PAGE 8
Martin Luther
by
But although he did not appear in person, Tetzel prepared a counter set of Theses, to the appalling number of one hundred thirteen, and had them printed and widely distributed. His agent came to Wittenberg and peddled the documents on the streets. The students got word of what was going on and in a body captured the luckless Tetzelite, led him to the public square, and burned his documents with much pomp and circumstance. They then cut off the man’s coat-tails, conducted him to the outskirts of the town, turned him loose and cheered him lustily as he ran.
It will thus be seen that the human heart is ever the same, and among college students there is small choice.
The following Sunday Luther devoted his whole sermon to a vigorous condemnation of the act of his students, admonishing them in stern rebuke. The sermon was considered the biggest joke of the season.
Tetzel seemed to sink out of sight. Those whom he had sought to serve repudiated him, and Bishops, Electors and Pope declined to defend his cause.
As for Luther, certain Bishops made formal charges against him, sending a copy of his Theses to Pope Leo the Tenth. The Holy Father refused to interfere in what he considered a mere quarrel between Dominicans and Augustinians, and so the matter rested.
But it did not rest long.
* * * * *
The general policy of the Church in Luther’s time was not unlike what it is now. Had he gone to Rome, he would not have been humiliated–the intent would have been to pacify him. He might have been transferred to a new territory, with promise of a preferment, even to a Bishopric, if he did well.
To silence men, excommunicate them, degrade them, has never been done except when it was deemed that the safety of the Church demanded it.
The Church, like governments–all governments–is founded upon the consent of the governed. So every religion, and every government, changes with the people–rulers study closely the will of the people and endeavor to conform to their desire. Priests and preachers give people the religion they wish for–it is a question of supply and demand.
The Church has constantly changed as the intelligence of the people has changed. And this change is always easy and natural. Dogmas and creeds may remain the same, but progress consists in giving a spiritual or poetic interpretation to that which once was taken literally. The scheme of the Esoteric and the Exoteric is a sliding, self-lubricating, self-adjusting, non-copyrighted invention–perfect in its workings–that all wise theologians fall back upon in time of stress.
Had Luther obeyed the mandate and gone to Rome, that would have been the last of Luther.
Private interpretation is all right, of course: the Church has always taught it–the mistake is to teach it to everybody. Those who should know, do know. Spiritual adolescence comes in due time, and then all things are made plain–be wise!
But Luther was not to be bought off. His followers were growing in numbers, the howls of his enemies increased.
Strong men grow through opposition–the plummet of feeling goes deeper, thought soars higher–vivid and stern personalities make enemies because they need them, otherwise they drowse. Then they need friends, too, to encourage: opposition and encouragement–thus do we get the alternating current.
That Luther had not been publicly answered, except by Tetzel’s weak rejoinders, was a constant boast in the liberal camp; and that Tetzel was only fit to address an audience of ignorant peasantry was very sure: some one else must be put forward worthy of Martin Luther’s steel.
Then comes John Eck, a priest and lawyer, a man in intimate touch with Rome, and the foremost public disputant and orator of his time. He proposed to meet Luther in public debate. In social station Eck stood much higher than Luther. Luther was a poor college professor in a poor little University–a mere pedagog, a nobody. That Eck should meet him was a condescension on the part of Eck–as Eck explained.