The difference between Savonarola and Luther was that the Saxon

reformer attacked the root of the corruption; not merely outward

and tangible and patent sins which everybody knew, but also and

more earnestly the special principles of theology and morals which

sustained them, and which logically pushed out would necessarily

have produced them. For instance, he not merely attacked

indulgences, then a crying evil, as peddled by Tetzel and others

like him, for collecting money to support the temporal power of the

popes or build St. Peter's church; but he would show that penance,

on which indulgences are based, is antagonistic to the doctrine

which Paul so forcibly expounded respecting the forgiveness of sins

and the grounds of justification. And Luther saw that all the

evils which good men lamented would continue so long as the false

principles from which they logically sprung were the creed of the

Church. So he directed his giant energies to reform doctrines

rather than morals. His great idea of justification could be

defended only by an appeal to the Scriptures, not to the authority

of councils and learned men. So he made the Scriptures the sole

source of theological doctrine. Savonarola also accepted the

Scriptures, but Luther would put them in the hands of everybody, of

peasants even,--and thus instituted private judgment, which is the

basal pillar of Protestantism. The Catholic theologians never

recognized this right in the sense that Luther understood it, and

to which he was pushed by inexorable logic. The Church was to

remain the interpreter of the doctrinal and disputed points of the

Scriptures.

Savonarola was a churchman. He was not a fearless theological

doctor, going wherever logic and the Bible carried him. Hence, he

did not stimulate thought and inquiry as Luther did, nor inaugurate

a great revolutionary movement, which would gradually undermine

papal authority and many institutions which the Catholic Church

indorsed. Had he been a great genius, with his progressive

proclivities, he might have headed a rebellion against papal

authority, which upheld doctrines that logically supported the very

evils he denounced. But he was contented to lop off branches; he

did not dig up the roots. Luther went to the roots, as Calvin did;

as Saint Augustine would have done had there been a necessity in

his day, for the theology of Saint Augustine and Calvin is

essentially the same. It was from Saint Augustine that Calvin drew

his inspiration next after Saint Paul. But Savonarola cared very

little for the discussion of doctrines; he probably hated all

theological speculations, all metaphysical divinity. Yet there is

a closer resemblance between doctrines and morals than most people

are aware of. As a man thinketh, so is he. Hence, the reforms of

Savonarola were temporary, and were not widely extended; for he did

not kindle the intelligence of the age, as did Luther and those

associated with him. There can be no great and listing reform

without an appeal to reason, without the assistance of logic,

without conviction. The house that had been swept and garnished

was re-entered by devils, and the last state was worse than the

first. To have effected a radical and lasting reform, Savonarola

should have gone deeper. He should have exposed the foundations on

which the superstructure of sin was built; he should have

undermined them, and appealed to the reason of the world. He did

no such thing. He simply rebuked the evils, which must needs be,

so long as the root of them is left untouched. And so long as his

influence remained, so long as his voice was listened to, he was

mighty in the reforms at which he aimed,--a reformation of the

morals of those to whom he preached. But when his voice was

hushed, the evils he detested returned, since he had not created

those convictions which bind men together in association;

he had not fanned that spirit of inquiry which is hostile to

ecclesiastical despotism, and which, logically projected, would

subvert the papal throne. The reformation of Luther was a grand

protest against spiritual tyranny. It not only aimed at a purer

life, but it opposed the bondage of the Middle Ages, and all the

superstitious and puerilities and fables which were born and

nurtured in that dark and gloomy period and to which the clergy

clung as a means of power or wealth. Luther called out the

intellect of Germany, exalted liberty of conscience, and appealed

to the dignity of reason. He showed the necessity of learning, in

order to unravel and explain the truths of revelation. He made

piety more exalted by giving it an intelligent stimulus. He looked

to the future rather than the past. He would make use, in his

interpretation of the Bible, of all that literature, science, and

art could contribute. Hence his writings had a wider influence

than could be produced by the fascination of personal eloquence, on

which Savonarola relied, but which Luther made only accessory.

Again, the sermons of the Florentine reformer do not impress us as

they did those to whom they were addressed. They are not logical,

nor doctrinal, nor learned,--not rich in thought, like the sermons

of those divines whom the Reformation produced. They are vehement

denunciations of sin; are eloquent appeals to the heart, to

religious fears and hopes. He would indeed create faith in the

world, not by the dissertations of Paul, but by the agonies of the

dying Christ. He does not instruct; he does not reason. He is

dogmatic and practical. He is too earnest to be metaphysical, or

even theological. He takes it for granted that his hearers know

all the truths necessary for salvation. He enforces the truths

with which they are familiar, not those to be developed by reason

and learning. He appeals, he urges, he threatens; he even

prophesies; he dwells on divine wrath and judgment. He is an

Isaiah foretelling what will happen, rather than a Peter at the Day

of Pentecost.

Savonarola was transcendent in his oratorical gifts, the like of

which has never before nor since been witnessed in Italy. He was a

born orator; as vehement as Demosthenes, as passionate as

Chrysostom, as electrical as Bernard. Nothing could withstand him;

he was a torrent that bore everything before him. His voice was

musical, his attitude commanding, his gestures superb. He was all

alive with his subject. He was terribly in earnest, as if he

believed everything he said, and that what he said were most

momentous truths. He fastened his burning eyes upon his hearers,

who listened with breathless attention, and inspired them with his

sentiments; he made them feel that they were in the very jaws of

destruction, and that there was no hope but in immediate

repentance. His whole frame quivered with emotion, and he sat down

utterly exhausted. His language was intense, not clothing new

thoughts, but riveting old ideas,--the ideas of the Middle Ages;

the fear of hell, the judgments of Almighty God. Who could resist

such fiery earnestness, such a convulsed frame, such quivering

tones, such burning eyes, such dreadful threatenings, such awful

appeals? He was not artistic in the use of words and phrases like

Bourdaloue, but he reached the conscience and the heart like

Whitefield. He never sought to amuse; he would not stoop to any

trifling. He told no stories; he made no witticisms; he used no

tricks. He fell back on truths, no matter whether his hearers

relished them or not; no matter whether they were amused or not.

He was the messenger of God urging men to flee as for their lives,

like Lot when he escaped from Sodom.

Savonarola's manner was as effective as his matter. He was a kind

of Peter the Hermit, preaching a crusade, arousing emotions and

passions, and making everybody feel as he felt. It was life more

than thought which marked his eloquence,--his voice as well as his

ideas, his wonderful electricity, which every preacher must have,

or he preaches to stones. It was himself, even more than his

truths, which made people listen, admire, and quake. All real

orators impress themselves--their own individuality--on their

auditors. They are not actors, who represent other people, and

whom we admire in proportion to their artistic skill in producing

deception. These artists excite admiration, make us forget where

we are and what we are, but kindle no permanent emotions, and teach

no abiding lessons. The eloquent preacher of momentous truths and

interests makes us realize them, in proportion as he feels them

himself. They would fall dead upon us, if ever so grand, unless

intensified by passion, fervor, sincerity, earnestness. Even a

voice has power, when electrical, musical, impassioned, although it

may utter platitudes. But when the impassioned voice rings with

trumpet notes through a vast audience, appealing to what is dearest

to the human soul, lifting the mind to the contemplation of the

sublimest truths and most momentous interests, then there is REAL

eloquence, such as is never heard in the theatre, interested as

spectators may be in the triumphs of dramatic art.

But I have dwelt too long on the characteristics of that eloquence

which produced such a great effect on the people of Florence in the

latter part of the fifteenth century. That ardent, intense, and

lofty monk, world-deep like Dante, not world-wide like Shakspeare,

who filled the cathedral church with eager listeners, was not

destined to uninterrupted triumphs. His career was short; he could

not even retain his influence. As the English people wearied of

the yoke of a Puritan Protector, and hankered for their old

pleasures, so the Florentines remembered the sports and spectacles

and fetes of the old Medicean rule. Savonarola had arrayed against

himself the enemies of popular liberty, the patrons of demoralizing

excitements, the partisans of the banished Medici, and even the

friends and counsellors of the Pope. The dreadful denunciation of

sin in high places was as offensive to the Pope as the exposure of

a tyrannical usurpation was to the family of the old lords of

Florence; and his enemies took counsel together, and schemed for

his overthrow. If the irritating questions and mockeries of

Socrates could not be endured at Athens, how could the bitter

invectives and denunciations of Savonarola find favor at Florence?

The fate of prophets is to be stoned. Martyrdom and persecution,

in some form or other, are as inevitable to the man who sails

against the stream, as a broken constitution and a diseased body

are to a sensualist, a glutton, or a drunkard. Impatience under

rebuke is as certain as the operation of natural law.

The bitterest and most powerful enemy of the Prior of St. Mark was

the Pope himself,--Alexander VI., of the infamous family of the

Borgias,--since his private vices were exposed, and by one whose

order had been especially devoted to the papal empire. In the eyes

of the wicked Pope, the Florentine reformer was a traitor and

conspirator, disloyal and dangerous. At first he wished to silence

him by soft and deceitful letters and tempting bribes, offering to

him a cardinal's hat, and inviting him to Rome. But Savonarola

refused alike the bribe and the invitation. His Lenten sermons

became more violent and daring. "If I have preached and written

anything heretical," said this intrepid monk, "I am willing to make

a public recantation. I have always shown obedience to my church;

but it is my duty to obey God rather than man." This sounds like

Luther at the Diet of Worms; but he was more defenceless than

Luther, since the Saxon reformer was protected by powerful princes,

and was backed by the enthusiasm of Northern Germans. Yet the

Florentine preacher boldly continued his attacks on all

hypocritical religion, and on the vices of Rome, not as incidental

to the system, but extraneous,--the faults of a man or age. The

Pope became furious, to be thus balked by a Dominican monk, and in

one of the cities of Italy,--a city that had not rebelled against

his authority. He complained bitterly to the Florentine

ambassador, of the haughty friar who rebuked and defied him. He

summoned a consistory of fourteen eminent Dominican theologians, to

inquire into his conduct and opinions, and issued a brief

forbidding him to preach, under penalty of excommunication. Yet

Savonarola continued to preach, and more violently than ever. He

renewed his charges against Rome. He even called her a harlot

Church, against whom heaven and earth, angels and devils, equally

brought charges. The Pope then seized the old thunderbolts of the

Gregories and the Clements, and excommunicated the daring monk and

preacher, and threatened the like punishment on all who should

befriend him. And yet Savonarola continued to preach. All Rome

and Italy talked of the audacity of the man. And it was not until

Florence itself was threatened with an interdict for shielding such

a man, that the magistrates of the city were compelled to forbid

his preaching.

The great orator mounted his pulpit March 18, 1498, now four

hundred years ago, and took an affectionate farewell of the people

whom he had led, and appealed to Christ himself as the head of the

Church. It was not till the preacher was silenced by the

magistrates of his own city, that he seems to have rebelled against

the papal authority; and then not so much against the authority of

Rome as against the wicked shepherd himself, who had usurped the

fold. He now writes letters to all the prominent kings and princes

of Europe, to assemble a general council; for the general council

of Constance had passed a resolution that the Pope must call a

general council every ten years, and that, should he neglect to

assemble it, the sovereign powers of the various states and empires

were themselves empowered to collect the scattered members of the

universal Church, to deliberate on its affairs. In his letters to

the kings of France, England, Spain, and Hungary, and the Emperor

of Germany, he denounced the Pope as simoniacal, as guilty of all

the vices, as a disgrace to the station which he held. These

letters seem to have been directed against the man, not against the

system. He aimed at the Pope's ejectment from office, rather than

at the subversion of the office itself,--another mark of the

difference between Savonarola and Luther, since the latter waged an

uncompromising war against Rome herself, against the whole regime

and government and institutions and dogmas of the Catholic Church;

and that is the reason why Catholics hate Luther so bitterly, and

deny to him either virtues or graces, and represent even his

deathbed, as a scene of torment and despair,--an instance of that

pursuing hatred which goes beyond the grave; like that of the

zealots of the Revolution in France, who dug up the bones of the

ancient kings from those vaults where they had reposed for

centuries, and scattered their ashes to the winds.

Savonarola hoped the Christian world would come to his rescue; but

his letters were intercepted, and reached the eye of Alexander VI.,

who now bent the whole force of the papal empire to destroy that

bold reformer who had assailed his throne. And it seems that a

change took place in Florence itself in popular sentiment. The

Medicean party obtained the ascendency in the government. The

people--the fickle people--began to desert Savonarola; and

especially when he refused to undergo the ordeal of fire,--one of

the relics of Mediaeval superstition,--the people felt that they

had been cheated out of their amusement, for they had waited

impatiently the whole day in the public square to see the

spectacle. He finally consented to undergo the ordeal, provided he

might carry the crucifix. To this his enemies would not consent.

He then laid aside the crucifix, but insisted on entering the fire

with the sacrament in his hand. His persecutors would not allow

this either, and the ordeal did not take place.

At last his martyrdom approaches: he is led to prison. The

magistrates of the city send to Rome for absolution for having

allowed the Prior to preach. His enemies busy themselves in

collecting evidence against him,--for what I know not, except that

he had denounced corruption and sin, and had predicted woe. His

two friends are imprisoned and interrogated with him, Fra Domenico

da Pescia and Fra Silvestro Maruffi, who are willing to die for

him. He and they are now subjected to most cruel tortures. As the

result of bodily agony his mind begins to waver. His answers are

incoherent; he implores his tormentors to end his agonies; he cries

out, with a voice enough to melt a heart of stone, "Take, oh, take

my life!" Yet he confessed nothing to criminate himself. What

they wished him especially to confess was that he had pretended to

be a prophet, since he had predicted calamities. But all men are

prophets, in one sense, when they declare the certain penalties of

sin, from which no one can escape, though he take the wings of the

morning and fly to the uttermost parts of the sea.

Savonarola thus far had remained firm, but renewed examinations and

fresh tortures took place. For a whole month his torments were

continuous. In one day he was drawn up by a rope fourteen times,

and then suddenly dropped, until all his muscles quivered with

anguish. Had he been surrounded by loving disciples, like Latimer

at the burning pile, he might have summoned more strength; but

alone, in a dark inquisitorial prison, subjected to increasing

torture among bitter foes, he did not fully defend his visions and

prophecies; and then his extorted confessions were diabolically

altered. But that was all they could get out of him,--that he had

prophesied. In all matters of faith he was sound. The inquisitors

were obliged to bring their examination to an end. They could find

no fault with him, and yet they were determined on his death. The

Government of Florence consented to it and hastened it, for a

Medici again held the highest office of the State.

Nothing remained to the imprisoned and tortured friar but to

prepare for his execution. In his supreme trial he turned to the

God in whom he believed. In the words of the dying Xavier, on the

Island of Sancian, he exclaimed, In te domine speravi, non

confundar in eternum. "O Lord," he prays, "a thousand times hast

thou wiped out my iniquity. I do not rely on my own justification,

but on thy mercy." His few remaining days in prison were passed in

holy meditation.

At last the officers of the papal commission arrive. The tortures

are renewed, and also the examinations, with the same result. No

fault could be found with his doctrines. "But a dead enemy," said

they, "fights no more." He is condemned to execution. The

messengers of death arrive at his cell, and find him on his knees.

He is overpowered by his sufferings and vigils, and can with

difficulty be kept from sleep. But he arouses himself, and passes

the night in prayer, and administers the elements of redemption to

his doomed companions, and closes with this prayer: "Lord, I know

thou art that perfect Trinity,--Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; I know

that thou art the eternal Word; that thou didst descend from heaven

into the bosom of Mary; that thou didst ascend upon the cross to

shed thy blood for our sins. I pray thee that by that blood I may

have remission for my sins." The simple faith of Paul, of

Augustine, of Pascal! He then partook of the communion, and

descended to the public square, while the crowd gazed silently and

with trepidation, and was led with his companions to the first

tribunal, where he was disrobed of his ecclesiastical dress. Then

they were led to another tribunal, and delivered to the secular

arm; then to another, where sentence of death was read; and then to

the place of execution,--not a burning funeral pyre, but a

scaffold, which mounting, composed, calm, absorbed, Savonarola

submitted his neck to the hangman, in the forty-fifth year of his

life: a martyr to the cause of Christ, not for an attack on the

Church, or its doctrines, or its institutions, but for having

denounced the corruption and vices of those who ruled it,--for

having preached against sin.

Thus died one of the greatest and best men of his age, one of the

truest and purest whom the Catholic Church has produced in any age.

He was stern, uncompromising, austere, but a reformer and a saint;

a man who was merciful and generous in the possession of power; an

enlightened statesman, a sound theologian, and a fearless preacher

of that righteousness which exalteth a nation. He had no vices, no

striking defects. He lived according to the rules of the convent

he governed with the same wisdom that he governed a city, and he

died in the faith of the primitive apostles. His piety was

monastic, but his spirit was progressive, sympathizing with

liberty, advocating public morality. He was unselfish,

disinterested, and true to his Church, his conscience, and his

cause,--a noble specimen both of a man and Christian, whose deeds

and example form part of the inheritance of an admiring posterity.

We pity his closing days, after such a career of power and

influence; but we may as well compassionate Socrates or Paul. The

greatest lights of the world have gone out in martyrdom, to be

extinguished, however, only for a time, and then to loom up again

in another age, and burn with inextinguishable brightness to

remotest generations; as examples of the power of faith and truth

in this wicked and rebellious world,--a world to be finally

redeemed by the labors and religion of just such men, whose days

are days of sadness, protest, and suffering, and whose hours of

triumph and exaltation are not like those of conquerors, nor like

those whose eyes stand out with fatness, but few and far between.

"I have loved righteousness, I have hated iniquity," said the great

champion of the Mediaeval Church, "and therefore I die in exile."

In ten years after this ignominious execution, Raphael painted the

martyr among the sainted doctors of the Church in the halls of the

Vatican, and future popes did justice to his memory, for he

inaugurated that reform movement in the Catholic Church itself

which took place within fifty years after his death. In one sense

he was the precursor of Loyola, of Xavier, and of Aquaviva,--those

illustrious men who headed the counter-reformation; Jesuits indeed,

but ardent in piety, and enlightened by the spirit of a progressive

age. "He was the first," says Villari, "in the fifteenth century,

to make men feel that a new light had awakened the human race; and

thus he was a prophet of a new civilization,--the forerunner of

Luther, of Bacon, of Descartes. Hence the drama of his life

became, after his death, the drama of Europe. In the course of a

single generation after Luther had declared his mission, the spirit

of the Church of Rome underwent a change. From the halls of the

Vatican to the secluded hermitages of the Apennines this revival

was felt. Instead of a Borgia there reigned a Caraffa." And it is

remarkable that from the day that the counter-reformation in the

Catholic Church was headed by the early Jesuits, Protestantism

gained no new victories, and in two centuries so far declined in

piety and zeal that the cities which witnessed the noblest triumphs

of Luther and Calvin were disgraced by a boasting rationalism, to

be succeeded again in our times by an arrogance of scepticism which

has had no parallel since the days of Democritus and Lucretius.

"It was the desire of Savonarola that reason, religion, and liberty

might meet in harmonious union, but he did not think a new system

of religious doctrines was necessary."

Beacon Lights of History, Volume 3 part 2: Renaissance and Reformation · 第 8 / 24 段