Luther diminished the impression of his general character as a reasoner, and invalidated the authority of his argumentations, by an elaborate and ingenious obstinacy in this controversy. He gave himself the air of an orator who could descant upon a broomstick, and could defend a bad cause as vehemently as a good one, by exhausting the great powers of his mind in forcible appeals and sophistical illustrations to establish this unfounded tenet. It is not that he knew, or thought, that he was advocating falsehood. His only palliation 40 is that he was honest — indeed, honest to his dying hour. For however he might regret the heat of spirit and of language into which he had gone out against his opponents, he never made any concession with respect to his doctrine, but declared it amidst the concussion and relentings of a severe sickness in 1526. And he continued to preach and write upon it to the last.
The spirit he had manifested, he regretted; and well he might. He had maintained it like a wild bull in a net, calling names, and making devils of his adversaries. To say the least, they were as pure, as learned, and as laborious, if not so commanding in their aspect, so exalted in their sufferings, and so brilliant in their successes, as he was. And rending the mantle which should have covered Switzerland as well as Germany, and made both one against the foe of both, was more his doing than theirs. 41
This acrimonious controversy, deplorable on many accounts, but not without its direct and collateral benefits, began in 1524, and continued up to and beyond Luther’s death: the churches which pass under his name still retain his dogma.
In the last of these controversies, I pronounce him all in the right. By right, I mean as respecting his conclusion and his opponent — though he adduces some arguments which might have been spared, and he does not always exhibit a full understanding and correct use of his weapons.
Erasmus, who was Luther’s predecessor in age by about sixteen years, had done the reformers some service. This was chiefly by facilitating the knowledge of the ancient languages through his successful researches in literature, but not a little by employing his peculiar talent of ridicule upon some of the grosser abominations of Popery. Not that he had any hearty concern about these; but he was a man born pour le rire 42 — he was all for his jest — and monks and friars furnished him with a subject which he did not know how to reject. Like Lucian and Porphyry,43 therefore, without seriously meaning it, he prepared the way for a better faith, by deriding much of the old faith. He was indignant to be thought a sceptic; and many now-a-days think him harshly used by such an insinuation. But is not everyone who trifles with his soul, a sceptic? And what is the great multitude of professing Christians, if not such a company of triflers who, if put to the test, would act out what Luther said in his irony: ‘God has not given everybody the spirit of martyrdom.’
Erasmus, however, had committed himself in some degree to the cause of the reformers, by speaking well of them, specially of Luther, and acquiescing in many of their dogmas. In 1520, when the bull was preparing, and when the bull was out, he had both written and spoken in a language very decidedly in Luther’s favour:
‘God had sent him to reform mankind;’
‘Luther’s sentiments are true, but I wish to see more mildness in his manner;’
‘The cause of Luther is invidious, because he at once attacks the bellies of the monks, and the diadem of the Pope.’
‘Luther possesses great natural talents; he has a genius particularly adapted to the explanation of difficult points of literature, and for rekindling the sparks of genuine evangelical doctrine, which have been almost extinguished by the trifling subtleties of the schools. Men of the very best character, of the soundest learning, and of the most religious principles, are much pleased with Luther’s books. In proportion as any person is remarkable for upright morals and gospel-purity, they have fewer objections to Luther’s sentiments. Besides, the life of the man is extolled even by those who cannot bear his doctrines. It grieved him that a man of such FINE PARTS should be rendered desperate by the mad cries and bellowings of the monks.’
When pressed by the Pope’s legates to write against Luther, he answered,
‘Luther is too great a man for me to encounter. I do not even understand him always. However, to speak plainly, he is so extraordinary a man, that I learn more from a single page of his books than from all the writings of Thomas Aquinas.’
Still, as the cause advanced, Erasmus did not advance with it, but receded. Vanity, a love of the praise of men, was his ruling passion; and the particular mode of it, which was a desire to stand high with great men — with princes, dignified ecclesiastics, and all who were highly thought of — to stand high, specially on the ground of extreme moderation, as became a man of letters. He would be an Atticus 44 in his day. To join heartily with the reformers was not the way to achieve this object. They were despised by the rulers, and, what was still more provoking, they would not make him a king even among themselves.
‘Micat inter omnes
Julium sidus, velut inter ignes
Luna minores.’ — HORACE 45
But he was not that Luna, Luther was that Luna. What was to be done therefore, but to pout, and to distinctly separate himself from them — giving the princes to understand clearly that they were mistaken if they thought him one of them. Thus, by a sort of dexterous maneuvre, he would kill two birds at once: avenge the injury of his ‘spreta forma,’ and open a way for the sun and stars to shine in upon him. He confessed this in his answer to Luther:
‘As yet I have not written a syllable against you; otherwise I might have secured much applause from the great; but I saw that I would injure the Gospel. I have only endeavoured to do away with the idea that there is a perfect understanding between you and me, and that all your doctrines are in my books. Pains have been taken to instill this sentiment into the mind of the princes, and it is hard even now to convince them that it is not so.’
Luther would have been glad if the matter had rested here. Erasmus had done all the service he was made for, but let him not become their enemy. He was a successful sharpshooter — some of his shots would hit, annoy, and dismay. However, there were underlings in Luther’s camp as well as in the Pope’s, and these did not quite mind enough to preserve Luther’s line. They would step beyond it. They lampooned the satirist, hinted pretty broadly what he was, and made him little to his great ones. Luther tried to abate the shock of their attack, but it was too late: the enemy had been with him beforehand. Henry VII of England had implored, Pope Adrian VI in two epistles had supplicated, duke George had demanded, Tunstall 46 had conjured, Pope Clement VII had persuaded — and all the while, the sting of the wasps was still sore.
Luther makes his last attempt to pacify Erasmus with great forbearance (yet not trenching upon sincerity) with some galling hints as to the real state of the cause; but, as Erasmus himself allowed, it was done with sufficient civility.
‘I will not complain of you, for having behaved yourself as a man estranged from us, to keep fair with the Papists, my enemies; nor that you have censured us with too much acrimony.’ …
‘The whole world must own with gratitude your great talents and services in the cause of literature, through the revival of which we are enabled to read the sacred Scriptures in their originals. — I never wished that, forsaking or neglecting your own proper talents, you should enter into our camp.’ …
‘I could have wished that the COMPLAINT of Hutten had never been published.’ …
‘I am concerned, as well as you, that the resentment and hatred of so many eminent persons have been excited against you. I must suppose that this gives you no small uneasiness; for virtue like yours, mere human virtue, cannot raise a man above being affected by such trials’…
‘What can I do now? Things are exasperated on both sides; and I could wish, if I might be allowed to act the part of a mediator, that they would cease to attack you with such animosity, and allow your old age to rest in peace in the Lord. And thus, they would conduct themselves, in my opinion, if they either considered your weakness, or the magnitude of the controverted cause, which has been long since beyond your capacity. They would show their moderation towards you that much more, since our affairs are advanced to such a point, that our cause is in no peril, even if Erasmus were to attack it with all his might — so far are we from fearing any of his strokes and strictures.’
‘Our prayer is that the Lord may bestow on you a spirit worthy of your great reputation; but if this is not granted, I entreat you, if you cannot help us,
