Page:Luther's correspondence and other contemporary letters 1507-1521.djvu/215

 knew that what Eck and his supporters brought forth was falsehood.

This is not remarkable, for Eck is entirely unversed in the Holy Scriptures. And, what is more, he does not even know as much sophistry^ as a man who wants to be thought so great a debater ought, for he boasts and claims to be a father and patron of sophistry. For I have smelled about a little, and understand the affair rightly (although I have neither reason nor discrimination), namely, that Eck speaks all that is in his mind and memory without reason, judgment or dis- crimination, although he can utter the words he has learned with great pomp and proper gesture. He does not seek the truth, but only to show off his memory and to defend the teachers of his school. ..

That you may believe that what I say is true, hear a text of the Bible which, with the counsel of the inept and un- learned sophists of Leipsic, Eck cited and brought forward to defend papal indulgence. It stands in Isaiah Ixi. i : "The spirit of the Lord is upon me ; therefore the Lord has anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim to the captives indul- gence/'^ that is, forgiveness of sins. See, my dear Spalatin, this one word (indulgence), which these famous sophists of Leipsic found in the large Concordance to the Bible, wrote for Eck with chalk upon a blackboard and sent to him the following day to support papal indulgences which have recently been invented for the sake of gain. For the prophet* does not speak of the forgiveness of sins by indulgence, but of our Lord and Saviour becoming a man. Just look at the unhappy, stupid sophists. But I am not surprised, for they know nothing. But I am surprised that Eck took the said text into the debate and uttered it before so remarkable an assembly, and dictated it to the notaries.

It is true, however, that Eck surpassed Dr. Carlstadt by far in memory and delivery, so that I was sorry that the thing had been begun, not because Eck won the victory, but because, had

'Amsdorf means scholastic learning, but the effect it comic '"Indulgentiam** in the Vulgate; "liberty" in our authorized Teraion. > After all, which was the more unhistorical error, that of Eck or tihat of Amsdorf?

�� �