The Procession--Mass--Mosellanus--Veni, Sancte
Spiritus!--Portraits of Luther and Carlstadt--Doctor
Eck--Carlstadt's Books--Merit of Congruity--Natural
Powers--Scholastic distinction--Point where Rome and the
Reformation separate--Grace gives man freedom--Carlstadt's
Note-Book--Commotion in the auditory--Melancthon during the
debate--Manœuvres of Eck--Luther Preaches--The Citizens
of Leipsic--Quarrels of Students and quarrels of Teachers.
The 27th of June was the day fixed for the commencement of the
discussion. In the morning the parties met in the hall of the
university, and thereafter walked in procession to the Church of St.
Thomas, where high mass was celebrated by the order and at the expence
of the duke. After service, those present proceeded to the ducal
castle. At their head walked Duke George, and the Duke of Pomerania;
next came counts, abbots, knights, and other persons of distinction;
and, lastly, the doctors of the two parties. A guard composed of
seventy-six citizens, carrying halberds, accompanied the procession,
with colours flying, and drums beating, and halted at the castle gate.
On the arrival at the palace, each took his place in the hall where
the debate was to take place--Duke George, the hereditary Prince John,
Prince George of Anhalt, a boy of twelve, and the Duke of Pomerania,
occupying the seats allotted to them.
Mosellanus, by order of the duke, mounted a pulpit, to remind the
theologians of the manner in which the discussion was to be carried
on. "If you begin to quarrel," said the orator to them, "what
difference will there be between a theological disputant and a
swaggering duellist? What is victory here but just to recall a brother
from his error?... Each, it would seem, should be more desirous to be
conquered than to conquer."[73]
[73] Seckend., p. 209.
[Sidenote: PORTRAITS OF LUTHER, CARLSTADT, ECK.]
At the conclusion of the address, sacred music echoed along the aisles
of the Pleissenberg, the whole assembly knelt down, and the ancient
hymn of invocation to the Holy Spirit, "Veni, Sancte Spiritus," was
sung. Solemn hour in the annals of the Reformation! The invocation was
thrice repeated; and, while the solemn chant was pealing, the
defenders of the ancient, and the champions of the new doctrines, the
men of the Church of the middle ages, and those desirous of
re-establishing the Church of the apostles, mingling together without
distinction, in lowly attitude bent their faces to the ground. The
ancient tie of one single communion still united all these different
minds, and the same prayer still proceeded from all these lips as if a
single heart had dictated it.
These were the last moments of external lifeless unity for which a new
spiritual living unity was about to be substituted. The Holy Spirit
was invoked in behalf of the Church, and the Holy Spirit was about to
answer by a revival of Christendom.
When the hymn and prayer were finished, the assembly rose up. The
discussion should have now commenced; but, as the hour of noon had
arrived, there was an adjournment of two hours.
The leading personages who proposed to attend the debate, having dined
with the duke, returned with him after dinner to the castle hall,
which was filled with spectators. Meetings of this description were
the public assemblies in which the representatives of the age
discussed questions of general and engrossing interest. The orators
were soon at their post. That a better idea may be formed of them, we
will give their portraits as drawn by one of the most impartial
witnesses of the debate.
"Martin Luther is of middle size; and so emaciated by hard study that
one might almost count his bones. He is in the vigour of life, and his
voice is clear and sonorous. His learning and knowledge of the Holy
Scriptures are beyond compare: he has the whole word of God at
command.[74] In addition to this he has great store of arguments and
ideas. It were perhaps to be wished that he had a little more judgment
in arranging his materials. In conversation he is candid and
courteous; there is nothing stoical or haughty about him; he has the
art of accommodating himself to every individual. His address is
pleasing, and replete with good humour. He displays firmness, and is
never discomposed by the menaces of his adversaries, be they what they
may. One is, in a manner, compelled to believe that, in the great
things which he has done, God must have assisted him. He is blamed,
however, for being more sarcastic in his rejoinders than becomes a
theologian, especially when he announces new religious ideas.
[74] Seine Gelehrsamkeit aber und Verstand in heiliger Schrift ist
unvergleichlich, so dass er fast alles im Griff hat. (Mosellanus in
Seckend., 206.)
"Carlstadt is of smaller stature; his complexion is dark and sallow,
his voice disagreeable, his memory less retentive, and his temper more
easily ruffled than Luther's. Still however he possesses, though in an
inferior degree, the same qualities which distinguish his friend.
[Sidenote: CARLSTADT'S BOOKS. NATURAL POWERS.]
"Eck is tall and broad shouldered. He has a strong and truly German
voice, and such excellent lungs that he would be well heard on the
stage, or would make an admirable town-crier. His accent is rather
coarse than elegant, and he has none of the gracefulness so much
lauded by Cicero and Quintilian. His mouth, his eyes, and his whole
features, suggest the idea of a soldier or a butcher, rather than a
theologian.[75] His memory is excellent, and were his intellect equal
to it he would be faultless. But he is slow of comprehension, and
wants judgment, without which all other gifts are useless. Hence, when
he debates, he piles up, without selection or discernment, passages
from the Bible, quotations from the Fathers, and arguments of all
descriptions. His assurance, moreover, is unbounded. When he finds
himself in a difficulty he darts off from the matter in hand, and
pounces upon another; sometimes, even, he adopts the view of his
antagonist, and changing the form of expression, most dexterously
charges him with the very absurdity which he himself was defending."
[75] Das Maul, Augen, und ganze Gesicht, presentirt ehe einen
Fleischer oder Soldaten, als einen Theologum. (Mosellanus in Seckend.,
206.)
Such, according to Mosellanus, were the men who drew the eyes of the
crowds who were then thronging into the great hall of Pleissenburg.
The discussion was opened by Eck and Carlstadt.
Eck, for some moments, fixed his eyes on the books which lay on the
little table in front of his opponent's desk, and seemed to give him
uneasiness: they were the Bible and the Fathers. "I decline the
discussion," exclaimed he suddenly, "if you are allowed to bring books
with you." A theologian have recourse to his books in discussion! The
astonishment of Dr. Eck was still more astonishing. "It is merely a
fig leaf which this Adam is employing to hide his shame," said Luther.
"Did Augustine consult no books in combating the Manichees?"[76] No
matter! Eck's partisans made a great noise. Carlstadt remonstrated.
"The man is altogether devoid of memory," said Eck. At last it was
decided, agreeably to the desire of the chancellor of Ingolstadt, that
each disputant should have the use only of his memory and his tongue.
"Thus then," said several, "the object in this debate will not be to
discover truth, but to show off the eloquence and memory of the
disputants."
[76] Prætexit tamen et hic Adam ille folium fici pulcherrimum. (L.
Epp. i, p. 294.) "Here, however, this Adam too weaved for himself a
most beautiful fig-leaf."
The discussion lasted seventeen days; but as it is impossible to give
the whole of it, we must, as a historian says, imitate painters who,
in representing a battle, place the most distinguished exploits in
front, and leave the others in the back ground.[77]
[77] Pallavicini, i, 65.
[Sidenote: MERIT OF CONGRUITY. SCHOLASTIC DISTINCTION.]
The subject of discussion between Eck and Carlstadt was important.
"Before conversion," said Carlstadt, "the will of man is incapable of
doing good; every good work comes entirely and exclusively from God,
who gives first the will to do, and afterwards the ability to
perform." This truth is proclaimed by the Scriptures, which say, "_It
is God which worketh in you, both to will and to do of his good
pleasure_,"[78] and by Augustine, who, in disputing with the
Pelagians, delivers it in almost the very same terms. Every work in
which there is neither love to God nor obedience to his will, is, in
his sight, devoid of the only quality which could render it truly
good, even should it be in other respects dictated by the most
honourable human motives. Now there is in man a natural enmity to
God--an enmity which he is utterly unable to suppress. He has not the
power to do so--he even wants the will. If ever, therefore, it is to
be suppressed, it must be by the power of God.
[78] Philippians, ii, 13.
This is the doctrine of free will, so much declaimed against in the
world, and yet so simple. It had been the doctrine of the church. But
the schoolmen had explained it in a manner which caused it to be
misunderstood. "No doubt," said they, "the natural will of man cannot
do any thing which is truly pleasing to God; but it can do much to
render man more capable and more worthy of receiving divine grace."
These preparatives they termed merit of congruity;[79] "because," as
St. Thomas expressed it, "it is congruous for God to bestow peculiar
favour on those who make a good use of their will." In regard, again,
to the conversion which man must undergo, it is no doubt true that,
according to the schoolmen, the grace of God behoved to accomplish it,
but still without excluding his natural powers. "These powers," said
they, "have not been annihilated by sin; sin only puts an obstacle in
the way of their development; but as soon as this obstacle is removed
(and this, according to them, was what the grace of God had to do,)
these powers begin again to act." To use one of their favourite
comparisons--"the bird whose legs are tied does not thereby lose
either its powers, or forget the art of flying, though it must be
loosed by some other hand before it can be able again to use its
wings." "The same," said they, "is the case with man."[80]
[79] Meritum congruum.
[80] Planck, i, p. 176.
[Sidenote: FREE WILL. ITS TRUE NATURE.]
Such was the question discussed between Eck and Carlstadt. At first
Eck seemed to deny Carlstadt's propositions out and out, but feeling
the difficulty of maintaining his ground, said, "I grant that the will
has not power to do a good work, but receives it from God." "Confess
then," rejoined Carlstadt, overjoyed at obtaining such a concession,
"that every good work comes entirely from God." "Every good work comes
indeed from God," replied the schoolman subtlely, "but not entirely."
"There," exclaimed Melancthon, "goes a discovery well worthy of
theological science." "An apple," added Eck, "is all produced by the
sun, but not altogether, and without the co-operation of the
tree."[81] Assuredly no man ever thought of maintaining that an apple
is all produced by the sun.
[81] Quanquam totum opus Dei sit, non tamen _totaliter_ a Deo esse,
quemadmodum totum pomum efficitur a sole, sed non a sole _totaliter_
et sine plantæ efficentiâ. (Pallavicini, Tom. i, p. 58.) Although the
_whole_ work is of God, it is not _wholly_ of God--just as the _whole_
apple is produced by the sun, but not _wholly_ by the sun, and without
the co-operation of the plant.
"Very well," said his opponents, going still deeper into this delicate
question, so important in philosophy and in religion, "let us consider
how God acts on man, and how man conducts himself when so acted on."
"I acknowledge," said Eck, "that in conversion the first impulse comes
from God, and that the human will is entirely passive."[82] So far the
disputants were agreed. "I acknowledge," said Carlstadt, on his part,
"that after this first action on the part of God, something must come
from man, something which St. Paul calls _the will_, and which the
fathers designate by _consent_." Here again both parties were
agreed--but at this point the separation began. "This consent of man,"
said Eck, "comes partly from our natural will, and partly from the
grace of God."[83] "No," said Carlstadt, "this will in man is entirely
created by God."[84] Hereupon Eck began to express astonishment and
indignation at words so well fitted to impress man with a sense of his
utter nothingness. "Your doctrine," exclaims he, "makes man a stone or
a block, incapable of any counter action...." "What," replied the
Reformers, "does not the faculty of receiving the powers which God
produces in him (a faculty which we admit that he possesses)
sufficiently distinguish him from a stone and a block?" "But," resumed
their antagonist, "by denying man all natural power, you contradict
experience." "We deny not," was the reply, "that man possesses certain
powers, and has in him a faculty of reflecting, meditating, and
choosing. We only consider these powers and faculties as mere
instruments, incapable of doing any thing that is good until the hand
of God sets them in motion. They are like the saw in the hands of the
sawyer."[85]
[82] "Motionem seu inspirationem prevenientem esse a solo Deo; et ibi
liberum arbitrium habet se passive." Preventing motion, or
inspiration, is from God, and therein free-will is passive.
[83] Partim a Deo, partim a libero arbitrio.
[84] "Consentit homo, se consensus est donum Dei. Consentire non est
agere." Man consents; but consent is the gift of God. Consent is not
action.
[85] Ut serra in manu hominis trahentis.
[Sidenote: CARLSTADT'S NOTE BOOK. PORTRAIT OF MELANCTHON.]
The great question of liberty was here debated, and it was easy to
demonstrate that the doctrine of the Reformers did not divest man of
the liberty of a moral agent or make him a passive machine. The
liberty of a moral agent consists in the power of acting conformably
to his choice. Every action done without external constraint, and in
consequence of the determination of the mind itself, is a free action.
The mind is determined by motives, but we constantly see that the same
motives act differently on different minds. Many do not act
conformably to the motives which their judgment approves. This
inefficiency of motives is attributable to the obstacles which they
meet with in the corruption of the understanding and the heart. Now,
God, by giving a new heart and a new spirit, removes those obstacles,
and thereby so far from depriving man of freedom, on the contrary,
removes what prevented him from acting freely, and in obedience to the
dictates of his conscience. In the language of the gospel it renders
him "free indeed." (John, viii, 36.)
A slight incident for a short time interrupted the debate. Carlstadt
(this is Eck's account[86]) had prepared different heads of argument;
and, as is done by many of the orators of our day, read what he had
written. Eck saw in this only a school boy's tactics, and objected.
Carlstadt embarrassed, and fearing he might be taken at a disadvantage
if deprived of his note-book, insisted on retaining it. "Ah!" said the
scholastic doctor, quite proud of the advantage which he thought he
had over him, "his memory is shorter than mine." The point having been
submitted to arbiters, it was decided that quotations from the Fathers
might be read, but that in other respects the discussion should be
extempore.
[86] Seckendorf, p. 192.
This first part of the discussion often met with interruption from the
audience. They ruffed and screamed. Any proposition offensive to the
ears of the majority instantly aroused their clamour, and then, as in
our day, it was necessary to call to order. The disputants also
occasionally allowed themselves to be carried away in the heat of
discussion.
[Sidenote: MELANCTHON'S OPINION. ECK'S MANŒVRES.]
Melancthon sat near Luther, and attracted almost equal attention. He
was of short stature, and would scarcely have been thought more than
eighteen. Luther, who was a whole head taller, seemed to be united to
him by the closest friendship; they came in, went out, and walked
together. "To look at Melancthon," says a Swiss theologian,[87] who
studied at Wittemberg, "one would think him a mere boy, but in
judgment, learning, and talent he is a giant. It is difficult to
comprehend how so much wisdom and genius can be contained within so
puny a body." Between the sittings, Melancthon conferred with
Carlstadt and Luther. He assisted them in preparing for the debate,
and suggested arguments drawn from the stores of his vast erudition;
but during the discussion he remained quietly seated among the
spectators, giving close attention to every thing that was said by the
theologians.[88] Occasionally, however, he came to the aid of
Carlstadt.[89] When the latter was on the point of giving way under
the powerful declamation of the chancellor of Ingolstadt, the young
professor whispered a word in his ear, or slipt a paper to him on
which he had noted down the answer. Eck on one occasion perceived
this, and indignant that this grammarian, as he called him, should
presume to intermeddle with the discussion, turned towards him, and
haughtily said, "Be silent, Philip, keep to your own studies, and give
me no disturbance." Perhaps Eck had already a presentiment of the
formidable adversary he was afterwards to encounter in this young man.
Luther was offended at the rude insult given to his friend; "The
judgment of Philip," said he, "weighs more with me than that of a
thousand doctor Ecks."
[87] John Kessler, afterwards reformer of St. Gall.
[88] Lipsicæ pugnæ otiosus spectator in reliquo volgo sedi. (Corpus
Reformatorum, i, 112.) At Leipsic I sat among the crowd as an idle
spectator.
[89] Tace tu, Philippe, ac tua studia cura, ne me perturba. (Ibid., i,
149.)
The calm Melancthon easily discerned the weak points of this
discussion. "We can only be surprised," says he with the wisdom and
grace conspicuous in all his words, "when we think of the violence
which was brought to the discussion of such subjects. How could any
advantage be derived from it? The Spirit of God loves retreat and
silence: there dwell those whose hearts he penetrates. The bride of
Christ does not stand in streets and public places, but conducts the
Bridegroom into her mother's house."[90]
[90] Melancth. Op., p. 134.
[Sidenote: LUTHER'S SERMON. THE BURGHERS OF LEIPSIC.]
Both parties claimed the victory. Eck employed all his address to make
it appear that he had gained it. As the points of divergence almost
met, he often exclaimed that he had brought over his opponent to his
opinion, or like a new Proteus, as Luther calls him, turning suddenly
round, he stated Carlstadt's own opinion in different words, and then
asked, with an air of triumph, if he did not feel constrained to
yield. The unskilful, who were unable to detect the sophist's
manœuvre, applauded and triumphed with him.... In several respects
the match was unequal. Carlstadt was slow, and sometimes left his
opponent's objections unanswered till next day. Eck, on the contrary,
was master of his subject, and could lay his hand at once on whatever
he required. He came forward with a haughty air, mounted his desk with
a firm step, and when there, stamped with his foot, moved backwards
and forwards, made the ceiling ring with his powerful voice, gave some
sort of reply to every argument, and astonished the audience with his
memory and adroitness. Still Eck, without perceiving it, conceded much
more in the discussion than he had intended. His partizans shouted
and laughed at each of his turns, "but," says Luther, "I strongly
suspect they only made a show of laughing, and were exceedingly vexed
at heart when they saw their chief, who had commenced with so much
bravado, quit his standard, abandon his army, and become a shameless
deserter."[91]
[91] Relictis signis, desertorem exercitus et transfugam factum. (L.
Ep. i, 295.)
Three or four days after the discussion had commenced, it was
interrupted by the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul.
The Duke of Pomerania requested Luther to preach before him, on the
occasion, in his chapel. Luther gladly complied. The chapel was soon
filled, and crowds still arriving, it became necessary to remove to
the great hall of the castle, where the discussion was held. Luther
preached from the text of the day, on the grace of God, and the power
of Peter, and gave a popular exposition of the views which he was wont
to maintain before a learned audience. Christianity causes the light
of truth to penetrate alike into the highest and the humblest
intellects, and is in this way distinguished from all other religions,
and from all philosophical systems. The theologians of Leipsic, who
had been present at the sermon, hastened to acquaint Eck with the
expressions which had offended them. "These subtile errors," exclaimed
they, "must be answered, must be publicly refuted." This was just what
Eck wished. All the churches were open to him, and on four successive
occasions he mounted the pulpit to declaim against Luther and his
sermon. Luther's friends were indignant, and demanded that the
theologian of Wittemberg should be heard in his turn. But they
demanded in vain. The pulpits were open to the enemies of evangelical
truth, but shut against those who proclaimed it. "I kept silence,"
says Luther, "and was obliged to submit to attacks, insults, and
calumnies, without being able to exculpate and defend myself."[92]
[92] Mich verklagen, schelten und schmæhen.... (L. Op. (L.) xvii, p.
247.)
[Sidenote: QUARRELS OF DOCTORS.]
The ecclesiastics were not the only persons who displayed hostility to
the evangelical doctrine: the citizens of Leipsic were in this respect
of one mind with their clergy, and yielded themselves up with blind
fanaticism to the falsehoods and animosities which were industriously
propagated. The principal inhabitants did not visit either Luther or
Carlstadt. They left them unnoticed when they met them in the street,
and tried to prejudice the duke against them. On the other hand they
visited and gave daily entertainments to the doctor of Ingolstadt, who
enjoyed their good cheer, and learnedly discussed the comparative
merits of Saxony and Bavarian beer. His manners, somewhat free, did
not indicate a very strict morality.[93] The only thing offered to
Luther was the customary present of wine to the disputants. Moreover,
even those who wished him well were anxious that others should not
know it; several Nicodemites visited him by night or in secret. There
were only two who did themselves honour by publicly declaring their
friendship. These were Dr. Auerback, whom we have already met at
Augsburg, and Dr. Pistor, junior.
[93] Eck to Haven and Bourkard, 1st July, 1519. (Walch, xv, p. 1456.)
The greatest excitement prevailed in the town. The two parties formed,
as it were, two hostile camps, and sometimes came to blows. In
taverns, frequent quarrels took place between the students of Leipsic
and Wittemberg. It was openly averred, even at meetings of the clergy,
that Luther carried about with him a devil, confined in a little box.
"Whether the devil is in a box, or only under his frock," said Eck,
maliciously, "I know not; but most assuredly he is in one or other of
them."
During the discussion several doctors of both parties lodged with the
printer Herbipolis; and the dispute ran so high that the host was
obliged to station a town-officer at the top of the table with a
halbert to keep the peace, and prevent the guests from coming to
blows. One day Baumgartner, a vender of indulgences, had a scuffle
with a gentleman, a friend of Luther, and fell into such a rage that
he dropt down dead. Fröschel, who gives the account, says, "I was one
of those who carried him to the grave."[94] The general agitation
which prevailed was thus manifested. Then, as now, the discourses of
the desk were re-echoed in the drawing-room and in the streets.
[94] Löscher, iii, 278.
Duke George, though very decidedly in favour of Eck, did not betray so
much passion as his subjects. He invited Eck, Luther, and Carlstadt to
dine together with him. He even asked Luther to pay him a visit in
private, but soon showed how strongly he was prejudiced against him.
"By your book on the Lord's Prayer," said the duke to him, with
bitterness, "you have led many consciences astray. There are persons
who complain of not having been able to say one _pater_ for more than
four days."