Hierarchy and Rationalism--Two Peasants' Sons--Eck and
Luther begin--The head of the Church--The primacy of
Rome--Equality of Bishops--Peter the Foundation--Christ the
Foundation--Eck insinuates that Luther is a Hussite--Luther
on the doctrine of Huss--Agitation in the
audience--Pleasantry of Dr. Eck--The Word alone--The Court
Fool--Luther at Mass--Saying of the Duke--Purgatory--Close
of the Discussion.
[Sidenote: HIERARCHISM AND RATIONALISM. TWO PEASANTS' SONS.]
On the 4th of July the debate between Eck and Luther commenced. Every
thing announced that it would be keener, more decisive, and more
interesting than that which had just been concluded, and during which
the audience had gradually thinned away. The two antagonists descended
into the arena, resolved not to lay down their arms till victory
should declare in favour of one of them. All were in eager
expectation, for the subject to be debated was the primacy of the
pope. Christianity has two great adversaries: hierarchism and
rationalism. Rationalism, as applied to the doctrine of man's natural
powers, had been attacked by the Reformation in the former branch of
the Leipsic discussion. Hierarchism, viewed with reference to what is
at once its apex, and its base, viz., the doctrine of the pope, was
now to be considered. On the one side appeared Eck boasting of the
debates in which he had been engaged, as a general boasts of his
battles.[95] On the other side stood Luther, to whom the contest
seemed to promise only persecution and obloquy, but who came forward
with a good conscience, a firm resolution to sacrifice everything for
the cause of truth, and a confident expectation founded on faith in
God and the deliverance which he affords. New convictions had sunk
deep into his mind; as yet they were not arranged into a system, but
in the heat of debate they flashed forth like lightning. Grave and
intrepid, he manifested a decision which set all trammels at defiance.
His features bore marks of the storms which had raged within his soul,
and of the courage with which he was prepared to face new tempests.
Two peasants' sons, representatives of the two systems which still
divide Christendom, were on the eve of a contest, the issue of which
would go far to decide the future destiny of the State and the Church.
[95] Faciebat hoc Eccius quia certam sibi gloriam propositam cernebat,
propter propositionem meam, in qua negabam Papam esse jure divino
caput Ecclesiæ; hic patuit ei campus magnus. (L. Op. in Præf.) Eccius
did so because he anticipated certain victory, in consequence of my
proposition, in which I denied that the pope was jure divino head of
the church; here he had a wide field in which to expatiate.
[Sidenote: THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH.]
At seven in the morning the two antagonists were in their desks, in
the midst of a numerous and attentive assembly.
Luther rose and, in the exercise of a necessary precaution, modestly
said:--
"In the name of the Lord! Amen. I declare, that the respect which I
feel for the Sovereign Pontiff would have disposed me to avoid this
discussion had the excellent Dr. Eck left me any alternative."
_Eck._--"In thy name, dear Jesus! before I descend into the arena I
protest in your presence, mighty lords, that whatever I shall say is
under correction of the first of all sees, and the master who occupies
it."
After a momentary pause, Eck continued--"There is in the church of God
a primacy derived from Jesus Christ himself. The church militant is an
image of the church triumphant. But the latter is a monarchical
hierarchy, rising step by step up to the sole head, who is God, and,
accordingly, Christ has established the same gradation upon earth.
What kind of monster should the Church be if she were without a
head!"[96]...
[96] "Nam quod monstrum esset, Ecclesiam esse acephalam!" (L. Op. Lat.
i, p. 243.)
_Luther_, (_turning towards the audience_).--"The doctor is correct in
saying that the universal Church must have a head. If there is any one
here who maintains the contrary, let him stand up? the remark does not
at all apply to me."
_Eck._--"If the Church militant has never been without a monarch, I
should like to know who that monarch is, if he is not the pontiff of
Rome?"
_Luther._--"The head of the Church militant is not a man, but Jesus
Christ himself. This I believe on the testimony of God." "_Christ_,"
says the Scripture, "_must reign until he has put_ ALL HIS ENEMIES
_under his feet_."[97] "We cannot therefore listen to those who would
confine Christ to the Church triumphant in heaven. His reign is a
reign of faith. We cannot see our Head, and yet we have him."[98]
[97] I Cor. xv, 25.
[98] "Prorsus audiendi non sunt qui Christum extra Ecclesiam
militantem tendunt in triumphantem, cum sit regnum fidei. Caput
nostrum non videmus; tamen habemus." (L. Op. Lat. i, p. 243.)
Eck, not admitting that he was beaten, had recourse to other
arguments, and resumed, "According to St. Cyprian, sacerdotal unity is
derived from Rome."[99]
[99] "Unde sacerdotalis unitas exorta est." (Ibid.)
_Luther._--"Granted in regard to the Western Church. But is not the
Church of Rome herself a descendant of the Church of Jerusalem, which
is properly the mother and nurse of all the churches?"[100]
[100] Hæc est matrix proprie omnium ecclesiarum. (Ibid. 244.)
[Sidenote: THE PRIMACY OF ROME. EQUALITY OF BISHOPS.]
_Eck._--"St. Jerome declares, that unless an extraordinary power,
superior to all other powers, is given to the pope, churches will have
as many schisms as pontiffs."[101]
[101] Cui si non exors quædam et ab omnibus eminens detur potestas.
(Ibid. 243.)
_Luther._--"_Granted_, that is to say, this power might, by human
authority, be attributed to the Roman pontiff, provided all the
faithful consent to it.[102] And, in like manner, I, for my part, deny
not that if all the faithful throughout the world were to concur in
acknowledging the bishop, either of Rome, or of Paris, or of
Magdeburg, as prime and sovereign pontiff, it would be necessary to
acknowledge him as such in deference to this universal consent of the
Church. The thing, however, never has been, and never will be seen.
Even in our own day does not the Greek Church refuse her assent to
Rome?"
[102] _Detur_, inquit, hoc est jure humano, posset fieri,
consentientibus, cæteris omnibus fidelibus. (L. Op. Lat. i, p. 244.)
At this period Luther was quite ready to acknowledge the pope as first
magistrate of the Church, elected by her own free choice; but he
denied that he was of divine institution. At a later period he denied
that subjection was due to him in any respect, and this denial he owed
to the discussion at Leipsic. Eck had come upon ground which he did
not know so thoroughly as Luther. The latter, it is true, could not
maintain his thesis, that the papacy had not been in existence for
more than four centuries. Eck quoted authorities of an earlier date,
and these Luther was unable to obviate, criticism not having yet
attacked the spurious decretals. But the nearer the discussion was
brought to primitive times, the more Luther's strength increased. Eck
appealed to the Fathers. Luther quoted the Fathers in reply, and all
the hearers were struck with his superiority to his rival.
"That my exposition," said he, "is that of St. Jerome, I prove by St.
Jerome's own Epistle to Evagrius, in which he says, 'Every bishop,
whether at Rome, or Eugubium, or Constantinople, or Rhegium, or
Alexandria, or Tanis, has the same merit, and the same priesthood.'[103]
The power of riches, and the humiliation of poverty, constitute the
only precedence or inferiority among bishops."
[103] "Ejusdem meriti et ejusdem sacerdotii est." (L. Op. Lat. i, p.
244.)
From the writings of the Fathers, Luther passed to the decrees of
Councils which regard the bishop of Rome as only a first among
equals.[104]
[104] Primus inter pares.
[Sidenote: PRIMACY OF ST. PETER.]
"We read," says he, "in the decree of the Council of Africa," "The
bishop of the first see must not be called either prince of the the
pontiffs, or sovereign pontiff, or any other similar name, but only
bishop of the first see. Were the supremacy of the bishop of Rome of
divine institution, would not these words be heretical?"
Eck replied by one of those subtile distinctions which were so
familiar to him.
"The bishop of Rome, if you will so have it, is not universal bishop,
but bishop of the universal church."[105]
[105] Non episcopus universalis, sed universalis Ecclesiæ episcopus.
(Ibid. 246.)
_Luther._--"I am quite willing to leave this reply unanswered: let our
hearers judge for themselves."
"Assuredly," said he, afterwards, "the gloss is worthy of a
theologian, and well fitted to satisfy a disputant thirsting for
glory. My expensive sojourn in Leipsic has not been for nothing, since
I have learned that the pope, though not indeed the universal bishop,
is the bishop of the universal church."[106].
[106] Ego glorior me tot expensis non frustra.... (L. Ep. i, 299.)
_Eck._--"Very well, I come to the essential point. The venerable
doctor calls upon me to prove that the primacy of the church of Rome
is of divine institution--I prove it by these words of Christ: '_Thou
art Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church._' St. Augustine,
in one of his epistles, has thus expounded the passage, 'Thou art
Peter, and upon this rock, that is to say, on this Peter, I will build
my Church.' It is true, Augustine has elsewhere said that, by this
rock must be understood Christ himself, but he never retracted his
former exposition."
_Luther._--"If the reverend doctor would attack me, he should first
reconcile these contrary statements of Augustine. It is undeniable
that St. Augustine has again and again said that the rock was Christ,
and he may perhaps have once said that it was Peter himself. But even
should St. Augustine and all the Fathers say that the apostle is the
rock of which Christ speaks, I would combat their view on the
authority of an apostle, in other words, divine authority;[107] for it
is written, '_No other foundation can any man lay than that is laid,
namely, Jesus Christ._'[108] Peter himself calls Christ, '_the chief
and corner stone on which we are built up a spiritual house_.'"[109]
[107] "Resistam eis ego unus, auctoritate apostoli, id est iure
divino." (L. Op. Lat. i, p. 237.)
[108] 1 Cor. iii, 11.
[109] 1 Peter, ii, 4, 5.
_Eck._--"I am astonished at the humility and modesty with which the
reverend doctor undertakes single-handed to combat so many
distinguished Fathers, and to know better than sovereign pontiffs,
councils, doctors, and universities.... It would, certainly, be
astonishing that God should have concealed the truth from so many
saints and martyrs ... and not revealed it until the advent of the
reverend father!"
[Sidenote: ECK'S STRATEGEM. THE HUSSITES.]
_Luther._--"The Fathers are not against me. The distinguished doctors,
St. Augustine, and St. Ambrose, speak as I do. '_Super isto articulo
fidei, fundata est ecclesia_,'[110] says St. Ambrose, when explaining
what must be understood by the rock on which the church is built. Let
my opponent then bridle his tongue. To express himself as he does is
to stir up strife, not to discuss like a true doctor."
[110] On this article of faith the Church is founded. (L. Op. Lat. i,
p. 254.)
Eck had not expected that his opponent would possess so much knowledge
of the subject, and be able to disentangle himself from the labyrinth
in which he tried to bewilder him. "The reverend doctor," said he,
"has entered the lists after carefully studying his subject. Your
highnesses will excuse me for not presenting them with such exact
researches. I came to debate and not to make a book." Eck was
astonished, but not beaten. Having no more arguments to give, he had
recourse to a mean and despicable artifice, which, if it did not
vanquish his opponent, would at least subject him to great
embarrassment. If the charge of being a Bohemian, a heretic, a Hussite
fastens upon Luther, he is vanquished, for the Bohemians were detested
in the Church. The scene of discussion was not far from the frontiers
of Bohemia. Saxony, which, immediately after the condemnation of John
Huss by the Council of Constance, had been subjected to all the
horrors of a long and ruinous war, was proud of the resistance which
she had then given to the Hussites. The university of Leipsic had been
founded to oppose their tenets, and the discussion was in presence of
nobles, princes, and citizens, whose fathers had fallen in that
celebrated struggle. To make out that Luther was at one with Huss was
almost like giving him the finishing blow, and this was the stratagem
to which the doctor of Ingolstadt had recourse. "From primitive times
downwards," says he, "it was acknowledged by all good Christians, that
the Church of Rome holds its primacy of Jesus Christ himself and not
of man. I must confess, however, that the Bohemians, while obstinately
defending their errors, attacked this doctrine. The venerable father
must pardon me if I am an enemy of the Bohemians, because they are the
enemies of the Church, and if the present discussion has reminded me
of these heretics; for, ... according to my weak judgment, ... the
conclusions to which the doctor has come are all in favour of their
errors. It is even affirmed that the Hussites loudly boast of
this."[111]
[111] Et, ut fama est, de hoc plurimum gratulantur. (L. Op. Lat. i, p.
250.)
[Sidenote: LUTHER ON HUSS. SENSATION.]
Eck had calculated well. All his partizans received the insinuation
with acclamation, and an expression of applause was general
throughout the audience. "These slanders," said the Reformer at a
later period, "tickled their fancy much more agreeably than the
discussion itself."
_Luther._--"I love not a schism and I never shall. Since the
Bohemians, of their own authority, separate from our unity, they do
wrong even were divine authority decisive in favour of their doctrine;
for at the head of all divine authority is charity and the unity of
the Spirit."[112]
[112] Nunquam mihi placuit, nec in æternum placebit quodcumque schisma
... Cum supremum jus divinum sit charitas et unitas Spiritus (Ibid.)
It was at the morning sitting, on the 5th July, that Luther thus
expressed himself. Shortly after, the meeting adjourned for dinner.
Luther felt uneasy. Had he not gone too far in thus condemning the
Christians of Bohemia? Have they not maintained the doctrine which
Luther is maintaining at this hour? He sees all the difficulty of the
step before him. Will he declare against the Council which condemned
John Huss, or will he abjure the grand idea of an universal Christian
Church, an idea deeply imprinted on his mind? Resolute Luther
hesitated not. "I must do my duty come what may." Accordingly, when
the assembly again met at two o'clock, he rose and said firmly:--
"Certain of the tenets of John Huss and the Bohemians are perfectly
orthodox. This much is certain. For instance, 'That there is only one
universal church,' and again, 'That it is not necessary to salvation
to believe the Roman Church superior to others.' Whether Wickliffe or
Huss has said so I care not.... It is the truth."
[Sidenote: ECK'S PLEASANTRY.]
This declaration of Luther produced an immense sensation in the
audience. The abhorred names of Huss and Wickliffe pronounced with
eulogium by a monk in the heart of a Catholic assembly!... A general
murmur was heard. Duke George himself felt as much alarmed, as if he
had actually seen the standard of civil war, which had so long
desolated the states of his maternal ancestors, unfurled in Saxony.
Unable to conceal his emotion, he struck his thigh, shook his head,
and exclaimed, loud enough to be heard by the whole assembly, "The man
is mad!"[113] The whole audience was extremely excited. They rose to
their feet, and every one kept talking to his neighbour. Those who had
fallen asleep, awoke. Luther's opponents expressed their exultation,
while his friends were greatly embarrassed. Several persons, who till
then had listened to him with pleasure, began to doubt his orthodoxy.
The impression produced upon the mind of the duke by this declaration
was never effaced; from this moment he looked upon the Reformer with
an unfavourable eye, and became his enemy.[114]
[113] Das walt die Sucht!
[114] Nam adhuc erat Dux Georgius mihi non inimicus, quod sciebam
certo. (L. Op. in Præf.) For I was well assured that Duke George was
not yet my enemy.
Luther was not intimidated by this explosion of disapprobation One of
his leading arguments was, that the Greeks had never recognised the
pope, and yet had never been declared heretics; that the Greek Church
had subsisted, was subsisting, and would subsist without the pope, and
was a Church of Christ as much as the Church of Rome. Eck, on the
contrary, boldly affirmed that the Christian Church and the Roman
Church were one and the same; that the Greeks and Orientals, by
abandoning the Church, had also abandoned Christian faith, and
unquestionably were heretics. "What!" exclaimed Luther, "Are not
Gregory of Nanzianzen, Basil the Great, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, and an
immense number of other Greek bishops in bliss? and yet they did not
believe that the Church of Rome was superior to other churches!... It
is not in the power of the pontiff of Rome to make new articles of
faith. The Christian believer has no other authority than the Holy
Scriptures--they alone constitute _divine law_. I pray the illustrious
doctor to admit that the pontiffs of Rome were men, and have the
goodness not to make gods of them."[115]
[115] Nec potest fidelis Christianus cogi ultra Sacram Scripturam, quæ
est proprie jus divinum. (L. Op. Lat. i, 252.) Nor can a Christian
believer be forced beyond the Sacred Scripture, which is properly
divine law.
Eck had recourse to one of those witticisms which at small cost give a
little air of triumph to the person employing them.
"The reverend father," says he, "not being well versed in the culinary
art, makes an odd mixture of Greek saints and heretics, so that the
perfume of holiness in the one disguises the poison in the
other."[116]
[116] "At Rev. Pater, _artis coquinariæ_ minus instructus, commiscet
sanctos græcos cum schismaticis et hæreticis, ut fuco sanctitatis
Patrum, hæreticorum tueatur perfidiam." (Ibid.) But the Rev. Father,
imperfectly skilled in the culinary art, confounds Greek saints with
schismatics and heretics, that by the sanctity of the Fathers he may
disguise the perfidy of the heretics.
_Luther_--(_hastily interrupting Eck_.)--"The worthy doctor is
impertinent. I do not hold that there is any communion between Christ
and Belial."
[Sidenote: THE COURT FOOL. LUTHER AT MASS.]
Luther had taken a large step in advance. In 1516, and 1517, he had
only attacked the discourses of the venders of indulgences, and had
respected the decrees of the popes. At a later period he had rejected
these decrees, but had appealed from them to a council. Now he had
discarded this last authority also, declaring that no council can
establish a new article of faith, or claim to be infallible. Thus all
human authorities had successively fallen before him. The sand brought
along by the rain and the floods had disappeared; and now, for
building up the ruins of the Lord's house, there remained only the
eternal rock of the Word of God. "Venerable father!" said Eck to him,
"if you believe that a council, lawfully assembled, can err, you are
to me only a heathen man and a publican."
Such were the discussions between the two doctors. The audience were
attentive but occasionally began to flag, and hence were pleased with
any incident which enlivened the scene and gave them a momentary
relaxation. The gravest matters have their comic interludes; and so it
was at Leipsic.
Duke George, according to the custom of the time, had a court fool, to
whom some wags said, "Luther maintains that a court fool may marry.
Eck maintains the contrary." On this the fool took a great dislike to
Eck, and, every time he came into the hall with the servants of Duke
George, eyed the theologian with a menacing air. The chancellor of
Ingolstadt, not disdaining to descend to pleasantry, one day shut one
eye, (the fool was blind of one,) and with the other began to squint
at the poor creature, who, in a perfect rage, let fly a volley of
abuse. "The whole assembly," says Peiffer, "burst into laughter." This
amusing incident somewhat relieved their minds from the stretch on
which they had been kept.[117]
[117] L. Op. (W.) xv, 1440.--2 Löscher, iii, p. 281.
At the same time, both in the town and in the churches scenes occurred
which showed how much the partisans of Rome were horrified at Luther's
bold assertions. An outcry was raised against him, especially in the
convents attached to the pope.
Luther had one day walked into the church of the Dominicans, before
high mass. The only persons present were some monks, saying low mass
at the side altars. No sooner was it told in the cloister that the
heretic Luther was in the church than the monks came down in all
haste, laid hold of the _ostensorium_, and carrying it into the
tabernacle shut it up, carefully watching it, lest the holy sacrament
should be profaned by the heretical eye of the Augustin of Wittemberg.
At the same time, those who were saying mass hastily gathered up their
articles, quitted the altar, ran across the church, and took refuge in
the sacristy, "just," says a historian, "as if the devil had been at
their heels."
[Sidenote: SAYING OF DUKE GEORGE. CLOSE OF THE DISCUSSION.]
The discussion became the general subject of conversation. In the
inns, at the university, and the court, every one gave his opinion.
Duke George, whatever his irritation may have been, did not
obstinately shut his ears against conviction. One day, when Eck and
Luther were dining with him, he interrupted their conversation,
saying, "Let the pope be pope, whether by divine or human law; at all
events he is pope."[118] Luther was much pleased with the expression.
"The prince," says he, "never would have uttered it, if my arguments
had not made some impression on him."
[118] Ita ut ipse Dux Georgius inter prandendum, ad Eccium et me
dicat: "Sive sit jure humano, sive sit jure divino, papa; ipse est
papa." (L. Op. in Præf.)
The discussion on the primacy of the pope had lasted during five days.
On the 8th of July, the doctrine of purgatory was discussed, and
occupied two days. Luther was still a believer in the existence of
purgatory; but he denied that the doctrine, as held by the schoolmen
and his opponent, was taught either in the Scriptures or by the
Fathers. "Our Doctor Eck," said he, referring to the superficial
knowledge of his opponent, "has to-day run over the Holy Scriptures
almost without touching them, just as an insect skims the water."
On the 11th July indulgences were discussed. "It was mere sport and
burlesque," says Luther. "Indulgences gave way at once, and Eck was
almost entirely of my opinion."[119] Eck himself said, "Had I not
disputed with Doctor Martin on the primacy of the pope, I could almost
agree with him."[120]
[119] L. Op. (L.) xvii, 246.
[120] So wollt'er fast einig mit mir gewest seyn. (Ibid.)
The discussion afterwards turned on repentance, absolution by the
priest, and satisfactions. Eck, as usual, quoted the schoolmen, the
dominicans, and the canons of the pope. Luther closed the discussion
with these words:--
"The reverend doctor flees before the Holy Scriptures, as the devil
does before the cross. For my part, with all due deference to the
Fathers, I prefer the authority of Scripture, and recommend it to our
judges."[121]
[121] Videtur fugere a facie Scripturarum, sicut diabolus crucem.
Quare, salvis reverentiis Patrum, præfero ego auctoritatem Scripturæ,
quod commendo judicibus futuris. (L. Op. Lat. i, p. 291.)
This closed the debate between Eck and Luther, but Carlstadt and the
doctor of Ingolstadt continued for two days longer to discuss the
subject of human merit and good works. On the 16th July, the whole
proceeding, after having lasted twenty days, was closed by a discourse
from the rector of Leipsic. The moment the discourse was finished,
thrilling music burst forth, and the whole concluded with the _Te
Deum_.
But, during this solemn chant, the feelings of the audience no longer
were what they had been during the _Veni Spiritus_. The presentiments
which several persons had expressed seemed to be actually realised.
The blows struck by the champions of the two systems had made a large
wound in the papacy.