewhere in Holy Scripture, imposing the obligation of seizing another's goods, and sanctioning their retention, on the plea that they can not, consistently with the dictates of conscience, be given up.... The Emperor also has a conscience, and, in our opinion, is far less inclined to deviate from the teachings of Christ's Holy Church and her venerable and ancient faith, than the Elector of Saxony and his allies."2 The Protestant princes forthwith took their leave of the Emperor. On the 13th of October, the "Recess," or decree of the Diet, was read to the Catholic States, which on the same day entered'The princes were the Elector of Saxony and five others in alliance with him; and the six cities were N uirnberg, Reutlingen, Kempten, Heilbronn, Windsheim, and Weissenburg. (Corp. Ref. II., p. 474-478.) (TR.) 2See the powerful speech delivered in the name of the Emperor by the ardent Catholic, Joachim, Elector of Brandenburg, in Menzel, Vol. I., p. 406.

Page  85 ~ 312. Diet of Augsburg, 1530, etc. 85 into a Catholic League.l On the 17th of the same month, sixteen of the more important German cities refused to aid the Emperor in respelling the Turks, on the ground that peace had not yet been secured to Germany.2 The Zwinglian and Lutheran cities were daily becoming more sympathetic and cordial in their relations to each other.3 Charles V. informed the IIoly See, October 23, of his intention of drawing the sword in defense of the faith. The "Recess" was read to the Protestant princes ~November 11, and rejected by them on the day foliowing,4 and the deputies of HIesse and Saxony took their departure immediately after. On the 19th of November, it was again read in presence of the Emperor, and the princes and deputies still present in Augsburg. The decree was rather more severe than the Protestants had anticipated, inasmuch as the Emperor declared that he felt it to be his conscientious duty to defend the ancient faith, and that "the Catholic princes had promised to aid him to the full extent of their power." The "Recess" was made public November 22, and two days after the Emperor set out for Cologne, having wholly failed to accomplish the object of his visit. The failure was mainly to be ascribed to the conflicting interests of the Catholic and Protestant princes; for while the former, dreading the consequences of a civil war, neglected to second the Emperor's efforts in any efficient way, the latter had to be conciliated if their aid was to be secured in prosecuting a war against the Turks, whose aggressive movements were at this time filling Europe with fear and alarm. The appointment of the Emperor's brother, Ferdinand, as King of the Romans (1531), gave deep offense to the Protestant princes, who now expressed their determination of withholding all assistance from the Emperor until the "Recess" of Augsburg should have been revoked.'Assembling at Smalkald on Christmas Day, 1530, they entered into an alliance offensive and defensive, known as the League of Smalkald, on March 29, 1531, to which they sev1 Documents II., p. 737-740. (TR.) I Corp. Ref. II., pp. 411, 416. (TR.) 3 Documents II., p. 728. (TR.) Documents II., p. 823; Corp. Ref. II., p. 437. (TR.)

Page  86 86 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. erally bound themselves to remain faithful for a period of six years. They were still further encouraged to go boldly forward in their new course by the advice of Luther and Melanllthon, who, reversing their former j ldgment, now authorized the ~use of arms for the maintenance of'Protestantismn. The Turkish sultan became now, in a measure, the natural ally of the Protestant princes; for, being himself desirous of profiting by the divisions in Germally, he encouraged those who were the cause of them to hold out against the Emnperor. Perhaps the most offensive and burthensome clause of the "Recess" of the Diet was that requirinrl the Protestants to restore the Chuarch property of which they had taken. possession, and placing those who refused compliance under the ban of the Empire. The danger from the threatened invasion of the Turks becoming daily more imminent, the Emperor saw the necessity of concluding peace-on favorable terms, if possible; otherwise, on the best he could extort. For this purpose, he opened negotiations at Frankfurt, which, through the efforts of the Elector of Mentz and the Elector Palatine, were brought to a conclusion at Niirnberg, July 23, 1532. It was here agreed that, until the assembling of a general council, no action should be taken against any of the princes; that in the interval everything should remain unchanged; that both parties should cease to carry on religious hostilities; and, finally, that those only who had already received the Confession of Augsburg should be included in the treaty of peace. The Protestant princes, acting on the suggestion of Luther and Melanchthon, urgently demanded the insertion of tile last clause; and the latter at the time expressed themselves fully content with what they had gained. As the Turks continued to advance on Europe, the consternation caused by their progress afforded the Protestant princes an opportunity to still further strengthen themlselves, by forming new alliances against the Emperor, and they were not slow to make the best of their advantages. Philip of lesse opened negotiations with Fraucis I., King of France.'Ulric, Duke of Wiirtemberg, who had been placed under the ban of the Empire, and whose states had been transferred to Ferdi

Page  87 ~ 313. Ulrich Zwinyli and (Ecolampadius. 87 nand, having joined the Protestant League, was forcibly reinstated in his duchy by Philip of IIesse. John Brenz and Erhard Schnepf gave form and organization to Protestantism in Wiirtelberg, where it had been propagated by the apostate monk, John JMaitel, assisted by Conrad Sama, of Rotenacker, and others.' Negotiations were also opened with the Swiss, and as the perfidious and pliant Bucer was ever ready to accommodate himself to circumstances, and to sacrifice his religious convictions to his sordid interests, a union was concluded between the Swiss Church and the Lutheran princes, although against Luther's own wish and advice (1538). While agreeing, or professing to be in agreement in matters of doctrine, they allowed every one to interpret the formula of consecration in the Lord's Supper according to his private judgment, a principle which has the unusual merit of securing unity of belief, by granting a general permission to all to believe and to disbelieve what they like. ~ 313. Ulrich Zwingli and (Ecolampadius. Zwing.lii Opera, ed. Gualther, Tig. (1545), 1581, 4 vol. in fol.; ed. Schzuler et Schulthess, Tig. 1829-42; eight Pts., in 11 vols. (prima ed. completa). German edition by the same editors, Zurich, 1828 sq. Corpus libror. symbolicor., qui in eccl. Reformatorum auctoritatem publicamn obtinuerunt, ed. Auu.sti, Elberfeld, 1827. Collectio confessionum in ecclesiis reformatis publicat., ed. A. H. Niemzeycr, Lps. 1840. (Ecolampadii et Zwinglii Epp. lib. IV. (Bas. 1536, fol.), 1592, 4to. This work is preceded by Osw. Myconi! ep. de vita et obitu Zwinglii.... The Lives and select Writings of the Founders of the Reformed Church, with an Introductory by IHagenbachl, Elberfeld, 1857 sq., 10 vols. Mloe)'ikofer, Ulrich Zwingli's Life according to original Documents, Leipsig, 1867. -5Eyid Tsc/hudi (Landamman of Glarus, t1572), Chron. Helv. ed. Iselin., Bas. 1734, fol., 2 T. (1000-1470); a manuscript work, derived from archives and rare sources; he goes as far as 1570. (Cf. The Life and Works of Giles Tschudi, by Ild. Futchs, St. Gall, 1805, 2 parts). tSalat, Chronicles and Full Account of the Commencements of the new heresies of Luther and Zwingli, to the end of the year 1534; manuscript in fol.... Hottinger, Ch. H. of Switzerland, Zirich, 1708 sq., 4 vols., 4to. J. Basnage, Hist. de la relig. des Sglises rel6rm6es (Rotter. 1690, 2 T., 12mo); La Haye, 1725, 2 T., 4to. Ruchat, Hist. de la r6form. de la Suisse, Gen6ve, 1727 sq., 6 vols., 12mo. J. E. FuesslIn, Essay supplementary to the Hist. of the Reformation in Switzerland, Zurich, 1741-53, 5 vols., Sa. Hess, Origin, Development, and Consequences of Zwingli's Reform at Zfirich, Zuirich, 1820, in 4to. Wirz and 3Melchior Kirchhofer, Hist. of the Swiss Churches,'Cf. Riffel, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 664-674.

Page  88 88 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Zuiirich, 1808-19, 5 Pts. t*R.ffel, Hist. of the Church of Christ during modern times, Vol. III., Mentz, 1847. Chronicles of the Reformation, by Georf/e the Carthusian, Basle, 1849. Examination, of the prejudices against the Catholic Church, by a Protestant Layman, 3d ed., Lucerne, 1842, 2 vols. Cf. bibliography preceding ~ 298, and- the art. "zu'ingii," in the Freiburg Eccl. Cyclopaedia. The condition of ecclesiastical affairs in Switzerland, at the opening of the sixteenth century, differed but slightly from that of Germany and other countries. Literature and science had received a fiesh impulse from the activity of Erasmus, and their study was being prosecuted with unusual ardor and success. The Friends of God, emulating their brethren in the Netherlands, imparted religious instruction to the people, and so wide was the influence of the teaching and example of these holy men, that it might be traced north and south from their respective centers of activity, along the course of the Rhine, enlbracing the whole of that beautiful and fertile district. The Plenarilm, whiclh was a German translation of the ordinary of the Mass, including hIymns, meditations, and prayers in aid of preparation for the reception of the Sacraments, arranged for the use of the people by a Carthusian monk, breathed a spirit of the warmest and purest mysticism. But if this much may be said in a general way of the healthful condition of religious practice and feeling, it must be added, on the other hand, that the state of cathedral chapters, the adim-inistration of ecclesiastical affairs, and the morals of the clergy, regular and secular, were far from satisfactory. We sl-lould not, however, omit to mention that the diocesan synod, held by Christopher Uttenheim, Bishop of Basle, in 1503, corrected many abuses and disorders, and still attests, by its wise provisions, his enlightened solicitude and pastoral zeal for his flock. That the seeds of the Reformationi, once they had taken root here, sprung more rapidly into life, had a more vigorous growth, and developed the distinctive features of Protestantism with more definiteness of form than they elsewhere attained in the same space of time, is mainly attributable to the peculiarities of the political and ecclesiastical constitution of Switzerland. Her inhabitants, enjoying a larger measure of independence and a Jfeer democratic constitution than those

Page  89 ~ 313. Ulrich Zwingli and (Ecolampadius. 89,of other countries, jealously defended both the one and the other, whether assailed by ambitious foreign princes from without or by worldly ecclesiasticals from within. The charter of rights, secured to the Swiss nation in the instrument called the "Priests'.Franchise," in 1370, and again renewed and confirmed by the Treaty of Stanz, in 1481, was ever regarded by them as the sacred bulwark of their liberties, and their watchful arid stubborn defense of its provisions is amply attested in their frequent political conflicts with their bishops. But these guarantees, such as they were, did not secure so large a measure of good to the bulk of the people as they would, had their operation not been impeded by the imperfect ecclesiastical organization of the country. There were altogether six bishopricks in the whole of Switzerland, which, however, were not united in one ecclesiastical province. Constance and Choire were suffragans of the metropolitan of Mentz; Basle and Lausanne of the Archbishop of Besan9on; Comro of the Patriarch of Aquileja; and Sion was exempt, having been declared so by Leo X. Finally, Switzerland, enjoying a -more liberal constitution than her neighbors, became the resort and asylum of such false mystics as the Lollhards, Beghards, and Beguines, after they had been expelled their own country. The author of the first religious controversy in Switzerland was Ulrich Zwinyli, the son of a yeoman, who held the office of landar mman, or chief magistrate, in the town of Wi Idhausen, situated in the Alpine valley of Toggenburg, in the canton of St. Gall. He was born January 1, 1484, and, as he grew up, received an excellent education- studying humanities at Bern, philosophy at the University of Vienna, and theology at Basle, under'Ihomas Wyttenbach. He was a fine classical scholar, and possessed a wide acquaintance with theological writers, and a critical knowledge of theological science. A man of brilliant talents, keen and penetrating intellect and great oratorical powers, he was incapable of profound and well-sustained thought, and wholly destitute of the speculative faculty. Appointed parish-priest of Glarus, in the diocese of Constance, in 1506, he attracted the notice of the Papal Legate, through whose kind offices he received an annuity

Page  90 90 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. of fifty florins, to enable him to prosecute his literary labors on the Latin classics and the Fathers. In the years 1512,'13, and'15, he served as chaplain to such of the inhabitants of Glarus as took part ill the canlpaigns in Lombardy, fighting in defense of the Iioly See against the Frenllch, and in consideration for these services received from the Pope a pension, which was continued until the year 1517. After the year 1513, he gave himself seriously to thle study of Greek and the New Testament, and in 1516 was appointed preacher in the convent of Maria Einsiedeln, where he began to declaimn violently against pilgrimages and devotion to the Blessed Virgin. But so little was lie suspected of any heretical leaning, that in 1518 Antonio Pulci, the Papal Legate, created him by diploma chaplain to the Holy See. He was shortly obliged to resign his care of souls in consequtence of his amours with a woman of notorious and profligate character becoming public. He was now called to Ziirich, where, receiving the appointment of preacher in the "CRthedral," or Great Minster, he again began to declaim with increased violence against the shortcomings and disorders of the clergy, of whic he professed to have had abundant evidence from personal observation, made during his many and protracted sojourns in Italy. IIe himself afterward made it a matter of boast that he had preached the Gospel of Christ as early as 1516, before even the namne of Luther had been heard in Switzerland; and that during the two following years, when the Saxon reformer was still unknown in that land, he had relied upon the Bible, and the Bible alone. In his opening address at Ziirich, January 1, 1519, he called for a reformation of the Church and a return to purity of morals, and seemed to think an immoral profligate like himself the proper ierson to effect the one and exemplify the other. That he was lamlentably ignorant of the historical development of tl-le Church and the Papacy, his discourses furnisll the most abundant proof.' The Zwiinglian movernenit was in some respects strikingly s.milar, and in others strikingly dissimilar, to that of iluther. The two reformers were born wvithi!, a year of each other; both'Cf. The Situation of Basle, etc., vide infira, p. 96, n. 1.

Page  91 ~ 313. Ulrich Ziwingli and (Ecolampadius. 91 lhad visited Romne previously to their defection, but they carried away with them very different impressions. Both began by acssailing the preachers of indulgences,-and while Luther defended his teachings in a disputation against Eck of Ingolstadt, at Leipsig, in 1519, Zwingli and (Ecolampadius defended theirs in a similar disputation at Baden, in 1526. Both possessed the gift of popular eloquence in an eminent degree, and employed it to misrepresent and vilify the Catholic Church and her doctrines; and, finally, both were assisted by men of superior culture and scientific training —Luther by Melanchthon, and Zwingli by CEcolampadius. They were dissimilar in this-that while the basis of Luther's system was a false mysticism, that of Zwingli's was wholly and thoroughly rationalistic; Luther opposed liberal studies and polite learning on principle, Zwingli was an apologist of Paganism and an excessive advocate of its literature; Luther was in a continuous state of morbid unrest, and the victim of harassing and unnecessary scruples; Zwingli was, from the opening of his career, light-minded and frivolous, and a slave to sensual pleasures; Luther, during the early days of his revolt, professed to trust the success of his cause to the power of the word of God, though he invoked the power of the magistracy some time later; Zwingli, from the very beginning, relied on the civil authority for the propagation of his teachings and the triumph of his principles. Moreover, being at bottom a radical republican, Zwingli directed his earliest efforts to an attempt to overturn the Papacy and the whole ecclesiastical hierarchy, boasting that he had, three years previously to his defection, taken counsel with Capito as to the best means of deposing the Pope. An implacable enemy of all preachers of indulgences, he assailed Bernard Samson, a Franciscan, with all the energy of his eloquence and the vehement passion of his nature. iNTot content with having them excluded from the pulpits of Constance and driven beyond the limits of the city by an order from the bishop, he attacked the doctrine itself, and was delighted to observe that his hearers not unfrequently listened to his furious philippics with undisguised pleasure. In 1520, he obtained from the Grand Council of Zurich a decree commanding that the word

Page  92 92 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. of God should be taught wherever their jurisdiction extended, only as found in Holy Scripture, regardless of any ecclesiastical tradition or authoritative interpretation. Leo X. summoned Zwingli to Rome to give an account of his teaching; and, still later, Hadrian VI., conformably with his character, wrote him a tender and paternal letter, which entirely failed of its purpose, for the reformer suddenly broke with the Church, and openly proclaimed himself an heresiarch. In 1522, he demanded from Hugo of Landenberg, Bishop of Constance, in his own name, a general permission for priests to take wives. " Your Lordship," he candidly said, " very well knows how disgraceful have been my relations heretofore with females (for I would speak only of myself); how these have been the scandal and ruin of many. Since, therefore, I know from personal experience that I can not lead a pure and chaste life, inasmuch as God has denied me this gift, I demand the privilege of taking a wife. I feel within me the carnal lust, of which St. Paul speaks,' and have often come to grief in consequence," etc. When the bishop, instead of acceding to the demand, rigidly enforced the rule of celibacy, and punished any. infraction of it with severe penalties, Zwingli severed his last thread of connection with the Church, rejected the authority of ecumenical councils, and in a circular letter, addressed to the Swiss people, declared celibacy ar invention- of the Devil. In. connection with the government of the canton, he arranged for a religious conference to be held at Ziirich, in January, 1523, at which sixty-seven theses were proposed for discussion, and challenged the Bishop of Constance and others to meet him, of whom John Faber, Vicar General of Constance, alone accepted. The propositions discussed were substantially the same as those defended by Luther, the most remarkable being the following: Holy Scripture is the only source of faith; Christ is the true and only Head of the company of the Saints, of God's elect; the authority of popes and bishops had its origin in pride and usurpation, and is wholly destitute of Gospel warrant or sanction; there is no Sacrifice other than that of Christ for the sins of the world, of which 1I. Cor. vii. 9.

Page  93 ~ 313. ZlUrich Zwingli and aEcolampadius. 93 the Mass is only a commemoration; Christ being our only mediator, we have no need of the intercession of the Saints; God alone having power to forgive sins, confession is only a method of giving and receiving counsel; the doctrine of purgatory is devoid of Scriptural proof; priests and monks have the same right as other men to take wives; the monk's habit is a device to cloak hypocrisy. At the close of the disputation, the Council of Ziirich declared Zwingli the victor. A second disputation was arranged for September of the same year, to which the bishops of Constance, Coire, and Basle, though invited to be present, refused either to go themselves, or to send representatives. Zwingli and his confederates, Leo Judae and Hetzer, the latter of whom was subsequently beheaded for his numerous adulteries, now rejected the use of images, abolished the AMass and clerical celibacy, and forthwith took wives, Zwingli marrying Ann Reinhard, a widow, with whom he had for many years maintained a criminal intercourse. Accompanied by many of the magistrates and a number of masons and carpenters, Zwingli went the round of the churches of the city, demolishing images and statues, overturning altars, and destroying the very organs in their insane hatred of whatever called up the memory of the ancient faith. Not content with this, they tore the relics of Saints from their shrines, and buried them away under ground. They would have neither music, lights, incense, nor external ceremony; for the magnificent and imposing grandeur of the Roman ritual, they substituted a cold, cheerless worship, as repulsive as it was grotesque. A plain table took the place of the altar of sacrifice, and goblets of wine and a basket of bread were the human substitutes for the plate and chalice containing the Body and Blood of Christ. The texts of Scripture were read in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, after which the various readings were compared, and the correct sense, according to their understanding of it, evolved. The vernacular text in use until 1529 was a translation of Luther's New and Old Testaments, according to the Hebrew, made into Switzero-German, and interpreted in a Zwinglian sense by Leo Judae. These religious innovations, and the disturbances which

Page  94 94 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. they occasioned, excited the fears and called forth the protests of the Catholic members of the Grand Council, who were in consequence deprived of their offices, and forbidden. to celebrate Divine worship after the manner of their forefathers for countless generations. These officials, together with representatives from various parts of Switzerland, to lwhom the recent events had given offense, assembled at Lucerne, in 1524, and appointed a deputation to go to Zurich to beg their brethren there not to contemn the faith of their venerable Mother, the Church, which they had cherished as a common heritage, and faithfully preserved for fifteen centuries. The deputies were further instructed to say that the assembly of Lucerne was ready to consult with the people of Zfirich as to "the best means of shaking off the yoke which the injustice and unwarrantable violence of certain popes, cardinals, bishops, and prelates had laid upon the Swiss people, and of puttinog an end to the scandalous traffic in ecclesiastical benefices, indulgences, etc." But the Grand Council of Ziirich, seeing that these innlovations would lead to an increase of the public revenue and heighten the influence of their city in the Confederacy, refused to listen either to the voice of religion or to the appeals of brotherly love. The Council was encouraged in this decision by Zwingli, who, to secure the energetic protection of that body for himself, willingly yielded it, in turn, full exercise of episcopal. jurisdiction, or, what was practically the same thing, a corresponding measure of authority in ecclesiastical affairs. He had soon, occasion to involke its aid, for the Anabaptists, great numbers of whom were now to be found in Switzerland, claimed, like Zwingli himself, the right of putting their own interpretation upon the Holy script.ures. Holding that infant baptism had no sanction in Holy Writ, and was only an invention of the Papists, tlhey came into conflict with Zwingli, with whorn they had a discussion on thle point. The Council decided that their teachings were erroneous, and forbade themr, under penalty of cleath, to rebaptize. Felix Manz, disregarding the inhibition, conitinued the practice, was adjudged guilty, and put to death by drowning, in 1526; while his associate, Blaurock, a mronk of Coire, was let off with a scourging.

Page  95 ~ 313. Ulrich Zwingli and (Ecolampadius. 95 At Basle, (Ecolampadius proclaimed himself the champion of the new religious principles. lie was born at Weinsberg, in Suabia, in 1482, and studied law at Bologna; but lie subsequently relinquished the idea of followzing this profession, and began the study of theology at Heidelberg. Appointed parish priest in the city of Basle, in 1515,-he soon became intimate with the learned Erasmus, who highly appreciated his classical attainments. The works of Luther had been largely circulated in the city through the efforts of _Froben, a bookseller. MAorecver, Wotfqapg Capito, a friend of Zxvingli's and the leading priest of Basle, and Reutblin, also a priest of the same place, had already shown lealnings toward Lutheranism in their sermons, and preached against the Mass, purgatory, and the invocation of the Saints. In 1516, (Ecolampadius was appointed preacher of the Cathedral of Anugs burg; but his feeble health preventing him from at once entering upon his duties, he withdrew to Alm-iinster, a convent at a short distance from the city, where he remained for a brief period. When it became known that he was an advocate of the new teachings, he was invited to find some imore congenial abode. He then became chaplain in the castle of Franz von Sickinyen, where he introduced many innovations in religious worship, and after the death of that nobleman, in 1522, he again went back to Basle as a professor of theology, and in 1524 was once more appointed parish priest. IHe now openly and boldly proclaimed his opposition to the teachings and usages of the Catholic Church, and, to give binding force to his new position, married a handsome young widow, who( subsequently became successively the wife of Capito ancl Bucer. WIrilliam Farel, a Frenlch nobleman, and the professors, Simon, Grynaeus and Sebastian Miinster, became his powerful and effective allies. The municipal authorities at first declared themselves hostile to any innovations, and instructed the reformers to await the action of a future council; but the partisans of (Ecolampadius, refusing to abide by this decision, raised seditious tumults in the city, and in this way forcibly extorted freedom of worship (1527). Once secure in the possession and enjoyment of religious liberty for themselves, their next step, char

Page  96 96 Period 3. Epoch.1. Chapter 1. acteristically enough, was an attempt to withdraw it from Catholics, the total suppression of whose religion they clamorously demanded (February, 1529). Seizing the arsenal, they plundered it of its contents, and, having placed cannron in position on the principal squares of the city, they rushed into the churches like so many inlfuriated demons, and after having demolished altars, statues, and images, they made twelve piles of the church furniture and ornaments, and consumed them with fire. Disgusted at this brutal mode of reforming the Church, Erasmus quitted Basle, and took up his residence at Freiburg, in Brisgovia.1 Similar scenes were enacted in nearly every city of Switzerland-notably in Miihlhausen (1524), St. Gall and Schaffhausen (1525), and Appenzell (1524). In the canton of Bern, the most populous and powerfill of the Swiss Confederaticon, an effort was made to correct abuses on the one hand, and on the other to keep out all innovations; but this conservative policy was wholly frustrated by a former disciple of Melanchthon's, Berthold Haller, a Suabian (t 1536), then a popular parish priest of Bern, who, acting on the cunning and inlsidious advice of Zwiing lij to another priest of Bern, finally succeeded in bringing the bulk of' the people over to the teaching of Protestantism (1528). Glarus, Soleure, and Freiburg leaned in the same direction, and it soon became evident that the'Protestant Cantons had a preponderating influence in the Confederation. Hence the representatives of the Canton of Zarich peremp1 Herzog, The Life of John (Ecolampadius and the Reformation of the Church of Basle, 2 Pts., Basle, 1843. - tIThe Condition of Basle Immediately before the Reformation, Hist,. and Polit. Papers, Vol. XIII., pp. 705-746, and 810-836; Vol. XIV., pp. 129-147, 273-291, and 377-392. 2t'-C. L. de Haller, Hist. of the Religious Revolution, or the Protestant Re — formation in the Canton of Bern. Lucerne, 1836. Zwingli, in a letter to the priest Kolb of Bern, giving instructions as to the way to proceed in propagating the new teachings, speaks as follows: "My dear Francis: We should observe much caution in this' affair.. You will, therefore, give to these bears at first only one sour pear among a number of sweet ones; then add another and another, and when they begin to have a relish for them, increase the number, mixing sour and sweet; and, finally, empty the whole bag, hard and mellow, bitter and sweet, for, when they have once their heads fairly into the trough, they will not patiently suffer themselves to be driven away. Your servant in Christ, Ulrich Zwingli. Zurich, the Monday after St. George's Day, 1527."

Page  97 ~ 313. Ulrich Zwingli and (Ecolampadius. 97 torilv demanded that such of the Cantons as had not yet embraced the new faith, should be obliged to do so. To this demand, Lucerne, the three original Cantons-viz.,. Uri, Schwyz; and Unterwalden —and the Canton of Zuq nmlale a heroic resistance, protesting that they would never abandon the faith of their fathers. It is a little remarkable that these Cantons were precisely the ones in which primitive simplicity of manners and purity of morals were still preserved, and whose inhabitants had but lately been witnesses of the holy life and miraculous deeds of Nicholas of Fliie. Their representatives declared over and over again that they had no jurisdiction over ecclesiastical affairs, and would never consent to assume any. On the 21st of May, 1526, a disputation took place at Baden, in the Canton of Argovia, betnween Eck, on the one side, and (Ecolampadius, Zwingli's Melanchthon, and many more divines, on the other, concerning the Mass, purgatory, and the veneration of the Saints, in which, although it was plain the former had gained a complete triumph, the friends of the latter claimed a victory for their champion.' Its most important result, however, was the complete alienation of the Protestant from the Catholic Cantons, the latter of which, after having definitely, but reluctantly, joined those of Freiburg and Soleure, and entered into an alliance with King Ferdinand of Austria (1529), were driven by the outrages2 of their opponents to retaliatory measures of more than usual severity, if indeed they do not merit a harsher name. The impending struggle was for the time averted by the mediation of the cities of Strasburg and Constance, and the Catholic Cantons in consequence broke off their treaty with Ferdinand; but, for all this, the popular feeling on each side was as deep and as hostile as ever. Hence, when the people of Ziirich, under pretense of promoting the glory of God and 1Cf. Riffel, Vol. III., p. 547-556; and Wiedemann, John Eck, p. 223. 2'"The burning of images, and sometimes even of monasteries," Hase blandly tells us, "was of course exceedingly painful to the Catholic authorities, especially when it occurred in places subject to their control." Ch. Hist., Eng. trans., N. Y. 1875, p. 388. (TaR.) VOL. III -7

Page  98 98 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. forwarding the interests of the Christian faith, intercepted convoys of provisions destined for the Catholic Cantons, a furious war at once broke out. A battle was fought October 11, 1531, at Cappcl, in which the army of Zurich suffered a disastrous defeat; and Zwilgli,. who, by the command of the magistracy, had gone to the field of battle as chaplain, and, clad in complete armor, had borne aloft the standard of the city, was stricken down, and numbered among the slain. (Ecoiampadius having been cut off' by a malignant plague on the 23d of November of the same year, the coincidence was remarked by the Lutherans, who observed, with brutal malevolence, that "the Devil had given both of them a sudden taking off." Zwingli was succeeded by Henry Bullinger, and CEcolampadius by Oswald Myconius,l who, together with Leo Judae, C(aspar Grossman, and William Farel, continued to spread the new doctrines in Switzerland. 8 314. Zwingli's System. " Uslegen und grfind der schlussreden oder Artikel " —Explanations and Reasons of the Conclusions or Articles,-veluti farrago omnium opinionurn, quae hodie controvertuntur (Zwinglii Opera, edd. Schuler et Schulthess, T. VII., p. 275 sq.) Comment. de vera et falsa religione, Tiguri, 1525; IFidei ratio ad Carolum Imperatorem, Tig. 1530; Christianae fidei brevis et clara Expositio ad Regem Christian. Francisc. I. (ed. Bullinger), Tig. 1536, in Zw. opera, T. IV., p. 42-78; De providentia, in opp. T. I. Zeller, The Theological System of Zwingli, Tuibg. 1853. Spbrri, Studies on Zwinglianism, Zirich, 1866. Schweizer, The Fundamental Dogmas of the Protestants, Zfirich, 1854. lHagenbach, Hist. of the First Confession of Basle, Basle, 1827. Siywart, Ulrich Zwingli; the character of his Theology, Stuttgart, 1855. Besides the Symbolism of MObhler and Hilgers, cf. especially Riffel, Vol. III., p. 54-102. Hundeshagen, Suppl. to the character of Zwingli, along with a comparison to Luther and Calvin (Theol. Studies and Criticisms, 1862, nro. 4). While Zwingli's claim to having been before Luther in publicly attacking the abuses that had crept into the Church may be allowed, his pretension to any originality of teaching must 1 Oswald Myconius (i. e. Geisshauter), Antistes of the Church of Basle, by Melchior K'irchhofer, Zfi:ich, 1813. Biography of M. Henry Bullinger (he had -been Dean of Bremgartcn), Antistes of the Church of Zurich, by Sal. Hess, Zdirich, 1828 sq., 2 vols. (incomplete).

Page  99 ~ 314. Zwingli's System. 99 be emphatically denied. The underlying principles of his system were taken from the writings of Luther, which had been largely circulated in Switzerland shortly after their appearance in Germany, and he could claim as his own no more than a recasting and an adaptation of these principles to suit his own ways of thought and intellectual bent. That he was superficial, and destitute of intellectual gifts of a high order, is evident from the fact that he started by denying that Christianity had anything of mystery in it. The principle upon which his whole system was grounded, and out of which it grew with rigorous consistency, may be briefly stated as follows: Holy Scripture is the one source of faith, and man's reason its only interpreter; and, hence, whatever it contains that is above or beyond the comprehension of the human intellect, may be discarded. Zwingli, like all reformers, professed to believe himself divinely inspired, and to have merited by his earnest prayers a direct mental illumination. As regards his specifc teaching, he held with Luther that man, in consequence of the siue of Adam, hadfallen so completely and hopelessly under the dominion of evil, that every faculty of body and soul was impaired, and his every act vain, unprofitable, and sinful. Hence, man had no power to do good, and free-will is a fiction. Human nature, being in itself wholly and essentially wicked, evil deeds are as necessarily its product as are the branches of a tree the outgrowth of the stem. His theory of Providence (De Providentia), which is set forth in precise and emphatic terms, is only an extreme form of the fatalistic belief of the Pagans; human free-will is totally annihilated; God is represented as the author of sin, and seems to have a very decided preference for it in its more aggravated forms of treason and murder! Starting with these wide and sweeping premlEpist. an. 1527: Hic ergo proruunt quidam: "Libidini ergo indulgebo, etc.; quidquid egero, Deo auctore fit." - Qui se voce produnt, cujus oves sint! Esto enim, Dei ordinatione fiat, ut hic parricide sit, etc.- - ejusdem tamen bonitate fit, ut qui vasa irae ipsius futuri sint, his signis prodantur, quum scilicet latrocinantur - citra poenitentiam. Quid enim aliud quam gehennae filium his signis deprehendimus? Dicant ergo, Dei providentia se esse proditores ac homicidas! Yet the caution is added further on: "Sed heus tu! caste ista ad populurn et rarius etiam!" Cf. also Hahn, Zwingli's Doctrine of Providence. the Ilature

Page  100 100 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. ises, he could accept no theory of justification other than that' of Luther by faith alone, and no other kwas admissible. Consistently with his debasing theory of absolute predestination, he asserted and maintained that such distinguished Pagan personages as Hercules, Theseus, Socrates, Numa Pompilius, the Catos and the Scipios were among the elect, and enjoyed the fellowship of Christ and His Saints-an opinion which, Luther said, made him a thorough-going Pagan. Like Luther, Zwingli also repudiated such works as in his belief were not inspired by faith, and among these lie included monastic vows, and everything connected with indulqences and purgatory. According to his definition, the Church, whose members are known to God alone, consists of that great community of Christians who recognize only Christ as their Head, He having no visible representative on earth. Hence the spiritual power of the Bishop of Rome, and of the bishops dispersed over the world, is neither more nor less than usurpation, it having been primarily lodged in the civil authorities, from whom it was extorted by the ecclesiastical hierarchy. The Sacraments, he said, are but empty signs, having no efficacy, conferring no grace, and are not even tokens of God's favor. They are a sort of advertisement to the public-that those who receive them are already in the enjoyment of God's favor.l Baptism does not cleanse the soul of sin,2 and make the recipient a son of God; but it is a sign of initiation for those who do not yet enjoy that sonship, and a pledge of continuance for those who do. The Holy Eucharist is not itself a sacrifice, but merely a commemoration of the expiatory Sacrifice of Christ; and, hence, the words of institution spoken by Christ are to be taken not in their literal and obvious sense, but in a sense wholly figurative.3 "Moreover," said Zwingli, and end of man, and also of the election of grace (Studies and Criticisms, 1837, 4th number, p. 765-805). 1 " Ex quibus hoc colligitur, sacramenta dari in signum publicum ejus gratiae, quae cuique privatoe prius adest." 2Zwingli, Works, Vol. II., p. 198 b.; p. 477. (TB.) 8 A single passage will suffice to show his teaching: " Hoc est, id est, significat Corldi Moum. Quod perinde est, ac si quae matrona conjugis sui annulum ab

Page  101 ~ 315. The Sacramentarian Controversy. 101 -anticipating the Calvinistic interpretation of the words of institution, and replying to it, "those should not be listened to who say:' We do indeed truly eat the flesh of Christ, but in.a spiritual sense;' for," he added, "the assertion involves a conltradiction of terms." Confirmation and Extreme Unction he dismissed from his mind as too trifling to claim his serious attention; and Holy Orders, he said, is only a ceremonial induction into the ministry of the Word, and neither confers grace nor imprints a sacramental character on the soul. For where is the good of these external means of grace since the power of God is everywhere visible, working in and through all things, not indirectly and as employing agencies, but directly and ab-.solutely; and if Christ, he went on to say, has instituted Baptism and the Eucharist as His two signs in the New Covenant, IHe did so only because He graciously stooped to accommodate Himself to the weakness of our poor nature. Between the cold, barren system of Zwingli and the teachings of Luther,' there was nearly as great a contrast as between it and the faith of the Catholic Church; and the repulsive aridity of everything connected with Zwinglianism will, in a measure, account for the fact, that, while religious sentiment and warmth of feeling early died out among its professors, they long continued to manifest their presence among those of Lutheranism. ~ 315. The Sacramentarian Controversy. (Cf. ~ 311.) Loescher, Complete History of the Struggle between Luther and the Reformed, Frankfurt and Lps., 2d ed., 1723, 3 vols. Lud. Lavater, Historia de origine et progressu controversiae de coena Domini ab an. 1523-1563, Tiguri, 1564 and 1572. Hospiniani Historia sacramentaria, Tig. 1598; 1602, 2 T. f., 1611, 4to. Bossuet, Hist. of Variations, Vol. I., p. 48 sq. Planck, Hist. of the Origin, Variations, etc. (Vol. II., p. 204 sq., 471 sq.; Vol. III., Pt. I., p. 376 sq.) By the same, Hist. ofj Protestant Theology (Vol. I., p. 6 sq.; Vol. II., Pt. I., p. 89 sq., Pt. II., p. 7. sq.; Vol. III., pp. 150, 274, and'732 sq.) Moehler, Symbolism, hoc ipso relictum monstrans, En conjux hic meus est, dicat." Ibid., Vol. II., p. 293. (TR.) 1 Hence Luther, replying to the Swiss deputies, said: " Either one party or the other must necessarily be working in the service of Satan; the matter does not admit of discussion, there is no possibility of compromise." Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 1907.

Page  102 102 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. chap. IV., p. 256 sq.; Engl. transl., p. 292 sq. Hilgers, Symbolism, chap. VI., ~} 27 and 28. *Riffel, Vols. I. and II., p. 298-335. The principle of private judgment introduced by the Reformers, granting to all unrestricted freedom to teach what they liked, and to interpret Holy Scripture arbitrarily, necessarily led at a very early day to grave divisions among the sectaries themselves. Luther was seriously alarmed,.and saw the importance of fixing upon some common creed as a basis of doctrine, and a guarantee of unity of teaching. Like Melanchthon, he had violently assailed the Sacraments, which, the Church has ever taught, are divinely ordained and effica — cious instruments of grace; and, being under the necessity of so shaping and adjusting the details of his system that they would fit in with his fundamental principle of justification by faith alone, he denied the teaching of the Church, and affirmed that, instead of being positive means for conveying sanctifying grace to the soul, the Sacraments are no more than signs and symbols designed to strengthen the faith of the believer in the assurance that he is loosed from his sin. Hence, he insisted, whoever receives the divine promises with unhesitating faith, has no need of the Sacraments. Notwithstanding this general denial of efficacy to the Sacramental system,'he still continued to teach that Christ is really and truly present in the Sacrament of the Altar, and, as to the rmode of this Presence, he held for a time that thesubstances of bread and wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. But his obstinate struggle against the Church, and his heated and acrimonious controversies with the Sacramentarians, led him before long to discard these views, and adopt others wholly at variance with them. Carlstadt had accepted the early teaching of Luther, and, in consequence, denied the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the Altar, because, as he said, it was wholly destitute of Scriptural proof. Luther could not deny the logical justness of the conclusion, and in 1524, when these questions were beginning to create a stir, wrote as follows to Bucer: "Had Dr. Carlstadt, or any one else, been able to persuade me five years ago that the Sacrament of the Altar is but bread and wine, he would indeed

Page  103 ~ 315. The Sacramentarian Controversy. 103 have done me a great service, and rendered very material aid in my efforts to make a breach in the Papacy. But it is all in vain; I can not escape; the meaning of the text is too evident; every artifice of language will be powerless to explain it away."' Pirkheirner,2 who also contributed his share to the controversy in his "De vera Christi carne et vero ejus sanguine ad J. (Ecolampadium responsio," stated in a letter to Melanchthon, that, in his opinion, Luther's true motive for reaffirming his belief in the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament, apart from his natural inclination to contradict everybody, was a desire' to achieve a victory over Carlstadt. There seems to be some truth in the statement, for Luther declared that he would continue to believe, in spite of the Papists, that the Sacrament of the Altar was only bread and wine; and, in spite of Carlstadt, he would continue to raise the Host aloft for the adoration of the people, lest it might seem the Devil had taught him a new lesson. If a council were to prescribe, he added, or to allow Communion under both kinds, he would, only for the sake of being in opposition to such council, admit but one, and utter anathema'upon those who, in obedience to the conciliar decrees, should receive under both kinds.3 Luther was annoyed that Carlstadt should put precisely the same meaning as himself upon the words of institution; the more so, since the latter had onl a former occasion, in explaining the sense of the passage in Matthew xvi. 18, declared, that, in instituting the Blessed Sacrament, Christ had pointed to His own body, and that the pronoun rourzo properly referred to aciua, and not to apro;. In like 1Walch, Luther's Works, Vol. XV., p. 2448. Cf. Goebel, Andrew Bodenstein's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper (Studies and Criticisms, 1842, nro. 2). Aschbach's Eccl. Cyclopaed., art. "Karlstadt." 2 Hagen, The Literary and Religious Relations of Germany during the Age of the Reformation, with a special reference to Willibald Pirkhleimer, Vol. I., Erlangen, 1841. Charitas Pirkheimer, Abbess of Nurnberg (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. XIII., p. 513-539; ef. Vol. XLIV., two articles). Hloefer, Charitas Pirkheimer, etc., Memoirs of the Age of the Reformation, Barnberg, 1852. D6llinger, The Reformation, Vol. I., p. 167 sq. lVm. Loose, Episodes of the Life of Charitas Pirkheimer, Dresden, 1870. sSee his Ordinary of the Mass. 1523.

Page  104 104 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. manner, Carlstadt explained the awful words of St. Paul: "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the Body of the Lord," 1 as conveying only an admonition to the faithful to celebrate the Lord's Supper with gravity and becoming reverence, and to exclude all unseemly hilarity and vulgar carousing. The restraints which publication necessarily imposed upon the two champions were broken through, and gave place to coarse abuse when they came into personal contact with each other. Luther never gave over pursuing Carlstadt, the preacher of Orlamiinde, from the day the latter had been driven from the gates of Wittenberg. He went to Jena, and, ascending the pulpit, occupied on the previous day by Carlstadt, greatly amused his audience by his ironical flings.at the fanatics. Carlstadt was present, and, stung by the raillery of Luther, at once challenged him to a discussion. They met in the Black Bear inn of Jena,' and, the argument continuing to grow more animated and heated, they finally transgressed every law of propriety and decency, and discussed the most sacred of subjects-the Lord's Supper-in a manner the most frivolous, and in language the most unbecoming. In closing, both pledged themselves to carry on the controversy in writing. "Will you write openly against me, Doctor?" asked Luther. " Yes," replied Carlstadt, "if it is agreeable to you, and I shall not spare you." "Good," rejoined Luther; "there, Doctor, is a florin as an earnest." "May I see you broken on a wheel," said Luther, on taking leave of Carlstadt; "And may you," retorted the latter, "break your neck before you get out of the city." Carlstadt escaped personal violence only by precipitate flight, "and thus," it was said, "was Andrew Bodenstein driven away by Luther without a hearing." He repaired to Strasburg, where he made Bucer and C(apito his allies' in his quarrel with Luther. After the close of the Peasants' War, in which he had taken part, I. Cor. xi. 29. 2 Martin Reinhardt, who was present, gives a detailed account of the debate in Actis Jenensibus; see Walch, T.' XV., p. 2423. Cf. C. A. Menzel, German f/ist., Vol. I., p. 254 sq.

Page  105 ~ 315. The Sacramentarian Controversy. 105 he humbly sued for Luther's pardon, and, retiring to the small +own of Kemberg, set up as a haberdasher, and for a seasoll ceased to give much attention to polemical controversy. But selling small wares was not to his taste, and in 1528 lie once more came forth from his obscurity, again assailed Luther, and was againl obliged to quit Saxony. Through the influence of Zwingli, he was granted ali asylum in Switzerland (1530), and was set over a parish, and, still later on, became a professor and preacher in Basle, where, as already stated, he was stricken by a plague, and died in 1541.1 But if Carlstadt had passed away, his errors lived after him, aand Zuwingli and (Ecolampadias promptly proclaimed allnd publicly defended them as their own. Like Berenyaritas in a former age,2 they put an erroneous interpretation upon the words of institlution-Zwingli maintaining, on the aithlority of Exodus xii, 11, "For it (i. e. the Paschal Lamb) is the P1lase, that is, the Passage of the Lord," and other texts of Scripture, that the cop'ula "is" means " signifies;" and CEcolamlpadius, that the predicate, " Body," means "symbol" or "sign" of the Body. In the meanitine, fourteen Suabian preachers had published, above their collective names, a document (Syngramm a), written by Breiz of Hall and Erhard Schnepf of Wimpfen, in which, while professedly inclining to the Lutheran belief, they seemed to favor the teaching of Zwingli, inasmuch as they held that the Body of' Christ, though not really present in the sacramental species, may become so in obedience to the faith of the worshiper. C(apito and Bacer at once saw that the meaning of the " Syngramrrna" was loose and equivocal, and hoped, by a skillful interpretation of its doubtfill passages, to furnish a common ground on which the conflicting parties might agree. But Luther refused to listen. to any such compromise. When it was proposed to him, he flew into a towering passion, raving incoherently against Zwingli and his partizans, " who," he said, " were Sacramentarians and minislers of Satan, against whom no exercise of severity, however great, 1 Jaeger, Andrew Bodenstein of Carlstadt, Stuttg., 1856. 2 See Vol. II, p. 443, note 1.

Page  106 106 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. would be excessive." The works published by Luther at this time against the Sacramentarians' are the most solid of all his writings. As long as he devotes his energies to defending the teachings of the ancient faith, instead of assailing them, his style is spirited and vigorous, his proofs clear, and, in many instances, apposite, and his reasoning luminous and conclusive; and for the simple, but potent, reason, that he has the unchangeable Church at his back. While accepting the words of institution in their literal and strict sense, Luther discarded the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation, and instead adopted one of his own, known as Consubstantiation, or Impanation, according to which the Body of Christ is received in, under, and with the bread (in, sub, et cum pane). This theory he supported by the authority of certain theologians, according to whom the body of Christ, because of its union with His divinity, is omnipresent (Ubiquity). Zwingli argued, in reply,2 that if a strictly literal interpretation were to be put upon the words of institution, then no meaning could be drawn from them other than that contained in the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation; but that if, on the other hand, the words: "'This is My Body," were to be interpreted as meaning: "This contains My Body," or: "This bread is united with My Body," then, he would ask, in what Luther's synecdoche was more tenable or more reasonable than his own metonymy. He further contended that the theory of bodily ubiquity, in which Luther sought refuge, was subversive of the doctrine of two natures in Christ, and a revival, under another form, of the Monophysite error. Zwingli complained bitterly of Luther's excessive violence against the Sacramentarians. "You cry out that we are heretics," said he, "and should be denied a hearIa. Against the celestial Prophets, in Watch, Vol. XX., p. 186 sq. b. Sermon on the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ against the Visionaries, in Watch, Vol. XX., p. 915 sq. c. That the words of Christ: "This is My Body," are to be retained against the visionaries, in Walch, T. XX., p. 950 sq. d. Great Confession of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, Walch, Vol. XX., p. 1118 sq. 2"IIt would require an extraordinary lesson in language," said Zwingli, "to persuade me that the words:'This is My Body,' are synonymous with the expression:'My Body is eaten in this bread,"'" etc. Walch, Vol. XX., p. 658.

Page  107 ~ 315. The Sacramentarian Controversy. 107 ing; you proscribe our books, and denounce us to the magistrates. Is not this doing precisely what the Pope did formerly when truth began to raise her head? " 1 The controversies and bickerings among the Reformers themselves concerning the most essential truths of Christianity, had at least one good effect: they proved the utter inefficiencv and fallaciousness of the principle of private interpretation, which invested every one with the absolute right of construing Scriptural texts after his own fashion, on the ground that their meaning is so very clear that one can not possibly mistake it. The advocates of both parties were obliged to appeal to the tradition of the Church, against which both had intemperately declaimed; and to seek to add weight to their individual opinions, by professing to rest theni upon the writings of her Doctors, whose authority Luther had contemptuously rejected.2 Writing in 1532 to 1Cf. ~ 311, vers. fin. 2 it All the Fathers," said Luther, "fell into error, and those of them that did not repent before dying are lost eternally."... "Their writings are fetid pools, whence Christians have been drinking unwholesome draughts, instead of slaking their thirst from the pure fountain of Holy Scripture."... "St. Gregory was the first to start the fictions concerning Purgatory and Masses for the dead, and is the author of the whole of them. He knew very little about either Christ or the Gospel, and was so superstitious as to be easily deceived by the Devil." *... "St. Augustine often fell into error, and can not be safely followed. He was a good, holy man; but, like the other Fathers, did not possess the true faith.".. "Jerome I regard as a heretic. He wrote many impious things, and deserves to be in hell rather than Heaven. I know none of the Fathers whom I so much dislike. He is eternally gabbling about fasting and virginity."... "Chrysostom is a sorry fellow, an empty declaimer, who has filled many books with pretentious trifles, which, when examined, are found to be only a mass of barren and undigested matter-a great puff of smoke and little fire."... "Basil is worthless; he is a monk through and through, and, to my mind, he is of no weight whatever.".... "The Apology of Melanchthon is superior to anything the Doctors of the Church, not excepting Augustine, ever wrote."... Nihil ad nos Thomas Aquinas; he is a theological abortion, a fount of error, whence issue all the heresies that subvert Gospel teaching." (These sententious expressions of Luther may be found scattered here and there-some in his Table-Talk, Frankfurt ed., No. 57, and some in his other works. They are given precisely as found in the several editions of his works as collated by Weislinger, in Friss Vogel oder Stirb-Neck or NVothing-Strasburg, 1726, pp. 300, 314, and other places.) Cf. also Dbllinger, The Reformation, Vol. I., p. 430-451.

Page  108 108 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Albert of Prussia' on the question in dispute between himself and the Zwinglians, Luther said: "This article is neither unscriptural nor a dogma of human invention; it is based upon the clear and irrefragable words of Holy Writ; it has been uniformly held and believed throughout the whole Cliristian world, from the foundation of the Church to the present hour. That such has been and is the fact, is attested by the writings of the Holy Fathers, both Greek and Latin, by daily usage, and the uninterrupted practice of the Church. Were it indeed a new doctrine, or had it been less uniformly observed in every Church throughout the whole of Christendam (or, what is the same thing, had it not the fullest testimony of the most unexceptionable Catholic tradition on its side), to call it in question, or controvert it, would not be so dreadful a matter or so dangerous. To doubt it, therefore, is to disbelieve the Christian Church, and to brand her as heretical, and with her the Prophets, Apostles, and Christ Himself, who, in establishing His Church, said:'Be.. hold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world;'2 to which the Apostle of the Gentiles added: this'Is the House of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."'3 And speaking of the rationalizing tendencies of Zwingli's teaching, he said: " Were Our Lord to spread wild apples before me, and bid me eat this one or that (as His Body), I should not venture to inquire the reason for doing His bidding." Again, forecasting its inevitable consequences, he uttered these prophetic words: "If the reason be allowed unrestricted freedom in'criticising and passing judgment upon God's word and works, not a single article of faith will long survive. In such an event, it will soon Luther's letters against certain intriguers, addressed to Albert, Margrave of Brandenburg (1532), in Walch, Vol. XX., p. 2089. Faber wrote a whole book,on this contradiction in Luther: De Antilogiis Lutheri. Cf. Raynald. ad an. 1531, nro. 57, and Cochlaeus, Lutherus septiceps ubique sibi, suis scriptis contrarius, Paris, 1564. Cf. Frint's Theological Review, years 1812 and 1813; and HEist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. VI., p. 336, and Vol. XI., p. 413. 2 Matt. xxviii. 10. 3 I. Tim. iii. 15.

Page  109 ~ 316. Progress of Protestantism till Interim of Ratisbon. 109 become apparent that the Zwinglian principles tend not to God's honor and a simple acceptance of His word by faith, but to the formation and fostering of sophistical, captious, and subtle habits of mind, leading directly to a denial of the Divinity of Christ; for it is no less unreasonable to say that nan is God, than to affirm that bread is changed into the Body of the Lord." The course pursued by Melanchthon in this controversy was very damaging to his character for manliness and honesty; for, while hypocritically professing to hold Luther's views on the Lord's Supper, and openly setting them forth in the Augsburg Confession as his own, he in truth favored those of Calvin, as is abundantly shown from the language used by him after Luther's death.1 C.-CONTINUATION OF THE HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION UNTIL THE RELIGIOUS PEACE OF AUGSBURG (1555). ~ 316. Progress of Protestantism until the Interim of Ratisbon (1541). Le Plat, Monuments pour servir a l'histoire du Concile de Trente, T. II. and III. Laemmer, Monum. Vatic., p. 195 sq. Riffel, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 480-580. A Menzel, Vol. II., p. 17-254. The last act of both the Catholic and the Protestant parties, at the conclusion of the Religious Peace of Niirnberg, was to mutually and solemnly bind themselves to hold a Council at the earliest possible moment. Clement VII., acting upon this pledge, exerted himself to the utmost to have the oft-promised Council convene; but notwithstanding his best efforts, it was again delayed. Conditions were proposed, which the Protestants rejected on pretexts at once novel and futile.2 To hold the Council in a church, according to time1 In the Confessio invariata, they say: " De coena Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis Christi vere adsint et distribuantur vescentibus in coena Domini, et improbant secus docentes." Here, according to Salig, Complete History of theAugsburg Confession, Vol. III., ch. 1, p. 171, there were left out after " Christii the words: "sub specie panis et vini;" while in the Variata the following substitute is found:'"De coena Domini docent, quod cum pane et vino vere exhibeantur corpus et sanguis Christi vescentibus in coena Domini." 2 For an account of the measures taken by him immediately after the Diet of

Page  110 110 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. honored custom, they said, would be inconvenient; neither could they bind themselves to the unqualified acceptance and observance of its decrees. They further objected to having it convene at Milan, Bologna, or Piacenza, preferring some city of Germany.: Other objections, equally trivial and evasive, were advanced. After the death of Clement VII., September 25, 1534, his successor, Paul IlI. (October 13, 1534-November 10, 1549), made renewed and still more strenuous efforts to have the Council convene. Through his Nuncio, Vergerius, he opened negotiations with the Protestants, and issued a decree of convocation, designating May, 1537, as the time, and Mantua as the place, of holding the Council.l Again the Protestants, assembled at Schmalkald, in December, 1535, refused to take any part in it, fully accepting as their own the opinion of Luther, "that the Catholics were not serious in their professions to hold a Council; while the Protestants, being perfectly enlightened upon all points by the Holy Ghost, had no need of it." They went on to express their conviction that a Council, whose methods and forms of' procedure should be directed by the Pope, could not be free, and that the Pope himself and his Cardinals should be impeached. The more proper way, they said, would be to have men of known ability and unbiased minds,.selected by the princes from every condition of life, who, recognizing no rule or authority other than the word of God, should examine and pass judgment on the questions in dispute.2 The war, which had in the meantime broken out between the Emperor and Francis I., inasmuch as it rendered a journey to Mantua difficult, if not hazardous, furnished the ProtestAugsburg, cf. Raynald. ad an. 1530, nros. 175, 176. Cf., moreover, ibid. ad an. 1533, nros. 3-8, and Walch, Vol. XVI., pp. 2263, 2281; de Wette, T. IV., p. 454. 1 Cf. Raynald. ad an. 1535, nros. 26, 30, 32. Paul's Encyclica to divers princes, Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 2290 sq. Melanchthonis Opp., ed. Bretschneider, T. Il., p. 962 sq. Pallavicini, Hist. Conc. Trid., lib. III., c. 17 and 18.-The circular convoking the Council, on June 2, 1536, in Raynaid. ad an. 1536, nr. 35. Cf. Pallavicint, 1. cit., lib. III., c. 19. Freiburg Eccl. Cyclop., Vol. XI., p. 606-609; Fr. tr., Vol. 25, p. 1-4, concerning Paul Vergerius, who afterward became an -apostate. Ldmmer, Monum. Vatic., p. 146 sq. 2Cf. Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 2305 sq.

Page  111 ~ 316. Progress of Protestantism till Interim qf Ratisbon. 111 ants a fresh pretext for declining to be present at the Council. The League of Schmalkald, renewed on this occasion for the space of ten years, was strengthened by many fresh accessions, in defiance of the prohibitions of the articles of the Peace of Nikrnberg. While, on the one hand, the Protestants were extremely mortified at seeing the proposed alliance between France and England frustrated; on the other, they had every reason to congratulate themselves on the favorable dispositions of the new Elector of Saxony, Frederic the Magnanimous, and on the accession to the League of the Dukes Ulrich of Wiirtemberg and Barnim and Philip of Pomerania; of Robert, Count-Palatine of Zweibriicken; of the Princes George and Joachim of Anhalt; of William, Count of Nassau, and of many cities of Germany. Moreover, Denmark, a country in which Protestant propagandists had been actively at work since the year 1536, began. to manifest such signs as led to a well-founded hope that she also would soon enter the League. As the time for holding the Council drew near, the Protestants again assembled at Schmalkald (February, 1537), and denounced the Pope in language more violent than they had ever before employed. After the publication of Luther's thirty propositions against the authority of Councils, the League subscribed the twenty-three articles of rguarantee drawn up by him at Wittenberg in the preceding year, and known as the Articles of Schmalkald; I which, while expressing in precise and energetic language the violent hostility of the League against the Catholic Church, present a striking contrast with the Augsburg Confession. Moreover, Melanchthon was commissioned to prepare a treatise on the Primacy of the Pope and the Jurisdiction of Bishops (De potestate et Primata Puipae); but his views, when submitted to the theologians assembled at Schmnalkald, were coldly received, being much too temperate to harmonize with their radical designs. Melanchthon had IArticuli qui dicuntur Smalcaldici e Palatino Codice MS. (Luther's autograph manuscript) accurate editi et annotationibus crit. illustrati, per Marheineke, Berol. 1817, 4to. De potestate et primatu Papae tractatus (now serving as an Appendix to the Articles of Schnmalkald), in Melanchthonis Opp., ed. Bretschneider, T. III., p. 271. Both are found together in Hase, Libri Symbol., p. 298-358.

Page  112 112 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. said, in substance, that the Primacy of the Pope and the jurisdiction of bishops, though not of Divine, were of human institution (jure humano), and should therefore continue to be retained. The aim and purpose of this treatise was to furnish arguments to those who still cared to attempt a justification of their conduct in renouncing all obligations of obedience to either Pope or bishops. Luther, broken in health and pained by the position taken by his old friend, quitted Schmalkald with these parting words: "May God fill you with hatred of the Pope." From this time forth, the members of the League of Schmnalkald were unanimous in their explicit and positive refusal to attend any Council whatever.1 Through the efforts of Held, Vice-chancellor to the Emperor, a confederation known as the Holy League,2 whose object was to oppose the League of Schmalkald, was formed by the Catholic princes at Niirnberg, in June, 1538. Its mehtbers were the Archbishops of Mentz and Salzburg, the Duke of Bavaria, George of Saxony, and Henry of Brunswick. In the meantime, the foreign wars, in which the Emperor was engaged, continued to divide his attention and weaken his authority at home. The Protestant League received, in 1538, a fresh accession of strength in the Swiss,3 with whom, owing to the adroit diplomacy of Bucer and Capito and the demand of the Protestant princes, Luther finally consented to unite on the basis of the Concordia Vitebergensis. Joachim II., Elector of Brandenburg,4 unmindful of the example of his illustrious father, embraced the new teachings in 1539, thus following in the footsteps of his brother, John, Margrave of Neumark, who had apostatized three years before. Protestantism was also introduced into the Duchy of Saxony I Walch, Vol. XVI., p. 2426 sq. Corp. Ref., Vol. II., pp. 962 sq., 982 sq. (TR.) 2The official documents are in Hortleder, Pt. I., Book 1, ch. 25-29; ialch, Vol. XVI., p. 2426 sq.; cf. Riffel, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 523-526. 3Cf. Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 2543; the Concordia, written out by Melanchthon, in his Opp. ed. Bretsch., T. III., p. 75. 4Joachim II., Elector of Brandenburg (Hist. and Polit. Papers, 1851, Vol. XXVIII., p. 291 sq.) Adam Miller, Hist. of the Reformation in the Margravate of Brandenburg, Berlin, 1839. Spiecker, Hist. of the Introd. of the Reform. in the March of Brandenburg, Berlin, 1839 sq., 3 Pts. Cf. Riffel, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 682-703.

Page  113 ~ 316. Progress of Protestantism till Interim of Batisbon. 113 by Henry, the brother and successor of Duke George, againstthe will and in spite of the protests of his subjects.l Luther was still indefatigable in his efforts to excite the hatred of the people against both Church and Council, and to this end continned to put forth hostile pamphlets of every size with unwearied activity and marvelous rapidity. It required all the terrors inspired by the recent victories of the Turks, who were now seriously menacing the whole of Germany, to temporarily suspend this religious war. Negotiations were opened at Frankfurt, in February, 1539, which resulted in the concillsion of an armistice for sixteen months.2 The Emperor, anxious to profit by this interval of peace to effect a reconciliation, summoned the theologians of both parties to a Religious Conference at Spire; but, an epidemic prevailing in that city, it was transferred to Haguenau (June, 1540); whence it was again transferred to Worms, where, owing to the inexcusable delays caused by the Protestants, it was not finally opened until January 14, 1541.3 Eck and Melanchthon led off in the discussion, taking as common ground the Confession of Augsburg, a circumstance which gave but poor promise of any ultimate satisfactory result. But, in the mneantime, the Elm — peror dissolved the Conference, and summoned a Diet to meet at Ratisbon, April 5, 1541, whither the celebrated Cardinal Coiitarini4 repaired to take part in the discussion. To facilitate the adjustment. of matters, a committee was appointed by the Emperor, consisting of three theologians from each side. Eck, Julius Pflug, and John Grgpper represented the 1 Hoffmann, Complete Hist. of the Reformation in the city and university of Leipsig, Lps. 1739. Leo, Hist. of the Reform. in Leipsig and Dresden, Lps. 1834. Von Langenn, Maurice, Duke and Elector of Saxony, Lps. 1841, 2 vols. Cf. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 674-681. 2The public document is in Hortleder, Pt. I., Bk. 1, ch. 32; Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 396 sq. $Raynald. ad an. 1540, nro. 15-24; TWalch, Vol. XVII., p. 453 sq.; Melanchthonis Opp. ed. Bretschneider, T. IV., p. 1 sq.-The first opinion of Cochlaeus, in Raynald. ad an. 1540, nro. 49. Cf. nros. 54 and 55. 4Pallavicini, 1. c., lib. III., c. 12-15; Acta in conventu Ratisbonensi, ed. MIelanchthon, Viteb. 1541. Cf. ejusdem Opp. ed. Bretschneider, T. IV., p. 119 sq.; Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 695 sq.; Riffet, Vol. II., p. 549 sq. VOL. III-8

Page  114 114 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1.,Catholics, and Melanchthon, Pistorius, and Bucer the Protestants. The Emperor implored them to lay aside all human prejudices and passions, and for the time being to have in view only the glory of God; and, with the purpose of narrowing the controversy down to essential matters, sent them, through Cardinal Granvelle, a treatise which should serve them as a basis and guide in their discussions. This treatise was probably the production of Gropper, and came to be known as the Ratisbon Interim.l Had it been a political paper, and intended for political purposes, its plans and suggestions for compromise would have merited, and doubtlessly received, the praise of having been astutely conceived; but judged from a religious point of view, which was its supposed character, it must be said that it set forth the teachings of faith neither clearly nor accurately, and was in consequence severely animadverted upon by the Catholic theologians, notably by Dr. Eck. In spite of this untoward circumstance, it seemed for a time that the Conference would have a happy issue. The conditions of the Interim were moderate, and both parties seemed more and more disposed for a reconciliation. But appearances were fallacious, and real difficulties were just as much difficulties as ever, as both parties learned once they came to discuss the fundamental article on the Church and the doctrine of satisfaction. Whatever may have been the dispositions of the Protestant divines relative to auricular confession and tranisubstantiation, when left to themselves, and these were by no means favorable, they absolutely refused to accept either after they had been reenforced by the strictly orthodox Lutheran, Amsdorf, whom the Elector of Saxony sent to them as an adviser. They gradually drifted into old traditions and methods, and in the end began to demand the abolition of penitential exercises, good works, monastic vows, indulgences, the veneration of saints, and, in short, everything which in their opinion detracted from the merits of Christ. The Catholic theologians, of course, refused to yield to their demands, i'Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 725 sq.; Riffel, Vol. II., p. 551-571; as to Eck's opinion on the Interim, ibid., p. 571, note 1. Cf. also Unionsmacherei, i. e. Bungling at Union-making (Review of Lutheran Divinity, 1856, nro. 2).

Page  115 ~ 317. Anabaptists at Miinster —Bigamy of Philip of Hesse. 115 and this Conference, like all those that had preceded it, closed without having effected anything. By the recess of the Diet, it was ordained that both parties should continue to observe the articles to which they had already agreed, until such time as either a Council or a Diet could be held, with the concurrence of the Pope; that in the interval the Peace of Niirnberg should be observed in every particular; and, as a consequence, that all monastic churches should be secure from all manner of violence. The Emperor also relaxed somewhat the conditions of the recess of the Diet of Augsburg, by suspending all suits at law pending in the Imperial Court of Justice against those whose title to enjoy the privileges of the Peace of Niirnberg was doubtful.' But even these concessions did not satisfy the Protestants, who continued to make still larger demands, which the Emperor, though he thought them extravagant, was forced to grant, in order to secure their aid against the Turks. ~ 317. The Anabaptists at Mfliinster-Bigamy of the Landgrave, Philip of Hesse. tHerm. a Kerssenbroik, Anabapt. furoris hist. narratio, 1564-1573 (incomplete); Menken, Script. Germ., T. III., translated from the manuscript and published at Frankfurt (Mfinster), 1771, 4to. According to this, Jochmus, Hist. of the Reform. at Mtinster and its Failure caused by the Anabaptists, )Minster, 1836. Faesser, Hist. of the Anabaptists, Miunster (1852), 1861. Cornelius, The Humanists of Miinster and their Relations to the Reformation, MIunster, 1851. By the same, Supplements to the Hist. of the Anabaptists, Miinster, 1853, and Hist. of the Rebellion of Mfinster, Lps. 1855 sq. Again by the same, The Anabaptists of the Netherlands during the siege of Mfinster, from 1534-1535 (Essay read in the Munich Academy, 1870, Vol. I., Pt. II., p. 50-111). IHase, The Kingdom of the Anabaptists (new prophets, 2d ed., nro. 3), Lps. 1861. Kampschullte, Introd. of Protestantism into the Territory of what at present constitutes the Province of Westphalia, Paderborn, 1866. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 580. Up to the date of the holding of the Diet of Augsburg, Westphalia, acting from purely political motives, had uniformly repelled2 the persistent and frequent attempts made 1Cf. Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 962-1000. 2See the account of their wants given in the Hist. Polit. Papers, under the heading, "Protestantism at Minster," Vol. IX., pp. 99-108, 129-158, 327-360; and Vol. X., pp. 42-45, 129-146.

Page  116 116 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. to introduce Lutheran errors within its borders. But the par — tisans of Luther, inspired with fresh courage by the action of the League of Schmalkald, grew daily more bold and aggressive; and one of them, Bernard Rottmann, chaplain of St. Maurice, near Miinster, a visionary and a fanatic, enjoys the distinction of having first preached the new teachings in the streets of that city (February 23, 1532), and, having communicated to the citizens somewhat of his own fanaticism, prevailed upon them to pull down the altars in the churches and to demolish the images of the Saints. With the connivance of the magistracy and the active support of Philip, Landgrave of HIesse, Protestantism was formally introduced into Miunster, as it had already been into the cities of Minden, Herford, Lemgo, Lippstadt, and Soest, and the Catholics were in consequence forced to surrender six of their churches to the victorious sectaries (February 14, 1533). But the triumphs thus gained by the Protestants were lost, and their further progress retarded for long years, through the religious and political fanaticism of the Anabaptists, who, finding this new field open to heretical error and sectarian propagandism, and flocking thither in hordes, gave themselves up to every sort of excess and outrage. These sectaries, who began their career of fanaticism at Zwickau, and were generally believed to have been annihilated in the Peasants' War, had scattered themselves over various countries, where they existed in large numbers, and, having neither home nor permanent abode, committed the wildest extravagances. Whilst, on the one hand, the Lutherans abused the liberty which they invoked as their proudest privilege, and made it a synonyvm for licentiousness; the Anabaptists, on the other, made a pretense of mortifying and crushing out whatever is human in our common natures. Entitled on more than one score to the honor of. being the legitimate heirs of the dualistic Gnostics and visionary Montanists of the early Church, they aspired to a false and extravagant illuminism, despised the Sacraments, reprobated all external practices, rejected the established institutions of the Church, and appealed to the Book of Revelations for a confirmation of their pretended millennial ecstasies, which, they claimed, had been revealed to them in fanciful

Page  117 ~ 317. Anabaptists at Miinster-Bigamy of Philip of Hesse. 117 visions and imaginary reveries. One of the most ardent champions of these teachings was Melchior Hoffman of Suabia, who exerted his best energies to propagate them in the _Netherlands.l Joh/n Bockelsohn, a tailor of Leyden, usually called John of Leyden, and Matthiesen, a baker of Haarlem, going to Manster, found an able and active coadjutor in the Protestant chaplain, Bernard Rottman. Having, with the aid of their adherents, made themselves masters of the city, they set up a theocratic Dernocracy, and proclaimed John of Leyden its autocratic king, while Matthiesen assumed the title and office of prophet, and Knipperdolling, a burgher, was named high sheriff and general-in-chief of the Hosts of the Lord. Twelve judges, constituting a court of justice, surrounded the newlyerected throne, and the city of Miinster was designated as the "City of Sion," whence was to go forth the Millennium of Christ's visible kingdom on earth. Matthiesen, in his office of prophet, and claiming a direct revelation from on high as the sanction of his conduct, ordered all books and manuscripts other than the Bible, and all paintings and images of Saints, which he designated as "instruments of Popish idolatry," to be destroyed, and they were accordingly committed to the flames amid profane dances and scenes of revolting profligacy and fanatical licentiousness. John of Leyden- surrounded his newly-erected throne with Oriental pomp and magnificence. He was attended by a numerous guard, and a brilliant court lent luster to his ephemeral reign. By Divine command, so he blasphemously said, he took several wives, and polygamy, having the sanction of his illustrious example, became as general among these fanatical enthusiasts as the practice of possessing their goods in common. They were intolerant of opposition, and put down any show of resistance to their institutions by force and violence. Nor was their insolence confined by the narrow limits in which they held supreme sway. John issued a manifesto, in which he pompously proclaimed his intention to take the field, and, in the name of the Lord, to exterminate all the tyrants of the earth. Assured 1See Faesser, 1. c., p. 84.

Page  118 118 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. of a victorious triumph in this undertaking, he parceled outin advance, among his followers, the duchies, bishoprics, and abbeys, situated immediately about Miinster. To John Denker, a shopkeeper, he assigned the Duchy of Saxony; and the Duchy of Brunswick to Bernard Thomas Moer, a tailor; while the Duchy of Westphalia, together with the territories lying between the Weser and the Rhine, was conferred upon the patrician, Christian Kerkerink. Other royal grants, equally munificent and grotesque, were made to his followers, and ceased only when his imaginary conquests had been entirely disposed of. He further announced that should any one-be he prince, magistrate, or burgher-refuse to receive the apostles sent out by him, he would come himself to destroy and utterly annihilate all such refractory spirits. But before John had time to carry into effect his splendid promises and terrible threats, Count Waldeck, the Bishop and temporal lord of Miinster, assisted by many Protestant princes, succeeded in putting a period to the frightful scenes that were daily disgracing the city. The princes at the head of the Catholic army, which had now sat down before the gates of Miinster, having summoned John to surrender, received the following reply: "Your favor and your clemency we despise-they are only another name for tyranny. We are content with the favor and assistance of our Heavenly Father, of which we are assured, and hence the offer of clemency by you, who stand in greater need of ours, is blasphemous. Understand, therefore, that it is our firm purpose to defend our religion and our city with the last drop of our blood." Every expedient was resorted to in order to rouse the courage of the multitude, and inspire them with enthusiasm. The preacher Rolle, king John, and many more, rushed like maniacs through the streets of the city, filling the air with cries of lamentation, and calling upon their followers to do "penance," and upon the godless to be rebaptized. One of these excited visionaries declared that he had seen Christ coming in the clouds, bearing aloft the standard of victory, and so general did the excitement become that it finally reached all classes, and every age and sex, and Tilbek, the chief burgomaster, bending before the fury of popular fanaticism, re

Page  119 ~ 317. Anabaptists of Miinster-Bigamy of Philip of Hesse. 119 quested to be again baptized. Matters grew daily worse, until, in the end, such as would not submit to be rebaptized were expelled the city. King John prepared a great federal banquet for his followers, which was served on the public square before the Cathedral, and to which eight thousand persons sat down. The city made a gallant defense, and it was only after eighteen months of incessant struggle that the besiegers succeeded in carrying it by storm (June 25, 1535). John of Leyden, Knipperdolling, and the chancellor, KIrechting, after being subjected to every sort of ignominy and outrage, were executed with painful torture (January 23, 1536), and their bodies, incased in iron cages, were for years afterward hung by iron chains from the steeple of St. Lainbert's church, as a warning to the citizens. By the capture of Miinster and execution of the Anabaptist leaders, the sect ceased to exist as an organized body, although its errors were long cherished and advocated by obscure and insignificant communities scattered up and down Westphalia. But polygamy, their characteristic institution, found favor in other quarters. Among those to whom this Oriental institution was particularly acceptable, Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, surnamed the Magnanimous, and the most ardent advocate and zealous defender of the Reformation, was notably conspicuous.l He had been married sixteen years to Christina, daughter of George of Saxony, and was the father of eight children; but it was notorious that he lived in habitual adultery during the whole of this time. Unable to stifle the voice of conscience, and unwilling to leave off his old habits of sin, he sought refuge in the convenient Lutheran tenet of "salvation by faith alone." Having thus put the claims of conscience summarily aside, the Landgrave dispatched, through the dextrous and pliant Bucer, a letter to Melanchthon and Luther, in which he expressed a wish to obtain their authorization to take as a second wife Margaret von der Saale, maid of honor to his 1 Landgrave Philip of Hesse, being a Supplement to the picture drawn in the Hist. and Polit. Papers of the schism of the sixteenth century (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. XIV., Vols. XV. and XVI., but, especially, Vol. XVIII., p. 224 sq., "Philip's Bigamy"). Hassencamp, Ch. H. of Hesse during the age of the Reformation, Marburg, 1852, Vol. I. Herzog's Cyclopaedia, Vol. II., p. 512-537.

Page  120 120 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. sister Elizabeth. He was of an ardent temperament, he said, and of a vigorous constitution, and could not possibly remain alone during his frequent attendance at the diets of the Empire and of his own States, where every one lived for pleasure and enjoyment, while to have his wife and court ladies to accompany him would be troublesome and inconvenient. Luther and Melanchthon were greatly perplexed. On the one hand, they shrank from the odium that would attach to them should they authorize the Landgrave's adultery; and, on the other, they dreaded, that, in case of refusal, he might carry out his threat, and return to the Catholic Church. But the defection of the Landgrave had more terrors for these pure reformers than the approval of an adulterous union, and they consequently authorized Philip to take a second wife, as they piously expressed it, " in order to provide for the welfare of his body and soul, and to bring greater glory to God." This instrument, signed by Luther, Melanchthon, Bucer, and five theologians from Hesse, went on to say, that to avoid scandal the marriage should be performed privately, in presence of only a few witnesses, and as if under seal of confession.1 The marriage ceremony was performed March 3, 1540, at Rothenburg on the Fuld, in presence of Melanchthon, Bucer, and other theologians, by the IHessian preacher, Denis Melander, who had special qualifications for the office, having himself taken three wives. This affair for a time disquieted Luther, but lie soon recovered his equanimity; "for his great heart," as Bucer writes, "was not easily shaken." Melanchthon, however, was not made of such stern stuff, and the grief and remorse he felt for his part in the transaction brought on a dangerous illness. Every effort was made to keep the secret of the marriage; but female vanity was not proof against the seductions of notoriety, and the whole affair shortly leaked out.2 Luther Instrumentum copulationis Philippi Landgravii et Margaritae de SaalBossuet, Hist. des Variations, T. I., p. 306. (TR.) 2Cf. Seckendorf, lib. III.; the original pieces are all printed in full in Bossuet, Hist. of the Variations of Protestant churches, Vol. I., Bk. VI., at the end; New York ed. of 1851, p. 200-218 (Germ. transl. by Meyer, Vol. I., p. 286-310);

Page  121 ~ 318. Fresh Acts of Violence by Protestants, etc. 121 *declared "that the divulgence of the secret andmitted of no -defense, and that he would therefore either deny outright having authorized the second marriage at all (a course which he might possibly take, since the authorization was granted for a secret marriage only, which therefore became null and void by being made public); or, should this course fail him, he would come out openly, confess that he had blundered and played the fool, and crave pardon for his fault." This affair was the occasion of a controversy between Luther and Henry, Duke of Brunswick, in the course of which Luther, in a pamphlet directed against the Duke, and entitled "Against the Buffoon," took occasion to show that that gentleman's conduct was not exemplary, and that his relations to his mistress, Eve of Trotta, were not honorable. The Landgrave, Philip, continued to live a peaceful and quiet life with his two wives, and he had the further gratification of having, after the date of his second marriage, two sons and a daughter born to him by Christina, and six sons by Margaret, the latter of whom were all called Counts of Diez. ~ 318. Fresh Acts of Violence by Protestants —Renewed Attempts to Adjust Religious Difficulties. The bishopric of Naumburg-Zeitz falling vacant, the Chapter gave its suffriages in favor of Julius von Pfiug, a man distinguished for his theological learning, his sweet temper, and pacific disposition; but the Elector, John Frederic, the Mag-,nanimous, disregarding the rights and ignoring the action of the Chapter, arbitrarily appointed Nicholas von Amsdorf to the vacant see (1542), taking the precaution, however, to grant him only the salary of a parish priest, and to put the temporal administration of the diocese into the hands of an official of the electorate. Luther, who never lost an opportunity to cast ridicule upon the institutions of the Catholic in Ulenberg, Hist. of the Luth. Reformers, Vol. II., p. 468-484. Schmitt, Essay of a hist. and philos. Exposition, etc., p. 429 sq. Cf. also "The Tomb of Margaret of Saale" (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. VII., p. 751 sq.; Vol. XVIII., p. 224 sq.; Vol. XX., p. 93 sq.)

Page  122 122 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Church, sacrilegiously consecrated Amsdorf a bishop after his; own fashion, and, referring to the affair in his writings, did so in a tone of cynical irreverence and coarse brutality. "We have," said he, "consecrated a bishop without chrism; nay, more, without butter or lard, or suet, or tar, or grease, or incense, or coals."' The forcible intrusion of this farcical bishop into a Catholic see was immediately followed by another act almost, if not quite, so violent and atrocious. Henry, Duke of Brunswick,, whose fidelity to the Catholic Church had always remained constant and ardent, was engaged in a war against the rebellious subjects of his ducal city of Brunswick, which had joined the League of Schmalkald2 contrary to his wishes. The city of Goslar had been placed under ban of the Empire by sentence of the Imperial Chamber, and Henry was proceeding to carry the sentence into effect when he was attacked by the princes of the Protestant League, his States invaded and seized (1542), Lutheranism introduced into them, and he himself forced to flee the country, and take refuge in Bavaria. The bishopric of Hildesheirn,3 which had been granted by Imperial award to the Dukes Eric and Henry, became the scene of outrages similar to those perpetrated in Brunswick, which in the sequel were followed by consequences equally disastrous. The conduct of Herman, Count of Wied and (p. 1515) Prince Elector of Cologne, was a fresh source of embarrassment to the Catholic party. He set out by taking up the work of Of. Lepsius, The Nomination and Induction of Nicholas von Amsdorf, N ordbausen, 1835; A. Jansen, Julius Pflug, etc., in Opel's New Communications of the Thuringian and Saxon Society, Vol. X., 1, 2, Nordhausen, 1864. 2Lentz, Hist. of the Introd. of the Evangelical Confession into the duchy of Brunswick, Wolfenbfittel, 1830. Gietz, John Bugenhagen, the Reformer of Brunswick, Lps. 1830. tHildesheim, Theological Monthly, Oct. and Nov. nros. of 1851. 3Cf. "Lutheranism in the city of Hildesheim," from an ancient manuscript (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vols. IX. and X.) Reifenberg, Hist. Societatis Jesu ad Rhen. infer., T. I., p. 251 sq. Luietzel, The Adoption of the Evangelical Confession by the City of Hildesheim, Hildesheim, 1842. Cf. also Schlegel, Ecclesiastical and Reformatory History of North Germany, especially of the Hanoverian States, Hanover, 1828, 1829, 2 vols. Baring, Hist. of the Reformation of the City of Hanover, Hanover, 1842.

Page  123 ~ 318. Fresh Acts of Violence by Protestants, etc. 123 Catholic reform, commenced by Gropper, and sanctioned by a Provincial Council held in 1536, and would have experienced but little difficulty in carrying it out successfully in his diocese had he possessed the mental endowments and moral qualifications indispensable to such a task. But of these he was wholly destitute. Of weak and unstable character, he gradually drifted into liberal habits of thought, accepted the new doctrines in their most radical sense, and ended by introducing Protestantism into his Statres according to a form drawn up by Bucer and Melanchthon, the former of whom opened a course of lectures on exegetics in the Franciscan convent of Bonn, the usual summer-residence of the Archbishop of Cologne. The Reformers, however, were far from having matters all their own way. They were resolutely and vigorously opposed by the canons of the Metropolitan Chapter of Cologne, who also published a refutation of the new teachings (antididagma). The members of the city council took sides with the Chapter, and both bodies were encouraged by the Pope and the Emperor to continue to offer a determined resistance to the Reformers. The Archbishop, appreciating the danger of his position, professed to yield; but it shortly appeared that his professions were insincere, and intended only to gain time. An appeal against him, drawn up in the name of the States, the Clergy, and the University, was then made to the Pope and the Emperor, by whom he was summoned to give an account of his conduct, which failing to do, I-e was stript of his possessions, and declared excommunicate.l He then made application to be admitted into the League of Schmalkald, and had the mortification of having his request refused; he invoked the intervention of the Protestant princes, and received in reply fair ltDeckers, Herman von Wied, Archbishop and Elector of Cologne, Cologne, 1840. Meuser, s. v. Herman von Wied in the Third Vol. of Aschbach's Eccl. Cyclopaed. tPacca, Cardinal, "Memorie Storiche," Roma, 1832, in which is a report of the Great Services rendered to the Cath. Church during the sixteenth century, by the Clergy, University, and Municipality of Cologne (Transl. from the Ital. into Germ., Augsburg, 1840). Ennen, Hist. of the Reformation in the Territory of the Archdiocese of Cologne, Neuss, 1849. The same treats this subject exhaustively in his "Hist. of the City of Cologne."

Page  124 124 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. promises, which were never made good; and having thus experienced disappointment after disappointment, he was finally,forced to content himself with the single county of Neuwied (t 1552). But on the other hand, in addition to the countries of North Germany already mentioned, the cities of Magdeburg, Halberstadt, Halle, Meissen, and others, were also severed from the Church;l and efforts were made to introduce Protestantism into the States of the Most Catholic, Dukes of Bavaria, into those of King Ferdinand, into the Tyrol,2 and elsewhere. Everywhere the prospect of becoming hereditary princes was held out to Catholic bishops as a bribe to induce them to embrace Protestantism.3 Finally, the Protestant princes, by putting a dishonest interpretation upon the acts of the Diet of Spire (1542), where the chief question related to the raising of subsidies to be employed against the Turks (a matter which gave them very little concern)', sought to justify their deeds of violence against Brunswick and Naumburg, and to find a pretext for dismissing all the suits at law pending in the Imperial Chamber. Consistently with their former policy, they refused to take any part in the General Council which had lately been convoked to meet at Trent. Still, the Emperor, desirous of having peace, and willing to pay almost any price to secure it, made concessions so extensive to the Protestants at the late Diet of Spire (1544), that the Catholics, not without reason, charged him with having *outstepped the bounds of his power, and Pope Paul III., in a letter, dated August 24, 1544, expressed his sorrow at the'Introd. of the Reformation into the Archdiocese of Magdeburg (Fiedler,'Pastoral Gazette of Torgau, 4th year, 1842, Jan., Feb., March, and May). Franke, Hist. of the Reformation in the City of Halle, Halle, 1841. Apfelstedt, Introd- of the Lutheran Reform into the District of Schwarzburg, Sondershau-:sen, 1841 (For the Jubilee of 1841). Fraustadt, The Introd. of the Reform into the Bishopric of Merseburg, Lps. 1844. 2Reformatory Intrigues in Bavaria, in the middle of the sixteenth century (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. IX., p. 14-29). Schism of Tyrol (Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. VI., p. 677-609). tBeda Weber, Tyrol and the Reformation, Innsbruck, 1841. 3Hase, Ch. H., Engl. trans., N. Y. 1873, p. 392. (TR.)

Page  125 ~ 318. Fresh Acts of Violence by Protestants, etc. 125, Emperor's action, and his serious apprehension as to its consequences. Charles having, with the cooperation of the Protestants of his Empire, from whom he had been fortunate enough to obtain a declaration of war against France, compelled his haughty adversary, Francis I., to sign the Peace of Crespy (September 18, 1544), set to work to dissipate the doubts which had been cast upon his conduct, and to place himself in his true character before the world. He in consequelce urged that a General Council should be convoked to assemble March 15, 1545. At a late Diet held at Worms (March, 1545), the Protestants again expressed their determination to take no part in the proposed Council of Trent, because it had been convoked by the Pope. In giving expression to their sentiments on this occasion, they employed language unusually coarse and violent even for that age. They were also at pains to scatter throughout the Catholic States copies of Luther's work entitled "The Papacy an Institution of the Devil," preceded by an indecent and brutal frontispiece,' and accompanied by a tract, written by Melanchthon,2 in which the author did his best to malign 11 Valch, Vol. XVII., p. 1278 sq.; also printed separately, with annotations by Abbot Prechtl, in his, "Fragments in Refutation of the Wisdom of Dr. Martin Luther," intended as contribution to the Jubilee of the Lutheran Reformation, 3d ed., Sulzbach, 1818. 2Melanchthon wrote by order of the Prince-Elector: "Causae, quare et amplexati sint et retinendam ducant doctrinam... confessionis Aug.... et quare iniquis judicibus collectis in synodo Trident., ut vocant, non sit adscntiendum." Vit. 1546. (Opp. ed. Vit., T. IV., p. 772). The following are the chief points brought out by Melanchthon: 1. One should obey God rather than man; 2. The Pope has no authority to convoke a Council; 3. The Bible, and the Bible only, can be used in determining what is Christian faith; 4. The warrant for the truth of Protestant teaching is to be found in the fact that it is held by thousands; 5. Inasmuch as laymen are excluded from the Council of Trent, it can not be said to be a general council; 6. The place of assembling isitself a circumstance calculated to excite distrust; 7. Nothing good can be expected from the Bishops assembled there, for they know as little of the teaching of Christ as the asses upon which they ride. It will only be necessary to place beside this ribald and insulting language the loving invitations repeatedly addressed to the Protestants by the Council and the Popes, imploring them to unite in securing harmony to the Christian world, to see the wide difference between the spirit by which each party was animated. Sess. XIII., De Reformatione, c. 8; Sess. XV.; Sess. XVIII.

Page  126 126 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. and insult Catholics. Notwithstanding these acts of determined hostility, the Emperor still clung to the vain hope of settling the religious difficulties by conference, and he accordingly summoned one to be held at Ratisbon, January 27, 1546. It seems strange that he should not have foreseen that this conference, apart from the fact that the assembling of such a body for such a purpose after the Council of Trent had already been opened, was a practical ignoring of the authority of the latter, could accomplish no possible good in the existing tem-.per of the Protestant mind.l Their action, however, left the Emperor free to assume a more aggressive attitude, which, having concluded an armistice with the Turks, he was now in a position to do. He began to make preparations for war, and openly declared to the Protestant princes, who questioned him on the subject, that while no token of his good-will should be withheld firom the loyal States of his Empire, every resource of his imperial power should be put forth to reduce those in rebellion to subjection. He also issued a proclamation to the whole Empire, stating that the war in which he was about to engage was not one of religion, and that his sole purpose in undertaking it was to compel the submission of those who, under cover of religion, had disturbed the public peace, and committed nu merous and flagrant acts of violence. He. declared the Landgrave of Hesse and the Elector of Saxony, both of whom were marching toward the Danube at the head of numerous armies, under ban of the Empire. ~ 319. Death of Luther-His Public Character. Dollinger, The Reformation, Vol. I., p. 278 sq.; Vol. III., p. 251-253. Von Gbrres, Luther's work, and Luther's Works (Catholic of 1827). (Doller) Luther's Catholic Monument, Frankfort, 1817. The Luther Monument of Worms, etc., see Vol. II., p. 979, note 2. The trials and contradictions which came to Luther from every quarter had early soured his temper, and made him'Actor. colloquii Ratisbonen. ultimi verissima relatio, Ingolstadii, 1546, 4to. (printed by order of the Emperor.) Report of G. Major, Wittenberg, 1546, 4to. (Hortleder, Pt. I., Bk. 1, ch. 40); by Bucer, ibid., ch. 41, and in Walch, Vol. XVII., p. 1529. See Rifel, Vol. II., p. 742 sq.

Page  127 ~ 319. Death of Luther-His Public Character. 127,discontented and morose. Himself dissatisfied, according to his own avowal, with his religious system,l he had the further mortification of knowing that it had a still more uncertain hold upon the minds of his former adherents. Even at Wittenberg, the scene of' his own zealous and extraordinary labors, no moral improvement was visible among the inhabitants. In a sermon, preached as early as 1532, he had made this candid confession: "Since we have commenced to preach our doctrine (the pure doctrine of the Gospel), the world has grown daily worse, more impious, and more shameless. Men are now beset by legions of devils, and, while enjoying the full light of the Gospel, are more avaricious, more impure, and repulsive, than of old, under the Papacy. Peasants, burghers, and nobles —men of all degrees, the highest as well as the lowest —are all alike slaves to avarice, drunkenness, gluttony, and impurity, and given over to shameful excesses and abominable passions."2 Unable longer to witness patiently the steadily increasing wantonness and libertinism of the inhabitants of NWittenberg, he quitted the city in angry disgust, resolved never again to enter it. "Let us go out from this Sodom," he wrote to his wife in July, 1545. "I had rather," Z"Alas!" he cried out on one occasion, "there was a time when I could believe anything on the authority of the Pope and the monks; but now my reason rejects even what comes to me on the authority of Christ, who can not possibly lead me astray." On another occasion, at the close of the singing of' grace before meals, he remarked: "Should one say that that singing is really good, he would be about as near the truth as if I should say that I believe the teachings' of theology to be true." MI. Anthony Musa, pastor of Rochlitz, once remarked to Luther with candid frankness that he could not himself believe what he preached to others, to which the latter replied: "' Praised be God that there be others no better off than myself. I had fancied myself the only pe;son in such a flrame of mind." Musa continued during his whole life to take comfort from these consoling words of his master (Table-Talk). There is something strikingly characteristic in the devices employed by Luther to stfife the voice of conscience, and the inspirations of the Holy Ghost speaking through it. He professed to regard these salutary warnings as so many devices of the Devi,;. and struggled against themn accordingly. "The Devil," he said, "has often upbraided me, and entered into controversy concerning the affair I have in hand; but," he complacently continues, "I had rather the temple should be destroyed, than that Christ should remain hidden and unknown.' Cf. Menzel, Vol. II., p. 427-429. 2Conf. Dbllinper, 1. c., Vol. I., p. 289 sq., 297 sq., 306 sq., and p. 167 sq.

Page  128 128 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. he continues, "go about the world as a stranger, and eat thebread of a beggar, than pass the few remaining miserable days of my life as a martyr in Wittenberg, to the detriment of my hard but precious labor." He, however, returned again to that city, but only at the urgent solicitation of the University and the Elector. While the principal points of Luther's teaching were being discussed at Ratisbon, he himself, though ill in health, made a journey to Eisleben,. at the request of the Elector of Saxony, for the purpose of arbitrating between the Counts George and Albert of Mansfeld, who were disputing about the boundaries of certain mining districts..But his efforts to adjust matters were not more successful than those of the lawyers had been, out of whose hands he had taken the litigation on his arrival.' Ascending the pulpit of St. Andrew's Church, in Eisleben, for the last time, Luther once more called down the vengeance of heaven upon the Jews, a race of people whom he had sounjustly and virulently assailed in his earlier writings, that his followers after his death were confused at the very mention of his malignant denunciations. In his first pamphlet against them, he called upon Christians to take the Bible from them, to burn their books and synagogues with pitch and brimstone, and to forbid their worship2 under penalty of death; and in his second, entitled "Of Shem Hamphoras," he describes them at the very outset as "young devils doomed to hell," who should be driven out of the country. Luther, after drinking and feasting, and jesting with his friends on the death of Pope Paul III. and the downfall of the Papacy, was taken suddenly ill on February 17, 1546, and'Luther's Letters, apud de Wette, Vol. V., p. 753. 2Cf. de Wette, Vol. V., p. 610. When, on one occasion, in 1546, Luther was journeying through the territory of the Counts of Mansfeld, on entering a village inhabited by Jews, a cold, frosty wind whistled about his ears and almost froze him, he insisted that the Jews had malignantly evoked the chilling breezes, and accordingly wrote to his wife, in a letter dated February 1, 1546: "W hen I shall have finished my chief business, I shall devote my energies to the expulsion of the Jews. Count Albert hates them heartily, and has declared them outlaws, but so far no one has done them harm. Should it be God's will, I shall mount the pulpit, and, with Count Albert, declare them beyond the pale of the law."

Page  129 ~ 319. Death of Luther-His Public Character. 129 died on the night of the following day. Thus suddenly and prematurely was Luther stricken down in the town where he had been born and baptized, after he had passed his life and exerted his powerful influence in setting people against people, sundering social bonds, and inflicting a severe, though not as he fancied, fatal Awound upon the Church of his fathers. "But this wound," as Moehler well observes, "served also for the discharge of impurities which wicked men had introduced into the body of the Church-a thought full of comfort where there are so many painful reflections." Luther closed' his career of a Reformer as he had opened it, breathing hostility against the Pope, and uttering drivelinig contradictions like the following: " The Pope is the most holy and the most devilish of fathers." His teachings, like his life, are full of inconsistencies.2 Shortly before his death, he declared that the Scriptures contained mysteries and unfathomable depths, in the presence of which one must humbly bowhis head.3 But however numerous and glaring may have been the inconsistencies of Luther's life and teachings, he was always. at one with himself in insolent pride and self-sufficiency, and in the testament containing his last will showed his usual I The following are among the most significant sentiments of Luther: "Nos hic persuasi sumus ad papatum decipiendum omnia licere." And again: "Pestis eram vivus, moriens ero mors tua, papa I " The latter is to be found in a letter written after his departure from Schmalkald (de IWette, Luther's Letters, Vol. V., p. 57), and again repeated, immediately before his death, in his pamphlet, entitled'The Papacy an Institution of the Devil." His partisans continued long afterward to approve them, by making them serve as legends for jubilee medals. Cfr. Pasig, The Writings published on the Occasion of Luther's Centenary Jubilees, Lps. 1846. 2 Hence Cochlaeus wrote: "Lutherus septiceps ubique sibi suisque scriptis con — trarius," Paris, 1564. Cf. Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. VI., p. 336; Vol. XI., p. 413. 3It is a great and difficult thing to understand the Scriptures. Five years' hard labor are required to understand either the Georgics or Bucolics of Virgil; an experience of twenty years to be master of the epistles of Cicero; and one hundred years' study of the prophets Elias, Eliseus, of St. John the Baptist, Christ and the Apostles, to get a mere insight into the Scriptures. Hanc tu ne divinam iEneida tenta, Sed vestigia pronus adora. Of a truth it may be said, poor human nature! VOL. III-9

Page  130 130 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. impatience and contempt of all the accepted forms of human right and law.' Judging Luther by the wonderful activity and tumultuous,excitement of his life, he is one of the most remarkable men the world has ever produced; but regarding him in his character as a reformer of the Church, he made the most disastrous failure of any person who ever attempted that difficult task, for the reason that he was totally destitute of the necessary virtues of charity and humility. Arrogantly rejecting the authority of the Church, he soon learned that he had acted precipitately and unwisely, and was forced to shelter himself behind it to successfully defend himself' against his adversaries. That he possessed courage is undeniable; but it is equally true that his courage frequently degenerated into foolish bravado. Ihis activity was ceaseless and untiring, and his eloquence popular and captivating, his ilind quick, his imagination brilliant, his character unselfish, and his temper profoundly religious. This overinastering religious sentiment, so characteristic of his system, contrasts strangely with the habitual blasphemy and sarcasm of his language. Hence, Erasmus said that he was a compound of two personalities. "At times," says the scholar of Rotterdam, "he writes like an Apostle, and again he talks like a fool. hls jests are so coarse, and his thrusts so reckless, that he seems utterly forgetful of the figure he is cutting, or the spectacle he is presenting to the world." When I pray (i. e. say the Our Father),.said Luther on one occasion, I can't help cursing the whole time.2 While declaiming against the use of arms in vindicating the rights of religion, he put forth principles and em1" Notus sum," it is said there, "in coelo, in terra et inferno, et auctoritatem ad hoc sufficientem habeo, ut mihi soli credatur, quum Deus mihi homini licet damnabili et miserabili peccatori ex paterna misericordia Evangeliurn filii sui crediderit dederitque, ut in eo verax et fidelis fuerim, ita ut multi in mundo illud per me acceperint, et me pro doctore veritatis agnoverint, spreto banno papae, Caesaris, regum, principum et sacerdotum, imo omnium daemonumn odio. Quidni igitur ad depositionem hane in re exigua sufficiat, si adsit manus nieae tesrimonium et dici possit, haec scripsit D. Mart. Luther, notarius Dei et testis Evangelii ejus?" (Seckend., lib. III., p. 651.) 2A number of these Our Fathers, Lembellished with profane oaths, may be seen in JVeisltnger, 1. c., preface, p. CCCCVIII. sq.

Page  131 ~ 319. Death of Luther-His Public Character. 131 ployed language that might have done honor to a Jacobin of the eighteenth century. Apparently frank and honest in his advocacy of an unlimited freedom in interpreting the -loly Scriptures, he refused to his adversaries the right which he vauntingly arrogated to himself; and, while proclaiming the glorious prerogatives of free inquiry, conducted himself toward his most devoted adherents and most intimate friends, Melanchthon among the rest, as a tyrant and a despot. So imperious was he in the assertion of his magisterial authority, and so exacting in its exercise, that Melanchthon confesses that, in his own case, it amounted to a degrading slavery (Tuli servitutem paene deformem). When it is further borne in mind that Luther was both a glutton and a drunkard, having so little regard for ordinary proprieties that he brutally wrote to his wife, in a letter dated July 2, 1540, "I am feeding like a Bohemian and swilling like a German, thanks be to God;"' that in speaking of marriage, the most sacred of social institutions, he gave utterance to thoughts so indecent in language, so coarse and revolting, that one seeks in vain to find an apology for him in the lax morals of that lax age;2 and that he employed this language not alone at table, but in his published writings and public addresses, one feels bound, apart from any consideration of the perversity of his principles or the falsity of his teachings, to say that he is hardly such a person as would be singled 6ut as having received a vocation to inaugurate and carry out a moral reform. It has always been characteristic of those who have had any success in carrying out reforms in the Church, that they began their work by first reforming themselves, and it is hardly necessary to remark that this was not Luther's 1Burckhardt, Correspondence of Dr. M. Luther, Leipsig, 1866, p. 357. 2Hence the strong expostulations addressed to him by his friends, given by de Wette, Vol. II., p. 49; Vol. IV., pp. 271, 276. Count Hoyer of Mansfeld wrote, in 1522, as follows to Count Ulrich of Helfenstein: "I have been all along, as I was at Worms, a good Lutheran; but I have learned that Luther is a blackguard, and as good a drunkard as there is in Mansfeld, delighting to be in the company of beautiful women and to play upon his flute. His conduct is unbecoming, and he seems irretrievably fallen." Cf. Luther's Correspondence, in Burkhardt, in the Supplement to the Augsburg Universal Gazette of January 18, 1867.

Page  132 132 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. method. To discover the notes of a reformer in the ungovernable transports, the riotous proceedings, the angry conflicts, and the intemperate controversies which made up the life of Luther, presupposes a partiality amounting to blindness. "It must be evident," safys Erasmus, "to the most feeble intellect, that one who raised so great a storm in the world, who always found pleasure in using language either indecent or caustic, could not have been called of God. His arrogance, to which no parallel can be found, was scarcely distinguishable from madness; and his buffoonery was such that it could not be supposed possible in one doing the work of God." His character is accurately portrayed in the following brief sketch from the pen of Pallavicini. "The products of his prolific genius," says the distinguished historian of the Council of Trent, "vwere extravagant and abnormal, rather than choice and correct-resembling more some gigantic offspring of immature birth, than the shapely babe brought forth after the lapse of nature's appointed time. His intellect was vigorous and robust; but its strength was expended in pulling down, not in building up. Gifted with a tenacious memory, he had acquired a vast deal of erudition, which he poured forth, as the occasion demanded, in impetuous torrents, resembling a thunder-storm in its angry and destructive fury, rather than the refreshing rains of summer, that brighten and gladden the face of nature. He was an eloquent speaker and writer; but his eloquence was more like the rush of the whirlwind, blinding the eyes with a cloud of dust, than the placid flow of a peaceful fountain, delighting them with light and color. His language was such that, throughout the whole of his works, not a single sentence can be found wholly free from a certain coarseness and vulgarity. Courageous to temerity in prosperous, he was cowardly to abjectness in adverse fortune. Professing his readiness to remain silent if his adversaries would do the same, he clearly showed that he was actuated, not by a motive of zeal for God's glory, but by feelings of jealousy and self-love. Princes were among 1 Erasmus, Hyperaspistes, Diatribe adv. servum arbit. Lutheri.

Page  133 ~ 320. Schmalkaldic War-Religious Peace of Augsburg. 133 his followers; but they became such not from any desire of forwarding his cause, but in the hope of enriching themselves with the property of the Church. The harm he did to the Church was indeed great; but, while bringing incomparable disaster upon others, brought no advantage to himself. His name will be memorable in history for all time, but as a name of infamy and dishonor. Now that the rotten branches have been lopped from the vine of the Church, the sound and living ones will thrive and flourish all the better for their ab-.selnce." Ancillon, an acute observer and faithful delineator of human character, has also given us a picture of Luther,' but its outlines are not more flattering or less repulsive than those of Pallavicini. But in spite of these adverse criticisms, the followers of Luther have bestowed upon the memory of their founder an honor which the Church reserves for her greatest Saints, and for doing which Catholics have been reproached with committing a scandalous impiety.2 ~ 320. The Schmalkaldic War —Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555)-Resignation and Death of Charles V. Hortleder, Vol. II., Bk. III., p. 618 sq. Note-book of Emperor Charles V., German, by Warnkoenig, Lps. 1862. Camerarit Comm. belli Smalc. graece script. (Freher, T. III., p. 557). Hist. of the Smalkaldic War, by Hahn, Lps.'Ancillon expresses his judgment of the heresiarch in the following words: "His acts were the result of passion, rather than the outgrowth of fixed principles; and if, on the one hand, his character was not soiled by degrading vice, on the other, it was not ennobled by distinguished virtue. On the whole, admitting that he was gifted with genius, it can not be denied that he was destitute,of moral qualities of a high order." Cf. also Raumer, H-ist. of Europe from the Close of the Fifteenth Century, Vol. I., p. 524 sq. 2In proof of this statement, we refer the reader to the following work, written on occasion of the Jubilee of the Eighteenth Century: " The Gold and Silver Memorial of the Dear Master in God, Dr. M. Luther, in which a detailed account is given of his death, his family, and his relics, based upon above two hu ndred very curious medals and engravings, with pertinent remarks by Christian Junker, Historiographer to the Illustrious Prince of Saxony-Henneberg," Frankfort and Leipsig, 1706, p. 562. This is just what he foretold his followers would Zdo once he had passed away. In his Table-Talk, he says: "Adorabunt stercora nostra et pro balsamo habebunt."

Page  134 134 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. 1837; by Jahn, Lps. 1857. Pallavicini, lib. VIII., c. 1. A. M3enzel, Vol. II., p. 451-472; Vol. III., p. 1-480. Riffel, Vol. II., p. 733-760. The chiefs of the Protestant League had been placed under ban of the Empire in an edict published by the Emperor, July 20, 1546, a course which received fresh significance and increased importance from a bull published by Pope Paul III., proclaiming a crusade, and calling upon the Church to contribute toward carrying it on.' When, however, war was finally declared, the Protestant princes were found fully prepared for the conflict. The League of Schmalkald had already been in existence for fifteen years, and the army of the Lutheran princes was in every way vastly superior to that of the Emperor, from the fact that some Catholic princes, jealous of his power, refused to range themselves under his standard. Charles was anxious, in case of success, to dictate his own terms of peace, and in consequence delayed calling them to his aid until he could no longer dispense with their assistance without peril to himself. On the other hand, although Schertlein of Burtenbach enjoyed at the time the reputation of being an able commander,2 it is nevertheless true that his reputation was undeserved, and that there was no man possessed of real military talent on the Protestant side. A-gain, Maurice of Saxony,3 a Protestant, who had succeeded to Henry, his father, in the government of the Duchy of Saxony, in 1541, passed over to the Catholic party. Apart from the fact that his father's attachment to the Protestant League had been greatly weakened by the influence of the former counselors of Duke George, Maurice, who was a nephew of the latter prince, and had been brought up at his. court, was repelled by the manners and detested the character of the Elector, John Frederic. Still, having married the 1Cf. Raynald. ad an. 1546, nro. 94. The Pope promised an Indulgence to the Crusaders; the Protestants, in turn, had public prayers offered up against the Pope and the Emperor, as enemies of the word of God. Walch, T. XVII., p. 1832 sq. 2Sebast. Schertlein of Burtenbach and his Letters to the Diet of Augsburg, published by Th. Herberger, Augsburg, 1852. 3von Langenn, TMaurice, Elector of Saxony, and his Age, Lps. 1841, 2 vols. Cornelius, Illustration of the Policy of Maurice, Elector of Saxony (Munich Annuary of History, year 1866).

Page  135 ~ 320. Schmalkaldic War-Religious Peace of Augsburg. 135 daughter of Philip, Landgrave of HIesse, he could neither fail to perceive, nor was he wholly insensible to, the advantages which he might reap by embracing Protestantism. The Emperor Charles, who had already had experience of Maurice's valor and capacity during his campaign against France, desirous to again secure his services as an ally, induced him to break off his connection with the League of Schmalkald, on the plea that he might now conscientiously do so since the Protestants had signified their intention not to attend the Ecumenical Council. Maurice accordingly accepted the Emperor's terms, entered into a compact with him (June 19, 1546), and further pledged himself to give such obedience to the decrees of the Ecumenical Council as they should receive from the other Princes of the Empire. lie then proceeded to march an army into the States of the Elector of Saxony, of which he took forcible possession under pretense of preventing them from falling into the hands of Ferdinand, King of the Romans. When the news of this bold act reached the Elector, who was encamped with the allied army on the borders of Suabia and Bavaria, he at once set out for Saxony. After the disbandment of the Protestant army, toward the close of autumn, city after city returned to their allegiance, and, by the opening of the following spring, the whole of Southern Germany had been reduced to submission without the shedding of a drop of blood. The Elector of Saxony, who had in the meantime regained possession of his States, while encamped in the forest of Lochau, near Miihlberg, was surprised by the imperial forces, suffered the total destruction of his army, and was himself made prisoner (April 24,1547). Shortly after, Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, surrendered at discretion; but, owing to pledges of security given by his son-in-law, Maurice, who had succeeded to the Electorate of Saxony, thus crippling the power of the Protestants, he was permitted the enjoyment of a restricted freedom. The Emperor having secured these splendid triumphs, not only without the concurrence of a single Catholic prince, but with the aid of a Protestant one, had no intention of employing the advantages they gave him either to extend his own dominion, or to compel Protestants by force to enter the Church. The latter end

Page  136 136 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. he hoped to secure by some amicable arrangement. To some over-zealous advisers, who referred to Caesar's habit of following up a victory by the total destruction of the enemy, the Emperor replied: "The Ancients were guided by the principles of honor only; we Christians by the principles both of honor and of conscience." Now that Charles had the power, the interests of the Catholic Church and the requirements of justice demanded that he should restore Julius von Pflug to the see of Naumburg, whence he had been driven away in defiance of all law and right; and to execute the sentence of deposition passed upon Herman, Archbishop of Cologne; and having done so, he opened the Diet of Augsburg (September 1, 1547), in the hope of finally bringing about the union so long desired and so frequently attempted, but which he despaired of effecting through a Council which the Protestants had rejected in advance, alleging as an additional excuse for their action that it had been transferred from Trent to Bologna. By the famous "Interim" of Augsburg' —the joint production of Julius von Pfiug, Bishop of Naumburg; Michael Helding, coadjutor of Mentz; and the wily and subtle John Agricola, preacher to the Elector of Brandenburg —Protestants were permitted to receive the Holy Eucharist under both kinds; the Protestant clergy already married to retain their wives; and a tacit approval given to the retention of property already taken from the Church. This instrument was, from beginning to end, a master-piece of duplicity, and as such satisfied no party. The Catholics of Germany, the Protestants, and the Court of Rome, each took exception to it. Rome complained that the Emperor had acted arbitrarily in thus summarily disposing of purely religious questions; and the Lutherans angrily protested against the proceeding as a " fornication with the whore of Babylon," and, having the invectives of Luther fresher in their memory than his pious exhortations, It was published-by the Emperor May 15, 1548. He also submitted on this occasion a plan of disciplinary reform to the bishops present. Formula Reformationis a Carolo V. in Comitiis Augustan. 1548, Statibus ecclesiast. oblata cum commentatione Ant. Diurr, Mogunt. 1782. ('onf. J. E. Bieck, The Triple In. terim, Lps. 1721. J. A. Schmidt, Historia interimistica, Helmst. 1730.

Page  137 ~ 320. Schmalkaldic War —Religious Peace of Augsburg. 137 had recourse to every manner of expression to signify their' abhorrence of what they styled a work of the Devil, a revival,of Papistry, and a new scheme to undermine the pure faith of Protestants (das Interim hat den Schalk hinter ihm). Magdeburg signified its opposition in a formal protest; and Maurice, the new Elector of Saxony, unwilling to give the Interim an unconditional approval, consulted with a number of Protestant theologians, headed by Melanchthon, as to how far he might accept its provisions with a safe conscience. In reply, they drew up what is known as the Leipsig Interim (1548), in which they stated that questions of ritual and ceremony, and others of minor importance, which they designated by the generic word adiaphora, might be wholly overlooked; and even in points of a strictly doctrinal character, they expressed themselves favorable to concession and compromise. They said, "that, while, on the one hand, man is justified solely by the merits of Jesus Christ; on the other, God does not direct his conduct as one might control the movements of a machine. The works ordained of God," they added, " are good and neces-.sary to salvation, and so are also the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity." Confirmation lrnd Extreme Unction, which had but lately been rejected with intemperate haste, they now admitted to be true Sacraments; and they further agreed that Mass should be celebrated according to the an*cient rite, only stipulating that German canticles should be sung while the solemn act of worship was in progress. It was evident from these concessions that the spirit of Luther was no more; and the German theologians of the Lutheran party, changing their conduct to suit the changed circumstances in which they found themselves, were now as docile to imperial authority as they had formerly been servile to the insolent demands of Philip of Hesse. In the meantime, however, such Lutheran preachers as professed to be faithful followers of their master, made a determined opposition to the "Interim," and began a vigorous assault upon its adiaphoristic clauses. The Anti-adiaphorists, as they were called, were headed by Flacius lllyricus, who being an ardent disciple of Luther's, and possessing somewhat of his courage and energy, repaired to Magdeburg, whose bold

Page  138 138 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. citizens were as defiant of imperial power as they were contemptuous of papal authority. But, in spite of this spirited,opposition, the Interim was gradually accepted by several Protestant countries and cities, a fact which encouraged the Emperor at the Diet of Augsburg, in 1550, to make a final effort to have the Protestants attend the sessions of the Council of Trent, again opened by Pope Julius Ill. They, however, once more urged their former claims, demanding that their theologians should be entitled to vote upon all questions; that all former acts and decrees should be declared null; and that the Pope should resign the position of presiding officer. Still, notwithstanding their demands, after a short delay, deputies from Brandenburg, Wiirtemberg, and Saxony began to appear at Trent; and even the Wittenberg theologians, headed by Melanchthon, were already on their way to the Council, when Maurice of Saxony, having secured all the advantages he hoped to obtain by an alliance with the Catholic party, and regardless of the obligations by which he was bound, proceeded to betray both the Emperor and his country. Having received a commission to carry into effect the ban of the Empire passed upon Magdeburg, he was in a position to assemble a large body of troops in Germany without exciting suspicion, or revealing his ulterior purposes. Besides uniting to himself, as confederates in his plot, John Albert, Duke of Mecklenburg; Albert, Margrave of Brandenbu rg; and William, Landgrave of Hesse, eldest son of Philip of Hesse, he entered into a secret treaty (Oct. 5, 1551) with Henry II., King of France, who, as was pretended, coming into Germany as the savior of the country, seized the cities of Metz, Toul, and Verdun.' Maurice also 1Scherer, The Robbery of the Three Bishoprics of Metz, Toul, and Verdun (Raumer, Manual of list., New Series, 3d year); Cornelius, i. c. (p. 134, n. 3), says that the severe sentence pronounced upon 3laurice and his confederates was too long delayed. Buchholz, Ferdinand I., Vol. VI., p. 477; Vol. VII., p. 23 sq.; A. Menzel, Vol. III., p. 411. The following is an extract from the treaty: "Should God favor our cause, we shall do whatever lies in our power to aid himt (the King of France) to recover the hereditary provinces of which he has been despoiled (viz., Franche-Comt6, Flanders, and Artois). When the election for the Imperial crown takes place, we further pledge ourselves to act in such manner as will be pleasing to his Majesty, and to vote for no one who is not his friend, or who will not give security to maintain amicable relations with him,

Page  139 ~ 320. Schmalkaldic War-Religious Peace of Augsburg. 139:' held out to Henry the prospect of securing the Imperial crown.' Everything being in readiness for action, Maurice, advancing through Thuringia, seized the city of Augsburg, and suddenly made his appearance before Inn.spruck, whence the Emperor, who lay sick of a severe attack of the gout, was hastily conveyed on a litter, through the passes of the mountains, to Villach, in Carinthia. While Maurice was thus making himself master of Innspruck, the King of the French was carrying out his part of the programme by actively prosecuting the war in Lorraine. Charles V., now destitute of the material resources necessary to carry on a successful campaign against the combined armies of the French King and the German princes, and despairing of putting an end to the obstinate conflict by his personal endeavors, resolved to reestablish, if possible, his waning power by peaceful negotiations. To this end, he coimmissioned his brother Ferdinand to conclude the Treaty of Passau (July 30, 1552),2 which provided that Philip of Hesse should be set at liberty,3 and gave pledges for the speedy settlement of all religious and political differences by a Diet, to be summoned at an early day. It further provided that neither the Emperor nor the Protestant princes should put any restraint upon freedom of conscience, and that all questions arising in tlie interval between the two parties should be referred for settlement to an Imperial Commission, composed of an equal number of Catholics and Protestants. In consequence of the war then being carried on by the Empire against France for the recovery of the three bishoprics of Lorraine of which the French had taken possession, the Diet did not convene until February 5, 1555. After some discussion, both parties agreed that, in the existing circumstances, it and be in every respect a good neighbor. Should the King himself be pleased to accept the Crown, we shall gratify his wishes in this regard, and give him the preference before any other."'The treaty is given by Liinig, Archives of the Empire, Part. Sp6c. et Recueil des Trait6s de paix, T. II., p. 258. 2Archives of German Diets, Pars gener., p. 131 sq.; Rortleder, Pt. II., Bk. V., ch. 14; Lehmann, De Pace religionis acta publica et originalia, i. e. Acts and 1Protocols of the Peace of Religion, Frankfort (1631, 4to.), 1707, Supplemr., 1709. 3 The Elector had through the Emperor regained his freedom some time before.

Page  140 140 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. was impossible to adjust the religious differences, either by mutual conference or by the action of a general council; and that, though reluctantly putting them aside for the present, they conceived it to be their imperative duty to give their whole attention to the restoration of peace and order in the Empire. After a lengthy discussion, the instrument, known as' the Religious Peace of Augsburg,1 was accepted as satisfactory to both parties, and it was further agreed that its provisions should have permanent force, irrespective of what might be the ultimate solution of the religious question. The Religious Peace guaranteed freedom of worship alike to Catholics and to those professing the faith of the Augsburg Confession; but since by the recently introduced territorial system, which replaced the more ancient one by episcopates, princes had the execution of this article entirely in their own hands, a precautionary clause was added, providing that any one believing his conscience to be outraged in his own State, should be free to pass to another where his religious convictions and feelings would be respected. It was further provided, that such ecclesiastical estates as had been seized by Protestants during, or previously to, the year 1555, should remain permanently in their possession. But the question which presented the greatest difficulty to a settlement was that known as the Ecclesiastical Reservation (Reservatum ecclesiasticum), according to which the functionaries and officers of all ecclesiastical estates, which from that time forth might go over to Protestantism, should be deposed and deprived of their dignities, and Catholics chosen to fill their places. Albert of Brandenburg, Herman of Cologne, and many more apostate bishops were quoted as instances to show that the precaution was not only wise, but necessary. This article, which gave occasion to the sanguinary conflicts that followed, was carried through the Diet, by the efforts of Ferdinand, in 1Archives of the German Empire, Pars general., p. 131 sq. Pacis compositio inter Principes et Ordines Rom. imperii Catholicos et Protestantes in comitiis Augustanis a. 1555, edita et illustrata a jurisconsulto Catholico, Dilling. 1629. This document in German, and accompanied with many illustrations, was published at Frankfort, 1629, 4to. Conf. Lehmann, and see note preceding; also, _Rtfel, Vol. II., p. 751-760.

Page  141 ~ 820. Resignation and Death of Charles V. 141 the face of a most determined opposition; and its adversaries, failing to secure its defeat, insisted on having their protest against it inserted in the Treaty of Peace. Charles V., taught by experience that his hopes of uniting the two religious parties, for the realization of which he had labored so long and so earnestly, were illusory, and that to pursue them further would be useless, resolved to withdraw from public affairs, and to give the remainder of his days to God. He is said to have been influenced in making this decision by the words of an old army captain, who remarked to him on a certain occasion that "one should lay aside the active duties of this life in time to give some attention before dying to the affairs of the next," and accordingly, having assembled the States of the Low Countries at Brussels, October 25, 1556, be formally resigned the Imperial crown. After reading the act of abdication, Charles, rising from his seat and leaning upon the arm of the Prince of Orange, made an address to those about him, in which he recounted, with dignity and pardonable pride, the chief events of his reign, closing with an appeal to his successor, full of parental tenderness and solicitude, urging him to live virtuously, to govern wisely, to respect the rights of his subjects, and to preserve inviolate the faith of the Catholic Church.l "I have," said he, "either in a hostile or pacific manner, visited Germany nine times, Spain six times, France four times, Italy seven times, the Low Countries ten times, England twice, and Africa as often. I have made one voyage upon the North Sea, and eight upon the Mediterranean. I have waged many wars, but have always undertaken them more from necessity than inclination. But I have experienced less difficulty in bearing up under these labors and conflicts than I do now in taking leave of you. Still, it must be done; for I feel myself unequal to the task of protecting my subjects, and securing to them that happiness which it is my wish they should enjoy. I had long since made up my mind to resign the crown; but rebellion at home, the French war abroad, and the desire of maintaining inviolate the frontiers of the Empire, then pre1 Robertson, Hist. of the Reign of Charles V., New York, 1833, pp. 455, 456. (TR.)

Page  142 142 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. vented me from carrying my purpose into effect. And if I now transfer to another the cares of a vast Empire, I am not doing so out of a desire to consult my own ease or to shirk fresh exertions, but because I feel that to retain them would be to act contrary to your interests. Be loyal. to the Catholic faith, which has been always and everywhere the faith of Christendom; for should it disappear, the foundations of goodness would crumble away, and every sort of mischief, now menacing the world, reign supreme." Having taken leave of his subjects, he withdrew to the Hieronymite monastery of Yuste, in Estremadura, where he passed two years, dividing his time between experiments with mechanical contrivances, and religious exercises of such extreme asceticism that they sometimes assumed a character of' gloomy extravagance, and died September 21, 1558.1 He suffered much from doubts as to the rectitude of the political motives by which his policy had been guided, and not unfrequently reproached himself with having neglected to employ adequate means at a proper season to secure the peace of the Church and to prevent schism; and with having sacrificed to his temporal interests the paramount claims of the Church. Documents recently made public throw much light upon the character of Charles, and have quite reversed the popular and erroneous opinions heretofore prevalent concerning this prince. From these it appears that Charles, far from being a man of contracted views and unworthy prejudices, possessed a fine intellect and large and generous sympathies. This is evident, were other proof wanting, from his favorite authors during the early period of his life; for Thucydides and Macchiavelli, St. Augustine and St. Bernard are not the writers that constitute the delight of small and bigoted minds. His whole life goes to show that he was throughout a most devoted son of the Church; that his faith was firm and undoubting, and his piety earnest and sincere. He was a man of restless activity; courageous in adverse and moderate in prosMonastic Life of Charles V., by Stirling (Germtan by Lindau, Dresden, 1853; by Kaiser, Lps. 1853). Prescott, Monastic Life of Charles V. (German, Lps. 1857). Cf. Raumer, Hist. of Europe from the end of the fifte~nth century, Vol. I., pp. 581, 582.,.Gams, in Moehler's Ch. H., Vol. III., p. 152-154.

Page  143 ~ 321. Calvin and His Reform at Geneva-Beza. 143 perous fortune; parsimonious toward himself, he was lavish when any public enterprise demanded a generous expenditure; and, though his life was not spotless, compared with the other princes of his time, he exercised a degree of selfdenial which at least kept him within the bounds of temperiance and decency, and to which they could lay no just claim. He had two natural children-Margaret of Parma and Doll Juan of Austria-the former of whom was born to him before his marriage, and the latter after the death of his wife; but so well was the secret of their illegitimacy kept, that Philip learned that Don Juan was his half-brother only a few days before the Emperor's death. D.-DEVELOPMENT OF PROTESTANTISM IN SWITZERLAND. ~ 321. Calvin and His Reform at Geneva-Beza. Epistolae et responsa, Geneva, 1576, fol. Opera (Genev. 1617, 12 vols. f.); Amsterdam, 1671, 9 vols. f.; in the Corpus Reformatorum, Vol. XXIX. sq. Calvini, Bezae aliorumque litterae quaedam, ex autogr. in bibl. Goth., ed. Bretschneider, Lps. 1835. (A collection of Calvin's Letters, compiled from the original MISS., and edited, with historical notes, by Dr. Jules Bonnet, were translated into English by D. Constable, 2 vols., 1855-1857. The best edition of Calvin's works is that of Amst., 1671, in 9 vols. fol., of which there is an Engl. transl. in 51 vols. 8vo., published at Edinburgh, 1843-1855. TR.) (Euvres franqaises de J. Calvin, prbcbd6s de sa vie, par Thbod. de Bbze, Paris (two treatises on the state of the soul after death, on the Lord's Supper, etc.) L'histoire de la vie et la mort de J. Calvin, par Theodore de Bize, Gen. 1564. Bolsec, Histoire de la vie de Calvin, Paris, 1577, and frequently. Henry, The Life of Calvin, Hamburg, 1835 sq., 4 vols. Staehelin, John Calvin's Life and Select Writings, Elberfeld. 1861-1863, 2 vols. Late Researches in the Protocols of the Council of Geneva concerning Calvin, made by the two Galiffes, father and son, Geneva, 1865.Viguet et Tissot, Calvin d'aprbs Calvin, Genbve, 1864. Herminjard, Correspondance des rbformateurs (1516-1526), Genbve, 1866. tV-Kampschulte. Calvin and his Church and State at Geneva, Lps. 1869 sq. tAudin, Histoire de la vie, des ouvrages et des doctrines de Calvin, Paris, 1841, 2 vols. (Tlhe Life of Calvin. by J. M. V. Audin, transl. into English by the Rev. J. McGill, Baltimore and Louisville, 1 vol. 8vo. TR.) Germ., 2 vols., Augsburg, 1843. Conf. Freiburg Eccl. Cyclopaed., art. "Calvin." Hundeshagen, The Conflicts of Zwinglianism. Lutheranism, and Calvinism in the Church in the territory of Bern, Bern, 1843. Guizot, Les vies de quatre grands chrbtiens frangais, Paris, 1873. (See also Blanc, Ch. H., Vol. II., p. 275; Merle dcAubign6, Hist. of the Great Reformation; Chambers' Cyclop., art. "Calvin." TR.) John Calvin, the son of Gerard Calvin, was born at Noyon, -in Picardy, July 10, 1509. His father began life as a cooper,

Page  144 144 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. but subsequently rose to some distinction, as we hear of him holding the offices of procureur-fiscal of the district of Noyon, and secretary to the Bishop of the diocese. Young John, being destined by his father for the Church, early gave himself to the study of theology, in which his brilliant talents enabled him to achieve such success, that, like Zwingli, he obtained as the reward of his proficiency several ecclesiastical benefices. But cleverness and study can not compensate for a bad character and loose morals, and both the character and morals of Calvin were infamous.l Leaving off the study of theology for a time, he went to Orleans, where he gave his attention to law, having as his master the celebrated Pore de ]'Etoile, one of the most distinguished jurists of that age. The new study does not appear to have had much attraction for him, and he again took up theology. He was chiefly indebted to PTre Olivetan, a professor at Paris, and to Melchior Wolmar, a professor at Bourges, for his knowledge of the principles of the Wittenberg school, of which the doctrine concerning justification appears to have made the deepest and most lasting impression upon his mind. While at Paris, his bold and open advocacy of the teachings of Luther drew upon him the ill-will of the Sorbonne, and he was in consequence forced to flee the city, notwithstanding that Francis I., influenced by his sister, Margaret of Navarre, was kindly disposed toward him. Leaving Paris, he led a wandering life for some time, and finally appeared at Basle, in the year 1534, where he attempted to establish his system, and where he wrote his. great work, "The Institutes of the Christian Religion," which he addressed to Francis I.2 The work became popular in France, and was the means of securing a numerous following to its author. The inhabitants of the reformed Cantons of Switzerland,'Abb6 Blanc, Ch. Hist., Vol. II., p. 554 (4th ed., Paris, 1867). (TR.) 2Institut. relig. Christ. ad reg. Franc. (Bas. 1536), Argent. 1539, Gen. 1559, ed. Tholuck., Berol. 1834 sq., 2 P.; ed. Baum, Cunitz, Reuss, Brunsvic. 1869. The Institutes consisted originally of six sections, subsequently of four books, viz: 1. De cognitione creatoris; 2. De cognitione Dei redemptoris; 3. De modo percipiendae gratiae; 4. De externis remediis ad salutem. Conf. Gerdes, De Joan. Calv. institut. rel. Chr. (Miscellan. Groeningia., T. II., Pt. I.)

Page  145 ~ 321. Calvin and His Reform at Geneva-Beza. 145 repelled by Zwingli's cold and contemptuous views concerning the Lord's Supper, were also inclined to receive with favor the teachings of Calvin, who appears to have been the real founder of the'"Reformed" denomination in that country. IHe appealed to Holy Scripture more confidently than any other of the reformers, and in his attempts to make its passages fall in with his system and support his peculiar views, stlrpassed them all in doing violence to the true meaning of the text. But Calvin being a man of fine classical culture, of a philosophic mind, and accurate methods of thought, did not follow the example set him by the Saxon reformers in their insane hostility to all antiquity, and their efforts to banisl classic literature and Greek philosophy from the Christian world. Quite the contrary. He was appreciatively grateful for the learning, the eloquence, and the philosophic treasures which, he candidly owned, were contained in the works of the Fathers of the Church and the theologians of the Schools; expressed his admiration of the historians, philosophers, and poets of Greece and Rome; and, in giving his opinion of them, did so with warmth indeed, but also with critical acute-. ness and judicial fairness. If, on the one band, he was not always original, and occasionally borrowed thoughts and ideas from Luther; on the other, it must be admitted that he showed much skill in the precision and method with which he developed them. But ideas did not constitute his whole debt to Luther. His language was often quite as coarse, vulgar, and blasphemous as that of the great Saxon reformer.' Geneva was the scene of Calvin's most efficient and imlportant labors. After returning from Ferrara, whither he had gone to visit the Duchess Renee, and where, it is said, there were many well disposed toward him, he passed through'Here is one specimen from many. He wrote two works, entitled respectively "De aeterna Dei praedestInatione" and "De libero arbitrio," against the clever and learned theologian, Albert Pighius, in the former of which he says: "Paulo post librum editum moritur Pighius. Ergo ne cans mnortuo insultaremii, ad alias lucubrationes me converti." Cf. Linsenmann, Albert Pighius and his theological views (Tfibg. Quart. Review, 1866, n. 4). VOL. III-10

Page  146 '146 Period 3. Epoch I. Chapter 1. Geneva. William Farel and his associate, Peter Viret, who -were propagating the new doctrines in the French Cantons of Switzerland, and had been quite successful in their efforts to spread their errors among the people of Vaud, learning -that Calvin had arrived in the city, went immediately to see him, and urged him to remain and labor where he was. When the latter demurred, preferring to occupy himself wholly in literary labors, Farel, yielding to his impetuous temper, invoked God's curse upon both him and his studies should he refuse to give himself to the well-being of the church of Geneva, and this menace, Calvin confesses, determined the course to be pursued by him. Unfortunately, an avenue was opened to the introduction of Protestantism, by an alliance entered into between the Genevese and the Canton of Bern, for the immediate purpose of asserting and maintaining the independence of Geneva against the claims of the Duke of Savoy. Their efforts were successful, and, to more completely alienate them from the Church, the Bishop, between whom and the citizens there was a conflict of authority, quitted the city, and pronolneed sentence of excommunication upon its inhabitants. This was the signal for a general movement against the old faith. Altars were pulled down and demolished, paintings and statues destroyed, and of those who continued faithful to the religion of their fathers, some were imprisoned, and others sent into exile. Thus was the foundation of the new faith laid upon the desecrated altars of the old; and its existence begun among the ruins it itself had made. Calvin arrived in Geneva in 1536, and soon completed the work which the less energetic Farel and Viret had comm-enced.l But Calvin, like all reformers whose zeal is not tempered by the wise experience of the Church, went to extremes in endeavoring to correct the loose morals of the city, and to bring all under a uniform code of severe and stern virtue. He also gave offense by his arbitrary and despotic manner in setting up his new worship (1538). Little by little, lMignet, Introduction of the Reformation, and Organization of Calvinism in,Geneva (German, by Stolz, Lps. 1843).

Page  147 ~ 321. Calvin and His Reform at Geneva-Beza. 147 public opinion began to set strongly against him, till in the end both he and his adherents were expelled the city by the opposition party, who went under the name of Libertines, or Patriots. Calvin now took up his residence in Strasburg, where he began to teach theology, and gathered about him quite a respectable community of persons, sharing his peculiar religious views. Here, too, he made the acquaintance of the widow of a converted Anabaptist, whom he married in 1539. In the meantime, his adherents in Geneva, who were numerous and devotedly attached to him, longed for his return, and at their invitation he again entered that city in 1541, and from that time forth exercised an authority well-nigh absolute ill both civil and ecclesiastical affairs. lie established a Consistorial Court of Discipline, whose office it was to take cognizance of all infractions of morality, among which were included dancing and other amusements. A system of espionage was organized, whose ramifications extended over the whole city, and whose officers invaded the homes and exercised a strict censorship over the social life, and even the speech of individual citizens. While suppressing all houses of public resort previously existing, Calvin allowed five drinking-rooms to be opened, provided they should be kept by virtuous persons (gens de bien), or, in other words, by Calvinists. The Genevese, acting under the guidance of the Libertines, became rebellious under pressure of these restraints on their social customs and habits; but Calvin, acting with his usual promptness, energy, and decision, made such use of the despotic power at his command as effectually kept in check for the time every symptom of revolt. So efficient were his police, that should any citizen be rash enough to give utterance to a sentiment disrespectful to his character, or adverse to his policy, the indiscretion was promptly followed by a punishment so terribly severe that others would carefully guard against repeating the offense.' Desirous to make Geneva the Rome of Calvinism, he elaborated a theocratical system of'The formula of excommunication drawn up by Calvin, in Audin, Life of Calvin, J. McGill's tr., p. 314, and in Kober, The Ban of the Church, p. 16.

Page  148 148 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. church-government, and placed himself at its head, with powers so extensive and prerogatives so extravagant, that even. those popularly said to have been claimed by the Popes ill the Middle Ages are limited and temperate in comparison. IHe had Castellio, the translator of the Bible, deposed from his office of Regent in the gymnasium, because the latter held certain rationalistic views as to the authenticity of the Song of Solomon; he had the physician, Bolsec, banished for assailing the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination; he had Ameaux, one of the Council of the Twenty-five, cast into prison, because, it was said, he had spoken disrespectfully of both the reformer and his reform; he ordered the execution (1548) of Gruet for having written words of menace against him, though he himself had given Gruet abundant provocation for the use of intemperate language, by publicly calling him a dog at a meeting of the Council. Gentilis, who charged Calvin with holding erroneous views on the Trinity, was in consequence condemned to death, and, though escaping the severe sentence for a time by retracting the charge and offering ample apologies, was eventually beheaded at Berne (1566). Michael Servede, a Spanish physician, was seized by the despotic orders of Calvin, while passing through Geneva, and burnt at the stake (1553), for having published certain heretical propositions concerning the Trinity. The Libertine, Berthilier, underwent a like punishment. It would seem that one who himself explained the mystery of the Trinity so indifferently, and whose views were so vehemently assailed by those of his own sect, should have been a trifle less bloodthirsty toward those who differed from him. These cruel and iniquitous executions, which, as Bossuet well observes, were not, as in the case of Luther, the effects of hasty impulse or uncontrollable bursts of anger, but the results of cool, calculating, and unfeeling malignity,' have left a stain upon the memory 1 Calvini fidelis expositio errorum Mich. Serveti et brevis eorum refutatio, ubi docetur, jure gladii coercendos esse haereticos, 1554 (Opusc., c. 686 sq.) Melanchthon has left us an elaborate defense (Consilia II., p. 204) of the practice of inflicting capital punishment on heretics. Writing to Calvin upon the same subject, he- says (Calvini Epp., No. 187): Legi scriptum tuum, in quo refutasti luculenter horrendas Serveti blasphemias, ac Filio Dei gratias ago, qui fuit~

Page  149 ~ 321. Calvin and His Reform at Geneva-Beza. 149 of the French Reformer which will never be effaced. Having firmly established his political power at Geneva, Calvin, through the agency of the Academy which he founded in that city in 1558, experienced little difficulty in replacing the doctrines of Zwingli by his own in the JIelvetic Cantons. The ecclesiastical organization of Geneva became a model for that of other countries, and was adopted by the Reformed churches of France, the Netherlands, England, Scotland, Germany, and Poland. Calvin's life was one of unwearied activity, and his labors were so numerous and so onerous that his bodily constitution gradually gave way under them. His health began to break in 1561, and, though less active and energetic than formerly, he lingered on till 1564, when he died on the 27th of May. His memory, long held in honor, has gradually fallen into disrepute. At his third centennial celebration in 1864, the inhabitants of Geneva refused to acknowledge him either as their national hero or national saint, and, by way of protesting against the celebration altogether, stuck up posters containing the capital sentences against Servede and Berthilier.1 In 1862, his latest descendant, a citizen of Noyon, of high standing and good character, returned to the bosom of the Catholic Church. Theodore Beza, Calvin's eulogistic biographer, took up the work of his master, and carried out his designs with energy and ability. Born of a noble family at Vezelai, in Burgundy, June 24, 1519, Beza received an admirable classical education at Orleans, and at the age of twenty gave evidence of his superior ability and attainments by writing brilliant and witty, but indecent verses. He led for some time a life of fashionable dissipation at Paris; but on his arrival at Geneva, ipa3ev'rg (Umpire) hujus tui agonis. Tibi quoque ecclesia et nunc et ad posteros gratitudinem debet et debebit. Tuo judicio prorsus assentior. Affirllmo etiamn vestros magistratus juste fecisse, quod hominem blasphemnum, re ordine judicata, interfecerunt. Beza, De haereticis a civili magistratu puniendis. Beza went so far as to insist that the Antitrinitarians should suffer capital punishment even after they had retracted their errors (Crenii, Animadversiones, XI. 90). See D1llinger, The Church and the churches, the Papacy, and the States of the Church, Munich, 1861, p. 68 sq. Audin, Life of Calvin, McGill's transl., pp. 413-416.' Cfr. Augsbg. Univ. Gaz., No. 154, June 2, 1864.

Page  150 150 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. he came into contact with Calvin, by whose austere severity the natural exuberance of his spirits and levity of his character were so toned down and kept in check, that he gradually assumed an air and demeanor more in harmony with the grave deportment of his master. The result of this self-discipline was a happy mixture of attractive mildness and severe reserve, which made him acceptable to persons of every degree, and a general favorite among the partisans of Calvinism, of which sect he became the acknowledged head and true founder. Moreover, he brought to the defense of the Calvinistic tenets splendid intellectual gifts and an extensive erudition, and, though unable, owing to the slavish rigorism of the system, to give full play to his mental powers, managed nevertheless to throw into his pages such classic brilliancy of style as gave him a complete advantage over the hostile attacks of the humanists, and notably of Castellio. His felicity in adapting his style to that of the Holy Scriptures is both original and peculiar to himself, and is especially conspicuous in his commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul.1 ~ 322. Calvin's System. Moehler, Symbolism, 5th ed., p. 21; Engl. transl., New York, 1844, pp. 123, 159, 181, 207, 292, 323, 407; Hilgers, Theology of Symbolism; Staudenmaier, Philosophy of Christianity, Vol. I., p. 698-709; Hepp, Dogmatics of the Evangelical Reformed Church, Elberfeld, 1861. The system of Calvin, as has been intimated above, resembles in its general features the teachings of Luther and Zwingli, though, on the whole, it is far more gloomy and severe. He began to depart from Luther's teaching on the question of free-will. Luther denied outright the faculty of free-will in man; Calvin, on the contrary, maintained that man did enjoy a certain sort of free-will, but, at the same time, colltended that it was subject to a Divine predestination of a more formal and sterner character than that admitted by either Luther or Zwingli. The one dominating element and'Fajus, De vita et obitu Th. Bezae, Gen. 1606; Schlosser, The Lives of Theodor Beza and of Peter Martyr, Heidelberg, 1809; Baum, Theodore Beza, according to authentic sources, Lps. 1843 sq., 2 vols.

Page  151 ~ 322. Calvin's System. 151 distinguishing characteristic of Calvinism is the doctrine of absolute predestination,' logically and rigorously deduced from his conception of original sin. The decree of predestination, he maintained, is a consequence of Adam's fall, and is, therefore, eternal and immutable. Moreover, the faculties of man are so utterly and radically corrupted and depraved by original sin, that man has an overmastering tendency to do wrong, and can not of himself, though he put forth his best efforts in the attempt, perform a single good action. God, the primordial Author of good and evil, had from the beginning set apart a certain number of His creatures, whom He doomed to everlasting punishment, to the end that His justice might be made manifest in them. But that there migh/t be a pretext for His wrath and a justification for the punishment, le caused the First Man tofall into sin, and visited upon all posterity the consequences of his revolt. Those foredoomled to eternal loss commit sills by a necessity of their being impelled to their commission by the irresistible influence of the Divine will. Their intellect is so blinded by Divine agency and their will so enfeebled, that the one is incapable of knowing and the other equally incapable of performing aught of good. Such expressions as the following are common in the writings of Calvin: Man, acting under a Divine impulse, does what it is not lawful to do-The heart of man, obeying a certain mysterious Divine influence, turns from the good and pursues the evil-Man falls because an overmastering Providence ordains that he shall fall.2 He further held that the 1Calvin professes to base his teaching on that of St. Augustine; but Petavius (Theologicor. Dognmatum, Tom. I., lib. X., c. 6-15) shows that there is a wide difference between the two. Hugo Grotius makes this very just observation on the character of Calvinism: "Nullum potuit in Christianismum induci dogma perniciosus quam hoc: hominem, qui credidit, aut qui regenitus est (nam haeec multis idem valent), posse prolabi in scelera et flagitia, sed accidere non posse, ut propterea divino favore excidat aut damnationem incurrat. Haec nemo veterum docuit, nemo docentem tutisset, nec aliud evidentius vidi argumentum detortae ad privatos et malos sensus scripturae, quam in hoc negotio." 2 Calvin, Institut., lib. IV., c. 18, ] 2: l Homo justo Dei impulsu agit quod s'bi non licet." Lib. III., c. 23, ] 8: "Cadit igitur homno, Dei providentia sic ordinante." Cf. Moehler, Symbolism, p. 128. (TR.) Calvin makes the following commentary on St. Paul's Ep. to the Romans ix. 18: "Nam res externae, quae ad excaecationem reproborum faciunt, illius irae (Dei) sunt instrumenta. Satan

Page  152 152 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. reprobate, even at the moment he receives the Sacraments, is as destitute of true faith as he is of sanctifying grace. The following is his definition of predestination: "By predestination," he says, "is understood an eternal decree by which God preordains what shall be the lot of each individual. For, inasnmuch as all are not created for the same end, some wvill enjoy everlasting hcappiness, and others suffer never-ending misery. Hence, according as man is created for the enjoyment of the one or the sufferance of the other, he is said to be predestined either to life or to death." Concerning the doctrine of justification by imputation, Calvin went a step beyond Luther, declaring that he who believes is not only perfectly assured of his justification, but also of his eternal salvation. In regard to the Sacraments, he differed from Luther, affirming that sanctifying grace has no connection with autem ipse, qui intus efficaciter agit, ita est ejus minister, ut nonnisi ejus imperio agat. Corruit ergo frivolum illud effugium, quod de praescientia Scholastici habent. Neque enirn praevideri ruinam impiorum a Domino Paulus tradit, sed ejus consilio et voluntate ordinari." He is not even at a loss for an illustration in confirmation of his doctrine: "Absalon incesto coitu patris torum polluens detestabile scelus perpetrat: Deus tamen hoc opus suumr esse pronunciat," etc. 1 The following is a summary of Calvin's teaching on Predestination, as given by Blunt (Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology, London, 1872, p. 102): "The teaching of Calvin on Predestination may be summed up in what are called the Five Points, a name given to the peculiarities of his system. These are: Election (and non-election or reprobation); redemption; the bondage, of the will; grace; final perseverance. His teaching on these subjects will appear from a statement of his theory on Predestination. He maintained that God not only foresaw, but from all eternity decreed, the fall of Adam, and the total corruption of his posterity by sin; all from birth inherit his fallen nature, with its hereditary bond of sin and guilt, and are in a state of utter alienation from God; free-will Godward is totally lost; man in his natural state can do nothing but sin, and that continually. God is pleased for wise reasons, inscrutable to ourselves and independent of the foreseen merits of the objects of His mercy, to elect some from the fallen race to salvation. They are made willing by this grace, which is irresistible or necessarily effectual, to obey the Gospel call, are regenerated by His Spirit, and live in holiness and obedience to His will, and can not finally fall from a state of grace. The rest of mankind God predestines to eternal destruction, not on account of foreseen sin, though it may aggravate their doom, but in fulfillment of His sovereign purpose or decree. He leaves them in their fallen state without effectual grace, deprived of which they must necessarily perish, as examples of His hatred against sin and for the manifestation of His glory." (TR.)

Page  153 ~ 322. Calvin's System. 153'the visible sign of the Sacrament, and is not invariably effi-?cacious. His language relative to the Lord's Supper and the Eucharistic Presence is insidiously equivocal and purposely obscure. Passages of it would lead one to believe that he is speaking of a truie Presence, and a true eating of the Body and drinking of the Blood of Christ, and that he really intends to convey the meaning that the Body of Christ is wholly independent of the faith of the recipient, the unworthy receiving equally with the worthy. But, be this as it may, his teaching is certainly more reasonable and more consolatory than that of Zwingli, according to whom the only Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is that " cwhich exists in the thoughts of a contemplative mind," and the only significance of the Sacrament itself, a remembrance of Christ, His sufferings, and His death.' Calvin, while dissatisfied with the cold and heartless theory of Zwvingli, was equally at variance in his teaching with the Catholic dogma of transubstantieation. He held that the bread and wine are not changed into the Body and Blood of Christ by the words of consecration pronounced by the priest, but remain precisely what they were before the act; that the Body and Blood of Christ are in Heaven, and there alone, but that at the moment of Communion a Divine power, emanating from the Body of Christ in Heaven, is communicated to the soul of the believer. Thus, according to his conception of the Eucharist, it contained two wholly distinct elements-the one material, which falls under the senses; the other spiritual, which constitutes the Divine food of the soul, is communicated only to those predestined to eternal life, and is connected with the material element only in so far as the latter is an occasion for its conveyance. Calvin pretended to support this opinion by citations from Scripture, but relied mainly on the words of St. John: "It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing." 2 1, Hoc est," said Zwingli (De Vera et Falsa Relig., II., p. 293), " id est, significat Corpus Meum. Quod perinde est, ac si quae matrona conjugis sui annulum ab hoc ipsi relictum monstrans, En conjux hic est meus, dicat." (TR.) 2 VI. 64. "As regards Calvin's theory (of the Eucharist), though he sometimes uses Catholic phraseology and speaks of Christ being in the'symbol' (in

Page  154 154 Period 3.. Epoch 1. Chapter 1. Finally, as regards the Church, Calvin was quite at one with Luther, both doing their best to misrepresen-t her history, and to picture her as an abyss of infamy, (luring the period between the first and the sixteenth centuries. But Calvin's views are widely divergent from those of the Wittenberg Doctor concerning the necessity of a distinct body of ministers in the Church. The former is clear and definite on this point, maintaining that there shall be three grades in the ministry, viz., Pastors, Elders, and Deacons; and that no one shall assume these offices, unless called of God, since no man, not having a vocation from God, signified to hinm through the voice of the people, should take upon him to preach His iword and dispense His Sacraments. Hence, in the system of Calvin, ordination has a significance and importance attached to it, of which it is nearly, if not quite, destitute in that of Luther; for while, in the former, it is, in a certain limited sense, called a Sacrament, and should be conferred, not by the body of the people, but by the presbytery, in the latter it signifies no more than a license to preach, granted by the civil power. Calvin further aimed at making the Church more independent of the civil power than did either Luther or Zwingli, his principle being "Ecclesia est sui juris "-a principle, however, which he advocated only for a time. In fine, Calvinistic communities were designed to be wholly independent the one of the other, each constituting a sort of little republic in itself; while, in the Catholic system, individual churches are only parts of a grand organism, extending over the whole world, and depending on a central government and a universally-acknowledged Head-the representative of Christ on earth. But in order to unite the individual churches by some sort of bond, Calvin symbolo), and of our being' partakers of His substance' (participes substantiae ejus); yet it is certain that he wholly rejected the true doctrine of the Eucharist. Thus he asserts that our Lord's human nature can only be present at the right hand of God, and can not, in any sense whatever, be present under Eucharistic signs.... Calvin maintained that the Eucharist was especially designed to kindle the believer's faith, and to raise his heart to Christ sitting at the right hand of God. He thus illustrates his theory: That as the sun, though so distant, can infuse light and heat, so Christ, though at the right hand of God, shines into the hearts of the faithful receivers, and fills them with His grace and presence." Blunt, 1. c., p. 623. (TR.)

Page  155 ~ 322. Calvin's System. 155 established Synods, which played a much more important part in his than in the Lutheran system. The rigorous exclusiveness of Calvin's opinions, and the inflexible sternness of his character, did not prevent him from stretching a point when he conceived it to be his interest to do so. Thus, for example, he formed a union with the Swiss, when such union seemed necessary for the advancement of his cause; and, in his conference with Dean Bullinger (Consensus Tigurinus, 1549), he, like Zwingli, employed language equally hostile to Catholics and Lutherans, saying that it was quite as senseless to affirm either " that tile Body of Christ was under the forms of bread, or that It was united with the bread, as to affirm that transubstantiation took place, and that the bread was changed into the body of Christ." To conclude, Calvin, like Zwingli, was the consistent and inveterate foe of all forms, was ardently bent upon abolishing every sort of outward ceremonial, and manifested the most determined opposition to whatever embellishes divine worship, elevates the soul, or warms the heart. 1 Non minus absurdum judicamus, Christum sub pane locare vel cum pane copulare, quam panem transsubstantiare in corpus ejus.

Page  156 CHAPTER IL PROPAGATION OF PROTESTANTISM IN EUROPE. D6llinger treats this subject very. fully in the continuation of Hortig's Church Hist., pp. 481-691. ~ 323. Protestantism in Prussia. CHIEF SOURCES.-Chronicles of Simon Grunau (a Dominican of Danzig), who was an eye-witness to what he relates. Cf. Freiburg Eccl. Encyclopaed., Vol. VIII., pp. 679 sq. French Trans., Vol. 19, p. 266. The Margrave, Albert of Brandenburg, who had been chosen Grand Master of the Teutonic Order in 1511, when he was scarcely twenty-one years of age, early joined the Protestant League. Western Prussia had belonged to Poland since 1466, and the remainder of the country was held in fief of the Polish King, Sigismund, to whom Albert, receiving encouragement from many quarters, refused to render feudal allegiance. Sigismund, in consequence, had recourse to arms to maintain his rights (1519); and Albert, failing to receive the aid that had been promised him, was forced to submit; but, through the friendly offices of the Emperor, a four years' truce was agreed to by both parties, at Thorn,l April 5, 1521. The Pope also interposed, and made an effort to effect a reconciliation between Albert and Sigismund;2 but the former had his mind fully made up to prosecute his plans for independence, and would listen to no overture that in any way interfered with his purpose. In the year 1522, he traveled into Germany, accompanied by James of Dobeneck, Bishop of Pomesania, and John of Polenz, Bishop of Samland, both of whom were strongly sus1Freiburg, Eccl. Cyclop., Vol. VIII., p. 681. Fr. Trans., Vol. 19, p. 268. Chambers' Cyclop., Art. Albert, Duke of Prussia. (TR.) 2Petri Bembi, Epistolae Leonis X. nomine scriptae, lib. I., ep. 22; lib. II., ep. 21. (156)

Page  157 ~ 323. Protestantism in Prussia. 157 pected of being favorably disposed toward the new religious teachings. He applied for succor to the Diet of Nfirnberg, then in session, but was refused (1522), and, having some idle time on his hands, became one of the audience that flocked to hear Osiander expounding the new doctrines. From a curious he became an interested and fascinated listener, and, while in this frame of mind, sought counsel of Luther and Melanchthoni as to the best way out of his difficulties, and received the advice to return and abolish the absurd and foolish, as they termed it, Rule of his Order; to take a wife, and make Prussia a secular dukedom. The advice was accepted, and promptly acted upon. Albert at once began to cast about for Protestant preachers, and in that very year two Lutherans, John Brismann and Peter Amrandus, were formally installed at K6nigsberg. Monks were driven firom their monasteries, and nuns from their convents; the suspected Bishops of Samland and Pomesania publicly declared in favor of Lutheranism (1524); and Frederic von Ileideck, counsellor to Albert, displayed a singular activity in furthering its interests. At the expiration of the four years' truce (1525), Albert concluded a treaty of peace at Cracow, with Sigismund, XKing of Poland, in virtue of which the external portion of eastern Prussia was secured to Albert and his heirs, and the suzerainty of Sigismund over the same territory acknowledged. When this treaty became known to the provincial Estates of the Duchy, the inhabitants, wearied of the protracted and seemingly inveterate feuds with Poland, received the news with transports of joy; while Weiss, who had lately succeeded to the bishopric of Samland, as a proof that his sympathies were with the people, surrendered the temporal administration of his diocese to the reigning prince, assigning as a reason for his action that bishops were canled to preach, and not to govern. To this general transformation of affairs, only one man of name, the Commander of Memel, had the courage and manliness to offer any opposition, and even his resistance was but feeble and temporary. The organization of the new church was rapidly pushed forward, and soon completed; a ritual in the

Page  158 158 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Polish language was introduced (1526); and John Seclusianus was appointed preacher at Koenigsberg. Duke Albert was solemnly married, in 1526, to Dorothea, daughter of the King of Denmark, an act which he intended as a public disavowal of all further connection with either the Teutonic Order or the Catholic Church, and which he attempted to justify in an apology for his conduct, published at the time, and filled with brutal expressions of contempt against the Church he had betrayed and dishonored. The Pope protested against this public and shameless apostasy, and called upon the Emperor to take rigorous measures for the punishment of the crime. The latter at once declared Albert under ban of the Empire, and the Teutonic Order, though stript of its legal rights, offered an emphatic, but vain, resistance; the action of both was frustrated by the insidious course pursued by King Sigis mund. The Confession of Augsburg was adopted by Albert in 1530, who, in order to possess a nursery of Lutheranism within his dominions, founded the University of Koenigsberg; and, knowing that neither the Pope nor the Emperor would give it his approval, sought and obtained for it the sanction of the King of Poland. The University soon became the theater of those theological discussions which, in the event, proved so disastrous to Osiander himself, their chief author, and, after his death, to his followers, called Osiandrists, who, on account of their teachings, were banished fiom every part of Prussia, in 1567.1 Albert, not content with his own apostasy, employed every resource of his power to compel his subjects to follow his example. Holding the principle, " cujus regio, illius religio," so subversive of freedom and destructive of the rights of conscience, he forced all his States to cease to obey the Church that had raised them from barbarism and ignorance to enlightenment and civilization; and so successful were his efforts, and so complete the alienation of the people from the ancient faith, that, on his death, in 1568, Lutheranism was everywhere predominant, and neither his successor nor any 1 Chambers' Cyclop., Art. Osiander. (TR.)

Page  159 ~ 324. Protestantism in Silesia. 159 of his subjects thought of returning to the Catholic Church. Theiner has attempted to show that Albert's successor eventually embraced the Catholic faith, but his arguments have been successfully refuted and his conclusion proved incorrect by Voigt.l ~ 324. Protestantism in Silesia. Ehrenkorn, Church History of Silesia, Freistadt, 1713, Pt. I., from ch. 5th, Pt. II. tBuckisch (Royal government clerk at Brieg, Imperial Counsellor and Historiographer), Acts of Religion in Silesia, 7 vols. in fol., unhappily still in MISC. This work is the chief source used by Fibiger (Master and Prelate of St. _Matthew's, Breslau), in writing his Lutheranism in Silesia and the Persecutions suffered by the Ronman Catholic Church in Consequence, Breslau, 17121733, 3 Pts., 4to. tBach, Authentic C. H. of the County of Glatz,.rreslau, 1841. tBuchmann, Antimosler, or an Attempt to form a just appreciation of Protestant Silesia under Austrian Domination, Spire, 1843. Hensel, Hist. of the Protestant Church in Silesia, Lps. and Liegnitz, 1764. Rosenberg, Hist. of the Silesian Reformation, Breslau, 1767. A. Mllenzel, Modern Hist. of the Germans, Vol. III., pp. 91-96; Vol. V., pp. 238-256, 422 sq.; Vol. VI., pp. 140144, 220-285. Doblinger, The Reformation, etc., Vol. I., pp. 226-273. Previously to the year 1163, Silesia formed part of Poland, but was, after this date, governed by independent Dukes. John., King of Bohemnia, skillfully turning to his own advantage the internal dissensions of the country, so directed afiairs that, in 1335, nearly the whole of Silesia acknowledged the sovereignty of the Kings of Bohemia. The duchies of J auer and Schweidnitz and the bishopric of Breslau resisted for a time, but gradually acquiesced —the two former in the year 1392, and the latter in 1442. While the Lutheran troubles were still at their height, Louis 1I., the young King of Bohemia and Hungary, perished fighting the Turks at the battle of Mohacz (1526), and his place was supplied by the Archduke Ferdinand, brother of Charles V., whom the Bohemians called to the throne of Bohemia, and to whom the wife of his brother, Louis, transferred the crown of Hungary. The evil influences of the decay of spiritual life and eccle1Theiner, Albert, Duke of Prussia, etc.; his Return to the Catholic Church, a. s. f., Augsburg, 1846. Vboigt, Letter addressed to Father Augustine Theiner, etc., Koenigsberg, 1846. Conf. Freiburq Cyclopaed., Vol. VIII., p. 700. Fr. tr., Vol. 19, p. 289. But, above all, Raess, Converts since the Time of the Reformation, Vol. II., pp. 584-595.

Page  160 160 Period 3.' Epoch 1. Chapter 2. siastical discipline, so marked in many countries of Europe during the fifteenth century, and the causes of which are to be sought in the moral degeneracy of the clergy and the worldliness of the bishops, were especially active and conspicuous in Silesia, whose condition was not improved by its alliance with the neighboring country of Bohemia, where the Hussites were disturbing the public peace and distracting individual minds by religious controversy. Thus prepared for religious innovation, Silesia was one of the first countries of Europe to embrace Lutheranism, and the readiness and alacrity with which its inhabitants accepted the new teachings must be mainly ascribed to the depraved morals of the clergy, an admission which is candidly made by Fibiger.' There is, however, another and a very important cause which goes a long way in accounting for the rapid spread of error in that country, and which deserves special mention. This is the apostasy and faithlessness of a bishop. John V., who was bishop of Breslau from 1506 to 1520, so far forgot his dignity as a man and his duty as a prelate that he opened a eorrespondence with Melanchthoon and Luther, and received fromn these heresiarehs the followving flattering eulogy " Were there ten. bishops like John, the rapid spread of the Gospel in Germany would be assured." It is said that the Lutheran doctrines were first preached (from 1518) in the territory of Baron Zedlitz, in the Duchy of Jauer, by Melchior Hoffmann, an Augustinian monk, who wvas shortly after joined at Freistadt by John of fReichenberg, a friend of Melanchthon's. At Liegnitz, Duke Frederic II. was the special friend and patron of Lutheranism. In the year 1523 he installed Valentine Krautwvald, a Lutheran preacher, in the church of St. John, and appointed two of Luther's friends to chairs in the College of Goldberg. But the main cause of the triumph of Lutheranism in Silesia is to be sought in the action of the Municipal Council of Breslau, the capital of the province, which at an early day declared openly in favor of the introduction of the new doctrines. In consequence of a difficulty l Cf. Pt. I., ch. 12, pp. 84, 85; l1Menzel, Vol. III., pp. 93 sq.

Page  161 ~ 324. Protestantism in Silesia. 161 which arose between the Cathedral Chapter and the Council,. the latter body banished the vicars of the parochial church of St. Mary Magdalen, and appointed a number of Lutheran ministers to fill their places. In the year 1522 a mob, assernbled in the market-place of the city, proceeded to make a mockery of the holy mysteries of religion, to ridicule the ceremonies of the Church, and to deride moniks, nuns, and priests by strutting about in their habits and dress and simulating their actions, while the civic magistrates looked on approvingly and gave signs of encouragement. Moreover, the Coulncil drove the Bernardines from their convent, and confiscated this and other property belonging to the Church. King Louis ordered the property thus illegally seized to be restored;.but owNing to the menacing attitude of the Turks, who were thent seriously threatening his States,- he was unable to enforce his decree, and it was in consequence disregarded. For a similar reason the efforts of Pope Hadrian VI. (ep. (lie 23 Julii, 1523), of James, Bishop of Salza (15~20-1539), and Sigismund, Kinigl of Poland, to defend the rights and uphold'the dignity of tile Catholic Church were ineffectual and nngatory.' The civic magistrates grew daily more bold and aggressive, and colnscious that they could now act without hindrance, forcibly ejected the worthy Joachim Zieris, whom the Bishop had appointed Rector of the Church of St. Mary Magdalen, and called to fill his place, under the title of Cathedral Preacher of Breslau, Doctor Hiess (1523), Awho had recently proclaimed the Lutheran errors from. the pulpit in his native town of Niirnberg. Simultaneously the chaplains of the churches of St. Elizabeth and St. Mary Magdalen were summoned before the Council, and commanded for the future to acknowledge no superior other than Doctor HIess, a command which, in the following year (1524), was extended to all the clergy of' the city, with the additional injunction that "they should paut aside all human ordinances and the frivolous interpretations of the Fathers," and in their sermons take their new superior as their model. And so cowardly and subservient had the:'For details, see Fihbiger, Pt. I., chs. 5-11, pp. 32-77 VOL. III-11

Page  162 162 Period 3. Epoch 1. CQhapter 2. clergy grown, and so unworthy of their high calling, that among them all, Doctor Sporn, l'rior of St. Albert's, alone had the manly courage to resist the impertinent demands of the Council, and to say plainly and boldly " that it was the office of the bishop, and not of magistrates, to give instructions as to the proper method of preachinq the Gospel." But his outspoken honlesty was not appreciated, or rather it vwas, and he was banished the city in consequence.' The bishop did what he could to throw obstacles inl the wvay of the installation of Hess, an(l made the matter the subject of some clever controversial writings. His efforts obtained probably as large a measure ~of success as those of any one could, who, holding the office of bishop, was destitute of the gravity, the earnestness, and the firmness so befitting that character. The members of the Council, taking conurage from the vacillating weakness of the.bishop, went on to commit fresh deeds of violence. The magnificent con rent of the Premon.stratcnsians on Mount Elbing was razed with the ground (1529), under the fiivolous pretext that it might afford a refuge to the Turks, and numerous churches were entered and plundered of their ornaments and )leci( OUIS stonles.2'l'he action of Breslau furnished a precedent and example, w'hich wa s closely followed by the Dukes of Silesia, of whom Frederic 11., of Lirgcnitz and Brieg, was especially conspicuous for his proselytizing activity.3 Besides calling in Lutheran preachers fr'om neigh boring territories, and installing them at Goldberg and Liegnitz, he gave a general order to all the clergy to preach "evangyelically," which, failing to do, they were to be deprived of the usual tax heretofore levied upon and paid by the people.. With this order, Father Anthony, aL discalced Carnlelite, refused to comply; and for persisting in preachinlg the Catholic faith, he and the other members of his ()lrder were expelled the country. These so-called Evancgelic;ils entered and pillaged the Catholic churches of Grossglog(tu, andl perpetrated deeds of brutal violence upon the'lFor particulars, see Fibiger, Pt. I.. ch. 11, 12; and ch. 15, p. 131. t';oeric/.. Hist. of the Premonstratensians of St. Vincent's, Breslau, 1836 sq. *3 Fibiger, Pt. I., ch. 14, pp. 118 sq.

Page  163 ~ 324. Pr.testantism in Silesia. 163 inhabitants of that city. Scenes equally saddening were enacted at Schweidnitz and other cities and towns of the.country, and it was not long before Lutheranism was everywhere triumphant.' King Ferdinand I. (1526-1564), though ardently devoted to the Catholic Church, and endowed with all energy and strength of character which admirably fitted him to take iup her defense, was unfortunately at this time engaged in repelling the aggressions of the Turks, and in consequence unable to oppose any effectual resistance to the advance of Lutheranismn. On the other hand, the bishops, who should have been the natural defenders of the Church, and who at that very time were in the possession of great political power, having, in 1526, in addition to their other civic offices, become the governors-general of the country, were wholly given up to secular affairs. Influenced by the spirit, and swayed by the passions of the world, they did not bring to the exercise of the functions of their sacred office the steady, energetic earnestness so indispensable to success in such critical seasons; or, what is still more deplorable, they were Lutherans at heart, and would have openly professed the errors they secretly encouraged were they not deterred from doing so by the fear of losing their handsome revenues.2 As a rule, the parish-priests were either lazy or corrupt; and being no longer able to look up to those who were set over them as patterns of virtue, or to seek from them the comfort and counsel so necessary to sustain a priest in the performance of the sacred duties of his office, they offered but a feeble resistance to the commands of arbitrary dukes and insolent magistrates. As a consequence, Von Senitz, Dr. Colo, and Kupferschmidt were the only three priests out of all the clergy in the circles of Brieg, Ohlau, Strehlen, and 1 Menzel, Modern Hist. of the Germans, Vol. V., p. 244 sq. 2 Concerning the successors in office of James of Saltza, in the See of Breslau, viz: Balthasar of Pommnitz (15;39-1562); Gaspar of Logau (1562-1574); Martin Gerstmann (1574-1585); Andrew Gerin (1585-1596); Paul Albert (1596-1600); John Sitsch (1600-1609); conf. Buchmann, 1. c., p. 9-11; and Ilerber, Silesiae sacrae Origines, p. 82 sq. On the satisfaction of the Protestants at the election of Balthasar Pommnitz, conf. Menzel, Vol. III., p. 93 sq.

Page  164 164 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Nimptsch who had the courage to refuse obedience to the or,ders of Frederic, and who, rather than deny their faith, went into exile. It was not long till the Lutherans of Silesia began to quarrel among themselves, as they had done in every other country. The doctrines of justification and the Eucharist were subjects of the liveliest discussion and the widest divergency of opinion. In these controversies Gaspar Schwenkfeld, counsellor to Duke Frederic II. and canon of Liegnitz, a man of vigorous and well-trained intellect, took the most conspicuous part.' ~ 325. Protestantism in Poland. (Cf. ~ 182.) 31. Lubieniecki, Historia reformationis Polonicae, Freistadt, 1683. Jura et libertates dissidentium in regno Poloniae, Berolini, 1707, fol. Friese, Documents for a Hist. of the Reformation in Poland and Lithuania, Pt. II., Vols. I. and II., Breslau, 1786. Vicissitudes of the Reformation in Poland, Hamburg, 1768-1770, III. Pts. Ostrowski, 1. c. (see Vol. II., p. 246), T. III. Lochner, Facta et rationes earum familiar. christianar. in Polonia, quae ab Ecclesia catholica alienae fuerunt usque ad consens. Sendomir. tempora (Acta Soc. Jablonovianae nova, Lps. 1832, Tom. IV., fasc. 2). Krasinski, Historical Sketch of the Rise, Progress, and Decline of the Reformation in Poland, Vol. I., London, 1838 (Germ. by Lindau, Lps. 1841). Lucaszewicz, Essay of a Hist. of the Dissenters in the city of Posen and in Great-Poland during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Germ. by Vincent of Balitzky, Darmstadt, 1843). The introduction of the Reformation into' Poland was accompanied by many and serious difficulties, notwithstanding the fact that the country had been in a measure prepared for its reception by the uassites and the Moravian Brethren, who blad sought a refuge there when fleeing from persecution in other lands. First of all, King Sigismund I. (1501-1548), who was a sincere Catholic, and earnestly devoted to the interests of the Church, put forth every effort to prevent the errors of Protestantism from tainting the minds of the Polish people, whose instincts and sympathies were then, as they have been in every age since their conversion to Christianity, deeply and intensely Catholic.2 Learning that the young 1 This subject will be treated in detail in ~ 341. 2Conf. Agenda secundum Rubricam eccl. Metropol. Gnesnen. edit. 1608, Cracoviae, which had been in use long before Luther lived.

Page  165 ~ 325. Protestantism in Poland. 165 Poles, who had made their studies at Wittenberg, following -the example set thenl by the young men of other countries, had brought home with them some of the writings of Luther, and were industriously engaged in scattering them among his subjects, he at once took every possible precaution to stop the spread of these mischievous publications. It was enacted at the Diet of Thorn (1520) that no one should have the writings of Luther in his possession. The efforts of Sigisnmund to preserve the purity of faith in Poland were ably seconded by John Laski, Archbishop of Gnesen (t 1531), and Andrew Krzycki, Chancellor to Queen Bona, and subsequently Bishop of Przemysl (1524), both of whom were among the most -zealous defenders of Catholic doctrine in that age.' A com-mission was also appointed to make search for and confiscate all heretical books. But, in spite of all these measures, Protestantism found its way into the University of Cracow, where it was introduced by Martin Glossa. It was preached at Posen by John Seclusian, who first published in print2 a complete translation of the New Testament in the Polish langutage (1551-1552), and at Danzig by the monk Jacob Knade (1518),through whose exhortations a number of the burghers were led to ask to be formally instructed in the new teachings. Knade, though obliged to flee from the anger of an in-dignant people, was soon brought back to the city by his partisans. Others of the Lutherans did not fare so well. Some of the, more intemperate were put to death, and some *received orders to quit the city within a fortnight; wlhile monks and nuns, who had broken their vows and married, were commanded to be away within twenty-four hours. The onlly effect of these measures was to excite the passions of the inhabitants, who now expressed themselves with so much t Consult above all' the Diocesan Statutes, and the very old collection of them by John Lnski, and another by Stanislaus Karnkowski, both of which have been arranged in five books and edited by Wenzyk, Cracow, 1630. 2 We say advisedly " in print," for even as early as the fourteenth century Polish authors make mention of translations of various portions of the Bible into their language. They specify the Psalter, and in fact nearly every book of both the Old and New Testaments. Cf. le Long, Bibliotheca sacra in binos -syllabos distincta, etc., Paris, 1723, fol., Sectio III., Biblia Polonica, p. 439 sq.

Page  166 166 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. vehemence in favor of the new teachings that the king, fearing they might rise in revolt and make themselves masters of the city, thought it prudent to adopt more moderate counsels. From Danzig Lutheranism was carried to the cities of Thorn and Elbing. To prevent the further spread of error, it was enacted at the Synod of Petrikau that the followers of Luther should be arrested and brought to trial, and such measures taken against them as would effectually repress the heresy. One of these was a prohibition forbidding any one to hold public office in Poland who had made his studies at Wittenberg. The decree, however, was never rigorously enforced. But, in spite of this vigorous opposition, Protestantism, protected and encouraged by a free-thinking nobility, steadily gained ground, and at the death of Sigismund I. had invaded many of the provinces of Poland. To add to the strength, and swell the number of the Polish Protestants, in the succeeding reign of Sigismund Augustus li. (1548-1572), a large body of Bohemian Brethren, who had been sent into exile by King Ferdinand, arrived at Posen. But the citizens soon tired of their presence, and the exiles again setting out on their pilgrimage, directed their course toward Marienwerder, in West Prussia. It soon appeared that the new king's opposition to the teachings of Protestantism was vacillating rather than decided, and feeble rather than energetic; and in consequence Poland became the asylum where sectaries of nearly every conceivable shade of opinion sought refuge. Thither flocked Bohemian Brethren and Lutherans, Reformed Christians and Unitarians (Socinians), from Switzerland and Italy. Amongthese last, the most prominent were the Franciscan, Lismanin, confessor to Queen Bona, and John of Lasko, whose name was well known in England. Prince Badziwill of Lithuania, a zealous member of the Reformed Christians, following the example of the Lutherans, had a translation of the Bible made into the Polish language, according to the sense of his own sect, and published in 1563.''The first printed edition of the New Testament published by Catholics was

Page  167 ~ 325. Protestantism in Poland. 167 In 1555 a "national Synod," composed of delegates from every province, and presided over by the king, was held at Petrikau, when it was determined to arrange for a conference of Catholic bishops and Protestant divines, to which lfclanclhthon, Lasko, Calvin, and Beza were to be invited, and a symbol of faith drawn up, which should embrace general principles recognized by all, and ignore such teachings as solme would not accept.' The king, strange to say, approved the action of the " Synod," and requested Pope Paul IV. to authorize the Mass to be said in the Polish language, to permit Communion to be taken under both kinds, to give priests leave to marry, to sanction the convocation of a national coun.cil, and to abolish the payment of annats. These requests, as might have been foreseen, were denied. The danger which threatened the Catholic Church grew daily more grave and alarming. The Polish nobles, thoroughly rationalistic in principle, and thoroughly PrQtestant in sympathy, and. exercising over the minds of their serfs a supremacy as complete in the spiritual order as that which they exercised over their bodies was in the material, alienated these poor people from the Church, though nothing could have been more unnatural to the Polish heart, or more revolting to Polish instincts, than the principles of the Protestant religion. But the fierce quarrels, which here as elsewhere broke out among the Protestant sects directly on their securing the ascendancy, alarmed the country; and thoughtful people began to foresee that if the principles of Protestantism be — came active in the national life, the unity of Poland would be shattered, and its very existence as a kingdom threatened. To avert so great a disaster, the Protestant sects, each differing from and antagonistic to all the rest, but all harmonizing in their rancorous hostility to the Catholic Church, met in brought out in 1556 at Cracow, by Scharfenberger. A complete translation of the Bible (by John Leopolita) appeared at Cracow in 1561. The translation by the Jesuit, John TJujek, was issued between the years 1593 and 1599. and was accompanied with the Hebrew and Greek texts, and supplemented with commentaries intended to elucidate difficult passages and to furnish argumeilts for the defense of the Catholic faith against the attacks of heretics. 1 Lukaszewicz, Hist. of the Ref. Church in Lithuania, Lps. 1848, I. Vol.

Page  168 168 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. council at Sandomir in 1570, and drew up and signed a symbol, couched in terms so general and indefinite that each nimight accept its articles and yet have the fullest liberty to believe what they liked.' Deriving a fictitious strength from this union, they were able, during the interregnum which followed the death of Sigismund Augustus, to conclude a religious peace, called the Peace of the Dissidents (Pax dissidentium, 1573), which set forth that Catholics and Dissidents were to remain forever at peace with each other, and both to enjoy equal civil lights. Henry of Valois, the newly elected king, was compelled to take oath that he would maintain the conditions of this Peace. He shortly returned to France, and Stephen Bathory, Prince of Transylvania (1575-1586), was,chosen in his room. Among the intimate friends of this prince were many Catholics of ability and learning, who exercised no little influence upon his mind. But while manifesting a more commendable zeal in the Catholic cause than any of his immediate predecessors had done, he yet refused to take any definite and decided step, feeling himself bound to respect the secret treaty (1557) of Sigismund Augustus, granting freedom of conscience and worship to three cities of Danzig, Thorn, and Elbing, whose inhabitants were long known to be favorably disposed toward Protestantism. But a severer trial and more threatening danger were yet to come upon the Polish Church. James Uchanski, Archbishop of Gnesen and Primate of Poland, publicly favored Protestantism, and exerted himself to bring about a rupture with Rome. This attempt to alienate the Court of Rome and the Polish nation, had it been completely successful, would have been followed by consequences the most disastrous, and rendered the stay of the Papal Legates, Lippomani (since 1556) ai(l C(ommendone, in the country extremely difficult. The hopes of the Catholic party were revived, and their influence among the nobles augmented, by the accession of,:.yiismand III., heir to the crown of Sweden, to the throne of'oland (1587-1632); antd, as a consequence, a very decided I Jablonsk/i, Hist. consensus Sendomirensis, cui subjicitur ipse Consensus, Berol. 1731, 4to.

Page  169 ~ 325. Protestantism in Poland. 169 reaction set in against Protestantism. Moreover, God raised -lp to Himself at this time priests eminent alike for their piety, their learning, and their zeal, such as Stanislaus losius,' Bishop of Ermeland (t 1579), through.whose energetic resistance the ravages of heresy were stayed, and through whose purity of faith and holiness of life the Poles were encouraged afnd strengthened to cling to the belief of their fathers. The learning, the conflicts, and the triumphs of this holy bishop were such that his name was held in honor by the universal Church, and he was selected, after he had become cardinal, to' preside for a time over the Council of Trent, where he was acknowledged to be one of the ablest of the great theologians who constituted that body. His polemical writings are among the very best of that age, and his exalted virtues and apostolic zeal are still gratefully commemorated at the Lyceum Hosiannum of Braunsberg, which bears his honored name. Another Catholic champion, equally distinguished for learning, eloquence, and living, energetic faith, was Stanislaus Karnkowski (t 1603), Archbishop of Gnesen and Primate oi Poland,2 who, with the frankness of a saint and the fearlessness of an apostle, wrote in the following words to Sigismnund Augustus: " Emulate the example of thy father and the piety of thy ancestors in preserving inviolate in thy kingdom, no less than in thy own heart, the old faith, the ancient Catholic religion." These confessors of the faith were ably seconded in their labors by the Jesuits, whose Order had spread rapidly, and was now firmly established in Poland, and under whose direction a large number of colleges had already passed. Among the Polish Jesuits, whose names came most prominently forward during the conflict against Protestantism, James Wujek 1 Stan. Hosii, Cardin. Major. Poenit. et episcopi Varm., vita auctore Stan. Rescio, Rom. 687. His principal work is Confessio fidei-verae chr. catholicaeque doctrinae solida propugnatio ctr. Brentium (1557). Cf. tEichhorn, Cardinal Hosius, Bishop of Ermeland, Mentz, 1854, 2 vols. Constitutiones Synodales dioeceseos Varmiensis, Brunsbergi, 1612, 4to. 2 His exertions to have the Roman Catechism translated into Polish are worthy of all commendation. Apart from his Diocesan Statutes, his fame rests kchiefly upon his sermons on the Eucharist and the Messiah; the former published at Cracow in 1602, and the latter at the same place in 1597.

Page  170 170 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. (VangrovieceWSis) deserves special mention for his zeal, ability, and untiring activity. Having completed his philological and scientific studies at the universities of Cracow and Vienna, and taught mathematics for a time at Ronme, he entered the Society of Jesus in the year 1565. In after years he passed much of his time in the colleges of Posen, Clausbuarg, and Cracow, and acquired no little celebrity as a preacher and controversial writer.l His translation of the Bible into the Polish language, which he made at the request and under the patronage of Stanislaus Karnskowlski, Archbislhop of Gnesen, is a work of great merit, and even at this day enjoys the special distinction of being the only one approved by the Church of Poland (t June 27, 1597). There were also three others belonging to Religious Orders who played a prominent part in the religious affairs of Poland during these years. The first was Peter Skarc/a,2 a Jesuit. lie was a good theologian, possessed a clear, well-trained, and vigorous mind, and was solidly erudite. He was, moreover, a skillful, eloquent, and powerful speaker, and as his dogmatical and controversial sermons, replete with patristic lore, anmply attest, the greatest preacher whom Poland has ever produced (t 1612). The next was Fabian Birkowski,3 a Dominican, and Skarga's successor as preacher to the Court of Cracow. He is remembered chiefly by his sermons for Sundays and Holydays, which are quite numerous, and portions of which are not unfrequently quoted as models of impassioned eloquence (t 1636). The third was Martin Bialobrzeski,4 abbot of the convent of Mogilno and suffragan bishop of Cracow, who, through his homilies, modeled after those of St. I Postilla major, and minor (in Polish). De missa et Deitate Verbi divini contra consens. Sendomir. Vita et doctrina Salvatoris ex quatuor evangel. De ecclesia cathol.-Hymni. 2Sermons, new edit., Lps. 1843. Extracts from Baronius, Rocyne-dzieje koscielne, etc., Cracow, 1603. fol., continued from 1198 to 1645, by Kiviatkiewlicz, Kalisz, 1695, fol. Lives of the Saints; on the reunion of the Latin and Greek Churches (in Polish); libb. III. dissertationum de Eucharistia. 3 Sermons for the Sunday and Feast days, in two series, 1620 and 1628. 4Postilla orthodoxa, 1581, 2 vols., shortly after translated into German. Catechllismus, Cracoviae, 1666, 4to. (387 pages). These two works are written in Polish.

Page  171 ~ 326. Protestantism in Livonia, Courland, etc. 171' John Chrysostom, became the great popular preacher of Poland. lie was also the author of a Complete Catechism, which is a m'aster-piece of its kind, and did much to foster among the clergy a taste for imparting Christian instruction, of which the young are always in so much need, and by which they profit so largely (t 1585). In the meantime, the Protestants of Poland, who had been treated with unusual kindness, incited by theologians at home and princes abroad, carried themselves with all the insolence of superiors and the hLaughtiness of conquerors, and have left upon record very exaggerated accounts of the cruelties they claimn to have endured, of the measures taken against them by Sigismuild III., and of the policy pursued by the Jesuits, which, it lmust be admitted, sometimes bordered on severity. The rupture between the Catholics and Dissidents finally hecame complete and irreparable. These dissensions were deplored by Ladislauis IV. (1632-1648), one of the most worthy princes of his age, with the keen grief of a father sorrowing over the alienation of different members of his own family. He appealed, but in vain, to the Poles to come together at the Religious Conference of Thorn (1644), and there devise measures which might make them once more a united people. His motives were misconstrued; and even had his words been listened to and acted upon, they could hardly have averted from Poland the disasters with which that country was threatened.' ~ 326. Protestantism in Livonia, Courland, Esthonia, Hungary, and Transylvania. Under the Grand-Master, Walter of Plettenberg (1521), Livonia severed its connection with the Teutonic Order. In order to escape the authority of the Archbishop of Riga, who showed a stubborn constancy in defending the prerogatives of his office and maintaining the rights of the Catholic Church, Walter embraced Protestantism, thinking this the surest way to a triumph over the archbishop and his clergy. This was the origin of the Protestant communes of Riga 1Cf. 1 354.

Page  172 -172 Period 3. ]Epooh 1. Chapter 2. (1523), Dorpat, and Revel, all of which joined the Schmalkaldie League. When at length William, Margrave of Brandenrburg, and brother to the Duke of Prussia, became Archbishop of Riga, the whole of Livonia passed under the influelnce of Protestantism.l Lutheranism was introducedl in to Courland by Gotl/ard Kettler, Grand-Master of the Teutonic Order, who in 1561 assumed the title of Duke of Courland and Semrgallen, ceding to Poland that part of Livonia lying beyond the Dwina, on condition that the inhabitants should be permitted to profess the Augsburg Confession. The defection of Courland was precipitated by the conduct of John of Mloen.ighausen, bishop of that country, who sold his see to the King of Denmark for the sum of thirty thousand thalers:(1559), and, retiring to Germany, embraced Protestantism and took a wife.2 The students from Wittenberg were chiefly instrumental in introducing Protestantism into Hunfgary.3 At the request of the Catholic clergy, severe laws were enacted against the Lutherans by the Diet of Pesth in 1525. But amid th e universal decay of ecclesiastical institutions, the clergy neither eomnmlinded the respect nor possessed the authority requisite to successf'ully uphold the declining fo)rtunes of' the Cllurch. As a conseqnuence, five royal free-cities of Upper Hungary, viz., Leutscljau, Seben, Bartfeld, Eperies, and Kaschau, declared in favor of Lutheranism at the Synod of Eperies. Moreover, owing to the death of the king, who perished in the disastrous battle of Mohacz in 1525, the approach of the Turks,' Te/sch. Ch. H. of Courland, Riga, 1767-1777, three parts. An abridgment of it is found in Nova Acta hist. eccl., T. VIII., p. 649 sq., T. X., p. 865, 1721, and in Acta hist. eccl. nostri temporis, T. II., p. 456 sq., 1711 sq..2 Schloezer and Gebhadi, Hist. of Lithuania, Livonia, and Courland, Halle, 1785. 4to. 3 Lehlnann, Hist. diplomatica de statu rel. evang. in Hung. 1710, fol. }list. eceles. reform. in Hungaria et Transsylvania (auct. P. C. Debrecce,) acces. loctriplet. a F. A. Lampe, Traj. ad Rhen. 1728. 3lemorabilia August. confess. in relno Hung. a Ferd. I. ad Carol. VI. recens. Joan Ribini, Poson., 1787-1789, 2 T. Cf. Engelhardt, Ch. H., Vol. IV., p. 217. Joh. Szebe-riny', Corpus miaxime memorabil. synodorum evangelic. Augustan. confession. in Hungaria, Pesthini,.1818.

Page  173 ~ 326. Protestantism in Livornia, Courland, etc. 173: and the prevalence of civil discord, it was found impossible to carry into effect the decrees of the Diet of Pesth. While the two kings, Ferdinand of Austria and John Zapolya, were engaged in making war upon each other, the nobles availed themselves of the opportunity to seize the estates of the vacant bisboprics, and secured their plunder by going over to Protestantism. The most active agent of Protestantism in Hungary at this time was Mlatthias Devoy, wlho, having at first professed Lutheranism, became a Zwinglian in 1543, and in 1545 held a sort of synod at Erdoed, in the county of Szathmar, at which twenty-nine ministers assisted. In the year 1548, the Diet of Presbutrg, in the name of the King anlld the estates, issued an edict for the suppression of heresy and the maintenance of the true faith, but it failed of its purpose; and Protestantism, enjoying the patronage and protection of Thormas Nadasdy, the new Palatine (since 1544), steadily gained ground, until its progress was retarded here as elsewhere by dissensions among the sectaries themselves. Some, relinquishing the profession of the Augsburg Confession, embraced the teachings of Zwingli, while others preferred the sterner tenets of Calvin. The Synod of Tarezal, held in 1563, adopted the Symbol of Beza, and commanded that the instruction given to the people concerning grace and predestination should be based upon the teachings of Calvin. Calvinism. was soon the predominant religion of Hungary, and its adherents, assembled at the Synod of Czenger, spoke of the Lutherans as a carnal and stupid set, who taught that the Eucharist was a bloody and cruel sacrifice. The Lutherans, on the other hand, declared at the Synod of Bartfeld, held in 1594, that the solution of all theological difficulties was to be sought in the writings of Luther, which were also the last resource in deciding the merits of theological discussions. The virtuous Nicholas Olahi, Archbishop of Gran, and the Jesuits, who had been established at the college of Tyrnau since 1561, were especially conspicuous for their vigorous and manly defense of the Catholic faith. On the 10th of April, 1560, a Synod held at Tyrnau decreed that all ecclesiastical property in the possession of laymen should be restored to,

Page  174 174 Period 3. Epoch i. Chapter 2. the Church. The destruction of the college of the Jesuits by fire temporarily suspended their labors in Hungary, which they quitted in 1567, but only to come back again in 1586. The new doctrines Were introduced into Transylvania by some merchants of Hermannstadt, who had picked them up at Leipsig, where they passed a portion of the year 1521, and by two Silesian preachers, who proclaimed them publicly thrcugh the country. In 1523 severe measures were enacted to prevent the spread of the new errors, but nothing came of them; and in the following year a Lutheran school was set np at. Hermannstadt, while in the meantime the nobles displayed their zeal by seizing the property of the Church. After the battle of Mohacz, which was no less disastrous to Transylvania than to HEtungary, the Protestants grew more bold and aggressive, and the authorities of Itermannstadt drove the monks from their monasteries and expelled them and all other Catholics from the town (1529). Joh.n Honter 1reached JwAith great applause at Kronstadt, and spread every-;lvere the teachings of Luther. It was not long before the Mass was abolished in many parts of Transylvania, and Conmrlunion distributed under both kinds (1542). The fathers assemlbled at the Synod of Mlediasch were afflicted to learn that tihe nation of the Saxons, invited into the country by King Geisa II. in the twelfth century, had unanimously declared their profession of the Augsburg Confession. The Magyars also declared in favor of the Reformed, while the Wallachians remained united to the Greek Church. During the contest for the crown of Hungary, in 1556, the provincial Diet of Klausenburg granted the fullest freedom of religious worship. Disorder and confusion were now at their height. The Lutllerans were straining themselves to the utmost to crush the a(lherents of the Reformed Church; and the Unitarians, while fleeing persecution in other lands, and seeking a refuge here, a.dded another element to the existing chaos, by demTanding equal rights with other religionists, which were.grLanted them by the provincial Diet of Maros Vasarhely in 1571. The first complete translation of the Bible, made upon the Vulgate and the version of Luther, was edited by Gaspar

Page  175 ~ 327. Protestantism in Sweden. l75 tleltai, a Lutheran preacher of Klausenburg, and appeared in 1562. A second, the work of Gaspar Karoly, a preacher ol' Goenz, corrected by Abrahamn Molnar, a Reformed preacher, was published in 1589. ~ 327. Protestantism in Sweden. Olai Petri Swenke Kr6nica (Olai Petri's Swedish Chronicle), ed. Ilemminy, Stockholm, 1860 (to 1520). Baaz, Inventarium eccl. Sueco-Gothor., Lincop. 1642, 4to. MIessenius, Scandia illustrata, Stockholmiae, 1700, 8 vols., fol. /'r. Riihs, Hist. of Sweden, Halle, 1805-1814, 5 vols., especially Vols I. and ii. Geijer, Hist. of Sweden, Hamburg, 3 vols. t'Aul. Theiner, Sweden and lTcr Relation to the Holy See, under John III., Sigismund IlI., and Charles IX., according to secret State-papers, two parts, Augsburg, 1838-1839 (the second part contains a collection of pieces, filling 3.50 pages). Clarus, Sweden O)nce and Now, 2 vols. By the celebrated treaty, known as the Union of Ctirtar (1397), tile supreme governnlent of the three northern uingdoms of Sweden, Norway, and Denmarkl was placed ill the'halnds of the Danish kings, who, it was provided, were to be chosen by delegates representing these three countries. It was hopedl that this measure would utnite the three kig,otdoms, give them comnnton interests and common aspirations, but subsequent events showed the hope to be fallacious. Instead of remnoving it fostered old, and was the prolific source of new jealousies, and caused ancient national hatreds to bu:rl with fiesh and increased violence. Bloody coiflictis followed, which, while diminishing respect for the throne and weakening its authority, extended thie in fluenee and augmented the wealth of the nobility and the cler qy. Th. clergy, however, used their power humanely. Theiil rulle was mild and benevolelt, and religion flourished among the people no less than among the nobility and the ecclesiastics. The Swedes were devotedly attached to the Supreme Itead of the Church. Their religious feasts, such as those they celebrated conjointly with the Finns at Abo in 1513, and at Linkoeping in 1520, on the occasion of the public announcement of the canonization of their countrymen, Hemminy and -Nicholas, they regarded as national festivals. Politically, these people were not equally happy. The

Page  176 176 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Iloble and courageous Sten Sture, the Younger, while at the head of the Swedish government, made an effort to throw offW the yoke of Denmark, but being already involved in a quarrel with Trolle, the perfidious Archbishop of Upsala, he was at a disadvantage, and was beaten by Christiern II. of Denmark in 1519. No sooner had Christiern been crowned King of Sweden by Trolle than he gave orders for the terrible massacre of Stockholm, which was continued from the 8th to the 10th of November, 1520, and in whiclh, besides a host of others, uinety-four Swedish nobles perished. The subserviency of Trolle was rewarded with the office of Regent of Sweden. Among the victims of these fatal days was the father of the intrepid Gustavus. Ericson of the house of Wasa, who, while still young, had been given up as a hostage to Christiern. HIaving made good his escape from his own country, Gustavus sought an asylum at Lfibeck, where he was kindly received, and after obtaining substantial assistance firom the municipal authorities, again. returned to Swvede n; and, calling upon his countrymen to rise and assert the fieedom of their country, lie put himself at their head, met and defeated the Danes, and, amid universal enthusiasm, was proclaimed Administrator of the State in 1521, and two years later chosen King of Sweden by the Diet of Strengnaes. In order to avert fromn his country the periodical evils and political agitations incident to elective monarchies, Gustavus exerted himself tomnake the succession in Sweden hereditary. His familiarity with the teachings of Luther, with which he had become acquainted during his stay at Liibeck, greatly facilitated the execution of his project. He publicly declared his hostility to the episcopacy and the ancient nobles of the land, an d avowed his intention of establishing a new Church and creating a new nobility. "He would not suffer himself to be crowned," he said, "until he had abolished the Catholic episcopacy and subverted the ancient Church." Among his most active and energetic assistants in bringing about these changes were the brothers Olof and Lawrence Peterson, both of whom had made their theological studies at Wittenberg, and returned to Sweden in 1519. The former was the most distiiguishled preacher of Stockholm, and the latter held a profess

Page  177 ~ 327. Protestantisnm in Sweden. 177 orship at Upsala. Lawrence Anderson, Archdeacon of Strengnaes, and subsequently Chatncellor to Gustavus Wasa, became the patron of the Peterson brothers, whose teachings he embraced. Such of the people and clergy as offlred any resistance were made to submit by force; bishops who, like John Braske of Linkoeping and Peter Jakobson of Westeraes, as: also Knut, Provost of the Cathedral, preferred fidelity and. duty to apostasy, were deposed and deprived of their dignities, while the Dominicans were banished the country. Gustavus, while thus putting forth his best efforts to destroy the Catholic Church in Sweden, cunningly concealed his real: intentions from John Magnus Gothus, the Papal Legate, and in numerous letters, addressed to Pope Hadrian VI., simulated a sincere attachment to the Catholic faith. To the latter he wrote as follows: "In order to extirpate as speedily tas possible the dangerous teachings of the Hussites, which a certain Augustinian monk, called Luther, is again reviving and attempting to spread, thereby imperiling the public peace, we have forbidden all our subjects individually, under penalty of loss of goods and even life, either to propagate the teachings of the said Luther, to introduce his writings into our States, to buy them, to sell them, or to make any use whatever of them." Gustavus, however, arranged a public Discussion to take place at Upsala between Olof Peterson and Peter Galle, in the course of which very nearly the same propositions that had been discussed at Leipsig were controverted and defended. Like Luther, Olof, who had little knowledge of Church history, put whatever interpretation upon Holy Scriptures best suited his purpose, and finding himself driven to absurdities by his own concessions, had recourse to intemperate language and personal abuse. Desirous of despoiling the Church of her wealth, and feeling that the iniquitous proceeding needed some justification, Gustavus sought a sanction for his conduct in arguments drawn from Luther's tract "On the Confiscation of Ecclesiacstical Property," and charged the professors of the University of Upsala, who by this time had all become Lutherans, with the congenial work of defending the sacrilegious robbery. When VOL. III -12

Page  178 178 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. the royal commissioners presented themselves, the Archbishop of Upsala protested against their violence, and the inhabitants of the city took up arms and rushled to his defense. The wily monarch, under a specious pretext, decoyed the archbishop to the royal palace, where he amply atoned for the crime of being the object of the admiration and love of his people. While other pastors and the inferior clergy were allured into keeping silence by seductive but fallacious promises, the cloistered nuns of Wadstena, though subjected to acts of brutal violence, made a most determined and heroic resistance. Pope Clement VII. called upon the king to desist from plunder and outrage, but his voice fell upon ears deaf to the accents of justice or sorrow. Magnus Knat, the Archbishop-elect of Upsala, and Peter Jakobson, Bishop of Westeraes, were condemned to death on the specious pretext of having incited and encouraged the inhabitants of' the valleys in their hostility to the king. Their persons were subjected to the vilest indignities before and their bodies after execution. A crown of straw was placed ulpon the head of Jakobson and a mitre of bark upon that of Knut; both were placed upon half-starved horses, with their faces toward the tails, and in this ignominious condition conducted through the city to be scoffed at by the multitude. After their execution, their bodies were torn upon the wheel, and then cast out to be devoured by birds of' prey (February, 1527). At the Diet of Westeraes (1527), where the two parties confronted each other, and manifested feelings of furious hostility, Gustavus, feigning much sorrow and great distress on account of the sad condition of affairs, professed his inability to govern under the circumstances, and declared his intention of abdicating. The artifice was clever and successful. The fear that, if the king should carry his threat of abdicating into execution, the country would lapse into anarchy, had its effect upon the Diet. The property of all bishoprics, convents, and cathedral-chapters was made over to him, and the nobles were authorized to take possession of all lands 1which their ancestors, as far back as the year 1453, had bestowed upon the clergy. As a consequence, the Church in Sweden was reduced to a condition of utter destitution.

Page  179 ~ 327. Protestantisrn in Sweden. 179 Gustavus, feeling that the moment was now come when he might throw aside all disguise, publicly proclaimed that it was necessary to go back to the true word of God, which, lihe added, the new teachers were announcing. The Refornmation was forthwith inaugurated by the adoption of a liturgy in the vulgar tongue and the abolition of the rule of clerical celibacy.1 When these preliminary measures had been fully carried out, the forimal establishment of the Reformation was accomplished by the Assembly of Oerebro in 1529. In the year 1531 the archiepiscopal see of Upsala was conferred upon Lawrenlce Peterson, who then took a wife, and, being not wholly insensible to the fascinations of this world, had the good taste to select one of noble lineage. It was not long, however, before Peterson and the new teachers began to experience some of the humiliation and bitterness consequent upon having a despot like Gustavus for their master. He told them plainly " that priests should not carry themselves like lords, and that if they should ever attemllpt to wield the sword, he knew of a very summary way of preventing them." On the other hand, the leaders of the Reformation, Olof Peterson and Lawrence Anderson, made personal attacks upon tile king in their sermons, and entered into a conspiracy (against his life. The plot was discovered, and its authors condemned to death by the Estates of Oerebro (1540), a penalty -which they escaped only by the payment of a heavy fine. In addition to this, Anderson was deprived forever of his office and dignity, and, withdrawing into obscurity, died in 1552 at Strenguaes, the very city in which he had first raised the standard of' revolt against the Catholic Church, forsaken by his fliends and despised by every one else. In the year 1544 the Diet of Westeraes at length made the crown of Sweden hereditary upon Gustavus and his male issue. 1Roemeer, De Gustavo I. rer. sacr. in Suecia saec. XVI. instauratore, Ultraj. 1840. The Aulic Chapel, dedicated in honor of St. Nicholas, still bears the inscription: Pio regis glorios. mem. Gustavi zelo a superstitionibus papisticis,an. 1527 repurgata. See the Swedish Lutheran Mass (liturgy) from the Kyrie to the Benedicamus Domino, in Kist, Ddnisches und Schwedisches, Mentz, 1869, p. 465.

Page  180 180 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. In Sweden, as in every other country, the corruption of faith was coincident with the corruption of morals. Gustavus, interpreting a frightful storm that swept over the country as a divine visitation, and regar(ling himself as the Supremne Read of the Church, commanded the observance of an eight days' fast (June 8, 1554). A similar fast was ordered by the Archbishop of Upsala in 1558, "because," said he, " a great mally persons, under plea of exercising an evangelical liberty, comimit sin as a matter of course, thinking seemingly such evil living to be the end of the Gospel we preach." Gustavus died September 10, 1560, and when his eldest son, Eric XIV., ascended the throne, the condition of the Catholic Church was unchanged. Almost immediately after the accession of Eric a violent conflict broke out between the Calvinists on the one side and the Lutherans on the other. The former were led by one Denis Beurreas, a Frenchman, who was an intimate friend of both Calvin and Beza, and had, by his address, obtained an ascendancy over the youngking's mind; and the latter by John Oseg, Bishop of Westeraes. The plans of the Calvinists miscarried, and their defeat was followed on September 14, 1568, by the dethronement and imprisonment of Eric, who, after enduring for eight years every sort of indignity, was finally forced to put an end to his life by taking poison (February 25, 15 77).1 John III., the younger brother of Eric, and his successor to the throne (1568-1592), wearied and disgusted with the everlasting contentions of the Protestants, commenced to study the Fathers of the Church in the hope of' finding the truth. He soon made up his mind to return to the Church, and his good resolution was strengthened and encouraged by his wife Catharine, a Polish princess, and Father flerbst, a Jesuit, and confessor to the queen. John at once set himself to the task of bringing about his own reconciliation with the Church and restoring the Catholic faith to his kingdom; and in this, as in everything else, he showed that unfaltering selfreliance and prudent foresight which are the natural adjuncts of a wise man working in a good cause. He began by pro1 Chambers' Encyclopaed., art. "Eric." (TR.)

Page  181 ~ 327. Protestantism in Sweden. 181 mulgating an instrument containing thirteen articles, intended -to correct the morals of the clergy, which was closely followed by an order to the aged Archbishop Anderson to publish (1571) certain additions to the ritual, in which he said, among other things, "that the true faith had been announced by Ansgar and other Saints of Sweden, and that a knowledge of the writings of the Fathers was necessary to a right understanding of Holy Writ."l The Jesuit, Father Herbst, seized the present favorable opportunity to expose the socalled "Agenda," or line of conduct of the Swedish Church, and to make known the true Catholic doctrine, which had been shamefully misrepresented and mutilated by the Lutheran and other sectaries. His chief instrument in accomplishing both purposes was the "Catechism of Peter Canisius," which, being a standard exposition of Catholic teaching, he was de-:sirous of having in the hands of every one. King John, though persuaded of the necessity of making the Catholic -faith once more the religion of the land, thought it expedient and even necessary that the queen should receive the Blessed Sacrament under both kinds; but Cardinal Josius opposed an unconquerable resistance to any such compromise.2 Upon -the death of the Archbishop of Upsala, the oldest and most formidable advocate of Lutheranism, and of the Bishops of Linkoeping and Westeraes, the king determined to fill these Sees with persons who would accept and carry out his policy. He was encouraged to take more decided measures by Father Warszewicki,3 a clever Jesuit, by whose advice he convoked a Council (1574), which he opened with an address, deploring the sad condition to which dissensions and divisions had brought the Protestant Church. Finding the clergy not averse to his policy, he appointed Lawrence Peterson Gothus to the archiepiscopal see of Upsala, and Martin and Erasmus to those of Linkoeping and Westeraes respectively. Peterson having pledged himself to put his signature to seventeen articles, wholly Catholic in their nature and tenor, was con1Theiner, Pt. I., pp. 348-353. 2 Ibid., Pt. I., pp. 363 sq. 3 Ibid., Pt. I., p. 390 sq.

Page  182 182 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. secrated according to the Roman rite, at the same time promising the king to employ his offices in gaining the other bishops over by degrees. Shortly afterwvard (1576) the king published a, Liturgy, whose author was probably Peter Feeht,1 his chancellor, and which obtained almost universal accept — ance. It was, however, opposed by Charles, Duke of Sbderrmanland (who, like his father, hoped to derive some advantage from the profession of Protestantism), on the ground " that he could not permit any change in tile religion that lia(d come to him as a heritage from his ancestors; that it was not in his power to put any constraint upon the consciences of his priests, or to force them to give up the teaching of thle Gospel, which had been believed and practiced in their country for half a century, and had been confirmed with the seal and signature of so ma.ny persons." About this time Lawrence Nicolai, a Jesuit, came from Belgium to Sweden, and was appointed by the king to a prlofessorship of theology at Stockholm. In January, 1577, a discussion on the power and authority of the Church and on the Sacrifice of the Mass took place between Nicolai and the professors Peter Jone and Olof Luth, in which the Jesuit gained a splendid triumph. In consequence, the Liturgy was accepted by a Diet and National Council held shortly after, the discussion being the occasion for convoking the latter assembly. Encouraged by these auspicious beginnings, the king deputed Fecht, his chancellor, and the distinguished Pontus de la Gardie, who, besides being skilled in statecraft, was an accomplished man of the world, to represent him at the Parpal Court. They were instructed to confer with Gregory XIII., the then reigning Pontiff; on the reunion of Sweden with the Catholic Church. Certain conditions, however, were stipulated, the chief of which were that laymen should be allowed to receive Communion under both kinds; that the national language should be used in divine worship; and that priests should be permitted to marry. Fecht was drowned at sea during the voyage. Gregory XIII. sent as'Apud Mi2nter (Magazine of the Ch. H. and C. L. of the North, Vol. II., p. 41-48), falsely attributed to the Jesuits. See Theiner, Pt. I., p. 421 sq.

Page  183 ~ 327. Protestantism in Sweden. 183 his Legate to Sweden Anthony Possevin,l a learned Jesuit,. who, after many earnest conferences with King John, finally received his abjuration in 1578. In taking leave of the Papal Legate, the king, deeply moved, said: " In embracing thee, I express my eternal attachment to the Church of Romne." The Congregation, which assembled at Rome to consider the twelLte concessions demanded by the king; refused to accede to several of them, and, in consequence, an animated controversy,. set on foot and kept alive by the Gernman divines, broke out in Sweden concerning the acceptance or rejection of the new Liturgy. The representatives and advocates of the conflicting opinions were called respectively Philoliturgists and Misoliturgists. Duke Charles, while in Germany, conferred with the Protestant princes, and requested them to combine with him against his brother John. His young wife, too, being by birth a German, and a Lutheran in religion, very naturally became the patron and protector of the Protestant leaders once she had made Sweden her home. The king, moreover, had the misfortune to be surrounded by a number of subtle and dangerous intriguers. Jcnames Typotius and the wily diplomatist, Pontus de la Gardie, urged the king to insist on having Rome grant his demands. The instructions of the Holy See to Possevin, on his return to Sweden in 1579, are outspoken and to the point. " We have done," said the H-loly Father, "whatever in us lay to bring back this country to the Catholic Church; but if it please God that the event should be otherwise, we shall stand justified before the Lord, and be obliged to live on as we have for these forty years, without being able to secure the object for which we have longed." John made still another effort to get the Holy See to acquiesce in his demands, but again meeting with fresh refusals, his zeal for the Catholic faith began to grow cold, in spite of all Possevin could do to keep, it aglow. With the death of Queen Catharine (September 16, 1583) vanished the last hopes of restoring the Catholic Church iln 1 Cf. Theiner, Pt. I., p. 457.

Page  184 184 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Sweden. John was not long in forgetting his pious Catholic consort, and at the Diet of Westeraes publicly announced his marriage with the young Guneila Bjelke, who in the sequel became the most powerful protector of Protestantism in the kingdom. Her influence over the king, to which Chytraeus, the celebrated theologian of Rostock, in a large measure contributed, became very manifest shortly after their marriage. Still the king to the end insisted on the adoption of his Liturgy, and openly quarreled on the subject with his brother, the Duke Charles, who was aspiring to the supreme government of Sweden; but beyond this he did nothing to forward the interests of the Catholic (Church. He died in 1592. Sigismundc II., his son and successor, being the last of the Jagellons, was chosen King of Poland on the death of Stephen Bathory. Havilng been brought up in the Catholic faith, under the tender care of a loving and solicitous mother, he remained steadfast during his life to the lessons he had learned in his youth. Accordingly, when required by the Senators of Swedeli, after the death of his mother, to make profession of the Augsburg Confession, as a condition to his succeeding to the throne, he replied: "I do not value an earthly crown so highly as to give a heavenly one in exchange for it." He was soon the idol of every Polish heart. Stanislaus Karnkowvsky, speaking of him in a letter to his father, wrote as follows: " Who does not recognize and admire a s!,ecial providence in all the Lord has done through this young and extraordinary king?" In the interval between his falling heir to the throne of Sweden and his arrival in that country, the administration of the government was placed in the hands of his uncle, the Duke Charles, who, using the power and resources at his command to further his own personlal interests and ambition, cunningly made his profession of Protestantism a means to enable him to secure the crown. Havinlg convoked a National Council at Upsala (February 25, i5'93), composed of the Clergy and Estates of the kingdom aid the deputies of the provinces, the duke made them an address, in the course of which he said: " Among the Swedes councils shall no longer be held, as among the Papists, by greasy fellows with shaven crowns."

Page  185 ~ 327. Protestantism in SwLeden. 185 The courage of the bishops deserted them, and, fawning like vile slaves in the presence of a master, they were servile enough to proclaim publicly that they had made a blunder in accepting the Liturgy of King John. The Council rejected what it was pleased to call the abuses of Catholicity, and declared its acceptance of the Augsburg Confession; prohibited such as refused to profess the Lutheran creed from preaching the Gospel or teaching in the schools; and closed with the following words of triumph: "' Henceforth the Swedes shall be of one heart and have but one God;" to which Duke Charles imperiously added: " Sigismund shall never be king if he refuse to make these concessions." When Sigismund returned to ascend the throne left vacant by his father, he made no secret of his devotion to the Catholic Church, and the exasperated Lutheran clergy, who were plotting with Duke Charles for the king's overthrow, avenged themselves by alienating as far as possible the hearts of the people front him. The presence of the Papal Nuncio, ZMa-.laspina, who accompanied the king, was the occasion and pretext of the most furious attacks upon the person of the latter. Acting upon the impulse of fanatical zeal and brutal insolence, they shortly went the length of telling the king he must not exercise any public act of Catholic worship. A Catholic Pole died at Stockholm, and his mortal remains were buried according to the rites of the Catholic Church; upon which Eric Schepper, a Luthera.n preacher of that city, ascending his pulpit, preached a vehement tirade upon the enormity and turpitude of the act; and, to properly punish the inhabitants for their apathy and remissness in the presence of so flagrant an outrage, put them all under the ban of interdict. So perfidious were the intrigues carried on by Duke Charles, and so numerous and dangerous the plots entered into by him against Sigismund, that the latter had neither the time nor the opportunity to secure to himself that measure of' authority to which his fairness, his honesty of purpose, and his principles of political and religious tolerance justly entitled him. Nevertheless, before leaving Sweden, he published a number of ordinances designed to promote the peace and prosperity of both Church and State. He in

Page  186 186 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. trusted the government of the country during his absence to Duke Charles and the royal judges. All the privileges and liberties claimed for the established Church of the country were solemnly confirmed; tlhe revenues of both the higher and the inferior clergy were increased; and, finally, the handfs of bishops and prelates were strengthened in the exercise of their authority (March 16, 1594). Sigismund was hardly well out of the country when the Lutheran preachers, led on by Eric Schepper, again began a violent attack upon him. IIe was reproached with having performed an idolatrous and papistical deed, because he had on Maundy-Thursday washed the feet of the poor, and the latter, being participants of the crime, were excommunicated and debarred from 1receiving alms for the future. Duke Charles was, if anything, more indecent thnan even the preachers in his assaults upon his kinsman and king, whom he held tp as a traitor to his country and to the established religion of the land. The Diet of Siiderkoepinq (1595) declared him guilty of high misdemeanors, in tlhat he had bestowed public offices on Catholics, and permitted them the free exercise of their religion; and it was accordingly enacted by this body t-hat any one refusing within the term of the six weeks next ensuing to make profession of Lutheranism should quit the Xcountry, or, failing to do so, should be forcibly expelled by the authorities. It was further provided that no appeals should be made to the king during his absence from the country, and that, not he, but Duke Charles, should appoint all public functionaries. A decree zwas also passed ordering the suppression of the noble convent of Wadstena. The plundler of the Church was divided pretty fairly between the duke and the Lutheran clergy, the former appropriating all In Sweden, as in Denmark, the office and dignity of bishops are merely w7ominal, the so-called Superintendents, though not in Orders, being in every sense their equals. Hence Miutdet' (I. c., Vol. I., p.'334) makes the following observation: "The Church of Sweden is wholly in accord with that of Den.mark as regards episcopal consecration, which it retains only as a venerable practice of the primitive Church, and in refusing to attach to the episcopal oflice any of those privileges and prerogatives which the advocates of the episce:pal system have been in the habit of considering as inherent in and Jiowing jrom the fact of consecration."

Page  187 ~ 327. Protestantism in Sweden. 187 the estates and the latter the sacred vessels and precious or — naments. Nothing was left undone to insure the triumph of Lutheranism. Did the people protest and make show of resistance? Every such indiscretion was followed by a more furious exhibition of the duke's cruelty. Sigismund was not without hope that his return to the cotilntry (1598) might have the effect of restoring order. He might, had he pleased, have crushed his uncle by having recourse to arms, and"thereby establish again his shattered authority; but his aversion to shedding Swedish blood deterred him from taking this extreme measure. Charles, destitute of magnanimity himself, and incapable of appreciating it in others, and ascribing the hasty departure of' Sigisnmund to indecision and weakness of character, called an assembly of the States at Jonkoeping (January, 1599), before which he appeared, and accused the king of wishing to again plunge Sweden into the errors of Antichrist. Another assembly, which met at Stockholm in May of the same year, passed a resolution releasing the States from their oath of allegiance, should the king refuse to grant all their demands, and in particular the one requiring him to place his son Ladislaus in the custody of Duke Charles to be educated; for, it was said,. should he continue a Catholic, he would forfeit all hope of the crown of Sweden. Any one who was either rash or bold enough to express his preference for Sigismund was effectually prevented from repeating the offense by having his head chopped off.' Charles forced the States at the Diet of Linkoeping, in 1600, to pass a law setting forth that Sigismund and his heirs had forfeited the crown of Sweden, because of his opposition to the true teaching of the Gospel. Many of the subjects of Sigismund, who had long lain in prison in expiation of their fidelity to their prince, and among whom were nine counsellors of State, were given their choice between death and allegiance to an usurper, and they unani1 The periodical "Sion" for September, 1841, contains a remarkable letter, written from the North, in which the writer speaks of a curious book, entitled "The Beheading Block of Duke Charles." About one hundred and forty persons were executed by his orders for offenses against the State, or, more definitely, for their allegiance to their lawful king.

Page  188 188 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. mrously preferred the former alternative, and died like heroes. On the 22d of March, 1604, the States again assembled at Nordkoeping, and declaring that Sigismund had forfeited the,crown, placed it upon the head of Duke Charles. Concerning the use made of Protestantism by Gustavus Vasa and Charles IXX., for the purpose of reaching the throne of Sweden, history has long since given her verdict. ~ 328. Protestantism in Denmark, Norway, and Iceland. In Denmark,1 as in the other Northern kingdoms, the political power was divided between the bishops and the nobility. The Bishop of NRskilde alone held thirty-three fiefs. As a rule, the bishops were both ignorant and licentious. The king, being elected by the two Estates, each nearly if not quite independent of the crown, and with conflicting interests, had not unfrequently conditions imposed upon him, which, besides being degrading to him as a monarch, could only with difficulty, if at all, be discharged. Christiern II. (1513-1523) could ill brook this ascendency, and resolved to humble the aristocratic classes and subvert their power. IHe took it for granted that Protestantism would be favorable to his designs, because, according to the teachings of Luther, princes might rob bishops of their estates, and strip them of all political influence, and not have their consciences in the least disturbed by a sense of moral obliquity. This prince, who was himself an impure despot and the submissive slave of his paramour's mother, had no purpose in introducing the principles of the Reformation into his kingdom other than to get possession of the wealth of the Church. Believing for the time that the terrible massacre, perpetrated by his orders in Stockholm, had been decisive in carrying out his plans in Sweden, he at once began his assault upon the Church in Denmark by handing 1 Abridgment of the Hist. of the Reformation in Denmark, by Ericus PIantoppidanus, Liibeck, 1734. By the same, Annales (see Vol. II., p. 229, n. 2). MiMnter, Danske Reform Historie. Kjobenh., 2 vols., and Ch. H. of Denmark,and Norway, Lps. 1834, Vol. III. Cf. Holberg, Political History of Denmark and Norway, Copenh., 1731, 4to. Dahlmann, Hist. of Denmark and Hamburg, 1841, 3 vols.

Page  189 ~ 328. Protestantism in Denmark, Norway, Iceland. 189' over the Church of Copenhagen (1520) to a certain Martin, a: disciple of Luther's, against the united protests of the Estates, the clergy, and the people. But Christiern would suffer nodifficulties to stand in his way, and, where other means would not do, menace and the extreme of punishment were employed. Ecclesiastics, who pleased to remain unmarried, besides other disabilities, were forbidden to hold any real estate in their own name, and the Archbishop-elect of Lunlld wass put to death. The despotism was too odious to be borne, and both bishops and barons united in a successful effort to overthrow it. Christiern was succeeded by Frederic I., Duke of Slesvig and Holstein (1523-1533), who, in spite of the fact that he had bound himself byv oath at his coronation to maintain the Catholic Church, soon began, from motives similar to those acted upon by his predecessor, to favor Protestantism in secret, and, after a time, openly professed himself a Protestant, and took the Lutheran preacher, Hans Tausan (after 1521), under his protection. He defended his line of conduct at the Diet of Odensee, in 1527, by saying that he had pledged himself to maintain the Catholic Church, but had not promised to tolerate her abuses. At this Diet he had a measurepassed by which the same civil rights were secured to Lutheraris as those enjoyed by Catholics, until such time as an Ecumenical Council could convene; but in the interval he was careful to break off all relations with Rome, and to reserve to himself the confirmation of persons appointed to bishoprics. The king summoned a conference on religion at Copenhagen in 1529, but the Catholic bishops, who had been placed in their sees by his -favor, being both ignorant and worldly, were,. single-handed, no match for their Lutheran adversaries, and they were therefore forced to call to their aid the distinguished Catholic German theologians, Eck and Cochlhaeu's. These theologians, however, failed to come, and the burden of the defense of the Catholic cause devolved upon Stagefyr of Cologne, the only Catholic theologian present. But new difficulties now arose to prevent a discussion. It was necessary, if it was to go on at all, that the disputants should speak Latin, which the Protestant champions peremptorily refused to do. The Catholics, moreover, claimed that the.

Page  190 190 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. authority of the writings of the Fathers and of the canons and decrees of Councils should be recognized, while the Protestants would admit no authlority other than the Bible. Both parties were therefore under the necessity of putting their claims and grievances in writing, and of presenting them. in this form to the king and counsellors of State, who, as might have been anticipated, declared Lutheranism the true and divinely revealed religion of Christ. Open acts of hostility against the Catholics were at once set on foot, in which the city of MalIm6 took the initiative. RMninow, the Bishop of R6skilde, was forced to pay the kilng six thousand forins as a gratuity for his pallium. Upon the death of Frederic, the bishops formally protested against the succession of his eldest son, Christiern 111., who was known to be a personal friend of Luther's; but this p)rince, fully confident that any aggressive act against the Church would conciliate the,ood-will of the lay nobility, issued an order for the arrest and imnprisonnlent of all the bishops of Dellmark (August 20, 1536), and demanded a surrender of their sees as the price of their fieedom. RPnnow, Bishop of Roskilde, steadfastly refused to become a partner to so iniqnitous a bargain, and died in prison in 1544, a martyr to his duty and his faith. In 1537, Bagrenhaqen, was invited by the king front Wittenbeirg to complete the work of ref'ormation in Denmark. Havinag criowned the king, he drew up a forml of ecclesiastical organization, according to which every detail of Church governnlent was wholly dependent upon the royal will. In the room of the bishops seven superintendents vere appointed, who, after a time, resumed the nowv meaningless title of " bishop."?The Diet of O(en.see (11539) gave its approbation- to this ecclesiastical organization, arnd the Diet of Copenha.yen (1544) stripped the! Catholic Church of all her rights and privileges, and parcelled out lier possessions between the king and the nobles. Cattholics Nwere disabled from holding office and deprived of their hereditary rights; the Catholic clergy were commanded, under pen-.alty of death, to quit thie kingdom, and the same punishment was to be inflicted upon those who might harbor them.

Page  191 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 191.Catholics wishing to remlain in thle country had to make tlleir choice between exile or apostasy. The Archbishop of Drontheini was largely instrumental in propagating Lutheranism in Norway.l. A faithful adherent of King Christiern II., he was obliged to seek safety in flight upon the fall of that prince, and, quitting his own country, found an asylum in the Netherlands (1537). After the forcible resignation of a second bishop and the imprisonment of a third, Protestantism was triumphant in the land, and one had either to profess it or be deprived of all rights, religious, political, and social. Numbers of the monks remained steadfast and went into exile rather than do violence to their consciences. In Iceland2 the first attempts to introduce Lutheranismn were firmly resisted by the inhabitants; but, being discouraged by the execution of John Aresen, a bishop, they held out for some time longer, and then gradually yielding (after 1551), began little by little to accept the new doctrines, and in the end were quite ready to receive any error that came in their way. ~ 329. Protestantismn in England. t Vera et sincera historia schismatis Anglicani a Nic. Sandero, aucta per Eld. Richtonum, tandem atucta et castigata per Ribadcneiram,, Colon. 1628.`-:Laemmer, Monumenta Vaticana, p. 25 sq., et passim. Jiundeshagen, Epp. aliquot ineditae Buceri, Calvini, etc., ad hist. eccl. Britan., Bern. 1844. Bu-rnet, Hist. of the LRef. of the Church of Engl., Lond. 1679 sq., 2 T. fol.; Oxf., 1816; Lond, 1825, 6 T.; Abridged ed., Brunswick, 1765, 2 vols. t Dodd's Church History of England, from the commencement of the sixteenth century to the revolution in 1688, with additions and a continuation by the Rev. Tierny, Lond. 1840, -1 vols. Hume, Hist. of Great Britain —-of Engl., Lond. 1754 sq., 4 vols., and frequently. Dahlmann, Hist. of the English Revolution, Lps. 1848. Guznpach. Explanations and amendments of Dahlmann's Hist., Darmstadt, 1845. By the sa(me, Separation of the English Church from Rome, Darmstadt, 1845. Ranke, English History, especially of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Berlin, 1859 sq., 6 vols. (Complete Works, Vols. XIV.-XXI.) M1aurenbrecher, England during the Age of Reformation, Duisseldorf, 1866. t*John Lbngard, History of England, Vols. VI.-XII. Lord John Russell, Essay on the English 1 Gebhardi, Hist. of Denmark (33d part of his Universal History, Halle, 1770, p. 156). 2 Harboe, The Reformation in Iceland (Hist. Mem. of the Scientific Society,of Copenhagen, Vols. VI. and VII., Altona, 1796).

Page  192 192 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Government and Constitution, 1823; new ed., 1865 (Germ. tr. accord. to the. 4th ed., Freiburg, 1873). t Audinz, Histoire de Henri VIII. et du schisme d'Angleterre, Par. 1850, 2 vols. tThommnes, Hist. of England during the Age of tthe Tudors, Mentz, 1866. Cobbett, Hist. of the Protestant Reformation in England and Ireland, 1824.(Germ., Offenbach, 1828, 3d ed.) tChalloner, MAemoirs of the Missionary Priests and other Catholics who suffered death on account of religion in England between A. D. 1577-1684, Derby, 1844, 2 vols., 16mo.; the same, Philad 1840, 1 vol. (Germ. ed., 2 vols., Paderborn, 1852). Boost, Hist. of the Reformation and Revolution in England, Augs. 1843. Also an able series of articles by T. W. 11. Marshall, LL.D., in the Tablet, London newspaper of 1876. (Tn.) In the course of the religious and political movements which disturbed Europe, questions touching all the relations and phases of society and the family came up for discussion; and the question of marriage,' being necessarily among the rest, became the occasion and cause of the religious and political revolution that took place in England. Henry VIlJ. succeeded to the throne of England upon the death of his father in 1509, when not quite eighteen years of age, and two nmonths later (June 83) married Catharine of Ara.qon, the widow of his elder brother, Arthur, lately deceased. To marry his brother's widow a papal dispensation was necessary, which was granted by Pope Julius II. on Catharine's relresentation, the truth of' which Henry himself afterward adcmitted, that her marriage with Arthur had not been consul mmated. For seventeen years Ienury lived a life of uninterrupted happiness with his queen, who during that time bore him five children, three sons and two daughters, of whom Mary, who subsequently ascended the throne, alone survived. Henry was suddenly stricken with scruples of conscience as to the legality of his marriage, and these were probably quickened and intensified by the fading beauty of Catharine, who was six years his senior, and by the fascinating charms of Anne Boleyn, maid of honor to the queen, who had Mwaon his heart. Henry requested Pope Clement VII. to declare bis marriage with Catharine invalid (1527). The Pope issued a commission to Cardinal Campeggio, the Papal Legate, and to Cardinal Wolsey, Henry's minister, to make the facts upon,'See p. 69, ] 312.

Page  193 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 193 which the application was based the subject of a judicial examination. The queen, deeming it unbecoming her dignity to have her marriage passed upon by a commission, which was not only composed of the king's subjects,' but which, she believed, did not enjoy the freedom necessary to judicial fairness, appeared before the court at Blackfriars only to offer an appeal to the Pope. Clement, unwilling to grant the king's demand, and yet desirous to avoid giving him offense, resorted to various expedients in order to gain time, in the hope that Henry would in the meanwhile return to a better mind. The effect was just the contrary, and every hindrance and delay added to the king's impatience. By the advice of Cranrner, the question was submitted to the universities of Europe. Those of Oxford and Cambridge declared in favor of the divorce; those of Germany decided against it; and those of France and Italy would not admit of its possibility, unless on the supposition that the queen's former marriage with Arthur had not been consummated.2 But the end was not yet. The Pope's decision was not forthcoming. Henry was irritated, and in his anger had the payment of the firstfruits to the Pope abolished. This measure, which was intended as a menace to Rome, was followed by another, providing that, should the Pope refuse to confirm appointments to episcopal sees made by the crown, the appointees should dispense with such confirmation, and go on and be consecrated. Henry had been privately married to Anne Boleyn in January, 1533, and it was therefore of the first importance to him that the affair of his divorce should be brought to a speedy issue. Cranmer had been working long and industriously to bring about a complete rupture with Rome, and 1 Cardinal Campeggio was the incumbent of the See of Salisbury. (TR.) 2 " In France the profuse bribery of the English agents would have failed with the University of Paris but for the interference of Francis himself. As shameless an exercise of Henry's own authority was required to wring an approval of his cause from Oxford and Cambridge. In Germany the very Protestants, in the fervor of their moral revival, were dead against the king. 5o far as could be seen from Cranmer's test [an appeal to the universities. (TR.) ]~ every learned man in Christendom condemned Henry's cause." Greene, Hist. of the English People. New York, 1876, p. 343. (Tn.) VOL. III-13

Page  194 194 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. now that the crisis was come he was found fully prepared to meet it. The clergy were to be won over by threats and punishments. They were declared to have incurred the penalties of Praemunire for having unlawfully submitted to the legatine power of Cardinal WTolseyv; but at the same time a hint was thrown out that they might expect a plenary pardon if they would consent to recognize the king as the Stpreme Read of the Church in? Erqland. The clergy returned an equivocal answer, saying they were willing to accept his jurisdiction in ecclesiastical affaiirs, "in so far as they might conlsistently with the law of Christ," and with this qualified suibi)ission the king expressed himself satisfied. But to carry out his ulterior designs he had need of' agents more devoted to his interests, and less conscientious as tco their own duties. Such was Crantmer. As Henry's envoy on the Continent, he be, came familiar with the teachings of' the Refotrmers, and, although in HIoly Orders, privately married a niece of the famous German divine, Osiander. After XWolsey's disgrace, and on the death of' Warharm, Cranmer was appl-ointed to the archiepiscopal see of (Canterbury, and made privy counsellor to the king. One more ready to carry out the royal will and less scrupulous about the means to be employed in doing so could not have been chosen. Previously to takinug the oath of fidelity to.tte Pope, on the day set; apart fobr the ceremoiny, he witlidrew to the chapter-house of St. Stephen's, at Westminster, and there, in the presence of witnesses, protested that in what he was about to do lhe had no intention of binding liimself or iaying himself under any sort of obligation to place the least obstacle in the w-av of the ecclesiastical reforms meditated by the king. This was the first of the series of hypocritical acts that followted. Fully informed of HIenry's marriage to Anne. Cranmer addressed himi a letter in April, 1533, begging to know if it were the royal pleasure that the cause of divorce should be heard in his own ecclesiastical court, and, if so, requesting his majesty to submit in advance to the future decision. The king graciously complied with the suggestion of the archbishop, taking occasion, however, to remind his Lord of Canterbury that "the sovereign had no superior on earth, and

Page  195 ~ 329. Protestantismn in England. 195 was not subject to the laws of any earthly creature." The Ecclesiastical Court was opened at Dunstable, and (Catharine received three citations to appear before it. Having refusetd, she was pronounced "verily and manifestly contumnacious," and her marriage was declared null and invalid. Cranmner conveyed the result to the king in a letter, in whicl he gravely exhorts his majesty to submit respectfully to the decisions of the Ecclesiastical Court, and to hasten to escape the censures of the Church, which he would bring upon himself by refusing to break off his incestuous intercolurse with the wife of his brother. At another court, held MIay 28 at Lambeth, Cranmer, " in virtue of his spiritual power and his apostolic jurisdiction," pronounced the marriage of I-enry and Anne valid and lawful. The Pope, acting on the almost unaninmous opinion of the Sacred College, reversed the"'ecision of Dunstable, and renldered a definitive sentence, declaring the marriage between lHenry and Catharine lawfiul and valid. This decision was the signal for the ruptare writlh the tlokl S(;, and it was forthwith proclaimed that, the Pope had no longler any jurisdiction in England. It was now the Archbishop of Canterbury who confirmed appointments to bishoprics anld granted dispensations; but an appeal might be carried from the archbishop's tribunal to the royal chancery. The king was the Supreme Head of the Church of England and the source of all spiritual jurisdiction, whether episcopal or papal. The oath of supremacy was imposed upon all, and those refusing to take it were adjudged guilty of high treason. An order was issued enjoining that the Royal Supremacy should be proclaimed from every pullpit, and form part of the teaching of every school in the kingdoin. The Pope's name was no longer heard in the lanld. Thoimas Cranmer, a layvlan, was inamed vicar-general in all matters ecclesiastical, and received from the king plenary spiritual powers. All the bishops were simultaneously suspended from exercising their filunctions, and had their jurisdiction and power restored only after thley had recognized the Royal Supremacy. In the eighth moi-th after the nuptial ceremony, Anne Boleyn bore to Henry a daughter,. who subsequently ascended the throne under the name of Elizabeth. Fearing that the shortness of the interval

Page  196 196 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. between the marriage and the birth of the princess mightgive rise to suspicions touching her legitimacy and endangerinig her succession, H1enry had an act passed requiring all his subjects to mlake oath that Elizabeth was the true and lawful heir to the throne. The confiscation of ecclesiastical property next occupied theattention of king and parliament. A commission was appointed by Cromwell to make a general visitation of the religious houses of the kingdom (1535), with a view, as Mr. ltiume candidly admits, of discovering such irregularities as might furnish a pretext for their suppression. Parliamlent, acting upon the report of these commissioners, familiarly called the "Black Book," hurriedly passed a bill providing for the suppression of all religious houses whose income was less than two hundred pounds a year, of which there were one hlundred and seventy-six, aiid granting their revenues to the crowvn. It was said these were dissolved "for the glory of AIlnmiqhty God and the honor of the kingqdom," and because'" they laLppened to be at once the weakest and the worst." (,27 IIenry VIII., c. 28.) TBut the larger monasteries, " in which discipline was better observed," were destined to share the fate of the less considerable and more disorderly. In the year 1536 there was an uprising of the inhabitants of the northern counties of England to protest against the recent innovations, and particularly against the expulsion of the monks from their monasteries. The insurgents bound themselves by oath to stand by each other " for the love which they bore to Almighty God, His faith, and the Holy Church;" and everywhere along the route of their march, which was called " The Pilgrimage of Grace," they seized the suppressed monasteries, and restored them to the ejected monks. The communities of the larger monastic establishments were now charged with having taken part in this insurrection, and, as a punishment for their complicity, their houses were dissolved and their property confiscated. In the southern counties fair promises and large bribes were held out to the abbots and more considerable personages of the various houses; andt when these failed of their purpose, frauds, threats, and vio-.

Page  197 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 197 lence were resorted to. The work of suppressing the monasteries was completed by an act of parliament in 1539, " vesting in the crown all property, movable and immovable, of the monastic establishments, which either had already been or should hereafter be suppressed, abolished, or surrendered." 1 By the year 1540 the work of "secularization" had been completed; the royal will had been carried out with shocking vandalismn; works that had cost years of patient and skillful labor, the triumphs of art and the monuments of science, all were destroyed. Nor did the hatred of the ancient faith stop here. The tombs of St. Augustine, the apostle of the AngloSaxons, and St. Thonas a Becket, martyr to his defense of ecclesiastical immunities, were despoiled, and the ashes they contained flung to the winds. Even the tomb of Kitg Alfred, the Founder of England's greatness, did not escape the hands of the ravager. From the revenues of the confiscated monastic establishments Henry founded and scahtily endowed six bishoprics and fourteen cathedral and collegiate churches; but the bulk of the sacrilegious plunder went to indemniify the royal visitors and the parasites of the court. But, notwithstanding these tyrannical proceedings, Henry had not yet fully made up his mind to wholly separate himself from the Catholic Church. "I will strike off;" he said, "her strange Head with the tiara, but the body I will leave untouched." In the year 1538, Henry, by a statute, entitled " An Act for Abolishing Diversity of Opinions," ordained that certain doctrines and practices, which were substantially those of' the Roman Catholic Church, should be accepted and professed by all his subjects, under the severest penalties. Even the use of holy water and blessed ashes was retained, and the veneration of the saints enjoined. This statute contained what are known as the "Bloody Six Articles," in which the doctrines were enumerated, concerning which there was the greatest conflict of opinions. They declared transubstantiation to be necessary to salvation, and clerical celibacy to be of Divine command; that private Masses should be retained, and that auricular confession was expedient and necessary. It was 1Lingard, Hist. of Engl., London, 1847, Vol. VI.

Page  198 198 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. further ordained that the severest penalties should be inflicted upon any one refusing to accept thlese teachings.' Henry permitted the reading of the Bible to all, reminding them, however, that this was not their right, but a favor granted "of the royal liberality and goodness," and that when they should meet passages difficult of interpretation, they should apply to others more learned than themselves.2 But whatever leniency he might show in other matters, there was one to which no opposition would be tolerated. His spiritual supremacy was sacred, and must be so regarded by all his subjects. For writing against it, Forest, confessor to Queen Catharine, was burnt at the stake; and others, who called it in question, were put to death in various ways. Among the victims of Henry's despotism and cruelty, Thomas More, High Chanlcellor, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester,3 were the most illustrious for their position, their learning, their virtues, and the fortitude with which thely suffered. Of the latter Henry said on one occasion "In myni opinion, I have never met, in all my travels, any one to compare in learning and virtue with the Bishop of Rochester." Bishop Fisher refused to acknowxledge the king's marriage with Anne Boleyn as "good and lawful," and for this offense he was soon to feel the full weight of the royal vengeance. He was shortly arrested for misprision of treason, in that he had heard a woman named Elizabeth Barton, better known as the Holy Maid of Kent, say that the king would survive his divorce from Catharine only seven months, and had failed to report the conversation. An oath was presented to him, affirming the legality of the king's marriage with Anne, which he declined to take, and was in consequence committed to the Tower April 26, 1534. He was now close on seventy years of age, but neither his gray hairs nor his past services could move the heart of the royal despot to mercy. He languished in prison for thirteen months, enduring privations the most severe and cruelties the most barbarous; and when he again came forth it was only to appear before a special commission appointed to try iLingard, 1. c., Vol. VI., p. 293. (TR.) 2 Ibid., p. 278. (TR.) 3 tKerker, John Fisher, Bp. of Rochester and Martyr, Tfibg. 1860.

Page  199 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 199 him at Westminster, on the charge of high treason, for having refused to make oath that the king was the " Supreme Head of the Church of England." After a hasty trial, he was declared guilty, and beheaded June 22, 1535. In the preceding May he had been created cardinal by Pope Paul III., but, though he may have appreciated the kindness, he had now ceased to put any value on dignities, and declared that, "if the hat were at his feet, he would not stoop to take it up." His head was set up on London-bridge, and his body, after lying naked all day at the place of execution, was carried away by the guards, and laid in the church-yard of All Hallows, Barlking.l Thomas Mo're, by his great learning and extraordinary capacity for business, had risen from a comparatively low station to the office of Lord Chancellor of' England. Distinguished for his literary ability, his knowledge of law, his winsome manners, and sweetness of temper, he was no less conspicuous for his deep and unaffected piety and his unwavering fidelity to his friends; thus uniting in himself the qualities of a statesman, a scholar, and a Christian. But neither his virtues, his abilities, nor his services could save him from the savage ferocity of Henry. More had refused to approve Henry's divorce from Queen Catharine and his marriage with Anne Boleyn, and for this offense he, like Bishop Fisher, was committed to the Tower, and, like him, too, brought forth again only to be arraigned before the commission at Westminster on the charge of high treason, for having denied the king to be the Supreme Head of the Church of England. As soon as the indictment had been read, More was told that hle mright still enjoy the king's favor by abjuring his former opinions. The offer was promptly declined, and the pr)isoner was declared guilty and condemned to death. He met death with the same vivacious cheerfulness and unfaltering courage that had distinguished him through life, professing with his last breath that he died a true Catholic before God. He was beheaded in the Tower July 6, 1535.2'Lingard, 1. c., Vol. VI., pp. 220-221. (TR.) 2 Thoniae Mori opera, Lovanii; 1566. Thomas More, Represented according to Authentic Sources, by Dr. Rudhart, Niirnberg, 1829. Sir Thomas More:

Page  200 200 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Cardinal Reginald Pole was equally the object of I-enry's vindictive cruelty. Having conlple.ted his education abroad, he returned to England in 1525, where the highest ecclesiastical dignities were awaiting his acceptance. About this time the king was meditating his divorce from Catharine, which Pole not only opposed, but still further incensed Henry by the publication of his treatise, "De Unitate Eceelesiastica." His pension and all his preferments were withdrawn, and preparations were being made for his impeachment, -when he eluded the king's vengeance by escaping to the Continent. The Pope rewarded his courage and constancy by raising him to the cardinalate. He was sent as Legate to France and the Low Countries in 1537, when Henry in vain demanded his extradition from the governments of these countries. Failing to avenge himself on Pole, the king had his mother, the aged Countess of Salisbury, and others of the obnoxious cardinal's relations arrested, tried upon fictitious charges, and put to death. The Countess of Salisbury was the nearest of kin to Henry of all his blood relations; was the last in the direct line of the Plantagenets, who had ruled England for so mlany generations; and both in prison and with her head upon the block showed a dignity and courage worthy her royal descent. She was beheaded May 21, 1541, repeating the words of our Lord, " Blessed are they who suffer persecution for righteousness' sake." Thomas Cromwell, who had been chiefly instrumental in shedding so much blood, was himself to be judged by the bloody laws he had made, and in virtue of which so many noble victims fell. Henry had never quite fiorgiven him for his share in negotiating the marriage with that unlovely woman, Anne of Cleves, who contributed so much to disturb the king's domestic happiness. He was arrested onf the 10th of June, 1540, and cast into prisol. Ie was accused of malversation in the discharge of his office of chancellor; of holdHis Life and Times, by W. J. Walter, London, 1840. Thommes. Thomas More, Augsburg, 1847.'Cf. Vol. III. of New Series of Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, London, 1869. See Reumont, in the Bonn Theological Review, 1870, nros. 25 and 26.

Page  201 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 201 ing heretical opinions and protecting heretics; and, finally, of treason, in that he had expressed his readiness to fight against the king, if it were necessary, in defense of his religious opinions. He demanded a public trial, and to be confronted with his accusers, but the justice which he had denied to so many others was now refused to himself. A bill of attainder was drawn up against him, and passed both houses of parliament without a dissentient voice. On the 28th of July following he was beheaded on Tower Hill. Stern and unrelenting during life, he was craven and cowardly at the hour,of death. Henry was as atrociously cruel to his wives as he was to his ministers and other subjects of inferior degree. Catharine of Aragon survived her repudiation a little less than three years, dying a most exemplary death January 8, 1536. She was hardly laid in her grave, when Anne Boleyn, who had taken her place in her husband's affections, and was the cause of all her misfortunes, was tried on the charges of adultery, incest, and high treason, declared guilty, and beheaded on the green within the Tower, May 19, 1536. Cranmner, who had formerly, " in virtue of his apostolic authority," pronounced the marriage between Henry and Anne lawful and valid, was now called upon to reverse his former decision, and, " in the name of Christ and for the glory of God," declared that the same marriage was and always had been null and void. On the day of Anne's execution, as if to express his contempt for her memory, Henry dressed himself in a suit of'white, and on the following morning was married to Jane Seymoutr, who died (October 24, 1537) in less than a fortnight after giving birth to a male child, subsequently known as Edward VI. Henry was next married to Anne of Cleves in the beginning of the year 1540. The marriage was a political one, brought about through the agency of Thomas Cromwell, who hoped to strengthen the Protestant cause in England anld prop up his own power through the influence of the new queen, who was known to be a thorough-going Lutheran. Deceived as to her beauty and personal attractions, Henry married her only because he could not well help himself, and, after living with her six months, procured a divorce mainly

Page  202 202 Period 3.- Epoch 1. Chapter 2. on these grounds (July 13). Within a month (August 8) he married Catharine Howard, who, being sh-ortly after charged with having committed adultery, was pronounced guilty, and beheaded February 13, 1541. Henry's sixth and last wife, Catharine Parr, was on one occasion nearly losing her head for venturing to differ on theological questions from the I-Iead of the Church of England; but quickly detecting her nuistake, she escaped the royal vengeance by adroitly flattering his great wisdom and theological learning, expressing her most humble submission to his judgment, and professing that in differing from him she had only desired to draw him into a heated discussion, because, when animated, he seemed to forget the pain of the malady from which he was suffering. By this clever expedient, Catharine kept her head on her shoulders, and had the good fortune to outlive the brutal monster, who died in 1547. Henry reigned for thirty-eight years, and during that time he ordered the execution of two queens, two cardinals, two archbishops, eighteen bishops, thirteen abbots, five hundred priors and monks, thirty-eight doctors of divinity and laws, twelve dukes and earls, one hundred and sixty-four gentlemen, one hundred and twenty-four commoners, and one hundred and ten ladies. Edward VI., who was only ten years of age at the death of his father', succeeded to the throne of England; but by an article in the last will and testament of Henry sixteen:viduali were named to exercise the authority of the crownL until the young prince should have completed his eigL.teenth year. This arrangement was brolen through by Edwc-iard Seymour, the young king's uncle, then Earl of IHereford and afterward Duke of Somerset, whlo was ardently attached to the principles of the Reformation. He succeeded in having himself appointed Protector of the realm and guardian of the king's person. The king renewed the authority of Cranmer, and parliament withdrew from the chapters the right of electing bishops. All pretense of observing Catholic forms, so much insisted on during his lifetime by Henry, was now cast aside, and tokens of apostasy were everywhere visible. The Mass was abolished, the marriage of priests authorized, and

Page  203 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 203 the use of the vulgar tongue in public worship introduced. Images, statues, sacred ornaments, altars, private chapels,in short, whatever served to preserve or revive the remembrance of the ancient faith, was either destroyed or put out of sight. Refractory bishops were deposed, and their goods confiscated. In the year 1547 a Book of Homilies was published, with the double purpose of supplying the want of sermons and securing uniformity of belief. This was followed in the succeeding year by a Catechism, the work of Cranmer, the object of which was set forth to be "for the singular profit and instruction of children and young people." Shortly after, Cranmer, "by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost," and with the assistance of Ridley and eleven other divines, began the composition, or rather compilation, of a liturgy or servicebook in the English tongue, and for the use of the English Church. Taking as their pattern and guide the Roman Catholic missal and breviary, and omitting whatever they conceived to be either superfluous or superstitious, they comrpleted a work containing offices for the various Sundays and holydays, forms for the administration of the Sacraments, service for the dead, and whatever else was necessary to the public worship of the new Church. This is known as The First Prayer-Book of Edwalrd VI. In January, 1549, the king dreNr the attention of bot.,h houses of parliament to it, by whom its use wA'e c.,"'atory on all ministers of the Church within..-.'t.ii ci 7 nlgland after the ensuing Pentecost, andl - e ot' (f,l,tr was forbidden under severe penalties.'i c i;,7ilch EstabiiK < by Law" was definitely fixed upon the English people by tihe aid of foreign and mercenary troops. The effects of suppressing the monastic establishments became now apparent. The poor, who had been in the habit of receiving abundant alms from the wealth of the Church, were now the objects of harsh legislation. Beggars were forbidden to solicit alms, and, if they persisted in doing so, they were cast into prison, and a mark of infamy set upon them by branding them on their foreheads and breasts with red-hot iron. The Duke of Somerset, fearing the ambitious designs of his younger brother, Sir Thomas

Page  204 '204 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2.:Seymour, and, it is said, at the instigation of Cranner, had himh arrested, tried on the charge of high treason for plotting to get possession of the young king's person and meditating:a change of government, and executed March 20, 1549. In less than three years the Duke of Somerset himself fell a victim to the jealousy and vindictiveness of his rival, the Earl of Warwick, lately created Duke of Northumberland. He was accused of having meditated the assassination of Northumberland and two other noblemen, declared guilty of felony, and beheaded January 22, 1552. He was succeeded, after his first arrest, in the latter part of 1549, in the office of Protector by John Dudley, Earl of Warwick,' who, judging fromn his dying declaration, was certainly a Catholic, though he never took any rmeasures to re-establish the ancient faith. It was now found that the Book of Common Prayer, which had been compiled by Cranmer and others," under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost," about three years before, contained some errors, which it was necessary to correct. It was accordingly revised and amended by Cranmer, assisted by Bucer and Peter Martyr, and, in its altered form, approved by Convocation and sanctioned by both houses of parlianient (1552). The bishops were authorized by statute to punish with spiritual censures, and the magistrates with corporal penalties, all who should introduce or use a different Service. Any one attending a form of worship other than that prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England was condemned to imprisonment for a term of six months for the first offense, twelve months for the second, and during *his natural life for the third. This is known as The Second Prayer-Book of Edward VI. It was also ascertained that the "Six Bloody Articles" of Henry VIII. were now by no means faithful expositions of the belief of the English Church, and Cranmer received orders to frame others which should adequately express it and be recognized by all as the standard of orthodoxy. After consultation with his friends, the archbishop drew up a formula of belief, known as "The Forty-two Articles," had it approved by a committee of bishops and divines, sanctioned by'Lingard, 1. c., Vol. VII. (TR.)

Page  205 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 205. the king, and subscribed by all church-wardens, school-masters, and clergymen.' These Articles, however, were never, ratified by parliament; nor is there any proof, except the printed title, that they ever received the sanction of Convocationl. To perfect the organization of the Church of England, a body of ecclesiastical law was still necessary. This had been under consideration during the reign of Henry VIII., but was not carried into effect until the reign of Edward VI., when an act was passed empowering the king to give the force of law to any ecclesiastical regulations framed by a commission of thirty-two, taken in equal number from the spiritual and lay estates of the realm. To avoid inconvenience and unnecessary complication, the duty was delegated to a sub-committee of eight persons, with Cranmer at their head. This committee drew up a body of ecclesiastical law under the title of "Reformatio legum ecclesiasticarum," in fiftyone articles, which, though not published, in consequence of the premature death of the king (July 6, 1553), are interesting as giving the views of the English reformers on many questions of vital importance.3 Cranmer had decided, and parliament had confirmed the decision, that Henry's marriage with Catharine of Aragon and that with Anne Boleyn were both invalid; and, as a consequence, neither Mary, the issue of the former, nor Elizabeth, 1These Articles are given in Burnet, Vol. II., and in Salig's Hist. of the Augsburg Confession, Vol. II. 2 Lingard, 1. c., Vol. VII., pp. 90-92. (TR.) 3 The following points relating to marriage are interesting, and might be referred to as high authority for some of the decisions delivered in our own divorce courts: " The marriage of minors, without the consent of their parents or guardians, and of all persons whomsoever, without the previous publication of banns, or the entire performance of the ceremony in the Church according to the Book of Common Prayer, are pronounced of no effect... Divorces are allowed, not only on account of adultery, but also of desertion, long, absence, cruel treatment, and danger to health or life: in all which cases the in — nocent party is permitted to marry again, the guilty condemned to perpetual exile or imprisonment. To these five cases is added confirmed incompatibility of temper; but this, though it may justify a separation, does not allow either party the privilege of contracting another marriage." Lingard's History of England, London, 1848, Vol. VII., pp. 93-94. (TR.)

Page  206 206 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. the issue of the latter, could succeed to the throne. HIence the Protector, who was conspiring to secure the succession to his own family, brought about a marriage between his son, Lord Guilfordl Dudley, and Lady Jane Grey, daughter of the Duchess of Suffolk and grand-daughter of Mary, the sister of Henry VIII. The Duke of Northumberland, who exercised unlimited control over the mind of the dying king, Edward, represented to him the dangers which would follow to the Protes-tant faith should Mary succeed to the throne, and persuaded him to sign a dccument entailing the crown on Lady Jane Grey and her heirs male. To this measure the Lords of the Council reluctantly gave their assent. Edward expired at Greenwich July 6, 1553, and, four days later, Lady Jane Grey was proclaimed queen. The ambition of Northumlberland was now apparent. A few days later, at the head of thirty thousand men, who had flocked to her standard from pure motives of loyalty, Mary entered London amid the joyful acclamations of the people (July 31), and was crowned by Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, September 30th. The Protector was at once arrested, tried, found guilty of high treason, and decapitated, professing before his execution that he died in the faith of his fathers. In the beginning of the following year, Lady Jane Grey and her husband were also tried and executed; he on Tower-hill; she, because of her royal descent, on the green within the Tower. Queen Mary earnestly desired to see the ancient faith againr the religion of England, and to this end a bill was introduced into parliament toward the close of the year 1553, providing that all religious innovations should be abolished, and that ecclesiastical affairs should be restored to the condition in which they were in the first year of the reign of Henry VIII. Such a measure would have compelled the surrender of all church-property confiscated during the last two reigns, alld now divided up among the wealthy families of the kingdom, wlho, having no intention to part with their spoil, opposed and caused the withdrawal of the bill. This was effected by the queen's proroguing parliament. In the next session, opened three days later, a modified bill was introduced, in

Page  207 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 207 which all mention of the Pope's Supremacy and the alienation of church-property was carefully omitted, and the restoration of religion to its condition at the accession of Edward proposed. The bill passed both houses, thus leveling at a blow the great structure that had been built up with so much care and labor by Cranmer and his associates. In the following year, Cardlinal Pole came as Papal Legate to England, and, after thanking the Lords and Commons for having repealed his attainder, expressed the hope that they would likewise repeal all statutes hostile to the Pope's jurisdiction, and his willingness and ability to do whatever might be necessary to bring about a complete reconciliation between Englaind and the Holy See. The motion for a union with Rome was carried in both houses almost by acclamation. The Pope's supremacy in ecclesiastical affairs was recognized; the Sacrifice of the Mass was restored; clerical celibacy enjoined; and married priests deprived of their cures. The Protestant bishops, who professed to derive their authority and jurisdiction immediately from the crown, were now, consistently with their own principles, deposed, and Catholic prelates appointed in their room. Cardinal Pole absolved " the whole nation and the dominions thereof. of all judgments and penalties" incurred on account of heresy and schism, after which a Te Deum was sung in thanksgiving for the happy issue of affairs. It was the intention of Cardinal Pole to effect the restoration of the ancient faith by pacific means, and to stem the tide of apostasy by the labors of a learned and pious clergy, the importance of whose instruction and training he was constantly and earnestly urging. Mary, unfortunately, did not share these wise and moderate views, obstinately insisting that heretics should be punished with death; and to this end, besides the laws already existing and in force in the two preceding reigns, making heresy a capital offense, revived others formerly enacted for the suppression of the Lollards. But, while it must be frankly admitted that the rigor exercised during this reign in punishing heretics was excessive, on the other hand it can not be said, in view of the atrocities perpetrated during preceding and subsequent reigns, that Mary

Page  208 20:8 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. merits the distinctive appellation of "Bloody." Neither were her acts of cruelty wholly without excuse. The proclamation of Lady Jane Grey as queen was urged ostensibly on the specific ground that Mary was a Catholic; and her religious opponents uniformly supported, if they did not inspire, every tumult, sedition, and revolt excited against her. Moreover, of the two hundred and seventy-nine persons. executed during her reign, many, like Cranmer and Ridley, were contemptible miscreants; while others, like Latimer, were perfidious knaves. Cranmer, who had been making decisions in the fullness of his authority during his whole life, and reversing them again at the bidding of an incontinent king; composing prayer-books "' under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost," and, at the suggestion of such reformers as Bucer and Peter Martyr, correcting the errors which the Holy Ghost had permitted hinm to insert; signing articles of faith under Henry VIII., and rejecting them again as false under Edward VI.; went on asserting and denying, as suited his interest or convenience, till the last hour of his life. In the hope of saving his life, he signed no fewer than six retractations, and on each occasion vehemently professed his attachnment to the Catholic faith; but, finding that these availed not to secure his.pardon, he recalled theni all at the moment of execution, and faced death (March 21, 1556) with a courage that must be admired, if the cause in which he suffered can not be approved. After the death of Mary, in 1558, everything conspired to forward the interests -of Protestantism, and to identify them with those of Elizabeth.1 For Elizabeth to remain a Catholic was all one with proclaiming her mother an adulteress, her own birth illegitimate, and, as a consequence, her eligibility to the throne impossible. If her claims were to be supported at all, they must be supported by the Protestants. Besides religious, there were also political considerations in her favor. By her exclusion, the English crown would have been the 1 Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vols. I. and III.; and Hefele, Isabella of Spain and Elizabeth of England, being a historical parallel (Cardinal Ximenes, p. 89-101).

Page  209 329. Protestantism in England. 209 right of Mary Stuart, Queen of Scotland, and great-granddaughter of Henry VII. Mary had married the Dauphin of France with the express stipulation that, should she die without issue, her right, not only to the throne of Scotland, but also to that of England, should pass to the ]King of France,, thus making England a dependency of the French crown.. The very thought of England passing under the dominion of a foreign prince was revolting to English pride; arid the feel — ings of indignation with which the country at large contem — plated such a contingency were greatly intensified by the fact that the relations of the English government, at this time, wmith those of Scotland and France were the reverse of friendly. Animated by such feelings, and swayed by such motives, the English people permitted Elizabeth to ascend the throne without opposition. During the reign of Mary, Elizabeth had frequently made public profession of the Catholic faith, and expressed her sincere attachment to the Catholic Church. After her accession shie ihad been crowned accordillg to the Catholic ritual, by a Catholic bishop, and had sworn to maintain the Catholic religion; but, notwithstanding her professions, her conformity, and her solemn pledges, she was hardly seated upon the throne before she declared openly in favor of Protestantism. By the advice of Sir William Cecil, the English embassador at the Court of Rome was recalled; the Protestants exiled during the preceding reign permitted to return and appear openly at court; and both houses of parliament filled with ardent partisans of the new faith. Parliament assembled in the early part of the year 1559; revived the statutes of Henry VIII. against Papal authority, and those of Edward VI. in favor of the Reformed service; bestowed the tithes and annats upon the queen, and once nmore invested royalty with ecclesiastical Supremacy. It was further enacted that all clergymlen taking orders or holding livings; all magistrates and inferior fulnctionaries receiving salaries or fees from the crown; and all laymen suing out the livery of their lands, or about to dohomage to the queen, should take an oath declaring her supreme in ecclesiastical and spiritual affairs, under penalty of' VOL. III —14

Page  210 210 Period 3.' Epoch 1. Chapter.2. adeprivation and incapacity; and that any one asserting the Pope's authority within the realm should, for the second offense, forfeit his property, real and personal, and, if contumacious, be condemned to perpetual imprisonment and death, as in cases of high treason.l Of all the prelates who had held office under Mary, one alone, the Bishop of Landaff, who consented to take the oath of Supremacy, was permitted to retain his see. The other sees were filled by men who had either gone into exile on the Continent, or were conspicuous at home for their attachment to the new faith. Among these the most distinguished was Matthew Parker, formerly chaplain to Anne Boleyn, whom Elizabeth now rewarded by appointing him to the Archbish-opric of Canterbury. HIe was consecrated by Barlow, the deprived Bishop of Bath, who had lately embraced the reformed teachings, and having been appointed to the See of iChichester, assisted Parker in consecrating the other newlycreated bishops.2 lLingard, 1. c., Vol. VLI., pp. 259-260. (TR.) 2 Ibid., pp. 26.2-263. (TR.) The question touching the validity of the consecration of these Anglican bishops, and, as a consequence, the validity of all Anglican ordinations, has been frequently discussed. It was at first objected that Barlow, the consecrator of Parker, had not himself been consecrated according to the ritual of the Roman Pontifical; but this objection, being regarded by some as not decisive, another, still stronger, drawn from the formnula of consecration, contained in the Ordinal of Edward VI., the one used in the consecration of Parker. was more confidently urged. The formula ran as follows: " Take the Holy Ghost, and remember to stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of hands." It will be seen that these words have no direct bearing on the purpose for which they were used; contain no reference to the office and authorify of a bishop; and might therefore be used with equal propriety in the baptism or confirmation of children. They have no specific meaning limiting their application to the consecration of bishops. To remedy this defect, the formula was changed by convocation in the year 1662, under Charles II., and made to read as follows: "Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a bishop in the Church of God, committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands; in the aam.e of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And remember that thou stir up the grace of God, which is given thee by this imposition of <our hands; for God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and love, and soberness." Archbishop Kearick (The Validity of Anglican Ordint-r tions, Phil. 1848, p. 197) remarks "that such a change, made in such circumstances, is equivalent to a tacit avowal of the insufficiency the of from which

Page  211 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 211 In the year 1560 the Book of Common Prayer was again revised, a few alterations introduced, and it was provided that, in the absence of clergymen, laymen, and even artisans, might recite the prayers. In the fourth year of Elizabeth's reign (1563), Convocation, presided over by Archbishop Parker, again examined and revised the Forty-two Articles of Edward VI., which, it will be remembered, were mainly the production of Cranmer. The Articles being the standard and test of orthodoxy in the English Church, it was essential they should set forth the exact creed of that body. After mature consideration, some of the Articles of Edward VI. were dropped, and others substituted in their room; and some were mended by additions or changes of phraseology, the result being the instrument now known as the Thirty-nine Articles. By this instrument, in which! some changes were again made in 1571, the spiritual suprenmacy of the Pope was denied; the Sacrifice of the Mass, w'hich was termed " a blasphemous fable and dangerous deceit," was abolished; the Catholic doctrines of transubstantiatioln and purgatory rejected; and the according of reverence to relies and images, and the invocation of saints, reprobated. Of the seven Sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, taken under both kinds, were alone retained; Holy Scripture was declared to contain everything necessary to salvation, and to be the sole rule of faith (Art. VI.); but it was added (Art. XXXIII.) that any one who,." through his private judgment, willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, ought to be rebuked openly, as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church." By Article XXXV., it was decreed that the Ordinal of Edward VI. 4 "contained all things necessary to the consecration of archbishhad been used during the first century of the Anglican Church." If, therefore, the form contained in the Ordinal of Edward VI., and used in the consecration of all bishops during the reign of Elizabeth, was not adequate to validly confer episcopal consecration, it follows that all subsequent ordinations were also necessarily invalid. But Elizabeth supplied any defects of the ritual. Harduin. S. J., Dissertatiorq du Pbre le Courayer sur la succession des dvesques an-lais et sur la validit6 de leur ordinations, Paris, 1714, 2 vols.

Page  212 212 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. ops and bishops and the ordering of priests and deacons;" and' it was added, "whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the rites of that book, or hereafter shall be," are to be "reputed as rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered." 1 It will be seen that in recognizing a hierarchy of three orders of clergy as an essential element in its constitution, the Anglican Church differed widely from every other sect of Protestantism. Finally, the Anglican Church retained, with some changes, the ancient ecclesiastical ritual, as given in the missals of the Roman Catholic Church; also the sign of the Cross, sacred vestments, and even attempted to arrogate to itself the name of Catholic. It was not long before the Established Church encountered opposition from a certain class of its own members, known in history as Nonconformists or Puritans. Professing to be followers of' the "pure word of God," in contradistinction to whatever was of human origin or tradition, they contended that the Anglican Church, by the use of its Liturgy, ceremonies, and discipline, too nearly resembled the Church of Rome, and that the line of distinction between the two should be more boldly drawn and more sharply defined. All were willing to recognize the supremacy of the queen, if for no other reason, because they regarded such a recognition as a protest against the Pope.. On this one point all were' in perfect accord; but on others there was a wide divergence, of opinion. Some were willing to accept the Liturgy, ceremonies, and discipline, provided these were revised and pruned of whatever savored too much of papistry; others, who regarded bishops as the servile agents of the crown, and hated them on account of their aristocratic tastes and tendencies, wished to abolish the Episcopacy altogether, and substitute Presbyterianism; and still others, who were equally hostile to 1 Hardwick, list. of the Arts. of Religion, London, 1859, where the Articles of 1553-1563 and 1571 are given in Appendix III. (TR.) They are found in Latin in Augusti, Corp. libror. symbolicor, pp. 126-142 (Germ. in Bonn Review, new series, year V., n. 1, p. 196-208; Freiburg Periodical, Vol. XII., pp. 250-261.) Cf. the art. "High-Church," in the Freiburg Cyclop., and in the Voices (Stimmen) of Maria Laach.

Page  213 ~ 239. Protestantism in England. 213'both the Episcopacy and Presbyterianism, assumed the attitude and professed the principles of thoroughgoing Dis-.senters. Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots, after a series of misfortunes, abdicated the crown, under compulsion, in favor of her son. She was Men a prisoner in the castle of Lochleven, but having made her escape, she revoked her act of abdication, and again assumed the style and authority of a sovereign. An army of loyal and trusty followers at once enrolled themselves under her standard, but they were no match either in numbers or discipline for the experienced soldiers of the regent, Murray, by whom they were defeated in the battle of Langside, May 13, 1568. After this disaster, Mary fled hastily across the border into England, and, against the advice and in spite of the remonstrances of her friends, sought the hospitality and protection of Elizabeth, by whom she was detained a prisoner during the remainder of her days. An attempt, made in November, 1569, by the Catholic gentlemen of the northerin counties to liberate the royal captive, was promptly put down, and hundreds of the insurgents executed. The only effect of the uprising was to intensify the hatred of Elizabeth for her Catholic subjects. In the following year the queen was still further exasperated by the publication of the bull "of Pius V.s declaring her cut off from the communion of the Church, her crown forfeited, and absolving her subjects from their allegiance. The condition of the Catholics of England became now almost intolerable. To receive or obey a papal bull or brief of any character whatever, or to deny the spiritual supremacy of the queen, was declared high treason; to refuse to attend Protestant worship (" recusancy ") was punished with fines, imprisonment, and bodily chastisenients; and a body of inquisitors was appointed, who, penetrating into the privacy of families, made search for and seized any papers that might throw a shade of suspicion upon the loyalty or the orthodoxy of their possessors, and were on the alert to catch any unguarded word or expression that might be tortured into an evidence of guilt. It was hoped that these measures would soon rid England ~of the presence of Catholic priests, and that in their absence

Page  214 214 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. the Catholic religion would wholly perish from the land, This, however, was prevented by the foresight of Williamnz Allen, a Catholic priest, descended.from an ancient Lancashire family, and formerly principal of St. Mary's Hall, at Oxford, who, in 1568, established a seminary at Douay, in Flanders, for the education of Catholic clergymen destined for the English mission. This seminary, which, in the course of five years, sent nearly one hundred priests across to England, was in 1578 transferred to Rheims, to be out of reach of the harassing persecutions of Elizabeth, but was again reestablished at Douay in 1593. The severest measures of the law were employed to free the country from the presence of such priests as were already there and to deter others from entering it. The penalty of death was pronounced against all priests coming into England, and a like penalty against those ewho should either afford priests an asylum or go to confession to them. To ordain a priest in England was also declared an offense, punishable with death, and all priests in the kingdom, several of whom were executed, were ordered to quit it within forty days (1584). Several attempts had been set on foot for the liberation of the Queen of Scots, all of which had been detected and frustrated by the vigilance and energy of the English government, and, after n!early nineteen years of imprisonment, Mary learned that her fate was decided. She was removed to the castle of Fotheringhay, where she was put on trial (October 11, 1586) before a commission appointed for that purpose, charged with having conspired with foreigners for the double purpose of the invasion of the kingdom and the murder of the queen. The evidence against her purported to be copies of letters addressed by her to Babington, who had been some time previously executed for the same offense; but neither were the originals produced nor was there any satisfactory account given of how the copies came into the hands of the commission.' After a short consultation, the commission adjourned to meet in the Star Chamber, at Westminster, on ILingard, 1. c., Vol. VIII., pp. 220-250. (TR:)

Page  215 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 215 October 25th, when Mary, who was still in prison at Fotheringhay, was declared guilty of the crimes laid to her charge,. and her execution demanded by parliament. Elizabeth for a time dissembled her real feelings, apparently unwilling to shed the blood of her kinswoman, and in the hope that some of those who were so profuse in professions of loyalty to the crown and attachment to her person would spare her the ignominy of authorizing so infamous a deed.. But on one point she had her mind fully made up: Mary must die; and, if it became, necessary to take the responsibility of her execution upon. herself, she would do so. Accordingly, she signed the death-warrant February 1, 1587, and seven days later the unfortunate Mary Stuart ascended the scaffold, and, placing her head upon the bloc'k, died with the dignity of a queen and the constancy of a martyr, professing to the last her firm belief in the faith of the Roman Catholic Church. She had asked as a last request that she might have the services of a Catholic priest in preparing herself for death,'but this the commissioners sternly refused, adding, Wvith brutal insolence, that to grant it would be to offend against the law of God and imperil their own souls. Iowever, Mary was not without spiritual comfort in her last moments, for a Host, which had been consecrated by Pope Pins V., was secretly conveyed to her, despite the watchfulness of her persecutors. The executioner, lifting up the head he had just struck off, cried out-: "God save Queen Elizabeth;" to which the fanatical Earl of Kent added: " So perish all the enemies of the Gospel," a speech which plainly laid open the true motives that had inspired the bloody deed. But the violent hatred of their religion and vindictive persecution of themselves did not crush out in the bosom of Catholics the sentiments of patriotism and loyalty to the crown, and when either the honor or the interests of England( were at stake, they were among the first to rush to her defense. When the "invincible armada" of Philip II. threatened the shores of England, Catholics answered the call of the queen no less promptly than their Protestant fellow-countrymen, with whom they stood shoulder to shoulder, ready to repel the hostile invaders. But neither their patriotism nor

Page  216 216 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. their loyalty availed to obtain a mitigation of the horrors they were suffering. They continued all the same to be imprisoned, fined, tortured, hung, and quartered. Elizabeth died in 1603, and was succeeded by the only son of Mary, Queen of Scots, and Lord Henry Darnley, James I. of England (1603-1625) and VI. of Scotland (1567-1625). On his elevation, the Catholics indulged the hope that they would now obtain some alleviation of their hardships, and it may be that James was disposed to treat them with clemency, if not with favor, but he dared not face the strong tide of public opinion that had set in against him. The fanaticism of the Puritans, who accused the king of favoring the enemies and persecuting the disciples of the Gospel, led to the revival of the penal law against recusants. The statutes of Elizabeth -were again enforced, and the king, besides entering the Star Chamber and professing his detestation of I'opery, issued a proclnliation, banishing all Catholic missionaries from the land, and commanding all magistrates to see to it that the penal laws were put into immediate execution (1604). These persecutions, increasing in severity as time went on, at length led a number of bold, reckless, and misguided men, of whom Guy Fawkes has obtained the most permanent notoriety, to form the famous Gunpowder Plot, by which it was designed to blow up the king and the members of both houses of parliament. The mine was to have been fired on the meeting of parliament, toward the close of 1605, but the plot was fortunately discovered in time to prevent the perpetration of so monstrous and inhuman a crime. The conspirators were apprehended and executed; and among those to whose execution the Gunpowder Treason gave occasion, were a number of missionary priests, who had not the slightest knowledge of its existence, and Father Garnet, the Provincial of the Jesuits, whose only offense appears to have been an unwillingness to ra,?eal what had been intrusted to him under seal of confesThe conspiracy furnished a pretext for fresh enactments against Catholics, more cruel and sanguinary than any that l See Scavini, Theol. Mor. Univ., ed. Mediolan. 1860, Vol. III., p. 440. (Ta.)

Page  217 ~ 329. Protestantism in'England. 217 -had yet disgraced English legislation. Because thirteen individuals had formed a diabolical plot for the destruction of those at whose hands some of them had suffered exceptional outrages, the whole Catholic body must be made to suffer the punishment of their guilt. A new penal code was drawn up by the concurrent action of both houses of parliament, and received the royal assent May 27, 1606. It ordained that Catholics should not dwell within ten miles of London, or go more than five miles from their homes without written leave from the neighboring magistrate; that they should be excluded from all civil offices and the learned professions; that husband and wife, unless married by a Protestant minister, could not derive the benefit which otherwise the one would be entitled to from the property of the other; and that if they failed to have a child baptized by a Protestant minister within a month after its birth, they should pay a fine of one hundred pounds; that every child sent to be educated on the Continent should be legally incapacitated from receiving inheritance or other devises until he should have conformed to the Established Church, refusing to do which his rights -should pass to the Protestant next of kin; that every recusant should be regarded by the law as one excommunicated by name, and, in consequence, his house might be searched, and his books and furniture, if thought to have any connection with his religion, might be burnt, and his horses and arms taken from him; and, finally, that as a punishment for absence from the Established Worship, the king might, in his discretion, take either a fine of twenty pounds per lunar month, or all the personal property and two.thirds of the real estate of the recusant. A new oath of allegiance was prescribed, in which a distinction was drawn between those who admitted and those who denied the temporal claims of the Pope. The latter were subject only to the above penalties, and the former, in addition to these, were liable to perpetual imprisonment, confiscation of their personal property, and forbfiture during life of the revenue derived from their lands; but, if married women, they were to be confined in a common,gaol until they would consent to take the oath. To avoid staking this oath, and escape the penalties of their refusal,

Page  218 '218 Period 3.. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. hundreds of Catholics crossed the Chalnnel, and took up their residence on the Continent.' To perpetuate the remembrance of the Plot, and to keep alive and active the odium which attached to Catholics, in consequence of the atrocious wickedness of a few of their number, it was ordered that the 5th of November, the day of the discovery of the Treason, should be annually commemorated with unusual pomp,2 and that a prayer should be inserted in the Liturgy imploring protection against " cruel and bloodthirsty enemies." The development of the principles of Protestantism in Scotland was the reverse of that which they assumed in England; for, while they led to the absolutism of the crown in the latter country, in the former they issued in the assertion of the supremacy of the people. James, who was constantly repeating the maxim, "No bishop, no king," was anxious to preserve the episcopacy, believing it to be the firmest support of the throne; but, on the other hand, he hesitated to do justice to Catholics, fearing to bring upon himself the fill fury of Presbyterian fanaticism. But the storm, which he dreaded to evoke, and succeeded in holding in check for a season, broke forth with terrific violence during the reign of his successor, Charles I. (1625-1649). The fanaticism of the Puritans or "Saints' grew daily more violent in England, till in the end it threatened not only the destruction of the Episcopacy, but the overthrow of the throne. These fanatical enthusiasts appealed to the Bible as authority for whatever they did, and claimed to find in it a sanction for the most atrocious crimes. Charles was unfortunate throughout his whole reign. All his measures miscarried, and produced effects the very reverse of those intended. He was at variance with his parliament from the beginning of his reign. I-e set public opinion at'Lingard, 1. c., Vol. IX., pp. 21-74. (TR.) I2n most towns of England, but notably in London, one of the features of the celebration was a grotesque figure, stuffed with straw, representing Guy TFawkes, which was carried about the streets, and finally comiitted to the flames. During the "No Popery" cry of 1850, the performance was varied by the substitution and burning of the effigy of Cardinal Wiseman, instead of that of Guy Fawkes. (TRE.)

Page  219 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 219 defiance, and increased the popular discontent by selecting the Duke of Buckingham, his father's favorite, as his chief adviser and prime minister. He exasperated the Puritans in England and Presbyterians in Scotland by appointing Laud, a vehement and uncompromising Episcopalian, to the Archbishopric of Canterbury, and by making him, after the assassination of Buckingham, his chief counsellor. He wounded the prejudices and roused the indignation of the whole nation by marrying a Roman Catholic, Maria Henrietta of France. And, finally, he called forth a spirit of opposition, which he -as never again able to lay, by dispensing for eleven years (1629-1640) with the aid of parliament in the government of the kingdom, and substituting in room of its authority his own despotic edicts and the arbitrary decisions of the Star Chamber. "INo Popery " became the rallying cry of the enemies of the king, and no display of severity on his part against the Catholics could satisfy their intolerant bigotry and insatiable craving for vengeance. The children of Catholics must be educated in the Protestant faith, and priests living in exile must be put to death if they ventured to visit the land of their fathers. A partiality for extemporaneous preaching and a hatred of church government by bishops were the two distinguishing characteristics of the Church of Scotland; and hence,. when King James attempted, in the year 1616, to force upon it a Service Book and a Code of Ecclesiastical Legislation, the attempt was successfully resisted. The scheme was revived by Charles I. in 1629, and a new Code of Ecclesiastical Law and a new Service Book were compiled, the latter of which received the royal approbation in 1636; but the Scotch churchmen again asserted their independence of the king in spiritual affairs, and their right to govern their Church and conduct their services as they thought fit. The royal party, who supported the claims of the king, were denounced from nearly every pulpit in Scotland as men who sought to " gag the Spirit of God and depose Christ from His throne." On July 23,-1637, when the Bishop of Edinburgh went to theprincipal church of the city to formally inaugurate the new

Page  220 220 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Service, he was greeted with groans and hisses and imprecations by the audience, which was chiefly composed of females, and a stobl, thrown by one of the enthusiasts, narlrowly missed his head. They cried out that tile "Mass was again entered; that Baal was in the church;" and told the bishop that he was "a thief, a devil's get, and of a witch's breeding." Again and again the king commanded the use of the Service to be enforced, and again and again his command was resisted by the indignant fury of the populace. The opponents of the king's policy grew daily in numbers and influence, and toward the close of the year demanded the formal revocation of the Service Book and Code of Ecclesiastical Law. In the beginning of the year 1638 a more efficient mode of resistance was agreed upon. A National Covenant, drawn up at Edinburgh, and intended to serve the double purpose of a Confession of Faith and a bond for uniting the whole people in one formidable body of dissenters, was ratified by the leading.Presbyterian -minoisters, and subscribed to by a great multitude of persons, representing every walk of life.' The king, acting on the advice of some of his counsellors, resolved to put down the Covenanters by force; but being as vet unprepared for war, he sent the Marquis of Hamilton as his commissioner to Scotland, partly with a view to gain time and partly in' the hope that the Scots might be wonj over by concessions. Ie proposed to them that if they would consent to disregard the Covenant and the obligations it imposed, the Service Book and the Book of Canons should be withdrawn, and those about to enter the ministry be excused fiom taking the oath of supremacy and canonical obedience. The Scots, who had secret information that Charles had no intention of:acting in good faith,'refufised to accept the royal proposal, and resolved to maintain the Covenant. At an assernbly, which met at Glasgow November 21, 1638, the Kirk, out of which, it was said, there was no salvation, -was declared independent in spiritual matters, the Episcopacy was abolished, the Service Book, the Ordinal, and the Book'Davidson, Historical Sketch, Illustrative of the National Confession of Faith, Edinburgh, 1849. (TR.) W1eber, Hist. of the Non-Catholic Churches iand Sects of Great Britain, Lps. 1845, 2 vols.

Page  221 ~ 329. Protestati.sm in England. 221 of Canons were repudiated, and the bishops excommunicated and deposed. The proceedings of this assembly were annulled by Charles, and by the Scots received with transports of joy. Active preparations were at once made for war on both sides. The Scots began hostilities in March of the following year by the seizure of the castle of Edinburgh; and Charles, after vainly attempting to successfully oppose them, opened a conference with them at Berwick, in whichl while reftsincg to recognize the proceedings of the assembly of Glasgow as legal, he proposed to leave the settlement of ecclesiastical questions to the decision of a general assembly, and that of civil matters to a parliament, both of which he would summon to convene in the month of August.l At the assembly, which convened in Edinburgh ill the following August, the king, dissembling his real feelings, reluctantly granted, through his representative, Traquaire, what it was no longer safe to refuse, and this happy consummation was hailed by the people of Scotland with shouts of triumph and prayers of thanksgiving. Charles returned to London, and summoned the parliament to meet (1640), in the hope that it would grant him the necessary supplies to carry on the war. The house of commons, however, declined to take any notice of the royal demands until the popular grievances should have been righted and the people's liberties guaranteed. The angry king hastily dissolved parliamrnt, and sent an army against the Scots, which was defeated at Newburn-upon-Tyne. After this victory, the Scottish army, encouraged by the tokens of good-will everywhere manifested by the inhabitants, continued its march toward the south as far as the borders of Yorkshire. Charles was now compelled, much against his will, to again convoke parliament. The memorable sittings of this body, which is known in history as the " Long Parliament," lasted from 1640 to 1649. The two houses began their labors by asserting the liberties of the people and impeaching high officers of State. Strabford was brought to trial, condemned, and beheaded, and Archbishop Laud was cast into prison. Fresh demands were daily made upon the king, and1Lingard, 1. c., Vol. IX., pp. 354-367. (TR.)

Page  222 222 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. new limitations put upon his prerogatives. Charles, conscious that the conflict between himself and his parliament would have to be submitted to the arbitration of arms, withdrew fiom London, and, on the 22d of August, 1642, unfurled the royal standard at Nottingham. The parliamentary leaders allied themselves with the Scotch covenanters "for the maintenance of the liberties of the Scotch Kirk and the reformation of the Church of England." In order to excite the prejudices and inflame the hatred of the people against the king and those who espoused his cause, they were branded as Papists by their opponents. In spite of the fact that Charles had had a number of priests put to death, it was reported, and generally believed, that the Catholics were conspiring in his favor. While the sufferings of the Catholics were many and terrible, those endured by the Episcopalians, if fewer and less rigorous, were still sufficiently aggravating to tax human patience to the utmost and to excite popular indignation against the persecutors. So intensely bitter was the feeling of the Presbyterians against the Established Church that, through their influence, its members were driven from their seats in parliament, and, if churchmen, deprived of their livings. The violence of the Presbyterians at length called forth a spirit of reaction in their own ranks, thus giving rise to a new party, known as the Independeits, and recognizing Fairf.ax and Oliver Cromwell as their leaders. Admitting neither a priesthood nor a ministry, to which the office of preaching necessarily attached, they permitted any one, who believed himself moved by the Holy Ghost, to expound the word of God, a task which army officers, and even common soldiers, took upon them to perform. An army inspired with such enthusiasm,'and led by a cool-headed, calculating general, was capable of extraordinary achievements, and hence the Parliamentarians, victorious throughout the whole struggle, crowned their triumph by a decisive victory over the king at the battle of Naseby, in May, 1645. After a series of disasters, Charles attempted to make hlis escape from the country, which., failing to do, he gave himself up to the Scottish army, by whose authority he was transferred to the Parliamentarians, and by them cast into

Page  223 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 223 -prison at Holmby. Refusing to purchase his perso'nal safety by a sacrifice of his principles and a surrender of his convictions, he was detained in prison until he was seized by the Independents, who wished to have possession of his person as a security against the hostile designs of the Presbyterians. In 1647, the king was transferred to Hampton Court, whence he escaped to the Isle of Wiglit, in the hope of being able to take passage in a vessel which the queen had sent from France to convey him thither. His design was frustrated by the vigilance and energy of the governor, and an uprising of the ilnhabitants of the island in his favor was instantly suppressed. Both houses of parliament passed a bill forbidding all further negotiations with the captive king, under penalty of high treason. The power of the army was now at its height, and the "Levellers," a fanatical sect, which included among its numbers the bulk of the private soldiers and many of the officers, pretended to demonstrate from Holy Scripture that the principle of popular sovereignty was the only true basis of government, and that all kings were hateful to God. The recent victories gained by Cromwell over the Scots, who attempted to rescue the king (1648), assured the triumph of the Rad;cals. They demanded that Charles should be brought to trial "as a man of blood," who had done his " utmost against the Lord's cause and people in this poor nation." The Presbyterians, who refused to share the views of the Independents and act in harmony with their designs, were forcibly drivenl from their places in the house of commons, which, consisting now of only sixty members —The Rump Parlianent-a)pointed a commission to try Charles on the charge of high treason, in that he had levied war against the Parliament of England. The king was brought to trial before the commission, assembled in Westminster Hall, and presided over by John Bradshaw, on the 20th of January, 1649. He received his sentence on the 27th, and three days later was beheaded. The Commonwealth was now proclaimed in England. Charles II., who had been recalled from the Continent, and crowned King of Scotland, after having been disastrously defeated by Cromwell at Worcester in 1651, made his escape

Page  224 224: Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. with some difficulty to France. This victory virtually made Cromwell supreme ruler of England; but, to give a color of legality to his acts, he was invested with the authority and title of Lord Protector by parliament in the year 1653.1 The policy pursued by this extraordinary man, who was by nature always stern and frequently tyrannical, soon put a period to anarchy at home, and made his government respected abroad. He put down every attempt at resistance with an iron hand, and when he died, in 1658, peace reigned throughout the land, and all ranks professed to obey, if they did not respect, his authority. On his death, his eldest son. Richard, wass proclaimed Protector by council; but destitute of the qualifications which fit one for so high and important an office, he was forced to resign in April, 1659, after holding his dignity little more than seven months; and in the following year Charles I1. was invited from the Continent to assume the title and responsibilities of King of England. Charles being deeply impressed with the conviction, which seemed a sort of first principle with the members of the House of Stuart, that episcopacy is the upholder of the throne, had it again re-established both in England and in Scotland. This measure, besides being extremely unpopular, rendered the king suspected of being at heart a Catholic, and drew upon himn the enmity of many. Cromwell had granted freedom of conscience to persons of every sect and shade of religious opinion, exceptinq Catholics alone, whose condition was not bettered under Charles II., notwithstanding that his brother, the Duke of tYork, was an earnest professor of the Catholic faith. They were accused of having been the authors of the great fire of London in 1666, and although there has never been produced a single shred of evidence in support of the charge, the lie is still perpetuated in an inscription on a monument erected ill London to commemorate the disaster. In the year 1673, a statute known as the "Test Act," and directed chiefly against James, Duke of York, passed the house of commons, ordaining'that all persons should be deI Villemain, Histoire de Cromwell d'apres les Mdmoirs du Temps et les Recueils Parlementaires, Paris, 1819, 2 vols. Ranke, Vol. III.

Page  225 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 225 dlared incapable of holding any office of public trust, either civil or military, and be disqualified to sue in courts of law and equity, to act as guardians or executors, or to take any legacy or deed of gift, who should refuse to take the oath of allegiance and supremacy, or decline to receive in public the, Sacrament according to the rites of the Church of England,. and subscribe a declaration denying the doctrine of transubstantiation.' Every possible means was resorted to, no matter how infamous, to suppress Catholicism and rouse public indignation against its professors. Lord Shaftesbury, who had been mainly instrumental in having the "Test Act" passed, now pretended that he had private information of a " Popish Plot" to assassinate the king, massacre the Protestants, and, burn the city of London, and that the conspirators, who were acting under the direction of the general of the Jesuits, included in their ranks nearly every Catholic in the kingdom.. The Plot was the pure invention of one Titus Oates or Ambrose, a man of disreputable character, who, taking advantage of a few adventitious circumstances, contrived a story so plausible that it readily obtained credence in the then excited state of the public mind. The subject was brought before parliament. Oates was hailed as the savior of the Protestants, granted a pension of nine hundred pounds a year, and assigned a suite of apartments at Whitehall. By the aid of suborned witnesses and truculent juries, many innocent Roman Catholic gentlemen were convicted of complicity in the Plot, and died the death of traitors at the block, protesting their innocence with their last breath. Charles II. was taken ill on1 February 2, 1685, and died four days later, after having made his peace with the Church of Rome, and received the consolations of her Sacraments. Notwithstanding the existence of an Exclusion. Bill, which. had passed the house of commons, declaring James, Duke of York, debarred from inheriting the crown of England, he succeeded to his brother without opposition (1685). On the 4th of April, 1687, he published a Declaration of Indulgence,'Lingard, 1. c., Vol. XII., pp. 28, 190, 191. (TR.) VOL. III-15

Page  226 226 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. granting liberty of conscience and freedom of worship to all his subjects. Had he been content with doing this much, he might, in all probability, have greatly ameliorated the condition of his Catholic co-religionists, without imperiling his own title to the throne. But being a devout and zealous Catholic, he desired to restore that faith to its ancient ascendency, and, by his efforts to do so, alarmed the jealousy and alienated the affections of his Protestant subjects, and thus prepared the way for his speedy downfall. He renewed relations with Rorne, and dispensed Catholics from the obligation of taking the Test Oath, thus removing their disqualificatiolis for holding office. On the 27th of April, 1688, James again published his Declaration of Indulgence, with some slight additions, and ordered it to be read in all the churches of the kingdom. This many of the clergy refused to do, and seven of the bishops, who ventured, on a written remonstrance, were committed to the Tower on the charge of seditious libel, tried and acquitted. The misfortunes of James culminated in the birth of a male heir apparent, known in history as "The Pretender," an event which, while bringing joy to the heart of the king, would, under different circumstances, have been hailed as a blessing by the nation. But now the prospect of a new line of Catholic rulers was viewed with apprehension by the discontented of every class, and with positive alarm by the holders of property formerly belonging to the Church. On the night of the 29th of June, 1688, the day of the acquittal of the bishops who had remonstrated in writing against reading the Declaration of Indulgence, and been indicted for libel in consequence, a message, signed by seven leading English politicians, was dispatched to William, Prince of Orange, begging him to come over to England and occupy the throne. William, who was then Stadtholder of the United Provinces, having married Mary, the daughter of James II., and a Protestant in religion, regarded his wife as the lawful heir to the English throne, and secretly favored every scheme for depriving her father of the crown. He accordingly accepted the invitation, and setting out with an army of fourteen thousand men, composed of English and Dutch, landed at Torbay, in Devonshire, November 5, 1688, and was hailed

Page  227 ~ 329. Protestantism in England. 227 as the "National Deliverer," come " to set the affairs of the realm in order." James, betrayed by his army and deserted by his children, after making a short, but ineffectual resistance, fled to France, and landed at Ambleteuse,Decenmber 25. His flight facilitated at once the triumph of his enemies, and furnished the chief ground of accusation against himself. He was declared to have abdicated the government, thereby leaving the throne vacant, and William and Mary were called to rule the English people as joint sovereigns. The date of their accession is coincident with the beginning of the " Protestant Ascendency." Catholics and those married to Catholics were forever declared incapable of wearing the crown of England; a new oath of allegiance was drawn up and prescribed; the right enjoyed by Catholics of appointing to livings was withdrawn from them, and bestowed upon the universities; and all Catholics, or those reputed to be such, were ordered not to approach within a distance of ten miles of London. An Act of Toleration, passed in the year 1698, granted liberty of conscience and freedom of worship to all except to Socinians and Catholics. The latter endured hardships the most rigorous, on account of their faith, being deprived of civil and political rights of every kind. Cathol-ic schools were closed, and Catholic priests were hunted down. Such Catholic clergymen as consented to give up their faith and enter what was styled " the one, true, saving, and apostolic Church of England," received the gift of splendid livings as a reward of their apostasy. Any Catholic child, who went over to the Established Church, obtained in his own right, even during the lifetime of his parents, and to the exclusion of his brothers and sisters, the wvhole family inheritance. That under such circumstances the Catholic faith did not become wholly extinct in Great Britain can be satisfactorily accounted for only by ascribing its preservation to the overruling guidance of its Divine Founder. This barbarous persecution was carried on without intermission or abatement throughout the whole course of the eighteenth century; and it required the fear inspired by the American War of Independence, and the dread of the contagious influence of the

Page  228 228 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. French Revolution, to extort from either statesmen or high — church functionaries any amelioration of the Penal Laws directed against Catholics. ~ 330. Protestantism in Scotland. J. Knox, Hist. of the Reform. of Scotland (till 1567), London, 1664, f. and' often. D. Calderwood, Hist. of the Kirk of Scotland, London, 1678, fol., Edinb. 1845, 7 vols. Gil. Stuart, History of the Establishment of the Reformnation in Scotland, London, 1780, 4to.; and The History of Scotland from the Establishment of the Reformation to the Death of Queen Mary. His object in this was to defend that unfortunate princess against Dr. Robertson and others. G. Cook, History of the Reformation in Scotland, Edinburgh, 1811, 3 vols., 8vo.; and History of the Church of Scotland, i vols., 8vo., 1815. lWm. Bradshaw, English Puritanism, containing the main opinions of the rigidest sort of thosethat went by that name in the realm of England, London, 1605 (Lat. trans., Puritanismus Anglicanus, Frcf. 1610). Wim. Robertson, History of Scotland, Edinburgh, 1.759, 2 vols. He passed over the earlier periods as " dark and fabulous." (Germ. tr., Brunswick, 2 pts.) Keith (Bishop), History of the Affairs of Church and State in Scotland, Edin. 1734, fol. G. Chalmers, Life of Mlary, Queen of Scots, Lond. 1818, 2 vols., 4to.; 1822, 3 vols., 8vo. P. F. Tutler, The History of Scotland, Edin. 1828-1843, 9 vols. M. Laing, Hist. of Scotland, 4 vols.; remarkable only for its partiality and attacks upon the character of the unfortunate Mary. Her great defender, Prince Labano/f, Recueil des Lettres de Marie Stuart, London, 1844, 7 vols., 8vo.; from which Rev. Donald M11cLeod drew the Life of Mary, Queen of Scots, New York, 1857. llf. Teulet, Papiers d' Etat relatifs a l'Histoire de l'Ecosse, Paris, 1851-1860, 3 vols, 4to.; 1862, 5 vols., 8vo. Miss Agnes Strickland, Lives of the Queens of Scotland, Edin. 1850-1859, 8 vols., 8vo. J. Cunningham, Church History of Scotland, 2 vols. (from a Presbyterian point of view). Geo. Grub, Eccl. Hist. of Scotland, 4 vols. (from an Episcopalian point of view). Burton, Hist. of Scotland (with numerous notices of eccl. affairs). T. nlines, Law of Creeds in Scotland. J. Skinner, Eccl. Hist. of Scotland, London, 1818, 2 vols., 8vo. Analecta Scotia, illustr. the civil, eccl., and lit. Hist. of Scotland, Edinb. 1834-1837, 12 vols., 8vo. J. A. Froude, Hist. of England, New York, 1865, 12 vols. Macaulay, Hist. of England. Stanley (Dean of Westminster), Lectures on the Hist. of the Church of Scotland, New York, 1872. Win. von Schitz, Mary Stuart, Mentz, 1839, 2 vols.; cf. concerning it Periodical of Historical Science, by Neander, year 1857. Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. I., p. 457 sq.; Vol. III., p. 696 sq. K. G. v. Rudlofl, Hist. of the Reform. in Scotland, Berlin, 1847-1849, 2 vols. IKoeslin, The Church of Scotland and her Relation to the State, Hamburg, 1852. W. M. Hetherington, Hist. of the Church of Scotland till 1843, 4th ed., Edinb. 1853, 8vo.; 3d ed., New York, 1844, 8vo. The introduction of the Reformation into Scotland was accompanied by deeds of exceptional atrocity. By an act of the Scotch parliament of 1525, the importation of books

Page  229 ~.30. Protestantism in Scotland. 229'treating of Lutheranism was prohibited, and all persons forbidden to take any other means of giving publicity to the lReforrmer's teachings. Patrick Hamilton, Abbot of Ferne,,during a stay in the cities of Wittenberg and Marburg, had become acquainted with the principles of Lutheranism, and after his return home disregarded the prohibition of parliament, and began to propagate the new heresy. He was arrested, tried, and burnt at the stake, opposite St. Andrew's College, in February, 1528. Of those who followed in his footsteps, and continued to spread the teachings of Luther, some, like him, expiated their offense at the stake, while others fled either to England or the Continent. These cruelties, coming with ill grace from a corrupt clergy, who were themselves the objects of public derision and contempt, still further roused the fury of their adversaries, who soon took a bloody vengeance. The inhabitants of the country gradually divided themselves into two hostile parties, which came into direct collision with each other in the year 1546. On the 28th of February of this year, George Wishart, the most eloquent of the Scotch Reformers, was arrested by the orders of Cardinal Beaton, the powerful Archbishop of St. Andrews, brought to trial, and burned at the stake.' On the 29th of the following May, a number of the Reform party, headed by Norman Lesley, attacked and murdered the cardinal, and seized and plundered his palace of St. Andrews, which became temporarily the stronghold of the Reformers. But of all those who preached the teachings of the Reformation in Scotland, none achieved such successes as the impetuous and eloquent John Knox.2 Brought up a Catholic, and'It should be stated, however, that Wishart's complicity in a plot entered into by the more zealous of the Reformers for the assassination of Card. Beaton was the immediate occasion of his arrest. 2 Th. M' Crie, Lives of John Knox and Andrew Melville, Edinburgh, 1811, 2 vols., and frequently ed.; in an abridgment by Plank, G6ttingen, 1817 (panegyric). Weber, John Knox and the Scottish Church (Studies and Criticisms, nro. 4). Brandes, John Knox, the Reformer of Scotland, Elberfeld, 1862.,(Lives and Select Writings of the Fathers and Founders of the Reformed ~Church, Pt. X.)

Page  230 230 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. educated for the service of the Church, he took priest's orders some time before 1530, and about twelve years later (1542) openly professed himself a Protestant. Ifearing of the assassination of Cardinal Beaton, he gave it as his opinion! that the deed had been of divine inspiration. He took up his residence at the castle of St. Andrew's, after its capture by the Reformers, and in 1547 began his career as a preacher in the parish church of the same name by an intemperate denunciation of the errors of Popery. When the fortress was taken by the royal troops, Knox, being one of the captured prisoners, was conducted across to France, where he spent nearly two years in the galleys. Returning to England, he again began to preach; was appointed one of the chaplains to Edward VI.; fell in love, and was married. When Mary sueceeded to the throne of England, Knox, with others of the Reformers, withdrew to the Continent. He spent some time at Dieppe, Geneva, and FraD kfort-on-the-Main; made a short visit to Scotland to encourage the Reformers (1555), and returned to Geneva (1556), where he passed nearly three years in charge of a church, and became a thorough-going Calvinist. Affairs in Scotland seemed to conspire to favor the Reformers. The weak and vain Earl of Arran, who became regent on the death of James V., in 1542, was quite content to allow the innovators to have their own way, provided only the prosecution of their plans did not lead to open rebellion. When Mary succeeded to the throne, she saw herself condemned to be an idle spectator of the uninterrupted progress of the new teachings, which had been propagated chiefly by English refugees, who sought an asylum in Scotland, after the accession of Mary Tudor to the throne (1553), and of whom John Willock was the most distinguished. A Synod convened in Edinburgh in 1549 to provide measures for the removal of the ignorance and the correction of the morals of the Scottish clergy, but it was already too late to effect any good. Among his other labors, Knox occupied himself during his stay at Geneva in writing a work, published in 1558, entitled "The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regimen of

Page  231 ~ 330. Protestantism in Scotland. 231 Women," being a violent attack upon Mary of Guise, Regent of Scotland, and Mary Tudor, Queen of England. From Geneva, Knox kept up an active correspondence with his partisans in Scotland, whom he counseled to employ force, should other means fail, for the suppression of an idolatrous worship and the overthrow of an idolatrous government. He was fond of repeating that, " by no other means were owls so effectually frightened away as by burning their nests." The passions of the multitude, which had been recently aroused by the burning of Walter Milne, an apostate priest, were still further inflamed when, in 1559, Knox was recalled to Scotland, and began to preach against the idolatry of the Mass and the veneration of images. The " rascal multitude," as Knox afterward called those who only put his precepts into practice,. roused to fury by the fiery Vlenunciations he had laiunched against an idolatrous worship, proceeded to demolish the images and tear and trample under foot the pictures in the churches of the city of Perth, and sack and lay in ruins the houses of the Franciscan and Dominican friars and the monastery of the Carthusians. Similar outrages were perpetrated in other cities of Scotland. The inauguration of the Reformed Religion was always preceded by the sacking of churches, the destruction of images, and the utter demolition of whatever in any way referred to the Mass, or had any connection with the veneration of Saints. The Scottish Reformers, with a view to centralizing their power, formed a covenant, which came to be known as the Congregation, and its leaders as Lords of the Congregation. Between that portion of the population represented by this body and assisted by Elizabeth, Queen of England, and the adherents of the queenregent, assisted by the King of France, a civil war of twelve months' duration was carried on, which was characterized by incidents of unusual atrocity. While the English troops were investing Edinburgh, the queen-regent died, after which both parties agreed to a truce, during which it was arranged to summon a parliament, to whose action the settlement of their difficulties should be left. The parliament, which assembled in August, 1560, declared the Reformed the established religion of Scotland, and interdicted Catholic worship.

Page  232 232 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. When, therefore, Mary Stuart, after the death of her husband, Francis II., Dauphin of France, returned to Scotland, August 21, 1561, to enter upon the government of that kingdom, she found her religion, to which she was devotedly attached, abolished, and the penalty of confiscation and death decreed against any one who should hear Mass. The old Catholic faith had been replaced by a rigid Calvinism, and the episcopal form of church government by that of Presbyters, belonging to the "Community of the Saints."' This democratic system was applied to politics as well as religion. Under these circumstances, Mary Stuart, while refusing to formally concede all the claims put forward by the victorious Reformers, was, nevertheless, content to leave matters as she found them, and even condescended to gratify their wishes in everything consistent with her duty as a Catholic and her dignity as a queen. Disregarding the counsels of the more zealous of the oroman Catholics, she selected her advisers from among the Protestants, and appointed as her minister of state her illegitimate brother, James Stuart, an ambitious and able statesman, whom she afterward created Earl of Murray. But, while granting freedom of worship to others, she claimed for herself the liberty of hearing Mass said in the chapel of the castle of Edinburgh, a concession which Knox and others of the extreme Reformers denounced as an offense against the law of God, which would inevitably draw down the divine vengeance upon the whole land. "I had rather," said Knox, " face ten thousand enemies than know that one Mass is said in Scotland.".So violent were his denunciations, and so effective in their results, that when Mary made her solemn entrance into Edinburgh, the city council issued a proclamation, expelling from the city "the whole wicked rabble of Antichrist and the Pope, to wit, priests, monks, lay-brothers, fornicators, and adulterers." While the manners of Mary's court were not'' The government and discipline of the Church rest, on the Presbyterian theory, with collective bodies of teaching (or clerical) elders, generally called'ministers,' and ruling (or lay) elders, who are generally meant when'elders' are spoken of, gathered in Synods, and not with individual persons, as in the Episcopal system, or with individual congregations, as in the Independent system." Blunt, Diet. of Heresies, etc., art. " Presbyterians." (TR.)

Page  233 ~330. Protestantism'in Scotland. 233 of that stern and gloomy severity which the Scotch Reformers affected, it must also be admitted that, in their judgments of her, they were harsh and unjust, rather than equitable and tolerant. Knox, who was fully alive to the impression whichl her singular beauty and attractive address would make upon those with whom she came in contact, resolved to counteract any influence she might derive from her personal graces and charm of manner by coarse invectives against her policy and indelicate insinuations against her character. Her marriage with her cousin, Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley, son of the Earl of Lennox, whose whole family were reputed zealous Catholics, he had the indecent effrontery to liken to the union between Ahab and Jezebel. This marriage, which was celebrated at Holyrood, July 29, 1565, though perfectly honorable, was disastrous in its consequences. It was the occasion of a revolt, headed by Murray and the Hamiltons, iwho, disappointed in their hopes of assistance from the Protestants, were defeated by the forces of the queen, who had taken the -field in person against them. Mary now began to awake to the fact that her marriage with Darnley had been a mistake. His morals were dissolute, his arrogance intolerant, and his ambition boundless. But, while he possessed all the vices, he had none of the virtues of a strong character. IHe had received from Mary the title of king; but, not content with this, demanded that the crown should be secured to him for life, and thiat in the event of the queen's dying without issue, it should descend to his heirs. His demands having been refused, he entered into a conspiracy with Murray, Morton, and others of the Protestant leaders, for the murder of Riccio, Mary's secretary, who, he persuaded them, was the real obstacle to the accomplishment of his wishes. Entering the queen's apartments, the assassins, headed by the king, seized the poor Italian, dragged him into the ante-chamber, and dispatched him with more than fifty wounds (March 9, 1566). Speaking of this atrocious and cowardly murder, the pious Knox said it was "a just act and worthy of all praise." The queen succeeded, by kind attentions and demonstrations of love, in detaching her husband from the conspirators; but,.although her affection for him seemed to revive as the time

Page  234 234 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. of her confinement drew near, she was again soon alienated from him. Darnley was taken ill of the small-pox at Glasgow toward the middle of January, 1567. TIe was removed thence to Edinburgh, where he was lodged in a small house beside the Kirk of the Field. This house was blown up ly gunpowder on the night of the 9th of' February, and Darnley's lifeless body found in the neighboring garden. Notwithstanding that Mary visited him daily while here, spending some whole nights under the same roof, and showing him every attention and kindness, she has been accused of complicity in his murder, although no satisfactory evidence of her guilt has ever been produced. Bothwell was generally believed to have been at the bottom of the plot, and Mary's marriage to him, only three months after the murder of her late husband, in spite of the fact that she had beeii abducted by violence, and her consent extorted by force, gave color of truth to the damaging suspicions that were put in circulation by her enemies. This fatal step was speedily followed by disaster. A faction, including many of the nobility of Scotland, and headed by Earl Murray, rose in arms; and unable to hold out against them, she wits forced to surrender herself a prisoner into their hands. She was prevailed upon whiJe a captive to sign an act of abdication in favor of her son, James, then only thirteen months of age, which she did at Lochleven, July 24th. Murray was named regent during the minority of the young king, and bound himself by oath to extirpate the enemies of the Gospel from Scotland. Accused of adultery and complicity in the assassination of Darnley, and vanquished by her enemies, Mary committed the fatal blunder of accepting the proffered hospitality of Elizabeth of England, her most inveterate enemy, from whose hands she never escaped.' The pious and rebellious Knox died in 1572, confessing that he was " wearied of the world," and his place was filled by another Reformer, quite as radical and fanatical as himself, named Andrew Melville. James VI. succeeded to the government of the kingdom in 1578, and, true to the traditionary IFred. v. Raumer, Elizabeth and Mary, Lps. 1836.

Page  235 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 235 policy of the House of Stuart, did what he could to strengthen the authority of the Episcopacy. His efforts, however, were frustrated by the boldness and energy of the Presbyterians. The general assembly of 1581 commanded all bishops to resign their sees, and forbade them to exercise any episcopal function, under penalty of banishment from the kingdom. By an act of parliament of the year 1584, the Episcopacy was again re-established, and all attempts against the royal person declared high treason. But now that James had the sanction of parliament for the restoration of the Episcopacy, he lacked the power to carry the act into execution, and was once more obliged to yield to the demands of the Presbyterians, whose system of church government was legalized by parliament in 1592. The bishops, while permitted to retain their seats in parliament, were deprived of all right to exercise ecclesiastical functions, and forbidden to bear the title of bishop. In spite of the persistent persecution directed against the Catholic religion in Scotland, it never quite disappeared from the land; and, after maintaining itself in obscurity for centuries in the Highlands, has been steadily gaining ground, and making notable progress in these latter days. ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. Thos. Moore, Memoirs of Captain Rock, ed. 1824 and 1852. The same, History of Ireland, forming 4 vols. of Lardner's Cabinet Cyclopaedia, 1839-1846. O'Connell, A Memoir of Ireland, Native and Saxon, 1 vol., 8vo., Dublin, 1843. Ireland's Situation, from an ecclesiastical point of view, in the Thbinyen Quarierty Review, year 1840, pp. 549 sq. Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. V., pp. 490 sq. Thos. Darcy M' Gee, Hist. of the Attempt to Establish the Protestant Refo)rmation in Ireland, Boston, 1853. Brenan, O. S. F., Eccl. Hist. of Ireland, Dublin, 1864. I1. D. Killen, Eccl. Hist. of Ireland, London, 1875. The very name of Ireland is associated in the mind with civil and religious persecution. The first attempts to rob Ireland of her independence and her people of their freedom date back to the reign of Henry II., in 1166. Those districts, occupied at different times by the English settlers, were known under the general name of "the Pale," the geographical limit of which varied with the fortunes of the English arms in Ireland. From the inhabit

Page  236 236 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. ants of the Pale, the members of the so-called Irish parliament into whose hands the destinies of the nation were committed, were selected. Once Henry VIIII. had made up his mind to become supreme spiritual head of the Church of England, lihe was equally anxious to enjoy the same title and authority ill Ireland. The archiepiscopal see of Dublin falling vacailt, Cromwell appointed to it one George Brown (1535), then provincial of the Order of Augustinians in England, and formerly a Lutheran. Having arrived in Dublin, he and the commissioners from Henry VIII., who accompanied him, summoned some of the bishops and nobles to the castle of Dublin, and called on them to subscribe to the supremacy of the king in the spiritual affairs of the Church of Ireland. George Cormer, Primate of Ireland, indignantly repelled such a claim, and -summonin g the Episcopacy of the country before him, called on themrto resist to the last this attempt to open a schism in the Irish Church. This scheme failing, Lord Grey, the deputy, called the parliament to meet at Dublin, May 1, 1536, and by this body Henry VIII. was declared "sole and supreme head on earth of the Church of Ireland," the Pope's jurisdiction renounced, and all who should maintain it rendered subject to the penalties of praemunire.'Brenan, Eccl. Hist. of Ireland, Dublin, 1864, pp. 392-393. (TR.) In a letter, dated September, 1535, written by Archbishop Browne to Cromwell, the writer says: "' He had endeavored, almost to the hazard of his life, to reduce the nobility and gentry of Ireland to due obedience in owning the king their supreme head, as well spiritual as temporal; but that he was much opposed therein, especially by Cromer, Archbishop of Armagh, who had laid a curse on the people whoever should own the king's supremacy, and had thereby drawn to him the most of his suffragans and clergy within his jurisdiction; that the archbishop and priests of Armagh had sent two messengers to Rome, and that it was feared O'Neill (the great chief of Ulster) would be ordered by the Pope -to oppose the changes." KIillen, Eccl. Hist. of Ireland, London, 1875, Vol. I., pp. 338-339. This writer is a Protestant, and shows the animus of a bigoted partisan. (TR.) " All officials of every class were required to take the oath of supremacy, and all who refused were declared guilty of high treason. Several of the old penal laws were revived. Marriage and fostering with the Irish were forbidden, and throughout the Pale the English language and habit were strictly enjoined. A law was made for the establishment of an English school in every district." Killen, 1. c., pp. 339-340. Of Archbishop Browne, through whose -exertions the Statute of Supremacy was passed, the same writer says: "In

Page  237 ~ 331. Protestantism in Irelanrd. 23T7 The royal supremacy was recognized by a few sordid bisliops and priests, who set more value upon the goods of this. world than upon their own salvation in the next;' and some of the Irish chieftains were won over by royal favor and bounty. But the great bulk of the Irish people opposed a vigorous and persevering resistance to the progress of the Reformation, being unable to comprehend in what the belief of men, who entered the country crying "Death to the Irish," could be superior to their own ancient faith, which counseled peace and good-will to all. Preachers were brouglht over from England, and the English liturgy introduced, with a view to facilitate and hasten the work of the Reformation in Ireland; but, strange to say, the results that followed were the reverse of what had been anticipated. The resistance of the Irish to the new teachings grew daily more pronounced and energetic. Every royal artifice and every display of kingly power, designed to alienate their affections from the ancient faith, failed utterly of their purpose. In vain did an Anglo-Irish parliament, held at Dublin ill 1542, proclaim Henry "King of Ireland;" in vain were peerages conferred upon some of the native princes. The absence of the bishops from the parliament was significant of the temper of the country, and no attempt was made by the natives to disguise their hostility to all foreign domination. Even the representatives of those English families that had been long settled in the land spurned the new teachings as contemptuously as did the ancient Irish. A new dynasty had indeed been thrust upon the country; but, instead of inspiring, love, it called forth the execrations of the people, who front that day forth have never ceased to regard the cause of theirs national independence and the cause of their religion as instead of insisting that at least a portion of them (the spoils of the dissolved abbeys) should be employed in promoting the general enlightenment of the people, he solicits once and again for a share to himself, though he already enjoyed a very ample income." Ibid., 1. c., p. 341. Such has always been the character of the men who have felt themselves called to improve upon the work of God, and supply the shortcomings of his censurable neglect. (TR.) 1Brenan, 1. c., p. 394. (Ta.)

Page  238 238 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. separably bound up together, and to view an attack on the one as a menace against the other. On the accession of Edward VI., the Duke of Somerset, the protector, issued a proclamation in the king's name, ordaining that the Liturgy of the Church of England should be introduced into all places of worship, and commanding all bishops and priests to yield obedience to the royal will. George Brown,1 Archbishop of Dublin, obeyed with alacrity, and on Easter Sunday, 1551, had the new service read in the Cathedral of Christ's Church in his own presence. The other bishops of the country, proving less pliable than the servile Brown, were commanded by the viceroy, Sir Anthony St. Leger, to come up to Dublin, where, assembled in the council chamber, they listened to the reading of the royal proclamation. When it was ended, George Dowdall, Primate of Arnagh, rose up, and, after having protested against its instructions as dangerous and unwarrantable innovations, abruptly left the chamber, followed by all the clergy, with the exception of Brown, of Dublin; Staples, Bishop of Meath; and John Bale, a Carmelite, who, as a reward for his apostasy, Mwas afterward thrust by royal power into the See of Ossory,2 whence he was expelled, after a short stay, by the fury of an outraged people. The dignified and manly course of Dowdall was too great an offense to go unpunished, and he was accordingly deprived of his see, and an Englishman, named Goodacre, appointed in his place. The title of Primate of all Ireland was also withdrawn from the See of Armagh, and conferred upon that of Dublin, as an additional recompense to Brown for his many virtues and his still more numerous 1 It would appear that this archbishop, who was so inveterate an enemy of:superstition that his zeal led him to cast into the fire the crozier, known as the Staff of Jesus, which well authenticated tradition said had belonged to St. l'atrick, the Apostle of Ireland, and for eleven hundred years had been held in veneration as one of Ireland's most precious relics, was not himself very fond of missionary work. Killen, the Protestant historian of the Irish Church, informs us that " his sermons could not have occupied more than from eight to te n minutes each in the delivery," and that "he preached only twice in the year.;' 1. c., Vol. I., p. 341, note 3, and p. 365, note 1. (TR.) 2Brenan, 1. c., p. 398. It is remarkable that these apostates were Englishmen. (TR.)

Page  239 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 239 services in the cause of reform. Every means that human ingenuity could devise, or human power execute, was now brought into play to induce the Irish clergy and people to prove recreant to the venerable faith of their fathers. Threats, blribes, flattery, promises of wealth, honors, and distinctions, ill served their turn, and all.were contemptuously rejected or disregarded. Of the Irish Episcopacy, except those already mentioned, Magenis, Bishop of Down, and Burke, Bishop of Clonfert, were alone found willing to give up their faith from motives of avarice. A few Irish priests also apostatized, and received mitres as a reconmpense for their dishonor.l Edward VI. died in 1553, and on the 6th of July of the same year Mary succeeded to the throne. During her reign the Catholics of Ireland enjoyed a short respite from the persecutions of the preceding one. Priests came forth from their places of concealment, where they had sought a refuge to escape the firy of their pursuers; churches and chapels that had been closed or desecrated were again opened and restored to their ancient uses; George Dowdall, who had retired to the Continent, returned and took possession of his See of Armagh; Brown, Staples, Lancaster, and Travers were deposed, and the same fate would have overtaken Casey and Bale had.they not prudently retired of their own accord; immoral ecclesiastics were punished; pastors were again set over their flocks; and order, morality, and religion once more held empire over the hearts of a faithful people. It is a signal proof of the humanity and forgiving temper of the Irish race that, notwithstanding the indignities and atrocities endured by theni during the preceding reign, this complete change was brought about without the shedding of a single drop of blood. For the purpose of reforming what needed reformation in the Irish Church, Archbishop Dowdall called a National Synod, which convened at Drogheda (1554), and was attended by nearly all the Catholic bishops of the country. Here several decrees were made, restoring ancient practices of the Church that 1Only three are mentioned, says Brenan, 1. c., in our authentic annals, namely: Robert Travers, Thomas Lancaster, and William Casey. The first became Bishop of Leighlin; the second Bishop of Kildare; and the third Bishop of Limerick. (TR.)

Page  240 240 Period 3. Epo&h 1. Chapter 2. had fallen into disuse, and providing for the correction orpunishment of immoral ecclesiastics.' In May, 1556, Viscount Fitzwalter entered upon his duties as viceroy, and in July of the same year parliament met in Dublin. An act was passed by this parliament, setting forth that the title of " Supreme Head of the Church " could not " be justly attributable to any king or governor," and that the IHoly See should " have and enjoy the same authority and jurisdiction" as had been lawfully exercised by His HIoliness the Pope during the early part of the reign of Henry VIII.2 Protestantism was now nearly extinct in Ireland, there being only three or four reformed preachers in the land,3 and the future of the Catholic Church seenmed full of hope and promise, when the whole aspect of affairs was changed by the death of Mary and the accession of Elizabeth (1558). During this and succeeding reigns a violent persecution was carried on against the Irish Catholics, so cold-blooded, systematic, and atrocious that, since the time of the Pharaohs, the world has seen nothing comparable to it. Violence was practiced under the forms of law; brute force was employed where other means failed; and to attempt any resistance, even in defense of the most sacred rights, was declared an act of high treason. Such, with the exception of' short seasons of peace, occurring at long intervals, was the normal condition of Ireland for three centuries. To hold that country dependent on England, the people were kept in a chronic state of insurrection, and the ministers of Elizabeth did not attempt to conceal that they practiced so infamous a means for so iniquitous a purpose. When, goaded to desperation, the people rose in rebellion, they were put down by fire and sword, and the work of destruction was completed by the ravages of famine. But while this policy carried ruin and death to the people, it secured-no solid advantages to Protestantism, in whose interest it was inaugurated, notwithstanding that Catholic bishops and priests were driven from their sees and parishes, their goods'Brenan, 1. c., p. 401-404. (TR.) 2 The'3d and 4th of Philip and Mary, chap. VIII., as quoted by Killen. (TR.) 3Ktllen, 1. c., Vol. I., p. 365. (TR.)

Page  241 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 241 confiscated, and they themselves either banished the country or put to death. In the year 1559, Thomas, Earl of Sussex, acting on the, order of his sovereign, summoned the Irish parliament to: meet in Dublin. This assembly, from which the Catholic nobles were carefully excluded, is described by IHooker as "l more like a bear-beating of disorderly persons than a parliament of wise and grave men."' Still agitators of this character,. whose undignified conduct excited the contempt of their own apologists, ordained that the Book of Common Prayers should be used in all places of public worship. If a priest cclebrated the Lord's Supper, either publicly or in private, inany manner other than that laid down in the Liturgy of the Church of England, he was condenlned to forfeit a year's income and be imprisoned six months for the first offense; to forfeit his income forever and be imprisoned at pleasure for the second; and for the third to be imprisoned during the term of his natural life. Laymen using any form of worship other than that contained in the Book of Common Prayer were sent to prison for one year for the first, and for life forthe second offense; and all persons, whether ecclesiastics or laymen, holding livings or offices, were ordered to come forward, under penalty of deprivation and forfeiture, and take the oath of Supremacy.2 Speaking of the character of the men who went over to Ireland to introduce the Reformation into that country, Spenser, himself a Protestant, and an eye-witness of what he attests, says: " Whatever disorders you see in the Established Church through England, you may find.here, and many more, namely, grosse simony, greedy covetousness, fleshy incontineney, carelesse sloath, and generally all disordered life in the common clergyman." 3 The legislation already in operation proving ineffectual to prevent the Catholic clergy of Ireland from providing for the interests of the Church by secret meetings held in Dublin,.'Brenan, 1. c., p. 404. (TR.) 2 Lib. Stat., p. 201, quoted by Brenan, 1. c., p. 405. (TR.) 8Spenser, pp. 139-140, quoted by Brenan, 1. c., p. 405. (Tr.) VOL. III 16.

Page  242 242 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. the Earl of Essex issued a proclamation in 1563, forbidding.all priests, whether secular or regular, either to meet or reside in the city, and republished a former edict, commanding all heads of families to attend Protestant service every Sunday. Another addition-was shortly after made to the proclamation *of 1559, summoning every individual in the country to come forward and acknowledge the Spiritual Supremacy of Elizabeth.1 But, though every means that great wealth and irresistible power could command was brought into play to break the spirit and shake the faith of the Irish people and clergy, they continued steadfast and loyal to the Church of their fathers; and of the episcopacy, only two, Miler Magrath, _Bishop of Down, and Hugh Curwin, an Englishman, who had been appointed by Mary to,the archiepiscopal See of Dublin in the roonm of Brown, proved recreant to their trusts and traitors to their God. The defection of these two bishops was, however, amply atoned for by the heroic constancy and glorious martyrdom of numerous others. Dermot O'ilurley, Archbishop of Cashel, was tied to a stake and his body covered with pitch, salt, oil, and sulphur; after which a slow fire was started, and managed with such a refinement of barbaric skill and civilized cruelty, that the victim was made to endure the inhuman torture for hours without being permitted to expire. He was then cast into prison, but only to be brought forth the next day and strangled on the rack in Stephen's Green, Dublin, 1583.2 Patrick O'Hely, Bishop of Mayo, was stretched on a rack; his hands and feet broken with hammers; large needles driven violently under his nails; and, after enduring these barbarities for some time, was taken from the rack only to be hung from the limb of a neighboring tree (1578).3 Richard Creach, Archbishop of Armagh, was carried to London and confined in the Tower. He was brought forth for trial, and confronted with a young lady, the daughter of the gaoler, who had been suborned to testify that he had attempted to outrage her person. Summoned to the witness-stand, the'Brenan, 1. c., p. 407. (TR.) 2Analecta sacra, appendix, p. 7. (TR.) 3Arthur a Monasterio, in suo Martyrologio, quoted by Brenan, 1. c., p. 415.. (TiR)

Page  243 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 243 young woman, startled at the injustice of her purpose, and yielding to the promptings of her better nature, openly confessed that the good prelate was wholly innocent of the crime his enemies were desirous of fastening upon him. But these men cared not whether he was innocent or guilty; they sought only his life, and of that they would not be baffled. He was again sent to the Tower, where he was chained like a wild beast; and, after undergoing every sort of suffering and privation for above four years, was finally poisoned October 14, 1585.1 The sufferings of these illustrious men, than whom Ireland has no greater saints in her long catalogue of martyrs, may serve as specimens to shlow what the Irish had to endure to keep the faith. The record of their lives is as proud a page as there is in the history of any people; and those historians who are assiduously ransacking the annals of the Spanish Inquisition for examples of inhuman atrocity can find them more conveniently and certainly in a more aggravated form by turning to the history of the Reformation in Ireland.2 To utterly root up and destroy the Catholic faith in Ireland, its seminaries and its colleges were closed by law; Catholic education, whether public or private,. proscribed throughout the whole island; and those desiring to acquire a liberal education could do so only by either giving up their faith or crossing over to the Continent, where the munificent hospitality of strangers opened seats of learning for the Irish youth, which in some sort supplied the advantages furnished by those that had been closed against them at home.3'Analecta sacra de rebus Cath. Hib. de Processu Martyr., pp. 46 sq. (TR.) 2 For particulars of the lives'of these men, and many more, the reader is referred to Brenan. (TR.) 3 The Irish seminary at Lisbon, which was munificently endowed, was founded in 1595. Another was founded about the same time at Evora by Cardinal Henriquez.'The Irish college of Douay was founded in 1596. Through the exertions of Christopher Cusack, a priest of the diocese of Meath, colleges were founded at Lisle, Antwerp, Tournay, and St. Omer. Seminaries were founded at Bordeaux, Toulouse, and Nantes, under the patronage of Anne of Austria. The Irish college on the hill of Ste. Genevieve, in Paris, was the gift of the French government, and Baron de St. Just was its chief benefactor. In 1582, the College of Salamanca was founded by the States of Castile and Leon, under

Page  244 244 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. The accession of James I. to the throne of England led the, Irish to'hope that they might look for at least a scant nieasureof justice from the son of Mary Stuart, and count upon the free exercise of their religion during his reign. Thlat this hope was fallacious they learned when James proclaimed an act of oblivion and indemnity, and excluded by name from the benefits of its provisions only "Papists an.d assassins." A petition, carried to the king in 1603, begging freedom of relitious worship for Catholics, was treated with contempt, and the bearers of it sent to prison in the Tower. On July 4, 1605, a royal ordinance was published, declaring all the enact-.ments of the reign of Elizabeth in force, to which the king added that " no toleration shall ever be granted by us; and this," he went on to say, "we do for the purpose of cutting off all hope that any other religion shall ever be allowed, save that which is consonant to the laws and statutes of this realm."1 This ordinance required " all Jesuits, seminary priests, and other priests whatsoever, to depart out of thekingdom of Ireland" before the ensuing 10th of December.2 During the reign of Elizabeth an unsuccessful attempt had been made to render the native Irish strangers in their own land and among their own people. It was proposed to send over English and Scotch colonists, who should take possession of the lands in various districts and settle permanently in the country. The scheme was again taken up by James, to whom an excellent opportunity of carrying it intoeffect was presented when the property of the three powerful chiefs of Ulster, namely, Tyrone, Tyrconnel, and O'Dogherty,. escheated to the crown. Their estates, it is said, included nearly the whole of the six northern counties of Cavan, Fermanagh, Armagh, Derry, Tyrone, and Tyrconnel, and embraced two millions of acres.3 When insurrections did not the patronage of Philip II. Baron George Sylveria founded the Irish college at Alcala de Henares, which, being richly endowed, was the great nursery of Irish missionaries during the seventeenth century. Brenan, 1. c., p. 423. (TR.), 1 O'Daly, Relatio Persec. Hib,, p. 232. (TR.) 2 Calendar of State Papers, James I., 1606-1608, Pref. 60-61; also Burke's Hibernia Dominicana, pp. 611-612. (TR.) 3This project, known as the Ulster Plantation, was carried out with great

Page  245 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 245 break out with sufficient frequency to satisfy the greed of the avaricious agents of government, it was pretended that the'pacification of Ireland required a periodical revision of titles to the possession of land. It was not to be expected that in a country so long and so violently convulsed all titles should be without flaw; and it is certain that wherever defects existed, they did not escape the keen and practiced eyes of the government lawyers. That the lord chief-justice and the viceroy fully appreciated their opportunity, their zeal in hunting -up defective titles, and their avidity in seizing the property for which no clear claim could be established, amply attest. In some instances, where the jury resolutely refused to do the bidding of the viceroy, they were summoned to Dublin, heavily fined, and cast into prison.1 These persecutions were kept up throughout the whole of the reign of James, and continued with increased violence under that of his successor, Charles I. (1625-1649). When this prince ascended the throne, it was hoped he would deal justly with the people of Ireland, and grant to them the same freedom of worship he allowed to his Catholic queen, Henrietta Maria, daughter of Henry IV. of France. This would probably have been his policy had he not inherited the weak and halting character so peculiar to the house of Stuart, and been surrounded by wicked and bigoted advisers. Accordingly, when the Catholics began to practice their religion openly, the Irish Protestant hierarchy, headed by the Archbishop Usher, took the alarm, and protested against a grant of graces, as they were called, which the king promised the skill. The lands to be "' planted " were parceled out into tracts of one thousand, fifteen hundred, and two thousand acres each, and given to Protestant settlers from England and Scotland, who were required to build castles or large houses, capable of being defended, in strong and commanding positions. The natives were permitted to take up their residence in the open country, under the control and at the mercy of the English and Scotch " undertakers and servitors." or capitalists and military officers. These latter were obliged to take the oath of supremacy, and to exclude any tenant not of British origin. Lilyard, Hist. of England, London, 1849, Vol. IX., pp. 148, 149. Killen, Eccl. Hist. of Ireland, London, 1875, Vol. I., p. 482. (TR.) 1Thos. Moore, Memoirs, Book I., ch. 7, notes 26-28. Killen, i. c., Vol. II., p. 29. (TR.)

Page  246 246 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Catholics in return for the payment of a certain sum of money. The Protestants went on to say that it would be " a grievous sin" to permit Catholics the "free exercise of their religion," because to do so would be to give the sanction of government to superstition, idolatry, and heresy, and to barter for money souls redeemed by the blood of Christ.' The king yielded to the pressure brought to bear upon him by the Protestant bishops of Ireland, and in 1629 the statutes against Catholics were once more revived.2 Lord Falkland, vwho was then Viceroy of Ireland, unwilling to carry out the initquitous and fraudulent policy of the government, was recalled, and Lord Wentworth, afterward Earl of Strafford, was appointed in his place in January, 1632. That Wentworth was a man of great ability and eminent talents there can be no doubt; 3 and there is just as little doubt that he prostituted in the service of the devil the splendid gifts he had received firom God. Once the uncompromising champion of the rights of the people, he had now become the uncompromising cham-:,ion of the claims of the king. Possessed of great courage and tenacity of purpose, and destitute of every humane feeling and conscientious scruple, he was appalled by no consideration of guilt in the conception of his measures, and was deterred by no obstacle in their execution. The leading and 1 Lingard,]. c., Vol. IX., pp. 335, 336. Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., pp. 3, 4. Brenan, i. c., p. 453. (TR.) 2 The character of these bishops, who were so zealous in putting down what they were pleased to call "superstition," is given in a letter of remonstrance, addressed to the four archbishops by the king in April, 1630. " The clergy," he said, "were not so careful as they ought to be... in removing all pretenses to scandal in their lives and conversation." "When livings fall vacant," "some bishops" " do either not dispose of them so soon as they should, but do keep the profits in their own hands, to the hindrance of God's service and great offense of good people, or else they give them to young and mean men, which only bear the name, reserving the greatest part of the benefice to themselves." Erlington's Life of Usher, pp. 106-108. Coyne, in his Memoir of the Life and Episcopate of Bedell, pp. 34, 35, says Thomas Moygne, the Protestant predecessor of Bedell in the See of Kilmore, treated " all things spiritual and temporal belonging to the episcopacy" as if they " had been ordinarily vendible commodities; " even "' orders and livings " being " sold to those that could pay the greatest prices." See Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., pp. 7, 8. (TR.) 3 Thos. Moore, 1. c., chap. 8, p. 65.

Page  247 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 247 controlling principle of his government was that Ireland was a conquered country, and as such her inhabitants held their possessions by no title other than the good-will of the king. A system of legalized robbery, under the specious name of an inquiry into the titles by which property was held, was begun and perfected by him, and under its operation the whole province of Connaught was declared the inheritance of the crown, and parceled out among the favorites of the court. This measure was the more atrocious, in that the king, by the contract of 1628 between himself and the landed proprietors of Ireland, had promised to make good by act of parliament the titles of the actual possessors of lanlds. In a parliament, which niet in Dublin in 1634, many of whose rmembers were selected either directly by the viceroy, or in compliance with his wishes, subsidies to the amount of ~46,000 sterling were voted to the king; but when the question of confirming the promised Fifty-one Graces was raised,. Strafford possessed sufficient influence to have the measure voted down. Among the leading causes that contributed to the success of this perfidious act were the threats and cajolery of the viceroy, the packing of the parliament, and the fact that of the Fifty-one Graces nearly all were intended to correct grievances that weighed upon Catholics alone.l At the moment when the king was threatened by his Scotch subjects, and at variance with the English parliament, the Irish came generously forward- to relieve his necessities, and in return asked only that he should do them the scanty justice which was now perfidiously denied them. But to do justice to Ireland was no part of the policy of the English government. The country was to be kept in a chronic state of rebellion for the benefit of thieves. "Rebellion," said Leland, a Protestant prebendary of Dublin, " is the goose that lays the golden eggs, and the lords chief-justices will not be stupid enough to kill it." 2 Such was the policy of the officials who governed Ireland, or rather who, under pretens.e of governing that country, did 1Lingar'd, 1. c., Vol. IX., pp. 336, 337. (TR.) 2Apud Moore, Bk. I., ch. 9, p. 73.

Page  248 248 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. their best to aggravate the condition of the unfortunate inhabitants and keep them ini a state of continuous revolt. It is not surprising, therefore, to learn that a formidable uprising of the people, under the lead of Roger O'Moore and Sir Phelim O'Neil, took place October 23, 1641. At first the insurrection consisted only of detached bands, organized for the purpose of surprising and getting possession of garrisons and strongholds, and acting without a complete understanding with each other; but in the following year it became general,over the whole island, and a systematic and effective plan of operations was agreed upon. ~Following the example of the Scots, Aho had successfiully maintained their right to freedom of worship, a number of leading men from every city, town, and county, including the Catholic nobility and the prelates of the kingdom, met in national convention at IKilkenny early in 1642, and forming themselves into a Coo,federation, bound themselves "by solemn' oath never to sheathe their swords until they saw their religion free, their kingdom constitutionally independent, and they themselves in possession of their natural and inalienable rights." 1 In compliance with a request from the Confederation, the bishops and clergy of Ireland assembled in a National Synod at Kilkeniry, May 10, 1642, and unanimously resolved "that, whereas, the Catholics of Ireland have taken up arms in defense of their religion, for the preservation of the king,.. the security of their own lives, possessions, and liberty, we, on behalf of the Catholics, declare these proceedings to be most just and lawful. Nevertheless, if, in pursuit of these objects, any person or persons should be actuated by motives of avarice, malice, or revenge, we declare such person to be guilty of a grievou's offtnse, and deservedly subject to the censures of the'Church." 2 The Synod ordained that there should be in each county and province a council composed of clerical and lay members, and a general or supreme council of similar composition, whose authority and jurisdiction the whole nation should 1 Brenan, 1. c., p. 454. (TR.) 2Ibid., 1. c., p. 455. Lingard, 1. c., Vol. X., pp. 100-101. (TR.)

Page  249 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 249 recognize. These councils were primarily intended for the administration of the statute law, the authority of which was acknowledged, appeals being carried from the lower to the higher; but they also exercised executive functions.' An oath was drawn up and administered to the members of the Confederation, binding those who took it to " bear true faith and allegiance " to King Charles; to defend their " prerogatives, estates, and rights;" to uphold "the fundamental laws of Ireland;" to maintain " the free exercise of the Romnan Catholic faith and religion;" and to "obey and ratify all orders and decrees made, and to be made by the Supreme Council of the Confederate Catholics of this kingdom con-,cerning the public cause." 2 It was further ordained that a General Assembly of the Confederate Catholics shoul(d be called. This body met at Kilkenny, October 24, 1642. Its members, although divided into two orders, the one consisting of the bishops and nobles, and the other of the representatives of the counties and' towns, sat in the same chamber. The General Assembly, without taking the name, performed all the functions of a parliament, and announced that its business was " to consult of an order for their own affairs till his majesty's wisdom had settled the present troubles." 3 It nonminated the members of the Supreme (Council, and invested them with the authority of an executive government. They appointed sheriffs, coined money, carried on correspondence with foreign powers, had jurisdiction over civil officials and military officers, and were the ordinary representatives of national authority when the General Assembly was not coiivened, at the close of which they were changed. The Gen-,eral Assembly adopted as its motto the legend, "Pro Deo, Rege, et Patria, Hiberni Ulnanimes." The success of the arams of the Confederation was a surprise, even to the most sanguine. Nearly every important city in Ireland, Dublin excepted, fell into their hands. And, when in the full tide of victory, their terms were moderate and their demands just.'Lingard, 1. c., Vol. X., pp. 101-102. (TR.) 2 Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 59, note 2. (TR.) 3 T. D. McGee, Attempt to Establish the Reformation in Ireland, Boston, 1853, p. 111. (TR.)

Page  250 250 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. The king appointed a Protestant nobleman, the Marquis of Ormon(l, to enter into negotiations with the Confederates. An armistice of twelve months, knrown as The Cessation, Wvas agreed upon at Sigginstown, near Naas, on, the 15tii of September, 16-43, by the terms of whi ch both parties were to retai in possession of places respectively occupied by eaeh, and the Catholics to hold the churches and ecclesiastical property they had regained, alnd to be unmolested in the free exercise of their religion. In the following year the armistice was prolonged for twelve months more, and when this period was about to expire, Charles, finding his condition in England well nigh hopeless, and having absolute and immediate need of both thb money and the soldiers of Ireland to.uphold his tottering throne, gave Earl Glamorgan a secret and informal, though binding commission, to cross the chtannel and negotiate a peace with the Confederation. Arrived at Kilkenny, Glamorgan met the Supreme Council, and concluded a treaty (August 25, 1645), by which the Catholics were granted freedomn of worship, permitted to take possession of all churches not actually in the hands of the clergy of the Established Church, and( secured in the enjoyment of many valuable civil, political, and social rights.' A copy of the treaty fell into the hands of the Puritans, and Challes, to escape the odium the discovery caused, sent an'address to parliament, disavowing the articles. Earl Glamorgan was arrested by Ormond, who, professing to believe the commission a forgery, cast him into prison. Ormond now drew up another treaty of Thirty Articles, in which he artfully allowed the claims for which the laymen contended, and. denied those on which the clergy insisted. This treaty was objected to by the clergy and the better class of the laity, and was disagreeable to the Papal Nuncio, John Baptist Rinucein:i, who had lately arrived in Ireland. It was, nevertheless, col)firmed by the Supreme Council at IKilkenny, on the 28th of March, 1646.2 The great bulk of the Irish people were indigLingard, 1. c., Vol. X., pp. 101-103. Brenan, i. c., pp. 455-456. (TR.) 2While the treaty was signed on the above date, the documents were not exchanged till the 29th of July of the same year. (TR.)

Page  251 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 251 nant, believing that the advantages they had purchased so dearly had been bartered away, and they did not hesitate to apply epithets of traitor and perjurer to the members of the Supreme Council.l This event caused a split among the members of the Confederation, and the old Irish Catholics and the clergy began to be depressed, when their hopes were suddenly revived by the news of a brilliant victory gained by their leader, Owen Roe O'Neil, the Irish Fabins, over the Scottish commander, Monro, at Benburb, June 5, 1646. With a force inferior to that of his enemy, O'Neil put him to an ignominious flight, captured his artillery, baggage, and provisions, and, while himself sustaining a loss of not above seventy men, left close upon three thousand of Monro's dead upon the field of battle.2 On the 11th of June, O'Neil proclaimed war on the Suprreme Council, and in the August following a National Synod convened at Waterford, which issued a declaration to the effect that "all and each of the Confederate Catholics who should adhere to the peace" of the Thirty Articles should be regarded as " perjurers," and that the assembled fathers would never consent to any treaty which did not guarantee unrestricted freedom of worship. By another decree, dated Kilkenny, October 5th of the same year, those adhering to the Peace were declared excommunicated and the Peace itself null and void, because it gave no satisfactory security for the free exercise of the Catholic religion.3 This decree was virtually ratified by the General Assembly, which met at Kilkenny, January 7, 1647. In July of this year the Marquis of Ormond, conscious that the royal cause had become hopeless, surrendered Dublin to the Parliamentary army, and now having the undivided power of the enemy brought against them, and experiencing dissensions in their own ranks, the Confederates found it impossible to hold out, with any reasonable hope of success. The divisions among the Confederates were still further increased by a treaty of peace, entered into (May 20, 1648) between the Supreme Council and 1 Lingard, 1. c., p. 164 sq. Vindiciae Catholicorum Hiber. Auctore Philopatre Irenaeo, 1. I., quoted by Brenan. (TR.) 2 Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 74. (TR.) 3 Brenan, 1. c., p. 459. (TR.)

Page  252 '252 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. Lord Inchiquin, who had lately deserted the Puritan for the Toyal cause. The bishops protested in a declaration published at Kilkenny, but their protest proving ineffectual, on the following 27th of May they caused a document to be affixed to the gates of the cathedral of St. Canice, in Kilkenny, excom-municating all the theologians who had approved the Peace and the members of the Supreme Council who had given it their assent. The excessive use of the censures of the Church has, as at all times, worked evil, and the present instance is no exception. Heretofore the bishops, at least, had been practically a unit on every important question, carrying with them, by their harmony and uniform action, the whole body of the clergy and the better class of the laity. But now they split among themselves, some maintaining that the sentence of excommunication was valid; and others, their equals in learning and virtue, denying that, under the circumstances, there was any justification of the measure. In the meantime,. Ormond returned to Ireland, and on the 17th of January, 1649, a treaty of peace, containing thirty-five articles, was ratified and published by the General Assembly at Kilkenny. This was the last official act of the Confederation. A few days later the king ended his life on the scaffold, and on the 15th of the following August, Cromwell landed in Ireland, and immediately commenced the subjugation of the country. After a short siege, he took Drogheda by storm, and even the Protestant Killen admits that thousands, including "priests, imonks, citizens, and soldiers," were put to the sword. And the fate of Drogheda was the fate of every city and town that did not surrender at the first summlons to the Puritan tyrant, who, holding the Bible in one hand, slaughtered innocent victims with the other. Limerick was taken in October, 1651, after a protracted siege, and Cromwell declared confiscated nearly all the lands belonging to Catholics in Ireland, and divided them among his soldiers and a class called "adventurers," who advanced money to pay the army. Twenty thousand were transported to the West Indies, and many thousands more, chiefly females, to the American colonies. Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 119. (TR.)

Page  253 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 253X Those who were not sent abroad were shut up in the western. province of Connaught. Preparations for the settlement of Con naught by the Catholics were completed by the year 1653, and, by an act of the English parliament, all who were found after the date of May 1, 1654, on the eastern side of the Shannon, were liable to the penalty of death. British settlements, extending to a distance of several miles, were planted along tl;e sea-coast and the western bank of the Shannon, and composed of men long trained to military service. Judging by human standards, the Catholic religion swas as good as extinct in Ireland. This barbarous proscription was applicable to all the land-owners of the island who could not prove that during the whole time of the civil war they had shown a " constant good affection to the cause of the parliament." It must also be borne in mind that Connaught had been made desolate by the civil wars, and that those of the nobility who could trace their ancestry back to the dim mists where history begins, and who had been accustomed to move about in noble palaces and enjoy all the luxuries of life, could not find a dwelling fit for a human being to abide in. Famine supervened to add to the miseries of war and persecution, and historians,. Protestant and Catholic alike, agree in stating that no pen can adequhtely portray the hardships and sufferings which this poor but gallant people underwent for religion's sake. Of a hierarchy of twenty-six prelates, three only were permitted to remain;' and of the priests, those who were not martyred were commanded to go into exile, only twenty-eight days being given them to quit the kingdom. Cromwell went to meet his judge September 3, 1658, and two years later Charles II. made his public entry into London. It is asserted that the new king had promised to deal justly with the Catholics of Ireland; but, if such promise had ever been made, it was soon forgotten. The Puritans, who were in possession of their lands, began now to represent them as fomenters of dissension, disturbers of the public peace, subjects of a foreign potentate, and incapable of loyalty 1 Darcy McGee, 1. c., p. 130. In the year 1653 there was only one bishop inm the whole island. Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 146. (TR.)

Page  254 254 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. to the crown. It was the old strategy, and was received by the enemies of the Church with as much credulity in that age as it has been in our own. To correct these misrepresentations, a number of the Catholic leaders met in Dublin in 1661, and drew up a. "iRemonstrance," addressed to the kifig, in which they stated that they felt themselves " obliged, under pain of sin, to obey his majesty ill all civil and temporal affairs, as much as any other of his majesty's subjects, and as the laws and rules of government in this kingdom did require at their hands."' The Roman Catholic nobility and gentry of Ireland, for the most part, were unanimous in their apprroval of the sentiments set forth in the Remonstrance; while the clergy,. on the other hand, protested against it as containing sentiments disrespectful to the HIoly See and propositions condemned by Popes Paul V. and Innocent X.2 It soon became evident that the Remonstrants received their inspiration from Ormond, the Lord Lieutenant, and that his aim was to divide the Catholic clergy and people among themselves. A synod was convened in Dublin, June 11, 1666, to consider the questions raised, and, six days later, unaninously rejected the Remonstrance. They, however, drew up another, in which, while omitting the passages disrespectful to the Holy See, they embodied the same expressi/ns of loyalty as set forth in the one of 1661. This action gave great offense to Ormond, and, in consequence, the bishops who had'Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 142. (TR.) 2 Brenan, 1. c., pp. 4 78-480. The passages to which exception was taken read as follows: "And that, notwithstanding any power or pretension of the Pope or the See of Rome, or any sentence or declaration'of what kind or quality soever, given, or to be given, by the Pope, his predecessors or successors, or by any authority, spiritual or temporal, proceeding or derived from him or his See, against your majesty or royal authority, we will still acknowledge and perform, to the uttermost of our abilities, our loyalty and true' allegiance to your majesty. And we openly disclaim and renounce all foreign power, be it either papal or princely, sDiritltal or temporal, inasmuch as it may seem able, or shall pretend, to free, discharge, -or absolve us from this obligation, or give us leave or license to raise tumults, bear arms, or offer any violence to your majesty's person or royal authority, or to the State or Government." This was not the production of the Irish leaders, but an exact copy of the Declaration presented by the South Britons to Charles I. in 1640. (TR.)

Page  255 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 255 come to Dublin again left the country. At the close of the year 1668, there were only two prelates in the island.' In the month of May of the year 1670, Lord Berkeley became viceroy, and during the four years of his administration the Catholics enjoyed a season of comparative exemption from persecution. Bishops returned; provincial and diocesan synods were held; Catholics occupied positions of public trust and honor; churches and chapels were again opened; and the old faith began once more to flourish in the land. But this interval of peace was only the stillness of the calm that precedes the storm. In 1673 the Puritans, who were in a majority in the house of commons, forced the king to recall Lord Berkeley, whose justice and humanity in the government of Ireland *excited the indignation of these fierce zealots. The " Declaration of Indulgqnce to Dissenters," granted three years previously, was revoked, and the " Test Act" again enforced. Those refising to take the oath of supremacy, to deny transubstantiation, and "to receive the Sacrament" according to the rite of the Established Church, were declared incapable of holding either civil or military office.2 Catholics were forbidden to reside in corporate towns; bishops and others exercising ecclesiastical jurisdiction by the Pope's authority were commanded to quit the kingdom; convents were dissolved, and all priests banished.3 In 1677, Lord Essex, who had succeeded to Berkeley in the viceroyalty of Ireland, was recalled, and Ormond again appointed in his place. The news of the "Popish Plot" reached the viceroy in the course of the fcllowing year, and, while he ridiculed the clumsy invention ill private, he made it a pretext in public for fresh persecutions against the Catholics. It was pretended that the "Plot " extended to Ireland; and although, as the Protestant Killen. candidly avows, " the evidence against the accused possessed transparent marks of' falsehood," Peter Talbot, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, and Lord Montgarret, both far advanced in years, the latter being eighty-one, and both 1 Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 146. (TR.) 2 McGee, 1. c., p. 143. (TR.) 8 Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 150. (TR.)

Page  256 256 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. sinking under disease and infirmity, were dragged to prison,. where they ended their days. Oliver Plunket, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, who, Killen tells us, " was an ecclesiastic of blameless morals and pacific temper," but who, " according to the testimony" of two friars and an apostate priest, whom he: had punished for their vices, " was a most desperate revolutionist," was of so exalted a character that the fear of not being able to get even a Protestant jury to convict him in Ireland induced his persecutors to send him to London, where he was tried at Westminster, and sentenced to be hanged, emboweled, andl quartered, " according to law." He was executed at Tyburn, July 1, 1681. Those who bore false witness against him all ended their days miserably.l These persecutions continued until the accession of James II., in 1685, when the Irish Catholics again looked forward in the hope of seeing them suspended and their rights restored. They were not disappointed. Lord Clarendon was sent as viceroy to Ireland in 1686, writh instructions to grant freedom of worship to Catholics; to remove or disregard their civil disabilities; and to admit them equally with Protestants t6 offices of State. The reform of the army was intrusted to Richard Talbot, Earl of Tyrconnel, and brother to the late Archbishop of Dublin. Protestant soldiers were removed, and Catholics appointed to fill their places.'These changes alarmed the Protestants, and their fears were still further aroused by the information that Talbot had gone to England for the purpose of pressing the repeal of the Act of Settlement, and by his appointment to the government of Ireland in the room of Clarendon, in whose recall he had been chiefly instrumental. Affairs were in this condition when James, driven from his throne by William of Orange, passed over to France (1688). The disasters that overtook the king in England did not shake the loyalty of his Catllolic subjects in Ireland. To them his cause was identical with their own. From the reign of Henry VIII. down, they had borne sufferings and death for their faith; he had granted 1 See his life, by the Rev. Dr. Croly, of Maynooth, Dublin.

Page  257 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 257 freedom of worship. They had labored under civil and political disqualifications; these he had removed. They had been robbed of their lands; he had shown an inclination to repeal the Acts of Settlement. These and other considerations attached them to James; but both their hopes and his were extinguished by the decisive battle of the Boyne, July 2, 1690. James quitted Ireland immediately after this disastrous and to him disgraceful engagement, but the Irish Catholics fought on for a year longer. Their defeat at the battle of Aauhrim, July 12, 1691, which was followed on the 13th of the following month by the capitulation of Limerick, destroyed all possibility of successful resistance, and made the authority of William supreme over the whole island. By the Treaty of Limerick, it was expressly stipulated that Catholics should be obliged to take only the oatlh binding them "to bear faithful and true allegiance to their Majesties William and Mary;" and yet in the year following an oath was drawn up and presented for their acceptance, in which they were called upon to deny the. dogma of " transubstantiation" in "the Lord's Supper;" and to declare that "the invocation of the Virgin Mary, or any other saint, and the Sacrifice of the Mass, as now used in the Church of Rome, are damnable and idolatrous." An "oath of abjuration" was also drawn up, which went on to say that no foreign prince or prelate " hath any jurisdiction, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm."' 1 McGee, i. c., p. 168. Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., pp. 177 et seq. During this and the preceding reigns, the clergymen of the Protestant Church in Ireland do not appear to have been self-denying, saintly men, or to have corrected in their own lives faults of which they complained so loudly in those of others. Speaking of the " Irish Episcopal Church," immediately after the Restoration, Killen says: "In the selection of the new dignitaries, political services and family connections had generally more influence than piety or learning. Instead of devoting themselves to the spiritual duties of their office, and thus seeking to remove the odium which had so long rested on their order, most of the bishops still continued to give offense by their covetousness, secularity, and ambition." One who subsequently became an archbishop was notorious "for his penuriousness and indolence." Another, who subsequently becanme Primate and Chancellor of Ireland, seems to have merited his promotion by his avaricious greed. He "was not satisfied with three sees," but, on "theo VOL. III -17

Page  258 258 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. By the Treaty of Limerick, the Irish Catholics were secured in the enjoyment of " their goods and chattels," " their estates of freehold and inheritance," together with all their interests and immunities; and yet by an act of the Irish parliament of 1695, any one known to have sent his child to the Continent, to be brought up in the Catholic faith, was incapacitated from prosecuting suits at law, from receiving any legacy or deed of gift, and was condemned to " forfeit" all his goods and chattels and "all his hereditaments, rents, annuities, offices, and estates of freehold." 1 A Protestant heiress, who married a Catholic, was punished by loss of her inheritance.2 In the parliament of 1697, an act was passed requiring all Catholic archbishops, bishops, vicars-general, deans, Jesuits, monks, friars, and all Catholics exercising any ecclesiastical jurisdiction, to quit the kingdom before the 1st of May, 1698, and should any return, they were declared subject to the penalties of high treason.3 Between the years 1696 and 1699, over nine hundred priests were banished the kingdom, and the two or three hundred who remained were obliged to hide away in the caverns of the earth or the pestilential morasses of the open country. The old scheme for robbing the Catholics by issuing a com-mission to inquire into defective titles was again revived, and under its operation 1,060,792 acres were forfeited to the crown, in addition to the 10,636,837 already seized.4 At the groundless plea that he could find no clergymen," appropriated for three years the " incomes " "of six parishes," leaving the Protestant parishioners in the interval " without a ministry." Neither did these holy men, who came to bring -the pure light of the Gospel to a benighted, and superstitious people, appear to improve as time went on. Mary, writing to William just after the battle of the Boyne, tells him to "take care of the Church in Ireland. Everybody agrees," she says, " that it is the worst in Christendom." We are told that Thomas Hacket, the Protestant Bishop of Down and Connor from 1672 to 1694, traded " in benefices with unblushing effrontery. The livings in his gift were sold to the highest bidder. For twenty years he was never within the bounds of his diocese, etc." And so the list of these good and pure Reformers goes on,to the end of the chapter. Killen, i. c., Vol. II., pp. 130 and 182-183. (TR.) I The 7th of William III., chap. IV., s. I. (TR.) 2 Ibid., s. I. (TR.) 3 The 9th of William III., chap. I. (TR.) 4 The proceeds from the confiscated lands were employed to defray the ex

Page  259 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 259 death of William, the Catholics, who only a century before had held in fee three-fourths of the soil of Ireland, did not nll(w own above " one-sixth part" of that amount.' The twelve vears of Queen Anne's reign (1702-1714) formu one of the darkest epochs of the history of persecution in Ireland. The enactments of the Irish parliament of 1 703 scan not be equalled in inhuman atrocity and a satanic disregard for the rights of mankind by the records of any legislalative body that ever disgraced a civilized world. They are absolutely without a parallel. One of them, entitled " an act to prevent Popish priests from coming into the kingdom," declared guilty of high treason and subject to its penalties all who should "harbor, relieve, conceal, or entertain" Catholic priests; and "any mayor, justice of the peace, or other officer," who was proved to be negligent in enforcing the law, was liable to fine of one hundred pounds. Another, entitled "a bill to prevent the further growth of Popery," consisting of twenty-eight sections, which received the royal assent March 4, 1704, is the most elaborate digest of' legislative persecution that was ever framed.2 penses of the war of 1688. A new class of adventurers were thus introduced into the country, consisting chiefly of Dutch and German Protestants. Their descendants in Munster are known to this day as " Palatines." McGee, 1. c., p. 170. (TR.) 1 Bedford's Compendious and Impartial View of the Law affecting the Roman Catholics, London, 1829, p. 15. (TR.) 2 The following is a summary of this bill, given by the Protestant historian. IKillen, 1. c., Vol. II., pp. 194, 195:'" It provides that any persuading a Pr,testant to embrace Popery, and every such pervert (!) shall incur the penalty of praemunire; that, if the eldest son of a Popish landlord conforms to the Established Church, the father shall hold the estate only as a tenant for life, whilst the son shall be proprietor in fee; that the orphan children of Popish parents shall be intrusted to Protestant guardians, and brought up in the Protestant religion; that any Papist undertaking such guardianship shall be liable to a penalty of five hundred pounds - that no Papist shall be at liberty to pUlrchase lands for a longer term than thirty-one years;... that a Papist. who has inherited from a Protestant any estate, tenement, or hereditament ill fee, and who does not conform to the Established Church, shall not be entitled to continue in the enjoyment of the property; that a Papist, who is the owner of a freehold, shall not have the power to bequeath it to his eldest son; that at his death it shall be split up in equal portions among all his male children; but that the law of primogeniture shall be maintained should the eldest son, within

Page  260 260 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. By a third act of the parliament, every secular priest was: obliged, under penalty of banishlment, to come forward before the 24th of June, 1704, register his name, age, the place of his abode, the name of his parish, the date of his ordination, the bishop by whom he was ordained, and to give security that he would not pass beyond the borders of the county in which he resided. By another clause of the same act, any priest who might apostatize had the sum of twenty pounds a year settled on him.l The aim of this enactment was obvious. Heretofore it had been difficult to apprehend or convict priests, but now it was only necessary, when occasion required, to send police to the designated places of abode, arrest, and execute the penalties of the law upon the poor victims, whose confessions in their written registrations were ample evidence against them. These laws were so revolting to. the feelings of our common nature that great difficulty was experienced in putting them in execution. The offices of the public informer were required, and there is no character so contemptibly odious to Irish instincts and Irish honor. Hence it was necessary to give those performing such offices a diploma of good conduct, and it was accordingly' declared "that the prosecuting and informing against Papists was an honorable service, and that all m'agistrates who neglected to execute these laws were betrayers of the liberties of the kingdom." 2 It should seem that the laws against the Irish Catholics were now sufficiently severe to satisfy any human being not inspired by satanic hatred against the Church of Christ. But the Earl of Wharton, the viceroy, did not think so, and in a speech, which he delivered in the Irish parliament of 1709, he so wrought upon the fears and the bigotry of the members, three months after his father's death, produce a certificate from the Protestant bishop of the diocese, stating that he belongs to the Church as established by law; that no Papist shall be capable of voting at an election for a member of parliament until he has taken the oath of allegiance and abjuration; and that all persons assembling at St. Patrick's Purgatory, Lough Derg, shall incur a fine'of ten shillings each, and, in default of payment, receive a public whipping." (TR.) 1 Brenan, 1. c., p. 649. Ktllen, 1. c., pp. 195, 196. (TR.) 2lrish Commons, Journal, Vol. III., p. 819. (TR.)

Page  261 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 261 -if, indeed, they needed any such incentive, that they resolved that many "Popish bishops had lately come into the king-.dom," who "had presumed to continue the succession of the Romish priesthood, and that their return was owing to a defect in the laws." They accordingly passed a new act " to prevent the further growth of Popery," providing that the children of Catholics, by conforming to the Protestant worship, might compel their parents, through the court of chancery, to make known the. full amount of their property, and to provide the young apostates with a suitable maintenance; that no one should be regarded as a Protestant who had not taken the oath of abjuration and received the Sacrament after the form of the Established Church; and that any one informing on an archbishop, bishop, or vicar-general, should receive a reward of fifty pounds; for a regular the reward was twenty pounds, and for a school-master ten pounds; these sums to be levied off the Catholic inhabitants of the county in which the person informed on resided.l In 1710, those priests who had complied with the law of registration were -commanded to come forward before the 25th of March, and take the oath of abjuration, under penalty of banishment,. and, should they return to the country, they were declared guilty of high treason. Anne, the last and the worst of the contemptible Stuarts, died on the 1st of August, 1714, and the character of the penal code of her reign can not be better described than in the words of Edmund Burke. "It was," says this distinguished statesman, " a machine of wise and elaborate contrivance, and as well fitted for the oppression, impoverishment, and degradation of a people, and the debasement in them of human nature itself; as ever proceeded from the perverted ingenuity of man." On the accession of George I. of the house of Brunswick to the English throne, the Tories were driven from office. The king was not naturally intolerant, but this element, which had formed so conspicuous a part in the characters of the late rulers of England; was abundantly supplied by the persecuting spirit of the Whigs, who had lately come to power. In 1715, 1 Brenan, 1. c., p. 550. Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 203. (TR.)

Page  262 262 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. the Scotch raised the standard of revolt in favor of the Pretender; and, while the Catholics took no part in the quarrel, they were as violently persecuted as if they had. Catholic nobles were hurried to prison; churches and chapels were closed throughout the kingdom; priests were seized at the altars, where they were officiating; and the usual bribes were offered to informers. The bulk of the execrable set of miscreants, known as priest-catchers, were Jews, who pretended to be converts to Catholicity, and assumed the dress and sometimes simulated the functions of priests.' In 1719, the Presbyterian Dissenters obtained an Act of Toleration; but no corresponding concession was granted to the Roman Catholics. Under the pretext that the Catholics were at heart attached to the Pretender, and only awaited a favorable opportunity to give him their support, they were visited with additional penalties by the Irish parliaments of 1716 and 1723.2 About this time, secret agents from the French Jansenists were sent into Ireland, and books containing their errors were distributed over the country. Pope Clement XI., taking alarm at these efforts to undermine the faith of the Irish people, sent, thlrough Vicentius Santini, his internuncio at Brussels, a warning to the Irish bishops, accompanied with a request that they would in some public way declare their acceptance of the bull "Uniqenitus." Each member of the Irish hierarchy sent in reply letters expressive of the attachmerit of themselves, their priests, and their people to the Holy See and its teachings; and assured the Holy Father that, though oppressed and despised, they would never cease to preserve with the Head of the Church " unity of spirit in the bond of peace," and that no such evasive terms as " religious silence and the question of right and fact" had been adopted by them. In the early part of the reign of George Ii. (1727-1760), a pretended fear of the influence of Catholics caused the passage of an act depriving them altogether of the privilege of voting 1Brenan, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 551, 552. (TR.) 2 The 2d of George I., chap. X. Ibid., chap. XIX., s. 7. (TR.)

Page  263 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 263 for members of parliament or the magistrates of" any city or corporate town;"' and, by another act of the same parliament, Roman Catholics were forbidden to practise as barristers or solicitors.2 At the time of this enactment, very nearly all the members of distinction belonging to the legal profession in Ireland were Roman Catholics, and they yielded reluctantly to the command of the law obliging them either to give up their profession or prove' apostates to their God. Under the circumstances, it is not wonderful that some of theni professed Protestantism openly, while they were at heart loyal to the old faith. It was noticed that, when about to be admitted to the Bar, persons, who until then had practised the Catholic religion, and who were now base enough to stultify their consciences for a paltry gain, never made very zealous or even fair Protestants. Thus far they had been obliged to produce only a certificate, stating that they had received the Sacrament according to the rites of the Church, as by law established either in England or Ireland. But an act was now passed, requiring that any one demanding admission to the Bar should prove, on satisfactory evidence, given under oath, that he had been a Protestant during the two previous years; and, should he neglect to educate his children under fourteen years of age at the time of his admission, or those born to him after this date, he was condemned to forfeit his certificate. In 1733, another act was passed, making this law still more stringent, and disqualifying any convert to Protestantism from practising in the courts of law who should allow his Roman Catholic wife to educate her children in the Catholic faith.3 In 1743, the rumor of an intended French invasion furnished another pretext for fresh persecutions, and so violent was the feeling against Catholics that one member of the privy council advocated an indiscriminate massacre of the whole bolvy. A proclamation was published, which, in addition to the sunis already set upon the heads of ecclesiastics, offered a reward 1 The 1st of George II., chap. IX., s. 7. (TR.) 2 Ibid., chap. XX. (TR.) S The 7th of George II., chaps. V. and VI. (TR.)

Page  264 264 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. of one hundred and fifty pounds for the conviction of a bishop or archbishop; fifty pounds for a priest; and two hundred pounds for any one who might harbor or give protection to a bishop.l Churches were again closed all over the country, and so vigilant and energetic were the officers of the law that it seemed impossible to escape them. Driven from their. churches, the priests would gather the faithful about them on some green hillside or in a secluded nook of a pleasant valley, and there, on a rude altar of stone in the temlple of nature, offer up the everlasting sacrifice to nature's God. Such are Ireland's witnesses to the faith. During the long period of persecution from the reign of Henry VIII. to that of George II., the Irish Catholic bishops were continuously driven from their dioceses, and forced to seek an asylum in some country on the Continent. What was for so long a necessity, by repetition grew into a practice; and the continued and protracted absences of the chief pastors from their flocks was beginning to work so much harm that Pope Benedict XIV., in a beautiful letter, dated August 15, 1741, reminded them of their duty. Ile implored them, as he said, with tears in his eyes, to remedy the evil, and told them plainly that if the word of God was not preached, the Sacraments not administered, if morals were corrupted, and the people in ignorance and error, they, and they alone, were responsible.2 From this time forth the hardships of the Irish began to grow less galling and oppressive; still one more effort was made by James Hamilton, not only to revive all the inhuman legislation of the reign of Queen Anne, but to add other statutes, which, if less atrocious, were more cunningly devised and more maliciously wicked. In 1756 a bill was introduced by him in parliament, providing for the registration of all Catholic priests, and also requiring that only one priest should be allowed to each parish; that he should be appointed by the 1 Brenan, 1. c., p. 561. (TR.) 2Ibid., p. 557 sq.; yet the date of Benedict XIV.'s letter is not August 1, 1746, given by Brenan, but August 15, 1741, as is proved by the Bullar., ed. Venet. 1768, p. 29. (TR.)

Page  265 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 265 grand jury, and sanctioned by the privy council and lord lieutenant; that he should give information of all priests residing in his parish; and that he should not attempt to make converts. Another clause provided for the expulsion from the country of all bishops, dignitaries, and friars. The bill, though defeated, was again introduced in the following year and passed, but the king refused to put his name to it, and from this act dates the definite mitigation of the penal laws in Ireland.l The Duke of Bedford, who was appointed lord lieutenant in the autumn of 1757, signified that he would pursue a policy friendly to Ireland, and that the inhabitants might count upon his good services in redressing their grievances and satisfying their just demands. The Roman Catholic clergy of Dublin immediately expressed their acknowledgments in an Exhortation to the people, in which, after thanking the government for its " large charities" during a recent season of scarcity. they called upon the people to show their gratitude to their civil governors "by an humble, peaceable, and obedient behavior;" to live virtuously; to abstain from crimes and misdeeds of every sort; and "to avoid riots and tumults," and thus "prove themselves good citizens and pious Christians." 2 The moment seemed opportune to take some definite steps toward ameliorating the political condition of the Catholics of Ireland, and accordingly an association was formed for this purpose. The members, who were exclusively of the commercial and citizen classes, the nobility and gentry having refused to join them, generally met at the Elephant Tavern, in Essex street. After the usual preliminaries, they gave aim and purpose to their labors by appointing the famous Dr. Curry, the hardly less famous Charles O'Conor, and Mr. Wyse, a Waterford merchant, a sort of executive committee for the association. The first work of the committee was to make a statement or declaration of principles, a task which they comlmitted to Dr. O'Keefe, Bishop of Klildare. The document was chiefly confined to proving for the thousandth time that Cath1 Brenan, 1. c., pp. 562, 563. (TR.) 2 Killen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 275. (TR.)

Page  266 266 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chaptcr 2. olics mlay be good and loyal subjects, and that their Church teaches no doctrine incompatible with civil allegiance. An opportunity of testing these principles soon came. When, in 1759, the French threatened a descent upon the coast of Ireland, the Roman Catholic committee sent an address to the lord lieutenant, in which they professed themselves " ready and willing, to the utmost of their abilities, to assist in supporting his majesty's government against all hostile attempts whatsoever."1 The address was graciously received, and the speaker of the Irish house of comrons, where it was read, expressed the extreme satisfaction which the evidence of the loyalty of the Roman Catholics afforded that body. On the accession of George 111: (1760-1782) to the English throne, the committee prepared and forwarded to that monarch a congratulatory address, in which they reminded him that they were tnder certain disabilities, not imposed upon other citizens, and expressed the hope that they "' might not be left incapable of-promoting the general welfare and prosperity."2 Inr 1767, public prayers were offered. up, for the first time since the Revolution, in all the Catholic Churches of Ireland for the sovereign and the royal family. Concessions, however, came slowly and grudgingly. By an act of the Irish parliament of 1774, the only oath to be required of Irish Roman Catholics was one expressive of allegiance to the house of Hanover, and denying that the Pope of Rome "i' had or ought to have any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power, superiority, or pre-eminence, directly or indirectly, within this realm."3 The tone and form of address used heretofore toward Catholics in official documents began now to be more respectful. When they had not been hostilely termed "the common enemy," they had been contemptuously styled "Papists;" but in an act of parliament of the year 1778, by which their condition was greatly improved, they were designated " Roman Charles O'Conor is the reputed author of the address. See Mitchell's Hist. of Ireland, p. 80. (TR.) 2Plowden I., Appendix, p. 276. (TR.) 3 iillen, 1. c., Vol. II., p. 296. (TR.)

Page  267 ~ 331. Protestantism in Ireland. 267 Catholics." 1 Among the supporters of this act was the celebrated Henry Grattan, a name ever dear to the Irish people. The fear inspired in England by the breaking out of the war of American Independence had probably more to do with the concessions now granted to Irish Catholics than any fair-minded purpose of doing them justice. The privilege granted by the parliament of 1771 of obtaining a lease of sixty-one years on land reclaimed from unwholesome bogs, and situated at least a mile from any town, and the permission given by the parliament of 1774 of taking an oath of allegiance, which did not contain a direct denial of the Catholic faith, can not be regarded as either very gracious or very generous concessions. Neither can the act, passed in 1778, permitting Roman Catholics to take leases for 999 years; making the conditions of the sale and inheritance of their lands the same as those enjoyed by Protestants; declaring them capable of holding and using any estates that might be conveyed or devised to them; relieving parents of the burden of supporting a wayward or wicked child, who might go over to the Established Church; and abolishing the law providing for the reversion of a Catholic father's estate to his eldest son, should the latter give up the Catholic faith, be considered as more than satisfying the demands of strict justice, and indicating on the part of some a growing disposition to be fair. For it is well to remember that this act did not pass the Irish house of commons until after a protracted and severe struggle. The same may be said of every concession that followed. As years went on, the rigors of the penal laws were gradually relaxed. In 1782, an unsuccessful effort was made to repeal the law passed in 1745, declaring invalid marriages celebrated by Catholic priests between Catholics and Protestants. But in the same year the right of Catholics to purchase lands in perpetuity, to teach schools attended by children of their own faith, and to act as guardians to Roman Catholic children, was recognized.2 Priests were also permitted to celebrate Mass publicly, provided the building in which they celebrated had neither a steeple nor a bell, a prohibition which was evaded by suspending a bell from a neighboring tree.3Other disabilities were removed by the Relief Act of 1792,4 and a petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, presented to George III., January 2, 1793, by a delegation sent to London for the purpose, was followed in the same year by a second Act of Relief, which was passed through both houses of tiJe Irish parliament more in obedience to the will of the government than from inclination on the part of those who gave it their support. By this act the Catholics were exempted from attending the service of the Established Church on Sundays; declared qualified to hold all offices and places of trust and profit under the crown, whether military or civil, except those of lord lieutenant, lord deputy, and lord chancellor, and seats in parliament; and admitted to the elective franchise,5 of which, as Mr. Burke remarked, there were very few to take ad — 1This act is the 17th and 18th of George III., chap. XIX. (TR.) 2 The 21st and 22d of George III., chaps. XXIV. and LXII. 3 Coyan, i. 144. (TR.) 4The 32d of George III., chap. XXI. (TR.) 5 The 33d of George I II.. chap. XXI. (TR.)

Page  268 .268 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. -vantage, "because almost all the old freeholders had been worn out during the reign of the penalties."' We have seen that when Catholic seats of learning in Ireland were closed,,and the most rigid laws existed against opening Catholic schools of any sort, Irish priests and Irish gentlemen passed over to the Continent, and by their zeal for religion and their love of the sciences and arts, which had been banished from their own land, so-interested strangers in their behalf, that seminaries and colleges were established in almost every country of the whole of Europe, through whose hospitable doors the exiled Irish student entered in pursuit of the learning which a nation, boasting of its enlightenment, denied him in his own home and in the land of his fathers. The Annals of the Four Masters were arranged at one of these colleges, and McGeoghehan's History of Ireland written at another. O'Connell studied at St. Omer's, and Luke Wadding and Dr. Doyle at Cambrai. All the men distinguished in Irish Cath-olic history for nearly three-quarters of a century previously to the date of the Relief Act were educated on the Continent.2 Dr. O'Keefe, Bishop of Kildare (t 1787), has the honor of having founded Carlow College, the first Catholic college in Ireland since the Reformation. It was not opened for the reception of students until the year 1793.3 The closing of the Irish colleges in France by the breaking out of the Revolution, and their declining condition in other countries, caused the Irish hier-.archy to cast about for some means of training their seminarists at home. It was thought necessary, under the circumstances, to modify somewhat the original purpose of Carlow College, and to admit to its halls students training for the priesthood. But this provision was inadequate. In February, 1794, the Irish hierarchy presented an address to the Lord Lieutenant, in which they state that the education given at the University of Dublin, while it is excellent for the purposes for which it was designed, is by no means suited to ecclesiastics, who require a special training of their own; and they therefore beg that his excellency may be pleased to recommend to his majesty the policy of establishing and endowing a college for the education of aspirants to the priesthood. The petition was favorably received, and in 1795 an act was passed establishing a college at Maynooth, and an endowment of eight thousand pounds for the -current yearly expenses was granted.4 To say that from the breaking out of the Reformation until (correspondence, Vol. III., pp. 363, 364, London, 1844. (TR.) 2 Besides the colleges already mentioned at page 243, there were those of St. Anthony (1617), the Collegium Pastorale Hibernorum (1624), and the Irish Dominican College (1659) at Louvain. At Rome, Fr. L. Wadding, assisted by the Barberini family; founded (1625) the Irish Franciscan College of St. Isidore, and he also persuaded Cardinal Ludovisi, " Protector of Ireland," to found (1628) an Irish secular college, which was under the direction of the Jesuits, and of which Oliver Plunket was a student. 3Brenan, 1. c., p. 567. (TR.) 4 This sum was increased in 1806 to thirteen thousand pounds, but again re-duced in 1808 to the original grant. (TR.)

Page  269 ~ 332. Protestantism in France. 269, the French Revolution "there was no law for Catholics in Ireland," is to state a sad but stern truth. It was only too manifest that in the interval those in power had no wish to do justice to Ireland, and no interest in making its. inhabitants peaceable and contented citizens. The atrocities which preceded and caused the rebellion of 1798 abundantly prove this statement.2 That the acts of injustice perpetrated by England upon Ireland were real and weighty national grievances is shown by the fact that Protestants, as well as Catholies, participated in the rebellion. The people were driven to desperation, and the principles of the French Revolution, which Nwere diffused among them chiefly through the works of the infidel, Thomas Paine, hastened the uprising. The Catholic hierarchy and clergy, as a body, exerted all their power and influence to quell the popular passions. The bill for the Union of Ireland with England, which received the royal assent on the 1st of August, 1800, and went into effect on the 1st of January, 1801, was the sad result of this rebellion. By this bill the existence of Ireland as a distinct nation came to an end. If the penal laws had been executed with the rigor contemplated by their framers and enactors, the preservation of the Catholic religion in Ireland would have been, judging by human standards, a verification of the words of Our Lord, speaking of His Church, " The gates of hell shall not prevail against thee." ~ 332. Protestantism in France. Histoire eccl6siastique des Eglises reforme'es au royaume de France (par Th. de BNze), Anvers, 1580, 3 vols. (to 1563). liaimbourg, Hist. du Calvinisme, etc. Hist. of the League, from the French, by Dryden, Lond. 1684, 8vo. Serrani (Reformed Preacher of Geneva, t 1598), Commentarius de statu relig. et reipub. in regno Galliae, Gen. 1572 sq., 5 vols. Thuanus, Hist. sui temp. Bert.ier. Hist. de l'6glise Gall., Paris, 1749, 4to. 5Lacretelle, Hist. de France pendant les guerres de religion, Paris, 1814-1816, 4 vols. Peignot, Livre des singttlarites, Dijon, 1841. tCapefigue, Hist. de la r6forme, de la ligue et du regne deo Henri IV., Paris. 1834, 4 vols. t* France and the Reformation (The Catholic, 1842, April, May, and June numbers). t Boost, Hist. of the Reformation in, 1 Moore, Bk. II., ch. 11, p. 277. 2 Ibid., Bk. II., ch. 12, notes 90, 91.

Page  270 270 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. France (1547-1844), Augsburg, 1844. Schmidt, Hist. of France, Hamburg, 1835 sq., Vols. 2d and 3d. Ranke, Civil Wars and Monarchy in France in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Stuttg. 1852 sq., 5 vols.; London, 1852 (Complete Works, Vols. 8-13); as far as this, Vols. 1st and 2d. Soldan, Hist. of Protestantism in France until the death of Charles IX., Lps. 1855, 2 vols. Polenz, Hist. of French Calvinism until 1789, Gotha, 1857-1864, 4 vols. E. Smnedley, Hist. of the Ref. in France, New York, 3 vols., 12mo. Ch. Weiss, Hist. of the Prot. Ref. in France, Lond. 1854, 2 vols., 12mo., and with an Append. by H. W. Herbert, New York, 1854, 2 vols., 12mo. G. de Felice, Hist. of the Protestants in France, from the Fr., Lond. 1853, 2 vols., 8vo. Many circumstances contributed to pave the way for the introduction of the Reformation into France, among the most important of which were the influence exercised by the sects in the southern provinces; the excessive cultivation of polite literature; the active part taken by the University of Paris in the reformatory synods of Constance and Basle, which was in many ways more hurtful than beneficial, and led eventually to the promulgation of the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges; the loose administration of the ecclesiastical law, according to the spirit of the so-called Gallican Liberties; the arbitrary methods of Francis I. (1515-1547) in conducting ecclesiastical, no less than civil affairs; and, finally, the appointment of bishops, who were more disposed to be servile to the king than obedient to the Pope. Both Zwinglius and Calvin had dedicated their most important works to Francis, and Luther and Melanchthon found eager readers in France. Among their most ardent admirers was the famous Biblical scholar, Lefebvre d'IStaples, so called from the town of Staples, near Boulogne-sur-Mer. The first Protestant community in France wag brought together amid tumult and disorder at Meaux by William Farel a.nd John Leclerc, a wool-dresser. Notwithstanding that tile Sorbonne, whose tendencies were well known to be toward liberalism, had ordered the works of Luther to be burnt, they were industriously sought after and eagerly read. The Reformers had powerful patrons at court, and among theml Berquin, the counsellor of state; the Duchess d'Ltarpes, the king's mistress;.and Margaret of Valois, the king's sister. Margaret having married IIenry d'Albert, King of Navarre, her court became the resort and refuge of Protestants fleeing from

Page  271 ~ 332. Protestantism in France. 271 persecution. On the other hand, Catholicism found able and zealous advocates and defenders in Cardinal Duprat, Chatncellor to Francis I.; Cardinal de Tournon; and the queen mother, Louise of Savoy. When the Protestants, emboldened by their growing nuimbIers and relying on the protection of their patrons, recklessly dlemolished a figure of Our Lord and another of the Blessed Virgin, and had the hardihood to affix to the door of the king's palace an indecent writing against Transubstantiation,' Francis 1. took alarm, and, apprehensive that the evils that had afflicted Germany might come upon his own kingdom, proceeded to take prompt and vigorous measures to check the propagation of Protestantism in France. Many of the Protestants, when pursued, sought safety in flight, and of those who were arrested some were put to death. Among the fugitives was Calvin, who withdrew to Geneva, whence he had his teachings carried into France. But, by a strange inconsistency, while Francis was persecuting Protestants in his own kingdom, he was doing his best to protect and encourage them in Germany; and, by following the same policy, his successor, Henry 11. (1547-1559), got possession of the territories belonging to the bishoprics of Metz, Toul, and Verdun.2 This prince published ordinances of unusual severity against the Calvinists, notably the Edict of Chateaubriand, in 1551,3 by which the inquisitorial jurisdiction over heretics, heretofore lodged in ecclesiastical tribunals, was transferred to the secular courts, because the former might not pass sentence of death upon those brought to trial before them. It was unfortunate that in France, as elsewhere, a much needed retformn among the clergy had neither been introduced early enough, nor, when introduced, had it been carried out with sufficient promptitude and thoroughness. The instructions of the Provincial Council of Narbonne (December 10-20, 1551) were disregarded by the suffragan bishops, and the reformatory decrees of Poissy (1565) met with no efficient response from' Apud Gerdesius, Hist. Evangelii renovati, T. VI., p. 50. 2 See p. 138. 3 Barthold, Germany and the Hugenots, Bremen, 1848, 2 vols.

Page  272 272 Period 3. Epoch. 1. Chapter 2. prelates, who were more intent on enjoying their wealth than on looking after the interests of the Church. The inconsistency of the policy of the government was favorable to the cause and growth of Protestantism, and accordingly Protestant communities were formed in the cities of Paris, Orleans, Rouen, and Angers. At a General Synod, held in Paris in 1559, these different communities united themselves into one body; adopted a Cal!'inistic Confession of Faith and a Presbyterian form of Church government; and, as if sanctioning in advance a law which would soon operate against themselves, decreed that all heretics should be put to death.' During the minority of Francis II. (1559-1560) and Charles IX. (1560-1574), and the regency of the queen mother, Catharine de Medici, and while the Dukes of Guise and the Princes of Bourbon, the former supported by the Catholics, and the latter by the Calvinists, were contending for supremacy, the "HIiuqenots," 2 as the French Protestants were now called, grew daily in numbers and influence. Destitute of true piety, Catharine was foolishly superstitious; and loving intrigue rather than a straightforward course, she did not scruple to sacrifice the interests of her children to her ow-n faithless policy. Protestant and Catholic were all one to her, and she coquetted with each as her interests or the exigencies of the moment demanded.3 That the Bourbons had espoused the cause of the Calvin1 Cf. Berthier, S. J., Histoire de l'Eglise Gallicane (commencae par Longueval; by Berthier, les six derniers volumes), Paris, 1749, 4to., Vol. XVIII., p. 460 sq. Bordes, pretre de l'oratoire, supplement au trait6 de Thomassin historique et dogmatique, etc., pour etablir et maintenir l'unite de l'6glise catholique, Paris, 1703, 2 vols., 4to. 2 For various explanations of the meaning of this word, see Daniel, Hist. de France, ed. Griffet, 10-54. The derivation which makes "Hugenots" equivalent to Eignots or Eidgenossen, that is, those bound together by an oath, is beyond doubt incorrect. Its probable and more usual derivation is from the French provincial word Hugo or Hugonot, meaning ghost of the night, according to a popular tradition, which states that Hugo Capet goes about as a spirit, wandering up and down the streets. It was first applied to French Protestants in derision, because they usually held their meetings after night had set in. Cluet (Hist. de Verdun et du pays Verdunois) derives it from the word "Goths." 3 Cfr. Von Reumont, Catharine de' Medici in Her Youth, Berlin, 1854. Al4beri,. The Life of Catharine de' Medici.

Page  273 ~ 832. Protestantism in France. 273 ists for no reason other than to secure a powerful ally in their struggle against the Dukes of Guise and the house of Valois was very evident. Louis of CondO, the youngest of three brothers, became a most zealous advocate of the new teachings; while Coligny subsequently proved himself the ablest leader on the Protestant side. Catharine at first took sides with the Dukes of Guise, the most determined enemies of the Hugenots; and, by the marriage of Francis II. to Mary Stuart, threw the weight of her influence against the Bourbons. The Calvinists, acting upon the advice of their theologians, headed by Beza, formed a conspiracy, known as the Conspiracy of Amboise (1560), against Francis II. and the Guises, which, however, was discovered in time to prevent its execution. Its authors were arrested, tried, and put to death. It had been suggested that the establishment of the Inquisition in France would be an efficient means of preventing the growth of Protestantism; but this was forbidden by the Edict of Rorn oran tin (1560); and, at the request of Admiral Coligny, the king, at the assembly of Fontainebleau (1560), had an enactment passed staying all legal proceedings against the Hugenots on religious grounds. He also promised to convoke a national synod for the special purpose of doing away with ecclesiastical abuses. The royal condescension was taken as confession of weakness, and gratitude for royal favors was expressed in the form of a conspiracy, at the head of which was the Prince of Conde. Catharine de' Medici pardoned the prince, and, in compliance with the wishes of Admiral Coligny, arranged for a theological conference at Poissy (1561), in presence of the court and assembled bishops. The Catholic party was represented by the Cardinal of Lorraine, a member of the house of Guise; by the eminent theologian, Claude d'Espence; and by the Jesuit Lainez; and the Protestant party by Beza and Peter Martyr Vermili. The controversy was spirited, and at times intemperate, particularly when the question of the Eucharist came up for discussion; but, like all such conferences, settled nothing.l 1See the Confessio Gallica, presented to Charles IX. in 1561, in Augusti, Corpus librorum symbolicor., pp. 110-125. VOL. III-18

Page  274 274 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. When the Guises entered into an alliance with Anthony, King of Navarre, and the Constable de Montmorenecy, the astute Catharine formed a counter-alliance with the Prince of Cond6. As a consequence of this step, the IHugenots, by an edict of the year 1562, secured freedom of worship and the right to hold meetings openly anywhere, except in the principal cities of the kingdom,' upon condition that they should use no violence toward Catholics. The edict was ill received by the inhabitants of Paris and the Catholic population generally, who were justly incensed by the sanguinary atrocities perpetrated by the Hugenots. The parliament for a long time refused to register it, and did so finally only under protest. The Calvinists, growing daily more bold and daring, began to murder priests and monks; forcibly compelled wayfarers to conle in and listen to the sermons of their preachers, justifying their conduct by a decree of the Consistory of Castres; and, acting ulpon enactments of a synod of sixty-two ministers, convoked at Nirmes in February, 1562, by Viret, interfered with the freedom of Catholic worship by creating disturbances in Catholic churches, and sometimes demolishing the edifices. These outrages roused the indignation of the Catholics, and the pent-up wrath of both parties burst forth, as if by mechanical impulse, leaving as witnesses of its presence all the extravagant horrors of a civil and religious war.2 A trifling event gave the signal for the beginning of the conflict. Some noblemen, belonging to the suite of the Duke of Guise, got into a quarrel with a number of lHugenots, who had assembled for religious service in a barn at Vassy, in Champagne, and were disturbing, by their singing of psalms, the Mass, which was being celebrated in a neigh boring church. The duke hearing the uproar, hastened to the spot to restore order. While endeavoring to do so, he was wounded by the blow of a stone, and his followers, infuriated by the indignity put upon him, rushed upon the Hugenots, killed sixty of their'Benoit (Hist. de l'6dit de Nantes, Delft, 1639 sq., 5 vols., 4to), Vol. I., itecueil d'6dits, p. 1 sq. (TR.) 2Lacretelle, Hist. de France pendant les guerres de religion, Paris 1814-1816, 4 vols. (transl. into German by Kiesewetter, Lps. 1815 sq., 2 vols.) HeIrrmann, The Civil and Religious Wars of France in the sixteenth century, Lps. 1828.

Page  275 ~ 332. Protestantism in France. 275 number, and dispersed the rest (March 1, 1562). By Protestant writers this event is called the " Massacre of Vassy." The Calvinists, after many abortive attempts, had succeeded in establishing a community at Toulouse, but the peculiar elements of which it was composed gave rise to a suspicion that its object was more military than religious. This suspicion was confirmed when they made an effort to get possession of the city by a coup de main; but in this they failed, and the Catholics, after an obstinate and hard-fought contest, lasting from the 11th to the 17th of May (1562), came off victorious. Refusing to accept the proffered terms of capitulation, the CalVinists attempted to make their escape under cover of the darkness of the night, and falling in with the cavalry of Savignac, who had had two brothers killed in the battle of Toulouse, suffered the loss of many of their number. The loss of the Catholics was also severe.' The Calvinists complained loudly that the affair of Vassy and that of Toulouse were violations of the Edict of 1562; and the Prince of Conde, acting upon the advice of ThTockmorton, the English ernbassador, put himself at their head, and began hostilities. While marching on Paris, at the head of an army of German Lutherans, Condo, together with several of the Protestant leaders, were made prisoners at the battle of Dreux, fought December 19, 1562, the issue of which was doubtful. Antoine de Bourbon, King of Navarre, a convert to Catholicity, died of a wound received at the siege of Rouen in the same year; Francis, Duke of Guise, now lieutenant of the kingdom, was assassinated (February 5, 1563) during the siege of Orleans, by Poltrot de Mere, a Calvinist in religion, a nobleman by birth, a craven by instinct, and a coward by nature. These events led to the edict of Amboise (March 19, 1563), by which freedom of conscience and the privilege of holding public service, under certain restrictions, were granted to the Calvinists. But the reconciliation between the two parties was more apparent than real, and of only short duration. The attempt of Coligny and Cond6 to get possession of the king's'The insurrection of Toulouse (May 11-17, 1562), in "The Catholic" of Mentz, 1863, new series, Vol. IX., pp. 227-248, and 317-336.

Page  276 276 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. person, by nlaking themselves masters of the castle of Mlonceaux, in Brie, was the occasion of the breaking out of a second civil war in the year 1567, during which the bloody atrocities of the HIugenots, known as the "Michelade of Nlimes," were perpetrated. At the battle of St. Denys the Catholics gained a,splendid victory, though they had to mourn the loss of the gallant Montmorency, Constable of France. In 1568, the Huogenots, through the kind offices of the Elector of the Palatinate, succeeded in neg'otiating a peace, and having the edict of 1562, without the clauses subsequently added, again enforced. This peace was regarded by the Hugenots only as a pretext to gain time to make preparations for carrying on the' war with renewed vigor and energy. And in matter of fact, no sooner had they received from Elizabeth, Queen of England, and from thle government of the Netherlands, the money necessary to carry on a campaign, than they at once began the third civil war (1568), which, for deeds of blood and acts of retaliation on both sides, surpassed either of the preceding wars. Briguemont, the most distinguished of the Itugenot leaders, run the ears of assassinated priests upon a cord, and wore them as an ornament about his neck. After the fall of the Prince of Cond6, at the battle of Jarnac, in 1569, Gaspar Coligny placed himself at the head of the Calvinists, and extorted from the timid court the peace of SaintGermain- en-Laye. This treaty, which was signed August 15, 1570, granted the Reformers freedom of public worship in two cities of each province; removed their political disabilities, thereby permitting them to hold any office of public trust; and, as a security for the future, put them in possession of the four fortified towns of La Rochelle, Montauban, Cognac, and La Charit4. They had now been successful in obtaining official recognition as a religious organization. But treaties could not efface from the minds of Catholics the horrible atrocities committed by the Hugenots, or stifle in their hearts the promptings of revenge. They brooded in silence over the wrongs they had suffered, and in secret they plotted to avenge them. In the hope of maintaining peace, Charles IX. invited Coligny to his court, and took him into

Page  277 ~ 332. Protestantism in France. 277 his counsels. Taking advantage of hiis position, the admiral used his influence to estrange Charles from his mother, and, by persuading him to support the rebels in the Netherlands, involved France in a war with Spain. At length a fortuitous event gave occasion for carrying into effect the long-cherished desire of revenge. The marriage of Henry of Navarre (Henry IV.) to Margaret, the youngest sister of Charles IX., attracted a great numlber of distinguished Calvinists to Paris, and on the night of St. Bartholomeu, (August 24, 1572), a name of terrible memory, they were set upon and massacred, thus again rekindling the lurid flarmes of civil war. This horrid massacre, however, was not the outcome of a long and carefully prepared design. On the contrary, as Protestant historians admit, it was the result of sudden impulse and hasty action, and was, in its origin, the work of the queen mother, who was apprehensive of the consequences which might follow an abortive attempt to assassinate Admiral Coligny two (lays previously, and known to have been inspired by her. The king was prevailed upon by Catharine de' Medici and her youngest son, the Duke of Anjou, and their most intimate friends, to give his consent to the assassination of Admiral Coligny, whom they represented as conspiring to stir up civil war, and they moreover hinted that he had designs upon the king's life. They urged him to immediate action, representing that if he should wait until the next morning, his mother, his brothers, and his most faithful servants would fall victims to the vengeance of the Calvinists. Charles was at first startled by so barbarous a suggestion, and for a long time was undecided how to act, but finally gave his consent. The Duke of Guise, burning to avenge the death of his father, took upon himself the task of murdering Admiral Coligny. Rumors had been afloat during the day of a Calvinistic conspiracy to murder the Catholics, and the inhabitants of Paris, apprehensive of danger, were awake in niomentary expectation of an attack, when the bell of the church of Saint-Germain-l'Auxerrois sounded the alarm. This proved to be the signal for the execution of the Hugenots. The work of destruction spread with a rapidity characteristic of the city of Paris. Citizens and soldiers made a rush for the

Page  278 278 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. dwellings of the Hugenots, who were shot doiwn, sabered, and pitched into the Seine. The example of the city was imitated in the provinces; but while in the former the murders were sanctioned-by royal authority, in the latter they were the effect. of popular indignation and a desire of revenge. The number of those who, both in the city and beyond its walls, fell victims to this terrible crime was close upon four thousand. Charles at first endeavored to shift the responsibility from himself to the Guises, but on the 26th of August he spoke out plainly in parliament, saying that the deed had been done by his express orders, to head off a conspiracy of the Hugenots against himself, the royal house, the King of Navarre, and the noblest subjects of his kingdom. Such was the account that reached Rome, and the Cardinal of Lorraine, who had gone there to attend a conclave, acting on this information, asked permission of Pope Gregory XIII. to make a solemn act of thanksgiving (Te Deurn) to God for the preservation of the king's life.l On this occasion Muret gave a discourse, for which he has been frequently and severely censured, but which, because few who talk or write about it are at the pains to read it, has been grossly misrepresented.2 1 Abbe Darras, Ch. H., Vol. IV., p. 230. (TR.) 2The objectionable paragraph runs as follows: Veriti non sunt adversus illius regis caput ac salutem conjurare, a quo post tot atrecia facinora non modo veniam consecuti erant, sed etiam benigne et amanter excepti. Qua conjuratione sub id ipsum tempus, quod patrando sceleri dicatum ac constitutum erat, divinitus detecta atque patefacta, conversum est in illorum sceleratorum ac foedifragorum capita id, quod ipsi in regem et in totam prope domum ac stirpem regiam machinabantur. O noctem illam mernorabilem-quae paucorumn seditiosorumn interitu regem a praesenti caedis periculo, regnum a perpetua civilium bellorum formidine liberavit. Mureti oratio XXII., p. 177, opp. ed. Ruhnkenii. As regards the number of those killed, which varies in different authors from ten to one hundred thousand, it may be remarked that la Popeliniere, a writer unquestionably beyond all suspicion of dishonesty, speaks of but one thousand as having been massacred in Paris, and adds that in other cities the number was quite small. Desirous of fixing upon their opponents the stain of so infamous a deed, writers are apt to forget that Protestants had previously slaughtered a far greater number of Catholics. Marshal Montgomery, for instance, had three thousand. Catholics butchered at Orthez. It is also a well established fact that from two to three hundred monks were either murdered or pitched into wells; that others were buried alive; and, finally, that as many as fifty cathedrals and five hundred Catholic churches of less importance were demol

Page  279 ~ 332. Protestantism in France. 279 These congratulations are of precisely the same character as the felicitations addressed by European sovereigns to one of their royal cousins upon his escape and preservation from some direful calamity; and being consonant with usage among princes, need excite no surprise, much less the affected horror with which dishonest and sentimental writers are accustomed to speak of them. When the facts became fuilly and definitely known to the Supreme Pontiff, he left no doubt, either when speaking or writing, of the horror with which the infamous crime inspired him. The magnanimous John Jlen?,uyer, Bishop of Lisieux, disregarding the commands of the king, took the IIugenots of his diocese under his special protection, and, as a reward for his Christian conduct, had the joy of seeing nearly the whole of them return to the Catholic Church. The court party had hoped that the result of their perfidy and crime would be to weaken the party of the IIugenots, but in this they experienced a bitter disappointment. With an energy that was akin to despair, and a ferocious thirst for revenge, the sectaries rallied for another struggle, and began in 1573 the fourth religious wvar. Destitute of an army adequate to take the field against the Ilugenots, who had now allied themselves with the formidable palitical party lately organized at Milhau, in the Rotuergue, Charles was forced to grant them another edict of pacification. The king died May 30, 1574, leaving to his brother, Henry Ill., the last representative of the house of Valois, who resigned the crown of Poland to accept that of France, a weakened scepter and a divided kingdom. The condition of affairs required a man of energy and decision of character, and the new king possessed neither; and, in consequence, he was compelled to grant (1576) to the victorious Hugenots a peace imcomparably more favorable than any they had yet obtained, ished. Cf. Audin, Hist. de la St. Barth6lemy, Paris, 1826. t-' IVm. von.chidtz, St. Bartholomew's Night Cleared up, Lps. 1845. Soldan, France and St. 13artholomew's Night. (Raumer, Pocket-Book of History, 1854.) IFeibu'q (>?/clopaed., art. "The Night of St. Bartholomew," Vol. II., p. 48. (French trans., art. " Barth6lemy (St.)," Vol. II., p. 335.) Gandy, Origin, Character, Progress, and Consequences of the Night of St. Bartholomew (Revue des questions historiques, A. D. 1866).

Page  280 280 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. which secured to them the free exercise of their religion in every part of the kingdom, except the city of Paris; a complete equality with the Catholics in civil and political rights; and an equal number of representatives in the parliament. Conditions so advantageous gave much offense to Catholics, who, for the purpose of successfully opposing the Calvinists, now formed themselves into a League, at the head of which Henry III., when the States assembled at Blois (1577), thought it prudent to place himself. Violations of the last treaty of pacification by the Ilugenots gave occasion to a fresh war, the result of which was the edict of Poitiers (1577), which materially restricted the concessions granted in the last treaty. As Henry III. was childless, and as his brother, the Duke of Alen~on, had lately died, the two aspirants to the throne were the King of Navarre and the young Prince of Cond6, both of whom were Calvinistic leaders. Dreading the consequences of having a Calvinist become King of France, the Catholics were anxious to bestow the crown on the Cardinal de Bourbon, the Catholic nearest of kin to the king. The proposal met with the approval of the cardinal, who, in 1585, p:ublished the manifesto of Peronne, with a view of furthering his interests. By misrepresentation and a dishonest concealment of facts,. Pope Gregory XII. was induced to give his consent to this arrangement. To hasten its oonsummation, a League wras formed, extending to every part of the kingdom. When the Pope had been accurately informed of the dishonest purposes of the Leaguers, he withdrew his former approval; and his successor, Sixtus V., while condenining them as dangerous conspirators, declared that, according to the fundamental laws of the realm, both HIenry of Navarre and the Prince of Cond6 were incapable of ruling over France. Ienry of Navarre appealed from the decision of the Pope to that of parliament, which had already declined to publish the pontifical bull. The affair was submitted to the arbitration of arms. Henry of Navarre was victorious at the battle of Coutras in 1587. Aftier the assassination of the D)uke of Guise, and the execution of the cardinal, his brother, both of which deeds had been done by order of IHenry III., the League again became formidable. So violent were the dellun

Page  281 ~ 332. Protestantisnsm in France. 281 ciations of the Sorbonne of Paris against the king that he was forced into an alliance with Henry of Navarre. He was shortly after assassinated (August 2, 1589) by James Clement; and, despite the papal bull, Henry IV. of Nravarre succeeded to the throne. Pope Clement VIII. consented to recognize his title on condition that he would embrace the Catholic faith.l Persuaded that he could successfully rule the country only as a Catholic, and acting upon the advice of Sully, his minister and personal friend, and at the same time consulting his own interest, he concluded that " France was worth the offering of a Mass," 2 and accordingly professed himself a Catholic July 25, 1593. Two years later, the Pope proposed to remove from him the sentence of excommunication that had been passed upon him, provided he in turn would promise to become the protector of the (Catholic Church, and to publish, with some omissions, the decrees of the Council of Trent. The nation had now begun to regard the League with disfavor, and its dissolution was completed by the attitude of the Roman Pontiff. The spirit of the Calvinists, however, was still unbroken. They were as seditious as ever, and had lost none of their uncompromising independence. Notwithstanding Henry's firmness of character, they succeeded in extorting from him, in 1598, the Edict of Nantes, by which they obtained the free exercise of their religion in every part of the kingdorrn; were made eligible to the Parliament of Paris; authorized to form separate chambers in the Parliaments of Grenoble and Bordeaux; permitted to hold synods; and empowered to found universities at Saumur, Montauban, Montpellier, and Sedan. These concessions were at once so ample and so unusual that it required all the tact and resolution of the king to have the edict registered. Moreover, the hostility of the Catholics was quick1 There is still extant in the archives of Prince Doria an unpublished autograph correspondence between Henry IV. and Clement VIII., which is necessarily of the highest importance to a thorough understanding of the religious condition of Europe immediately after the return of the King of France to the Catholic Church. Cf. also Staehelin, The Conversion of King Henry IV. to the Catholic Church, Basle, 1856. 2Journat des Debats, September, 1871.

Page  282 282 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. ened and intensified by the persistent intolerance of the Calvinists, who, in the thirty-first article of the Confession of the Synod of Gap (1603), made the following declaration: " We believe that the Pope is truly Antichrist and the son of perdition, spoken of in Holy Writ as the whore clad in scarlet rainment." The assassination of Henry IV., on the 14th of May, 1610, by Francis Ravaillac, may be traced to the rancorous and imp!acable enmities existing between the two parties. Mary <de' Medici was declared regent during the non-age of Louis XIII. (1610-1643), and, while she held the reigns of government, the IIugenots enjoyed a season of comparative quiet. Under Cardinal Richelieu (1624-1642), however, whose rare intellectual endowments were supplemented by unusual energy of action, their condition underwent a complete change. Believing that no lasting peace could be hoped for front a body of men who were constantly showing signs of discontent, and assu'ming attitudes of defiance, and who were highly exasperated because the young king had married a Spanish princess, and the churches of B6arn, which had been taken from the Catholics, had been again restored to them, the cardinal made a radical change in the legislation regarding the Calvinists. La Rochelle was their last stronghold, and its capture was at once the death-blow to their party as a political organization (1628), and put a period to a bloody strife, which had lasted for seventy-one years.' Hence they made no attempt to disturb the peace during the minority of Louis XIV.; and when, in 1659, acting upon the suggestion of the Synod of Montpazier,2 they offered to ally themselves with England, the plot was discovered, and its authors severely punished. The sees of France were at this time filled by men of ability and learning, through whose exertions, admirably seconded I Fezelon, Correspondance diplomatique, the last volume of which was published under the editorial supervision of Cooper, Paris, 1841. It contains valuable information on the battles of Jarnac and Moncontour (Dep. Vienne), the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the siege of La Rochelle. 2 Not Montpellier, as is said in the French translation. Montpazier is the chief town of a canton in the department de la Dordogne, so named from a northern tributary of the river Garonne, with which united it forms la Gironde. (TR.)

Page  283 ~ 332. Protestantism in France. 283 by a body of priests, trained in the schools of St. Francis de Saloes and St. Vincent de Paul, and distinguished by the purity of their lives and the warmth of their zeal, great numbers of the Calvinists were by degrees brought back to the Church.l Thousands were also converted by the publication, in 1668, with the papal approbation of Bossuet's "Exposition de la Doctrine Catholique." The freedom of those who chose to continue heretics was being constantly abridged, until finally Louis XIV., having reached the superlative of absolutism, which he tersely expressed by the well-known phrase, "1 anm the State" (L'etat c'est moi), and believing that the opposition and obstinacy of the IIugenots proceeded from political, rather than religious motives, acted upon the advice of le Tellier, his chancellor, and revoked the Edict of Natrtes, October 18, 1685, substituting in its place another of twelve articles,2 by which nearly all their privileges were withdrawn, and they themselves subjected to many hardships. The revocation of the Edict of Nantes, while it can not be said to have been wholly arbitrary, was a very inopportune and unwise measure. It is true it received the cordial approbation of many bishops of France, but it is equally true that it drove the Calvinists to desperation. They had also other causes of complaint. Louvois, the minister of state, by sending among them missionaries, attended by dragoons (Dragonnades, la mission bottee, or, les conversions par logemens), to work their conversion, had highly exasperated them. In consequence, sixty-seven thousand of them went imnlediately into colWntary exile, taking up 1 Picot, Essai historique.sur l'influence de la religion en France pendant le XVIIe si6cle, Paris, 1824, 2 vols.; Louvain, 1824. German transl., by Raes and tWeis. 2 On the legality of this measure, Hugo Grotius (Apol. Riveti discuss., p. 22) says: "Norint illi, qui Reformatorum sibi imponunt vocabulum, non esse illa foedera, sed regum edicta ob publicam facta utilitatem, et revocabilia, si aliud regibus publica utilitas suaserit." Conf. (Benoist) Hist. de 1'6dit. de Nantes, Delft, 1693-1695, 5 vols., 4to. (Ancillon) L'irrevocabilit6 de l'6dit. de Nantes, prouvee par les principes de la politique, Amsterdam, 1688. It is unnecessary to call attention to the numerous instances in which Protestants persecuted Catholics with incomparably greater severity; but it is a little remarkable that authors, who profess to write fairly and dispassionately, while employing all their eloquence to excite sympathy for the former, can not check their prejudices sufficiently to treat the latter with ordinary courtesy.

Page  284 284 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. their abodes in England, Holland, and Denmark, but chiefly in Brandenburg. It is worthy of mention that Pope In nocent XI. disapproved of these severe measures, but not being himself on amicable terms with the French king, requested James II. of England to interpose his good offices in behalf of the oppressed Protestants.' ~ 333. Protestantism in the Netherlands. Stradae Romani, S. J., Hist. Belgicae duae decades, Romae, 1640-1647, 2 vols., fol. and frequently. H. Leo, Twelve Books of Netherlandish History, Halle, 1835, Pt. II. The same, Manual of Univ. Hist., Vol. III. Prescott, Hist. of the Reign of Philip II., King of Spain, London. 1857. t1 lKoch, The Revolt and Defection of the Netherlands from Spain, Lps. 1860. -* Holzwarth, The Defection of the Netherlands, Schaffhausen, 1865-1871 (Vol. I. from 1539-1566; Vol. II., in two parts, fr. 1566-1572, and fr. 1572-1581 resp., 1584). IVuyens, Hist. of the Netherlandish Rebellion, 1865-1870, in 4 vols. Conf. Hist. and Polit. Papers, Vol. VI., pp. 193 sq., 269 sq. J. L. AMIotley, The Rise of the Dutch ]Republic, 1856, tr. into Germ. (Dresden, 1857), Dutch and French. By the same, H ist. of the United N\Tetherlands, of which two vols. appeared in 1860. There was no country of Europe more exposed than the Netherlands to the twofold infection of the Lutheran and Calvinistic heresies. To this condition of things many causes contributed. The inhabitants were the unwilling subjects of Charles V.; they kept up an active commercial intercourse with Germany; and their minds had been long distracted, and were now unsettled by the quarrels of literary men and the controversies of the Schoolmen. These circumstances were fully appreciated by Charles V., and, fearing their consequences, he ordered the Edict of Worms against Luther to be published in the Netherlands; had the Inquisition introduced; and, by the execution of Henry Voes and John Eusch (1523), gave the people to understand that he was terribly in earnest in what he was doing. HIere the emperor put aside the gentle forbearance which he exercised toward the Protestants of Germany, and, by a display of unusual severity, sought to avert from his own patrimonial dominions the 1 Such is the testimony of Macaulay. See Dollinger, The Churchr and the Churches, etc., Preface, p. XXXIII.

Page  285 ~ 393. Protestantism in the Netherlands. 285 disasters, such as the Peasants' War, which the Reformation had brought upon that country. But, in spite of this rigor, holland soon became the scene of the fanatical excesses and barbarous cruelties of the Anabaptists. A Dutch translation of the Bible, made in the spirit of the principles of Luther, by James van Liesveld, was published in 1525. Charles saw that still more rigorous measures were necessary, and he accordingly issued decrees of greater severity against the heretics in 1530 and 1550. When Philip II. (from 1556) succeeded to his father, his zeal to preserve the purity of the Catholic faith led him to employ measures still more severe and despotic against these unfortunate people, thereby violating rights that had been secured to them by the most solemn pledges. The Flemings, who were already discontented at seeing the more important offices of State filled by the Spaniards, were still further incensed when Philip II., by the authority of a bull obtained from Pope Paul IV., bearing the date of May 14, 1559, in place of the four old sees of Utrecht, Arras, Cambrai, and Tournay, established fourteen new ones, and. raised Molines, Cambrai, and Utrecht to the dignity of archbishoprics. These States had been intrusted by Philip to the governiment of Charles V.'s natural daughter, Margaret, Duchess of Parma, with Cardinal Granvelle as prinle -minister. The cardinal, who was a man of indefatigable industry, and possessed great capacity for business, sided with the Flemings in their opposition to the increase in the number of episcopal sees; but his devotion to the Head of the Church, and his loyalty to the king, rendered him an object of aversion to the mralcontents, and furnished them a pretext for revolt. Their hatred of him culminated when the Council of Regency was called to consider the question of publishing the Decrees of the Council of Trent in the Netherlands. The cardinal favored, the Calvinists steadily opposed the publication. They organized against him. At their head were William, Prince of Orange, Stadtholder of Holland, Zealand, and Utrecht; Count 1 Documents inedits, papiers d'etat du Cardinal de Granvelle, Paris, 18411842, 3 vols., 4to.

Page  286 286 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. d-'Egmont, Stadtholder of Flanders and Artois; and Count de loorne, High Admiral of the United Provillces. They fermed a league, and so threatening was their attitude that Margaret was forced to beg that the obnoxious minister be recalled (1564). The powerful Triumvirs now resumed their places in the Council of State, whence they had withdrawn, but they did not possess sufficient influence in that body to prevent a vote favoring the publication of the Tridentine Decrees. When the result of the vote reached Philip, he ordered all the edicts against heretics to be enforced with the extremest rigor. The order filrnished a fresh and plausible pretext for opposition on the part of the malcontents, who were under the skillful direction of Williaam " The Silent." Prince of Orange. He was a son-in-law of Coligny's, and, from motives of ambition, devotedly attached to the cause of the Hugenots. On the 16th of February, 1565, a dozen noblemen, wholly under his influence, signed a compact, known as "The Compromise of Breda," by which they demanded a redress of grievances. In a few months the number of signers lhad increased to two t.housand,' of whom two hundred were Catholics. Their arms and their services they placed at the command of' William. This "Compromise" the Triumvirs designedly abstained from signing. Meetings were held throughout the whole of the Netherlands, and in the following month of April a deputation of two hundred and fifty gentlemen sent through Margaret a; petition to Philip, demanding the suppression of the Inquisition and a revocation or suspension of the severe edict of religion with which they were threatened. Balaimont, one of the nobles of Margaret's coulrt, contemptuously styled the members of the deputation "Guteux," or Beggars, a name which they afterward appropriated as one of honorable distinction. Notwithstanding that the petitioners professed their intention of maintaining the Catholic Church, and that alone, a Protestant Symbol appeared in the Netherlands in the year 1561 (Confessio Belgica), and was adopted by many of the Belgians, who worshiped apart by 1 Freiburg Cyclop., Vol. VII., p. 602. (TR.)

Page  287 ~ 333. Protestantism in the Netherlands. 287 themselves and followed a rite of their own.l Receiving encouragenment from the magistrates and nobles, the Protestants rose simultaneously over the whole country, and Calvinists, who had sought an asylum in France, returned in large bodies. Conscious of their power, they began to inflict upon others the treatment of which they had but lately so bitterly complained. Even in the larger cities, they entered, sacked, and pulled down churches and convents; destroyed images and pictures; and so blind was their rage that the magnificent cathedral of Antwerp did not escape its fury. In the Ineantime, the regent, after the recall of the obnoxious Cardinal Granvelle, succeeded in concluding a treaty with Louis of Orange and twelve noblemen, which was in a measure satisfactory to the Reformers. By this instrument their grievances were corrected, and the severity of the ordinances in force against them mitigated. These concessions, however, did not prevent them from rising in rebellion, and submitting their cause to the fortune of a doubtful war, in which they were completely vanquished. William of Orange was forced to quit the country, and seek an asylum in Germany; and Count d'Egmont, deserting the Protestant cause, threw himself upon the mercy of the king (1567). The royal authority was restored in the revolted provinces, and the Catholic religion was again triumphant. Philip should have been content with matters as they now stood; but, instead of being so, he adopted an unwise and aggressive policy. Withdrawing the government from the gentle and prudent Margaret, he trafisferred it to the stern, but by no means tyrannical, Duke of Alva,2 whom he appointed 1Augusti, Corpus libror. symbolicor., pp. 170-177. 2 The American, UIn. H. Prescott, in his History of the Reign of Philip the Second, King of Spain, Boston, ed. of 1855, Vol. II., p. 298, says of him: " Far from being moved by personal considerations, no power could turn him frcm that narrow path which he professed to regard as the path of duty." And, as a proof that Alva was not wholly insensible to feelings of compassion, when they did not interfere with the performance of his duty, Prescott refers to a letter of his to the king, written in behalf of the afflicted family of Count d'Egmont. The duke says: "Your majesty will understand the regret I feel at seeing these poor lords (Egmont and Hoorne) brought to such an end, and myself obliged to bring them to it. But I have not shrunk from doing what Is

Page  288 288 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. generalissimo, and sent into the Netherlands at the head of ten thousand picked men. Alva made his entry into Brussels on the 22d of August, 1567, and began the work of his office by appointing a "Council of Troubles," consisting of twelve persons, whose duty it was to hunt up the authors of the late troubles and bring them to summary punishment. Many of the nobility, who had taken part in the revolt, fled from the country. Of those who remained, eighteen were executed on the 1st of June, 1568; and, on the 5th of the same month, Count d'Egmont and Count de Hoorne died the death of conspirators at Brussels. The property of the leaders of the conspiracy was confiscated. William of Orange, whose estates had thus escheated to the crown, now began to levy war with troops raised in Germany and France, and, aided by his brother, Louis of Nassau, meditated a simultataneous attack upon the Spaniards in Friesland, Guelderland, and Brabant. This design was frustrated by Alva. Louis having been defeated at Gemmingen, near the Ems (July 21, 1568), hastened to join his brother with the remnants of his forces, and the two now endeavored to effect a junction with Cond6, who was at the head of the French Calvinists. Alva, who divined their plans, intercepted them, and forced them, after many defeats, to retreat into Germany. Thus far Alva had discharged the important duties of his office with ability and success. But the new scheme for raising money, by exacting, besides other imposts, one-tenth of the value of goods every time they changed hands, which he now introduced, again fanned into a flatfie the embers of a protracted and momentous civil war. The Dutch merchants turned toward William of Orange for protection, and contributed liberally to enable him to confor your majesty's service.... The Countess Egmont's condition fills me with the greatest pity, burdened as she is with a family of eleven children, none old enough to take care of themselves; and she too a lady of so distinguished a rank, sister of the Count Palatine, and of so virtuous, truly Catholic, and exemplary life. There is no man in the country who does not grieve for her! I can not but commend her," he concludes, "as I do now, very humbly, to the good grace of your majesty, beseeching you to call to mind that if the count, her husband, came to trouble at the close of his days, he formerly rendered great service to the State."

Page  289 ~ 333. Protestantism in the Netherlands. 289 tinue a struggle, which they hoped would deliver them from the tyranny of the Spanish yoke. The injudicious measure of Alva, so detrimental to the commercial interests of the Netherlands, gave a decided and triumphant victory to the Reformers, which, under other circumstances, they could never have obtained in that country. William. at once changed his whole plan of operations. Trarisferring the war from land to water, he issued letters of marque to privateers, which swept the sea in search of Spanish vessels. The northern provinces rose in insurrection, and so critical did Alva's position become that he sent in his resignation to his government, and was recalled in the autumn of 1573. He was replaced by Don Luis (le Requesens y Zuiaiga, a man of abilitv and moderation. He revoked the odious financial edicts, and was just beginning to give fair promise of a prosperous and successful career, when, unfortunately for the interests of Spain in the Netherlands, he died prematurely in 1576. His successor in the government was the illustrious hero of Lepanto, Don John of Austria, Philip's half-brother. Lacking the skill of a statesman, and the sternnesss of a disciplinarian, he proved wholly unfit for his new position.. The northern and southern provinces rose in revolt, and, by their combined efforts, expelled the Spanish soldiers who plundered their country and the commander who tolerated their excesses (1576). This enabled the Prince of Orange to include five more provinces in the confederacy that had been formed, "as a defense against any violence that might be practiced in the name, or to promote the interests, of the king." Don John of Austria was declared an enemy of the State, and his successor, Archduke Matthias of Austria, being no match in diplomacy, for the astute William, was wholly deceived as to the import of the oath which that wily statesman prevailed upon him to take (1578), and was in consequence obliged to be content with a merely nominal authority. War again broke out. Don Alessandro da _Farnese, now\ in command of the royal forces, gained a splendid victory at Gemblours (January 31, 1578), thus preserving the southernl provinces to the king and the Catholic cause. The nortllerl VOL. III-19

Page  290 290 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. provinces were in the hands of William of Orange, who,, though he had given pledges to respect the rights of Catholics, failed to make them good in a single instance. The Treaty of Union between the seven northern provinces was signed at Utrecht in 1579, by which it was agreed that the Confederated Provinces should form an indissoluble union, and that questions of war and peace and the levying of taxes shoukld be submitted to a vote of the representatives of the Confederacy. William of Orange was appointed stadtholder, high admiral, and generalissimo of all the forces, whether on land or sea, and was to hold these offices for life. Heretofore the provinces in revolt had headed all their public documents with the name of the king; but they now left off doing so, and substituted instead that of Williarm of Orange.l In 1568 William had declared that " he had taken up arms to secure religious freedom to the Catholics, no less than to the Evangelicals," and that it was his intention " to see that the former should be in the full enjoyment of their rights." He, however, forgot or proved false to his promise, and in 1582' published an ordinance, which was rigorously enforced, proscribing the Catholic religion in Holland. William was assassinated in the year 1584, but his loss did not shake the courage of his followers. They called to the head of the government his second son, JMaurice, who, with the aid of troops sent over by Queen Elizabeth, maintained himself during the interval from 1588 to 1590, ahd took the offensive in 1591, after the defeat of the Spanish Armada, and the year followingl-, when the royal troops were under the command of the successor to Don Alessandro, who had lately died. By the armistice of 1609, the northern provinces were recognized as a -Republic, but their independence was not definitively acknowledged by Spain until the Peace of Westphalia, in 1648. The close alliance of these confederated provinces with I rance and England was favorable to the spread of Calvinismn, whose principles were indorsed by the synods of Dordrecht in 1574 and 1618, and defended and developed by the University of Leydlen. The Catholics in Holland, however, 1 Freiburg Cyclqp., art. "Netherlands.". (TR.)

Page  291 ~ 334. General Causes of Spread of Protestantism. 291 -were still very numerous, and the southern provinces of Belgium remained steadily loyal to the Church. OBSERVATION.-" In Italy and Spain," says Guericke, " the darkness of Popery:shut out the pure light of the Gospel." McCrie, an English writer, speaks of the generous sympathy with which Protestantism was received in these countries; but it may be truthfully said of his statements, that they belong to the domain of fiction rather than that of fact.' There is no proof to the contrary furnished by the Italian work entitled "On the Charity of Christ," published in 1542.2 Padre Saluzzo, O. S. F., was mainly instrumental in preventing the.spread of Protestantism in Upper Italy. ~ 334. General Causes of the Rapid Spread of Protestantism. t* Marx, Causes of the Rapid Propagation of the Reformation, etc., Milentz, 1834. Moehler's Ch. Hist., Vol. III., pp. 159 sq. It is perhaps no more than natural that Protestant writers ~should manifest a certain bias when treating of this subject; but it is certainly a little strange to find authors of ilname comparing the rapid spread of Protestantism to the progress made by Christianity when it was first preached to man, without taking into account the very different circumstances w'hich accompanied the propagation of both the one and the other. It should be borne in mind, on the one hand, that the early Christian confessors were reviled and persecuted as no set of men ever were; and, on the other, that favors the most flattering and privileges the most ample were the portion of the IRefobrmers. To escape the charge of partiality, we shall confine ourselves to facts from which a judgment may be fairly formed. 1. Luther's efforts received a color of recognition and support from the serious complaints which had been made in'Thos. McCrie, Hist. of the Rise and Fall of the Reformation in Italy (Germ. lby Friedrich, Lps. 1829). By the same, Hist. of the Development and Sulpres-sion of the Reformation in Spain (Germ. by Plieninger, Stuttg. 1835). Altolfo *de Costro, Hist. of the Spanish Protestants and their Persecution by Philip II. (tr. fr. the Spanish into German, and edited by Hertz, Frankfort, 1866). I'Franzisca Hernondez and Fray Franzisco Ortiz, or Beginnings of Reformatory MAlovements in Spain during the reign of Emperor Charles V., by E. Boehmer, Lps. 1865. 2 Germ transl., Lps. 1855. Cf. A. Theiner, Della introduzione del Protestantismo in Italia tentata, Roma e Napoli, 1850.

Page  292 292 Period 3. Epoch 1. Chapter 2. general councils, with a view to the correction of existing' abuses. Many well-meaning bishops had spoken out in no: faltering terms against abuses of every kind, and chiefly against those of indulgences; and hence, when Luther reechoed their language, he was listened to with approval. Moreover, at the outset of his career, he professed to teach only the pure doctrine of the Catholic Church, and to desire only the correction of abuses and the enforcement of discipline; and his professions being honorable and apparently sincere, carried with them a weight of authority to which they were by no means entitled. In this way, for the time being, he imposed upon a great number of persons, not among the illiterate alone, but among the learned also; and such men as Cochlaeus, Willibald Pirkheimer, Zasius, Wizel, John Haner, Erasmus, and others of equal distinction in the literary world were among his dupes. 2. Luther and his followers employed every means, fair and unfair, to misrepresent the teaching of the Catholic Church, and to put forward their own as the pure and genuine teaching of the Gospel. They did not hesitate, when addressing the illiterate, to tell them that the Mass was an impious act of worship and the veneration of Saints an idolatrous one. The Calvinistic Confession of Faith proclaimed "that pure and divine truth is banished from the Church of Rome; that her Sacraments are corrupted and falsified; and that she tolerates in her bosom every sort of impiety and superstition." 1 And having adopted these unscrupulous methods, Luther went on to speak and write with such an air of assurance that it was next to impossible that any doubt as to the truth of his assertions should enter into the minds of those who had once received what he said with implicit trust.2 Papal tyranny was an inspiring theme for eloquent and lively sermons, offensive satires