Wedding-Dinner—Melanchthon—Slanders.
Thus had Luther, actuated by the purest motives, suddenly and silently,
entered into this matrimonial alliance. Now it was no longer secret, and
in compliance with a custom common in that day he determined to invite a
number of his friends, in and out of Wittenberg, including his parents,
to a wedding-dinner. This was to occur on the 27th of June, two weeks
after his marriage. On that day also, he purposed to conduct his wife
publicly to his own residence at the Augustinian monastery. To his
absent friends he sent written invitations, seven of which are still
extant. But he was particularly desirous of having his parents, who
resided at Mansfeld, present on the occasion. He was anxious to show
them that he had finally gratified their most ardent wishes in
abandoning the monastic life and entering on matrimony. But he also
wished to make them personally acquainted with Catharine, and to receive
from them their parental blessing. They, with three or four others of
his friends, accepted the invitation. At this, as well at the other more
private festival on the day after his marriage, the town council of
Wittenberg expressed their highest respect for Luther by sending him
some essential contributions to his dinner.
It may appear remarkable, at first sight, that Melanchthon, Luther’s
most intimate friend and inseparable companion, should not have been
present at this nor at the previous solemnity, nor even consulted by
Luther on the subject of his marriage. But he well knew the timidity and
excessive sensitiveness of Melanchthon. He knew that his friend was so
painfully concerned for his reputation and peace of mind, that though he
could not disapprove of the act, yet he would reprove him for the manner
and time, fearing the evil consequences that might result to the work of
the Reformation. Hence Luther did not consult Melanchthon, and even
avoided his company at this time. The whole circumstance occasioned much
painful anxiety to Melanchthon, not because he did not sanction the act
in itself, but because it would give the numerous enemies of Luther
fresh occasion for more bitter persecution and more virulent calumny.
Although Luther had acted with great deliberation in this affair, making
it a subject of most fervent prayer, and hastening its consummation in
order only to avoid excitement, yet occasionally he sometimes seemed
deeply depressed on that very account, because in the opinion of many,
the whole transaction was calculated to injure his reputation. But
through the fraternal consolations of Melanchthon, he was soon restored
to his usual vivacity. He felt himself happy in the possession of
Catharine; for his marriage, instead of interfering with his numerous
professional engagements, only inspired him with renewed courage and
strength in the prosecution of his work. In many of his letters written
at this period, he expresses the most affectionate interest in his wife
and the most perfect satisfaction with his connubial state.
It would, however, have been surprising if the enemies of Luther had
passed in silence his marriage with a former nun. The most outrageous
slanders and abominable falsehoods might have been anticipated. Their
hatred of the man who had shaken the pillars of their spiritual
despotism, was also to be vented against the woman whom he had chosen
for his wife. “See,” cried out these despicable slanderers, “see the
real design of his apostasy from the Catholic Church! It was only that
he might marry.” And yet Luther was not married until eight years after
he had taken the first step towards the Reformation. They loaded
Catharine with the most opprobrious and disgraceful epithets, and
endeavored to cover her husband with shame and contempt. But they did
not reflect that if Luther had been inclined to an irregular course of
life, he might more easily, with much less excitement and much less
censure too, have indulged his evil propensities as an unmarried monk
than as a married clergyman. Even King Henry VIII. and Duke George of
Saxony sent him letters most bitterly censuring his course. The language
of the royal slanderer of England is especially vulgar, and his
accusations are infamous. But his more recent enemies have not been less
virulent. Luther, in dealing such a terrible blow on their forefathers,
has fearfully wounded them also, and that wound will never heal. They
most dishonestly perverted his language, and endeavored to dishonor the
name of Catharine by the most wretchedly contrived and disgraceful
fables. The principal object of Luther’s enemies was to sever the
matrimonial bond which united him and his wife. They exerted all their
diabolical cunning to gain Catharine over by their machinations, and
induce her to separate herself from Luther in order to return to the
convent. Two young men, members of the University of Leipzig, were
employed to write _Eulogies on Monastic Life_, and send them to Luther
in the hope that they would fall into Catharine’s hands, and induce her,
as a penitent sinner, to resume the veil. But neither he nor his wife
honored these writings with much attention at that time. They were sent
back to their authors in not quite as good a condition as when received,
for the servants, without Luther’s knowledge, had taken special pains to
deface them. They accompanied the papers with the Latin word _asini_
(asses), so ingeniously arranged in a square, that beginning in the
centre the same word could be read in forty different directions. Some
time after, Luther answered these writings and constructed several
amusing fables on them. The treatment of these eulogies by Luther and
his wife, and especially by the servants, created such an excitement in
Leipzig that Jerome Walther, a councillor, found it necessary to
communicate a full report of the whole transaction to the Court
Chancellor of Duke George. The infamous attempt, however, to separate
Luther and his wife signally failed.
The great restorer of the true gospel doctrine might have lived in open
profligacy as a monk, and it would not probably have been noticed; but
to marry was an unpardonable sin. The acknowledged teachers of the
priests have laid down such doctrine as the following: Cardinal de
Campeggi has taught that “It is a greater sin for a priest to marry than
to lead an infamous life.” The Jesuit Coster taught that “Although a
priest who indulges the most unnatural appetite commits a great evil,
yet he sins still more if he marries;” and Cornelius à Lapide remarks,
“For those who have taken the vow of chastity, it is better that they
live unchastely than marry.” The men who taught such morals were the
opponents of Luther’s marriage. The most influential of his enemies at
this time was Erasmus, who, in the beginning did not disallow Luther’s
merits, but he was fond of ridicule and sarcasm. He slandered Catharine
most infamously, but eight months afterwards he had the magnanimity to
retract his false accusations.
As we have already learned, Luther had determined to give a particular
wedding-festival especially for the sake of his own parents, but we have
no account of his having invited the parents of his wife. Every
unprejudiced reader will conclude that either her parents were
dissatisfied with her flight and marriage, or, what is more probable,
they were no longer living. For from the well-known letter of Luther to
Koppe, we cannot even with certainty conclude that her parents were
living at the time of her escape from the convent. He states that those
nine nuns had most earnestly implored their parents and _relatives_ to
deliver them from the prison, from which we presume that some of them
were orphans, and for this reason applied to their relations. But
Luther’s enemies still maintained that the parents of his wife were
living, but were of no account, and hence not mentioned at all. It is
likely that _poverty_ first moved them to place their daughter in a
convent early in life. Luther and some of his cotemporaries bear
testimony to the fact that she possessed no property. At one place he
thus expresses himself relative to the condition of her property, “As
thou gavest her to me, so I return her to thee again, O thou faithful
God, who richly aboundest in all things; support, sustain, and teach her
as thou hast supported, sustained, and taught me, thou Father of the
orphan and judge of the widow.” Even if she had taken property with her
into the convent, how could she have secured it in her flight? But when
Erasmus writes and says, “Luther has married a wife, a most beautiful
daughter of the celebrated family of Bora, but, as is said, without a
fortune,” this might also proceed from the dissatisfaction of her
relatives with her marriage and her flight from the convent.
But though those enemies of Luther could not exactly show the humble
condition of his wife’s parents, others tried hard to throw doubt, at
least, on her _noble_ birth. They could not deny that her mother was
entitled to that distinction of rank, but they totally reject her
father’s claim to it, and because Luther does not mention him in his
writings, they draw the unsound conclusion that he must have belonged to
the very lowest class of society. Catharine’s honor would not in the
least have been periled even if her father had been of humble birth. But
the most unimportant circumstances were industriously used by Luther’s
enemies to degrade him; hence, they would not allow her distinguished
birth, although the plainest proofs of the fact were given. His
opponents sometimes contradicted each other. They all agreed in most
scandalously calumniating him, but in their accusations they sometimes
singularly differed, and often unintentionally wrote something which was
more honorable to Luther than injurious. Cochlaeus, for example, charges
it as the greatest sin of Luther “that he rescued from the convent nine
nuns, _who were all_ of _noble rank_, and, to the eternal disgrace of so
many distinguished families, led them away.” Could this deadly enemy of
Luther only have conjectured that some of his brethren of the faith ever
intended to assail Catharine’s birth, he would have been more careful
than to have spoken of _noble_ rank and _distinguished_ families. But
the testimony of one such cotemporary is proof sufficient of her noble
origin, and we need not stop to refute those who maintain that there
never even existed a _family_ of _de Bora_.