The feast of St. Erick, celebrated on the 18th of May, was a great day in Sweden. It was the day on which honors were paid to the memory of King Erick IX. (1155), who had attempted to introduce Christianity in Finland, and had founded for his subjects wise institutions. An annual fair was held at this time at Upsala, to which large numbers of people were attracted. The king visited the fair in May, 1526, attended by his Chancellor, Lawrence Anderson, and two thousand horsemen. He desired to conciliate the affections of the people, which the priests and the monks were stirring up against him, and to put the haughty archbishop back into his own place. He left his armed men in their quarters, and rode on horseback among the crowd, smiling on the people with a gracious air, which won all hearts. Having reached the top of one of the hills in the neighborhood of Upsala he halted, and assuming for the moment in addition to his royal functions those of a reformer, made a speech, sitting on his steed, to the multitude around him.[[424]] ‘What is the use of the service in Latin?’ he said; ‘what is the use of the monastic life?’ Many expressed their agreement with these sentiments; but some peasants, who came perhaps from Linkoping, cried out, ‘We mean to keep the monks. They are not to be driven away; we will sooner feed them ourselves.’ The king, waiting for an opportunity which was soon to offer itself, of bringing down the pride of the priests, rode down the hill, returned to the town, and went to the palace of the archbishop, who had prepared a splendid banquet for him, and purposed to display before him all his magnificence. Towards the close of the feast the primate rose, determined to place himself on a level with the king, and holding his glass in his hand turned to Gustavus and said, ‘Our Grace drinks to the health of Your Grace.’ ‘Thy Grace and Our Grace,’ replied Gustavus, coolly, ‘cannot find room under one roof.’[[425]]
The king then called together the chapter of the cathedral and said, ‘By what right does the Church possess temporal power?’ The archbishop, disconcerted by the answer which the prince had made to him at table, remained silent. Iveran, provost of the cathedral, spoke in his stead, and named the Decretals as the foundation of their rights. The king, not satisfied with this authority, resumed: ‘Is there in Holy Scripture a single passage which supports your privileges?’ Every one was silent. At length Doctor Galle, who was reputed the foremost theologian of Sweden, said, ‘Sire, the kings your predecessors conferred these privileges on us and maintained them.’ ‘Certainly then,’ replied Gustavus, ‘if kings conferred them, kings may withdraw them. For this purpose it is only necessary for them to recognize the fact that it was for want of knowledge these institutions were founded aforetime to humor superstitious requirements and to promote personal interests.’
The archbishop and the bishops, seeing so clearly the signs of the storm which was threatening to overthrow them, resolved, in order to control it, to take the initiative, and attack their adversaries.[[426]] They therefore went in a body to the king, and the archbishop, in the name of them all, required of Gustavus that he should show himself the protector of religion. ‘The version of the New Testament made by Olaf,’ said he, ‘is simply Luther’s version. This is already condemned by the pope as heretical. Let Olaf and his followers, therefore, be brought to trial, as guilty of heresy.’ Gustavus, believing that he could turn this demand of the clergy to account in advancing reform another step, replied—‘I consent to a sentence of capital punishment against Olaf and his followers, on condition that they are justly convicted of the crime of heresy of which you accuse them. But I have observed so many beautiful traits in the life and the habits of this minister, that I question whether it is not out of hatred that you accuse him of heresy. Theologians are accustomed,’ he added sternly, ‘to blacken in this way those who do not think as they do.’[[427]]
The archbishop was much moved by this reply.[[428]] The imprudent prelate exclaimed—‘I take upon myself to convict Olaf of heresy, on the most important points of the faith, and this in the presence of your Majesty and all your ministers.’ Magnus, mistaking his strength, had gone too far. Gustavus hastened to take advantage of it. He commanded a conference to be held such as was asked for, entertaining no doubt that it would turn to the triumph of the truth. He invited to it learned men, the members of the Diet, and all the nobles who desired to have the means of judging for themselves of the foundations on which the doctrines rested which were professed either by the adherents of the pope or by those of the Reformation. Olaf declared himself ready. The bishops, on the contrary, shuffled, either because they considered it beneath their dignity to hold a discussion with Olaf, or, as has been said, ‘because they were afraid of exposing themselves in a conflict with a learned and eloquent man.’[[429]] At last they chose, as defender of their dogmas, a distinguished divine, Peter Galle, the man who had previously replied to the king at Upsala.[[430]]
Olaf And Galle.
The meeting was held in the chapter-house, and the king and the most influential men of his suite were present. Secretaries took their seats at a table for the purpose of taking down the discussion in writing. The champions of Rome and of the Gospel came forward, and the colloquy began. The first question contained within itself all the others. It was, whether the traditions established by the Fathers and the ancient doctors of the Church must be abolished. Galle admitted that the Christian religion was certainly contained, as Olaf asserted, in the Holy Scriptures. ‘But,’ he said, ‘these Scriptures are difficult to understand, and we must therefore receive the explanation given of them by the ancient Fathers.’ ‘Let us admit the interpretation of the Fathers,’ replied Olaf, ‘when it does not disagree with the written Word; but when the teachings of the Fathers are at variance with those of Scripture, let us reject them.[[431]] If we do not reject them, we should make no difference between the word of God and the decrees of men.’
The discussion turned afterwards upon the great doctrine of the Reformation, Is a man saved by his own merits or by the grace of God alone?[[432]] Olaf maintained that eternal life is ‘the gift of God’ (Rom. vi. 23), and that Christians are saved by grace (Ephes. ii. 8). Man obtains a reward solely by the grace of God and because Christ has merited it for him. This fundamental doctrine was met with among all nations at the epoch of the Reformation. Galle expected to triumph by maintaining the ecclesiastical princedom of the bishop of Rome, which had existed, he added, for twelve hundred years. ‘The office of a bishop,’ answered Olaf, ‘is not a lordship but a labor. The papacy has not existed for so long a time as you assign to it. Moreover, we have to consider, not the antiquity of an office but its goodness. Satan the tempter of man is very ancient, but it does not follow from this that he is good.’ The discussion continued on other matters in controversy, such as conversion, the Lord’s Supper, and particularly miraculous apparitions which Galle asserted still took place. He instanced those seen by St. Martin, St. Anthony, and Cyrillus, bishop of Jerusalem. ‘Every day new ones are witnessed,’[[433]] he added, ‘and so far from despising them, we ought to feel great reverence for them.’ ‘The Church of God,’ replied Olaf, ‘built up on the doctrine of prophets and apostles, has no need of apparitions. The Word of God is sufficient to impart the knowledge of salvation. But man who is a liar delights himself in these fallacious novelties because he has no relish for the Word of God.[[434]] Holy Scripture forbids us to seek after the truth at the hands of the dead.’ In support of his proposition he quoted Deut. xix. 9; Lev. xx. 6; Isa. viii. 19; and Luke xvi. 27.
The two combatants had displayed at first great moderation; but they gradually got excited and, forgetting the respect due to an assembly so august as that which was listening to them, they began to use, according to the practice of the age, rather strong expressions. The king declared the discussion to be ended, pronounced victory to remain with the evangelical doctor, and gave command that the proceedings of the disputation should be drawn up and published, in order that religious men might be able to judge on which side the truth lay.[[435]]
Irritation Of Parties.
This colloquy of 1526, notwithstanding its great importance, was far from re-establishing unity. The partisans of the Roman Church regretted that they had allowed themselves to be drawn into it. Bishop Brask accused the archbishop of weakness, and severely blamed him for having authorized the disputation. ‘The Catholic faith,’ he wrote to him, ‘is beyond objection altogether, nor is it permissible to subject it to examination. You will never be able to justify yourself before the pope.’ This fierce champion of the papacy was constantly repeating to those about him that ‘it was to the bishops and the doctors of the Church that Christ entrusted the interpretation of Holy Scripture;[[436]] and that Olaf must be taken to Rome, not for the purpose of convincing him and those like him, but to have them put to death by fire or by sword.’[[437]]