Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 9.djvu/485

 LTTTHSB

442

LTTTHEB

offices. For this payment, which smacked of simony, though the Protestant historian, Kalkoff ("Archiv. fQr Reform. Geschichte", 1, 381), claims such a charge to be untenable, the pope would allow an indemnity, which in this case took the form of an indulgence (Kawerau,**Stud.u.Kritik", 1898, 584-85; Kalkoff, op. cit.; * Schulte, " Die Fugger in Rom.", Leipzig, I, 1904, 93 , 1 40) . By this ignoble business aim ngement with Rome, a financial transaction unw^orthy of both pope and archbishop, the revenue should be partitioned m equal halves to each, besides a bonus of 10,000 gold ducats, which should fall to the share of Rome. John Tetzcl, a Dominican monk with an impreasive per- sonality, a gift of popular oratory, and the repute of a successful indulgence preacher, was chosen by the archbishop as general-subcommissar}'. History pre- sents few characters more unfortunate and pathetic than Tetzel. Among his contemporaries the victim of the most corrosive ridicule, eveiy foul c4iarge laid at his door, every blasphemous uttemnce placed in his mouth, a veritable literature of fiction and fable built about his personality, in modern history held up as the proverbial mountebank and oily harlequin, denied even the support and sympathy of his own allies — Tetzel had to await the light of modern critical scru- tiny, not only for a moral rehabilitation, but also for vindication as a soundly trained theologian and a monk of irreproachable deportment (*Paulus, " Johann Tetzel", Mainz, 1899; *Ilormann, "Johann Tetzel", Frankfort, 1882; *Grdne, "Tetzel und Luther", Soest, 1860). It was his preaching at JQterbog and Zerbst, towns adjoining Wittenberg, that drew hearers from there, who in turn presented themselves to Luther for confession, that made him take the step he had in contemplation for more than a year. It is not denied that a doctrine like that of indulgences, which in some aspects was still a disputable subject in the schools, was open to misunderstanding and misconception by the laity; that the preachers in the heat of rnetorical enthusiasm fell into exaggerated statements, or that the financial considerations attached, though not of an obligatory character, led to abuse and scandal (*Jans- sen, "Geschichte des deutsch. Volkes", II, Freiburg, 1892, 78; *"IIist. Jahresbuch", XII, 320. 321). The opposition to indulgences, not to the doctrine — which remains the same to this day — but to the mercantile methods pursued in preaching them, was not new or silent. Duke George of Saxony prohibited them in his territory, and Cardinal Ximenes, as early as 1513, forbade them in Spain (Ranke. " Deutsche Gesch. im Zeit. der Reformation", I, Berlin, 1839, 307).

On 31 October, 1517, the vigil of All Saints*, Luther affixed to the castle church door, which served ti» the " black-lx)ard " of the university, on which all notices of disputations and high academic functions were dis- played (Beard, op. cit., 213), his Ninety-five Theses. The act was not an open declaration of war, but simply an academic challenge to a disputation. " Such disputations w^ere regarded in the universities of the Miadle Ages partly as a recognized means of defining and elucidating truth, partly as a kind of mental eymnastie apt to train and quicken the faculties of the disputants. It was not understood that a man was always ready to adopt in sol)er earnest propositions which he was willing to defend in the academic arena; and in like manner a rising disputant might attack orthodox positions, without enclangering hi-* reputa- tion for orthodoxy" (Beanl, op. cit.). The same day he sent a copy of the Theses with an explanatory letter to the archbishop. The latter in turn submitted them to his councillors at Aschaffenburg (*Pa.'*tor, op. cit., 242) and to the professora of the University of Alainz. The councillors (*Pastor, op. cit.) were of the unani- mous opinion that they were of an heretical character, and that proceeriings "against the Wittenberg Augus- tinian should Iw taken. This report, with a copy of £&e Tbejses, was then transmitted to the pope. It will

thus be seen that the first judicial procedure against Luther did not emanate from Tetzel. His weapons were to be literary.

Tetzel, more readily than some of the contemporary brilliant theologians, divined the revolutionary import of the Theses, which while ostensibly aimed at the abuse of indiilgences, were a covert attack on the whole penitential system of the Church and struck at the veiy root of ecclesiastical authority. Luther's Theses impress the reader " as thrown together, some- what in haste", rather than showing 'carefully di- gested thought, and deliberate theological intention "; they "bear him one moment into the audacity of rebellion and then carry him back to the obedience of conformity" (Bcaid, 218, 219). Tetzel's anti-theses were maintained partly in a disputation for the doc- torate at Frankfort-on-the-Oder (20 Jan., 1518), and issued with others in an unnumbered list, and are commonly known as the One Hundred and Six Theses. They, however, did not have Tetzel for their author, but were promptly and rightfully attributed to Conrad AV impina, his teacher at Leipzig. That this fact argues no imorance of theology or unfamiliarity with Latin on the part of Tetzel. as has been generally assumed, is frankly admitted by Protestant writers (Lammer, "Die vortridentinische katholische Theologie". Ber- lin, 1858, 8). It was simply a legitimate custom pursued in academic circles, as we know from Melanch- thon himself (Hausleiter, "Aus der Schule Melanch- thons", Griefswald, 1897, 5; Beard, op. cit., 224). Tetzel's Theses — for he assumed all res|)onsibility — opposed to Luther's innovations the traditional teaching of the (.-hurch; b«t it must be admitted that they at times gave an imcompromising, even dogmatic, sanction to mere theological opinions, that were hardly consonant with the most accurate scholarship. At Wittenberg they created wild excitement, and an un- fortunate hawKer who offered them for sale, was mobbed by the students, and his stock of about eight hundred copies publicly burned in the market square — a proceeding that met with Luther's disapproval. The plea then made, and still repeated, that it was done in retaliation for Tetzel burning Luther's Theses, is admittedly incorrect, in spite of the fact that it has Melanchthon as sponsor (Beard, op. cit., 225, note; ♦Paulus, op. cit., 52). Instead of replying to Tetzel, Luther carried the controversy from the academic arena to the public forum by issuing in popular ver- nacular form his " Sermon on Indulgences and Grace ". It was really a tract, where the sermon form was aban- doned and -twenty propositions laid down. At the same time his Latin defence of the Theses, the " Reso- lutiones ", was well under way. In it« finished form, it was sent to his ordinary, Bishop Scultetus of Bran- denburg, who counselled silence and abstention from all further publications for the present. I^uther's acouiescence was that of the true monk: " I am ready, ana will rather obey than perform miracles in my justification" (Kfistlin-Kawerau, I, 170).

At this staeB a new source of contention arose. Johann Ekjk, Vice-Chancel lor of the University of Ingolstadt, by common consent acknowledged as one of the foremost theological scholars of his day, en- dowed with rare dialectic skill and phenomenal mem- ory, all of which Luther (De Wette, op. cit., I, 100) candidly admitted before the I..eipzig disputation took place, innocently became invoh'ed in the controversy. At the request of Bishop von Kyb, of Eichstiitt, he subjected the Theses to a cla*<er study, singled out eighteen of them as concealing the germ of the Hussite heresy, violating Christian charity, subverting the order of the ecclesiastical hierarchv, and breeding sedition. These "Obelisci" ("olx^lisks", the old printer's device for not ing doul)tf ul or spurious pa.s- sages) were submitted to the bishop in manuscript form, passed around among intimates, and not in- tended for publication. In one of their transcribed