‘CESAROPAPIE.’
(1528-1546.)
In pursuance of the resolutions of Westeraas, the Reformation had been
introduced in every part of the kingdom. But there was a large number of
Swedes who still closed their eyes to the light which had arisen upon
their native land. Many of the priests who retained their posts retained
with them the Romish dogmas; and, taking their stand between their
parishioners and the Gospel, persuaded them that any change in the
services of the church was an apostasy from Christianity. The kingdom
thus presented the spectacle of a grotesque medley of evangelical
doctrines and Romish rites. Exorcism was practised in connection with
baptism, and when the dead were buried, prayers were made for their
deliverance out of purgatory. The king, therefore, determined to convoke
a synod, which should be authorized to complete the work of reformation,
to abolish the superstitious services of Rome, to set aside the Pope,
and to establish the Holy Scriptures as the sole authority in matters of
religion.[459]
[Sidenote: The Synod At Orebro.]
The assembly met at the beginning of January, 1529, at Orebro, the
birthplace of Olaf and his brother, near the street in which their
father used to work at the forge. The bishops of Strengnaes, Westeraas,
and Skara, and ecclesiastics from every diocese of Sweden came to the
meeting. The archdeacon and chancellor, Lawrence Anderson, was the
king’s delegate, and presided on the occasion. Olaf sat beside him as
his counsellor. Gustavus had consulted his two representatives as to the
manner in which the assembly ought to be conducted. Olaf’s keen
intellect, his presence of mind, and the ease with which he could fathom
deep subjects and give a luminous exposition of them, qualified him well
for such an office. But the very liveliness with which he had grasped
the truth, the importance which he attached to a sincere reform, and his
frequent intercourse with Luther, did not render him tolerant towards
error. He could not endure contradiction. The king had good reason to
fear that Olaf did not altogether share his views. In fact, Gustavus
looked upon matters of religion from a political point of view. He was
afraid of every thing which might possibly occasion disputes and schism;
and if he was severe towards the guilty, he was merciful to the simple
and the weak, and he did not wish to have these estranged or possibly
driven to revolt by an abrupt alteration of the old ecclesiastical
rites. He had therefore come to an understanding with his two delegates;
and Olaf, remembering the Scripture saying, _We then that are strong
ought to bear the infirmities of the weak_,[460] had entered, partly at
least, into the views of the prince. The chancellor, who was a
politician as well as a religious man, had done so much more fully.
These two reformers were, however, determined to do a really evangelical
work, and they resolved, therefore, to lay a solid foundation. At the
moment of their rejection of the Chair of St. Peter, from which strange
dogmas were promulgated by a man, they set up another, the throne of
God, from which a heavenly word proceeded. Luther had said that we must
look upon the Scriptures _as God Himself speaking_.[461] While
recognizing the secondary author who imprints on each book the
characteristics of his own individuality, Olaf also recognized above all
the primary author, the Holy Spirit, who stamps on the whole of the
Scriptures the impress of His own infallibility. The main point in his
view was that the divine element, the constitutive principle of the
Bible, should be acknowledged by all Christians, so that they might be
truly _taught of God_. He attained his object. All the members of the
assembly made the following solemn declaration: ‘We acknowledge that it
is our duty to preach the pure Word of God, and to strive with all our
powers _that the will of God revealed in His Word may be made plain to
our hearers_.[462] We promise to see to it that in future this object is
attained by means of preaching established in the churches both in towns
and in country places.’ It was resolved that Holy Scripture should be
daily read and explained in the churches, at which not only the
students, but also the young country pastors should be present. Readings
of a similar kind were to be given in the schools. Every student was to
be provided with a Bible, or at least with a New Testament.
Well-informed ministers were to be settled in the towns, and the pastors
of the rural districts should be bound to attend their discourses, to
the end that they might increase in the understanding of the Divine
Word. The pastors of the towns were also required to go into the
villages, and there faithfully preach the Word of God. It was stipulated
that, if the more learned ministers should find any thing to censure in
the sermons of those less enlightened, to avoid scandals they should not
point out the faults in their public discourses, but should modestly and
privately represent them to their colleagues.[463] The assembly agreed
in acknowledging that the numerous saints’ days were a cause of disorder
and prevented necessary labor. The festivals were therefore reduced to a
smaller number. It was added, ‘that simple folk must be distinctly
taught that even the keeping of Christ’s passion and resurrection has no
other object but to impress on the memory the work of Christ who died
for us and rose again.’[464]
It has been said that ‘the doctors who composed this council
acknowledged as their rule of faith the Confession of Augsburg.’[465]
This is not correct; for that Confession did not appear till ten months
later (June, 1530). We may imagine that Olaf of his own accord would
have presented a similar confession, or one even more decided. This was
not done, either because the doctrines established by Olaf at Upsala, in
1526, were looked upon as accepted, or because Gustavus was afraid that
such a confession would give rise to dissension, which he so much
dreaded. Little was gained by this course; for the struggles which they
hoped to avoid began afterwards and disturbed Sweden for five-and-twenty
years.
[Sidenote: Ecclesiastical Rites.]
At length they came to the subject of ecclesiastical rites. Anderson and
Olaf would have preferred to suppress those to which superstitious
notions were attached. But most of the members of the synod thought that
to abolish them would be to suppress the religion of their forefathers.
Anderson and Olaf got over the difficulty. They determined to maintain
such of the ceremonies as had not a meaning contrary to the Word of God,
at the same time giving an explanation of them. ‘We consent to your
keeping _holy water_ (_eau lustrale_),’ they said, ‘but it must be
plainly understood that it does not wash away our sins, which the blood
of Christ alone does,[466] and that it simply reminds of baptism. You
wish to keep the _images_, and we will not oppose this; but you must
state distinctly that they are not there to be worshipped, but to remind
of Christ or of the holy men who have obeyed Him, and of the necessity
of imitating their piety and their life. The outward _unction_ of the
_chrism_ denotes that the inward unction of the Holy Ghost is necessary
for the faithful. _Fasting_ is kept up that the faithful soul may
renounce that which gratifies the flesh, and render to God a living
worship in the spirit. _Festivals_ likewise are not a kind of special
service. They only instruct us that we ought to set apart the time
necessary for hearing and reading the Word of God, and for enabling
workmen wearied with their toil to taste some repose.’
These concessions were made from a good motive; but were they prudent?
The Romish mind, especially when uncultivated, easily lets go the
spiritual signification and keeps only the superstitious notions which
are attached to the sign. It would have been better to abolish every
thing that was of Romish invention and without foundation in Scripture.
This was seen at a later period.
[Sidenote: Obstacles To Reformation.]
On Quinquagesima Sunday, February 7, 1529, the ecclesiastics present
signed this ‘Form of Reformation.’ The articles received the royal
sanction, and henceforth the Reformation was virtually established in
the kingdom; but it was not universal. In some districts opposition was
strong. Two evangelical ministers having been sent to preach and teach
in the cathedral church of Skara, no sooner had one of them entered the
pulpit than the people rose up and drove them away. The second having
established himself in the school, while preparing to expound the Gospel
according to St. Matthew, was assailed with stones and obliged to
abandon the place. These weapons, although not very spiritual, produced
some effect. Similar occurrences were taking place in the provinces of
Smäland and West Gothland. Even in those places where evangelical
ministers were received or reforms effected, murmuring and grief were
frequently found amongst the women. Mothers were in a state of sharp
distress about the salvation of their children. As the ministers had not
exorcised them, the mothers believed that they had not been properly
baptized and really regenerated; and they wept as they gazed upon the
little creatures in their cradles. Other women could not be comforted
because prayer for the dead had been abolished. If they lost any beloved
one they suffered cruel anxiety and sighed to think of him day and night
as still in the fires of purgatory. So easy it is to plant in the human
heart a superstition which is not easily to be eradicated.[467]
But if there was discontent on one side, there was just as much on the
other. Olaf, in spite of his peremptory disposition, had made large
concessions, either in pursuance of the king’s orders, or because,
knowing the character of his people, he considered (as every one,
moreover, asserted) that if the Reformation suddenly appeared in its
purity and brightness it would terrify the timid, while if its progress
were comparatively slow, men would become accustomed to it and scandals
would be avoided. On returning to Stockholm, he found that serious
discontent prevailed, not at the court, but in the town. The most
decided of the evangelicals, especially the Germans, gave him a very
unfriendly reception. They reminded him angrily of his concessions. ‘You
have been unfaithful to the Gospel. You have behaved like a coward.’
‘Take care,’ replied Olaf, ‘lest by your sayings you stir up the people
to revolt. Here in our country we must deal gently with people and our
advance must be slow.’[468] He did not, however, remain inactive, but
strove to dispel the darkness which he had felt bound to tolerate. He
composed for the use of ministers a manual of worship,[469] from which
he excluded such of the Romish rites as appeared to him useless or
injurious. He published afterwards other works, particularly on the
Lord’s Supper and on justification by faith. ‘It is altogether the grace
of God which justifies us,’ he said. ‘The Son of God, manifested in the
flesh, has taken away from us, who were undone by sin, infinite wrath
which hung over us, and has procured by His merits infinite grace for
all those who believe. The elect in Christ are children of God by reason
of the redemption of Him who was willing to become our brother.‘[470]
But the king himself intervened in the dispute. He wrote to his servants
not to display overmuch zeal. ‘Little improvement is to be hoped for,’
he said, ‘so long as the people are no better informed.’ Acting in
harmony with his convictions, he undertook the restoration of the
schools, which were in a very bad condition. To Olaf he gave the
superintendence of those at Stockholm, and as the rector was dead he
entrusted the seals to him. He urged him to attend above all to the
training of good masters. Olaf applied himself to this work with heart
and soul, and drew up a plan of studies which was approved by the king.
He taught personally, and succeeded in engaging the interest of his
young hearers in so pleasant a manner that they heartily loved him. He
presented the most conscientious and diligent pupils to the king, who
provided for the continuation of their studies. He did not allow them to
leave the gymnasium for the university until they were well grounded in
all branches of knowledge, and especially in the knowledge of
religion.[471]
[Sidenote: Progress.]
The principles of the Reformation were thus gaining ground, and the
transformation of the Church became more visible. There were
conversions, some gradual, and others more sudden. The prior, Nicholas
Anderson, having become acquainted with evangelical truth, at once left
the monastery of Westeraas,[472] and became dean of the church of the
same place. The monks of Arboga also went out of their convent and
became pastors in the country. They changed not only their dress, but
their morals and way of living.[473] Some shadows gray and dark were
undoubtedly still to be seen; but we must acknowledge the life where it
really exists. The inhabitants turned the convent into a Gospel church.
In many places were seen ex-priests or monks devoting themselves
joyfully to the ministry of the Word of God, ‘purified,’ they said,
‘from papistical pollutions,’ _a sordibus papisticis repurgatum_. The
reading of the New Testament, biblical expositions, and the prayers of
the reformer, overcame obstacles which had appeared to be
insurmountable. The Finlanders themselves, perceiving that ‘the truth
was so vigorously springing up,’ opened their hearts to it.
Lawrence Petersen, Olaf’s brother, professor of theology at Upsala, was
a man of grave and gentle character. Conscience ruled in both the
brothers. To Olaf she gave courage to prefer her behests to the opinion
of those whom he most highly esteemed; while Lawrence obeyed her secret
voice, especially in the discharge of his daily duties. He fulfilled his
functions with great punctuality. The charity which breathed in all his
actions and all his words won the hearts of men. He made his students
acquainted with the Bible; he taught them to preach in conformity with
Scripture, and not after the traditions of men. But notwithstanding the
rare nobleness and candor of his character, the enemies of the Gospel
hated him. Gustavus who, in 1527, had given him a proof of his
satisfaction by naming him perpetual rector of the university, was now
about to confer on him a still higher dignity.
[Sidenote: Lawrence Petersen.]
Archbishop Magnus had vacated his archiepiscopal see; it was therefore
necessary to fill it up. The king consequently called together at
Stockholm, on St. John’s Day, 1531, a large number of ecclesiastics. The
chancellor Anderson requested the assembly to take into its
consideration the choice of a new archbishop, imposing at the same time
the condition that he should be a man thoroughly established in
evangelical doctrine. The assembly pointed out three candidates—Sommer,
bishop of Strengnaes; Doctor Johan, dean of Upsala; and Lawrence
Petersen. It then proceeded with the definitive election, and on the
suggestion, as it seems, of Gustavus, Lawrence obtained one hundred and
fifty votes, and was therefore elected. The king testified his complete
satisfaction with the result. The question might be asked, how was it
that their choice did not fall on Olaf, who was the principal reformer?
The assembly, doubtless, was unwilling to remove him from the capital.
Lawrence’s long residence at Upsala qualified him for this high dignity;
and perhaps the Scripture saying, ‘A bishop must be temperate,’ caused
the preference to be given to his brother. The king handed to Lawrence a
costly episcopal crosier, saying to him, ‘Be a faithful shepherd of your
flock.’ The old proverb, ‘Wooden crosier, golden bishop; golden crosier,
wooden bishop,’ was not to be applicable in this case.
The new archbishop was about to exercise, ere long, important functions.
The king, desirous of founding a dynasty, had sought the hand of
Catherine, daughter of the duke of Saxe-Lauenburg. Lawrence married the
royal couple, and placed on the head of the wife the crown of Sweden. He
did this with a dignity and a grace befitting the solemnity. At table
the archbishop was called to take the place of honor which belonged to
him. While at court, he was respectfully treated by the king; but the
canons of Upsala, who were also present at the feast, and who, as
passionate adherents of the pope, had been bitterly grieved to see an
evangelical archbishop elected, were provoked at the honors which were
paid him. They called their new head a heretic, treated him as an enemy,
and seized every opportunity of showing their contempt for him. The son
of an iron-master of Orebro to hold the highest place next to the king
in Sweden! They ought to have remembered that many of the popes had been
of still lower origin. The king was going to do a deed which would make
their annoyance sharper still. In the household of Gustavus was a noble
damsel, whose grandmother was a Vasa. When the marriage feast was over,
the king and the queen rose, all the company did the same, and Gustavus
then, in the presence of his whole court, betrothed the archbishop to
his kinswoman. Never could a greater honor be conferred on the primate
of Sweden.[474]
The canons of Upsala, far from being pacified, were still more inflamed
with anger and hatred. They saw that the power of the pope in Sweden was
at an end; and fancying that if they ruined the archbishop they should
ruin the Reformation, they assailed him with their blows. They accused
him of horrible crimes; they stirred up the people against him; and they
formed the most frightful conspiracies. Fears were entertained for his
life; a fanatic’s dagger might any day make an end of him. The king
therefore assigned him a guard of fifty men to protect him from
assassins. He did more than this; he removed the canons who had never
been any thing but idle clerks, and had displayed a temper so
intractable; and he put in their place learned and laborious men who
were devoted to the Gospel.[475]
The evangelical archbishop was not the only man in Sweden whose life was
threatened; the king was threatened also. The Hanse towns, with Lübeck
at their head, desirous of regaining the influence which they had so
long held in the North, allied themselves for this purpose with Denmark,
and opened a correspondence with the Germans who were very numerous at
Stockholm. The powerful Hanseatic fleet was thus to find in the very
capital of its enemies trusty agents who pledged themselves to deliver
up to it the town. But the scheme was detected; and Gustavus, who never
hesitated when the business was to strike those who intended to strike
himself, ordered the Germans and the Swedes who had taken part in the
treacherous designs of the Hanseatics to be put to death. These events
created great excitement throughout Sweden, especially at Stockholm. It
was given out that the Germans had intended to bring gunpowder into the
church and place it under the king’s seat, and then explode it during
divine service. It was a _Gunpowder Plot_; but in this case the king was
to be attacked, not while discharging his political functions, but at
the moment when he was offering to God the worship in spirit and in
truth which the Gospel requires. This story, however, might be nothing
more than one of those reports which circulate among the public, without
any other foundation than the general blind excitement which gives birth
to the wildest rumors. These events occurred in the year 1536.[476]
[Sidenote: Infringement Of Religious Freedom.]
Gustavus, having escaped the dangers with which his enemies threatened
him, went forward in his work with a firmer step. Endowed with a
peremptory and energetic character, he even took some steps of too bold
a kind, and seemed to aim at commanding the Church as he would an army.
Olaf and the other reformers began to perceive that the king was
assuming an authority in matters of religion which infringed on
Christian freedom. After the Diet of Westeraas, he had not only taken
their castles from the prelates, which was a quite legitimate measure,
but he had further taken the Church with the castles, and had
confiscated the ecclesiastical foundations for the benefit of the crown;
while the reformers had hoped to see their revenues applied to the
establishment of schools and other useful institutions. Evangelical
Christians were asking one another whether they had cast off the yoke of
the pope in order to take up that of the king. It seemed to be the
intention of Gustavus to defer indefinitely the complete reformation of
Sweden. After the council of Orebro, Olaf had entered upon the
prudential course which the king insisted on; but it appeared to him
that he must now courageously advance in the paths of truth and freedom.
In his judgment, the work of the Reformation would be undone if it were
allowed to crystallize in the midst of branches, images, holy water, and
tapers. The young preachers supported him, and earnestly called for the
suppression of those rites, the plainest effect of which was to keep up
superstition among the people. Some of them even uttered complaints from
the pulpit that the royal authority obliged them to do or to tolerate
acts contrary to their consciences.
This gave rise to extreme coolness between Olaf and the king; and ere
long the confidential and affectionate intercourse which had united them
was succeeded by a certain uneasiness, and even actual hostility.
Gustavus having been informed of the discourses delivered by young
ministers who had only just left the schools, was offended. He saw in
the fact a spirit of rebellion, and he sharply rebuked Olaf, who, to his
knowledge, sympathized with these desires for a complete reformation. He
said to Olaf—‘The young ministers scandalize simple folk by the
impudence which leads them to aim at the abolition of the ancient usages
of the Church; and I think further that they have cherished the purpose
of giving a lesson to me and my government.’[477] The prince, far from
taking a lesson from another, gave one, and that sharply, to the first
preacher of the capital.
These two men were both of a noble nature. In each were greatness,
devotedness, activity, and a strong love of good. But each had also a
fault which laid them open to the risk of a rude collision with each
other; and one shock of this kind might overthrow the weaker. Gustavus
would dictate as law whatever seemed to him good and wise, and he did
not intend to allow any resistance. He placed great confidence in any
man who showed himself worthy of it; and of this he had given striking
proofs to the two brothers Petri. He did not easily withdraw his favor;
but once withdrawn, it was impossible to regain it.
[Sidenote: Olaf’s Grievances.]
Olaf, on his side, endowed with a spirit of integrity and with a sincere
and living faith, had a vivacity of temperament which prevented him from
_pondering the path of his feet_. He could not endure contradiction, he
could hardly forget an offence, and he was too prone to attribute
malevolent motives to his adversaries. He not only believed that the
king intended to destroy the liberty of the Church (which was the fact),
but also that his obstinate maintenance of Romish customs among the
people would throw them back again into the Romish apostasy. He began
loudly to complain of Gustavus. He said to all about him that the king
was completely changed, and certainly for the worse. He did not refrain
from speaking in this manner even in the presence of flatterers of
Gustavus. The enemies of the reformer hastened to take advantage of
this. They reported to the king what they had heard Olaf say, adding to
it exaggerations of their own invention.[478] Their one object was to
stir up hatred, and that implacable, between the king and the reformer.
They did not gain their end at the first stroke; but a change was
gradually wrought in the relations between these two men, both so
necessary to Sweden. The king manifested to Olaf his unconcern by his
manner and his words. He saw him much less frequently; and when he did
send for him, there was a reserve in his reception which struck the
reformer. Frequently when Olaf requested to see the king, the latter
refused to admit him; or if he did receive him, business was despatched
as speedily as possible, as if his only care was to get rid of him. This
coolness, while it greatly grieved the sincere friends of the Gospel,
rejoiced its adversaries; and on both sides the people were wondering,
some with a sense of alarm, others with secret but deep joy, whether
Gustavus in thus gradually estranging himself from the reformer was not
at the same time making friends with the pope, and whether a few steps
more would not precipitate him into the abyss.
Olaf himself, who while complaining of Gustavus had nevertheless up to
this time entertained no doubt of his good intentions, now took offence,
and resolved to avail himself of his rights as a minister of the Word of
God. Ought he to conceal the truth because it was to a prince that it
must be spoken? Did not Elijah rebuke Ahab, and John the Baptist Herod?
The feeling which blinded him did not allow him to apprehend the
important difference existing between a Gustavus and an Ahab. An obvious
fault of the king had often struck him. The habit of swearing in a fit
of anger was very common at the court and in the town, and Gustavus set
the example. Olaf, pained to hear the name of God thus taken in vain,
preached against the sin. He did not hesitate, at the close of his
sermon, to designate the king as setting the example of swearing. He
even had his discourse printed; and letting loose his displeasure, he
complained loudly of the obstacles which the king placed in the way of a
thorough reformation. The young pastors, encouraged by the example of
their chief, went further than he did. They complained of the commands
which the king had given them, and gave free vent to their indignation
against a despotism which was, in their view, an attempt to violate the
rights of the Word of God and of Christian freedom.
It was a serious matter, and Gustavus was much moved by it. He resolved
to appeal to the archbishop. The primate, more temperate than his
brother, confined himself to the duties of his calling. He was never
seen either in places of amusement or at the court, which his
predecessors used frequently to visit; but he was always at work in his
diocese. In consequence of the death of the queen, he had gone at the
king’s call to Stockholm, to marry him to his second wife, and had
immediately returned to Upsala to devote himself to his work. Gustavus
esteemed Lawrence; but he was, nevertheless, somewhat out of temper with
him, because he knew that at bottom he shared his brother’s sentiments.
To him, in his capacity of archbishop, the king addressed his mandate,
in September, 1539. ‘We had expected of you and of your brother,’ said
Gustavus, ‘more moderation and more assistance in matters of religion.
True, I do not know how a sermon ought to be composed, but still I will
tell you that preachers ought to confine themselves to setting forth the
essence of religion without setting themselves up against ancient
customs. You wrote me word that sermons were being preached at Upsala on
brotherly love, on the life acceptable to God, on patience in
affliction, and on other Christian virtues. Very good: see to it that
similar sermons are preached throughout the kingdom. Christ and Paul
taught obedience to the higher powers; but from the pulpits of Sweden
are too often heard declamations against tyranny, and insulting language
against the authorities. I am accused, abuses which are complained of
are imputed to me, and these insults are published by the press. Holy
Scripture teaches us that a minister ought to exhort his hearers to seek
after sanctification. If people had any real grounds of complaint
against my government, why not make them known to me privately instead
of publishing them before the whole congregation?‘[479]
[Sidenote: The Mock Suns.]
This letter, addressed to the archbishop of Upsala, instead of soothing
the Stockholm minister, irritated him and inflamed still more his ardent
zeal. A circumstance which had little connection with the religious
interests of Sweden, convinced him that the time was come to denounce
the judgments of God. Olaf, in common with some of the most enlightened
men of his time, among others Melanchthon, believed in astrological
predictions. Seven or eight mock suns, reflecting in the clouds the
image of the sun, appeared over Stockholm at this time. The sun was of
course Gustavus, and the mock suns were so many pretenders who were on
the point of appearing around the king, one or other of whom would take
his place. ‘It is a token of God’s anger and of the chastisement which
is at hand,’ exclaimed Olaf in his pulpit. ‘Punishment must come, for
the powers that be have fallen into error.’ The unfortunate Olaf did
more. Exasperated by the part which the king was taking in the
government of the Church, he caused these mock suns to be painted on a
canvas, and this he hung up in the church, in order that all might
satisfy themselves that God condemned the government and that His
judgments were near.[480] This proceeding was even more ridiculous than
blameworthy, but it was both. It took place, undoubtedly, after the king
in his capacity of _Summus Episcopus_ had addressed the letter to the
archbishop; for although he spoke in it of the sermons on swearing,
there is no reference to that on the mock suns, which was, moreover, by
far the most serious affair.
The anger of Gustavus against Olaf was now at its height. His enemies
gladly seized the weapon with which by his mistakes he furnished them
against himself; and already they insulted him with their looks. A storm
was gathering against the reformer; and Anderson, whose elevation and
influence had made many jealous, was to fall with his friend. These two
personages being manifestly in disgrace, the number of those who
contributed to their ruin was daily increasing; and it seemed as though
nothing short of the death of the objects of their hatred could satisfy
them.
All this would have been without effect if Gustavus had continued to
protect the liberty of the reformers. But he thought (this is at least
our opinion) that he might take advantage of the animosity existing
between the two parties for maintaining his own universal and absolute
authority. Olaf was blinded by excess of zeal, and Anderson did not
sufficiently subordinate the interests of religion to those of politics.
A sharp lesson must be given to each of them. Olaf was accused of having
delivered seditious sermons, and of having censured in a historical work
the ancestors of the king. This was not enough.
[Sidenote: Charges Against Olaf And Anderson.]
Some still more serious charge must be made. For this they went back
four years (1536), and it was given out that the project, formed by the
German inhabitants of Stockholm, of favoring the attack by the Hanse
Towns, had been confided to Olaf under the seal of confession—this
institution was still in existence—and that he had not made it known.
Even if this supposition had any foundation, was it not truer still that
the hostility of the Germans was universally known, and especially by
the vigilant Gustavus? But, in fact, there was little more in the case
than rumors, no attempt whatever at execution of the plan having ever
been made. To suppose that Olaf had intended to injure the king, his own
benefactor and the saviour of Sweden, is a senseless hypothesis. Many
other persons in Stockholm had learnt as much of the matter and more
than he had. But the enemies of the Reformation wanted to get rid of the
reformer; they must have some pretext, and this appeared to be
sufficient. People asked, indeed, why Olaf had not been prosecuted for
this offence four years before, and why since that time no inquiry had
been set on foot about it. But all improbabilities were passed over. All
the passions of men combined against Olaf. Men of lower degree felt the
hatred of envy caused by the elevation of the son of the ironmaster of
Orebro. The great felt the hatred of pride, a hatred which is seldom
appeased. Worldly and bad men, such as were not wanting at the court,
felt that irreconcilable hatred which is cherished against those who
declare war on vice and worldliness. The king commanded that Olaf as
well as Anderson should be brought to trial. The writer who recounts, in
a not very authentic manner, the alleged offence of the reformers, was a
zealous Roman Catholic, and besides this a very credulous man.[481] The
archives of Lübeck, the town which played the leading part in the attack
of which it was alleged that Olaf was an accomplice, are very complete
for the history of this period; but they do not contain the slightest
trace of any proceeding of the kind.[482] Men of peremptory character
resemble each other; and, although Gustavus Vasa was infinitely superior
to Henry VIII., the proceedings against Olaf and Anderson remind us of
those instituted by the king of England against his wives, his most
devoted ministers, and his best friends. The same court influences, and
the same pliability on the part of the judges were found in both cases;
and, by a stroke which recalled the Tudor sovereign, the king insisted
that the archbishop should sit as a judge at the trial of his brother.
Olaf and Anderson were condemned to death in the spring of 1540. This
was paying rather dear for the folly of the mock suns. ‘Simplicity,’ it
is said, ‘is better than jesting’; and a simple and credulous proceeding
often disarms the man who has a right to complain of it. Olaf had been
simple and credulous, but his foolishness did not disarm the king.
The sentence which filled the ultramontanes with joy threw consternation
among the evangelical Christians, and especially among the parishioners
of Olaf. The man who had so often consoled and exhorted them was to be
smitten like a criminal. They could not bear to think of it. They
remembered all the services which he had rendered them, and, what does
not often happen in this world, they were grateful. They therefore
bestirred themselves, interceded in behalf of their pastor, and offered
to pay a ransom for his life. The king did not push matters to
extremities, but granted a pardon. Perhaps his only intention had been
to inspire fear in those who assumed to set limits to his power. The
townsmen of Stockholm paid for their pastor fifty Hungarian florins.
Anderson also saved his life, but by a payment out of his own purse.
These pecuniary penalties contributed to keep people in mind that the
king was not to be contradicted.
The exaction of these sums for the ransom from the scaffold of the two
men who had done the most good to Sweden did no honor to Gustavus. But
he appears to have thought that strong measures were necessary for the
purpose of maintaining himself on the throne to which he had been
elevated. It was part of his system to strike and to strike hard.
[Sidenote: Olaf’s Sermon.]
Olaf subsequently resumed his functions as preacher at the cathedral.
Was not the permission to reappear in the pulpit an acknowledgment of
his innocence? On this occasion he delivered an affecting discourse by
which the whole congregation was moved. He understood the lesson which
Gustavus had given him, and acknowledged that henceforth resistance to
the king’s authority in the church was useless. This resistance might
sometimes have been not very intelligent, but it was always sincere and
well meant. He could not begin again either to preach the Gospel or to
reform Sweden unless he submitted. This, therefore, he did. Before every
thing the Gospel must advance. The king did not conceal his intention of
governing the Church as well as the State. He said to his subjects,
‘Take care of your houses, your fields, your pastures, your wives and
your children, but set no bounds to our authority either in the
government or in religion.[483] It belongs to us on the part of God,
according to the principles of justice and all the laws of nature, as a
Christian king to give you rules and commandments; so that if you do not
wish to suffer our chastisement and our wrath, you must obey our royal
commands in things spiritual as well as in things temporal.’ Olaf had
learnt by experience that _the wrath of a king is as the roaring of a
lion_. He had paid his debt to the liberty of the church. Henceforth he
bowed his head; he gave himself wholly up to his ministry; to instruct,
to console, to confirm, to guide, these tasks were his life, and in the
discharge of his duty he won high esteem. As for Anderson, he never
recovered from the blow which had fallen upon him. This fine genius was
extinguished. He who had done so much towards giving a durable life to
the church and to the State went slowly down to the grave, overwhelmed
with sorrow. A strange drama, in which the actors, all in the main
honest, all friends of justice, were carried away by diverse passions,
the passion for power and the passion for liberty, and inflicted on each
other terrible blows, instead of advancing together in peace towards the
goal which both alike had in view.
Gustavus had won the victory. Olaf was not the only one who gave way.
The blow which had fallen upon Olaf alarmed the other evangelical
ministers so much that they abandoned the thought of taking any part in
the control of the church, and left it all to the king. This pope was
satisfied. The mock suns had disappeared one after another, and the sun
left alone shone out in all his glory.
[Sidenote: George Normann.]
Gustavus, having thus broken down what threatened to be an obstacle in
his way, took up his position as absolute monarch in the Church and in
the State. In 1540 he obtained at Orebro a declaration that the throne
should be hereditary; and taking in hand the ecclesiastical government
he named a council of religion under the presidency of his
superintendent-general, who was strictly speaking minister of worship.
The king had engaged, as governor to his sons, George Normann, a
Pomeranian gentleman, who had studied successfully at Wittenberg, and
had come into Sweden with testimonials from Luther and Melanchthon. ‘He
is a man of holy life,’ Luther had written to Gustavus Vasa, ‘modest,
sincere, and learned, thoroughly competent to be tutor to a king’s
son.[484] I recommend him cordially to your majesty.’ Luther, however,
aimed at more than the education of the prince royal. Having had an
opportunity of conversing with an envoy of the king, Nicholas, a master
of arts, he wrote to Gustavus—‘May Christ, who has begun his work by
your royal majesty, deign greatly to extend it, so that _throughout your
kingdom_,[485] and especially in the cathedral churches, schools may be
established for training young men for the evangelical ministry. Herein
consists the highest duty of kings who, while engaged in political
government, are friendly to Christian piety. In this respect your
majesty has the reputation of surpassing all others, illustrious king!
and we pray the Lord to govern by his spirit the heart of your majesty.’
Along with George Normann, Luther sent a young scholar, named Michael
Agricola, whose learning, genius, and moral character he extols. In
conclusion he says—‘I pray that Christ himself may bring forth much
fruit by means of these two men; for it is he who through your majesty
calls them and assigns them their duties. May the Father of mercies
abundantly bless, by his Holy Spirit, all the designs and all the works
of your royal majesty.’[486] It seems as if Luther had some fear that
Gustavus might monopolize too much the government of the Church. In his
view it is Christ who governs it, who calls and appoints his laborers.
Gustavus appreciated the abilities and the character of Normann, and saw
in him an honorable but yielding man, at whose hands he would not
encounter the resistance which Olaf had offered. The bishops gave him
some uneasiness, and as he did not venture to suppress them, he resolved
to neutralize their influence by placing the _protégé_ of the Wittenberg
reformer above all the clergy, including the bishops and even the
archbishop. While allowing the episcopal order to subsist for form’s
sake, he at the same time introduced a semblance of the presbyterian
order. In 1540 he appointed in all the provinces conservators,
counsellors of religion, and _seniors_ or elders who under the
presidency of the superintendent were to administer ecclesiastical
affairs and make regular visitations in the dioceses. No change might be
made or even _proposed_ in the Church without the express permission of
the king. The opposition of Olaf and other ministers to certain remains
of popery was not, however, without effect. Gustavus abolished them. But
this semi-episcopal and semi-presbyterian constitution could never be
got to work perfectly; and at a later time fortunate circumstances
restored to the Swedish Church a more independent standing. Gustavus
continued to have at heart the serious fulfilment of the functions of
supreme bishop. He made laws for the frequenting of the religious
assemblies, for the observance of the rules prescribing a decorous
behavior in the church, for the suppression of immorality both among the
laity and among the ecclesiastics, for the improvement of teaching and
for the spread of civilization and culture among the people. Desirous of
seeing the extension of the kingdom of God, he sent missionaries into
Lapland. In Sweden likewise he set the inspired Word above every thing.
‘Thou doest well,’ he wrote to one of his sons, ‘to read the writings of
the ancients and to see how the world was then governed; but do not give
these the preference over the Word of God. In this is found true
instruction and reasonable morals; and from it we learn the best mode of
governing.’
[Sidenote: Excuses For Severity.]
This zeal for good did not prevent him from hitting hard when he thought
he saw any thing amiss. He could be calm, gentle, and tolerant, but also
earnest, terrible, and swift as a thunderbolt. If he perceived any
opposition he struck energetically. ‘It is not right,’ he said one day,
‘that the bishop of Strengnaes should dwell in a stone house. It appears
to me that a wooden house might suffice for a servant of him who made
himself poor.’ The bishop boldly answered—‘It is doubtless in the same
chapter of Holy Scripture that it is said that to the king tithe ought
to be paid.’ The bishop’s reply having offended the king, he was not
slow to show his displeasure. The marriage of the bishop was at this
time being celebrated. It was his wedding-day, and there was a large
company and a grand feast in the stone house. Gustavus unhesitatingly
sent his sergeants in the very midst of the rejoicings, with orders to
carry off the bishop from the marriage table, paying no regard to the
general alarm, and he cast him into prison. His benefice was given to
another. The contemporaries of Gustavus might reproach him, and with
good reason, for his severity; and yet this seems moderation in
comparison with the ways of Henry VIII., Mary Tudor, Francis I., Henry
II., Charles IX., and with those of his predecessor Christian II. ‘I am
called,’ he said, ‘a harsh monarch; but the days will come when I shall
be regretted.’[487] He had indeed other qualities which made people
forget his severity. The beauty of his person predisposed men in his
favor, and the eloquence of his speech carried away all with whom he had
to do.
But there are other considerations which although they do not justify
his rigorous measures, explain them.
The kingdom of Christ not being of this world ought not to be governed
by kings and by their secretaries of state. This principle once
admitted, there are three remarks to make: The development of Christian
civilization was not sufficiently advanced in the sixteenth century for
a recognition of the independence of the two powers. Catholicism was
still so powerful in Sweden that nothing short of the authority of such
a king as Gustavus could secure to the Gospel and to its disciples the
liberty which they needed. Lastly, if Gustavus was wrong in assuming, as
so many other princes did, the episcopal office in the Church, he did at
least discharge its duties conscientiously.
In 1537 the king had received deputies from the elector of Saxony, the
landgrave of Hesse, and the Protestant towns, who entreated him to unite
with the evangelical churches of Germany.[488] Gustavus had promised to
do all that might be in his power for the good of their confederation.
In 1546 he was formally asked to enter into the league of Smalcalde; but
this he declined to do. The Confession of Augsburg was not accepted in
his lifetime. It was only after many vicissitudes that Sweden was
induced to place itself under this flag.
Footnote 459:
‘Ut de toto reformationis negotio plenius definiretur,’ &c.—Gerdesius,
_Ann._ iii. p. 319.
Footnote 460:
Rom. xv. 1.
Footnote 461:
_Contra Latomum._
Footnote 462:
‘Ut voluntas Dei in verbo ejus revelata patefiat auditoribus
nostris.’—_Forma Reformationis in consilio Orebrogensi definita._ This
document is given in the Appendix to Gerdesius iii. p. 193.
Footnote 463:
‘Id modeste et primo privatim agant.’—Gerdesius, _Ann._ iii. p. 197.
Footnote 464:
‘Ut inculcent in memoriam facta Christi qui pro nobis passus est et
resurrexit.’—_Ibid._ p. 197.
Footnote 465:
Vertot, _Révolutions de Suède_, ii.
Footnote 466:
‘Quod solus sanguis Christi facit.’—Gerdesius, _Ann._ iii. p. 196.
Footnote 467:
Geijer, _Geschichte Schwedens_, ii. p. 71. Schinmeier, p. 81.
Footnote 468:
Geijer, ii. p. 71.
Footnote 469:
Gerdesius, _Ann._ iii. pp. 320-323.
Footnote 470:
‘Qui frater noster fieri voluit ut officium mediatoris præstaret.’
Gerdesius, _Ann._ iii. p. 323.
Footnote 471:
Schinmeier.
Footnote 472:
‘Legimus quod is intellecta veritate evangelica confestim claustro
fuerit egressus.’—Gerdesius, _Ann._ iii. p. 324.
Footnote 473:
‘Mutato habitu mores quoque mutaverint atque vitæ genus.’—_Ibid._
Footnote 474:
Schinmeier, _Lebensbeschreibungen der drei Reformatoren_, p. 39.
Herzog, _Ency._, xiv. p. 76.
Footnote 475:
Schinmeier, _Lebensbeschreibungen der drei Reformatoren_, p. 39.
Herzog, _Ency._, xiv. p. 76.
Footnote 476:
Geijer, _Geschichte Schwedens_, ii. p. 88.
Footnote 477:
‘Gar zu geneigt seine Person und Regierung zu meistern.’—Geijer, ii.
p. 89.
Footnote 478:
‘Daher nahmen seine Feinde, deren Anzahl am Hofe immer stärker ward,
täglich Gelegenheit zu manchen Erdichtungen und Vergrösserungen, um
ihn vollends verhasst zu machen.’—Schinmeier, _Lebensbeschreibungen
der drei Reformatoren_, p. 82.
Footnote 479:
Schinmeier, _Lebensbeschreibungen_, p. 101.
Footnote 480:
Schroeckh, _Reform._, ii. p. 52.
Footnote 481:
Messenias. He wrote in verses of very bad taste:—‘Es war ein eifriger
Katholik, und überdies noch sehr leichtgläubig.’—Schinmeier, p. 20.
Footnote 482:
‘In allen Acten dieser Zeit findet sich auch nicht ein Schatten
davon.’—_Ibid._ p. 81. Geijer, ii. p. 88.
Footnote 483:
‘Uns aber setzet kein Ziel im Regiment und in der Religion.’—Geijer,
_Geschichte Schwedens_, ii. p. 91.
Footnote 484:
‘Dignus omnino pedagogus regii filii.’—Luther, _Epp._ v. p. 179. De
Wette.
Footnote 485:
‘Per totum regnum, in ecclesiis præsertim cathedralibus, scholæ
instituantur.’—Luther, _Epp._ v. p. 179.
Footnote 486:
‘Precor Christum ut per hos multum fructum faciat Christus ipse, qui
eos per majestatem tuam vocat et ordinat. Benedicat Pater . . omnibus
consiliis et operibus regiæ tuæ majestatis.’—Luther, _Epp._ v. p. 179.
Footnote 487:
Raumer, _Geschichte Europas_, ii. pp. 137-141. Geijer. Gerdesius.
Footnote 488:
Gerdesius, _Ann._ iii. p. 326.