Address To The Nobility of the German Nation
1520
Martin Luther (1483-1546)
|
Introductory Note
Martin Luther, the leader of the Protestant
Reformation, was born at Eisleben, Prussian
Saxony, November 10, 1483. He studied jurisprudence
at the University of Erfurt, where he later
lectured on physics and ethics. In 1505 he
entered the Augustinian monastery at Erfurt;
two years later was ordained priest; and
in 1508 became professor of philosophy at
the University of Wittenberg.
The starting-point of Luther's career as
a reformer was his posting on the church
door of Wittenberg the Ninety-five Theses
on October 31, 1517. These formed a passionate
statement of the true nature of penitence,
and a protest against the sale of indulgences.
In issuing the Theses, Luther expected the
support of his ecclesiastical superiors;
and it was only after three years of controversy,
during which he refused a summons to Rome,
that he proceeded to publish those works
that brought about his expulsion from the
Church.
The year 1520 saw the publication of the
three great documents which laid down the
fundamental principles of the Reformation.
In the "Address to the Christian Nobility
of the German Nation," Luther attacked
the corruptions of the Church and the abuses
of its authority, and asserted the right
of the layman to spiritual independence.
In "Concerning Christian Liberty,"
he expounded the doctrine of justification
by faith, and gave a complete presentation
of his theological position. In the "Babylonish
Captivity of the Church," he criticized
the sacramental system, and set up the Scriptures
as the supreme authority in religion.
In the midst of this activity came his formal
excommunication, and his renunciation of
allegiance to the Pope. He was proscribed
by the Emperor Charles V and taken into the
protection of prison in the Wartburg by the
friendly Elector of Saxony, where he translated
the New Testament. The complete translation
of the Bible, issued in 1534, marks the establishment
of the modern literary language of Germany.
The rest of Luther's life was occupied with
a vast amount of literary and controversial
activity. He died at Eisleben, February 18,
1546.
|
Introduction
The Three Walls Of The Romanists
Of The Matters To Be Considered In The Councils
Twenty-Seven Articles Respecting The Reformation
Of The Christian Estate
To his most Serene and Mighty Imperial Majesty
and to the Christian Nobility of the German
Nation. Dr. Martinus Luther.
The grace and might of God be with you, Most
Serene Majesty, most gracious, well-beloved
gentlemen!
It is not out of mere arrogance and perversity
that I, an individual poor man, have taken
upon me to address your lordships. The distress
and misery that oppress all the Christian
estates, more especially in Germany, have
led not only myself, but every one else,
to cry aloud and to ask for help, and have
now forced me too to cry out and to ask if
God would give His Spirit to any one to reach
a hand to His wretched people. Councils have
often put forward some remedy, but it has
adroitly been frustrated, and the evils have
become worse, through the cunning of certain
men. Their malice and wickedness I will now,
by the help of God, expose, so that, being
known, they may henceforth cease to be so
obstructive and injurious. God has given
us a young and noble sovereign, 1 and by
this has roused great hopes in many hearts;
now it is right that we too should do what
we can, and make good use of time and grace.
[Footnote 1: Charles V. was at that time
not quite twenty years of age.]
The first thing that we must do is to consider
the matter with great earnestness, and, whatever
we attempt, not to trust in our own strength
and wisdom alone, even if the power of all
the world were ours; for God will not endure
that a good work should be begun trusting
to our own strength and wisdom. He destroys
it; it is all useless, as we read in Psalm
xxxiii., "There is no king saved by
the multitude of a host; a mighty man is
not delivered by much strength." And
I fear it is for that reason that those beloved
princes the Emperors Frederick, the First
and the Second, and many other German emperors
were, in former times, so piteously spurned
and oppressed by the popes, though they were
feared by all the world. Perchance they trusted
rather in their own strength than in God;
therefore they could not but fall; and how
would the sanguinary tyrant Julius II. have
risen so high in our own days but that, I
fear, France, Germany, and Venice trusted
to themselves? The children of Benjamin slew
forty-two thousand Israelites, for this reason:
that these trusted to their own strength
(Judges xx., etc.).
That such a thing may not happen to us and
to our noble Emperor Charles, we must remember
that in this matter we wrestle not against
flesh and blood, but against the rulers of
the darkness of this world (Eph. vi.
12), who may fill the world with war and
bloodshed, but cannot themselves be overcome
thereby. We must renounce all confidence
in our natural strength, and take the matter
in hand with humble trust in God; we must
seek God's help with earnest prayer, and
have nothing before our eyes but the misery
and wretchedness of Christendom, irrespective
of what punishment the wicked may deserve.
If we do not act thus, we may begin the game
with great pomp; but when we are well in
it, the spirits of evil will make such confusion
that the whole world will be immersed in
blood, and yet nothing be done. Therefore
let us act in the fear of God and prudently.
The greater the might of the foe, the greater
is the misfortune, if we do not act in the
fear of God and with humility. If popes and
Romanists have hitherto, with the devil's
help, thrown kings into confusion, they may
still do so, if we attempt things with our
own strength and skill, without God's help.
The Three Walls Of The Romanists
The Romanists have, with great adroitness,
drawn three walls round themselves, with
which they have hitherto protected themselves,
so that no one could reform them, whereby
all Christendom has fallen terribly.
Firstly, if pressed by the temporal power,
they have affirmed and maintained that the
temporal power has no jurisdiction over them,
but, on the contrary, that the spiritual
power is above the temporal.
Secondly, if it were proposed to admonish
them with the Scriptures, they objected that
no one may interpret the Scriptures but the
Pope.
Thirdly, if they are threatened with a council,
they pretend that no one may call a council
but the Pope.
Thus they have secretly stolen our three
rods, so that they may be unpunished, and
intrenched themselves behind these three
walls, to act with all the wickedness and
malice, which we now witness. And whenever
they have been compelled to call a council,
they have made it of no avail by binding
the princes beforehand with an oath to leave
them as they were, and to give moreover to
the Pope full power over the procedure of
the council, so that it is all one whether
we have many councils or no councils, in
addition to which they deceive us with false
pretences and tricks. So grievously do they
tremble for their skin before a true, free
council; and thus they have overawed kings
and princes, that these believe they would
be offending God, if they were not to obey
them in all such knavish, deceitful artifices.
Now may God help us, and give us one of those
trumpets that overthrew the walls of Jericho,
so that we may blow down these walls of straw
and paper, and that we may set free our Christian
rods for the chastisement of sin, and expose
the craft and deceit of the devil, so that
we may amend ourselves by punishment and
again obtain God's favour.
(a) The First Wall
That the Temporal Power has no Jurisdiction
over the Spirituality
Let us, in the first place, attack the first
wall.
It has been devised that the Pope, bishops,
priests, and monks are called the spiritual
estate, princes, lords, artificers, and peasants
are the temporal estate. This is an artful
lie and hypocritical device, but let no one
be made afraid by it, and that for this reason:
that all Christians are truly of the spiritual
estate, and there is no difference among
them, save of office alone. As St. Paul says
(1 Cor. xii.), we are all one body, though
each member does its own work, to serve the
others. This is because we have one baptism,
one Gospel, one faith, and are all Christians
alike; for baptism, Gospel, and faith, these
alone make spiritual and Christian people.
As for the unction by a pope or a bishop,
tonsure, ordination, consecration, and clothes
differing from those of laymen-all this may
make a hypocrite or an anointed puppet, but
never a Christian or a spiritual man. Thus
we are all consecrated as priests by baptism,
as St. Peter says: "Ye are a royal priesthood,
a holy nation" (1 Peter ii. 9); and
in the book of Revelations: "and hast
made us unto our God (by Thy blood) kings
and priests" (Rev. v. 10). For, if we
had not a higher consecration in us than
pope or bishop can give, no priest could
ever be made by the consecration of pope
or bishop, nor could he say the mass, or
preach, or absolve. Therefore the bishop's
consecration is just as if in the name of
the whole congregation he took one person
out of the community, each member of which
has equal power, and commanded him to exercise
this power for the rest; in the same way
as if ten brothers, co-heirs as king's sons,
were to choose one from among them to rule
over their inheritance, they would all of
them still remain kings and have equal power,
although one is ordered to govern.
And to put the matter even more plainly,
if a little company of pious Christian laymen
were taken prisoners and carried away to
a desert, and had not among them a priest
consecrated by a bishop, and were there to
agree to elect one of them, born in wedlock
or not, and were to order him to baptise,
to celebrate the mass, to absolve, and to
preach, this man would as truly be a priest,
as if all the bishops and all the Popes had
consecrated him. That is why in cases of
necessity every man can baptise and absolve,
which would not be possible if we were not
all priests. This great grace and virtue
of baptism and of the Christian estate they
have quite destroyed and made us forget by
their ecclesiastical law. In this way the
Christians used to choose their bishops and
priests out of the community; these being
afterwards confirmed by other bishops, without
the pomp that now prevails. So was it that
St. Augustine, Ambrose, Cyprian, were bishops.
Since, then, the temporal power is baptised
as we are, and has the same faith and Gospel,
we must allow it to be priest and bishop,
and account its office an office that is
proper and useful to the Christian community.
For whatever issues from baptism may boast
that it has been consecrated priest, bishop,
and pope, although it does not beseem every
one to exercise these offices. For, since
we are all priests alike, no man may put
himself forward or take upon himself, without
our consent and election, to do that which
we have all alike power to do. For, if a
thing is common to all, no man may take it
to himself without the wish and command of
the community. And if it should happen that
a man were appointed to one of these offices
and deposed for abuses, he would be just
what he was before. Therefore a priest should
be nothing in Christendom but a functionary;
as long as he holds his office, he has precedence
of others; if he is deprived of it, he is
a peasant or a citizen like the rest. Therefore
a priest is verily no longer a priest after
deposition. But now they have invented characteres
indelebiles, 2 and pretend that a priest
after deprivation still differs from a simple
layman. They even imagine that a priest can
never be anything but a priest-that is, that
he can never become a layman. All this is
nothing but mere talk and ordinance of human
invention.
[Footnote 2: In accordance with a doctrine
of the Roman Catholic Church, the act of
ordination impresses upon the priest an indelible
character; so that he immutably retains the
sacred dignity of priesthood.]
It follows, then, that between laymen and
priests, princes and bishops, or, as they
call it, between spiritual and temporal persons,
the only real difference is one of office
and function, and not of estate; for they
are all of the same spiritual estate, true
priests, bishops, and popes, though their
functions are not the same-just as among
priests and monks every man has not the same
functions. And this, as I said above, St.
Paul says (Rom. xii.; 1 Cor. xii.), and St.
Peter (1 Peter ii.): "We, being many,
are one body in Christ, and severally members
one of another." Christ's body is not
double or twofold, one temporal, the other
spiritual. He is one Head, and He has one
body.
We see, then, that just as those that we
call spiritual, or priests, bishops, or popes,
do not differ from other Christians in any
other or higher degree but in that they are
to be concerned with the word of God and
the sacraments-that being their work and
office-in the same way the temporal authorities
hold the sword and the rod in their hands
to punish the wicked and to protect the good.
A cobbler, a smith, a peasant, every man,
has the office and function of his calling,
and yet all alike are consecrated priests
and bishops, and every man should by his
office or function be useful and beneficial
to the rest, so that various kinds of work
may all be united for the furtherance of
body and soul, just as the members of the
body all serve one another.
Now see what a Christian doctrine is this:
that the temporal authority is not above
the clergy, and may not punish it. This is
as if one were to say the hand may not help,
though the eye is in grievous suffering.
Is it not unnatural, not to say unchristian,
that one member may not help another, or
guard it against harm? Nay, the nobler the
member, the more the rest are bound to help
it. Therefore I say, Forasmuch as the temporal
power has been ordained by God for the punishment
of the bad and the protection of the good,
therefore we must let it do its duty throughout
the whole Christian body, without respect
of persons, whether it strikes popes, bishops,
priests, monks, nuns, or whoever it may be.
If it were sufficient reason for fettering
the temporal power that it is inferior among
the offices of Christianity to the offices
of priest or confessor, or to the spiritual
estate-if this were so, then we ought to
restrain tailors, cobblers, masons, carpenters,
cooks, cellarmen, peasants, and all secular
workmen, from providing the Pope or bishops,
priests and monks, with shoes, clothes, houses
or victuals, or from paying them tithes.
But if these laymen are allowed to do their
work without restraint, what do the Romanist
scribes mean by their laws? They mean that
they withdraw themselves from the operation
of temporal Christian power, simply in order
that they may be free to do evil, and thus
fulfil what St. Peter said: "There shall
be false teachers among you, . . . and in
covetousness shall they with feigned words
make merchandise of you" (2 Peter ii.
1, etc.).
Therefore the temporal Christian power must
exercise its office without let or hindrance,
without considering whom it may strike, whether
pope, or bishop, or priest: whoever is guilty,
let him suffer for it.
Whatever the ecclesiastical law has said
in opposition to this is merely the invention
of Romanist arrogance. For this is what St.
Paul says to all Christians: "Let every
soul"
(I presume including the popes) "be
subject unto the higher powers; for they
bear not the sword in vain: they serve the
Lord therewith, for vengeance on evildoers
and for praise to them that do well"
(Rom. xiii. 1-
4). Also St. Peter: "Submit yourselves
to every ordinance of man for the Lord's
sake, . . . for so is the will of God"
(1 Peter ii. 13,
15). He has also foretold that men would
come who should despise government (2 Peter
ii.), as has come to pass through ecclesiastical
law.
Now, I imagine, the first paper wall is overthrown,
inasmuch as the temporal power has become
a member of the Christian body; although
its work relates to the body, yet does it
belong to the spiritual estate. Therefore,
it must do its duty without let or hindrance
upon all members of the whole body, to punish
or urge, as guilt may deserve, or need may
require, without respect of pope, bishops,
or priests, let them threaten or excommunicate
as they will. That is why a guilty priest
is deprived of his priesthood before being
given over to the secular arm; whereas this
would not be right, if the secular sword
had not authority over him already by Divine
ordinance.
It is, indeed, past bearing that the spiritual
law should esteem so highly the liberty,
life, and property of the clergy, as if laymen
were not as good spiritual Christians, or
not equally members of the Church. Why should
your body, life, goods, and honour be free,
and not mine, seeing that we are equal as
Christians, and have received alike baptism,
faith, spirit, and all things? If a priest
is killed, the country is laid under an interdict
3: why not also if a peasant is killed? Whence
comes this great difference among equal Christians?
Simply from human laws and inventions.
[Footnote 3: By the Interdict, or general
excommunication, whole countries, districts,
or towns, or their respective rulers, were
deprived of all the spiritual benefits of
the Church, such as Divine service, the administering
of the sacraments, etc.]
It can have been no good spirit, either,
that devised these evasions and made sin
to go unpunished. For if, as Christ and the
Apostles bid us, it is our duty to oppose
the evil one and all his works and words,
and to drive him away as well as may be,
how then should we remain quiet and be silent
when the Pope and his followers are guilty
of devilish works and words? Are we for the
sake of men to allow the commandments and
the truth of God to be defeated, which at
our baptism we vowed to support with body
and soul? Truly we should have to answer
for all souls that would thus be abandoned
and led astray.
Therefore it must have been the arch-devil
himself who said, as we read in the ecclesiastical
law, If the Pope were so perniciously wicked,
as to be dragging souls in crowds to the
devil, yet he could not be deposed. This
is the accursed and devilish foundation on
which they build at Rome, and think that
the whole world is to be allowed to go to
the devil rather than they should be opposed
in their knavery. If a man were to escape
punishment simply because he is above the
rest, then no Christian might punish another,
since Christ has commanded each of us to
esteem himself the lowest and the humblest
(Matt. xviii. 4; Luke ix. 48).
Where there is sin, there remains no avoiding
the punishment, as St. Gregory says, We are
all equal, but guilt makes one subject to
another. Now let us see how they deal with
Christendom. They arrogate to themselves
immunities without any warrant from the Scriptures,
out of their own wickedness, whereas God
and the Apostles made them subject to the
secular sword; so that we must fear that
it is the work of antichrist, or a sign of
his near approach.
(b) The Second Wall
That no one may interpret the Scriptures
but the Pope
The second wall is even more tottering and
weak: that they alone pretend to be considered
masters of the Scriptures; although they
learn nothing of them all their life. They
assume authority, and juggle before us with
impudent words, saying that the Pope cannot
err in matters of faith, whether he be evil
or good, albeit they cannot prove it by a
single letter. That is why the canon law
contains so many heretical and unchristian,
nay unnatural, laws; but of these we need
not speak now. For whereas they imagine the
Holy Ghost never leaves them, however unlearned
and wicked they may be, they grow bold enough
to decree whatever they like. But were this
true, where were the need and use of the
Holy Scriptures? Let us burn them, and content
ourselves with the unlearned gentlemen at
Rome, in whom the Holy Ghost dwells, who,
however, can dwell in pious souls only. If
I had not read it, I could never have believed
that the devil should have put forth such
follies at Rome and find a following.
But not to fight them with our own words,
we will quote the Scriptures. St. Paul says,
"If anything be revealed to another
that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace"
(1 Cor. xiv.
30). What would be the use of this commandment,
if we were to believe him alone that teaches
or has the highest seat? Christ Himself says,
"And they shall be all taught of God."
(St. John vi. 45). Thus it may come to pass
that the Pope and his followers are wicked
and not true Christians, and not being taught
by God, have no true understanding, whereas
a common man may have true understanding.
Why should we then not follow him? Has not
the Pope often erred? Who could help Christianity,
in case the Pope errs, if we do not rather
believe another who has the Scriptures for
him?
Therefore it is a wickedly devised fable-and
they cannot quote a single letter to confirm
it-that it is for the Pope alone to interpret
the Scriptures or to confirm the interpretation
of them. They have assumed the authority
of their own selves. And though they say
that this authority was given to St. Peter
when the keys were given to him, it is plain
enough that the keys were not given to St.
Peter alone, but to the whole community.
Besides, the keys were not ordained for doctrine
or authority, but for sin, to bind or loose,
and what they claim besides this from the
keys is mere invention. But what Christ said
to St. Peter: "I have prayed for thee
that thy faith fail not" (St. Luke xxii.
32), cannot relate to the Pope, inasmuch
as the greater part of the Popes have been
without faith, as they are themselves forced
to acknowledge; nor did Christ pray for Peter
alone, but for all the Apostles and all Christians,
as He says, "Neither pray I for these
alone, but for them also which shall believe
on Me through their word" (St. John
xvii.). Is not this plain enough?
Only consider the matter. They must needs
acknowledge that there are pious Christians
among us that have the true faith, spirit,
understanding, word, and mind of Christ:
why then should we reject their word and
understanding, and follow a pope who has
neither understanding nor spirit? Surely
this were to deny our whole faith and the
Christian Church. Moreover, if the article
of our faith is right, "I believe in
the holy Christian Church," the Pope
cannot alone be right; else we must say,
"I believe in the Pope of Rome,"
and reduce the Christian Church to one man,
which is a devilish and damnable heresy.
Besides that, we are all priests, as I have
said, and have all one faith, one Gospel,
one Sacrament; how then should we not have
the power of discerning and judging what
is right or wrong in matters of faith? What
becomes of St. Paul's words, "But he
that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet
he himself is judged of no man" (1 Cor.
ii. 15), and also, "we having the same
spirit of faith"? (2 Cor. iv. 13). Why
then should we not perceive as well as an
unbelieving pope what agrees or disagrees
with our faith?
By these and many other texts we should gain
courage and freedom, and should not let the
spirit of liberty (as St. Paul has it) be
frightened away by the inventions of the
popes; we should boldly judge what they do
and what they leave undone by our own believing
understanding of the Scriptures, and force
them to follow the better understanding,
and not their own. Did not Abraham in old
days have to obey his Sarah, who was in stricter
bondage to him than we are to any one on
earth? Thus, too, Balaam's ass was wiser
than the prophet. If God spoke by an ass
against a prophet, why should He not speak
by a pious man against the Pope? Besides,
St. Paul withstood St. Peter as being in
error (Gal. ii.). Therefore it behoves every
Christian to aid the faith by understanding
and defending it and by condemning all errors.
(c) The Third Wall
That no one may call a council but the Pope
The third wall falls of itself, as soon as
the first two have fallen; for if the Pope
acts contrary to the Scriptures, we are bound
to stand by the Scriptures, to punish and
to constrain him, according to Christ's commandment,
"Moreover, if thy brother shall trespass
against thee, go and tell him his fault between
thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee,
thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will
not hear thee, then take with thee one or
two more, that in the mouth of two or three
witnesses every word may be established.
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell
it unto the Church; but if he neglect to
hear the Church, let him be unto thee as
a heathen man and a publican" (St. Matt.
xviii. 15-17). Here each member is commanded
to take care for the other; much more then
should we do this, if it is a ruling member
of the community that does evil, which by
its evil-doing causes great harm and offence
to the others. If then I am to accuse him
before the Church, I must collect the Church
together. Moreover, they can show nothing
in the Scriptures giving the Pope sole power
to call and confirm councils; they have nothing
but their own laws; but these hold good only
so long as they are not injurious to Christianity
and the laws of God. Therefore, if the Pope
deserves punishment, these laws cease to
bind us, since Christendom would suffer,
if he were not punished by a council. Thus
we read (Acts xv.) that the council of the
Apostles was not called by St. Peter, but
by all the Apostles and the elders. But if
the right to call it had lain with St. Peter
alone, it would not have been a Christian
council, but a heretical conciliabulum. Moreover,
the most celebrated council of all-that of
Nicaea-was neither called nor confirmed by
the Bishop of Rome, but by the Emperor Constantine;
and after him many other emperors have done
the same, and yet the councils called by
them were accounted most Christian. But if
the Pope alone had the power, they must all
have been heretical. Moreover, if I consider
the councils that the Pope has called, I
do not find that they produced any notable
results.
Therefore when need requires, and the Pope
is a cause of offence to Christendom, in
these cases whoever can best do so, as a
faithful member of the whole body, must do
what he can to procure a true free council.
This no one can do so well as the temporal
authorities, especially since they are fellow-Christians,
fellow-priests, sharing one spirit and one
power in all things, and since they should
exercise the office that they have received
from God without hindrance, whenever it is
necessary and useful that it should be exercised.
Would it not be most unnatural, if a fire
were to break out in a city, and every one
were to keep still and let it burn on and
on, whatever might be burnt, simply because
they had not the mayor's authority, or because
the fire perchance broke out at the mayor's
house? Is not every citizen bound in this
case to rouse and call in the rest? How much
more should this be done in the spiritual
city of Christ, if a fire of offence breaks
out, either at the Pope's government or wherever
it may! The like happens if an enemy attacks
a town. The first to rouse up the rest earns
glory and thanks. Why then should not he
earn glory that descries the coming of our
enemies from hell and rouses and summons
all Christians?
But as for their boasts of their authority,
that no one must oppose it, this is idle
talk. No one in Christendom has any authority
to do harm, or to forbid others to prevent
harm being done. There is no authority in
the Church but for reformation. Therefore
if the Pope wished to use his power to prevent
the calling of a free council, so as to prevent
the reformation of the Church, we must not
respect him or his power; and if he should
begin to excommunicate and fulminate, we
must despise this as the doings of a madman,
and, trusting in God, excommunicate and repel
him as best we may. For this his usurped
power is nothing; he does not possess it,
and he is at once overthrown by a text from
the Scriptures. For St. Paul says to the
Corinthians "that God has given us authority
for edification, and not for destruction
(2 Cor. x. 8). Who will set this text at
nought? It is the power of the devil and
of antichrist that prevents what would serve
for the reformation of Christendom. Therefore
we must not follow it, but oppose it with
our body, our goods, and all that we have.
And even if a miracle were to happen in favour
of the Pope against the temporal power, or
if some were to be stricken by a plague,
as they sometimes boast has happened, all
this is to be held as having been done by
the devil in order to injure our faith in
God, as was foretold by Christ: "There
shall arise false Christs and false prophets,
and shall show great sings and wonders, insomuch
that, if it were possible, they shall deceive
the very elect" (Matt. xxiv. 23); and
St. Paul tells the Thessalonians that the
coming of antichrist shall be "after
the working of Satan with all power and signs
and lying wonders" (2 Thess. ii. 9).
Therefore let us hold fast to this: that
Christian power can do nothing against Christ,
as St. Paul says, "For we can do nothing
against Christ, but for Christ" (2 Cor.
xiii. 8). But, if it does anything against
Christ, it is the power of antichrist and
the devil, even if it rained and hailed wonders
and plagues. Wonders and plagues prove nothing,
especially in these latter evil days, of
which false wonders are foretold in all the
Scriptures. Therefore we must hold fast to
the words of God with an assured faith; then
the devil will soon cease his wonders.
And now I hope the false, lying spectre will
be laid with which the Romanists have long
terrified and stupefied our consciences.
And it will be seen that, like all the rest
of us, they are subject to the temporal sword;
that they have no authority to interpret
the Scriptures by force without skill; and
that they have no power to prevent a council,
or to pledge it in accordance with their
pleasure, or to bind it beforehand, and deprive
it of its freedom; and that if they do this,
they are verily of the fellowship of antichrist
and the devil, and having nothing of Christ
but the name.
Of The Matters To Be Considered In The Councils
Let us now consider the matters which should
be treated in the councils, and with which
popes, cardinals, bishops, and all learned
men should occupy themselves day and night,
if they love Christ and His Church. But if
they do not do so, the people at large and
the temporal powers must do so, without considering
the thunders of their excommunications. For
an unjust excommunication is better than
ten just absolutions, and an unjust absolution
is worse than ten just excommunications.
Therefore let us rouse ourselves, fellow-Germans,
and fear God more than man, that we be not
answerable for all the poor souls that are
so miserably lost through the wicked, devilish
government of the Romanists, and that the
dominion of the devil should not grow day
by day, if indeed this hellish government
can grow any worse, which, for my part, I
can neither conceive nor believe.
1. It is a distressing and terrible thing
to see that the head of Christendom, who
boasts of being the vicar of Christ and the
successor of St. Peter, lives in a worldly
pomp that no king or emperor can equal, so
that in him that calls himself most holy
and most spiritual there is more worldliness
than in the world itself. He wears a triple
crown, whereas the mightiest kings only wear
one crown. If this resembles the poverty
of Christ and St. Peter, it is a new sort
of resemblance. They prate of its being heretical
to object to this; nay, they will not even
hear how unchristian and ungodly it is. But
I think that if he should have to pray to
God with tears, he would have to lay down
his crowns; for God will not endure any arrogance.
His office should be nothing else than to
weep and pray constantly for Christendom
and to be an example of all humility.
However this may be, this pomp is a stumbling-block,
and the Pope, for the very salvation of his
soul, ought to put if off, for St. Paul says,
"Abstain from all appearance of evil"
(1 Thess. v. 21), and again, "Provide
things honest in the sight of all men"
(2 Cor. viii. 21). A simple mitre would be
enough for the pope: wisdom and sanctity
should raise him above the rest; the crown
of pride he should leave to antichrist, as
his predecessors did some hundreds of years
ago. They say, He is the ruler of the world.
This is false; for Christ, whose vicegerent
and vicar he claims to be, said to Pilate,
"My kingdom is not of this world"
(John xviii. 36). But no vicegerent can have
a wider dominion than this Lord, nor is he
a vicegerent of Christ in His glory, but
of Christ crucified, as St. Paul says, "For
I determined not to know anything among you
save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified"
(2 Cor. ii. 2), and "Let this mind be
in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who
made Himself of no reputation, and took upon
Himself the form of a servant"
(Phil. ii. 5, 7). Again, "We preach
Christ crucified" (1 Cor. i.). Now they
make the Pope a vicegerent of Christ exalted
in heaven, and some have let the devil rule
them so thoroughly that they have maintained
that the Pope is above the angels in heaven
and has power over them, which is precisely
the true work of the true antichrist.
2. What is the use in Christendom of the
people called "cardinals"? I will
tell you. In Italy and Germany there are
many rich convents, endowments, fiefs, and
benefices, and as the best way of getting
these into the hands of rRome, they created
cardinals, and gave them the sees, convents,
and prelacies, and thus destroyed the service
of God. That is why Italy is almost a desert
now: the convents are destroyed, the sees
consumed, the revenues of the prelacies and
of all the churches drawn to Rome; towns
are decayed, the country and the people ruined,
because there is no more any worship of God
or preaching; why? Because the cardinals
must have all the wealth. No Turk could have
thus desolated Italy and overthrown the worship
of God.
Now that Italy is sucked dry, they come to
Germany and begin very quietly; but if we
look on quietly Germany will soon be brought
into the same state as Italy. We have a few
cardinals already. What the Romanists mean
thereby the drunken Germans 4 are not to
see until they have lost everything - bishoprics,
convents, benefices, fiefs, even to their
last farthing. Antichrist must take the riches
of the earth, as it is written (Dan. xi.
8, 39, 43). They begin by taking off the
cream of the bishoprics, convents and fiefs;
and as they do not dare to destroy everything
as they have done in Italy, they employ such
holy cunning to join together ten or twenty
prelacies, and take such a portion of each
annually that the total amounts to a considerable
sum. The priory of Wurzburg gives one thousand
guilders; those of Bamberg, Mayence, Treves,
and others also contribute. In this way they
collect one thousand or ten thousand guilders,
in order that a cardinal may live at Rome
in a state like that of a wealthy monarch.
[Footnote 4: The epithet "drunken"
was formerly often applied by the Italians
to the Germans.]
After we have gained this, we will create
thirty or forty cardinals on one day, and
give one St. Michael's Mount, 5 near Bamberg,
and likewise the see of Wurzburg, to which
belong some rich benefices, until the churches
and the cities are desolated; and then we
shall say, We are the vicars of Christ, the
shepherds of Christ's flocks; those mad,
drunken Germans must submit to it. I advise,
however, that there be made fewer cardinals,
or that the Pope should have to support them
out of his own purse. It would be amply sufficient
if there were twelve, and if each of them
had an annual income of one thousand guilders.
[Footnote 5: Luther alludes here to the Benedictine
convent standing on the Monchberg, or St.
Michael's Mount.]
What has brought us Germans to such a pass
that we have to suffer this robbery and this
destruction of our property by the Pope?
If the kingdom of France has resisted it,
why do we Germans suffer ourselves to be
fooled and deceived? It would be more endurable
if they did nothing but rob us of our property;
but they destroy the Church and deprive Christ's
flock of their good shepherds, and overthrow
the service and word of God. Even if there
were no cardinals at all, the Church would
not perish, for they do nothing for the good
of Christendom; all they do is to traffic
in and quarrel about prelacies and bishoprics,
which any robber could do as well.
3. If we took away ninety-nine parts of the
Pope's Court and only left one hundredth,
it would still be large enough to answer
questions on matters of belief. Now there
is such a swarm of vermin at Rome, all called
papal, that Babylon itself never saw the
like. There are more than three thousand
papal secretaries alone; but who shall count
the other office-bearers, since there are
so many offices that we can scarcely count
them, and all waiting for German benefices,
as wolves wait for a flock of sheep? I think
Germany now pays more to the Pope than it
formerly paid the emperors; nay, some think
more than three hundred thousand guilders
are sent from Germany to Rome every year,
for nothing whatever; and in return we are
scoffed at and put to shame. Do we still
wonder why princes, noblemen, cities, foundations,
convents, and people grow poor? We should
rather wonder that we have anything left
to eat.
Now that we have got well into our game,
let us pause a while and show that the Germans
are not such fools as not to perceive or
understand this Romish trickery. I do not
here complain that God's commandments and
Christian justice are despised at Rome; for
the state of things in Christendom, especially
at Rome, is too bad for us to complain of
such high matters. Nor do I even complain
that no account is taken of natural or secular
justice and reason. The mischief lies still
deeper. I complain that they do not observe
their own fabricated canon law, though this
is in itself rather mere tyranny, avarice,
and worldly pomp, than a law. This we shall
now show.
Long ago the emperors and princes of Germany
allowed the Pope to claim the annates 6 from
all German benefices; that is, half of the
first year's income from every benefice.
The object of this concession was that the
Pope should collect a fund with all this
money to fight against the Turks and infidels,
and to protect Christendom, so that the nobility
should not have to bear the burden of the
struggle alone, and that the priests should
also contribute. The popes have made such
use of this good simple piety of the Germans
that they have taken this money for more
than one hundred years, and have now made
of it a regular tax and duty; and not only
have they accumulated nothing, but they have
founded out of it many posts and offices
at Rome, which are paid by it yearly, as
out of a ground-rent.
[Footnote 6: The duty of paying annates to
the Pope was established by John XXII. in
1319.]
Whenever there is any pretence of fighting
the Turks, they send out some commission
for collecting money, and often send out
indulgences under the same pretext of fighting
the Turks. They think we Germans will always
remain such great and inveterate fools that
we will go on giving money to satisfy their
unspeakable greed, though we see plainly
that neither annates, nor absolution money,
nor any other-not one farthing-goes against
the Turks, but all goes into the bottomless
sack. They lie and deceive, form and make
covenants with us, of which they do not mean
to keep one jot. And all this is done in
the holy name of Christ and St. Peter.
This being so, the German nation, the bishops
and princes, should remember that they are
Christians, and should defend the people,
who are committed to their government and
protection in temporal and spiritual affairs,
from these ravenous wolves in sheep's clothing
that profess to be shepherds and rulers;
and since the annates are so shamefully abused,
and the covenants concerning them not carried
out, they should not suffer their lands and
people to be so piteously and unrighteously
flayed and ruined; but by an imperial or
a national law they should either retain
the annates in the country, or abolish them
altogether. For since they do not keep to
the covenants, they have no right to the
annates; therefore bishops and princes are
bound to punish this thievery and robbery,
or prevent it, as justice demands. And herein
should they assist and strengthen the Pope,
who is perchance too weak to prevent this
scandal by himself, or, if he wishes to protect
or support it, restrain and oppose him as
a wolf and tyrant; for he has no authority
to do evil or to protect evil-doers. Even
if it were proposed to collect any such treasure
for use against the Turks, we should be wise
in future, and remember that the German nation
is more fitted to take charge of it than
the Pope, seeing that the German nation by
itself is able to provide men enough, if
the money is forthcoming. This matter of
the annates is like many other Romish pretexts.
Moreover, the year has been divided among
the Pope and the ruling bishops and foundations
in such wise that the Pope has taken every
other month-six in all-to give away the benefices
that fall in his month; in this way almost
all the benefices are drawn into the hands
of Rome, and especially the best livings
and dignities. And those that once fall into
the hands of Rome never come out again, even
if they never again fall vacant in the Pope's
month. In this way the foundations come very
short of their rights, and it is a downright
robbery, the object of which is not to give
up anything again. Therefore it is now high
time to abolish the Pope's months and to
take back again all that has thereby fallen
into the hands of Rome. For all the princes
and nobles should insist that the stolen
property shall be returned, the thieves punished,
and that those who abuse their powers shall
be deprived of them. If the Pope can make
a law on the day after his election by which
he takes our benefices and livings to which
he has no right, the Emperor Charles should
so much the more have a right to issue a
law for all Germany on the day after his
coronation 7 that in future no livings and
benefices are to fall to Rome by virtue of
the Pope's month, but that those that have
so fallen are to be freed and taken from
the Romish robbers. This right he possesses
authoritatively by virtue of his temporal
sword.
[Footnote 7: At the time when the above was
written - June, 1520 - the Emperor Charles
had been elected, but not yet crowned.]
But the see of avarice and robbery at Rome
is unwilling to wait for the benefices to
fall in one after another by means of the
Pope's month; and in order to get them into
its insatiable maw as speedily as possible,
they have devised the plan of taking livings
and benefices in three other ways:
First, if the incumbent of a free living
dies at Rome or on his way thither, his living
remains for ever the property of the see
of Rome, or I rather should say, the see
of robbers, though they will not let us call
them robbers, although no one has ever heard
or read of such robbery.
Secondly, if a "servant" of the
Pope or of one of the cardinals takes a living,
or if, having a living, he becomes a "servant"
of the Pope or of a cardinal, the living
remains with Rome. But who can count the
"servants" of the Pope and his
cardinals, seeing that if he goes out riding,
he is attended by three or four thousand
mule-riders, more than any king or emperor?
For Christ and St. Peter went on foot, in
order that their vicegerents might indulge
the better in all manner of pomp. Besides,
their avarice has devised and invented this:
that in foreign countries also there are
many called "papal servants", as
at Rome; so that in all parts this single
crafty little word "papal servant"
brings all benefices to the chair at Rome,
and they are kept there for ever. Are not
these mischievous, devilish devices? Let
us only wait a while, Mayence, Magdeburg,
and Halberstadt will fall very nicely to
Rome, and we shall have to pay dearly for
our cardinal. 8 Hereafter all the German
bishops will be made cardinals, so that there
shall remain nothing to ourselves.
[Footnote 8: Luther alludes here to the Archbishop
Albert of Mayence, who was, besides, Archbishop
of Magdeburg and administrator of the bishopric
of Halberstadt. In order to be able to defray
the expense of the archiepiscopal tax due
to Rome, amounting to thirty thousand guilders,
he had farmed the sale of the Pope's indulgences,
employing the notorious Tetzel as his agent
and sharing the profits with the Pope. In
1518 Albert was appointed cardinal. See Ranke,
Deutsche Geschichte, etc., vol. i., p.
309, etc.]
Thirdly, whenever there is any dispute about
a benefice; and this is, I think, well-nigh
the broadest and commonest road by which
benefices are brought to Rome. For where
there is no dispute numberless knaves can
be found at Rome who are ready to scrape
up disputes, and attack livings wherever
they like. In this way many a good priest
loses his living, or has to buy off the dispute
for a time with a sum of money. These benefices,
confiscated by right or wrong of dispute,
are to be for ever the property of the see
of Rome. It would be no wonder, if God were
to rain sulphur and fire from heaven and
cast Rome down into the pit, as He did formerly
to Sodom and Gomorrah. What is the use of
a pope in Christendom, if the only use made
of his power is to commit these supreme villainies
under his protection and assistance? Oh noble
princes and sirs, how long will you suffer
your lands and your people to be the prey
of these ravening wolves?
But these tricks did not suffice, and bishoprics
were too slow in falling into the power of
Roman avarice. Accordingly our good friend
Avarice made the discovery that all bishoprics
are abroad in name only, but that their land
and soil is at Rome; from this it follows
that no bishop may be confirmed until he
has bought the "Pall" 9 for a large
sum, and has with a terrible oath bound himself
a servant of the Pope. That is why no bishop
dare oppose the Pope. This was the object
of the oath, and this is how the wealthiest
bishoprics have come to debt and ruin. Mayence,
I am told, pays twenty thousand guilders.
These are true Roman tricks, it seems to
me. It is true that they once decreed in
the canon law that the Pall should be given
free, the number of the Pope's servants diminished,
disputes made less frequent, that foundations
and bishops should enjoy their liberty; but
all this brought them no money. They have
therefore reversed all this: bishops and
foundations have lost all their power; they
are mere ciphers, without office, authority,
or function; all things are regulated by
the chief knaves at Rome, even the offices
of sextons and bell-ringers in all churches.
All disputes are transferred to Rome; each
one does what he will, strong through the
Pope's power.
[Footnote 9: The Pallium was since the fourth
century the symbol of archiepiscopal power,
and had to be redeemed from the Pope by means
of a large sum of money and a solemn oath
of obedience.]
What has happened in this very year? The
Bishop of Strasburg, wishing to regulate
his see in a proper way and reform it in
the matter of Divine service, published some
Divine and Christian ordinances for that
purpose. But our worthy Pope and the holy
chair at Rome overturn altogether this holy
and spiritual order on the requisition of
the priests. This is what they call being
the shepherd of Christ's sheep-supporting
priests against their own bishops and protecting
their disobedience by Divine decrees. Antichrist,
I hope, will not insult God in this open
way. There you have the Pope, as you have
chosen to have him; and why? Why, because
if the Church were to be reformed, there
would be danger that it would spread further,
so that it might also reach Rome. Therefore
it is better to prevent priests from being
at one with each other; they should rather,
as they have done hitherto, sow discord among
kings and princes, and flood the world with
Christian blood, lest Christian unity should
trouble the holy Roman see with reforms.
So far we have seen what they do with the
livings that fall vacant. Now there are not
enough vacancies for this delicate greed;
therefore it has also taken prudent account
of the benefices that are still held by their
incumbents, so that they may become vacant,
though they are in fact not vacant, and this
they effect in many ways.
First, they lie in wait for fat livings or
sees which are held by an old or sick man,
or even by one afflicted by an imaginary
incompetence; him the Roman see gives a coadjutor,
that is an assistant without his asking or
wishing it, for the benefit of the coadjutor,
because he is a papal servant, or pays for
the office, or has otherwise earned it by
some menial service rendered to Rome. Thus
there is an end of free election on the part
of the chapter, or of the right of him who
had presented to the living; and all goes
to Rome.
Secondly, there is a little word: commendam,
that is, when the Pope gives a rich and fat
convent or church into the charge of a cardinal
or any other of his servants, just as I might
command you to take charge of one hundred
guilders for me. In this way the convent
is neither given, nor lent, nor destroyed,
nor is its Divine service abolished, but
only entrusted to a man's charge, not, however,
for him to protect and improve it, but to
drive out the one he finds there, to take
the property and revenue, and to install
some apostate 10 runaway monk, who is paid
five or six guilders a year, and sits in
the church all day and sells symbols and
pictures to the pilgrims; so that neither
chanting nor reading in the church goes on
there any more. Now if we were to call this
the destruction of convents and abolition
of Divine service we should be obliged to
accuse the Pope of destroying Christianity
and abolishing Divine service-for truly he
is doing this effectually-but this would
be thought harsh language at Rome; therefore
it is called a commendam, or an order to
take charge of the convent. In this way the
Pope can make commendams of four or more
convents a year, any one of which produces
a revenue of more than six thousand guilders.
This is the way Divine service is advanced
and convents kept up at Rome. This will be
introduced into Germany as well.
[Footnote 10: Monks who forsook their order
without any legal dispensation were called
"apostates."]
Thirdly, there are certain benefices that
are said to be incompatible; that is, they
may not be held together according to the
canon law, such as two cures, two sees, and
the like. Now the Holy See and avarice twists
itself out of the canon law by making "glosses,"
or interpretations, called Unio, or Incorporatio;
that is, several incompatible benefices are
incorporated, so that one is a member of
the other, and the whole is held to be one
benefice: then they are no longer incompatible,
and we have got rid of the holy canon law,
so that it is no longer binding, except on
those who do not buy those glosses of the
Pope and his Datarius. 11 Unio is of the
same kind: a number of benefices are tied
together like a bundle of faggots, and on
account of this coupling together they are
held to be one benefice. Thus there may be
found many a "courtling" at Rome
who alone holds twenty-two cures, seven priories,
and forty-four prebends, all which is done
in virtue of this masterly gloss, so as not
to be contrary to law. Any one can imagine
what cardinals and other prelates may hold.
In this way the Germans are to have their
purses emptied and their conceit taken out
of them.
[Footnote 11: The papal office for the issue
and registration of certain documents was
called Dataria, from the phrase appended
to them, Datum apud S. Petrum. The chief
of that office, usually a cardinal, bore
the title of Datarius, or Prodatarius.]
There is another gloss called Administratio;
that is, that besides his see a man holds
an abbey or other high benefice, and possesses
all the property of it, without any other
title but administrator. For at Rome it is
enough that words should change, and not
deeds, just as if I said, a procuress was
to be called a mayoress, yet may remain as
good as she is now. Such Romish rule was
foretold by St. Peter, when he said, "There
shall be false teachers among you, . . .
and through covetousness shall they with
feigned words make merchandise of you"
(2 Peter ii. 1, 3).
This precious Roman avarice has also invented
the practice of selling and lending prebends
and benefices on condition that the seller
or lender has the reversion, so that if the
incumbent dies, the benefice falls to him
that has sold it, lent it, or abandoned it;
in this way they have made benefices heritable
property, so that none can come to hold them
unless the seller sells them to him, or leaves
them to him at his death. Then there are
many that give a benefice to another in name
only, and on condition that he shall not
receive a farthing. It is now, too, an old
practice for a man to give another a benefice
and to receive a certain annual sum, which
proceeding was formerly called simony. And
there are many other such little things which
I cannot recount; and so they deal worse
with the benefices than the heathens by the
cross dealt with Christ's clothes.
But all this that I have spoken of is old
and common at Rome. Their avarice has invented
other device, which I hope will be the last
and choke it. The Pope has made a noble discovery,
called Pectoralis Reservatio, that is, "mental
reservation"-et proprius motus, that
is, "and his own will and power."
The matter is managed in this way: Suppose
a man obtains a benefice at Rome, which is
confirmed to him in due form; then comes
another, who brings money, or who has done
some other service of which the less said
the better, and requests the Pope to give
him the same benefice: then the Pope will
take it from the first and give it him. If
you say, that is wrong, the Most Holy Father
must then excuse himself, that he may not
be openly blamed for having violated justice;
and he says "that in his heart and mind
he reserved his authority over the said benefice,"
whilst he never had heard or thought of the
same in all his life. Thus he has devised
a gloss which allows him in his proper person
to lie and cheat and fool us all, and all
this impudently and in open daylight, and
nevertheless he claims to be the head of
Christendom, letting the evil spirit rule
him with manifest lies.
This wantonness and lying reservation of
the popes has brought about an unutterable
state of things at Rome. There is a buying
and a selling, a changing, blustering and
bargaining, cheating and lying, robbing and
stealing, debauchery and villainy, and all
kinds of contempt of God, that antichrist
himself could not rule worse. Venice, Antwerp,
Cairo, are nothing to this fair and market
at Rome, except that there things are done
with some reason and justice, whilst here
things are done as the devil himself could
wish. And out of this ocean a like virtue
overflows all the world. Is it not natural
that such people should dread a reformation
and a free council, and should rather embroil
all kings and princes, than that their unity
should bring about a council? Who would like
his villainy to be exposed?
Finally, the Pope has built a special house
for this fine traffic-that is, the house
of the Datarius at Rome. Thither all must
come that bargain in this way, for prebends
and benefices; from him they must buy the
glosses and obtain the right to practise
such prime villainy. In former days it was
fairly well at Rome, when justice had to
be bought, or could only be put down by money;
but now she has become so fastidious that
she does not allow any one to commit villainies
unless he has first bought the right to do
it with great sums. If this is not a house
of prostitution, worse than all houses of
prostitution that can be conceived, I do
not know what houses of prostitution really
are.
If you bring money to this house, you can
arrive at all that I have mentioned; and
more than this, any sort of usury is made
legitimate for money; property got by theft
or robbery is here made legal. Here vows
are annulled; here a monk obtains leave to
quit his order; here priests can enter married
life for money; here bastards can become
legitimate; and dishonour and shame may arrive
at high honours; all evil repute and disgrace
is knighted and ennobled; here a marriage
is suffered that is in a forbidden degree,
or has some other defect. Oh, what a trafficking
and plundering is there! one would think
that the canon laws were only so many money-snares,
from which he must free himself who would
become a Christian man. Nay, here the devil
becomes a saint, and a god besides. What
heaven and earth might not do may be done
by this house. Their ordinances are called
compositions - compositions, forsooth! confusions
rather. 12 Oh, what a poor treasury is the
toll on the Rhine 13 compared with this holy
house!
[Footnote 12: Luther uses here the expressions
compositiones and confusiones as a kind of
pun.]
[Footnote 13: Tolls were levied at many places
along the Rhine.]
Let no one think that I say too much. It
is all notorious, so that even at Rome they
are forced to own that it is more terrible
and worse than one can say. I have said and
will say nothing of the infernal dregs of
private vices. I only speak of well-known
public matters, and yet my words do not suffice.
Bishops, priests, and especially the doctors
of the universities, who are paid to do it,
ought to have unanimously written and exclaimed
against it. Yea, if you will turn the leaf
you will discover the truth.
I have still to give a farewell greeting.
These treasures, that would have satisfied
three mighty kings, were not enough for this
unspeakable greed, and so they have made
over and sold their traffic to Fugger 14
at Augsburg, so that the lending and buying
and selling sees and benefices, and all this
traffic in ecclesiastical property, has in
the end come into the right hands, and spiritual
and temporal matters have now become one
business. Now I should like to know what
the most cunning would devise for Romish
greed to do that it has not done, except
that Fugger might sell or pledge his two
trades, that have now become one. I think
they must have come to the end of their devices.
For what they have stolen and yet steal in
all countries by bulls of indulgences, letters
of confession, letters of dispensation, 15
and other confessionalia, all this I think
mere bungling work, and much like playing
toss with a devil in hell. Not that they
produce little, for a mighty king could support
himself by them; but they are as nothing
compared to the other streams of revenue
mentioned above. I will not now consider
what has become of that indulgence money;
I shall inquire into this another time, for
Campofiore 16 and Belvedere 17 and some other
places probably know something about it.
[Footnote 14: The commercial house of Fugger
was in those days the wealthiest in Europe.]
[Footnote 15: Luther uses the word Butterbriefe,
i. e., letters of indulgence allowing the
enjoyment of butter, cheese, milk, etc.,
during Lent. They formed part only of the
confessionalia, which granted various other
indulgences.]
[Footnote 16: A public place at Rome.]
[Footnote 17: Part of the Vatican.]
Meanwhile, since this devilish state of things
is not only an open robbery, deceit, and
tyranny of the gates of hell, but also destroys
Christianity body and soul, we are bound
to use all our diligence to prevent this
misery and destruction of Christendom. If
we wish to fight the Turk, let us begin here,
where they are worst. If we justly hang thieves
and behead robbers, why do we leave the greed
of Rome so unpunished, that is the greatest
thief and robber that has appeared or can
appear on earth, and does all this in the
holy name of Christ and St. Peter? Who can
suffer this and be silent about it? Almost
everything that they possess has been stolen
or got by robbery, as we learn from all histories.
Why, the Pope never bought those great possessions,
so as to be able to raise well-nigh ten hundred
thousand ducats from his ecclesiastical offices,
without counting his gold mines described
above and his land. He did not inherit it
from Christ and St. Peter; no one gave it
or lent it him; he has not acquired it by
prescription. Tell me, where can he have
got it? You can learn from this what their
object is when they send out legates to collect
money to be used against the Turk.
Twenty-Seven Articles
Respecting The Reformation Of The Christian
Estate
Part I
Now though I am too lowly to submit articles
that could serve for the reformation of these
fearful evils, I will yet sing out my fool's
song, and will show, as well as my wit will
allow, what might and should be done by the
temporal authorities or by a general council.
1. Princes, nobles, and cities should promptly
forbid their subjects to pay the annates
to Rome and should even abolish them altogether.
For the Pope has broken the compact, and
turned the annates into robbery for the harm
and shame of the German nation; he gives
them to his friends; he sells them for large
sums of money and founds benefices on them.
Therefore he has forfeited his right to them,
and deserves punishment. In this way the
temporal power should protect the innocent
and prevent wrong-doing, as we are taught
by St. Paul (Rom. xiii.) and by St. Peter
(1 Peter ii.) and even by the canon law (16.
q.
7. de Filiis). That is why we say to the
Pope and his followers, Tu ora! "Thou
shalt pray"; to the Emperor and his
followers, Tu protege! "Thou shalt protect";
to the commons, Tu labora! "Thou shalt
work." Not that each man should not
pray, protect, and work; for if a man fulfils
his duty, that is prayer, protection, and
work; but every man must have his proper
task.
2. Since by means of those Romish tricks,
commendams, coadjutors, reservations, expectations,
pope's months, incorporations, unions, Palls,
rules of chancellery, and other such knaveries,
the Pope takes unlawful possession of all
German foundations, to give and sell them
to strangers at Rome, that profit Germany
in no way, so that the incumbents are robbed
of their rights, and the bishops are made
mere ciphers and anointed idols; and thus,
besides natural justice and reason, the Pope's
own canon law is violated; and things have
come to such a pass that prebends and benefices
are sold at Rome to vulgar, ignorant asses
and knaves, out of sheer greed, while pious
learned men have no profit by their merit
and skill, whereby the unfortunate German
people must needs lack good, learned prelates
and suffer ruin-on account of these evils
the Christian nobility should rise up against
the Pope as a common enemy and destroyer
of Christianity, for the sake of the salvation
of the poor souls that such tyranny must
ruin. They should ordain, order, and decree
that henceforth no benefice shall be drawn
away to Rome, and that no benefice shall
be claimed there in any fashion whatsoever;
and after having once got these benefices
out of the hands of Romish tyranny, they
must be kept from them, and their lawful
incumbents must be reinstated in them to
administer them as best they may within the
German nation. And if a courtling came from
Rome, he should receive the strict command
to withdraw, or to leap into the Rhine, or
whatever river be nearest, and to administer
a cold bath to the Interdict, seal and letters
and all. Thus those at Rome would learn that
we Germans are not to remain drunken fools
forever, but that we, too, are become Christians,
and that as such we will no longer suffer
this shameful mockery of Christ's holy name,
that serves as a cloak for such knavery and
destruction of souls, and that we shall respect
God and the glory of God more than the power
of men.
3. It should be decreed by an imperial law
that no episcopal cloak and no confirmation
of any appointment shall for the future be
obtained from Rome. The order of the most
holy and renowned Nicene Council must again
be restored, namely that a bishop must be
confirmed by the two nearest bilhops or by
the archbishop. If the Pope cancels the decrees
of these and all other councils, what is
the good of councils at all? Who has given
him the right thus to despise councils and
to cancel them? If this is allowed, we had
better abolish all bishops, archbishops and
primates, and make simple rectors of all
of them, so that they would have the Pope
alone over them as is indeed the case now;
he deprives bishops, archbishops, and primates
of all the authority of their office, taking
everything to himself, and leaving them only
the name and the empty title; more than this,
by his exemption he has withdrawn convents,
abbots, and prelates from the ordinary authority
of the bishops, so that there remains no
order in Christendom. The necessary result
of this must be, and has been, laxity in
punishing and such a liberty to do evil in
all the world that I very much fear one might
call the Pope "the man of sin"
(2 Thess. ii. 3). Who but the Pope is to
blame for this absence of all order, of all
punishment, of all government, of all discipline,
in Christendom? By his own arbitrary power
he ties the hands of all his prelates, and
takes from them their rods, while all their
subjects have their hands unloosed, and obtain
licence by gift or purchase.
But, that he have no cause for complaint,
as being deprived of his authority, it should
be decreed that in cases where the primates
and archbishops are unable to settle the
matter, or where there is a dispute among
them, the matters shall then be submitted
to the Pope, but not every little matter,
as was done formerly, and was ordered by
the most renowned Nicene Council. His Holiness
must not be troubled with small matters,
that can be settled without his help; so
that he may have leisure to devote himself
to his prayers and study and to his care
of all Christendom, as he professes to do,
as indeed the Apostles did, saying, "It
is not reason that we should leave the word
of God, and serve tables.... But we will
give ourselves continually to prayer, and
to the ministry of the word" (Acts vi.
2, 4). But now we see at Rome nothing but
contempt of the Gospel and of prayer, and
the service of tables, that is the service
of the goods of this world; and the government
of the Pope agrees with the government of
the Apostles as well as Lucifer with Christ,
hell with heaven, night with day; and yet
he calls himself Christ's vicar and the successor
of the Apostles.
4. Let it be decreed that no temporal matter
shall be submitted to Rome, but all shall
be left to the jurisdiction of the temporal
authorities. This is part of their own canon
law, though they do not obey it. For this
should be the Pope's office: that he, the
most learned in the Scriptures and the most
holy, not in name only, but in fact, should
rule in matters concerning the faith and
the holy life of Christians; he should make
primates and bishops attend to this, and
should work and take thought with them to
this end, as St. Paul teaches (1 Cor. vi.),
severely upbraiding those that occupy themselves
with the things of this world. For all countries
suffer unbearable damage by this practice
of settling such matters at Rome, since it
involves great expense; and besides this,
the judges at Rome, not knowing the manners,
laws, and customs of other countries, frequently
pervert the matter according to their own
laws and their own opinions, thus causing
injustice to all parties. Besides this, we
should prohibit in all foundations the grievous
extortion of the ecclesiastical judges; they
should only be allowed to consider matters
concerning faith and good morals; but matters
concerning money, property, life, and honour
should be left to temporal judges. Therefore,
the temporal authorities should not permit
excommunication or expulsion except in matters
of faith and righteous living. It is only
reasonable that spiritual authorities should
have power in spiritual matters; spiritual
matters, however, are not money or matters
relating to the body, but faith and good
works.
Still we might allow matters respecting benefices
or prebends to be treated before bishops,
archbishops, and primates. Therefore when
it is necessary to decide quarrels and strifes
let the Primate of Germany hold a general
consistory, with assessors and chancellors,
who would have the control over the signaturas
gratiae and justitiae 18 and to whom matters
arising in Germany might be submitted by
appeal. The officers of such court should
be paid out of the annates, or in some other
way, and should not have to draw their salaries,
as at Rome, from chance presents and offerings,
whereby they grow accustomed to sell justice
and injustice, as they must needs do at Rome,
where the Pope gives them no salary, but
allows them to fatten themselves on presents;
for at Rome no one heeds what is right or
what is wrong, but only what is money and
what is not money. They might be paid out
of the annates, or by some other means devised
by men of higher understanding and of more
experience in these things than I have. I
am content with making these suggestions
and giving some materials for consideration
to those who may be able and willing to help
the German nation to become a free people
of Christians, after this wretched, heathen,
unchristian misrule of the Pope.
[Footnote 18: At the time when the above
was written the function of the signatura
gratiae was to superintend the conferring
of grants, concessions, favours, etc., whilst
the signatura justitiae embraced the general
administration of ecclesiastical matters.]
5. Henceforth no reservations shall be valid,
and no benefices shall be appropriated by
Rome, whether the incumbent die there, or
there be a dispute, or the incumbent be a
servant of the Pope or of a cardinal; and
all courtiers shall be strictly prohibited
and prevented from causing a dispute about
any benefice, so as to cite the pious priests,
to trouble them, and to drive them to pay
compensation. And if in consequence of this
there comes an interdict from Rome, let it
be despised, just as if a thief were to excommunicate
any man because he would not allow him to
steal in peace. Nay, they should be punished
most severely for making such a blasphemous
use of excommunication and of the name of
God, to support their robberies, and for
wishing by their false threats to drive us
to suffer and approve this blasphemy of God's
name and this abuse of Christian authority,
and thus to become sharers before God in
their wrong-doing, whereas it is our duty
before God to punish it, as St. Paul (Rom.
i.) upbraids the Romans for not only doing
wrong, but allowing wrong to be done. But
above all that lying mental reservation (pectoralis
reservatio) is unbearable, by which Christendom
is so openly mocked and insulted, in that
its head notoriously deals with lies, and
impudently cheats and fools every man for
the sake of accursed wealth.
6. The cases reserved 19 (casus reservati)
should be abolished, by which not only are
the people cheated out of much money, but
besides many poor consciences are confused
and led into error by the ruthless tyrants,
to the intolerable harm of their faith in
God, especially those foolish and childish
cases that are made important by the bull
In Coena Domini, 20 and which do not deserve
the name of daily sins, not to mention those
great cases for which the Pope gives no absolution,
such as preventing a pilgrim from going to
Rome, furnishing the Turks with arms, or
forging the Pope's letters. They only fool
us with these gross, mad, and clumsy matters:
Sodom and Gomorrah, and all sins that are
committed and that can be committed against
God's commandments, are not reserved cases;
but what God never commanded and they themselves
have invented - these must be made reserved
cases, solely in order that none may be prevented
from bringing money to Rome, that they may
live in their lust without fear of the Turk,
and may keep the world in their bondage by
their wicked useless bulls and briefs.
[Footnote 19: "Reserved cases"
refer to those great sins for which the Pope
or the bishops only could give absolution.]
[Footnote 20: The celebrated papal bull known
under the name of In Coena Domini, containing
anathemas and excommunications against all
those who dissented in any way from the Roman
Catholic creed, used until the year 1770
to be read publicly at Rome on Maundy Thursday.]
Now all priests ought to know, or rather
it should be a public ordinance, that no
secret sin constitutes a reserved case, if
there be no public accusation; and that every
priest has power to absolve from all sin,
whatever its name, if it be secret, and that
no abbot, bishop, or pope has power to reserve
any such case; and, lastly, that if they
do this, it is null and void, and they should,
moreover, be punished as interfering without
authority in God's judgment and confusing
and troubling without cause our poor witless
consciences. But in respect to any great
open sin, directly contrary to God's commandments,
there is some reason for a "reserved
case"; but there should not be too many,
nor should they be reserved arbitrarily without
due cause. For God has not ordained tyrants,
but shepherds, in His Church, as St. Peter
says (1 Peter v. 2).
7. The Roman See must abolish the papal offices,
and diminish that crowd of crawling vermin
at Rome, so that the Pope's servants may
be supported out of the Pope's own pocket,
and that his court may cease to surpass all
royal courts in its pomp and extravagance;
seeing that all this pomp has not only been
of no service to the Christian faith, but
has also kept them from study and prayer,
so that they themselves know hardly anything
concerning matters of faith, as they proved
clumsily enough at the last Roman Council,
21 where, among many childishly trifling
matters, they decided "that the soul
is immortal," and that a priest is bound
to pray once every month on pain of losing
his benefice. 22 How are men to rule Christendom
and to decide matters of faith who, callous
and blinded by their greed, wealth, and worldly
pomp, have only just decided that the soul
is immortal? It is no slight shame to all
Christendom that they should deal thus scandalously
with the faith at Rome. If they had less
wealth and lived in less pomp, they might
be better able to study and pray that they
might become able and worthy to treat matters
of belief, as they were once, when they were
content to be bishops, and not kings of kings.
[Footnote 21: The council alluded to above
was held at Rome from 1512 to 1517.]
[Footnote 22: Luther's objection is not,
of course, to the recognition of the immortality
of the soul; what he objects to is (1) that
it was thought necessary for a council to
decree that the soul is immortal, and (2)
that this question was put on a level with
trivial matters of discipline.]
8. The terrible oaths must be abolished which
bishops are forced, without any right, to
swear to the Pope, by which they are bound
like servants, and which are arbitrarily
and foolishly decreed in the absurd and shallow
chapter Significasti. 23 Is it not enough
that they oppress us in goods, body, and
soul by all their mad laws, by which they
have weakened faith and destroyed Christianity;
but must they now take possession of the
very persons of bishops, with their offices
and functions, and also claim the investiture
24 which used formerly to be the right of
the German emperors, and is still the right
of the King in France and other kingdoms?
This matter caused many wars and disputes
with the emperors until the popes impudently
took the power by force, since which time
they have retained it, just as if it were
only right for the Germans, above all Christians
on earth, to be the fools of the Pope and
the Holy See, and to do and suffer what no
one beside would suffer or do. Seeing then
that this is mere arbitrary power, robbery,
and a hindrance to the exercise of the bishop's
ordinary power, and to the injury of poor
souls, therefore it is the duty of the Emperor
and his nobles to prevent and punish this
tyranny.
[Footnote 23: The above is the title of a
chapter in the Corpus Juris Canonici.]
[Footnote 24: The right of investiture was
the subject of the dispute between Gregory
VII. and Henry IV., which led to the Emperor's
submission at Canossa.]
9. The Pope should have no power over the
Emperor, except to anoint and crown him at
the altar, as a bishop crowns a king; nor
should that devilish pomp be allowed that
the Emperor should kiss the Pope's feet or
sit at his feet, or, as it is said, hold
his stirrup or the reins of his mule, when
he mounts to ride; much less should he pay
homage to the Pope, or swear allegiance,
as is impudently demanded by the popes, as
if they had a right to it. The chapter Solite,
25 in which the papal authority is exalted
above the imperial, is not worth a farthing,
and so of all those that depend on it or
fear it; for it does nothing but pervert
God's holy words from their true meaning,
according to their own imaginations, as I
have proved in a Latin treatise.
[Footnote 25: The chapter Solite is also
contained in the Corpus Juris Canonici.]
All these excessive, over-presumptuous, and
most wicked claims of the Pope are the invention
of the devil, with the object of bringing
in antichrist in due course and of raising
the Pope above God, as indeed many have done
and are now doing. It is not meet that the
Pope should exalt himself above temporal
authority, except in spiritual matters, such
as preaching and absolution; in other matters
he should be subject to it, according to
the teaching of St. Paul (Rom. xiii.) and
St. Peter (I Peter iii.), as I have said
above. He is not the vicar of Christ in heaven,
but only of Christ upon earth. For Christ
in heaven, in the form of a ruler, requires
no vicar, but there sits, sees, does, knows,
and commands all things. But He requires
him "in the form of a servant"
to represent Him as He walked upon earth,
working, preaching, suffering, and dying.
But they reverse this: they take from Christ
His power as a heavenly Ruler, and give it
to the Pope, and allow "the form of
a servant" to be entirely forgotten
(Phil. ii. 7). He should properly be called
the counter-Christ, whom the Scriptures call
antichrist; for his whole existence, work,
and proceedings are directed against Christ,
to ruin and destroy the existence and will
of Christ.
It is also absurd and puerile for the Pope
to boast for such blind, foolish reasons,
in his decretal Pastoralis, that he is the
rightful heir to the empire, if the throne
be vacant. Who gave it to him? Did Christ
do so when He said, "The kings of the
Gentiles exercise lordship over them, but
ye shall not do so" (Luke xxii. 25,
26)? Did St. Peter bequeath it to him? It
disgusts me that we have to read and teach
such impudent, clumsy, foolish lies in the
canon law, and, moreover, to take them for
Christian doctrine, while in reality they
are mere devilish lies. Of this kind also
is the unheard-of lie touching the "donation
of Constantine." 26 It must have been
a plague sent by God that induced so many
wise people to accept such lies, though they
are so gross and clumsy that one would think
a drunken boor could lie more skilfully.
How could preaching, prayer, study, and the
care of the poor consist with the government
of the empire? These are the true offices
of the Pope, which Christ imposed with such
insistence that He forbade them to take either
coat or scrip (Matt. x. 10), for he that
has to govern a single house can hardly perform
these duties. Yet the Pope wishes to rule
an empire and to remain a pope. This is the
invention of the knaves that would fain become
lords of the world in the Pope's name, and
set up again the old Roman empire, as it
was formerly, by means of the Pope and name
of Christ, in its former condition.
[Footnote 26: In order to legalize the secular
power of the Pope, the fiction was invented
during the latter part of the eighth century,
that Constantine the Great had made over
to the popes the dominion over Rome and over
the whole of Italy.]
10. The Pope must withdraw his hand from
the dish, and on no pretence assume royal
authority over Naples and Sicily. He has
no more right to them than I, and yet claims
to be the lord-their liege lord. They have
been taken by force and robbery, like almost
all his other possessions. Therefore the
Emperor should grant him no such fief, nor
any longer allow him those he has, but direct
him instead to his Bibles and Prayer-books,
so that he may leave the government of countries
and peoples to the temporal power, especially
of those that no one has given him. Let him
rather preach and pray! The same should be
done with Bologna, Imola, Vicenza, Ravenna,
and whatever the Pope has taken by force
and holds without right in the Ancontine
territory, in the Romagna, and other parts
of Italy, interfering in their affairs against
all the commandments of Christ and St. Paul.
For St. Paul says "that he that would
be one of the soldiers of heaven must not
entangle himself in the affairs of this life"
(2 Tim. ii. 4). Now the Pope should be the
head and the leader of the soldiers of heaven,
and yet he engages more in worldly matters
than any king or emperor. He should be relieved
of his worldly cares and allowed to attend
to his duties as a soldier of heaven. Christ
also, whose vicar he claims to be, would
have nothing to do with the things of this
world, and even asked one that desired of
Him a judgment concerning his brother, "Who
made Me a judge over you?" (St. Luke
xii. 14). But the Pope interferes in these
matters unasked, and concerns himself with
all matters, as though he were a god, until
he himself has forgotten what this Christ
is whose vicar he professes to be.
11. The custom of kissing the Pope's feet
must cease. It is an unchristian, or rather
an anti-Christian, example that a poor sinful
man should suffer his feet to be kissed by
one who is a hundred times better than he.
If it is done in honour of his power, why
does he not do it to others in honour of
their holiness? Compare them together: Christ
and the Pope. Christ washed His disciples'
feet and dried them, and the disciples never
washed His. The Pope, pretending to be higher
than Christ, inverts this, and considers
it a great favour to let us kiss his feet;
whereas, if any one wished to do so, he ought
to do his utmost to prevent him, as St. Paul
and Barnabas would not suffer themselves
to be worshipped as gods by the men at Lystra,
saying, "We also are men of like passions
with you" (Acts xiv. 14 seq.). But our
flatterers have brought things to such a
pitch that they have set up an idol for us,
until no one regards God with such fear or
honours Him with such marks of reverence
as he does the Pope. This they can suffer,
but not that the Pope's glory should be diminished
a single hair's-breadth. Now if they were
Christians and preferred God's honour to
their own, the Pope would never be pleased
to have God's honour despised and his own
exalted, nor would he allow any to honour
him until he found that God's honour was
again exalted above his own.
It is of a piece with this revolting pride
that the Pope is not satisfied with riding
on horseback or in a carriage, but though
he be hale and strong, is carried by men,
like an idol in unheard-of pomp. My friend,
how does this Lucifer-like pride agree with
the example of Christ, who went on foot,
as did also all His Apostles? Where has there
been a king who has ridden in such worldly
pomp as he does, who professes to be the
head of all whose duty it is to despise and
flee from all worldly pomp-I mean, of all
Christians? Not that this need concern us
for his own sake, but that we have good reason
to fear God's wrath, if we flatter such pride
and do not show our discontent. It is enough
that the Pope should be so mad and foolish;
but it is too much that we should sanction
and approve it.
For what Christian heart can be pleased at
seeing the Pope when he communicates, sit
still like a gracious lord and have the Sacrament
handed to him on a golden reed by a cardinal
bending on his knees before him? Just as
if the Holy Sacrament were not worthy that
a pope, a poor miserable sinner, should stand
to do honour to his God, although all other
Christians, who are much more holy than the
Most Holy Father, receive it with all reverence!
Could we be surprised if God visited us all
with a plague for that we suffer such dishonour
to be done to God by our prelates, and approve
it, becoming partners of the Pope's damnable
pride by our silence or flattery? It is the
same when he carries the Sacrament in procession.
He must be carried, but the Sacrament stands
before him like a cup of wine on a table.
In short, at Rome Christ is nothing, the
Pope is everything; yet they urge us and
threaten us, to make us suffer and approve
and honour this anti-Christian scandal, contrary
to God and all Christian doctrine. Now may
God so help a free council that it may teach
the Pope that he too is a man, not above
God, as he makes himself out to be.
12. Pilgrimages to Rome must be abolished,
or at least no one must be allowed to go
from his own wish or his own piety, unless
his priest, his town magistrate, or his lord
has found that there is sufficient reason
for his pilgrimage. This I say, not because
pilgrimages are bad in themselves, but because
at the present time they lead to mischief;
for at Rome a pilgrim sees no good examples,
but only offence. They themselves have made
a proverb, "The nearer to Rome, the
farther from Christ," and accordingly
men bring home contempt of God and of God's
commandments. It is said, "The first
time one goes to Rome, he goes to seek a
rogue; the second time he finds him; the
third time he brings him home with him."
But now they have become so skilful that
they can do their three journeys in one,
and they have, in fact, brought home from
Rome this saying: "It were better never
to have seen or heard of Rome."
And even if this were not so, there is something
of more importance to be considered; namely,
that simple men are thus led into a false
delusion and a wrong understanding of God's
commandments. For they think that these pilgrimages
are precious and good works; but this is
not true. It is but a little good work, often
a bad, misleading work, for God has not commanded
it. But He has commanded that each man should
care for his wife and children and whatever
concerns the married state, and should, besides,
serve and help his neighbour. Now it often
happens that one goes on a pilgrimage to
Rome, spends fifty or one hundred guilders
more or less, which no one has commanded
him, while his wife and children, or those
dearest to him, are left at home in want
and misery; and yet he thinks, poor foolish
man, to atone for this disobedience and contempt
of God's commandments by his self-willed
pilgrimage, while he is in truth misled by
idle curiosity or the wiles of the devil.
This the popes have encouraged with their
false and foolish invention of Golden Years,
27 by which they have incited the people,
have torn them away from God's commandments
and turned them to their own delusive proceedings,
and set up the very thing that they ought
to have forbidden. But it brought them money
and strengthened their false authority, and
therefore it was allowed to continue, though
against God's will and the salvation of souls.
[Footnote 27: The Jubilees, during which
plenary indulgences were granted to those
who visited the churches of St. Peter and
St. Paul at Rome, were originally celebrated
every hundred years and subsequently every
twenty-five years. Those who were unable
to go to Rome in person could obtain the
plenary indulgences by paying the expenses
of the journey to Rome into the papal treasury.]
That this false, misleading belief on the
part of simple Christians may be destroyed,
and a true opinion of good works may again
be introduced, all pilgrimages should be
done away with. For there is no good in them,
no commandment, but countless causes of sin
and of contempt of God's commandments. These
pilgrimages are the reason for there being
so many beggars, who commit numberless villainies,
learn to beg without need and get accustomed
to it. Hence arises a vagabond life, besides
other miseries which I cannot dwell on now.
If any one wishes to go on a pilgrimage or
to make a vow for a pilgrimage, he should
first inform his priest or the temporal authorities
of the reason, and if it should turn out
that he wishes to do it for the sake of good
works, let this vow and work be just trampled
upon by the priest or the temporal authority
as an infernal delusion, and let them tell
him to spend his money and the labour a pilgrimage
would cost on God's commandments and on a
thousandfold better work, namely, on his
family and his poor neighbours. But if he
does it out of curiosity, to see cities and
countries, he may be allowed to do so. If
he have vowed it in sickness, let such vows
be prohibited, and let God's commandments
be insisted upon in contrast to them; so
that a man may be content with what he vowed
in baptism, namely, to keep God's commandments.
Yet for this once he may be suffered, for
a quiet conscience' sake, to keep his silly
vow. No one is content to walk on the broad
high-road of God's commandments; every one
makes for himself new roads and new vows,
as if he had kept all God's commandments.
13. Now we come to the great crowd that promises
much and performs little. Be not angry, my
good sirs; I mean well. I have to tell you
this bitter and sweet truth: Let no more
mendicant monasteries be built! God help
us! there are too many as it is. Would to
God they were all abolished, or at least
made over to two or three orders! It has
never done good, it will never do good, to
go wandering about over the country. Therefore
my advice is that ten, or as many as may
be required, be put together and made into
one, which one, sufficiently provided for,
need not beg. Oh! it is of much more importance
to consider what is necessary for the salvation
of the common people, than what St. Francis,
or St. Dominic, or St. Augustine, 28 or any
other man, laid down, especially since things
have not turned out as they expected. They
should also be relieved from preaching and
confession, unless specially required to
do so by bishops, priests, the congregation,
or other authority. For their preaching and
confession has led toGnought but mere hatred
and envy between priests and monks, to the
great offence and hindrance of the people,
so that it well deserves to be put a stop
to, since its place may very well be dispensed
with. It does not look at all improbable
that the Holy Roman See had its own reasons
for encouraging all this crowd of monks:
the Pope perhaps feared that priests and
bishops, growing weary of his tyranny, might
become too strong for him, and begin a reformation
unendurable to his Holiness.
[Footnote 28: The above-mentioned saints
were the patrons of the well-known mendicant
orders: Franciscans, Dominicans, and Augustines.]
Besides this, one should also do away with
the sections and the divisions in the same
order which, caused for little reason and
kept up for less, oppose each other with
unspeakable hatred and malice, the result
being that the Christian faith, which is
very well able to stand without their divisions,
is lost on both sides, and that a true Christian
life is sought and judged only by outward
rules, works, and practices, from which arise
only hypocrisy and the destruction of souls,
as every one can see for himself. Moreover,
the Pope should be forbidden to institute
or to confirm the institution of such new
orders; nay, he should be commanded to abolish
several and to lessen their number. For the
faith of Christ, which alone is the important
matter, and can stand without any particular
order, incurs no little danger lest men should
be led away by these diverse works and manners
rather to live for such works and practices
than to care for faith; and unless there
are wise prelates in the monasteries, who
preach and urge faith rather than the rule
of the order, it is inevitable that the order
should be injurious and misleading to simple
souls, who have regard to works alone.
Now, in our own time all the prelates are
dead that had faith and founded orders, just
as it was in old days with the children of
Israel: when their fathers were dead, that
had seen God's works and miracles, their
children, out of ignorance of God's work
and of faith, soon began to set up idolatry
and their own human works. In the same way,
alas! these orders, not understanding God's
works and faith, grievously labour and torment
themselves by their own laws and practices,
and yet never arrive at a true understanding
of a spiritual and good life, as was foretold
by the Apostle, saying of them, "Having
a form of godliness, but denying the power
thereof, . . . ever learning, and never able
to come to the knowledge" of what a
true spiritual life is (2 Tim. iii. 2-7).
Better to have no convents which are governed
by a spiritual prelate, having no understanding
of Christian faith to govern them; for such
a prelate cannot but rule with injury and
harm, and the greater the apparent holiness
of his life in external works, the greater
the harm.
It would be, I think, necessary, especially
in these perilous times, that foundations
and convents should again be organised as
they were in the time of the Apostles and
a long time after, namely when they were
all free for every man to remain there as
long as he wished. For what were they but
Christian schools, in which the Scriptures
and Christian life were taught, and where
folk were trained to govern and to preach?
as we read that St. Agnes went to school,
and as we see even now in some nunneries,
as at Quedlinburg and other places. Truly
all foundations and convents ought to be
free in this way: that they may serve God
of a free will, and not as slaves. But now
they have been bound round with vows and
turned into eternal prisons, so that these
vows are regarded even more than the vows
of baptism. But what fruit has come of this
we daily see, hear, read, and learn more
and more.
I dare say that this my counsel will be thought
very foolish, but I care not for this. I
advise what I think best, reject it who will.
I know how these vows are kept, especially
that of chastity, which is so general in
all these convents. 29 and yet was not ordered
by Christ, and it is given to comparatively
few to be able to keep it, as He says, and
St. Paul also (Col. ii. 20). I wish all to
be helped, and that Christian souls should
not be held in bondage, through customs and
laws invented by men.
Part II
14. We see also how the priesthood is fallen,
and how many a poor priest is encumbered
with a woman and children and burdened in
his conscience, and no one does anything
to help him, though he might very well be
helped. Popes and bishops may let that be
lost that is being lost, and that be destroyed
which is being destroyed, I will save my
conscience and open my mouth freely, let
it vex popes and bishops or whoever it may
be; therefore I say, According to the ordinances
of Christ and His Apostles, every town should
have a minister or bishop, as St. Paul plainly
says (Titus i.), and this minister should
not be forced to live without a lawful wife,
but should be allowed to have one, as St.
Paul writes, saying that "a bishop then
must be blameless, the husband of one wife,...
having his children in subjection with all
gravity" (I Tim. iii.). For with St.
Paul a bishop and a presbyter are the same
thing, as St. Jerome also confirms. But as
for the bishops that we now have, of these
the Scriptures know nothing; they were instituted
by common Christian ordinance, so that one
might rule over many ministers.
[Footnote 29: Luther alludes here of course
to the vow of celibacy, which was curiously
styled the 'vow of chastity'; thus indirectly
condemning marriage in general.]
Therefore we learn from the Apostle clearly,
that every town should elect a pious learned
citizen from the congregation and charge
him with the office of minister; the congregation
should support him, and he should be left
at liberty to marry or not. He should have
as assistants several priests and deacons,
married or not, as they please, who should
help him to govern the people and the congregation
with sermons and the ministration of the
sacraments, as is still the case in the Greek
Church. Then afterwards, when there were
so many persecutions and contentions against
heretics, there were many holy fathers who
voluntarily abstained from the marriage state,
that they might study more, and might be
ready at all times for death and conflict.
Now the Roman see has interfered of its own
perversity, and has made a general law by
which priests are forbidden to marry. This
must have been at the instigation of the
devil, as was foretold by St. Paul, saying
that "there shall come teachers giving
heed to seducing spirits, . . . forbidding
to marry," etc. (1 Tim. iv. 1, 2, seq.).
This has been the cause of so much misery
that it cannot be told, and has given occasion
to the Greek Church to separate from us,
and has caused infinite disunion, sin, shame,
and scandal, like everything that the devil
does or suggests. Now what are we to do?
My advice is to restore liberty, and to leave
every man free to marry or not to marry.
But if we did this we should have to introduce
a very different rule and order for property;
the whole canon law would be overthrown,
and but few benefices would fall to Rome.
I am afraid greed was a cause of this wretched,
unchaste chastity, for the result of it was
that every man wished to become a priest
or to have his son brought up to the priesthood,
not with the intention of living in chastity-for
this could be done without the priestly state-but
to obtain his worldly support without labour
or trouble, contrary to God's command, "In
the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy
bread" (Gen. iii); and they have given
a colour to this commandment as though their
work was praying and reading the mass. I
am not here considering popes, bishops, canons,
clergy, and monks who were not ordained by
God; if they have laid burdens on themselves,
they may bear them. I speak of the office
of parish priest, which God ordained, who
must rule a congregation with sermons and
the ministration of the sacraments, and must
live with them and lead a domestic life.
These should have the liberty given them
by a Christian council to marry and to avoid
danger and sin. For as God has not bound
them, no one may bind them, though he were
an angel from heaven, let alone the Pope;
and whatever is contrary to this in the canon
law is mere idle talk and invention.
My advice further is, whoever henceforth
is ordained priest, he should in no wise
take the vow of chastity, but should protest
to the bishop that he has no authority to
demand this vow, and that it is a devilish
tyranny to demand it. But if one is forced,
or wishes to say, as some do, "so far
as human frailty permits," let every
man interpret that phrase as a plain negative,
that is, "I do not promise chastity";
for "human frailty does not allow men
to live an unmarried life," but only
"angelic fortitude and celestial virtue."
In this way he will have a clear conscience
without any vow. I offer no opinion, one
way or the other, whether those who have
at present no wife should marry, or remain
unmarried. This must be settled by the general
order of the Church and by each man's discretion.
But I will not conceal my honest counsel,
nor withhold comfort from that unhappy crowd
who now live in trouble with wife and children,
and remain in shame, with a heavy conscience,
hearing their wife called a priest's harlot,
and the children bastards. And this I say
frankly, in virtue of my good right.
There is a many poor priest free from blame
in all other respects, except that he has
succumbed to human frailty and come to shame
with a woman, both minded in their hearts
to live together always in conjugal fidelity,
if only they could do so with a good conscience,
though as it is they live in public shame.
I say, these two are surely married before
God. I say, moreover, that when two are so
minded, and so come to live together, they
should save their conscience; let the man
take the woman as his lawful wife, and live
with her faithfully as her husband, without
considering whether the Pope approve or not,
or whether it is forbidden by canon law,
or temporal. The salvation of your soul is
of more importance than their tyrannous,
arbitrary, wicked laws, which are not necessary
for salvation, nor ordained by God. You should
do as the children of Israel did who stole
from the Egyptians the wages they had earned,
or as a servant steals his well-earned wages
from a harsh master; in the same way do you
also steal your wife and child from the Pope.
Let him who has faith enough to dare this
only follow me courageously: I will not mislead
him. I may not have the Pope's authority,
yet I have the authority of a Christian to
help my neighbour and to warn him against
his sins and dangers. And here there is good
reason for doing so.
(a) It is not every priest that can do without
a woman, not only on account of human frailty,
but still more for his household. If therefore
he takes a woman, and the Pope allows this,
but will not let them marry, what is this
but expecting a man and a woman to live together
and not to fall? Just as if one were to set
fire to straw, and command it should neither
smoke nor burn.
(b) The Pope having no authority for such
a command, any more than to forbid a man
to eat and drink, or to digest, or to grow
fat, no one is bound to obey it, and the
Pope is answerable for every sin against
it, for all the souls that it has brought
to destruction, and for all the consciences
that have been troubled and tormented by
it. He has long deserved to be driven out
of the world, so many poor souls has he strangled
with this devil's rope, though I hope that
God has shown many more mercy at their death
than the Pope did in their life. No good
has ever come and can ever come from the
papacy and its laws.
(c) Even though the Pope's laws forbid it,
still, after the married state has been entered,
the Pope's laws tre superseded, and are valid
no longer, for God has commanded that no
man shall put asunder husband and wife, and
this commandment is far above the Pope's
laws, and God's command must not be cancelled
or neglected for the papal commands. It is
true that mad lawyers have helped the Pope
to invent impediments, or hindrances to marriage,
and thus troubled, divided, and perverted
the married state, destroying the commandments
of God. What need I say further? In the whole
body of the Pope's canon law, there are not
two lines that can instruct a pious Christian,
and so many false and dangerous ones that
it were better to burn it.
But if you object that this would give offence,
and that one must first obtain the Pope's
dispensation, I answer that if there is any
offence in it, it is the fault of the see
of Rome, which has made unjust and unholy
laws. It is no offence to God and the Scriptures.
Even where the Pope has power to grant dispensation
for money by his covetous tyrannical laws,
every Christian has power to grant dispensation
in the same matter for the sake of Christ
and the salvation of souls. For Christ has
freed us from all human laws, especially
when they are opposed to God and the salvation
of souls, as St. Paul teaches (Gal. v. 1
and 1 Cor. viii. 9, 10).
15. I must not forget the poor convents.
The evil spirit, who has troubled all estates
of life by human laws, and made them unendurable,
has taken possession of some abbots, abbesses,
and prelates, and led them so to rule their
brothers and sisters that they do but go
soon to hell, and live a wretched life even
upon earth, as is the case with all the devil's
martyrs. For they have reserved in confession
all, or at least some, deadly sins, which
are secret, and from these no brother may
on pain of excommunication and on his obedience
absolve another. Now we do not always find
angels everywhere, but men of flesh and blood,
who would rather incur all excommunication
and menace than confess their secret sins
to a prelate or the confessor appointed for
them; consequently they receive the Sacrament
with these sins on their conscience, by which
they become irregular 30 and suffer much
misery. Oh blind shepherds! Oh foolish prelates!
Oh ravenous wolves! Now I say that in cases
where a sin is public and notorious it is
only right that the prelate alone should
punish it, and such sins, and no others,
he may reserve and except for himself; over
private sins he has no authority, even though
they may be the worst that can be committed
or imagined. And if the prelate excepts these,
he becomes a tyrant and interferes with God's
judgment.
Accordingly I advise these children, brothers
and sisters: If your superiors will not allow
you to confess your secret sins to whomsoever
you will, then take them yourself, and confess
them to your brother or sister, to whomsoever
you will; be absolved and comforted, and
then go or do what your wish or duty commands;
only believe firmly that you have been absolved,
and nothing more is necessary. And let not
their threats of excommunication, or irregularity,
or what not, trouble or disturb you; these
only apply to public or notorious sins, if
they are not confessed: you are not touched
by them. How canst thou take upon thyself,
thou blind prelate, to restrain private sins
by thy threats? Give up what thou canst not
keep publicly; let God's judgment and mercy
also have its place with thy inferiors. He
has not given them into thy hands so completely
as to have let them go out of His own; nay,
thou hast received the smaller portion. Consider
thy statutes as nothing more than thy statutes,
and do not make them equal to God's judgment
in heaven.
[Footnote 30: Luther uses the expression
irregulares, which was applied to those monks
who were guilty of heresy, apostacy, transgression
of the vow of chastity, etc.]
16. It were also right to abolish annual
festivals, processions, and masses for the
dead, or at least to diminish their number;
for we evidently see that they have become
no better than a mockery, exciting the anger
of God and having no object but money-getting,
gluttony, and carousals. How should it please
God to hear the poor vigils and masses mumbled
in this wretched way, neither read nor prayed?
Even when they are properly read, it is not
done freely for the love of God, but for
the love of money and as payment of a debt.
Now it is impossible that anything should
please God or win anything from Him that
is not done freely, out of love for Him.
Therefore, as true Christians, we ought to
abolish or lessen a practice that we see
is abused, and that angers God instead of
appeasing Him. I should prefer, and it would
be more agreeable to God's will, and far
better for a foundation, church, or convent,
to pull all the yearly masses and vigils
together into one mass, so that they would
every year celebrate, on one day, a true
vigil and mass with hearty sincerity, devotion,
and faith for all their benefactors. This
would be better than their thousand upon
thousand masses said every year, each for
a particular benefactor, without devotion
and faith. My dear fellow-Christians, God
cares not for much prayer, but for good prayer.
Nay, He condemns long and frequent prayers,
saying, "Verily I say unto you, they
have their reward" (Matt. vi. 2, seq.).
But it is the greed that cannot trust God
by which such practices are set up; it is
afraid it will die of starvation.
17. One should also abolish certain punishments
inflicted by the canon law, especially the
interdict, which is doubtless the invention
of the evil one. Is it not the mark of the
devil to wish to better one sin by more and
worse sins? It is surely a greater sin to
silence God's word, and service, than if
we were to kill twenty popes at once, not
to speak of a single priest or of keeping
back the goods of the Church. This is one
of those gentle virtues which are learnt
in the spiritual law; for the canon or spiritual
law is so called because it comes from a
spirit, not, however, from the Holy Spirit,
but from the evil spirit.
Excommunication should not be used except
where the Scriptures command it, that is,
against those that have not the right faith,
or that live in open sin, and not in matters
of temporal goods. But now the case has been
inverted: each man believes and lives as
he pleases, especially those that plunder
and disgrace others with excommunications;
and all excommunications are now only in
matters of worldly goods, for which we have
no one to thank but the holy canonical injustice.
But of all this I have spoken previously
in a sermon.
The other punishments and penalties-suspension,
irregularity, aggravation, reaggravation,
deposition, 31 thundering, lightning, cursing,
damning, and what not-all these should be
buried ten fathoms deep in the earth, that
their very name and memory may no longer
live upon earth. The evil spirit, who was
let loose by the spiritual law, has brought
all this terrible plague and misery into
the heavenly kingdom of the holy Church,
and has thereby brought about nothing but
the harm and destruction of souls, that we
may well apply to it the words of Christ,
"But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,
hypocrites! for you shut up the kingdom of
heaven against men, for ye neither go in
yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are
entering to go in" (Matt. xxiii. 13).
18. One should abolish all saints' days,
keeping only Sunday. But if it were desired
to keep the festivals of Our Lady and the
greater saints, they should all be held on
Sundays, or only in the morning with the
mass; the rest of the day being a working
day. My reason is this: with our present
abuses of drinking, gambling, idling, and
all manner of sin, we vex God more on holy
days than on others. And the matter is just
reversed; we have made holy days unholy,
and working days holy, and do no service;
but great dishonour, to God and His saints
will all our holy days. There are some foolish
prelates that think they have done a good
deed, if they establish a festival to St.
Otilia or St. Barbara, and the like, each
in his own blind fashion, whilst he would
be doing a much better work to turn a saint's
day into a working day in honour of a saint.
[Footnote 31: Luther enumerates here the
various grades of punishment inflicted on
priests. The aggravation consisted of a threat
of excommunication after a thrice-repeated
admonition, whilst the consequence of reaggravation
was immediate excommunication.]
Besides these spiritual evils, these saints'
days inflict bodily injury on the common
man in two ways: he loses a day's work, and
he spends more than usual, besides weakening
his body and making himself unfit for labour,
as we see every day, and yet no one tries
to improve it. One should not consider whether
the Pope instituted these festivals, or whether
we require his dispensation or permission.
If anything is contrary to God's will and
harmful to men in body and soul, not only
has every community, council, or government
authority to prevent and abolish such wrong
without the knowledge or consent of pope
or bishop, but it is their duty, as they
value their soul's salvation, to prevent
it, even though pope and bishop (that should
be the first to do so) are unwilling to see
it stopped. And first of all we should abolish
church wakes, since they are nothing but
taverns, fairs, and gaming places, to the
greater dishonour of God and the damnation
of souls. It is no good to make a talk about
their having had a good origin and being
good works. Did not God set aside His own
law that He had given forth out of heaven
when He saw it was abused, and does He not
now reverse every day what He has appointed,
and destroy what He has made, on account
of the same perverse misuse, as it is written
in Psalm xviii. (ver. 26), "With the
perverse Thou wilt show Thyself froward"?
19. The degrees of relationship in which
marriage is forbidden must be altered, such
as so-called spiritual relations. 32 in the
third and fourth degrees; and where the Pope
at Rome can dispense in such matters for
money, and make shameful bargains, every
priest should have the power of granting
the same dispensations freely for the salvation
of souls. Would to God that all those things
that have to be bought at Rome, for freedom
from the golden snares of the canon law,
might be given by any priest without payment,
such as indulgences, letters of indulgences,
letters of dispensation, mass letters, and
all the other religious licences and knaveries
at Rome by which the poor people are deceived
and robbed! For if the Pope has the power
to sell for money his golden snares, or canon
nets (laws, I should say), much more has
a priest the power to cancel them and to
trample on them for God's sake. But if he
has no such power, then the Pope can have
no authority to sell them in his shameful
fair.
[Footnote 32: Those, namely, between sponsors
at baptism and their good-children.]
Besides this, fasts must be made optional,
and every kind of food made free, as is commanded
in the Gospels (Matt. xv. II). For whilst
at Rome they laugh at fasts, they let us
abroad consume oil which they would not think
fit for greasing their boots, and then sell
us the liberty of eating butter and other
things, whereas the Apostle says that the
Gospel has given us freedom in all such matters
(1 Cor. x. 25, seq.). But they have caught
us in their canon law and have robbed us
of this right, so that we have to buy it
back from them; they have so terrified the
consciences of the people that one cannot
preach this liberty without rousing the anger
of the people, who think the eating of butter
to be a worse sin than lying, swearing, and
unchastity. We may make of it what we will;
it is but the work of man, and no good can
ever come of it.
20. The country chapels and churches must
be destroyed, such as those to which the
new pilgrimages have been set on foot: Wilsnack,
Sternberg, Treves, the Grimmenthal, and now
Ratisbon, and many others. Oh, what a reckoning
there will be for those bishops that allow
these inventions of the devil and make a
profit out of them! They should be the first
to stop it; they think that it is a godly,
holy thing, and do not see that the devil
does this to strengthen covetousness, to
teach false beliefs, to weaken parish churches,
to increase drunkenness and debauchery, to
waste money and labour, and simply to lead
the poor people by the nose. If they had
only studied the Scriptures as much as their
accused canon law, they would know well how
to deal with the matter.
The miracles performed there prove nothing,
for the evil one can show also wonders, as
Christ has taught us (Matt. xxiv. 24). If
they took up the matter earnestly and forbade
such doings, the miracles would soon cease:
or if they were done by God, they would not
be prevented by their commands. And if there
were nothing else to prove that these are
not works of God, it would be enough that
people go about turbulently and irrationally
like herds of cattle, which could not possibly
come from God. God has not commanded it;
there is no obedience, and no merit in it;
and therefore it should be vigorously interfered
with, and the people warned against it. For
what is not commanded by God and goes beyond
God's commandments is surely the devil's
own work. In this way also the parish churches
suffer: in that they are less venerated.
In fine, these pilgrimages are signs of great
want of faith in the people; for if they
truly believed, they would find all things
in their own churches, where they are commanded
to go.
But what is the use of my speaking. Every
man thinks only how he may get up such a
pilgrimage in his own district, not caring
whether the people believe and live rightly.
The rulers are like the people: blind leaders
of the blind. Where pilgrimages are a failure,
they begin to glorify their saints, not to
honour the saints, who are sufficiently honoured
without them, but to cause a concourse, and
to bring in money. Herein pope and bishops
help them; it rains indulgences, and every
one can afford to buy them: but what God
has commanded no one cares for; no one runs
after it, no one can afford any money for
it. Alas for our blindness, that we not only
suffer the devil to have his way with his
phantoms, but support him! I wish one would
leave the good saints alone, and not lead
the poor people astray. What spirit gave
the Pope authority to "glorify"
the saints? Who tells him whether they are
holy or not holy? Are there not enough sins
on earth as it is but we must tempt God,
interfere in His judgment, and make money-bags
of His saints? Therefore my advice is to
let the saints glorify themselves. Nay, God
alone should be glorified, and every man
should keep to his own parish, where he will
profit more than in all these shrines, even
if they were all put together into one shrine.
Here a man finds baptism, the Sacrament,
preaching, and his neighbour, and these are
more than all the saints in heaven, for it
is by God's word and sacrament that they
have all been hallowed.
Our contempt for these great matters justifies
God's anger in giving us over to the devil
to lead us astray, to get up pilgrimages,
to found churches and chapels, to glorify
the saints, and to commit other like follies,
by which we are led astray from the true
faith into new false beliefs, just as He
did in old time with the people of Israel,
whom He led away from the Temple to countless
other places, all the while in God's name,
and with the appearance of holiness, against
which all th prophets preached, suffering
martyrdom for their words. But now no one
preaches against it; for if he did, bishops,
popes, priests, and monks would perchance
combine to martyr him. In this way Antonius
of Florence and many others are made saints,
so that their holiness may serve to produce
glory and wealth, which served before to
the honour of God and as a good example alone.
Even if this glorification of the saints
had been good once, it is not good now, just
as many other things were good once and are
now occasion of offence and injurious, such
as holidays, ecclesiastical treasures and
ornaments. For it is evident that what is
aimed at in the glorification of saints is
not the glory of God nor the bettering of
Christendom, but money and fame alone; one
Church wishes to have an advantage over another,
and would be sorry to see another Church
enjoying the same advantages. In this way
they have in these latter days abused the
goods of the Church so as to gain the goods
of the world; so that everything, and even
God Himself, must serve their avarice. Moreover,
these privileges cause nothing but dissensions
and worldly pride; one Church being different
from the rest, they despise or magnify one
another, whereas all goods that are of God
should be common to all, and should serve
to produce unity. This, too, is much liked
by the Pope, who would be sorry to see all
Christians equal and at one with one another.
Here must be added that one should abolish,
or treat as of no account, or give to all
Churches alike, the licences, bulls, and
whatever the Pope sells at his flaying-ground
at Rome. For if he sells or gives to Wittenberg,
to Halle, to Venice, and above all, to his
own city of Rome, permissions, privileges,
indulgences, graces, advantages, faculties,
why does he not give them to all Churches
alike? Is it not his duty to do all that
he can for all Christians without reward,
solely for God's sake, nay, even to shed
his blood for them? Why then, I should like
to know, does he give or sell these things
to one Church and not to another? Or does
this accursed gold make a difference in his
Holiness' eyes between Christians who all
alike have baptism, Gospel, faith, Christ,
God, and all things? Do they wish us to be
blind, when our eyes can see, to be fools,
when we have reason, that we should worship
this greed knavery, and delusion? He is a
shepherd, forsooth-so long as you have money,
no further; and yet they are not ashamed
to practise all this knavery right and left
with their bulls. They care only for that
accursed gold, and for nought besides.
Therefore my advice is this: If this folly
is not done away with, let all pious Christians
open their eyes, and not be deceived by these
Romish bulls and seals and all their specious
pretences; let them stop at home in their
own churches, and be satisfied with their
baptism, Gospel, faith, Christ, and God (who
is everywhere the same), and let the Pope
continue to be a blind leader of the blind.
Neither pope nor angel can give you as much
as God gives you in your own parish; nay,
he only leads you away from God's gifts,
which you have for nothing, to his own gifts,
which you must buy, giving you lead for gold,
skin for meat, strings for a purse, wax for
honey, words for goods, the letter for the
spirit, as you can see for yourselves though
you will not perceive it. If you try to ride
to heaven on the Pope's wax and parchment,
your carriage will soon break down, and you
will fall into hell, not in God's name.
Let this be a fixed rule for you: Whatever
has to be bought of the Pope is neither good,
nor of God. For whatever comes from God is
not only given freely, but all the world
is punished and condemned for not accepting
it freely. So is it with the Gospel and the
works of God. We have deserved to be led
into these errors, because we have despised
God's holy word and the grace of baptism;
as St. Paul says, "And for this cause
God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie, that they all
might be damned who believed not the truth,
but had pleasure in unrighteousness"
(2 Thess. ii. II, 12).
21. It is one of the most urgent necessities
to abolish all begging in Christendom. No
one should go about begging among Christians.
It would not be hard to do this, if we attempted
it with good heart and courage: each town
should support its own poor and should not
allow strange beggars to come in, whatever
they may call themselves, pilgrims or mendicant
monks. Every town could feed its own poor;
and if it were too small, the people in the
neighbouring villages should be called upon
to contribute. As it is, they have to support
many knaves and vagabonds under the name
of beggars. If they did what I propose, they
would at least know who were really poor
or not.
There should also be an overseer or guardian
who should know all the poor, and should
inform the town-council, or the priest, of
their requirements; or some other similar
provision might be made. There is no occupation,
in my opinion, in which there is so much
knavery and cheating as among beggars; which
could easily be done away with. This general,
unrestricted begging is, besides, injurious
for the common people. I estimate that of
the five or six orders of mendicant monks
each one visits every place more than six
or seven times in the year; then there are
the common beggars, emissaries, and pilgrims;
in this way I calculate every city has a
blackmail levied on it about sixty times
a year, not counting rates and taxes paid
to the civil government and the useless robberies
of the Roman see; so that it is to my mind
one of the greatest of God's miracles how
we manage to live and support ourselves.
Some may think that in this way the poor
would not be well cared for, and that such
great stone houses and convents would not
be built, and not so plentifully, and I think
so too. Nor is it necessary. If a man will
be poor he should not be rich; if he will
be rich, let him put his hand to the plough,
and get wealth himself out of the earth.
It is enough to provide decently for the
poor, that they may not die of cold and hunger.
It is not right that one should work that
another may be idle, and live ill that another
may live well, as is now the perverse abuse,
for St. Paul says, "If any would not
work, neither should he eat" (2 Thess.
iii. 10). God has not ordained that any one
should live of the goods of others, except
priests and ministers alone, as St. Paul
says (I Cor. ix. 14), for their spiritual
work's sake, as also Christ says to the Apostles,
"The labourer is worthy of his hire"
(Luke x. 7).
22. It is also to be feared that the many
masses that have been founded in convents
and foundations, instead of doing any good,
arouse God's anger; wherefore it would be
well to endow no more masses and to abolish
many of those that have been endowed; for
we see that they are only looked upon as
sacrifices and good works, though in truth
they are sacraments like baptism and confession,
and as such profit him only that receives
them. But now the custom obtains of saying
masses for the living and the dead, and everything
is based upon them. This is the reason why
there are so many, and that they have come
to be what we see.
But perhaps all this is a new and unheard-of
doctrine, especially in the eyes of those
that fear to lose their livelihood, if these
masses were abolished. I must therefore reserve
what I have to say on this subject until
men have arrived at a truer understanding
of the mass, its nature and use. The mass
has, alas! for so many years been turned
into means of gaining a livelihood, that
I should advise a man to become a shepherd,
a labourer, rather than a priest or monk,
unless he knows what the mass is.
All this, however, does not apply to the
old foundations and chapters, which were
doubtless founded in order that since, according
to the custom of Germany, all the children
of nobles cannot be landowners and rulers,
they should be provided for in these foundations,
and these serve God freely, study, and become
learned themselves, and help others to acquire
learning. I am speaking only of the new foundations,
endowed for prayers and masses, by the example
of which the old foundations have become
burdened with the like prayers and masses,
making them of very little, if of any, use.
Through God's righteous punishment, they
have at last come down to the dregs, as they
deserve-that is, to the noise of singers
and organs, and cold, spiritless masses,
with no end but to gain and spend the money
due to them. Popes, bishops, and doctors
should examine and report on such things;
as it is they are the guiltiest, allowing
anything that brings them money; the blind
ever leading the blind. This comes of covetousness
and the canon law.
It must, moreover, not be allowed in future
that one man should have more than one endowment
or prebend. He should be content with a moderate
position in life, so that others may have
something besides himself; and thus we must
put a stop to the excuses of those that say
that they must have more than one office
to enable them to live in their proper station.
It is possible to estimate one's "proper
station" in such a way that a whole
kingdom would not suffice to maintain it.
So it is that covetousness and want of faith
in God go hand in hand, and often men take
for the requirements of their "proper
station" what is mere covetousness and
want of faith.
23. As for the fraternities, together with
indulgences, letters of indulgence, dispensations
for Lent, and masses, and all the rest of
such things, let them all be drowned and
abolished; there is no good in them at all.
If the Pope has the authority to grant dispensation
in the matter of eating butter and hearing
masses, let him allow priests to do the same;
he has no right to take the power from them.
I speak also of the fraternities in which
indulgences, masses, and good works are distributed.
My friend, in baptism you joined a fraternity
of which Christ, the angels, and saints,
and all Christians are members; be true to
this, and satisfy it, and you will have fraternities
enough. Let others make what show they wish;
they are as counters compared to coins. But
if there were a fraternity that subscribed
money to feed the poor or to help others
in any way, this would be good, and it would
have its indulgence and its deserts in heaven.
But now they are good for nothing but gluttony
and drunkenness.
First of all we should expel from all German
lands the Pope's legates, with their faculties,
which they sell to us for much money, though
it is all knavery-as, for instance, their
taking money for making goods unlawfully
acquired to be good, for freeing from oaths,
vows, and bonds, thus destroying and teaching
others to destroy truth and faith mutually
pledged, saying the Pope has authority to
do so. It is the evil spirit that bids them
talk thus, and so they sell us the devil's
teaching, and take money for teaching us
sins and leading us to hell.
If there were nothing else to show that the
Pope is antichrist, this would be enough.
Dost thou hear this, O Pope! not the most
holy, but the most sinful? Would that God
would hurl thy chair headlong from heaven,
and cast it down into the abyss of hell!
Who gave you the power to exalt yourself
above your God; to break and to loose what
He has commanded; to teach Christians, more
especially Germans, who are of noble nature,
and are famed in all histories for uprightness
and truth, to be false, unfaithful, perjured,
treacherous, and wicked? God has commanded
to keep faith and observe oaths even with
enemies; you dare to cancel this command,
laying it down in your heretical, anti-Christian
decretals that you have power to do so; and
through your mouth and your pen Satan lies
as he never lied before, teaching you to
twist and pervert the Scriptures according
to your own arbitrary will. O Lord Christ,
look down upon this; let Thy day of judgment
come and destroy the devil's lair at Rome.
Behold him of whom St. Paul spoke (2 Thess.
ii, 3, 4) that he should exalt himself above
Thee and sit in Thy Church, showing himself
as God-the man of sin and the child of damnation.
What else does the Pope's power do but teach
and strengthen sin and wickedness, leading
souls to damnation in Thy name?
The children of Israel in old times were
obliged to keep the oath that they had sworn,
in ignorance and error, to the Gibeonites,
their enemies; and King Zedekiah was destroyed
utterly, with his people, because he broke
the oath that he had sworn to the King of
Babylon; and among us, a hundred years ago,
the noble King Ladislaus V. of Poland and
Hungary, was slain by the Turk, with so many
of his people, because he allowed himself
to be misled by papal legates and cardinals
and broke the good and useful treaty that
he had made with the Turk. The pious Emperor
Sigismond had no good fortune after the Council
of Constance, in which he allowed the knaves
to violate the safe-conduct that he had promised
to John Huss and Jerome; from this has followed
all the miserable strife between Bohemia
and ourselves. And in our own time, God help
us! how much Christian blood has been shed
on account of the oath and bond which Pope
Julius made and unmade between the Emperor
Maximilian and King Louis of France! How
can I tell all the misery the popes have
caused by such devilish insolence, claiming
the power of breaking oaths between great
lords, causing a shameful scandal for the
sake of money? I hope the day of judgment
is at hand; things cannot and will not become
worse than the dealings of the Roman chair.
The Pope treads God's commandments under
foot and exalts his own; if this is not antichrist,
I do not know what is. But of this, and to
more purpose, another time.
24. It is high time to take up earnestly
and truthfully the cause of the Bohemians,
to unite them with ourselves and ourselves
with them, so that all mutual accusations,
envy, and hatred may cease. I will be the
first, in my folly, to give my opinion, with
all due deference to those of better understanding.
First of all, we must honestly confess the
truth, without attempting self-justification,
and own one thing to the Bohemians, namely
that John Huss and Jerome of Prague were
burnt at Constance in violation of the papal,
Christian, and imperial oath and safe-conduct,
and that thus God's commandment was broken
and the Bohemians excited to great anger.
And though they may have deserved such great
wrong and disobedience to God on our part,
they were not obliged to approve it and think
it right. Nay, even now they should run any
danger of life and limb rather than own that
it is right to break an imperial, papal,
Christian safe-conduct and act faithlessly
in opposition to it. Therefore, though the
Bohemians may be to blame for their impatience,
yet the Pope and his followers are most to
blame for all the misery, all the error and
destruction of souls, that followed this
council of Constance.
It is not my intention here to judge John
Huss' belief and to defend his errors, although
my understanding has not been able to find
any error in him, and I would willingly believe
that men who violated a safe- conduct and
God's commandment (doubtless possessed rather
by the evil spirit than by the Spirit of
God) were unable to judge well or to condemn
with truth. No one can imagine that the Holy
Ghost can break God's commandments; no one
can deny that it is breaking God's commandments
to violate faith and a safe-conduct, even
though it were promised to the devil himself,
much more then in the case of a heretic;
it is also notorious that a safe-conduct
was promised to John Huss and the Bohemians,
and that the promise was broken and Huss
was burnt. I have no wish to make a saint
or a martyr of John Huss (as some Bohemians
do), though I own that he was treated unjustly,
and that his books and his doctrines were
wrongfully condemned; for God's judgments
are inscrutable and terrible, and none but
Himself may reveal or explain them.
All I say is this: Granting he was a heretic,
however bad he may have been, yet he was
burnt unjustly and in violation of God's
commandments, and we must not force the Bohemians
to approve this, if we wish ever to be at
one with them. Plain truth must unite us,
not obstinacy. It is no use to say, as they
said at the time, that a safe-conduct need
not be kept, if promised to a heretic; that
is as much as to say, one may break God's
commandments in order to keep God's commandments.
They were infatuated and blinded by the devil,
that they could not see what they said or
did. God has commanded us to observe a safe-
conduct; and this we must do though the world
should perish: much more then where it is
only a question of a heretic being set free.
We should overcome heretics with books, not
with fire, as the old Fathers did. If there
were any skill in overcoming heretics with
fire, the executioner would be the most learned
doctor in the world; and there would be no
need to study, but he that could get another
into his power could burn him.
Besides this, the Emperor and the princes
should send to Bohemia several pious, learned
bishops and doctors, but, for their life,
no cardinal or legate or inquisitor, for
such people are far too unlearned in all
Christian matters, and do not seek the salvation
of souls; but, like all the papal hypocrites,
they seek only their own glory, profit, and
honour; they were also the leaders in that
calamitous affair at Constance. But those
envoys should inquire into the faith of the
Bohemians, to ascertain whether it would
be possible to unite all their sects into
one. Moreover, the Pope should (for their
souls' sake) for a time abandon his supremacy
and, in accordance with the statutes of the
Nicene Council, allow the Bohemians to choose
for themselves an archbishop of Prague, this
choice to be confirmed by the Bishop of Olmutz
in Moravia or of Gran in Hungary, or the
Bishop of Gnesen in Poland, or the Bishop
of Magdeburg in Germany. It is enough that
it be confirmed by one or two of these bishops,
as in the time of St. Cyprian. And the Pope
has no authority to forbid it, if he forbids
it, he acts as a wolf and a tyrant, and no
one should obey him, but answer his excommunication
by excommunicating him.
Yet if, for the honour of the chair of St.
Peter, any one prefers to do this with the
Pope's knowledge, I do not object, provided
that the Bohemians do not pay a farthing
for it, and that the Pope do not bind them
a single hair's-breadth, or subject them
to his tyranny by oath, as he does all other
bishops, against God and justice. If he is
not satisfied with the honour of his assent
being asked, leave him alone, by all means,
with his own rights, laws, and tyrannies;
be content with the election, and let the
blood of all the souls that are in danger
be upon his head. For no man may countenance
wrong, and it is enough to show respect to
tyranny. If we cannot do otherwise, we may
consider the popular election and consent
as equal to a tyrannical confirmation; but
I hope this will not be necessary. Sooner
or later some Romans, or pious bishops and
learned men, must perceive and avert the
Pope's tyranny.
I do not advise that they be forced to abandon
the Sacrament in both kinds, for it is neither
unchristian nor heretical. They should be
allowed to continue in their present way;
but the new bishop must see that there be
no dissensions about this matter, and they
must learn that neither practice is actually
wrong, just as there need be no disputes
about the priests not wearing the same dress
as the laity. In the same way, if they do
not wish to submit to the canon laws of the
Roman Church, we must not force them, but
we must content ourselves with seeing that
they live in faith and according to the Scriptures.
For Christian life and Christian faith may
very well exist without the Pope's unbearable
laws; nay, they cannot well exist until there
are fewer of those laws or none. Our baptism
has freed us and made us subject to God's
word alone; why then should we suffer a man
to make us the slaves of his words? As St.
Paul says, "Stand fast therefore in
the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us
free, and be not entangled again with the
yoke of bondage" (Gal. v. 1).
If I knew that the only error of the Hussites
33 was that they believe that in the Sacrament
of the altar there is true bread and wine,
though under it the body and the blood of
Christ-if, I say, this were their only error,
I should not condemn them; but let the Bishop
of Prague see to this. For it is not an article
of faith that in the Sacrament there is no
bread and wine in substance and nature, which
is a delusion of St. Thomas and the Pope;
but it is an article of faith that in the
natural bread and wine there is Christ's
true flesh and blood. We should accordingly
tolerate the views of both parties until
they are at one; for there is not much danger
whether you believe there is or there is
not bread in the Sacrament. For we have to
suffer many forms of belief and order that
do not injure the faith; but if they believe
otherwise, it would be better not to unite
with them, and yet to instruct them in the
truth.
[Footnote 33: Luther uses here the word Pikarden,
which is a corruption of Begharden, i. e.
"Beghards," a nickname frequently
applied in those days to the Hussites.]
All other errors and dissensions to be found
in Bohemia should be tolerated until the
Archbishop has been reinstated, and has succeeded
in time in uniting the whole people in one
harmonious doctrine. We shall never unite
them by force, by driving or hurrying them.
We must be patient, and use gentleness. Did
not Christ have to walk with His disciples,
suffering their unbelief, until they believed
in His resurrection? If they had but once
more a regular bishop and good government
without Romish tyranny, I think matters would
mend.
The temporal possessions of the Church should
not be too strictly claimed; but since we
are Christians and bound to help one another,
we have the right to give them these things
for the sake of unity, and to let them keep
them, before God and the world; for Christ
says, "Where two or three are gathered
together in My name, there am I in the midst
of them." Would to God we helped on
both sides to bring about this unity, giving
our hands one to the other in brotherly humility,
not insisting on our authority or our rights!
Love is more, and more necessary, than the
papacy at Rome, which is without love, and
love can exist without the papacy. I hope
I have done my best for this end. If the
Pope or his followers hinder this good work,
they will have to give an account of their
actions for having, against the love of God,
sought their own advantage more than their
neighbours'. The Pope should abandon his
papacy, all his possessions and honours,
if he could save a soul by so doing. But
he would rather see the world go to ruin
than give up a hair's-breadth of the power
he has usurped; and yet he would be our most
holy father. Herewith I am excused.
Part III
25. The universities also require a good,
sound reformation. I must say this, let it
vex whom it may. The fact is that whatever
the papacy has ordered or instituted is only
designed for the propagation of sin and error.
What are the universities, as at present
ordered, but, as the book of Maccabees says,
"schools of 'Greek fashion' and 'heathenish
manners" (2 Macc. iv. 12, 13), full
of dissolute living, where very little is
taught of the Holy Scriptures of the Christian
faith, and the blind heathen teacher, Aristotle,
rules even further than Christ? Now, my advice
would be that the books of Aristotle, the
Physics, the Metaphysics, Of the Soul, Ethics,
which have hitherto been considered the best,
be altogether abolished, with all others
that profess to treat of nature, though nothing
can be learned from them, either of natural
or of spiritual things. Besides, no one has
been able to understand his meaning, and
much time has been wasted and many noble
souls vexed with much useless labour, study,
and expense. I venture to say that any potter
has more knowledge of natural things than
is to be found in these books. My heart is
grieved to see how many of the best Christians
this accursed, proud, knavish heathen has
fooled and led astray with his false words.
God sent him as a plague for our sins.
Does not the wretched man in his best book,
Of the Soul, teach that the soul dies with
the body, though many have tried to save
him with vain words, as if we had not the
Holy Scriptures to teach us fully of all
things of which Aristotle had not the slightest
perception? Yet this dead heathen has conquered,
and has hindered and almost suppressed the
books of the living God; so that, when I
see all this misery I cannot but think that
the evil spirit has introduced this study.
Then there is the Ethics, which is accounted
one of the best, though no book is more directly
contrary to God's will and the Christian
virtues. Oh that such books could be kept
out of the reach of all Christians! Let no
one object that I say too much, or speak
without knowledge. My friend, I know of what
I speak. I know Aristotle as well as you
or men like you. I have read him with more
understanding than St. Thomas or Scotus,
which I may say without arrogance, and can
prove if need be. It matters not that so
many great minds have exercised themselves
in these matters for many hundred years.
Such objections do not affect me as they
might have done once, since it is plain as
day that many more errors have existed for
many hundred years in the world and the universities.
I would, however, gladly consent that Aristotle's
books of Logic, Rhetoric, and Poetry, should
be retained, or they might be usefully studied
in a condensed form, to practise young people
in speaking and preaching; but the notes
and comments should be abolished, and, just
as Cicero's Rhetoric is read without note
or comment, Aristotle's Logic should be read
without such long commentaries. But now neither
speaking nor preaching is taught out of them,
and they are used only for disputation and
toilsomeness. Besides this, there are languages-Latin,
Greek, and Hebrew-the mathematics, history;
which I recommend to men of higher understanding:
and other matters, which will come of themselves,
if they seriously strive after reform. And
truly it is an important matter, for it concerns
the teaching and training of Christian youths
and of our noble people, in whom Christianity
still abides. Therefore I think that pope
and emperor could have no better task than
the reformation of the universities, just
as there is nothing more devilishly mischievous
than an unreformed university.
Physicians I would have to reform their own
faculty; lawyers and theologians I take under
my charge, and say firstly that it would
be right to abolish the canon law entirely,
from beginning to end, more especially the
decretals. We are taught quite sufficiently
in the Bible how we ought to act; all this
study only prevents the study of the Scriptures,
and for the most part it is tainted with
covetousness and pride. And even though there
were some good in it, it should nevertheless
be destroyed, for the Pope, having the canon
law in scrinio pectoris, 34 all further study
is useless and deceitful. At the present
time the canon law is not to be found in
the books, but in the whims of the Pope and
his sycophants. You may have settled a matter
in the best possible way according to the
canon law, but the Pope has his scrinium
pectoris, to which all law must bow in all
the world. Now this scrinium is oftentimes
directed by some knave and the devil himself,
whilst it boasts that it is directed by the
Holy Ghost. This is the way they treat Christ's
poor people, imposing many laws and keeping
none, forcing others to keep them or to free
themselves by money.
[Footnote 34: In the shrine of his heart.]
Therefore, since the Pope and his followers
have cancelled the whole canon law, despising
it and setting their own will above all the
world, we should follow them and reject the
books. Why should we study them to no purpose?
We should never be able to know the Pope's
caprice, which has now become the canon law.
Let it fall then in God's name, after having
risen in the devil's name. Let there be henceforth
no doctor decretorum, but let them all be
doctores scrinii papalis, that is, the Pope's
sycophants. They say that there is no better
temporal government than among the Turks,
though they have no canon nor civil law,
but only their Koran; we must at least own
that there is no worse government than ours,
with its canon and civil law, for no estate
lives according to the Scriptures, or even
according to natural reason.
The civil law, too, good God! what a wilderness
it is become! It is, indeed, much better,
more skilful, and more honest than the canon
law, of which nothing is good but the name.
Still there is far too much of it. Surely
good governors, in addition to the Holy Scriptures,
would be law enough; as St. Paul says, "Is
it so that there is not a wise man among
you, no, not one that shall be able to judge
between his brethren?" (I Cor. vi. 5).
I think also that the common law and the
usage of the country should be preferred
to the law of the empire and that the law
of the empire should only be used in cases
of necessity. And would to God, that, as
each land has its own peculiar character
and nature, they could all be governed by
their own simple laws, just as they were
governed before the law of the empire was
devised, and as many are governed even now!
Elaborate and far-fetched laws are only burdensome
to the people, and a hindrance rather than
a help to business. But I hope that others
have thought of this, and considered it to
more purpose than I could.
[Footnote 35: Luther refers here to the "Sentences"
of Petrus Lombardus, the so-called magister
sententiarum, which formed the basis of all
dogmatic interpretation from about the middle
of the twelfth century down to the Reformation.]
Our worthy theologians have saved themselves
much trouble and labour by leaving the Bible
alone and only reading the Sentences. 35
I should have thought that young theologians
might begin by studying the Sentences, and
that doctors should study the Bible. Now
they invert this: the Bible is the first
thing they study; this ceases with the Bachelor's
degree; the Sentences are the last, and these
they keep forever with the Doctor's degree,
and this, too, under such sacred obligation
that one that is not a priest may read the
Bible, but a priest must read the Sentences;
so that, as far as I can see, a married man
might be a doctor in the Bible, but not in
the Sentences. How should we prosper so long
as we act so perversely, and degrade the
Bible, the holy word of God? Besides this,
the Pope orders with many stringent words
that his laws be read and used in schools
and courts; while the law of the Gospel is
but little considered. The result is that
in schools and courts the Gospel lies dusty
underneath the benches, so that the Pope's
mischievous laws may alone be in force.
Since then we hold the name and title of
teachers of the Holy Scriptures, we should
verily be forced to act according to our
title, and to teach the Holy Scriptures and
nothing else. Although, indeed, it is a proud,
presumptuous title for a man to proclaim
himself teacher of the Scriptures, still
it could be suffered, if the works confirmed
the title. But as it is, under the rule of
the Sentences, we find among theologians
more human and heathenish fallacies than
true holy knowledge of the Scriptures. What
then are we to do? I know not, except to
pray humbly to God to give us Doctors of
Theology. Doctors of Arts, of Medicine, of
Law, of the Sentences, may be made by popes,
emperors, and the universities; but of this
we may be certain: a Doctor of the Holy Scriptures
can be made by none but the Holy Ghost, as
Christ says, "They shall all be taught
of God" (John vi. 45). Now the Holy
Ghost does not consider red caps or brown,
or any other pomp, nor whether we are young
or old, layman or priest, monk or secular,
virgin or married; nay, He once spoke by
an ass against the prophet that rode on it.
Would to God we were worthy of having such
doctors given us, be they laymen or priests,
married or unmarried! But now they try to
force the Holy Ghost to enter into popes,
bishops, or doctors, though there is no sign
to show that He is in them.
We must also lessen the number of theological
books, and choose the best, for it is not
the number of books that makes the learned
man, nor much reading, but good books often
read, however few, makes a man learned in
the Scriptures and pious. Even the Fathers
should only be read for a short time as an
introduction to the Scriptures. As it is
we read nothing else, and never get from
them into the Scriptures, as if one should
be gazing at the signposts and never follow
the road. These good Fathers wished to lead
us into the Scriptures by their writings,
whereas we lead ourselves out by them, though
the Scriptures are our vineyard, in which
we should all work and exercise ourselves.
Above all, in schools of all kinds the chief
and most common lesson should be the Scriptures,
and for young boys the Gospel; and would
to God each town had also a girls' school,
in which girls might be taught the Gospel
for an hour daily, either in German or Latin!
In truth, schools, monasteries, and convents
were founded for this purpose, and with good
Christian intentions, as we read concerning
St. Agnes and other saints 36; then were
there holy virgins and martyrs; and in those
times it was well with Christendom; but now
it has been turned into nothing but praying
and singing. Should not every Christian be
expected by his ninth or tenth year to know
all the holy Gospels, containing as they
do his very name and life? A spinner or a
seamstress teaches her daughter her trade
while she is young, but now even the most
learned prelates and bishops do not know
the Gospel.
Oh, how badly we treat all these poor young
people that are entrusted to us for discipline
and instruction! and a heavy reckoning shall
we have to give for it that we keep them
from the word of God; their fate is that
described by Jeremiah: "Mine eyes do
fail with tears, my bowels are troubled,
my liver is poured upon the earth, for the
destruction of the daughter of my people,
because the children and the sucklings swoon
in the streets of the city. They say to their
mothers, Where is corn and wine? when they
swooned as the wounded in the streets of
the city, when their soul was poured out
into their mothers' bosom" (Lam. ii.
11,12). We do not perceive all this misery,
how the young folk are being pitifully corrupted
in the midst of Christendom, all for want
of the Gospel, which we should always read
and study with them.
[Footnote 36: See above, pp. 301, seq.]
However, even if the high schools studied
the Scriptures diligently we should not send
every one to them, as we do now, when nothing
is considered but numbers, and every man
wishes to have a Doctor's title; we should
only send the aptest pupils, well prepared
in the lower schools. This should be seen
to by princes or the magistrates of the towns,
and they should take care none but apt pupils
be sent. But where the Holy Scriptures are
not the rule, I advise no one to send his
child. Everything must perish where God's
word is not studied unceasingly; and so we
see what manner of men there are now in the
high schools, and all this is the fault of
no one but of the Pope, the bishops, and
the prelates, to whom the welfare of the
young has been entrusted. For the high schools
should only train men of good understanding
in the Scriptures, who wish to become bishops
and priests, and to stand at our head against
heretics and the devil and all the world.
But where do we find this? I greatly fear
the high schools are nothing but great gates
of hell, unless they diligently study the
Holy Scriptures and teach them to the young
people.
26. I know well the Romish mob will object
and loudly pretend that the Pope took the
holy Roman empire from the Greek emperor
and gave it to Germany, for which honour
and favour he is supposed to deserve submission
and thanks and all other kinds of returns
from the Germans. For this reason they will
perhaps assume to oppose all attempts to
reform them, and will let no regard be paid
to anything but those donations of the Roman
empire. This is also the reason why they
have so arbitrarily and proudly persecuted
and oppressed many good emperors, so that
it were pity to tell, and with the same cleverness
have they made themselves lords of all the
temporal power and authority, in violation
of the holy Gospel; and accordingly I must
speak of this matter also.
There is no doubt that the true Roman empire,
of which the prophets (Num. xxiv. 24 and
Daniel ii. 44) spoke, was long ago destroyed,
as Balaam clearly foretold, saying, "And
ships shall come from the coast of Chittim,
and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict
Eber, and he also shall perish for ever"
(Num. xxiv. 24). 37 And this was done by
the Goths, and more especially since the
empire of the Turks was formed, about one
thousand years ago, and so gradually Asia
and Africa were lost, and subsequently France,
Spain, and finally Venice arose, so that
Rome retains no part of its former power.
[Footnote 37: Luther here follows the Vulgate,
translating the above verse: "Es werden
die Romer kommen und die Juden verstoren:
und hernach werden sie auch untergehen."]
Since then the Pope could not force the Greeks
and the emperor at Constantinople, who is
the hereditary Roman emperor, to obey his
will, he invented this device to rob him
of his empire and title, and to give it to
the Germans, who were at that time strong
and of good repute, in order that they might
take the power of the Roman empire and hold
it of the Pope; and this is what actually
has happened. It was taken from the emperor
at Constantinople, and the name and title
were given to us Germans, and therewith we
became subject to the Pope, and he has built
up a new Roman empire on the Germans. For
the other empire, the original, came to an
end long ago, as was said above.
Thus the Roman see has got what it wished:
Rome has been taken possession of, and the
German emperor driven out and bound by oaths
not to dwell in Rome. He is to be Roman emperor
and nevertheless not to dwell in Rhme, and,
moreover, always to depend on the Pope and
his followers, and to do their will. We are
to have the title, and they are to have the
lands and the cities. For they have always
made our simplicity the tool of their pride
and tyranny, and they consider us as stupid
Germans, to be deceived and fooled by them
as they choose.
Well, for our Lord God it is a small thing
to toss kingdoms and principalities hither
and thither; He is so free with them that
He will sometimes take a kingdom from a good
man and give it to a knave, sometimes through
the treachery of false, wicked men, sometimes
by inheritance, as we read concerning Persia,
Greece, and nearly all kingdoms; and Daniel
says. "Wisdom and might are His; and
He changes the times and the seasons, and
He removeth kings and setteth up kings"
(Dan. ii. 20, 21). Therefore no one need
think it a grand matter if he has a kingdom
given to him, especially if he be a Christian;
and so we Germans need not be proud of having
had a new Roman empire given us. For in His
eyes it is a poor gift, that He sometimes
gives to the least deserving, as Daniel says,
"And all the inhabitants of the earth
are reputed as nothing; and He does according
to His will in the army of heaven, and among
the inhabitants of the earth" (Dan.
iv. 35).
Now, although the Pope has violently and
unjustly robbed the true emperor of the Roman
empire, or its name, and has given it to
us Germans, yet it is certain that God has
used the Pope's wickedness to give the German
nation this empire and to raise up a new
Roman empire, that exists now, after the
fall of the old empire. We gave the Pope
no cause for this action, nor did we understand
his false aims and schemes; but still, through
the craft and knavery of the popes, we have,
alas! all too dearly, paid the price of this
empire with incalculable bloodshed, with
the loss of our liberty, with the robbery
of our wealth, especially of our churches
and benefices, and with unspeakable treachery
and insult. We have the empire in name, but
the Pope has our wealth, our honour, our
bodies, lives, and souls and all that we
have. This was the way to deceive the Germans,
and to deceive them by shuffling. What the
popes wished was to become emperors; and
as they could not do this, they put themselves
above the emperors.
Since, then, we have received this empire
through God's providence and the schemes
of evil men, without our fault, I would not
advise that we should give it up, but that
we should govern it honestly, in the fear
of God, so long as He is pleased to let us
hold it. For, as I have said, it is no matter
to Him how a kingdom is come by, but He will
have it duly governed. If the popes took
it from others dishonestly, we at least did
not come by it dishonestly. It was given
to us through evil men, under the will of
God, to whom we have more regard than the
false intentions of the popes, who wished
to be emperors and more than emperors and
to fool and mock us with the name.
The King of Babylon obtained his kingdom
by force and robbery; yet God would have
it governed by the holy princes Daniel, Ananias,
Asarias, and Misael. Much more then does
He require this empire to be governed by
the Christian princes of Germany, though
the Pope may have stolen, or robbed, or newly
fashioned it. It is all God's ordering, which
came to pass before we knew of it.
Therefore the Pope and his followers have
no reason to boast that they did a great
kindness to the German nation in giving them
this Roman empire; firstly, because they
intended no good to us, in the matter, but
only abused our simplicity to strengthen
their own power against the Roman emperor
at Constantinople, from whom, against God
and justice, the Pope has taken what he had
no right to.
Secondly, the Pope sought to give the empire,
not to us, but to himself, and to become
lord over all our power, liberty, wealth,
body and soul, and through us over all the
world, if God had not prevented it, as he
plainly says in his decretals, and has tried
with many mischievous tricks in the case
of many German emperors. Thus we Germans
have been taught in plain German: whilst
we expected to become lords, we have become
the servants of the most crafty tyrants;
we have the name, title, and arms of the
empire, but the Pope has the treasure, authority,
law, and freedom; thus, whilst the Pope eats
the kernel, he leaves us the empty shells
to play with.
Now may God help us (who, as I have said,
assigned us this kingdom through crafty tyrants,
and charged us to govern it) to act according
to our name, title, and arms, and to secure
our freedom, and thus let the Romans see
at last what we have received of God through
them. If they boast that they have given
us an empire, well, be it so, by all means;
then let the Pope give up Rome, all he has
of the empire, and free our country from
his unbearable taxes and robberies, and give
back to us our liberty, authority, wealth,
honour, body, and soul, rendering to the
empire those things that are the empire's,
so as to act in accordance with his words
and pretences.
But if he will not do this, what game is
he playing with all his falsehoods and pretences?
Was it not enough to lead this great people
by the nose for so many hundred years? Because
the Pope crowns or makes the Emperor, it
does not follow that he is above him; for
the prophet, St. Samuel, anointed and crowned
King Saul and David, at God's command, and
was yet subject to them. And the prophet
Nathan anointed King Solomon, and yet was
not placed over him; moreover, St. Elisha
let one of his servants anoint King Jehu
of Israel, yet they obeyed him. And it has
never yet happened in the whole world that
any one was above the king because he consecrated
or crowned him, except in the case of the
Pope.
Now he is himself crowned pope by three cardinals;
yet they are subject to him, and he is above
them. Why, then, contrary to his own example
and to the doctrine and practice of the whole
world and the Scriptures, should he exalt
himself above the temporal authorities, and
the empire, for no other reason than that
he crowns, and consecrates the Emperor? It
suffices that he is above him in all divine
matters-that is, in preaching, teaching,
and the ministration of the Sacrament-in
which matters, however, every priest or bishop
is above all other men, just as St. Ambrose
in his chair was above the Emperor Theodosius,
and the prophet Nathan above David, and Samuel
above Saul. Therefore let the German emperor
be a true free emperor, and let not his authority
or his sword be overborne by these blind
pretences of the Pope's sycophants, as if
they were to be exceptions, and be above
the temporal sword in all things.
27. Let this be enough about the faults of
the spiritual estate, though many more might
be found, if the matter were properly considered;
we must now consider the defects of the temporal
estates. In the first place, we require a
general law and consent of the German nation
against profusion and extravagance in dress,
which is the cause of so much poverty among
the nobles and the people. Surely God has
given to us, as to other nations, enough
wool, fur, flax, and whatever else is required
for the decent clothing of every class; and
it cannot be necessary to spend such enormous
sums for silk, velvet, cloth of gold, and
all other kinds of outlandish stuff. I think
that even if the Pope did not rob us Germans
with his unbearable taxes, we should be robbed
more than enough by these secret thieves,
the dealers in silk and velvet. As it is,
we see that every man wishes to be every
other man's equal, and that this causes and
increases pride and envy among us, as we
deserve, all which would cease, with many
other misfortunes, if our self-will would
but let us be gratefully content with what
God has given us.
It is similarly necessary to diminish the
use of spices, which is one of the ships
in which our gold is sent away from Germany.
God's mercy has given us more food, and that
both precious and good, than is to be found
in other countries. I shall probably be accused
of making foolish and impossible suggestions,
as if I wished to destroy the great business
of commerce. But I am only doing my part;
if the community does not mend matters, every
man should do it himself. I do not see many
good manners that have ever come into a land
through commerce, and therefore God let the
people of Israel dwell far from the sea and
not carry on much trade.
But without doubt the greatest misfortune
of the Germans is buying on usury. But for
this, many a man would have to leave unbought
his silk, velvet, cloth of gold, spices,
and all other luxuries. The system has not
been in force for more than one hundred years,
and has already brought poverty, misery,
and destruction on almost all princes, foundations,
cities, nobles, and heirs. If it continues
for another hundred years Germany will be
left without a farthing, and we shall be
reduced to eating one another. The devil
invented this system, and the Pope has done
an injury to the whole world by sanctioning
it.
My request and my cry therefore is this:
Let each man consider the destruction of
himself and his family, which is no longer
at the door, but has entered the house; and
let emperors, princes, lords, and corporations
see to the condemnation and prohibition of
this kind of trade, without considering the
opposition of the Pope and all his justice
and injustice, nor whether livings or endowments
depend upon it. Better a single fief in a
city based on a freehold estate or honest
interest, than a hundred based on usury;
yea, a single endowment on usury is worse
and more grievous than twenty based on freehold
estate. Truly this usury is a sign and warning
that the world has been given over to the
devil for its sins, and that we are losing
our spiritual and temporal welfare alike;
yet we heed it not.
Doubtless we should also find some bridle
for the Fuggers and similar companies. Is
it possible that in a single man's lifetime
such great wealth should be collected together,
if all were done rightly and according to
God's will? I am not skilled in accounts,
but I do not understand how it is possible
for one hundred guilders to gain twenty in
a year, or how one guilder can gain another,
and that not out of the soil, or by cattle,
seeing that possessions depend not on the
wit of men, but on the blessing of God. I
commend this to those that are skilled in
worldly affairs. I as a theologian blame
nothing but the evil appearance, of which
St. Paul says, "Abstain from all appearance
of evil" (I Thess. v. 22). All I know
is that it were much more godly to encourage
agriculture and lessen commerce; and that
they do the best who, according to the Scriptures,
till the ground to get their living, as we
are all commanded in Adam: "Cursed is
the ground for thy sake. . . . Thorns also
and thistles shall it bring forth to thee.
. . . In the sweat of thy face shalt thou
eat bread" (Gen. iii. 17-19). There
is still much ground that is not ploughed
or tilled.
Then there is the excess in eating and drinking,
for which we Germans have an ill reputation
in foreign countries, as our special vice,
and which has become so common, and gained
so much the upper hand, that sermons avail
nothing. The loss of money caused by it is
not the worst; but in its train come murder,
adultery, theft, blasphemy, and all vices.
The temporal power should do something to
prevent it; otherwise it will come to pass,
as Christ foretold, that the last day shall
come as a thief in the night, and shall find
them eating and drinking, marrying and giving
in marriage, planting and building, buying
and selling (Matt. xxiv. 38; Luke xvii. 26),
just as things go on now, and that so strongly
that I apprehend lest the day of judgment
be at hand, even now when we least expect
it.
Lastly, is it not a terrible thing that we
Christians should maintain public brothels,
though we all vow chastity in our baptism?
I well know all that can be said on this
matter: that it is not peculiar to one nation,
that it would be difficult to demolish it,
and that it is better thus than that virgins,
or married women, or honourable women should
be dishonoured. But should not the spiritual
and temporal powers combine to find some
means of meeting these difficulties without
any such heathen practice? If the people
of Israel existed without this scandal, why
should not a Christian nation be able to
do so? How do so many towns and villages
manage to exist without these houses? Why
should not great cities be able to do so?
In all, however, that I have said above,
my object has been to show how much good
temporal authority might do, and what should
be the duty of all authorities, so that every
man might learn what a terrible thing it
is to rule and to have the chief place. What
boots it though a ruler be in his own person
as holy as St. Peter, if he be not diligent
to help his subjects in these matters? His
very authority will be his condemnation;
for it is the duty of those in authority
to seek the good of their subjects. But if
those in authority considered how young people
might be brought together in marriage, the
prospect of marriage would help every man
and protect him from temptations.
But as it is every man is induced to become
a priest or a monk; and of all these I am
afraid not one in a hundred has any other
motive but the wish of getting a livelihood
and the uncertainty of maintaining a family.
Therefore they begin by a dissolute life
and sow their wild oats, (as they say), but
I fear they rather gather in a store of wild
oats. 38 I hold the proverb to be true, "Most
men become monks and priests in desperation."
That is why things are as we see them.
[Footnote 38: Luther uses the expression
ausbuben in the sense of sich austoben, viz.,
"to storm out one's passions,"
and then coins the word sich einbuben, viz.,
"to storm in one's passions."]
But in order that many sins may be prevented
that are becoming too common, I would honestly
advise that no boy or girl be allowed to
take the vow of chastity or to enter a religious
life before the age of thirty years. For
this requires a special grace, as St. Paul
says. Therefore, unless God specially urge
any one to a religious life, he will do well
to leave all vows and devotions alone. I
say further, If a man has so little faith
in God as to fear that he will be unable
to maintain himself in the married state,
and if this fear is the only thing that makes
him become a priest, then I implore him,
for his own soul's sake, not to become a
priest, but rather to become a peasant, or
what he will. For if simple trust in God
be necessary to ensure temporal support,
tenfold trust in God is necessary to live
a religious life. If you do not trust to
God for your worldly food, how can you trust
to Him for your spiritual food? Alas! this
unbelief and want of faith destroys all things,
and leads us into all misery, as we see among
all conditions of men.
Much might be said concerning all this misery.
Young people have no one to look after them,
they are left to go on just as they like,
and those in authority are of no more use
to them than if they did not exist, though
this should be the chief care of the Pope,
of bishops, lords, and councils. They wish
to rule over everything, everywhere, and
yet they are of no use. Oh, what a rare sight,
for these reasons, will a lord or ruler be
in heaven, though he might build a hundred
churches to God and raise all the dead!
But this may suffice for the present. For
of what concerns the temporal authority and
the nobles I have, I think, said enough in
my tract on Good Works. For their lives and
governments leave room enough for improvement;
but there is no comparison between spiritual
and temporal abuses, as I have there shown.
I daresay I have sung a lofty strain, that
I have proposed many things that will be
thought impossible, and attacked many points
too sharply. But what was I to do? I was
bound to say this: if I had the power, this
is what I would do. I had rather incur the
world's anger than God's; they cannot take
from me more than my life. I have hitherto
made many offers of peace to my adversaries;
but, as I see, God has forced me through
them to open my mouth wider and wider, and,
because they do not keep quiet, to give them
enough cause for speaking, barking, shouting,
and writing. Well, then, I have another song
still to sing concerning them and Rome; if
they wish to hear it, I will sing it to them,
and sing with all my might. Do you understand,
my friend Rome, what I mean?
I have frequently offered to submit my writings
for inquiry and examination, but in vain,
though I know, if I am in the right, I must
be condemned upon earth and justified by
Christ alone in heaven. For all the Scriptures
teach us that the affairs of Christians and
Christendom must be judged by God alone;
they have never yet been justified by men
in this world, but the opposition has always
been too strong. My greatest care and fear
is lest my cause be not condemned by men,
by which I should know for certain that it
does not please God. Therefore let them go
freely to work, pope, bishop, priest, monk,
or doctor; they are the true people to persecute
the truth, as they have always done. May
God grant us all a Christian understanding,
and especially to the Christian nobility
of the German nation true spiritual courage,
to do what is best for our unhappy Church.
Amen!
At Wittenberg, in the year 1520.
Source:
Martin Luther: Address to the Christian nobility of the German
nation respecting the reformation of the
Christian estate, tr. by C. A. Buchheim.
from The prince / by Niccolo Machiavelli. Utopia / by Sir
Thomas More.
Ninety-five theses; Address to the German
nobility ; Concerning Christian liberty / by Martin Luther ; with introductions
and notes. (New York : P. F. Collier, c1910)
Harvard classics 36, ed. by C. W. Eliot
This text is part of the Internet Modern
History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection
of public domain and copy-permitted texts
for introductory level classes in modern
European and World history.
Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic
form of the document is copyright. Permission
is granted for electronic copying, distribution
in print form for educational purposes and
personal use. If you do reduplicate the document,
indicate the source. No permission is granted
for commercial use of the Sourcebook.
© Paul Halsall, August 1998 halsall@murray.fordham.edu
|