VIII. King's Bench, he was discharged, as has been already related. HENRY And as for Dr. Standish, the bishops promised the king he should be dismissed from farther trouble in the convocation; which was done accordingly. Keilway, ibid. Hist. of the Trent. Id. et Slei Luther ap Pope Julius was now dead, and succeeded by Leo X., of the house of Medici. This pope being over-munificent, endeavoured to recover his exchequer by a plenary indulgence. These favours of the court of Rome used to be published by the Hermits; but the Dominicans being looked on as the best managers, the matter was put into their hands. These men, F. Paul, it seems, flourished extravagantly upon the virtue of indulgences, Council of and told the people they would wipe out the blemish of any crime whatever: that they need not question their being happy in another world; and that as soon as the money was paid for the dead, the souls in purgatory would be immediately discharged, A. D. 1517. and mount to the regions of bliss. Martin Luther, a Hermit dan Comfriar of Wittemberg, was disturbed at these abuses. He ment, p. 1. thought the people doubly cheated, and that they not only lost pears against indulgences. their money, but were in danger of suffering much farther in their spiritual interest. To stop the course of this mischief, he wrote to Albert, of the house of Brandenburgh, archbishop of Mentz. And here, putting this prelate in mind of his office, he entreats him to suppress the pamphlets put out for recommending the indulgences: and to order the publishers to be less mercenary and scandalous in their harangues: for unless some prevention of this kind was made use of, it was to be feared, there might be a rupture in the Church. With this letter he sent his ninety-five conclusions, upon which he had disputed at Wittemberg. In these theses, purgatory, penance, and indulgences were handled, together with some strokes of satire upon the excessive rhetoric of the Dominicans: but all this was only in a problematical way, without coming to any positive decision. And that the difficulty of the case might be the better disentangled, he invited all men of learning to come and argue the point. That those who were not at leisure should send their opinion in writing: protesting at the same time, that he pretended to determine nothing, but submitted the whole matter to the judgment of the Church: however, as to Thomas Aquinas and the other schoolmen, he had no implicit belief for such authorities; neither could he go into their 8. WARНАМ, sentiment any farther than they agreed with the holy ScripAbp. Cant. tures and Fathers of the Church. Tetzel writes against Luther. June. He writes letter to the submissive a The archbishop of Mentz returned no answer: but not long after John Tetzel, a Dominican, of Frankfort upon the Oder, published several theses in direct opposition to Luther. In these discourses, he set forth the pope's authority and the benefit of indulgences with a great deal of elocution: and was so hardy as to compare Leo X. with the apostle St. Peter. This performance being much cried up, Luther replied in a letter to his own bishop Jerome: and afterwards sent a copy to John Stupitz, desiring him it might be conveyed to A. D. 1518. the pope. Soon after he wrote to Leo himself. In this letter, he gives his holiness to understand, "what dangerous doctrine was advanced by his collectors, and how much they abused his authority to serve their avarice; adding, that he did not question that great complaints had been preferred against him, but he was altogether wronged. It is true he had published something to check the extravagances delivered by the collectors in their sermons, but that was only by way of information. He therefore desires his holiness not to give credit to any clamours against him. That provided the reports of his adversaries had been true, the elector of Saxony, that prudent and pious prince, would never have suffered him to live in his dominions; neither should he have received any better countenance at the university of Wittemberg. In fine, he lays his writings and his life at the pope's feet; telling him, that whatever decision shall come from his holiness, he shall look upon it as an oracle from heaven, and as if it had been pronounced by our Saviour himself: neither would he refuse to die if his holiness should think he deserved it." pope. Eccius and Prierias against Luther. Besides others, one John Eccius, a divine, published an publish books answer to these last discourses of Luther. To this Luther, in his reply, endeavoured to prove that this Eccius had not fortified his assertions with any authorities from the holy Scriptures and Fathers; but only advanced his own fancy, countenanced with the opinions of the schoolmen. Sylvester Prierias, a Dominican, and master of the sacred palace, seconded Eccius in the dispute. He dedicated his book to the pope, set forward with a great deal of spirit, and seemed confident of success. But to proceed with greater caution, he VIII. laid down as a kind of postulatum, that the pope was head of HENRY the whole Church, and that in matters relating to faith and religion, the see of Rome was infallible; that a council, where the pope assisted, had the same privilege; that the canon of Scripture was received upon the authority of the Church, in conjunction with the pope that whoever refused to receive the doctrine taught by the Church of Rome, or contested the jurisdiction of that see, was undoubtedly an heretic. After he had intrenched himself under this shelter, he ventured upon the controversy. On this Luther, in his answer, acquaints Sylvester, "that He replies. he admired his manner more than he understood it. But then he thought fit to follow his method so far as to lay down some grounds for his defence. And here he made the holy Scriptures his preliminary; from which he argued, that we are not to take every body's doctrine upon trust, but to prove all things, and make the Word of God the standard of our belief; and that those human writings, which keep close to the Scriptures, were only to be admitted without reserve: as to the rest, we were left at our liberty. From hence he proceeds to indulgences, and affirms, that the collectors ought not to advance any new doctrine or methods, but be governed entirely by the directions of the canon law. He proceeds to object against Prierias, that he does not bring any text of Scripture in maintenance of his position; that he rests too much upon the testimony of Thomas Aquinas; and that this doctor used to follow his own sentiment too far, without having recourse to the inspired writings: that upon this account, he could not admit the reasonings either of St. Thomas or Prierias: that he had both St. Paul and St. Austin for his warrant. He desired him likewise to consider, that it was customary among those of the long robe, to make good their pleading from the text of the law and that in matters of religion, it was still more necessary the point should be ruled by the holy Scriptures." By the way, the doctrine of indulgences had not been tho- The opinions roughly examined in former ages: some looked upon them only concerning as relaxations of discipline, and relief from canonical penance: gences. and this was the most defensible opinion: others went farther, and seemed to believe, they discharged from guilt, and were a satisfaction to the divine justice. But how this could be done Id. p. 2, et 3. the indul WAR- without something by way of compensation, was not so intelliAbp. Cant. gible. To furnish means for this purpose, they had recourse to the treasure of the Church: that is, the merits of supererogating saints, together with those of our Saviour, they conceived might supply the defects, and atone for the misperformances of other people. Now the disposing of this treasure is supposed to be lodged with the head of the Church and upon this footing stands the strength of the pope's indulgences. F. Paul, Hist. of the Luther is cited to Rome. His cause referred to cardinal Cajetan. 9. Id. p. 8. Cardinal Cajetan blamed for his rough To proceed. The controversy grew warm upon motion; and Luther always advanced to some new proposition, as occasion offered. The difference being thus widened, pope Leo cited him to Rome, and desired the duke of Saxony, in a brief, not to protect him: but being afterwards solicited that the cause might be tried in Germany, he yielded to refer it to his legate Cajetan. This cardinal had instructions, that in case he found Luther disposed to a submission, he should offer him a pardon, and encourage him with promises of preferment. And here the legate had a discretionary commission, and was left to his own conduct. This latitude proved unfortunate to the court of Rome. For Luther being a man of no great ceremony, and managing the conference with unexpected freedom, the cardinal took check, menaced him, and bid him be gone. Upon this Luther went from Augsburg, where the conference was held, without farther reply. But not long after, recollecting his behaviour, he wrote to the cardinal. And here he confessed he had managed himself with too much vehemence, and promised to be more reserved for the future. He was willing, he said, to satisfy the pope, and dispute no further about indulgences, provided his adversaries might be held to the same terms. But notwithstanding this offer, it seems both parties continued to write and inflame the difference. The court of Rome was much displeased with the cardinal's management: they blamed him for treating Luther so rugtreatment of gedly. Whereas, on the contrary, he should have endeavoured to have won him with gentle usage, with promises of wealth and honour. He ought, they said, to have bribed him high to his duty, and tempted him with a mitre or a cardinal's hat. Luther. This false step in Cajetan, put the pope upon another unserviceable expedient. This prelate, being apprehensive the authority of his see might suffer in Germany by the present VIII. Luther ap controversy, published a bull, by way of prevention. In this HENRY instrument he sets forth the virtue of indulgences, and that Nov. 9. himself, as vicar of Christ, had power to grant them, both for 1518. The the living and dead: that this was the doctrine of the Church pope publishes a of Rome, of the mother and mistress of all Christians; and bull in dethat her resolutions of faith ought not to be disputed. This authority fence of his and the inbull was sent to cardinal Cajetan, who published it at Lints, dulgences. in Austria. Id. P. 8. By this bull, Luther perceived himself lost at the court of Rome. This prospect made him sally into further freedoms, throw off all ceremony and reserve, and treat the pope in a manner upon the level. Thus much the reader may understand from his appeal. It is true, he premises, that when the pope taught the truth, he would not oppose his authority: but then he takes the liberty to add, that sin and error are incident to mankind, and that his holiness was not exempt from those common infirmities: that St. Peter's successors could not pretend a privilege above St. Peter himself: that this great apostle failed once in his conduct, and was sharply reprimanded by St. Paul: but, for his part, he was no match for the pope : for it was easy for so wealthy and powerful a prelate to crush any private person who happened to differ from him. That in this case there was no other remedy but to retreat to a council. That here he resolved to lodge his cause, as being the last resort of justice, and the highest authority in the Church. peals from the pope to a council. Id. to new arti Id. This appeal made a great noise, and was not without its A. D. 1519. effect. Luther, perceiving his doctrine gain ground and his He advances party increase, advanced to new articles in his opposition, cles. argued for the restitution of the cup, decried auricular confession, and touched upon the abuses in the monastic order. The pope's authority and the received doctrine being thus directly struck at, it was thought fit to apply to stronger remedies. To this purpose, Leo publishes a bull, condemns The pope forty-two articles in Luther's doctrine, prohibits the reading forty-two of of his books, and orders them to be burnt. The points con- tenets. demned relate to original sin, penance, and the holy eucharist; to indulgences, the power of the pope, and the authority of councils; to good works, the freedom of the will, purgatory, and poverty. All which tenets are called pernicious, scandalous, and offensive to the ears of good Christians, &c. condemns Luther's |