“Father Grisar has gained a high reputation in this country through the translation of his monumental work on the History of Rome and the Popes in the Middle Ages, and this first instalment of his life of Luther bears fresh witness to his unwearied industry, wide learning, and scrupulous anxiety to be impartial in his judgments as well as absolutely accurate in matters of fact.”—Glasgow Herald.

“It is impossible to understand the Reformation without understanding the life and character of the great German. The man and the work are so indissolubly united that we cannot have right judgments about either without considering the other. It is one of Father Grisar’s many merits that he does not forget for a single moment the fundamental importance of this connection. The man and his work come before us in these illuminating pages, not as more or less harmonious elements, but as a unity, and we cannot analyse either without constant reference to the other.”—Irish Times.

“Professor Grisar is hard on Luther. Perhaps no Roman Catholic can help it. But it is significant that he is hard on the anti-Lutherans also.... He shows us, indeed, though not deliberately, that some reformation of religion was both imperative and inevitable.... But he is far from being overwhelmed with prejudice. He really investigates, uses good authorities, and gives reasons for his judgments.”—The Expository Times.

“This Life of Luther is bound to become standard ... a model of every literary, critical, and scholarly virtue.”—The Month.

“The most important book on Luther that has appeared since Denifle’s epoch-making ‘Luther und Luthertum.’ ... It is an ordered biography, ... and is therefore very probably destined to a wider general usefulness as a Catholic authority.”—The Irish Rosary.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER XV. ORGANISATION AND PUBLIC POSITION OF THE NEW CHURCHpages [3-108]
1.Luther’s Religious Situation. Was his Reaction aBreak with Radicalism?
The New Church, with its binding formularies of faith andits constituted authorities, contrasted with Luther’s earlierdemands for freedom from all outward bonds. The changewhich occurred in his mind in 1522. What prompted thereaction? Did Luther, prior to 1522, ever cherish the idea of a“religion minus dogma”? His clear design from the beginningto preserve all the Christian elements deemed by himessential. His assertion of the freedom of the Christian;the negations it logically involved pass unperceived. Greaterstress laid on the positive elements after 1522; the subjectivecounter-current. Ecclesiastical anarchy. Modern Protestantsmore willing than was Luther to push his principlesto their legitimate consequences. Conclusion: The reactionwhich set in in 1522 implied no real change of view. HowLuther contrived to conceal from himself and from others theincompatibility of his leaningspages [3-21]
2.From the Congregational to the State Church. Secularisations.
Previous to espousing the idea of the Congregational ChurchLuther invites the secular authorities to interfere; his “Anden christlichen Adel”; his hopes shattered; Luther’snew ideal: the Evangel not intended for all; the assemblyof true Christians; the Wittenberg congregation and themodel one established at Leisnig. The Congregational Churchproving impracticable, Luther advocates a popular Church;its evolution into the State Church as it afterwards obtainedin Protestant Germany. Secularisation of church propertyin the Saxon Electorate. Luther’s view as to the use to whichchurch property should be put by the rulers; he complains ofprincely avarice. Secularisation of the marriage-courts;matrimonial cases dealt with by secular lawyers; Luther’santipathy for lawyers, how accounted forpages [21-43]
3.The Question of the Religious War; Luther’s VacillatingAttitude. The League of Schmalkalden, 1531.
Luther casts all reserve to the winds; his resolve to proceedregardless of the consequences. His earlier opposition toarmed resistance; his memoranda on the subject clearlyevince his hesitation. His change of view in 1530; reasonswhy he veered round; the change kept secret; difficultieswith the Nurembergers; a tell-tale memorandum publishedby Cochlæus. The League of Schmalkalden; Luther’s hopesand fears; a new memorandum. Luther’s misgivings regardingPhilip of Hesse’s invasion of Würtemberg; the expeditionturning out successful is blessed by Luther. The religiouswar in Luther’s private conversations in later years. Latermemoranda. A question from Brandenburg. Later attemptsto deny the authenticity of the document signed by Lutherin 1530pages [43-76]
4.The Turks Without and the Turks [Papists] Within theEmpire.
The danger looming in the East. Luther’s earlier pronouncements(previous to 1524) against any militarymeasures being taken to prevent the Turkish inroads;attitude of the preachers; imminent danger of the Empireafter the battle of Mohacz; Luther’s “Vom Kriege widderdie Türcken” registers a change of front; his “Heer-Predigtwidder den Türcken” and the approval it conveys of warlikemeasures against the invader; he robs his call to arms ofmost of its force by insisting on his pet ideas; his later sayingson the subject; the Turk not so dangerous a foe as Poperypages [76-93]
5.Luther’s Nationalism and Patriotism.
Luther’s sayings about the virtues and vices of his owncountrymen; his teaching sunders the Empire and underminesthe Imperial authority; his advocacy of resistance;the “Prophet of the Germans”; discouragement of tradeand science; Döllinger on Luther as the typical German;the power of the strong man gifted with a facile tonguepages [93-108]
CHAPTER XVI. THE DIVINE MISSION AND ITS MANIFESTATIONSpages [109-168]
1.Growth of Luther’s Idea of his Divine Mission.
His conviction of his special call and enlightenment; hisdetermination to brook no doubt; all his actions controlledfrom on high; finds a confirmation of his opinion in the extentof his success and in his deliverance from his enemies; hisuntiring labours and disregard for personal advancement;the problem presented by the union in him of the fanaticmystic with the homely, cheerful man enjoying to the fullthe good things that come his way; his superstitions; his“temptations” promote his progress in wisdom. His consciousnessof his Mission intensified at critical junctures, forinstance, during his stay at the Wartburg; his letter toStaupitz in 1522; his statement: It is God’s Word. Letwhat cannot stand fallpages [109-128]
2.His Mission Alleged against the Papists.
How Luther describes the Pope and his Court; his call toreform Catholics generally; his caricature of Erasmus; howlater Protestants have taken Luther’s claims. Luther’sapocalyptic dreams; his exegesis of Daniel viii.; the PapalAntichrist: A system rather than a man; Luther’s work onChronology. The Monk-Calf as a Divine sign of the abominationof Popery and monasticism. Luther’s “Amen” toMelanchthon’s Pope-Asspages [128-153]
3.Proofs of the Divine Mission. Miracles and Prophecies.
Luther on the proofs required to establish an extraordinarymission. The distinction between ordinary and extraordinarycalls. His appeal to the rapid diffusion of his doctrine; thereal explanation of this spread not far to seek. His appeal tohis doctorate, to his appointment by authority, and, finally,to the “Word of Truth” which was the burden of hispreaching. Luther’s account of the “miracle” of Florentina’sescape from her convent. His unwillingness to ask forthe grace of working miracles; his demand that the fanaticsshould work miracles to substantiate their claims; his allusionsto the power of his own prayer in restoring the sick tohealth. The gift of prophecy; Luther loath to predictanything “lest it should come true.” His own so-calledpredictions. Earlier predictions of mystics and astrologerstaken by him as referring to himselfpages [153-168]
CHAPTER XVII. GLIMPSES OF A REFORMER’S MORALSpages [169-318]
1.Luther’s Vocation: His Standard of Life.
What may rightly be looked for in a reformer of theChurch. Luther’s contemporaries on his shortcomings:Joh. Findling, Erasmus, and Ferreri. The remedyproposed by Luther to drive away depression, viz. self-indulgencepages [169-180]
2.Some of Luther’s Practical Principles of Life.
His contradictory views on sin, and on penance; his ideassuited to meet his own case and to relieve his own conscience.His attitude towards human endeavour; predestinationand unfreedom; the devil’s dominion; the failings of theSaints. “Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe more boldlystill.” Protestant strictures on Luther’s doctrine of sinpages [180-199]
3.Luther’s Admissions Concerning his own Practice andVirtue.
Luther on the weakness of his own faith, his doubts, hisutter misery, and the shortcomings of his life. His attitudetowards prayer; prayer mingled with imprecation; histhreatened prayer against dishonest brewers. Christian joyand peace. Preparation for the sacraments. Mortificationand self-conquest. Mediocrity as the aim of ethics. Lack ofzeal for the salvation of all men; disregard for missionarywork. Luther in his home; minor disappointmentspages [200-217]
4.The Table-Talk and the First Notes of the Same.
Luther’s evening conversations at Wittenberg recordedby his friends; utility of the notes they left; Walch, Krokerand others on the authority of these notes. Excerpts fromthe Table-Talk: The pith of the new religion, viz. confidencein Christ. Catholic practices and institutions described:The Mass, fasting, confession, the religious life. Praisesheaped on the Table-Talk by Luther’s early disciples. Lutherhimself responsible for the foulness of the language. Pommer’sway of dealing with the devil. Filthy references to thePope; unseemly comparisons; “adorabunt nostra stercora.”Such language by no means confined to the Table-Talk; afew quotations from Luther’s “Wider das Bapstum zu Rom.”An excuse alleged, viz. that such language was then quiteusual. Sir Thomas More’s protest. A modern defender ofLuther. The real explanation of Luther’s unrestraintpages [217-241]
5.On Marriage and Sexuality.
On the imperative necessity of marriage; the irresistibilityof the natural impulse; the world full of adulterers? The“miracle” of voluntary and chaste celibacy. Luther’sanimus against Popish celibacy. His loosening of themarriage-bond. Cases in which marriage is annulled.Meaning of the words “If the wife refuse, then let the maidcome.” A modern secularist’s appeal to Luther’s principles.Polygamy. Luther, after some hesitation, comes to toleratepolygamy, but makes it a matter of the forum internum. Theopinions of Catholic theologians. “Secret marriages” andconcubinage; what those have to do who are forbidden bylaw to contract marriage. Denial of the sacramental characterof matrimony. Luther’s tone in speaking of thingssexual; a letter to Spalatin; regret expressed for offensivemanner of speech; odious comparisons contained in his“Vom Schem Hamphoras” (against the Jews) and “WiderHans Worst” (against the Catholics); improper anecdotes;Luther, like Abraham, “the father of a great people,” viz. ofthe children of all the monks and nuns who discarded theirvowspages [241-273]
6.Contemporary Complaints. Later False Reports.
Simon Lemnius; fanatics and Anabaptists; Catholics:Hieronymus Dungersheim, Duke George, AmbrosiusCatharinus, Hoyer of Mansfeld; Protestants: Melanchthon,Leo Judae, Zwingli, Bullinger, Joh. Agricola. How far thecomplaints were grounded. Apocryphal legends to Luther’sdiscredit: Had Luther three children of his own apart fromthose born to him by Bora? His jesting letters to his wife notto be taken seriously. Did he indulge in the “worst orgies”with the escaped nuns in the Black Monastery of Wittenberg?The passages “which will not bear repetition.”Whether Luther as a young monk declared he would bringthings to such a pass as to be able to marry a girl; WolfgangAgricola’s authority for this statement and the informationhe gives concerning Spalatin. Luther’s stay as a boy inCotta’s house at Eisenach no ground for a charge of immorality.Did Luther describe the lot of the hog as the mostenviable goal of happiness? Did he allow the validity ofmarriage between brother and sister? Whether he counselledpeople to pray for many wives and few children; variantsof an ancient rhyme. Did he include wives in the “dailybread” for which we pray in the Our Father? Was he theinventor of the proverb: “Who loves not woman, wine andsong, remains a fool his whole life long”?pages [273-294]
7.The “Good Drink.”
Need of examining critically the charges made againstLuther; the number of his literary productions scarcelycompatible with his having been an habitual drunkard.Testimonies of Musculus, the “Dicta Melanchthoniana,”Ickelsamer, Lemnius, etc. Opinions of Catholics: Catharinus,Hoyer of Mansfeld, Joh. Landau and others. Luther’sown statements about his “Good Drink”; his reasons forsuch indulgence; his distinction between drinking and drunkenness;his reprobation of habitual drunkenness. Melanchthonand Mathesius, two witnesses to Luther’s temperance.From the cellar and the tap-room; gifts in kind made toLuther; his calls on the cellar of the Wittenberg council;the signature “Doctor plenus” appended to one of his lettersto be read as “Doctor Johannes”; the “old wine” of theCoburg and Luther’s indisposition in 1530; beer versuswinepages [294-318]
CHAPTER XVIII. LUTHER AND MELANCHTHONpages [319-378]
1.Melanchthon in the Service of Lutheranism, 1518-30.
What Luther owed to his friend. Their earlier relations;Luther’s unstinted praise; Melanchthon’s apprehensions;his work during the Visitation in 1527; is horrified byLuther’s language to Duke George and saddened by the“Protest” of the dissidents at Spires. Melanchthon at theDiet of Augsburg, 1530. The “Augsburg Confession” andits “Apology” characteristic of the writer; his admissionregarding the use he had made of the name of St. Augustine;his letter to Cardinal Campeggio; some contemporarieson Melanchthon’s “duplicity”; the Gospel proviso;Melanchthon judged by modern historians; Luther consoleshis friend. The “Erasmian” intermediarypages [319-346]
2.Disagreements and Accord between Luther and Melanchthon.
Melanchthon first accepts the whole of Luther’s doctrine,but afterwards deviates from it even in essentials; hisantipathy to the denial of freedom and to absolute predestinationto hell, to faith alone and to the denial of thevalue of works. Penance and the motive of fear. Differsfrom Luther on the question of the Supper and graduallyapproaches the Zwinglian standpoint. Points of accord withLuther; he shares Luther’s superstition and belief in thePapal Antichrist; has unjustly been accused of being moretolerant than his master; his ideal a pedagogic onepages [346-360]
3.Melanchthon at the Zenith of his Career. His MentalSufferings.
His interest in the promotion of studies; his correspondence;his intimacy with Luther; his disappointment; whathe disliked in Luther; he meets with little sympathy inLuther’s circle, though Luther’s personal esteem never failshim; the rumour that he was disposed to return to theCatholic fold; his willingness to find congenial employmentaway from Wittenberg; his tendency to leave religious affairsin the hands of the Statepages [360-378]
CHAPTER XIX. LUTHER’S RELATIONS WITHZWINGLI, CARLSTADT, BUGENHAGEN ANDOTHERSpages [379-416]
1.Zwingli and the Controversy on the Supper.
Earlier relationship between Zwingli and Luther; theirdivergent opinions on the Eucharist; the Marburg Conferencebetween the two; the power behind this Conference;Luther on Zwingli’s untimely endpages [379-385]
2.Carlstadt.
Finding Wittenberg too warm, Carlstadt removes toOrlamünde; his meeting with Luther in the Black Bear Innat Jena; he goes to Strasburg, and thence to Rothenburg; heis driven by want to accept Luther’s conditions; he breakshis promise, escapes to Switzerland and receives an appointmentat Basle. What Luther says of him in the Table-Talkand in his “Widder die hymelischen Propheten”: Thedefects of Carlstadt’s mission, his violent behaviour, hisattachment to the Decalogue, his wrong interpretation of theSupper, his stress on the inward rather than on the outwardWord, his unacquaintance with “temptations”pages [385-400]
3.Johann Agricola, Jacob Schenk, and Johann Egranus.
Luther on Agricola. Schenk and the question of the Law;an encounter between Schenk and Luther. Egranus’s dissatisfactionwith Luther; Luther’s references to the “broodof Erasmus”; the burden of Egranus’s complaintspages [400-404]
4.Bugenhagen, Jonas and Others.
Luther’s admiration for Amsdorf and Brenz. Bugenhagen,a legate “a facie et a corde”; his antecedents; becomespastor of Wittenberg; his missionary labours; his intimacywith Luther; his letters from Denmark; a femaledemoniac. Friendship between Luther and Jonas as attestedby the Table-Talk; chief events of Jonas’s lifepages [404-416]
CHAPTER XX. ATTEMPTS AT UNION IN VIEW OFTHE PROPOSED COUNCILpages [417-449]
1.Zürich, Münster, the Wittenberg Concord, 1536.
The Swiss theologians on Luther and his doctrine. TheAnabaptists and Luther’s opinion of their doings at Münster.Pope Paul III. Efforts of the Protestants to reach anunderstanding among themselves; Martin Bucer; theWittenberg Concord; attempts to secure the adhesion of theSwiss; Luther pockets his scruples; collapse of the negotiations;Luther’s “Kurtz Bekentnis”pages [417-424]
2.Efforts in View of a Council. Vergerio visits Luther.
Pope Paul III. determines to hold a Council at Mantua in1537. Vergerio dispatched by the Pope to Germany tosmooth the way; the Legate invites Luther to breakfastwith him at the Castle of Wittenberg; his description of hisguest; his own subsequent apostasypages [424-430]
3.The Schmalkalden Assembly of 1537. Luther’s Illness.
The Schmalkalden League. The league of the CatholicPrinces. Luther’s “Artickel” for the Schmalkalden convention.Melanchthon’s endeavour to arrange matters.Luther’s willingness to promote the Council. The discussionsat Schmalkalden; Melanchthon’s backhanded proceedings.Luther, prostrated by an attack of stone, desires to be removedso as not to die in a town defiled by the presence of aPapal envoy. His parting benediction: “Deus vos impleatodio Papæ.” The agreement subsequently reached atSchmalkalden. Luther makes his “First Will”; his recovery;his imprecatory Paternosterpages [430-438]
4.Luther’s Spirit in Melanchthon.
Melanchthon’s sudden change of attitude whilst at Schmalkalden;he emulates Luther; reason of the change;Melanchthon’s preference for the “needle,” Luther’s for the“hog-spear.” Melanchthon’s work for Luther in the Antinomianand Osiander controversies; his “Confessio Augustanavariata” tacitly sanctioned by Luther; Bucer andMelanchthon and the “Cologne Book of Reform”; Bucer isviolently taken to task by Luther, but Melanchthon is spared.The last joint work of Luther and Melanchthon, viz. the“Wittenberg Reformation” (1545)pages [438-449]