POPE LEO X

CHAPTER VIII.

Luther is summoned to Rome.—His Transactions with Cardinal Cajetan and with Miltitz. —The Bull “Exsurge” and its Reception in Germany.—Aleander’s Mission to the Diet of Worms, and the Imperial Edict against Luther.

I.

When, in the beginning of 1518, Leo X, through a notice sent to him by the Archbishop of Mainz became cognizant of the extent of Luther’s new doctrines, he at once took measures to check them. On the 3rd of February he directed Gabriele della Volta, Vicar-General of the Augustinians, to remonstrate with Luther, either by letter, or through learned and upright envoys, and urge him to refrain from disseminating his new doctrines. If this were done at once, said the Pope, there was hope of extinguishing a fire so lately kindled; but should there be further delay, it might be found impossible to quench the conflagration.

This attempt to check the innovator and bring him back to the Church by the discipline of his own Order, was frustrated by Luther’s determined resistance. For the purpose of justifying himself, he wrote with great care his Resolutionen von der Kraft des Ablasses, which was forwarded to Rome by his religious superior, Staupitz. But in the apparently humble letter to Leo X which accompanied it, he refused to make any retractation.

Luther had good reason to fear lest the Apostolic See might take more energetic measures against him. In order to be beforehand with Rome, he preached, in the middle of May, a sermon on the power of excommunication. In this, skilfully starting from the abuse of censures as carried on especially by subordinate ecclesiastics, and rightly condemned, he proceeded to lay down a new doctrine in startling contrast with that of the Church, namely, that the real communion of the Church was invisible, and that therefore no one could be cut off from it by excommunication, and that nothing but sin could affect it. “All men wonder”, wrote Luther to a friend, “that they have never heard of such a thing before. Meanwhile, whatever evil may befall me in the future, we may all hope that a new fire has been kindled. In this way the word of truth will become a sign of contradiction”.

One month later the canonical process against Luther was instituted in Rome. The watchful Dominicans, the faithful brethren of Tetzel, had drawn the attention of the Curia, as early as March, 1518, to the danger of Luther's proceedings ; but no measures were taken until the middle of June, or, in other words, until the reception of Luther’s letter refusing all recantation. Now for the first time the Papal fiscal-procurator, Mario di Perusco, brought a charge against the professor of Wittenberg of propagating false doctrines. Leo X entrusted the preliminary inquiry to Girolamo Ghinucci, Bishop of Ascoli, the Auditor-General of legal causes to the Apostolic Camera. The learned Master of the Sacred Palaces, Silvestro Mazzolini, better known as Prierias, from his native city, was appointed theological examiner of the case. He was a Dominican, and an ardent disciple of St. Thomas Aquinas. The anti-thomist tone of Luther’s theses stirred up within him the strongest feeling of antagonism. Immediately after they had been posted up at Wittenberg, he—as his office of Master of the Sacred Palaces constituted him supreme guardian of theological literature—had gone deeply into the subject of them. Consequently he was able at the shortest notice to put on paper his opinion of them, which was at once printed and sent with a dedication to Leo X. The title of Dialogus, which was given to this work, written in bad Latin, is explained by its form. Luther’s theses are placed in order, and to each the answer of Prierias is subjoined. To form a right estimate of the work of Prierias, we must bear in mind what he himself says in his dedication to the Pope and in his letter to Luther, namely, that in this, his first passage of arms with the Wittenberg professor, he had no intention of refuting the theses exhaustively. So long as Luther did not too prominently obtrude his fundamenta, but contented himself with putting forward his theses without trying to prove them, Prierias was content to meet him with counter-theses, which, according to his own convictions, met the case. Should Luther, however, go back on what he had said, try to prove and add to them, then Prierias held himself ready to enter the lists with an extended scheme. In order not to fall into the fault which he blamed in his adversary, and put the theses of the latter to the test, he summed up under four principal heads his essential propositions (fundamenta). These related to the Church, the supreme spiritual authority of the Pope as her Head, the infallibility of the Church, of General Councils, and of the Pope in decisions in matters of faith and morals, as also the heretical character of rebellion against the doctrines of the Church, whether expressly defined or actually existing. The infallibility of the Church was then asserted as regarded her doctrine of indulgences in all its branches; and on this ground he condemned Luther’s attack on it. It is, however, a fact that, in spite of the excellence of most of his arguments against Luther’s assertions, his over bearing manner led him into exaggerations in his defence. It is much to be regretted that he should have allowed himself to make rude personal attacks, even if Luther’s defenders had no right to find fault with their opponent on that score. Nevertheless, to suppose that a more gentle and considerate way of meeting the attack would have had any better results than his high-handed methods, would be to misapprehend Luther's character and to ignore the breach with the Church to which he had already committed himself in his own mind.

At the beginning of July, 1518, Ghinucci and Prierias sent Luther an official summons to appear in person in Rome within sixty days, to give an account of his heretical doctrines and his contempt of the authority of the Pope. If he did not put in an appearance, he would be subjected to severe ecclesiastical penalties. This summons, together with Prierias’s pamphlet, was sent to Cardinal Cajetan at Augsburg, and were both placed in the hands of the Wittenberg professor at the beginning of August, when he set to work at once to compose a rejoinder. This reply to the “Dialogus” of Prierias, which Luther, in order to be beforehand with his adversaries, wrote in two days, was finished and printed by the end of August, and is full of expressions of contempt for his opponents, as Italians and as Thomists. What Prierias says on the question, he writes, signifies absolutely nothing to him, and he rejects the teaching of St Thomas with equal contempt. He acknowledges the canonical books of Scripture alone as infallible and maintains that both Councils and Pope are subject to error. Nevertheless he holds firmly that the Roman Church has always maintained the true faith, and that it is necessary for all Christians to be in unity of faith with her. At the same time he repudiates any authority (unless a decision of the Church or a Council intervene) which forbids him to advocate his own views about indulgences. But even while facing the possibility of such a decision, he does not speak as though he would be willing to submit his own private opinions to it; for almost in the same breath he denies the infallibility equally of Council and Pope. Evidently he expects that the Church assembled in Council would agree with him.

As soon as Luther had received his summons to appear in Rome, he wrote to his friend Spalatin, the Elector Frederick’s court chaplain, and intimated to him that it was the duty of his suzerain to defend the honour of the University of Wittenberg which was being attacked in his person, “by his murderers, with vice and cunning”. As regarded the “execrable summons through viperous and horrible instruments”, the Elector of Saxony—who was then at the Diet of Augsburg—might obtain of the Pope through the Emperor, that his affair should be tried by “an impartial commission” in Germany. In the same sense Luther wrote directly to the Emperor to have a care for the honour of his University. Maximilian, however, was not inclined to mix himself up in the matter. Under the influence of Cardinals Cajetan and Lang, and in the hopes of winning the Pope over to favour the election as King of Rome of his grandson Charles, the Emperor had written a most significant letter to Leo X from Augsburg on the 5th of August, 1518. In this he had declared that, unless Luther’s new doctrines were met seriously, the unity of the Church would be in danger, and private judgment would be set up in opposition to the revealed truths of religion. He himself was prepared to ensure that any measures the Pope saw fit to take, to put a stop to these audacious and insidious disputations, should be duly carried out throughout the Empire, for the honour of God and the salvation of souls.

This promise of the Emperor, which conveyed so much moved the Curia not to wait for the expiration of the term of sixty days set for Luther’s appearance at Rome, but to pursue a course of greater energy. This is shown by the issue of the important Brief which was sent on the 23rd of August, 1518, to the learned Dominican, Cardinal Cajetan, who had been appointed Legate to the Diet of Augsburg on behalf of the affair of a Turkish war. The news of further incriminating circumstances had reached Rome, said the Brief, and Luther had published fresh heresies. Cajetan was directed to call Luther—who had already been declared to be a heretic by Ghinucci—before him in person, “as the case was notorious and by help of the Emperor and all spiritual and temporal princes, compel him to appear. Should Luther appear voluntarily and retract his errors with signs of repentance, then he should be forgiven. But should he not appear voluntarily, but wait to be compelled, and even so did not retract, then the Cardinal must arrest him and deliver him over to Rome, there to appear before the Pope. If Luther despised the secular arm, and refused to put himself in the power of the Legate, or, in other words, made it impossible for the secular authorities to hand him over and compel him to appear before the Legate, Cajetan was, in the first place, empowered to declare him and his followers heretics by public edict, and, secondly, to demand the assistance of all spiritual and temporal princes, the Emperor alone excepted, under threat of excommunication, to seize and deliver Luther over. If any of these princes should afford him shelter or help, advise or favour him, the very ground trodden by Luther was placed under interdict These commands, especially that relating to extradition (mandata requisitionis), issued by Cajetan, were to be carried out by all authorities promptly and on the spot. To those who obeyed there was held out the prospect of a reward, to be given at the Legate’s discretion.”

The more severe course against Luther, indicated in the Brief, was based on the notoriety and aggravation of his case. Rome, with a full appreciation of the gravity of the situation, had determined to take all means within reach to meet this dangerous movement. As the support of Maximilian could be relied on, there was every hope that, if the aged Emperor survived, this object might soon be attained.

At the same time (August 23, 1518) as this Brief, the Pope wrote to the Elector of Saxony requesting him to co-operate in handing Luther over to the Legate, as he was spreading the most pernicious doctrines. The issue of this Brief led to intimate personal dealings between the Cardinal-Legate and the Elector. Frederick refused positively to deliver Luther over to Rome. He wished that the case should be tried in Germany before impartial judges. Cajetan could not agree to this; though he declared himself ready, if only Luther would appear before him at Leipzig, to treat him with paternal gentleness. The Elector regarded this conciliatory proposal as an important concession; but, as will be seen later, he put an entirely different construction on the expression “paternal gentleness” from that intended by the Cardinal.

If Cajetan did really, in the further course of the proceedings, promise to accede to the Elector's demands, and to pardon Luther without compelling him to retract, he was most certainly acting contrary to his instructions. No doubt he did provide “for the event that Luther might refuse to recant, and it might be necessary to allow him to return to Saxony, by extracting a promise from the Elector, that he would not expose himself to the censures of the Church by favouring Luther in a way forbidden in the Brief. He implored of Frederick not to disgrace the good name of his ancestors for the sake of a miserable monk. Frederick repeatedly made the promise thus asked of him, and Cajetan believed that he had thus secured the extradition of Luther”. But his calculations were at fault, for the Elector took a different view of what constituted the good name of his family from that taken by Cajetan. From the very beginning he had been determined to take active measures against Luther only in the event of his doctrines being proved false to his own satisfaction. That the Cardinal went so far to meet the “lukewarm policy” of Frederick, is most easily explained by his confidence in the theological superiority of his position, which made him hope to arrive by scientific methods at conclusions before which his adversary would be compelled to yield. A man entirely devoted to study, without much practical knowledge of the world, the Cardinal was no match for such an expert politician as the Elector of Saxony.

In consideration of the excited state of feeling in Germany, and the importance of Frederick in the matter of the election of the King of Rome, Leo X assented to the arrangements, taken as a whole, which he and Cajetan had come to, and left to his Legate to bear alone the risk of overstepping his instructions. A Brief of the 11th of September gave Cajetan the dangerous power of examining and deciding on Luther’s case at Augsburg.

Luther, encouraged by his own suzerain and provided by him with recommendations, decided to obey the summons to Augsburg, where he arrived on the 7th of October. Thrice, on the 12th, 13th, and 14th of October, he, having prudently provided himself with an imperial safe-conduct, appeared before the Cardinal-Legate, who had, in view of the coming disputations, studied the subject of them deeply.

From the first Cajetan received Luther—as is admitted by the latter in his letters— in a gentle and friendly manner, explaining that he had not summoned him to appear before him as his judge. It is true that, as the discussion went on, Cajetan could not control his indignation at Luther’s obstinacy. In the name of the Pope he demanded of the Wittenberg professor to think better of his ways and retract his errors, and to promise, furthermore, never to return to them, and refrain henceforward from meddling with doctrines which were opposed to the authority of the Roman Church. He asked him especially to retract the fifty-eighth thesis, which denied that the merits of Christ and of the Saints formed the treasury of the Church, as also that sentence in his “Resolutions” which made a salutary reception of the sacraments conditional on the faith of the recipient. Luther wished there on to enter into a lengthy and learned disputation with the Cardinal; but, in accordance with his instructions Cajetan would not be drawn into this, and broke off the first conference with a fatherly warning to Luther to renounce his errors.

At the second interview, on the following day, Luther was accompanied by Staupitz, who had in the interval arrived at Augsburg. He also brought with him a notary and several witnesses. The notary read out a declaration on behalf of Luther, that as far as he could remember he had never taught anything against Holy Scripture, the doctrines of the Church, the Papal Decretals, or sound reason. But as he was a man subject to error, he submitted himself to the decisions of the Holy Church and to all who knew better than he did. He wished to speak openly in answer to all charges and, finally, to submit to the decisions of the Universities of Basle, Freiburg, Louvain, and Paris. The Legate did not agree to the last request, by which Luther “wished to wrest the affair from the Pope’s hands, and again give it the aspect of a scholastic quarrel, thus to gain time”. However, urged by Staupitz, he ended by granting the request that Luther might hand in a written vindication. In this, which he handed in on the third day, October the 14th, Luther criticized Clement the Sixth’s Extravagant, Unigenitus, which Cajetan had proposed to him as a definition of the Catholic doctrine of the treasury of the Church. He maintained that a construction could be placed on it which would leave nothing to condemn in him. In the second place, Luther defended the doctrine of the necessity of faith for justification and for the reception of Communion. Being convinced of the infallible truth of his own opinions, he demanded that a better knowledge of Holy Scripture should be brought to bear against what he considered irrefragable arguments; and without this he refused to retract. But again Cajetan declined to allow himself to be drawn into an argument, and at parting bade him not return until he was in a better mind.

The Cardinal then tried to work on Luther through Staupitz, and induce him to yield. By the persuasion of Staupitz and Wenzel Link, Luther then wrote a letter to Cajetan on the 17th of October, in which, with an outward show of profound respect, he extolled the Cardinal’s gentleness and friendliness, and admitted that he had spoken too violently and disrespectfully against the Pope, for which he asked pardon and promised amendment. He also promised to keep silence thenceforward on the subject of indulgences, if the same were imposed on his adversaries. But he refused to comply with the primary condition, namely, that of making retractation of his errors, which, said he, his conscience forbade him to do, and against his conscience he dare not act. The authority of St. Thomas and the other scholastics, he went on to say, did not suffice for him, nor did their reasons convince him : he must be convinced by more cogent reasons than theirs. He begged Cajetan to refer the matter to the Pope, so that it might be decided by the Church, and he might know what to retract and what to adhere to. If now he retracted what was a matter of doubt, he laid himself open to the reproach of maintaining or retracting that about which he knew nothing. Obviously the Cardinal could not be satisfied with any such declaration. By accepting it he would have admitted that on all those points on which Luther had defied the authority of the Church, only those doctrines were at stake which, “not being defined by the Church, were open to reasonable discussion”.

In a later letter of the 18th of October, Luther declared that, having proved his obedience by his long and laborious journey to obey the summons to appear before the Legate, and having expressed his submission to any future judgment of the Holy See by giving up his “Resolutions”, he now considered that a longer sojourn in Augsburg was unnecessary, and burdensome both to himself and to the Carmelites with whom he was staying ; that, moreover, the Cardinal had forbidden him to reappear before him so long as he refused to recant; and on that subject he had made himself clear in his former letter. Now, therefore, he would take his departure. He went on to say that he appealed from the Legate and from the Pope, badly informed, to one who would be better informed, who would be pointed out to him by the Most High. He had, he said, no fear of censures, which he had not deserved, for by God’s grace he was in such a condition that he feared condemnation much less than he feared error and false opinions; for he knew that censure could not harm him, but would rather benefit him if he had on his side truth and a sound faith.

Two days later, in the night between the 20th and 21st of October, Luther, having been released by Staupitz from rule and obedience, fled secretly from Augsburg, and arrived in Wittenberg on the 31st. During his journey he received news of the Brief sent by the Pope to Cajetan on the 23rd of August, a copy of which Spalatin had contrived to procure secretly.

The purport of the manifesto mentioned above, the rough draft of which he had given to his notary and witnesses on the 16th of October, to be publicly affixed to the door of the Cathedral of Augsburg after his departure, and sent to the Cardinal, was as follows : There was much that was uncertain about the matter of indulgences, as well as about the manner in which they can be applied to the dead; therefore a discussion on the subject is not only permissible but praiseworthy. This he undertook to promote, moved thereto by the immoderate stir made by the preachers of indulgences, who, under pretext of carrying out their mission, carried on a scandalous and covetous trade to an un precedented extent, which brought contempt on the Roman Church, the power of the keys, and the Apostolic See. He had therefore submitted the matter under dispute not only to the judgment of the Church, but to the intelligence of those who knew and understood it better than he did. But first of all he had submitted it to his most Holy Father and Lord, the present Pope Leo X. In spite of this he had been calumniated and held up to hatred by certain children of mammon, gluttonous misers who hungered after the milk and the wool of Christ's lamb, just as if he had done any thing to bring discredit and dishonour on the Church and the power of the keys. For reasons of importance he had not obeyed the summons to appear in person in Rome, nor could he make the retractation demanded of him by the very learned and friendly Cajetan, because the points on which he was supposed to be in error had not been pointed ' out to him. As he had affirmed nothing but only discussed, as he had submitted everything to the most Holy Father, Leo X, in whose voice he recognized that of Christ, and as he had no intention of saying or believing anything except what had been proved by Scripture, the Fathers of the Church, and the canons, he appealed from this Pope, who was badly informed, and from the judges chosen by him (Prierias and Ghinucci, whom he rejected as prejudiced) to a Pope who should be better informed, and to the protection of whom he submitted himself and his actual and future followers. He reserved to himself the right to make in this present appeal, changes, additions, and improvements.

Cajetan was painfully affected by Luther’s flight, as well as by the contents of his manifesto. On the 25th of October he wrote to the Elector of Saxony and briefly told him all that had occurred, entreating him to send Luther to Rome or at least to banish him from his State. Frederick at once forwarded this letter to Luther. In his answer to Cajetan, on the 18th of December, 1518, the Elector refused the Legate’s request. He was not, he said, as yet convinced that the professor of Wittenberg had fallen into heresy. Had this been so, he would have done his duty as a Christian prince; but as it was, any action against Luther would only injure his University. Thus was Cajetan’s mission frustrated.

Luther had no doubt that his condemnation would follow ; and on the 28th of November he issued another address in which he appealed from the Pope, who was subject to error, to a future General Council.  Even before taking this step, earlier in November he had printed a report of his interviews with Cajetan ; and in this also can be seen the development and accentuation of his attitude towards the Papacy. In forwarding this document to Wenzel Link on the 11th of December, Luther says : “I send you my trifling work that you may see whether I am not right in supposing that, according to Paul, the real Antichrist holds sway over the Roman court. I think I can prove that this last is worse than any Turk”. The Sermon on Penance, belonging to about this time (November, 15 18), shows how far his protest about indulgences had carried him in the direction of his new doctrine of justification by faith alone.

On receiving the report of the transactions between Cardinal Cajetan and Luther at Augsburg, Leo sent to the Legate a constitution about the doctrine of indulgences, bearing the date of the 9th of November, 1518. So that henceforward no one should be able to excuse himself on the plea of ignorance, it was here laid down as the doctrine of the Catholic Church that, by virtue of the power of the keys, the Pope can remit both the guilt and punishment due to actual sins —the guilt by the sacrament of penance, and the temporal punishment by indulgences ; and that he can, as occasion arises, draw from the overflowing treasury of the merits of Christ and His Saints, and grant remissions to faithful Christians whether they are in this life or in purgatory, united to Christ by love. He grants (conferre) this to the living per modum absolutionis, or assigns (transferre) it to the dead per modum suffragii; therefore all who obtain these indulgences are freed from that amount of temporal punishment which is in proportion with the indulgence granted and obtained. This is what all must teach and preach under penalty of excommunication; and Bishops arc directed to make this constitution known in all places. The name of Luther was not, out of consideration, mentioned in the document, the only reference to him being at the beginning, where it is said that certain religious in Germany have by their sermons disseminated false doctrines about indulgences, which have from time immemorial been granted by the Holy See.

Cajetan received this important Bull at Linz in Austria. He published it there on the 13th of December, and at once had copies spread throughout Germany. But the results were small, for Luther’s appeal had preceded it, and had to no small degree weakened its effect. Moreover, the preaching of the Indulgence was unpopular, and nearly all through the country the people saw in it f nothing but a contrivance on the part of the covetous Curia for enriching themselves, and of the equally hated Dominicans, who were supposed to have extorted the Bull from Rome. Luther's attack on indulgences seemed to thousands to be perfectly justifiable, and he himself was regarded as the champion of necessary ecclesiastical reforms in the Church.

Connected with Cajetan's failure to amicably terminate the difference with Luther, was the mission of the Saxon nobleman and Papal private chamberlain Karl von Miltitz. The real object of the mission of this superficial, frivolous, and vain courtier, which was, throughout, quite in harmony with his consequential attitude, has been much overrated, though it was in reality quite a subordinate affair. He was the bearer of the Golden Rose which had been for so long the object of the Elector of Saxony's desire, and which he was directed to leave provisionally at Augsburg with the Legate. He was qualified for this mission by his relations with the Spanish court, and was directed to try to ascertain the Elector's intentions as regarded Luther, and procure his extradition. But throughout these transactions he was only a subordinate agent, with no right to work independently of the sanction of the Cardinal-Legate, without whose express permission he might not convey to the Elector the token of Papal favour. Still less could he “even subordinately” make an attempt “to arrange the Lutheran affair as far as possible”, or “influence Luther in a conciliatory way”, or, in a word, carry out all that he interpreted as belonging to his ostensible mission. If, notwithstanding this, Miltitz did actually enter into such negotiations with Luther as have connected him for all time with the history of the disorders of that period, he did so without authority, and entirely on his own account, under the influence of his desire for importance.

In the beginning of January, 1519, negotiations were entered into at Altenburg, in which Miltitz tried to persuade the Wittenberg professor to agree to an accommodation which must then be submitted to Rome. The result of these transactions, which is usually estimated too high, was nothing more than that Luther pledged himself to keep silence for the future on the subject of indulgences, if his adversaries would on their side do the same ; and that he agreed with Miltitz that the latter should approach the Pope with a request to entrust the settlement of the whole affair to a German Bishop. On the 10th of January, 15 19, Luther was again in Wittenberg. From Altenburg Miltitz went to Leipzig, where, in his braggart way, although without any authority, he bore himself in an arrogant and harsh way towards Tetzel, on whose behalf the Provincial of the Order, Hermann Rab, had already written to him at Altenburg on the 3rd of January, 1519. Tetzel fell ill from worry, and Luther was generous enough to console him. “Let him not trouble himself”, said he, “for it was not he who had begun the affair : but the child has quite a different father”.

In Luther'’ letter of March 3rd to Leo X, about which so much has been said, many have tried to trace the fruit of a concession extracted by Miltitz at Altenburg. In his letter to the Pope, the Wittenberg professor asseverates “that it had never been in his mind to attack the authority of the Roman Church or the Pope. On the contrary, he acknowledged that the authority of the Roman Church surpasses all other, and that nothing in heaven or on earth, save only Jesus Christ, is to be put above it”. As at that time Luther had reached that stage in his apostasy when he had declared the Pope to be Antichrist, and as shortly after the date of this letter he wrote to Spalatin saying that he had not made up his mind whether the Pope were Antichrist or only his emissary, the falseness of his submissive letter to Leo X is painfully apparent. As is shown by the latest researches the original draft which is still existing was written, not on the 3rd of March, but as early as the 5th or 6th of January, during his sojourn at Altenburg. It remained in the form of a draft, for when the letter was laid before him, Miltitz declared it to be insufficient, because, in spite of its submissive language, there was no mention in it of retractation. The document appears in a better light seen thus, as regards honesty of intention ; but looked at as being of two months' earlier origin, its contradiction with his assertion in December, that he believed the Pope to be Antichrist, is most glaring. Eck’s appearance did not at first lead Luther so far, this “was only an inducement to him to express more openly the hostility to the Pope, which he had been for so long cherishing within his heart”.

The following circumstances, and especially the disputation in Leipzig in June and July, 1519, together with the correspondence connected with it, put Luther before us as moving with more and more certainty along the road which led to open apostasy from the Church. It is remarkable that during this time, in fact until the autumn, no further steps were taken in Rome about the matter, with the exception of the Pope’s Brief to Luther on the 29th of March, 1519. In this it is said that “the Pope, delighted with Luther's repentant submission, invites him graciously to set forth at once for Rome, there to make the retractation which he postponed when before the Legate”. But, meanwhile, the unreliable Miltitz was left for three parts of the year to play his own part as mediator, without any important results ensuing in the second negotiations with Luther at Liebenwerda on the 9th of October, or in those with the Elector of Treves about arranging an accommodation by arbitration.

That the endeavours of Miltitz to mediate could only injure the Catholic cause, is undoubted. The fact that this man was given a free hand, and that nevertheless nothing was done against Luther till the autumn of 1519, is most significant. It is not difficult to find an explanation. Meanwhile, the political considerations which impeded the progress of an affair so important to the Church are highly characteristic of the Medici Pope. The imperial election reduced everything else to insignificance. In face of the absorbing interest taken by Leo X in this question, the Lutheran business fell into the background as a matter of subordinate importance. It seemed, rather, advisable to let it rest for a while, for political motives demanded the greatest consideration towards the influential and highly-respected Elector of Saxony, who was for a time the Pope’s favourite candidate for the imperial throne. Thus alone can be explained the announcement, in the Brief of the 29th of March, of Luther’s supposed readiness to recant, resting on the authority of the subordinate and unreliable Miltitz, and why that envoy was allowed to pursue his own way, which bound the commissaries to nothing. Thus time was gained by the enemy, and a definite settlement avoided. Attempts were made to temporize in this all-important matter, and opportunities of an infinitude of good were missed. Meanwhile, the waves of the anti-Papal agitation rose higher and higher, yet nothing was done by Rome!

It was only when the election question had been settled that the influential Cardinal Giulio de' Medici urged that the Luther affair should be brought to a conclusion. The Cardinal had returned to Rome at the beginning of October, 1519, and it was only then that the renewal of Luther's trial was taken in hand. Eck had already reported about the Leipzig disputation, and had warned the Pope not to defer such an important matter. It had all along been his intention to go to Rome to place before the Pope the real state of affairs, in the place of Miltitz’s misleading and highly-coloured reports, when he was fore stalled by his appointment by Leo X, and he set forth on his journey on the 18th of January, 1520.

Eck had a great share in the energetic prosecution of the cause, even if his interposition had not such decisive effects as we might be led to suppose by his boastful words. Before he arrived on the scene, such prompt and strong measures had been already taken in the matter, that it seemed as if those concerned wished to make up in one moment for the delay of months. In open Consistory, by the express command of the Pope, the process against Luther was renewed on the 9th of January, 1520, the proceedings being now extended against the Elector of Saxony as his protector. An Italian member of the Curia employed all the force of his eloquence in bringing against the Elector the charges of obstinacy, cruelty, and tyranny, by which he had kindled a fire which it would be very difficult to quench. It was to be feared, he said, that the Elector, in combination with the mortal enemies of the Holy See, would seduce all Germany by his errors. The orator moved that efficacious steps should be taken against this hydra. The Pope must give full powers to the Auditor of the Camera to take all legal measures to ensure the coercion of Luther and his followers, and compel them to give an account of their religious opinions ; failing which, they should be declared to be heretics. Religion was un done, said he in conclusion, unless the evil were grasped in its beginning and the incurable wound cauterized.

Accordingly, in preparation for the final sentence, the Pope appointed a commission in the beginning of February, chiefly composed of Franciscan Observantines, under the learned Cardinals Accolti and Cajetan, who were charged permanently with the conduct of the affair. At the first sitting of the commission a summary of Luther’s false doctrines, drawn up by one of the Louvain Dominicans, was read out. This session had a very short existence, for those who composed it wished to go too fast. On the nth of February a second commission of theologians was formed, which sat till the middle of March. It recommended the publication of a Bull against Luther’s writings, but the sparing of him in person. It made a careful distinction between the degrees of objection to be taken to the new doctrines. But this more gentle mode of procedure did not receive the consent of Leo X. As Eck had arrived in Rome in the middle of March, the assumption is justified that his influence was at work in this. A new commission, presided over by the Pope in person, then took the case in hand.

While Rome was still considering what had best be done, Luther declared most unequivocally his complete secession from the Church, about which he had in reality made up his mind long before. His position was completely changed by his alliance with the humanists, who detested the Church, and the revolutionary forces, represented by Ulrich von Hutten. The espousal of Luther’s cause by the anti­Catholic humanists was of the very gravest importance. These men, who had been trained in feuds and disputes, were strong in speech and with their pens, and as they had done in the case of Reuchlin, so now were they ready to do everything in their power to assist Luther. With their co-operation the difference with the Church, which had originally been theological, assumed quite a different character. At the head of these deadly enemies of the “Papists” stood Ulrich von Hutten.

Hutten, who was by nature revolutionary, had, in spite of his hostility to Rome, looked down with contempt on Luther, and in the whole affair of his difference with the Church had seen nothing but a miserable monkish squabble. His eyes were opened by the Leipzig disputation, when Luther was pressed for the first time to make a distinct declaration of his heretical views about Pope and Council. He saw the purpose to which this monk, whom he had hitherto so underrated, could be turned. Thenceforward Luther’s cause was his own. With all the passion of his undisciplined nature, he took Luther’s part, and tried to further his cause among the masses of the people. Hutten’s former hatred of Rome now assumed really fearful proportions. His dialogue, “Vadiscus, or the Roman Trinity”, contains, according to his own verdict, the strongest things that have ever been written against Rome. As a characteristic of her he drew the revolting picture of “a gigantic, blood-sucking worm”. If, said he, Germany has not the strength to free itself, then let the Turks execute judgment on Rome; for in her there stands “the great barn of the universe, into which is garnered all that has been robbed and taken from other nations. In the midst sits that insatiable corn-weevil which devours piles of fruit, sur rounded by its many fellow-gluttons, who, having first sucked our blood and then consumed our flesh, are now seeking to grind our bones and devour all that is left of us. Will not the Germans take up their arms, and make an onslaught on them with fire and sword?”

Under Hutten's influence Luther took up national and revolutionary ideas. Instead of holding theological discussions, he now issued pamphlets and preached revolution to the people, not only in ecclesiastical but also in political matters. The whole movement assumed quite a new character. All the inflammable material which had been piling itself up for years now broke out into open flame. Cleverly chosen battle-cries, such as Fatherland! Liberty! Gospel! carried away the masses of the people.

While Hutten developed this really superhuman activity, Luther was not far behind him. The effects of his popular oratory became more and more apparent. He took Hutten as his model and often appropriated his very words. No longer can we find any trace of diffidence. When, on the 11th of June, the knight, Silvester von Schaumburg, offered to bring up a hundred nobles to protect him, he wrote to Spalatin saying : “I have cast the die ; I now despise the rage of the Romans as much as I do their favour. I will not reconcile myself to them for all eternity, nor have anything to do with them. Let them condemn and burn all that belongs to me. In return, I also will do as much for them ; otherwise I could not kindle the fire that is to condemn and burn, before the eyes of the world, the whole Papal system —that Lernaean hydra of heresy. Then there will be an end to this show of humility, which has proved so fruitless, about which I will no longer permit the enemy of the gospel to become puffed up. Silvester von Schaumburg and Franz von Sickingen have freed me from all human respect”. “Franz von Sickingen”, he says in a letter to a fellow- Augustinian, “promises to protect me through Hutten from all my enemies. Silvester von Schaumburg will do the same with his Franconian nobles. I have had a beautiful letter from him. Now I no longer fear, and am publishing a book in the German tongue about Christian reform, directed against the Pope, in language as violent as if I were addressing Antichrist”.

Thousands of copies of this book, which was written in the beginning of August, were spread all over Germany. It bore the title: "An den christlichen Adel deutscher Nation von des christlichen Standes Besserung”. In his programme of reform, the writer skilfully combines a thoroughly laudable social reform with demands relating to the Church which would upset the whole of the actual condition of ecclesiastical law. In these demands relating to the Church lie the kernel of the book, which has been described as “revolution pictured in grand style and with vigorous strokes, as though it were the normal state of things”.

“Three walls have been built round the Church”, says Luther: (1) the distinction between clergy and laity; (2) the right of the Church to interpret Scripture; (3) the right of the Pope to summon a Council. These walls, built of straw and paper, must, says he, be overthrown. All Christians are priests ; all have an equal right to expound Scripture ; a Council should be summoned by the temporal powers, so that Germany may be set free “from the Roman robber and from his shameful and devilish rule”. Rome sucks the Germans so dry that “it is a matter for wonder that we have still something left to eat”. “O noble princes”, he cries, “how long will you forsake your country and people to be the prey of these ravening wolves?” Instead of fighting the Turks in the East, you should rather attack “those who are at your very doors”.

Combined with this appeal for an attack to be made on “the Romanists”, Luther makes some positive and practical suggestions. The German Bishops, instead of being mere ciphers and tools of the Pope, should be free and subject only to the Archbishop of Mainz, as the Primate of Germany. The grievances should be abolished, holidays, pilgrimages, fasts, and ecclesiastical censures done away with, mendicant orders reduced, the care of the poor organized, the celibacy of the clergy abandoned. On the other hand, cathedral benefices should remain as a provision for the younger sons of the nobles. In the same way as this clause was intended to be a sop to the nobility, so was the subsequent proposal, to confiscate the States of the Church and do away with the Papal suzerainty over Naples, intended to win the favour of the Emperor.

The effect of this book, written in the vernacular and in vigorous style, was very powerful and far-reaching. The first edition of four thousand copies was exhausted in a very short time, and new impressions had to be set in hand at once to satisfy the eager demand. By his advocacy of economic changes and his severe attitude towards capitalization, luxury, and immorality, Luther won the sympathy of the multitudes for the ecclesiastical reforms recommended in this work, which were nevertheless “nothing but a flourish of trumpets directed against the actual position of the Papacy”. The hostility to Rome, which was already so widely spread over Germany, now advanced with unprecedented rapidity.

A postscript to his book, addressed to the German nobles, which completed his breach with the Church, was intended as an answer to the Epitoma responsionis of Prierias. He had this work, originally published in Perugia, reprinted with a preface and postscript as well as marginal notes. The preface and postscript contained his violent repudiation of the Papacy as such. If, says he, such doctrines as were expressed by Prierias about the authority of the Pope, were taught in Rome, then he, Luther, openly declared that Antichrist sat there in the temple of God, and that the Roman Curia was the synagogue of Satan. He extolled as blessed the Greeks, Bohemians, and all who had separated themselves from this Babylon. If the Pope and Cardinals did not restrain that mouth of Satan (i.e. Prierias), and force him to retract, he himself would renounce the Roman Church, together with the Pope and Cardinals, as the abomination of desolation seated in the holy place

In his postscript he in so many words called for a religious war and the waging of a bloody persecution against the Catholic Church. “If”, he says, “the madness of the Romanists be continued, it seems to me that the only hope of salvation left is that Emperor, kings, and princes take up arms and attack this pest of the earth, and thus bring matters to a conclusion, no longer by words but by steel... If a thief is punished by a halter, a murderer by the sword, and a heretic by fire, why should not we, with all our weapons, attack these teachers of corruption, these Popes, Cardinals, and all the rabble of the Roman Sodom, and wash our hands in their blood?”

If such writings did not decide Rome’s final verdict, they nevertheless afford sufficient proof that their author did not fall unjustly, though too late, under the ban of the Church.

So far as can be judged by the very defective accounts of the prosecution and termination of Luther’s Roman trial, the influence of the Louvain theologians must have been quite equal to that of Eck : though all through its last stage the ruling spirit was Cardinal Giulio de' Medici. In the Bull Exsurge, the draft of which was made by Accolti, forty-one of Luther’s articles were grouped by Eck with due regard to the Louvain doctors. These were condemned wholesale without sufficient regard to the distinction of their individual degree of offensiveness. The Bull was, at the end of April, given for consideration to a new commission. On the 2nd of May Eck made his report to the Pope about the final wording of this most important document. He had to seek him in the hunting lodge of Magliana, in the immediate neighbourhood of Rome. Not till then was the Bull submitted to the Sacred College. Four Consistories, held on May 21, 23, 25, and June 1, were necessary to bring the affair to a conclusion. In the second and third Consistories the only thing settled was the order of the day. The care with which the case was gone into can be seen by the unusual duration of the sittings. Some lasted six, others seven, and some even eight hours.

On the 20th of May a demand from Leo X, in menacing terms, was sent through Cardinal Riario and Valentin von Teutleben, the agent of the Elector of Saxony, and temporarily serving in that capacity to the Elector of Mainz, to request Frederick of Saxony to compel Luther to recant. This was an ultimatum which Frederick rejected finally at the end of July, almost in Luther’s own words. The Elector demanded the institution of a court of arbitration, to be held in a safe place and to be composed of men of undoubted learning, and in sufficient numbers to test the doctrines which had never yet been refuted.

On the 21st of May the draft of the Bull, together with the acts of the Leipzig disputation relating to the notoriety of Luther’s heresy, were read in Consistory. The question was then put whether, the articles of Luther being explicitly condemned, he should be once more warned to retract his errors within a given term, and in case of a refusal condemned publicly as a heretic, and at the same time his works be forbidden and committed to the flames. Then came the question, proposed by Eck, whether Luther's articles be condemned indiscriminately and without specification, or whether, according to the opinion of Cardinal Cajetan, some discrimination be made between those which could be described as simply heretical and those which were scandalous and offensive to pious ears. The Consistory decided that Cardinal Accolti, who was held in much esteem in Rome for his learning, and especially for his knowledge of law, should consult experts, and decide this fine theological distinction. After the single articles had been put to the vote, the opinion on this subject was communicated to the Cardinals at the next Consistory, at which Cajetan, in spite of his suffering health, appeared. The long duration of the Consistory shows how thorough and searching were the consultations. “It is five in the afternoon”, wrote the Este Ambassador, “and the Consistory is still sitting: Luther’s affair is under consultation”. The discussion that day was not over until six o'clock. The final resolution passed was the rejection of all Luther's articles as erroneous; while the discussion of the wording of the Bull on the subject was to be discussed at another Consistory. The protocol of the next sitting, which took place on the 25th of May, records only one resolution, namely, that Luther’s sentences be quoted verbally in the Bull. The fixing of the various degrees of censure attributable to each sentence fell through, obviously because of the delay it would have caused in terminating the process.

Prompt action was all the more necessary because it was rumoured that other princes besides the Elector of Saxony were taking Luther’s part. Cardinal Accolti, who talked over the situation with the Ambassador of the court of Este, was most anxious about these tidings. He remarked about the Archbishop of Mainz : “We thought he was one of ours ; but now we know the contrary. Meanwhile, it is to be hoped that as soon as the Bull is published in Germany, most men will forsake Luther”.' Cardinal del Monte also had something to say about the part taken by the German princes in favour of Luther; and he expressed a doubt whether even “the greatest of them” were to be trusted. Cardinal Scaramuccia Trivulzio spoke most pessimistically, and said that he doubted whether any good would be effected by the Bull. The Pope also was most anxious ; he believed, by what Erasmus said in a letter, that the Bishop of Liege had declared himself in favour of Luther.

It was obvious that under these circumstances it was out of the question to apportion the degree of censure to each proposition. The one thing to be done was to judge them as a whole, with a general reference to individual points. Cardinal Carvajal’s description of Luther’s appeal to a General Council as “the gravest of all his offences” was entered.

In the Consistory of the 1st of June, the Bull was read once more and its publication resolved upon. By the 15th the preparation of the document was officially completed, and the publication followed soon after. It was known as the Bull Exsurge Domine from its first words.

In the solemn prelude to the Bull, which is for the greater part made up of passages from Scripture, the protection of the Divine Founder of the Church and the Princes of the Apostles is first invoked. “Arise, O God, judge Thine own cause” (Ps. LXXIII 22). “Catch us the little foxes that destroy the vines” (Cant. II. 15). “The boar out of the wood hath laid it waste, and a singular wild beast hath devoured it” (Ps. LXXIX. 14). Even as Peter had foretold, lying teachers had risen up who had brought in sects of perdition. The whole Church was then appealed to, whose true interpretation of Scripture was set at naught by men whose minds had been blinded by the father of lies and led to falsify the Bible, in contradiction to the interpretation of the Holy Ghost, as was the way with all teachers of error.

Proceeding, the Pope complains that such doctrines should have been spread among the illustrious German nation, which he and his predecessors had always held in special affection. It was well known that among all nations the Germans had ever been most eager to oppose heresy, that they had shed their blood in the war against the Hussites, and even now, through the Universities of Cologne and Louvain, had triumphantly refuted the new errors.

After this, forty-one Lutheran errors were enumerated. These relate to free-will and original sin, to the sacraments in general, to faith, grace, sin, penance, confession, good works, purgatory, communion under both kinds, the Primacy, excommunication, the authority of General Councils, the punishment of death for heretics, and the errors of Hus.

As God had confided the chief pastoral office to the Pope, he must provide against the propagation of such errors, and cut them out like a canker. Therefore, by virtue of his supreme authority he now condemns them, partly as heretical, partly as a cause of scandal, partly as false, partly as offensive to the ears of the faithful, partly as seductive to simple souls and contrary to Catholic truth. He forbids, under the severest penalties, that they should be preached by any, whether religious or secular.

The writings which contain the above-named errors shall, immediately after the publication of the Bull, be solemnly and publicly burned in every place. In connection with this injunction Luther is expressly alluded to for the first time. Then the Bull turns to his person in the following manner:—The preceding course of events is described, and the emphatic declaration is made that the Pope has left nothing undone to recall Luther from his errors. He mentions his invitation to appear in Rome, his discussion with Cajetan, his obstinate disobedience in remaining for more than a year under censure. He is reminded of his appeal—contrary to the stringent prohibition of Pius II and Julius II—to a future Council, the authority of which he nevertheless declares to be null. From all this the Pope draws the conclusion that he could no longer proceed against Luther as against one only under suspicion in matters of faith, but must without further warning declare him to be a heretic. Nevertheless, the Pope will not pronounce sentence of excommunication at once, but, yielding to the counsel of the Cardinals, will allow justice to give way to mercy. Being mindful of the compassion of God who desireth not the death of a sinner, but that he should be converted and live, he would forget the injury done to the Holy See, and would proceed with all gentleness, in order that the prodigal son might be brought back to the bosom of the Church. Then he exhorts and adjures Luther, by the mercy of God and the Blood of Christ, no longer to disturb the peace, unity, and truth of the Church for which the Divine Redeemer Himself had so instantly prayed to the Father, and to abjure those errors which had been condemned. A limit of sixty days, after the publication of the Bull, is fixed for his recantation, which is to be made at St. Peter’s and the Cancelleria in Rome, as well as in the Cathedrals of Brandenburg, Meissen, and Merseburg. If he did not recant within this time, Luther and his followers, by the evidence of the writings which had been examined, should be cut off “like the withered vine branches which abide not in Christ”(John xv. 6), and declared notorious and obstinate heretics, and condemned to all the penalties to which canon law could condemn them.

Then the Bull returns once more to Luther’s writings and commands that all books that he has already written and might write in the future, be burned, even if they do not contain the above-mentioned errors.

After the expiration of the term of sixty days, Luther was to be avoided as a heretic by all the faithful; all spiritual and temporal authorities were bound to arrest him and deliver him up in Rome, or else banish him and his followers from their dominions. All the places in which he dwelt would be laid under an interdict while he was there and for three days after. Finally, should he not recant within the time fixed, all the clergy, secular and religious, were to declare him a heretic.

There are therefore three divisions to be noted in the Bull. In the first, Luther’s errors in faith are unconditionally condemned ; in the second, his writings are equally condemned and ordered to be burned as soon as the Bull is published. The author of these false doctrines and writings, who is the subject of the third part, is on the contrary to be allowed time for reflection, and be excommunicated only after the expiration of that time.

By the Bull Exsurge the Pope applied to Luther and his followers the “monitio evangelica” which precedes the sentence of excommunication and gives time to do penance, while at the same time it enables the judge to establish the moment of obstinacy (pertinacia) which is essential to constitute the state of heresy.

II.

Briefs of the 17th and 18th of July, 1520, entrusted the publication and execution of the Bull Exsurge to the Papal Librarian, Hieronymus Aleander, and the professor of Ingolstadt, Johann Eck, whom the Pope soon made protonotary. Both these learned men were devoted to the Holy See, and gifted with rare intelligence and energy. Nevertheless the Italian was more of a humanist than a theologian, and before he entered the priesthood his morals had not been above reproach.

Girolamo Aleandro, or, as he is more commonly called, Aleander, was born at Motta in Friuli in 1480. Even during his studies in Venice he won for himself a name as a distinguished humanist. He also studied theology and canon law, but was more remarkable for his rhetorical gifts; His renown grew when he was called to the University of Paris, where he worked with only the intermission of half a year, from 1508 till 1513. There he was the real founder of the Greek School, and was the leading professor of Hebrew and Latin during the reign of Louis XII. His brilliant position both as professor and humanist was exchanged in 1514 for a post of confidence with the Prince­Bishop of Liege, Eberhard de la Mark. In 1515 he became his Chancellor; in 1516 he was sent by his master on business to Rome. There the versatile and also brilliant diplomatist won the favour of the Pope and his cousin Cardinal Medici, whose service he entered as secretary in 1517. In this capacity he continued to work hard in the interests of his Prince-Bishop, who was very anxious to obtain a Cardinal’s hat. Even his appointment in July, 1519, as Librarian to the Vatican made no difference in this respect. He was on very confidential terms with both the Pope and Cardinal Medici, and the esteem, in which they held him was proved by the mission fin which he was sent to the Emperor.

The other Nuncio, Johann Eck, was also highly gifted. He, like Luther, was the son of a peasant, and was unusually talented. He was absorbed in the most profound scholastic questions, as well as in mystical theology, speculative studies, and the positive science of his day. He also enthusiastically devoted to humanist studies. As a theologian he was far superior to Aleander. After he became, as it were accidentally, mixed up in the dispute with Luther, he placed all his talents and knowledge at the service of the Church. Wherever he had the chance he fought the innovator and his followers with a truly fiery zeal, though often with too great severity, for he was firmly convinced of the danger of the false doctrines. He fully deserved the honourable name of the “Catholic Achilles”, bestowed on him by Cardinal Pole. It is now admitted on all sides that he was the most efficient of all Luther’s antagonists.

The sphere of Eck’s activity was limited by Leo X to the courts of the Bishops of Brandenburg, Meissen, and Merseburg, and the other Bishops and prelates, to those of Duke Frederick of Saxony and the other Electors, of John of Saxony and the princes, barons, and towns of Upper and Lower Germany.

It made no difference to Luther personally who was commissioned to proclaim the Bull, for since 1519 he had determined to break for ever with the Pope and the Catholic Church. But it was considered by his followers most unfortunate that Eck, who had come forward as the most inveterate antagonist of the Wittenberg professor, and had drawn down on himself the hatred of the whole party, should, of all men, have been charged with the publication of the Bull. It was, however, a great misfortune for the Catholic cause, that the fact of Eck's share in drawing up the Bull Exsurge had become known in Germany. The condemnation conveyed by the Bull did not come on the Germans as a blow struck by the supreme power so much as a sword-thrust from the hand of a passionate enemy.

In August, 1520, Eck arrived with the Bull in Germany, where he found that, through the treachery of a Roman official, its contents were already known. It had in fact been printed there before it was published in Rome, and was being held up to the derision of satirists. Eck began his work in Saxony showing his intrepidity by plunging at once into the very centre of the enemy’s position. On the 21st of September he had the Bull fixed up at Meissen, on the 25th at Merseburg, and on the 29th at Brandenburg. Eck, as also Aleander, had been given the authority to mention by name some of the principal followers of Luther in his deed of publication ; he therefore inserted those of Carlstadt, Johann Wildenauer (Sylvius) of Eger, Johann Dolzegk von Feldkirch, Willibald Pirkheimer, Lazarus Spengler and Bernhard Adelmann von Adelmannsfelden. In his notification of the publication of the Bull which he sent to Rome in the beginning of October, he specifies that “the parties concerned should, within the term of sixty days, either justify themselves before the Pope, or else forward to him the proof of their absolution at the hands of the special commissioners ; or else, if they preferred to do so, be themselves the bearers of it, Unless this were done under sixty days, they would fall under the penalties mentioned in the Bull”.

Of the six of Luther’s followers thus singled out, Adelmann, after talking very boastfully and trying to delay the execution of the Bull, was the first to ask for absolution from Eck, which was granted to him on the 9th of November, and delivered to him in writing on the 15th. His submission was not sincere, for though he succeeded in making a good impression on Eck, he remained a secret partisan of Luther’s. The two Nurembergers, Pirkheimer and Spengler, also came to Eck with the request for absolution.

At Leipzig, where Eck arrived on the 29th of September, he had a foretaste of the difficulties which awaited him. He was personally threatened by the students from Wittenberg, and became the object of unexpected attention on the part of the University, so that the Bull was not executed until February, 1521. Opposition now began in earnest. On the 7th of March, 1521, Luther was able to send the pleasing news to his friend Link that the Bull had been pelted with dirt in Leipzig and torn down. The  same thing occurred at Torgau and Dobeln. At the last place the jeering inscription, “The nest is here but the birds have flown,” was added to the Bull.

From Leipzig, Eck sent the Bull on October 3rd, 1520, to the Rector of the University of Wittenberg, Peter Burkhard : but the University refused to accept it. That of Erfurt also offered resistance. There was a tumult among the students, and even the theological faculty opposed Eck: the students tore down the Bull and threw it into the Gera. Resistance was also shown by the University of Vienna, where Eck sent the Bull on the 14th of October. The motive assigned was that they could not accept the document until they knew the pleasure of the Emperor, to whom they therefore wrote on the 10th of December. Even after the submission of the theological faculty, the Rector and the other members of the University continued their resistance, and it was only by imperial command (March, 1521) that the Bull was received. Even the Bishop showed great unwillingness to move. At Ingolstadt, to which University Eck sent the Bull on the 17th of October, its publication on the 29th was met with some resistance.

Many of the Bishops hung back, either from want of loyalty or from timidity. The Bishop of Meissen published the Bull in January, 1521, and the Bishop of Merseburg on the 23rd of the same month. In those parts of the Electorate of Saxony where Frederick exercised spiritual jurisdiction, it was not published until April. In South Germany the Bishop of Eichstatt, Gabriel von Eyb, published the Bull through his Vicar-General ten days after he received it on October 24th, 1520. The Bishop of Augsburg, Christoph von Stadion, made greater difficulties when he received the summons in October to publish the document. His Chapter was divided into two parties, a small one which adhered to the Bishop, and a large opposition under the influence of the brothers Adelmann, who had on their side the Dean of the Chapter, Philip von Rechberg, a helpless and incapable young man. Both parties thought the moment inopportune for the publication of the Bull by the Bishop ; but the Adelmann faction raised more fundamental difficulties, and did all they could to obtain a delay under the pretext that the Bishop should send for Eck to discuss the subject with him. As for the Bishop himself, he was not actuated by any consideration involving principle. “In taking up his position he was moved neither by sympathy with Luther nor by zeal for the purity of the faith. To him the Bull was simply inconvenient for external reasons only, because the possessions of the clergy, their lands and privileges, would be endangered by the seditious proclivities of the populace. The position assumed by him in his difficulty was essentially that of a political materialist”.

He therefore sent a negative reply to Eck’s summons, and consequently received a second, requesting him to proceed at once with the publication of the Bull. He perceived that further delay would have the worst consequences for himself and his see, and would be construed into dis obedience to the Pope. He therefore ordered that preparations for the publication should be made at once. The episcopal mandate of publication is dated the 8th of November; and directions for the printing of it and the Bull followed on the 12th, and were repeated on the 14th of November. He had waited to receive an answer from Eck, whom he had invited to be present at the publication of the Bull and episcopal mandate. The reply came in the form of a candid letter, written on the 10th of November, in which the Nuncio declined the invitation on the plea that the Bishop, being such a good shepherd, would not like to put forward another in his place when danger was threatened on the part of the wolves. The difficulties attending the printing of the Bull and episcopal mandate in Augsburg caused fresh delay. But on the 30th of December, 1520, the Bull was proclaimed in the town of Augsburg, though not throughout the diocese until the beginning of 1521.

The Bishop of Freising, the palsgrave Philip, after much consideration and with great unwillingness, published the Bull on the 10th of January. The palsgrave John, the Administrator of Ratisbon, had the Bull read from the pulpit on the 4th of January, 1521. The Bishop of Bamberg refused to publish it because it had been sent to him in an irregular way. In Passau nothing took place for some little time; the Bishop, Ernest, the younger brother of the Duke of Bavaria, was one of those unfortunate men who had entered the ecclesiastical state without a vocation, only for the sake of possessing a principality. It was reported that this prelate was too fond of dabbling in Lutheran doctrines ; and it was probably on this account that Eck omitted to send the Bull to him.

Although the attitude of a man like the Bishop of Passau may not cause surprise, the same cannot be said of the supine behaviour of the Archbishop of Salzburg, Cardinal Lang. Until the beginning of March, 1521, he had made no pronouncement against Luther. He preferred to remain in a state of watchful inactivity, waiting for further developments, wishing neither to force nor hamper events by any decision. The same consideration influenced the Dukes of Bavaria, though in their case territorial jealousy played its part. On the 11th of March they sent to the Bishops of the Duchy letters of expostulation, as to the manner in which pastors of souls had acted after the publication of the Pope’s Bull of condemnation. By their own experience, they said, as well as by credible reports received, they found that the severity of these in refusing absolution to those who were possessed of Lutheran books, and would not give them up, conduced to sedition and the injury of Christian works, rather than to the salvation of souls and the production of salutary effects. The laity, they added, were opposed to this mode of procedure and were “crying out and murmuring”. As the Diet of Worms had undertaken to deal with Luther, the Bishops would do right to direct the clergy to cease their proceedings against Lutheran writings, and neither condemn nor approve, but “let the matter rest” until the result of the examination before the Diet were known. To this the Bishop of Eichstatt replied forcibly that it was not in his power to set aside the command of the Pope. Such a method of proceeding on the part of the strictly Catholic Dukes of Bavaria, shows how little the importance of the whole affair was realized.

Luther, who knew himself to be safe under the protection of his own Elector, had at first, like Erasmus, given himself the airs of not believing the Bull to be genuine. He declared that it had been made up by Eck, and as such discredited it in his book : “Eck’s New Bull and Lies”. When, however, he was no longer able to keep up a semblance of incredulity as to its genuineness, he took a line more violent than ever against the Pope. “Never, from the beginning of the world”, he wrote in November 1520, to Spalatin, “has Satan spoken so shamelessly against God as in this Bull. It is impossible for anyone who accepts it and does not contest it, to be saved”. On the 17th of November he again appealed from the Pope, “as from an unjust judge, hardened and erring, and, by all his writings, a convicted heretic and schismatic”, to a General Council. He demanded of the Emperor, the Electors, and all princes and sovereigns to join with him in opposing “the unchristian conduct and amazing enormities of the Pope”. Whoever, says he, follows the Pope, him did he, Martin Luther, hand over to the Divine tribunal. At the beginning of November he gave vent to his full fury in an intemperate, passionate pamphlet, “Against the Bull of Antichrist”, published both in Latin and German. Starting from his usual premise that his doctrine alone was the truth, he declares that the Bull, which is opposed to this truth, has for its object to compel men to deny God and worship the devil. If the Pope and his Cardinals will not change this, he declares that the Roman See is the seat of Antichrist, he condemns it and hands it over to Satan, with this its Bull and all its Decretals. “What wonder if all princes, nobles, and all the laity should set to and belabour Pope, bishops, priests, and monks, and drive them out of the country?” The Bull deserves that “all good Christians should trample it under foot, and that the Roman Antichrist and his apostle Eck should be driven away with fire and brimstone”. “As a full proof of his defiance”, he published another pamphlet in which he defended the condemned sentences, and in places emphasized them.

On the 10th of December, 1520, Luther went in solemn procession, followed by the students, and burned the Papal Bull together with the books of canon law and several of his adversaries’ writings. While doing this he solemnly pronounced the words: “Because thou hast afflicted the saints of the Lord, so may everlasting fire afflict and devour thee!”. By this action he expressed, publicly and finally, his breach with the Church. Next day he spoke as follows to his disciples in the College: “This burning is only a trifle. It is necessary that the Pope and the Papal See be also burned. He who does not resist the Papacy with all his heart cannot obtain eternal salvation.” In his treatise, published under the name of “Warumb des Babsts und seiner Jüngern bücher von D. Martin Luther verbrandt sind,” he says: “From all time it has been the custom to burn impious books (Acts XIX. 19), and as Doctor in Holy Scripture he was bound to suppress bad books; if others from ignorance or human respect neglected to do this, it did not free him from responsibility. His writings had been burned at Cologne and Louvain, which, among the ignorant, had raised suspicion against him ; therefore, for the establishment of truth, he had good reason to burn the books of his adversaries, being, as he hoped, prompted thereto by the Holy Ghost.”

The term of grace after the Bull had been affixed at Meissen, Merseburg, and Brandenburg expired on the 27th of November. On the 3rd of January, 1521, excommunication was pronounced on Luther in the Bull Decet Romanum Pontificem. This Bull definitely excluded Luther and his followers from the communion of the Church, and at the same time all pretext for maintaining that Luther had not been unconditionally condemned by the Holy See, was removed. With this Bull the Pope sent special Briefs to Cardinal Albert of Mainz, as Inquisitor-General for the whole of Germany, as well as to the Nuncios, Caracciolo, Aleander, and Eck, giving them powers to proceed with energy against all obstinate Lutherans, even were they of electoral dignity, and to reconcile to the Church all who repented. The absolution of Luther, Hutten, Pirkheimer, and Spengler was reserved to the Pope.

The two last named, “though not without keen personal humiliation”, asked for absolution. But Hutten had not the remotest idea of doing such a thing. His rage against Rome had known no bounds ever since the Pope had, in a Brief of July 20, 1520, ordered the Archbishop of Mainz to stop his dangerous operations, and, if necessary, take severe measures against him. Hutten published a pamphlet against the Bull, full of the bitterest remarks. In the prelude he called on all Germans to take vengeance on the Pope, on account of the document by which he wished to suppress the budding truth. The conclusion was in the form of missive to Leo X, in which he said “Bounds and limitations must be set to thine audacity, and curb on such childish, wanton Bulls”.

In his pamphlets, written for the people, and therefore in German, Hutten, trusting to the protection of his powerful friend Franz von Sickingen, openly incited them to revolt.

All superstition we root out,

Return of truth we bring about ;

And if all gentle means prove vain,

We will by blood the victory gain.

In face of such an agitation, almost everything depended on the attitude taken by the young Emperor; and Aleander’s first efforts were directed towards influencing him.

III.

Aleander’s appointment, dated July 17 and 18, as Nuncio-Extraordinary and Ambassador to Charles V and the other sovereigns of Germany, was to be in conjunction with that of the ordinary Nuncio, Marino Caracciolo, already accredited to the imperial court, and entrusted with carrying out the secular policy of the Holy See, and was to be carried on contemporaneously with the mission of Eck.

The instructions received by Aleander warned him to work in harmony with Eck, and provided for the event of Luther or any of his followers demanding a hearing of the Emperor. In answer to any such demand it was laid down that, Luther’s doctrine having been condemned by the Holy See, any appeal elsewhere could not be allowed. But if Luther wished to appeal to Rome, a safe-conduct would be granted, and a gracious hearing vouchsafed.

The further purport of the instructions shows how little the possibility of such an event was expected. Aleander was directed to petition, first the Emperor, and after him all the princes, to arrest Luther at the expiration of the term of grace, and deliver him up to Rome to be punished, and to proceed with severity against his followers. All the Bishops were to be exhorted to proceed against them in accordance with the Bull of the Lateran Council, directed against all who printed wicked and heretical books.

The appointment of a second Nuncio in connection with the Lutheran affair shows the importance attached to it by the Pope. There was more than a remote possibility that jealousies might arise and disturb the harmonious proceedings of the two Nuncios. Indeed, there was no lack of jealousy, and the Pope had to send frequent admonitions to the Nuncios to work in harmony.

As Aleander’s time was still claimed by his private business, his departure, much to the annoyance of the impatient Pope, was deferred till the 27th of July ; even then he had to keep a previous engagement in France with Francis I, and it was not until the 22nd of September that he arrived at Cologne, and not until the 25th at Antwerp. To his joyful surprise the Emperor declared that he was willing to lay down his life in defence of the Church. Consistently with this declaration, he showed the greatest readiness to put the Papal Bull into execution in the Netherlands promptly and loyally. Immediately afterwards an imperial edict was issued commanding the burning of the heretical books. Aleander, looking on everything as so far settled, went on to Louvain on the 8th of October and to Liege on the 17th.

Next to the sermons which, by his instructions, he was bound to preach in all parts, Aleander considered the public burning of the heretical books as the best means of checking the propagation of false doctrine. By this means the Papal condemnation of the heresy became more surely proclaimed than was possible by the delivery of the Bull to the Bishops. Besides, the execution in this manner of the sentence pronounced by the authority of the Pope, made a deep impression on the infected laity. Finally, the Lutherans feared nothing more.

At Aix, where Aleander attended Charles’s coronation, he, in company with Caracciolo, visited Cardinal Albert of Mainz, who had equally declared himself against Luther and Hutten. The Electors of Cologne and Treves showed the same readiness to obey the Pope. Aleander was very favourably impressed by the Elector Frederick of Saxony. “The Elector”, he wrote, “seems to be naturally right-minded. He is very pious, but his counsellors are nearly all as Lutheran as Luther himself. On the 4th of November Caracciolo and I visited him, and were at such great pains in arguing with him, that he appeared to be more or less convinced, and declared to us that he had not exchanged more than twenty words with Luther”.

But Aleander was greatly deceived as to the real opinions of the Elector, for he was in reality wholly on the side of Luther, and tried with the utmost ingenuity to interpret the laws of the Empire in favour of his protégé. On the 31st of October he went to Cologne to remonstrate with the Emperor in person about the condemnation without appeal of the professor of Wittenberg. To this Charles replied that Luther would have the benefit of the law as occasion offered.

On the 6th of November Frederick rejected the alternatives, offered by the Papal Nuncios, of either imprisoning or delivering Luther up, and burning his writings at once, before he had been examined by learned and impartial judges and convinced of his error. If he were thus really convicted, the Elector was willing to do everything that befitted an obedient son of the Catholic Church.

This scheme of submitting the case to the so-called arbitration of certain learned men was equivalent to saving Luther’s cause, and to bringing about the suspension, or rather the recall, of the Bull Exsurge. This was advocated, conjointly with the Elector of Saxony, by no less a personage than Erasmus. The project was worthy of the temporizing disposition and vague theology of the highly-gifted scholar. The deep-seated nature of the dispute made such a plan futile. Moreover, the withdrawal of the Bull would have been against the first principles of the Catholic Church ; so also would a dispute about matters of faith, submitted to private arbitration, have been a defiance of ecclesiastical authority, which could alone be appealed to. What good could a court of arbitration do, which, as Luther wished, would ask the Church to break with all past traditions concerning her most vital doctrines, her sacraments and institutions? There could be no question of any such understanding or compromise ; and this Erasmus’s vague theology quite ignored.

He believed so fully in the realization of his idea! that he used all his influence to promote it, and tried to sweep away all that was opposed to it, making use of even the most reprehensible means, “the moral overthrow of Aleander and false representations of his methods”. While Erasmus was casting slurs on Aleander as a false Nuncio and a deceiving Jew, he threw doubts, against his better knowledge, on the validity of the Bull Exsurge. He declared that such a document was quite irreconcilable with the known gentleness of Leo's character, and must therefore have been fabricated, not even in Rome, but by the extremists of Cologne and Louvain. With the greatest success he spread his views as to its invalidity among the people, working for that end not only by private letters and conversation, but also by a craftily worded anonymous publication, and by contributions to the biting pamphlets of Hermann van dem Busche, in which Aleander was threatened with death. Every method, even the most reprehensible, seemed permissible to Erasmus, if only it would enable him to sweep from the face of the earth this Bull, which was so dangerous to his plans.

Although he worked mostly in the dark, his schemes did not escape the vigilance of the Papal Nuncio. Late in the autumn he called to account the man who had tried by such underhand means to bring his mission to naught. More than once he expressed his regret to Erasmus at finding that he was the author of the widespread belief that the Bull was either a forgery or fraudulently compiled. Erasmus was compelled to accept the testimony produced by Aleander, and the Nuncio rejected all his excuses so emphatically that the versatile scholar reddened, and stammered “in mortal confusion”.

It appears that, even after the Elector of Saxony showed his hand on the 6th of November, Aleander still believed that he would be able to win him over ; for at that time the Nuncio was under a fatal delusion as to the importance of the Lutheran revolt. Even when at Cologne, he said that “he had no slight hopes of victory”. He came face to face with resistance for the first time when, in spite of the strong protest of Erasmus, he ordered a general destruction of Lutheran writings at Mainz. The people protested loudly, and those charged with the burning hesitated. Aleander himself was nearly subjected to violent treatment, and it was only by threats that he carried out his purpose. Before he left the city, he gave directions to the Provincial of the German Dominicans to preach against Luther throughout his province. As the Papal mission proceeded on its way it was much harassed by Hutten’s threats.

At Worms, where he arrived on the 30th of November, Aleander passed through still more bitter experiences. Here all his most sanguine hopes were so completely crushed that he fell into the opposite extreme and judged matters perhaps too despondently. “A legion of armed nobles”, he wrote from Worms in the middle of December, “under the leadership of Hutten, were thirsting for the blood of the clergy, and were only waiting their opportunity to break into revolt. The German jurists, both spiritual and secular, were declared Lutherans ; still worse, the whole tribe of grammarians and poets maintained that none could have any pretensions to learning, especially in the matter of Greek, unless they renounced the teaching of the Church. He had to suffer the most bitter defamation and calumny from Luther’s followers, Reuchlin and Erasmus ; there was a report going about that Hutten and his friends desired his blood ; the clergy, with the exception of the parish priests, were infected by the false doctrines, and those who had received preferment from Rome were the worst of all : everywhere the people were carried away blindly by what they heard”.

Aleander placed all his hopes in the Emperor, for, as he wrote to Cardinal de' Medici, there had not been, perhaps for the last thousand years, a prince raised up with better dispositions. His horror was all the greater at learning that Charles V had yielded to the Elector of Saxony’s representations and consented to give Luther a hearing. During Aleander’s absence on the 28th of November, the Emperor had written to the Elector Frederick, telling him to bring Luther with him to the Diet of Worms, so that he might be there examined by learned and well-informed persons. Aleander at once foresaw the full consequences of this step, and did not hesitate to make energetic remonstrances, in which his theological knowledge and his acquaintance with Luther’s writings stood him in good stead. The contention of the imperial party, that a German subject could not be legally condemned without a previous hearing, was set aside by him as of no value. There could be no question, he maintained, of a sentence having been passed without a hearing, for Luther's writings spoke only too plainly for themselves ; and matters of false doctrine had always been dealt with in this way. The supreme authority of the Pope overrode any other; on it, according to St. Jerome, depended the safety of the Church, which otherwise would be torn into as many shreds as there were priests. Aleander explained to the Emperor and his counsellors how, according to the most elementary ecclesiastical principles relating to the authority of the Pope, it was not practicable to give another hearing to an open heretic who had been legally condemned by the Holy See, and had refused to retract ; it was therefore inadmissible to revive before the Diet, which has no special qualifications for dealing with such matters, a case on which the Pope as the true judge had already pronounced a sentence of condemnation. A further aspect of the affair was that Luther had refused to be judged by any who did not agree with him.

Aleander’s arguments did not fail to produce an effect, especially on the Catholic-minded Emperor. Meanwhile the report was spread, presumably through the instrumentality of Eck, that the term of grace of sixty days fixed in the Papal Bull had expired, and that with this Luther’s excommunication had become a fact ; that the places in which he set foot had fallen under an interdict, and that any holding intercourse with him were excommunicate. Hearing this, on December 17th, Charles V revoked his invitation of the 28th of November, and told the Elector that only in the event of Luther’s recantation could he be admitted to the neighbourhood of Worms.

This first success on the part of Aleander was soon followed by a second. At his request, the general Council of State determined (Dec. 29) to issue a mandate against Luther applicable to all his followers, to be extended all over the Empire, and to be obeyed under pain of imperial attainder. It was, moreover, directed that a special deputation should be sent to the Elector of Saxony, requesting him, in the name of the Emperor, to take proceedings against Luther. These instructions were drawn up by Aleander.

The deputation to the Elector was, however, deferred, as that prince was already on his way to Worms, where the Diet was opened on the 27th of January, 1521. The situation was thereby changed for the worse as regarded Aleander ; for the political considerations which weighed with the States, prevailed more and more in the imperial counsels. They believed that the anti-Papal feeling, which was growing daily in Germany, could only be met slowly and prudently. The Elector Frederick knew how to take advantage of this for the benefit of his protégé. In a letter of the 8th of February, 1 521, Aleander described this change in the situation, and the difficulties which now stood in the way of carrying out the imperial edict against Luther. All Germany was in a state of religious sedition, and nine-tenths of the people were adherents of Luther, while the remainder held the Roman Court in deadly hatred. All were crying out for a General Council, which would help to remove the grievances imposed by the Curia. The most powerful princes favoured this movement ; the Emperor alone was staunch to the right side. Aleander then went on to relate how Charles had torn in pieces and thrown on the ground a letter from Luther demanding to have “impartial judges”. The Emperor had taken a personal part in drawing up the imperial edict against Luther, the first draft of which was, after “unbearably fatiguing” discussion, finally agreed to in the beginning of February. This draft simply demanded the carrying out of the Pope's Bull, while Luther was refused a hearing. Aleander hoped to obtain a speedy publication of this edict by the authority of the Emperor, but the Chancellor, Gattinara, and other influential counsellors, declared that such an important question must be submitted to the States.

On the 1 2th of February Aleander handed to the Emperor the Bull of the 3rd of January, which declared the term fixed for Luther’s submission to have expired, and consequently pronounced excommunication on him. At the same time a Papal Brief requested the Emperor to issue an edict which would secure the execution of the Pope’s sentence. Charles V explained that it was the opinion of his Council that the States must not be ignored in a matter of such importance. But in order to incline them to accept the edict, he charged Aleander to appear at the Diet next morning and put forward the Papal demands without any reserve.

On the 13th of February, when Charles V and all the States, with the exception of the Elector of Saxony, were assembled, the Abbot of Fulda read out the message of the Pope to the Emperor, requesting him, as Protector of the Church, to put into execution, by a public edict, the sentence passed on Luther by the Holy See. Aleander then rose to confirm this request, which put into words the only possible conclusion that the Pope could have arrived at. Luther, he declared, was endeavouring, as the Bohemians had done before, to overthrow, in the name of the Gospel, both the ecclesiastical and secular governments in Germany. He had gone so far in writing as to exhort his readers to wash their hands in the blood of the clergy ; the Pope and the Universities of Cologne and Louvain had condemned his errors. He showed how numerous and terrible these were by quoting several strongly-worded passages; he also proved that Luther appealed without sanction to Holy Scripture in favour of his doctrines. The Nuncio contested, on solid grounds, the opinion of those who wished Luther to have a hearing at Worms. “All-gracious Emperor”, he cried, “how can a man be heard who has openly declared that he refuses to be taught by any, not even by an angel from heaven; and that he desires nothing better than excommunication? Luther has appealed from the decision of the Apostolic See to a General Council ; yet he says publicly that Hus was unjustly condemned at Constance. Therefore I ask to know by whom he can be heard and judged”.

Aleander’s speech before the Diet is a masterpiece. He spoke for several hours, quickly, fluently, with Italian vivacity, and altogether most ably, and with complete control of his subject. The impression produced by it was the more permanent because many who heard it had not been aware before how entirely Luther had given up the most fundamental doctrines of the Church.

Aleander pursued his advantage with great vigour. During the lengthy and excited discussion which followed—in the course of which the Electors of Saxony and Brandenburg nearly came to blows—he, zealously backed up by Caracciolo, did all he could to carry the point that Luther should be refused a hearing at Worms. His adversaries were, however, quite as zealous and active as he. “Were not the Emperor so well-disposed”, he wrote, “we must have lost the day. The Chancellor, Gattinara, considers it quite hopeless to fight the heresy without a Council. Charles’s confessor, Glapion, dreads a general conflagration ; the princes are full of indecision, and the prelates full of fear. Everything is in such a state of confusion that, unless God help us, the wisdom of men will be of no avail”.

The situation was further confused by the action of the strongly Catholic Duke George of Saxony, who brought forward the question of the German grievances against the Roman government of the Church. He did this with the best intentions, thinking thus to obtain a freer hand to defend the greater interests of the Church connected with faith. The Emperor, however, dissuaded him from mixing up the Lutheran affair, which concerned faith, with grievances and abuses, for the redress of which he undertook to approach the Pope.

Meanwhile, to Aleander’s great vexation, Charles’s counsellors advised him to temporize. They represented to the Emperor that, on account of the political complications with the States, the greatest possible caution was necessary in regard to this question. They convinced the Emperor that he must use consideration in the matter.

With regard to the excited state of public opinion, the States, on the 19th of February, rejected the severe edict by which Luther was condemned unheard. In place of this they suggested that he should be provided with a safe­conduct and summoned to appear before the Diet. He was, it is true, to be asked whether he would retract his doctrines, as being opposed to the Holy Catholic Faith : if he consented, he was to be given a hearing and fairly met on other points, namely, the grievances connected with the abuses of the Roman Court. If, on the contrary, he refused to retract his errors, the Emperor would at once issue, throughout the Empire, an edict against him as a heretic.

Charles V consented to this proposal on the 2nd of March; at the same time he stated in writing that he would be ready to take counsel with the States, in a friendly and gracious spirit, about the Roman grievances and abuses, and discuss the means of their redress. The draft of an edict was appended to this answer, by which Luther was required to make a retractation, and, in case of refusal, be subjected to severe measures. In the meantime his writings were to be everywhere destroyed.

On the 6th of March the States rejected the draft of this edict, and, consequently, the Emperor, on the same day, gave a safe-conduct to Luther. “God grant”, said Aleander in a spirit of resignation, “that his coming before the Diet may bring peace to the Church”. After an attempt to put the responsibility of Luther’s summons on the Elector of Saxony’s shoulders, frustrated by Frederick’s repudiation of any such thing, the Emperor issued the citation himself. He, however, expressed his personal views in an edict issued on the 26th of March, by which the confiscation of all Lutheran writings was commanded on his own authority, without further consultation with the States.

Thereupon Ulrich von Hutten sent a threatening letter to the Emperor, containing a warning against the Romans, as well as abusive invective against all the princes of the Church who were taking part in the Diet. Still more bitter were his letters, full of slanders and threats, to the Papal Nuncios, Aleander and Caracciolo, whom he styled the most reprobate of deceivers, and the most violent of robbers. He threatened Aleander personally, and said he would do all he could to see him annihilated. The Nuncios thereupon begged for the protection of the Emperor against any attempt on their lives, which would have been a transgression of international law. But Charles himself was not surrounded by armed men. As he was still making use of Sickingen's services, he could not call Hutten to account, but was rather inclined to purchase his silence by an income of four hundred gulden. On the 8th of April Hutten sent an apology to the Emperor, in which, nevertheless, he made a violent attack on the Nuncio. “We cannot”, wrote Aleander on the 15th of April, “make it sufficiently clear to the imperialists, in a friendly way, how shameful it is to tolerate such proceedings, and not to concede to us means of redress. They only shrug their shoulders and lament that, under present conditions, they are unable to act otherwise through lack of soldiers. In truth Sickingen is now the only sovereign in Germany ; the other princes fold their hands, the prelates tremble and let themselves be snared like rabbits, while the whole world is crying death to the priests”.

On the 1 6th of April the “arch-heretic”, as Aleander styled Luther, arrived at Worms. On the following day the first examination took place before the Emperor and the Diet. Luther admitted that he had written the books which were produced, and which Aleander had procured. To the other questions put to him by the Treves official, Johann von der Ecken, as to whether he would retract the false doctrines contained in them, he replied “in such a low voice that even those close to him could scarcely hear”, and requested more time for consideration. This was granted to him, but only until the following day. Next day he boldly defended his writings in a long speech delivered in Latin and German. In it he inveighed against the tyranny of the Pope, and called Rome the flaying-ground of Christendom. In a skilful reply the Treves official pointed out that nearly all Luther's doctrines had been already condemned by the Council of Constance. “Martin”, he cried to him, “follow the dictates of your conscience, as you are bound to do ; then will you certainly and un hesitatingly retract your errors. You will not be able to prove to me that Councils have erred in matters of faith”. But Luther positively refused to retract anything, unless he were first convinced of his error by the Holy Ghost or by plain reason, for, said he, Popes as well as Councils have often erred and have contradicted each other.

Aleander did not sit as the Pope’s representative during Luther’s examination, although he continued to work actively in the interests of the Church. He had with much skill made out the scheme of the examination, had inspired the questions to be put to Luther, and the answers to be given by the Treves official, and had checked the tendency to dispute. Before long he was to find out that his representations to the Emperor had fallen on fruitful soil. On the very next day, April 19, Charles made a declaration, written by himself and spoken in French, that he was ready to lay down his life and crown for the maintenance of the religion of his fathers, and for the extirpation of the heresy so obstinately held to by this erring monk, in opposition to the whole of Christendom ; and he regretted that he had I not sooner taken measures to repress it. The safe-conduct given to Luther should be respected, nevertheless he could not be allowed to sow sedition among the people. As to what further proceedings he could take against Luther as a convicted heretic, he must wait for the States to express an opinion consistent with their duty as Christians, and in accordance with the promise made by them on the 19th of February.

After this vigorous address of the Emperor’s, the sanguine Aleander believed that the victory was gained. But in the night Luther’s followers fixed up a manifesto on the door of the Council-chamber, in which they threatened to pass on the word to the seditious peasants. The Archbishop of Mainz was seized with such terror that he begged the Emperor and princes to reopen negotiations with Luther. Charles made merry over his cowardice ; but the majority of the States were so intimidated that they besought the Emperor to consent to Luther’s being called before a small commission of learned men, who would inform him as to the articles in which he had erred. Charles once more yielded, in regard to the dispute going on between the supreme court and the imperial chamber. But all attempts to induce Luther to recant were of no avail. “He can be convinced neither by persuasion nor argument”, Aleander said in his report to Rome, “for he will accept no judge and rejects all Councils, considering nothing valid except the words of the Bible interpreted by himself, for he rejects all other interpretations as inadequate”.

The Nuncios once more breathed freely when, all discussions having been broken off, Charles compelled Luther to leave Worms on the 26th of April.  This state of affairs had been provided for in the declaration of the States on the 19th of February and the 20th of April. By Luther’s refusal to recant, the Emperor was set free to issue an imperial edict in defence of the Catholic Faith, on his own authority. By the desire of Charles, Aleander drew up this important deed on May the 1st. The Nuncio worked all night, and was able to submit his draft on the following morning ; though it was then submitted to, and revised by, the imperial council. On the 8th of May he obtained an order through the imperial cabinet for the immediate preparation of the edict. However, when the document was brought to him for signature, Charles declared that it must be first made known to the States. Aleander and Caracciolo were at first equally alarmed by this, but they soon perceived that this precaution was solely in order not to exasperate certain princes inclined to Lutheranism, and thus avoid injury to the proposals contained in the edict.

The surmise was correct. In spite of all the pressure put on him by the Nuncios, the Emperor, from reasons of political prudence, refused to act until his demands had been passed by the Diet. Aleander meanwhile worked in every possible way, in conjunction with Caracciolo, to promote the issue of the edict by the States, in accordance with the Emperor’s repeated promises. Charles kept his word. On the 25th of May he had his edict solemnly read in the presence of a number of Electors and princes, after which Joachim of Brandenburg declared that it was accepted unanimously. The States also accepted it with equal unanimity. All ambiguity had vanished. Even though all the States were not present at the reading, the validity of the edict was not affected. The reading before the States, and still more its discussion, were unnecessary, for, in accordance with the resolution passed by the Diet on the 19th of February, the Emperor was entitled, in the event of Luther’s refusing to recant, to issue just such an edict, assuming it to have been passed by the States.

The news that the edict had been passed by the Diet caused great joy among Luther’s enemies, and great confusion among his followers. Aleander did not close his eyes all night, partly from the effects of joyful excitement, partly from fear of counter-intrigues. He did not feel secure until the Emperor had signed the document on the 1 2th of May. “Blessed be the Most Holy Trinity”, wrote the Nuncio to Rome, “on whose Feast the greatest means of overcoming the evil, which human reason can conceive, has been given to us. The converting of hearts, and setting men in the right way, belongs to God alone. He will not forsake us”.

The imperial mandate, which is known to the world as the Edict of Worms condemned Luther in the severest terms, and placed him under the ban of the Empire, with the command that all his writings be destroyed. The edict declared that he disseminated evil fruits; that he violated the number, rite, and use of the sacraments ; that he denied the inviolable bond of matrimony; that he uttered shameful calumnies against the Pope, despised the priesthood, and incited the laity to wash their hands in the blood of priests. He taught that man had no free-will, and encouraged a life without law, as he had proved by destroying all its hallowed safeguards and burning the books of canon law. He drew contempt on all Councils, especially that of Constance, which had, to its everlasting honour, restored peace and unity to the German nation, calling it the “synagogue of Satan”, and all those who took part, in it “antichrists and murderers”. “Like the spirit of evil in a monk’s habit”, he united in himself heresies new and old ; under a semblance of preaching the faith, he tried to destroy the one true faith; and under pretence of preaching the Gospel, he destroyed all evangelical peace, love, and order.

On the 29th of May Aleander witnessed the carrying out of the imperial instructions at Worms, by the arrangements made there for burning all Luther’s writings. Two days later he and Caracciolo, in obedience to instructions received from Rome, went down the Rhine to Cologne in the Emperor’s suite.

Aleander’s activity did not cease yet, and he showed the utmost zeal in carrying out the edict throughout the Empire proper, as well as in the Netherlands, where he dwelt for the most part. It was largely owing to his discreet and indefatigable efforts that the religious innovations were almost entirely suppressed in that country.

Aleander was still there when Leo X died. By this event he failed to receive the reward which he had so richly deserved by his untiring energy in the interests of the Church. He had remained unmoved at his post in a foreign land, though exposed to the most violent and venomous attacks from his former friends the humanists. He had endured hardships and physical sufferings of every sort, and at times his life had been in danger. He had, indeed, moments of despondency, especially when he did not consider himself sufficiently supported by Rome. But these were only passing phases; and on the whole he carried on his warfare against the religious innovators with wonderful endurance, ardent zeal, and great prudence and ability. Nothing could have surpassed his zeal against the heretics, which led him, highly-cultivated man as he was, to the use of very abusive language. This is much to be regretted, however great the aggravation to which he was subjected. In fact, he succumbed in this to the custom of his age quite as much as if he had succumbed to the practice of bribery.

Owing to his excitable and violent temperament, Aleander’s judgment of events was often at fault. The greatest mistake he made was that of at times attributing the strength of the Lutheran movement to base and material motives : in this he showed himself a true child of the Renaissance. Consequently he trusted too much to being able to stem the movement by marks of favour and a generous expenditure of money, and was therefore untiring in his efforts to win over individuals. He cannot be reproached with the disappointment which awaited the hopes he had based on the issue of the Edict of Worms. No one could have foreseen future developments. Not only Aleander, but all other contemporaries, saw in stringent measures the only way of dealing with the very precarious state of things. Nevertheless, however much Aleander might believe in the efficacy of violent and material methods, he was too clear-sighted to ignore the importance of the use of spiritual weapons. His endeavours to make use of these are shown in a letter which he wrote to Cardinal Medici on the 5th of April, 1521. “I say openly to our poets and rhetoricians”, he says, “whose action consists in elaborating verses a month long, and in abusing each other all for the sake of some miserable word, let them be unanimous in defending our faith in their writings. They could accomplish great things by their understanding and capabilities ; they could put these shriekers to silence who, with their gifts of narrative and poetry, set themselves up before the multitude as if they had quite succeeded in trampling on theology. Excommunication could make no sort of impression on them, for they only mock at it. Here is a case of driving one wedge on the top of another, and of fighting these people with their own weapons. Would that the Pope, through the intercession of Your Eminence, would, by praise and reward, encourage men of talent to make an intelligent study of Scripture, and put their pens to work, after the example of the Germans, in defence of the faith. In this work God would assist them. There is no need of great doctors of theology to refute these knaves for, as we have seen, they refuse to learn anything of such. I am far from meaning that the antagonists of error should be devoid of a deep knowledge of Holy Scripture; but even in so important a matter much depends on literary facility.”

Here we can see how Aleander, as a true humanist, expected less from profound learning than from a skilful use of literature. It was, it is true, a gross delusion to expect lasting results in this great contest from the Roman humanists; but the principle was right that the enemy must be fought with his own weapons, and that the anti­Catholic literature must be met by one of the same kind, only on the side of truth.

To the honour of Aleander are the unceasing warnings he addressed to the Curia to redress the abuses, which he pointed out with the greatest candour. He adjured the Pope to do away with the number of reservations and dispensations, to revoke the abrogation of the Concordat with Germany, to reform the scandals connected with the Roman Court, to put a curb on the benefice-hunters, and to restore ecclesiastical discipline. Though these warnings were but too often neglected, they make known to us the man who, as Papal Nuncio to the Emperor, served the Holy See with a fiery devotion, and was the immediate precursor of the great Catholic reformers, to whom he ultimately attached himself.

CHAPTER IX

ALLIANCE OF THE POPE WITH THE EMPEROR CHARLES V.