Results of the Diet of Ratisbon--conferences
of the theologians--original
sin--free-will--justification--impossibility of agreement in the
sacrament of the Supper.
RATISBON, _11th May 1541_.
Though I find my prolonged stay here to be irksome, yet never shall
I regret having come. Do you think me to be not in a sound state of
mind when I say so? I am quite conscious of what I am saying; and
that I do not speak unreasonably you shall understand when we meet.
For the present, you can pick up a few crumbs, as much as you can,
by way of narrative. Our friends in the commission have come to
agreement on the doctrine of original sin without any difficulty; a
discussion followed on that of free-will, which was drawn together
out of the writings of Augustine; they departed in neither of these
points from ourselves. The debate in controversy was more keen
upon the doctrine of justification. At length a formula was drawn
up, which, on receiving certain corrections, was accepted on both
sides. You will be astonished, I am sure, that our opponents have
yielded so much, when you read the extracted copy, as it stood when
the last correction was made upon it, which you will find enclosed
in the letter. Our friends have thus retained also the substance of
the true doctrine, so that nothing can be comprehended within it
which is not to be found in our writings; you will desire, I know,
a more distinct explication and statement of the doctrine, and, in
that respect, you shall find me in complete agreement with yourself.
However, if you consider with what kind of men we have to agree upon
this doctrine, you will acknowledge that much has been accomplished.
Next came the subject of the Church: as to the definition they
agreed in opinion; on the question of the power of the Church
they began to differ. When at length they could not anyhow be
reconciled, it seemed best to omit that article. With regard to the
sacraments, there was some jarring of opinion; but when those of
our side conceded to them their ceremonies as things indifferent,
they advanced then to the consideration of the sacrament of the
Supper. There stood the impassable rock which barred the way to
farther progress. Transubstantiation, reposition, circumgestation,
and other superstitious forms of worship, were utterly rejected.
This our opponents would by no means allow. My colleague,[271] who
is full of enthusiasm in the desire for agreement, began to murmur,
and to become indignant, because such unseasonable questions were
entertained. Melanchthon rather tended to the opposite opinion,
that so, the gangrene being brought to a height, he might cut off
all hope of pacification. Our friends having consulted, they called
us together. We were requested, each in succession, to state our
opinions; it was the unanimous voice of all, that transubstantiation
was a mere fiction or figment, the reposition of the consecrated
wafer a piece of superstition, that the adoration of the wafer was
idolatrous, or at the least dangerous, since it had no authority
from the word of God. I had also to explain in Latin what were my
sentiments. Although I had not understood any one of the others,
deliberately, without fear of offence, I condemned that peculiar
local presence; the act of adoration I declared to be altogether
insufferable. Believe me, in matters of this kind, boldness is
absolutely necessary for strengthening and confirming others. Do
you, therefore, earnestly supplicate the Lord that he may uphold
us with that spirit of fortitude. A document in writing was then
drawn up by Philip, which, when it was presented to Granvelle, was
rejected with harsh expressions, because those three commissioners
had made us aware of them. When such things happen, at the very
threshold, you may conceive how much difficulty remains in regard
to private masses, the sacrifice of the mass, and the cup in the
communion. What if it should come to a consideration of the open
confession of the spiritual presence? How much disturbance would
be ready to burst forth out of it! Your letters, by the quill
merchant, were delivered to me a month after they were written; I
shall be surprised if, in the course of a day or two, others do
not make their appearance. The safety of the brethren has been
recommended to me to attend to it as I ought, but we stick as yet
at that obstruction which you are aware of. Maurus,[272] who was
sent about that business, is actively engaged in untying that knot.
Greater hope than usual breaks forth: for the Landgrave begins to
perceive some failure in the quarter from which he expected most;
therefore he will incline to that which we propose. If that shall so
fall out, they will, I doubt not, have a particular consideration
of the brethren; and Maury will do his utmost, as he is a pious and
right-hearted man. Believe me, he has hitherto been faithful in
attending to that which he undertook. Nothing more, however, has
been obtained, than that they might have permission to return home
with impunity, provided they abjured in presence of the bishop. N.
is most troublesome to us; may the Lord either take him away or
amend him. Greet all the brethren in the most friendly manner. May
the Lord Jesus keep you. Philip and Bucer salute you. When we dined
with the Landgrave the day before yesterday, kindly mention was made
of you.
[_Calvin's Lat. Corresp._ Opera, tom. ix. p. 17.]
[271] Martin Bucer.
[272] This was doubtless that gentleman of the chamber of King
Francis I., to whom Œcolampadius wrote in 1524, to congratulate
him on his sincere attachment to the Gospel. This gentleman is known
only under the pseudonyme of Maurus Musæus, _a secretis et cubiculo
Regis Galliarum_. See the letter of Œcolampadius in the Life of
Gerard Roussel, by M. Schmidt. Strasbourg, 1845, in 8vo, App. No. 3,
p. 179.