OTorksi fhtbltsfyrtl by €. anti C Ctarfc, ClEomburcrJ). 
 
 Just published, in One Volume, demy 8vo, price 7s. 6d., 
 
 THE RELIGIONS BEFORE CHRIST; 
 
 BEING 
 
 AN INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO 
 
 THE HISTOEY OF THE FIRST THREE CENTUEIES OF 
 THE CHUECII. 
 
 EDMOND DE PKESSENSE, 
 
 PASTOR OF THE FRENCH EVANGELICAL CHURCH, AND DOCTOR OF DIVINITY OF THE 
 UNIVERSITY OF BRESLAU. 
 
 TRANSLATED BY 
 
 L. CORKKAN. 
 With Preface by the Author, 
 
 ©pinions of iljc |{m& 
 
 From the Morning Herald. 
 
 ' The object of this book is briefly to show under what conditions Christianity began 
 its life and death struggle with Paganism. The object is as useful as the result is 
 admirable. M. de Pressense has done the religious world a service by his publication of 
 this volume, and we can have no doubt that by the religious world the value of his labours 
 will be duly appreciated.' 
 
 Dublin Evening Mail. 
 
 ' We are glad to see that the valuable works of this pious and erudite French pasteur 
 have at last attracted the attention they deserve from the English religious public, and 
 that Messrs Clark have undertaken their publication, through the medium of a translation, 
 which seems to us peculiarly faithful and powerful, rendering all the force and terseness of 
 the original with an elegance rarely attained in a translation.' 
 
 Scottish Press. 
 
 ' The present volume, by M. De Pressense, forms an introduction to his great work upon 
 the History of the First Three Centuries of the Church, and contains an exposition of 
 truths and principles that are of very great moment to those who desire to learn the exact 
 nature of Christianity, and what it has accomplished for the human race, compared with 
 those religions which it superseded. The translation appears to be an excellent specimen 
 
 : he difficult act of the transfusion of thought from one language to another ; and the 
 i • lias a freshness and elegance about it which makes the work, in its English dress, 
 appear as if it were original.' 
 
 Northern Warder. 
 1 A remarkable work, and the fruit evidently of great learning and research. The 
 translation possesses all the merits of elegance, ease, and accuracy combined, and is most 
 felicitously executed.' 
 
 Edinburgh: T. & T. CLARK. London: HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO. 
 
U\ovhi -Publt'siljrt lin 'C- <nn ^ c - GIa>*> eutnburgl). 
 
 Ju.-i published, in one volume, 8vo, price 8s. 6d., 
 
 THE LIFE OF CALYIN: 
 
 III- Lin:. LABOURS, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 BY FELIX BUNGENER, 
 
 Author of the ' History of the Council of Trent,' etc., etc. 
 
 I'm author of this volume is already well known for his researches and writings in con- 
 11. .-t i. -11 with Protestant history. Iu the present volume, he does not profess to be the 
 
 n of Calvin, Booking his apotheosis, but the patient student of authentic records. 
 Bis admiration for Calvin is rather the result of his inquiries than of any foregone con- 
 
 i. He wishes to be just, and, therefore, we find candid admissions of the Reformer's 
 faults and mistakes, as well as resolute defences of his innocence, where he has been unjustly 
 
 i. If. Bnngener is well acquainted with the absurd calumnies, — almost all of Popish 
 
 origin,— which have been heaped a] Calvin's head. Some of these he ably refutes by 
 
 appeals to fact : but he does not fuel called upon to go over again all the ground which 
 Drelinconrl has patiently traversed. The author seeks to describe the peculiar features of 
 Calvin's character and genius; to give a statement and explanation of his literary and 
 ministerial activity ; to analyse his principal writings ; to record the leading events of his 
 1 1 f « - : and, generally, to reproduce him, as it were, living, speaking, and acting before us. 
 
 . rable space is given to Calvin's religious sentiments and doctrinal opinions, which 
 are Illustrated by numerous extracts from his letters and published works. M. Bungener 
 also throws considerable light upon Calvin's personal religious and domestic life, and the 
 
 a re many of them highly curious and interesting. His work at Geneva is described 
 
 Somewhat minutely, and with much care ; and his experience in that city is graphically 
 
 narrated. The affair of Servetus is recorded and examined at length, and with much 
 
 ability and Impartiality. Calvin's relations to other cities and countries are related, and 
 
 in particular, his relations to England and to Knox. In general, his movements, from his 
 
 Mrth at Noyon in 1609, to bis death at Geneva in 1564, are all carefully set forth in a well 
 
 d and picturesque style. The work makes frequent allusions to the leading charac- 
 
 ats of the time, so far as they are connected with Calvin and Geneva. The 
 
 volume is, therefore, not only a complete picture of Calvin, but a valuable contribution to 
 
 the history of the Beformation during the period of his life. It is divided into four books ; 
 
 which extends from 1509 to 1536; the second, from 1536 to 1541; the third, 
 
 from 1541 to 1555 J and the fourth, from 1555 to 1564. M. Bungener has compiled his his- 
 
 Bources of information, and has sought to produce a work which shall 
 
 the tame time popular and trustworthy. The English reader will now have the 
 opportunity of studying the life of Calvin by the light of the latest researches among con- 
 locuments. 
 
 .lust published, in two volumes, Svo, price 14s. (1300 pages), 
 
 HE INSTITUTES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. 
 
 BY JOHN CALVIN. 
 
 TRANSLATED BY BENRY BEVERIDGE. 
 
 ■ us Institutes was originally executed for the « Calvin Transla- 
 tion bocu ly, and is umvei sally acknowledged to Be the best English version of the work. 
 ive reprinted it in an elegant form, and have, at the same time, fixed a 
 i • « nl. in the reach of all. 
 
 ; ROH: T. & i. CLARK. London : HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO. 
 
CLARK'S 
 
 FOKEIGN 
 
 THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY. 
 
 NEW SERIES. 
 VOL. VI. 
 
 &llmann'0 JftefonnerS before tf)e ftcformatiop- 
 VOL. I. 
 
 EDINBURGH : 
 T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET. 
 
 LONDON : J. GLADDING ; WARD & CO. ; JACKSON, WALFORD, & CO. 
 DUBLIN : JOHN ROBERTSON. 
 
 MDOOOI.X III 
 
REFORMERS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 REFORMATION, 
 
 PRINCIPALLY IN 
 
 GERMANY AND THE NETHERLANDS, 
 
 DEPICTED BY 
 
 DR. O/ULLMANN, 
 
 THE TRANSLATION 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. ROBERT MENZIES. 
 
 Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona 
 Multi :— Horace. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 THE NEED OF A REFORMATION IN REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL SPIRIT 
 OF THE CHURCH AND CERTAIN PARTICULAR ABUSES. 
 
 THIRD EDITION. 
 
 EDINBURGH : 
 T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 
 LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.; SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO. J 
 
 WARD AND CO. J JACKSON AND WALFORD, ETC. DUBLIN : 
 
 JOHN ROBERTSON, AND HODGES AND SMITH. 
 
 MDCCCLXIII. 
 
MURRAY AND GIBB, TKINTERS, EDINBURGH. 
 
CONTENTS OF THE FIRST VOLUME. 
 
 GENEEAL INTBODUCTION. 
 
 Page 
 The Nature of the Reformation, and what led to it. P. 1 — 13 
 The idea of a Reformation in general : Its positive, historical, and 
 practical character. Application of this idea to the Reformation 
 
 of the 16th century, . 1 — 4 
 
 A Reformation only possible in reformatory times. What is implied 
 in a reformatory time negatively and positively,-— existing cor- 
 ruptions, a sense of them, the rudiments of improvement, — 
 shewn in the main features of the development of Christianity 
 
 until the loth century, 4 — 11 
 
 Forerunners of the Reformation in various spheres and directions. 
 
 Sketch of the principal contents of the volumes, . . . 11 — 13 
 
 BOOK FIRST. 
 
 JOHN OF GOCH; 
 
 OR 
 
 The need of the Reformation in reference to the general spirit of the 
 Church. P. 15—157. 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 The Life of 3 ohn of Goch, and his position generally as a Theologian. 
 P. 17—51. 
 Chapter First. Biographical particulars. His birthplace. Early 
 education. Connexion with the Brethren of the Common lot. 
 Universities. The exact particulars only to be gathered by 
 
 conjecture, .......... 17 — 21 
 
 Labours in Mechlin. Description of the ecclesiastical state of the 
 
 place. Monachism. Goch's position, . . . 21 — 27 
 
 His decease, and general characteristics, . . . ' 27 — 28 
 
 Chapter Second. . Goch's general position as a theologian, . 28 — 51 
 He belongs to the theology of the West, and to that in its transition 
 
 from the Mediaeval period to the Reformation, . . 29 — 32 
 Main features of his theology ; scriptural and relatively antiphiloso- 
 
 phic, Augustinian and decidedly Antipelagian. The polemical 
 
 attitude of the Reformers towards philosophy. Its causes, 32 — 38 
 
 Outlines of Goch's fundamental convictions, . . . 39 — 42 
 General principles. Predominantly practical point of view. Love, 
 
 liberty, evangelical sentiment, .... 42—51 
 
iv CONTENTS, 
 
 TART SECOND. 
 
 Goal's theology in particular, first in its positive aspect. The Book on Chris- 
 tian liberty. P. 52 — 82. 
 
 Page. 
 
 1 remarks on the Book on Christian liberty, . . 52—53 
 
 In mi in FiKM. The authority and interpretation of Scripture. 
 
 Scripture and philosophy, ..... 54—63 
 
 Ceattbb Second. Goch's doctrine on human nature, and the 
 method of salvation Nature and grace. Sin and redemption. 
 nan merit and the merit of Christ. Controversy with 
 Thoinisin and 1'elagianism. Errors in these tendencies and the 
 opposite, truths ..... 63 — 82 
 
 PART THIRD. 
 
 Goch in opposition to the religious aberrations of his age. The Trea- 
 tise on the Four errors touching the Gospel-law. P. 83 — 132. 
 
 Character of Goch as a controversialist. The Book on the four 
 
 errors 83 — 87 
 
 Chapter First. Legalism and Gospel liberty, .... 87 — 90 
 
 Chapter Second. Freethinking lawlessness aud evangelical liberty. 
 
 Goch liberal-minded, but no freethinker 91 — 95 
 
 Chapter Thiud. False confidence in self and the need of grace. 
 Combats the Pelagianism in the theology of the Schoolmen, 
 especially of Thomas Aquinas. Confronts it with evangelical 
 supernaturalism, 95 — JQ6 
 
 (Haiti u Fourth. Factitious and genuine Christianity. Contro- 
 versy with holiness by works and self- righteousness, especially 
 in Monachism. Refutation of Aquinas' s statements respecting 
 ecclesiastical and especially Monastic vows. Import of Mo- 
 nachianj 106 — 122 
 
 Chapter Fifth. Position of the Church in these respects. Dis- 
 tinctions between the Divine ordinances of the Gospel and the 
 positive enactments of the Church. The nature and vocation 
 of the Church. Its fallibility. Priesthood and Episcopacy. 
 Priesthood and Monachism. Property and privation, . 122 131 
 
 The reformatory elements in Goch's views, . . . 131 132 
 
 PART FOURTH. 
 
 Relation of Goch to his own and aftertimes. P. 133—157. 
 
 Oiai-ii it Fxbbt. Goch's connexion with the Reformation. Cor- 
 
 KXLTUBG KAPHSUB edits his works and spreads their reformatory 
 
 principles. The judgments passed upon Goch, as a reformer, 
 
 thai writers, from the sixteenth century to the present day, 133—148 
 Chapii a Si ( oKB. The writings of Goch and their various editions. 
 General remarks respecting them. Which of them survive,* 
 and which have been lost. The oldest and recent editions, . 148—157 
 Otlng the Epistola Apolofrticn, sec also p. 108. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 BOOK SECOND. 
 
 JOHN OF WESEL; 
 
 or 
 The necessity for the Reformation in reference to particular things 
 in the Church, especially Indulgences and the corruptions of 
 the clergy. P. 159—374. 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 Page. 
 
 The Church of the West, and particularly that of Germany, in the 
 fifteenth century. P. 161—216. 
 
 1. The growth and blossom of the hierarchy. Import of the Papacy, 162 — 170 
 
 2. The decline of the Papacy in its chief stages, . . . 170 — 172 
 
 3. The idea of the Papacy according to the rival systems. The 
 
 strictly Papal — and the Representative system, . . 172 — 176 
 
 4. The Papacy as it really was in the 15th century. Individual 
 
 Popes, their aims and labours, 176 — 180 
 
 5. The clergy and the monks. Principal forms of depravity, 180 — 186 
 
 6. The Christian people. Their good and bad qualities. Described 
 
 by liberal-minded men, especially Sebastian Brant, . 186 — 192 
 
 7. The opposition to the hierarcy. Nationality an element in the Re- 
 
 formation. Gregorg of Heimburg, His life, tendencies, and 
 conflicts with the Papacy and its champions, . . 192 — 208 
 
 8. The hope of a reformation. Jacob of Jiiterbock. The tendency 
 
 of his mind, and his work upon the Seven states of the Church, 
 especially touching the question, whether, and in what way a 
 reformation may be expected, 208 — 216 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 John of Wesel at the University of Erfurt, and as the opponent of 
 Indulgences. P. 217—276. 
 
 Chapter First. University of Erfurt, the scene of Wesel' s educa- 
 tion and labours. The institution and character of this Uni- 
 versity. Its importance for the Reformation. Theologians 
 of Erfurt at the time. The professors and spiritual influences 
 which may have contribute to form the mind of Wesel at Erfurt, 217 — 243 
 
 Chapter Second. John of Wesel and Indulgences. Importance of 
 the doctrine on this subject in the Catholic system. Its origin 
 and formation, especially by Alexander of Hales, Albert the 
 Great, and Thomas Aquinas. The state of the doctrine at the 
 time. Critical observations. Opposition : Jacob of Jiiter- 
 bock, who probably influenced the mind of Wesel. Wesel's 
 own controversy on this subject occasioned by the year 
 of jubilee. His work against Indulgences. Its contents. 
 Compared with the theory of the Schoolmen, and with the 
 Theses of Luther. Of the grounds on which the doctrine of 
 Indulgence rests, the idea of forgiveness of sin and communi- 
 cation of grace, penalty and its abolition, the power of the 
 keys, the treasure of good works and purgatory ; likewise of 
 the authority and fallibility of the Church, and the difference 
 between the Church general and the Church of Christ, . 243—276 
 
x J CONTENTS. 
 
 TART SECOND. 
 John of YVbbbl and the depraved clergy, P. 277—328 
 
 Page. 
 
 Cn u'ti u First. AYesel as preacher at Mayence and Worms. The 
 Uhincland. Its ecclesiastical and theological state. The main 
 ta of civilization, and the more celebrated characters. The 
 city of "Worms. Its bishops in the immediately preceding 
 period, and at the time, especially Reinhard of Sickingen, under 
 whom Weael laboured, ...... 277—287 
 
 l's position under these circumstances. He was alive to the 
 threatening dangers. His ideal of an apostolical man and 
 preacher. His theological principles and pastoral practice, 
 especially their reformatory elements 287 — 300 
 
 Ckaptbb Second, Wescl as a writer against the depravity of the 
 clergy. Matthew of Cracow a Reformatory Bishop of Worms. 
 His work on the Pollutions of the Court of Rome, and Wesel's 
 on the Authority, duty, and power of the pastors of the church, 
 characterised and compared with each other. Matthew of 
 Cracow on the nomination to spiritual offices by the Pope, on 
 simony and its sophistical palliations, on the natural and neces- 
 sary restraints of the Papacy and on the position of the Church 
 in relation to it. Wesel on the validity of ecclesiastical enact- 
 ments, their relation to the Gospel, the authority of the tem- 
 poral power, and several deplorable disorders in the actual state 
 of the Church, 300 -328 
 
 PART THIRD. 
 
 Page. 
 Wbsbl'b trial for heresy and his relation to after times. P. 329—374. 
 CKAPTSB Fikst. Wesel's trial for heresy. Antecedent persecutions 
 on the part of Reinhard of Sickingen. Causes of dislike to 
 1. Charges of connexion with Jews and Hussites. Par- 
 ticular examination of the latter charge. Hussitism in Fran- 
 conia and in the Neckar and Rhine districts. Wesel's position 
 
 in regard to it 329—338 
 
 The trial itself. Interest taken in it by the Universities of Heidel- 
 berg and Cologne. The chief actors. The two narratives of 
 the trial. Its course and issue. Opinion respecting the con- 
 dud of Wewl. (ii'ncral sketch of his spirit and deportment, 338—362 
 
 (TO. Wesel's connection with the Reformation. 
 Opinion* expressed respecting him by cotemporaries, by the 
 !;• formers, particularly Luther, by Catholic and modern Pro- 
 
 ti-t ant Theologians, . .... . 362 370 
 
 '- Writings and their Editions, 370—374 
 
CONTENTS. vil 
 
 APPENDIX, 
 
 I. 
 
 Page. 
 Hans Boheim of Nik.lasha.usen, a Forerunner of the Peasant War. 375 — 393 
 The Peasant AVar and the Reformation. The former preceded by 
 
 preparatory phenomena, . . . . , . . . 377 --378 
 Hans Boheim one of the most notable pioneers of these commotions 
 His conversion, principles, and the impression he produced. 
 His connexion with Hussites and Beghards. Similar tendencies 
 in Franconia. Strong excitement of the people. Conduct of 
 the Governments. He is apprehended and burnt. Opinions 
 of him expressed by worthy cotemporaries, .... 378 — 393 
 
 II. 
 
 Cornelius Grapheus, the first Propagator of Goch's Doctrines and 
 
 Works, 395—416 
 
 Rudiments of the Reformation in the Netherlands. Counteractive 
 measures. Antwerp, Groningen, Jac. Probst, William Frie- 
 derici, and others, 397—400 
 
 Reformatory zeal and labours of Grapheus. His imprisonment. 
 His letter and poem (Querimonia) then written. His recanta- 
 tion. The principles he revoked, 400 — 410 
 
 Total change in the position of his mind. The Reformation pro- 
 gresses while he remains behind. His connection with Eras- 
 mus. Labours in the field of general literature. Sketch of his 
 character, 410 — 416 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 W. Gilpin, an English author, wrote in his day biographies of 
 Wickliffe, Lord Cobham, Huss, and Jerome of Prague, whom he 
 entitled the best-known of the Reformers prior to Luther. On 
 the work which I now present to the goodwill of the public, I 
 might inscribe the very opposite title, and call it, Biographies of 
 the least-known of those early Reformers. In that case, however, 
 it would be requisite, if proper, to annex, that they all the more 
 deserved to be known. 
 
 In fact, with few exceptions, the men of whom these volumes 
 treat, and whom, for brevity's sake, I call Reformers, although 
 aware what distinguishes them from those to whom the name is 
 strictly due, are not well known, or rather, are most of them, 
 wholly unknown, whereas other forerunners of the Reformation 
 are mentioned in even the most concise histories of the world, 
 and live in the mouths of all. The way in which this has hap- 
 pened is quite natural. The Reformation, in one aspect, was 
 a fresh conception of the faith and doctrine of the Gospel, formed 
 from a central point of view, then for the first time clearly and 
 vividly recognised. In another aspect, however, it was also 
 a great fact in the history of the Church and of mankind — a 
 conversion of what was previously only known and taught into 
 action and reality — a drama composed of successive magnificent 
 acts, and in which, upon different platforms, the chief monarchs 
 and nations of Em-ope played the parts. Unless founded upon 
 doctrines genuinely Christian, derived from a legitimate source, 
 and embraced with deep and experimental conviction, or in other 
 words, upon a new and purified faith, such a drama would have 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 hadno true rignificance, taken no certain hold, and must have 
 1 , away. On the other hand, unless faith and 
 ( ne bad been immediately carried out into action and 
 reality, both of these must have continued as before confined 
 chiefly to the domain of sentiment, or the school, and no total 
 renovation of religion and ecclesiastical affairs, no Church-reform, 
 extending even to the people, would have ensued. It was only 
 by the union and commixture of knowledge with action, and 
 of faith with practice, that the Reformation became what it 
 really was, a comprehensive renovation of the Christian life 
 and spirit. Of course on both these sides, the way required to 
 be paved and preparations made for it. The two things — a clearer 
 conception of Christianity in the mind, and a testimony in its 
 favour by ostensible acts — must to a certain extent have already 
 existed before they could be combined, as they were into a great 
 and mighty whole. For this reason, we find the Reformation 
 preceded by two descriptions of men, by some who privately, 
 in either a popular or scientific way, seek to impress deeper 
 convictions of the Reformatory doctrines upon themselves and 
 others ; and by some, who make their appearance upon the 
 public stage, and by vigorous acts endeavour to bring back the 
 Church to a more proper condition. The former were allowed 
 tranquilly to execute their vocation, remained unembroiled with 
 the hierarchy, and terminated their lives in peace. The latter, 
 however, obliged to attack existing abuses, were unavoidably 
 involved in conflict with the vastly superior power of the Church 
 — a conflict outwardly most unequal and generally desperate, 
 but for these very reasons all the more interesting and memor- 
 able. It was their lot to be confessors, and martyrs, and 
 sometimes the founders of parties, who shared their views and 
 th. sir enthusiasm. Hence their lives are imbued with a dra- 
 matic and even tragical interest, of a varied and elevating kind. 
 And as action and conflict always appeal more powerfully to 
 the popular sympathies, than research, intelligence, and deep 
 sentiment, and particularly, as the most interesting of all spec- 
 tacles is outward defeat conjoined with inward victory and 
 triumph, it was quite natural that these champions should, soonest 
 and preferentially, have become the men of the people, and sub- 
 jects for history and fame. Having once, however, fully ac- 
 
PREFACE. XI 
 
 corded their rights to the parties who strove and sacrificed them- 
 selves, it is not less the duty of history to exercise impartiality, 
 and not refuse to others what is also their due. By the practical 
 men alone, the Reformation could never have been achieved. 
 They were not always the most highly gifted with Christian in- 
 telligence, but in many cases were better fitted to diffuse around 
 them fervour and excitement, than clear insight into the nature of 
 Christianity, and hence, the fire which they kindled not unfre- 
 quently blazed with a wild and destructive flame. They may per- 
 haps have produced greater, but they by no means produced deeper 
 and purer effects, than the quiet and intellectual Reformers of the 
 14th and 15th centuries. For, if we consider what it was, which, 
 ere they appeared upon the stage of the Reformation, made 
 Luther and its other heroes what they were, and equipped them 
 for their parts, we shall find that it was by no means the ex- 
 ample of a Huss, a Savonarola, and other martyrs of the kind. 
 Neither was it the writings and doctrines of WicMiffe, but totally 
 different elements of Christian experience and theology, with 
 which they nourished their minds. Their spiritual food was 
 derived mainly from the Biblical and sound mystical Divines of 
 Germany and the Netherlands, at the close of the 14th, and in 
 the course of the 15th century — from that school of humble, 
 scriptural, and experimental theologians, of which the calm and 
 contemplative Staupitz was to Luther, and the noble Wittenbach to 
 Zwingli, the proximate representatives. If, too, we enquire from 
 what quarter emanated those influences of Christian intelligence 
 and polite learning, which, during the 15th century, in ever- 
 widening circles and encreasing degrees, silently and impercep- 
 tibly penetrated through the various classes of the people, and 
 rendered them susceptible of the words and acts of the Reformers, 
 we find ourselves again directed not to the more famous and 
 heroic pioneers of the Reformation, who sacrificed themselves for 
 the great cause, but to those modest men, who, in narrower 
 spheres, and often almost unobserved, employed themselves in 
 educating, training, and quickening those around them. Far 
 from wishing in the least to depreciate the services of the 
 heroes of the faith and their followers, who roused the public 
 mind, we yet feel constrained by historic justice to say, that 
 more was done in the way of enlightening and educating the 
 
Xii PREFACE. 
 
 people in Christianity by Gerhard Groot, and the Brethren of the 
 Common lot— more in the way of spiritualizing the Christian 
 faith and life, by the Dutch and German Mystics — more in the 
 way of purifying Theology and conforming it to Scripture by a 
 Gockj a John of Wesel, and a John Wessel, than from the very 
 nature of the case was possible for the men of conflict and action. 
 The labours of such theologians and societies, educating as they 
 did from the centre outwards, were absolutely indispensable to 
 what constituted the very essence of the Reformation, viz., its 
 belief and theology. Inasmuch, however, as their labours were 
 for the most part of limited outward extent, and destitute of loud 
 and ostensible parade, history, though it has not perhaps alto- 
 gether forgotten them, may yet at least be said to have placed 
 them in the back-ground. It is therefore, all the more plea- 
 sing a task to pay to them upon this field the debt of gratitude 
 due by evangelical theology. Neither do we here intend to 
 enquire to which of the two belongs the palm of superiority — to 
 those who quietly planted and nurtured, or to those who strenu- 
 ously dared and struggled ? It is enough to know that both 
 were indispensable if the object in view was to be gained. Each 
 of them fulfilled their own allotted mission, and if the more 
 quiet labourers have less attraction for lovers of the dramatic in 
 historical compositions, they are all the more important for the 
 scientific theologian, for whom the development of the inner life, 
 and the cultivation of theological ideas, constitute the radical 
 elements of Church history. 
 
 We have something else to add — Germany, including Swit- 
 zerland and the Netherlands, was indisputably the centre of that 
 gnat movement in the history of the world, which we call the 
 Reformation. It is remarkable, however, and not a little surpris- 
 ing, that this has not been long ere now more deeply felt, and more 
 frequently expressed, that for centuries so much has been said 
 of its English, its Bohemian, its French, and even of its Italian, 
 but scarcely a word of its German, precursors. I here mean Ger- 
 many in tlic widest sense, as comprising those countries connected 
 with the fatherland by the Rhine, the most German of rivers, 
 ami by the German language, moulded though it be into a pecu- 
 liar dialect. Is it possible that Luther and his confederates, or that 
 ZtoingU and his, or that the men whom we see taking the field 
 
PREFACE. Xlll 
 
 for the pure evangelical doctrine on the banks of the Rhine, 
 downwards to the Netherlands, should have dropped as Re- 
 formers from heaven, or received their impulse and insight 
 from a foreign land ? No, certainly. Even the law of historical 
 continuity would require us to suppose corresponding interme- 
 diate links, labourers who prepared this particular soil. We know, 
 however, as matter of fact, that in both Germany and the Nether- 
 lands, there were very distinguished precursors of the Reforma- 
 tion, who unquestionably exercised a far greater influence upon 
 our Reformers than any foreigners ever did. To give but a few 
 instances, Where do w6 find Luther speaking of the impression 
 produced upon his religious and theological development by any 
 of the more distinguished foreigners, in language like that which 
 he uses of his less known countrymen in Germany and Holland? 
 Of John of Wesel, he says, that he had studied his writings for 
 his degree — of the Brethren of the Common lot, that they were 
 the first to receive the Gospel — of Wessel, that it might seem as if 
 he (Luther) had derived from him all he knew — of Tauler, that, 
 neither in the Latin nor German tonguej does there exist a more 
 sound or more evangelical theology than his — of the Author of 
 the " Deutsche theologie," that no one had instructed him better 
 what God and Christ and all things are— and finally of Staupitz, 
 that by his means the light of the Gospel had first dawned on his 
 heart, and that his words had stuck like the arrows of a strong 
 man in his mind ? So far as I know, Luther says nothing like 
 this of any pioneer of the Reformation who was not a German, and 
 therefore, in treating of the historical causes of the great event, 
 these persons must not be left out of view. On the contrary, 
 we are loudly called upon to depict their character and labours 
 at length, as the only way to understand how the efforts of the 
 Reformers attained their great success in Germany and the con- 
 tiguous lands, and how of all countries that was the one which not 
 only became, but could not avoid becoming, the home of the 
 Reformation. Nowhere else were the preparations so deep and 
 effectual for Christian knowledge and a purer and more spiri- 
 tual Christian practice. 
 
 If, however, the object primarily proposed in the following 
 work was to do justice to certain less known, but most deserving 
 pioneers of the Reformation, and particularly to throw new light 
 
PKEFACE. 
 
 i the steps of transition to it in Germany and the Nether- 
 lands, the author was obliged by the nature of the case to keep 
 in view another and more general object, viz., a more complete, 
 
 rand, ami correct knowledge of the Reformation itself, which 
 must necessarily be promoted by a comprehensive acquaintance 
 with the steps which led to it and the measures by which it was 
 prepared. In all cases, a knowledge of the cause and a know- 
 ledge of the effect mutually depend, and reflect light upon each 
 other, and in no case more than the present. We can only 
 obtain a right insight into the Reformation by means of a complete 
 apprehension of the rudiments from which it. sprung. Its sub- 
 stantial spirit was already contained in the doctrine and efforts 
 of its pioneers, and in these is even more prominent and con- 
 Bpicuous than in the initiatory efforts of the Reformers them- 
 selves, which were sometimes made under inward and outward 
 conflicts. Let us indicate this in a few chief points. 
 
 The Reformation, viewed in its most general character, is the 
 reaction of Christianity as gospel against Christianity as law. 
 During the Middle Aires, the essential nature of the Christian 
 faith became gradually and progressively misunderstood, until, at 
 last, it was again reduced almost wholly to an objective law — an 
 external ordinance strict and unbending, and which only com- 
 manded and threatened. In opposition to the legalism of the 
 Church, however, a heretical and generally pantheistical Antino- 
 mianism had been formed, and between these two tendencies, the 
 false letter and the false spirit, the Reformation took the proper 
 medium. Evolving from the word of Scripture more purely and 
 Btrictly interpreted, the vital spirit, it taught men once more to 
 
 raise in Christianity a creative power of God, diffusing fresh 
 life into the deepest roots of our spiritual being, and guiding us 
 from the atonement to sanctification — a free doctrine of grace 
 and faith, of love and spirit, prompting us from the heart out- 
 wards to the fulfilment of the law; while, at the same time, it 
 i red the doctrine which is the kernel of St Paul's creed, but 
 which, in the course of time, had been wholly overgrown by the 
 legalism which had crept in. The extent to which this consti- 
 tutes the very germ of the Reformation, can scarcely be con- 
 I by any other means than an acquaintance with the spiri- 
 tual manifestations which preceded it. Its forerunners were, 
 
PREFACE. XV 
 
 almost more than its agents, under the dominion of a Christianity- 
 petrified into law, a sort of legal ecclesiasticism; While, at the same 
 time, as the light of free grace and the Spirit, and a knowledge 
 of the true principle of faith, had beamed upon their minds from 
 the Gospel and the writings of Paul, they apprehended the con- 
 trast still more strictly, and stated it still more broadly than the 
 Reformers themselves, though equally hostile to all Antino- 
 mianism. Almost all they did — and here we have John of Goch 
 particularly in view, who was little known, and laboured in calm 
 retirement — concentrated itself in the struggle which necessarily 
 sprung from this source, and which they maintained in more 
 private and circumscribed circles, as the Reformers afterwards 
 did, in public and on a great scale. 
 
 With this fundamental antithesis between law and gospel, 
 others are connected. In the first place there is that between 
 the externalism and the internalism of the religious and moral 
 life. On the legal stand-point, religious and moral things are 
 predominantly conceived and rated as quantities, upon the evan- 
 gelical, as qualities. In the one case, the stress is laid upon the 
 visible act, upon the character, number, and extent of the works 
 performed — in short, upon what may be weighed and measured 
 in the spiritual life. In the other, it is laid upon what is inmost 
 in the general bias of the mind, upon such imponderable things 
 as faith and sentiment. In the one case, the language is — Be 
 righteous and fulfil all the commandments ; in the other — Be- 
 lieve and love out of a pure heart, and then do what you will 
 and must, for all that comes from unfeigned faith and self-deny- 
 ing love is good. This antithesis, which is likewise one of the 
 radical differences between the Old and New covenant, runs, no 
 less than that between law and gospel, through the whole of 
 Church history. Besides being legalized, the mediasval Church 
 had more or less also fallen a prey to the principle of exter- 
 nalism ; In opposition to which, however, mysticism — thus also 
 becoming an important preparatory element of the Reformation — 
 asserted the principle of internalism. This it not un frequently 
 did in a sound and vigorous way, and with great success, but 
 sometimes also with a partial and morbid spiritualism, which by 
 falsely severing the outward from the inward, laid the whole strain 
 upon the latter, and by this means sank into pure indifference 
 
xv i PEEPACE. 
 
 cting moral actions, and wholly lost sight of the necessity 
 ,,;' imbuing with the Christian spirit all that belongs to life. 
 The true pioneers of the Reformation occupy the sounder stand- 
 point of an internalism strictly moral and thoroughly consonant 
 to the practical genius of Christianity. They recognise the 
 ! which is the offspring of living faith, and which never 
 remains mere sentiment, but is always and to an equal degree 
 active, as the true fulfilling of the law. They estimate every 
 outward work solely by the measure of the faith and love with 
 which it is imbued. They discover the vital point of piety and 
 morality not in the visible act, but in the spirit of which the act is 
 the expression ; While at the same time they require no self-seques- 
 tration inwards, or monkish retreat from the world, but a vigorous 
 infusion of the Christian spirit into all the relations of life. This 
 principle of a truly moral and sound internalism breaks forth 
 in the Reformation upon a large scale. In how 7 far, however, it 
 belonged to the essence, is most evident from the recognition of 
 its importance in all the preparatory rudiments, of that event. 
 It is the centre of all the controversy waged by its precursors 
 against works of righteousness, merit, and supererogation, against 
 indulgence, the opus operation, monachism, vows, and everything 
 of the sort. 
 
 After the evangelical principles of faith and internalism, the 
 next in importance of the general characteristics of the Reforma- 
 tion is the principle of Christian liberty. Here it is of great 
 consequence to conceive the idea of liberty according to the 
 sense actually entertained of it by the Reformers, and here, too, 
 the tendency of their precursors casts an important and illustra- 
 tive light upon the Reformation itself. No doubt the Reforma- 
 tion, as a fact, is a great act of emancipation, and one which 
 also includes a principle of liberty. It is, however, an act and 
 principle, not by any means of liberty in general, but of Chris- 
 tian liberty alone. The liberty for which the Reformers, with 
 equal calmness and determination, contend, is no mere form and 
 abstraction, no unsubstantial and empty shade, which may be 
 twisted on any side for or against religion, and for or against 
 < 'hristianity, but, like all rational liberty, it is a definite and con- 
 crete thing, and possesses as its vital content that which the 
 rmcrs considered Divine truth, viz., substantial Christianity. 
 
PREFACE. XV11 
 
 The soil in which their notion of liberty was rooted is the Chris- 
 tian doctrine of grace and faith. According to them true liberty 
 flows from fellowship with God and the appropriation of His 
 grace ; for liberty is founded upon love, and love upon faith, and 
 faith is the work of that which is its object, viz., the atoning love 
 or grace of God manifested in Christ. The liberty of the Re- 
 formers is thus, on the one hand, the assurance of perfect fellow- 
 ship with the Divine Being, in which the creature naturally 
 recognises his absolute dependence upon the Creator, as the 
 original fountain of all truth, holiness, and love; while, on the 
 other hand, and for that reason, it is also the consciousness of 
 perfect religious and moral self-sufficiency, and independence of 
 all human things. The autocracy which it confers, the complete 
 exemption from all outward constraint, and arbitrary and facti- 
 tious ordinances and authority, is in every case based upon theo- 
 cracy, that is, upon a well-ordered life in God and from God, and 
 included within the bounds of His revelation and law. Were 
 there any doubt, that what the Reformers term freedom is 
 thus really the full, religious and moral independency of the sub- 
 ject of redemption of all created things, and of all those that 
 men pretend to be divine — an independency rooted in vital 
 fellowship with, and submission to, God and his revelations — a 
 lesson upon the point might be learned from their forerunners. 
 It is a point on which there is essential agreement between 
 those who prepared the way and those who completed the work. 
 Among the former the idea of theocratically-Christian liberty is 
 always that of the abolition, not of absolutely all restraints to 
 which man may be subjected, but of those only which sin, the 
 world, law, and human authority attempt to impose upon him 
 in contradiction to the Gospel — an abolition which is perfectly 
 consistent with inward subjection to the Divine ordinances and 
 to the laws of Divine truth and charity. And as they knew no 
 other Christianity, save that which is in itself free, so do they 
 also know no other liberty save that which is Christian and 
 evangelical, and the offspring of vital faith and love. This is 
 another subject on which Goch deserves special attention, and on 
 which he has left a particular treatise. 
 
 It is, however, a subject on which it is of material importance 
 that we should have clearer and clearer views. In our own 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 times, and judgingfrom many of the speakers, there is a constant 
 disposition to consider the liberty of the Reformation as an abstract 
 form, to fancy that any imaginable substance may be put into 
 it, and hence to conceive Protestantism as implying a principle of 
 progress absolutely unrestricted, and, it matters not whether, be- 
 yond the pale of Christianity or even in determined opposition to it. 
 This is not the place speculatively to discuss such a tenet. It 
 is. however, the very place for protesting, as on conscience, and 
 to the best of our historical knowledge we do, that no such 
 tenet has any foundation upon the idea of liberty, as conceived 
 by the Reformers and their predecessors. It is true, that the 
 Reformation contains essentially the principle of vital progress, 
 of a continual purifying and perfecting alike of practice and of 
 doctrine, of the Church and of science, but then this advance is 
 always to be made upon the foundation of the Gospel. The Re- 
 formers could not possibly have had anything else in view, either 
 before or after the great achievement. No doubt the principle 
 of the Reformation is not absolutely connected with its first 
 practical manifestation. A right may be claimed to keep the two 
 to a certain extent apart, and to give to the principle a greater 
 extension than when it was first realized. But then Protestant- 
 ism, as a principle, ought never to be conceived in away irrecon- 
 cilably contradictory to Protestantism as a fact, or so as to make 
 philosophical Protestantism destructive of that of history. At 
 hast he who does this has no right to use the words reformation 
 and protestantism, as forms of malediction and enchantment 
 against actual Protestants, while he pretends to apply them to 
 the things to which they are customarily given. The recollec- 
 tion of the idea of liberty, entertained by the Reformers, may, at 
 any rate, conduce to a more distinct and precise discrimination 
 of principles, and if it should happen that the fact which emerges 
 does not please the advocates of a purely formal Protestantism, 
 it is still the duty of history to depict her object simply and 
 fully, having the opinion of the day to sort with it as it best can. 
 A- to the view which history takes of the Reformation in gene- 
 ral, we may say that in recent times it has become more discern- 
 ing, comprehensive, free, and objective, than was the case during 
 the period of a greater tension of the antithesis, between Catholi- 
 cism and Protestantism. In spite, however, of this general advance, 
 
PREFACE. XIX 
 
 we still find two false notions of the great event extensively- 
 prevalent, and which must not be here passed unnoticed. In 
 opposition to the true and unprejudiced historical view, there 
 is on the one side a narrow Protestant, and on the other a 
 no less narrow Catholic one. The correct historical view may, 
 it appears to me, be characterised by the following few traits : 
 It openly and unreservedly owns, first, that Catholicism with 
 its institutions was, under the existing conditions, developed with 
 historical necessity, and that it has been as a whole, and principally 
 for the Middle Ages, as it now is relatively for Modern times, 
 of great consequence and undeniable aptitude : Secondly, that 
 from the very outset of its development, much human imper- 
 fection, sin, and narrow-minded unchristianism, penetrated into 
 it, and gradually waxed so powerful, and offered so great an ob- 
 struction to the cultivation of the better Christian elements, that 
 an advance beyond it, by means of a return to what was primitive 
 and pure, became likewise a necessity, and after long preparatory 
 steps, at last actually ensued in the Reformation. The two wrong 
 conceptions of the Reformation leave, the one the first, and the 
 other the second, of these particulars disregarded. The narrow 
 Protestant view, occasioned partly by the authors of the Refor- 
 mation themselves, — but which is by no means justified by their 
 example, inasmuch as however greatly we may admire the zeal with 
 which they fought for life or death, we do not need to take it as 
 a pattern in our study of history, — the narrow Protestant view, 
 we say, overlooks what was natural, and relatively even necessary, 
 in the development of Catholicism, as well as its importance in the 
 history of the world. It beholds in the hierachy mere depravity, in 
 the Mediaeval Church mere darkness; while, on the con tray, in the 
 Reformation all is light, liberty and perfection. The former, and 
 all who represent it, it paints in the worst and blackest colours, 
 but can find none too bright and shining to depict the latter. On 
 the other hand, the narrow Catholic view, which originated with 
 the hierarchy, and has been continually advocated by its modern 
 champions, especially in Germany and France, ignores the histori- 
 cal necessity and the deep and general importance of the Reformation 
 — incalculably great though these are even for the regeneration of 
 Catholicism itself. It regards the Mediaeval Church in all essen- 
 tials, as divinely constituted, perfect, and exemplary, and conse- 
 
XX PREFACE. 
 
 quentlysees in the Reformation only rebellion, apostacy, and sin, 
 and what all evil is, antithesis to the Divinely instituted thesis. 
 The first view, overlooking the fact that it was rooted in the 
 ecclesiastical development of the Mediaeval period, and was a 
 gradual growth, leaves the Reformation historically unexplained. 
 The new light, without being kindled by a previous one, appears 
 as pun 1 antagonism to the pre-existent darkness, and flashes, as 
 it were, directly from the clouds. The second view, without con- 
 sidering the inward necessity of the work of the Reformation, 
 and its consonance to a higher plan, leaves the great event un- 
 explained as regards the Divine governance in history. For the 
 fact, that the most noble and deep-soulcd nations and individuals, 
 they who with greatest earnestness strove after piety and spiritual 
 light, were, and still continue to be, the most deeply involved in 
 this pretended apostacy, is very badly explained by alleging that 
 God permits such a thing to be as long as he sees fit. Besides, 
 if we regard a phenomenon which has given the prevailing bent 
 to all modern intellect as a purely extraneous emergence, a mis- 
 calculation introduced by human hand into the Divine govern- 
 ment, we must likewise of necessity doubt whether it is correct 
 to look upon history as exemplary at all. Both views, however, 
 history, when impartially handled, refutes. It shows indisput- 
 ably to the ingenuous eye, and all the more clearly, the more 
 completely the preceding centuries are studied, that in spite of 
 its originality and freshness, the Reformation by no means inter- 
 rupted the continuity of human affairs — that, on the contrary, it 
 was, on the one hand, preceded and its way prepared, by pious 
 and enlightened men, who preached almost the very doctrines that 
 distinguished the Reformers, while, on the other hand, a very con- 
 siderable Christian and intellectual culture was possessed by 
 numerous individuals and communities, and generally, that there 
 was a wide circle of susceptible minds which sympathised with the 
 rmers, and resigned themselves to their influence— all tend- 
 ing to prove that the Church, never wholly forsaken by the spirit 
 <>f ( Ihrist, was reformed by itself from within, to a much greater 
 extent, than by any parties disconnected with its antecedents 
 from without. Nor docs impartial history less evidently show, 
 that into the hierarchy and the dominant ecclesiasticism in gene- 
 ral, in spite of some mixture of what was relatively good and 
 
PREFACE. XXI 
 
 estimable, corruptions had crept, and had accumulated to such an 
 extent as to render a thorough transformation, by virtue of a new 
 spirit, one of the most urgent necessities, and that it was only in 
 consequence of the obstinate resistance of these parties to the 
 new and better spirit, that the renovating powers, which had 
 sprung up in the Church's bosom, were forced out of it, and 
 driven off to form a new community. 
 
 The fact of the Reformation having pre-existed its actual 
 advent, its origin in the Church's own bosom, and the conditions 
 and importance of that circumstance at least in a certain pro- 
 vince, the following work proposes to illustrate in detail. And, 
 inasmuch as I must in justice presume that enlightened Catho- 
 lics, no less than unprejudiced Protestants, are anxious for 
 historical truth, I count upon having favourable readers even 
 among the brethren of that faith. At any rate, I can quiet my 
 mind as respects them, with the conviction, that however good a 
 Protestant I am, I have never lost sight of the common Christian 
 ground of both churches, or of the special excellencies and merits 
 of theirs. Much more has my motive in writing been pure 
 affection to the cause of Christianity, exempt from anger or zeal, 
 which there was nothing to excite ; and although the facts them- 
 selves may here and there contain irritating matter, which, as a 
 historian, I could neither mitigate nor veil, still I have never 
 with design adopted such a method of delineation as was calcu- 
 lated to wound the piety of any man when it was sound in cha- 
 racter, and built upon conviction. 
 
 Just as the Reformation, besides much that is subordinate, 
 ministers mainly to three different branches of study, viz., to that 
 of doctrine, to that of the history of literature in a narrower 
 sense, and to that of ecclesiastical history in a wider ; and just as 
 in the lives of the Reformer's severally, more is done for one and 
 more for another of these, while none is wholly overlooked, the same 
 happens in the history of their precursors. Goch is of greater 
 consequence for the history of doctrine, Wesel with his con- 
 comitants, for that of the Church, especially as respects its morals 
 and constitution, Wessel with his surrounding group, for both,- 
 and no less for the history of the sciences. In these men, 
 however, and their subordinates, we generally find something 
 profitable for other than these main ends Along with its 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 great importance for the development of mind in the higher 
 regions, especially of Bcience, the Reformation was also of im- 
 measurable consequence for the moral, the religious, and in 
 genera] the intellectual life of the people. Nor is even this popu- 
 lar element wanting in the phenomena which paved the way 
 for the Reformation. We discover it particularly in its religions 
 and moral aspect, in the schools of the Mystics, and to a still 
 greater extent, and in combination with a lively zeal for the 
 social improvement, instruction, and training of the people, among 
 the Brethren of the Common lot. Both of these, the Reformatory 
 element in Mysticism, and still more, because still more widely 
 operative, that in the Institute of the Common lot, and in its chiet 
 representatives, of whom Thomas a Kempis is one, I have been 
 at great pains to depict, and believe that no one has hitherto done 
 it as fully and distinctly. 
 
 The contents of the whole work are divided as follows : The 
 first volume deals -chiefly with the need of the Reformation in 
 reference to the prevailing corruptions, while the sequel treats 
 of the positive preparations made for it and of its incipient 
 rudiments. The first consists of two books, and so does the 
 second, while each of the four has one or more representative 
 characters as its main theme. In the first book, John of Goch 
 shows us the need of the Reformation, as respects the general 
 spirit of the Church inwardly. In the second, John of Wesel 
 and several of the members of his circle, show the same thing 
 with reference to special ecclesiastical abuses. The third de- 
 scribes the practical and popular efforts in behalf of the Refor- 
 mation, made by the Brethren of the Common lot, and by the 
 Dutch and German Mystics. The fourth exhibits in John IVessel, 
 the theology prior to the Reformation in its most highly finished 
 form. I have begun with Goch, because I was thus necessarily 
 led to treat of the spirit and essence of the Church in general. A 
 calm and self-concentrated character, he lives mainly in contem- 
 plation, and furnishes few materials for the Church's external his- 
 tory. This want, however, is amply compensated by his impor- 
 tance as the cultivator of reformatory thoughts and principles. 
 ( )n tin' other hand, Wesel leads us at once into the very midst of 
 the Church's affairs, and side by side with him we have depicted 
 other men who likewise strenuously fought the ecclesiastical battle. 
 
PREFACE. XX1U 
 
 Here too we have introduced a variety of particulars connected 
 with the history of the Universities and the study of theology, which 
 are of some importance in order to a more precise acquaintance 
 with this period of transition. Nor am I without hope that a con- 
 tribution given in an appendix to the present volume, and intended 
 to illustrate the commencement of the war of the peasantry, will 
 he read with pleasure. I promise myself, however, a much livelier 
 interest for the second volume, partly because the materials are 
 of richer variety, and partly because the persons and subjects 
 treated of are of greater positive importance. The brethren on 
 the Common lot are one of the most pleasing phenomena in the 
 annals of spiritual life. Gerard Groot and Thomas a Kempis 
 awaken general sympathy by their very names. The German 
 Mystics, in their connection with the Reformation, are of the 
 highest importance, — an importance which has not been hitherto 
 sufficiently estimated, — while the most superficial acquaintance 
 with the theology of Wessel suffices to secure for him in a pre- 
 eminent sense, the title of Luther's precursor. 
 
 It may perhaps be objected to the work, that it connects the 
 whole materials with persons, in place of relating them according 
 to their own natural connection, and so consists of a mere series 
 of biographies. This was occasioned by the circumstance that the 
 work was originally a monography of Wesel, and has grown from 
 that to the size in which it now appears. At the same time, it 
 seemed to me a very proper method of depicting the different ten- 
 dencies of the age, to do it through the medium of persons, because, 
 in this way, many things become more lively and concrete than is 
 possible in any other, however otherwise advantageous. Besides, 
 as the several personages represent different modes of thought, or 
 varieties of the same main mode, they implement each other and 
 furnish a collective picture of the age. The work may perhaps be 
 more justly blamed for an excessive fulness of particular details ; 
 and in characterising at least the leading personages, I cer- 
 tainly did aim to be complete, and to omit nothing essential 
 either done by or said respecting them. In this respect many 
 may think I have gone too far, and have thereby weakened 
 the general impression. As the work, however, has been written 
 not merely for general readers, but likewise for consultation by 
 professional men, some indulgence, I hope, will be shown to a 
 
Xxiv PREFACE. 
 
 which is not without advantages. It may also serve to 
 
 amend the work to scholars, that, on several points, I have 
 
 able to consult manuscripts and rare books. This was 
 
 particularly the case in the instances of Goch, John of Wesel, 
 
 J I,n,s Bdheim, the precursor of the peasant war, and even of 
 
 . To ifi respected keepers of the libraries of Heidelberg, 
 
 Carlsruhe, Munich, Darmstadt, Bonn, and Emden, I offer my 
 
 heartiest thanks for their obliging assistance in this matter. 
 
 The men who have been here delineated form a connected 
 group. "They are Scriptural and reformatory theologians of the 
 fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, some of them predominantly 
 practical and mystical, others of a more scientific character. In 
 ! - far, the volumes constitute a whole. They do not, however, 
 even as regards Germany and the Netherlands, by any means 
 exhaust the subject, which may be called the Characteristics of 
 the pioneers of the Reformation. For that reason I have inten- 
 tionally entitled them not, " Tlie Beformers before the Reforma- 
 tion," but simply, " Reformers before the Reformation." If 
 favourably received, and God vouchsafe to me life, strength, and 
 leisure, I may perhaps attempt a continuation. Meanwhile, may 
 what is here furnished experience a suitable reception, and be 
 productive of good. 
 
 The evangelical theology of our day is threatening on two 
 sides to forsake the principles of the Reformers. One party, re- 
 linquishing the historical basis, and all that is positive, concrete, 
 and vital in Christianity, have cast themselves wholly into the 
 arms of Idealism, and that generally pantheistic. Another, adher- 
 ing strictly to the positive, refuse to recognise it in any but a 
 single strictly denned and fixed formula of Christianity, and are 
 1 ite of desire for advancement and of the spirit of vital reform. 
 The former repudiate stability, the latter progression, and neither, 
 I robably, will take much interest in a work like the present. The 
 Idealists will say that it is over-loaded with the ballast of personal, 
 individual, and subjective matter, and will desiderate " the de- 
 velopment of the idea through its phases." The others, cleaving 
 Bolely to what has been, or now is, will be unwilling to bestow 
 much of their sympathy on that which is about to be, and whose 
 variety has not yet been moulded into formulas. This unfavour- 
 able state of theology, however, ought not to prevent us either 
 
PREFACE. XXV 
 
 from investigating the nature of the Reformation, and depicting it 
 in its entire historical truth, or yet from holding fast its true 
 principle, in the promotion of science. Probably many of our 
 cotemporaries are of opinion that we are now upon the eve of a 
 new reformation, and I will not deny, — who, with the present 
 signs of the time before his eyes, would be bold enough to deny ? 
 — that we are living in a period of transition highly critical for 
 the immediate future, and in many of its features strikingly akin 
 to the 15th century. But whether the change that now awaits 
 us be a reformation, and destined to accomplish for our age what 
 that of Luther and Zwingli did for the 16th century, is a ques- 
 tion few will venture to decide. All the reformatory measures 
 we have yet heard of are much too negative and unhistorical, and 
 contain too little to satisfy the deeper cravings of the intelligence 
 and the religious sentiment to merit the name. A reformation is 
 never a mere work of ruin, but involves only as much tfestruction I 
 as is unavoidable for construction, and as the elements of the' 
 latter, constituting though it does the very heart and essence of 
 the thing, are still wanting, the only course of safety I see, is for 
 every man who can, to cleave with conviction to the principles of 
 the Reformers, and firm in the faith, and free in science, to build 
 upon that ground conformably to the wants of our age. 
 
 ULLMANN. 
 
 Heidelberg, 18th October 1841. 
 
JOHN OF GOO II 
 
 JOHN OF WESEL, 
 
 AND 
 
 OTHER PROMOTERS OF REFORMATION CONNECTED 
 WITH THEM, 
 
 ESPECIALLY 
 
 CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS, GREGORY OF HEIMBURG, 
 JACOB OF JUTERBOCK, 
 
 AND 
 
 MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 
 
 DELINEATED BY 
 
 DR C. ULLMANN. 
 
 THE TRANSLATION BY THE 
 
 REV. ROBERT MENZIES. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 THE NATURE OF THE REFORMATION, AND WHAT LED TO IT. 
 
 In undertaking to give an account of several remarkable persons 
 who, in the 15th century, paved the way for the Reformation, we 
 have first of all to explain what the Reformation really was. This 
 is byno means unnecessary, inasmuch as the correct definition of 
 a subject materially influences its historical delineation ; and just 
 as little is it superfluous, for the point is one on which a variety 
 of opinions have been circulated, equally erroneous in theory and 
 prejudicial in practice. Nothing is more common — and the 
 remark applies to the friends no less than to the enemies of 
 the Reformation — than to conceive that event as something essen- 
 tially negative, a mere setting aside of errors and abuses, and of 
 course to infer, that as errors and abuses exist at all times and in all 
 places, it is possible always and anywhere to set a Reformation on 
 foot. Here, then, at the very outset, we observe, that no genuine 
 Reformation can be produced at will, and that what may be so 
 produced has no title to the honourable name. A Reformation' 
 in the higher sense of the word is always a great historical result, 
 the issue of a spiritual process, extending through centuries. It is 
 a widely-^felt and overpowering necessity, entered into, no doubt, 
 spontaneously by the individual, and carried into effect by eminent 
 leading characters, but which at the same time is essentially based 
 upon a large and comprehensive public spirit, such as cannot pos- 
 sibly be evoked at a given moment, but forms itself slowly and 
 gradually by an inward and irresistible exigency. For such a 
 
 A 
 
2 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 lasting process of formation, the one thing needful is a quickening 
 centre— a positive kernel. No mere negative, such for example 
 :is doubt, objection, hostility to existing things, is powerful enough 
 to unite the minds of men on a large scale, and keep them for 
 centuries in a state of tension and movement. In the physical 
 or moral world there can be no organic and enduring production 
 except from some vital and prolific seed which virtually contains 
 within it, although in embryo, the life actually developed out of 
 it. Such a seed too is always positive. It first secures a position 
 to itself, and then, in order to make room for its free develop- 
 ment, it opposes what is foreign and repels what is obstructive. 
 The same general law we likewise observe in every phenomenon 
 which takes place in the religious domain, and to which the name 
 of Reformation may be rightfully applied. Reformation means 
 formation again, restoration of life. In the idea, however, of a 
 restoration of religious life, three essential elements are involved. 
 In the first place, it is a going back to something already fixed and 
 original ; for the Reformation, which must be distinguished from 
 the introduction of Christianity and the first establishment of the 
 Church, aims not at the creation of some wholly new thing, but 
 at the renovation of an already existing institution. Accordingly 
 it always proceeds upon a distinct historical domain, and in over- 
 stepping this boundary, looses its character. But then, secondly, 
 it is not merely a return or reference to, a recognition of or longing 
 after, an original. It is much more, an effectual restitution of it, 
 a new and successful introduction into life of that which is ascer- 
 tained to be genuine ; and this mainly constitutes its practical and 
 positive character. It is a great historical act, but one which rests 
 upon a given foundation, clearly known and recognized in the 
 general conscience, and which for that reason becomes in its turn 
 the basis of a further development — a spiritual re-edification. In 
 fine, the nature of a Reformation likewise implies a conflict with 
 what is false, and an abolition of what is antiquated, by which its 
 position is converted into opposition. For if it is to be the reno-» 
 ration of an original, this presupposes that the original has in the 
 course of time been disfigured and adulterated, and that its corrup- 
 tions require to be put away. The necessity of giving it room 
 enough to assume its new form also implies an effort to combat 
 and abolish what is old and obstructive. But never is a true 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 Reformation a mere process of destruction. On the contrary it 
 is always a process of construction, effected through only as much 
 destruction as is unavoidable. 
 
 These definitions pertain to the nature of all Reformations, and 
 nobody will deny their applicability to the change undergone 
 by the Church in the 16th century. Bearing the name of Refor- 
 mation in the narrower sense, this event is a deliberate return to 
 primitive Christianity. It moves essentially in that sphere. 
 As far as its knowledge went, and by a series of glorious acts, it 
 restores primitive Christianity to life, and secures for it room and 
 liberty by vigorously and decidedly cutting off all that is alien. In 
 order, however, to its becoming an historical transaction of such a 
 magnitude — a transaction shared by the most enlightened nations 
 of Europe, especially by the earnest, deep-souled, and energetic 
 off-shoots of the German stock, and within these, by all ranks, by 
 princes and nobles, scholars and artists, citizens and peasantry, 
 a transaction forming, as it were, the turning-point of history from 
 the mediaeval to modern times, and the centre of the whole subse- 
 quent intellectual progress of the world, — we must suppose it to 
 have had very great antecedents. Like a giant oak, such a phe- 
 nomenon in the history of the world could not have been produced 
 without deep and wide-spread roots, and a firm ground from which 
 to grow. It betrays a lack of historical insight to attempt to 
 explain it merely by the qualities of the actors or the transitory 
 interests of the age. These nodoubt are points which must not 
 be left out of view. At the same time all that is really great, 
 general, and lasting, in history, proceeds from other and deeper 
 grounds. It is not the work of persons. Persons are merely 
 subservient to it, and are great and influential only when, and in 
 as far as, they are so from clear conviction, and with a perfectly 
 decided will. 
 
 If a Reformation is to be effected at all, there are three things 
 indispensably necessary. Corruption must really exist in the 
 domain on which it is to take place ; the necessity of abolishing 
 that corruption must be felt and recognized ; and the rudiments 
 must be prepared of the new and better system to be substituted 
 for the old. The time for actually reforming only arrives when 
 these conditions are implemented, and only at such a time, and 
 not at any optional moment of history, can true Reformers make 
 
4 GENERAL IXTEODUCTION. 
 
 their appearance. The reason is, because under no other circum- 
 stances can they be thoroughly successful. 
 
 That, during several centuries prior to the Reformation of the 
 Church in Germany and Switzerland, the corruption of Chris- 
 tian laith and practice was great and extensive, is a fact which it 
 would occupy a special work to demonstrate. Abundant contri- 
 butions to such a task will occur in the sequel of our delineation. 
 Here we mean only to give a summary of the most general points. 
 Christianity was vouchsafed to mankind as a new principle of life, 
 a fresh creative spirit, which, in the progress of their historical 
 development, was to pervade and regenerate the nations. Origi- 
 nally it was a purely spiritual thing, a strong and invincible 
 conviction of renewed fellowship with a merciful Father and God, 
 effected by the Saviour, and, as the offspring and product of this 
 conviction, or in other words of this living faith, a life of love and 
 spontaneous morality. If, however, the internal spirit of faith 
 was not to evaporate, but to be maintained with some degree of 
 steadiness among mankind, and to brave the storms of time, it 
 required to have a vessel to contain it, and, as is likewise involved 
 in the nature of living faith, to form for itself a body. Tire 
 body for the spirit implanted by Christ in mankind is the 
 ( Jhurch. The Church arose of necessity from the natural ten- 
 dency of Christianity to unite men in fellowship with each other, 
 and was equally indispensable for the accomplishment of its end 
 as the religion of the world — an end designed and predicted for 
 it, both by its author and by the great Apostle of the Gentiles. It 
 is, however, impossible to conceive a Church without an external 
 substratum — that is, without a definite form of doctrine, worship, 
 and government. Now for all these the Gospel no doubt supplies 
 the principles and rudiments. It does not, however, actually 
 construct them or apply them to particular points ; for this was 
 designed to be the spontaneous work of mankind themselves, en- 
 lightened and embued by the spirit of Christianity. In carrying 
 it on, the nature of historical development required that, as the 
 elements for the ecclesiastical structure could not be gathered in 
 the air, they should be borrowed in some measure from the existing 
 systems of religious, scientific, and political life, partly among the 
 Jews and partly among the Gentiles. Accordingly the doctrine 
 was evolved under a relative influence, especially of Gentile 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 5 
 
 culture, and the worship and government were modified by assi- 
 milation to the forms of the Jewish commonwealth. This was 
 a natural process, and not liable to objection so long as only 
 analogies were adopted into the several branches of the frame- 
 work of the Christian society, and so long as the spirit which 
 dwelt in it was of sufficient strength to govern and animate the 
 body thus formed. The time came, however, when that was no 
 longer the case. Owing to the mixture and confusion of Old with 
 New Testament principles, and the preponderance conceded to 
 heathen philosophic culture, heterogeneous things crept in. And 
 when at last Christianity was elevated to the imperial throne, 
 and the mass of the heathen were admitted into the Church, 
 the influx of paganism could not be prevented. The Church 
 obtained a body which was no more really governed by the spirit 
 of the Gospel. 
 
 This appeared in the three elements which enter into the 
 Church's life, — viz., doctrine, government, and worship. In the 
 matter of doctrine the influence of Grecian philosophy and of Gen- 
 tile opinions in general brought it to pass that Christianity, which 
 is a religion, was, in a great measure, transformed into a system 
 of metaphysics and speculation, and the Gospel of redemption 
 through Jesus Christ into a doctrine of self-salvation by works. 
 With respect to the government, by confounding Old and New 
 Testament principles, the primitive idea of the universal spiritual 
 priesthood of Christians was supplanted by the notion of a special 
 order of priests. And finally, as regards the worship, — a subject 
 closely connected with government, inasmuch as the priest must 
 have an actual sacrifice to offer, — the simple heart-affecting rites 
 and love-feasts of the early Christians gave way to that form of 
 the Lord's Supper, which treats it as a constantly renewed sacri- 
 fice of the God-man present alike in spirit and in body. The 
 transplantation of Christianity from the domain of religion to that 
 of speculation and metaphysics, accompanied by an indifference 
 to its practical aspect, is first met with in the Eastern Church ; 
 but the same tendency, under an accession of new elements, con- 
 tinued long to operate in the scholasticism of the West, and at first 
 with a quickening influence and grand effects. Gradually, how- 
 ever, it stiffened into formulas, and to such an extreme was this 
 carried as necessarily to evoke a powerful opposition, unless 
 
G GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Christianity was to retire altogether from the sphere of life into 
 that of ideas, and from the Church into the school. The conver- 
 sion ..t'the Gospel of grace into a doctrine of salvation by outward 
 acta meete us most distinctly upon the domain of the Western 
 Church in the shape of Pelagianism. No doubt it was publicly 
 repudiated by the Church, but it still continued to grow rankly 
 both in the East, where it had long before struck its roots, 
 and in the West, where Monachism and Scholasticism came to 
 its aid. It here engendered a multitude of evils, such as the 
 notion of the desert of good works, the doctrine of a treasure of 
 merits, the whole system of indulgences, the various corruptions 
 (.(' Monachism, and in general the mistaken conception of Chris- 
 tianity as a mere preceptive institute, and the change of the 
 Gospel into a code of laws promulgated for all mankind and not 
 solely for the Jews. The rise in the Church of a separate Priestly 
 order, reckoned of itself holy and divine, was derived mainly 
 from the West, and produced inwardly a total change in the 
 spiritual relation of Christians towards God and the Saviour, 
 while the entire Hierarchial and Papal systems, supplanting the 
 original equality of the several Churches, were an external growth 
 from it. In fine, the idea of a sacrifice in the Holy Supper 
 became the central point of that mysterious and splendid ritual 
 which, so long as men retained a living consciousness of its signifi- 
 cance, no doubt made a deep and imposing impression upon their 
 minds, but which soon degenerated into an empty form, extruding 
 the worship of the spirit and the heart, and completely forcing into 
 the shade, the doctrine of salvation so essential to Christianity. 
 
 Such, to a considerable extent, was the form in which Chris- 
 tianity first arrived among the nations of Germany, and as they 
 had never seen it in any other, they could not possibly recognize 
 its disfigurement. Even that form, too, though but a shell, 
 contained the kernel of the Gospel. Nay, it may even be said 
 that in the rude state of these nations at the time, there was a 
 necessity for their being trained by a Hierarchy, bridled by a 
 law, impressed by a rich and sensuous ritual, and inspired with an 
 aweof heavenly mysteries. Accordingly not only did they con- 
 tinue to cultivate this tendency, but they carried it to the highest 
 perfection. The Hierarchy, the Papacy, Scholasticism, and the 
 whole imaginative worship expanded among them and bore their 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 7 
 
 'fairest blossoms. At the same time, however, a principle essen- 
 tially discrepant, the principle of spirituality and self-acquaint- 
 ance, of liberty and independence of mind, was seated in their 
 inmost nature. This principle is closely related to the religion 
 of Christ in its primitive form, and inseparably resides in it, so 
 that it may be said that by their very birth these nations were 
 predestined for Christianity and Christianity for them. It was 
 among them that the Christian spirit was to display its utmost 
 power and fulness ; and hence as soon as on the one hand they 
 had ripened to some degree of independence and culture, and 
 as soon as on the other a just conception of primitive truth 
 dawned upon their minds, the necessary result was the rise and 
 progress among them of a reaction against the secularisation of 
 Christianity, its ossification into dogmatism and legality, and its 
 perversion to the purposes of priestly domination. We do not 
 mean to say that in this reaction all Europe did not take part. 
 But at least the heart of it was evidently in Germany, and we 
 may affirm that the German who was most German in his charac- 
 ter, took the lead in the great religious and national movement.^/ 
 
 Before, however, it reached this stage, a long preparation re- 
 quired to be made, and a historical process carried on, through 
 several centuries. Defects and corruptions in Christianity existed, 
 but they needed also to be known and felt. In such cases, how- 
 ever, conviction is not produced at a single stroke, but comes 
 by degrees and through the operation of various causes. The 
 Church is a very complicated organism. It has an inward as 
 well as an outward part, and comprehends' doctrine and life, con- 
 stitution and worship, in manifold relations to each other. All 
 this no doubt proceeds from, and is determined by a centre, which 
 is the spirit reigning in the Church ; and if the spirit be sound, 
 so likewise will be its several manifestations in ecclesiastical life; 
 whereas if the spirit be distempered, the external form of the 
 Church will also be more or less morbid. To penetrate, however, 
 to the Church's inmost centre, and from that point of view, to 
 estimate its manifestations, is competent only to a deep seeing and 
 practised eye. An eye less skilful looks no farther than the out- 
 ward aspects which the life of the Church presents. Hence we 
 find that the opposition began, in the first instance, with externals, 
 penetrated by degrees more and more inwardly, and only at last 
 
8 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 assailed the corruption in the general spirit of the Ecclesiastical 
 body. The part most external and conspicuous is the worship ; 
 and, therefore, we first discover single individuals and smaller 
 parties, with well-intentioned but frequently stormy zeal, taking 
 tin- field against the ever-increasing multitude of ceremonies and 
 ecclesiastical decorations, and the false and excessive value placed 
 upon outward acts of religion, opposing to these the more inward 
 worship of God, the baptism of the Spirit, and the prayer of the 
 heart, and insisting simply upon the experience of the truth and 
 the practice of the duties of Christianity. This was the path 
 pursued, as early as the 11th century, by several minor sects in 
 France and Germany which are usually branded by the Church 
 aa Manichaean. We allude in particular to the Petrobrusians and 
 Henricians, who even at that early date had acquired considerable 
 strength. The form of worship then prevailing, however, had its 
 main foundation in the Hierarchical constitution of the Church, 
 and as the Hierarchy was every day becoming more powerful, and 
 assuming a more threatening attitude, opposition to the form of 
 worship necessarily led further to opposition against that domi- 
 nant order, and the general circumstances of the Church upon 
 which it rested. This movement was especially represented by 
 Arnold of Brescia, by several branches of the Albigenses, and par- 
 tially in Germany by the Stedinger. The Hierarchy, however, was 
 related in other ways to the whole condition of Christian life, for 
 it had risen to an importance, which seemed attainable only dur- 
 ing a general lapse from the original end and aim of Christianity. 
 An attempt was accordingly made to bring back Christian life, in 
 all its branches, to its primitive purity, and to the simplicity and 
 dignity of the Apostolic times. Apostolicity in fact became the 
 watchword of the parties dissatisfied with the Church. A special 
 order of Apostolic brethren was instituted; and in particular we 
 see this tendency carried out with a high degree of purity and 
 success by the Waldenses. No sooner, however, was their atten- 
 tion turned in this direction, than men were unavoidably led 
 back to the Holy Scriptures, hitherto kept in the dark, and 
 constrained to recognize their authority as the rule of Chris- 
 tian life. We mark this among the Waldenses, and after them 
 among all who took a deep and serious interest in the culti- 
 vation of Christian piety. The resuscitation of the Bible in its 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 turn led ultimately and necessarily to what constituted the soul 
 of the opposition — viz., denial of the prevailing doctrine. This 
 step, however, translated the opposition out of the popular sphere 
 to which it had hitherto been chiefly confined, and raised it into 
 the higher regions, the domains of Theology and Science ; for 
 the study of Scripture, and the cultivation of the doctrine were 
 the subjects to which divines and scholars mainly directed their 
 attention. This accordingly was the way in which such men 
 as Wickliffe, Huss, Jerome of Prague, several of the great French 
 Divines, and the persons with whom we are to be specially occu- 
 pied, arose. Their common distinction is that from its central 
 spirit and doctrine, as their point of view, they look less at par- 
 ticular blemishes, than at the corrupt state of the Church as a 
 a whole, recognize it as depending not upon external circum- 
 stances and specific abuses, but upon the general spirit of the 
 body, to the renovation of which accordingly they direct all 
 their efforts, and prosecute these with lively zeal, but with equal 
 prudence and thorough knowledge of the subject. Inasmuch, 
 however, as during the course of four centuries, resistance to the 
 ecclesiastical corruption, in all its aspects, had sprung up, and 
 the spirit of opposition now penetrated all classes of society, from 
 the lowest to the highest and most enlightened, while at the same 
 time no serious and effectual -reformatory measures appeared to 
 be adopted, but the clergy became every day more and more de- 
 based, it necessarily came to pass that the desire for a Reformation 
 grew to a public matter, a popular cause in the fullest sense of 
 the word, that it was taken up and zealously debated in the sight 
 of all Europe, by the great Western Councils, that the Diets of 
 the Empire reverted to it from time to time, and always with 
 increasing urgency, until at last all Europe rang with the cry for 
 an improvement of the Church in both its head and members. 
 The fact is notorious to the whole world, and such a fact must 
 have had good grounds to rest upon. There can be no doubt, that 
 the need for reformation existed, and that it was deeply, perma- 
 nently, and generally felt. The negative condition therefore in- 
 dispensable to a reformation was fulfilled. 
 
 Still more indispensable, however, was something else of a 
 positive kind, viz., a preparatory basis for what the Reformation 
 was actually to call into existence. The spirit now once more 
 
XO GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 to be shed forth and universally diffused, required to pre-exist, at 
 least in individuals and smaller circles. The purer conception 
 of the Christian faith, which was to give a new and better form 
 to the Christian life, needed to be initiatively incorporated m 
 certain definite modes, in order that from these the theology of 
 the Reformation might proceed, if not in outward, still in inward 
 historical sequence. Nor was a commencement of this kind 
 lacking. That which is peculiar in the convictions and ten- 
 dency of the Reformers, although bearing almost universally 
 the impress of originality, and in the highest degree of personal 
 experience, was still not absolutely new. Its radical elements 
 were contained in the improved spirit of the age, and had been 
 highly elaborated by distinguished men. All that they were called 
 upon to do was clearly and convincingly to collect these elements, 
 to connect them with vital faith, as their true and governing 
 centre, to introduce into life what had been previously mere desire 
 and sentiment, and to make the better theology of a few, the basis 
 of the convictions of a vast community. 
 
 The principle that Salvation flows not from man hut from God, 
 may be considered as the ultimate and comprehensive basis of 
 the Reformation ; and the main tendency in which all the 
 Reformers are comprised concentrates itself in the endeavour to 
 prostrate human things, however venerable by tradition, or high 
 in the estimation of the Church, before God and Christ, to give 
 the glory to these alone, to separate from Christian faith and 
 practice whatever seems derogatory to the Divine honour and 
 word, and to restore the proper relationship of man and the 
 Church towards God — a relationship either immediate, or formed 
 by Christ, the sole and everlasting high-priest. We find the 
 same tendency likewise among their predecessors, and exhibit- 
 ing the twofold phase of Christian knowledge and Christian 
 practice, so that even among them the formal as well as the 
 material principle of the Reformation is prominent and conspi- 
 cuous. The two things which these men made to be more 
 clearly and generally understood were, First, the necessity of 
 appealing to Scripture as the pure Word of God in opposition 
 to all human doctrine and tradition,— of building upon the word 
 rightly expounded, and upon the pattern of the primitive Apos- 
 tolic Church cordially embraced, all faith and practice— and of 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 11 
 
 giving to these, both in individuals and the general Church, a 
 purer and a freer mould ; and, Secondly, the conviction, pervad- 
 ing all religious thinking and moral effort, that perfect peace 
 and full salvation do not spring from human actions or eccle- 
 siastical works at all, but solely from the grace of God re- 
 vealed by Jesus Christ, and embraced by living and true faith, 
 — and that the shortest and only safe way to God is, not the 
 Church and the Church's ordinances, mixed as these are with 
 human additions, but Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer, and 
 his Spirit, who alone can make men free, and guide them 
 to all truth and holiness. Such were the radical truths which 
 we find in all the precursors of the Reformation, and they 
 involved everything else. The sequel of the delineation will 
 demonstrate this so fully that it is needless to expatiate further 
 upon it here. We only desire to direct the reader's attention 
 to what is most salient and characteristic in each of the persons 
 we are about to sketch. 
 
 The nature of the case implies that the characteristics of 
 the Reformers will likewise be found in their precursors, not 
 indeed in the same fulness, combination and harmony, for in that 
 case they would have been Reformers themselves, — but still, to 
 a certain extent, and in certain main aspects. This, in fact, 
 was what made them the pioneers of the Reformation. If we 
 apply the remark to particular instances, we are supplied with 
 a twofold division. Among the Reformers we find, and in a 
 greater or less degree proportioned to the extent of their influ- 
 ence, a perfect unity and mixture of conviction with action, — of 
 theological thought with ecclesiastical practice. The same thing 
 is also observable relatively in their predecessors, but with this 
 difference, that ecclesiastical action predominated with some, 
 and with others, theological research. The former work with 
 greater power and apparent effect, and their lives possess a 
 higher degree of dramatic interest ; the latter are more retired, 
 and move within narrower circles, but their labours are of greater 
 theological consequence. In the struggle with the prevailing 
 domination, the former often manifest a degree of eccentricity; 
 the action of the latter is more spiritual and concentrated. The 
 one class include's Huss, Jerome of Prague, and Savonarola ; 
 the other John of Goch, John of Wesel, and John Wessel. It is 
 
] 2 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of the more quiet pioneers of the Reformation, those who directed 
 their theological labours inwards, that we shall here treat. They 
 belong chiefly to German j, including therein the Netherlands, 
 and in all respects evince the national character. A further dif- 
 ference, however, may be drawn between the two in the following 
 •t. The Reformers unite the thetical with the antitheti- 
 cal, position and opposition, in beautiful proportion. The same 
 feature is likewise conspicuous in their true precursors, although 
 Borne of these labour more to establish positive truth, some rather 
 to refute error. The one is the case with John of Goch, the other 
 with John of Wesel. The fullest symmetry of both elements 
 is beheld in John Wessel. In fine we may also trace another 
 difference. It was the authority of a living scriptural theology 
 in opposition to the scholasticism of the previous age which the 
 Reformation was the means of asserting. There were, however, 
 two ways leading to this scriptural theology, one mainly scien- 
 tific, and another mainly practical, the way of the school, and 
 the way of life. The former was prepared negatively by refut- 
 ing and displacing scholasticism, and positively by the revived 
 study of the ancient languages and literature, and by the intro- 
 duction of a theological speculation, not based upon ecclesiastical 
 or scholastic tradition, but upon the purer foundation of Scrip- 
 ture. The other way was paved by the better sort of practical 
 mysticism, and generally by the religious sensibility, fostered by 
 a diligent use of Scripture, and pervading all ranks, particularly 
 the people. In this manner we may classify the precursors of the 
 Reformation, beginning from below, into those that roused and ani- 
 mated the lower orders, such as Gerard Groot, and the Brethren 
 of the Common Lot, — the practical Mystics such as Thomas a 
 KempiSj — the learned philologists such as Agricola, Reuchlin, and 
 Erasmus, — and the theologians properly so-called. These persons, 
 with the exception of the philologians, we shall here delineate, with 
 more or less detail in each case, according to then- respective im- 
 ] k -it ance for the Reformation. The plan we shall pursue is to com- 
 prehend in the first volume John of Goch and John of Wesel, 
 along willi the men of their circle. The sequel of the work will 
 1 ie devoted to John Wessel, as the most important in a theological 
 respect, associating with him the Brethren of the Common Lot in 
 whose schools he was trained. The case of John of Goch will 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 bring under review the need of the Reformation as respects the 
 general spirit and state of the Church, and the principles of the 
 mediaeval theology in their practical aspect. That of John of 
 Wesel will exhibit the controversy carried on against the de- 
 praved manners of the clergy and the system of indulgences. 
 In John Wessel we behold a portrait of the accomplished Theo- 
 logian of the age prior to the Reformation. If to these we 
 add the Brethren of the Common Lot, we shall likewise have 
 before us the share contributed by the people on the one hand, 
 and by the practical mystics on the other, in paving the way for 
 the improvement of the Church. The philological pioneers alone 
 would then be wanting to complete the delineation, but these 
 have been so frequently depicted, especially in more recent times, 
 that we may reasonably pass them over, and, accordingly, we 
 commence our narrative with John of Goch. 
 
BOOK FIRST. 
 
 JOHN OF GOCH, 
 
 OR 
 
 THE NEED OF THE REFORMATION IN REFERENCE TO 
 THE GENERAL SPIRIT OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Johannes Gocchius.virsingularieruditioneacsuo tempore nulli secundus, libertatis Christianas 
 propugnator acerrimus, interpres legis Evangelicoe diligentissimus. Hunc nocturna versate 
 manu, versate diurna. 
 
 Cornelius Grapheus. 
 
( 17 ) 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOGH 
 
 AND HIS POSITION GENERALLY AS A THEOLOGIAN. 
 
 CHAPTEE FIEST. 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL PARTICULARS. 
 
 To discern the corruption of the ecclesiastical body, the deep 
 roots from which it sprang, and the means proper for its cure, 
 required earnest and feeling men, of decided, enlightened, and 
 concentrated piety, and such in an eminent degree was John of 
 Goch. The whole energy of his mind was directed to divine 
 things ; although, unlike practical men in advance of their age, 
 he did not seek to make a direct impression upon the world 
 around him so much as to gratify a taste for calm and abstract 
 contemplation. For this reason there is little to relate of his 
 life. It presents no striking variations, but passed away in 
 devout meditation and theological study, resembling somewhat, 
 in its recluse and holy tenor, that of a Thomas a Kempis. Still 
 it was far from being fruitless and unprofitable either for his own 
 or after times, as will appear from an account of his theology. 
 The few biographical particulars which have been transmitted 
 in records or may be gathered from conjecture are as follows. 
 
 John Pupper was born about the commencement of the 
 fifteenth century at the little town of Goch, in the Duchy of 
 
 B 
 
13 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCH. 
 
 Oleves. 1 He seems himself to have seldom taken the family 
 name of Pupper, but, according to the common usage of the age, 
 is generally styled John of Goch from the place of his birth. Of 
 the family from which he sprung we know little, except that it 
 probably was not of high rank. Neither is our positive know- 
 ledge respecting his early education much more abundant, and 
 we must have recourse to conjecture to supply the blank. ^ In 
 his writings Goch shews himself to be possessed of no ordinary 
 theological acquirements. He is familiar with Scripture, well 
 read in the Latin ecclesiastical fathers, especially Jerome and 
 Augustine, and versed in the doctrines of the Scholastic Divines, 
 particularly of Thomas Aquinas and his school. At the same time 
 he is singularly correct in defining, and skilful in the logical 
 exposition of his ideas. In the current language of the learned 
 he expresses himself, if not elegantly, 2 yet with propriety, clear- 
 ness, and distinguished precision. He even attempts etymologies 
 of his own, and in general demonstrates himself as, according to 
 the standard of the age, an accomplished scholar. All this 
 implies a school education. Nor can there be a doubt that Goch 
 did frequent excellent scholastic institutions. The only question 
 is, what these were ? Of the seminary to which he owed his earliest 
 
 1 It is true that Gesner (Biblioth. belg., p. 712) designates Goch as 
 a Brabanter, Fabricius (Biblioth. lat. med. et inf. aet. t. iv. p. 228) as 
 a Belgian, and Guicciardini (Description de tous les Pais-bas. Arnh. 
 1613, p. 214), along with Gerius (in the preface to Cave's hist. litt. t., 
 ii., p. 187), as an inhabitant of Mechlin. But the constant appellation 
 of von Goch, and the most reliable ancient accounts, indicate the little 
 town of Goch as the place of his nativity. The transference of his birth 
 to Mechlin arose from the circumstance that a great part of his life was 
 ^pent in that city. In calling him a Belgian, Fabricius means gene- 
 rally an inhabitant of the Netherlands. The town of Goch lies in the 
 Duchy, and not far from the town of Cleves, above Gennoch, upon the 
 little river Niers. It belonged at the time of Goch's birth to the Duke 
 of Gelders, but in 1473 was assigned to the house of Cleves, as a com- 
 pensation for outlays in war. As the citizens refused to swear allegi- 
 ance, a castle, now in ruins, was built in it. In the years 1599 and 
 1622, the city was taken by the Spaniards, and in 1625, by the Hol- 
 landers. At present it belongs to the Rhine Province of Prussia. 
 
 2 Graphcus, otherwise a great admirer of Goch, likewise says of him, 
 in his preface: Mirabar, id aetatis hominem tametsi stilo incultiori, 
 tantum potuissc. Walch. Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. Praef. 
 p. xiii. 
 
THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 19 
 
 instruction we have no distinct traces. But the conjecture is 
 unavoidable, that it was one of the Institutions of the Brethren 
 of the Common Lot. The domiciles and schools of that society 
 were at the time widely scattered over the Netherlands, and 
 the spirit which breathes through Goch's writings corresponds 
 entirely with their tendency and character. Goch himself 
 frequently speaks with affection and reverence of this manner 
 of life (the vita communis 1 ), although his idea of it is not always 
 restricted to the brotherhoods which bore the name. It would 
 also seem that he enjoyed the friendship of one who was likewise 
 a pupil — but a still more learned and illustrious pupil — of these 
 institutions, viz., John Wessel, and there are even vestiges of his 
 having, at a more advanced period of life, belonged for a time 
 to the society. All this, however, furnishes mere probability, 
 and by no means points to any particular place. A higher degree 
 of assent is due to a conjecture respecting the University at which 
 he studied. It was part of the use and wont of the age for all 
 students, especially those of theology, to attend some University, 
 and the scientific character of Goch's theological accomplishments 
 admit in his case no doubt of the fact. It is true we do not 
 find him possessed of a master's degree, 2 which it was usual 
 
 1 e.g. Dialog, de quat. erroribus. cap. 22. Walch. Monim. vol. i. 
 fasc. 4, p. 225, sqq. De libertate Christiana. Lib. ii., cap. 52. 
 
 2 This notice is given us, in an apparently quite reliable way, by an 
 anonymous writer, who had set on foot a search in the town of Mechlin 
 for any existing remains of Goch. It is contained in a letter in Walch 
 (Moniment. med. aev\, vol. i., fasc. 4, praefat. p. xxxiii.), in these terms, 
 Sed ut ad Gochium nostrum redeamus, demirari nunquam satis possum, 
 qui fieri potuit, ut unus ille, sic divino lumine illustraretur, tarn aereo 
 et indocto seculo, ut solemnium doctorum errores tarn audenti pectore 
 confutaret et refelleret, cum gentilem Mam duarum litterarum M. N. 
 (Magister noster) adsalutatiunculam scholis non deportasset, id quod 
 testantur, qui etiamnum vivunt apud Mechlinienses, Gochianae vitae et 
 status probe gnari. The fact that he did not obtain a Master's degree 
 may no doubt be made the ground of an inference that he had never 
 attended any University. It evidently, however, implies the oppo- 
 site conclusion, for it would scarcely have been mentioned that Goch 
 did not obtain this honour at the University, had the fact been that he 
 never attended one. If that had been the author's meaning, he would 
 have simply said so, without alluding to the acquisition of a Master's 
 degree. As the words stand before us, they rather amount to an in- 
 direct proof, that Goch did receive his education at a University — nay, 
 if we urge the use of the plural scholis, that he had attended more than 
 
 b2 
 
20 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 to cany away from those scats of learning. Still it is possible 
 that many quitted them without this honour, and the want of 
 it only appears strange in the instance of so distinguished a man. 
 If, however, Goch did study at a University, there were three at 
 hisoption. For the sake of their proximity he might choose, either 
 the old institution at Cologne, then distinguished for several cele- 
 brated professors, or the newly established one of Louvaine. On 
 the other hand, for the sake of its fame and authority, he might 
 prefer that of Paris, to which multitudes of youths and scholars 
 from "all European countries still resorted as the mother institute 
 of philosophical and theological study, and the grand theatre of 
 those scientific pursuits, which could not fail to interest a mind like 
 Goch's. Of Cologne, however, there is not in all his writings 
 the slightest notice, not even once the mention of its name. Its 
 flourishing days in fact were already past. On the other hand 
 he does speak of the Universities of Louvaine and Paris, and 
 treats their concerns as if they were well known to him. About 
 Louvaine he mentions a dispute which had been maintained be- 
 tween the theologian Henry von Zomeren, another acquaintance 
 of John Wessel, and the great majority of the members of the 
 University, on the subject of future contingencies. 1 Henry 
 von Zomeren came from Paris to be Canon of the Cathedral and 
 Professor at Louvaine in the year 1460, a date long subsequent 
 to the period of Goch's studies, because in 1451 we find him 
 Superior of the Priory Thabor in Mechlin. Still the notice 
 he takes of the University may indicate a personal acquaintance 
 with it, and his former residence at the place account for his 
 lively interest in its subsequent history. The probability in 
 favour of Pans, however, is much greater. In the first place, it 
 was then the usual resort of the great majority of the aspiring 
 youth, especially of the Netherlands. In the second place 
 it is frequently mentioned by Goch, and reference made to 
 special circumstances, of -which he seems to have obtained his 
 knowledge on the spot. 2 And lastly, he repeatedly speaks of 
 
 one, according to the supposition we have made in the text. This, 
 however, would be too much to suppose, as the plural word may also 
 indicate vaguely a University education in general. 
 
 1 Dc libcrtate Christiana. Lib. i. cap. 26. 
 
 2 De liberate Christiana. Lib. i. cap. 17, 18. 
 
THE LITE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 21 
 
 John Gerson simply as " the Chancellor," 1 and without farther 
 designation. This circumstance may indeed be explained by 
 the universal celebrity of the great President of the Parisian 
 University. But the most natural account of it seems to be 
 that, during an early residence at Paris, Goch had familiarized 
 himself with the designation of the great theologian, which 
 was the simplest and the most current in the place. It is true 
 he could not have enjoyed the noble Chancellor's instruc- 
 tions, for after the Ecclesiastical Council at Constance, where 
 he played so distinguished a part, Gerson never returned to 
 Paris, having died at Lyons in 1429, and it is very impro- 
 bable that before the opening of the Council in 1414 Goch had 
 yet visited that city. At the same time much was there said about 
 " the Chancellor" for several decennia after his death, and it was 
 very long before the impression of his doctrine and writings 
 wholly passed away. As for Goch's theological opinions and 
 method, I do not think that they contain any positive indications 
 of his having been educated at Paris. Still less, however, is 
 there anything to lead us to doubt of the fact. 
 
 On the field of positive history Goch makes his first appear- 
 ance in the year 1451, when he founded a Priory of Canonesses 
 in Mechlin. We give to this transaction, as its probable date, 
 the 50th year of his life, or somewhat earlier. Betwixt this date, 
 however, and the period of his studies, a considerable interval 
 must have elapsed. For although in those days it sometimes 
 happened that the course of study was prolonged to an advanced 
 stage of manhood, this was not usually the case, and therefore is 
 not probable in Goch's. How he spent the interval is a subject 
 on which we have no positive information. One John of Goch 
 is mentioned along with Godfrey a Kempis, as head governor of 
 a house cf the Brethren of the Common Lot at Harderwick, 2 founded 
 in 1448, and it is most natural to suppose that this person was 
 the subject of our narrative, as may be done without occasioning 
 any chronological difficulty. By his own exertions and with the 
 help of Godfrey a Kempis, and Herman von Schurrenburgh, 
 
 1 De liber. Christ. Lib. ii. c. 52 in fine. 
 
 2 Delprat die Bruderschaft des gemeinsamen Lebens, ubersetzt von 
 Mohnike, Leipzig, 1840, s. 58. 
 
22 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 Rector of the School, this Institution of the Brethren is said to 
 have attained a high degree of prosperity. We know with greater 
 certainty that about this time Goch received holy orders, and no 
 doubt also exercised the functions of the office. This he probably 
 did at Sluys, 1 in Flanders, for that was the place from which he 
 transferred its first inmates to the Priory Tabor which he founded 
 at Mechlin. At all events it is with this Institution that the later 
 period of his life commenced — the period with which we are 
 somewhat better acquainted, and to which also we assign what 
 we reckon of most consequence, the composition of his writings. 
 
 In order to understand Goch's position in life, and partly also 
 the tendency of his writings, we must here premise a few obser- 
 vations respecting the place which was the scene of his labours 
 and its ecclesiastical condition. 
 
 The town of Mechlin? situated in the heart of Brabant, in a 
 fertile plain, watered by the Dyle, grew at an early period from 
 slender commencements to considerable magnitude and import- 
 ance. It is mentioned in records even under the Carlovingian 
 dynasty, for in the time of Pepin a certain Count Ado figures in it 
 as a Franconian feudatory. 3 At thepartition of the kingdom, under 
 Lothario, in 870, the city was allotted to Charles the Bald, and 
 consequently to France. In 915 Charles the Simple resigned it 
 to the Church of Liege, the Bishops of which appointed the 
 Bertholds, lords of Grimberg, 4 to govern it as their Stewards. 
 Under this Ecclesiastical rule it continued for more than 400 
 years, until, in 1333, Louis of Nevers, the Count of Flanders, 
 purchased it for himself and his posterity for a very great sum. 
 Even so shortly after, however, as in the year 1346, another Count 
 
 1 There are two places of the name of Sluys, a smaller one in the 
 southern part of Wallonian Flanders, situate on the Maes, and a more 
 considerable one, remarkable for its strength, in Dutch Flanders (Sluys, 
 Sluis, Schleuss, Slusae, FEcluse), in the vicinity of Bruges, and Mid- 
 dleburg. The latter, celebrated in the history of the wars, is the one 
 here meant. The want of a particular designation supposes it to be a 
 well-known place. 
 
 2 The best work on the special history of Mechlin, is Cornel, van 
 Gestel llistoria sacra et prof. Archiepiscopatus Mechliniensis. Hae\ 
 Com. MDCCXXV. fol. 
 
 3 V. Gestel, s. 1 sq. 
 
 4 Ibid. s. 13 sq. 
 
THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 23 
 
 of Flanders parted with it to John 3d, Duke of Brabant. 1 Sub- 
 sequently, in 1369, Mechlin came by marriage into the hands of 
 Philip the Bold ofBurgundy, and continued for some time under 
 the dominion of his family, 2 until by the marriage of Charles' 
 daughter, Mary, to Maximilian, it passed into the possession of 
 the Austro-Spanish house. 
 
 As for the Ecclesiastical state of this city, the introduction of 
 Christianity into Mechlin, is traced back to St Lambert, 3 and 
 after him to St Rumold (| 775) ; 4 to the later of whom, as the 
 chief founder of the Church and the patron saint of Mechlin, was 
 consecrated its beautiful Gothic Cathedral, the building of which 
 was begun about the end of the twelfth century, and completed 
 near the close of the fifteenth. In Ecclesiastical matters the 
 city at first, and undoubtedly after the eleventh century, was 
 subject to the Bishop of Cambray. 5 This connexion existed until 
 1559, when Pope Paul the 4th elevated Mechlin to an archiepis- 
 
 i Ibid. s. 17. 
 
 2 Ibid. s. 18 sq. 
 
 3 St Lambert, or Landebert, born of noble parents at Msestricht, and 
 Bishop of that town, is said to have done much for the spread of 
 Christianity in these quarters, partly in connection with Willibi'od, and 
 to have suffered martyrdom on the 17th Sept. 708 or 709. He was 
 venerated as Patron- Saint of Liege. His life was written by Gottschalk, 
 Deacon of Liege in Mabill. Annal. Ord. Ben. Sec. 3 ; also in Canis. 
 Lect. antiq. T. ii. pars i. p. 135 ; Hist. Lit. de la Fr. T. iv. p. 58 ; 
 Acta SS. T. V. Sept. p. 518 ; Gallia Christ. Nov. T. iii. p. 827. 
 
 4 The holy Rumold was either a Scotchman (Chronicon. Cameracense, 
 Apud Maslinas quoque Monasterium est canonicorum, ubi quiescit pre- 
 ciosus Martyr Rumoldus, genere Scotus, qui vitam heremiticam ducens 
 inibi martyrisatus est), or as is maintained with greater probability (v. 
 Job. Sollerii Acta S. Rumoldi. Antw. 1718 fob), an Anglo-Saxon, and, 
 according to some accounts, of noble birth. At an early age he retired 
 from the world, and led a solitary and ascetic life. Following the impulse 
 which in those days conducted not a few men of piety among the Anglo- 
 Saxons, to the kindred races beyond the sea, he went as missionary 
 into Lower Germany, took a share in the labours of Willibrod, was 
 consecrated a Bishop, but without a fixed See, and is said to have been 
 murdered, upon the 24th of June 775, by two men, whose anger he had 
 provoked by the boldness of his reproofs. Comp. besides the principal 
 work of Sollier cited above, particularly the Hist, litter, de la France, 
 t. ix. p. 338 ; Gallia Christ, nova, t. v. p. 9 ; Acta Sanctor. Jul. t. 
 i. p. 169 ; Butler Leben derVater und Miirtvrer, deutscheUbers.B. 9, 
 s. 15. 
 
 5 Van. Gestel s. 24. 
 
£ 1 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 copal see, with a very extensive jurisdiction. The roll of its 
 Archbishops commences with Anthony Perrenot, afterwards the 
 far celebrated Cardinal Granvella. 1 
 
 Even, however, before it became the seat of an archbishopric, 
 Mechlin was always abundantly stocked with clergy and monks. 
 These indeed were not likely to be wanting in a place which for 
 400 years had continued under the sway of the crosier. In the 
 catalogue of the provosts of the mother Church of St Eumold, 
 we find members of the most distinguished families of the place, 2 
 under whom a numerous body of deacons and clergy exercised 
 their functions. But other Churches also flourished in Mechlin, 
 and many of the rural congregations in the vicinity 3 were in Ec- 
 clesiastical connexion with the town. Besides, there were nume- 
 rous monasteries and Religious Societies, both male and female ; 
 and inasmuch as Goch added to their number, we shall here 
 present a view of these, which will at the same time serve as a 
 contribution to the characteristics of the age. 
 
 Till the end of the 15th century, the monastic Institutions 4 at 
 Mechlin included a commandery of the Teutonic order occupy- 
 ing since 1198, the Pitzenburgh House — a monastery of Mino- 
 rites dating from 1231 — of Carmelites from 1303 (after establish- 
 ing themselves in the city in 1254) — of Hermits of the order of 
 St Augustine from 1305 — of Alexians from the same date with 
 a Fraternity of the Brethren of the Common Lot, founded in 1490, 
 and in the 16th century transformed by Archbishop Matthew 
 Hovius into an Archiepiscopal Seminary. 5 Not less numerous 
 were the female communities. Up to the close of the 15th century 
 we may enumerate the following 6 ; the Priory of Lillydale (Lilien- 
 dale, Prepositura vallis liliorum), the principal and wealthiest of 
 tla- female convents, belonging to the Praemonstratensian order, 
 founded about the year 1251, and subsequently enriched by liberal 
 
 1 See respecting him and the Archbishops, his successors, Van Gestel, 
 p. 49— G6. 
 
 2 The ancient Provosts of St Rumold are enumerated by Van Gestel, 
 p. 40, the Deacons, p. 21. 
 
 3 They are mentioned by Van Gestel s. 86—131. 
 
 1 There is a catalogue of the Monasteries for males in Mechlin, in 
 Van Gestel, p. 71—71. 
 Van Gestel, p. 79. 
 G Van Gestel, p. 79— SG. 
 
THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 25 
 
 , donations and extensive estates ; the monastery of Mount Sion 
 (Laeti Mons, Blydenberg) occupied by Victorine Nuns, who, as 
 was alleged, almost as early as the introduction of Christianity 
 into the country, had established themselves here, and lived at first 
 under the rule of St Augustine, but afterwards adopted that of 
 St Victor ; the Priory Bethania, a Society of Canonesses of the 
 order of St Augustine, belonging to the Chapter of Windesem, 
 and founded in 1421, and. the Priory of Muysen for Cistercien 
 Nuns in 1380. Besides these regular monasteries an important 
 place was occupied by certain female associations possessing less 
 of the monastic character, and devoted chiefly to practical and 
 benevolent objects. Associations of this description, as is well 
 known, took their rise in great numbers from the peculiar cha- 
 racter and special necessities of the middle age, and performed 
 the same duties which in our day fall to the share of hospitals, 
 infirmaries, and all the varieties of benevolent male and female 
 societies. Among the institutions of this sort, Mechlin could 
 boast of a very extensive establishment of Beguines founded about 
 the year 1249, without the city walls, and which gradually grew 
 to be a little walled town of itself; 1 of a lazaretto (Sieckelieden, 
 Virgines leprosae) introduced as it appears about 1209, in con 
 sequence of the intercourse with the East at the time of the 
 Crusades ; of an Institution of Nuns of the hospital of St Mary, 
 for attending the sick poor, and which originated about the be- 
 ginning of the 13th century ; and of an establishment of the 
 Black Sisters (Sorores nigrae) so called from their dark dress, 
 who followed the Augustinian rule, and were appointed to the 
 care of infectious patients about 1465. 
 
 Taken together these facts force upon us the conclusion that 
 old Mechlin was in the full sense of the word a monkish city, and 
 even pre-eminent among the places which, during the middle 
 ages, abounded in monastic institutions. 2 They also explain how 
 
 1 At first the Beguines lived in a street called by their name. Sub- 
 sequently they built for themselves without the city, Curiam, officinas 
 et habitacula, tanto successu, ut habitatio earum nonnullis certaret cum 
 oppidulis, muroque includeretur lateritio, et numerus earum esset 
 aliquot millium. Van Gestel. p. 79. 
 
 2 There can be no doubt that this was a reason for Pope Nicholas V., 
 in 1450 — the year before Goch founded his convent — granting to the 
 city of Mechlin a jubilee, and calling it the " blessed." 
 
26 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCII. 
 
 the monastic life, with its obligations and fundamental principles, 
 came to furnish Goch with so highly important a subject of reflec- 
 tion and authorship. Living as he did in a world of Monks, his 
 mind was constantly turned by the force of circumstances to the 
 a insidcration of monachism. He was himself, however, connected 
 with it by a double tie. On the one hand he did something to 
 promote its spread in as far as it was for the time suitable to the 
 wants and progress of the age, and for that reason, advantageous. 
 "While, on the other, a deep spirit of free evangelical and fervent 
 piety enabled him perfectly to estimate its real worth, and in 
 the most vigorous and decided way, to resist the false esti- 
 mate in which it was held, and the abuses it had contracted. 
 He lent a hand to its extension, and was the founder of a 
 Monastic institution, viz., the Priory Tabor. On this subject 
 we have the following notice in the history of the Archbishopric 
 of Mechlin. 1 "The Priory of the Canonessesof St Augustine called 
 Tuhor took its origin in 1451. It was founded by John Pupper, 
 a priest from the town of Goch in Cleves, for the accommodation 
 of eight females desirous to devote themselves to the service of 
 God. For this purpose lie purchased the Wilderenhaus, 2 as it was 
 then called, not far from the city walls, where these ladies were 
 to lead a pious life, to the honour of the Holy Saviour on Mount 
 Tabor, and according to the rule of St Augustine. But this 
 Monastery having been destroyed and burned in the troubles of 
 the Netherlands, they purchased another house in 15G7, which 
 stood within the walls, and which they still occupy. It is 
 true that from it also they were expelled in 1580, but return- 
 ing, after an absence of six years, they adapted their habita- 
 tion more perfectly to monastic purposes than it had been before. 
 These ladies, like the Victorines of Zion (Blydenbergh) are 
 under the government of an Ordinary. Among several distin- 
 guished men who have held the office of Eector was Dr Simon 
 Verepaeus, who acquired great reputation by his writings. Dur- 
 ing the troubles of the Netherlands, he was expelled by the 
 Calvinists ; but the town of Herzogenbusch, which remained 
 faithful to its Catholic Prince and the orthodox religion, gave 
 
 1 Van Gestel p. 81. 
 
 2 Praetorium Wilderense. 
 
THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 27 
 
 him a hospitable reception, and honoured him with a canonry in 
 the Cathedral of St John, of which he retained possession until 
 his death in 1598." With this we have to connect the account 
 of Foppens 1 to the effect that John of Goch translated the first 
 Nuns from the house of St Mary Magdalen, at Sluys in Flan- 
 ders, to Mechlin, and that under his zealous superintendence 
 the new society greatly prospered, so that in a short time its 
 members increased to the number of sixty. Both accounts 
 show the high position and importance of the institution founded 
 by Goch, and the zeal with which he cherished it. His attach- 
 ment, however, to a particular convent did not prevent him from 
 forming clear views upon the whole subject of monachism, and 
 as in almost all his writings he more or less reverts to it, we 
 shall have ample opportunity of stating the enlarged and pro- 
 found opinions he was led to form on one of the most important 
 features of that age. 
 
 Goch occupied the office of Rector or Confessor to the Nuns 
 at Tabor for twenty-four years. He died upon the 28th of March 
 1475, and consequently fourteen years before the death of Wessel. 
 His remains were interred in the old Church of the Monastery 
 Tabor, which was then still standing without the walls of Mechlin. 
 Some scholars, especially Conrad Gesner, 2 affirm that he sur- 
 vived Wessel, and was alive in 1490. This statement, however, 
 when weighed with others more precise, 3 has little probability. 
 
 From the meagre information we possess respecting the life of 
 Goch, it would be difficult to draw any satisfactory sketch of his 
 character. All the more vividly, however, does his spiritual 
 image present itself to our view in his ivritings, and the following 
 appear to be its leading features. Goch was a man of great sensi- 
 bility, with an intellect equally profound and acute, of glowing 
 piety, and a very subtile power of argumentation. With insight 
 to comprehend the phenomena of ecclesiastical life in their root, 
 he combined a keen and correct judgment in ordinary matters. 
 
 1 Joh. Franc. Foppens Biblioth. Belg. Brux. MDCCXXXIX. Tom. 
 ii. p. 714 et 715. 
 
 2 See Walch Moniment. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4, Praef. p. xviii. 
 
 3 This is especially remarked by a very credible witness, Grapheus, 
 in the preface to one of Goch's writings. S. Walch Monim. Med. aev. 
 vol. ii. fasc. i. Praef. p. xiv., and vol. i. fasc. 4, p. xviii. xix. Praef. 
 
28 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 The natural bent of his mind disposed liim to solitary contempla- 
 tion, and to his connexion with Nuns was probably due the gentle 
 and sensitive caste of his character. But, at the same time, by the 
 bold and unreserved utterance of the results of his reflection, he 
 made a deep and salutary impression upon the external world. 
 His chief aim was to satisfy his religious and spiritual wants 
 by positive perceptions of truth, and yet, when in the course of 
 his enquiries, he encountered any prevalent error, never did he 
 fail to denounce it clearly and distinctly and with all the earnest- 
 ness and zeal of love. Less learned and comprehensive than his 
 friend Wessel, and with less also of the activity and spirit of a Re- 
 former, he yet on the other hand had greater depth of intellect 
 and sentiment, and was more thoroughly imbued with the nobler 
 species of Mysticism. Compared on the contrary with Tlwmas 
 a Kempis and men of his stamp, he united with less of the mysti- 
 cal element a larger measure of logical and scientific accom- 
 plishment, a more luminous and penetrating mind, and was in 
 general greater as a theologian, and more decided and zealous for 
 an immediate reform of the religious and ecclesiastical life. 
 
 Of all this the reader will be convinced when we have described, 
 as we now proceed to do, Goch's position as a theologian in 
 general. 
 
THE LIFE OP JOHN OF GOCH. 21) 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 GOCH'S GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 
 
 As it is the chief office of Biography to depict some historical 
 character, and to show both what he was in himself and what in 
 relation to the age in which he lived, and as the internal life of 
 a great theologian involves a multiplicity of bearings, it appears 
 necessary for a right appreciation of the position of Goch, and of 
 other congenial men, to premise some general observations. 
 These we shall extend to some length, and all the more because 
 they will at the same time describe the general position of the Re- 
 formatory theology of the fifteenth century. 
 
 To begin with the most general of all views, John of Goch is 
 a theologian of the Western School. At a very early period Chris- 
 tian theology had developed itself in particular ways, determined 
 by the diversities of national character and other co-operating 
 circumstances. In the East, and especially among the Greeks, 
 the theoretic and speculative parts of the doctrine, such as the 
 articles relating to the being and attributes of God, and to the 
 person of Christ, had been chiefly cultivated; whereas, among the 
 "Westerns, the practical doctrines which immediately influence 
 life, and which relate to sin and grace, redemption and sanc- 
 tification, had received the largest share of attention. This 
 peculiar bent was given to the theology of the West as early 
 as the days of Tertullian, the first of the Fathers who wrote 
 in Latin ; but it was afterwards far more deeply and per- 
 manently impressed upon it by Augustine. Tertullian had, at 
 the same time, assumed a hostile and repulsive attitude to 
 philosophy, which was also followed by his immediate successors 
 Augustine, on the contrary, having himself received the educa- 
 tion of a philosopher and logician, sought to satisfy the demands 
 of speculation. It was his aim (and to this he owes his scientific 
 importance) to reconcile faith with knowledge and authority with 
 philosophic enquiry, always however in subservience to the interests 
 of practical religion and the creed of the Church. His theology 
 became the ground work of the whole development of the middle 
 
30 TITE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCrT. 
 
 ages. Tlic principle lie laid down, that faitli necessarily precedes 
 reasoning, and that reasoning is as necessarily the offspring of 
 faith, was the initial basis of the most important forms which 
 scholasticism assumed. The middle ages, however, subsequently 
 received new theological impulses, and in particular were power- 
 fully influenced by the Aristotelian philosophy, in consequence of 
 which the love of theory and speculation re-appeared with in- 
 creased (rigour. Indeed after Aristotelianism, which itself gave an 
 undue preponderance to theory, had supplanted Platonism, — a 
 system more comprehensive and more akin to the spirit of Chris- 
 tianity, — so predominant did theory become in Scholasticism, as 
 materially to impair the practical aspect of Christian truth. A 
 reaction could not but ensue. The practical character peculiar 
 to the religion of Christ, inherent in the Western theology from 
 its birth, and which had been so deeply impressed upon it by its 
 chief representatives, could not but again vigorously assert its 
 rights by assuming a hostile position towards the too exclusively 
 theoretical scholasticism. The movement which thus arose em- 
 braces all the men who helped to pave the way for the Refor- 
 mation, and among others the subject of this memoir, in whom its 
 connexion with the Scriptural and Augustinian character of his 
 theology can scarcely be mistaken. 
 
 Goch, however, does not merely belong to the theology of the 
 West. His connexion is still closer with that of the middle 
 ages, and with the mediceval theology in its transition to the Refor- 
 mation ; and in order to assign to him his exact place, it is 
 requisite to refer to this latter theology, and ascertain what it 
 was, and what the forms which it assumed. Its essential character 
 will be found in the fact, that while based upon ecclesiastical tra- 
 dition, it is not content barely to accept its data, without inwardly 
 vivifying and subjecting them to the understanding. There were> 
 however, two ways of inwardly appropriating and quickening 
 the materials which tradition supplied : It might be done either 
 in the heart, with the organ of faith and love, or it might be 
 done in the intellect, by an analysis of the ideas, with the organ 
 of ratiocination. Hence arose the two main tendencies of the 
 Mediaeval period, Mysticism and Scholasticism. No sooner, 
 however} had these separated from each other as antagonistic 
 contraries, than an endeavour to reconcile them could not but 
 
THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCn. 31 
 
 ensue, and by means of the Victorines, a tendency arose once 
 more consonant with the Augustinian principles, and which, 
 setting out with faith and love as its roots, proceeded to specu- 
 lation, and treated even Mysticism theoretically and systema- 
 tically. Both tendencies were equally the offspring of an essential 
 exigency, and both were also of unquestionable benefit to the 
 general economy. Mysticism, principally fostered by the branches 
 of the Germanic stock, preserved among the nations the Chris- 
 tian spirit in its fulness of life and practical efficacy : Scho- 
 lasticism, belonging more to the Romanic tribes, devoted its 
 chief attention to the formal elaboration of Christian ideas, and 
 the exercise of argument in the schools ; and are conciliation 
 betwixt them was indispensable, unless two things essentially 
 related, and each necessary as a complement to the other, were 
 to be wholly dissevered. Scholasticism, however, whose genius 
 was despotic, showed itself in the sequel, least susceptible of 
 Counteraction on the part of Mysticism and other vital impulses : 
 In the course of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, it became 
 more and more exclusively theoretical and pedantic, wedded to 
 formalism and subtilties, and useless for life. On the other hand, 
 Mysticism raised its head especially in Germany and the Nether- 
 lands. It contained a more vigorous germ of vitality, assumed 
 a more simple, popular, and practical character, and increasingly 
 appropriated the new and important element of Scripturalism. 
 Allying itself with the freshly emerging love of the Bible, it 
 had the chief hand in effecting the transition to the Reforma- 
 tion, whereas Scholasticism, as a thing essentially antiquated, 
 was assailed and driven from the field. In order, however, 
 successfully to vanquish it, it was to a certain extent necessary 
 to fight Scholasticism with its own weapons, and thus it also 
 directly contributed an element for the further cultivation of 
 theology, viz., Logic. Such generally is the position in which 
 we find the theology of the scientific precursors of the Reforma- 
 tion, and into the constituent elements which we have just stated, 
 the theology of Goch may also be resolved. We may designate 
 it as a theology of love, for love is the true fundamental principle 
 from which all else in it flows, and with which all else is connec- 
 ted; and in so far it is related to the higher species of Mysticism. 
 It is a theology too of living faith in Scripture, for to that, as the 
 
32 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCU. 
 
 ruling authority, Gocli in every case refers, and in so far he too 
 claims a share in the introduction of the Keformation. It is, 
 however, likewise, a theology of reflection, for he endeavours to 
 develop and estahlish logically the statements of the Bible, and 
 in that respect, is still rooted in Scholasticism, although he 
 strenuously impugns it as defective in the two former particulars. 
 The Scholastic element of his theology Goch probably derived from 
 his early education at the University : The Mystical, seems to 
 have been innate, but may also have been fostered by his 
 recluse, life and intercourse with nuns ; and it is probable that 
 the Scriptural was developed by his connexion with Wessel, 
 although a general bent in that direction was one of the features 
 of the age. The two latter elements, however, must be re- 
 carded as the most essential. The first manifests its influence 
 only in his style and method of treating his subjects. In general 
 his plan is, when positively expounding a doctrine, first to state 
 the idea, then to prove and demonstrate it to be scriptural, and 
 then, to dissect it logically, and on scriptural grounds exhibit its 
 spiritual import. Whereas, in refutation, he first states clearly 
 the false doctrine, then confronts with it the true one which he 
 expresses in Scripture texts, and finally endeavours to enforce by 
 scientific arguments. 
 
 Proceeding further we meet with two other points. In the 
 first place, Goch's theology is biblical, and, therefore, in some 
 respects anti-philosophic. In the second place, it is substantially 
 Augustinian and therefore decidedly Antipelagian. At the same 
 time, however, as Pelagianism had entwined itself closely with 
 Scholasticism, it is in respect of doctrinal matter also anti-scho- 
 lastic. 
 
 As regards the first of these points, Goch in all his writings 
 declares his positive biblical tendency, and to this we shall have 
 occasion frequently and more fully to recur. At present and in 
 a prefatory way, we shall only point to a few statements. Even 
 the fundamental conception, which he forms of the true spiritual 
 liberty of the Christian, and the leading principle of his theology, 
 that whatever is salutary and good emanates from God alone, essen- 
 tially imply that he derives the higher knowledge of truth from 
 the same exalted source, viz., the Spirit and the revelation of God, 
 and, on the other hand, that he contemns all human authority. 
 
GOCH'S GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 33 
 
 In his highest concerns man ought to be independent of his fellow- 
 men, and dependent upon God alone. In God are to be found 
 supremacy, liberty, all-sufficiency, and perfection. He needs no 
 superior from whom to derive what he does not possess, and, 
 consequently, no instruction. Instruction, however, especially 
 in Divine things, is of indispensable necessity to man, and 
 as conformity to God is the end of his being, it follows, that 
 he is the most perfect man, who wholly resigns himself to 
 the guidance of the Divine Master, 1 and requires no human 
 master or teacher. All certain, pure, and authoritative instruction 
 in Divine truth, according to Goch's conviction, emanates from 
 the revelation of God in Christ and from that alone, and is stored 
 in the Holy Scriptures, which are therefore styled canonical. 
 Every other doctrine on supernatural things, however high and 
 distinguished the author may be, is valuable and important only 
 if it be, and in so far as it is, consonant with Scripture. To the 
 truth of the Canonical Scriptures, so far as the Lord shall open up 
 to him their meaning, Goch avers his determination to adhere, and 
 then proceeds, 2 — " Let others be full of their own opinions, and 
 by logical inferences mould the truth to suit their fancy. For me 
 I have no desire but to rescue it, in its nakedness and simpli- 
 city, from the darkness of philosophic reasonings, and present 
 it in a form adapted to the comprehension and taste of the simple. 
 Let others excel in the science of oratory : With me the highest 
 philosophy is to know how to act, 3 for it is not the teachers of 
 the law, but the doers of it, that shall be justified." Pie like- 
 wise practically shews that his stand is upon the Bible by the 
 fact, that in all his expositions of doctrine, he starts with Scrip- 
 ture, and only on the basis of texts thoroughly understood, 
 endeavours to discern the intrinsic truth of the matter in hand. 
 He applies the same rule in judging of heresy in general, for he 
 says that " It consists in obstinate adherence to an opinion, con- 
 tradictory to canonical truth, as that is simply and clearly expressed 
 in Sacred Scripture," 4 and he applies it likewise in opposing the 
 
 1 Dialog, de quatuor erroribus. eap. 22. p. 237. 
 
 2 Dialog, de quatt. err. cap. 1.0. p. 131. 
 
 3 . . . abundent alii in scientia dicendorum, nobis sit summa philo- 
 Bophia habere scientiam fiendorum. 
 
 4 Dialog, de quatt. err. cap. 22. p. 227. 
 
 C 
 
34 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 various tendencies of the age which he deemed unchristian. In 
 every case he appeals to the standard of Scripture. 
 
 The necessary reverse, however, of such a positive Scriptural 
 tendency was an antagonistic attitude to philosophy, especially to 
 the reigning philosophy of the times. This is a point the special 
 consideration of which, in all its bearings, is indispensable in 
 order to form a just estimate of Goch, and the men of kindred 
 spirit, and even of the Reformers. In consequence of the con- 
 flict they waged with philosophy, especially Aristotelianism, the 
 precursors of the Reformation, and, still more, some of the Re- 
 formers themselves, might seem to us to have been unenlightened 
 and blind zealots, destitute of all historical equity, were we not duly 
 to consider their peculiar circumstances and essential vocation. 
 Every great advance of mankind includes an opposition to things 
 as they have previously existed and been received, and conse- 
 quently bears in its bosom an element of hostility, which must 
 be singly and resolutely carried out, if a new path is to be opened 
 at all. At the same time this inevitably prevents full justice being 
 done to existing things, and begets a severe and exclusive mode 
 of thinking. In this way, not merely in our judgments of history, 
 but even in the domain of practice, there may be what is relatively 
 a retrograde movement, in order that, on a large and general 
 scale, an advance all the more considerable may be possible, 
 Let me remind the reader of a very remarkable example in 
 Ecclesiastical History. We, who stand upon the ruins of the 
 religions of antiquity, and contemplate them in the mirrors of his- 
 tory, never entertain a doubt that piety and the consciousness of 
 a Divine Being existed among the Heathen, and that even their 
 myths contain much that is beautiful, good, and true. The case 
 however, was, widely different during the deadly combat which 
 early Christianity had to maintain with Paganism, then no doubt 
 inwardly enfeebled with age, but still spreading its roots far and 
 wide, and wielding outwardly a great amount of power. That 
 was not, therefore, the time historically to weigh, or calmly to. 
 estimate, its merits, but to fight with it ; and, at such a time, we 
 must consider as not merely pardonable but proper, the conduct 
 of the champions of Christianity in principally if not exclusively 
 exposing to view all that was false, absurd, morally pernicious, 
 and devilish in a system, then for the most part degraded. The 
 
goch's general position as a theologian. 35 
 
 same is the case here ; and as we never think of denying the 
 greatness of Aristotle or the importance of his labours, and far 
 less of blaming him, because he was not a Christian, just as little 
 do we deny that the blending of the Aristotelian logic with the 
 Christian faith contributed greatly to the systematic elaboration 
 of its doctrine, as well as to the discipline of the intellect in the 
 middle ages. That, however, which seems easy and natural to us 
 who now look back upon vanquished Scholasticism, must to those 
 who had Scholasticism still to vanquish, have appeared unreason- 
 able and impossible. The thing which then required to be done 
 was to remove the corruptions which had sprung from the false 
 connexion of theology with philosophy, and this was only practi- 
 cable by sharp and decided controversy. Just as little can these 
 corruptions be denied. The matter only requires to be viewed in 
 its right connexion, and the difference of times to be weighed. 
 Scholasticism was an indispensable link in the development of 
 the European nations. It served as a means of effecting the 
 transition from a merely positive way of apprehending the doctrine 
 of Christianity to that scientific liberty and independence which 
 the Reformation introduced. In this important interval it called 
 into being certain vast productions, and, so long as the want of 
 free subjectivity was but feebly felt, no doubt to a certain extent it 
 satisfied the mind. It is, however, a scientific phenomenon which 
 extends over a period of not less than four centuries, and conse- 
 quently passed through various phases of development. At its 
 commencement in the eleventh century, under Anselm of Canter- 
 bury, it was very different from what it finally became at the end 
 of the fifteenth, under Gabriel Biel. Originally it was a real step 
 in advance, as compared with that positive theology which merely 
 collected texts, being instinct with spirit and intellect, deeply 
 embued with sentiment, and inflamed with the fresh ardour of 
 scientific improvement. At its culminating point, it was compre- 
 hensive, rich in matter, widely ramified, and, like a Gothic edifice, 
 carefully elaborated in every part. But being more and more 
 controlled by extraneous powers, — in respect of its matter, by the 
 hierarchy, and in respect of its form, by Aristotelianism, — it too, 
 in its last stage, became a mere external tradition, a cunning and 
 spiritless formalism, incapable of satisfying the deeper wants of the 
 enquiring intellect or of vital Christian feeling, and an obstruction 
 
3G THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 to the progress of true enlightenment. From the meshes of a sys- 
 tem so over-complicated and artificial, and from a theology which 
 had gradually degenerated into an empty form, unprofitable and un- 
 true, the mind required to escape, and concentrating itself within, 
 to seek in the simple and really quickening truths of primitive 
 Christianity that refreshment, purity, and vigour which were 
 necessary for new productions. It required to return once more 
 to the Gospel, and draw supplies from its inmost heart, in order to 
 shed them with new and living power from itself. Nor ought it, 
 moreover, to be forgotten that in Scholasticism, especially under 
 the form which it assumed in the course of the fifteenth century, 
 there was an intrinsic principle of dissolution. The union of 
 Christianity with Aristotelianism was a marriage which could not 
 last. A philosophy predominantly empirical in its character, 
 cognizable by reason alone, and in some degree sceptical, — a phi- 
 losophy which decidedly prefers theory to practice, treats Divine 
 things merely as objects of analytical reflection, and neither 
 teaches a Divine providence over human affairs, nor thinks so 
 highly of the human soul, as to deem it worthy of enjoying true 
 communion with God and an everlasting existence — a philosophy 
 which had been reared upon the soil of totally different religious 
 and moral views of the world, could never permanently blend with 
 a religion which, on the contrary, is thoroughly ideal, and full of the 
 inspiration of faith, which has an essentially ethical character and 
 aim, which contains inalienable mystical elements, and looks upon 
 living fellowship with God and the sure prospect of eternal life 
 as her most precious jewels. Any contract between two such spiri- 
 tual powers could not but lead to the inevitable consequence that 
 in the course of their development, either the philosophy would 
 rob the religion of its peculiarities and wholly absorb it, or that 
 the religion would repudiate and break all connexion with the 
 philosophy. For Christianity, which was still as a whole and within 
 its own domain of Christendom, pervaded by faith, to have been 
 consumed by Aristotelianism, was, considering its intrinsic force 
 of truth and life, an impossibility. The latter alternative there- 
 inn • alone remained, and could not but take place, whenever, as 
 was the case in the course of the fifteenth century, the discre- 
 pancy between the two became a distinct object of consciousness. 
 lnially,wo have to consider the actual aspect which philosophy 
 
GOCll'S GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 37 
 
 at that time at least partially presented. Things emerged which 
 were calculated to inspire any man, not to say any Christian, 
 of the least earnestness and piety, with a complete disrelish for 
 it. John of Goch himself relates a remarkable example of the 
 use which the young France, or — when we consider the body of 
 students in Paris as an assemblage from all countries — the young 
 Europe of those days, made of philosophy, as a cloak under which 
 to propound the most licentious and immoral principles. In the 
 year 1376, the philosophical students in Paris, proceeding on the 
 principle, as false as it is pernicious in its manifold applications, 
 that there is a double truth, one philosophical and another theolo- 
 gical, and that a proposition may be true in philosophy which is 
 false in theology, propounded a list of theses, for which they 
 justly incurred the animadversion of the Archbishop of the city, 
 who was also officially superintendent of the University. Besides 
 denying the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the immortality of 
 the soul, and the resurrection, and asserting the eternity of the 
 world, and the influence of the stars upon human affairs, these 
 theses contained the following strange doctrines : The will of 
 man is necessarily determined by his knowledge, as is the ap- 
 petite of the brute. There cannot possibly be such a thing as sin 
 in the higher powers of the soul ; Man sins from the influence of 
 his passions, not of his will. Salvation belongs to the present life 
 and to no other. There are no other kinds of virtue butthe acquired 
 and the innate. Continence is not essentially a virtue. Simple 
 fornication, considered as the connexion of a male with a female, 
 and voluntary on the part of both, is no sin. There are fables and 
 falsehoods in the Gospels as in other books. It is useless to pray, 
 because whatever happens, happens necessarily, and cannot be 
 changed. Of such articles as these the young philosophers had 
 propounded 219. From the existing records on the subject and 
 the letter of the Bishop, Goch selects mere specimens, from which, 
 however, it is easy to infer the spirit of the whole. 1 
 
 Viewing all this conjointly, it is impossible to deny, that phi- 
 losophy, in the form which it then wore, and philosophic theology, 
 were greatly corrupted. And let it not be said, that the proper way 
 
 1 There h a long account of the affair in Goch's work De libertate 
 Christiana Lib. i. cap. 17 and 18. 
 
38 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 was at once to have substituted a better philosophy, in the room 
 of that whose imperfections were now seen. Such a requirement 
 betrays a total ignorance of history. In the first place, the ground 
 required to be cleared, and an open field secured for the Christian 
 faith and its scientific development. Only upon such a fresh soil 
 could a speculative philosophy of a peculiarly Christian character 
 spring and grow. This, however, was not even the task of the 
 lleformers, to say nothing of their forerunners, but was reserved 
 to a much later period. The task appointed for them was to give 
 battle to the corrupt philosophy of the age, and making no capi- 
 tulation with it, sternly and resolutely to resist the current opi- 
 nions. We would do them the highest injustice, however, were 
 we to allege that on that account they were opposed to freedom 
 of thought, scientific enquiry, or an experimental and living 
 apprehension of the Christian doctrines. In fact, if the word 
 philosophy be understood in its more general sense, they were but 
 relatively anti-philosophic. So far from being so absolutely, we 
 find Goch and Wessel, who was of a congenial mind, frequently 
 expatiating in the field of speculation. In their hands, how- 
 ever, speculation is a free and independent exercise of thought 
 based exclusively upon Scripture, and hence essentially theolo- 
 gical. It is free from the excrescences, traditions, and dead for- 
 malism of the Schoolmen, and resembles the better theological 
 method of the early founders of Scholasticism, and the more dis- 
 tinguished Fathers of the Church. 
 
 What remains for us to contemplate in the theology of Goch 
 is its Augustinian and Antvpelagian elements, and these demand 
 attention all the more as substantially determining its content. 
 Pelagianism, although originating in a well-intentioned regard 
 to morals, was a view of Christianity which, by representing the 
 natural man as morally pure, and all-sufficient for himself, grace 
 and redemption as subordinate means of virtue, and Christ as a 
 mere teacher and pattern, essentially altered its character. This 
 involved, on the one hand, an almost insuperable impediment to 
 the appropriation of the true spirit of the Gospel, while, on the 
 other, it supplied a foundation for a false method of treating 
 Christianity^, as if it were a mere moral laiv, a new although 
 higher species of Judaism. The necessary consequence was, that 
 it originated many other corruptions similar to those which pre- 
 
goch's general position as a theologian. 39 
 
 vailed among the Jews, before the introduction of Christianity, 
 and after that event among many Jewish Christians, and which 
 are so strenuously impugned by the Apostle Paul. In this way 
 the mediaeval church had lapsed into a state of mere legalism, and 
 thence, as could not but happen, into a pursuit of righteousness 
 by works, with all its natural fruits ; so that there was an absolute 
 necessity for some powerful counteracting force, in order to bring 
 it back once more to the spirit of the Gospel, and the principles 
 of saving grace and faith. Such a counteracting force required 
 of course to be reared upon the doctrine of Paul as its main basis, 
 and, inasmuch as Augustine was not only in other respects the 
 most eminent and revered of the Western Fathers of the Church, 
 but was likewise the most determined advocate of the principles 
 of the great Apostle, and the keenest opponent of Pelagianism, it 
 necessarily enlisted under his banner, and took advantage of his 
 mighty intellect, forcible language, and universally recognized 
 authority, against the prevailing errors and corruptions. This is 
 the tendency which we find comprehending not only the Reform- 
 ers, but all who helped to pave their way, and among these, the 
 subject of our narrative. Without neglecting Christ's own 
 sayings in the Gospels, and the works of the other Apostles, 
 especially John, the writings of Paul, and, above all, the 
 weighty passages in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, 
 form the mainstays upon which Goch rests his theological disqui- 
 sitions. In all his writings he appears imbued with the spirit of 
 the Apostle of the Gentiles, and deeply and vitally smitten with 
 a relish for his doctrine of justification through faith, working 
 by love. And although, among the Fathers of the Church, in 
 whose ranks he takes his place, he mentions several others, such 
 as Jerome, Gregory the Great, and in ecclesiastical matters, the 
 Chancellor Gerson, still Augustine is the one to whom above 
 all, after proving his point from Scripture, he continually recurs, 
 the one whose language he most frequently cites, for the enforce- 
 ment or distinct expression of his own Opinion, and whose whole 
 mind he seems most to have appropriated. 
 
 Both of these, the Pauline and the Augustinian elements, will 
 appear in the theology of Goch if we give a short outline of his 
 leading views. The whole substance of his theology may be con- 
 densed into the words Of God, through God, to God. God is the 
 
40 THE LIFE OP JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 fountain alikeof all being, and of all well-being. Deriving as he does 
 his existence from God, the chief end of man is fellowship with God 
 by spontaneous love. This end, however, especially now that man 
 is a sinner, can be attained only through God, and in the use of 
 those means which His grace and spirit supply, so that, the life of 
 man here on earth, no less than the higher stage of its evolution, 
 and the blessedness in which that is to terminate, are essentially 
 a Divine work and gift. All that meets our observation in man, is 
 either nature or grace. Nature is what God gives to him in order 
 to his existence : Grace is whatever is supernaturally imparted, in 
 the course of his development, in order to the further end of his 
 becoming truly good and capable of pleasing his Maker. Accord- 
 ing to the original construction of human nature, the flesh was 
 subject to the spirit, and the spirit to God. The flesh did not 
 encumber the soul, because it harboured no hurtful desire. The 
 will, free from bondage, guilt, and misery, was capable of all good. 
 It was in man's power not to have sinned ; but by a free act of 
 his will, he admitted sin into his mind, and thereby his condition 
 was essentially altered. Concupiscence forced its way into his 
 nature, and implanted in it the inclination to sin. And from the 
 first man, after he had thus become a sinner, sin has been commu- 
 nicated to all his descendants, partly by propagation, and partly by 
 imitation. It spreads by propagation, inasmuch as the commis- 
 sion of it has left behind a sinful bias, or concupiscence, which, 
 by virtue of their common connexion, is entailed upon all the 
 members of the race ; and it spreads by imitation, inasmuch as in 
 every member of the race, no less than in its founder, inflamed 
 concupiscence begets actual sin. The history of the serpent, the 
 woman and the man, is the moral history of mankind, and what it 
 typically pourtrays is repeated afresh in every individual. In 
 spite of sin, however, man still retains the will in a state of free- 
 dom from constraint and of susceptibility for good. This includes 
 the possibility of recovery. For man, however, once fallen into 
 sin and guilt, recovery is inconceivable by any other means than 
 grace. The mediator of recovering grace is Christ, the only per- 
 fectly righteous human being, and the only one also who, being. 
 wholly sinless and acceptable in the sight of God, really pos- 
 sessed the power of earning true merit either for himself or for 
 others. By this one person, all who have fallen into a state of 
 
goch's general position as a theologian. 41 
 
 enmity, are again reconciled to God, which does not mean, that 
 there is anything like hostility on the part of God towards man 
 requiring to be removed, but which means, that on the part of man, 
 the principle of opposition to God, or sin, is extirpated, and the 
 principle of love implanted in its room. As sin was spread by pro- 
 pagation and example, so likewise is righteousness. It is imparted 
 to individuals partly by means of a spiritual birth from God and 
 Christ, and partly by the imitation of Christ in their life. What- 
 ever is in this way wrought in man is the work of grace, for grace 
 is the sum of all the gifts bestowed upon him, through Christ and 
 his spirit by God, in order to his higher development, the deli- 
 verance of his will from concupiscence and the inflaming it 
 with a love of righteousness, so that he becomes meet for eternal 
 blessedness. Grace is identical with love, and is not merely the 
 gift of God, but is also the Holy Spirit. Yea it is God himself, for 
 God is love, so that it really is the Divine Being who both in- 
 clines the will of man to choose, and strengthens it to perform, that 
 which is good, working in him both to will and to do. According 
 to this, the cause of evil is the will of the creature, whereas the 
 cause of any good we possess is the Divine goodness, operating 
 upon us either directly, or indirectly by the use of means. The 
 true principle of all good, however, is love. Love, as manifested 
 in Christ, is shed abroad in the hearts of believers by the Holy 
 Spirit. It is the only source of genuine goodness, for only that 
 which proceeds from love is free, and only that which is freely 
 done is truly good. The mere objective doing of good is not the 
 task assigned to man. His task is to do good in the right way, and 
 the right way is to do it with the will, either brought by love into 
 perfect harmony with that of God, or wholly absorbed in it, so 
 that it does the good with the most absolute submission to it. 
 In this manner subjection to God becomes the highest liberty, 
 and the highest liberty manifests itself as entire subjection to 
 God. Such principles of vital religion and morality could not but 
 produce opposition to external legality, to what were called good 
 works, and their merit, to the high value set upon vows and other 
 ecclesiastical obligations, and even to the Church itself, by which 
 these were all ordained and overrated. This we shall learn more 
 fully in the sequel. . 
 
 Leaving, however, these generalities, we will allow Goch him- 
 
1 2 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 self to declare the main principles of his theology. First of all, it 
 is very characteristic of the practical tendency of these, which is 
 closely connected with his scriptural and anti-scholastic bent, to 
 mark how he determines the relation betwixt knowledge and voli- 
 tion. This is a subject allied to an old and much disputed 
 question of mediaeval theology, viz. — What is the relation be- 
 twixt faith and knowledge 1 The parent of Scholasticism, fol- 
 lowing the lead of Augustine, 1 had taught that faith is prior and 
 antecedent, and knowledge posterior and derivative, in as much 
 as only he, who has experience of Divine things, can believe in 
 them, and only he who believes, comprehend them. 2 Specula- 
 tion, however, soon attained to self-confidence, and was thereby 
 led to assert its independence of faith, and Abelard proceeded 
 upon the principle that we must first know, in order then to 
 believe. 3 In opposition to this principle, which unquestionably 
 does not sufficiently recognize life as the basis upon which re- 
 ligious knowledge must be reared, and which appeared in the 
 eyes of the Church, still urgent for faith, as the height of arro- 
 gance, practical Mysticism felt itself called to combat specu- 
 lation, and to lay the stress upon belief, love, and contemplation, 
 
 1 The fundamental principle of the Augustinian Theology was, as is 
 well known, Fides praecedit intellectum. 
 
 2 The known words of Anselm, Neque enim quaero intelligere, ut 
 credam, sed credo ut intelligam . . . Nam qui non crediderit, non ex- 
 pcrietur, et qui expertus non merit, non intelliget. Prosolog. i. de fide 
 trinit. 2. The well-known work in which Anselm states the ontologi- 
 cal proof bears the title, Prosologium, sive Fides quaerens intellectum. 
 
 3 Abiilard frequently warns against credulity, citing the text Ec- 
 clcsiastieus xix. 4, qui credit cito, lenis est corde. Introd. ii. 3. et in a. 1. 
 His disciples asserted the principle, nihil credi posse, nisi primitus in- 
 tellectum. Ilist. calamit. 9. And upon this principle he himself acted. 
 lie preferred starting from the stand-point of doubt, rather than from 
 that of faith, as his words evince, Dubitando ad inquisitionem venimus, 
 inquirendo veritatem percipimus. The following passages are specially 
 significant, Introduc. ad Theol. 1. ii. p. 1055 : Quid prodest clavis 
 aurea, si aperire quod volumus non potest. Epit. cap. v. p. 9 : Quid ad 
 doctrinam loqui proficit, si quod dicimus exponi non potest, ut intelli- 
 gatur. Introduc. ii. 3. p. 1058 : Si enim cum persuadetur ut aliquid 
 credatur, nihil est ratione discutiendum, utrum ista credi oporteat vel 
 non : quid restat, nisi ut aequo tarn falsa, quam vera praedicentibus 
 acquiescamua . . . Alioquin cuiusque populi fides, quantamcunque 
 astruat ialsitatem, refelli non poterit . . . Pag. 1064 : Legere et non 
 intelligere, neg'igere est. 
 
GOCIl'S GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 43 
 
 as exclusively the organ by which man appropriates Divine things. 
 Thinking, however, was an exigence too powerful to be suppressed, 
 and hence Scholasticism generally reverted to the fundamental 
 principle of Augustine and Anselm, that upon the ground of 
 faith, knowledge is a necessary growth. If, however, we take 
 into consideration that faith is a thing essentially practical, this 
 question also includes another, viz., whether in matters of piety 
 .the precedence is to be assigned to practice or to theory % Upon 
 this latter question Thomas Aquinas had taught, that intelligence 
 is of its own nature superior to volition, and that in the exer- 
 cise of this faculty consists the highest perfection of the soul. 1 In 
 this way, by exalting theory as the culminating point of religious 
 life, he had likewise assigned to it the superiority over practice 
 in the whole development of religious life. This appeared to 
 
 1 Thomas Aquinas treats largely of the scientific development of the 
 powers and capacities of the human mind, in the first part of the 
 gumma, but states the relation between the Intellectus and Voluntas, 
 more particularly from the 79th Quaestio, and onwards. In the course 
 of this weighty disquisition, Avhich we cannot here fully pursue, he 
 comes, Quaest. 82. Artie. 3. to the question : Utrum voluntas sit altior 
 potentia, quam intellectus ? And here, after in his usual manner stat- 
 ing the contrary arguments, he takes his stand upon a deliverance of 
 Aristotle, in the 10th book of the Ethics, and pronounces his opinion to 
 the effect, that as the object of the Intellect is more simple and abso- 
 lute, and consequently higher than that of the Will, so is the Intellect 
 itself, considered per se, a higher faculty than the Will, although re- 
 latively and under certain circumstances, the Will may possibly be 
 superior to the Intellect, as for instance, when the object of a volition 
 is of a higher kind than that of an act of intelligence. He expresses 
 himself to this effect, as follows : Respondeo dicendum, quod eminentia 
 alicujus ad alteram potest attendi dupliciter. Uno modo simpliciter : 
 alio modo secundum quid. ... Si ergo intellectus et voluntas consi- 
 derentur secundum se, sic intellectus eminentior invenitur. Et hoc 
 apparet ex comparatione objectorum adinvicem. Objectum enim in- 
 tellectus est simplieius.et magis absolutum, quam objectum voluntatis. 
 Nam objectum intellectus est ipsa ratio boni appetibilis : bonum autem 
 appetible, cujus ratio est in intellectu, est objectum voluntatis. Quanto 
 autem est aliquid simplicius et abstractius, tantum secundum se est 
 nobilius et altius. Et ideo objectum intellectus est altius quam objec- 
 tum voluntatis . . . Secundum quid autem, et per comparationem ad 
 alteram, voluntas invenitur interdum altior intellectu, ex eo scilicet 
 quod objectum voluntatis in altiore re invenitur, quam objectum intel- 
 lectus. Sicut si dicerem auditum esse secundum quid nobiliorem visu, 
 inquantum res aliqua, cujus est sonus, nobilior est aliqua re, cujus est 
 color, quamvis color sit nobilior et simplicior sono. 
 
41 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 Goch to be without foundation either in Christianity or in the 
 nature of piety. On the contrary, lie affirms that the supreme 
 perfection of the soul rather consists in the action of the will, and, 
 treading in the footsteps of Augustine, endeavoured in the fol- 
 lowing manner 1 to demonstrate his conviction. The soul, he 
 says, has in the state of bliss three high and ultimate opera- 
 tions. These are to apprehend God by the memory, to see and 
 know him by the intellect, 2 and to enjoy him by the 'will. 0£ 
 these three the two former, viz., the apprehension and know- 
 led <tc of God, are subservient to the third, which is the fruition of 
 him, and which constitutes the consummate blessedness and feli- 
 city of the soul, as St Augustine declares, 3 that fulness of joy 
 consists in the fruition of the Trinity. For just as in the case of 
 transitory things, the highest pleasure consists in the use of such 
 as are useful, so in the case of things eternal, supreme felicity 
 consists in the enjoyment of those made to be enjoyed. In as 
 much then as the highest bliss consists in the fruition of the 
 chief good, and as fruition is an act of the will, in like manner as 
 intuition is of the intellect, it is clear that upon an act of the will 
 the supreme perfection of the soul depends. That fruition is an 
 act of the will Augustine likewise attests when he says 4 that 
 " It is to unite oneself in love with any object for that object's 
 sake," and in another passage, 5 " We enjoy the blessings we 
 know as such, when the will reposes in them with perfect self- 
 satisfaction." From these words it may be inferred, that in 
 fruition there is the combination of two acts essentially distinct, 
 the choice of the object, and the pleasure taken in it (dilectio et 
 delectatio), which, as they are acts of the same agent in reference to 
 some good, viewed as such, so are they also mutually subordinate, 
 each being required to complete the other, and as they severally 
 rest upon an act of volition, so is this also the case with both 
 combined. It may here, however, be objected, that fruition pre- 
 supposes knowledge, as is implied even in the saying of the 
 
 1 Dialog, de quatt. err. cap. 10. p. 132. 
 
 2 Intellect is here of course taken in the higher sense of the word, in- 
 clusive of what we arc accustomed to call the reason. 
 
 3 Augustin. dc trinit. 1. i. 
 
 4 Augustin. de doctrina Christ, lib. i. cap. 4 : Frui est amore alicui 
 rei inhacrere propter se ipsam. 
 
 5 Augustin. de trinit. lib. x. 
 
goch's general position as a theologian. 45 
 
 Saviour, 1 " This is life eternal, to know thee the true God," ac- 
 cording to which, fruition would, in the first instance, be an act 
 of the intellect. But then we must here also distinguish between 
 a two-fold cognizance, that of sight and that of taste, that of 
 apprehension and that of appropriation {visits et gastus, vel in- 
 tellectionis et fruitionis). The former is a pure act of the 
 intellect ; the latter, however, as it cannot take place without an 
 affectionate union of the soul with its object, is an act of volition. 
 For the will is not merely an impulsive, but is also an apprehen- 
 sive and appropriating power. The intellect apprehends the chief 
 good as its ultimate end, which is an act of fruition. It is ac- 
 knowledged that the soul, in the state of bliss, is conformed to God 
 only by an act of love, which, among all emotions and impulses 
 of the heart, is the only one by which the creature can correspond 
 and reciprocate with the Creator, if not upon a footing of equality, 
 yet with a certain degree of resemblance. Love, however, is an 
 act of the will, and when the Apostle says, " We shall be like 
 him, for we shall see him as he is," he means, not the intuitive 
 cognizance of the understanding, but the fruitional (fruitivam) 
 cognizance of the will. It is that which by the act of love con- 
 ducts the glorified spirit to the highest conformity and fullest 
 acquaintance with the Creator. The case is the same with the 
 senses. The eye beholds a beautiful apple, and that same apple 
 the taste enjoys. By the sight, we obtain full cognizance of the 
 apple, as far as the power of vision reaches. But we have not by 
 sight full cognizance of it, in respect to its enjoyable qualities, 
 for that is only competent to the power of taste, whose office is 
 to pierce into the heart of the apple, by the actual use of it, and 
 more fully to apprehend its parts and properties. Hence, although 
 fruition, pre-supposes cognition, it does not properly lie in intui- 
 tive cognition, which is an act of the intellect, but in fruitive 
 cognition, which is an act of the will. In the same way we must 
 also understand what the Saviour 1 said about eternal life consist- 
 ing in knowing the true God. He meant the supreme and full 
 knowledge of the chief good, by which not only the intellect is 
 enlightened, but the affections imbued with a deep relish for it. 
 This is also the only kind of knowledge which can justly be called 
 
 1 John xviu 3. 2 John xviL 3* 
 
4G THE LIFE OF JOnN OF GOCH. 
 
 vriadom. 1 It thence follows that as great illumination of under- 
 standing is to many of no benefit, as a means of conforming 
 them to the Divine goodness, so there are others, to whom simpli- 
 city of mind is just as little any hindrance in the attainment of 
 that object. And the reason is, because a high measure of 
 Divine knowledge does not always lead to conformity with God, 
 whereas a high measure of Divine love never fails to do so. 
 God delights in the soul which glows with love, although its 
 knowledge may be small. But he takes no delight in a soul 
 enlightened with knowledge, but which is destitute of love, and 
 hence the Apostle says, " Knowledge puffeth up, but charity 
 edifieth." 2 As for the true simplicity of mind of which I speak, 
 it consists essentially in the knowledge of Jesus Christ and Him 
 crucified, and that is a knowledge of Christ implying 3 something 
 more than a mere acquaintance with the Gospel History, which 
 even sinners may acquire. Many do, in fact, acquire it by the 
 cognizance of the intellect, which we call knowledge, but not all by 
 the cognizance of the affections, which we call Wisdom. The 
 Apostle preached the crucified Saviour to Jews and Greeks, and 
 they, who did not believe, received a mere intellectual knowledge 
 of the truth of the historical facts, and consequently reckoned the 
 wisdom of God to be foolishness, and his sovereign power, infirmity. 
 On the other hand, believers, instructed by the Holy Spirit, 
 experienced in themselves that which was also in Christ. To 
 them was given the cognizance of love, which is the right illumi- 
 nation of the mind, the water of saving wisdom drunk only 
 by the children of God, and with which a stranger does not 
 intermeddle. It is, moreover, the true light of the soul, and 
 separates between the children of light and the children of 
 darkness. Nor can it be acquired by the study of heathen 
 
 1 The sapientia, meaning properly a knowledge partaking oj the 
 nature of a taste, an intelligere in which there is at the same time a 
 sapere, and which appropriates, and takes in its object with vividness, 
 and a lively relish. The passage contains an ingenious play upon the 
 words which cannot possibly be reproduced in English : Ipsa denique 
 eat Bumraa et plena cognitio summi boni, quando non solum intellectus 
 illuminatur, sed et affectus intimo sapore eruditur, quae utique cognitio 
 recto nomine sapientia nominatur. Dialog, cap. 10. p. 135 ct 136. 
 
 2 1 Cor. viii. 1. 
 
 8 Dialog, cap. 10. p. 137 sqq. 
 
GOCIl'S GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 47 
 
 philosophers, but only by the imitation of the humble and crucr 
 tied Jesus. 
 
 The will is accordingly the power which Goch regards as 
 chiefly determining the bent of man's spiritual life, whether 
 towards Divine things, or to evil, which is their contrary. No 
 doubt the determination of the will, in every case, pre-supposes 
 a certain knowledge ; but, in that knowledge, the determinative 
 principle does not lie. It belongs rather to the sphere of prac- 
 tice. Still, in reference to right conduct, the will may exist in 
 a twofold state. 1 One is the state of terror under the law, which 
 the Apostle calls the spirit of bondage, because therein works of 
 righteousness are done from fear of punishment, and not for 
 their own sake. The other is the state of love under the Gospel, 
 and this he calls the spirit of adoption, and elsewhere the spirit of 
 liberty, because in it the soul, being delivered by grace from the 
 bondage of sin, does that which is good of its own inward mo- 
 tion. It is the second of these conditions alone which expands to 
 the full fruition of the celestial glory, and the perfect liberty of 
 the children of God. 2 The will, however, is based upon another 
 power, which influences its motions. It has its root in the 
 affections, and the heart. .Love is the primal and ultimate 
 power in man, and if the tendency of his being outwardly is deter- 
 mined by the will, so, inwardly, in its centre, the will receives 
 in turn its bent and force from love. This idea is expressed by 
 Goch in many ways and in connexion with a great variety of 
 subjects. We shall here indicate only a few passages, — " What 
 wings are to the bird, love is to us. They seem to add to the 
 weight of the body. In reality, however, so far from depressing, 
 they elevate it into the air. In like manner the yoke of love, 
 when imposed upon our sensuous nature, not only does not 
 weigh it down, but lifts the spirit with the senses to celestial 
 things 3 . .... Take from them their wings, and you take 
 from birds the power of flying. Even so, separate love from the 
 will, and the will is made incapable of every act that transcends 
 nature. If it be objected, that the yoke of love does violence to 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 9. pag. 125 and 126. 
 
 2 Ibid. s. 126 and 127. 
 
 3 Ibid. cap. 11. p. 146, 
 
48 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCH. 
 
 the flesh, and sensuous part of our frame, we answer, that such 
 constraint does not diminish the liberty of the will, for that is 
 perfectly consistent with the subjugation of the flesh, and even 
 of nature itself. 1 .... Much more all things done from 
 love are necessarily done with delight (cum clulcedine). Love 
 sweetens even the sharp bitterness of death. Truly, it is a 
 light and gentle yoke strengthening and refreshing him who 
 bears it, and with pleasing motion raising him above the range 
 of his natural faculties, to God." 2 Still more distinctly and cha- 
 racteristically, however, does Goch, in the following passage, 
 declare how love is the mainspring which directs the higher life, 
 and to which the will is obedient. 3 " Love and the will are 
 no doubt said to be the two factors which together constitute 
 the impelling cause to a mode of action above nature. Love, 
 however, is by far the greater of the two, 4 partly because it 
 inclines the will to act above nature, partly because it directs 
 and determines it to the particular act, and partly because, with- 
 out love, the will is incompetent, and cannot be rendered com- 
 petent otherwise than by love, for acting above nature. For just 
 as iron, when heated, retains the fire it has imbibed and co- 
 operates with it, so as to produce fiery effects, not simply as iron, 
 but as iron combined with fire, and thus is absolutely incapable of 
 doing without the fire, what it easily does in combination with it : 
 Even so the will, when imbued with love, co-operates with it, as a 
 free cause, and in place of being constrained by it, is rather exalted 
 to a higher degree of liberty and power. What it thus does, 
 however, it does not do as mere will, but as will imbued with love, 
 without which it would be incapable of anything of the kind." 
 
 To the same effect Goch elsewhere says, 5 " Inasmuch as the 
 Gospel law is the law of love, according to the declaration of 
 the Apostle, that love is the fulfilling of the law, and in as much 
 as the law of love is the law of liberty, whereas the law of fear is 
 the law of bondage, it follows, that whoever binds himself by the 
 promise of faith to the observance of the Gospel, devotes himself 
 
 1 Dialog, s. 149. 
 
 2 Ibid. s. 147 and 148. 
 
 3 Ibid. cap. 16. p. 172. 173. 
 
 . . . tamen cbaritas est multo principalior. 
 6 Dialog, cap. 12 p. 134, 155. 
 
goch's general position as a theologian. 49 
 
 to the exercise of Divine love, because to fulfil the Gospel law is 
 nothing else than to discharge the duties of that love. 
 This exercise of Divine love does not diminish the freedom of the 
 human will, but perfects it, because whatsoever is done from love 
 is most of all considered free." 
 
 This leads us to another point to which, in the foregoing pas- 
 sages, allusion has already been made. It is, that true freedom 
 springs only from love, so that in this respect also, love appears 
 to be the fountain and centre of the higher life. Love and/Vee- 
 dom are the constituent elements of our being, and they are also the 
 fundamental principles of the Gospel. Here again, however, love 
 claims the superiority, as that which alone makes us truly free. If 
 we collect the thoughts which Goch has expressed in various pas- 
 sages to this effect, the sum of them is as follows : God is love, but 
 he is at the same time the freest of all beings. In his freedom 
 he is infinitely loving, and in his love he is infinitely free ; and 
 that which he himself is, he also desires created spirits to be, and 
 more and more to become, by continual approximation and con- 
 tinual assimilation to him. He is to all intelligent beings the 
 creative principle of love and freedom, and it is b y love that he 
 makes them free. The state of the matter is this : All existing 
 things have emanated from the Divine freedom, and, by the same 
 way in which they came from him, they must return back to 
 God. Such is the case with spiritual beings. Issuing from God, 
 by the free exercise of his will, they must, by the free exercise of their 
 own, turn towards him and return to him. 1 That the rational 
 soul is the offspring of the freedom of the Divine will, is evident, 
 for the Divine will is the productive principle of all created 
 things. The Divine will, however, is a free agent, and con- 
 sequently all created things were called into being by the Divine 
 freedom. Nor can it be here objected, that the Divine knowledge 
 is the anterior and higher cause in creation (principalis causa), 
 for the Divine intelligence is, doubtless, the conceptive principle of 
 things (principium rerum repraesentativum), by virtue of which 
 God has them all present in his eternal mind, but the proper and 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 10. p. 139 : Sciendum, quod anima rationalis eodem 
 modo reducitur in Deum, quomodo exit a Deo : sed per libertatem 
 divinae voluntatis exit a Deo, ergo per libertatem suae voluntatis debet 
 reduci in Dcum. 
 
 D 
 
50 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 productive principle (prindpium ellcitwum et productivum) is his 
 will, for in the order of causes, that is the higher, which, in and 
 of itself, rules its own action, and such is the will. That the soul, 
 however, must return to God by the way of freedom, results from 
 the nature of the Gospel law. 1 The law of the Gospel is a law 
 of love, and can only be obeyed in and from love. All, however, 
 that is done from love, is also done with freedom. Indeed, no 
 other actions are so free. All things are moved and brought to 
 their own place by their gravity, 2 the light up and the heavy down. 
 But the gravity of the rational soul is love, the first and pro- 
 per motive which inclines the will to its object. That which 
 is done from love, however, is done freely and spontaneously 
 in the highest sense of the words. In as much, therefore, as it 
 is by love that the soul aspires after all good, and as love is the 
 freest movement of the will, it is clear that the soul aspires after 
 
 all good of free will and not by compulsion 
 
 And as the will receives strength from love, and as its power 
 consists in the faculty of freedom, it is evident that the more 
 powerful the will is, the more it is also free." 3 
 
 In this manner genuine liberty springs only from love, just as 
 true love always manifests itself in the form of the most perfect 
 freedom. The fountain of true love, however, is God, the creative 
 and animating principle of all things. " All things brought by 
 creation into existence," says Goch, 4 " have their existence in 
 God more perfectly than in themselves, because in him they have 
 an eternal, in themselves, merely a temporal and created existence. 
 Every created good is in its nature participant and dependent, 
 and the good, which is dependent, has its basis in the uncreated, 
 which is the only self-existent good. This being the case, it is 
 manifest that there can be no good in the human will which has 
 not been produced in it by the Divine will, the sole self-subsis- 
 tent good, and the productive cause of all good in the creatures. 
 Hence St Paul, exulting in the abundance of spiritual blessings, 
 directs the eye of his mind to the Lord, of whose rich beneficence 
 they are all the work, and who divides them to every man seve- 
 
 1 This is expounded, Dialog, cap. 11. p. 141, sq. 
 
 - Ibid. p. 114. 
 
 8 Ibid. p. 114 at bottom, and 145 at top. 
 
 1 Ibid. cap. 21. p. 218. 
 
goch's genekal position as a theologian. 51 
 
 rally as he will. 1 The Divine love awakens reciprocal love in 
 man. Grace kindles the spark in his heart, and thus spontaneous 
 love determines the will, and directs it in a way by which, from 
 his inmost being, man becomes good and like God. It is in this 
 sense that Christ has brought Divine liberty to light. He himself, 
 and faith in him,' have become a principle of freedom to all, and 
 with the fullest right may his religion be designated the religion 
 of liberty. 2 
 
 Nay more, as love is the ground-work of freedom, so also does 
 it include the best guarantee of everlasting life. It is the firm 
 basis of the belief of immortality, in as much as it is imperishable, 
 continuing in the celestial country the same as it was on this 
 scene of earthly pilgrimage, 3 and in as much as a being, who for 
 ever loves, must necessarily for ever exist. This latter reason is 
 conceived with equal cogency and depth, and is expressed by 
 Goch in the following beautiful words : 4 " The love of the ever- 
 lasting good cannot but be itself everlasting. For, as it is the 
 nature of love to desert self and penetrate into its object, and thus 
 to assume its object's form, the party loving becomes assimilated 
 in nature to the party beloved, and hence, as God is that chief 
 and eternal good which the soul loves, so is this love of the soul, 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 219. With which comp. cap. 22. p. 266, 237. 
 
 2 Ibid. cap. 18. p. 168 and 187. At the end of the disquisition, 
 we have : Et sic religio Christiana est ab exordio a Christo sub lege 
 evangelica, libera, in libertate spiritus ordinata. 
 
 3 Dialog, cap. 16. p. 174. 
 
 4 Ibid. p. 174 and 175. 
 
( 52 ) 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 GOCH'S THEOLOGY IN ITS POSITIVE ASPECT. 
 
 THE BOOK ON CHRISTIAN LIBERTY. 
 
 Enough has been said to indicate the general position held 
 by Goch as a Theologian. We have found that the formal 
 principle of his Theology is the Divine revelation in Scripture, 
 and the substantial principle, love, — love, in the first instance, on 
 the part of God, from whose creative power human love emanates, 
 and, in the next instance, love on the part of man, which is 
 the productive cause of all good. In fact, the thought which 
 lies at the basis of all his Theology may be expressed in some 
 such formula as this, — God, who is love, is thereby the source 
 of all good. Or, God is the everlasting and creative love, and 
 man the created, which, having emanated from God, must 
 through God return to him again ; and the means by which this 
 return is effected is Christ's work of redemption leading by love 
 to liberty. This rudimental thought is unfolded in a great 
 variety of ways, both thetically and antithetically ; and it is now 
 time to enter itpon the 'particulars of his Tlieology. 
 
 And here the two principal works of Goch will serve for a 
 thread to guide us, fully exhibiting as they do, the internal 
 organism of his thoughts, and his method of exposition. These 
 two works are the Book on the Liberty of the Christian Religion? 
 and the Treatise, written in the form of a dialogue, on the four 
 
 l Dc libcrtate Christiana or de libertate christians religionis, cdid. 
 Corn. Grapheua Antwerp. 1521. On the literary character of the book, 
 see the sequel. 
 
goch's positive tiieology. 53 
 
 errors touching the evangelical Law} The first chiefly contains 
 GocIls positive convictions on the principles of Christian know- 
 ledge, human nature, and the method of salvation. In the 
 second, we have mainly' his controversy with the false tendencies 
 of the age, and the bulk of his Reformatory views. Inasmuch, 
 however, as in his instance, like that of all genuine reformers, 
 opposition is based upon position, so, consonantly with the 
 nature of the case, we commence with the contents of that 
 treatise which is predominantly positive. This order may 
 also have a chronological foundation, for, although we possess 
 no precise information as to the dates of Goch's writings, still 
 it is probable, that he first settled the groundwork of his Chris- 
 tian convictions, and then proceeded from that to contro- 
 versy. Moreover, the Treatise on the four errors displays more 
 freedom of mind and language, and consequently appears to 
 belong to a riper stage of life, than the more scholastic book on 
 Christian liberty. In fine, account must also be taken of the 
 circumstance, that when old authors enumerate the writings of 
 Goch, the Book upon Christian liberty is usually mentioned 
 first, and as it is likewise a great bibliographical rarity, and cer- 
 tainly known by personal inspection to very few ecclesiastical 
 historians, it seems proper to present its contents in extracts of 
 some length. 
 
 After a short introduction, the work treats in six books, 1, 
 of the interpretation of Scripture as the only sure source of 
 Christian faith; 2, of the human will and its operations; 3, 
 of merit and the conditions on which it depends; 4, of vows 
 and questions connected with them ; 5, of the different positions, 
 as regards moral conduct, occupied by parties who are under 
 vows, and by parties who are not ; 6, of the objections made 
 to Goch's views by Engelbert, a monk of the order of St Thomas. 
 Of these six books, three entire, and part of the fourth, are all that 
 have been preserved. 2 We must not, however, overrate the loss 
 of the rest, because the subjects of them are discussed by Goch 
 in his Treatise on the four errors. The substance of the books 
 before us is as follows. 
 
 1 Dialogus de quatuor erroribus circa legem evangelicain exortis — we 
 shall allude to it in the course of the work. 
 
 2 There stands at the end, Finis horum, reliqua dcsyderamus. 
 
54 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 CHAPTEE FIRST. 
 
 THE AUTHORITY AND INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 
 SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 1 
 
 Scripture, says Goch, 2 is the light of the human intellect, and 
 as the human intellect is enlightened by a two-fold light, so is 
 there also a two-fold Scripture, one natural and another super- 
 natural. The former is philosophy, of which we shall treat in the 
 sequel. The second, which conducts the intellect to the know- 
 ledge of the highest truth, and the will to the love of the chief 
 good, is Canonical Scripture, the rule of the Church general, 
 and the foundation, upon which, as upon an immoveable rock, 
 faith rests. This Scripture is the only one, which, being derived 
 from the highest truth, possesses an incontrovertible authority, 
 from which nothing can be taken away, and to which nothing 
 can be added, so that all other writings are authoritative only in 
 proportion to their consonance with canonical Scripture. 
 
 The place thus assigned to Scripture necessarily gives the 
 greatest importance to its interpretation. Following the lead of 
 the ancients, Goch affirms that there are four senses in Scrip- 
 ture, — the literal, the allegorical, the tropological, and the ana- 
 gogical. 3 Having been vouchsafed by God, for the purpose of 
 implanting in man, faith, love, and hope, and conducting him 
 to salvation, Scripture must necessarily contain all that is 
 requisite for that end. The literal sense teaches the things we 
 most need to know, viz., what has happened, and what is the 
 will, and what the purpose of God ; the allegorical sense, what 
 belongs to the faith through which man is consecrated to life ; 
 the anagogical, what he has to hope ; the tropological, what in 
 virtue of his will, when moulded by love, it is his duty to do. The 
 
 1 The discussion of these subjects forms the contents of the First 
 Boole. 
 
 2 Book i. cap. 1. 
 
 3 lie makes use of the well-known lines : 
 
 Litera gesta docet, quid credas Allegoria, 
 Tropologia quid agas, quid speres Anagogia. 
 
SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 55 
 
 three last are comprehended tinder the name of the spiritual 
 sense ; and thus again the senses of Scripture are essentially of 
 two kinds, — the literal, and the spiritual or mystical. The literal 
 sense, primarily intended by God, is to be found in all those pas- 
 sages, whether historical, prophetical, or didactic, in which his 
 will and purpose are clearly and intelligibly expressed, accord- 
 ing to the plain meaning of the terms. On the other hand, 
 where the letter is somewhat obscure, and the Divine purpose is 
 veiled beneath signs and figures, recourse must be had to the 
 spiritual sense. Where the historical connexion ends, there the 
 door opens to the mystical meaning. A passage may sometimes 
 be explained in four, sometimes in three, and sometimes in two 
 ways ; sometimes it admits of only a single sense. Many have 
 a literal without a mystical meaning, and many a mystical without 
 a literal. 1 
 
 Although, however, this be the case, 2 yet, when a dispute 
 arises among the learned, respecting the import of Scripture, no 
 argument, conclusive for the refutation of error, can be drawn ex- 
 cept from the literal sense, and for this reason, the literal sense is 
 superior to the rest, to which we ought to have recourse only 
 when a passage, if literally interpreted, contains nothing instruc- 
 tive to faith, or useful for morality. Inasmuch, however, as many 
 passages may be explained literally, and yet in several different 
 senses, certain rules of procedure must be laid down for expis- 
 cating which of these is the proper one. It is not indeed possible 
 to give a general rule of decision in such cases, but the following 
 hints may serve for direction. 3 1. That literal sense is the right 
 one, and should be preferred to every other, which corresponds 
 most fully with the signification of the words, either in the pas- 
 sage in question, or in some parallel and plainer passage ; for 
 the Scripture is not so concealed in single texts, as not to be 
 more apparent in others more simple ; and what is doubtful is 
 always to be determined by the sense which results from other 
 and plainer texts. Where there is no plainer text, the connexion 
 
 1 In Goch's opinion, the literal interpretation ought to be applied 
 in almost every case to the Epistles of Paul. De Lib. christ. 1. iii. 
 cap. 2. 
 
 2 Book i. cap. 2. 
 
 Cap. 
 
 a. 
 
50 TUE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 must principally decide. 2. That sense is most to be approved 1 
 which is given by those Catholic teachers, wto live according to 
 the spirit of the Church, and who found their expositions upon 
 Scripture, more than upon natural reason. For it is to be pre- 
 sumed respecting persons living within the Church's bosom, 
 that they are enlightened by the spirit of truth, in a higher degree 
 than others, whereas the light of natural reason, which is the only 
 guide of unbelievers, however acute, does not suffice for an ac- 
 quaintance with the supernatural things which are taught in 
 Scripture. 3. That sense appears to merit the preference 2 which is 
 most consonant with the decisions of the Church, and how much 
 soever an interpretation may seem to correspond with the letter, 
 still it is not to be considered as the true one, if found to be mani- 
 festly contradictory to these decisions. This is especially true in 
 matters of faith, which God has so clearly revealed to the Church, 
 Avhereas in matters of practice, no such decided certainty is attain- 
 able, but much has been reserved for future investigation. 4. 
 Finally, of two meanings we ought to prefer that 3 which has 
 most foundation in sound reason, because God, being the highest 
 wisdom and the fountain of Scripture, is more rational than any 
 man, and in all Scripture proceeds rationally. A passage, how- 
 ever, literally referring to facts of the Old Testament, or to the 
 manifestation of Jesus Christ, admits of being also interpreted 
 allegorically, 4 when it is applied to the mystical body of Christ 
 which is the Church ; morally, when applied to the actions of the 
 members of this body, according to the pattern of the head ; and 
 anagogically, when applied to the end and aim of the actions of 
 these members, which is eternal life. Moreover, a text which, 
 according to the letter, relates to the Church, may likewise be 
 interpreted morally and anagogically. And a passage of moral 
 import is also susceptible of an anagogical application. That text, 
 however, which in its literal sense refers to the state of glory, 
 and which is consequently anagogical, can be explained in no 
 other, inasmuch as it is figurative of nothing else, and can pre- 
 figure nothing higher. 
 
 From these, Goctts principles of interpretation, we see upon 
 the one hand, how necessarily they led to the position he main- 
 
 1 Cap. 8. 2 c a p. 9. 3 Cap. 10. 4 Cap. 12. 
 
SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 57 
 
 tained, viz., that of adherence to Christian antiquity, and to 
 the Church as it was in the days in which he lived. For 
 he sanctions the mystical interpretation of Scripture, which had 
 prevailed from the earliest time, was cultivated by the Alex- 
 andrian School, and was also indispensable for the exegetical 
 defence of the later system of the Catholic Church. And he 
 moreover assigns a special weight to the expositions of orthodox 
 teachers, and requires that Scriptural explanation shall accord 
 with the rule of the Church. On the other hand, we also discover 
 in his principles of interpretation, the commencement of some- 
 thing new and reformatory, inasmuch as he requires, that the 
 Scripture shall be explained principally by itself, gives a decided 
 preference to the literal and historical senses above the mystical, 
 and restricts to the former the power of furnishing arguments on 
 Theological subjects. Still more, however, does the reformatory 
 tendency manifest itself in Goch, when treating of the authority 
 of Scripture, and of its relation to Philosophy. No doubt he is 
 not of opinion, 1 that Scripture, although containing infallible 
 truth, obliges us in every passage in the same uniform way to 
 assent to its statements. In reference to both its doctrinal and 
 moral import, he distinguishes between what is substantially and 
 directly 2 affirmed, and also corroborated by the authority of the 
 Church, and what is only derivatively and indirectly 3 intimated, 
 but has never been settled by the Church in elaborated articles 
 of faith ; and he says with respect to the former class of state- 
 ments, that Scripture binds all believers indiscriminately to 
 assent to them, so that they cannot, without mortal sin, hold the 
 contrary opinion, though held by the greatest teacher. To 
 the latter, however, it does not oblige all without distinction 
 to assent; but any one, without incurring the danger of sin, 
 may maintain the opposite, provided that he does so not from 
 obstinate perversity, but, it may be, from imperfect acquaint- 
 ance with Scripture, and that he is always ready in mind to 
 believe and hold what the Church believes and holds and 
 what the Scripture means. It thus appears that Goch is not 
 a believer in the mere letter of Scripture. Whereas, on the 
 other hand, he decidedly and exclusively maintains the authority 
 
 1 Cap. 11. 2 Principalitcr et directe. 3 Secundarie et indirecte. 
 
58 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 of canonical Scripture, in opposition to what he calls natural 
 Scripture f meaning thereby the assertions of philosophers and 
 modem teachers, who attempt to demonstrate or confute re- 
 vealed and supernatural truth by proofs derived from natural 
 reason. 
 
 To establish this relation more correctly, Gocli discusses three 
 points : l What natural Scripture, or that of the philosophers, 
 is in itself; what authority it possesses; and what weight is due 
 to the teachers who build their demonstrations upon it. 
 
 On the first point, and to distinguish them broadly from the 
 Scriptures, as the book of life, Goch denominates 2 the writings 
 of the philosophers, books of death, and believes himself able to 
 prove them to be so in three ways, and first, by the manner of their 
 production. The writings of philosophers are all produced by men 
 from the reflections of their intellect. The insight, however, which 
 is derived from the natural light of the intellect, without the higher 
 illumination of faith, does not lead to the knowledge of those 
 Divine attributes, which lie beyond the circle of human thought, 
 but only to the knowledge of such as man can learn by inference 
 from himself. By its means, no doubt, we may become acquainted 
 with the working and power of God, and with the Godhead 
 generally, but not with God as the Author of all good ; and 
 hence such knowledge does not serve to guide us, through humi- 
 lity, to the love of God, but, inasmuch as we fancy that it 
 is the reward of our own exertions, it misguides us to pride 
 and vain-glory. Secondly, by their effect. The natural light 
 of the understanding cannot rise above its own limits, and 
 therefore can only regulate 4 that which is congenial with itself. 
 Hence, we find, that although it may enlighten us with a certain 
 knowledge of God, it still leaves the soul cold and uninflamed by 
 the love of him. We must here also consider that wisdom of 
 this sort does not subject its possessor to the law of God. It is 
 consequently opposed to him, and far from imparting life, can 
 lead to nothing but death. Thirdly, by their end and aim. In 
 their pursuit of Divine knowledge, philosophers propose to them- 
 selves no other object to be gained but the knowledge they 
 
 1 Book i. cap. 13—26. - Cap. 13. 
 
 3 Ex eftectu operandi. 4 Ordinare. 
 
SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 59 
 
 pursue, regarding that as an ornament of the mind. Hence, 
 to them the chief good is of an intellectual nature. 1 In this, 
 however, they commit a great error, for they stop short of 
 becoming acquainted with that true happiness which consists 
 in the love of God. They have a sort of knowledge, but no 
 fruition or relish, of that which is good. Accordingly, as the 
 Scripture of philosophers relates merely to the government and 
 happiness of the present- life, and as the present life, compared 
 with eternity, may be called death, so also may the books, which 
 contain this Scripture, be justly designated books of death. 
 
 On the question of the authority of natural Scripture, 2 Goch 
 defines the word authority to mean a positive assurance of what 
 is infallibly true, and for this he requires three things ; a firm 
 foundation for faith to rest upon, convincing evidence, and infal- 
 libility. He then proceeds. These properties belong to canonical 
 Scripture. It rests upon the rock of Divine revelation. It possesses 
 the evidence of knowledge — a knowledge which shall one day be 
 perfect and intuitive in the celestial state, where figures cease, and 
 truth is fully beheld, and which even now, and already here on 
 earth, is perfect in Christ, (for he spake to us not merely as one 
 travelling to a place (viator) in a prophetic way, but as one fully 
 comprehending it (compreJiensor) by intuitive perception) 3 — a 
 knowledge prophetical in the case of Divinely enlightened men, 
 and figurative in that of believers, who sojourn upon earth in the 
 light of faith. It has likewise the property of infallibility, in 
 respect that it cannot be altered by any power, not even by that 
 of God. The writings of philosophers, on the contrary, have 
 but a natural certainty and rational evidence. This consists in 
 the certainty of their first principles. It does not lie so much in 
 that of the inferences drawn ; for into these error possibly may, 
 and often does, creep. But it lies rather in the certainty of the 
 ultimate propositions which are self-evident, or may be recognized 
 from the idea. Take for instance the following : Every con- 
 ceivable thing either does, or does not exist, or The whole is 
 greater than the part. Such is the evidence of natural certainty, 
 and within its limits philosophers confine their enquiries. It 
 follows that their writings can possess only a natural authority, 
 
 1 Optimum intelligbile. 2 Cap. 14. 15. 16. 3 Cap. 15. 
 
GO THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 and not even that in all respects. They possess it in fact only 
 in respect of the first principles which involve their own evidence. 
 What conclusion, however, can natural knowledge possibly draw 
 respecting the truth which transcends nature ? Deduction must 
 be preceded by comprehension. Can a man draw inferences 
 from that which he does not understand ? Just as little as the 
 blind can judge of colour. Accordingly the knowledge of philo- 
 sophers can be true only within the boundaries of their insight, 
 and that reaches no farther than their natural capacity. It has 
 no authority in reference to the things of which we take cognizance 
 in a supernatural way. On the contrary, the attempt to compre- 
 hend naturally that which is supernatural has been the source of all 
 errors and heresies. Hence the writings of all teachers, ancient 
 and modern, however embued with piety and learning, possess 
 no authority of their own, and apart from that which they may 
 derive from reference to canonical Scripture, for as, in the writ- 
 ings of philosophers, natural truth is ascertained by tracing it 
 back to first and self-evident principles and ideas, so in the writ- 
 ings of orthodox teachers, the truth as to what we must believe 
 and hope and love, is recognized by referring to Scripture, the 
 offspring of Divine revelation. 
 
 From this we also learn the weight due to the writings of those 
 teachers who found their demonstrations on philosophy. Goch, 
 sensible of the need, to which we have already alluded, of a 
 sharp opposition to the reigning philosophy, reminds the reader 
 of the pernicious excrescences of speculation, such for instance 
 as appeared among the students at Paris, 1 and were the offspring 
 of a most objectionable distinction between philosophical and 
 theological truth, and then expresses himself substantially as 
 follows : 2 There is but one truth, 3 the canonical and revealed, 
 and so great is its power and authority, that whatever is repug- 
 nant to it, must be regarded as undoubtedly alien and heretical. 
 If, however, in this way, truth and falsehood are absolutely 
 distinct, then that is necessarily false, which is not true, and in as 
 much as philosophical truth is alien to that which is canonical and 
 which alone deserves the name, it ought justly to be designated as 
 
 1 Cap. 17. 18. See above. 
 
 2 Cap. 19. 
 
 Goch, here, of course speaks solely of the province of religion. 
 
SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. Gl 
 
 something false. Even in the days of the Apostles, this kind of 
 error was by false teachers intermingled with canonical truth, 
 and defiled the faith of Christians. If, however, such a thing 
 could happen at a time, when the light of canonical truth beamed 
 forth in all its strength, and when faith blazed with the keenest 
 ardour of love, what may not happen in these times of ours, when 
 faith begins to languish, and the windows of the temple, or in 
 other words, the priests of the Church, contract an earthly 
 dimness, and lose their light. From day to day things are 
 growing worse and more dangerous. Is not canonical truth, 
 both in the doctrines of the faith and the precepts of morality, 
 the subject of so great a divei'sity of sentiment, that opinions, 
 not to call them fancies of the brain, are almost as numerous as 
 heads % Modern teachers contend earnestly, each for his own 
 views, and the fatal consequence is, that truth which is indivisible 
 is divided, and all, following their several masters, exclaim : one, 
 I am an Abertist, another, I a Thomist, another, I am a Scotist, 
 each takes part against the other, for this teacher or that. But 
 can that be good and laudable now, which was so baneful in the 
 Apostle's day ? Or can that be now profitable to the Church 
 which was then its ruin ? Nevertheless, 1 although the world be 
 already filled with writings in which canonical truth is mixed with 
 philosophical vanity, although many are much more intent upon 
 defending their masters than upon defending Christ, the genuine 
 disciples of truth will embrace, and the preachers of it proclaim, 
 no other doctrine, but that which has its foundation in Holy 
 Scripture, and coincides with the canon ; as the Apostle testifies 
 of himself, when he says : " For we are not as many, which 
 corrupt the word of God, but as in sincerity, in the sight of God, 
 speak we in Christ." 
 
 To this no doubt objections may be made. Many allege 2 that 
 the doctrines of philosophy are derived, though not from Divine 
 revelation, still from the light of sound understanding, and con- 
 tend, that as sound understanding is itself derived from God, 
 nothing that emanates from it ought to be considered as alien from 
 him. The answer is : Philosophers have never attained to sound- 
 ness of understanding, and therefore cannot possibly enjoy its 
 
 1 Cap. 20. 2 Cap. 21. 
 
G2 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCn. 
 
 light; and the proper way to argue is as follows: The under- 
 standing has been obscured by the Fall, and cannot be healed by 
 its own natural light. The only effectual remedy is justifying 
 grace, by means of which faith's supernatural light islet in upon 
 it, and restores its health. Hence even that soundness of under- 
 standing which is alleged, is not natural, but is the work of 
 grace, and transcends nature. The Apostle speaks to the same 
 effect in the Epistle to the Romans i. chap. Others maintain 1 
 that the writings of philosophers, although perhaps of no use as 
 respects, faith, may yet be profitable for morals and instruction in 
 virtue. The answ r er is : The good that is in them is neutralized 
 by the evil with which it is mixed. They hide the simple and 
 certain truth with definitions and argumentations, transplant it 
 into the field of controversy, and thereby render it wavering and 
 doubtful. Finally, there are others 2 who consider it requisite that 
 the study of the philosophic sciences should be cultivated in the 
 Church, in order that, at least in the hour of assault and diffi- 
 culty, there may be champions properly qualified for the defence of 
 the faith. But let them who call for this say, whether Catholic 
 truth has ever been so violently assailed, as by those, who, being 
 addicted to philosophy, attempted to comprehend, and argument 
 in a natural manner, upon things that are supernatural, and 
 whether all heresies have not emanated from such parties as an 
 Arius, a Nestorius, aManichaeus, and a Pelagius. On the con- 
 trary, Catholic simplicity has never yet injured the Church, and 
 although there have been some monks, who have done harm 
 to the Catholic faith, as for instance Pelagius, still even these 
 gathered their venom, not from the purity of monastic institu- 
 tions, but from philosophy alone. From what other source, for 
 example, did Pelagius draw the tenet peculiar to him, that it is 
 possible to earn salvation by the exertion of one's own will, and 
 without love? If, however, it be asked, with what weapons the 
 errors which proceed from philosophy are to be combatted ? the 
 Apostle Paul answers, when, in the Epistle to Titus, he depicts 
 the qualifications of a bishop, and requires of him, for the purpose 
 of resisting gainsayers, not a knowledge of all other things, but 
 the knowledge of the faith, or in other words, of canonical truth, 
 
 1 Cap. 22. 2 Cap. 26. 
 
goch's views on human nature, etc. 63 
 
 bidding him refute them by the faithful word, and sound doctrine, 
 Avithout entangling himself hi foolish questions and useless dis- 
 putations. 
 
 Having thus secured the foundation, identical with that from 
 which the Reformation afterward proceeded, he rears upon it 
 the views evolved in the Second and Tldrd Book, and which we 
 sum up as follows. 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 goch's doctrine on human nature and the method op 
 salvation. nature and grace. sin and redemption, 
 human merit and the merit of christ. 
 
 The principles maintained by Goch respecting the rule of Faith, 
 and which we have hitherto delineated, are decidedly opposed to 
 Scholasticism. And not less so are those he held respecting its 
 subject matter, which we have still to develop. The former are 
 antithetical to the philosophism of the reigning theology, the 
 latter to its Pelagianism. The worst offence of Pelagianism was, 
 that it obliterated the distinction, undeniably founded in Chris- 
 tianity, between nature and grace. Hence, Goch sets out with an 
 exact statement of this antithesis, 1 and defines the relative ideas 
 in the following way. All that is given by God to man, in order 
 to his existence, is nature, and all that was given to him in crea- 
 tion, in order to his being good in a natural way, was a gift of 
 nature. On the contrary, all that is given to man in the course 
 of life, 2 in order to make him good, by virtue of supernatural 
 goodness, is grace. In fine, what is given to the elect in the 
 perfect state, 3 in order to their being perfected in supernatural 
 goodness, is glory. 4 " In this manner, the Creator has provided 
 
 Book ii. cap. 1. 2 In via. 3 In patria. < Gloria, 
 
64 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 three things for the purpose of perfecting man. In the first place, 
 he gives him nature, which makes him susceptible of blessedness, 
 then grace, which makes him meet for it, and finally glory, 
 which actually confers it upon him. In the first state, man pos- 
 sesses the natural will, which may aspire after supernatural good, 
 but neither chooses nor can perform it. In the second, he 
 possesses the sanctified will, imparted to him by the Holy Ghost, 
 which both chooses and can do the higher good. In the third, 
 he possesses the will made perfect in goodness, and by virtue of 
 it not only chooses and performs the supernatural good, but can 
 never more desist from loving and performing it ; and this is the 
 true liberty of the children of God. 
 
 Moreover, 1 whatever has been brought into existence by God 
 in creation, is, in as far as it is, nature; and, in as far as it is 
 nature, is also good, because all nature is good. It may be asked, 
 if then all nature be good, whether the evil nature be so too ? for 
 there is an evil nature, and it is well known, both that man is 
 nature, and that he is evil. And yet whatever has been created, 
 must in itself be good. The answer is, evil is of a twofold kind, 
 that which corrupts the goodness of nature, and that by which 
 the sin of its corruption is punished. The first is sin, which God 
 did not create, and which therefore is properly nothing but a mere 
 privation of that which is naturally good. The second is the 
 •penalty appointed for it by Divine justice. This second kind of 
 evil, being produced by God, is for that reason, likewise good, for 
 although it may be bad for the body, which it destroys, it is yet 
 good for the soul, which it heals. Thus it is both good and bad 
 together ; just as a wicked man may be said to be both good and 
 bad, good as man, but bad as a sinner. A wicked man is accord- 
 ingly a perverted good, 2 and violates the rule of the logicians, 
 who aintain, that opposites cannot exist simultaneously in the 
 same subject. 3 Nay it may be asserted generally that the bad 
 never exists without the good, and can only exist in connexion 
 with it ; for if there were nothing good which could be corrupted, 
 there could also be nothing bad to corrupt it. The good which 
 cannot possibly be corrupted is the perfect ; that, however, which 
 
 1 Cap. 2. 
 
 2 Malum bonum. s An echo of the modern speculative Logic. 
 
goch's views on human nature, etc. 65 
 
 can be so greatly corrupted, as in every respect to be despoiled of 
 good, is no longer competent to exist. 1 
 
 Here also it might be objected, 2 If the will belong to the nature 
 of the soul, if nature be of itself good, and the soul, as a natural 
 object, unchangeable, how can the natural will become depraved ? 
 In order to solve this difficulty, a distinction must be drawn be- 
 tween the will as a faculty, and the will as an operation. In the 
 first sense, the will is never depraved, but in the second it is, 
 whenever it proposes to itself a wrong end, or employs wrong 
 means for a good one. As a faculty, the will continues unde- 
 praved, even amidst wicked actions ; but as an operation, it may 
 be corrupted, by taking a wrong bias. 
 
 After having in this way demonstrated the possibility of evil, 
 or sin, within the bounds of what God created good, viz., nature, 
 Goch proceeds 3 to explain the actual origin of evil, and as he 
 virtually traces it back to the will of the creature, he requires to 
 start with a definition of the will. The will, he says, is that 
 movement by which the mind, without external constraint, re- 
 jects or aspires to an object. It is either a power, 4 or it is an 
 operation 5 of the power. As operation in reference to good, it is 
 either natural, or sanctified, 6 or glorified 7 will. The natural and 
 the sanctified wills are both liable to change ; the glorified is ex- 
 alted above all change. When God created man from a clod of 
 earth, and breathed into him a living soul, 8 he, at the same time 
 in and with that, gave him a good will, likewise superadding to 
 it, the aid of natural grace, the natural faculty of freedom. In 
 virtue of this freedom it was possible for man to stand, and retain 
 the goodness of his nature. He might never have deviated from 
 it, if he had so willed. But this willing not to deviate from what 
 is good in nature, man lost by means of liberty. If he had re- 
 ceived the willingness, as he did the ability, not to forsake it, 
 he would not have fallen. The aid of natural grace, however, 
 which God superadded, was merely the pure and unblemished 
 
 1 According to this, Gocli, to be consistent with himself, must either 
 have denied the existence of the Devil, or ascrihed to that Being some 
 good qualities. Of these ideas, however, there is no trace elsewhere in 
 his works. 
 
 2 Cap. 4. 3 Cap. 5, 4 potentia. 5 actus potentiae. 
 6 voluntas gratuita. 7 voluntas glorificata. 8 Cap. 6, 
 
 E 
 
G6 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 freedom of the will, the will's incorrupt rectitude, 1 the soundness 
 and vigour of all the powers of the soul. This was no innate 
 quality of nature, but was superadded by God 2 as a special gift, 
 in order that man might be able, if he were willing, to keep the 
 good things of nature. Hence, when he sinned, man was deprived 
 of those blessings of grace, and wounded in the nature of his 
 original powers, not indeed that their substance was injured, but 
 that their operation was impaired. Disobedience, howevei*, gave 
 birth to two other evils, viz., ignorance respecting what it is a man's 
 duty to do, and inclination to that which is hurtful, with which, 
 as their attendants, error and pain entered, and from which all 
 the misery of the rational nature proceeds. 
 
 In thus inculcating the doctrine of a corruption propagated 
 from the first transgression, or in other words, of original sin, and, 
 unlike most of the Schoolmen, conceiving it not as a mere nega- 
 tion, the want of original righteousness, but as being likewise a 
 positive thing, the wounding of the natural powers, and a bent 
 towards evil, he still holds fast the idea of a caj)hhility of salva- 
 tion, even in the sinful state, and for this capability he finds a 
 basis in freedom. Freedom, says Goch, 3 is, like the power of the 
 human will, threefold. The first freedom, which belongs to the 
 nature of the will as a power, and is the foundation of man's re- 
 sponsibility for his actions, is the will's exemption from constraint, 
 which is found equally in the good and the bad. The second 
 consists in beino; free from sin. It belonged to man before the 
 Fall, but he lost it by transgression, and now can only recover it 
 through the grace of the Mediator. It is not, however, even when 
 recovered, the same as it was before the Fall. Before the Fall, the 
 state of it was, that it did not tempt to sin. Since the Fall, all 
 we can say of it is, that sin does not reign, although appetence 
 and infirmity remain. There is this, however, in the nature of 
 the will (and it is the point of which salvation takes hold), that 
 although injured by sin, it is not annihilated; for, if all that is 
 good in nature were lost and corrupted, no restitution of it would 
 be possible. Finally, the third and perfect kind'of freedom, which 
 
 1 roctitudo. 
 
 2 The donum superaddiium of the Scholastics and the Catholic 
 Doctrinalists. 
 
 3 Cap. 7. 8. 
 
GOCn's VIEWS ON HUMAN NATUKE, ETC. 67 
 
 corresponds with the glorified state, consists in being free from 
 misery, that is, from fear, pain, error, and all possibility of sin- 
 ning. 
 
 But, however unhesitatingly, Goch infers general sinfulness, 
 from the first act of sin, still in every individual he considers actual 
 sin as originating in the co-operation of the same agencies, by 
 whose false position towards each other the first sin was produced. 1 
 Just as in the case of our first parents, there was a concurrence ol 
 three parties, of the enticing serpent, of the woman who yielded to 
 the enticement, and of the man who listened to the woman more 
 than to the voice of God, the same still happens every day in every 
 individual, even though he may have been renovated by grace. 
 The three things are sensuality, which corresponds with the ser- 
 pent, the inferior understanding corresponding with the woman, 
 and the higher understanding which again corresponds with the 
 man. Spiritually these exist in us all, so that no one needs to 
 have an external enemy, but in and of himself has something 
 which assails him, and against which he has to contend in defence 
 of Paradise. The sensual motion, when sin's temptation takes 
 effect, suggests to the inferior understanding, as the serpent did 
 to the woman, that it should gratify the desire which the senses 
 have kindled, and taste its pleasantness in fruition. When this 
 is done, it is the serpent addressing the woman, and if the matter 
 stops with the sensual excitement, a small and venial sin is com- 
 mitted. Moreover if the inferior understanding, which occupies 
 itself with earthly things, takes in the impression, but indulges it 
 merely in thought, without determining to put it into execution, 
 in that case, the woman only has eaten the forbidden fruit, not 
 the man, by whose authority the will has been restrained from 
 proceeding ; and in this case, according to circumstances, the sin 
 may be either venial or mortal. If, however, in fine, the higher 
 understanding be so influenced by the enticement to sin, which 
 it has received from the inferior, as that it resolves to proceed to 
 action, in that case the woman has given the forbidden fruit to 
 the man, whether the act be really committed or not. The 
 understanding, however, of whose determination we speak, 2 is not 
 in these cases to be conceived, as the intelligent faculty 3 of the 
 
 1 Cap. 9. 10. 2 Cap. 11. 5 virtus apprehensiva. 
 
QS THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 soul, but as a faculty not differing from the will, and rather con- 
 stituting with it the soul's undivided nature. For the soul, as 
 consisting of Memory, Judgment and Will, is a type of the Divine 
 Trinity, 1 and as the works of the uncreated Trinity are undivided, 
 so are also the works of the created Trinity. Hence the soul can 
 perform no act in which the three do not co-operate, the memory 
 pourtraying, the judgment controlling, and the will choosing and 
 deciding. 
 
 The result from all this is, 2 that as nothing but good comes 
 from 'God, the cause of all evil can lie only in the created will, 
 whether it be of angel or man, who falls from conformity to the 
 uncreated will of God. For the act of volition on the part 
 of the sinful creature, had no antecedent from which evil could 
 have sprung ; its antecedent being the good will created in him 
 by God, and so equipped, that, if he had so pleased, the creature 
 might have persevered in goodness. Accordingly the pravity 
 of sin has originated from that which is good, and which, with- 
 out ^my cause inwardly constraining it, voluntarily apostatized 
 to evil. Hence both angel and man were justly punished by 
 God, but the angel more severely than the man, because while 
 there was nothing to induce the former to sin, the latter was 
 assailed if not by inward yet by outward temptation. Now, as 
 man has a two-fold nature, 2 one bodily and another spiritual, 
 so is there also a two-fold evil, and as the bodily nature draws its 
 strength and vigour from the spiritual, so also has the evil of the 
 bodily nature originated in that of the spiritual. By man's 
 
 1 Cap. 13 — 18. Here follows a further exposition of the proposition, 
 that man, although merely an analogous and not a perfectly adequate 
 /mage, is yet a true image not only of the Deity generally, but of the 
 Triune God, and in fact not of the Father, Son, or Holy Ghost seve- 
 rally, hut of theTrinity as a whole. This proposition, which the School- 
 men developed on Augustinian principles, does not concern us here as 
 a speculative question, inasmuch as it does not come within the circle 
 of the Reformation. The practical inference drawn from it, how- 
 ever, is of great importance. It was in fact this conception of 
 human nature, as the creature — image of the Trinity, which mainly 
 guarded the Psychology of Goch, John Wessel, and other mediaeval 
 theologians, from the error of conceiving the human powers and facul- 
 ties divided into such fractions as we frequently find them in modern 
 Psychology and Anthropology, and by which the recognition of the in- 
 ward and indivisible unity of the human being is determined a priori. 
 
 2 Cap. 19. 3 Cap 20. 
 
goch's views on human nature, etc. 69 
 
 apostacy from union with the Divine will, the harmony in the 
 powers of his bodily nature was destroyed, and a languor 1 intro- 
 duced which is the lust or the law of the flesh. In this manner, 
 original sin, the kindling spark of sin in all, and with which all 
 are born, has sprung from the actual sin of Adam. In this 
 respect the case with the descendant is the inverse of that with 
 the progenitor. In the latter, corruption originated from actual 
 sin. In the former, it is propagated by sinful concupiscence 
 from parents to children (and is the basis of actual sin). In the 
 former, it proceeded from the soul to the sensuous part. In the 
 latter, it proceeds from the sensuous part to the soul ; the soul, 
 in fact, is not propagated, but implanted in the body already 
 organized. 2 For this reason, it does not contain within it the 
 cause of sin, but catches defilement from sin through the medium 
 of the flesh, which is sin's conductor. 
 
 And now, if the result be, that all evil orignates in the creature 
 and the created will, the necessary reverse will be found in the 
 proposition, that even at first, and still more after the creatures' 
 Lapse into sin, every thing that is good in it is derived solely from 
 God, from Divine grace. Inasmuch, however, as even in the 
 state of sin, man retains the will, as freedom from constraint, and 
 inasmuch as the goodness, which is fhe offspring of grace, can- 
 not be forcibly or mechanically imparted to it, the consequence 
 is, that the recovery of the sinner is always brought about by 
 means of his liberty. This is the point mainly handled by Goch 
 in the sequel of the work, 3 in which he treats of saving and sanc- 
 tifying grace and of their operations. 
 
 He defines grace generally to be 4 the gift of God imparted to 
 man in the course of his development, 5 for the purpose of eman- 
 cipating his will from the bondage of concupiscence, and inflam- 
 ing it with the love of that righteousness, which renders him 
 worthy of eternal salvation. The various definitions given of the 
 
 1 Languor. 
 
 2 Goch, as we hence perceive, was not, as might be inferred from his 
 Augustinian principles, a Traducianer, but a Creatianer. 
 
 3 Book ii. cap. 23—42. * Cap. 23. 5 in via. 
 
70 THE LIFE OF JOIItf of Gocn. 
 
 nature of grace, viz., that it is faith working by love, or love shed 
 abroad in the heart, or the right disposition of the soul becoming 
 the principle of action, or that which co-operates with freedom in 
 order to justification,— are all reduced by Goch to what he thinks 
 the result of the whole doctrine of the Bible, and especially of 
 Paul and Augustine, viz., that grace is that love which is infused 
 by the Holy Spirit into the hearts of believers. For, he says, 
 just as love consists in God's loving himself and us, and in 
 causino- us to love him and our neighbour, so grace consists in 
 the same love, and the reason of its being called grace, is to 
 teach us that we have in no way deserved it, but that it is im- 
 parted to us as a free gift from God. Accordingly grace is 
 not a quality with which the soul is endowed in creation, any more 
 than love; but it is God himself; it is the Holy Spirit deigning 
 so to operate upon the will of man, as that he inclines to good 
 and is delivered from the bondage of concupiscence. The first 
 grace is operative. By it God manifests himself gracious to us, 
 and makes us acceptable to him. The second is co-operative. 
 By it he assists the will, and enables it successfully both to will 
 and to do that which is good. Thus it is that God worketh all 
 in all, for he works, first, the good will itself, and then its action. 
 If in one place we read, 1 that we are justified by grace, and in 
 another, that we are justified by faith, the object is to shew, that 
 we must not suppose that faith of itself, that is faith without life, 2 
 can possibly justify, or any other faith but that which worketh by 
 love. For grace is faith taking its mould in love. 3 It is there- 
 fore evident that grace is love, because even faith is nothing, and 
 has no justifying power, without love. 
 
 The operation of grace 4 produces the sanctified ivill, 5 consist- 
 ing in the supernatural movement of the mind, exempt from 
 force and sin, to will and to do that which is supernaturally 
 good. It is liberty as regards supernatural good, in the degree 
 in which it is vouchsafed by God. For as, in the first creation, 
 God implanted its natural power and liberty in the human will, 
 so does he, in justification, impart to the will of the sinner its 
 preternatural power and liberty, by virtue of which, it is emanci- 
 
 1 Cap. 25. 2 fides informis. 3 fides formata. 4 Cap 2G. 
 
 5 voluntas gratuita. 
 
goch's views on human nature, etc. 71 
 
 pated from the fetters of concupiscence, and freely inclines to the 
 love and practice of righteousness. This liberty of the renewed 
 nature is, to be sure, not like that in the primaeval state of inno- 
 cence, a total emancipation from sin and all temptation to it, for 
 sin still lingers in the flesh. At the same time the dominion of sin 
 is broken, and it no longer injures the man who is dead in Christ, 
 as it once injured him, when, though born in Adam, he was not 
 yet born again in Christ. If in this view, however, primaeval 
 liberty was of a purer kind ; on the other hand, that which is 
 recovered by the believer is proportionally the more exalted ; for 
 by it the nature of the will is not merely released from the fetters 
 of concupiscence, in which, by the sin of Adam, it was entangled, 
 but it is even elevated to the liberty of the Divine love, which is 
 of a far higher species than that of nature. In fact, by virtue 
 of the first freedom, man really loved only himself, and what 
 corresponded with or was required by his nature ; whereas, by 
 virtue of the second, he loves God more than himself, and loving 
 him, resigns himself to his will. In like manner, 1 the power of 
 the natural will consisted in exemption from constraint, and the 
 possibility not to sin, whereas the power of the sanctified will con- 
 sists in a capacity, though not to abstain from all sin, still to 
 ascend to celestial and eternal things. 
 
 To sum up all, 2 there are two principles which regulate men's 
 actions in this life, nature and grace. Nature is the principle of 
 those actions which proceed from the innate powers of man, but 
 which are insufficient of themselves to earn eternal life. Grace 
 is the principle of the actions which are performed by pre- 
 ternatural power derived from God, and by which, man earns ' 
 eternal life. Nature, even when healed by grace, is not for 
 that reason converted into grace, but, even although raised 
 above itself, continues to be nature still : just as a stone, when 
 projected into the air, retains its natural qualities. Nature 
 receives strength from on high, and is clothed upon by grace, 
 but not transformed into it. As the sanctified will, however, is 
 a gift of God, the whole justification and glorification of man 
 are the work of free grace, without co-operation of the natural 
 
 l Cap. 23. 2 Cap. 31. 
 
72 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCI1. 
 
 power of the will, except that the will responds to the Divine 
 influence exerted upon it. 
 
 Goch follows up this treatise upon the principles and motives 
 of human action with a disquisition as to the matter of it, the 
 oppositea of good and evil, and the possibility of things indiffer- 
 ent 1 lying betwixt the two. Many teachers had maintained 2 
 that all the acts of the will, bad as well as good, have their 
 foundation, in as far as they exist, in God, and are for that 
 reason, in as far as they exist, good. It is necessary only to dis- 
 tinguish between the act of the will itself, and the sinfulness 
 adhering to it. Even the evil act of the will is good as an exist- 
 ing thing, and only evil on account of the flaw attaching to it. 
 Others had taught that the operation of the depraved will, like 
 the depraved will itself, is always sinful, because it takes place 
 without God ; that what takes place without God is nonentity, or 
 in other words, sin ; and that sin may be called nonentity, not in 
 respect that it is not wrong action, for even a wrong action is an 
 entity, but in respect that it separates man from the true being, 
 and misleads him to evil, which is nonentity. Others, moreover, 
 had laid down the principle, that all acts of the will are indif- 
 ferent, and in themselves neither good nor bad, but that they 
 become either the one or the other, by reason of their cause, 
 their object, and their aim. Rejecting, all these assertions, 
 and referring to Scripture, Goch deems it necessary to con- 
 ceive the matter in the following form : 3 There are, he says, 
 certain acts of the will so good that they never can be evil, such 
 for instance as acts of love, for the act of love is always good. 
 There are other acts of the will which are always evil, and never 
 possibly can be good, such as the acts of concupiscence ; although 
 here we must recognise a difference of degrees. There are like- 
 wise acts which are both good and bad, according to their several 
 aspects : Such for instance as the acts which are at one and the 
 same time sins, and penalties for sin. For these, in as far as 
 they are sins, and proceed from men, are evil, and in as far as 
 they are penalties proceeding from God, are good. In fine, 
 there are such as arc neither good nor bad, but which derive the 
 
 1 Cap. 32—42. 2 Cap. 32. 3 Cap. 33. 
 
goch's views on human nature, ETC. I'd 
 
 one or other quality from their cause and intention, and such 
 actions are termed indifferent. The name is applied not merely 
 to pure natural functions, such as eating, drinking, sleeping ; but 
 also to such actions as are not so good but that they may be 
 perverted by a bad intention, nor yet so bad but that they may 
 be turned into good by a good intention, such as feeding the 
 hungry, or teaching the ignorant. In saying this, however, we 
 have always in view that perfect goodness which involves some 
 degree of desert, not the goodness which is the mere expression 
 of nature, and is irrespective of God. Even wicked men some- 
 times do good things, 1 such as clothing the poor, and taking part 
 in the Divine worship, but, as these things are not done with 
 good intention, but without faith and love, they are not good ; 
 for without love all virtue is unprofitable, and he only does the 
 will of God, who does it with inward acquiescence. There are, 
 liowever, in the main, three kinds of good works which have not 
 their worth in themselves, but derive it from their intention and 
 aim. 2 In the first place, there are works of Divine worship, 
 such as prayer, attending church, and paying vows. Then 
 there are the works which man performs with a view to his own 
 cleansing and sanctification, such as abstinence, fasting, volun- 
 tary poverty. In fine, there are the works which relate to the 
 good of our neighbour, such as alms-giving, protecting the 
 oppressed, and feeding the hungry. If in these the intention 
 really points to God, they are good. If, however, they subserve 
 a mere temporal and worldly purpose, and are done from hypo- 
 crisy and ostentation, then are they evil and deserving of 
 condemnation. Nevertheless, if the main drift and ultimate aim 
 of human actions point to God, and to fellowship with him as 
 the chief and only satisfying good, then may they have other 
 and subordinate aims, which yet do not render them objection- 
 able, nor detract from their goodness, 3 provided the inferior ends 
 are really subordinated to that which is supreme. 
 
 If by these disquisitions, Goch's chief intention was to lower 
 the exasperated estimate in which all ecclesiastical works, such 
 
 i Cap. 37. 2 Cap. 39. 3 Cap. 41. 
 
74 THE LIFE OF JOTIN OF GOCII. 
 
 as discipline and charitable deeds, were then held, to reduce them 
 to a just standard, to lay the foundation for a sound Christian 
 judgment respecting them, and thereby to prevent all pursuit of 
 holiness by works (as, in point of fact, in the inferences which he 
 proceeds to draw, 1 he specially instances entrance and reception 
 into a monastery, as things which, according to the intention 
 witli which they are done, may be either good or bad, and may 
 even amount to simony and heresy, 2 ) he proceeds, with the 
 saiiK' polemical tendency, to append, in the Zd Booh, a Disquisi- 
 tion upon a kindred subject ; viz., the merit of human actions. 
 Here he has chiefly in view the Pelagianism of the theology of 
 the Schoolmen, especially of Thomas Aquinas and his followers, 
 and, while sharply combating him, he at the same time takes 
 the opportunity, in connexion with the previous subject, of treat- 
 ing the central point of Christianity, viz., redemption through 
 Christ. 
 
 Here too Goch sets out with a statement and refutation of the 
 false doctrine, in order to place the right and canonical one in 
 clearer contrast with it. He says, 3 with evident reference to the 
 Thomists, Many theologians allege that merit is a human action 
 or effort, to which a reward is due on the score of justice, and dis- 
 tinguish three kinds of it, viz., the merit of worthiness, the merit 
 of congruity, and the merit of condignity. 4 The first they assign 
 to a distinguished act of virtue performed with a strong fervour 
 of love ; the second, to an act of virtue performed voluntarily, 
 but with a less degree of love ; and the third, to a free act, 
 prompted by love, and meriting eternal life, in consequence of 
 the connexion established by Divine justice between merit and 
 reward. 5 This doctrine is in many respects contradictory to 
 canonical truth. The first error contained in it reminds us of the 
 Pelagian heresy. For after all other heresies had been extirpated 
 as perverse, that of Pelagius, relating chiefly to practice and 
 behavioui', on which subjects the distinction between natural 
 and supernatural is most difficult to draw, has maintained its 
 ground with many teachers, and spread like a cancer. While 
 
 1 Cap. 42. Conclus. 1—9, 2 Conclus. 9. 3 Book iii. cap. 1. 
 
 1 meritum digni, congrui, condigni. 
 
 The fullest exposition of Thomas' doctrine of Merit is contained 
 in the Summa, Prima Secundae, Quacst. cxiv. 
 
GOCn'S VIEWS ON HUMAN NATURE, ETC. 75 
 
 this heresy derives the merit, which entitles to eternal life, wholly 
 from the natural ability of the will, and leaves nothing at all 
 for grace to do, modern teachers (semi-Pelagian) assert, that 
 Divine grace is also necessary for merit, but in so far err that, in 
 place of ascribing it solely to grace, they allege that the will of 
 man and the grace of God must co-operate for its production. 
 This is the doctrine, to guard against which the Apostle Paul 
 wrote almost all his epistles, especially that to the Romans, and 
 the only wonder is, that men of piety and eminence like St 
 Thomas should ever have embraced it. It involves essentially 
 four errors. The first 1 of these consists in its averring that 
 man's natural will must co-operate with the grace of God in 
 order to his justification. The authority of St Paul rises in 
 unanswerable opposition to such a doctrine, for that apostle 
 teaches that we are justified freely by the grace of God, and 
 that whom God hath fore-ordained, them he also called, and 
 whom he has called, them has he also justified and glorified. No 
 doubt he justifies them, with the concurrence of their own 
 wills, that no one may suppose he can be justified against 
 his will. But grace precedes man, in order that man may 
 will, and follows the act of volition, that that may not be in 
 vain. The second error, which results from the first, is, 2 that 
 merit is an action to which reward is due on the score of justice. 
 This error, which the Apostle Paul likewise combats, presup- 
 poses that the will's own act, which, considered in itself, is still 
 an act of nature, can make God the debtor of man. But no 
 mere act of nature can ever merit eternal salvation, which is 
 something supernatural, and can be earned only by the grace of 
 the Holy Spirit. Nothing good exists apart from the chief 
 good. Where there is no recognition of eternal truth, there 
 virtue is false, even though the morals are excellent. The third 
 error is, 3 that merit receives a certain increase from the nature of 
 the good work to which it belongs. And this is the ground on 
 which St Thomas affirms, that there is more merit in performing 
 a good work with a vow than without a vow, and that one kind 
 of good work is better and more meritorious than another. But 
 the doctrine is quite false, because no act, however good, has any 
 
 1 Cap. 2. 2 Cap. 3. 3 c ap . 4. 
 
76 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 meritorious goodness in itself, and derives its goodness solely from 
 the sanctified will and intention. Besides, a vow cannot possibly 
 confer merit on other actions, because it is not itself meritorious, 
 unless it emanate from the sanctified will, and point to God as 
 its ultimate aim. In that case, however, the merit does not 
 flow from the vow, but from the sanctified will. Moreover, that 
 no one description of good works is more noble than another, 
 but rather that all genuine virtues stand upon a level, results 
 from the unity of the cause which produces them, which is the 
 plenitude of Divine grace, and which never bestows one virtue 
 without another, — from the unity of the actuating principle, 1 which 
 is love, and which either actuates all the virtues or none, — from 
 the inward harmony of the several virtues, — and from the unity 
 of their operation, which is especially evident in the theological 
 virtues, for a man's hope is always commensurate with his faith, 
 as his love also is with his hope, and the converse. Finally, the 
 fourth error is, 2 that an action performed from love, 3 when weighed 
 in the scale of justice, bears some proportion to eternal felicity. 
 This the Scripture contradicts in numerous passages, especially 
 the Apostle Paul in Romans iv., also Christ's parable in Luke 
 xvii. By no actions, however, that may be performed, can man 
 acquire merit to himself; for antecedently he is a debtor to God 
 for all he can do. Hence it is that the Church, being founded 
 upon faith in Christ, relies upon his merits, and believes and 
 hopes for salvation from these. In fact he alone has procured 
 for us deliverance, and justification, and glorification, that God 
 may be praised in all. The true faith, by which we are incor- 
 porated with Christ, consists in believing that our whole salva- 
 tion is based upon his merits. 
 
 This leads Goch to the positive statement of his views, in 
 which, opposing four truths to the four errors above specified, 
 he refers all to the merit of the Saviour, and more fully depicts 
 the saving ivork of Christ? He starts with what appears to him 
 a more correct definition of the idea of merit, 5 to the effect, that 
 it is an action of the sanctified will directed with right intention 
 to God, and accepted by him, and to which, in the fulness of his 
 
 1 formae informantis. 2 Cap. 6. 3 actus chartitate informatus. 
 i Cap. 7—13. c a p. 7. 
 
GOCIl'S VIEWS ON HUMAN NATURE, ETC. 77 
 
 love and mercy, he has assigned the reward of eternal salvation. 
 To constitute such a meritorious action, four things are required 
 — First, that it be an act of the sanctified, as distinguished from 
 the natural will ; secondly, that this act be with right intention 
 directed to God ; thirdly, that it be accepted as meritorious by 
 God ; and fourthly, that it be a virtuous act of such a kind as 
 to qualify for eternal salvation. All these Goch finds purely, 
 perfectly, and originally only in Christ, and hence he represents 
 all merit and all salvation, as procured through him. A fuller 
 exposition of this is given in four propositions, or truths, as 
 follows : — 
 
 First truth. — Merit can be earned only by a party who is abso- 
 lutely free, and in other respects not bound and obliged. 2 But 
 this can be said of no member of the human race, except that one, 
 who is man indeed, but in such a way as to be also by nature, 
 God. This sole freeman among mortals has offered himself in sa- 
 crifice for us, and through him God, who was in him, has reconciled 
 the world to himself. Hence, it is not the merit of our works 
 which makes us heirs of the kingdom of heaven, but the being 
 spiritually born of God, and that Christ has merited for us by his 
 death. The grace of Christ, from whose fulness we all receive, 
 is the sole cause of all our merits. The mode of our salvation, 
 however, 3 is described by the Apostle in Rom. v., where he 
 says, that " As by the obedience of one man many were made 
 sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made right- 
 eous." The sin of Adam was communicated to his posterity by 
 propagation and imitation, and so likewise is the merit of Christ. 
 The propagation of the holy will of Christ, by means of the 
 spiritual birth from God, corresponds with the propagation of 
 the inclination to sin by means of bodily birth; and the imitation 
 of the first transgression by all the descendants of Adam, finds 
 its counterpart in the imitation of the infinite love of Christ by 
 the elect. In forming to ourselves a conception of the redemp- 
 tion instituted by Christ, we must not imagine, that there had 
 existed any such enmity between God and man, as sometimes 
 exists between two hostile individuals, for whose reconciliation 
 it is necessary that, on both sides, friendship should be restored. 
 
 1 Cap. 3. 2 obligalua. 3 Cap. 9. 
 
78 TIIE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCII. 
 
 No : The antithesis is that between righteousness and sin. 
 Hence there is hatred only on the side of sin, and the moment 
 sin is taken away, enmity also ceases. Christ accordingly has 
 reconciled us to God, not as foe is reconciled to foe. The method 
 rather is, that our sin, through whicn we manifested hostility to 
 God, being abolished by Christ's death, we now begin to love 
 him, whereas he never withdrew his love from us, but loved us 
 from the foundation of the world, and even while we were his 
 enemies. In this sense, God demonstrates his love to us by the 
 death of his Son, that we, receiving such a pledge of his love, 
 should, on our part, also be stirred up to love him. In this way 
 the merit of Christ is transferred to us by the appropriation and 
 imitation of his love. We are set free from sin and the Devil, and 
 accepted as sons of God. 
 
 Second truth} — No one can acquire merit in God's sight on 
 the score of justice, unless his love be so great that he fulfils all 
 righteousness (is a sinless saint). There is, however, no such per- 
 son among men, nor ever was, nor ever can be, save that one, 
 who was man in such a way, as to be likewise by nature God. 
 Excepting him, therefore, none can acquire merit on the score of 
 justice. The first requisite for the fulfilment of all righteousness 
 is, that a man shall be moved by no desire or lust, that is, by no 
 temptation to sin. The second, that he shall exercise all love, 
 that is, shall love God supremely and his neighbour as himself. 
 This requires a corresponding power of will, which, in its turn, 
 pre-supposes that we are acquainted with the essential parts of 
 righteousness, and that what we know, fills us with a relish for it, 
 which overcomes every hindrance. In this manner the fulfil- 
 ment of all righteousness essentially requires two things. 1, A 
 perfect knowledge of God, enlightening us as to all that pertains 
 to complete righteousness. For it often happens, that, even when 
 desirous to do the will of God, we do from ignorance that which 
 displeases him, and if it be true that the fuller the insight, the 
 greater also is the love, so inversely every defect of insight will 
 render love defective, and every defect of love impair the practice 
 of righteousness ; for it is very possible to know and believe, that 
 which yet we do not love, whereas nothing is loved, which is not 
 
 1 Cap. 10. 
 
GOCIl'S VIEWS ON HUMAN NATURE, ETC. 70 
 
 known and believed. 1 2. A perfect love of righteousness, by 
 means of which the good, perfectly known as such, so highly de- 
 lights the mind, as to vanquish all obstructions to it. It follows 
 that no one can fulfil all righteousness, unless, while sojourning 
 upon earth, he has already a complete vision of God, as was 
 the case with Christ. 2 For although it is not impossible for 
 God, in virtue of his sovereign power, to impart to a pure man all 
 the strength requisite for the fulfilment of perfect righteousness, 
 still the Scripture does not say of any, save Christ, that this either 
 was or shall be done to him. Many things are possible which 
 never did, and never will happen. Even the perfection of the 
 Apostles does not pretend to purity from sin, and if such be the 
 case with theirs, what are we to think of that of other men? Do 
 not the most enlightened Fathers and potentates of the Church 
 acknowledge that if we say : We have no sin, we deceive our- 
 selves, and that there is no one who does not sin and need 
 forgiveness ? 
 
 Tldrd truth. 3 — No one can acquire merit on the score of justice, 
 to whom it has not been given of the Father. According to 
 Scripture, however, it has been given to none except Christ. The 
 first proposition is correct, because merit does not depend on 
 human working but upon Divine acceptance ; and nothing is 
 acceptable to God, save that which he has willed, his will being 
 the rule and measure of all goodness. The second is also correct, 
 because the boon, if ever given to any, must have been given to 
 John the Baptist, who, according to the testimony of Scripture, 
 was the greatest among all those who have been born of woman. 
 Even to him, however, it was not given, as appears from the fact 
 that he did not walk in the full light of glory, but only in faith. 
 
 Fourth truth. 4 — No one shall receive the reward of eternal 
 salvation who has not performed meritorious acts of virtue, when 
 he had the means and opportunity. And yet no one, whatever 
 degree of perfection he may possess, can merit eternal salvation by 
 works, for that is allotted to virtuous acts only from the fulness of 
 the grace of God. The proof of this is contained in many passages 
 of Scripture, and may be stated as follows : In order that any one 
 
 1 Cap. 11. 2 nisi fuerit simul viator et comprehensor. 
 
 3 Cap. 12. * Cap. 13. 
 
80 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 may merit eternal salvation, it is requisite that there shall be a 
 perfectly equal proportion between the meritorious works which 
 lie performs and the reward which he is to receive. There is, how- 
 ever, no such proportion between human works and eternal salva- 
 tion, partly because terrestrial love can never equal that which is 
 heavenly, and partly because among men on earth there is no 
 just one who doeth good and sinneth not. It is, therefore, neces- 
 sary for all, save Christ alone, to obtain salvation and blessedness 
 in the way of grace. 
 
 The doctrine of redemption through Christ naturally led to 
 an exposition of the duties incumbent upon the subject of it, 
 towards God, man, and himself, or, in other words, to a deli- 
 neation of the Gospel as a moral law. This Goch treats in the 
 fourth Book of his work, of which only a part is preserved. 
 According to its title, indeed, this Book relates principally to vows^ 
 their effects and conditions. The chief thing, however, con- 
 tained in the part that remains, is a discussion upon the nature 
 of the Evangelical law, and as we shall have an opportunity 
 elsewhere of learning what were Goch's views on the subject of 
 vows, we shall here only advert to that general subject. He 
 starts with the assertion, that vows are not mentioned in the New 
 Testament nor in the infancy of the Church. 1 He also shows, 
 however, that from the nature of the Gospel laic, 2 they could not 
 possibly be mentioned. That law is a law of liberty, and at the 
 same time, of love. It excludes every kind of compulsion like 
 that which a vow involves ; otherwise contradictory things would 
 be combined in one and tire same law. It is further, however, 
 a law of the heart, that is, it leaves an option to the will 3 which 
 distinguishes it especially from the Mosaic Law, that having 
 been a law of works, under which the will was in bondage. 4 For 
 the New Testament, given not like the Old, merely to the House 
 of Israel, but to all who are sons of Abraham in faith, and des- 
 tined, when the time of the Old should have passed, to supply its 
 place, is not written outwardly upon tables of stone, but inwardly 
 upon the table of the heart, and is designed not to inspire terror 
 or bridle the flesh, but to enlighten the mind and by the free 
 
 1 Book iv. cap. 1. « Cap. 3. 8 delibcrativae voluntatis. 
 
 4 voluntatis scwitiae, 
 
goch's views on human nature, etc. 81 
 
 bond of affection, to unite the creature with his Creator, who is 
 himself reconciled as Love. And if the new law is set down in 
 writing, in the works of Evangelists and Apostles, still even this 
 record of it, taken by itself, is merely the letter that killeth, and 
 acquires its true significance, only when referred to the love 
 shed abroad by the Spirit of God in our hearts, or, in other 
 words, to the law which neither is nor can be written. 1 In 
 fine, the essential object of the Gospel Law 2 is to emancipate 
 man from all bondage and constraint, and to exalt him to the 
 full liberty of the children of God, and, therefore, all that it 
 requires of him is, with genuine and holy affection, to love God 
 and his neighbour, as it is by this one thing, embracing every 
 ..other, that he is delivered from coercion, and conducted to the 
 glory of the children of God. 
 
 Such are Goch's positive doctrines ; and certainly the reader, 
 whose acquaintance with the Reformation is not confined to what 
 is expressed by the current phrases of the scattering of dark- 
 ness, and the restoration of light, — the reader, who knows its 
 actual form and historical import, will hardly need to have his 
 attention directed to the reformatory elements which these doc- 
 trines contain. Even although the article of justification by 
 faith alone does not shine forth as the governing centre, in the 
 same degree . as was the case with the Reformers, still this is 
 the only one of their peculiar characteristics which is wanting. 
 There is the same conflict with the spurious philosophy of the 
 Schoolmen, and all human authority, waged from the same 
 stand-point of a lively faith in Scripture to which a sound 
 exegesis had given birth. There is the same preference of the 
 practical doctrines of salvation to the predominantly theoretic 
 and speculative predelictions of the reigning theology. There 
 is, in the whole treatment of Christianity, the same spirituality 
 as opposed to the legal views of the Mediaeval Church, and in 
 connexion with this, the same estimate of morality, not by the 
 mere external performance, but by the principle and disposition 
 from which it proceeds. And in fine there is the same hostility, 
 
 1 Cap. 5. 2 Cap. 6. 
 
82 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 ■which we find in the greatest theologians of the 16th century, to 
 that excessive esteem in which the good works and disciplinary- 
 exercises, enjoined by the Church, were held. Neither is there 
 wanting here and there, in the particular exposition of doctrines, 
 that profound sense of human sinfulness, that strict exclusion of 
 all merit, that pious recognition and exaltation of the grace 
 of God procured by Jesus Christ, as the only fountain of all that 
 is truly good and necessary for our welfare and salvation, and 
 that firm conviction, that nature cannot heal itself, but requires 
 an interposition of the supernatural, in order to its deliverance 
 from the unnatural state of sin, and its thorough renovation, all 
 of which specially mark the position of Luther. In like man- 
 ner we have also the same deeply-penetrating and weighty, 
 distinction between Law and Gospel, between the service of 
 works required by the former, and the spirit of love and 
 liberty accompanying the latter, which constitutes the turning 
 point in MelanchthorC s expositions of doctrine. In short, we have 
 all the positive rudiments of the Reformation, and where these 
 exist we cannot but expect that the opposition will in many 
 respects correspond with it. To that opposition we now pass. 
 
( 83 ) 
 
 PART THIRD, 
 
 GOCH IN OPPOSITION 
 
 TO THE 
 
 RELIGIOUS ABERRATIONS OF HIS AGE. 
 
 THE TREATISE ON THE FOUR ERRORS TOUCHING THE GOSPEL 
 
 LAW. 
 
 The most striking feature in Goch , s controversial writings is, 
 that he did not, like his forerunners, and many, both of his co- 
 temporaries and successors, direct his attention merely to single 
 and superficial points, but, consonantly with the deeper impulses 
 of his nature, took into view the action of the Church in its full 
 extent and inmost springs. WicWffe had assailed the mendicant 
 monks, the usurpations of the Hierarchy, and the perversion of 
 the doctrine of the sacraments. Huss had sketched the beau- 
 ideal of the Church, of the Episcopacy, and of the Priesthood, and 
 had held it up before a corrupt Hierarchy and clergy, that they 
 might behold it and blush. It was chiefly against the corrup- 
 tions of the clerical body, and the abuses of indulgence, that John 
 of Wesel took the field. With the fiery eloquence of a prophet 
 Savonarola attacked the moral degradation of all ranks, of the 
 people and the nobility, both in the state and the Church ; while 
 Erasmus poured his pungent wit upon the stupidity and folly, 
 the superstitions and abuses of his age. None of them all, how- 
 ever, penetrated so deeply into the general spirit of the Churchy 
 which was the basis of all the mischief, the root from which the 
 unchristian or anti-christian tendencies grew, or depicted these 
 tendencies with such precision as the silent, calm, and thoughtful 
 John of Goch. Even in his opposition, he is more contemplative 
 
84 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 than active ; and for that reason also all the more penetrating and 
 profound. 
 
 Of this we have a remarkable monument in the Treatise on the 
 four errors touching the Gospel Laic} In the same way in which 
 a celebrated teacher of the Church in modern times 2 supposes 
 that there are four -natural heresies on the subject of Christianity, 
 Goch also recognizes four fundamental errors, which, from the 
 first, have been injurious to it, and, especially in his day, operated 
 destructively upon the Church. The structure of the disquisi- 
 tion in which Goch unfolds these views is as follows. It is com- 
 posed in the lively form of a dialogue, and the conversation is 
 carried on between the Spirit, as the higher power which instructs, 
 and the Soul, as the inferior which receives the instruction. 
 Christianity is conceived as a Law, a view of it, no doubt, rest- 
 ing partly upon a distinction drawn between the Gospel as a free 
 evangelical commandment, and the false external legalism which 
 had become dominant in the Church. At the same time it is 
 connected with the whole stand-point of the middle ages, from 
 which Christianity was viewed and treated as a restrictive, 
 threatening, penal, and disciplinary code, the Old Testament 
 element, in which it was historically rooted, raised to its former 
 ascendancy, and from this spirit a priesthood, a legal Church- 
 system, and even a Theology deduced, which, with an apparent 
 liberty of argumentation, was yet substantially of an external, 
 traditionary, positive, and legal character. In spite of this im- 
 perfect conception of Christianity, we still find Goch penetrating 
 into the inmost essence and sanctuary of religious liberty, and 
 thereby paving the way for the Reformation, the great object of 
 which was to re-open that sanctuary to the nations, who had now 
 attained to their majority. 
 
 In the introduction? Goch intimates the occasion of the Treatise 
 
 1 Dialogus de quatuor erroribus circa legem evangelicam exortis — 
 printed in Walch Moniment. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4. p. 73 — 239. 
 The title De quatuor erroribus was perhaps borrowed from the well- 
 known work of Walter de St Victore, Contra quatuor labyrinthos 
 Galliae, or at least contains an allusion to it. 
 
 2 Schleiermacher in his Glaubenslehre Th. i. s. 137, § 22. The 
 heresies are the Doeetian, the Nazarcean, the Mannichsean, and the 
 Pelagian. 
 
 3 Dialog, p. 75—79. 
 
GOCH IN OPPOSITION TO THE ABERRATIONS OF HIS AGE. 85 
 
 by addressing it to certain friends, who had communicated to 
 him, by letter, that many corrupters of Holy Scripture had gone 
 so far in their perversity as to maintain, " That the liberty of the 
 Gospel Law was, from the very commencement of the Church, 
 confined within the obligation of vows, and limited by these, so 
 that, without the obligation of a vow, the Gospel Law could not 
 be perfectly kept." This error, although buried long ago, was now 
 once more lifting its pestilent head, and Goch was invited by the 
 brethren to disprove it from Scripture. Entering into the pro- 
 posal, he guards himself against saying anything contrary to the 
 decisions of the Church, or to the prejudice of truth, but being 
 desirous in simplicity, and to the best of his insight and con- 
 science, to instruct the brethren, and in order to be able to do 
 this in a sound manner, he undertakes no more than " to draw 
 from the fountain of canonical Scripture, the sole indisputable 
 authority." In so doing, he requires that none of his readers 
 shall find fault, if what he says contradict particular statements 
 of the Fathers, for in such a case, he promises to evince by 
 clear proofs " that they had either erred in interpreting Sacred 
 Scripture, or had not expressed themselves with sufficient accu- 
 racy." At the same time, he also requires that whatever is demon- 
 strated in this way to be true, shall be received with approbation, 
 " Because," says Goch, " what a man says or writes is authentic, 
 not because he who says it is great and honourable, but because 
 what he says is true. For it is Truth alone which everywhere 
 evinces its efficacy and invincible force, and gives authority 
 to all speakers. I shall therefore have not merely to trace the 
 footsteps of the Fathers who have gone before me, but either to 
 find out a middle way between them, when they disagree, or to 
 oppose and refute their statements by sounder arguments. This 
 may not be agreeable to all, still no one ought to treat with con- 
 tempt what is done from love of truth." 
 
 At the commencement of the dialogue* the Soul observes, that 
 both the dignity conferred upon her in creation, and the great love 
 manifested in her redemption, clearly show, that she was intended 
 by her Maker for something great, and connects with this observa- 
 tion a desire to know by what way and means she may, with the 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 79—82. 
 
86 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCII. 
 
 greatest degree of certainty, reach her exalted destination. The 
 Spirit replies, and allows that it is doubtless a very great, and indeed 
 the chief good, for which the Soul was destined ; but that in the 
 destination of the Creator, his wisdom is to be admired no less than 
 his goodness, because, while he made the Soul with a capacity for 
 the supreme and uncreated good, he had associated her with a body 
 of clay, thus combining in her the extremes of dignity and mean- 
 ness ; and that his object in this was that the Soul might be con- 
 stantly mindful of her origin, and feel the value of the blessings 
 of the Creator enhanced by the sense of her vileness. It is proper 
 that the Soul should aspire, with all zeal, after the chief good, but 
 for this, the thing above all else indispensably necessary is the 
 light of discretion. For the attainment of that light, however, 
 it is not requisite to explain the aberrations of all, even of such 
 •as have cast off every restraint. It is sufficient to know the 
 essential errors of those, who, although owning subjection to the 
 Gospel Law, contravene in various ways the true Christian life. 
 There are four kinds of errors, which from the outset have ob- 
 scured the Gospel Law, and greatly disturbed the peace of 
 Christians. 
 
 These injurious tendencies are then characterized by Goch as 
 1. Unevangelical legality, 2. Lawless liberty, 3. False confi- 
 dence in self, and 4. Self-devised, outward piety. Nor is he con- 
 tent with merely exposing the errors, but in every case confronts 
 them with the truth. Thus to legality is opposed Evangelical 
 freedom ; to free-thinking, that respect for law which leads to self- 
 control ; to carnal confidence in self, a deep sense of the need of 
 grace ; and to a Christianity of inventions and forms, its primi- 
 tive and inward spirit of freedom. More or less also he expressly 
 mentions the historical manifestations of the erroneous opinions, 
 in his own and the immediately preceding times. For instance, 
 on the subject of spurious legality and self-righteousness, he refers 
 to Pelagianism, Thomism, and Monachism ; and on the subject of 
 free-thinking, (so at least it appears to me) to the Pantheists, the 
 Fanatics, and Antinomian parties of the age, who had found cham- 
 pions and proselytes even in the Netherlands. In this manner, 
 the Treatise is calculated to furnish us with an excellent thread 
 in our enquiries, on the one hand, into the corruptions of Chris- 
 tian life as manifested in a variety of forms, and, on the other, 
 
LEGALISM AND GOSPEL LIBERTY. 87 
 
 into the remedial and purifying agencies of which many, in a true 
 spirit of reform, already felt the necessity. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 LEGALISM OR THE JUDAISING TENDENCY, AND GOSPEL 
 LIBERTY. 
 
 The fundamental distinction between Judaism and Christianity 
 is, that the one is Law and letter, the other is Gospel and spirit. 
 The nature of Law consists in its being something enacted, in other 
 words, outwardly imposed and entirely positive, which, as a com- 
 manding and threatening power, sets itself in opposition to man. 
 Whereas the nature of the Gospel consists in its being the 
 announcement and offer of the Divine grace practically mani- 
 fested, the effect of which is to implant in man a new spirit of 
 life, by whose virtue, and from an instinctive impulse of liberty, 
 he, as a free agent, fulfils the Divine will. It consists in kind- 
 ling in man a love which, spontaneously and without any external 
 commandment, leads to the fulfilling of the Law. The Gospel 
 inscribes the Law upon the heart, and thereby the Law ceases 
 to be Law by becoming Spirit. Both states, the Legal and 
 Evangelical, rest upon essentially different principles, and are in 
 so far opposite to each other ; at the same time they mutually 
 imply each other, because the Legal prepares for the Evange- 
 lical, and the Evangelical results historically from the Legal, 
 and in so far the two are inseparably connected. In conse- 
 quence of this inward connexion, manifested historically in the 
 economy of the Old and New Testament, the element of the 
 legal frame of mind had been largely transplanted into the sphere 
 of the Gospel, and hence we find from the outset, and through 
 the whole course of the Christian Church, the traces left by a 
 Legal kind of Religion. First of all we meet with Judaised 
 Christianity in its milder and ruder form. Even, however, after 
 this had been absorbed in the sect of the Nazarenes and Ebionites, 
 
88 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 legalism was far from beino; abolished in the Church ; it only 
 manifested itself in new shapes and combinations. Small parties 
 here and there still exhibited a strong legal hue, as, for example, 
 the Hvpsistarians of early Christianity and the Passagians of the 
 middle a^es. The last observed the whole Mosaic Law, and 
 even bound themselves to its observance by circumcision (hence 
 called circumcisi). Even into the great Christian body, how- 
 ever, the legal spirit penetrated in an ever increasing degree. 
 We find traces of it in many of the Fathers, especially those 
 of the Greek Church, who all embraced some philosophical 
 system. By them the way was opened for Pelagianism, which- 
 treated Christianity, as Socinianism and Rationalism afterwards 
 but still more recklessly did, conceiving it to be mainly a doc- 
 trine of virtue, a refined law, little more in fact than a moral 
 directory for salvation. Pelagianism and Semipelagianism sub- 
 sequently, in the course of the middle ages, gave birth to other 
 corruptions of the truth. Nay, during this period, and owing 
 to the conflux of the most heterogeneous influences, the legal 
 views gained the complete ascendancy. In our quarter of the 
 world, where Christianity was now making its greatests conquests, 
 there were powerful but rude nations to be trained ; and Chris- 
 tianity was the sole effectual means by which this could be done. 
 But as the nations were not sufficiently ripe to embrace the 
 Gospel in its spirituality and freedom, it lowered itself to them, 
 and, in the hands of the priesthood, once more became Law, 
 in order to pave the way for a deeper and purer conception of its 
 real nature in a future age. In this manner, about the time the 
 Prophet of Mecca propagated his Law, Christianity had become 
 thoroughly legalized, and had relapsed into the Old Testament 
 form. The Pope was the great pedagogue of the European 
 family of nations, the Church, a rigid schoolmistress, the priests, 
 the executioners of the Law, the monks, the patrons of its obser- 
 vance, and the saints, its loftiest exemplars, having more than 
 fulfilled its utmost requirements. As the basis of the whole 
 system, an Ecclesiastical legislation w r as developed, more orga- 
 nized and comprehensive than even the civil law. So general 
 and all-pervading indeed did the Legal conception of Christianity 
 become, that we find it, although perhaps in a milder form, among 
 the sects who set themselves in opposition to the dominant Church, 
 
LEGALISM AND GOSPEL LIBERTY. 89 
 
 as, e.g., the Waldenses. Relatively this state of matters may be 
 considered beneficial and necessary ; still it was but a chrysalis 
 state, from which Christianity required to emerge, in order freely 
 to expand its celestial pinions, and the thorough regeneration of 
 the free from the legalised Gospel was the Reformation. Before, 
 however, this crisis, could arrive, it was requisite that there 
 should be minds to pave the way for more correct views, and 
 such, in an eminent degree, was John of Goch. He says on the 
 subject with brevity and force : x " The first error is chargeable 
 upon those who contend that with the Gospel Law, bequeathed by 
 Christ to his followers in a few precepts and sacraments, it is 
 necessary, for the attainment of salvation, to conjoin the burden- 
 some servitude of the Law of Moses. They appeal to the say- 
 ing of the Saviour : ' I am not come to destroy the Law, but to 
 fulfil;' believing these words to signify that it is indispensable 
 for every one so to keep the more perfect precepts of the Gospel 
 Law, as not to neglect the less perfect of the Law of Moses. But 
 the Apostle Paul, in those Epistles of profound wisdom which he 
 wrote to the Romans and Galatians, refutes this error with argu- 
 ments of such unanswerable force as to exclude all doubt. For 
 he shews that the observance of the Gospel Law not only suffices, 
 but is the only thing that does suffice, for the highest perfection 
 of the Christian life ; whereas the observance of the Mosaic Law, 
 although obligatory while it lasted, so far from promoting that 
 great end, is, on the contrary, very disadvantageous for it. To 
 this effect, he says to the Galatians : ' I, Paul, say unto you, 
 that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Who- 
 soever of you are justified by the Law, ye are fallen from grace ; 
 for we through the spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by 
 faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any- 
 thing, nor uncircumcision ; but faith which worketh by love.' ' n 
 In opposition to outward legality Goch everywhere insists on 
 inward disposition. No outward works, however strict, can 
 satisfy him, and as he supposes that evil already exists, even 
 though there be only the resolution to commit it in the mind, so 
 does he acknowledge as good nothing which does not come from 
 a sanctified will directed towards God, or that is not done in faith 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 83 and 84. « Galat. v. 3—6. 
 
90 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCH. 
 
 working by love, or, in a word, in love itself. He everywhere 
 opposes liberty to bondage and servitude, and in the liberty, 
 which is the inseparable concomitant, and even the offspring, of 
 love, he recognizes the imperishable spirit of Christianity, that 
 spirit whose source and prototype is Christ himself. With this 
 spirituality, however, he at the same time combines that truly 
 Christian gentleness usually foreign to the stern and exclusive 
 rigour of the legal stand-point. On this subject he very forcibly 
 says: 1 "Many in the Church of God are led, by a variety of 
 motives, to the exercises of the Christian life, and everywhere 
 appear to manifest a great ardour of love, do great, and tell 
 strange things, and promise still greater and stranger, and, if 
 others do not display the same fervour and impetuosity, accuse 
 them of coldness. Hence ensues an intolerable rigour in out- 
 ward customs and ceremonies, and a total want of love towards 
 weaker brethren. They pursue indefatigably the inclinations of 
 their heart, fondly embrace the traditions of men, but are found 
 to omit the weightier matters of the Law. To them applies what 
 the Lord said of the Scribes and Pharisees, viz., that they were 
 hypocrites, and blind leaders of the blind. If we penetrate 
 more deeply into their hearts, we discover that, though they 
 seem in men's eyes to be great, they are not actuated by the 
 zeal of the Spirit of God, but instigated by their own passions. 
 What they do has a show of spirituality, but, there can be no 
 doubt, it has been suggested by flesh and blood. To guard 
 against this evil, he who seeks to do good should be admonished 
 to seek also to do it in a good way." 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 6. p. 99 sqq. 
 
FREE THINKING LAWLESSNESS, EVANGELICAL LIBERTY. 91 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 FREE THINKING DISREGARD OF LAW, AND THE RIGHT AND 
 LAWFUL LIBERTY OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 When we say that, to conceive and handle Christianity as if it 
 were a Law, was the prevailing tendency of the Mediaeval 
 period, we must not be understood to mean, that this was either 
 absolutely dominant or exclusive ; on the contrary, we find a 
 twofold exception. On the one hand, we meet with men of 
 great intellects, and deep souls, who, even under the existing 
 circumstances, became so inwardly imbued with the essence of 
 Christianity, that either wholly, or to a great extent, it ceased 
 for them to wear the temporal form of legalism. This was espe- 
 cially the case with many warm-hearted Schoolmen, such as 
 Anselrn of Canterbury, and with the nobler class of Mystics, 
 such as St Bernard, Hugo de St Victore, and Bonaventura. 
 Besides, the prevailing Nomianism called forth another extreme, 
 viz., decided Antinomianism, or free thinking, which overlooked 
 the amount of Law involved in the nature of the case, and which 
 is the condition of all true liberty, viz., self-restraint. The rudi- 
 ments of this tendency may likewise be discovered in a great 
 variety of forms from the very infancy of the Church. The 
 carnal and fanatical men, who abused or perverted the doctrine 
 of Paul, were, even in the days of the Apostles, treading this 
 path. By certain Gnostic sects the views were digested into a 
 regular system. We have to mention in particular the Mar- 
 cionites, Carpocratians, and Kainites, and in general all the 
 Gnostics who were decidedly opposed to Judaism. But, as is well 
 known, a thread of Gnosticism also runs out into the middle 
 ages, and here an element of Pantheism which fermented power- 
 fully, and in the process overflowed up#h the people, became 
 associated with Phantasticism. Stirred up probably by the more 
 speculative and deliberate Pantheism of the great Scotus Erigina, 
 there arose in the course of the twelfth, thirteenth, and four- 
 teenth centuries, certain Pantheists who departed farther and 
 farther from Deism, and the historical foundation of Christianity, 
 
92 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 and at the same time operated powerfully upon the popular 
 mind. We here speak of David of Dinanto, Amalrich of Bena, 
 and Eckard, 1 who formed, or at least occasioned the formation 
 of, parties and associations among the people for the adoption of 
 these opinions. Such were the Brother-and-Sisterhoods of the 
 Free Spirit, as they were called, and the enthusiasts among the 
 Beghards and Beguines. These sects, setting out with the 
 principle of the natural identity of the Divine and human spirit, 
 and adhering to the proposition that God worketh all in all, 
 averred" that every act of a godly man is good, and, regarding 
 the true life as seated only in the spirit and the heart, pronounced 
 the outward action, even in the case of a mortal sin, to be wholly 
 indifferent. A doctrine like this could not but produce the 
 most baneful effects among the people by whom its deeper mean- 
 ing was not understood. And hence sensible and truly Christian 
 men were imperatively called upon to insist, not only upon 
 liberty, but along with it, upon obedience to law and self-con- 
 trol. In the ranks of those who did so we find the subject of 
 our memoir. He designates as the second fundamental error 2 
 the doctrine of those who make the perfection of Christian life to 
 consist in faith alone (spirit and disposition of mind), and reckon 
 works of faith to be unnecessary, so that they suppose, if they 
 but believe in Christ and possess the gift of faith, all other tilings 
 are lawful to them. To this error, which appealed to the saying 
 of Jesus Christ : " He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be 
 saved," Goch opposes in the first place the authority of the 
 Apostle Paul, to wit, Gal. v. 13 : " Brethren, ye have been 
 called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to 
 the flesh, but by love serve one another." B-elying upon this 
 statement Goch explains the matter as follows : " When the 
 Apostle says : Ye have been called unto liberty, he shews them the 
 benefit of faith infused by the grace of Christ into the hearts of 
 believers ; for it is love alone which induces men to believe in 
 Christ, by liberating tlfg affection of the heart from all created 
 objects, and by giving it, when liberated, its freedom in God. 
 When the Apostle, however, further adds : ( Only use not liberty 
 
 1 On this remarkable man see the beautiful treatise of Dr Schmidt in 
 the Stud, und Krit. 1839. Heft 3. s. 6G3. 
 
 2 Dialog, p. 84. sqq. 
 
FREE THINKING LAWLESSNESS, EVANGELICAL LIBERTY 93 
 
 as an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another,' he 
 shews equally how works of virtue should proceed from faith. 
 ' By love serve one another,' comprehends two things, the 
 inward movement of the will, and the outward performance 
 of the work. To love in the spirit is the movement of the will, 
 to serve another is the performance of the outward work. 
 Love sets the will in motion, and the will, when moved, acts 
 by means of the animal spirits, upon the members of the body, 
 and causes them to perform the outward work. Hence it 
 follows, that, when it has the opportunity of proceeding to 
 the outward work, the will, though actuated by love, does 
 not of itself suffice for the perfection of the Christian life. 
 Whereas, when there is no such opportunity, then must the will, 
 being moved by love, stand for the deed." Accordingly Goch 
 distinguishes 1 a twofold act of the will as requisite for the perfec- 
 tion of the Christian life, one inward, and springing immediately 
 from the will itself, the pure act of faith working by love, 2 by 
 which the soul is assimilated and rendered acceptable to God ; 
 and the other required by law and external, which lias no doubt 
 an inward basis, but which at the same time depends upon other 
 conditions, 3 and makes a man not only pleasing to God, but, for 
 the Divine honour, exemplary to others. This act of faith (which 
 is just the practical principle manifesting itself in life) is no less 
 indispensable for the perfection of the will, in every case in which 
 there is the possibility of carrying its inward movement into out- 
 ward effect ; where this, however, is wanting, the good will is 
 accepted for the deed. 
 
 But, proceeds Goch, 4 In proof of the indifference of the external 
 performance, and of the exclusive value of the interior act of 
 faith for the perfection of the Christian life, some may appeal to 
 the doctrine of the Apostle Paul, who asserts, that all of us, as 
 sinners, come short of the glory of God, and that we are justified 
 by faith alone without the works of the Law a text, which seems 
 to lay the whole weight solely upon the interior act of faith. In 
 respect of this doctrine of free grace, however, the main effect of 
 which ought to be to humble the pride of man in the sight of 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 86. sqq. 2 the fides formata in and of itself. 
 
 3 actus fidei formatae exterior. 4 Dialog, p. 88 — 90. 
 
94 TIIE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCH. 
 
 God, it ought, as Gocli pertinently observes, to be well con- 
 sidered, First, that the Apostle does indeed say, A man is jus- 
 tified without the works of the Law, but he by no means says, 
 without the works of faith : And next, that as the Scripture con- 
 tains contradictions only for superficial readers, but to all who 
 penetrate more deeply into its meaning, constitutes a harmonious 
 whole, other passages ought to be taken to implement the sense. 
 Now, several texts in his Epistles, both to the Romans and to 
 the Galatians, evidently prove, that it is not the Apostle's design 
 to exclude the works of faith from the perfection of the Chris- 
 tian life ; but that, while teaching that man is saved gratuitously, 
 and without the works of the Law, he acknowledges at the same 
 time, how necessary the works of faith are, if there be any possi- 
 bility of performing them. For how could he require of us, To 
 do good and not be weary, if the inward movement of faith alone 
 sufficed ? To will that which is good, is one thing, and to do it 
 is another. By the inward movement of faith, we will and choose 
 that which is good ; by the outward performance of the work, 
 we do it. It is accordingly clear that to the perfection of the 
 Christian life, provided the conditions exist, both acts, the inward 
 and the outward, belong. This has, indeed, been declared by 
 Him who is the truth itself, for He says : " Not every one that 
 saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven ; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in 
 heaven." 
 
 It has, indeed, been alleged, that John of Gcch may himself 
 have partaken the erroneous views of the Free Spirit. 1 Such an 
 allegation, however, could only be founded upon the facts, that 
 he strenuously advocates Evangelical freedom in opposition to 
 Legality, and that in his time, and in the district where he 
 laboured, abettors of the errors of this sect made their appearance. 
 Neither reason, however, is conclusive. Let us bew T are of sepa- 
 rating single sayings of Goch from the connexion in which they 
 stand, and let lis take him all in all, as he shows himself, par- 
 ticularly in the section before us, and it will be evident that he 
 speaks as decidedly against false as in favour of true liberty ; 
 for whereas the former section was levelled against a legalism 
 
 1 Walchii Praefat. ad monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. xxiv. 
 
FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND NEED OF GRACE 95 
 
 that was not free, so the one before us is clearly pointed against 
 a spurious Spiritualizing, and an Idealistic Antinomianism. It 
 is probable that Goch may have found occasion in his neigh- 
 bourhood to express his views. Such an occurrence, however, 
 was more likely to induce a man such as his whole style of sen- 
 timent shows him to have been, to express himself with decision 
 against, than in any way whatever to adopt them. 
 
 CHAPTER THIRD. 
 
 FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GKACE. 
 
 The erroneous tendencies which we have hitherto shown to have 
 been controverted by Goch, are chiefly objective, and rest upon a 
 misunderstanding of what Christianity essentially is, inasmuch 
 as they overlook either the inward liberty of spirit, which it 
 imparts, or the obedience to law, and respect for morality of life, 
 which it involves. There are, however, and from the first have 
 been, wrong tendencies of a more subjective nature, which place 
 man in a false position towards Christianity, as a thing which he 
 ought to appropriate and introduce into life. In so doing, he 
 may either from want of a sufficiently profound acquaintance 
 with God and himself, keep wholly aloof from God in the work 
 of sanctification, and relying upon his own spiritual strength, 
 consider Divine grace as unnecessary, or, even though he may not 
 actually reject it, may yet cherish the supposition, that in order 
 to attain to true perfection of life, he likewise and above all things 
 requires an outward support, an Ecclesiastical obligation, or vow, 
 or some such appliance. The former is the error of Pelagianism, 
 the latter is described by Goch as the error of the Thomists, and 
 of outward Monachism, which is intimately connected with Pela- 
 gianism. It was at the same time the fundamental error of his 
 age, because not only the whole Monastic system, but all the in- 
 stitutions of outward vows and obligations in the Church, were 
 based upon it. We have to consider both tendencies, along with 
 
9G THE LIFE OF JOIEST OF GOCII. 
 
 Gocli's objections to them, first singly, and then in their inward 
 and historical connexion. 
 
 First, as regards Pelagianism, its gradual growth, especially 
 after the time of Origen, in the Greek Church, the distinct traces 
 of it impressed by its author and his friends upon the Western, 
 and its continued operation in both, although generally under a 
 mitigated form, are sufficiently known. We intend here to 
 direct particular attention solely to the manner in which the 
 Pelagian principle affected even the orthodoxy of the Church 
 during- the Mediasval period, and thereby produced extensive 
 and by no means desirable consequences. We shall shew this 
 in the instance of the most influential of the Schoolmen, whom 
 in all his controversy Goch has chiefly in his eye. 
 
 So thoroughly did Pelagianism pervade the whole Church, 
 that even that theologian, who, among all the founders of the 
 Scholastic system, evinces the most decided adherence to Augus- 
 tine, viz., Thomas Aquinas, did not escape its infection. This 
 appears in the radical views he entertained on human nature, 
 and the method of salvation, of which we shall here offer a concise 
 summary. It is matter of notoriety, that in the conflict between 
 Augustine and Pelagius, all depended upon the ideas they 
 respectively formed of sin and of grace. Augustine considers 
 sin as something which, in consequence of the fall of our first 
 parents, has acquired the ascendancy in the whole of their 
 descendants, and he conceives the sinful state, which is the 
 foundation of all actual transgression, in other words, original sin, 
 as something positive, as sensual desire (concupiscent ia) resisting 
 that which is good. This positive conception of hereditary sin- 
 fulness had since the time of Anselm fallen into the shade, and 
 original sin, had come to be represented as essentially negative, 
 as the want of original righteousness (defectus justitiae originalis 
 or justitiae debitae nuditas). Thomas, whose main endeavour 
 in his theology was to collect and reconcile the different state- 
 ments of preceding teachers, adopted both views into his concep- 
 tion of original sin, 1 and taught, that it consists, substantially, 
 in sensual desire, and the consequent disordered or perverse state 
 
 1 He treats of original sin in the Summa prim. sec. Qtiaest. lxxxi. 
 sqq. 
 
FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 97 
 
 of the natural powers, and formally, in the want of original 
 righteousness. In the development of his idea, however, he stated 
 much that considerably abated the rigour of the Augustinian doc- 
 trine. To him original sin is an infirmity, a feebleness of nature 
 {languor naturae). 1 It affects principally the will, and in a less 
 degree, the intellectual faculties. 2 The higher natural endow- 
 ments are not in general destroyed by it, but merely impaired. 
 The state of original righteousness and acceptability to God 
 is all that is done away ; whereas those powers and faculties, 
 which properly constitute human nature, have remained unin- 
 jured. Even the natural inclination to that which is good is 
 lessened indeed, but by no means annihilated ; 3 for just as little 
 as man, in consequence of sin, could cease to be rational, so 
 little could the goodness of nature which pertains to man, as 
 a rational being, or in other words, his natural bent to virtue 
 be destroyed by sin. 4 Original sin is therefore a wound in- 
 flicted upon nature, a diseased and discordant state of it, (vul- 
 neratio naturae) 5 which has been induced by sin, rather than a 
 thorough and positive destruction of it in the sense of Augustine 
 With this conception of sinfulness, the idea formed by Thomas 
 of grace and its operations naturally required to correspond. 6 As 
 original sin has its seat less in the intellectual than in the moral 
 powers, and as, in spite of his sinfulness, man continues a being 
 naturally rational, and intelligent, he is competent of himself to 
 recognize natural truths, even without the higher gift of grace, 
 but to will and to do that which is right, to raise himself 
 from sin to goodness, to be free from sin, to love God supre- 
 mely, and to merit eternal life, — these are things which in 
 the sinful state, affecting as that mainly does the will, are not 
 in man's power without the help of Divine grace, and of this 
 grace he indispensably requires supplies, through the whole 
 course of his sanctification. At the same time, this is done, in 
 
 1 Quaest. lxxxii. Art. 1. 
 
 2 Quaest. lxxxiii. Art. 3. 
 
 3 . Aliud denique, cujusmodi est ipsa naturalis inclinatio 
 ad virtutem, sublatum quidem non est, verum valde diminuitur per pec- 
 catum. Quaest. lxxxiv. Art. 1. 
 
 4 Ibid. Art. 2. 
 
 5 Ibid. Art. 3. 
 
 6 Summa Thcol. prim. sec. Quaest. cix. sqq. 
 
 G 
 
98 TIIE LIFE OF JOnN OF COCII. 
 
 the exercise of man's liberty, and in so far, lie is commanded to 
 convert himself to God. It lies with himself to prepare his 
 mind, because this is done by free will, though, at the same 
 time, not without the help of God, who moves and attracts him 
 to himself. In this manner conversion and sanctification appear 
 as the mutual co-operation of grace and liberty. Inasmuch then 
 as free agency on the part of man is exercised in conversion, 
 there accrues to him some degree of moral merit. 1 It is true 
 that Thomas expressly refers all human merit to the grace of 
 God, 2 as its chief and final cause ; but inasmuch as grace acts 
 through free will, this free agency, actuated by grace, has rela- 
 tively the character of meritoriousness ascribed to it. Man, 
 says he, 3 has the power of meriting something from God, not so 
 much in virtue of the absolute perfection of his righteousness, as 
 by virtue of a Divine appointment, in respect that he obtains as 
 the reward of his working that which God has given him strength 
 to work for. All that is good in man always proceeds from God, 
 and in this sense it is, and not by virtue of his own, but by vir- 
 tue of a Divinely wrought righteousness, that he can stand before 
 Him. Inasmuch, however, as man does by his own free will 
 what it is his duty to do, a merit likewise accrues to him, only 
 there is no equality between the merit that arises from what God 
 works and that which flows from what man wills. The merit, of 
 which the operations of Divine grace lay the basis in man, and 
 which properly earns for him salvation, is a merit of worth or 
 condignity (meritam ex condigno or condigni) ; that, however, 
 which is connected w T ith the free agency of the will in man, is 
 only a merit of fitness (meritum ex congruo or congrui.)* In 
 the former case, God crowns his own work; in the latter, he 
 reckons it proper to reward, according to the immensity of his 
 goodness, what man does in virtue of the strength vouchsafed to 
 him. 5 By the merit of condignity or worthiness, Christ alone, 
 the perfectly righteous being, was competent to earn grace for 
 others. By the merit of congruity, however, this may be done 
 
 1 On this point, sec Summa Theol. prim. sec. Quaest. cxiv. 
 
 2 Quaest. cxiv. Art. 2. 
 
 8 Ibid. Art. 1. * u^j. Art. 3. 
 
 5 Videtur congruum, ut homini opcranti secundum suam virtutcm 
 Deua recompenset secundum exccllentiam suae virtutis. 
 
FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 99 
 
 by one man for another ; l for inasmuch as he who standeth in 
 grace executes the will of God, it is meet and answerable to the 
 friendly relation between them, that God should, on his part, 
 carry into execution the will, which is pointed to the salvation of 
 others. 
 
 It is true that this theory of St TJiomas appears to retain the 
 leading idea of Augustine in the proposition, that all good comes 
 from God, and is the offspring of His grace, and that thereby 
 the Pelagian notion of the merit of human virtue is in a great 
 degree circumscribed, or cast into the shade. At the same time, 
 the conception formed of what is moral is, so to speak, more one 
 of quantity, than of quality, while it introduces into the creed 
 the idea of human merit in the sight of God. As on the one 
 hand, however, this idea is unevangelical, so, on the other, it be- 
 came the point to which, by inevitable consequence, all sorts of 
 corruptions, in the doctrine and Ecclesiastical system of the Medi- 
 aeval period, fastened. In fact, it formed the basis upon which 
 the errors on the subject of good works, their merit, and even 
 supererogatory merit, the treasure of them possessed by the 
 Church, and the indulgences derived from it, were all sub- 
 stantially founded. For this reason, as the Reformation in a 
 doctrinal point of view may be designated a fundamental and 
 thorough confutation of the principle of Pelagius, and conse- 
 quently a restitution, in all its strictness, of the contrary principle 
 of Paul on the subject of free grace, conjoined with a deeper ap- 
 prehension of the real nature of the moral sentiment, it follows, 
 that an essential preparative for the Reformation was to wage 
 controversy with the Pelagian opinions in all their forms, and 
 smooth the way for those deeper-views which look less to the 
 degrees of good and evil, and more to the inward disposition 
 of mind from which they spring. And this is precisely what 
 we find in Goch. It is the sense of the following delineation 
 which he gives of the nature of the fourth error : " It is main- 
 tained," he says, "by those who, considering the inward act 
 of volition, and the outward one of performance, as both neces- 
 sary to the perfection of the Christian life, nevertheless do not 
 blush to assert, that the natural powers of the free will, or the 
 innate capabilities of human nature, are perfectly sufficient for 
 1 Quaest. cxiv. Art. 6. 
 
100 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 them, without the aid of Divine grace. Such was the Pelagian 
 error which, although rejected by the Church and disproved by 
 many texts of Scripture, is found to send forth various rank shoots 
 in the minds of many, who do not ascribe the practice of virtue 
 to Divine grace alone, but trust more than is right to the innate 
 ability of man." Against these views also, Goch appeals first 
 to the testimony of the Apostle Paul, as one who had learned 
 from experience that human nature, though originally destined 
 for the highest felicity, yet, by reason of its immeasurable distance, 
 cannot reach that height, unless some means be employed for 
 elevating it from its debasement to its lofty and glorious destina- 
 tion, and this means is called grace. If this, however, be true of 
 nature, even in her state of integrity, it is true of it much more 
 in the state of corruption, and manifold entanglement with sin. 
 At the same time, Goch does not here confine himself to the 
 authority of the Apostle, but seeks to evince the truth of the fact 
 by intrinsic reasons, and in his exposition brings forward the fol- 
 lowing thoughts. 1 There are two chief powers which perform 
 the highest mental operations, and these are the intellect and the 
 will. It is known, that every power of the soul has its own pro- 
 per object, by which it is induced to exercise its peculiar action, 
 and by acting on which it is perfected. The proper object of the 
 intellect is the highest truth, just as that of the will is the chief 
 good. Inasmuch, however, as no power is brought into activity 
 by its object, unless it be influenced by it (informatur) ; and as no 
 power can be influenced by its object, unless the object is appre- 
 hended by the power, just as sight is not rendered active except 
 by the perception of colour, nor hearing except by the perception 
 of sound ; and in fine, inasmuch as the power cannot apprehend 
 the object, unless that be proportional to its capacity of appre- 
 hension, it follows, that even the essential powers of the soul, if 
 they are to exercise their appropriate functions, must be influenced 
 by their peculiar objects, and that for this end, there must be a 
 corresponding relation between the poivers, and their objects. Be- 
 tween the reason, however, and its object, which is the highest 
 truth and the chief good, such a relation does not exist ; for the 
 object here is of an infinite compass, whereas the natural facul- 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 93 sqq. 
 
FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 101 
 
 ties of the intellect and the will are finite and circumscribed. The 
 finite is manifestly insufficient for the infinite, nor can any natural 
 faculty rise above itself, for no agent can exceed the limits of its 
 innate principle of action. It is clear, therefore, that the chief 
 powers of the soul cannot, of their own ability, perfect themselves 
 in their proper action, but must be qualified for this by the acces- 
 sion of another infinite power, and this we call the assistance of 
 grace. 1 
 
 The same fundamental thought, which is true, although it 
 overlooks the fact that there is an infinity also in the mind, and 
 that this requires the matter to be more deeply conceived, is 
 brought forward by Goch in another way. He says, 2 " As the 
 yearning of the mind must depart from and rise above itself, 
 in order to unite with God in love, so also must the intellect 
 of man ascend above itself in order to attain to the knowledge 
 of Him. Neither of the two faculties, however, can, in the 
 strength of its own proper bent and motion, go beyond the bounds 
 of its nature, because nothing is greater and stronger than itself; 
 and, therefore, if either of them is to reach its highest and ulti- 
 mate exercise, which is of a supernatural order, it must derive 
 some other assistance from without, and that is grace." 
 
 In fine, Goch illustrates the matter by the following proposi- 
 tions, 3 which at the same time speak for his strict supernaturalism, 
 as contrasted with the rationalistic speculation of the Schoolmen. 
 " The will of the Christian stands in a necessary relation to that 
 which he ought to do, as does his understanding to that which 
 he ought to believe. The will is under obligations to keep the 
 Divine laws, even against its own inclination and natural desire ; 
 but because the natural bias of the will is to keep nature as it is, 
 the observance of the Divine commandments consists in forsak- 
 ing nature, and if it be enjoined, in even devoting it to destruc- 
 
 1 Elsewhere (Epist. Apolog. p. 21) Goch expresses the same thing 
 with great precision, " As that which is black cannot by means of 
 blackness become white, nor that which is cold, by coldness, warm, but 
 as the black object must put off the quality of blackness in order to he- 
 come white, so must mere obligation be removed from works of virtue, 
 if these are to be reckoned among the works of the children of God 
 which ai-e freely done. " 
 
 2 Dialog, p. 95. 
 
 3 Dialog, p. 95 — 9. 
 
102 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 tion, as was shown in the case of the martyrs. The task of the 
 intellect is to assent to the revelations made by God respecting 
 articles of faith, even when contrary to the natural apprehension 
 of the reason. Inasmuch, however, as to believe the articles 
 of faith necessary for salvation, is not done by the natural ap- 
 prehension of the intellect, seeing that the intellect can believe 
 nothing supernaturally, but can only apprehend those objects 
 whose truth is evinced with evidence or probability from rational 
 grounds, a thing which, as to many of the articles of faith, can- 
 not be done, it is evident that the intellect needs to obtain other 
 helps for the performance of this saving act, and so it does. The 
 light of faith is vouchsafed to it, or, in other words, the aid of 
 grace. The result of all accordingly is, that the natural capacity 
 of man, although competent for natural functions, 1 is yet, without 
 the help of grace, altogether incompetent for those supernatural 
 acts, which render the soul meet for the life of eternal blessed- 
 ness. 
 
 To this exposition, which, conformably to the plan of the dia- 
 logue, proceeds from the higher principle, that is the Spirit, the 
 Soul raises the following objection 2 : — Inasmuch as God, who 
 is the Creator of all things and the contriver of nature, has made 
 nothing in vain ; so, neither can any of nature's movements and 
 tendencies be vain. If, however, the aspiration of the mind 
 be, by its own natural movement, directed to the chief good, as 
 being its proper object, and yet it be asserted that it cannot of 
 itself attain to the apprehension of this object, is not this assert- 
 ing that there is something natural, which is vain and nugatory ? 
 For to aspire after an object and yet not to be able to attain it, 
 what is that but to labour in vain ? Unless, therefore, we cha- 
 racterize the natural movement as in itself nugatory, we must 
 inevitably affirm that nature is competent, of her own ability, to 
 compass the object towardswhich she naturallyaspires. TheSpirit, 
 recognising in this objection a proof of the continued operation 
 of the Pelagian error, proceeds with its instruction as follows : 3 
 " There are many persons in the Church of God who, with a 
 
 1 The justitia civilis, as the Augsburg confession expresses it, in 
 contrast with the justitia spiritualis. 
 
 2 Dialog, p. 97 and 98. 
 
 3 Dialog, p. 99—108. 
 
FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 103 
 
 deep interest, and an apparently strong and ardent zeal, endea- 
 vour after that which is good. With the most scrupulous exact- 
 ness also, they perforin whatever is prescribed to them. Here, 
 however, the great task is not merely to do what is good, but to 
 do it well. Man's natural ability is sufficient to do many good 
 things, but the opinion that it also suffices to do them well 1 is an 
 aberration from the purity of the Christian faith. Of this we 
 have a proof in the Epistle to the Galatians, when the Apostle 
 says, " I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me ;" as if he said, 
 The virtuous actions which prove the life of grace to be in me, 
 I perform, not in the strength of nature and in as far as I am 
 a man, but in the strength of the grace which Jesus Christ 
 ministers to me, as one of the members of his body. I do not 
 live as one actuated by the motions of nature. But Christ lives 
 in me, and by the power of his spirit incites me to the service he 
 has ordained. The truth of the text, however, will be self- 
 evident to the man who rises above the flesh and contemplates 
 things in the light of God, who is truth. The whole appetence 
 of the intellect, whether it be natural or supernatural, tends to 
 conjunction with that which is its origin, viz. God ; because in 
 Him alone it finds its rest and consummation. This con- 
 junction, however, does not consist in their being locally 
 approximated to each other. It is rather the concord of two 
 appetences, 2 the Divine and the rational, each conformed as 
 much as possible to the other ; for, as God does not descend 
 from heaven, in respect of his unchangeable essence, but in 
 respect merely of what he communicates, and of the influence of 
 the goodness emanating from him, so the rational spirit does not 
 rise above itself to union with God by change of local position, 
 but by virtue of its conformity with him ; 3 and hence the more 
 it resembles God, the more it becomes united to him, and the 
 more unlike him it becomes, the more it is separated from 
 him. All things are moved by their weight. The weight 
 of the soul, however, is love, for the soul tends to the object 
 to which it is drawn by love. The nature of love, however, is to 
 steal the loving party from himself, and translate him into the 
 
 1 The justitia spiritualis. 
 
 2 duorum appetituura. 
 
 3 Per habitum deiformem. 
 
lOt THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 object of his love ; l and the effect of this translation is, that the 
 loving party assumes the form of the beloved. Hence the 
 ground of the resemblance which unites the soul to God, and 
 of the dissimilarity which separates it from Him, is to be sought 
 in the appetence (desire or aspiration) of its intellect. 2 And 
 here we find the point of right discrimination. For, continues 
 the Spirit, 3 appetence (appetites) is excited in various ways, and 
 by these we may distinguish the different kinds of love. It pro- 
 ceeds either from a natural, or from a psychical, or from a 
 rational impulse. The natural is a consequence of the disposi- 
 tion of natural qualities, such as the desire for rest in the state 
 of weariness. The psychical is the consequence of the percep- 
 tions of sense, such as the desire of looking upon a beautiful 
 object. The rational is the consequence of a free judgment of 
 the understanding, and of a free choice of the will on the part of 
 the subject, and it is of the last that we speak. It is wont to 
 move the soul with a twofold love, corresponding with the two 
 kinds of it which form the soul's gravity ; for within thee, there 
 is the nature imparted in creation, in virtue of which thou hast a 
 weight of natural love, and by means of it art raised aloft to the 
 Supreme good. But within thee there is also grace superadded' 
 to nature, by the lovingkindness of thy Saviour, and hence a 
 weight of Divine love by means of which thou forsakest, and art 
 raised above thyself, and, in total self-oblivion, absorbed into the 
 Divine good pleasure. These two kinds of love, as they both 
 attract us to the highest good, are often confounded with each 
 other, so that acts which proceed from the one are ascribed to 
 the other. It is clear, however, that nature, so long as it 
 cleaves to itself, and is the object of its own love, cannot grow 
 more like to God, nor be drawn nearer to Him. For if nature 
 be enamoured of herself, she can never possibly be ameliorated 
 by the mere transmutation of herself into herself; 4 and in vain 
 efforts of this sort many wear themselves away. The criterion 
 
 1 In amatum transferre. 
 
 2 The appetitus rationalis. 
 
 3 Dialog, p. 104. 
 
 4 Quia mini appetitus ponclere amoris in amatum transferer, si time 
 natura est ipsura amatum, in quod appetitus appetentis transfertur, 
 manifestnm est, naturam ex translatione sui ipsius in se ipsam non 
 mekorari, ac per hoc Deo similiorem, quam priua fuerat, non fieri. 
 
FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 105 
 
 of true love is to be found in the effect which it produces. For 
 as the nature of love is to steal the lover from himself, and to 
 transfer or transmute him into the beloved, we see its nature 
 from its prints. Hence he who loves the flesh becomes carnal ; 
 he who loves nature, natural ; and he who loves God, Divine, 
 by being conformed to his image. Whenever, therefore, the 
 aspiration of the soul ascends upwards to the chief good, atten- 
 tion ought to be paid to the object which it is conscious oi 
 seeking. For if a man seek the chief good, because it is good, 
 useful, and in many ways pleasant to himself, it is clear that he 
 is seeking it more as a merchant than as a lover. If, however, 
 his aspiration is set in motion by the gravity of the Divine love, 
 — if it goes beyond, and rises above self and nature, and in total 
 self-oblivion dissolves in God, who is its object, so that, careless 
 of its own advantage or delight, it seeks only the will, glory, and 
 pleasure of its object, even at the expense of its own disgrace, — 
 then it is love of the sort which takes on the Divine form, and 
 approximates to the Divine likeness ; and this is true love, for 
 only true love leads the lover in all things to seek the pleasure of 
 the beloved object, and to desire nothing but to be loved in 
 return. It is also manifest, however, how foreign this is, and 
 how superior, to any work done by man, and in the hope of 
 meriting the Divine acceptance. For in performing such works, 
 a man does not rise above himself. On the contrary, true love is 
 its own reward, finds its satisfaction in itself, seeks nothing else 
 and nothing more ; And this love (such is the virtual, although 
 unexpressed result of all that has been said), is not the offspring 
 of nature, which it far transcends, but emanates from Divine 
 grace, which raises a man above himself, and invests him with the 
 Divine nature and strength. For only when a man is attracted 
 by God, and receives his form from Him, can he be transformed 
 into Him, and become like Him, or, to express it in the words 
 Goch uses in a subsequent passage 1 : " Because all goodness is 
 essentially in God, and none in the creature, except by partici- 
 pation, and because goodness is not produced in any subject by 
 participation, unless the essential Good, by the free operation of 
 its infinitely gracious will, offer itself to be participated in, it 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 122—21. 
 
10G TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 follows, that there can be no movement of love in the created 
 ■will which has not been kindled there by the love of the Creator. 
 For as iron or wood cannot burn, unless they are first ignited 
 themselves, so neither can the created will exercise the act of 
 loving until it has been kindled by the love of God, as is clearly 
 taught by the Apostle John : ' Herein is love, not that we loved 
 God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be a propitia- 
 tion for our sins.' It is from this Divine love that reciprocal 
 love is produced, and rises in still increasing degrees till the con- 
 summation of the life of bliss. For that consists in a continual 
 and never ending influx of the Divine goodness into the created 
 will, and in a continual and never ending reflux of the created 
 will to God in the fulness of love. " 
 
 CHAPTER FOURTH. 
 
 FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 With the Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism transferred so 
 largely into the system of the Schoolmen, Monachism, especially 
 in its later stage of growth, was strictly and intimately connected. 
 Both were based upon the principle of the meritoriousness of 
 human actions in the sight of God, and upon the idea, more or 
 less coarsely conceived, of self-righteousness and righteousness by 
 works ; and if it was the doctrine of Pelagianism respecting Chris- 
 tians in general, that they required to merit their salvation from 
 the Divine justice, by moral worth and virtuous deeds, Mon- 
 achism only went a step further, under the persuasion that, by a 
 stricter practice of virtue, and a more specific engagement to it, 
 a higher degree of holiness and of saving merit might be attained, 
 nay, that it was possible to achieve a superabundance of it, which 
 might be transferred to the account of others. This view, how- 
 ever, though essentially connected with the general legal tendency 
 of the middle ages, was not held uniformly by all the Monastic 
 orders, or by all the members of any one. Even in the domain 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 107 
 
 of Monachisn, we find a more profound and more purely Chris- 
 tian conception of the matter. In particular, a somewhat general 
 difference, or rather opposition on the subject, seems to have ob- 
 tained between the Dominicans and the Aagustinians. The Domi- 
 nican order had taken its rise in a decided contradiction to the 
 prevailing heresy of the 12th century. Indeed its main object 
 was to impugn and extirpate it. The heretical parties of that 
 and the following age, however, advocated predominantly the 
 principle of religious sentiment, and an evangelical frame of 
 mind, and hence the Dominican order necessarily sank more and 
 more into the principle of outward observance and legality which 
 prevailed in the Romish Church. This, accordingly, is the posi- 
 tion which we find them occupying in the course of the 15th 
 century, and the small number of honourable exceptions among 
 the preaching Monks, especially those imbued with a deeper mys- 
 ticism, such for example as Tauler, count for little against the 
 whole spirit of the order. In general we find among them a stiff 
 resistance to all progress, a firm adherence to the received forms 
 of doctrine and to Ecclesiastical use and wont ; And possessing, 
 as they did, the most influential places both in the Church and 
 Universities, and above all, having the Inquisition at their dis- 
 posal, they enforced their principles with dreadful violence against 
 all who differed in opinion from themselves, especially the advo- 
 cates of change. Wherever any symptoms of life ; liberty, or aspira- 
 tion above the common appeared, as for example, in the instances 
 of John of Wesel, Reuchlin, and subsequently Luther himself, we 
 see theDominicans engaged most zealously in opposition. Certain 
 localities, however, were in a particular manner the seats of their 
 spirit, as for instance, Cologne in Germany, which thereby became 
 a fortress of obscurantism against all the efforts of progress. On 
 the other hand, we find in the Augustinian order, and in the 
 canonical life akin to it, a deeper and more heartfelt piety, 
 imbued with the spirit of its honoured and much read patron 
 Saint, that mighty defender of the doctrine of grace, the principle 
 of faith, and, as the fruit of it, of the spirituality of the Chris- 
 tian life, against all and every species of righteousness by works. 
 Less entangled with the interests of the dominant Ecclesiastical 
 system, they lived principally for calm contemplation, and the 
 sanctification of their own souls, and cultivated, bv a sort of 
 
108 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 traditionary right, a gentler and more spiritual Christian mind. 
 We have vouchers for this, in the canon Thomas a Kempis, and 
 the two celebrated Augustinians Staupitz and Lather. In par- 
 ticular the letters of Luther in the early period of his life, breath- 
 ing as they do a deep sense of religious want, and an earnest 
 evangelical spirit, manifest that, in this respect, there were, withm 
 the ranks of his order, and in various quarters of Germany, not 
 a few who shared his sentiments. To this tendency, which spread 
 also to the Netherlands, and there led to the institution of the 
 more unfettered association of the Brethren of the Common Lot, 
 John of Goch belonged. He was Superior of the Canonesses of 
 St Augustine, and in so far connected with the order. At the 
 same time, he exercised the utmost independance of mind in 
 forming his opinion respecting the worth of the Monastic life, 
 its obligations and exercises, and hence we also find in him 
 another instance of hostile opposition to the Orders and their 
 views. Often, and especially in the work which expressly treats 
 the subject, he had defended the principle of evangelical freedom. 
 A Dominican, however, with whom we are otherwise unac- 
 quainted, had taken the field in reply, and against him, as we 
 have already said, Goch wrote a special Apologetic Epistle} But 
 
 1 This Apologetic Epistle, declarans quid de Scholasticorum scriptis 
 et religiosoruni votis et obligationibus sit censendum et tenendum, is 
 printed in Walch Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1 p. 1 — 24. It was 
 occasioned by an unknown (Walch's preface p. xviii.) Preacher Monk, 
 who had written against the liberty of the Christian religion, and, as is 
 probable, specially against Goch, either with reference to his Treatise 
 upon the Four errors, or to his work on Christian liberty, or to both 
 (Walch in al. 1. p. xix.) together. The Epistle, of whose literary 
 merits we shall afterwards speak, was, in all likelihood, the last pro- 
 duction of Goch's pen. It is fouuded entirely upon his former works, 
 contains nothing substantially new, and merely furnishes us with a 
 proof that he continued stedfast in his convictions till the close of his 
 life. As it makes no addition to our knowledge respecting him, a short 
 statement of its contents, and a few citations from it, may here suffice. 
 The whole occupies only twenty-four pages, and is divided into two 
 parts : The first, p. 1 — 14, treats of Scripture, the source of our 
 knowledge of the true Christian faith, and of its relation to the state- 
 of lat r I achers ; the second, p. 14 — 24, treats of the principle 
 of Christian liberty. The first, in the manner already known to us as 
 Goch's, combats the pretensions of theologians and philosophers, in as 
 fir as they claim an independent authority, settles the exclusive autho- 
 rity of canonical truth, and shows its inward harmony, in the instance 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 109 
 
 even in his work upon the four errors, and towards the close of 
 
 of several of the authors of the Bible. It rejects with peculiar vehe- 
 mence Aristotle, with his accomplices {cum suis complicibus), and St 
 Thomas, of the latter of whom the very commencement thus speaks. 
 " Who then is this Thomas Aquinas, whose writings, even though 
 founded on mere philosophic reasons, we are to believe in contradiction 
 to canonical truth ? Is he not frequently contradicted over the whole 
 Church? Are not his writings refuted with solid arguments by many 
 teachers of the greatest celebrity and highest rank, and sometimes in- 
 dignantly derided '? Is it not the opinion of many that they diverge so 
 far from sound doctrine, as not even to be worth refutation." The 
 second part, founding upon Scripture, especially upon Paul, and also 
 James, then shows the opponent, who seems, like all Dominicans, to 
 have gone very far in defending the principle of Monastic rigour and 
 legalism, that the Gospel law from the very first was established upon 
 the freedom of the mind, and had never been properly observed by any 
 one, except in the exercise of such freedom. All theologians, it is hero 
 said, both ancient and modern, agree in asserting that human actions 
 possess merit or guilt, only in as far as they are voluntary. So that 
 nothing is esteemed good or bad unless it be freely done. A man may, 
 therefore, bind himself by a thousand vows to do what is good, and yet 
 no desert will ever arise from such an obligation, unless the good to 
 which he binds himself is done with freedom of mind. That the evan- 
 gelical law can only be rightly observed in freedom, may also be infer- 
 red (Epist. apol. p. 19. 20) from the fact, that it is a law of love. No 
 one can love unless his will be free. Love is a thing which you can- 
 not possibly force a man to do, although you may possibly force him to 
 exercise abstinence, or to renounce his property, or to obey rules. It 
 is the offspring of the will and of grace, and these are the most free of ail 
 principles of action ; for whatever is done from love, cannot but be freely 
 done. Whoever would fulfil the Gospel law, must of necessity love. 
 " But how shall the constraint of obligation be converted into freedom? 
 Black cannot be changed by black into white ; and cold cannot be 
 changed b}' cold into hot ; but black must divest itself of blackness, in 
 order to become white, and even so must constraint be done away from 
 the works of virtue, if they are to be reckoned among the works of the 
 children of God, which are performed with freedom" (Epist. apolog. p. 
 21). The works of faith are not for that reason all good works, but 
 only such of them as are done from love, for only in these does faith 
 show itself to be living. A man might perform works of abstinence 
 for a hundred years, in the strength of a vow, but not from love, or with 
 a view to come nearer to God, and yet these would neither demonstrate 
 his faith to be living, nor yet help to perfect it. On the contrary, it would 
 still be justly reckoned dead and inefficacious (Epist. apolog. p. 22). 
 Abraham pleased God, not because he was willing to perform the cut- 
 ward act of sacrificing his son, but because, in obedience to the Divine 
 command, he conformed in all respects to the Divine will. Tor as the 
 will of God is the rule and measure of all that is good in the will of the 
 creature, tl^e goodness of the latter is recognized by the degree in which 
 
HO TITE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCn. 
 
 it, he had expressed his views. lie designates 1 as the fourth 
 radical error the opinion of those, who reckon the twofold act of 
 faith, hoth that of inward volition and that of outward operation, 
 as essential to the perfection of the Christian life, but, at the 
 same time, presumptuously maintain, that to execute the more 
 perfect works of the Gospel law, the liberty of the spirit, inwardly 
 influenced by faith, is insufficient, and that the obligation of a 
 vote is likewise indispensable, so that, reducing Evangelical free- 
 dom to an obligatory servitude, they are not far removed from 
 Pharisaieal superstition," and he then adds : " This is the error 
 of our age, and it coincides in many respects with the Pelagian 
 heresy. For the Pelagian heresy absurdly affirms, that grace 
 is not requisite for the virtuous works which lead to eternal life, 
 the natural power of the will being quite sufficient for them of 
 itself; while, if we carefully examine the error, we will find that 
 although avowing the necessity of grace for such works, it is 
 nevertheless wedded to the notion, that grace is not, in and of 
 itself, sufficient for them. For to say that, without the obligation 
 of a vow, the precepts of the Gospel, in their highest perfection, 
 cannot be observed, is to say in substance, although in different 
 words, that the grace of the Evangelical law is not, in and of 
 itself, sufficient for that end." These few words distinctly show 
 the connexion of Monachism and of the whole Ecclesiastical system 
 of votes and obligations with the principle of Pelagianism. No less 
 pertinent, however, are Goch's observations at large upon this 
 fourth error, and it is here, especially, that he displays in perfec- 
 
 it corresponds with the former. Obedience is not that action of the will, 
 in virtue of which, it controls the other powers of the soul and mem- 
 bers of the body, hut it is the action which the will, under the impulse 
 of grace, produces from itself, and in virtue of which, it is wholly re- 
 solved into the good pleasure of God, both with refei'ence to the object 
 and with reference to the manner of the volition. He who does 
 that which is commanded in a mere outward manner, but without the 
 inward assent of the will, only appears to obey, but does not in reality 
 perform the work of obedience. This depends wholly on the free 
 acquiescence of the will. He who does that which is commanded, 
 against his will, exhibits only a picture of virtue, not virtue itself. 
 (Epist. apolog. p. 23. 24.) All of this, however, shows that under the 
 evangelical law nothing acceptable to God can be done except in the 
 strength of that liberty of love with which Christ has made us freo. 
 (Ibid. p. 24.) 
 1 Dialog, p. 109. 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. Ill 
 
 tion that logical skill, which is always more or less at his com- 
 mand. 
 
 Inasmuch as Tlwmas Aquinas, the main representative of 
 the mediaeval theology, is here chiefly in view, it will be requisite 
 to give a concise summary of his doctrine, on the subject of 
 voivs, the foundation on which Monachism is built. 1 He de- 
 fines a vow to be a kind of promise, by which a person, quali- 
 fied by age and other circumstances, engages of his own free 
 motion to perform to God some eminently good work 2 which is 
 wholly in the power of his will. According to Tlwmas, a vow is 
 an act of worship 3 implying the highest degree of obligation, not 
 merely on account of the promise made to the Divine Majesty, 
 but for the sake of the great advantages which it brings. Its 
 effect is to give to certain good works a higher importance and 
 greater merit with God, than they would otherwise possess. To 
 the completeness of a vow, three things are necessary, viz., consi- 
 deration, a purpose of the will, and an actual promise, by which it 
 is consummated. The very nature of a vow, however, involves 
 that it shall always relate to some work of special excellence, 4 as 
 all things generally necessary for salvation are. Every vow points 
 ultimately to God, and determines respecting such matters as are 
 t be done to his honour and in obedience to his commands, and in 
 so far it is an act of worship and religion. This applies also to 
 the vows which are made directly to the Saints or to Ecclesiastical 
 superiors ; for in such cases the party comes under an engage- 
 ment to God, that he will fulfil what he has promised to the 
 Saints or to the prelates. Inasmuch, however, as a vow is an 
 act of worship, that which is done in consequence of it, is more 
 commendable and meritorious, 5 than that which is done without 
 it. 6 It may indeed seem, says Thomas, that the reverse is the 
 case, because whoever acts without a vow is in a less degree under 
 constraint, the act, which is the subject of the vow, being often 
 
 1 Thomas treats of this subject in the Surama Theol. Sec. sec. 
 Quaest. lxxxviii. in 12 Articles. 
 
 2 aliquod excellens bonum. 
 
 3 latriae actus. 
 
 4 a melius bonum, as Thomas often designates it. 
 
 5 laudabilius et magis mcritorium. 
 
 G This is the main question, and is discussed by Thomas, especially 
 in the 1th Article of the 88th Quaestio. 
 
112 tiif life of jonN of cocn. 
 
 performed with a depressed and sorrowful mind, and because tlio 
 vow lias no peculiar power to strengthen the will. When more 
 closely weighed, however, this is not the case. Rather does it 
 appear, that there are three respects in which it is better and 
 more meritorious to do a work in consequence of a vow, than to 
 do it otherwise : 1st, Because a vow is an act of Divine worship, 
 and as such stands at the head of the moral virtues. An act of 
 a higher order of virtue, however, is always better and more meri- 
 torious than that of a lower. In this sense, fasting or abstinence 
 acquires a superior worth by its connexion with a vow, because, 
 under this assumption, it pertains to the worship of God, and is a 
 sort of sacrifice offered to him. 2d, Because he who vows to do a 
 thing and does it on that account, subjects himself to God in a 
 greater degree than he who does the same thing without a vow 
 For he subjects himself to God, not merely in respect of tin 
 action, but in respect also of his liberty to perform it, seeing that 
 after the vow, it is no longer in his option to act otherwise. 
 Finally — Because the effect of a vow is steadfastly to confirm the 
 will in that which is good ; but to do a thing from a will con- 
 firmed in what is good pertains to the very perfection of virtue, 
 just as in the opposite case sinning from a hardened mind is an 
 aggravation of the sin. 
 
 To this whole statement of the doctrine of vows, and of the 
 Pelagian views upon which, in his conviction, it "was founded, 
 Goch opposes the following dilemma i 1 " A vow is either an act 
 of nature or an act of grace. If it be an act of nature, caused 
 by the natural bent of the will to good in general, it follows' 
 that grace is not of itself sufficient for the perfect observance of 
 the Gospel law, for if it were, no act of nature would require 
 to be superadded. If, however, it be said, that a vow is an act 
 of grace, produced by an inclination of the will to good in a more 
 special sense, in so far as the will is moved thereto by grace, it 
 again becomes a question, whether this motion of grace is neces- 
 sarily required to the completeness of the vow or not. If it be 
 not necessarily required, it may then be inferred, that a vow 
 may be sound and complete without grace, and that is faDing 
 once more into the old error. If on the contrary grace is neces- 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 110-113. 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 113 
 
 sarily required for it, this is to admit that a vow, made without 
 the movement of grace, is not a right and perfect vow. If, how- 
 ever, it be not right neither is it obligatory, and if it be not 
 obligatory, he who makes, cannot be bound to perform it, and 
 yet every monk is compelled by the Church to observe his 
 vow, while it is clear that many of them have in no degree 
 been moved by grace to take it upon them and engage in 
 the monastic life, but by the most unworthy motives. Never- 
 theless the Church looks upon their vows as good and valid, 
 and merely subjects them to a stricter discipline, or to penance 
 in another monastery. It is therefore evident that, (in the 
 view of our opponents) the motion of grace is not necessarily 
 required for the soundness and completeness of a vow. Ad- 
 mitting, however, what they declare to be their doctrine, that 
 grace is necessary, and that the will of the party making it is 
 by this grace confirmed in that which is good, as the author of 
 the error 1 openly maintains, then another question emerges, to 
 wit, Inasmuch as grace is related to the will in the same way as 
 light is to the object on which it shines, and must therefore put 
 something into the will, just as light puts something into the 
 illuminated object, — further, inasmuch as that which grace puts 
 into the will is nothing else but a certain conformity of the will 
 of man to the will of God, — and inasmuch as, finally, this con- 
 formity daily grows by increase of grace, until the susceptibility 
 of the will is heightened to the utmost, so that it becomes worthy 
 to hear that word of truth, " enter into the joy of thy Lord," 
 having reached the highest pinnacle of love, and being wholly 
 transformed into the beloved object, — all this being the case, 
 
 1 Inasmuch as Thomas teaches generally that nothing good is done 
 by man, not even that which he performs in the exercise of a free 
 agency, without the impulse and operation of grace (v. Summa Theol. 
 P. ii. 1. Quaest. 109, where, among other things, it is said, Liherum 
 arbitrium ad Deum converti non potest, nisi Deo ipsum ad se conver- 
 tente . . . nihil homo potest facere nisi a Deo moveatur ; et ideo, 
 cum dicitur homo facere, quod in se est, dicitur hoc esse in potestate 
 hominis, secundum quod est motus a Deo), he must necessarily also 
 maintain that the higher good which is wrought by means of a vow, 
 although proceeding from free will (dicitur enim aliquis proprio voto 
 facere quae voluntarie facit. Sec. sec. Quaest. ix. — xxviii. Art 1), is yet 
 at the same time an operation of grace, which strengthens and con- 
 firms the will in this higher good. 
 
 II 
 
114 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCIT. 
 
 how can grace, by means of a vow proceeding from it, ever pos- 
 sibly put into the will of him who takes it, more than it pnts 
 into the will of him ayIio, without a vow, and in the exer- 
 cise of Gospel liberty, gives himself up, according to the per- 
 fection of the Gospel, to serve the Lord all the days of his 
 life ? Opponents will answer, A vow puts into the will of him 
 Avho makes it a steadfastness in that which is good, such as is 
 not in the will of him who does not make it, appealing to the 
 Avords of their master, 1 who says, " The will of the party who 
 vows is thereby strengthened in that which is good, and is 
 to a certain degree assimilated to the confirmed state of the 
 blessed." But that this argument is unsound we may certainly 
 convince ourselves. 2 If any such confirmation actually took 
 place, it would behove to be, either the confirmation of the pre- 
 destinated, or that of the sanctified, or that of the blessed, for 
 there is no other kind of confirmation but these. But in the 
 first place, it cannot be the confirmation of the predestinated, 
 for this excludes, if not the possibility of sinning, yet the possi- 
 bility of a total lapse and final perseverance in sin, seeing that 
 the ultimate purpose of God cannot be frustrated. A vow, how- 
 ever, imparts no such confirmation ; on the contrary, the most 
 distinguished doctors openly affirm, that many who have taken 
 the monastic vow Avill be subjected to damnation, and no man 
 of sound mind will venture to affirm, that all monks Avill be 
 saved. Just as little can we ascribe to parties taking a vow 
 such a confirmation of the will in Avhat is good, as is found in 
 the sanctified. For this would presuppose an indissoluble union 
 of the human will with the will of God, in consequence of the 
 continual presence of the Divine grace. Such, however, is not 
 the necessary effect of a voav, for monks can very easily fall from 
 virtue and become most abandoned sinners, a fact which needs 
 no proof, because the life of many of them is so manifestly 
 
 1 Thomas Aquinas, who is here also meant, says in his Summa Sec. 
 sr c. Quaest. lxxxviii. Art. 4, Ad primum ergo dicendnm, quod sicut non 
 posse peccare non diminuit libertatem, ita etiam necessitas finnatae 
 A-oluntatis in bonum non diminuit libertatem, ut patet in Deo et in 
 beatis. Et talis est necessitas voti, similitudinem quandam habens cum 
 cojijirmatione beatorum. 
 2 Dialog, p. 114—124. 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 115" 
 
 detestable, that it is proverbially said, "What a monk ventures 
 to do the devil himself would blush to conceive." Least of all, 
 however, do we find, in those who take vows, the stability of the 
 blessed, for their condition involves the impossibility of sinning, 
 in consequence of the presence of the chief good, with which 
 the capacity of their will is so completely filled, and its desire so 
 perfectly satisfied, that it can never possibly be diverted from it. 
 No one, however, will affirm that this is the case with monks 
 who, daily, and in all manner of ways, commit sin and indulge 
 in the embraces of harlots, more than in spiritual enjoyments 
 and Divine delights, a fact too obvious to need any proof. It is, 
 accordingly, evident, that a vow confers no special stability in 
 what is good, that might not equally be ensured without it, by 
 him who, of the free motion of grace, daily consecrates himself 
 to the service of God ; nay more, that in general a vow does not 
 at all promote advancement in what is good, and does so only 
 perhaps in particular cases, just as chains and bonds may some- 
 times be serviceable to one who is infirm. 
 
 The Soul, starting with another saying of Aquinas, 1 objects to 
 this argumentation, that the compulsion of a vow may facili- 
 tate religious acts to man, in the same way, for instance, as the 
 Jewish people were driven by threats and terrors to the obser- 
 vance of the law, whereas he who is absolutely free finds it more 
 difficult to persevere in what is good. To this, the Sjnrit 
 answers, and most justly, that that is not genuine good which is 
 done in such a way, 2 because genuine good can only proceed 
 from liberty, and liberty receive its direction only from love. 
 " It is clear," 3 he says, " that they, whom it is necessary to com- 
 pel, do not love the good which they have promised to do ; for 
 only that which is done from love is voluntary in the highest 
 sense. Neither can any man, by such an obligation, assimilate 
 himself in a higher degree to God, for, as God does nothing by 
 outward compulsion, but all by the free determination of his will, 
 and as that which forms the distinction between the rational 
 creature and all others is, that his acts are not subjected to ne- 
 cessity, it is manifest that the actions of men are all the more 
 conformable to those of God, the more they are the result of 
 
 1 In the Sumina contra gentiles. 
 2 Dialog, p. 118—122.. 3 Dialog, p. 120 and 121. 
 
HG THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 liberty. . . Yea, even grace does not destroy the natural 
 freedom of the will, but perfects it, and, by means of love, resolves 
 it into a higher freedom, for as the love which it imparts to the 
 will is greater and stronger than that which is the offspring of 
 nature, in the same measure also is the liberty which is the off- 
 spring of grace superior to that of nature. What emanates 
 from love is in the highest degree free." 
 
 This amounted substantially to a refutation of the opponents, 
 but as he had here to do with the fundamental error of his age, 
 Goch traces it in all its roots and ramifications, and as he takes 
 the opportunity to say much that is weighty in a Reformatory 
 view, we shall accompany him a little further. The Soul sub- 
 sequently starts 1 the objection, that, even as respects the ordinary 
 profession of the Christian religion, there is an obligatory vow in 
 Baptism, which the Church not only permits to be made, but 
 likewise holds every one bound to fulfil. The Spirit 2 answers, 
 and draws a distinction between the Baptismal and the Mo- 
 nastic vote. The vow of faith at baptism is essential to salva- 
 tion, as the observance of the commandments also is during 
 life. Christ requires that we shall confess him before men, and 
 the Apostle designates, as a constituent of the faith that saves, 
 not only the assent of the heart, but the confession of the 
 mouth. But, whatever is necessarily required of us, the grace of 
 the Lawgiver also gives ability to do. Hence it comes to pass, 
 that the freedom of the will, as it is not lessened by the obliga- 
 tion to the law of the Gospel, so neither does it suffer any dimi- 
 nution by the vow of faith, which ought to be absolutely volun- 
 tary. At the same time the vow of faith in Baptism is a testi- 
 mony of the spiritual communion and friendship of the baptized 
 party with the Church ; for there can be no better sign of an 
 inviolably holy connexion, than such an irrevocable vow. That 
 vow pertains also to the nature of the Sacrament, 3 for the Sacra- 
 ments are distinctive marks, by which, not only in the hidden 
 judgment of God, but even in the public judgment of the 
 Church, believers are separated from unbelievers. In order to 
 this, however, it is requisite that there shall be an inward sus- 
 
 1 Dialog, p. 152. 2 Ibid. p. 153 sqq. 
 
 3 Dialog, p. 156. 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 117 
 
 ceptibillty of mind for the reception of grace, and also an external 
 confession of the mouth. In Baptism, in fact, these are requisite 
 in a higher measure than in the other Sacraments, because it 
 is the one which first incorporates the party with the Church. 
 Now all this, shewing the Baptismal vow to be advantageous and 
 necessary, is not applicable to the Monastic vow, and hence it is 
 evident, that the two are essentially distinct, and if to the Bap- 
 tismal vow there be annexed the promise, that to them who 
 receive Christ, power is given to become the Children of God, 
 it is difficult to see how any promise of higher perfection can be 
 connected with the Monastic vow. For supposing that that did 
 confer any degree of perfection, it would necessarily have the 
 effect of harmonizing the human will more completely with the 
 Divine, in which, in fact, the whole supernatural perfection of 
 the soul consists. That this, however, is not the case we have 
 already shewn. The Spirit further distinguishes 1 in a vow two 
 things, the oblation and the obligation (oblatio et obligatio) of 
 the will to that which is good. The oblation of the will consists in 
 the act by which, under the influence of faith, and of its own free 
 choice, it devotes itself to the performance of virtuous actions, and 
 this is not essentially different from the volition (volitio) of good 
 itself. Such oblation, however, proceeding, as it always does, from 
 the impulse of grace, is to be found in no will which is not, and in 
 every will which is, actuated by grace. It is, therefore, nothing 
 special in the will of him who makes the vow, but is common to 
 every truly virtuous will. The obligation of the will, however, con- 
 sists in its binding itself, of its own accord, by a promise or vow, 
 to do such and such an action. In such a case, as the obliga- 
 tion can be undertaken equally by a sinner and a virtuous person, 
 no motion of grace takes place, but merely a determination of the 
 will and the understanding, and consequently no higher perfec- 
 tion is imparted to the will of the obligant, as the matter belongs 
 only to the jurisdiction of the Church, which does not judge of 
 things hidden. 2 
 
 All this is essentially hostile to vows, shewing, as it does, in 
 
 1 Dialog, c. 13. p. 159—161. 
 
 2 De occultis non judicat ecclesia. 
 
118 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 every aspect, that they are unnecessary for the perfection of the 
 Christian life, and contribute nothing supplemental to what is, of 
 itself and in general, good. Inasmuch, however, as the public 
 opinion and moral judgment of the whole Christian world, during 
 the middle age, rested on the supposition of the superior perfec- 
 tion of the Monastic life, and the peculiar excellence of monkish 
 virtue, and, moreover, as the Monastic life had its ultimate and 
 binding foundation in the vow, and what the vow imparted, this 
 controversy was of great and far-reaching consequence. It might 
 appear, indeed, as if in waging it, Goch was in contradiction 
 to himself as well as to the Church ; to himself, as being the 
 Superior of a monastic institution, and to the Church, which 
 had instituted, or at least sanctioned, Monachism and vows. He 
 was obliged, therefore, while denying their necessity, to admit, 
 that in the whole system, there was something at least relatively 
 good and profitable. It behoved him to shew, that he did not 
 attack Monachism itself, but only the error, superstition, and 
 corruption connected with it ; and this he does, expressing him- 
 self on the subject of the relation of Monachism and vows to the 
 Church, and on the conduct of the Church in many of its outward 
 ordinances in a very remarkable way. " The Churchy" he says, 1 
 11 is the mother of believers. In mothers, however, abundance of 
 affection is more frequent than strength of intellect, 2 and hence 
 in some acts of the Church we may observe more fervour of 
 piety than light of discretion. Thus it is that the Church mili- 
 tant, just because she is militant, may sometimes err in insight, but 
 she never errs in affection, for there can be no doubt, that what- 
 ever she ordains for her children, she labours to regulate with 
 motherly love. And so it is with the Monastic vow, which, although 
 it may not be calculated to confirm the will in that which is good, 
 miiy yet afford the opportunity of doing it, for, just as many things 
 are forbidden, not because they are themselves bad, but because 
 they may possibly give rise to that which is so, so likewise have 
 many things been ordained, not because they are of themselves ab- 
 solutely good, but because they may furnish to many the occasion 
 
 1 Dialog, c. 14. p. 161 and 165. 
 
 2 In matribus autem plus solet abundare aftectus, quam vigere intel- 
 lcctus. 
 
FACTITIOUS AISID GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. Hi) 
 
 of something better. Thus the silence enjoined upon monks is 
 not an absolute good, or better than the opposite. On the con- 
 trary, to speak profitably, at the right time, and in the right 
 place, is better than in such circumstances to be silent ; and yet 
 silence has been carefully imposed upon monks, because it may 
 be the occasion of much good. For the same reason has the 
 Monastic vow been ordained by the Church, not as if it were a 
 great good in itself, 1 but because there are many weak and 
 neglectful persons to whom it may become the occasion of some- 
 thing better. Even so the Saviour said, ' Compel them to come 
 in, that my house may be filled,' not that by means of forcible 
 constraint his Church might be furnished with good members, but 
 that something good, which cannot be otherwise than voluntary, 
 might be produced by the compulsion." This idea is further 
 developed by Goch in the ensuing meditations. 2 The will, that 
 gives itself up to a carnal freedom, must sometimes be forcibly 
 restrained from the works of the flesh, by depriving it of the 
 opportunity of committing them. No doubt this does not trans- 
 form the will, but it may give it occasion to change its bias, as 
 for instance was the case with the prodigal son. Just, then, as 
 the Divine goodness does not, by the visitation of adversity, force 
 the perverse will to that which is good, but seeks, by the pressure, 
 to elicit a voluntary good from it, so does the Church impose 
 upon monks the obligation of their vows, not so much to compel 
 them to do good, as rather thereby to draw from them a good that 
 is spontaneous. This is said, not to underrate the ordinance of the 
 Church, but only to obviate error and superstitious pride. For 
 as one thing is salutary for the sick, and another for the whole, 
 one thing for the weak and another for the strong, so has our 
 Mother the Church, making the exigencies of individuals her 
 own, 3 studied to provide all with incentives to piety. With this 
 view, she has ordained the Monastic vow for the weak and 
 
 1 Yea, he who does good only under the spur of a vow, from fear of 
 punishment and without love, rather commits sin. Dialog, cap. 22. p. 
 229, Religiosus faciens actus voti sui, ad quos se obligavit ex timore 
 poenae, transgressoribus oppositse, nullo eum adjuvante amore justitise, 
 peccat. 
 
 2 Dialog, cap. 15, p. 165—171. 
 
 3 Singulorum necessitates in se transformans. 
 
120 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF DOf IT. 
 
 unstable, who could not, by means of ordinary ^institutions, be 
 brought to the perfect observance of the Gospel law, that they 
 might be accustomed by an outward obligation to live under the 
 yoke of Gospel freedom. It is, therefore, a very great mistake 
 in many monks, who, seeking to exalt their order, do not blush, 
 although to their own disgrace, to call it a state of perfection. 
 Much rather, monks belong to the class to whom the saying of 
 the Saviour applied, " Compel them to come in." They are the 
 unsettled vagrants of the highways, 1 mentioned in the parable, 
 who have, no doubt, a certain willingness to be Christians, but 
 are driven and tossed about by the inconstant gusts of their 
 inclinations, and without some outward check on these, would 
 neither persevere in the good they have, nor yet advance to a 
 better. On such characters, the Monastic vow is profitably 
 imposed, because it is the only means of restraining them from 
 forbidden things. 
 
 The monks are therefore not in the state of perfection, as was 
 the prevailing opinion of the whole mediaeval period, for true 
 perfection and genuine goodness rest solely upon the freedom 
 which is the offspring of love. On the contrary, they are rather 
 the imperfect, the weak and unstable, who need some outward 
 impulse or spur to do what is good, and the Church has devised 
 the bond of a vow, not as if she deemed it necessary to imple- 
 ment or perfect the evangelical law, which is sufficient of itself, 
 but, like a tender mother, moved by condescension to the infirm. 
 This leads Goch to draw a distinction between the positive ordi- 
 nances of the Church, and those of God, with reference to the 
 Christian life, and on this subject he says, 2 The Divine ordi- 
 nances and constitutions are absolutely sufficient for the highest 
 and most perfect observance of the Gospel law, and require no 
 addition. For this reason, the positive constitutions of the 
 Church, which have been superadded to these, are nothing more 
 than certain external and decent observances, introduced as pro- 
 moting a greater reverence either in the participation or adminis- 
 tration of the Sacraments, such, for instance, as to partake of the 
 supper with an empty stomach, and to perform the marriage service 
 in face of the Church, things which do not add to the truth, but 
 
 1 vagi ct inconstantes. 2 Dialog, cap. 17. p. 177 — 182. 
 
FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 121 
 
 merely to the ' dignity of the Sacrament. To the same class 
 belongs the Monastic vow, which, therefore, does not reach into 
 the inner sphere of the will, but is essentially an outward act 
 like other ecclesiastical institutions. Hence also it can produce 
 no good of a higher kind in the will, as all such good must 
 have an inward source, and cannot proceed from an external 
 work. The Thomists admit, on the one hand, that the order of 
 a prelate does not reach to the inward movement of the will, but 
 only to the matter of the "outward act; and, on the other, they 
 also maintain, that the Pope can dispense with any Monastic vow 
 however sacred, which obviously infers, that even in their opinion, 
 such a vow is to be classed with the positive and external institu- 
 tions of the Church. When, however, they at the same time say 
 that a vow can be the basis of merit, and that meritorious acts of 
 virtue may proceed from it, this is nothing else but saying, that 
 eternal salvation may be earned by outward actions, and without 
 the aid of grace. It is in point of fact affirming the absurd doc- 
 trine of Pelagius, that the will, by its natural ability, and without 
 the assistance of grace, is sufficient to merit eternal blessedness, 
 and from that doctrine the error of the Thomists, both in the 
 present case and on many other things, seems not to be far 
 remote. 
 
 Such are the injurious tendencies which Goch combats, not 
 only negatively, but positively, by confronting with them the truth. 
 It was natural, however, that this disquisition, as shown in the 
 last section, should lead him to some statements respecting the 
 idea and the nature of the Church. Even in treating of the 
 Monastic vow, he had described the Church as a mother possessed 
 of more affection than prudence, and had drawn a distinction 
 between its enactments and the Divine law. In one word, he had 
 acknowledged the ChurcUs fallibility. To us, at the present time, 
 this may appear a very small and unimportant matter, but in that 
 aire, as the fierce inward conflicts of the heroic Luther half a 
 century later demonstrate, it was of incalculable consequence. 
 It was a flat contradiction of the principle of the whole 
 mediaeval period, which assigned to the Church a Divine rank and 
 authority. It was the most vigorous assault upon the central 
 
122 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF COCIT. 
 
 point of Catholicism and the Hierarchy. It is therefore much to 
 be desired that Goch had explained himself upon it more fully. 
 This, however, he has not done, probably because the question was 
 too oreat, and the responsibility, under existing circumstances, 
 too serious. Nevertheless he does emit certain hints, and 'these, 
 as the dawning rudiments of the thoughts, which afterwards at 
 the Reformation ripened into full conviction, are very impor- 
 tant. 
 
 Here too, not confining himself to mere negation, he exercises 
 enquiry and expresses his opinion. In place of simply advancing 
 statements contrary to the prevailing doctrines on the subject of 
 the Church, he endeavours to ascertain what the Church really 
 is, and to evolve from general principles the definitions he gives 
 of it. At the same time, the natural affinity of the subjects leads 
 him to considerations respecting the Hierarchy, the Priesthood, 
 and the Episcopacy ; and we therefore deem it proper to collect 
 into another chapter all that relates to these points. 
 
 CHAPTER FIFTH. 
 
 THE CHURCH. — PRIESTHOOD AND EPISCOPACY. — PRIESTHOOD 
 AND MONACHISM. — PROPERTY AND PRIVATION. 
 
 Goch, in the first place, traces the doctrine of the Church back 
 to those last and simple elements which constitute the foundation 
 of all his Christian convictions, and even of his Theology. Love, 
 from which he derives everything, and liberty, which spontaneously 
 springs from love, are with him the forming and governing prin- 
 ciples of the Church. As he cannot figure to himself a Chris- 
 tianity which is not free, so as little can he conceive a Church in 
 that condition. If, as he expressly says, Christianity be the reli- 
 gion of liberty, and if the Church be the manifestation of Chris- 
 tianity, then the same principle which reigns in Christianity must 
 also reign in the Church ; and if in Christ, who is the Church's 
 head, the most perfect liberty has been manifested, in union with 
 
THE CHURCH. 123 
 
 the highest degree of love, then must the same spirit which fills 
 the head, likewise pervade the body and all its members. This 
 last sentiment we must first unfold in the sense and with the 
 words of Goch. There must be, he says, 1 in the universal 
 Catholic Church a consummate perfection, excelling all kinds of 
 perfection, claimed by self-devised modes of religious life, 2 and 
 consisting essentially in inward sanctity. The Catholic Church 
 is Christ's mystical body, well ordered and perfect in con- 
 struction, and of this body Christ is the head, and communi- 
 cates to the several members spirit and motion. A well 
 ordered body, however, implies that the members are properly 
 arranged as respects each other, and subordinated to the 
 head. The Catholic Church then, being Christ's mystical 
 body well and perfectly organized, must needs be duly pro- 
 portioned with Christ, its head. This, however, would not be 
 the case if the human will, as respects both the outward act 
 of evangelical perfection, and also the inward disposition, were 
 not conformed to the Divine will in Christ. Proportion signi- 
 fies the commensurateness of one thing with another. The 
 perfection or imperfection, however, of virtue is not measured 
 by quantity but by quality. Here the greater is synonymous 
 with the better. If then the Catholic Church did not possess 
 perfection of the highest kind, and a perfection consonant with 
 that of Christ, it would, as a body, be disproportioned with 
 its head. It is impossible that a supremely perfect head can 
 have a defective and imperfect body. But Christ is a supreme 
 and perfect head, and, therefore, there must exist in the Catholic 
 Church that plenitude of perfection, in virtue of which the 
 human will, according to the measure of this temporal state, is 
 conformed in all things to the will of Christ. That for this end, 
 however, there is no need of any outward obligation or of any 
 righteousness by works, such as, under the constraint of their 
 vows, the monks perform, and that all depends upon faith, work- 
 ing by love, and consequently exercising a liberty begotten of the 
 spirit, and circumscribed by no bound, are truths which Goch 
 elsewhere declares and clearly illustrates. The chief vocation of 
 
 . * Dialog, cap. 19. p. 196 and 197. 
 2 religionum facticiarum, as they exist in the Monastic orders. 
 
1 2 ! TITE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCH. 
 
 the Church accordingly consists in appropriating and propagatinq 
 the spirit of Christ, and in the practical exercise of the evangelical 
 life. The evangelical law which has been given her, and which is 
 just the law of love and liberty, is of supreme and universal 
 authority. Such is the original Divine ordinance, and it is per- 
 fectly sufficient for perfection of life, and consequently also for 
 salvation. To this the Church has no doubt superadded positive 
 enactments ; but, according to what we have said, these can be 
 regarded merely as decent outward customs, which contribute 
 nothing essential either to the completeness or yet to the exe- 
 cution of the Gospel law, and only serve to heighten the solemnity 
 of ecclesiastical transactions. 1 Yea, the Church militant, which 
 is not raised above error, like a mother whose love exceeds her 
 prudence, may well go too far in this. Her ordinances are, 
 however, in all cases well intended, and though incompetent to 
 produce what is spiritually and substantially good, may yet re- 
 strain from evil and furnish opportunity for improvement. 2 In 
 this sense she may even, by vows or other obligations, " compel 
 them to come in." In the communion of the Church, however, 
 a distinction will always have to be drawn between those who 
 come of their own accord and those who come because they are 
 compelled. It is only the former who, incited by grace, and with 
 liberty of spirit, endeavour after evangelical perfection and eternal 
 salvation, whereas the rest are impelled by the mere stress of obli- 
 gation, and an outward and accidental cause. 3 Such, however, is 
 the nature of the kingdom of heaven that it is not to be filled icith 
 reluctant subjects, but only with such as, of free choice, follow the 
 call ; because that which is truly good can eminate only from 
 love, and consequently only from liberty, for there is no liberty 
 like that of love. 4 
 
 In assigning the highest place in the Church to Christ, 
 as its Head and Pattern, and in regarding his priesthood as the 
 chief of his offices, Goch recognizes the order of Priests as the 
 highest in the Church, and as not excelled even by that of 
 Bishops. This is a highly important point. The apostolical 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 17. p. 177 and 178. 
 
 2 Ibid. cap. 14. p. 164 and 165. 
 
 3 Ibid. cap. 15. p. 171. — Comp. also the preceding pages 165 — 169. 
 * Ibid. cap. 17. p. 181 and 182. 
 
PRIESTHOOD AND EPISCOPACY. 125 
 
 age, at least in its first stadium, knew no difference between 
 Presbyter and Bishop. The rise of Episcopacy was the first 
 step in the development of the Hierarchy, and its consequences 
 are incalculable. It required to be made, and from it, with a 
 force which nothing could resist, the monarchy of the Pope 
 was evolved through the medium of the hierarchical aristo- 
 cracy. The papacy, however, had fulfilled its vocation in the 
 Western group of nations, and the day was now dawning 
 when it became necessary to make room for a more free and 
 lofty development. And as once the most important step to- 
 wards the introduction of the Hierarchy had been the decided 
 elevation of Episcopacy over Presbytery ; so now, the most im- 
 portant step towards emancipation from it was to recognize and 
 establish the essential equality between the Episcopal and Presby- 
 terial offices. It would have been a step still further in advance 
 to have recognized the universal priesthood of Christians, in 
 opposition to a separate priestly class; and this step we see taken 
 by John Wessel. But it was not taken by John of Goch. On 
 the contrary, he raises the priestly order to a high pre-eminence. 
 The former step, however, he takes decidedly ; and in this there 
 are two things to be considered. On the one hand, there is the re- 
 turn it involved to what is primitive and apostolical, and, on the 
 other, the opposition to existing things, and the preparation thereby 
 made for a new series of developments. His notions are substan- 
 tially as follows. 1 The sacerdotal is the simply and truly apos- 
 tolical life, the highest perfection of the Christian religion. This 
 may be concluded, in the first place, from the eminence of the 
 priestly state, which is the highest in the Church militant. It is 
 clear, that all perfection in the Church is a participation in the 
 perfection of Christ, its head. In Christ, however, of whom it 
 was said, " Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchi- 
 zedek," the priesthood is the highest of his dignities, for we 
 call that rank the highest, which secures to its possessor the 
 loftiest station in a community. Now it belongs to Christ, 
 in virtue of his priesthood, to be the Prince and Head of the 
 Church, because it is as a Priest that he legislates for and governs 
 it. And agreeably to Christ's pattern, it belongs to the 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 20. p 199 sqq. 
 
120 TITE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCIT. 
 
 priests to ho the leaders of the Catholic Church, and, by conse 
 crating and dispensing the Sacraments, to minister as instru- 
 ments of sanctification to the people. This is implied even in 
 the etymology of their name. The priest is called sacerdos, because 
 he is quasi sacer dux, vel sacra da?is, vel sacramentorum dispen- 
 sator. It is the duty of Priests to preach to God's people the 
 doctrine of salvation, and amidst the perils of this world, to point 
 out to them, both by the word of truth *nd a holy example, the 
 way of life. They are therefore called sacri duces, their office 
 being to go before us in the paths of righteousness. In like 
 manner, it is specially incumbent upon them to administer the 
 sacraments, and hence they are also sacra dantes. To be the 
 leader, however, and dispenser of spiritual benefits to any 
 community, intimates the chief place and station in it, and 
 hence the priesthood is the station of highest "perfection. In the 
 Heavenly hierarchy, his is the highest place who stands nearest 
 to God, and in the Ecclesiastical, his who is nearest to Christ. 
 Now, this in the Church is done by the priest. Secluded from the 
 affairs of the world and the flesh, and consecrated to the service 
 of God, he is bound to devote himself wholly to the contempla- 
 tion of Divine things, to keep his heart open for the reception of 
 Divine gifts, and thus, from the plenitude of vision, to descend 
 to the performance of his priestly functions. Unquestionably, 
 this high and heavenly purity of mind must be required by him, 
 because, he who is not himself advanced and perfected, cannot 
 advance and perfect others, nor he who is in darkness enlighten 
 them. This last reason is likewise a proof that the priesthood is 
 the highest rank in the Church militant, and that a life, which 
 is truly priestly, is also apostolical, so that, for the attainment of 
 higher perfection, the priest does not require to change his 
 station, as that includes all perfection, and nothing more is need- 
 ful for him but that he should walk worthy of it. In fine, a further 
 proof of the perfection of the rank of the priest 1 is implied in the 
 fact, that his ordination and functions are the highest. It is the 
 business of the priest to consecrate the body and blood of Christ. 
 In this, however, resides the plenitude of all graces, and hence 
 the sacrament of the altar is the sacrament of sacraments, and 
 the consecration of it the highest and noblest act of the Church. 
 
 1 Dialog p. 105 sqq. 
 
PRIESTIIOOD AND EPISCOPACY. 127 
 
 Inasmuch, then, as the priestly order are empowered and autho- 
 rized to perform this so exalted service, it is proper that 
 for its execution they should receive an ordination, which 
 not only gives them superiority over all other ranks, but makes 
 them to these the means of consummation and the channels or 
 grace. 1 
 
 It might here be objected' 2 that Episcopacy is a higher office 
 than priesthood, because the Bishop is authorized to perform all 
 ecclesiastical acts, and not merely consecrates the Eucharist, but 
 confirms, and confers orders, — functions which are not compe- 
 tent to a priest. To this the answer is, The priesthood is the 
 highest order in the Church, because to create the body and 
 blood of Christ is absolutely the greatest and noblest of the 
 Church's acts, for which therefore the highest order is required. 
 Besides, the authority possessed by the Bishop, to consecrate the 
 Eucharist and administer the Sacraments, belongs to him on 
 account of his priesthood, not of his episcopacy. If, however, 
 there are certain privileges accorded to the Bishop, and which are 
 wanting to the priest, such as the power to confirm, and to confer 
 orders, these are the offspring either of custom, or of the appoint- 
 ment of the Church, which have abstracted from the sacerdotal 
 order much that was conferred upon it by Divine institution. For 
 instance, the power of absolution in all important cases (casibus 
 criminalibus) was Divinely conferred upon priests by the saying, 
 " Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, 
 and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in 
 heaven ;" for this was spoken, not merely to Peter, but to all in 
 whose name Peter spake on the occasion. To the same effect 
 Christ, after his resurrection, said, " Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; 
 whosoever's sins ye remit, are remitted unto them, and whoso- 
 
 1 The words of this passage, which are difficult to translate, run as 
 follows : Ordo sacerdolalis est summus in ecclesia militante ; quia 
 ipsius est consecrare corpus Christi et sanguinem, in quo est plenitudo 
 omnium gratiarum. Et ideo hoc sacramcntum altaris, quod est saeramen- 
 tum sacramentorum, consummatur in ordine uno, tanquam in fine 
 ultimo et completo, ut nihil desit ministerio ordinato, quia ipse ordo 
 est superior aliis et consummativus aliorum omnium ordinum, quare 
 merito sibi competit nolilissimus et summus actus Ecclesiae, qui est 
 consecrare corpus Christi et sanguinem. 
 
 2 Dialog, cap. 20. p. 206: 
 
128 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCn. 
 
 over's sins yc retain, they are retained." This plenary authority, 
 however, has been greatly circumscribed by the enactments of 
 the Church, for many cases are reserved, some to the ordinary 1 
 (Bishop) and others to the apostolical authority (the Pope). But 
 although, in this manner, the fulness of the priestly authority 
 has been much abridged, still the dignity of the priestly rank 
 remains unimpaired, if not in respect of the external exercise of 
 all priestly functions, yet certainly in respect of the plenary 
 qualification and ability. If to this it be objected, 2 that only 
 Bishops are successors of the Apostles, the answer is, that this is 
 true, in respect of the custom and enactment of the Church, but 
 not in respect of the primitive institution of the Sacraments, and 
 the Divine appointment. Bishops are the Apostles' successors as 
 regards authority of jurisdiction, and the government of the 
 people who are subject to them ; and it is on this account that 
 they are called prelates. As the captain, however, is a soldier 
 among soldiers, and the abbot a monk among monks, so also is 
 the bishop a priest among priests. This is involved even in the 
 etymology of the name, episcopos, for it is compounded of ewi, 
 which means over, and a/coiro?, 3 a watcher, as being one who is 
 charged with the duty of superintendence. To exercise the 
 oversight in any community, however, does not exclude him, 
 whose duty this is, from being a member of that community, but 
 merely binds him to some administrative work, and compels him 
 zealously to serve those whom he superintends. This, however, 
 indicates a burden rather than a dignity, and consequently the 
 Apostle affirms, " If a man desire the office of a bishop, he 
 desireth a good work." He says a good work and not a great 
 honour. For this reason,, the bishops of former times used to 
 live in common with their priests, like fathers among the inmates 
 of their families, as St Augustine and St Martin relate. 
 
 To what we have said we have to add something respecting 
 the rank and external position of the clergyman. Not only does 
 he stand, upwards, upon an absolute equality with the bishop, 
 but, downwards, he holds a rank superior to that of the monk. 
 
 1 autoritas ordinata. 2 Ibid. p. 209. 
 
 3 This expression also occurs in pure Greek, in the acceptation of 
 " spy." No stress is here to be laid on the sort of etymology. 
 
PRIESTHOOD AND MONACHISM. 129 
 
 The seriousness, the austerity, the elevation above the world, 
 which some monks really had, and many at least appeared to 
 possess, might easily engender the notion that Monachism is the 
 true state of perfection, the real blossom of the Christian life ; 
 And that place the monks of the mediaeval period actually con- 
 trived to secure for themselves in public opinion. There were 
 men, however, of deeper insight, who saw this to be only a cor- 
 ruption and an inversion of ecclesiastical order, and one of these 
 was John of Goch. For although he did not assume a position 
 of hostility to Monachism, he was just as far from sharing the 
 blind reverence with which it was regarded by the multitude. 
 He makes a decided difference between the clergyman (dermis) 
 and the devotee (religiosus), between sacerdotal orders and 
 the Monastic vow. 1 Sacerdotal orders confer the power of 
 exercising sacramental functions, which are the noblest in the 
 militant Church. The Monastic vow, on the contrary, binds 
 him who takes it to the exercise of outward actions, tending to 
 the mortification of the body of sin ; so that the monk is properly 
 in a penitential state, and this is the reason why he wears an un- 
 sightly garment. Seeing that their several functions are so diffe- 
 rent, there must also be a difference in the perfection of their 
 respective lives. This difference, Goch affirms, is recognized by 
 Jerome, who, in a letter to Rusticus, says, " Live in the 
 monastery in such a way as to deserve to be a priest." The 
 fellowship of the bishop and his priests (the canonical life), 
 according to the pictures of it drawn by St Martin and St 
 Augustine, approximates much more closely to that of the 
 Apostles than does the life which men lead in a monastery. 
 
 Another and very obvious objection, also stated by Goch, 2 was 
 that the Monastic life manifests its superiority in the total renun- 
 ciation of property which it involves, whereas the priest, without 
 injury to his sacerdotal rank, can both p>ossess property and legally 
 bequeath it. To this objection he answers as follows, "Property 
 is only possible in respect to temporal things ; for that which is 
 eternal and universal belongs to no one in particular. It is, 
 however, one thing to possess temporal, and another to possess 
 personal property. 3 To possess temporal things is a necessity of 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 20. p. 211 sqq. 2 Dialog, cap. 21. p. 213 sqq. 
 
 3 Comp. here the passages, Dialog, p. 233, 235, and 237. 
 
 I 
 
130 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCTI. 
 
 this present life, which cannot otherwise be supported. To possess 
 personal property is, in respect of the possessor himself, unques- 
 tionably a fault of corrupt nature, but, in respect of the entire 
 human race, a means of preserving general peace, and to 
 many, a protection against negligence and sloth. To possess 
 temporal things therefore, does not necessarily impair sanctity, 
 for Christ had a purse, and the Apostles property, of their own, 
 and so too have the monks of all orders, and, hence, that cannot be 
 reckoned a disadvantage to the priestly rank. Personal property, 
 on the contrary, may be possessed in two ways, either in virtue of 
 the right of possession, or from love to that which is possessed. The 
 right to possess belongs to Christians as well as others, hy the laws 
 of their religion* The love of the thing possessed is sinful, and 
 unquestionably entails an extenuation of perfection, for personal 
 attachment to temporal things impairs the liberty of the soul, which 
 is only to be acquired by the love of that which is Divine. If, there- 
 fore, a priest possess a temporal estate, and fix upon it his chief 
 affection, he does not possess it, according to the dignity of the 
 Christian life, for, as even the tonsure intimates, 1 he ought to re- 
 nounce that which is secular and transitory. If, however, he 
 possess it solely for the uses of life, and the support of the brethren, 
 he does not thereby undergo any loss of perfection, provided he 
 keep free the bent of his will, according to the word of the Psalmist, 
 " If riches increase set not your heart upon them." On the other 
 hand, the renunciation of property in consequence of his vow, 
 cannot promote perfection of life in the member of a religious 
 order, unless he keep the bent of his will unfettered by the 
 desire of temporal possessions, 2 for the perfection of sanctification 
 consists wholly in the freeness of love to God ; and, therefore, 
 the external performance of a work profits nothing unless the 
 inward disposition of the mind correspond. 
 
 But then, as Goch again suggests in objection, did not 
 
 l Superior rasura capitis. 
 Nee etiarh nihil vel proprio vel commmuniter habere, says Goch, 
 elsewhere (Dialog, cap. 19 p. 192) pertinently, utfaciunt fratres minores, 
 est suinina perflctio Christianae religionis, sed nihil velle habere, et 
 affectum voluntatis liberum et absolutum ab omni creatura, quae est 
 bonum particulare, reservare, et in Deo habere resolutum, quod est bonum 
 universale, est summa pcrfectio Christianae religionis. 
 
PROPERTY AND PRIVATION. 131 
 
 the Lord himself say, "A rich man can hardly enter into the 
 kingdom of heaven," and again, " Whosoever he be that for- 
 saketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple I" To this 
 he replies, by drawing a distinction between the rich man of the 
 world and the rich man of the Gospel, and between the worldly 
 and the evangelical poor man. i The rich man of the world is 
 he who is filled with the desire of possessing transitory things, 
 and wholly absorbed and enslaved by the love of them when 
 possessed, and such is the rich man, who hardly enters into the 
 kingdom of heaven. On the contrary, the evangelical rich man is 
 he who, delivered from the desire of transitory things, rises with the 
 entire force of his will to God, and is wholly dissolved into the 
 free love of Him. Such is the man to whom to live is Christ, 
 and to die gain. In like manner, the poor of this world are they 
 who, possessing little or nothing of its transitory goods, still pant 
 so eagerly for their acquisition, that forgetting eternal things, 
 they seek in those that are temporal the highest object of life. 
 Such persons are poor indeed, because they both lose the sweet- 
 ness of present blessings, and also forego the enjoyment of those 
 which are eternal. The evangelical poor, on the other hand, are 
 they who, destitute of temporal things, or, at least, using the 
 little of them which they possess, with affections so loose, as to 
 escape all the snares which threaten the conscience, aspire with- 
 out impediment or pause to the love of eternal blessings. Such 
 are they who " buy as though they did not possess, and who 
 use this world as not abusing it," by keeping their inclination 
 and will free and unfettered. These are also they of whom the 
 Lord says, " Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the king- 
 dom of heaven." He says not poor in substance, but poor in 
 spirit, for he means the bent of the will. 
 
 Thus did Goch labour upon a positive basis, and at the very root 
 of the matter, to promote the Eeformation,but without causing any 
 outward disturbance. To the legality of the dominant Church, 
 degenerating often into mere Pharisaism, he opposed the free, 
 filial, and devoted spirit of the Gospel ; to the liberalism of Antino- 
 mian principles, the strict obedience and active moral practice of 
 
 1 Dialog, cap. 21. p. 217—222. 
 
132 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCIT. 
 
 Christianity ; to false reliance upon ecclesiastical and outward 
 works of virtue and their merit, the deep felt want of the grace of 
 God ; and to the self-devised sanctity of Monachism, which pre- 
 tended to be superior to every other, but never stepped beyond 
 the circle of obligation, the higher sentiment of a truly Apostolic 
 and Catholic Christian piety, the offspring of free love. He re- 
 quired that this spirit of piety, founded upon God, and sponta- 
 neous in its motions, should be purely and unfeignedly expressed 
 in the Church, and where he did not discover it, where he saw it 
 displaced by the ordinances of men, there he was not afraid to 
 speak out, and to accuse the visible Church of error and abuse. 
 He especially considered as a great disorder, and tending to 
 many improprieties, that the Episcopal office was raised above 
 the Priestly, and by demonstrating their original equality, he 
 took one of the most important steps in that opposition to the 
 hierarchy, which reached its full development at the Reforma- 
 tion, by the revival of the idea of the common priesthood of all 
 Christians. 
 
 In so doing Goch always proceeds upon the foundation of Scrip- 
 ture, whose positive data, however, are in his hands vivified by 
 experience, and illustrated by the light of independent thought. 
 A logic, often of great subtlety, is associated with a Mysticism 
 which is never fanciful or trifling, but always rests on a sound 
 practical basis, and thus keeps its proper place as a means and 
 not an end. All his thoughts are bound together, and go- 
 verned by a thorough practical spirit, or, in other words, have 
 a reference to active faith, love, and holiness. Not by any means 
 that he seeks to cover defects in intelligence and science by lay- 
 ing stress upon practice, but because, in his mind, the practical 
 always originates in the profound apprehension of Christian ideas 
 by the intelligence. 
 
(133) 
 
 PAKT FOURTH. 
 
 RELATION OF GOCH 
 
 TO 
 
 HIS OWN AND AFTER TIMES. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 GOCH'S CONNEXION WITH THE REFORMATION. CORNELIUS 
 GRAPHEUS. OPINIONS CONCERNING GOCH. 
 
 It is not known that, during his lifetime, Goch gave any 
 offence, excited the suspicion of the hierarchy, or endured the 
 smallest persecution from its ministers. The worst that hefel 
 him was a literary attack on the part of the Dominican against 
 whom he wrote the Epistola apologetica. With this single 
 exception, lie laboured quietly in the bosom of the Church, died 
 in the enjoyment of public esteem, and received honourable 
 interment in the chapel of the priory of which he had so long 
 been superior. This could not have happened but for the fact, 
 that he kept himself with his opinions substantially within the 
 pale of the Church, and appeared upon the stage of public life 
 with plans of innovation and improvement, much less than many 
 of his predecessors and cotemporaries. His writings, so richly 
 stored with the elements of the Reformation, were, no doubt, 
 at first read only within a confined circle, and by persons of 
 congenial sem'ments, who, in place of taking offence, found in 
 
134 the life of joiin of cocn. 
 
 thorn plentiful sources of instruction and comfort. That suscep- 
 tible minds of this kind existed at the time, and in no small 
 number in these districts, is evident from many circumstances 
 in the history of the Brethren of the Common Lot, and the 
 lives of Wcssel, and Erasmus, as was also the case at the first 
 commencement of the Reformation in the Netherlands. Beyond 
 his own immediate and quiet circle, Goch's influence seems at first 
 not to have extended. At least there are none of the more cele- 
 brated Reformers on whom it can be shewn to have operated in 
 the way of exciting, instructing, or determining the bent of their 
 minds. In particular, we can find no trace of Luther's having 
 been acquainted with his writings and labours, as we know he was 
 with those of John Wessel. 1 Notwithstanding of this, however, 
 Goch's intimate connexion with the Reformation is certain beyond 
 all doubt. The Reformation required other preparatory work than 
 that which is outward and ostentatious. In order to the growth 
 of a new spiritual seed, it was indispensably requisite that a pre- 
 liminary fertilizing process should be silently carried on, in the 
 narrower but more profoundly susceptible circles of society, which 
 should in clue season bring forth to the light its living fruits. Such 
 accordingly is the work in which we find Goch engaged ; and that 
 it was in the best sense of the word Reformatory r , that is, the sort 
 of preparation for the Reformation required by the times, does not, 
 from what we have said, appear to admit a doubt. In the most 
 decided way he sets out, not merely with the formal principle of 
 the Reformation, by founding all Christian doctrine upon Scrip- 
 ture, but also with its material principle, which is the justifica- 
 tion of the sinner in the sight of God, effected not by works, but 
 solely by a living faith in Christ. As the consequence of these 
 principles, he likewise taught in detail the essential doctrines of 
 the Reformation, such for instance as that of man's sinfulness, and 
 absolute need of salvation, of Divine grace as the only source of 
 pardon and the only foundation of good in man, of faith, and its 
 inseparable concomitant love, as the fountain of all true morality, 
 
 1 Walch says in his preface to the Monim. med. sev. vol. i. fasc. 4. p. 
 xxiv., Num legerit Lutherus libellos Gochianos, dubitandi causa est. 
 Quamvia enira fieri potueri , ut iu Erfurtensi bibliotbeca illi una cum 
 Wesselii similiumque scriptorum opusculis servarentur ; nullamtaraen 
 unquain a Lidhero nostri, meniini, fieri mentionein. 
 
HIS CONNECTION WITH THE REFORMATION. 135 
 
 of the liberty of the Christian, resting upon this foundation, and 
 of the distinction between the Law and the Gospel. In like 
 manner, as regards several very decided points, he assumed the 
 same antagonistic attitude, which the Reformers afterwards occu- 
 pied with more energy and, doubtless, with greater success. He 
 combattcd the errors of the Schoolmen, of Pelagianism, and of 
 Monachism, which were the basis of the Church's doctrine respect- 
 ing merit, as they also were of the hierarchy. He asserted the 
 principle of the fallibility of the Church, and from that position, 
 contested many of her authoritative ordinances and articles of doc- 
 trine, such as the institution of ecclesiastical vows and obligations, 
 the belief of the efficacy of the sacraments, ex opere operato, 
 the distinction of priests and bishops as essential and of Divine 
 appointment, and the prevailing opinion on the subject of evan- 
 gelical poverty. In general, he helped, and by his clear and per- 
 suasive style may be said to have contributed largely, to liberate 
 Christianity from many pernicious and deeply-rooted priestly fic- 
 tions, and from the institutions based upon these, and to bring it 
 back to the simplicity and purity of the Apostolic faith. 1 If all this 
 was not to promote the Reformation, it would be difficult to say to 
 what else that language can be applied. Much speaking about 
 the matter was not absolutely requisite, and was likewise foreign 
 
 1 "VValch gives a summary of the reformatory principles in the 
 Theology of Goch, in the above-cited preface, p. xxxv. xxxvii. in the 
 following articles. I. Scripturum sacram unicum esse rerum creden- 
 darum fontem unicamque regulara, ad quam patrum aliorumque doc- 
 torum opiniones sint dijudicandae. II. Impium esse et pelagianam 
 haeresin revocare, qui credat, natu rales vires liberi arbitrii sine auxilio 
 gratiae ad internae et externae pietatis opus sufficere. III. Peccare, 
 qui variia cultus externi partibus, immo ede^odp-qaKeias generibus et exer- 
 citiis corporis virtutem christianam absolvi putant omnique erga alios 
 carent amore. IV. Ecclesiam posse en-are. V. Doctrinam Thomae de 
 votis monasticis eorumque virtute esse erroneam sibique contrariam. VI. 
 Praedestinatiouem non ponere impossibilitatem peccandi, sed impossi- 
 bilitatem in fine deficiendi et finaliter in peccato perseverandi. VII. 
 Sacramenta non ex opere operato operari, sed requirere certam reci- 
 pientis dispositionem. VIII. Discrimen, quod inter presbyteros et epis- 
 copos interesse Romanenses volunt, non esse jure divino constitutum, 
 sed ab ecclesia injuria introductum. IX. Paupertatem evangelicam non 
 requirere, ut quis nihil possideat, sed ut animum a nimio divitiarum 
 amore revocet : hinc fictam monasticam paupertatem legibus Christi 
 esse contrariam. 
 
13G THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 to Gocli's genius and character. He had certainly no such 
 distinct and express consciousness of its approaching advent as 
 Huss, Wessel, and some others, but an aspiration after it, and a 
 presentiment of it he certainly had, as every one must have of the 
 event for which he helps to prepare the way. 
 
 Although, however, Goch did not labour in an ostensible and 
 popular manner, or outwardly to any great extent, for the Refor- 
 mation, he yet unquestionably exercised a most important influence 
 upon those immediately around him, as well as upon several who, 
 in their turn and in the same way, stirred up others. He was 
 the commencement of a Reformatory Tradition. Of this we have 
 sufficient evidence in the opinions and judgments respecting him, 
 which have come down from the period immediately posterior to 
 his death and from after times, in the efforts that were made for 
 the discovery and publication of his writings, and in the interest 
 awakened by such of them as were actually published. 
 
 And here in particular we have to mention a man, who was 
 eminently serviceable in spreading his works and doctrines, but 
 who, being of a keener temperament than their author, involved 
 himself thereby in trouble. We speak of Cornelius Grapheus (Scri- 
 bonius, or in the common dialect, Schryver) born in 1482 at Alost 
 (Aelst) in Flanders, 1 and a person distinguished in many ways. 3 
 He was secretary to the city of Antwerp, but at the same time emi- 
 nent in the arts and sciences, a historian, orator, poet, and musician, 
 master of several languages, and on terms of intimate friendship 
 with the celebrated Erasmus. In those days, there were in all 
 the cities of the Netherlands many who favoured a purer Gospel, 
 and at Antwerp, Grapheus seems to have formed their centre. 
 About the year 1521, and consequently about the time of the diet 
 at Worms, Grapheus published Goch's book, On the liberty of 
 the Christian religion, with a very spirited preface. By the spread 
 
 1 Alostanus Flander in Gerdes. 
 
 2 Comp. about him Dan, Gerdesii Hist. Evangelii renov. Groning. et 
 Brem. MDCCXLIX. Tom. iii. p. 20, where there is also a likeness of 
 Grapheus indicating great vivacity of mind, but especially Dan. Ger- 
 desii Scrinium Antiquarium sive Miscellanea Groningana. Gron. et 
 Brem. 1756. Tom. v. P. 1. p. 496— 508.— also the French epitome of 
 the Hist, reform. Belg. by Gerh. Brant vol. I. p. 18. — and with regard 
 to the writings of Grapheus, Foppens Bibliotk. Belg. T. i. p. 201. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 137 
 
 of the work Itself, and especially by the warlike tone of the preface 
 with which he accompanied it, he irritated the Inquisitors, who 
 charged him with abetting the Lutheran heresy, arraigned him 
 before their court, and caused him to be deposed from his office, and 
 imprisoned at Brussels. His confinement was of considerable du- 
 ration. During the course of it, he addressed an Epistle to John 
 Carondiletus 1 which is dated the 18th October 1521, and is still 
 extant. Ultimately he was forced to recant, recall his preface and 
 commit it to the flames. In subscribing the act drawn up for this 
 purpose, which is dated the 23d day of April 1522, and is of consi- 
 derable length, he certainly shewed little of the spirit of a hero. 
 Among other things, which could not be consonant with his con- 
 viction, he acknowledged, that he had acted foolishly and incon- 
 siderately in so highly recommending Goch's treatise on Christian 
 liberty, as he had never himself read the book. In consequence 
 of this submission, which he may possibly have regarded as a mere 
 formality, forced from him by the violence of authority, he resumed 
 his former position, was permitted to return to his friends, and 
 subsequently edited several works, which won great celebrity for 
 his name. After surviving the leading events of the Reformation, 
 he died at the age of 76, in the year 1588. It is not with 
 Grapheus in the later period of his life that we have here to do, 
 but with the young man of 29, the enthusiastic admirer of Goch. 
 This sentiment he expresses in the forementioned preface in a very 
 characteristic way. With great penetration and truth he states 
 the contrast between the mediseval principles and those of the 
 Reformation, between the legal and the free Gospel spirit, paints 
 in strong colours the decline of Christianity, and exhorts his 
 countrymen to the work of restoring it. For this too he prescribes 
 the most proper means, specifying a return to Apostolic simplicity 
 and eternal truth, the propagation of the Scriptures in the mother 
 tongue, a plain and correct exposition of them for the use of the 
 people, the perusal of the recent authors who seek to edify the 
 minds of Christians, and not to freeze or inflate them with sub- 
 tilities, and a lively interest on the part of the laity in the affairs 
 of the Church and of Christianity. After shewing how believers 
 
 1 The letter is printed in Brant Hist. Reformat. Belg. Tom. 1. Lib. 
 II. p. 71—79. 
 
138 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 have been exalted, by Christ and by the spirit which he imparts, to 
 childship with God, and emancipated from the law, and the 
 power and curse of sin, he characterises in the following highly 
 striking terms the state into which the Christianity of the middle 
 ages had sunk, " We have declined from Christ to Moses, and 
 backslidden from Moses to Pharaoh. We have rejected the light 
 food of evangelical liberty, and from the quietness of the Christian 
 life and the repose of the Gospel, have returned to the flesh pots 
 of Egypt, and to the bondage of the brick kilns. We have des- 
 pised the' easy yoke and light burden of Christ, and have betaken 
 ourselves to the heavy load of human ordinances, giving attention 
 to lying spirits and not believing the Gospel, distrusting the surest 
 promises of the Saviour, but trusting in human fables. In place 
 of the Gospel, we have adopted the decrees of the Pope, in place 
 of Jesus, a certain Aristotle, in place of piety, ceremonies, and in 
 place of the truth, falsehood. Afraid of all things, we do nothing 
 with confidence and love. How foolish and infatuated we have 
 been ! What Satan, what lying spirit has bewitched us, that now 
 for more than 800 years we have so deplorably backslidden from 
 liberty to miserable bondage, from faith to infidelity, from hope to 
 anxiety, from love to fear, from earnest piety to cold ceremo- 
 nialism, from Christ to Moses, from the Gospel to the Jewish 
 law, inculcating nothing but unprofitable works, so that what 
 we began in the spirit we are now finishing in the flesh ? 
 Once all of us without distinction, whether freemen or servants, 
 were still equally Christians and brethren ; once we were a 
 chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. , . . . 
 Now, no longer kings and priests, we have become slaves of 
 men, no longer a chosen generation, we have become a despic- 
 able race, no longer a royal priesthood, we have become a vulgar 
 folk. Once we were the people of God, now we are but the sub- 
 jects of Moses ; once we were called sons of the heavenly Father, 
 brethren and fellow-heirs of Jesus, now we are sons of the earthly 
 Adam, and prefer taking our name from St Francis, or St Do- 
 minic, from' Augustine or Bernard, rather than from Christ. 
 Once we were called disciples of Christ, now we are scholars 
 of Aristotle, of Aquinas, of Scotus, and of Albert. Once we 
 were simple-minded, purely and freely instructed in the word of 
 God, now we are vexed and deluded with controversies, and 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 139 
 
 sophisms, inferences and distinctions. Then we acknowledged 
 Christ alone as the foundation of our faith, our leader and our 
 head, who has promised to be with us always even to the end 
 of the world ; now, however, another foundation has been laid, 
 and in place of the celestial leader and head, we have set up a 
 
 secular and an earthly one, yea, a sort of idol 
 
 Once the service of the Church was performed gratuitously, now 
 there is nothing but what must be purchased with gold. All 
 tilings, however holy, are objects of sale, so that not even the 
 smallest spot of earth is left free for the burial of a Christian's 
 corpse. . . . Once Christians were allowed to choose for 
 themselves suitable pastors ; now, however, as is most deeply 
 to be deplored, ambitious men, with tyrannical power, by gifts 
 and menaces, in right ways and wrong, intrude into the spiritual 
 office, and enter otherwise than by the door. Nor is even that 
 sufficient. Ignorant hirelings, men living in concubinage and 
 debauchery, are generally appointed, who, by their profligate 
 example, hurry the souls of the simple, which Jesus purchased 
 with his blood, along with their own, to destruction. These 
 men, when called upon to preach the true Gospel doctrine, 
 either in their ignorance interpret it falsely, or appoint stupid 
 monks as their substitutes, who, for the sake of gain, pervert 
 still more the work of God, and in place of the Gospel and the 
 doctrine of Paul, inculcate dreams of their own, and commend to 
 the people their subtile, enlightened, holy, seraphic, hierarchical, 
 invincible, and most profound doctors, their sums (summulas), 
 canons, and laws, their Aristotle and Master of Sentences. . . 
 . . Once the doctrine of Christ was common to all promiscu- 
 ously, the only exception being that women were not allowed to 
 speak in public ; now, however, our masters, licentiates, and 
 bachelors, our haughty Thomists, and obscure Scotists, alone 
 have the right to explain Scripture. As for us, they despise us, 
 and exclude us from the kingdom of which they claim the 
 sole possession. 'This people,' they say, 'know not the law, 
 and are cursed ; in fact they know nothing at all, and ought not 
 to dispute upon theology ; they never took a degree ; they do 
 not understand logic ; they have not grown old in the study of 
 Aristotle ; they never saw the work of St Thomas, or read the 
 subtile Scotus, or the unanswerable Alexander of Hales ; they 
 
140 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF COCII. 
 
 cannot even form a syllogism; they are but painters, poets, 
 orators, 1 who may perhaps write a good Latin style, but in other 
 respects are unlettered laymen. Such persons ought not to be 
 allowed to have the sacred Scriptures in the mother tongue, for 
 they do not comprehend what they read, and fall into gross errors.' 
 . . . . And yet were not they simple and illiterate laymen, 
 whom Christ called before all others into his presence, and to 
 whom he taught his Divine philosophy % Did not Paul, the chosen 
 vessel, boast of knowing nothing but Christ and him crucified ? 
 Has not God promised, by the prophet Joel, ' I will pour out 
 my spirit upon all flesh.' Where are laymen here excluded 1 ? 
 Or perhaps is the Spirit of God extinct ? Is it no longer com- 
 petent to do what it then did 1 Much do I wish that Christ's 
 philosophy, being common to all, were likewise translated by 
 learned and good expositors into the vulgar tongue, so that 
 every professor of the Christian religion, at least every one who 
 knows to read, might purchase, a copy for himself, and by the 
 preparation of the spirit (per spiritus promptitudinem) be intro- 
 duced to an acquaintance with evangelical truth. I also wish, 
 that in order to the suppression of human opinions, learned 
 priests were appointed over all Churches, who upon the festivals, 
 when the Christian people are assembled with their Bibles in 
 their hands, should twice a-day, instead of preaching a sermon, 
 instruct them in the doctrine of the evangelists and apostles, in 
 strict accordance with the Word. In this way, in place of being 
 any longer led astray by circuitous paths, or deceived by human 
 dreams and errors, the people might be conducted by the royal 
 road directly to Christ. This, I well know, will be taken ill by 
 those gluttonous monks (for I always except the good ones) who 
 pervert the Word of God to their own gain. But I shall not be 
 restrained by them from saying it, for there is need that the truth 
 should once for all be set in its right place. You see then, dearest 
 brethren in Christ, how low Christianity has sunk, and how we 
 have been robbed of our freedom by human traditions. But 
 come all ye, to whom Christian liberty is dear", as it is to me, 
 contend for Christ, and be of good courage. Behold, even now, 
 
 1 Grapheus here manifestly alludes to himself, and to what was 
 currently said of him among the clergy. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 141 
 
 the fairest opportunity of achieving our deliverance. The 
 sciences are being once more gradually restored. Restored once 
 more is the Gospel of Jesus, and Paul rises from the dead. 
 For what else does the Gospel breathe, or what else does St 
 Paul teach, exhort, and inculcate upon us, but the liberty which 
 is in Christ Jesus ? If, therefore, zeal for piety, if love for your 
 own salvation, if the appeal of Christian affection are of any avail 
 with you, ye friends of the Christian religion, I exhort and adjure 
 you by Christ Jesus, with whose blood you have been bought, 
 to read those authors who treat of him, and incite us to the love 
 of God, and kindle the spark of it in the heart ; and decidedly to 
 reject all the subtle Scholastics who puff up but do not edify, Avho 
 sharpen the intellect but darken the heart. Among the former, 
 one of the most excellent is the writer whom, by the Divine 
 guidance, I have discovered, and now introduce to you, viz., John 
 of Goch, a man of rare erudition, inferior to none of his day, 
 the most zealous pioneer of Christian liberty, and the most diligent 
 expounder of the Divine law. Read him by day and night, 
 especially when you have leisure from the perusal of sacred 
 Scripture, and the Epistles of Paul, to which no doubt your 
 chief study is due. Farewell in Christ Jesus." 
 
 In the same strain, Grapheus expresses himself in the preface 1 
 to another smaller work of Goch, viz., the Epistola Apologetica, 
 which he seems to have subsequently 2 edited. This preface is 
 dedicated to the priest and doctor, Nicolaus von Uerzogenbusch, 3 
 and contains the following very characteristic remarks. Grapheus 
 expresses the great delight he took in the little treatise, as a 
 monument of genuine Christian philosophy. " I was astonished," 
 he says, " that a man, in that age, had gone so far even though 
 not writing in the vulgar tongue. I admired the undaunted 
 fortitude of a most independent mind. I admired the highly 
 pertinent and consecutive quotations both from the Holy Scrip- 
 ture and orthodox ecclesiastical authors. I congratulated myself 
 
 1 This is printed in Walch Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. Praef. 
 p. xii. — xvii. 
 
 2 The preface is, without assignation of the year, merely dated Ant- 
 werpise X. Calend. Sept. 
 
 3 With the predicate, verae christianae theologicae candidate, acade- 
 miae Antvverpiensis moderatori vigilantissimo. 
 
142 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF COCII 
 
 that oven the last century, agreeing with us, had diverged so freely 
 from the Scholastic philosophy, and that so admirable an author 
 
 had been delivered from the darkness Rejected 
 
 it may be by the miserable sycophants, who pass their lives 
 in philosophic subtilties contradictory of the creed of simple 
 Christianity, who despise the holy teachers of the ancient Church, 
 and prefer Aristotle, Averroes, Albert, Thomas, Alvarus, Syl- 
 vester, and other sophists of the same class almost to the Gospel 
 itself, who ascribe more weight to their dreaming little doctors 
 (doctorculis) than to the holy prophets of God, the evangelists 
 and apostles, who denounce as heretical, blasphemous, scan- 
 dalous, and offensive to every pious (which means supersti- 
 tious) ear, and fit for fire and flames, whatever does not smack 
 of their Aristotle, Thomas or Holcot, and who are continually 
 endeavouring, by their writings, but with fruitless effort, to 
 show that the heavenly doctrine of Christ can not be upheld 
 without the help of the Aristotelian philosophy." Graplieus 
 confidently hopes that true and simple Christian philosophy 
 will soon and perfectly revive from the oppression under which 
 it has hitherto laboured, although there were some who strove 
 with united effort to keep it down, but who must just be allowed 
 to cry and threaten, rage, curse, and persecute as they were 
 doing. " The Christian philosophy will not thereby be shaken, 
 subverted, or unsettled, for it is founded on the firm rock of 
 truth, and in spite of them, will happily triumph over the whole 
 world. They may pride themselves as they please in their vain 
 opinions, we on the contrary will with honest minds embrace 
 the pure doctrine of Christ, drawn from the wells of Holy Scrip- 
 ture, and not from the marshy puddles of Thomas or Aris- 
 totle. That is what we honour and will endeavour to restore, 
 while with the warmest sympathy of Christian affection, we 
 earnestly invoke Christ himself to open the eyes of these blind 
 leaders of the blind, that at last they may see the light, recognize 
 the truth, and recover their senses." 
 
 After Grapheus, we have next to refer to an anonymous writer, 
 who was a warm admirer of the works of Goch, and has left us 
 a letter on those of them that survive. 1 This letter was evidently 
 
 l The letter is printed in Walch Monim. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4. 
 Praefat. xxxi. — xxxiii 
 
COIUSELIUS GEAP1IEUS. 143 
 
 written subsequently to the fore-mentioned prefaces of Graphcus, 
 for it alludes to some of Goch's writings as having been already 
 printed and published ; but there can be no doubt that it dates 
 from the first 30 — 40 years of the 16th century, for the writer, 
 who had searched the Monastery Tabor at Mechlin, for any 
 surviving remains of its distinguished Superior, speaks of inha- 
 bitants of that city who were still acquainted with the particulars 
 of his life, either from personal knowledge or direct tradition. 1 
 This shows, on the one hand, that the impression made by Goch 
 upon those in his immediate vicinity was strong enough to leave 
 lasting traces in their memory, and on the other hand, that at a 
 very early period, and by various parties, a lively interest was 
 taken in the spiritual treasures he left behind him. The person 
 to whom the letter was addressed, and who was a certain N. 
 (perhaps the Nicolaus von Herzogenbusch we have already 
 mentioned) shared this interest. Both the writer and the receiver 
 of the tetter reckoned Goch one of the first theologians of their 
 age, and set a high value upon his Book on Christian liberty. The 
 writer specially commends the moderation he shows on the per- 
 plexed and doubtful question respecting Monachism and the 
 worth of vows, inasmuch as he does not reject and condemn the 
 whole system, but only seeks to lop off its false excrescences ; 
 and therefore he expresses a hope, that his labours may have the 
 effect of enlightening even those persons who shrunk, as they 
 would do from poison, from the writings of more violent and 
 bitter Theologians. (This is no doubt an allusion to Luther.) 
 " But to return," says the author, " to Goch, I cannot sufficiently 
 wonder how it was possible for this man, in that iron and illiterate 
 age, to have had his mind so brightly illuminated with light 
 from God, as enabled him intrepidly to combat and refute 
 the errors of the most distinguished teachers, especially as he 
 had not gained from the schools even the heathenish title of 
 Master of Arts, a fact testified by inhabitants of Mechlin still 
 alive and acquainted with the particulars of his life. 1 At the 
 same time it would be high presumption were any one so inflated 
 
 1 . .id quod testantur, qui etiaranum vivunt apud Mech- 
 
 Knienses, Gochianae vitae et status probe gnari. 
 
Md TITE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCII. 
 
 in his carnal mind, as to tolerate no teachers but the Rabbins, 
 that is, the professors of the Scholastic philosophy, and suppose 
 that the influences of the Holy Spirit cared or waited for glittering 
 distinctions and titles. Not by outward consequence, nor by the 
 party to which he belongs, but by his own spirit, ought a man 
 to be estimated. He only who judges by this rule, judges 
 righteously." 
 
 Not long after this Epistle was written, we find a brief histori- 
 cal sketch of Goch and his labours, in the well known Catalogue 
 of the Witnesses of the truth prior to the Reformation, by Mat- 
 thias Flacius, which was first published at Basle in 1556. Here 1 
 Goch is very properly associated with John of Wesel and John 
 Wessel, and the substance of his opinions is summed up as fol- 
 lows : "John Goch, a priest at Mechlin, flourished about 110 
 years ago. Upon the article of justification through grace, he 
 held perfectly correct views, as he did on many other subjects. 
 He maintained that the writings of Thomas, Albert, and other 
 sophists, being derived from the muddy fountains of the philoso- 
 phers, obscured, more than they illustrated the truth, contra- 
 dicted canonical doctrine, were even inconsistent with them- 
 selves, and bore traces of the Pelagian heresy. The writings of 
 modern theologians, especially of the mendicant orders, were, in 
 his opinion, destitute of any solid foundation. In place of en- 
 lightening the mind, they rather darken the naked and simple 
 truth, and minister to vanity. We ought to follow Scripture 
 alone, and try all other authors by it. To it must be subjected 
 even the decrees of Popes and Councils. He wholly rejects the 
 Monastic vow, as useless for piety, and hostile to Christian liberty, 
 and no less all self-devised satisfactions and good works. Respect- 
 ing Christianity, he complains that it has degenerated into 
 Judaism and Pharisaism. He strenuously maintains that we are 
 justified by virtue of Christ's merit, through faith, and not by any 
 deserts of our own. He says that sin still cleaves to good men ? 
 but that it is forgiven to them for the sake of Christ ; and he 
 decidedly refutes the sophists who extenuate the sin still lingering 
 in the saints. He unflinchingly follows the footsteps of Paul in 
 
 1 Catalog. Test, verit. lib. xix. torn. ii. p. 887. edit. Lugdun. Comp. 
 Walchii Monim. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4. Praefat. p. xix. 
 
OPINIONS EESPECTING GOCH. 145 
 
 preaching the merit of Christ, and asserts that there is no need 
 of the glosses of the sophists in expounding the Apostle, but that, 
 on the contrary, these pervert his meaning. It would probably 
 be found that he also held right opinions upon other articles, if we 
 possessed all his writings. Only part of them, however, have been 
 printed, and even these are incomplete*" I have given in full this 
 sketch of Flacius, because, although it contains no new particulars 
 respecting Goch, it shews the opinion entertained of him by one 
 of the most learned promoters of the Reformation, and because it 
 is also characteristic of the style in which Flacius writes his 
 history. On the whole, his statement of the views of Goch is 
 correct. It is obvious, however, partly that he makes him figure 
 as much as possible in the garb of Lutheran orthodoxy, and 
 partly too that he omits several essentially characteristic traits ; 
 in short, that he depicts him, not altogether as he appeared in- 
 dividually and objectively in history, but more according to a 
 received type, and for a particular polemical and apologetical 
 purpose. 
 
 These, the oldest panegyrists of Goch, are succeeded in the 
 following centuries by the historians of literature, or of the Re- 
 formation. Conrad Gesner, in his Universal Library, 1 gives a 
 catalogue of his writings with a few extracts. Henry Fantaleon, 2 
 in his Sketch of the illustrious men of Germany, makes honour- 
 able mention of him as a most learned and pious man, and suc- 
 cinctly repeats what is said by Flacius. Von der Hardt 3 gives a 
 summary of his writings. Lewis of Seckendorf, in his celebrated 
 History of Lutheranism, alludes to him in a cursory manner, 4 
 but forms a just estimate of his value as a distinguished pioneer 
 of the Reformation. Gerius, in his Appendix to Cave's History 
 of Ecclesiastical Authors, 5 commends Goch, calls him the friend 
 
 1 Biblioth. univers. Tigur. MDXLV. p. 442. 
 
 2 Prosopographia Heroum atque illustr. viror. totius Germaniae. 
 Basil. 1565. p. 461. 
 
 3 Antiqua literar. monimenta autographa Lutheri aliorumque ab 
 anno 1517 usque ad annum 1546. Helmst. 1690. sqq. t. ii. p. 76. 
 
 4 Historia Lutherani3mi. Francof. et Lips. 1692. Lib. i. sect. 54. § 
 133. Supplement ad indie, i. num. 30. Seckendorf denies any outward 
 connection of Luther with Goch, and contends only for a congeniality 
 of spirit. He derived his knowledge of Goch from the Catalog. 
 Biblioth. Rudolph, torn. ii. p. 77 sqq. 
 
 5 Cave Hist. Lit. vol. ii. Append, p. 187. ed. Basil. 1745. 
 
 K 
 
146 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 of Wcssel, and speaks of him in the style of Grapheus, as one of 
 the most learned and evangelically enlightened men of his age, 
 and as an excellent pioneer in the cause of Christian liberty. 
 Even J. Albert Fabricius does not refuse him a place in his 
 Library ;* and, in like manner, we find our author and his works 
 either briefly or largely noticed by Foppens 2 Guicciardini, z Van 
 Gestel,* and the two learned Dutchmen, Daniel and David 
 Clemens Gerdes. 5 
 
 The most of these writers were Protestants, and speak of Goch 
 in laudatozy terms. It is natural, that as the obverse of the high 
 estimation in which he was held by them, we should find him re- 
 pudiated by the Catholic Church and its members. 6 The Council 
 of Trent places Goch in the first class of prohibited authors, 
 whose works ought never to be read by the adherents of the 
 Catholic faith. 7 Van Gestel, at the least, says nothing in his 
 favour, and Foppens much that is decidedly of an opposite 
 character. His words are : " John Pupper was a friend of Wessel 
 of Groningen, and a priest of some learning, but fond of innova- 
 tion, and who preached, to a sickening extent, the necessity of a 
 Reformation in the Church. He also wrote to the same effect ; 
 and the Tridentine Fathers have therefore condemned his works." 8 
 This treatment on the part of the Catholics amounts to a valuable 
 testimony in favour of Goch's character as a Reformer. 
 
 1 Biblioth. Lat. med. et. inf. aetat. Lib. ix. t. iv. p. 228. 
 
 2 Biblioth. Belg. Bruxell. 1739. t. ii. p. 714. 715. 
 
 3 Description de tous les Pais-bas. Arnh. 1613. p. 214. 
 
 4 Hist. Archiep. Mechlin. 1725. p. 81. See above. 
 
 5 Daniel Gerdes in Serin, antiquar. sive Miscellan. Groning. t. v. 
 Tars 1. p. 497. not. 6. Groning. et Brem. 1756. Florileg. libror. rar. 
 s. v. Goch p. 110. Histor. evang. renov. t. iii. p. 20. Dav. Clem. 
 Gerdes Biblioth. curieuse. t. ix. p. 194. Comp. Walch Praef. ad mo- 
 mm. med. aev. ii. 1. p. iv. — xii. 
 
 6 Dav. Clem. Gerdes very justly says in the Biblioth. cur. t. ix. p. 
 194 : On n'aura pas sujet de s'etonner de ce que les livres de Gochius 
 out 6te fletris avec tant de severite, si Ton se donne la peine d'en lire quel- 
 ques feuillets, puisqu'on y remarquera une liberte de penser qui ne pou- 
 voit etre que prejudiciable aux opinions recues dans l'eglise avant la 
 reforme. 
 
 7 Walch monim. med. aev. i. 4. Praef. p. xxv. Walch quotes all 
 the passages in which the name of Goch is mentioned in the various 
 editions of the Index libr. prohib. Cologne 1597, p. 26. Paris 1599. 
 p. 159. Madrid 1583. p. 40. Rom. 1664. p. 260. 
 
 8 Foppens Biblioth. belg. t. ii. p. 715. 
 
OPINIONS RESPECTING GOCH. 147 
 
 More recently, however, Christian Will. Fran. Walch has ren- 
 dered the most important services to Goch and his writings. Two 
 of the most valuable of these, he has reprinted in his Monimenta 
 Medii -ZEvi, and in prefaces to them, 1 has embraced the oppor- 
 tunity of expatiating upon their author. He justly discrimi- 
 nates 2 between two classes of the witnesses for the truth prior to 
 the Reformation, those who combat the corruptions of the clergy, 
 and those who refute the errors of the teachers. Both, he says, 
 were indispensably necessary to pave the way for a Reformation 
 of the Church, but as the latter were fewer in number, they and 
 their writings have a proportionally stronger claim to be highly 
 appreciated, and to this class Goch belongs. Walch does not 
 overlook certain defects in his method of interpreting Scripture, 
 nor the artificialities in his expositions of doctrine ; but at the 
 same time, on the strength of the general tendency of his views, 
 he does not hesitate to place him on the roll of the Lutherans 
 who preceded Luther, and in the first rank of enlightened 
 theologians. 
 
 Among the modern Church historians who speak honourably 
 of Goch, we have particularly to mention Schroeckk and Gieseler. 
 The former 3 gives a summary of the contents of the work on the 
 Four errors touching the Gospel law. The latter 4 associates him 
 with John of Wesel, and the still more profound John Wessel, as 
 the leading champions of the principles of Scripture and St Augus- 
 tine, who first formed a path for the Reformation, and were 
 chiefly instrumental in exalting spiritual liberty to its place, as the 
 soul of all Christian virtue, and he gives well-selected and cha- 
 racteristic extracts from his works as reprinted in the collections 
 of Walch. 5 With these exceptions, however, which ought to be 
 gratefully acknowledged, modern writers have unduly neglected 
 Goch, so that hitherto not only has no separate work been 
 
 1 Mouim. med. aev. Goetting. 1760. vol. i. fasc. 4. Praef. p. xiii. — 
 xxxvii., and vol. ii. fasc. 1. Praef. p. ii. — xxiv. 
 
 2 Vol. i. fasc. 4. Praef. p. xxxiv. 
 
 3 Christl. Kirchengesch. Th. 33, s. 303—308. 
 
 4 Lehrbuch der K. Gesch. B. 2. Abth. 4. s. 488—492. 
 
 5 Goch's principal work on Christian liberty appears not to have been 
 accessible to Gieseler. 
 
148 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 devoted to him, but he has even been passed in silence in works 
 where some notice of him might justly have been expected. 1 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 GOCH'S WRITINGS. THEIR VARIOUS EDITIONS. 
 
 As he did not cause any immediate sensation during his life- 
 time, and as for half a century his works existed merely in manu- 
 script, it might naturally be expected that many of them have 
 been lost. And in point of fact the accounts given of them 
 include several which we no longer possess. At the same time, 
 when we compare the titles of the lost with the contents of those 
 which survive, and take into account his general character, as an 
 author, we can scarcely hesitate to say, that the loss is not very 
 material. The truth is, Goch moved in a very close and strictly 
 defined sphere of thought, which he had formed for himself from 
 Scripture, and his own experience of life, and in which his posi- 
 tion, as the member of a Church in many respects corrupted, 
 served to confirm him. With all his depth, vigour, and acute- 
 ness of mind, it is impossible to overlook a certain sameness. A 
 few leading thoughts have dominion over him, and under various 
 forms are constantly recurring in his writings. They relate to 
 the normal dignity of Scripture, and the subordinate authority of 
 theological teachers, to saving grace and justifying faith, to love 
 based upon belief, and liberty as the offspring of love, and to the 
 conditional value of all ecclesiastical works and obligations, espe- 
 cially of the Monastic vow. It is probable that Goch had elaborated 
 his views upon these points in various ways, and reduced them to 
 writing at first in the shape of mere sketches, then in a more de- 
 tailed, and at last in a complete and comprehensive form. This 
 
 1 e.g. in Henke's Gesch. der christl. Kirche. B. 2. s. 517, der 5ten 
 Ausgabe, in Erhard's Gesch. des Wiederaufbliihens wissenschaftlicher 
 Bildung, B. i., in which two works John of Wesel, John Wessel, and 
 other very inferior persons are brought forward, whereas Goch is not 
 even mentioned. 
 
goch's writings. 149 
 
 explains the fact that among his writings, several are men- 
 tioned which, judging from their superscription, appear to have 
 been of substantially the same import ; nay it would seem 
 that the topics of them were likewise identical with those 
 chiefly discussed in the writings which survive. The first 
 draughts were, doubtless, never intended for publication. Goch 
 wrote them solely for his own use, or to shew to intimate 
 friends. They were found, however, among the papers which 
 he left, and therefore were inserted in the catalogue of his 
 works. The fuller expositions were destined for a more exten- 
 sive circulation, and hence were probably elaborated with 
 greater care. It fortunately happens, that the works which 
 have come down to us are chiefly of the latter description, 
 viz., the two disquisitions, one upon Christian liberty, and the 
 other upon the Errors touching the Gospel Law, and we may 
 have the confident persuasion, that these are of themselves suf- 
 ficient to enable us to form a correct and substantially complete 
 view of his religious and theological opinions. What we have 
 most to lament is the loss of a Treatise on the state of the Soul 
 after death, which he seems to have left. It probably contained 
 his views on Purgatory, and that is a subject on which, as well 
 as on the whole matter of a future existence, little is said in his 
 remains, although from the data they supply, we can have no 
 difficulty in inferring what his convictions respecting the ever- 
 lasting life really were. 
 
 In noticing Goch's writings, 1 w r e commence with those which 
 are the most authentic, and which still survive. No doubt 
 attaches to the disquisitions, De Libertate Christianae JReligionis, 
 and De quatuor Erroribus circa Legem Evangelicam, or to the 
 Epistola Apologetica, declarans quid de Scholasticorum scriptis et 
 Religiosorum votis, et obligationibus sit censendum et tenendum. 
 These formed part of Goch's remains, or at least, while the 
 remembrance of him was still fresh, they were given to the press 
 
 1 About the writings of Goch, besides the Literary histories of Ges- 
 ner, Cave, Foppens, and Fabricius, compare especially, Von d. Hardt's 
 Autographa Lutheri Sive Antiqua literar. monira. autogr. t. ii. p. 
 76. Dav. Clem. Gerdes Biblioth. curieuse. t. ix. p. 194 sqq., and 
 Christ. Guil. Franc. Walch in Monim. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4, vol. ii. 
 fasc. 1. in the preface to each of the two fasciculi. 
 
150 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 by learned men deeply interested in their author. By their 
 contents and their form, they evince themselves the productions 
 of one and the same mind, and that such a mind as tradition 
 must lead us to infer Goch's was. Nor is there in the particulars 
 they contain anything to awaken the suspicion of their having been 
 interpolated. Respecting his other disquisitions, the earliest 
 and most authentic source of information is the Letter of the 
 anonymous writer, who probably between 1520 and 1530, or 
 certainly not much later, set on foot a search for his literary 
 remains in the Monastery Tabor itself. He took pains in the 
 first place to find the conclusion of the book De Libertate Chris- 
 tiana, which is wanting in the edition published in 1521, but 
 without success. On the other hand, besides the treatises De 
 Libertate Christiana and De quatuor Erroribus, he found papers 
 containing essays on the following subjects : De Gratia et 
 Meritis — De Fide et Operibus — De Perfectione Religionis Evan- 
 gelicae. Goch himself gives a hint that he had written a treatise 
 upon the connexion of Thomism with Pelagianism, 1 and Walch 
 also possessed other manuscripts under Goch's name, entitled De 
 Gratia et Libero Arbitrio and De Gratia et Christiana Fide, 
 which it was his intention to have published. 2 
 
 At an early period catalogues also were made of his writings. 
 Gesner's 3 contains the following : Epistola apologetica adv. quen- 
 dam Praedic. Ord. — Dialogus de quat. erroribus circa legem evan- 
 gelicam exortis, — De votis et religionibus factitiis, sive de libertate 
 Christianae religionis conclusiones novem, — Insunt item huic operi 
 fragmenta quaedam : de gratia et meritis, de fide et operibus, de 
 perfectione legis evangelicae, — De libertate Christiana. 
 
 1 Dialog, de quat. errorib. cap. 17. p. 180: . . . quod Thomistae 
 affirmant oranino negamus, immo falsum esse et haeresi Pelagianao 
 vicinum dicimus, quod partim superius, partim alias copiosis et efficaci- 
 ous autoritatibus et rationibus declaravimus. 
 
 2 Monim. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4. Praefat. p. xxx. Praeter dialogum 
 ejusque additamenta nihil ad manus meas pervenit, exceptis binis opus- 
 culis, quorum alterum de gratia et libero arbitrio : de fide et bonis operi- 
 bus ; alterum de gratia et Christiana fide, contra justitiam et merita 
 operurn exponit. Utrumque, si deo visum fuerit, alio tempore luce 
 donare, animus est. I do not know that Walch ever really published 
 the treatises. 
 
 3 Biblioth. univ. Fig. 1545. p. 422. 
 
GOCIl'S WRITINGS. 151 
 
 Fabricuis 1 enumerates them thus : De S. Scripturae dignitate 
 et irrefragabili auctoritate, et quo judicio aliorum scripta, prae- 
 sertim Scholasticorum et Philosophorum legenda sint, ad En- 
 gelbertum Ord. Praed. — De quat. error, circa leg. evang. exortis. — 
 De votis et religionibus factitiis sive de libertate Christianae reli- 
 gionis, conclusiones novem. 
 
 Foppens 2 gives us the following list which is the most complete : 
 
 De libertate Christianae religionis. 
 
 De gratia et fide. 
 
 De Scripturae sacrae dignitate, 
 
 De Scholasticorum scriptis. 
 
 De Statu animae post vitam. 
 
 De reparatione generis humani per Christum. 
 
 De votis et obligationibus. 
 
 Of these treatises, however, several, so far as the substance is 
 concerned, may be identified with those which we still possess. 
 The one De Gratia et Fide can scarcely have been different from 
 the essays found by the anonymous person on the subjective Gratia 
 et Meritis and De Fide et Operibus, or from that possessed by 
 Walch,Zte Gratiaet Christiana Fide, and can hardlyhavecontained 
 much important matter which is not still to be found in the book 
 De Libertate Christiana. The two treatises, De Scripturae sacrae 
 dignitate, and De Scholasticorum scriptis, are in like manner, and 
 as respects their substance, preserved in the Epistola apologetica, 
 for the first treats of the authority of Scripture, and the second, 
 of the weight to be assigned to theological authors, and both 
 subjects are elsewhere handled by Goch in detail, viz., in the 
 book De Libertate Christiana. The work De reparatione generis 
 humani per Christum is doubtless no longer extant, but the doc- 
 trine itself is fully stated in the main work, DeLibertate Christiana; 
 while the disquisition De votis et obligationibus may have been, 
 and as the statement of Fabricius shews, probably was, identi- 
 cal with that work De Libertate Christiana, or more probably, as 
 shown by Gesner and Foppens, with the Dialogus de quatuor 
 Erroribus. This too bore the title, Et de votis et religionibus 
 
 1 Biblioth. lat. med. et inf. aet. Lib. ix. t. iv. p. 228. 
 
 2 Biblioth. belg. t. ii. p. 714 and 15. 
 
152 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 facticiis, and inasmuch as, although one of Goch's most im- 
 portant writings, it is not even mentioned in the catalogue of 
 Foppens, there seems to be a natural ground for the supposition 
 that it is the work meant by the title, De votis et obligationibus, 
 and all the more, because this title gives a correct statement of 
 its chief contents. In this manner, it is the disquisition De statu 
 animae post vitam, with reference to which we have chief cause 
 to lament, not merely a formal, but also a material loss. 
 
 Respecting the chronological order of the writings, we have 
 no historical data, nor are there any grounds from which it would 
 be easy to ascertain more than we have already attempted to 
 conclude upon the subject. According to that, among the works 
 extant, we reckon as the earliest production, the book De Libertate 
 Christiana, although it was constructed out of several antecedent 
 draughts upon the main topics connected with the subject, and 
 therefore composed in his maturer years. Next would follow 
 the more controversial and reformatory treatise De quatuorErrori- 
 bus, while as the last of his productions, being called forth by an 
 attack on some of his earlier opinions, we place the Epistola 
 Apologetica. The first editor Grapheus says of this, that it was 
 written about 46 years prior to its publication. 1 If then we 
 suppose it to have been published in 1521, and from that sub- 
 tract 46, we have the year 1475, which was the last of Goch's 
 life, so that with this apology he must have terminated his 
 labours as an author. 
 
 We shall follow the same order, in mentioning the various 
 editions of these writings. It is no doubt asserted by Foppens, 
 that all which he enumerates were published in Germany. This 
 statement, however, is very vague, and even untrue. The 
 earliest editions, as can be easily proved, were set on foot, not in 
 Germany but in the Netherlands. Moreover, the impressions 
 of one or -two treatises, if any such were ever made, appear to 
 have been wholly lost, and we must therefore confine ourselves to 
 what can be distinctly proved. And here we have to men- 
 tion first the Booh upon Christian liberty. Tlie only edition^ 
 so far as is known to me, of this work, was brought out by Cor- 
 
 i Letter of Grapheus in Walch Monim. raed. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. 
 Praef. p. xii. xiii. 
 
goch's writings. 153 
 
 nelius Grapheus, at Antwerp 1521, in a medium form 1 between 
 quarto and octavo. The title, ornamented with wood cuts, runs 
 as follows :-^- 
 
 DE LIBER 
 
 TATE CHRISTIANA 
 
 prestantissimi Viri, Dni loan 
 nis Pupperi Gocchiani. 
 
 Hie videre licebit De vario et multiplici intel- 
 
 lectu sacrae scripturae, 
 De libertate voluntatis et ei 9 opationibus, 
 De eo in quo sit meritum humani opens, 
 De voto religionis longe aliter q Thomas 
 
 aliiq ; scholastici tractarunt. 
 
 Introspice hospes, nam et hie dij sunt. 
 An. D. XXL Mensis Martii. 
 
 CUM GRATIA et PRIYILEGIO. 
 
 The preface, the substance of which we have already com- 
 municated, bears the superscription : Cornelius Grapheus omnibus 
 fratribus vere Christianis ad Christianam libertatem anhelantibus, 
 salutem in Christo Jesu, nostrae libertatis assertore, and, at the 
 conclusion, the date, Antverpiae, Anno a Christiano nataliMDXXl. 
 Quarto Calendas Apriles. Upon the last blank page of the three 
 leaves which contain the preface stands the text, Ephes.iv. 14. The 
 Treatise itself is headed : Incipit Tractatus de libertate Christiane 
 religionis V. patris D. Johannis Pupper de Goch, confessoris 
 Monialium apud Mechliniam in TJiabor, and occupies 124 leaves 
 or 247 pages. At the close there stands 
 
 FINIS HORUM, 
 
 Reliqua desyderamus. 
 
 Antverpiae per Michaelem Hillenium^ 
 
 in intersignio Rapi. 
 
 1 Gesner also probably alludes to this edition, when he says, De 
 libert. Christiana, liber impressus, sed ab auctore, ut videtur, non ub- 
 solutus. 
 
154 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF GOCH. 
 
 The type has many abbreviations, and here and there also some 
 errors, but upon the whole is good and legible. A copy of this 
 edition, which, for the sake of its great rarity, 1 I have thus fully 
 described, exists in the Library kept in the hall of the great 
 Church at Emden. 2 
 
 Of the Dialogus de quatuor erroribus circa legem evangelicam 
 exortis et de votis et religionibus facticiis, the second in rank of 
 GocKs treatises, I have used the imprint inserted by Walch in 
 his Monimenta medii aevi vol. I. fasc. iv. Goetting. 1760. It occu- 
 pies 166. pages small octavo, and is to be found in that work from 
 p. 73 — 239. At the end are appended Conclusiones novem de 
 Libertate Christianae religionis, partly the results of what pre- 
 cedes, with other pieces less closely connected with it, as for in- 
 stance Notata de vita communi et libertate evangelica, de votis 
 et evangelica paupertate, etc. Walch believed that he was the 
 first to bring this Dialogue to light by means of the press. 3 
 This, however, he afterwards discovered to be a mistake. He 
 learned from Von der Hardt and others, 4 that the work had 
 been printed before, and even, according to Von der Hardt's 
 opinion, so early as 1520. The excuse, which in a very full 
 and learned manner, Walch makes for himself, may be read 
 in the preface to the first Fasciculus of the second part of. 
 the Monimenta Med. JEvi, page 7 sq. The old edition of the 
 dialogue has never come under my inspection. The date of 
 the impression is not given. There can, however, be no doubt, 
 that it must be assigned to the same period as the one already 
 
 1 Dan. Gerdes styles the writings of Goch in general libros rarissimos; 
 Dav. Clemen. Gerdes, although he employed himself zealously in the 
 search of them, could not obtain a sight of the book de libert. christ. 
 Walch. Monim. ii. 1. Praef. p. x. Few moderns have ever seen it. 
 
 2 Catalogue of all the books in the library of the great church at 
 Emden 1836. Erstes Heft: Theologie S. 45. Num. 193. The library 
 contains various works on Church history, especially the history of 
 the Reformed churches, as well as of the Reformation in general. 
 
 3 Monim. med. aev. i. 4. Praef. p. xxx. : Accedo ad dialogum, quern 
 primum in conspectum doctorum a me proferri, milii persuadeo. 
 
 4 Autograph. Luther, vol. ii. p. 76. sqq. Even Gesner had already 
 said, liber excusus in 4. chartis 13 et dimid. — Dan. Gerdes floril. libr. 
 rarior. p. 110. — Sammlungen von alien und neuen Theol. Sachen. 
 1736. s. 499. Catalogue des livres imprimes de la biblioth. du Roi de 
 France, t. ii. p. 42. Dav. Clem. Gerdes biblioth. cur. t. ix. p. 194. 
 
goch's writings. 155 
 
 mentioned of the book De Libertate Christiana, and there- 
 fore at the commencement of the third decennium of the 16th 
 century. 
 
 T7ie third work of Goch, which exists in print, is the Epistola 
 Apologetica, declarans, quid de Scholasticowm scriptis et religioso- 
 rum votis et obligationibus sit censendum et tenendum. It is also 
 contained in Walch, 1 where it occupies only twenty-four pages. 
 It was published, however, at a much earlier date, and by the 
 zealous disseminator of the works and doctrines of Goch, viz. 
 Cornelius Grapheus, under the title of Epistola apologetica D. 
 Johannis Gochii, Presbyteri, praefecti monialibus monasterii in 
 Thabor celeberrimi oppidi Mechliniensis in Brabantia adversus 
 quendam praedieatorii ordinis, super doctrina doctorum Scholasti- 
 corum et quibusdam aliis. Perlege Christiane lector, et tum judica. 
 This is, without doubt, the edition mentioned by Gesner as, Im- 
 press, in Germania in 4. chart. 2.et dimid. Walch gives 1 the preface 
 which Grapheus wrote to this little work and addressed to Nicolaus 
 von Herzogenbusch. Here he expresses the lively pleasure he 
 took in the short, but at the same time pithy work", notices that 
 it was written about forty-six years before, and thanks Nicolaus 
 for sending to him the manuscript of it, accompanied with the 
 assurance that it proceeded from the author's own hand ; 3 " It 
 was a particular satisfaction to him," he says, " to be instru- 
 mental in bringing to light so excellent an author," and he asks, 
 " But where has he hid himself for such a length of time ? In 
 what corner has so pure a pearl hitherto remained concealed % 
 Truly the good man deserved a better fate than to have been 
 thrust by mischance into that rude and barbarous century ; for 
 he is said to have departed this life as early as the year 1475." 
 According to these statements the Epistola Apologetica must 
 have been the first of Goch's pieces edited by Grapheus, probably 
 in the year 1520, but perhaps somewhat earlier. The preface gives 
 the date as follows : Antverpice, ex aedibus nostris, X. Calend. 
 
 1 Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. i. p. 1 — 24. 
 
 2 Ibid. Praefat. p. xii. — xvii. 
 
 3 . . . idque pervetusto cbaractere propria ipsius autoris manu 
 (ut affirmabas) exaratum. 
 
156 LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 
 
 Sept. without the year.' Then followed (but whether edited by 
 Grapheus himself or not we do not know), the Treatise Be 
 quatuor Erroribus, and finally in March 1521, the workZte Liber- 
 tate Christiana, to which Grapheus wrote a cutting preface 
 which provoked the anger of the Inquisitors. We can scarcely 
 conceive the order to have been the reverse of this, and that 
 Grapheus edited the work De Libertate Christiana first, for after 
 he had been entangled in the process for heresy, and put into 
 confinement, after he had in April 1522, and while still in prison, 
 subscribed his recantation, we can not suppose that he would 
 publish anything more from the pen of our author. It is very 
 probable, therefore, that the order in which the three best known 
 writings of Goch were published was the reverse of that in which 
 they were at first composed by their author. 
 
 Besides these a Fourth work of Goch's has also appeared in 
 print. Von der Hardt, 1 Dav. Clemens Gerdes, 2 and Walch 3 all 
 mention it, and Gerdes had even the printed copy in his hands. 
 The title is : In divince gratiaz et Christiana? Jidei commendationem, 
 contra falsam et Pharisaicam multorum de justitiis et meritis 
 operum doctrinam, et gloriationem, fragmenta aliquot D. Joannis 
 Gocchii Mechliniensis, ante hac numquam excusa. Appendix 
 aurea ex diversis, de gratia et libero arbitrio, de fide et bonis 
 operibus ; et quod non sint sine peccato, quomodo intelligitur. 
 Indicem eorum, quo? hoc opusculo continentur, folio sequenti, lector, 
 reperies. Ad Roma. X. ignorantes dei justitiam et suam quaerentes 
 statuere, justifies dei non sunt subjecti. The copy which Gerdes 
 had in his hand was printed forma secunda without assignation 
 of the year. The Parisian catalogue mentions another copy 
 with the year 1525. Walch, however, is not disposed to consider 
 the notice as founded upon fact. This work of Goch's is also 
 very rare, and I have never -been able to obtain a sight of it. 
 Walch had proposed to introduce it into his collection, but ap- 
 pears not to have executed his purpose, any more than in the 
 reprint of the two Treatises De gratia et libero arbitrio, and De 
 gratia et Christiana fide. 
 
 1 Autogr. Luth. vol. ii. p. 76. 
 
 2 Biblioth. cur. t. ix. p. 164. 
 
 3 Monim. med. aev. ii. 1 . Praef. p. x. 
 
goch's writings. 157 
 
 In fine, Von der Hardt 1 states that fragments of Goch's trea- 
 tises De gratia Divina et de Christiana fide have also appeared in 
 print, and assigns the publication to the year 1520 ; but of these 
 likewise I have never succeeded in obtaining a sight. 
 
 1 Autogr. Luth. vol. ii. p. 76. sqq. Comp. Walch monim. med. aev. 
 ii. 1. Praefat. p. vii. 
 
SECOND BOOK. 
 
 JOHN OF WESEL 
 
 NECESSITY FOR THE REFORMATION IN REFERENCE 
 
 TO PARTICULAR THINGS IN THE CHURCH, 
 
 ESPECIALLY INDULGENCES, AND THE 
 
 CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 
 
 T scorn the Pope, the Church, and Councils, and I extol Christ ; let his "Word dwell in us 
 richly.— John of Wesel, in a sermon at Worms. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF THE WEST, AND IN PARTICULAR OP GERMANY, 
 IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 In John of Gocli we have made the acquaintance of a Theo- 
 logian, who, being of a predominantly reflective nature, devoted 
 himself almost exclusively to the contemplation of the more in- 
 ward condition of the Christian body, traced the deep roots of 
 its corruption, and pondered upon the remedies which would 
 prove most effectual for renovating its spirit and general tendency. 
 In John of Wesel, the person to whom we now pass, we find 
 a man possessed of a more practical turn of mind, and who, 
 for that reason, directs his chief attention to the Church's 
 external condition, combats its manifest corruptions, and endea- 
 vours to apply his hand at once to the task of its improve- 
 ment. At the same time, having been born upon the Rhine, and 
 having devoted his whole labours to his native land, he points 
 our view principally to Germany ; and as we cannot form a 
 just estimate of his character, without taking into account the 
 state of the Church with which he was connected, he will 
 thus become our guide to a fuller acquaintance with the eccle- 
 siastical affairs of that country. 
 
 It is not to subjects of science or of doctrine that our attention 
 will here be called, but rather to the constitution of the Church. 
 The task and labour of our forefathers, till the time of the Refor- 
 mation, were directed to the improvement, not so much of Theo- 
 logy or Philosophy, as of the State, and its relation to the 
 hierarchy. The Germans, at the first, embraced the religion of 
 Jesus Christ practically with the heart. This peculiar relation- 
 ship to Christianity, however, developed itself among them in 
 two directions. Of these, one was more inward, penetrating to 
 
162 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 the depths of the spirit, and was pursued by men of a contem- 
 plative nature; the other was more outward, with application to 
 life, and was taken by men of an active turn. The inward prac- 
 tical direction produced the Theology of experience or Mysti- 
 cism, which, while the cultivation of Logic in the Schools 
 chiefly occupied the Romanic nations, nourished and satisfied 
 the German heart, and especially in the 15th century, after the 
 decline of Scholasticism came to be sensibly felt, manifested 
 itself more and more victorious, and influential for the future, 
 as the c i German Theology." The other externally-practical drift 
 bore principally upon the Church, and originated a lively and 
 active interest in its constitution and government. And inas- 
 much as, in consequence of the position assumed by the German 
 Empire in the middle ages, the great questions of the day, those, 
 to wit, respecting the spiritual and temporal powers, were debated 
 between Germany and Home, we find a multitude of noble and 
 active minds devoting their life, or at least a considerable portion 
 of their labours, to the evolution of this relationship. No doubt 
 the bond of Christian union was then twined around all the 
 nations of Europe, and we do not mean to affirm, either that the 
 Germans take no part in the cultivation of Scholasticism, or that 
 the Theologians of other nations, especially the great Frenchmen 
 of the loth century, did nothing to modify the condition of the 
 Church. Generally, however, and on a large scale, the case was 
 the reverse of that which we find in modern times, for science 
 fell more to the lot of the French, and politics to that of the 
 Germans. In the ranks of the men distinguished for practical 
 activity, John of Wesel occupies a place, and he, therefore, diverts 
 our course away from the other main bent of the German mind, 
 viz., that to Mysticism, and directs it chiefly to the ecclesiastical 
 affairs of the period. In order, however, to form a correct notion 
 of the existing state of things, especially in reference to the hier- 
 archy, we must necessarily revert to the remote past. 
 
 1. THE GROWTH AND BLOSSOM OF THE HIERARCHY. 
 
 Whoever intends to depict the ecclesiastic affairs of the middle 
 ages, finds himself inevitably involved in the political. Nor is 
 
WESTERN CHURCH IN THE 15TH CENTURY. 1G3 
 
 the reverse of this statement less true : Church and State are 
 inseparately conjoined. This is especially the case from the Car- 
 lovingian era, and during the whole course of German history. 
 The Empire evolved itself by the side of the Papacy, and the 
 Papacy simultaneously with the Empire. Each presupposes the 
 other. Their mutual relation and reciprocal influence constitute 
 the great heart throbs in all the transactions of the middle ages. 
 Both powers, although representing different tendencies and 
 interests, rise together, and contemporaneously stand side by side 
 in the full blossom of their prosperity, partly combatting, and 
 partly implementing and supporting each other, and both of them, 
 in the same century, although from different causes and in dif- 
 ferent degrees, begin to decline. Of all this let us here attempt 
 at least a sketch. 
 
 The German Church, as is well known, was founded at first 
 in dependence upon Rome. At the time when Christianity was 
 successfully spread between the Rhine and the Elbe, the Bishop 
 of Rome was recognized as the undoubted primate of the West, 
 the central and connecting point in establishing and organizing 
 the Church. For this reason, the pious and stout-hearted men 
 in the British monasteries, who felt the impulse to carry the 
 Gospel to their kinsmen on the continent, betook themselves, 
 with few exceptions, to Rome, in order to receive consecra- 
 tion for the labours they were to prosecute, and for the over- 
 sight of the Churches they were to collect. In this manner 
 Germany was brought at once into the ecclesiastical organism 
 of which Rome was the centre. The same deep devotion with 
 which they embraced Christianity, the Germans likewise paid to 
 the visible head of the Church. No nation was ever more sub- 
 missive to the Romish chair, because with them submission 
 rested upon a deep religious and moral foundation. For the 
 same reason, however, when their piety and moral sense were 
 scandalized by the secularized hierarchy, no nation ever waged 
 with Rome a more angry, persevering, and general war. 
 
 The superior authority of the Roman Bishop among the 
 Western nations was founded upon a variety of traditional 
 grounds. The cause, however, which was chiefly instrumental 
 in building up the politico-ecclesiastical power of the Papacy, 
 was the connexion of the Romish chair with the Carlovingian 
 
1G4 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 family. In terminating the shadowy dominion of the Merovin- 
 gians, Pepin leant, on the one side, upon the will of the people 
 expressed at the diet of the Empire, which was a substantial 
 power, and, on the other, upon the sanction of the Romish 
 Bishop, the champion of the Church, a power purely ideal, but 
 reverenced at the time as the Divine authority visible upon earth. 
 This fact was fraught with vast consequences in the history of 
 the world. It laid a foundation for the opinion, that it was in 
 the competence of the Romish Bishop to withhold the higher 
 consecration from one prince and to bestow it upon another, and 
 Gregory VII. did not fail to cite the case against Henry IV. 1 
 From that time, the most intimate alliance was formed between 
 the Romish chair and the new dynasty, as the powers aspir- 
 ing to the dominion of Europe. It was again a bishop of Rome 
 by the word of whose mouth the Western Empire, then practi- 
 cally extinct, was transferred to one who had sufficient strength 
 to uphold it, viz., Charlemagne, and Charlemagne, in his turn, 
 elevated the Roman Bishop to the rank of a great and w r ealthy 
 ecclesiastical prince. In this manner, the Western Empire and 
 the Papacy arose side by side, and with the mutual help of each 
 other. 
 
 Even under Charlemagne, the Church occupied an important 
 position, closely connected with the life of the State, as is proved 
 by the Capitularies which relate to ecclesiastical matters. The 
 commanding spirit of this monarch, however, repressed every 
 attempt on the part of the clergy at intrusion into the civil 
 domain, and endeavoured rather to guide them back to their 
 apostolic vocation. 2 He also kept his strong hand over Rome, 
 and the Pope, who was really nothing more than the first Bishop 
 of the Empire, and subject in temporal things to him whom he 
 had called to its throne. 
 
 This relation, however, took a different shape under Charle- 
 
 1 The words of Gregory are : Alius Romanus Pontifex Regein 
 Francorum, non tarn pro suis iniquitatibus, quam pro eo, quod tantae 
 potestati non erat utihs, a regno deposuit et Pipinum Caroli M. Impe- 
 ratoris patrem in ejus loco substituit, omnesque Francigenas a jura- 
 mento tidelitatis, quod illi fecerant, absolvit. 
 
 2 Comp. especially the very characteristic 2d Capitulary of A.D 811. 
 T. i. p. 479 in Baluzius, especially § 2, 5, 11. 
 
GROWTH AND BLOSSOM OF THE HIERARCHY. 165 
 
 magne's successors. The constitution of the Church under- 
 went a change. The supreme head of the civil authority 
 became weak, that of the spiritual increased in strength. The 
 aristocratic metropolitan constitution, invented in the East, had 
 at first been introduced among the Western nations, simultane- 
 ously with Christianity, but had not attained to right vigour. 
 Now, however, when the Bishops found it their interest to evade 
 or resist the authority of their own Archbishops, by connecting 
 themselves with the Bishop of Rome, that authority was more 
 and more undermined. Upon the foundation of the primitive 
 aristocracy an ecclesiastical monarchy took its rise. To this evo- 
 lution the Decretals of Isidore, in the 9th century, largely con- 
 tributed. A product of the tendency of the age, these Decretals 
 helped in an important way to strengthen the tendency from which 
 they sprang, inasmuch as by a mixture of genuine and spurious re- 
 cords, which there was no criticism to detect, they practically ex- 
 hibited the idea of the Church as an independent commonwealth, 
 superior to the State, but governed by the arbitrary will of the 
 Romish Bishop. Circumstances were peculiarly fa vourable for the 
 introduction of this notion. The posterity of Charlemagne lacked 
 their great ancestor's genius for government, and even underLouis 
 the Pious, the Bishop of Rome could aspire to settle the dispute 
 between the Emperor and his rebellious sons, by asserting the 
 principle, that the rule of the Pope over the souls of men is 
 superior to the temporal dominion of the Monarch. It is true, 
 that Lothario attempted to recover the imperial privileges. The 
 canonical election of the Pope was to be ratified by the Emperor, 
 to whom also the Romans were to swear allegiance ; l But Popes 
 were consecrated before the sanction of the Emperor was obtained, 
 and his sway at Rome continued to fluctuate. 
 
 The Papacy, however, was destined to celebrate its triumphs 
 only after mighty conflicts. At the division of the kingdom of 
 the Franks, the imperial sceptre passed into German hands. By 
 this means, Germany became the centre of all politico-ecclesias- 
 
 1 " I promise," such is the form of the oath, " that I will be faithful 
 and obedient all my life to the Emperors Louis and Lothario, yet without 
 prejudice to the oath by which I am already bound to ray Lord the 
 Pope." 
 
166 LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 tical affairs ; whereas in France, as we have observed, the culti- 
 vation of science became the chief interest. Under the great 
 Saxon Emperors, Henry I. and Otho I., the foundations of the 
 stability and order of the German Empire were laid. In the elec- 
 tion of these Emperors, the clergy had no determining voice. On 
 the contrary, Henry rather kept the ecclesiastics in obedience and 
 submission, and even in Italy, Otho reasserted, and when neces- 
 sary by force of arms and in opposition to the Pope, the rights 
 which he had inherited from his Carlovingian ancestors. Under 
 the pornocracy (government of harlots) in the first half of the 
 10th century, the Papacy was degraded and all Italy torn by 
 factions. Otho I. established order, and appointed a Pope, and 
 thenceforward the elections continued to take place under the 
 predominating influence of the German Emperors. In the state 
 in which things were at the time, and when the Emperors hap- 
 pened to be virtuous men, this was a good arrangement. It did 
 not, however, correspond with the idea of the Church and the 
 Papacy, in the shape which these had assumed, and it was perni- 
 cious in its consequences, when the imperial influence was opposed 
 to the Church's higher interests. In that case, the Church was 
 secularised, her head dishonoured, the clergy corrupted, and a 
 reaction rendered inevitable. And at last a reaction came, as is 
 well known, under Henry IV., the third of the Franconian Em- 
 perors. Henry's father and predecessor, Henry III. had, without 
 challenge, appointed to all vacant ecclesiastical offices, and even 
 several of the Popes had been raised by his good pleasure to the 
 Romish chair. On its becoming vacant in 1048, an embassy 
 from Rome had supplicated him to appoint a person to fill it, 
 when he selected the Bishop of Toul. 1 In the reign of this 
 Pope, Leo IX., a monk from the monastery of Clugny arrived at 
 Rome, and under several of his successors, prosecuted a powerful 
 reaction in favour of the Papal authority, until at length as Gre- 
 gory VII. he completed the work. 
 
 The Papacy, already vividly possessed with the notion of a 
 universal theocracy, had long beheld itself out-flanked by the 
 Empire. To this humiliation it was compelled to submit, during 
 
 1 A man who was related to him by the mother's side. 
 
GROWTH AND BLOSSOM OF THE HIERARCHY. 1G7 
 
 the life time of the stern and resolute Henry III. 1 Shortly after 
 his death, however, Alexander II. mounted the Papal throne 
 without the imperial sanction, and all things became more and 
 more ripe for restoring to the Church and its head an indepen- 
 dent position. The institution of an elective college secured 
 freedom and order in the choice and appointment of the Pope. 
 Laws Avere promulgated against simony, and zealous endeavours 
 made for a reformation of .the morals of the clergy, and a con- 
 sequent increase of their respectability and weight. While the 
 Church was thus strengthening itself inwardly, the imperial 
 sceptre passed into inexperienced and unsteady hands. Henry 
 IV., although gifted by nature w T ith excellent qualities, was yet 
 badly trained and badly advised, and in the impetuosity of youth, 
 committed faults on every side. In particular, he grossly abused 
 the imperial power in appointing to ecclesiastical offices, thereby 
 exposed many weak points to the far-reaching sagacity of Gre- 
 gory VII., and allowed his imperatorial energy, now in arms 
 against him, to acquire an immeasurable ascendancy. The con- 
 flicts betwixt the two are well known. Gregory, after great 
 triumphs, died in exile, and Henry, crowned at Rome by a rival 
 Pope of his own appointment, vindicated his cause in arms. It 
 is not, however, always upon battle-fields that victories are 
 decided. The principles which Gregory defended were entwined 
 with the most powerful tendencies in the progress ot society ; 
 and when he fled from Rome, they took possession of the world. 2 
 His attempts, whose sole object at the first was probably the 
 emancipation and independence of the Church, aspired in the 
 sequel at realizing the idea of a universal Christian theocracy, 
 as alone adequate to implement the conception of the Papacy 
 and satiate the ambitious spirit of the man who then occu- 
 pied its throne. A balance of powers appeared an impossi- 
 bility. It behoved that one should predominate, and as the 
 Papacy had hitherto been dependent on the Empire, their rela- 
 tion was henceforward to be reversed, the temporal was to serve, 
 
 1 Nevertheless, by the advice of Hildebrand, Leo IX., having been 
 nominated by the Emperor, had come to Rome, not as Pope, but as 
 Pilgrim, and was styled Pope only after he was elected at Rome to 
 the office. 
 
 2 Expressions of Rarike in his excellent, Deutschen Geschichte im 
 Zeitalter dcr Reformation. Th. i. s. 33. 
 
168 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the spiritual to reign, and the Pope to stand at the head of 
 the family of Christian nations, as the Divinely appointed and 
 commissioned Father, dispensing all the gifts and graces both of 
 heaven and of earth. There is grandeur, no doubt, in the con- 
 ception, and it was no common spirit which ventured to devise, 
 and carry it into effect. Human nature, however, is insufficient 
 for the task of realizing it, and at all events, the attempt was 
 only practicable at a time of relative political and ecclesiastical 
 immaturity, when the energies of nations were yet in a state of 
 powerful fermentation. At such a time it is impossible to over- 
 look the high consequence of the Papacy. It was capable 
 of being a shield to the oppressed, and by mitigating the violence 
 of the temporal sword, and inspiring the dread of a higher power, 
 a bulwark of public freedom. Such was in fact the position 
 occupied by the Popes, when they understood their vocation. 
 Moreover, the Papacy was better adapted, than any mere political 
 power, to restore among the European nations the union requi- 
 site for their collective development, and to serve at the time as 
 some compensation for the want of the vastly enlarged means of 
 intercourse which are now enjoyed. In fine, as we have already 
 had occasion to observe, the Papacy was to a certain extent 
 useful, as a system of discipline. If Christianity was destined 
 once more to become a law to the rude nations, and gradually to 
 train them for the enjoyment of the liberty of the Gospel, it was 
 requisite that a powerful and Divinely authorized defender of the 
 law should take the lead, and who was competent for the task 
 but the Head of the Church, whose office it is to enforce moral 
 discipline ? In this manner, for a certain age, and within proper 
 limits, the Papacy was a necessity, and was felt to be so by the 
 nations, for at the first they adhered to it in the strength of con- 
 viction, and for many centuries could not be brought to renounce it 
 even by the worst of the Popes. But times changed, and the Papacy 
 did not restrain itself within due bounds. Raised to a still loftier 
 height by the general commotion of the Crusades, which they set on 
 foot, and in which, as the heads of the Church militant, and the 
 supreme governors of the Germanico Roman Commonwealth, 
 they took the lead, the Popes encroached more and more upon 
 the political sphere, and raised up a domination which rivalled 
 that of the Empire, even when most powerfully represented. 
 
GROWTH AND BLOSSOM OF THE HIERARCHY. 1G9 
 
 Two systems were formed and contended for in a keen and univer- 
 sal war, the imperial Gibelline, which sought to vindicate for the 
 head of the Empire, Divine authenticity and independence, and 
 the Papo-Italian, which made the Pope absolute and supreme even 
 in temporal things ; and for a time at least the latter was com- 
 pletely victorious. The Pope became, in fact, the Sun in the 
 Christian world, while the Emperor was only the Moon. The 
 temporal sword appeared as if merely lent to him by the Church, 
 that he might use it in her cause, and according to her good 
 pleasure ; l and alas for him when he did otherwise ! Upon this 
 pinnacle of theocratic glory we behold Innocent III., and several 
 more both of his predecessors and successors. Entangling itself, 
 however, with politics and temporalities, the Papacy fell from its 
 moral and patriarchal dignity, and by degrees became thoroughly 
 secularised. 2 The Pope, originally the protector of the persecuted, 
 became more and more a persecutor himself. In place of uniting 
 the nations, he irritated them against each other, and sowed dis- 
 cord between subjects and their rulers. His importance as an 
 educator vanished with the growth of national civilization and 
 independence. The pupil advanced while the master remained 
 behind, and this gave birth to a discrepancy which continually 
 increased. Even the Crusades, which at first were so greatly 
 instrumental in elevating the Papal power, turned at last to its 
 destruction, by helping to call forth new states of the world and 
 
 1 Thoughts, which run through the whole middle ages, but in par- 
 ticular are openly avouched in the well-known Bull Unam Sanctam of 
 Boniface VIII. 
 
 2 This cannot be more beautifully expressed than in the words of 
 the sublime Poet of the mediaeval Catholic Church, the great Gibelline 
 Dante, in the 16th canto of his Purgatorio — 
 
 . . . Rome, that turned it into good, 
 Was wont to boast two suns whose several beams 
 Cast light on either way, the world's and God's. 
 One since hath quenched the other ; and the sword 
 Is grafted on the crook, and so conjoined 
 Each must perforce decline to worse, unawed 
 By fear of other, If thou doubt me, mark 
 The blade. Each herb is judged of by its seed. 
 On this at last conclude. The Church of Rome, 
 Mixing two governments that ill assort, 
 Hath missed her footing, fallen into the mire, 
 And there herself and burden much defiled. 
 
170 EIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 society, which, in some instances, were hostile tp the Church. 
 The more imperious the Papacy outwardly appeared, the more 
 rapidly and surely it hastened to its fall. 
 
 2. THE DECLINE OF THE PAPACT. 
 
 Boniface VIII. forms a turning point. Proud and daring 
 above all other Popes, he endured worse humiliation than any, 
 and died insane." What the heroic energy of the Hohenstaufens 
 attempted in vain was successfully achieved by the prudent dar- 
 ing of a French monarch, when the times had changed, and the 
 popular power leagued itself with the crown. Philip the Fair, 
 after defying Boniface, prevailed upon Clement V. to transfer 
 his seat to France. This step broke to a great extent the 
 ancient power of the Papacy. The lustre which the eternal city 
 had lent to it vanished. Instead of being both an independent 
 monarch, and a spiritual authority, encompassed by temporal 
 lords, and exercising an imposing effect upon all, the Pope fell 
 under the influence of a French King, and became in some 
 dco-ree a mere instrument of the policy of France. The Gibel- 
 lines, the champions of the Empire, arose more boldly than ever, 
 and taught men, by Scripture and example, to resist the Papal 
 decrees. 1 Without relinquishing the smallest of its ancient 
 claims, though stript of inward dignity and outward splendour, 
 the Papacy entered upon another and most ruinous course, which 
 in a great measure alienated from it the minds of all well-dis- 
 posed and intelligent men. It applied itself to the acquisition 
 of wealth. A system of financial speculations was invented, and 
 cast like a net around all possible things. About the Papal 
 chair all was venal. To suffer the Emperor of Germany to be 
 dependent upon a Papacy of such a character appeared too great 
 a disgrace even to those Electoral princes, who formerly had often 
 taken the Pope's side against him, and hence, in the year 1338, 
 they came to the resolution, that whosoever was chosen by a 
 majority of the electors, should, with or without the sanction of 
 
 1 Even men like Dante, thoroughly catholic and theoretically 
 attached to the hierarchy, not only expose the errors of the Popes, but 
 also those of the secularized Papacy. 
 
DECLINE OF THE PAPACY. 171 
 
 the Pope, immediately be acknowledged Emperor. 1 About the 
 same time, another element of opposition arose in the young and 
 aspiring class of citizens, who were the natural allies of the 
 Empire. Nay — even within the Church itself, many a voice 
 was heard, and many a party came forward, bitterly reproaching 
 the secularised hierarchy, and putting them to shame by holding 
 up to their view the pattern of the Apostles. Supported by 
 auxiliaries like these, Louis of Bavaria was able to contemn the 
 Papal interdict, repeatedly issued against him. 
 
 Still more sensibly, did the Schism, produced by the exile of 
 Avignon, wound the Papacy in its roots. During a period of 
 upwards of thirty years, in which there were two or there 
 Popes mutually attacking, excommunicating, reviling, and heap- 
 ing every possible dishonour upon each other, all the nerves 
 of the Papal authority were dissevered, and the Christian 
 world thrown into interminable confusion. The ruinous course 
 formerly adopted by the one Pope, was now pursued by seve- 
 ral. There was no end to the pecuniary exactions, and no 
 one was so dull as not to feel that things could not continue as 
 they were. It was this state of matters which, in the first half 
 of the 15th century, called into existence the General Councils. 
 Their task was to restore ecclesiastical unity, and thoroughly 
 amend the state of the Church, so as to prevent in future the 
 recurrence of such abuses. For both of these purposes, the Ge- 
 neral Councils, as an independent representation of the Church, 
 required to possess an unlimited and supreme judicial and legis- 
 lative authority. Such an authority was, in fact, vindicated for 
 them, by the most intelligent men of both the Universities and 
 the Church, and on the strength of such an authority did the 
 Ecclesiastical Assemblies of Constance and Basle transact their 
 business and promulgate their decrees. They established the 
 principle that there should exist in the Church a free legislative 
 body of representatives, and that to them, as an essential part of 
 its constitution, 2 should be committed the task of its reformation, 
 both in its head and members. All seemed to promise that a 
 
 1 RanJce, deutsche Gesch. im Zeitalter der Reformation. Th. i. s. 
 45 ff. 
 
 2 There are in von der Ilardt T. iv. p. 86 and 96 several decrees of the 
 Ecclesiastical Synod of Constance which are classcial in this respect. 
 They were passed in Sess. quart, of the 30th March 1415 and in Sess. 
 
172 LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 complete transformation of the Papacy was about to be effected 
 within the Church itself, and that the sovereign and unlimited 
 authority, which it had hitherto wielded, would be reduced to a 
 subordinate, and greatly circumscribed one, by the introduction 
 into the ecclesiastical organism of a reformatory and represen- 
 tative power. The Papacy, however, survived, outwardly at 
 least, even this blow. From the rights, which in the course of 
 centuries it fancied itself to have secured, it did not swerve a 
 foot's breadth, and by violent measures succeeded in keeping 
 down the opposition raised by the advocates of the representa- 
 tative system. But even although suppressed, that opposition 
 continued an important spiritual power. Hitherto the conflicts 
 of the Church had been waged with external adversaries; 
 now in her own bosom two powerful parties took opposite sides, 
 the one advocating the old, and the other the new principles. 
 Both of them from different points of view set up systems of 
 their own respectingthe Papacy, the old party, the so-called Papal, 
 the new party, the representative system. The leading ideas 
 which these respectively involve are as follows : 
 
 3. THE IDEA OF THE PAPACY ACCORDING TO THE RIVAL 
 
 SYSTEMS. 
 
 The Papal system contemplated the Pope as the rightful Lord 
 and Monarch of the whole world, from whom emanate all power 
 and jurisdiction even of a temporal kind, to whom it pertains 
 to set up and overthrow kingdoms, and who is consequently 
 the supreme and transcendent authority on earth. The 
 advocates of this view, 1 founding upon the notion of a vice- 
 quint, of the 6th April of the same year, and confirm the authority of 
 Councils as supreme in the Church. The same may be said of the 
 decree Frequens of the 9th Oct. 1417 in von der Harclt T. iv. p. 1435, 
 •which enjoins their stated recurrence. Comp. also the Decrees T. i. 
 p. 650. 
 
 i The advocates of this opinion are Johannes de Turrecremata, Magi 
 stcr S. Palatii, a Dominican, who took an active part in the Councils oi 
 Basle and Florence, and died as cardinal in the year 1468. See his 
 Suinraa dc Ecclcsia et ejus auctoritate Lib. iv. esp. Lib. i. de Potestate 
 Papali and Lib. iii. de Conciliis. Rodericus Scatcius, Bishop of Zamora 
 and papal Referendary, in the Speculum vitae humanae, edited Rome 
 
TIIE PAPACY ACCORDING TO TIIE RIVAL SYSTEMS. 173 
 
 gerency of the Divine Being, on this lower world, and of its being 
 committed to the Pope, affirmed that there is no human power supe- 
 rior to the Papal ; but on the contrary that the Papal is superior to 
 every other. It extends over the whole world, and no believer is 
 exempt from it. In the Pope the temporal and spiritual autho- 
 rities are conjoined. He stands at the summit of both, 1 and even 
 in secular matters, possesses that measure of might and jurisdic- 
 tion which is salutary for the Church and its members, and 
 requisite for the punishment of sinners. In virtue of this might, 
 he has the right to depose negligent or rebellious princes. Of 
 the Church he is the supreme Judge, and the source from which 
 jurisdiction emanates. He judges all, and is judged by none. 
 In like manner, he is the owner and fountain of Episcopal autho- 
 rity. Indeed all authority in the Church is derived from him. The 
 other prelates and clergy are but his plenipotentiaries, and at any 
 moment he can take their places, and do directly whatever he 
 had commissioned them to do for him. He is the shepherd of 
 the whole Church, and as every shepherd stands above the flock 
 entrusted to his charge, so is the Pope superior to the whole 
 Church. Hence even the authority of Councils depends upon 
 him. He convokes, and superintends them, and gives validity 
 to their decrees. There can therefore be no appeal from the 
 Pope to a Council, but there may be an appeal from a Council 
 to the Pope. He has the right to reject, to cashier and excom- 
 municate Councils, which have caused mischief or disturbance. 
 In fine, the Pope is also the universal teacher of the Church. 
 It is his part to determine what pertains to the faith, to interpret 
 authentically the sense of Scripture, and to try, and either approve 
 or reject, the statements of individual teachers on matters of doc- 
 trine. His official decisions on such points are not subject to error, 
 
 1468, Strasburg 1507, more particularly the 2d Book. Dominicus Vene- 
 tus, Bishop of Brixen in 1475, in his work de Cardinalium legitima 
 creatione, and in other treatises, printed in Marci Antonii de Dominis 
 de republica eccles. T. i. Theodorus Laelius, Bishop of Feltre, in his 
 controversial pamphlet against Gregorj' of Heimburg, Pro Pio Papa ii. 
 et sede Romana, in Goldast Monarch. S. Rom. Imp. T. ii. p. 1595. 
 There are extracts from the three above-mentioned authors in Gieseler 
 ii. 4. s. 218 seq. The sequel will contain further notices of Theodorus 
 Laelius. 
 
 1 Utriusque potestatis apicem tenet say9 Turrecremata. 
 
171 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 for it is proper that that Church, which is the corner-stone of all 
 the rest, should be Divinely endowed with the peculiar gift of 
 infallibility. 
 
 The Representative, or as it is also called, the Monarcldc- 
 aristocratical, system offers a decided antithesis to most of these 
 averments. 1 Without rejecting the idea of the Papacy as the 
 basis of Ecclesiastical unity, it insisted that, in place of the purely 
 absolute monarchy of the Papal system, a system involving 
 material limitations should be substituted. The principle on 
 which it -rested was, that power in the Church is not derived 
 from the Pope, but that the power of the Pope is derived from the 
 Church ; and from that principle, all the other parts of the system 
 resulted by natural inference. The plenitude of spirit and of 
 power — said its advocates — is seated originally in the Church. 
 The Church devolves the supreme government of its affairs upon 
 the Pope, but always under the condition, that it shall be con- 
 ducted for the edification and good of the general body. He is 
 not the Lord of the Church ; he is only the administrative head. 3 
 The Church as a whole is always superior to the Pope, who is 
 himself but one of its members. The Church, however, is con- 
 stitutionally represented by General Councils. It is through 
 these that she acts, and what is true of the Church is also true 
 of them. To none but to the Church collectively, and the Coun- 
 cils representing it, has the promise been given of superiority to 
 error, as the consequence of the guidance of Christ and the Holy 
 Spirit. The Pope, being a fallible man, 3 may err and abuse his 
 power to the Church's detriment. There must therefore exist 
 
 1 It was defended by the Councils of Constance and Basle, and by a 
 succession of distinguished Theologians, among whom the French 
 occupy the foremost rank, but which contains also Dutchmen and 
 even Italians. Its most distinguished representative is Gerson, in a 
 work written during the sitting of the Council of Constance, de Potes- 
 tate ecclesiast. Consid. Opp. ed. du Pin T. ii. p. 246. Next to him we 
 must place Nicolaus von Casa, who afterwards became a convert to the 
 Papacy. His work is entitled, De Concordantia cathol. Lib. ii. iii. in 
 Schardii Syntagma tractatuum, p. 356. There are numerous Treatises 
 on the subject in Von der Ilardt's Hist. Concil. Constant. We shall 
 ourselves afterwards notice several men of this school. See extracts in 
 Gieseler ii. 4, S. 209 ff. 
 
 2 caput ministcriale, the highest servant, 
 8 homo peccabilis. 
 
TTIE PAPACY ACCORDING TO THE RIVAL SYSTEM. 175 
 
 some superior authority for securing the Church's interest, and 
 that is lodged in General Councils which act in its behalf. If 
 General Councils, however, are to effect their object, they must 
 be invested with a supreme judicial and legislative authority. 
 An appeal may certainly be taken from the Pope to the Church, 
 or, which is the same thing, to a General Council. The Church, 
 constitutionally represented, has a right to judge the Pope, and 
 when he falls into heresy or other offences manifestly injurious 
 to its interests, even to oppose him, but the Pope cannot 
 judge the whole Church. The Church and its representatives 
 are also competent to enact laws binding upon the Pope, both 
 as an individual, and as the Church's head, whereas the ordi- 
 nances of the Pope derive their whole force from the assent 
 of the Church and her Councils. The Episcopal authority does 
 not emanate from that of the Pope, with which it has the same 
 foundation and source ; for if the Pope be Peter's successor, no 
 less are the Bishops the successors of the other Apostles, upon 
 whom, no less than upon Peter, Christ conferred the power of 
 the keys, and all higher gifts, and through them upon the whole 
 Church. In the same way the temporal power of princes does 
 not flow from the spiritual power of the Pope, but is an inde- 
 pendent institution and ordinance of God. 
 
 The Church has often anticipated the State in the modifica- 
 tions it has undergone, and it is evident that there was now in 
 operation within its bosom an antagonism similar to that which 
 was afterward manifested in the political sphere. Just as in 
 modern times, it was said by Louis XIV., " I am the State," so, 
 according to the sense of his conclave, might the Pope have said, 
 " I am the Church ;" and just as Frederick the Great called him- 
 self " the first servant of the State," so ? in the sense of the repre- 
 sentative system, might the Pope have called himself the Church's 
 ministerial head or chief servant. According to the Papal system, 
 a position, absolute, superhuman, and which sets him on a level 
 with God and Christ, is assigned to the Pope, as the vicar of God. 
 He is exalted to the summit of all terrestrial might, and as Christ 
 possessed within himself the power to institute the Church, so in 
 like manner there is an indwelling power in the Pope, to emit 
 the Church which is substantially hierarchical from himself. 
 He always constitutes the Church. It exists on his account. 
 
17G LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 He is at every moment exalted above it, and wields over it an 
 unlimited control. The representative system gives the Pope a 
 position consonant with the real nature of things. It looks upon 
 him as a human being subject to error and sin. It makes him the 
 Church's creature, and not the Church his. It considers him 
 as existing for the Church's sake, and not the Church as 
 existing for his, and subordinates him as a member, the highest 
 but still a ministerial member, to the will and purposes of the 
 whole. This system, consonant with the principles of progress 
 and reformation, which had actually penetrated into the Church, 
 was manifestly better adapted to actual life, and appeared also to 
 promise a bright future. It involved, however, an internal de- 
 fect. It sought to retain the idea of the Papacy, while it tore up 
 its foundations, and outwardly it had an unequal conflict to sus- 
 tain with the hierarchy, which was still powerful, and commanded 
 vast material resources. The Papal system had the privilege of 
 possession, but as it demanded for the Popes a Church such as 
 no longer existed, and for the Church Popes such as could not 
 be found, it stood in glaring contradiction with reality, and 
 its pretentions sounded like mockery, when the mind turned from 
 the absolute infinity of the idea to the littleness of the persons 
 in whom it was embodied. 
 
 4. THE PAPACY AS IT EEALLY WAS IN THE FIFTEENTH 
 CENTURY. 
 
 The persons who, in the course of the 15th century, repre- 
 sented the transcendental idea of the Papacy advocated by the 
 Roman courtiers, were very far from having preserved those 
 lofty sentiments and that personal dignity, which in several of 
 the ancient Popes had so imposing an effect, and might still 
 have been able to reconcile the more matured minds of men 
 with an authority aristocratic in its nature, but at the same 
 time wielded with a paternal spirit, and an eye to the inte- 
 rests of the Church. Scarcely had the illustrious Council of 
 Constance succeeded in once more giving to the Church a single 
 head in the person of Martin V. when this crafty man com- 
 menced making use of his newly acquired power for the purpose- 
 
THE PAPACY IN THE 15TH CENTURY. 177 
 
 of defeating the schemes so long and universally cherished, and so 
 frankly and zealously advocated, especially by the nations on the 
 north of the Alps. With a show of courtesy, he by no means 
 refused that reformation of the Church in its head and members, 
 which all Europe longed for and required, but he deferred it, 
 and in the meanwhile strengthened the old abuses, in the first 
 instance by the regulations of chancery which he adopted imme- 
 diately after his accession, and then by the concordats into 
 which he entered with the several nations. The very Pope, who 
 owed his existence to a Council invested with the highest eccle- 
 siastical authority, forbade at once all appeals from Popes 
 to General Councils, and used every effort to liberate the 
 Papacy from the restraints which the Eepresentative system, 
 acted upon at Constance, laboured to impose. In the face 
 of endeavours after reformation on the part of almost all Western 
 Christendom, he recommenced the old pecuniary exactions, 
 and although, as Cardinal, he had borne a high character for 
 benignity and gentleness, he departed this life (f 1431) with 
 the reputation of being a greedy miser. The ecclesiastical 
 Council which, after many long delays and fruitless intermediate 
 attempts, was at last convoked at Basle, was generally expected 
 to help the Church, but its intrepidity, independent spirit, and 
 deep and earnest zeal for substantial ecclesiastical improvement, 
 soon brought it into irremediable discord with Martin's succes- 
 sor, Eugene IV. The opposition, conducted by men of the 
 highest distinction, such as Nicolaus von Cusa and Aeneas 
 Sylvius, achieved the most brilliant success, and was able for a 
 time to bid defiance to the tottering Papacy. The questionable 
 expedient, however, of electing a rival Pope, and other circum- 
 stances, prepared their downfall, and Eugene IV. had gained the 
 mastery, when he died in the year 1447. In spite of its noble 
 efforts, able discussions and salutary decrees, the Council of 
 Basle left behind it little more than the impression of its spirit 
 upon the minds of cotemporaries, and a great memorial in 
 history. The object it was designed to accomplish, and the 
 actual fruits of its reforming principles, were again lost, especially 
 for Germany, by the Concordat of Aschaffenburg or Vienna, 
 negotiated for Nicolaus V. with the weak Emperor Frederick 
 III., and to the great advantage of the Papal chair, by the 
 
 M 
 
178 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 shrewd Aeneas Sylvius, who had in the mean while changed his 
 views. Nicolaus V. may, in other ways, have acquired great merit, 
 especially as a friend of science, and a patron of the learned 
 men who fled from Greece. This was more a personal matter. 
 As Pope, like all the rest, he made it his main object to resist and 
 crush the efforts at reform, and during his reign, (Nicolaus f 1445) 
 Ave hear earnest men uttering bitter and despairing complaints 
 of the hopelessness of thoroughly remodelling the Church. His 
 successor, Calixtus III., guided by the advice of Aeneas Sylvius, 
 and receiving from Frederick III. ready aid in the suppression 
 of religious liberty, could even venture to advance the arrogant 
 principle, that the authority of the Apostolic chair, being in all 
 respects free, could be bound by no treaties, and had consented 
 to the Concordats only by way of special grace. But, as is 
 usual with apostates, the most zealous in pushing these principles 
 was Pius II. (between 1458 and 14G4), a man of splendid talents, 
 and highly accomplished in science, of large experience and libe- 
 ral views in life, and capable of accomplishing the greatest enter- 
 prises, if his genius had only been seconded by a corresponding 
 character. Once the leader of the movement for reform, Pius II., 
 apostatising from himself, destroyed all that, as Aeneas Sylvius 
 Piccolomini, he had helped to do for the good of the Church, and 
 in the most solemn manner revoked the principles which, in 
 the Council of Basle, he had advocated with intrepidity and 
 eloquence. He hoped, by an imitation of the great Papal models, 
 to restore the ancient glory of the Pomish chair, not reflecting 
 that the times were changed, and that he, who expects to awaken 
 conviction and interest in the bosom of others, must first feel 
 them in his own. His artful and designing policy failed to pro- 
 duce any great or extensive effect. The assembly of princes he 
 convoked at Mantua (in 1459) for the purpose of setting on foot 
 a new crusade, under the guidance of the Pope, only served to 
 show how completely the taste for such enterprises had died 
 away, and afforded to the opposition an opportunity of charging 
 him with ambitious and mercenary designs. The condemna- 
 tion, with which at this assembly he branded every appeal 
 from the Pope to a General Council, was far from being fol- 
 lowed with the desired success ; on the contrary, from that 
 time forward the appeals were numerous and strong, as for 
 
THE PAPACY IN THE 15TH CENTURY. 179 
 
 instance that of Gregory of Heimburg. The bull of retrac- 
 tation, dated 1463, l?y which, comparing himself with Augustine, 
 he condemned his former sentiments and views, could not obviate 
 the doubts entertained respecting him, and served rather to excite 
 indignation, than to reconcile the contradictions which his life 
 displayed. In this manner, Pius II. disappeared, like a phantom 
 (f 1464), and notwithstanding the vast resources of his mind, 
 was not successful in effecting a new creation. His successor, 
 Paul II., a zealous persecutor of the Hussites, likewise devoted his 
 chief exertions to the task of confirming the absolute power of 
 the Papacy. The attempt entangled him in a variety of disputes, 
 in the midst of which he died in 1471. 
 
 Of all the fore-mentioned Popes it must be admitted that they 
 pursued, as an objective aim, the elevation of the Komish chair; 
 not so a long series of their successors. Morally unworthy, and 
 devoted to mere secular and selfish ends, these men attest the cor- 
 ruption of the Romish court, especially of the conclave, while 
 they served to degrade the Papacy still deeper in public opinion. 
 Sixtus IV. (1471 — 84) strove for almost nothing but the aggran- 
 dizement of his family, and was thus betrayed into measures 
 which occasioned the greatest disturbances in Italy, nor could 
 the patronage he bestowed upon the sciences shield him from 
 contempt. Innocent VIII., addicted to the same vice of nepot- 
 ism, and induced by the number of his posterity to practice it 
 to a still greater extent, was also the originator of prosecution for 
 witchcraft, and actively promoted the sale of Indulgences, the 
 abuses of which had already reached a high pitch (f 1492). 
 But all former unworthy and scandalous occupants of the chair 
 were outdone by the profligate Borgia, Alexander VI. He and 
 his whole family, polluted by lust and murder, stand in history as 
 a revolting instance of impiety, and if ever there was a glaring 
 contradiction between what a man required by his position to 
 have been, and what he actually was, it was exhibited by Alex- 
 ander. Dying in 1503, he closes the series of St Peter's 
 successors in the 15th century. There was none among them 
 who had the power, or, if the power, the inclination and will, 
 to remodel, in an improved and nobler style, the old and tot- 
 tering fabric, a task which would have required some original 
 mind. Even the more virtuous (and the most distinguished of 
 
180 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 all, Pius II., was not altogether free from reproach on the score 
 of morality 1 ), by the use of overstrained anjj violent means to 
 uphold what could no longer stand, helped to originate a coun- 
 teraction on the part of the opposition, which was kept down, but 
 not at all annihilated ; while the immoral and wholly unworthy, 
 as they were themselves an evidence of the deep debasement of 
 the Papal court, accelerated still more the catastrophe, which was 
 being prepared by the force of circumstances and the progress of 
 education. All conspired to show that in the Papacy, as it actu- 
 ally was, -there was no salvation. 
 
 5. THE CLERGY AND THE MONKS. 
 
 If we look farther around us, we shall find that the case was 
 little better with the high clergy, than with the supreme head of 
 the Church. Surrounded with imposing splendour and wealth, 
 and powerful as rivals to the State, the Prince-bishops were 
 wholly dependent on the Pope, and styled themselves by the 
 grace of God and of the Apostolic chair. In place of being 
 pastors and teachers, they were temporal lords and monarchs, 
 nay in case of necessity, even soldiers. It was no uncommon 
 thing to see them in complete armour, with a sword at their side, 
 and a lance in their hand, marching forth to battle. With few 
 exceptions they purchased their dignities, and compensated them- 
 selves for the cost by a similar traffic with the subordinate offices. 
 Simony was almost universal, from the "°ope to the humblest 
 ecclesiastic. It is notorious what immense sums found their way 
 to Rome in the shape of expectancies and annates. The charge 
 for the Archiepiscopal pallium of Mayence was reckoned 30,000 
 florins, and for the Bishoprick of Treves, 20,000. It was the same 
 withother high offices. Even the humblest appointments, however, 
 still produced something. " No competition," says a serious 
 minded Bishop, at the commencement of the 15th century, 2 " for 
 any situation however low, or by any candidate however poor, 
 
 i Comp. Ins 15th letter to his father and Heimburg's Appellatio in 
 Goldast's Monarch. T. ii. p. 1593. lin. 55, 62. 
 
 - Mathcw of Cracow, Bishop of Worms, in his Tractatus de squalori- 
 bus Komanae Curiae ia Walch Mouim. mod. rev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. 1. 
 Bqq. cap. 7. 
 
THE CLERGY AND MONKS. 181 
 
 meets with success at Rome, unless a ducat be first paid, and paid 
 to the last penny. In applications for the reversion of benefices 
 — for these are almost all disposed of before they are vacated, — so 
 much as 30, 40, and 50 ducats, is sometimes given. For a 
 place already vacant, the applicant is bound to pay the amount 
 of the yearly revenue [the so-called annate]. If, however, a 
 provision be asked for a third anonymous applicant, never is 
 that granted, until a definite sum has been agreed upon, and 
 security taken in legal form for its payment." These simoniacal 
 practices could not but corrupt the whole clerical body. The 
 inevitable consequence was, that men of nobler sentiments with- 
 drew from the spiritual office, and the most unworthy characters, 
 if only possessed of money and impudence, pushed themselves 
 then into all situations. " This method of appointing to offices," 
 says the Bishop whom we have just mentioned, 1 "is a chief 
 impediment to the promotion of able and honourable men, for 
 these are restrained by good sense and shame from coming for- 
 ward, and stooping to the usual means. Whereas, on the other 
 hand, it is an easy way for light-minded persons and vagabonds, 
 who are ready for everything, and demean themselves to the 
 lowest services, to obtain high situations. Can anything be more 
 lamentable ? Scarcely will you find a groom, 2 or any mean and 
 unworthy fellow, who does not hold one or more spiritual offices, 
 no matter however incompatible, and arduous, and to which only 
 persons of eminence and learning ought to have been preferred. 
 Added to this, was the celibacy of clergy now firmly established, 
 a most effectual expedient, no doubt, for making the whole 
 clerical body an independent and powerful instrument in the 
 hands of the hierarchy, but at the same time, an inexhaustible 
 source of barbarism and profligacy. The obverse side of celi- 
 bacy, was concubinage, and in general the licentious lives of the 
 clergy, against which all the Ecclesiastical laws, in no century 
 more numerous than the fifteenth, proved totally ineffectual. 
 " Concubinage," says the same voucher from the commencement 
 of this century, 3 " is publicly and formally practised by the 
 clergy, and their mistresses are as expensively dressed, and as 
 
 1 In a. 1. cap. 4. 
 
 2 stabuhmus. 
 
 3 Mathew of Cracow de squalor. Cur Romanae, cap. 2- 
 
182 THE LIFE op jonx OF wesel. 
 
 respectfully treated, as if their connexion were not sinful and 
 indecent, but honourable and praiseworthy. . . . There is 
 scarce a person, however profligate and scandalous, who is not 
 admitted into the spiritual office. No attention is paid by those, 
 who have the power, to the correction of such offenders. To 
 breathe a word on the subject would seem ridiculous, for men 
 squander so much of their time, and thoughts, and strength 
 upon other matters, that they have none to spare for such a pur- 
 pose. They are occupied day and night with vacancies, law- 
 suits, hunting after properties, and the ceremonies and forms of 
 the Papal court." There can be no doubt that these irregularities 
 were not effectually stopped from higher quarters and by Rome ; 
 but on the contrary were even sanctioned by notorious examples 
 upon the chair of Peter. What could be expected of the clergy 
 when men like John XXIII., Innocent VIII., 1 and Alexander 
 V ., rose to the highest dignity in the Church ? Accordingly 
 during the whole of this centuiy, we hear the bitterest com- 
 plaints of their rude ignorance, debauchery, immorality, and 
 avarice. The indignation of the nobler members of the body, 
 and of well disposed laymen, is poured out in biting sarcasm and 
 serious reproof. Nor was it merely the fiery spirits of the opposi- 
 tion, such as Huss and Savonarola, but men of calm good 
 sense, themselves occupying the highest dignities in the univer- 
 sities and the Church, such for example as Matthew of Cracow, 
 the above cited Bishop of Worms, Peter d'Ailly, John Gerson, 
 and the worthy abbot of Spanheiin, John Trithemius, who 
 exposed the deep and universal corruption of the priests and 
 pastors of their time. In fine, let us collect and combine into 
 one picture the traits 2 with which the last of these authors 
 depicts the ordinary manners of clergy. " Unlettered and 
 rude men," he says, " wholly destitute of merit, rise to the 
 priesthood. No attention is paid to purity of life, a liberal educa- 
 tion, or a good conscience. The Bishops, occupied with tempo- 
 
 1 The Epigram upon the latter is well known. It ends with these 
 words 
 
 " Ilunc merito poterit dicere Roma patrera." 
 
 2 They are scattered in the work of Trithemius, written in 14S5, 
 Institutio vitae sacerdotalis. Opp. pia et Spirit, ed. Rusaeus. Mayence 
 1G05. p. 705, sq. 
 
• THE CLERGY AND MONKS, 183 
 
 ral affairs, devolve the trouble of examining candidates upon 
 persons of no experience. The study of Scripture and learning 
 are totally neglected by the priests, who prefer occupying them- 
 selves with the training dogs and birds. Instead of buying books 
 they beget children, 1 and instead of studying, make love to their 
 concubines. They sit with tipplers in the taverns, are addicted 
 to gaming and debauchery, and destitute of the slighest fear of 
 God. They can neither speak nor write Latin, and scarcely 
 know enough of German to explain the Gospels. Nor is it a 
 wonder that the inferior priests are so illiterate and averse to 
 the study of Scripture, considering that in this they have the 
 prelates for a pattern, who are appointed to their offices, not 
 for superiority in learning, but for superior skill in making 
 money. Even they are seldom or never possessed of a bible, 
 and plainly shew a hatred of science. They are blind leaders of 
 the blind, and in place of guiding the people in the paths of righte- 
 ousness, rather misguide them. Hence they need not be at all 
 surprised that the laity despise them, when they themselves 
 despise the commandments of Christ. I very much fear, how- 
 ever, that something still more dreadful awaits them ere long." 
 This is indeed a revolting picture. No one thinks of denying 
 that there were also better men, and of purer minds, among the 
 clergy of this period, nay, even great and scientific theologians ; 
 but not only were these rare phenomena, they were for the most 
 part also objects of hostility and persecution. 
 
 The place next to the clergy is claimed by the monks, already 
 no doubt somewhat declined in importance, but still exercising 
 an immense influence upon the people and the youth attending 
 schools and universities. It was the spirit of chivalry and of 
 monachism, which, as the concomitant and auxiliary of the 
 hierarchy, ruled the mediaeval period. The one inflamed the 
 higher ranks, and celebrated its triumphs in the Crusades. The 
 other governed the people, and reached its consummation in the 
 great mendicant orders. We behold a combination of the two 
 in the orders of spiritual knighthood, which were instituted on 
 occasion of the Crusades. In those expeditions, indeed, the spirit of 
 chivalry, enlisted in the service of the Church, was almost entirely 
 
 1 pro libris sibi liberos comparant, pro studio concubiiias amant. 
 
184 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 extinguished. The abortive attempts of Pius II. and other 
 Popes and personages of exalted rank to revive it, demonstrate 
 that the season for doing so on a larger scale, had now passed 
 away. The spirit of monachism, however, continued to operate 
 much longer, and shed its influence over the whole of the 
 fifteenth century; nay, under a more refined form, has descended 
 to recent times. It would be a mockery of history to venture 
 to assert, that this influence was as a whole, and on a great scale, 
 beneficial. All honour to the well-deserving Benedictines, and 
 to the austere spirit of several other orders, as for example the 
 Carthusian, and part of the Augustinian ! The vast host of 
 monks, however, was nothing more than the standing army of 
 the absolute Papal power, and a mass of intellectual stupidity 
 and moral putrefaction. They were tainted with almost the 
 same corruptions as the clergy, aggravated in their case by 
 greater inactivity, and the flagrant contradiction of their man- 
 ners with the strictness of their rule. " Alas, what deadly 
 monsters !" exclaims a man who belonged to the pure Carthu- 
 sian order, and was himself a model of extreme monastic auterity, 1 
 " what monsters, hiding the rapacity of wolves beneath the 
 fleece of sheep, are in these days found skulking in the mo- 
 nastic retreats of our orthodox forefathers ! They shrink from 
 no kind of sin, and it is a true proverb, that what a hardened 
 devil would be afraid to do, a bold and profligate monk will 
 commit without scruple. 2 They also mislead the common 
 people into much wickedness, and into an obstinate palliation of 
 it. For every one alleges, "Why do you blame me for doing what 
 is done by so many monks although they are bound to a more 
 perfect rule ? " Besides the vow of chastity, however, that of 
 poverty was also trodden under foot by the monks of that 
 day. For all orders, and above all, the mendicants, Aposto- 
 lical poverty was the great law. St Bernard had said " that a 
 monk who possesses a penny of his own, is himself not worth a 
 penny." The monks, however, needed considerable pecuniary 
 
 1 Jacob von Jdterbock (See more of him in the sequel) in his Treatise 
 de Ncgligentia Praelatorum in Walch Monim. med. sevi. vol. ii. fasc. 2. 
 p. 157—202. v. cap. 3. 
 
 Quod agere verctur obstinatus diabolus, intrepide agit reprobus et 
 contumax monachus. 
 
THE CLERGY AND MONKS. 185 
 
 means to support their effeminate and luxurious manner of living, 
 and hence we find, during the whole of this age, complaints of 
 numbers of them possessing private property, 1 and of the extensive 
 prevalence among them of avarice. We have a work from the 
 middle of the 15th century which treats of the matter. 2 It shows 
 us how general in this respect the departure from the rule had 
 become, the sophistries urged in excuse of it, 3 and at the same 
 time, the sentiments held on the subject by the more serious monks. 
 The author, himself a monk, characterises such brethren as per- 
 jured idolaters, hypocrites, and contaminators of that which is 
 holy, and approves of the language of Cardinal Cusa, the 
 zealous and active reformer of the German monasteries, who, in 
 a public sermon, had called such recreant monks " incarnate 
 devils." 4 It is true that during this period we hear of many at- 
 tempts to reform the monastic establishments, while in several free 
 associations which spread far and wide, we see no less distinctly 
 •the tendency to realize, in consistency with the Apostolic pattern, 
 but without the fetters of a vow and other restrictive rules, what 
 had been the better spirit and object of the monastic life. These 
 
 1 Proprietas, individual Monks who possessed private property, pro- 
 prietarii. 
 
 2 The above quoted little work of Jacob von Jiiterbock de Negligentia 
 Praelatorum. Felix Hammerlein also has written a special Tract de 
 Religiosis proprietariis. V. Opusc. et Tractat. fol. 46 sqq. 
 
 3 The Proprietarii among the Monks reasoned in this manner — " St 
 Benedict has said, a monk ought to possess nothing which the abbot has 
 not given him, or does not allow him to possess — therefore, whatever 
 the abbot allows him to possess that he may possess." See Jacob von 
 Jiiterbock de Neglig. Praelat. c. 9., and Anonymi Ordinis Cisterc. pro- 
 positi affirmitiva in Constant. Cone. ann. 1417 oblata, quod Monachi 
 Cisterc. possint propria possidere bona — in von der Hardt. T. iii., p. 
 120 sqq. c. 1.3.5.6. Jacob von Jiiferbock pertinently answers the 
 above-mentioned sophism in the following way, " This inference does 
 not hold, because the affirmative does not necessarily result from the 
 negative. The proposition, however, is in itself substantially wrong, 
 for the abbot might in the same way permit theft or concubinage. It 
 is certain, that neither the abbot nor the Pope can permit a monk to 
 have private property, and the monk who transgresses the prohibition 
 commits a mortal sin. . . . The Pope, as Vincentius says, may 
 make the monk no monk, but he cannot give him a dispensation for 
 possessing private property, so long as he continues a monk." 
 
 4 Jacob. Jiiierb. de Negligent. Prael. c. 27, 
 
186 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 reformatory efforts, however, were all partial, and were commonly 
 rendered abortive by the sloth and obstinacy of the monastic 
 brethren ; while the free associations formed on a purer model, 
 and which, in their continual struggles with the monks, espe- 
 cially the mendicant orders, could barely maintain their ground, 
 involved, no doubt, vital germs of great importance for the 
 development of the future age, but were, for the time, of little 
 account when compared with the regular orders. On the whole, 
 Monachism, even in its declension, operated both restrictively and 
 destructively upon the intelligence and morality of society, while 
 a few better examples could not compensate for the evil done by 
 the dominant multitude. 
 
 6. THE CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. 
 
 If, in fine, we descend from the aristocracy of the Church, 
 through the intermediate democratic grade of Monachism, to the 
 people, it is easy to see what must have been the effects produced 
 upon them by a multitude of clergy and monks such as we 
 have just described. Apart altogether from the example of 
 rudeness and frivolity which they set, it was these in particular 
 who cried up an unevangelical holiness by works as the perfec- 
 tion of religion, were always ready with the easiest means of 
 atonement for all excesses and crimes, lulled the conscience 
 asleep, and kept the spirit of sincere piety, which the minor 
 religious parties and mystics laboured to excite, from reach- 
 ing any height or vigour of development. At the same time, it 
 may be said that the people, and especially the class of citizens, 
 usually possessed more sound piety and moral feeling than their 
 ecclesiastical leaders, who by their vices had rendered them- 
 selves objects of derision. At all periods, and in every nation, 
 there is a mixture of good and of evil, and it is difficult to ascer- 
 tain with any degree of precision the morality of particular ages. 
 The rule is, that at one period the vices of barbarism prevail, and 
 at another those of refinement, and only at times of singular cor- 
 ruption do we find the two flourishing side by side. At the 
 period of which we treat, and looking particularly to Germany, 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. 187 
 
 the amount of intelligence was slender, but there still existed a 
 sound kernel of honesty, truthfulness, candour, and patriotic 
 spirit, and we behold, especially among the middle classes in 
 towns — Nuremberg is the most brilliant instance — among mer- 
 chants, artists, and scholars, a mode of life which, although cir- 
 cumscribed in its range, not only displayed a highly cultivated 
 ingenuity and poetic taste, but often a character singularly 
 noble and dignified. The blemishes which appear were more 
 frequently follies than vices. They were rather outbreaks of 
 strength, than sins of refined selfishness and malice. Rude un- 
 bridled power manifested itself partly in an immoderate passion 
 for independence, and partly in sensual excesses. The spirit 
 of independence gave birth to a multitude of petty wars and 
 feuds. The princes often rose against the Emperor. The lower 
 ranks of the nobility took arms against the princes and cities. 
 The citizens themselves were split into constant factions, or, in 
 episcopal seats, embroiled with their spiritual lords. Nay, the 
 passion for freedom was kindled even in the rural population, 
 and, premonitory of the war of the peasantry, several times in 
 the course of the 15th century, flamed out into rebellion. Sensu- 
 ality gave rise especially to outbreaks of debauchery and lust, 
 and, no doubt, also to the love of finery and pleasure, which began 
 to prevail, and respecting which, we find serious men uttering 
 the bitterest complaints down to the days of Luther. Here also 
 the clergy led on the people, by their pernicious example. It is 
 notorious what a pattern was exhibited to the gaze of all Europe, 
 by the Council of Constance. Convoked for the most solemn 
 and important purposes, under the eyes of the Emperor, the 
 Pope, and the chief prelates of ail countries, that assembly, never- 
 theless, found leisure and inclination to amuse themselves, not 
 only with tournaments, but with the tricks of several hundred 
 mountebanks and jugglers, and the blandishments of a still 
 greater number of another class of persons least of all proper for 
 an ecclesiastical Council. Nor was it merely the temporal lords 
 and knights, the merchants and tradesmen congregated in the 
 place, who gave themselves up to dissipation. On the contrary, 
 we read of the clergy, from the highest to the lowest rank, indulg- 
 ing in debauchery of all sorts, dressing in the most vain and 
 worldly manner, and treating with ridicule the exhortations to 
 
188 TI1E LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 repentance addressed to them by the austere preachers, of whom 
 there were some also present. 
 
 The moral and religious blemishes of the age may be best 
 learned from the writings of those by whom they were attacked. 
 And here, as in the similar records of all other times, the mat- 
 ter presents a double aspect. The deep-souled and ideal men, 
 who see wickedness to be a positive resistance of the Divine 
 Being, are impressed by it with burning pain and profound 
 sorrow, and take arms against it with a noble indignation ; 
 Whereas the men predominantly wedded to reality, easy minded 
 and conversant with actual life, treat it, on the contrary, with keen 
 derision and coarse humour. At a still earlier period, the Italian 
 poets, particularly Dante, and the German Minnesingers, 1 had 
 spoken out respecting the Church, the hierarchy, and their cor- 
 ruptions, with boldness and gravity, but in a loftier style, calcu- 
 lated rather to elevate the people than to humour their taste. 
 Now, however, this higher strain of poetry was hushed, and the 
 stern reproofs we hear are rather from the mouths of theologians, 
 and the prophetic men of the Church, a Huss, Savonarola, and 
 others. On the other hand, the masters of song give forth their 
 remarks, in the shape of jests and pleasantries, and even the 
 preachers of morality, from the pulpit, indulge more and more in 
 the coarse and pithy, but at the sametime often burlesque, popular 
 style. By them wickedness is almost always treated as a folly, 
 and scourged with rude humour. This is the tone which 
 specially characterises the age. The fool acts an important 
 part in literature, and in him, as its obverse, true wisdom is 
 held up to view. The productions of poetry, and the dis- 
 courses of the clergy, alike assume the jocular character, and in 
 several countries it is the style in which we hear the ingenious 
 and witty express their thoughts. Felix Hammerlein, Sebastian 
 Brant, Nider, Barletta, Michael Menot, and Geiler of Kaisers- 
 berg belong to this class, and even the scoffer Erasmus, in 
 whom the tendency reached its culminating point, attained 
 his greatest popularity by a work called " The Praise of 
 Folly." If we direct our attention to one, who was a principal 
 
 1 We have a beautiful collection of passages on this subject in 
 UhlantVs Walther von der Vogelweide. Stuttg. 1822. s. 114. If. 
 
THE CLERGY AND MONKS. 189 
 
 representative of the sarcastic school, and flourished at the close 
 of the fifteenth century, viz., Sebastian Brant, 1 no less distinguished 
 as a scholar and lawyer, than as a patriot and man of the people, and 
 look into his celebrated " Ship of Fools" (NarrenschifT), a book of 
 no great merit as a work of art, but full of good sense and right 
 feeling, large observation of life, and fresh humour, we shall find 
 the richest traits for a picture of the morals of the age. Of these 
 we shall cite a few. 2 Brant depicts with force and keen mockery, 
 not only the common sins prevalent in public and private life, 
 
 1 Sebastin Brant (latinized Titio) was born at Strasburg in 1458, 
 and studied at Basle, vvbere he caught incitement from Reuchlin, among 
 his other teachers. For a while he likewise taught as a Doctor of Laws 
 in the University of that city ; but spent the greatest part of his life, — 
 from 1498, till his death in the year before the Diet at Worms, 1520, 
 — in his native city, Strasburg, no less renowned than Nurenberg, for 
 refinement and civic polity. Here, as Chancellor or Syndic, he acquired 
 and maintained a reputation for singular experience in life, and sound 
 knowledge of Law. His advice was often asked by parties at a dis- 
 tance. TheEmperor Maximilian, who highly esteemed, and was esteemed 
 by him, nominated him Imperial councillor and Count Palatine. His 
 learned works are now mere literary curiosities, but he has won for him- 
 self an enduring celebrity as a popular author by his Ship of Fools 
 (Narrcnsclvff) , which was received with rapturous applause by con- 
 temporaries, and so highly esteemed as a treasury of sound obser- 
 vation, and practical wisdom, that the famous Strasburg preacher 
 Geiler of Kaisersberg (-J- 1510) made it the ground of a series of 
 sermons. Of Sebastain Brant it may be said in general, that, in 
 politics, he was a patriotic German, zealously concerned for the true 
 greatness of his country, and in a religious point of view, a sincerely 
 pious man, strictly moral, attached to the Church, and orthodox in his 
 views, reverencing Scripture as a Divine revelation, and the Church's 
 doctrines and ordinances as holy institutes, and decidedly rejecting what- 
 ever was heretical ; but who, at the same time, had an open eye and 
 a very free tongue for the blemishes both of social and ecclesiastic 
 life, and for the corruptions in all ranks, especially the clerical and 
 monastic. His Ship of Fools, no doubt, depicts the state of things at 
 the end of the fifteenth century ; but it is not necessary to discrimi- 
 nate the times so strictly from each other as to hesitate applying it to a 
 somewhat earlier period. On the life of Brant see Professor Strobel in 
 the introduction to his new edition of the Narrenschiff. Bibliothek der 
 Deutschen National-Litteratur. B. 17. Quedlinb. und Leipz. 1839. 
 
 2 I use the Latin edition of the Narrenschiff, corrected by the author, 
 but published by Jacob Locher (cognomento Philomusus, Suevus), 
 Stultifera navis Narragonicee profectionis per Seb. Brant, Latine per 
 Jac. Locher. Ann. 1497. The traits here given are collected from the 
 whole of the little work. Quotatatious would accumulate to too great a 
 number. 
 
180 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL 
 
 and in the conduct of individuals, sucli as excesses of lascivious- 
 ness and gluttony, laxity of morals, the bad education of chil- 
 dren, the faithlessness of friends, marrying for money, envy, 
 loquacity, and such like, but he enters still more narrowly into 
 the individual characteristics of the age. Fired with pious 
 indignation, he speaks of the desecration of the festivals and the 
 public worship on the Sabbath, describes how the knights and 
 gentlemen usually come to church, with their hounds and falcons, 
 and for the purpose of staring at their neighbours' wives and 
 daughters, how the citizens and merchants talk of their business, 
 and how even priests and canons entertain themselves with con- 
 versation about war and other news, or utter indecent jokes. 
 Christians generally are censured for their mere nominal Chris- 
 tianity, for the absence of any evidence of true faith in their lives, 
 for want of respect for Scripture, for the wrong state of mind 
 which prays for only temporal blessings, and for weakly trusting 
 in the goodness, without any serious thoughts of the penal justice, 
 of God. With reference to the clerical order, he deplores as a 
 gross abuse, that every peasant is now eager to make his son a 
 clergyman, not in order to his serving God, but merely leading 
 a comfortable life, and that most ecclesiastics strive only for a 
 number of benefices, while they were as little able to discharge 
 the duties connected with them, as an ass was to bear an over- 
 burden of sacks. He reproaches the monks with their mendi- 
 cancy and fraudulent arts, and side by side with them, as Felix 
 Hammerlein 1 had done before, he paints, in the very darkest colours, 
 the Lollards, Beghards, and Beguines, as an indolent, useless, and 
 hypocritical set, who, under the cloak of liberal notions, indulged 
 the most shameful lusts. 2 Even the state of the universities 
 does not escape his keen observation. And here especially he 
 
 1 See Opuscula et-Tractatus Felicis Hammerlein, cantoris quondam 
 Thuricensis, edited by Sebastian Brant, Basil 1597, in mult. loc. esp 
 fob 1 sqq., fol. 10 sqq., fob 15 sqq. 
 
 2 See the supplement to Sebastian Brant's Latin translation of the 
 Ship of Fools, Nro. cxi : de singularitate quorundam novorum fatu- 
 orum. Brant thus expresses the fanciful principles of those freethink- 
 ing sects : 
 
 Vos hominem ex toto praesenti in came putatis 
 Perfectum, et suminum tangere posse gradum ; 
 
 Usque adeo, ut nunquam deinceps mortale patrare 
 Crimen, et ut nequeat proficere ulterius. 
 
TITE CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. 19l 
 
 gives scope to his wit, and rails at the numbers of young per- 
 sons who travel from one to another of the celebrated seats of 
 learning, such as Vienna, Erfurt, Basle, Leipsic, Heidelberg, 
 Mayence, and even as far as France, Italy, and beyond the sea, 
 decorated with the badges of students and masters, but occupied 
 with mere trifles, and destitute of the slightest tincture of solid 
 and profitable learning. On the whole Brant finds in his age a 
 General declension alike of the State, the Church, and the Catholic 
 faith, and Christendom occupying a humbling and dangerous posi- 
 tion, as regards its hereditary enemy, the Turk ; to repel whom, 
 he, in the overflow of his patriotic enthusiasm, loudly summons 
 the noble German nation to take arms under its chivalric head, 
 the Emperor Maximilian, whom he elsewhere highly extols. In 
 short, the signs of the times appear to him so critical, and his 
 cotemporaries so perverse and wicked, that he expects the jjorld 
 to come to a speedy termination. Among the serious theologians 
 and opponents of the ruling powers who entertained that idea, 
 it is singular to find a moderate, sensible, and strong-minded 
 jurist, and to hear him expressing his firm conviction of the im- 
 pending advent of Antichrist. It proves how deeply serious 
 minds at the time were penetrated by what was certainly a just 
 thought, that if the progress of society in Germany did not take 
 another turn, the debasement would soon reach its utmost limit. 1 
 
 1 I shall only quote one passage which contains the substance of the 
 whole ; under the title, De Antichristo fol. cxvii., there is at the end : 
 
 Nam tria sunt, fixa est in quibus alma fides ; 
 Gratia Pontificis, quae sacro funditur ore ; 
 
 Quae tamen ad nihilum spreta redacta jacet ; 
 Copia librorum : qui falso interprete marcent, 
 
 Atque bono legis expositore carent ; 
 Sunt et doctrinae : quibus et nunc gloria nulla 
 
 Praestatur ; tcnebras discimus usque meras. 
 Copia librorum totum est jam sparsa per orbem, 
 
 Pauperis et libros bibliotheca tenet. 
 Nemo tamen veri sinceras diligit artes, 
 
 Dogmata nemo col it nunc nisi solus inops. 
 Nobilibus pudor est doctos versare libellos ; 
 
 Heu laceris Pallas moeret ubique comis. 
 Gloria nulla datur studiosis, praemia nulla, 
 
 Incassum studii perditur usque labor. 
 Tempus adest, venit tempus, quo Pseudoprophetae 
 
 Omnia subvertent : tempora prava patent. 
 The false Prophets who already arose in crowded ranks and pitched 
 
192 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 Under these circumstances, it was no wonder that a reaction 
 ensued. For this the way was paved and a door opened by the 
 growing consciousness in men's minds of the existing evils. The 
 reaction, when it came, manifested itself in two phases, which, 
 however, are closely connected with each other. The one is of 
 a negative character, and consists in hostility directed against the 
 main props of the Church, while the other was more positive, 
 asserting the urgent necessity of a better state of things, 
 and even endeavouring to introduce it. The former is the war 
 against the Papacy, which with all its corruptions still advanced 
 the most preposterous claims. The other is the passionate 
 desire, which was felt for a reformation, and the zealous efforts 
 made to set it on foot. To illustrate the subject we intend to bring 
 forward two vigorous champions of both tendencies, one a lawyer 
 and statesman, the other a theologian and monk. 
 
 7. THE OPPOSITION TO THE HIERARCHY. GREGORY 
 OF HEIMBURG. 
 
 The abuses and usurpations of the Papacy, and the necessity 
 of a thorough remodelling of the Court of Rome, had in those 
 days, and especially during the period of the schism and the 
 reforming Councils, roused many intrepid voices in almost all 
 parts of Europe. Foremost, and as directors of this movement, 
 stand the French theologians, many of them men occupying the 
 highest positions in the Church and Universities, such as Peter 
 oT Alliaco and John Charlier cte Gerson. Neither, however, were 
 champions wanting in Germany, who with great boldness of speech 
 assailed the secularity of the hierarchy. We might here mention 
 and characterize Henry of Hessen, who terminated his career 
 as teacher of theology at Vienna in 1397, Mathew of Cracow, 
 Bishop of Worms (f 1410), Jacob of Jueterbock, a Carthusian 
 Monk, and Professor in the University at Erfurt, who flourished 
 
 the camp of Antichrist, destroyed themselves, and plunged the people 
 into ruin, are described by Brant as follows : 
 
 Qui Christi falso pectore sacra colunt, 
 Quique aliter sacras leges et dogmata versant, 
 
 Quain textus planus edocet atque sonat. 
 
orrosmoN to the hierarchy. 193 
 
 about the middle of the 15th century. Reserving, however, the 
 rest of the particulars for the sequel of the narrative, we confine 
 ourselves at present to a single man, but one fitted above all 
 others to exemplify the thoughts and actings of the German 
 opposition. We speak of the indefatigable Gregory of Heimburg, 
 a person highly interesting for his patriotism, his independence 
 of mind, and heroic sentiments. We can have no better repre- 
 sentative of one peculiar aspect of the measures now on foot for 
 the introduction of the Reformation. 
 
 And here we must take into account an element which, 
 although of high importance, has not as yet been specially men- 
 tioned, viz., nationality. The Reformation is the outburst of the 
 purer spirit of Christianity in close affiliation with the spirit of 
 German patriotism. It is the vigorous reaction particularly of 
 the mind of Germany against the mind of Rome ; and although 
 the religious efforts, both practical and scientific, which helped 
 to promote it, should not be overlooked, we must nevertheless 
 affirm, that the Reformation became a popular cause, chiefly in 
 consequence of the appeal it made to the national sentiment of 
 Germany. We find instances of this in Hutten, Sickingen, 
 and other knights of their character, and, in the highest degree, 
 in Luther himself. There can be no more brilliant specimen c/ 
 it than his address to the German nobility. In Worms he does 
 not merely found upon Scripture, but makes a powerful appeal to 
 the national feeling. And after the diet at Augsburg, he ex- 
 presses the opinion that " if such proceedings in matters of 
 religion are continued, no man under the canopy of heaven will 
 henceforth be afraid of us Germans." 1 The movement, a heri- 
 tage from the period of the Hohenstaufen, runs through the 
 whole of the 15th century. It was the meaning of the language 
 which the German Commissioners used in the Councils of Con- 
 stance and Basle. The assembly of the princes at Frankfort in 
 1438, and at several of the diets, were full of it. The grievous com- 
 plaints which, about the middle of the 15th century, were presented 
 to John, Cardinal of St Angelo, 2 the Nuncio of Nicholas V., and 
 
 1 Luther's warning to his dear Germans in Walch xvi., 1975. 
 
 2 Gravamina Nationis Germanicae adversus Curiam Romanam Jo- 
 anna Cardinali S. Angeli, Nicolai V. P. R. Legato exhibita. They 
 
 N 
 
194 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the still more celebrated Hundred grievances 1 drawn up by the diet 
 of Nuremberg in 1522, were all its offspring. Their ignominious 
 subjection which was felt to be unworthy of a free and great nation, 
 and the obligation to pay tribute to a foreign state, were what 
 chiefly provoked the spirit of the Germans. " Germany," says 
 a pamphlet of the age, 2 " was in days of yore a free country, but 
 now it is more tributary and subject to the Italians, than it ever 
 was in the time of the ancient Romans. It allows itself so easily 
 to be drained and exhausted of its gold, property, and substance, 
 that the cunning Italians take particular delight in it." Still 
 more strongly does Martin Meyer, the Chancellor to Dietrich 
 von Erbach, Archbishop of Mayence, express himself, in a letter 
 addressed, about the year 1457, to the new Cardinal Aeneas 
 Sylvius 3 : " A thousand ways (many of them he had just enume- 
 rated) are devised, by which the Romish chair cunningly robs 
 us poor barbarians of our money : And thus it has come about 
 that our nation, once so highly renowned, and which by its 
 courage and blood set up the Roman Empire, and rose to be 
 mistress and queen of the world, has now been reduced to a poor, 
 servile, and tributary condition, and for many years has been 
 grovelling in the mire, and deploring her misfortune and poverty. 
 At last, however, our princes have awakened from their slumber, 
 and begun to think by what means the evil may be remedied. 
 Nay they have determined wholly to shake off the yoke, and to 
 assert again their ancient freedom, and it will be no small loss to 
 
 are printed in Walcli Monim. med. acv. ii. 1, p. 103 — 110. Of their 
 literary character Walch treats in his Praef. p. xxxviii. sqq. 
 
 1 Die 100 Beschwerden der deutschen Nation, mit Amnerk. v. G. 
 M. Weber. Frankf. 1829. 
 
 2 Ettlich Artikel Gottes lob und des heil. Rom. Reichs nnd der gan- 
 zen teutschen Nation Eere und Nutz belangend. Hagenau bei Thomas 
 Anselm. Febr. 1521. (To be found in the Schopflin library at 
 Strasburg.) 
 
 3 The letter is in Von der Ilardt Acta Concil. Const. T. i. p. iv. p. 
 182. In reply to it Aeneas Sylvius published his well-known book 
 de ritu, situ, moribus etc. Germaniae, which Wimpheling followed 
 with his remarks, "I must answer," says he, "as a German for the 
 German, and as a Heidelberger for the Heidelberger who is never at a 
 loss for an ansiver" (Meyer was meanwhile dead). About Meyer see 
 Elenchus Cancellariorum Moguntin. in Gudeni Sylloge dipl. p. 530. 
 
GREGORY OP HEIMBURG. 195 
 
 the Papal court if the princes of the Roman Empire really exe- 
 cute what they now design." 
 
 The chief representative, however, of this tendency in the 
 15th century was Gregory of Heimburg, who well deserves to be 
 entitled the Citizen-Luther before the days of Luther, and of 
 whom therefore we propose to give a somewhat full account. 
 
 Gregory of Heimburg was descended 1 from a noble Franconian 
 family, studied at Wurtzburg, took the degree of Doctor of Laws 
 about the year 1430, and in 1431 made his appearance upon the 
 great ecclesiastical arena, having been taken into the service of 
 Aeneas Sylvius, then a member of the Council of Basle, and one 
 of the leaders of the opposition party in the Church. From that 
 date we find Heimburg concerned in all the most important 
 transactions of Church and State, consulted by many potentates, 
 both temporal and spiritual, and active at all the diets. 2 The 
 greater part of his life was spent at Nuremberg, the city which 
 took so important a part in cultivating the Germanic spirit of the 
 age. He there filled the same office as Sebastian Brant after- 
 wards did at Strasburg, that of City-syndic, and so absorbed was 
 he by the interests, and imbued with the spirit of this beloved 
 community, that, in his official situation, he may be regarded as 
 the most strenuous champion and advocate of German citizen- 
 ship in that day. He prosecuted, however, other still higher and 
 more general interests. Three tendencies, different in kind, but 
 yet auxiliary to each other, are prominently conspicuous in his 
 life ; first, lively zeal for the commencements of the study of clas- 
 sical literature and eloquence in Germany; secondly, active endea- 
 vours to strengthen the tottering empire, to promote its unity 
 and independence, and exalt the class of peaceful and indus- 
 trious citizens in opposition to the martial power of the princes ; 
 
 1 The character of this man may be gathered from an excellent and 
 well-digested article of Dr Hagen in the periodical, Braga Heidelb. 
 1839. B. ii. S. 414—450. 
 
 2 The famous scholar and poet, Conr. Celtes, who, though of a later 
 age, was also a Franconian by birth and his kinsman, praises Gregory 
 of Heimburg as a distinguished jurist. He says Ode vi. Lib. ii. : — 
 
 Sunt, qui jura ferant, et pulchris legibus urbes, 
 
 Reges, cum ducibusque gubernent. 
 Inter quos fueras primus Heimburge Georgi, 
 
 Cognato mihi sanguine junctus. 
 
196 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 and thirdly, indefatigable war against the encroachments and 
 usurpations of the hierarchy. The whole of these tendencies, 
 however, are combined in the one great aim of his life, which 
 was to restore the greatness of his country in intellectual and 
 political power. The two first, interesting though they are, we 
 now pass unnoticed, 1 and confine ourselves to the last, that is, the 
 ecclesiastical warfare of Heimburg. And here nothing is more 
 worthy of attention than his connexion with Aeneas Sylvius, 
 which was commensurate with his life. The opening of the 
 Councih of Basle first brought the two distinguished men into 
 contact. The polished, high-bred Italian, valued the German, not 
 merely for his sound scientific attainments, and his classical and 
 energetic eloquence, 2 but also for his sentiments and principles. 
 They were soon, however, separated, although still occasionally 
 belonging to the same party. Heimburg continued true to his early 
 principles. By betraying these, Aeneas Sylvius rose from one step 
 of ecclesiastical rank to another, until, in the year 1458, he seated 
 himself upon the chair of St Peter. From that date their 
 mutual coolness passed into decided antagonism, which was pub- 
 licly evinced by speeches, writings, and acts. The two men in 
 fact were the most prominent representatives of the opposite 
 tendencies of the age, and as they entered into these with their 
 whole heart, became at last also personal enemies. Aeneas 
 Sylvius died loaded with public honours and wearing the triple 
 crown, Heimburg in poverty, exile, and all but excommunication, 
 In him, however, history recognizes a man of deep convictions, 
 integrity, and fortitude ; in the other, the mere possessor of bril- 
 liant and supple talents, 3 but destitute of character. 
 
 1 They are further treated of in the article by Dr Hagen, p. 419 and 
 427 sq. 
 
 2 Comp. the remarkable letter of Aeneas Sylvius to Heimburg, printed 
 in Goldast Monarch. T. ii. p. 1632 and 33. Here the Italian writes 
 to the German (Juris consultissimo viro) after he had been present at 
 a disputation: Nam et Legistam et Teuthonem superabas, et Italicam 
 rcdolebas oratoriamque facundiam — he sends him his love, because, 
 while adorning his country by his morals, he strives at the same time 
 to exalt it in science, and says : Kevixit etiam eloquent ia, etnostro qui- 
 dem scculo apud Italosmaximc floret. Spero idem inTeutoniafuturum, 
 6i tu tuique similes continuare et amplecti totis conatibus oratoriam 
 decreveritis. 
 
 3 llagenbach furnishes us with a beautiful and just estimate of this 
 
GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 197 
 
 Heimburg took the field against the Pope for the first time in 
 1446, upon occasion of the opposition raised by the German 
 Electors to Eugene IV. Eugene had deprived of their dignities 
 the ecclesiastical Electors of Treves and Cologne, because they 
 appeared to countenance the Council of Basle. The rest of the 
 Electors, however, took the part of their brethren, and despatched 
 commissioners to Home to threaten and remonstrate. At the 
 head of this embassy stood Gregory of Heimburg. With the 
 port and sentiments of a hero, and in a strain of bold and defiant 
 eloquence, he delivered in the presence of the Pope a speech 
 of unparalleled intrepidity, and as his Holiness' answer was 
 evasive, gave the utmost freedom to his tongue, in other parts 
 of the city, when speaking of the conclave, and generally of 
 the Italians and their country. Even in his dress and beha- 
 viour he delighted to show the rough and reckless manners of his 
 nation. On this occasion, however, we also became acquainted 
 with Heimburg in a higher and more serious aspect of his charac- 
 ter. He then composed one of his most remarkable controversial 
 works, which is still extant. It bears the title, " An admonition 
 touching the unjust usurpations of the Popes of Rome, addressed 
 to the Emperor and all Christian kings and princes. " x And 
 as it is singularly illustrative of the views not merely of the 
 author himself, but of a large number of his cotemporaries, we 
 shall here give its substantial contents. 
 
 Although aware that "for a long time it is much more dangerous 
 to question the power of the Pope than that of God Almighty," 2 
 Heimburg notwithstanding ventures to give the following pic- 
 ture of the state of the Church. The Head of the Church, he 
 says, wishes to humble the whole world, and subject it to him- 
 self. Everywhere he exposes benefices for sale, and offers the cup 
 of ignominy, always so sweet to favoured ecclesiastics, and now 
 
 distinguished Popo in the Erinnerungen an Aeneas Sylvius Piccolo- 
 mini. Basel 1840. 
 
 1 Admonitio de injustis usurpationibus Paparum Rom. ad Impera- 
 torem, reges et principes Christianos, sive Confutatio Primatus Papae 
 — printed in Goldast Monarchia S. liom. Imperii torn. i. p. 557 — 
 563. 
 
 2 Liberius fuit a multis annis de potestate Dei, quam Papae praedi- 
 care et disputare — as is said, p. 557. lin. 52. 
 
198 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 gradually become palatable even to princes and laymen, to whom 
 at first it was bitter. Intoxicated Irv the draught, they have accus- 
 tomed themselves to look upon the usurpations of the Papacy in 
 the light of a Divine appointment : and the reason is, because the 
 Pope, appealing to the consignment of the flock of Christ to the 
 Apostle, boasts himself to be Christ's vicegerent, and possessed of 
 plenary power. Although knowing well enough, from the words 
 of Christ himself, that the opposite of this is true, he yet does not 
 blush to assert it, and as no teacher ventures to gainsay him — for 
 some are hunting for promotion, and others are afraid of losing 
 what they have already obtained 1 — he has actually succeeded in 
 subjecting the whole world, curtailing the authority of the Em- 
 peror and civil magistrate, and putting all things into confusion. 
 Emperors and kings, princes and commonwealths, either from 
 ignorance of the matter, or prevailing love of the world, 2 
 have been reduced to a state of slavish dependence, and com- 
 pelled to embrace, as an essential article of saving faith, the 
 doctrine that Jesus Christ has invested the Bishop of Rome with 
 a plenitude of power, in virtue of which he has at his disposal 
 all that the earth contains, no one daring to ask him, Wherefore 
 dost thou so % yea, issues his commands even to the angels? 
 
 1 . . . . aliis tacentibus ob spem promotionis ad beneficia, aliis 
 ob metum perdendi jam adepta. This same point is frequently 
 brought forward by other contemporaneous writers, e.g. by Jacob v. 
 Jiiterbock, in his work, which we shall afterwards characterise, De 
 septem ecclesiae statibus, where among other things (Wcdch. nioniin. 
 med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 2. p. 43) it is said, No one opposes the Re- 
 formation more than the Italians, and indeed, spe promotionis aut 
 lucri, aut temporalis commodi, aut timore amissionis dignitatem — 
 further by Thomas de Corsellis, in a speech delivered before the 
 Council of Basle in Aen. Sylvius de Concil. Basil. Lib. i. p. 19. edit. 
 Cattop. 1667. — and by Joannes Major Comment, in Matth. c. 18. in 
 Gerson. Opp. t. ii. p. 1144, where he says with great naivete, Concilium 
 raro congregatur, nee dat dignitates eeclesiasticas, Papa dat eas : hinc 
 homines ei blandiuntur, dicentes, quod solus potest omnia quadrare 
 rotunda, et rotundare quadrata, tarn in spiritualibus quam in tempo - 
 ralibus. 
 
 2 . . . vel propter ignorantiam et studii et scientiarum in adsue- 
 factione provenientem, vel propter nimiam lasciviam mundanam eos 
 occupantem. 
 
 3 . . . cum etiam (ut tcrminis utar suorum adulatorum) ipse Papa 
 Angelis habcat imperare. 
 
GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 109 
 
 In the first part of his treatise, Heimburg then takes up the 
 proofs from Scripture and the Fathers of the supremacy of the 
 Pope, which he handles with great ability. The result at which 
 he arrives is as follows. Christ did not confer upon his apostles 
 and disciples any temporal power, bnt only spiritual authority to 
 teach. He has even expressly commanded them to be subject 
 to the temporal powers, to give to Cassar that which is Caesar's, 
 and not to administer his kingdom as if it were a kingdom of this 
 world. He refused to be made a temporal king himself, and was 
 obedient to the civil governor of his country ; and his apostles 
 acted and taught in the same way. "With what conscience then 
 can a priest, for the Pope is nothing else, absolve the vassals of 
 the Empire from the oath of fidelity and allegiance, which Christ 
 and his apostles have made obligatory upon all. Even although, 
 according to his own oligarchical law, he might grant a dispensa- 
 tion, he is not entitled by the Law of God to do any thing of the 
 kind, without falling into serious error." 1 
 
 Heimburg looked with ridicule upon the argument so fre- 
 quently used 2 by the flatterers of the conclave, and drawn from 
 the analogical comparison of the Pope with the sun. " For," he 
 observes, u although the moon does receive her light from the 
 sun, she does not receive her motion, and in like manner though 
 temporal princes may submit to be compared to the moon, in 
 respect that they obtain from the Pope and the Church the light 
 of doctrine, they are not on that account subjected to his domina- 
 tion. On the contrary, the similitude, when rightly understood, 
 proves the very opposite, for as these two lights have been 
 ordained, the sun to rule the day and the moon to rule the night, 
 so do the Pope and the clergy preside over doctrine and prayer 
 and the dispensation of Divine grace, but the Emperor over 
 secular things. In fact it is not desirable that spiritual teachers, 
 like the Pope and the clergy, should have temporal authority and 
 compulsory power at their command. That faith, which is the 
 offspring of external constraint, is worthless. Christ himself 
 was very far from using coercive measures to convert the Jews 
 and Gentiles. 
 
 1 Goldast Monarch, t. i. p. 559. lin. GO. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 558. line 37. 
 
200 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 The second part of the treatise is of great weight, 1 and con- 
 tains especially the historical exposition of the subject. The 
 primitive Church, says Heimburc), by sanctity of morals and 
 doctrine, edified the Roman world, converted it to the faith, and 
 inspired reverence for the priesthood, whereas the modern Church, 
 instigated by unbridled ambition, exacts as a due the respect at 
 first volunteered by the good-will of the Emperors, has converted 
 the liberties conceded by their piety into a despotism, and has 
 thus gradually usurped a power which owns no bounds. For 
 300 years, from St Peter to St Sylvester, nothing of the kind was 
 ever heard of. The vocation of the Popes was then not secular 
 dominion, but martyrdom. Their glory consisted not in purple 
 raiment, snow-white horses, wealth, splendour and power, but in 
 conformity to the saying of the Apostles : " Lord we have left 
 all things to follow thee." From the days of St Sylvester the 
 Church began to mingle with the world and lost her purity. 2 
 Thenceforward, till the reign of Otho I., the Emperor treated 
 the Popes with great respect. They waited upon them, either 
 personally or by ambassadors, supplicated their blessing, and 
 recommended themselves to their intercession. Some even 
 received coronation at their hands. This inflated the Popes 
 with presumption, and the consequence was that the Emperors 
 deposed several of them. It was also enacted that no one was 
 to be elected Pope, except with the Emperor's assent. In the 
 days of the Othos, the imperial power was strong, and kept 
 the usurpations of the ecclesiastical within bounds. The Empe- 
 rors were chosen by the princes, uninfluenced by the Pope, who 
 took no part in the matter. After Otho III. the Popes reflected 
 by what means they might bring the Emperors into subjection, 
 and none appeared to them more answerable than to corrupt the 
 Electors and embroil them with each other, that so one of the 
 contending parties might take the Pope's side. In this manner, 
 discord arose in the empire, and the papal power increased on every 
 hand. Nevertheless, in Henry III.'s time, the vacant bishoprics 
 were still filled up by the emperors and princes, and the bene- 
 fices by the bishops, with the princes' consent. From the days 
 
 Goldasl. Monarch, p. 560—63. 
 
 2 Incoepit Ecclesia mixta — by the pretended donation of Constantino? 
 in which Ileimburg still believed. 
 
GREGORY OF IIEIMBURG. 201 
 
 of Henry IV., however, the Popes interfered more and more 
 with the affairs of the empire, till at last, under Innocent III., 
 they succeeded in transferring to themselves the privileges, which 
 the Emperors had hitherto asserted as their own, so that they 
 appointed to the bishopricks and abbeys, and at last even to the 
 benefices, to say nothing of all the pecuniary exactions connected 
 with the matter. In this manner the Popes have, no doubt, be- 
 come the vicars of Christ, but in glaring contradiction to the 
 command of him whose place they pretend to fill. 1 It was to 
 remedy these abuses that the Sacred Council assembled at Basle. 
 The object of that Council was to oblige him who was Christ's 
 vicar to conform to Christ's manner of life. In this, however, it 
 was hindered. By pointing reformation at the Papal court, it 
 raised a mighty storm against itself. The ship of St Peter reeled. 
 Many, who at first showed the greatest zeal, 2 were won over by 
 the Pope, and now ascribed to him the supremacy, which they 
 once asserted for the General Council. The harlot intoxicated 
 her lovers and worshippers, so that the true bride of Christ, with 
 her representative Council, has scarcely one faithful admirer 
 among a thousand. In this manner, by a single headstrong in- 
 dividual, 3 the Reformation is obstructed and the Church dis- 
 turbed ; and of all parties none is more to be pitied than the 
 German nation, who might otherwise have regained their dear 
 and blood-bought privileges, both civil and ecclesiastical. " Up 
 then," concludes Heimburgf " awaken from your stupor. Shake 
 off the dust. Break the yoke from your neck. Recede from 
 your shameful position of neutrality. 5 Convoke the Council 
 
 1 The contradiction is sharply stated in the single passage, p. 265. 
 lin. 24., where among other things it is said : Cliristus regnum mun- 
 danum exclusit : Vicarius illud ambit. Christns regnum fugit : Vica- 
 rius ingerit, ut habeat negatum. Cliristus se negavit constitutum se- 
 cularem judicem : Vicarius praesumit judicare Caesarem. . . Christus 
 discordes Judaeos et gentcs in unuin regnum congregat : Vicarius Ger- 
 manos olim Concordes saepe seditionibus conturbavit. 
 
 2 Here, as in other passages, Heimburg has especially in his eye 
 Aeneas Sylvius and Nicolaus of Cusa. 
 
 3 . . . propter unum captiosum hominem, tamdiu reformation! 
 Ecclesiae Romanae se opponentem. 
 
 4 P. 562. lin. 62 sqq. 
 
 5 . . . postponendo damnab'dem neutralitatem. The German 
 
202 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 afresh, which, with the hark of Peter, is now floundering in the 
 waves ; and by means of it reform the Church." 
 
 Such was the appeal which Ileimhurg uttered in the ears of 
 the princes and nobility of all Christendom, with an intrepidity 
 and vigour like Luther's, the man of the people in a subsequent 
 age, but at the same time with judgment, and upon a sound basis 
 of historical information worthy, in that unfavourable age, of 
 double respect. We find the same spirit in all that proceeded 
 from his pen. In 1459, Pius II., his former friend and patron, 
 who had, the year before ascended the papal throne, convoked a 
 meeting of princes at Mantua, in order to set on foot a new 
 crusade. Heimburg, who was present, as counsellor of the 
 princes, saw nothing in the proposal but a scheme of the Pope 
 to magnify his power and extort money. 1 He spoke and endea- 
 voured to persuade the princes and ambassadors to vote against 
 it. The enterprise proved abortive. Ere long, however, Pius 
 II. found an opportunity of revenging himself upon his opponent. 
 This occurred in his dispute with the Archduke Sigismond of 
 Austria, to whom Heimburg was councillor. The Pope had ap- 
 pointed the celebrated Nicolaus of Cusa, a man of great intellec- 
 tual powers, but, like his Papal patron, an apostate from the 
 liberal principles of his youth, to the Bishopric of Brescia, in op- 
 position to the will of the Archduke. In virtue of his office, 
 Nicolaus, already disposed for variance, claimed several pro- 
 perties and regalia, which Sigismond was exceedingly averse to 
 resign. The dispute went so far that the Duke took the bishop 
 prisoner, a step which the Pope retaliated on the 1st June, 14G0, 
 by laying the Duke under an interdict, and endeavouring to stir 
 up all his neighbours against him. Sigismond, on the 13th of 
 August, appealed to a General Council, following the advice of 
 
 Electors, in order to mediate between the Synod of Basle and Pope 
 Eugene IV., had to declare the German Church neutral, in the year 
 1438. 
 
 1 In his Appellatio in Goldast Monarch, t. ii. p. 159. lin. 52. Helm- 
 burg says : Cur hoc ? Nisi quia voluit Papa ipse abuti potestate sua, 
 talliam imponendo, et sub velamento militaris expeditionis in Turcam 
 instaurandae facultates Germaniae illius, quae est inter Coloniam Ag- 
 rippinam et Austriam, ac rursus inter Daciam et Alpes medullitus ex- 
 haurire. It would appear he had spoken almost in this strain even in 
 Mantua. 
 
GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 203 
 
 Heimburg, and receiving his assistance in preparing the neces- 
 sary document. 1 Pius II. looked upon the proceeding as cri- 
 minal rebellion, and all the more, because at the recent diet of 
 Mantua he had forbidden such appeals. For this reason, the ex- 
 communication was also levelled against Heimburg? The city 
 of Nuremberg was formally required to expel the impious man, 
 confiscate Ins goods, and deliver him up as a son of the devil to 
 all sorts of persecution. Of course, Heimburg replied by a stout 
 appeal, in his own name, to a future Council. This document, 
 which is still extant, 3 states particularly the principles involved in 
 the relation of the Popes to the General Councils of the Church. 
 Heimburg conducts his personal defence with great ability and 
 power, and bitterly complains that, contrary to all Divine and 
 human law, he had been condemned unheard, and that the Pope 
 had acted towards him in a mere arbitrary manner. At the same 
 time, he developes the following general proposition. It was not 
 to Peter alone, but to the whole Apostles in common, that Christ 
 committed the keys. The Apostles are then, in their turn, supposed 
 to have acknowledged Peter as their chief, and raised him to the 
 chair of Antioch. They did not thereby, however, renounce any 
 portion of their own commission and authority ; and consequently 
 the government of the Church still was, and continued to be, in 
 the hands of the majority of the Apostles. The place of the 
 Apostles is now occupied by General Councils, which are the 
 citadel of the Christian faith, intended for the instruction and 
 improvement of the Popes. It is vain for the Pope to affirm, 
 that a future Council cannot possibly be superior to the vicar of 
 Christ. Because, if all the Apostles were commissioned by 
 Christ, if to all of them he said, " Go ye into all the world ; 
 whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be "bound in heaven, 
 and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven," 
 and if they afterwards met, so to speak, in council, and sent 
 forth Peter to reap the Lord's harvest, who can doubt that 
 the sacred Councils, as successors of the whole body of the Apos- 
 tles, have also taken the place of Christ P No doubt, the Pope 
 
 1 According to the Papal letter to be soon quoted, Heimburg had 
 pasted up the original of the Appellatio in the church at Florence. 
 
 2 The letter of excommunication is in Goldast Monarch, t. ii. p. 1591. 
 
 3 In Goldast t. ii. p. 1592—1595. 
 
 4 In al. loc. p. 1592 and 93. 
 
204 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 is as much afraid of a Council, that stronghold of Christian free- 
 dom, as he is of the plague, 1 and before it meets, endeavours to 
 oppose to it a worthless decree. This, however, will only help 
 to call it together. For the more he shows himself afraid of it, 
 the more he will stimulate the desire for its convocation. The 
 objection that no Council was then sitting, 2 Heimburg obviates 
 by say in 2, 1 maintain that, as an appeal can be made to the Papal 
 chair when unoccupied, so may also an appeal be made to a Ge- 
 neral Council before it has met. The power of the Church is im- 
 mortal, like the Church itself, which, although it be dispersed for 
 a season, may yet afterwards be gathered together. That this at 
 the present moment is of urgent necessity, no one acquainted 
 with the miserable state of the Church doubts. And if the 
 Pope does not deny that he is a part of the Church, he must 
 necessarily admit his subordination to it, fpr the world is surely 
 larger than the city of Home. 3 His only object, however, is to 
 rule us as slaves, and his only ground of complaint that we will 
 not submit to be ruled peaceably. 
 
 This appeal of Heimburg was answered 4 by the Apostolic Refe- 
 rendary, TJieodore Laelius, Bishop of Feltre, who stoutly maintains 
 the absolute monarchy of the Pope. In his reply, he starts with 
 the idea of order in the Church, and shows that this necessarily 
 infers that there are regular gradations in the Ecclesiastical body, 
 and a head at the top. At the same time he endeavours to found 
 the primacy upon passages of Scripture and the early Fathers. 
 It was not the Apostles, he says, who placed Peter at their head, 
 but Jesus Christ by subordinating the rest to him. It is true 
 that the power of the keys was given to all the Apostles, but at 
 the same time it was given to Peter before all and for all, so that 
 in him the unity and government of the Church are represented. 
 Laelius traces the denial of the primacy of Peter to the influ- 
 
 1 Sicut iliacara passionem. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 1593 at the foot and p. 1594. 
 
 3 Siquidem orbis major est urbe, i.e., the whole Christian world is 
 larger than the single city Rome. This is what other writers on the same 
 side more abstractly express by saying the Church as the whole is above 
 the Pope, who is only a part of the Church. 
 
 4 Replica Theod.-LaeZM Episc. Feltr. pro Pio Papa II. et sede Romana 
 —in Goldast t. ii. p. 1595-1604. 
 
GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 205 
 
 ence of Eastern or Bohemian poison, and considers it as a most 
 damnable error, a sin not on any account to be pardoned. 1 
 
 Heimburg did not fail once more to defend his convictions. 
 This he did in an apology, 2 which enters minutely into all the 
 arguments of Laelius. To shew the character of the work, we 
 cite a single passage in which he expresses himself on the much 
 disputed relationship of Peter to the rest of the Apostles. " You 
 seek," says he to Laelius, 3 " to lower the other eleven Apostles 
 in order to accumulate all ecclesiastical power upon the head of 
 Peter, and will not confess that the whole collective body of 
 them are superior to the one, of whom, however, we are in- 
 formed that he obeyed the whole body. You deny that the 
 sacred General Councils are the main pillars of the Christian 
 faith, and that they have been established by Christ over all 
 believers, even when these glitter with the Papal dignity. What 
 disease of the mind has smitten you with such stupidity, as that 
 you have fallen from the evangelical truths I asserted, into such 
 errors as these? Can truth ever contradict itself? Tell ine 
 then, you who assign the pastoral office to Peter alone, for what 
 purpose was it that John, the favourite disciple, was taught the 
 holy truths, and imbibed them directly from the breast of the 
 Saviour ? Was it to lock them up in his bosom, or to preach 
 them abroad % Did not the twelve in the midst of the multitude 
 who believed, aver, " It is not reason that we should leave the 
 word of God." To preach, however, is to do the shepherd's 
 part, for it is to feed the flock with the food of the Divine 
 word. And how could that chosen vessel, the ambassador of 
 Christ, say of himself, " Not of men, neither by men, but by 
 Jesus Christ and God the Father," if it had been from Peter 
 that he received his- commission. In the same way all the 
 other Apostles without distinction of place, or choice of person, 
 were sent by Christ into all the world to found and to govern 
 Ills Church. 4 
 
 Heimburg defends the same principles in a violent invective, 
 
 1 In al. loc. p. 1604. lin. 25. sq. 
 
 2 Apologia contra detractiones et blasphemias Thcocl. Laelii in Gal- 
 dast t. ii. p. 1604—1625. 
 
 3 In al. loc. p. 1616 top. 
 
 4 In al loc. p. 1619 bottom. 
 
206 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL 
 
 which ho wrote in the year 1461 on the dispute between Duke 
 Sigismond and Nicolaus of Casa. 1 In this he upbraids that 
 prelate, as he had done Pius II., with deserting his principles, 2 
 rebukes his sophistries, and very cogently calls his attention to 
 the fact, that his own rank as Cardinal was based upon the 
 authority of the Council of Constance. This argument was 
 much pleaded by the advocates of the authority of Councils 
 against all the successors of Martin V., the Pope elected at Con- 
 stance, and it placed them in the awkward dilemma of either 
 renouncing the validity of their own succession, or acknow- 
 ledging the principles of the Council on which it was based. 
 Here too let one very graphic citation suffice : 3 " And now you 
 sacrilegious and shameless man," says Ileimhurg, addressing the 
 worshipful Cardinal, " you deny that the Council is above the 
 Pope, though you once maintained the very reverse. Writings 
 by you and the Pope, in defence of sentiments the opposite of 
 what you now hold, are still extant. You say one thing stand- 
 ing, and another sitting. But there is no absurdity for which a 
 man will ever blush who ventures to argue, 'The Council of 
 Constance called Pope John their lord, which it would not have 
 done, if he had been subject to it.' How stupid you are to 
 think of drawing arguments from a form of courtesy. You 
 might with equal truth infer, that you yourself have dominion 
 over the conclave, for when they address you, they also say, My 
 Lord of St Peter's. 4 ... In point of fact the great synod 
 of Constance surrendered nothing when it designated Pope 
 
 1 Invectiva in Rever. Patrem, Dom. Nicolaum dc Cusa — in Goldasi 
 t. ii. p. 1626 — 1631. The commencement is equally pointed, Cancer 
 Cusane Nicolae, qui te Cardinalem Brixiensem vocas. The family 
 name of the Cardinal was Crebs. It is also an allusion to his back- 
 sliding course. 
 
 2 Nicolaus of Cusa, like Aeneas Sylvius, was at an earlier period the 
 friend of Heimburg. In the year ] 457, as newly-elected Cardinal, he 
 had invited him along with some others to Rome, using the following 
 language : Veni igitur, obsecro veni. Neque enim tua virtus est, quae 
 inter nives et umbrosas clausa valles languescere debeat. Scio com- 
 plures esse, qui te videre, audire et sequi cupiunt, inter quos me sem- 
 per auditorem discipulumque obsequentem invenies. Goldast t. ii. p. 
 1632. lin. 37. 
 
 3 In Goldast t. ii. p. 1627 bottom. 
 
 4 The title of Nicolaus as Cardinal was, & Petri ad vincula S. Rom. 
 Ecclesiac Presbyter Cardinalis. 
 
GEEGOEY OF HEIMBUEG. 207 
 
 John ' the most holy Lord ;' and the proof of this is, that it 
 afterwards rightfully deposed him, and if this had not been done, 
 Martin would never have occupied the vacant chair, nor have 
 bequeathed it to Eugenius, nor Eugenius to Nicolaus, nor would 
 Nicolaus have nominated you to be a Cardinal, o c , The 
 same relation as that between the Pope and the Council subsists 
 in other departments. The archbishop is chosen by the suf- 
 fragan-bishops, and by them called Lord ; and yet he is sub- 
 ject to the jurisdiction of the provincial synods which he convokes. 
 The parliament judges the kings of the French, and the Count 
 Palatine of the Rhine, the Roman Emperor, and yet deferenti- 
 ally they gave them the name of lords." 
 
 Though already excommunicated, Gregory of Heimburg 
 found himself entangled in a new dispute between 1461 and 
 1463. Diether of Jsenburg, elected Archbishop of Mayence, 
 had quarrelled with the Pope, and the Pope on his part refused to 
 sanction Diether's election. Here too the indefatigable opponent 
 of the Papacy was called in as an auxiliary. Although rejected by 
 the Papal nuncios, Heimburg was yet admitted by Diether into 
 his council, and for a considerable time conducted his dispute 
 simultaneously with Sigismond's. At last, however, he found 
 himself sadly deserted. Diether resigned the Archbishopric and 
 submitted, and Sigismond, by the mediation of the Emperor, was 
 reconciled to the Pope. But in these arrangements, the interests 
 of Heimburg were overlooked. Even the good inhabitants of 
 Nuremberg did not espouse his cause. Forsaken on every 
 side, he entered Bohemia, and on the soil of the Hussites, 
 and under the protection of George Podiebrad, carried on the 
 warfare with unflinching fortitude. Podiebradj for whom 
 he composed a series of controversial works, 1 died in the 
 year 1471. Heimburg then went into Saxony, and there found 
 a protector in Duke Albert, who effected his reconciliation 
 with Sixtus IV. He had just been absolved from the sentence 
 of excommunication at Easter in 1472, when in the course of 
 the ensuing month of August, he terminated his life of many 
 conflicts. Such was the end of a man, who, though he may 
 
 1 They are in Eschenlor's Geschicte v. Breslau, herausgegeben v. 
 Kumisch. Breslau 1827. B. 1 and 2. 
 
208 TIIE LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 occasionally liave overstepped the bounds of moderation, 1 always 
 acted from sincere conviction, and contended for the highest in- 
 terests — who could say of himself, that Ite never swerved from the 
 independence of a Diogenes or a Cato, nor earned in the cause of 
 liberty as large a share of temporal blessings as was his due 2 — 
 and of whom we may well say, that although, like Nicolaus of 
 Cusa, and Aeneas Sylvius, he might have improved his fortunes, 
 and secured a share of their pomps and honours, by deserting to 
 the party in power, 3 he yet continued to the last true to his con- 
 science, and in a hard and straitened position, freely and intre- 
 pidly uttered truths of which thousands were equally convinced, 
 but wanted the courage to speak them out. 4 
 
 8. THE HOPE OF REFORMATION. JACOB OF JUTERBOCK. 
 
 Having thus, from the writings of one who represented the 
 scholars and citizens of Germany, made ourselves acquainted 
 with the sentiments entertained in these circles on the subject of 
 the Papacy — and that similar sentiments were very general 
 among other classes will appear from many proofs in the sequel — 
 it is not less remarkable to see, what the prevailing opinions were 
 respecting the need of ecclesiastical reformation, and the means by 
 which that might be effected. And here we come in contact 
 with a man of quite a different stamp, with one who did not, 
 like Heimburg, apply a strong hand to public affairs and fight 
 
 1 e.g. as ambassador of the Electors at Rome. 
 
 2 Heimburg' s Appellatio in Goldast t. ii. p. 1593.1m. 60 and p. 1594. 
 lin 33. 
 
 3 The above citation may be seen in the letter of the Cardinal of 
 Cusa, in the year 1457, in which he enticingly endeavours to impress 
 upon Heimburg, how generally his arrival was desired at Rome, with 
 which an acquiescence in the Romish principles would naturally be 
 conjoined. 
 
 4 Conrad Celtes, the relation of Heimburg, composed for him the fol- 
 lowing epitaph, (Epigram. 89. Lib. iv.) 
 
 Hie jaceo Heimburgus, patriae qui primus in oras 
 
 Invexi leges, Caesareosque lihros. 
 Romanae praesul me condemnaverat urbis : 
 
 Consilium dixi, quod sibi majus erat. 
 
HOPE OP REFORMATION. 209 
 
 his way through the world, but who lived aloof from it, absorbed 
 in contemplation, and exercising his influence in a quiet cell, and 
 yet with such effect, that he deserves to be numbered among 
 the first men of his age. And he is here all the more entitled 
 to be heard, that he did not stand out of the Church's pale, or 
 endeavour, from worldly motives, to withdraw from its enact- 
 ments, but rather showed himself one of its most zealous mini- 
 sters and teachers, and practised the rigours of monachism, 
 with a devotion so entire, that Luther's saying may well be ap- 
 plied to him ; " If any one ever entered the kingdom of heaven 
 by monkery, it was he." 
 
 This person, whose name well deserves to be rescued from un- 
 just oblivion, was called Jacob of Jixterbock. He was a native 
 of the same Saxon town, in which, 132 years after his birth, the 
 coarse Tetzel, by the reckless sale of indulgences, gave the first 
 external impulse to the .Reformation, and during the later period 
 of his life, he laboured in the same University where John of Wesel 
 taught, and Luther received his education, viz., that of Erfurt. 
 Born about the year 1383, Jacob 1 entered the Polish monastery 
 
 1 The man of whom we here speak is mentioned among the older 
 writers under very different names. In the manuscripts which contain 
 his treatises, he is commonly styled Jacob Junterburg, also Junlerbock, 
 both of which are antiquated and unusual forms of the name Jdterbock. 
 From the two orders to which he belonged, he is called Jacobus Cister- 
 ciensis or Carthusianus ; from the Cistercian Monastery, where he 
 at first lived, Jacobus de Paradiso ; and because this monastery was 
 situated in Poland, from which, at an after period, he returned to his 
 native land, Jacobus de Polonia. He must not be confounded with a 
 Jacobus Quytrodius (Guytrodc) , who also bore the cognomen Carthu- 
 sianus, but who was a Dutchman, and respecting whom, consult Foppens 
 Biblioth. Belg. t. i. p. 514. — The earliest notice of our Jacob v. Jiiter- 
 bock is given by Joh. Trithemius, in Catalog, illustr. viror. t. i. Opp. 
 p. 158. and De scriptor. eccles. cap. 814. p. 191. ed. Fahr. He is also 
 spoken of by Matth. Flacius in Catalog, test, verit. Lib. xix. p. 883 
 (who confounds him with Jac. Guytrode) ; by Joh. Alb. Fabricius in 
 "Biblioth. lat. vol. iv. p. 17 ; by Henric. Wharton and Rob. Gerius in 
 Adpend. ad. Cav. hist lit. vol. ii. p. 174 and 206 ; by Pezius in praefat. 
 torn. vii. hiblioth. ascet. num. 8. Casim. ; by Oudinus in Comment, de 
 scriptor. eccles. t. iii. p. 2647 ; by Sim. Starovolscius in Ccntur. scriptor. 
 Polon. p. 103 j by Carol. Vischius in biblioth. Cisterc. p. 165; by 
 Christoph. Molschmannus in Erford. literat. Pars. vi. p. 913 ; and by 
 Walch in praefat. ad. monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. lxv. — lxxvii. 
 The ivritings of Jacob of Jiiterbock 7 which Walch has printed, are, De 
 O 
 
210 TIIE LIFE OF JOnN OF WE3EL. 
 
 of Paradise, which belonged to the Cistercian order, pursued his 
 studies at Cracow, received there the doctor's degree, and was after- 
 wards, as abbot, raised to the government of his monastery. He 
 also spent some time, either as visitor or regular inmate, of a 
 monastery at Prague. 1 For forty years he continued a Cistercian, 
 but as the rule was not sufficiently austere to satisfy his zeal, 
 he obtained from the papal legates, who were present at the 
 Council of Basle, permission to change into the Carthusian order. 
 Having accordingly entered their monastery at Erfurt, 2 he rose 
 to the dignity of prior, taught theology in the University, and 
 died on the 30th of April 1465, in the 80th year of his age. The 
 learned Trithemius depicts him 3 as a man full of zeal and 
 well versed in Holy Scripture, of large experience in Canon- 
 law, possessed of a clear and discriminating intellect, affable in 
 speech, modest in manners, celebrated both as an author and 
 speaker, and held in so high estimation, that all he said and 
 wrote was reverenced like the Delphic oracles. Flacius 4 assigns 
 to him his due place among the witnesses of evangelical truth 
 prior to the Reformation. His writings evince acquaintance 
 with the Holy Scriptures, and a deep reverence for them. A 
 certain tincture of mysticism in his interpretation we must equit- 
 ably excuse, in consideration of the age. That he possessed a 
 thorough acquaintance with the state and circumstances of the 
 Church, especially of the clerical and monastic orders, cannot be 
 denied. His statements receive full corroboration from the testi- 
 
 septem ecclesiae statibus — De negligentia Praslatorum — -and De In- 
 dulgentiis. Those which he adduces as printed, are Sennones nota- 
 biles et formales de tempore et de Sanctis — Libelli tres de arte curandi 
 vitia, added to the Edition of the works of Job. IVessel, by Lydius 
 Amsterd. 1617 — Liber de veritate dicenda — Tractatus de caussis mul- 
 tarum Passionum, printed in Pezii biblioth. asc. t. vii. p. 389. — and 
 De apparitionibus aniinarum separatarum ex corporibus liber, which 
 work bears the name of a Jacobus de Clusa, but is ascribed by Oudinus 
 and Motschmann to our Jacob of Jiiterbock. 
 
 1 De Indulgent, cap. 2., De quorum numero, says he, ego olim fui, 
 cum in solenni monasterio aulae reglae degebam prope civitatem Pra- 
 gensem, ubi abundantissimae indulgcntiae in reliquiarum ostensione 
 conferebantur. 
 
 2 Trithemius styles him Vicarius domus montis sancti salvatoris 
 prope Erfordiam. De Scriptor. eccles. cap. 814. p. 191. ed. Fabr. 
 
 3 Catalog, illustr. viror. in Trith. Opp. t.i. p. 158. 
 
 4 Catalog. Test, verit. Lib. xix. p. 883. 
 
JACOB OF JUTERBOCK. 211 
 
 monies of cotemporaries. It is remarkable that, although so 
 zealous a monk, he avows the opinion, that monastic property 
 might lawfully be applied by the magistrate to other benevolent 
 objects, 1 even though of a secular nature. With deep and 
 almost despairing aspiration, he anticipated a better condition of 
 the Church, and forcibly describes the necessity and conditions of 
 its reformation. Among his many works, with the contents of 
 part of which we shall have an opportunity in the sequel of be- 
 coming acquainted, one of the most important is a disquisition 
 "Upon the seven states of the Church," 2 written about the year 
 1440, and of which, as exhibiting his reformatory views, we shall 
 state the subject matter. 
 
 Jacob of Juterbock, applying the opening of the seals in the 
 Apocalypse to the successive stages in the development of the 
 Church, believes that it has now reached its fourth and fifth 
 periods, of which the former appears to him the period of prevail- 
 ing hypocrisy, and the latter that in which many would require 
 to shed their blood for a testimony to the word of God. These 
 two, he thinks, are now commingled, and form the present time 
 In it the peculiarities and evils of earlier times are in some mea- 
 sure to be found. Its leading feature, however, is hypocrisy. 
 "Whether a reformation will take place at present, or whether it 
 will always go back until the advent of Antichrist, which may 
 be expected in the sixth stadium, is doubtful to him. The latter, 
 however, he thinks more likely to happen, when he looks to the 
 negligence of the clerical body and its members, to the wars 
 and conflicts raging in all parts of the world, to the persecution 
 of spiritually minded men, to the prevalence of simony, and to 
 the moral corruption among princes and people, clergy and 
 laity. The extreme necessity of a reformation is proved by the 
 corrupt state of the whole world, but the means of accomplishing 
 it have not yet been discovered. " General Councils," says this 
 liberal-minded monk, 3 " have been convoked for the purpose, and 
 these Councils have issued reformatory decrees, but they in- 
 stantly roused a fierce resistance on the part both of the clergy 
 
 1 De negligent. Praelator. cap. 30. Walch monim. ii. 1. p. 196. 
 
 2 De septera ecclesiae statibus opusculum — in Walch Monim. mecl. 
 aev. vol. ii. fasc. 2. p. 23 — 66. 
 
 3 In al. loc. p. 38 sq. 
 
212 TI1E LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 and laity, so that nothing was effected. The children came to 
 the birth, and there was not strength to bring forth. So great 
 was the rage of the adversaries, that they not only sought to put 
 the holy progeny, that is, the Reformation, to death, but even the 
 mother who bore it, viz., the authority of Councils, and the right 
 of convoking them, by means of which alone there can be any 
 hope of accomplishing a reformation." 
 
 It is interesting to observe how Jacob of Ji'derboch attempts 
 to combine the results of past experience, and thereby to divine, 
 as it were, the way in which a reformation might possibly be 
 introduced, and how, while his insight as to what could not be 
 expected was most correct, there was yet a veil before his eyes, 
 respecting that which was ordained by heavenly wisdom, and 
 afterwards actually took place. 'A reformation, he says, if it 
 were possible, 1 would have to be effected either directly by God, 
 in the way of inspiration, or by men. There seems to be no 
 third way. Who doubts the competency of God, if it were his 
 will, to enlighten the minds of priests and secular princes, so that 
 each should reform himself and those connected with him? 
 Hitherto, however, it has not been God's method to act without 
 means. If, however, the Reformation is to be effected by men, 
 the hope of it rests mainly upon those in authority, 2 both spiri- 
 tual and temporal, possessing, as they alone do, the power to 
 effect it not only by persuasion but by threats of punishment. 
 In this case, the Reformation would be accomplished either by 
 one or by many. 3 It will not be accomplished by one, however 
 eminent he may be for pleasing manners, attainments in science, 
 and outwarcf rank, nay, perhaps, even for miraculous powers. 
 We know of several who shone in these respects ; yet the Church 
 was not reformed in their day, but rather the schisms continued. 
 Neither, in my opinion, will it be accomplished by any single 
 sovereign pontiff. Because, in point of fact, a multitude of 
 canons, decretals, and constitutions have already issued from 
 the Popes, which uselessly blacken parchment, and have led to 
 no reformation. Besides it is palpably evident that the Pope's 
 own court is what most of all requires to be reformed, as the 
 
 1 In al. loc. p. 39. 
 
 2 spes rcforraandi maxime residet apud praesidentcs. 
 
 3 In al. loc. p. 41. 
 
JACOB OF JUTERBOCK. 213 
 
 recent councils loudly declare. But if the Pope cannot or 
 will not reform his own court, which he has under his wings, 
 who can believe that he will ever be able to reform the Church, 
 which extends so far and wide ? The Church cannot be reformed 
 till the wounds of its head are healed, and the conclave puri- 
 fied. The difficulty of doing this, however, has been shewn in 
 the course of the present times, for no Christian nation has so 
 obstinately resisted all ecclesiastical reform as the Italian ; and 
 with it others join hands, moved by hopes of preferment, gain 
 and temporal advantage, or by the fear of losing their dignities. 
 They tremble to hear a word said of the convocation of a Ge- 
 neral Council, knowing from experience, that these assemblies 
 do not understand how to flatter or fawn, but correct and amend 
 without respect of persons. The reason is, men congregate there 
 from all parts of the world;, and unseduced by love or fear, do not 
 spare vice. 1 
 
 Having mentioned that, in recent times, after the wound in- 
 flicted upon the Church, by the tragical fate of the Council of 
 Basle, and of whose cure there was yet no prospect, many men 
 of great learning had used their endeavours to undermine the 
 authority of General Councils, and to set up in opposition to them 
 the dogma of the Pope's absolute power and supremacy, Jacob 
 of Ji'derboch proceeds to say, 2 " Persons who dogmatize in 
 this way, imagine that they are serving the Roman pontiffs, 
 and do not consider that, on the contrary, they are obstruct- 
 ing their salvation. They deprive them of a thing which, 
 above all others, is most desirable and salutary for any man, 
 but of which the Pope stands in special need, in order to the 
 good of the Church, and that is brotherly correction ; for no one 
 surely will be so insane as to affirm, either that the Pope cannot 
 sin or cannot err, thereby exalting him above the common lot 
 of mortals, and not reflecting that Peter, the first of the Popes, 
 was reproved by Paul, a single individual and of subordinate 
 rank. All ecclesiastical and civil history, as well as undeni- 
 able experience, shews that, owing to the mutability of his will, 
 not yet confirmed in goodness, the Pope may err in faith and 
 morals just as other men. To withdraw him from correction and 
 
 1 Ibid. p. 43. 2 Ibid. p. 45. 
 
214 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 deprive liim of even the power of demitting liis office, is the lieiglit 
 of impiety. It is virtually to give him full license to sin as he 
 likes, and consequently is putting a sword into the hands of a 
 madman. 1 From this quarter, accordingly, all hope of reforma- 
 tion is cut off. It would be trusting to a fallible man, 2 who may 
 bring the Church and himself into the ways of error. Unless 
 some stop be put to so pernicious doctrine, the greatest evils 
 will arise. 3 The Pope will be emboldened to sin with impunity, 
 and to deal with all ecclesiastical matters according to his good 
 pleasure His subjects will have an excuse for disregarding his 
 ordinances and enactments, for if he himself pays no attention 
 to the Canons and the decrees of sacred Councils, his subjects 
 will fancy themselves absolved from the necessity of obeying the 
 Papal constitutions, and will murmur and say, " Father, learn 
 first to keep thine own law." In fine no one, especially of the 
 German nation, will henceforward attend a Council, 4 for if the 
 management of the Church is to be in the hand of a single fal- 
 lible man, it seems useless to assemble so many together, and so 
 the Councils will fall a prey to inward discord, and become a 
 mockery. And how dare they also affirm, that the Church 
 assembled in council has no title to rebuke, far less to depose 
 the Pope, seeing it is impossible' to avoid judging that when he 
 scandalizes the Church, and is incorrigible, he does not act as 
 Pope, but as a delinquent who has fallen from the papal dignity 1 
 If, according to the words of Christ, he who offends one of the 
 least of his disciples deserves the most severe punishment, how 
 much more he who offends the whole Church ! And who ought 
 to inflict the punishment but that court of which Christ spoke 
 when he said, " Tell it to the Church V' Moreover the fact, that 
 the ministerial head is placed above the rest of the members, 
 does not prove that the Pope is superior to the Church, for the 
 Pope is himself one of the Church's members, Christ being its 
 supreme and essential head." 5 
 
 From all this, according to our author's conviction, it follows, 
 that the Church cannot possibly be reformed by a single 
 fallible man ; that, on the contrary, if, as a whole, it is to be 
 
 i Ibid p. 46, 47. 2 pece ibili. 3 p. 48 sq. 
 
 1 p. 49. s p . 55_57. p. 57 S q. 
 
JACOB OF JUTERBOCK. 215 
 
 remodelled in both head and members, this can only be effected 
 by the Church itself assembled in Council; and that to such a 
 Council the Pope must be subject in all things relating to faith, 
 the extinction of schism, and general reform. In fact, he says, 1 
 the Church has in modern times become so corrupt and deformed 
 that one can scarcely believe in the possibility of a general 
 reform of it. Neither this age of ours, nor that which is to suc- 
 ceed it, will permit anything of the kind, and, in my opinion, 
 the world will gradually become more and more depraved in 
 morals, and God's inscrutable providence will permit it to do 
 so, until the measure of its iniquities is full, and the son of 
 perdition come. It is true that the Church in these days of 
 ours, 2 viz., the year 1449, enjoys once more the benefit of a 
 single and undoubted shepherd in Pope Nicolaus V. At the 
 same time, it deplores the manner in which the laws, passed 
 by recent Councils, are trampled upon, and laughs to see the 
 total discrepancy of the prevailing practice. Nevertheless, every 
 endeavour should be used, not to suffer the decree, Frequens, 3 
 which recommends the repetition of General Councils, to fall 
 into oblivion ; and although there be many who resist it, yet, 
 by the grace of God, there are also excellent men in all parts of 
 the world, who will never, in this or any future age, surrender 
 the cause of Councils, who die in peace in the pleasing conviction 
 of its truth, and who defend it by arguments which no human 
 understanding, uninfected by passion, can resist, especially as God 
 has promised his infallible aids to no single individual, as he has 
 promised them to the whole Church ; nay, did not do this even to 
 the first Pope, who, we learn from Scripture, fell into error, both 
 before and after the effusion of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 1 p. 60 sq. 
 
 2 p. 64. 
 
 3 A famous and important decree of the Council of Constance of 9lh 
 Oct., 1417, in von der Hardt Hist. Cone. Const, t. iv. p. 1435, which 
 begins with these words : Frequens generalium conciliorum celebratio 
 agri Dominici praecipua cultura est, quae vepres, spinas et tribulos 
 haeresiurn, errorum et schismatum exstirpat, excessus corrigit, defor- 
 mata reformat, et viam Domini ad frugem uberrimae fertilitatis addu- 
 cit — and then gives the deliverance, that from thenceforth r general 
 Ecclesiastical Council should be regularly held in five years from the 
 close of the present, in seven years from the close of the next, and every 
 ten years afterwards. 
 
216 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 All this, the pious and intelligent monk, less bold than Savon- 
 arola, wishes the reader to take as the opinion of one not gifted 
 with the prophetic spirit. 1 He avers, however, that he will not 
 retract what he has said, unless the Church, to whose autho- 
 rity he submits himself, or some other person of clearer insight, 
 instruct him better. Accordingly, we have here a man, deeply 
 impressed with the need of reformation, but looking upon it as 
 something so great and difficult, that he dares not hope for it 
 from a corrupt age, and who, although belonging to the move- 
 ment which paved the way for what was coming, and in so far 
 meriting the name of a prophetic spirit, was yet at the same time 
 sufficiently modest not to predetermine in what way, nor under 
 what shape, the event would come. It is highly interesting to 
 mark how the foreboding views of such a person stand related 
 to what afterwards really eventuated. He is of opinion that the 
 Reformation will not come by one man, that is to say, the Pope, 
 because he wants the will to effect it. Scarcely does he ven- 
 ture to expect it even from many, that is to say, from the members 
 of a Council, because with the best intentions, they want the 
 power to carry it through ; and yet, in point of fact, the Refor- 
 mation did come both by one and by many, and proved not less 
 a single than it was a conjoint act. That one, however, was 
 not a Pope, nor these many a Council, and the whole movement 
 took a shape of which the quiet and recluse monk, who was 
 conversant only with the ecclesiastical forms and appliances of his 
 age, never dreamt. Still his eye had caught the essential features 
 of what was impending, and his words yet remain as an important 
 testimony how irresistibly the necessity of a reformation had 
 forced itself upon the minds of even the most pious Churchmen, 
 or rather of Churchmen above all. 
 
 It was under these circumstances, and at a time when the wide- 
 spread corruption of the Church was recognized by many, and a 
 reformation of it anxiously desired and hoped for, though, owing 
 to the strength of opposing parties, with much fear and trembling, 
 that the person whom we now intend to pourtray received his 
 education and prosecuted his labours. We mean John of WeseL 
 
 1 aestimative dictum, s. 65, 
 
( 217 ) 
 
 PART FIBST. 
 
 JOHN OF WESEL 
 
 AT THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ERFURT, 
 AND AS THE OPPONENT OF INDULGENCE! 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 ERFURT UNIVERSITY. WESEL's TRAINING AND PROFESSORIAL 
 LABOURS THERE. 
 
 John of WeseVs proper name was the family one of Ruchrath 
 or Richrath. 1 Usually, however, he is called, after his native 
 place, the little town of Ober-Wesel, 2 so beautifully situate upon 
 
 1 The family name of this man is written in many different forms, 
 fiuchard, Jiuchrad, Bucherath, in Latin also Burchardus. The form 
 given in the text is the one most in use. The reading Richrath de- 
 rives additional prohahility from the circumstance, that this name is 
 still in use in the Provinces of the Rhine. 
 
 2 Many more ancient and modern writers give Nieder-~Wese\ in the 
 Duchy of Cleves as the birthplace of Wesalia. "We are, however, in- 
 clined to rely upon the old and authentic testimony of Butzbach, a monk 
 in the Abbey of Histerbach, who thus begins his account of Wesel, a 
 work worthy of credit in other respects : Joannes de Wesalia superiore, 
 patria Renensis. . . . That Ober-Wesel must have been a much 
 more considerable town in the middle ages than it is at the present day, 
 appears from the extent of its old walls and the magnificent churches 
 and towers which adorn it. 
 
218 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the bank of the Rhine between Mayence and Coblentz, not far 
 from St Goar, Joannes de Vesalia or simply Vesalia. The date 
 of his birth is not given : but there can be no doubt that it falls 
 within the first 20 years of the 15th century. Just as little have 
 we any positive information respecting his parentage and early 
 education. The theatre upon which he makes his first appearance 
 in history is the University of Erfurt. We shall therefore be 
 obliged at the outset to take a view of that institution, highly 
 important at the time for the education of Germany, in order to 
 ascertain in how for the peculiar circumstances of the place may 
 serve to explain Wesel's turn of mind, or the status which he 
 occupied in it as professor. In doing this we also step upon a 
 main theatre of the reformatory movements in Germany, for 
 Erfurt was the place from wdiich, prior to the institution of the 
 University of Wittemberg, all that was important in this respect 
 originated. 
 
 The University of Erfurt was not, in order of time, the first in 
 Germany. Even if Prague be left out of account, it was pre- 
 ceded by Vienna, Heidelberg, and Cologne. It was, however, the 
 earliest in central Germany, in the very heart of the country, and 
 the first which was calculated for a more general diffusion even 
 in its northern parts of the light of scientific culture. It did not, 
 like its predecessors, owe its institution to a temporal or to a spiri- 
 tual prince, but was the work of an independent citizenship. For 
 although the flourishing and important city of Erfurt stood 
 under the spiritual, and partly also under the temporal jurisdic- 
 tion and lordship of the Archbishops of Mayence, and although 
 it also frequently recognized the landgraves of Thuringia, in which 
 it was situated, as its protectors, it still vindicated for itself such 
 a measure of civil liberty and independence as entitled it to be 
 placed upon a level with the free cities. 1 The consequence was, 
 that when the happy proposal was made of instituting a uni- 
 versity in a locality with so fine and open a situation, so 
 healthy, industrious, and economical, the council and the citizens 
 
 1 Comp. Joann. Maurit. Oudeni (Doctor Juris, counsellor of the 
 Elector of Mayence, Professor of Civil Law and magistrate in Erfurt) 
 Hiatoriae Erfurtensis Lib. iv. Duderstad. MDCLXXV. and Johann 
 Heinr. von Falkenstein (privy-counsellor in Brandenburg-Anspach) 
 Historic von Erffurtb, in 5 Biichern abgehandelt, Erffurth 1739. 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 219 
 
 without, as it appears, any further authority, applied at once 
 to the Pope for the necessary privileges. It so happened, how- 
 ever, that, at the time (1378), the schism between Urban VI. 
 and Clement VII. was at its height, the former of whom, being 
 elected by the Italian party of the Cardinals, vindicated his 
 right in Rome, while the latter, who was set up in opposition by 
 the French, resided at Avignon. The citizens of Erfurt, influ- 
 enced by, we know not what, particular motives, addressed them- 
 selves to the latter, and Clement, no doubt with the hope of 
 attaching an important city of Germany to his cause, accorded 
 to them, without hesitation, and in the most agreeable terms, 
 permission to erect a University. 1 The letter, written by his Holi- 
 ness in answer to theirs, expresses strong expectation that the dis- 
 tinction he is about to confer upon the city of Erfurt will 
 induce it " to adhere to him, and reject all letters and orders 
 of Bartholomew of Periguano, formerly Archbishop of Bari (the 
 rival Pope), who, in contravention of the Canon-laws, has taken 
 possession of the apostolical chair to the perdition of himself and 
 all his adherents." In these preliminary steps to the foundation 
 of the University, Adolph, the reigning Archbishop of Mayence, 
 by birth a Count of Nassau, took no part ; at least, it is certain, 
 that the Pope, from suspicion of his fidelity, did not entrust 
 him, but the clergy of the Church of the Holy Virgin, with the 
 chancellorship of the new seat of learning. 2 For a time indeed 
 no use was made of the papal favour. Eleven years elapsed 
 before the University was actually founded, and as in this interval 
 Clement VII. lost all authority in Germany, the town of Erfurt 
 
 1 The Papal letter, granting the concession, bears the date, which, 
 however, can no longer be determined by documentary evidence of 1st 
 Oct. in the first year of the pontificate of Clemens VII., i.e., 1st Oct. 
 1378. The letter of privilege is dated xvi. Cal. Octobr. pontif. an. 1. 
 i.e., 16th Sept. 1379 (for Clement was eleeted on the 20th Sept. 
 1378). As it is very unlikely that only a few days after his election — ■ 
 the interval would be from the 20th Sept. to the 1st Oct. — Clement 
 would execute a bull of concession in favour of^a German University, 
 there must either be some error in the dates, or some previous transac- 
 tion must have taken place of which we know nothing. V. Erhard in 
 a.l. p. 158, 159, and 162. 
 
 2 Gudenus B. ii. c. 18, p. 122. Is solenni diplomate petitis assen- 
 serat, et cum de Adolphi fide dubitaret, eo rescusante (?), Archican- 
 cellariatum Clero Mariano detulerat. 
 
220 TUE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 applied to Urban VI. for a renewal of their privilege, which was 
 accorded to them on the 3d of May 1389. In fine, a third papal 
 privilege by Boniface IX., the successor of Urban, and dated 
 25th April, 1390, was added to the other two ; the last, how- 
 ever referring only to the clerical students. By the year 1392 
 all the preparations had been made, and in the third week 
 after Easter the lectures were commenced, the papal privileges 
 having been first solemnly read in the great college at St Mi- 
 chael's, and a banquet given by the magistrates to the Professors. 1 
 At first the Chancellor of the University was the Archdeacon of 
 St Mary's. In a new bull of confirmation, however, which, on 
 the petition of the magistrates, Boniface IX. emitted on the 5th 
 of July 1396, it was provided that, henceforth to promote the 
 importance of the University, the Archbishop of Mayence for 
 the time should be its Chancellor. 2 Besides, by a bull of con- 
 cession, four canonries, with prebends for salaries to the Professors 
 of Holy Writ and of the Canon-law, were granted to the Arch- 
 bishop, so that the pay of all the professors at this period amounted 
 to 62 merks or 434 florins. 3 The first Rector was Master Louis 
 Molner (called also Miiller) from Arnstadt, a bachelor of decrees. 
 Subsequently this honorary office was, as in other universities, 
 discharged by young gentlemen of high family who were at the 
 time pursuing their studies, as e.g., about the year 1420, by Count 
 Albert of Gera ; about 1433, by Count Diether of Isenburg, after- 
 wards celebrated by what befell him as Archbishop of Mayence ; 
 about 1458, by Count John of Heneberg, under whom John of 
 Wesel, the subject of our memoir, was vice-Rector ; 4 and about the 
 year 1507, a twelvemonth before Luther left Erfurt, by Count 
 ( reorge of Heneberg. At Erfurt, we find no trace of the divi- 
 sion of the whole university body into nations, which obtained 
 at Paris and Prague, and subsequently also at Leipsig. No 
 doubt this University was chiefly intended for Germany, or appre- 
 hensions were entertained that such a division might give rise to 
 
 1 On this feast 37 florins were spent. Falkenslein p. 280. 
 
 2 Falkenslein p. 281. 
 
 3 Falkcnstein, ibid. On the salaries of the Professors see also Fal- 
 kenslein p. 292. In the year 1412, the amount of all of them 
 275 Thalers 14 Groschcn. The highest was 59 Thalers. Mag. J. 
 Zachariah, at that time a distinguished theologian, received 31 Thalers. 
 
 4 Falkenslein p. 315- 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 221 
 
 party spirit, like that which not long after produced so vio • 
 lent a catastrophe at Prague. On the contrary, the division 
 of professors and students into the four faculties of Theology, 
 Law, Medicine, and Arts, common elsewhere, was here also 
 adopted. The Rector was chosen by the four faculties, each of 
 them naming three voters, with the exception of that of Philosophy, 
 which named only two, leaving the third to be filled up by the 
 students, who in this manner obtained a share in the election of 
 the head of the Institution. 1 Besides these arrangements, pro- 
 vision was also made for the maintenance of the students, and 
 their progress in learning, in the same way as at other univer- 
 sities, by founding colleges and bursaries. 2 
 
 Its favourable site and judicious arrangements secured for the 
 University of Erfurt the happiest success. For a time, it stood 
 alone in the wide circuit of central and Northern Germany, and 
 before the foundation of Wittemberg, .to which Erfurt resigned 
 her most distinguished pupil, the great Reformer, Luther, was 
 the most efficient nurse of civilization in those countries. Shortly 
 after its institution, the catalogue of the Erfurt University ex- 
 hibits a considerable number of Masters in Theology and the 
 Arts, who came to it from other universities. 3 At the first, it 
 appears to have attracted many of its members from the Univer- 
 sity of Wurtzburg (founded probably in 1403), where the 
 
 1 Gudenus in a. 1. p. 123, where the proceedings of the election are 
 particularly related. 
 
 2 Respecting the different colleges and bursaries see Gudenus ii. 
 23. p. 135. ii. 28. p. 146. hi., 17. p. 200. Falkenstcin p. 296. 301. 
 304.332. Erliard p. 171. The following are specially mentioned. 
 The College of Jurists (Schola Juris or Collegium Juris Marianuni), 
 instituted in 1410 by Henry of Gerbstet, a Doctor of Decretals, 
 and Dean of St Mary's. He was a native of Anhalt, and for that 
 cause principally attended to his fellow countrymen. The College at 
 Porta Cceli (Collegium Porta Coeli or Amplonianum), founded in 1420 
 by AmploniusRutinger de Fago, Doctor of Medicine, a native of Rhine- 
 berg, who, in 1394, had heen the 2d Rector of the University, and 
 bequeathed to the College he had so liberally endowed, a library 
 rich in manuscripts. The so-called Collegium Magnum (Collegium 
 magnum or maj as). Of this we have no particular information, but it 
 was probably the same in which the University was solemnly opened. 
 The Saxon College established by Tileman Brandis, a native of Hildes- 
 heim, especially for members of his own family and his countrymen ; 
 and lastly the Georgian Bursary, of which we have no details. 
 
 3 Gudenus in a. 1. p. 123. 
 
222 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WEgEL. 
 
 students were frequently embroiled with the inhabitants. 1 The 
 greatest accession to its members, however, was made from 
 Prague, for when, in the year 1409, under the rectorship of the 
 zealous Bohemian, John Huss, the famous schism took place be- 
 tween the native and foreign students, who were mostly Germans, 
 an immense multitude of the latter (the chroniclers 2 speak of 
 them, but no doubt with exaggeration, as amounting to many 
 thousands) migrated to Erfurt, where they were received with 
 the utmost kindness by the magistracy, and met with encourage- 
 ment of every kind, after having pledged themselves never to 
 attempt the introduction of any statute injurious to the liberties 
 and laws of the city. In those days, the University of Erfurt 
 had already acquired so considerable a reputation, that it fur- 
 nished the first Professor of Civil Law, Dr Conrad Thus, 3 to that 
 of Leipsig, established in 1409, and to the Academy at Kostock, 
 when instituted in 1419, Mr Peter Steimbeck, 4 to fill the office of 
 Eector, and complete its inauguration. It also sent commis- 
 sioners to the great Councils of Constance and Basle. 
 
 It was during the full bloom of its prosperity, that John of 
 Wesel attended this University, and was settled at it as one of the 
 professors. And in order to form a distinct conception how far 
 the institution was calculated either to awaken or confirm in 
 him an anti-hierarchical and reformatory spirit, Ave must take into 
 view first, the general condition of the University, at its origin, 
 and during its development, and then the persons, especially the 
 most influential of them, who laboured there. 
 
 As respects the general condition of the University of Erfurt, 
 the particulars which our object requires us to consider are as 
 follows : The Universities of the middle aires have all funda- 
 
 1 Gudenus in al. p. 122. 
 
 2 Falkenstein p. 290 : " At that time 40,000 students left (Prague) 
 and arrived in companies to the number of 20,000. In consequenceof 
 this Margrave Frederick I. founded the University of Meissen ; but 
 many came to Erfurt and were there joined by many from AVurtz- 
 burgh." 
 
 3 Erhardy. 171. Of the foundation of the University v. Sc!iw~'kh 
 K. Gesch B. 30. s. 110 sq. 
 
 4 Falkenstein p. 300. Founding of the University, Schrockh B. 30. 
 s. 115. Jul. Wiggers Kirchengeschichte Mecldenburgs. 1840. 3. 89. 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 223 
 
 mentally an ecclesiastical type, having been instituted under 
 the sanction of the supreme ecclesiastical power, and super- 
 intended by an ecclesiastical board ; and inasmuch as at most 
 of them, the theology of the Church, the Canon-law, and a 
 philosophy cast in a theological mould, maintained a decided 
 preponderance over the other sciences. At the same time much 
 depends upon the circumstance, whether at their institution 
 severally, they were the direct or merely the indirect offspring of 
 ecclesiastical power. It is manifest that they assume a difference 
 of physiognomy, according as their institution and guardianship 
 were the work of a spiritual or of a temporal prince, or of a free 
 city. In the first case, the ecclesiastical type is strictly retained , 
 in the second, we may expect a higher degree of freedom, and a 
 more careful culture of those branches of knowledge not imme- 
 diately connected with the Church ; in the third, there is most 
 room to hope for a free and proportionate development of both, 
 at least in the position in which matters stood during the middle 
 ages. In point of fact such is the actual state of the case, and as 
 lively exemplifications of it, we may adduce the three German 
 Universities of Cologne, Heidelberg, and Erfurt. Under imme- 
 diate ecclesiastical government, Cologne assumed towards the 
 new development of science in the fifteenth century an attitude 
 either merely negative, or decidedly hostile. In that develop- 
 ment Heidelberg, from the commencement, took a greater 
 share, particularly under the patronage of the Elector Philip, 
 who was friendly to science, and even at this early period, to the 
 branch of the Belles Lettres. Erfurt, on the other hand, before 
 Wittemberg became the cradle of the Reformation, was the 
 fostering nurse of the tendency that led to it ; and of this the 
 first and general reason appears to have been, that its University 
 was not placed so directly under the government of the Church, 
 or even under that of a temporal prince, but grew up in the 
 midst of an aspiring, and relatively most independent citizenship. 
 We have next to consider that this University was founded at the 
 commencement of the Papal schism, and that the season of its 
 early bloom occurred partly during the schism itself, and partly 
 in the time of the great reforming Councils. Instituted suc- 
 cessively by two rival Popes, it could not cherish a strong 
 attachment to either of them, and at a period when respect for 
 
224 TITF. LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the Papacy had fallen so low, and when the University of Paris 
 set the example of vigorous resistance to the extravagant preten- 
 sions of the hierarchy, it was not to be expected that a University, 
 which had been reared under a fainter ecclesiastical influence, 
 would adopt an exclusively papal character. It was likewise 
 almost inevitable that the deputies sent by the University of 
 Erfurt to the opposition Councils at Constance and Basle, should 
 bring home with them some tincture of the principles which these 
 councils asserted and maintained. Of one of them at least, by 
 name Mathew Doering, we know that at Basle, he took the part 
 of the Council in its conflict with the Pope. Nor is it unlikely 
 that the members of the University, both professors and students, 
 who, at the commencement of the fifteenth century, migrated in 
 such numbers from Prague to Erfurt, helped to kindle the 
 reforming spirit. For although the great body of the fugitives 
 from the Bohemian capital at that time were opponents of IIuss, 
 on the subject of academical institutions, it is scarcely to be 
 doubted, that there were among them many who had adopted the 
 opinions of a person already so influential on ecclesiastical and 
 theological matters. 1 In fine, as a necessary condition of the 
 development, if not of the reformatory spirit, yet still of that of 
 German patriotism, we must take into account the circumstance 
 that the University of Erfurt, situated in the middle of Germany, 
 was frequented chiefly, or indeed almost exclusively, by natives, 
 and that there was no division of the students into nations. In 
 this way, the main source of party spirit was stopped, and the 
 opportunity given for a powerful development of patriotic feel- 
 ing among the German youth there living unmixed and undi- 
 vided. The importance of this will be understood by every one 
 who is aware, that the great ecclesiastical revolution of the 16th 
 
 1 John Hagen, an Erfurt Professor, who flourished in the middle of 
 the fifteenth century, the contemporary of Wesd, left several writings 
 which were intended to confute the doctrines of the Hussites and 
 heretics in general, Conti'a errorcs Bohcmorum. — AdEpiscopum Katis- 
 ponensem contra eosdem. — De doctrinis peregrinis cavendis. — De falsis 
 prophetis. — De communione sub utraque specie. See Trilhem.dc script 
 eccles. cap. 822. p. 196 ed. Fabric. Wesel himself was latterly accused 
 of holding Hussite principles. One of the significant prophetic sayings 
 bo common in that age related to the University of Erfurdt, "Erfordia 
 Praga." Falkenslein p. 577. 
 
wesel's training and professiorial labours. 225 
 
 century could only have been effected, at least in Germany, by 
 men in whom deep Christian sentiment was intimately conjoined 
 with that of German nationality. In point of fact, Hutten and 
 Luther, the two persons whom we consider as the most eminent 
 representatives of this combination of Germanism with Chris- 
 tianity, although in each the ingredients were differently mixed, 
 were pupils of the University of Erfurt. 
 
 If we look to the persons who either as originators of the spirit 
 of the University, or as professors and cotemporaries, might have 
 contributed to the training of Wesel, it must be confessed, that Er- 
 furt, which afterwards sent forth its great intellectual heroes, had 
 not, at an early stage, many distinguished personages to boast of. 
 At the close of the 14th, and in the first half of the following cen- 
 tury, the scientific spirit of Germany was still in its childhood, 
 and naturally required to pass through a stage of gradual growth 
 in order to enter into that of ripeness and manhood in the 16th 
 century. At the same time Erfurt was not, even from the first, 
 destitute of men whose names were mentioned with honour at least 
 in their own country ; and, towards the middle of the 15th cen- 
 tury, we find then an increasing number of persons, who in various 
 ways contributed to the future progress of the public mind and 
 the Church. It is natural, in such a work as ours, to look chiefly 
 to the Theologians. Trithemius mentions a certain John of 
 E/furt, a native of Thuringia, and a member of the Franciscan 
 order, as a man of great learning and experience in Holy Scrip- 
 ture, Philosophy, and Law, and as having likewise acquired 
 celebrity by his writings. The worthy Abbot, however, states 
 no particulars, and, from the place assigned to him, John of Erfurt 
 would seem to have flourished before the institution of the Uni- 
 versity. 1 As the earliest Professor of Theology, in the newly 
 erected institution, we meet with Angelas von Dobelin (Dobeln) 
 a member of the Augustinian order, previously an inmate of the 
 Monastery at Grimma, and after his call to Erfurt, distinguished 
 both as a teacher and preacher. 2 Beside him we have to place 
 John Zacharia* apparently somewhat younger, but yet a cotem- 
 
 1 Jo. Trithemius de scriptor. eccles. cap. 630. p. 149. ed. Fabric. 
 Trithemius ranks John of Erfurt among the men who lived in tho 
 middle of the 14th century. 
 
 2 ErhardB. i. s. 186. 
 
 3 Ibid. 
 
 P 
 
22G TIIE LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 porary, a native of Erfurt, and likewise an Augustinian. He re- 
 ceived part of his education in Italy, and was promoted in Bologna 
 to be Doctor of Divinity. Subsequently he held considerable 
 dignities in his own order, rose to eminence in his native city as a 
 teacher of Theology, and was also, as a learned and active man, 
 employed at the Papal Court in its affairs. 1 Both of these men 
 not only acquired a literary reputation by writing — the first, a 
 commentary upon the Sentences and a Treatise on Logic, and the 
 second, a similar work upon the Sentences, and various exegetical 
 disquisitions and sermons ; 2 but they also won for themselves a com- 
 mon and special reputation, as Commissioners from the Univer- 
 sitv to the Council at Constance. Here Angelas of Dobelin is 
 said to have made so deep an impression upon the Pope that the 
 latter called him, " a real angel." 3 Zacharia, whom Trithemius 
 also extols for superior intellect and controversial acuteness, dis- 
 tinguished himself particularly as the opponent of Huss, and so 
 victoriously combatted the odious heretic, that the Pope paid 
 him an honour usually reserved for crowned heads, presenting 
 him with the consecrated rose to be worn upon his cap, as a 
 memorial of his services to the Church. 4 These two Divines of 
 Erfurt, and especially the latter, no doubt appear wholly devoted 
 to the interests of the dominant Church and Hierarchy. The 
 case, however, was very different with the deputies sent by the 
 University in 1432 to the Ecclesiastical Council at Basle. Of 
 these, the most distinguished as a Theologian Avas Matthew 
 Doering. 5 *Born at Kyritz in the Marquisate of Brandenburg, a 
 Franciscan Monk, and, from 1424, a Doctor of Theology, he 
 lectured and preached at Erfurt with great applause. At the 
 Council of Basle, however, he joined the opposition, and for that 
 
 1 Falkenstein s. 292. 
 
 2 Jo. Trithem. de scriptor. eccles. cap. 733. p 170. The exegetical 
 works arc upon the three first books of Moses and the Epistles of Paul. 
 
 » Erhard B. i. s. 171. 
 
 4 Fallcenslein s. 295 and 296. On his tombstone, which was lately 
 to be seen in the Church of St Augustine, there was hewn a figure of 
 Zacharia, with the Papal rose in his cap. 
 
 5 Erhard s 171. His companions were, Nicol. Bayer, Doctor of 
 Ecclesiastical Law and Pro-chancellor of the University, John Schu- 
 nemann, Doctor of Medicine, Arnold Westphal, Licentiate of Law, 
 latterly Bishop of Liibeck. Further particulars about Doring are to be 
 found in Erhard s. 188. 189. 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 227 
 
 reason, was elected General of his order, by the members who 
 sided with the Council against the Pope. It is true, that ere 
 long he resigned this dignity, and retired into the Monastery at 
 Kyritz, where, after distinguishing himself in various ways as a 
 theological, philosophic, and exegetical author, he departed this 
 life. lie serves, however, to exemplify, that the spirit of opposi- 
 tion to the Hierarchy had taken root even among the Theologians 
 of Erfurt, and as a voucher, that having subdued a person of his 
 great weight and influence, it exercised a power already very 
 considerable. A representative of the same tendency, but 
 who lived somewhat later, is John Kannemann, a Minorite at 
 Erfurt, who flourished as a learned theologian and professor, 
 about the same time (1460) as Wesel. As, according to the 
 account of Trithemius, 1 he entertained wrong opinions on the sub- 
 ject of ecclesiastical power, he found an opponent in Theological 
 warfare in John of Hagen, and became the object of ecclesiastical 
 persecution, on the part of the Provincial of the Minorites in 
 Saxony. 
 
 Along with these men, we mention in particular Gottschalk 
 Gresemunt, 2 frequently called from his birth-place in Westphalia, 
 Gottschalk of Meschede. In 1429, he was Master in Philosophy, 
 ten years after Doctor in Divinity, ere long a canon in St Mary's 
 Church, and a Theological professor. He departed this life 
 about 1470, after having several times, subsequently to 1437, 
 held the office of Rector. It is probable that this person was one 
 of WeseVs teachers. For the period of his professorial labours 
 coincides exactly with that which we must assign to WeseVs 
 studies. Trithemius commends him 3 for acuteness of intellect, 
 
 1 Trithem. de script, ecclcs. c. 813. p. 190 qui depotestate 
 
 ccclesiastica male sentiens, cum a ministro Saxoniae (Provinciali Ordinis 
 minorum per Saxoniam) quaereretur ad carcerem fuga lapsus ad obser- 
 vantiales confugit, et errorem cum vita deinceps emeudavit. Corripue- 
 rat eum Johannes de Hagen (of him see the sequel), Carthusiensis vir 
 doctissimus jampridem et ad semitas aequitatis revocavit. Trithemius 
 mentions the following treatises as compositions of Kannemann : De- 
 fensorium sui. — De passione Domini. — Sermones varii. — Quaestiones 
 quaedam. 
 
 2 Erhard s. 189. 
 
 3 De Script, eccles. cap. 831. p. 198 and 199. The Works of Grese- 
 rnunt, which Trithemius quotes, are : Quaestiones Sententiarnm Lib.r. iv. 
 
228 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 familiarity with Scripture, acquaintance with profance philo- 
 sophy, an exemplary life, and a sound method of theological 
 instruction, by means of which he acquired for himself a great 
 name among his cotemporaries. He also mentions several pro- 
 ductions of his pen on doctrinal subjects ; but takes no notice of 
 any characteristic, by means of which he could have influenced 
 the direction of WeseVs mind. In particular there is no trace of 
 his connexion with the Reformatory tendencies, which at that 
 time were so widely spread. With all the greater certainty, how- 
 ever, do we know this fact respecting another person, who then 
 lived at Erfurt, and whom I have already pourtrayed. I allude 
 to Jacob of Jiiterbock. Jacob had come to reside in the Car- 
 thusian Monastery of the town, probably in the 3d, but at the 
 latest, at the commencement of the 4th decennium of the 15th cen- 
 tury, and here he laboured as a highly respected Theologian, by 
 his lectures and writings, till the year 1465. We have documen- 
 tary evidence that he was, more than almost any of his cotempo- 
 raries, alive to the need of a Reformation, ardently longed for it, 
 and although quietly, and with little hope of immediate success, 
 zealously laboured to carry it into effect. Such a man could 
 not but exercise a general influence upon the spirit of the Uni- 
 versity, and even they, who were not his immediate auditors, 
 beheld in him the animating and invigorating pattern of a Theo- 
 logian, not more pious and heart-devoted, than he was liberal 
 in his views, and bent on making progress. 
 
 In looking back upon these earlier Theologians of Erfurt, we 
 discover, so far as we have any knowledge of their ecclesiastical 
 position, the double tendency which marked the period in which 
 they lived. On the one hand, there is zealous adherence to the 
 Papacy and Hierarchy ; on the other, there is the spirit of re- 
 form manifesting itself in an opposition to both, on the principles 
 of the great Councils of Constance and Basle. As representative 
 of the first tendency, we would name John Zacharia, and as 
 representatives of the second, Matthew Doering, Jacob of Jiiter- 
 
 Scrmones ct Collationes Lib. i. Quacstiones variae disputatae Lib. i. 
 Etaliacomplura. Immediately before Gresemunt, Trithemius mentions 
 Benedict Stendel from Halle as another Theologian of Erfurt distin- 
 guished in his time, whose Commentaries on the Pentateuch are much 
 quoted. De script, eccles. cap. 830. p. 198. 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 229 
 
 bock, and for a time at least John Kannemann. These men 
 however, although their mere names have survived, did not stand, 
 or hold their opinions, alone, but were respectively surrounded 
 by a host of others who shared them, and hence we may pre- 
 sume that when Wesel arrived at Erfurt, he found there, as was 
 the case in many other places, a decidedly papal, and a decidedly 
 opposition party, commingled with a multitude who cared for 
 neither one nor other. We may likewise infer that consonantly 
 with the progress of the age the former gradually yielded to the 
 latter. 
 
 Such were the circumstances in which John of Wesel com- 
 menced his studies, probably — for it is impossible to fix the date 
 with greater precision — about the year 1440. We infer this 
 from the fact that in 1445 he graduated as Master of Arts, an 
 honour the attainment of which may well have been preceded by 
 five years of study. During this period his attention was, doubt- 
 less, devoted chiefly to Scholastic logic. It is true that Erfurt 
 subsequently became also a cradle for polite learning. We find, 
 for example, about 1460, a certain Peter Luderus officiating as 
 public teacher of the art of Poetry. 1 Six years afterwards, Jacob 
 Publicius, a native of Florence, and celebrated among his cotem- 
 poraries as an able orator and poet, also laboured at Erfurt. 
 About 1485 it was for a while the abode of Conrad Celtes, 2 and 
 the scene of study to Rudolph Lange and John of Dalberg, 3 two 
 persons who did much for the revival of classical literature. All 
 this, however, belongs to a later period. Even if he had still 
 been at Erfurt at the commencement of these events, Wesel was 
 too far advanced in life, and his mind already too matured to 
 have been influenced by them. Moreover, we do not find in his 
 writings a single trace of familiarity with ancient literature, or 
 of predilection for the study of it. As for his teachers, besides 
 
 1 Comp. Erhard Gesch. des Wiederaufbliihens wissensch; Bildung 
 in Deutschland, B. i. s. 302. The said Luderus may possibly have 
 belonged to the same Thuringian family from which Luther was des- 
 cended ; for the latter frequently wrote his name Luderus or Luder. 
 We have, however, no further historical proof to confirm this con- 
 jecture. 
 
 2 Erhard B. 2. s. 13, and esp. s. 19 sq. 
 
 3 Erhard B. i. ss. 302 303. 309. C. Ullmann Memoria Jo. Dal- 
 burgii, summi Univers. Heidelb. patroni. Ileidelb- 1840. p. 5. 6. 
 
230 TUE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 those whose names are wholly unknown to us, I should conjec- 
 ture Gottschalk Gresemunt to have been one. He had been 
 Master in philosophy since 1429, Doctor of theology since 
 1439, and then played a principal part as philosopher and theo- 
 logian at the University. At the same time it is scarcely to be 
 doubted, that Wesel must have been influenced by Jacob o/Jiiter- 
 bock, who then laboured at Erfurt, for this Theologian was of much 
 too great weight among his cotemporaries not to have laid hold 
 upon so susceptible a mind. And whenever we behold a young 
 man living in the immediate vicinity of an older, and adopting a 
 congenial course, there are natural grounds to conjecture, that he 
 must to a certain extenthave been influenced by him. We cannot, 
 therefore, go far astray in supposing that Wesel imbibed from 
 Gresemunt the material of the sciences of Philosophy and Theo- 
 logy, but caught the general bent of his mind chiefly from 
 Jacob of Jilterbock. It is possible that the John Kannemann 
 mentioned above, may also have- had some influence in biassing 
 him to the opposition. This, however, appears less probable, 
 when we consider that, if not coeval with him, he was even 
 younger, and does not appear to have been of great eminence. 
 It was about this time that Wesel entered the clerical profession, 
 without, however, taking the Monastic vow. 
 
 We cannot exactly determine the date when he passed from 
 the rank of pupil into that of professor. Probably the transition 
 was made, in his as in other cases, gradually. At any rate it 
 took place very shortly after his graduation as Master in Philo- 
 sophy. In the work upon Indulgence, which he wrote about 
 the Jubilee year, 14 50, 1 he already speaks of himself as appointed 
 a professor of Holy Scripture. Not long after — 1456 is assigned 
 as the date — he became Doctor of Divinity, and from that time 
 highly distinguished himself as a Professor in the University, and 
 as a preacher of the Gospel. His cotemporary, Wimplieling, 
 calls him an ornament of Erfurt, and the most celebrated pupil 
 of its University. Luther says, 2 " John Wesalia ruled the Uni- 
 versity of Erfurt by his books, and it was out of these that I 
 studied for my master's degree." A statement from which we 
 learn two things. First, that Wesel's reputation as a man of 
 
 1 Mutschmanni Erfordia litter, contin. p. 23. 
 
 2 In the Work de Conciliis, Walch xvi. 2743. 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 231 
 
 science was so great at the University, that he left the impress 
 of his mind and doctrine upon it, for a series of decennia after 
 his departure, and till the commencement of the 16th century ; 
 and, secondly, that Wesel, as a philosopher, was attached to the 
 Nominal opinions, which at that period were generally affiliated 
 with a more liberal turn of mind. We know that Luther, in his 
 early days, was a Nominalist, 1 and if he derived the learning 
 which qualified him for a master's degree from the books of 
 Wesel, we may conclude with certainty that Wesel himself had 
 been one. 
 
 Any additional information which has come down to us from 
 the period of WeseVs sojourn at Erfurt, consists of the following 
 particulars : — About 1450, when he was now among the number 
 of the professors, the great Jubilee was by order of Nicolaus V. 
 celebrated over Western Christendom. Countless multitudes made 
 the pilgrimage to Rome. In order, however, that even they, who 
 were prevented from taking the journey, might participate in the 
 graces of the festival, the Pope accorded special concessions, and 
 prolonging the duration of the holy season to the year 1451, 
 despatched the celebrated Nicolaus of Cusa into Germany to 
 preach Indulgences, and to collect the gifts made by the penitent 
 to the Pope in return, and which were cast into a chest pre- 
 pared for the purpose. This prelate, who had high personal 
 qualities to recommend him, as he travelled from place to place 
 attended by a meagre retinue, and mounted upon a mule, was 
 everywhere received by the princes, the clergy, and the common 
 people, with the utmost reverence, and escorted with songs 
 of praise, into the churches where he used to celebrate mass, 
 or preach a sermon. In the course of his journey he visited 
 Erfurt, and there, with the usual solemnities, was conducted by 
 the clergy and citizens into the cathedral of Mary and Severus. 
 He then rode to the Monastery of St Peter, and preached upon 
 the lawn in front. On the feast of Ascension, he delivered another 
 discourse to the people from a pulpit of stone. He did the same 
 the following day on the Petersberg, on which occasion the 
 throng was so great that several persons lost their lives. 2 We 
 need not doubt that Wesel was one of the celebrated cardinal's 
 
 1 Jac. Thomasius de doctorib. scholastic, latin, § 17. 
 
 2 Falkenstein s. 313. 
 
232 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 auditors. It is as certain, however, that neither the ostentatious 
 display of the ecclesiastical prince, who had betrayed the liberal 
 principles of his youth, nor the discourses he delivered, made the 
 same impression upon him as upon the mass of the people. 1 We 
 know from his work upon Indulgences how widely his opinions 
 differed from the doctrinesprevalent in the Church upon this sub- 
 ject, and it is very possible that the effect produced upon his mind 
 by the visit of Cardinal Cusa to Erfurt was only to strengthen him 
 in his own sentiments. The same scenes were repeated in 
 1454, when the well-known preacher of penitence, the Italian 
 Franciscan monk, John of Capistrano, arrived at Erfurt, and 
 there discoursed for two successive hours. 2 This person, born 
 in the Abruzzi, a scholar of St Bernardine of Sienna, not 
 destitute of theological learning, but of great and even uni- 
 versal celebrity as a popular orator, 3 and one of the hottest 
 zealots for the papacy and Catholic doctrine, had already tra- 
 versed all Italy, confuting the Fratricelli, the revolted mem- 
 bers of his order, and now, by the advice of Aeneas Sylvius 
 and the command of Nicolaus V., was employed on a similar 
 mission in Germany and Bohemia, to convert the followers of 
 Huss and set on foot a crusade against them. Canonized after 
 his decease, Capistrano even during his life was reverenced by the 
 people as a saint and worker of miracles, and upon this occasion 
 probably received still more lively testimonies of enthusiasm for 
 his person, than the more learned and sober-minded Nicolaus 
 of Cusa. Even so exciting a spectacle, however, passed away 
 without, as it appears, making any impression upon Wesel ; for 
 so little were his opinions changed by the bold, and in many 
 instances successful, adversary of the heretics, that, on the con- 
 trary, he afterwards incurred the suspicion of being infected with 
 
 1 He probably experienced the same feelings, which inspired Luther 
 with his 55th Thesis. " The Pope can only mean, If Indulgence, which 
 is a very trivial affair, is gone about with a bell and other pomps and 
 ceremonies, men ought much more to honour and laud the Gospel 
 with a hundred bells, pomps, and ceremonies." 
 
 2 FaiJcenstein s. 315. 
 
 3 Trithemius describes him as divini verbi praedicator celeberrimus, 
 qui multos verbo et exemplo ab iniquitate convertit. De script, eccles. 
 cap. 804. p. 187. ed. Fabric. Comp. Schrbckh K. Gesch. Th. 33. s. 
 421. Th. 34. s. 728. 
 
wesel's training and professorial labours. 233 
 
 the same errors. Neither, on the other hand, did occurrences of 
 so transitory a nature, although totally discrepant from his turn 
 of mind, shake WeseVs reputation at the University ; for having, 
 in the year 145G, obtained, as we have already noticed, the degree 
 of Doctor of Divinity, he not only, to use the expression of 
 Luther, won for himself a ruling authority as Professor, but 
 was also in 1458 elected Vice-rector, under Count John of 
 Heneberg. 1 At this time, indeed, so great was the weight 
 he had acquired, that another celebrated Theologian of Erfurt, 
 the Carthusian John Hagen (Joannes de Indagine), a man con- 
 nected by many ties with the Church, one of the most prolific 
 authors of the age, and whose zeal for study was so great, that he 
 fed his midnight lamp with the butter allotted for his bread, was 
 induced to indite a work against him. 2 Whether this was one 
 of the many works of Hagen enumerated by Trithemius, 3 and 
 which one of them, cannot be ascertained, as in none do we find 
 any trace of having been levelled against Wesel. Probably, 
 however, it was a treatise on the principles of the Church, which 
 form the subject of not a few of this author's productions : And 
 we may perhaps venture to conjecture that the controversy re- 
 lated to Indulgences ; for upon that subject, Wesel had already 
 promulgated opinions very much at variance with the prevailing 
 doctrine, and therefore likely to provoke contradiction. This 
 
 1 Falkenstein s. 315 : " In the year 1458 Count John of Henneberg 
 was Rector Magnificentissimus, whose Vice-rector was the then famous 
 and learned theologian M. John Wesel, commonly styled Vesalia. His 
 Lectiones and Quaestiones on the Sententias Lombardi were afterwards 
 held in singular esteem in this University." 
 
 2 See Falkenstein ibid. 
 
 3 De script, eccles. cap. 822. p. 195. Trithemius says of him, 
 Johannes Hagen, alias de Indagine, natione Teutonicus, ordinis Car- 
 thusiensium, domus montis Salvatoris prope Erfordiam, Prior in 
 Ysenach, et in Stetyn, vir in divinis Scripturis studiossisimus et valde 
 eruditus atque in jure canonico egregie doctus, ingenio clarus, concilio 
 promptus et providus. Scripsit aperto sermone multa praeclara volumina 
 ad Principes, Episcopos et alios Ecclesiarum praelatos, de variis ac 
 diversis questionibus interrogatus. Trithemius relates that Hagen pub- 
 lished more than 300 Treatises, but that of these only a small part had 
 come into his hands; still he quotes from 60. Among them is a pam- 
 phlet against Joh. Kannemann, who lived in Erfurdt contempora- 
 neously with Hagen and Wesel, and who, as is worthy of remark, for 
 a long time also adhered to the opposition party in the Church. 
 
23-i THE LIFE OE JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 leads us to further considerations, for which we have a more 
 definite historical basis than for the foregoing. 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 JOHN OF WESEL AND INDULGENCES. 
 
 The doctrine respecting Indulgence is one of the most compre- 
 hensive and remarkable in the Catholic system. It concentrates, 
 as in a focus, all the radii of the hierarchical tendencies ; while 
 the practice in the matter, especially as carried on in the fifteenth 
 century, exhibits in the most glaring colours the secularity or 
 the Church. Nothing could be more natural than that it should 
 prove the origin of the Reformatory movement of the sixteenth 
 century. Luther and his coadjutors opposed the inward and 
 spiritual to that which was outward and carnal, and in at- 
 tempting to unravel the web of the Hierarchy and Scholasticism, 
 were led from point to point, until, as an inevitable conse- 
 quence, a war was kindled against the whole Catholic system, 
 which could not but ultimately end in the construction and 
 establishment of two radically different theories. In all such 
 matters neither good nor evil comes at once, and so the doctrine 
 of Indulgences had run its course for centuries before it reached 
 its acme. In much the same way the opposition to it had 
 been growing for more than a century before it rose to the out-, 
 burst at the Reformation. Even in the case of Luther himself 
 we may discriminate several stages in the progress of his mind.. 
 At first, as is well known, he attacked not Indulgences themselves, 
 but only their abuses, and nothing but the necessity of advancing 
 forced him at last to reject them root and branch. In the progress 
 of this opposition, John of Wesel plays one of the most important 
 parts upon the theological stage. He stands in the history of it 
 as a salient out-post, having advanced much farther than any ot 
 his predecessors in the warfare. They had merely attacked par- 
 ticular defects, whereas he took a penetrating and comprehensive 
 
INDULGENCES. 235 
 
 view of the whole institute, and its foundations. In order, how- 
 ever, to understand the position which he occupied, and the 
 nature of the controversy which he carried on, it is necessary to 
 give a particular account both of the growth of the doctrine 
 upon the subject, and of the commencement of the theological 
 war against it. 
 
 Indulgence 1 is originally the remission of ecclesiastical pains 
 and penalties, and in as far.as it is connected with penitence as an 
 ordinance of the Church, its commencements are lost to the view 
 in the earliest ages of Christianity. The primitive Church 
 exercised so strict a watch over the purity of its members, as to 
 exclude from communion all who were openly guilty of sin and 
 disobedience. If the excommunicated person desired readmis- 
 sion, he was obliged to submit to a penitential discipline, which 
 was often very wearisome and severe. The penances consisted of 
 abstinences and mortifications, voluntarily undergone, as well as 
 good works, such as prayers and alms. After having endured a 
 fixed and sufficient amount of these, and provided he had thereby 
 exhibited the signs of a truly contrite mind, the penitent was 
 received back, by certain regular steps, into fellowship with the 
 Church. If even in the early stages of his probation, decided 
 traces of amendment were visible, the severity of the discipline 
 might be mitigated, or its duration abridged, and this was the first 
 unobjectionable and harmless commencement of remission or 
 indulgence. That which, in primitive times, was granted only 
 to the excommunicated, came in time to be extended to all 
 delinquents. Penitential discipline was exercised to a wider 
 extent, but for that very reason, especially when the members of 
 the Christian society increased among the upper and even the 
 highest ranks, it became more indulgent and more lax. During 
 the mediaeval period, in fact, it was no longer regarded as a 
 spiritual and moral matter at all, but rather as an ecclesiastical act, 
 and obtained a place among the sacraments. Peter Lombard 
 and Thomas Aquinas were the parties chiefly instrumental in con- 
 structing the doctrine, as of the other sacraments, so likewise of 
 that of penance. No doubt they drew a distinction between in- 
 
 1 On the History of Indulgences consult especially : Amort de origino 
 progressu, valore et fructu indulgentiarum. Aug. Vindel. 1735. 
 
23G THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 ward and outward penitance, and asserted that the latter was only 
 valid and efficacious when founded upon the former. But still, 
 as there was a general bent of the age towards the external and 
 legal, and as it was connected with other ecclesiastical ordinances, 
 a superior value was ascribed to bodily penitance. The con- 
 stituent elements of the sacrament so-called were, according to 
 the doctrine of certain old fathers, especially Hildebert of Tours, 
 said to be contrition of heart, confession with the mouth, and 
 satisfaction by works. It is with the last that we are here princi- 
 pally concerned. 
 
 Penitance corresponds in a certain respect with baptism, for 
 while the latter, as a purely sacramental act, commences the 
 Christian life, and procures remission of the guilt of all antece- 
 dent sin, both original and actual, the former as being not merely 
 a sacrament, but likewise a good work, and practised as long as 
 we live (whether in act or in habit) procures the forgiveness of the 
 sins which we commit in the course of our lives. Such sins being 
 personal, require a personal satisfaction, and this is effected by the 
 good works, which constitute the third part of penitance. These 
 good works are, according to the measure of the trespass, fixed 
 and imposed by the priest, acting as the steward of the sacrament, 
 and the judge armed with the power of the keys, in the room 
 of Christ and God. They consist chiefly of fasting, prayer, and 
 alms, and are efficacious not merely in doing away the sins of the 
 past, but as a preservation from those of the future. And just as 
 in early times the penances of the excommunicated were fre- 
 quently mitigated, so in the course of the middle ages, an analo- 
 gous mitigation was introduced, with reference to the works of 
 penance, to which delinquents were subjected. Permission was 
 given to exchange a more severe for a gentler kind of penance. 
 Sometimes, in place of doing penance himself, the party was 
 allowed to employ a substitute. And sometimes, in fine, instead 
 of the actual penance prescribed, some service conducive to the 
 interest of the Church and the glory of God was accepted. This 
 last was the real basis of Indulgence. Even here, however, the 
 process was gradual. At first only personal acts performed for 
 the Church were admitted. Then pecuniary gifts became more 
 and more common, until at last the matter assumed the shape of 
 a mere money speculation. Initiatively the abuse grew up in 
 
INDULGENCES. 237 
 
 practice. Then came Scholasticism, and furnished it with a 
 theoretical substratum, and not until the institution had thus 
 received an ecclesiastical and scientific basis, was a method of 
 practice introduced which overstepped all limits. 
 
 The first powerful impulse to the introduction of Indulgences 
 properly so called, was given by the Crusades at the great Synod 
 of Clermont in 1096. Urban II. there promised to all who took 
 part in the Crusade, which he proposed as a highly meritorious 
 ecclesiastial work, plenary Indulgence (Indulgentias plenarias) ; 
 and from that date, for a period of two hundred years, this grace 
 of the Church continued one of the most powerful means for 
 renewing and enlivening these expeditions ; although it was evi- 
 dent to unprejudiced cotemporaries that the adventurers, when 
 they crossed the ocean, did not undergo a change of character 
 with the change of climate. 1 The same favour was ere long 
 extended to the military expeditions set on foot against the here- 
 tics in Europe, and at last, by Boniface VIII. in 1300, to the 
 year of the Roman jubilee. Subsequently to that date, several 
 monastic orders and holy places likewise received from successive 
 Popes special privileges in the matter of Indulgence. 
 
 The practice was already in full vogue, when the Scholastic 
 Theology obsequiously offered to justify it in speculation. It is 
 of special importance for a right understanding of the sequel to 
 know how that was done, and to this end there are three men 
 who chiefly claim our attention, Alexander of Hales, Albert the 
 Great, and Tlwmas Aquinas. The two former, especially the 
 first, laid the foundation. St Thomas completed the structure. 
 
 Alexander of Hales (f 1245) furnished a suitable substratum 
 to the theory of Indulgence by propounding the doctrine of the 
 so-called Treasure of the Church. That doctrine rests upon the 
 following train of thoughts : Christ, the God-man, by his infi- 
 nitely meritorious sufferings and death, has not only made a 
 sufficient, but a more than sufficient satisfaction for the sins of 
 mankind. 2 He has acquired a superabundance of merit. This 
 
 1 Coelum, non animum mutant, qui trans mare currunt, — says Albert 
 of Stade in his Chronick. llelmst. Ausg. fol. 188. 
 
 2 Even one drop of the blood of Christ would have been suffi- 
 cient to expiate the guilt of mankind, but he shed infinitely more, Non 
 guttam sanguinis modicam, quae tamen propter unionem ad Verbum 
 
238 TI1E LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 superfluous merit of Christ is conjoined with that of the martyrs 
 and saints, which is similar in kind, though smaller in degree, 
 for they likewise performed more than the divine law required of 
 them. The sum of these supererogatory merits and good works 
 forms a vast Treasure, which is disjoined from the persons who 
 won or performed them, exists objectively, and having been 
 accumulated by the Head and Members of the Church, and in- 
 tended by them for its use, it belongs to the Church, and is neces- 
 sarily placed under the administration of its representatives, especi- 
 ally the Pope, who is supreme. It is therefore competent for the 
 Pope, according to the measure of his insight at the time, to draw 
 from this Treasure, and bestow upon those, who have no merit 
 of their own, such supplies of it as they require. "Indulgences 
 and remissions," says this author, 1 " are made from the superero- 
 gatory merits of Christ's members, but most of all from the super- 
 abundance of Christ's own, the two constituting the Church's 
 spiritual treasure. The administration of this treasure does not 
 pertain to all, but to those only who occupy Christ's place, viz., 
 the Bishops." It appears to Alexander of Hales that this trans- 
 ference of merit from one party to another does not infringe upon 
 God's penal justice, inasmuch as in every case a punishment is in- 
 flicted, and a satisfaction made, and this within the precincts of the 
 Church. "For," he says, " when the Pope grants plenary Indul- 
 gence, he inflicts a penalty, inasmuch as he obliges the Church or 
 one of its members, to make satisfaction. Or it may also be said, The 
 Treasure of the Church, from which the indulgence is taken, is 
 derived substantially from Christ's merits, and consequently God 
 still punishes evil, having as God-man suffered and satisfied for 
 us." 2 To the objection raised by some that the absolution of the 
 Church availed only before the Church's tribunal, and not before 
 God's, Alexander of Hales answers by saying, 3 that if that were 
 
 pro redemption^ totius humani generis suffecisset, sed copiose velut 
 quodtlam profluvium noscitur effudisse, ita ut a planta pedis usque ad 
 verticem nulla sanitas inveniretur in ipso — is the language of Clemens 
 VI. in his Jubilee-Bull of 27th Jan. 1343, which first gave the 
 sanction of the Church to the theory of Indulgences elaborated by the 
 Schoolmen. 
 
 1 Alexand. Hales. Summa. P. iv. Quaest. 23. art. 2. membr. 3. 
 
 2 Ibid. Membr. 6. 
 
 3 Quaest. 23. art. 1. 
 
INDULGENCES. 239 
 
 true, Indulgences would be more a deception than a consolation, 
 more a cruelty than a blessing, because the mitigation of the 
 present penalty would necessarily be followed by an incomparable 
 aggravation of the penalty afterwards inflicted by God, and that 
 we must hold Indulgence to be also valid before the Divine 
 tribunal, seeing that God considers as remitted what the 
 Church remits. 1 As regards the extent of Indulgence, Alex- 
 ander of Hales is of opinion that it reaches even to the souls 
 in Purgatory, 2 under the condition, however, that there shall 
 be the power of the keys in the party who dispenses it, faith, 
 love, and devotion in the party to whom it is dispensed, 
 and a competent reason and a proper relation between the two. 
 He does not, however, suppose that in such cases Indulgence is 
 granted in the way of judicial absolution or barter, but in that of 
 intercession (per modum suffragii sive impetrationis). 
 
 Albert, the Great, (f 1280), adopting the opinions of this prede- 
 cessor, designates Indulgence 3 the remission of some imposed 
 punishment or penance, proceeding from the power of the keys 
 and the treasure of the superfluous merits of the perfect. A 
 penalty can only be remitted to a party by whom it is due, on 
 condition that some other party, who has done more than was 
 obligatory upon him, furnishes an equivalent for it; and this 
 more is kept in store in the treasure belonging to the Church, 
 and containing the fulness of the merits of Christ and the saints. 
 With respect to the efficacy of Indulgence, Albert proposes to 
 steer a middle course between two extremes. Some, he says, 
 imagine that Indulgence has no efficacy at all, and is merely a 
 pious fraud, by which men are enticed to the performance of 
 good works, such as pilgrimages and almsgiving. These, how- 
 ever, reduce the action of the Church to child's play, and fall 
 into heresy. Others, carrying the contrary opinion farther than 
 
 1 Instead of coming to the conclusion, that as the justice of man can 
 never be wholly adequate to that of God, so the granting of Indulgences, 
 which proceeds on that principle, ought not to take place, the School- 
 men rather infer as follows, — Inasmuch as, if the judgment of the 
 Church did not coincide with that of God, Indulgence would be a cruel 
 deception, it follows that, as the infallible Church grants Indulgence, 
 its judgment must be in unison with that of God. 
 
 2 Ibid. art. 2. membr. 5. 
 
 3 Albert. Magn. in Sentcnt, Lib. iv. Dist. 20. art. 16, 17. 
 
240 TIIE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 is necessary, assert that an Indulgence at once and uncondition- 
 ally accomplishes all that is expressed in it, and thus make the 
 Divine mercy diminish the fear of judgment. 1 The true medium 
 is, that Indulgence has that pi'ecise amount of efficacy which the 
 Church assigns to it. In order to this, however, six conditions 
 are required, — two on the part of Him who dispenses it, viz., 
 competent authority and a pious cause ; two on the part of the 
 receiver, viz., repentance 2 and faith in the power of the keys ; 
 and two on the part of the Church, viz., the superabundance of 
 the treasure of merits, and a proper appreciation of the deliver- 
 ance for which Indulgence was instituted. 8 
 
 The whole exposition both of Alexander of Hales and of 
 Albert the Great proceeds on the radical, though unexpressed, 
 supposition that the Church is properly an indivisible whole, the 
 parts of which are all connected with each other, or a mystical 
 body in which the acts of the head redound to the advantage of 
 the members, and those of any one member to that of all the 
 others ; so that, in consequence of their mutual connexion as 
 members one of another, the merits of each are transferable to 
 any of the rest. Now this thought we find distinctly expressed 
 by Thomas Aquinas (f 1274), who is here too the Church's most 
 authoritative representative, and embodies the substantial im- 
 port of this doctrine as it had come to be taught in the Church 
 and the schools. 4 
 
 TJiomas views Indulgence first as it is in itself, secondly with 
 reference to the party dispensing, and thirdly with reference to 
 the party receiving it. As for Indulgence in itself, he deduces its 
 efficacy indirectly from Christ. 5 The history of the adulteress 
 shews, that it is in Christ's power to remit the penalty of sin 
 without satisfaction, and so could Paul, and so also can the Pope, 
 whose power in the Church is not inferior to Paul's. Besides, 
 the Church general is infallible, and as it sanctions and practises 
 
 1 . . . nimis bonum forum dant de misericordia Dei. 
 
 2 . . . et ideo semper in litteris indulgentiarum continetur : omnibus 
 contritis et confessis. 
 
 3 justa aestimatio solutionis ejus, pro qua indulgentia est instituta. 
 
 4 The treatise of Thomas Aquinas referring to this point is in the 
 Supplementum tertiae partis Suinmae Theologiae, Quaest. xxv. — 
 xxvii. 
 
 5 In a. 1. Quaest. xxv. art. 1. 
 
INDULGENCES. 241 
 
 Indulgence, Indulgence must be valid. This, Thomas is per- 
 suaded, all admit, because there would be impiety in representing 
 any act of the Church as nugatory. Many, however, allege that it 
 does not absolve from liability to the penalties inflicted by God in 
 Purgatory, but merely from liability to that punishment which 
 the priest imposes, or the ecclesiastical laws ordain. But this 
 appears to be false. In the first place, because it would be 
 expressly contrary to the privilege conferred upon Peter, which 
 declares, that what he remits on earth shall be remitted in heaven ) 
 and further, because, were the Church to dispense Indulgence on 
 the terms supposed, it would rather condemn, than acquit peni- 
 tents, inasmuch as, while absolving them from the prescribed pen- 
 ances, it would consign them to the penalties of Purgatory, 
 which are far more severe. It must, therefore, be held that, 
 both before the court of the Church, and the tribunal of God, 
 Indulgence is efficacious for the remission of the punishment 
 remaining after contrition, confession, and absolution, whether 
 that punishment be expressly imposed or not. The reason 
 of its efficacy, however, lies in the oneness of the mystical body, 1 
 within the limits of which there are many who, as respects 
 works of penitence, have clone more than they were under 
 obligation to do ; for instance, many who have patiently endured 
 undeserved sufferings sufficient to expiate a great amount of 
 penalties. In fact, so vast is the sum of these merits that it 
 greatly exceeds the measure of the guilt of all the living, especially 
 when augmented by the merit of Christ, which, although operative 
 in the sacraments, is not in its operation confined to these, but 
 being infinite, extends far beyond them. Within the Church 
 any one person may satisfy for another. The saints, in whom 
 there is an overplus of works of satisfaction, did not perform them 
 on account of this or that individual, who needed pardon, but on 
 account of the whole Church ; as the Apostle declares (Col. i. 
 24) : " I fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ 
 for his body's sake, which is the Church." And thus it is that 
 the merits of which we speak are a common good of the Church. 
 That, however, which is the common property of a multitude is 
 
 1 Quaest. xxv. art. 1 : Ratio autem, quare valere possint, est unitas 
 corporis mystici, in qua multi in operibus poenitentiae supererogave- 
 runt etc. 
 
 Q 
 
242 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 apportioned to the individuals of it, according to the good pleasure 
 of Inmicho presides over the ivhole. 1 Hence, as any party would 
 obtain the remission of a penalty, were another to make satisfac- 
 tion expressly in his name, the same happens when the satis- 
 faction, made by that other, is allotted to him by a third having 
 competent authority to do so. 
 
 On the extent of the efficacy of Indulgences, St Thomas adopts 
 the ojrinions of his forerunners, 2 to the effect, that Indulgence 
 possesses all the validity which the Church declares it has, and 
 that it- must be valid, in every case in which there is authority on 
 the part of him who dispenses, love on the part of him who ob- 
 tains it, and piety in the reason for which it is vouchsafed. On 
 the other hand, he rejects two other views, one, that the efficacy 
 of Indulgence is regulated by the measure of the faith and piety 
 of the recipient ; the other, that it is so by the equitable judgment 
 of good men. And the reason why he thinks the first of these 
 opinions unsound, is, because the Church would lose her whole 
 authority, if anywhere in the dispensing of Indulgences there 
 were to be pious fraud or falsehood. The second opinion he 
 considers unsound, because, according to it, absolution would be 
 less an act of pardon than of barter ; and, moreover, because the 
 Church could not be wholly acquitted of falsehood, as she some- 
 times accords a greater Indulgence than seems answerable to a 
 sound judgment. The measure of the efficacy of Indulgence — this 
 St Thomas reckons to be the truth — is determined by the measure 
 of its cause. The procuring cause of the remission of punish- 
 ment in Indulgence is, however, solely the plenitude of the 
 Church's merits, not the piety, labours, or gifts of the party by 
 whom it is obtained ; and therefore the quantity of the Indul- 
 gence does not need to correspond with any of these, but only 
 with the merits of the Church. The merits of the Church, 
 however, are always superabundant, and therefore every one 
 secures pardon in the measure in which these merits are allotted 
 to him. All that is requisite for their application is authority on 
 the part of the dispenser, and a reason corresponding with the 
 
 i ... sic praedicta merita sunt communia totius Ecclesiae. Ea 
 autem, quae suntalicujusmultitudinis communia, distribuuntur singulis 
 de multitudinc, secundum arbitrium ejus, qui multitudini praeest. 
 
 2 Quaest. xxv. art. 2. 
 
INDULGENCES. 243 
 
 purpose of those by whom they were collected. They were 
 collected, however, for the glory of God, and the good of the 
 Church in general; and therefore every cause, which relates 
 to the glory of God and the good of the Church, is a suffi- 
 cient ground for granting Indulgence. For this reason it may 
 be granted for any secular service performed in the interest 
 of the Church, 1 such 'for example as waging war with her 
 enemies, building churches and bridges, making pilgrimages, 
 and bestowing charitable gifts, provided only that such secular 
 services are pointed to a spiritual object. And this is also the 
 reason why there can never be simony in an Indulgence. An 
 Indulgence is the giving of a spiritual thing, not in return for a 
 temporal thing, but in return for a spiritual thing like itself. 
 
 In respect of the party who ought to dispense Indulgence, St 
 TJwmas asserts 2 that no mere priest or pastor, but only the bishop, 
 is competent for the duty. To grant Indulgence, he says, is 
 something greater than to excommunicate, and as the clergyman 
 is not authorized to do the one, just as little is he authorized to 
 do the other. Neither is Indulgence taken from the merits of 
 particular persons or churches, but from the treasure of the 
 Church general, where they are contained in inexhaustible ple- 
 nitude, and therefore no person who presides merely over 
 one of her congregations, but he only who presides over the 
 whole, and who is therefore called her prelate, can dispense it. 3 
 On the other hand, deacons and other parties, not in orders, as 
 for example Nuncios, may grant Indulgence, if either in an 
 ordinary or extraordinary way, they have been entrusted with 
 jurisdiction for the purpose. For Indulgence does not, like 
 sacramental acts, pertain to the power of the keys inherent in 
 the priesthood, but to that power of the keys which belongs to 
 jurisdiction, (ad clavem jurisdictions non ad clavem ordinis.) 4 
 The efficacy of this latter power of the keys, however, does not, 
 
 1 Quaest. xxv. art. 3. 2 Quaest. xxvi. 
 
 3 Quaest. xxvi. art. 1. : ... in una persona vel in una congre- 
 gatione non est indeficientia meritorum, ut sibi et omnibus aliis valere 
 possint, unde iste non absolvitur a poena debita pro toto, nisi tantum 
 determinate pro eo fiat, quantum debeat. Sed in Ecclesia tota est in- 
 deficientia meritorum, praecipue propter meritum Cbristi ; et ideo solus 
 ille, qui praeficitur Ecclesiae, potest indulgentias facere. 
 
 4 Quaest. xxv. art. 2. 
 
244 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 like that of the sacraments, depend solely upon God, but is sub- 
 ject also to the judgment of men. 1 But although bishops and 
 other parties, invested with jurisdiction, are competent to grant 
 Indulgence, still the plenitude of ecclesiastical power resides in 
 the Pope, whereas the Bishops are but the assistants he employs, 
 and the judges who represent him in particular countries. Only 
 the Pope therefore possesses the poiver of Indulgence in plenitude. 
 Let a sufficient cause be presupposed, and in this matter he can 
 act according to his good pleasure ; whereas the Bishops can only 
 do as 'much as the Pope directs, and no more. 2 As for the 
 frame of mind of the dispensing party, an Indulgence is not ren- 
 dered inefficacious, even though that party should happen to be 
 in mortal sin, 3 for it is granted in virtue of jurisdiction which 
 mortal sin does not annul. Besides, he who grants Indulgence 
 does not remit the penalty in the strength of his own merits, 
 but in the strength of the merits contained in the treasure of the 
 Church, so that his personal character does not enter into ac- 
 count. 
 
 In fine, as regards the recipients of Indulgence, St Tliomas 
 delivers the following judgment : 4 In their case, no doubt, the 
 efficacy of the grace is obstructed by the presence of mortal sin, 
 for, although on that account they have all the more need, they 
 are yet all the less susceptible, of it. 5 He who commits a mortal 
 sin is to be regarded in the light of a dead member ; and as in 
 the natural body such a member receives no influence from the 
 living ones, so neither does he who commits a mortal sin re- 
 ceive influence from the living members of the Church ; and as 
 there is no remission of penalty unless there be a previous remis- 
 sion of guilt, so Indulgence cannot profit those who live in the 
 guilt of mortal sin, but those only who have repented of it and 
 confessed it. 6 The question, whether Indulgence can benefit 
 monks, is answered by St Thomas in the affirmative, 7 on the 
 ground, that there is no reason why they should not reap advan- 
 tage from the merits of others, and because there would be a 
 
 1 clavis jurisdictionis non est quid sacramentale, et 
 effectus ejus arbitrio hominis subjacet. 
 
 2 Quaest. xxvi. art. 3. 3 Ibid. art. 4. 
 
 4 Quaest. xxvii. 6 Quaest. xxvii. art. 1. 
 
 contritis et confessis. 7 Quaest. xxvii. art. 2. 
 
INDULGENCES. 245 
 
 contradiction, if the Monastic vow, which is a benefit, were con- 
 nected with a disadvantage. Nay, even to the person who dispenses 
 it, Indulgence may be profitable. 1 For although he cannot ap- 
 point it for himself alone, still, if Indulgence be granted at all, he 
 would be in worse circumstances than others, were he himself 
 incapable of benefitting by it. On the other hand, it is self-evi- 
 dent, that as all Indulgence is connected with certain services, 
 the efficacy of it ceases, if these conditions, as being its procuring 
 cause, are not fulfilled. 2 With this, however, is connected a still 
 more important question, 3 which St Thomas answers elsewhere. 
 If all Indulgence is given on account of some corresponding cause 
 and service, it may be matter of doubt, whether it can possibly 
 benefit the dead, seeing that they are no longer capable of doing 
 anything for the good of the Church. This doubt St Tliomas 
 solves by saying, " Absolutely and directly Indulgence is of no 
 benefit to the dead ; indirectly, however, and derivatively, it may 
 turn to their advantage if adjusted for that end. Indulgence is 
 useful in two ways, originally and derivatively. Originally, it 
 benefits him who receives it, because he performs the service for 
 which it is bestowed ; and derivatively it benefits him in whose 
 behalf the service is done, which is the procuring cause of the In- 
 dulgence. To this end, however, a special and appropriate form 
 of Indulgence is requisite. It must, for instance, be said, " If 
 the party perform this or that service, then shall he and his 
 father, or any one of his near relations being in Purgatory, ob- 
 tain such and such Indulgence." An Indulgence of this kind 
 benefits not merely the living but also the dead. For there is no 
 reason why the Church should be able to transfer the common 
 good of her merits, which is the basis of Indulgence, to the liv- 
 ing, and not also to the dead. In the case of the dead, however, 
 St Thomas, following Alexander of Hales, represents the efficacy 
 of Indulgence as resulting not from judicial acquittal (per mo- 
 dum absolutionis et judicii), but from deliverance and inter- 
 cession (per mod urn solutionis et suffragii), an opinion which 
 subsequently became prevalent in the Church, although not 
 without contradiction — Gerson, for example, denied the efficacy 
 
 1 Quaest. xxvii. art. 4. 2 Ibid. art. 3. 
 
 2 Quaest. lxxii. art. 10. 
 
246 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 of absolution upon the dead, 1 while others fancied that there 
 was here also an immediate judicial decision of the Pope. 2 
 
 In this manner, the doctrine of Indulgence had been fully 
 elaborated so early as the second half of the 13th century. What 
 had been written upon it, especially by St Thomas, continued 
 thenceforward the type of the Church's teaching, and was 
 neither superseded nor changed by the Council of Trent. A 
 criticism of it would be here out of place : But to some points we 
 must advert, partly for the purpose of introducing, and partly in 
 order to explain the opposition against it. Viewed even in its 
 purest form, as stated by the most eminent doctors, and sanc- 
 tioned by Papal bulls, the doctrine of Indulgence not only 
 introduces a contradiction into the Catholic system, in respect 
 that works of satisfaction, which were originally an integral part 
 of the sacrament of penitence, are entirely disconnected with it, 
 and viewed as a mere matter of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; but 
 it has this further radical defect pervading all its constituent 
 parts, that moral and religious things which can only be taken 
 as spiritual magnitudes, are considered as material ones, quality 
 being treated wholly as quantity, and consequently a standard of 
 external computation, and a sort of religious arithmetic applied, 
 which involves contradiction. 3 Even in ojder to establish the 
 superabundance of the merit of Christ, it was affirmed that 
 though a single drop of his blood would have sufficed for a uni- 
 versal atonement, yet the Saviour had shed so much, as if it 
 were not the Divine sacrifice of love on the part of the Son of 
 
 1 Gerson Sermo ii. pro defunctis. His Treatise de Indulgentiis p. 
 514 sqq. 
 
 2 It was formally sanctioned in a declaration by Sixtus IV. in the 
 year 1477. Amort de origine, progressu, valore et fructu indulgen- 
 tiarum. P. ii. p. 292. Gieseler ii. 4. § 147. B. 355. Note q. 
 
 3 In this point of view, Indulgences also show the legal tendency of 
 the Catholic Church in the middle ages, and its declension from evange- 
 lical principles to those of the Old Testament, for it was peculiar to the 
 latter to introduce an arithmetical relation between the righteousness 
 of men and the mercy of God, between the sum of the particular acts of 
 obedience to the law, and that of the particular transgressions in the 
 life of men, whereas the New Testament says nothing of any such 
 relation of quantity, but rests everything upon the unity of the dispo- 
 sition and bent of the will. See the shrewd remarks of Gurlitt Stud, 
 und Krit. 1840. 4. s. 952. 
 
INDULGENCES. 247 
 
 God and man, and his atoning death in general, but his several 
 outward sufferings and their quantity, in which its value 
 and importance consisted. In like manner, on the part of the 
 saints, it was not their peculiar and more exalted moral and reli- 
 gious character, but their several works, and especially the volume 
 rather than the worth of these, which was taken into account ; 
 and the whole was handled as something totally disconnected 
 with their persons, as an objective fund, a sum of ready money in 
 the Church's hands. According to the same category, the impu- 
 tation of the merits of Christ and the saints was described as a 
 purely external transference of a portion of that sum to one who 
 needed it. For although a penitent frame of mind was required 
 of the sinner, still it was not for the sake, nor according to the 
 measure of that, that the merit of Christ and the saints were 
 transferred to him, but solely for the sake of some service per- 
 formed by him for the Church, and this performance again is 
 quite an external and isolated work. Even the transference 
 itself is not a religious and moral transaction, but of a purely 
 judicial nature, emanating not from a religious personage as 
 such, for he might be in mortal sin at the time, but only from 
 such a personage in as far as he possessed or shared the judicial 
 power of the Church. The whole was thus a legal proceeding, a 
 computation of magnitudes, which, under such a form, had no 
 existence in this field, an external work in glaring contrast 
 with the essentially spiritual nature of Christianity. At the same 
 time, as respects the merits of the saints, the theory of Indulgence 
 rests on the supposition, that a man, who is still human, although 
 a saint, may not only possess a sufficiency of merit to answer his 
 own need before God, but may likewise do more than the Divine 
 law demands of him, and thus acquire a surplus of merit for 
 the use of others. Even this is a monstrous supposition, but still 
 more monstrous perhaps is another which invades the religious 
 domain and the glory of God. In point of fact, the doctrine 
 and practice of Indulgences gives the Church a position as an 
 absolutely unerring and omniscient judicial power. It identifies 
 the tribunal of the Church with that of God, and the tribunal 
 of the Pope with that of the Church, thereby indirectly identify- 
 ing the Pope's with God's, so that the Pope is raised to a position, 
 in virtue of which, as the visible head of the mystical body of 
 
248 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 Christ, and as the dispenser of all penalties and graces, he de- 
 cides the highest questions involving the salvation of the living 
 and the dead, according to his mere good pleasure. Granting, 
 however, that the whole doctrine were well founded, the position 
 assigned to the Pope would be one elevated far above the reach 
 of fancy, and could be designated only as that of a terrestrial 
 god. What an infinite amount of obligation would it impose 
 upon the Papacy, and with what conscientiousness sharpened to 
 the utmost, ought the Popes, if they were bold enough to believe 
 that such plenitude of power had actually been lodged in the 
 hands of any child of the dust, to have dispensed the lofty bless- 
 ings committed to their trust ? How carefully ought they to 
 have guarded them from perversion and debasement ? And yet 
 what do we see ? Abuse upon abuse, and profanation upon pro- 
 fanation, in an ascending scale for more than two centuries, until 
 at last moral indignation bursts like a tempest upon their im- 
 piety. 
 
 Innocent III. had, even at the commencement of the 13th 
 century, restrained various abuses of their authority, committed 
 by the Bishops in the matter of Indulgence. 1 The only object, 
 however, for which this was done was to open a more bound- 
 less field for the exercise of the grace upon the part of the Pope, 
 From that time Indulgence was regarded as a privilege of the 
 Romish see. The Popes acted as if they possessed an unre- 
 stricted lordship over the Divine favours. No doubt they should 
 have had a sufficient reason for every Indulgence they granted, 
 but what that reason was no one was permitted to enquire. The 
 question which would now sound like a jest, " Why the Pope, 
 having sufficient authority for the purpose, did not with one word 
 release all souls from Purgatoxy ? 2 was at that time debated by 
 the theologians with solemn earnestness. The answer they gave 
 was : if God himself exercises his compassion in such a manner 
 
 1 References in Gieseler B. ii. Abth. 2. § 82. s. 497. 
 
 2 Not quite in mockery, but as one of the " acute and cunning ques- 
 tions of the common man" which are so hard to answer, Luther in his 
 82d Thesis has the words, " Why does the Pope not at once deliver all 
 souls from Purgatory for the sake of sacred charity, and in compassion 
 of their pains, than which there can be no holier reasons, while for the 
 sake of perishable gold, which is the very worst reason, he frees num- 
 bers ?" 
 
INDULGENCES. 249 
 
 as not to do away with the fear of his justice, much more must 
 his servant act upon the same principle ; and therefore the bless- 
 ings of the Church must be dispensed with discretion and mode- 
 ration. For if this were not the case, God would withhold his 
 approbation. 1 During the 14th century Indulgences were multi- 
 plied from the most multifarious causes, and more and more came 
 to be granted for money ; at last, indeed, a regular list of prices 
 was drawn out, so that what had been already treated in theory 
 as a sort of traffic with ecclesiastical blessings now also assumed 
 in practice the shape of a mercantile transaction, and the busi- 
 ness was carried on with a punctuality and attention which 2 would 
 have done honour to the first commercial house in the world. 
 The mischief attained a still greater height under the Popes of 
 Avignon, and those of the schism. Divested of their old Roman 
 dignity and independence, the former generally turned their atten- 
 tion to pecuniary speculations ; while the latter, dividing between 
 them the countries of Christendom, endeavoured, each within his 
 own jurisdiction, to raise as large an amount as the single Pope 
 used to collect from the whole domain of the Church. The 
 Council of Constance recognising the evils connected with the 
 sale of Indulgences, endeavoured to restrain them, 3 but without 
 success ; and subsequently, as the Council of Basle, although 
 in other respects imbued with reformatory zeal, granted in- 
 dulgences on its own authority, 4 never was the system more 
 shamefully abused than in the course of the 15th century. 
 
 From the first the great body of the people had looked upon 
 Indulgence, in a very gross and carnal light, as the forgiveness 
 of sins granted for a fixed service or price, in fact, as the 
 sale of eternal salvation for money. They had troubled them- 
 selves very little with the repentance and confession which were 
 insinuated as conditions ; and in point of fact, they might very 
 simply argue, If contrition and repentance are of real value, 
 
 3 The difficulty is solved in the Summa Astesana (a casuistic work oi 
 the Minorite Astesanus in the year 1330) Lib. v. tit. 40. 
 
 2 To borrow the language of Planck. 
 
 3 Proofs in Gieseler ii. 4. § 147. s. 351. Note a. 
 * Ibid. s. 351. Note. b. 
 
250 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 why is a price also demanded? 1 If a price be necessary to 
 implement their insufficiency, contrition and repentance cannot 
 be of any great moment. In these low views, the people were 
 abundantly confirmed by the practice of many of the preachers 
 of Indulgence, who, in order to promote its sale, extolled its 
 efficacy upon both the living and the dead, by arguments which 
 cither absolutely omitted, or at least cast into the shade, all reli- 
 gious and moral requirements. 
 
 An abuse of this sort could not become prevalent in the 
 Church without originating attempts to put a stop to it, on the 
 part of pious and serious men. From the 13th century, when 
 the system reached its maturity, loud and many were the voices 
 raised by learned theologians, preachers, and poets, in condem- 
 nation of the sale of Indulgence, or in endeavours to bring it 
 back to the purity of its origin, and separate from it all that was 
 injurious to morality. The worse the corruption grew, the louder 
 and more powerful also became the opposition. In the course of 
 the 15th century especially it spread far and wide, and assumed 
 a character of greater determination ; and at last, at the com- 
 mencement of the 1 6th, gave the watchword of the Reformation 
 in the Theses of Luther. But long before Luther's bold protest, 
 others had spoken out upon the matter with even greater intrepidity 
 and more comprehensive views, and foremost among these stands 
 John of Wesel. As we propose to pourtray Wesel in the character 
 of Luthei-s forerunner in this matter, it is proper that we should 
 recollect at the same time who was WeseVs own, and here we 
 once more meet a person of whom we have already had occasion 
 repeatedly to speak — viz., Jacob of Jiiterboch. 
 
 Jocob of Jiiterbock, like many divines of the period, wrote a 
 special Treatise upon Indulgences. 2 For this the jubilee of 1450 
 
 1 In this sense, Luther, in his 87th Thesis, puts the following into the 
 niouth of the " common man :" " Why does the Pope issue or dis- 
 pense his Indulgence to those who, having perfectly repented, have a 
 right to perfect forgiveness and remission?" 
 
 2 Jacobi Junterburgii de Indulgentiis Tractatio. Walch Monim. med. 
 aev. vol. ii. fasc. 2. p. 163—270. 
 
INDULGENCES. 251 
 
 appears to have furnished the occasion ; l as the chief object of 
 the work was, to calm the minds of his monastic brethren, who 
 were precluded from travelling to Rome to obtain the promised 
 benefit. The graces of the year of Jubilee being at first, as 
 is well known, connected with a pilgrimage to that city, and 
 not until, afterwards, extended to foreign countries, " It might 
 seem," says the author, 2 " that monks are in a worse condition 
 than laymen, as respects the remission of sin and guilt by Indul- 
 gences, inasmuch as they are totally unable to procure them, 
 being forbidden to quit their monasteries, and much too poor to 
 pay the price. In point of fact many monks are deeply afflicted 
 on this account," and the author confesses that at one time he was 
 himself among the number of those who, " conscious of their fail- 
 ings, looked fondly upon Indulgences as a means by which these 
 might be purged away." Persons experiencing such feelings are, 
 by Jacob of Jilterbock, referred 3 to the founders of monachism, 
 and to the objects which they had in view. " We do not read," 
 he says, " that St Benedict, although he passed several years in 
 a cave in the vicinity of Rome, was a great seeker of Indul- 
 gences ; and just as little was St Jerome, who, in a letter to 
 Bishop Paulinus, declares, that that which is truly commendable 
 is ' not to have visited Jerusalem, but to have lived a good life.' 
 Such men, however, would certainly never have neglected to 
 adopt among their rules, that their disciples were to hunt after 
 Indulgences, if they had known that that was salutary for monks." 
 If we here consider that St Tliomas contends for the extension 
 to monks of the benefit of Indulgence, 4 we will perceive in these 
 statements, and especially in the style in which they are expressed, 
 a depreciation of their value. This, however, is still more distinctly 
 evinced 5 by the author's affirming in the sequel, that Indulgences, 
 as being designed to cover the lack of merit by draughts of it 
 from the Church's store, are intended properly for the poor and 
 
 1 He refers also to the year of Jubilee, its origin and rise. Cap. 43. 
 s. 252. According to Trithcmius de script, eccles. cap. 814. p. 191, 
 Jacob v. J. wrote a separate tract entitled de anno jubilaeo. 
 
 2 Caps. 1 and 2. 
 
 3 Cap. 3. 
 
 4 Summ. Suppl. Quacst. xxvii. art. 2. see p. 244. 
 
 5 Cap. 1.1. 
 
252 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the beggars of the Church; and as it is more blessed to give than 
 to receive, it follows that the recipients of indulgence are in a 
 condition much worse than theirs who collect that treasure. 
 11 The treasure, however," he proceeds, 1 " is collected by the per- 
 fect men, and the life of the monks, as being devoted to con- 
 templation, is the more calculated to do honour to God by charity 
 and good works. It is not the business of monks, therefore, to 
 be begging for indulgences, but rather to be augmenting the 
 treasure of them. In this way they ought to be rich in order to 
 relieve the poverty of others. Let the laity, however, who are 
 the paupers of the monks, receive from them their supplies." 
 
 As respects the doctrine of Indulgence in general, Jacob oj 
 Jiiterboch, avers'e to deviate from the Doctors of theology and 
 the canon law, adheres to the received views, especially as laid 
 down by St Thomas? Partly, however, he gives prominence to 
 a point greatly overlooked at the time, and wholly cast into the 
 shade by the preachers of Indulgence, that indulgence affects 
 merely the penalties of sin, not sin itself or sin's guilt, and solely 
 the temporal and ecclesiastical penalties, and that it can only bene- 
 fit those who are in venial sin, and not those who are in mortal. 3 
 Partly he seeks to obviate mistakes, and improves the opportunity 
 to impose very serious restrictions, as is evident from the follow- 
 ing particulars. No doubt Jacob of Jiiterbock assigns supreme 
 and exclusive authority to the Pope 4 in dispensing Indulgences, 
 while to the other prelates and officers of the Church, he con- 
 cedes only as much as the Pope chooses to devolve upon them ; 
 at the same time he limits this to solemn and public, or, as it 
 was called, Plenary Indulgence. On the other hand, he affirms 
 that "private indulgence granted upon confession, is competent 
 to every priest, in all cases that concern him, and so far as his 
 jurisdiction extends." 5 Whether the efficacy of indulgence ex- 
 tends to the pains of Purgatory, he is at least doubtful. In one 
 passage he denies that it has any efficacy upon these at all, 6 and 
 assigns as the reason, that persons in Purgatory are not under 
 the authority of him who dispenses the indulgence, and could 
 
 1 Cap. 12. 
 
 2 Cap. 4, and those following. 
 
 3 Cap. 6. Cap. 40. 
 
 4 Cap. 16. 
 
 - Cap. 14. 
 
 c Cap. 27. 
 
INDULGENCES. 253 
 
 know nothing of it except by special revelation ; in another pas- 
 sage 1 he concedes that indulgence may avail even before the 
 tribunal of God, but adds, This must not be understood, as if a 
 year's indulgence stood for a year in Purgatory, because the pains 
 of that state are much more severe than those of the present life. 
 A year's indulgence is to be understood as what God would 
 appoint in Purgatory as the equivalent for a year's penalties in 
 this life, supposing these not to be remitted, a thing for which 
 man possesses no measure. The mistaken notion that indulgence 
 effects the remission, not merely of punishment, but likewise of 
 guilt, he meets as follows : 2 " Where forgiveness is offered both 
 from guilt and punishment, either this must not be understood 
 in a strict sense, but generally as implying confession and repen- 
 tance, by which the guilt is taken away, or it is to be understood 
 of the forgiveness of venial guilt. Still I do not recollect to have 
 seen many Papal epistles in which the remission of punishment 
 and likewise of guilt is proclaimed. There is rather ground to 
 fear that this is an interpolation by itinerant vendors, who fre- 
 quently extend indulgence beyond all due limits, and deceive the 
 multitude. If, however, there be Papal letters which contain such 
 expressions, they must be understood in the sense explained, and 
 when a full remission (plena remissio) of punishment and guilt 
 is guaranteed by the Pope, 3 this is done to distinguish it from a 
 partial (semiplena) forgiveness, which any other party besides 
 the Pope may grant, but always on the presumption that the 
 sinner, in virtue of the Papal supremacy, has made his confes- 
 sion at the place where the indulgence is granted, and then 
 receives absolution and acquittal from all penalties and satisfac- 
 tions." Probably, however, the most important topics which occur 
 in the treatise are, First, that the author, although recognising 
 Indulgence as a discharge from the satisfactions imposed by the 
 Church, nevertheless hints 4 that the actual performance of these 
 may be of more use than to take advantage of the discharge, and 
 that for a twofold reason ; because thereby a direct satisfac- 
 tion is made for the sins remitted at confession, and a compen- 
 sation paid to the Divine justice ; and further, because such 
 
 i Cap. 30. 2 Cap. 40. s Cap. 41. 
 
 4 Cap. 6. s. 174. 
 
254 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 performance is a remedy against future sins. In the second 
 place, the author in connexion with the same subject observes 
 at the close, 1 " In these days the prelates of the Churches, find- 
 ing how hard it is to persuade the people to exercise a proper 
 penitence, have multiplied indulgences, out of concern for the 
 salvation of their souls. In the primitive Church, however, men 
 were greatly more disposed to repentance, and for that reason far 
 less was said about indulgences." 
 
 In Jacob of Jdterboch we see a person who, though the cor- 
 ruption had reached a great height, speaks of it in the gentlest 
 and most sparing terms, and only ventures to hint at some im- 
 provement. On the other hand, John of Wesel has advanced 
 farther, comes forward with greater power, and begins to 
 lay the axe to the root of the tree. The festival of the year of 
 Jubilee furnished him with the occasion to take the field. In his 
 trial for heresy at Mayence, being questioned when he wrote his 
 treatise upon Indulgence, he replied, " At the time Indulgences 
 were dispensed, and the year before." 2 The expression " when 
 Indulgences were dispensed," can only refer to the year of 
 Jubilee. During the period of WeseVs manhood, however, two 
 such festivals took place, one in 1450 under Clement VI., and 
 another about 1475, under Sixtus IV. In 1450 Wesel was still 
 in Erfurt; in 1475 he was a preacher in Worms. Inasmuch, 
 therefore, as in the introduction to his treatise he speaks of him- 
 self as " called to be a professor of Holy Scripture," there 
 can be no doubt that we must understand the Jubilee year of 
 1450, which was prolonged into 1451, to be meant. This 
 Jubilee, however, was all the more calculated to excite and in- 
 flame Wesel, that in 1451, Cardinal von Cusa visited Erfurt, as 
 a preacher of Indulgence, and afforded Wesel an opportunity of 
 witnessing its effects. The only difficulty is that Wesel was not 
 made a Doctor of Divinity until 1456. Still either this date 
 cannot be entirely relied on, or he was, as many then were, a 
 
 1 Cap 47. s. 269. 
 
 2 Tempore eo, quando fuerunt Indulgentiae, scripsi Tractatura de 
 Indulgentiis et anno praecedenti. This date is taken from the manu- 
 script copy of his prosecution for heresy, to be examined hereafter. 
 
INDULGENCES. 255 
 
 professor before he was a doctor of theology. At all events, it is 
 a point chronologically settled, that the Treatise against Indul- 
 gence was composed either immediately before or immediately 
 after the year 1450. Inasmuch then as the celebration of this 
 year of Jubilee was the special occasion which provoked Wesel to 
 controversy, and as the institution of Jubilees in general is closely 
 interwoven with the whole system of Indulgence, we shall here 
 say a word on the subject. 
 
 The Christian, or to speak more properly, the Romish year oj 
 Jubilee, is connected with the Jewish, although across an im- 
 mense interval of time, and wearing a totally different shape. 
 Among the Jews, the festival whose appointment we find in 
 Leviticus, but which was probably never at all, or never pro- 
 perly, introduced into practice, until after the exile, like other 
 theocratical institutions, rested upon a religious foundation, 
 but, at the same time, was of great importance in a civil 
 respect. If it did not originally contemplate, it could not, when 
 applied, fail to effect, among the Jewish people a certain equality 
 of property, and in particular of landed property. In the Sep- 
 tuagint, it also bears the name of the year of release, or simply, 
 the release, 1 and with this appellation, which imported that the 
 Jewish year of jubilee was the time for the remission of pecuniary 
 debts, and the reversion of alienated properties to their original 
 possessors, the Christian year of Jubilee corresponded, as the 
 season for a general remission of guilt and restitution, in a moral 
 respect. 2 The institution of the Roman Jubilee took place about 
 the commencement of the 14th century of the Christian era, 
 under the haughty Boniface VIII., who at the close of his 
 life sustained so deep a humiliation. According to the account 
 of a contemporary, 3 and near relative, the impulse, which origi- 
 
 1 eVo? rrjs atyearecos Or acjieais. 
 
 2 Jacob of Juterbock de Indulg. cap. 43. p. 252, says, after having 
 mentioned its Old Testament foundation : Ex isto fundamento colligi • 
 mus, quod annus jubilaeus est annus dimissionis. Et ad hujus simili- 
 tudinera nos vocamus tempus gratiae annum jubilaeum, quia illo anno 
 datur a Romano Pontifice remissio plena per indulgentias per euin factas 
 certis locis. 
 
 3 The Pope's grandson, Jacobus Cajetanus (Gregorii ad velum aurcum 
 diaconi Cai'dinalis) in the treatise, de centesimoseu Jubilaeo anno liber. 
 Biblioth. Patr. Max. torn. xxv. p. 267 and 936. Raynald. Annal. 
 
256 TITE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL, 
 
 nated it, did not proceed from the Pope himself, but from the 
 inhabitants of Rome. " So early as the year 1299," he relates, 
 " a rumour circulated in the city, that the first year of the new 
 century, then about to commence, would have so great a virtue, 
 that all the inhabitants of Rome who then visited the Church of 
 Peter, the prince of the Apostles, would obtain a full pardon of 
 sin." The Pope, whose ears this rumour reached, with the view 
 of discovering its foundation, caused a search to be made in old 
 books. Nothing, however, was found, "whether the matter 
 from negligence had not been recorded, or whether the docu- 
 ments relating to it had been lost, or whether there was more of 
 fancy than of fact at work in the whole affair." Nevertheless, 
 upon January 1st of the new century, especialty in the evening 
 and till midnight, the people thronged in crowds into the Church 
 of St Peter, and surrounded its altar, as if upon that particular 
 day the highest grace was to be obtained. Other pilgrims soon 
 swelled the throng, especially upon the day when the handker- 
 chief of St Veronica was exhibited. At last a living witness also 
 appeared. An old man, 107 years of age, declared in the pre- 
 sence of the Pope aiid of others summoned for the occasion, that 
 he well remembered how, 100 years ago, his father, who was a 
 peasant, had gone to Rome to receive indulgence, and how he 
 had then exhorted him, if alive, after the lapse of another 100 
 years, not to neglect to repair to the city for the same purpose, 
 adding an assurance, that upon every day of that year it was 
 possible to receive an indulgence of a whole century. Although 
 similar vouchers started up in other places, the matter continued 
 a vague rumour; but, notwithstanding, the Pope, in concur- 
 rence with the Cardinals, considered it expedient to institute 
 the new devotion. In a bull, 1 of date 22d February 1300, his 
 Holiness, building upon the reliable statements of old men, 2 in 
 virtue of the Divine mercy, with confidence in the merits of the 
 Apostles Peter and Paul, and from the plenitude of his Papal 
 
 Eccles. ad aim. 1300. t. xiv. p. 538. Schrockh K. G.Th. 28. s. 164 sq. 
 Gieseler ii. 2. § 82. s. 499 sq. 
 
 1 It is in the Extra vagantes communes Lib. v. Tit. 9. c. 1. and 
 in Boehmeri Corp. Jur. can. P. ii. p. 1193. The chief passage in 
 Gieseler ii. 2. § 82. s. 499. 
 
 2 Antiquorum habet fida relatio etc. 
 
INDULGENCES. 257 
 
 authority, promises that every one who, in the course of the year 
 1300, and of every 100th year to come, shall visit with reverence 
 the churches of the Apostles Peter and Paul in Rome, and 
 there do penance and confess his sin, shall obtain not only a full, 
 but the very fullest forgiveness of all Ids sins, 1 it being required 
 in return from every inhabitant of the city, that for thirty days, 
 either in succession or otherwise, he shall visit these churches at 
 least once a day, and from every foreigner, that he shall so visit 
 them for fifteen days. 
 
 It is scarcely possible not to suspect that the popular excite- 
 ment which gave rise to the Jubilee was stirre d up by the 
 Pope or the clergy. But whether that were the case or not, at 
 all events the Pope and the Cardinals entered with the liveliest 
 satisfaction into the popular notion, and as the institution which 
 might be connected with it, was too profitable for the Hierarchy, 
 were by no means very strict in the examination of those who 
 vouched for its foundation in antiquity. The year of Jubilee 
 displayed the plenitude of the Papal power with increased bril- 
 liancy, gave to the practice of Indulgence a new foundation and 
 fresh spirit, and brought incalculable gain to the city of the 
 Papal residence. In the course of the first year, it is said, that 
 not less than 200,000 pilgrims visited Rome. The advan- 
 tages, however, rendered it highly desirable that the Jubilee 
 should be frequently repeated. A hundred years are a very 
 long space of time, and how many Popes, and how many in- 
 habitants of Rome might die and never see the return of the 
 blessed season ! 3 No doubt the Popes spoke of it in other 
 terms. " How many sinful souls," they said, " may depart this 
 life, in so long an interval, without participating in the graces of 
 the Jubilee !" But however that might be, the fact is, that 
 
 1 . . . non solum plenam, seel largiorera, imo plenissimam omnium 
 suorum concediinus veniam peccatorum. 
 
 2 Luther expresses himself with sufficient bitterness on this point, 
 Thesis. 67. " The Indulgences which the preachers proclaim as the 
 greatest mercies, are to be reckoned great mercies indeed, since they 
 bring along with them gain and pleasure." 
 
 3 Clemens VI., in the Bull appointing the Jubilee every 50th year, 
 says : Volentes quam plurimos hujusmodi indulgentiae fore participes, 
 cum pauci multorum respectu propter vitae hominum brevitatem vale- 
 ant ad annum centesimum pervenire. . . . 
 
 li 
 
258 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 Clement VI., induced by a deputation of the citizens, conform- 
 ing to the custom of the Jewish Jubilee, which took place 
 every 50th year, and urging the mystical import which the 
 number 50 bears, both in the Old and New Testaments, limited 
 the interval between the Jubilees to 50 years, and ordained its 
 repetition in 1350. On this occasion, the number of the pilgrims 
 was estimated at 1,200,000. Not, however, content even with 
 this, Urban VI. (in 1389) fixed every 33d year for the solemnity, 
 and finally Paul II. (in 1470) every 25th. Before, however, 
 that Was done, one of the most brilliant of these festivals was 
 celebrated at the time to which we transport ourselves in 
 thought, i.e., in 1450, under Nicolaus V. 1 According to the 
 existing regulation of Urban VI., it ought properly to have 
 fallen in the year 1456. Nicolaus, however, preferred adher- 
 ing to the older appointment of Clement VI., and fixed upon 
 1450. The concourse of pilgrims from all the countries of 
 Europe was again immense. At the games appointed for cele- 
 bration by the Pope (Ludi seculares), several hundred persons 
 are said to have lost their lives by the fall of one of the bridges 
 over the Tiber. But notwithstanding the vast numbers who 
 made the pilgrimage to Home, the Indulgence was in the follow- 
 ing year extended to several countries of Christendom, and, as 
 we have already seen, to Germany. 
 
 All this greatly excited John of Wesel. At the time of the 
 Jubilee, he composed his Disputation, not about, but against 
 Indulgences, 2 and traces back the institution to its ultimate 
 ground, which he partly calls in 'question, and partly formally 
 controverts. As this work is not only very characteristic of its 
 author, but one of the most important monuments of the 15th 
 century, we must here give a somewhat complete idea of it. 
 Even the introduction is very remarkable. " We read," says 
 Wesel, 3 " the discourses of Jesus Christ the Son of God recorded 
 in the four Gospels. In these the mysteries of salvation, and 
 probably all that is needful for its attainment, are contained 
 but not a word is said of Indulgence. Afterwards the Apostles 
 
 1 Corap. Schrockh K. Gesch. Th. 33. s. 468 sq. 
 
 2 Joannis de Vesalia ad versus Indulgcntias Disputatio; in Walchii 
 Monim. mcd. acvi. vol. ii. fasc. 1, p. Ill — 156. 
 
 3 Cap. 1. 
 
INDULGENCES. 259 
 
 preached, and wrote their Epistles, and just as little is there any 
 mention of Indulgence by them. In fine, not very long after, 
 the celebrated teachers, Gregory of Nazianzen, Basil of Cesarea, 
 Athanasius, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine, 
 wrote numerous works, which have received, so to speak, the 
 sanction of the Church, and yet they too say nothing of Indul- 
 gence. It was not until after St Dominic and St Francis insti- 
 tuted their orders, that men of eminence and learning wrote 
 upon the subject. Even they are far from being unanimous, 
 and express the most diverse and conflicting sentiments. Their 
 opinions, moreover, are the subject of much disputation among 
 scholars in these days in which I, John of Wesel, now live. 1 Nay, 
 I myself have debated the value of Indulgence in the schools, 
 and maintained its efficacy and Divine authority, having as a 
 scholar too easily assented to my teachers." 
 
 It would thus appear that at an earlier period, Wesel had ad- 
 vocated in debate the doctrine of Indulgence, but having now 
 been made doctor of divinity, and being more seriously asked 7 
 his opinion upon the subject, he proposes to give a deliberate 
 summary of his convictions. At the same time, he premises a 
 caution, which, like the allusion to the increase of his obligation 
 in consequence of his doctor's degree, reminds us vividly of 
 Luther. "Intending," he says, 2 " to answer the question whe- 
 ther it be in the Pope's power to grant indulgence and thereby 
 absolve the party from all penalties, /, John of Wesel, being 
 appointed a prof essor of Holy Scripture, z although the least, pro- 
 test at the outset, that it is not my intention to say or write any 
 thing in any way contradictory of the truth of the faith, as that is 
 contained in Scripture. If, however, my opinion or averment 
 shall also contradict any, it may be of the sacred teachers, I 
 intend not thereby to impugn his honour or sanctity. For I can 
 
 1 . . . temporibus his, quibus ego Joannes de Vesalia in ku- 
 manis degi. 
 
 2 Cap. 3. 
 
 3 Ego Joannes de Vesalia sacrae scripturae professor vocattts, licet 
 minimus, ante omnia protestor. ... In a similar, though some- 
 what prouder way, Luther commences his tract, in which he mado 
 known to the world the burning of the Papal Bull : " I, Martin Luther 
 Doctor of Holy Scripture, Augustinian Monk at Wittemberg, wish all 
 men to know." 
 
2G0 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 say with St Augustine, that my manner of reading other authors, 
 be they ever so distinguished for holiness and learning, is not to 
 consider any thing to be true, merely because they have thought 
 it so, but because by canonical (scriptural) or probable reasons, 
 they convince me that it does swerve from Scripture." 
 
 In this manner, taking his stand, like Luther, upon Scripture, 
 and upon clear and evident reasons, and applying them as a test 
 to the authority of all ecclesiastical teachers, as being otherwise 
 insufficient of itself, Wesel, with copious citations from Scripture, 
 lays down the following seven propositions. 1 
 
 1. On every one who has infringed his law, God, as Law- 
 giver, and in the exercise of his justice, imposes a penalty, and 
 this penalty he does not remit, although in his mercy he may 
 forgive the guilt ; for, as Augustine says, God is always merciful 
 in a way that leaves free course to his justice. 
 
 2. Christian priests, to whom are committed the keys of 
 heaven, are the ministers of God in the remission of guilt. 
 
 3. The penalty which God has imposed upon a transgressor, 
 no man can forgive ; for nothing can resist the Divine will. 
 
 4. The Holy Scriptures nowhere state, that any priest, or even 
 the Pope, can grant an Indulgence which shall liberate a man 
 from the penalties denounced against him by God. 
 
 5. The Pope, however, has it in his power to absolve from the 
 penalties which man or positive law has denounced for sin, be- 
 cause the Pope is appointed by the Church the founder of posi- 
 tive law, in as far as it subserves the Church's edification, and 
 not its destruction. 2 
 
 6. That the penalties, which man or positive law have de- 
 nounced, correspond with the awards of God's penal justice, in such 
 a manner as that when they are annulled, God's justice is also 
 satisfied, is by no means certain, unless it has been revealed by 
 God. For the Divine will {Wesel of course means in such par- 
 ticular cases) is unknown to man, and nothing is said of this in 
 Scripture. 
 
 7. The opinion of theological teachers regarding a treasure of 
 the Church, accumulated from the merits of Christ, and the 
 
 1 Cap. 4— 10. p. 115—119. 
 
 2 Quia ipse est ab ecclesia constitutus juris positivi institutor, inquan- 
 tuin ad aedificationera ecclesiae facit, non ad destructionem. 
 
INDULGENCES. 2G1 
 
 supererogatory works of the saints, and committed to the charge 
 of the Pope, is undoubtedly very pious, but is at the same time 
 an opinion to which certain modest objections may be profitably 
 made. 1 In particular, it may be objected that the saints have left 
 behind them on earth no such treasure, because the Scripture says, 
 " Their works do follow them." So long as the saints sojourn in 
 this life their works are by their very nature transitory; and 
 when the saints cease to labour, their works have no independent 
 existence of their own, 2 but in as far as, through the grace 
 of God, they are in any degree meritorious, they follow their 
 authors from the scene of their labour, and enter with them into 
 rest. The works of the saints, accordingly, have no local 
 habitation here below, but are in the place where they who 
 performed them reside. If, during life, the saints earned any merit 
 for others, it was done consonantly with the will of God, who 
 distributes to every one severally as he will. Our merit does 
 not spring from our own will but from God's, and to distribute 
 such merits in the last instance is competent to God alone. If 
 done by a man, holding a Divine commission for the purpose, it 
 can only be done in virtue of some agreement entered into be- 
 tween God and him, such as the teachers maintain is the case in 
 regard to the sacraments. But that any such agreement has 
 ever been made by Jesus with the ministers of the Church is not 
 stated in the Gospel. 
 
 These propositions comprise the substance of WeseVs senti- 
 ments upon Indulgence. Still more weighty, however, are the 
 reasons which he proceeds to allege, because in these he enters 
 into an analysis of the most important ideas, such as those of 
 sin, grace, pardon, which goes far beyond the formulas of the 
 received creed, and contains statements strictly consonant with 
 his whole reformatory and antipelagian views. 
 
 Indulgence is designated by Wesel, 3 according to the current 
 notion, remission of the temporal penalty for an actual sin.* Of 
 
 1 Opinioni doctorum de ihesauro ecclesiae . . . quanqnam sit 
 valde pia, salubres tamen sunt debiles objectiones. The word debiles is 
 either corrupt, or is used half in irony. 
 
 2 . . . nullum esse babent secundum se. 
 s Cap. 11. 
 
 4 . . . remissio ponae temporalis debitae pro peccato actuali. 
 
2G2 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the pardon and remission of sin, (remissio et dimissio) he proceeds, 
 much is said in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, 
 without any distinction being drawn between them. Now, inas- 
 much as a reference to debt is not unfrequently connected with 
 remission, the question arises whether sin and debt are the same. 
 To this it may be answered that every sin is also a debt, but that 
 every debt is not sin, nor every debtor a sinner. For the good 
 and righteous man, and even God himself, is called a debtor 
 without involving any reference to sin. Sin is the transgression 
 of the -Divine law by thought, word, or deed, and the sinner 
 is consequently a trangressor. On the contrary, he who fulfils 
 the Divine law, is righteous, in virtue of a righteousness which 
 is vouchsafed to him by God. To this I give the name of 
 grace. It is what makes man acceptable, and frees him from all 
 that is contrary and displeasing, to God. The idea of sin com- 
 prises two elements, one material and the other formal. The 
 material element is desire, word, or deed, and of this every one 
 who commits it is cognizant. The formal element is the breach 
 of the Divine law, or a state of contrariety to it, which is not 
 always matter of consciousness, for many are ignorant of the 
 law, and therefore also ignorant that their desires, words, and 
 actions contraA^ene it ; and even those who are acquainted with 
 it do not always know the Lawgiver's will, or in how far he 
 lays any thing to the charge of the party desiring, speaking, and 
 acting. In as far, however, as obedience to the law arises from 
 grace, he who violates it does not know that he is destitute of 
 grace, because the lack of grace is not recognized, unless the 
 opposite condition be also known. This formal element in sin, 
 viz., destitution of grace, is consequently concealed from the 
 party who sins. At the same time, whoever consciously acts 
 against the law of God has a notion that he is destitute of 
 grace. 
 
 The essential evil resulting from sin is the being dispossessed 
 of that which is good, and it is the destitution of that which is 
 good, when such destitution is felt, which engenders punishment. 3 
 There are therefore in sin two things, the guilt and the penalty. 
 It is not that sin consists of the two ; on the contrary, sin is guilt 
 
 i Cap. 11—15. 2 Cap. 17. 3 Cap. 15. 
 
INDULGENCES. 263 
 
 conjoined with punishment, (culpa et dcbitum cum connotatione 
 poenae) not absolutely but relatively, to wit, by virtue of impu- 
 tation, (reatus) which is a positive reference (of the evil which 
 befalls a person) to the wrong thing (which he has committed). If 
 therefore there be forgiveness of sin, and that there is we express 
 our belief in the creed, we must further explain, 1 in as far as this 
 can be known without injury to faith — for faith is the knowledge 
 of what we may in thought apprehend, 2 but cannot comprehend 
 —we must, I say, further explain what the forgiveness of sin is ? 
 Now here Wesel makes a decided advance beyond the customary 
 definition, for according to the conception he forms of the forgive-- 
 ness of sin, it is not merely a negative but an essentially posi- 
 tive thing, in fact, a translation into the condition opposite to sin. 
 He designates it the communication and infusion of grace which 
 makes man well-pleasing to God. 3 And inasmuch as it is God alone 
 who communicates and infuses grace, it is asked in Scripture, 
 " Who can forgive sin but God only ? 4 Even, however, if God do 
 impart and infuse grace, without antecedent merit, he does not 
 do so to persons who offer obstruction to it, (obicem ponentibus), 
 but only to those who do their utmost to prepare for its recep- 
 tion. How this preparation should be made, 5 God has taught, 
 first by the law revealed in the heart, then by that of Moses, and 
 finally by that of the Gospel ; and at all times sinners grown to 
 the age of discretion have been required to repent. Repentance, 
 however, is voluntary sorrow for sins committed, and this is the 
 only frame of mind which corresponds with the forgiveness of 
 sins, consisting as that does in the communication of grace. 
 
 If then, in the New Testament law, the pardon of sin by God 
 has annexed to it the condition, that the recipient shall forgive 
 his neighbour, the question arises, in how far it is possible for a 
 man to forgive sin ? Here Wesel 6 distinguishes in the sin com- 
 mitted against a neighbour, the reference to the neighbour and 
 the reference to God. A man sins against another, in as far as 
 
 1 Cap 17. 
 
 2 Fides enim est notitia eorum, quae per intellectum nostrum com- 
 prehendi non possunt, possunt autem aliqualiter aJprehendi. 
 
 3 Cap. 18. 
 
 4 Mark ii. 7. Js. xliii. 25. IIos. xiii. 4—14. 
 
 5 Cap. 19. and 20. 6 Cap. 21 and 22. 
 
2G4 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 he injures him either in his person, property, or relatives. He 
 sins .against God in as far as he violates his law. In such a case, 
 if the injured party conceive no resentment, or if he allow his 
 anger to subside, and forego revenge and punishment, he forgives 
 the injuring party his sin. This, however, he can do only as 
 far as his ability reaches. It is further requisite, that God should 
 also forgive the offender, for against Him there has likewise been 
 an offence, and as God is exalted above every man, he can for- 
 give the offender his sin, even when the offended party refuses 
 to do it, If from this point of view then we contemplate the 
 plenary power of pardon committed to priests, it is evident 1 that 
 no priest can dispense pardon originally and effectually (princi- 
 paliter et effective), but only by the Divine assistance, which lies 
 in the communication of grace. Hence the priestly absolution is 
 a sacramental service (quoddam ministerium sacrame7itale) which 
 is rendered to the penitent sinner, and thus it coincides with the 
 administration of the sacrament of penitence, the effect of which 
 is forgiveness of sin, and in which forgiveness likewise rests upon 
 the communication of grace by God, in virtue of an agreement 
 entered into with the priest. 
 
 Wesel lays a marked stress upon the principle, 2 that there is 
 no virtue in the sacrament of penitence to produce any effect, 
 prior to the communication of grace. Aware that in this opinion, 
 he differs from many masters and teachers, he yet says that he 
 cannot help it, because the honour of God constrains him, requir- 
 ing, as that seems to do, that God alone, of his pure goodness, 
 should be the author and giver of grace. When his opponents 
 urged against him Peter Lombard's definition, that a sacrament 
 is the visible form of invisible grace, and yet, as also involving 
 its cause, is more than a mere image of it, Wesel, on the con- 
 trary, took his stand upon the simple definition of Augustine, 
 that it is just the visible form of invisible grace. It likewise 
 appeared to him inconceivable, that in several things differing 
 in their nature, substance (quidditate) and subject, (and conse- 
 quently in a transaction so complicated as the sacrament of 
 penitence) there should reside one and the same undivided effi- 
 cacy, an essential unity, as the sacramental operation might be 
 
 1 Cap. 24 and 25. 2 Cap. 26. 
 
INDULGENCES. 265 
 
 called. Accordingly the truth, which seemed to him to result, 1 is 
 that when the priest, with right intention and suitable words, 
 dispenses the sacrament of penitence to a person in a penitential 
 frame of mind, God himself ivorks, produces, and carries into 
 effect the pardon of sin. In this transaction God. was, and still 
 is, pleased to make his servants the priests fellow-workers with 
 himself, so that, as they are the agents in dispensing the sacra- 
 ment, they are said to forgive. In this, however, the priests 
 cannot do more nor further than God himself, the original 
 pardoner (principalis remissor) does and allows. If then God 
 works grace in the soul of the penitent, which is always the 
 case, the effect of the sacrament of penitence is grace. If, 
 however — a subject into which we have still to enquire — God 
 remits also the penalty, the effect is the remission of the penalty. 
 It is accordingly a question whether God, when he imparts 
 grace, remits also the penalty. On this point, Wesel quotes 2 
 the conflicting opinions of the teachers, and then states as his 
 own, that a man committing that kind of sin, which teachers 
 usually denominate mortal, renders himself thereby obnoxious to 
 everlasting punishment, but that by grace, when grace is given to 
 him, he is restored to life eternal, so that whoever receives grace, 
 is freed from liability to everlasting punishment. The case, how- 
 ever, is different with respect to the temporal penalty. On that 
 point 3 sacred Scripture says nothing positive. So much, how- 
 ever, we may learn from it, that many who received grace were 
 yet afterwards appointed to great afflictions. For instance, Jesus 
 himself, though as man he received grace, Peter, Paul, the 
 Apostles, and other disciples, had all sore afflictions to endure. 
 No doubt it is uncertain, whether the disciples of Christ, who 
 sinned, but received grace, were subjected on account of their 
 sins, to the temporal punishments they afterwards suffered, for 
 God may possibly have imposed their sufferings for the pur- 
 pose of qualifying them for higher degrees of grace and glory. It 
 may also be alleged, 4 that as all God's works are perfect, so also 
 must be his grace, but that no grace is perfect save that which 
 abolishes both eternal and temporal punishment. But then 
 w r hen the work of Divine grace is designated perfect, this must 
 not be understood absolutely, but in a way of its own, and to the 
 
 i Cap. 23. 2 Cap. 27—23. 3 Cap. 29. * Cap. 30. 
 
2GG THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 effect that grace restores man to a condition in which it is pos- 
 sible for him to merit eternal life. With such a condition, how- 
 ever, liability to temporal penalties in consequence of the Divine 
 justice is perfectly consistent ; for the perfection of the grace of 
 God is such as does not exclude his justice. Wesel accordingly 
 adheres to the principle, that God, in the exercise of his justice, 
 assigns a punishment to every sinner, and does not remit it even 
 when he gives him grace ; and tins leads him to the chief subject 
 of diseussion, namely, 
 
 Indulgence. The first question which he here encounters is, 
 whether such a thing exists at all f This question he answers as 
 follows : 2 If there be anything which answers to the definition 
 we have given of Indulgence, that thing must in every case be of 
 a spiritual nature, and only discoverable by faith. Faith, how- 
 ever, is based upon revelation. Now whether there be any person 
 who has received a revelation upon the subject of what we call 
 Indulgence, I do not know. At any rate, however, no mention is 
 made of it in those writings, which our faith holds to have been 
 inspired by the Holy Ghost. Nevertheless the teachers who write 
 upon it endeavour to demonstrate its truth from Scripture. This, 
 therefore, is a point which it behoves us closely to investigate. 
 
 It is alleged by some 3 that Indulgence is dispensed in virtue of 
 the office of the keys, so that whoever possesses the keys, pos- 
 sesses also power to dispense Indulgence. The keys of the king- 
 dom of heaven, however, were given equally to Peter and to the 
 rest of the Apostles. And what they imply is explained by the 
 Lord in the words, " Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall 
 be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall 
 be loosed in heaven." The keys accordingly are a power to 
 remit or to retain sins, by granting or refusing the sacrament of 
 penitence. There is, however, no power in the keys to do any- 
 thing different from that which God, the supreme agent in the 
 matter {principalis') does. Inasmuch, however, as, in dispen- 
 sing the grace which consists in the forgiveness of sins, God does 
 not abolish, but rather imposes, their temporal penalties, so neither 
 is any one, in virtue of the office of the keys, invested with the 
 power of dispensing Indulgence. This appears to me to be an 
 argument of demonstrative force in Theology. 
 
 1 Cap. 32. 2 Cap. 34. 3 Cap. 35. 
 
INDULGENCES. 2G7 
 
 Others on the contrary allege 1 — and this was the prevailing 
 opinion, and was laid by St Thomas at the foundation of his ex- 
 position on the subject 2 — that in the words we have quoted, 
 Jesus entrusted to the Church the keys of jurisdiction, and that 
 it is on these keys of jurisdiction that Indulgence is founded. 
 So, says Wesel, they indeed affirm, but they do not prove their 
 affirmation. For in neither the Old nor the New Testament is 
 there any mention of the .key of jurisdiction, and yet, as St 
 Augustine in his day remarks upon Ps. lxvii., a statement is 
 only true when it does not set aside the authority of either of 
 these sacred Scriptures. The jurisdiction which we now find 
 in the Church was, as even St Jerome confesses, instituted by 
 men, and to derive Indulgence from the key of jurisdiction is 
 childish. 
 
 An attempt is, however, made to lay another and further basis 
 for Indulgence by the proposition, that the penalties due for sin 
 are compensated by those which Christ and all other innocent 
 sufferers have borne, and by the supererogatory merit of the 
 works of Christ and of the saints, both those who have departed 
 this life and those who still survive. They who entertain this 
 opinion, says Wesel, z figure to themselves that there exists a 
 treasure made up of the merits of Christ, the saints, and the Church, 
 and that it is from this fund the needful supplies are allotted 
 to those who live in charity, but who are still without the remis- 
 sion of the penalties they have incurred ; provided they do what 
 the dispenser enjoins. In connexion with this, they also main- 
 tain, that the Bishop of Rome dispenses the treasure, and has 
 the privileges of Indulgence at his disposal. " O how blessed 
 a thing it would be," exclaims Wesel, " if in any such a way 
 the penalties of sin could be remitted !" To this opinion, how- 
 ever, there are many objections, some of which may be deduced 
 from what we have already said; and some may be further 
 urged. 4 
 
 In the first place, if the penalties due for sin are compensated 
 by means of those of Christ and the saints, it might be asked 
 by whom are they compensated'? If it be said, that God is the 
 
 1 Cap. 42. 2 Supplem. Quaest. xxv. art. 2. see above p. 243. 
 
 3 Cap. 43* 4 Cap. 44. 
 
2G8 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 party, then it is inconceivable, that he should effect by compen- 
 sation what he can effect directly, for it would suffice, if for 
 the sake of Christ's penal sufferings he were to impose no 
 punishment. If, again, it be alleged that this party is a human 
 being, viz. the Pope, then we have to reply, that no human 
 being knows what amount of penalty the sinner has in the Divine 
 judgment deserved, and hence that no human being can assign 
 the equivalent to it. If it be said, that God knows the penalty 
 due to the sinner, and that when, from the treasure of the Church, 
 he allots to him a suitable equivalent, he accepts of the same 
 (as a satisfaction), the question arises, Who certifies us that God 
 does accept of it % This could only be certified by a Divine 
 revelation, and to whom has any such fact been revealed ? In 
 fine, if it be said, 1 that the truth is corroborated by the word of 
 the Lord : " If two of you shall agree on earth as touching any- 
 thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father 
 which is in heaven," 2 that many more than two have agreed in 
 the prayer that God would permit the sufferings of his Son and 
 saints to stand for the sufferings of others who have sinned, 
 that this has now been accorded by the heavenly Father, and 
 that these many have committed the distribution to the Pope, so 
 that to him the work of compensation pertains, we have to answer, 3 
 that the Lord himself expressly restricted his words, by the 
 saying which immediately follows, viz., " Where two or three 
 are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of 
 them." 4 Now all do not meet together in the name of Jesus, 
 who say u Lord, Lord," or " Jesus, thou art our God ;" for 
 many meet in that way who do not obtain the object of their 
 prayers ; but only they are meant, whom the Divine will, antici- 
 pating their prayers, brings together. That this is the meaning 
 no one will doubt who believes that God confers his graces ac- 
 cording to the freedom of his will. 5 Now it is incredible that God 
 will interfere, and determine several to pray for a thing which is 
 unbecoming his justice. To leave the transgressor unpunished, 
 however, and accept of the punishment of the innocent in place 
 of the guilty party, would be a violation of the Divine justice; 
 
 1 Cap. 45. 2 Matth. xviii. 19. s Cap. 46. 
 
 4 Matth. xviii. 20. 5 1 Cor. xii. 11, 18. 
 
INDULGENCES. 2GD 
 
 whereas the very smallest penalty endured by the transgressor 
 himself may be acceptable and pleasing to God, even for many 
 and great sins. 
 
 In the second place, 1 if the punishment of parties who sin were 
 to be compensated by that of the innocent, no punishment would 
 await the guilty soul in the life to come, and so there would be 
 no need of supposing a purgatory after the present life. There 
 does, however, exist a purgatory, and consequently certain 
 punishments must be kept in reserve for it. That the expecta- 
 tion of a purgatory after the present life is well founded, 2 appears 
 in the first place by the saying of the Lord : 3 " Agree with thine 
 adversary . . . lest at any time the adversary deliver thee 
 to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou 
 be cast into prison." The place of this prison must not be sought 
 in the present life, but in the life to come, and in that, it cannot 
 be hell (inasmuch as a prospect of escape from it is held out.) 
 It must, therefore, be purgatory. It is also shewn by the say- 
 ing of Christ, 4 " Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, 
 it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the 
 world to come." For here a possibility of forgiveness is supposed, 
 and somewhere in the world to come. That is not, however, the 
 case in hell, and so the place meant must be purgatory. In fine, 
 the Apostle points to purgatory, when he says, 5 " The fire shall 
 try every mans work of what sort it is. If any man's work shall 
 be burned, he shall suffer loss, yet he himself shall be saved." 
 For this passage cannot refer to the flames of hell, of which the 
 Lord declares that they are destined for everlasting destruction. 6 
 
 In fine, Wesel also refers 7 to the opinion, that Indulgence is the 
 remission of the punishment assigned for sin by the law or by 
 man. And here he says : It must be recollected that the holy 
 fathers not being aware of either the nature or the magnitude of 
 the punishment appointed by God for sins according to their 
 best convictions, settled that certain penalties should be imposed 
 by confessors upon their penitents. Several penalties of the 
 kind are set down in the laws of the Church, and it is customary 
 to say of them, that they are imposed by law. Others are left to 
 
 1 Cap. 47. 2 Cap. 48. 3 Matth. v. 25. 
 
 4 Matth. x 32 5 1 Cor. iii. 13, 15. G Matth. xxv. 41. 
 
 7 Cap. 49. 
 
270 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 the discretion of confessors, and are therefore said to be imposed 
 by men. At the same time, the holy fathers imagined that by 
 snch penances, punishments, and works, satisfaction was made 
 to God, who for that reason either wholly or in part remitted 
 his punishment. As these notions, however, are not autho- 
 rized by Holy Scripture, their weight depends upon themselves, 
 and it may be said 1 that the sort of remissions which we call 
 Indulgences, are a pious fraud practised upon believers, as 
 many priests have already declared. The reason, however, why 
 they are a pious fraud, is because they tempt believers to make 
 pilgrimages to holy places, to give alms for pious uses, to 
 build churches, and equip warriors against the infidel, under 
 the notion that by that means they shall be absolved from the 
 penalties due to them for their sins, and escape the pains of pur- 
 gatory in the life to come. By this notion they are deluded, and 
 in so far there is a fraud. Inasmuch, however, as it is likewise 
 true that these works are done in the love of God, they become 
 meritorious for those who perform them, and conducive to eter- 
 nal life, and consequently there is also in the matter some degree 
 of piety and usefulness. 
 
 For these reasons, Wesel deems himself justified 2 in giving a 
 negative answer to the question : Can "the truth of Indulgence 
 be demonstrated from Scripture ? The age in which he lived, 
 however, recognized another authority, as superior to that ot 
 Scripture — viz., the Church. And on every side, and from all 
 the usual text-books of theology, two counter arguments were 
 levelled against him. In the first place, it was alleged, The Church 
 is infallible, and the Church sanctions indulgence, therefore indul- 
 gence must be valid. In the second place, If the Church, by the 
 indulgences it grants, does not really absolve from the Divinely- 
 appointed penalties, it does far more harm than good, because, 
 while pronouncing the sinner absolved from all such penalties as 
 satisfy for sin in this life, it dismisses him to the far more severe 
 inflictions of purgatory. To these allegations, Wesel gives the 
 following answer : 3 That the Catholic Church is infallible, is a 
 mere assertion in support of which no proof, either from reason or 
 Scripture, is advanced. If, however, we endeavour strictly to 
 
 1 Cap. 50. 2 Cap. 51. 3 Cap. 52. 
 
INDULGENCES. 271 
 
 investigate the matter, it must be understood at the outset, 
 that the word Church is a collective name, and combines the 
 idea of multitude with that of unity. The unity it involves, 
 however, is always particularly specified by some adjunct, as for 
 example when it is said, The Church of the saints. In that 
 case it is the unity of holiness which constitutes the Church. Or 
 if it were said the Church of the wicked, then the constituent 
 unity would be wickedness. Or supposing the expression to be, 
 the Church at Ephesus or Smyrna, then identity of place is the 
 bond of union. These definitions occur in Scripture, but the 
 Church of which we speak, and which we call the Universal 
 Church, is not mentioned in Scripture, and not even hinted at 
 by Peter. Universal is synonymous with Catholic, and under 
 this name the Church figures, both in the Nicene and in the 
 Apostles' creed. As the universal or Catholic Church, however, 
 we may designate all who believe Jesus to be God and man, 
 and the name Catholic is given to it, because the preaching 
 of Christ, by which alone faith is produced, is spread over the 
 whole world. In consonance with this must the proposition that 
 the Catholic Church cannot err be understood. 1 We mean, 
 that inasmuch as the Catholic Church embraces the Church of 
 Christ, which is founded upon a rock, and against which the 
 gates of hell shall never prevail, 2 and inasmuch as this Church 
 (the Christian Church in a narrower sense) is holy and undc- 
 filed, 3 there exists no error in it, none at least that is self- 
 induced, because that would be a spot or wrinkle. In virtue, 
 therefore, of the Church of Christ being a part of that which is 
 Catholic, the proposition that the Catholic Church does not err 
 is true. The reason of its truth, however, lies in the fact that 
 the proposition is ambiguously expressed, inasmuch as the truth 
 of it holds only in regard to one of its parts. Co-existent with 
 this (partial) truth, however, there is another, 4 viz., That the 
 Universal Church does err, and that she is an adulteress and 
 whore, the reason being that she is in part composed of wicked 
 men. The result is, that the argument drawn from the infallibi- 
 lity of the Church is inconclusive, because it applies only to a part 
 of it. The proposition, however, that the Church grants indid- 
 
 1 Cap. 53. 2 Mat. xvi. 18. 3 Epli. v. 27. * Cap. 54. 
 
272 TITE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 gence, comes from that part of the Church which does err. The 
 other argument, that the Church in incompetently granting in- 
 dulgence would do more harm than good, Wesel fully admits, 1 
 but he gives it a turn contrary to that of the Schoolmen. They 
 inferred the validity of indulgence from the fact that it is dis- 
 pensed by the Church. lie says that the Church ought not to 
 dispense it, because it is founded upon error. 
 
 Such is the substance of John of WeseVs treatise against In- 
 dulgence, — a treatise which likewise derives high importance from 
 the style of its controversy. It is interesting to see, how he 
 penetrates into all the joints of the Scholastic and Ecclesiastical 
 system, inserts the wedge of a skilful logic at every open chink, 
 and endeavours to rend it asunder. He manifests in his opposi- 
 tion an advance considerably further, not only than any other of 
 his predecessors or cotemporaries, but even than Luther himself in 
 his 95 Theses, although the two substantially agree. Not merely 
 does he combat the abuses and excrescences of Indulgence, but 
 the thing itself; and what is most important of all, he does this, 
 not, like so many in the same ranks of the opposition both 
 before and after him, by mere negations, but by opposing to 
 the fundamentals of the doctrine another and a higher truth, 
 and that a truth entwined with all his views as a Reformer, 
 and constituting the basis of his entire theology. The radical 
 ideas, which were the starting point of WeseVs controversy, are 
 manifestly those of the Divine justice, and the Divine mercy, 
 especially the latter. To keep these ideas pure, unimpaired, and 
 unadulterated, was his chief object, and as they appeared to him 
 to be infringed and corrupted by the system of Indulgence, he took 
 the field against it convinced that in combatting that system, he 
 was promoting the glory of God. The Divine Being, thought 
 Wesel, is just and merciful, but in him neither must justice curtail 
 mercy, nor mercy, justice ; and still less must the exercise of his 
 justice be disturbed by the admixture of human agency. If then, 
 on the one hand, Divine justicec alls for punishment, and this 
 punishment cannot, by human satisfaction or imputation, be done 
 
 1 Cap. 53. 
 
INDULGENCES. 273 
 
 away, recovering and succouring mercy in all its freeness and 
 purity interposes on the other hand, and does away, if not the 
 penalty and consequences of sin, yet at least sin itself and its 
 guilt ; and this effect it substantially produces by communicating 
 to the sinner strength to do good, and translating him into a 
 state in which, so to speak, he can start afresh upon the way to 
 sanctification and glory. Divine mercy requires on the part of 
 man, as its only essential condition, repentance ; and the two, 
 mercy and repentance, comprise all that belongs to the recovery 
 of a sinner. Thus it is that Wesel considers the relation of the 
 sinner to God as in its inmost core direct. It obtains solely 
 betwixt God or Christ and sinful man. Then comes the Church, 
 but only in virtue of its Divine commission, to mediate, and with 
 its priesthood, to minister between the two, but these can give 
 nothing to the sinner which God has not already and directly 
 given him. Their function is not to judge and decide, but 
 merely to preach and serve. The gifts of his mercy proceed 
 always in a sovereign way from God himself. Inasmuch, how- 
 ever, as they are conveyed through the ministry of the priesthood, 
 there arises the sacramental action, and it is as being of that 
 character that Wesel considers the remission of sin and its guilt. 
 This constituted a very decided contradiction to the theory of 
 the Schoolmen. Indulgence, conceived as acquittal from the 
 punishment of sin, and emanating from the authority of the 
 Church, was grounded, at least according to the general opinion, 
 upon the power of the keys. The Schoolmen on their side, how- 
 ever, had made a distinction between the key of priesthood 
 (clavis ordinis), and the key of jurisdiction (clavis jurisdictionis), 
 and a question arose to which of the two keys pertained the 
 plenary power of Indulgence. The Schoolmen decided in favour 
 of the former, Wesel in favour of the latter, but in a way which 
 led him to subvert Indulgence altogether. This is a main point 
 in his controversy. What he says is : If the forgiveness of sins 
 emanate from the key of the priesthood, it is sacramental, part 
 and parcel of the sacrament of penitance. Such, in fact, was the 
 view which, adopting the persuasion of the early Church, Wesel 
 considered sound. In that case, however, it is also a matter that 
 belongs to God, from whom alone sacramental operations take 
 s 
 
274 TILE LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 their rise ; l and the priest is but the minister who announces 
 the Divine pardon of sin, and the abolition of its punishment, 
 when its punishment is really abolished. If it emanate, however, 
 from the key of jurisdiction, it is, as even Thomas Aquinas did 
 not deny, a human award, in which case there is no possibility of 
 proving that it exactly coincides with God's. That is a point we 
 could only know by special revelation, and neither the Pope nor the 
 Church possesses any special revelation on the subject. More- 
 over, the title to assume a key of jurisdiction would require to be 
 first demonstrated, and that cannot be done, for there is no trace 
 of anything of the kind either in Scripture or the ancient Church. 
 In this manner, Wesel impugns, as destitute of any substantial 
 foundation, the identification of the tribunal of the Church, and 
 more particularly of the Pope, with that of God, and as not less 
 unscriptural, the second main basis of the theory of Indulgence, 
 viz. the doctrine of the treasure of good works and of its objective 
 existence ; and when at last, from lack of sufficient scriptiiral 
 reasons, the reigning theology appealed to the absolute authority 
 and infallibility of the Church, he does not hesitate to attack 
 this bulwark, and without having recourse to the distinction 
 subsequently drawn between the visible and invisible Church 
 of God, he draws a similar distinction between the Church 
 universal and the Church of Christ, and to the latter alone con- 
 cedes the prerogative of infallibility. Although, however, the 
 keenness of controversy leads Wesel so far as to call Indulgence 
 a pious fraud, he is at the same time sufficiently equitable to 
 acknowledge, that mixed up with the deception there was some- 
 thing at least subjectively pious in the case of every work per- 
 formed from love to God. 
 
 Whether Wesel's treatise and doctrine on the subject of In- 
 dulgence exercised any influence in developing the views of 
 Luther, cannot with certainty be determined. The thing is 
 possible and even probable, considering that Luther, when at 
 
 . 
 
 1 Thomas Aquinas says in the Summa Theol. Suppl. Quaest. xxv. 
 art. 2. : Quia sacramentorum effectus non sunt determinati ab homine, 
 sed a Deo, ideo non potest taxare sacerdos, quantum per clavem ordinia 
 in foro confessionis de poena debita dimittatur j sed tantum dimittitur, 
 quantum Deus ordinavit. 
 
INDULGENCES. 275 
 
 Erfurt, studied his works, and that independently of these, 
 his opinions certainly continued for long to operate upon that 
 University. At any rate, in WeseVs polemics there is not a 
 little which reminds us of Luther. Let me refer to a few main 
 instances. Like him, Luther founded the pardon of sins singly and 
 solely irpon the Divine mercy on the one hand, and upon repen- 
 tance on the other. He says in the 3Gth Thesis, "Every Christian 
 who truly repents of his sins, and mourns over them, obtains full 
 remission of both punishment and guilt ; and does so even with- 
 out any letter of indulgence; and in the thesis which follows, " A 
 true Christian, whether sojourning on this earth, 01 departed 
 from it, is made partaker of all the blessings of Christ and the 
 Church, by the gift of God and without any letter of indulgence." 
 In Luther's view also, the relation of Divine grace to the sinner is 
 direct, for he says, in the 58th Thesis, " The merits of Christ and 
 the saints produce, at all times and without the Pope's interference, 
 grace in the inner man. Equally with Wesel, he denies that Indul- 
 gence, in and of itself, has any efficacy in procuring the forgiveness 
 of sin ; " On the contrary, we affirm," is the language of the 76th 
 Thesis, " that the Pope's Indulgence cannot take away the very 
 smallest of our daily sins, so far as its guilt is concerned." The 
 two likewise entirely agree in making the personal qualification 
 for dispensing indulgence, depend upon the sentiments with which 
 the power is exercised. For, as Wesel says, " the work, of 
 Indulgence may be a pious and profitable work, if it be done from 
 the love of God ;" so is the language of Luther to the same effect 
 in the 47th Thesis : " Christians ought to be taught that the 
 Pope's Indulgence is good, if no reliance is placed upon it ; on the 
 contrary, however, nothing is more pernicious, if it lead men to 
 forget God." In spite of all this, however, when Wesel composed 
 his treatise against Indulgences, he was theoretically far in advance 
 of Luther, at the time Luther published his Theses. In contro- 
 versy likewise he was clearer, more self-reliant and comprehensive. 
 The view he took of the whole system and its ultimate reasons was 
 wider than Luther' 1 s, which, although not destitute of vigour, depth, 
 and boldness, still wavered somewhat in knowledge, and was 
 levelled against transitory blemishes. Nor could Wesel have 
 ever been induced to say what Luther says in the 71st Thesis, 
 and said, as there can be no doubt, at the time, with the deepest 
 
276 THE LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 conviction, " Whosoever speaks against the truth of the Papal 
 Indulgence, let him be cursed and execrated." On the other 
 hand, that which made Luther's Theses practically and histori- 
 cally of greater consequence, was the progress of the age, their 
 coincidence with other important affairs, the many references to 
 existing things, their fresh and popular tone, the connexion of the 
 author with more eminent personages, and especially the circum- 
 stance that they were not a mere learned treatise, but an act 
 which constituted at once a signal and a challenge to conflict. 
 
( 277 ) 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 JOHN OF WESEL 
 
 THE DEPRAVED CLERGY. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 WESEL AS PREACHER AT MAYENCE. THE RHINELAND. WORMS. 
 wesel's THEOLOGY AND PRACTICE. 
 
 After having laboured for about twenty years as a teacher, and 
 for ten at least as a regular professor of theology of Erfurt, Wesel 
 was called — probably about 1460 — as a preacher to Mayenee. 1 
 
 1 Luther, in his disquisition De Conciliis § 192. Th. 16. s. 2743 in 
 Walch, says of Wesel, "Who was preacher at Mayenee." This is 
 considered by Christ. Wilh. Franz Walch (Monim. med. aev. ii., 1. 
 Pracf. p. lvi.) as an error. He says that it was at Mayenee that 
 Wesel was condemned, hut that he was a preacher only at Worms. 
 Walch' s opinion, however, ought rather to be rectified by that of Luther, 
 who being so near a contemporary of Wesel, and taking so deep an 
 interest in him, must have been acquainted with the fact. Melancthon 
 also calls Joh. of Wesel, Concionatorem Moguntinum, in the Respons. 
 script, ad impios artic. Bavaricae inquisitionis. Witteb. 1559. 8. 
 Bogen B. 3. 6. Comp. Stud, und Krit. 1828. 2. s. 400. The author 
 of the Monography on Dietherof Isenburg, Frankf. 1792, believes that 
 Wesel was preacher in the Cathedral of Mayenee in 1468. This, how- 
 
278 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 Owing to the close connexion of the two places, it seems to have 
 been customary to call distinguished teachers and preachers from 
 the seat of the University to that of the archiepiscopal residence. 
 We find two additional instances occurring in the course of the 
 15th century. The first was John of Latter, 1 a man who had 
 gained distinction as a preacher at Erfurt, and who continued in 
 the zealous exercise of the office until his death in 1479. The 
 second was Master Eggeling or Engelin from Brunswick, 2 who 
 was even greater than the former as a theologian, enjoyed also 
 an extraordinary reputation as a preacher, and, after labouring 
 for a considerable period at Mayence, terminated his life at Stras- 
 burg in 1481. These two persons were preceded at Mayence by 
 John of Weselj who did not, however, hold the office so long as 
 either of them, for it is said, and the fact is not creditable to his 
 courage, that a pestilence frightened him from his post probably 
 not very long after he had entered upon it. He then obtained a 
 similar situation in Worms, which he occupied for seventeen years, 
 and only resigned, as we shall afterwards see, to end his days in 
 prison. As, next to Erfurt, Worms was the chief theatre oiWeseVs 
 labours, and as these mainly related to the Church, it will be 
 proper to take a view of the theological and ecclesiastic condition 
 of that city, and its environs, as the natural introduction to an 
 account of them. 
 
 It is impossible not to see that at that time as regards Germany, 
 the chief seat of culture and intellectual activity lay in the Southern 
 districts, on the Rhine downwards, and extended in the central, as 
 
 ever, cannot be true, because on the supposition that it is, the seventeen 
 years could not be made up, which, we know for certain, Wesel after- 
 wards passed at Worms, previous to his trial for heresy. 
 
 1 Trithemius calls him Johannes de Lutria, De script, eccles. c. 849. 
 p. 202. and de Lutra villula, de script. Germ. c. 214, which is probably 
 Lutter on the Barenberg. The works which Trithemius ascribes to 
 him are : Super sententias. — Sermones varii. — Quaestiones disputatae. 
 Quaedam in Philosophia. 
 
 2 In his Book, de script, eccles. c. 854. p. 203. Trithemius speaks of 
 him under the name Angelas Saxo de Brunsvico — in the work de 
 script. Germ. c. 219. under the name Magister Engelinus. In the first 
 passage he predicates of him : ingenio acer, vita praeclarus, in decla- 
 mandis sermonibus ad popuhim celeberrimae opinionis. His writings : 
 In Canonem missae. — Sermones varii. — Quaestiones diversae. — Quae- 
 dam alia. 
 
THE EHINELAND. 279 
 
 far as the Elbe. We have already become acquainted with Erfurt 
 as a centre of scientific, and especially of theological, life, for the 
 North of Germany. Leipsic and Wittemberg became its associ- 
 ates at the commencement, in the one case, of the 15th, and in the 
 other, of the 16th century. In the South, however, we find at the 
 same period a much greater number of such luminous points, in 
 its universities, residences, and industrial free cities. In parti- 
 cular, the great Spiritual territories stretched along the banks of 
 the Rhine. This country, as designated by the popular wit, was 
 the priest-gait of the German empire. Here the clemency of the 
 government of the crozier, as well as its oppression, might be ex- 
 perienced more largely than elsewhere. Among the great Prince- 
 bishops, several were not only highly accomplished scholars, 
 but also patrons of science and art. Their territories were 
 especially rich in monasteries, and of these, there were always 
 some which shone as nurseries of erudition, and harboured within 
 their silent enclosures men who, as theologians, preachers, and 
 patterns of a devout and godly life, spread a blessing around 
 them. The true pith, however, of life and progress, was no 
 longer, as in the earlier mediaeval period, to be found exclu- 
 sively in the circle of the clergy and the monks. Education 
 became more and more a common good, and secured for itself a 
 far wider basis among the nobility, the higher class of citizens, 
 and the vast multitude of scholars and artists, whose connection 
 with the Church was feebler than in former years. The locali- 
 ties, however, in the great valley of the Rhine, 1 which claim 
 special attention, as scenes of ecclesiastical and civil life, of 
 science and of art, are the following. In Constance and Basle, the 
 great reforming councils were held, and certainly not without 
 influencing the sentiments of these districts and towns, especially 
 Basle, which from 1460 possessed a flourishing university. Next 
 in rank came Fiiburg, which was adorned with a university about 
 the same date. Strasburg was a very ancient theatre of ecclesi- 
 astical and scientific life, of German citizenship, and artistic taste. 
 In its vicinity, the 15th century witnessed the rise of Schlettstadt, 
 the seat of the celebrated school of L. Dringenberg ; and of 
 
 i 
 
 1 Comp. an older treatise in Hagen, Deutschlands liter, und relig. 
 Verhaltnisse im Reform. Zeitalter. 1841. B. i. s. 197 sqq. 
 

 
 280 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL 
 
 TIagenau, the nurse of the newly invented art of printing. In 
 the middle district of the Rhine Speyer, Worms, and Mayence 
 flourished as ancient and famous towns, 1 in which the aspiring 
 spirit of citizenship emulated the power of the Prince-bishops, 
 conflicted with every obstacle, and kindled animation upon every 
 side. Close at hand, and to the east of the Rhine, stood the town 
 of Heidelberg, the abode of princes, distinguished both for bravery 
 and love of science, and adorned (since 1386) with a university 
 which, at its very outset, had struck out a fresh course both in 
 theology and philosophy congenial with the opposition. Some- 
 what further down on the other side of the river, we meet the 
 Episcopal city of Treves, which, with its environs, are of the 
 highest interest in an ecclesiastical point of view ; and in fine, at 
 the opening where the Rhine flows into the plain, old Cologne, 
 boasting an ecclesiastical importance so great as to have been 
 called in the middle ages the " Holy City," distinguished in many 
 respects as the seat of an Archbishopric, and the nurse of art 
 and science, and although belonging rather to the past, still, by 
 means of its monuments, shedding a powerful and quickening 
 influence over the present. 2 
 
 At all these places, near the close of the 14th and in the course 
 of the 15th century, we find men figuring prominently in Theo- 
 logy and ecclesiastical affairs. John of Iritheim, 3 the celebrated 
 Abbot of Sponheim, who was himself one of them, mentions, in 
 his work on ecclesiastical authors, 4 a very considerable number of 
 learned divines and preachers, who about this time adorned the 
 cities and monasteries from Strasburg to Cologne. We shall 
 select for mention a few of those who flourished in the localities 
 
 1 Aeneas Sylvius gives a beautiful description of these lovely towns on 
 the Rhine in his remai-kable work, De ritu, situ, moribus et conditione 
 Germaniae. Bzovii Annal. eccles. T. xvii. p. 19 4. 
 
 2 Of Cologne e.g. Aeneas Sylvius says in the afore-mentioned descrip- 
 tion, Quid ea Colonia ? Nihil ilia magnificentius, nihil ornatius tota 
 Europa reperias. Templis, aedibus insignis, populo nobilis, opibus clara, 
 plumbo tecta, praetoriis ornata, turribus rnunita, fluraine Rheno et leetis 
 circum agris lasciviens. 
 
 3 Born 1462, died 1516, 
 
 De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, one of the continuations of the work 
 of Jerome de viris illustribus, written in the year 1494, and dedicated 
 to the noble John of Dalberg. Edition in Fabricii Bibliotheca eccles. 
 Ilauib. 1718. 
 
THE RniNELAND. 281 
 
 around the scene of WeseVs labours. In Speyer we find the 
 Augustinian monk Peter of Spira, well versed in Scripture 
 and Philosophy, and enjoying extensive celebrity as a preacher. 1 
 In Heidelberg, Marsilius of Inghen (f 1394), the first professor 
 of Theology in the University, had had the following eminent 
 successors : John Plath, a theologian and dogmatic author, 
 thoroughly trained in the study of Scripture and the Aristo- 
 telian philosophy, who rose to celebrity about the year 1430, 
 and is designated by Trithemius, 2 an ornament and pillar of 
 the University ; John Dieppurg, or, as he is otherwise called, 
 John of Frankfort, likewise a scientific theologian, an acute 
 controversialist, and an eminent preacher. As chaplain and 
 secretary to Count Palatine Louis, he was employed in diffi- 
 cult civil transactions and embassies, was the author of various 
 doctrinal, controversial, and ascetic writings and political dis- 
 courses, and likewise flourished about the year 1430 ; 3 Henry of 
 Gouda, probably in his day the most eminent of the professors 
 of Heidelberg. He was skilled in Scripture and Philosophy, 
 known for many doctrinal and ascetic works, and enjoyed great 
 distinction about the year 1435. 4 John Hrnesti, familiar with 
 Scripture and ancient literature, acute, eloquent, and the author 
 of several doctrinal and ascetic works laboured about 1440 ; 5 
 Stephen Hoest from Ladenburg, a canon at Speyer and for a 
 while court-chaplain at Heidelberg, learned in Scripture and pro- 
 fane science, celebrated as a philosopher and orator, the author 
 of a commentary upon ethics and of a collection of sermons (-{- 
 1471) ; 6 Nicolaus von Wachenheim, a philosophic divine, and one 
 of the most influential of the Heidelberg professors in the second 
 half of the 15th century (f 1487), but an opponent of all free 
 movement, a character in which we shall become better acquainted 
 with him in the sequel; 7 and finally Jodocus Eichenmann, usually 
 
 1 Trithem. de script, eccles. cap. 714. p. 165. ed. Fabric. 
 
 2 De script, eccl. c. 763. p. 178. 
 
 3 Ibid. cap. 764. p. 178. 
 
 4 Ibid. cap. 775. p. 181. 
 
 5 Ibid. cap. 798. p. 186. 
 
 6 Ibid. cap. 833. p. 199. Other persons, devoted more to the secular 
 sciences and civic industry who then lived in Heidelberg, are men- 
 tioned in Kroner's history of Frederick the victorious. 
 
 7 Trithem. de script, eccles. cap. 864. p. 206. 
 
282 TIIE LIFE OP JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 called Jodocus of Calw from his birthplace. He was a professor, 
 and for a time, according to the custom of the age, united to this 
 office that of preacher in the Church of the Holy Spirit. Toler- 
 ably acquainted with the scholastic philosophy, but especially by 
 long practice familiar with Scripture, 1 he was a man of a some- 
 what keen temperament, acted a prominent part in the 8th 
 decennium of the 15th century, and will also be found pre- 
 sent at the trial of Wesel for heresy at Mayence. From the 
 district on the west of the Rhine downwards, we find in Tri- 
 themius notices of the following persons : Conrad of Altzei, 2 
 known in the second half of the 14th century, well grounded 
 in theology and the sciences, of wide celebrity among his co- 
 temporaries, as a philosophic poet and mathematician, liberal 
 in his views, eloquent in prose and verse, and author of a 
 poetical work commendatory of the Virgin Mary and the re- 
 demption of the world ; John Fust of Kreidznach, 3 was towards 
 the end of the 14th century prior at Strasburg, and reader in a 
 Carmelite monastery in his native town. He exercised a great 
 influence by his sermons, of which several collections survived 
 himself ; Nicolaus of Kreutznaclfi lived about a century later, 
 and was distinguished as a professor of theology at Vienna ; 
 John Gauwer, 5 a Carmelite, was a reader of Sacred Scripture at 
 Mayence, eminent as a preacher and as the author of several 
 doctrinal, exegetical, and ascetic works, and flourished about 
 1440 ; Conrad of Rodenburg, 6 abbot of the monastery of Johan- 
 nisberg in the Rheingau, was a Benedictine monk, of great learn- 
 ing and piety, austere in his habits, and the author of several 
 ascetical works (f 1486) ; Henry of Andernach, 7 a Carmelite, was 
 celebrated as a preacher and theological author about the end of 
 the 14th century ; Mheinhard of Frottthoven, Henry Kaltysen, a 
 
 1 Tritheim describes him as ingenio promptus et vehemens, qui in 
 Gymnasio Heidelbergensi legendo, docendo et praedicando raultis annis 
 in prctio fuit. He states his works to be : De diversis Sermones varii 
 Lib. i. — Vocabularius praedicantium Lib. i. et varii Tractatus. De 
 Scriptor. eccl. c. 873. p. 208. 
 
 2 Trithem. de script, eccles. c. 660. p. 155. 
 
 3 Ibid. c. G65. p. 154. i Ibid. c. 874. p. 208. 
 5 Ibid. c. 793. p. 185. 6 Ibid. c. 860. p. 205. 
 ■ Ibid. c. 688. p. 161. 
 
worms. 283 
 
 Dominican, and Tilmann of HacJienherg, a Minorite, were all 
 three 1 greatly beloved as preachers in their several monasteries 
 at Coblentz, the two first at the beginning, and the third at the 
 end of the 15th century. Finally, John Rode 1 was a native of 
 Treves, thoroughly educated at the University of Heidelberg in 
 theology and the canon law. He was abbot of a Benedictine 
 monastery in his native city, and as a strict and rigid monk was 
 of great use in the reformation of the monasteries set on foot by 
 the Council of Basle. It is true that only a few of these men 
 joined the new and liberal tendencies, which in the course of the 
 15th century were more and more powerfully developed. The 
 majority of them merely propagated the received opinions in 
 theology, and the old ecclesiastical routine. The very number 
 of these, however, which relatively is not small, is a proof that a 
 considerable activity in the branches of study we have specified, 
 reigned in the district, and that the soil was sufficiently pre- 
 pared for the reception of fresh seed. 
 
 Directing our view to Worms itself, a place so famous in the 
 traditions and history of Germany, and which then stood greatly 
 higher in the scale of prosperity than is the case in modern 
 times, it is well known that the ancient city of the Vangions 
 was one of the earliest seats of Christianity in Germany. It 
 probably possessed a bishop about the middle of the 4th century. 3 
 Towards the end of the 6th, St Kupert took his departure from 
 it to convert Bavaria. 4 In the reign of Charlemagne, Erembert 
 was celebrated as its bishop, and from his day to the present, the 
 catalogue of his successors is tolerably entire. 5 Till the 11th 
 century the citizens of Worms had lived in peace and obedience 
 under the crozier. In the reign of Adelbert (1068 — 1107) they 
 became embroiled with their Bishop. Endowed with peculiar 
 privileges by Henry IV., and several of his successors — as, for 
 example, Charles IV. and Wenzel, — this city endeavoured more 
 
 1 About them see Trithem. c. 715. p. 165. c. 808. p. 189, c. 700. p. 
 1G3. 
 
 2 Ibid. c. 806. p. 188. 
 
 3 Hefele Geschicte der Einfuhrung des Christenthums ira siidwest- 
 lichen Dcutschland. Tub. 1837. s. 187. 
 
 4 Hefele, s. 191. 
 
 5 Schannat, Historia Episcopatus Wormatiensis. Francof. ad Moen. 
 MDCCXXXIV. T. i. p. 310 sqq. 
 
284 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 and more to cast off the Episcopal government. 1 Within the 
 walls of Worms, the same conflict arose which is also witnessed 
 in Speyer, Cologne, and other episcopal seats, between the old 
 and privileged hierarchy and the class of citizens now inflamed 
 with youthful ambition and the thirst of freedom. This state 
 of tilings lasted, with occasional fluctuations, during the whole of 
 the 15th century, at the close of which it became so violent that 
 John of Dalberg, 2 the most distinguished of all the bishops of 
 Worms, was forced to live almost the whole period of his incum- 
 bency away from his capital. At the beginning of the 15th cen- 
 tury, we find the episcopal chair occupied by Echard of Ders 
 (1370 — 1405). He was a lover of peace, and yet even under 
 him the magistrates and citizens endeavoured in every way 
 to restrict the spiritual jurisdiction and ancient rights of the 
 Bishop. 3 The prime subject of dispute was a claim urged 
 by the clergy to have the wine, on which their income mainly 
 depended, delivered to them free of duty, and according to 
 the old measure. This the citizens, in spite of an admoni- 
 tion by the Emperor, peremptorily refused, and ere long car- 
 ried matters still farther, by calling in question other privileges 
 of the clergy, insisting upon their taking a civic oath, and 
 threatening to expel them from the city. As the dispute swelled 
 at last to violence and tumult, the Bishop laid the city under 
 interdict, 4 and the Imperial court ordered the reinstatement of 
 the clergy who had been banished or forced to fly, and imposed 
 upon the place a fine of 100,000 gold marks. The storm now 
 burst forth in full fury. On the 1st of March 1386 the citizens 
 rose in arms against the clergy, inflicted various outrages upon 
 them, and cast thirty-eight prelates into prison. The excommu- 
 nication of the Pope and the ban of the Emperor both menaced 
 the city, when the Count Palatine, Eupert the younger, interposed 
 and mediated a peace between the contending parties, which 
 lasted for six years. Even yet, however, perfect concord was 
 far from being established, and Echard, weary of the struggle, 
 withdrew from Worms to Neuhausen, where he died, upon the 
 
 1 Schannat T. i. p. 342 Bqq. 
 
 2 Schannat T. i. p. 417—422. Ullmann Memoria Dalburgii p. 7. 
 
 3 Schannat T. i. p. 401 — 406. 
 
 4 • • • . toti civitati sacris interdixit. 
 
worms. 285 
 
 14th May, 1405. He was succeeded by a person, remarkable 
 not only among the bishops of Worms, but among the learned 
 and liberal-minded men of the age, Matthew of Cracau, or Cra- 
 cow (r. 1405 — 1410). x Descended from a noble family, emi- 
 nent as a theologian, and of great experience in the manage- 
 ment of business, Matthew, by favour of King Rupert, whose 
 chancellor he was, 2 and supported by Pope Innocent VII., 
 was enabled to take a firmer stand. The citizens were com- 
 pelled to submit, and through the mediation of Rupert and 
 John of Nassau, Archbishop of Mayence, an agreement was 
 entered into substantially favourable to the Bishop. In 1409 
 Matthew attended the Council at Pisa, where, agreeably to the 
 wish of Rupert, he strove, but without success, to resist the 
 deposition of Gregory XII. He departed this life in the follow- 
 ing year. The epitaph upon his tomb in the choir of the dome 
 calls him a distinguished Doctor of Theology, and in this charac- 
 ter we shall make his acquaintance in the sequel. It appears 
 likewise to have been in his day, or that of his predecessor, that 
 another man of learning and high celerity for his free opinions 
 in Theology, Master Henry of Langenstein, usually called Henry 
 of Hesse (f 1428) was canon in Worms. 3 And about the same 
 time, Philip,' 1 abbot of the Cistercian monastery of Otterberg, in 
 the diocese, was highly extolled as a Scriptural Divine, a philoso- 
 pher, and a devotional author. 
 
 In consequence of the state of both the Empire and the 
 Church, great disturbances took place under the Bishop who suc- 
 ceeded Matthew of Cracow. John II. of Flechenstein 5 (1410 — 26) 
 lived in almost continual broils, and at the close of a life of conflict 
 retired to Ladenburg. Eberhard III. of Sternberg, after a reign 
 of eight months, voluntarily withdrew from the difficulties of the 
 
 1 Schannat T. i. p. 407—408. 
 
 2 Matthew of Cracow, and Conrad of Sallow, Bishop of Werden, 
 were influential advisers of Ruprecht. Joh. Georg. Eccardi Corp. 
 histor. med. sev. T. i. p. 2125. 
 
 3 Trith. de script, eccl. c. 684, p. 159 sqq. Hunc, quemadmodura 
 ex quadam ejus Epistola reperi, Canonicum Wormaciensis ecclesiae 
 fuisse crediderim. 
 
 4 Trithem. c. 697. p. 162. 
 
 5 Schannat T. i. p. 409—411. 
 
2SG TIIE LIFE OP JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 situation. 1 Frederick II. of Dumneck (1427 — 45) 2 deemed it 
 best to relinquish many privileges which it was difficult to assert, 
 and occupied himself with all the greater zeal, and in the spirit 
 of the Council of Basle, with the reformation of the clergy and 
 the monastic institutions. Louis of Ast, 3 whose election had 
 been contested, resigned the office after a reign of forty days. 
 He was succeeded by a man who once more took the field with 
 energy, and whose episcopal administration claims our attention, 
 as having been coincident with the period of Wesers residence at 
 Worms,. We speak of Reinhard I. of Sicking en (r. 1445 — 82). 4 
 After receiving solemn consecration at the hands of Archbishop 
 Dietrich of Mayence, upon the Ehrenfels, Reinhard made a 
 pompous procession into the city. Endowed with great strength 
 of will, and considerable talents, proud of his ancient and noble 
 extraction, and little disposed to make concessions, he struck out 
 for himself a path very different from that of his immediate 
 predecessors, and strove with all his might to maintain the 
 ancient prerogative, of his see. The method he adopted is well 
 illustrated by the following incident. It was the old custom of 
 the magistrates of Worms, when they had a malefactor to hang, 
 to petition the bishop for the halter. This obligation involved 
 an acknowledgment of his jurisdiction, and seemed to be humi- 
 liating, and therefore, in order to evade it, they caused chains to 
 be fastened permanently to the gallows. The indignant Bishop 
 immediately summoned the Provost and Council into his pre- 
 sence, and admonished them to abstain in future from all such 
 innovations, adding that " neither he nor yet his bishopric were 
 so impoverished as not to possess plenty of ropes to hang even 
 rebellious magistrates, if necessary." At the same time, Reinhard 
 of Sickingen was full of zeal for the public good. At the diet of 
 Nuremburg in 1456 he advocated with all his might a war against 
 the Turks. In the dispute between Dietrich of Isenburg and 
 Adolph of Nassau, as well as in that between Frederick the Vic- 
 torious and his neighbours, he occupied a neutral position, anxi- 
 ous only to avert all injury from his subjects. In 1464, at the 
 decease of Hesso count of Leiningen, the last of his family, being 
 
 1 Sehannat p. 142—414. 3 Ibid. T. i. p. 41 1. 
 
 2 Ibid. T. i. p. 412. ^ T bid# t. i. p. 415—417. 
 
worms 287 
 
 doubtful of his ability to assert with arms his right to the territory 
 which was a feu of the Church of Worms, he applied for aid to his 
 powerful neighbour, Frederick the Victorious, with whom he- 
 stood on the best footing, and whose councillor he was, 1 promis- 
 ing him a half of the possessions, which were all, however, to 
 continue feudatory to the Bishopric. Reinhard of Sickingen also 
 applied himself with great zeal and vigour to the improve- 
 ment of the morals of the clergy and monks. Among others, he 
 reformed the monasteries of Lobenfeld, Neuburg, and Liebe- 
 nau. When that at Frankenthal, belonging to the canons of St 
 Augustine, opposed his measures, he transferred it to the mem- 
 bers of the College of Windesem, 2 who were eminent for their 
 piety, and extended his reformatory zeal even to the Nuns of 
 the rich Franciscan Convent at Worms. 3 But with all his love 
 of improvement in this way, he cared for it only when strictly 
 confined within the Church's limits. The moment it crossed 
 these he encountered it with a no less vigorous hostility. 4 Hence 
 we find him a decided opponent of Wesel, and delivering him 
 into the hands of the Inquisition. 
 
 Such were the circumstances under which John of Wesel lived 
 and laboured at Worms. The Church as a whole was in a state 
 of evolution and movement, fermentation, and conflict, and so 
 was the particular place to which Wesel was translated. He had 
 to play his part upon a scene of great and often violent struggles 
 for liberty on the part of the citizens, of jarring elements, of oppo- 
 sition to the clergy, and love of innovation. He himself was 
 decidedly attached to the new views which were daily being de- 
 veloped with increasing vigour. As a learned theologian and an 
 able preacher, he was conscious of his superiority to the clergy 
 in the district both immediate and remote, and he did not shrink 
 
 1 Cremer's Geschichte Kurfurst Frederichs I. Mannh. 1766. Th. 1. 
 s. 393 and 625 sqq. 
 
 2 See this singular document which breathes a fine and pious spirit, 
 in Schannat T. ii. p. 244. Prob. 267. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 245. Prob. 268. . 
 
 4 Schannat T. i. p. 416 : Demum in mores ac doctrinam Joannis de 
 Wesalia, concionatoris famigeratissimi, altius investigans, quod is turn 
 scripto turn viva voce quaedam sparsisset in vulgus, quae ex Hussito- 
 rum sentina videbantur deprompta, ipsum Moguntiae in manus Inqusi- 
 torum tradidit. 
 
288 TIIE LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 from giving the freest expression to his sentiments. Indeed, 
 although not destitute of modesty, still in the enunciation of what 
 seemed to him to be sacred truth and to pertain to life's highest 
 interests, and in the denial of what he considered falsehood, pre- 
 tence, and deceit, he may more justly be charged with having 
 been reckless and offensive than with any excess of prudence, 
 hesitation, and timidity. Let us see in what light he regarded 
 his task, and in what manner he endeavoured to execute it. 
 
 Wesel was not blind to the difficulties which,i n his age and 
 circumstances, were opposed to a faithful preacher of the Gospel. 
 He clearly saw and deeply deplored the corrupt state of the 
 Church, and boldly stated what he thought upon the subject. 
 u The Church," he says in a treatise written during his residence 
 at Worms, 1 " has lapsed so far from true piety into a certain 
 kind of Jewish superstition, that wherever we turn our eyes we 
 see nothing but an empty and ostentatious display of works, 
 void of the least spark of faith, the Pharisaic pride of the Rabbis, 
 cold ceremonies, and vain superstition, not to call it idolatry. 
 All seem intent on reaping a golden harvest, pursue only their 
 own interest, and totally neglect the duties of Christian piety." 
 He was also aware how few there were in high stations who did 
 their part in vigorously counteracting the prevailing corruption. 
 " It is certainly," he says, 1 " a hard task to be one of the princes 
 and rulers of the people, for they have to answer not merely 
 for their own sins, but also for the errors of others, and if men 
 would reflect upon this, they would never canvas for the office of a 
 ruler and pastor, nor pursue, or purchase it with gold, but would 
 wait the call of the Lord ; for they who obtain this dignity with- 
 out vocation are, according to the language of our Saviour, 
 thieves and robbers, having entered in by another way and not 
 by the door of Christ. The preachers of eternal wisdom ought 
 to be the salt of the earth. * But if the salt have lost its savour, 
 wherewith shall it be salted ? It is henceforth good for nothing, 
 but to be cast out and to be trodden under foot of men.' The 
 meaning of which is, if the doctrine of the priests and prelates be 
 not the genuine doctrine of Christ, it ought to be rejected and 
 
 1 De auctoritate, officio et potestate Pastorum ecclesiasticorum 
 Walch Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 2. p. 142—143. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 136 and 137. 
 
PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 289 
 
 trampled in the dust, so little is it our duty to listen to pastors, 
 who would fain besprinkle and season us with salt that has lost 
 its virtue. Rare as a black swan is the priest who discharges 
 the apostolical office with apostolical fidelity. And the reason 
 is, because the Word of the Lord is fettered by human devices 
 and cannot be freely preached. Tyranny and oppression on 
 every side cry out against it, and the ordinances of many 
 bishops are opposed ; not to speak of the legends of the saints, 
 the imposture of indulgences, the labours of fraternities, which 
 one must in every way extol to the skies, in order to enjoy 
 favour, and escape the chance of losing one's stipulated pay. 1 
 ' Speak to us what we like to hear,' say the people in their folly, 
 ' or we will call down the wrath of God upon your head.' The 
 consequence is, that (as good pastors either hide in a corner, 
 or are proscribed and shamefully banished), the great majority 
 discharge their office with no other view but to feed themselves 
 and not the sheep, and seek to promote their own interests in- 
 stead of nourishing them. Nay sometimes not satisfied with 
 their wool and milk, they flay and wholly devour them. How 
 extreme the misery of the Christian flock ! The little ones call 
 for bread and there is no one to give it them. They seek for 
 water and there is none, and their tongue faileth for thirst." 
 
 He did not, however, permit this state of things to dim his 
 mental vision. The less he was satisfied with realities, the more 
 did the image of the truly apostolical man and preacher rise bright 
 and majestic before his soul ; the more he felt repelled by the 
 present, the more did he hopefully and aspiringly cast his eyes 
 into the future* " The object of the office of prince and pastor," 
 he says, 2 probably in allusion to his immediate vicinity, and in 
 particular to Bishop Reinhard of Sickingen, " is not to outshine 
 others by the splendour and wealth in which he lives, not to go 
 about in royal state, not to surpass great satraps in the number 
 of their satellites, not to play the Sybarite in idleness and luxury, 
 and labour to regain lost power ; 3 but with his whole heart to 
 
 1 This l-efers especially to the situation of Wesel in Worms. See in 
 the sequel Wesel' s letter to Bishop Reinhard vf Sickingen. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 138—140. 
 
 3 The last words are particularly suited to Bishop Sickingen, whose 
 endeavours in one direction aimed at the restoration of the Episcopal 
 authority. 
 
 T 
 
2 ( J0 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 execrate and contemn these things, and, on the contrary, to do 
 good to all committed to his charge, or connected with him in 
 the bond of charity, by exhortation and counsel, instruction, 
 consolation, and help. For it is the duty of a Christian man 
 to exercise not power, but love, over those whom he governs, 
 measuring all with one line, viz., the communion of faith and 
 the confession of Christian charity. In this religion there is no 
 difference, the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesus 
 Christ being in all and upon all who believe. They have made 
 thee a prince, saith the Scripture, therefore exalt not thyself but 
 be as one of them. 1 Yea, the Lord commands, Whoever will 
 be chief among you, let him be your servant. " The ruler," says 
 Jerome, " ought, by his humility, to be the companion of them 
 that do well, and by his zeal for justice, to stand boldly up against 
 the sins of the wicked, yet so as never to prefer himself to the 
 good." The first qualification, including all others, which Wesel 
 requires in him who preaches the Gospel, whether pastor or 
 bishop, is complete dedication to his office and his Church. He 
 ought to delight, 2 not in being superior to others, but in doing 
 them good. 3 " As Christ," he says with deep emotion, " gives 
 himself wholly to me, so am I bound, in my turn, to give myself 
 wholly for the good of the brethren, and as he became our 
 Saviour, so ought we also to strive to be saviours of others." 4 
 And this helpful sympathy ought, in his opinion, to be directed 
 no less to their spiritual than their temporal good, and more 
 especially, according to the pattern of Jesus and the Apostles, 
 to the care and succour of the poor. 5 Even more important, 
 however, in WeseVs eye is the radical and objective require- 
 ment which he sets befure every other, that the preacher shall 
 deliver uncurtailed and unalloyed the pure Gosp>el as it is 
 contained in the Word of God. " The Redeemer," he says, 6 
 " promises the glory of the apostolic name to those who shall 
 abide in his word. He whom God hath sent must preach God's 
 
 1 In this passage also the admonition appears addressed to the then 
 Bishop of Worms. 
 
 2 non praeesse hominihus, sed prodesse. 
 
 8 Ibid. p. 139. 6 ibid. p. 141. 
 
 4 Ibid. p. 148. e Ibid . p . 122. 
 
PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 291 
 
 word ; whereas he, whose discourse does not agree with the 
 word of the Father, is excluded from his discipline. ... It 
 is clear 1 that he only who teaches the word of the Lord is a true 
 apostle and pastor. Whosoever delivers a contrary doctrine is 
 not to be believed. The kernel of the Gospel, however, was, 
 according to Wesel, not the moral law, nor a righteousness by 
 works arising from it, but Christ and Christ's righteousness, and 
 emanating from these, a life of love and of free and spontaneous 
 obedience to the law. " Whoever," he says, 2 " teaches that 
 Christ has been made unto us for righteousness, the same is a 
 teacher whom the Lord has given." Still more characteristic, 
 however, is the following passage, " As the law is not given to the 
 righteous, but to the unrighteous and unbelieving, every one has, 
 in the Holy Spirit, a leader who is above the law. For there 
 is no other fulfilling of the law, but the shedding abroad of 
 the love of God in the heart. He who has obtained this has 
 become one Spirit with God, and can say with the Apostle, " I 
 live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me. . . . Whoever does 
 the work of the law, even as respects its moral requirements, only 
 in consequence of the law's constraint, keeps it in a mere carnal 
 way, and does not really satisfy its demands, but whoever, from 
 the spirit of faith, and with a willing mind, executes the law's 
 work, even as respects outward things, for him alone is the law 
 truly spiritual. This genuine fulfilment of the law is the gift 
 of that Spirit who quickens the ungodly, and by whom every 
 pious man is certainly actuated. 
 
 In this manner Wesel not only took his stand upon the Word 
 of God, but what is more, in opposition to his age, in which the 
 legal principle of the mediaeval period still bore the sway, he had 
 penetrated to the centre of Christianity, to the very essence of 
 the Gospel, to the righteousness, spirit, and life of Christ, in 
 short, to that Saviour who, to all who embrace him by livino- 
 faith, becomes a source of peace, love, and true morality. He 
 recognized the love, which is the offspring of faith, as the sole 
 true fulfilling of the law ; and this knowledge, embraced with his 
 whole soul, gave him confidence and alacrity, both to labour 
 
 i Ibid. p. 123. 2 ifcia, p m< 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 150—152. 
 
292 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 undauntedly amid the difficulties of the present, and hopefully 
 and joyfully to anticipate the future. He knew that the word 
 of God was not held in great esteem, and that it could scarcely 
 be preached except at the risk of life. Against this, however, 
 he sought to steel his mind. He says : 2 " The language of our 
 Rabbis is like that of the Jews in the days of the Saviour, 
 'Thou wast altogether born in sin and wilt 'thou teach us;' 
 Good God ! how odious and intolerable to these proud and 
 inflated Moabites is a preacher of Christ ! Their cry is — 
 
 * Dii nostris istas terris avertite pestes.' 
 
 If, however, thou art enjoined to teach evangelical and Christian 
 piety, than which nothing is so greatly disrelished, then suffer 
 not yourselves to be frightened and discouraged by the Papal 
 fulminations, curses, and interdicts. From bulls (made of paper 
 and of lead) they dart but a harmless flash. The excommuni- 
 cato!* was himself under excommunication by the Divine Judge, 
 before he uttered his sentence, and with a curse upon his own 
 head, he has no power to excommunicate others. There is, 
 therefore, much greater cause to fear the curse, which says, 'Woe 
 unto you who call evil good, and good evil,' than that which 
 human tyranny presumes to utter." Full of courage like this, 
 Wesel did not shrink from the undisguised declaration of his 
 evangelical sentiments, even at the risk of occasionally giving 
 offence. No doubt he had learned from the great Apostle of the 
 Gentiles to be subject even to human ordinances, when these 
 seemed conducive to edification in the faith, and calculated to 
 promote love. He deemed it a Christian duty, as far as it was 
 practicable without compromising truth, to abstain from wound- 
 ing the brethren ; but where truth was at stake, he cared for 
 no one. " When we are placed in such straits," he says, 3 
 " that we must choose between disobeying a superior, upon the 
 one hand, and thereby causing a scandal, and injuring truth 
 upon the other, it is much better that our neighbour should 
 
 1 Ibid. p. 149 : quod verbum domini humilibus ludibriosit et probro, 
 ut non liccat libere, nisi capitis paratus sis adire pericula, praedicare. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 149 and 150. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 141. 
 
TREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 293 
 
 suffer, for to him we may possibly make compensation, than that 
 truth should be injured which it is impious to do.'' This confi- 
 dence in the Divine word enabled him to look with assurance to 
 the future. Like Jacob of J'dterbock, his cotemporary and a man 
 of congenial sentiments, when burdened with the painful experi- 
 ences of the present, he stands erect, but with greater vigour, and, 
 without giving way to distracting conjectures, takes a firmer hold 
 of the future, and anticipates the approach of the hero who was 
 to deliver them. " Come it will," he says, in a short but very 
 remarkable passage, 1 " Our souls will perish with hunger, unless 
 from on high some star of mercy rise, and dispel the darkness, and 
 clear our eyes from the delusions with which they are bewitched 
 by the falsehood of our rulers, and restore the light, and, at last, 
 after so many years, break the yoke of our Babylonish captivity, 
 by either guiding these workers of iniquity, these slowbellies, these 
 dogs and evil beasts, these gluttons, and devourers of widows' 
 houses, to the eternal truth, or if not, by plunging them into 
 hell, lest we all go down together into the same pit. Deliver, O 
 God, thy people from all their tribulations." 2 
 
 Such are the principles laid down for the guidance of his minis- 
 terial labours, such the spirit in which he worked. The matter of 
 his sermons, or at least the leading topics, are known to us from 
 a collection of his peculiar opinions, which bears the title of " Tlie 
 Paradoxes of Dr John Wesel" 3 and was compiled chiefly from his 
 discourses. Some particulars upon the subject may also be gleaned 
 
 1 Ibid. p. 129. 
 
 2 In the sequel, p. 153, Wesel speaks to the same effect, "Thou 
 hast," he addvesses God, " set men over us, who load us with burdens 
 grievous to be borne, and which they themselves will not touch with one 
 of their little fingers. Hear at last our cry, save us from the burden 
 which weighs us down, break the yoke that oppresses us. Hear the 
 sighs of the prisoners, and loose the fetters of them that are 
 destroyed." 
 
 3 Paradoxa D. Joannis de Wesalia, quae feruntur a quibusdam 
 Thomistis ex illius concionatoris ore fuisse excepta — first printed inter 
 varia scripta ad calcem Commentariorum de rebus gestis in Concilio 
 Basil, ab Aenea Sylvio conscriptorum adjecta, sine anno et loco — then 
 in Ortuini Gratii Fasciculus rerum expetendarum et fugiendarum, edit. 
 i. fol. 163. edit. ii. T. i. p. 325; lastly, in D'Argentre Collectio judi- 
 ciorum de novis erroribus. Paris. 1728. T. i. p. ii. p. 291. 292. The 
 last imprint is here used. 
 
294 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 from his trial before the court of Inquisition. In this way, we 
 likewise obtain a view of WeseFs Tlieological convictions, so far as 
 they have not been stated in the fore-mentioned treatise against 
 Indulgences. 
 
 As in the case of all the great men connected with the Refor- 
 mation, we can distinguish in the views of Wesel two fundamental 
 elements : 1st, Reverence for the whole Bible ; and 2dly, special 
 reverence for the Epistles of Paul — the latter somewhat tinged by 
 the works of Augustine. He sets out with referring all things to 
 Scripture, and then proceeds to deduce them more specifically 
 from the idea of the Divine grace, as in every case decisive. 
 Every thing in the doctrine or practice of the Church, which 
 seems to conflict with either of these criteria, he rejects. Hence 
 nothing has any worth in his eyes which has not been ordained 
 by Christ, and all is baneful that bears the character of righteous- 
 ness by works. It is true that his statements have been reported 
 to us only in a brief and fragmentary w r ay, and probably are 
 here and there likewise disfigured. Neither is their connexion 
 with the whole system of his views always perceptible. From 
 the two fundamental principles, which we have specified, how- 
 ever, it is possible to derive them with tolerable fulness. 
 
 Scripture, according to Wesel, is, in the first place, the only 
 sufficient guarantee for unity of faith. " Seldom," says he, " do I 
 find that any two learned men agree in faith. No one coincides 
 in opinion with me, if we take away the Gospel. In it, however, 
 we are all at one." 1 For this reason it was his great desire that 
 all should hold fast by Scripture, and by that alone. 2 Christ 
 enjoined upon His disciples nothing but to preach the Gospel, 
 and therefore they were neither entitled nor qualified to make 
 new laws. All they had to do was to guide believers to the ob- 
 servance of the Gospel. 3 Still less have the clergy of after times, 
 the prelates, any such authority, and hence it is no sin to trans- 
 gress the ecclesiastical ordinances which they have issued. 4 If 
 
 1 Paradoxa p. 291, b. 
 
 2 In the Examen magistrale s. 296, it is said of Wesel : Item 
 credit, quod nihil sit credendum, quod non habeatur in Canone 
 Bibliae. 
 
 3 Parad. 291, a. 
 
 4 Ibid 291, b. 
 
PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 295 
 
 Scripture, however, is to hold sway as the only law of Christian 
 life, all depends upon its interpretation, and here Wesel believes 
 neither in the Glosse 1 nor in the writings of any teacher, how- 
 ever holy and highly esteemed he may be. He is afraid " of 
 the Doctors giving a wrong, deceptive, and false interpretation. 2 
 Hte would prefer having the Bible explained solely by itself. No 
 authority of even the wisest and most learned Christian can 
 here avail. For who among men would venture to determine 
 the meaning which Christ put into his words, except himself? 
 Cautious expositors, however, will compare passages together 
 and explain the one by the other." 3 That, however, which 
 Wesel finds to be fundamental in the teaching of Scripture is the 
 grace of God. It is by the grace of God alone that all are saved 
 who are ever saved at all. 4 They are destined to it from eternity. 
 " From eternity God has inscribed all his elect in a book. In that 
 book no name which is not there will ever be written. Neither 
 will any name once written in it ever be blotted out." 5 In this 
 matter, and to gain eternal salvation, the Pope, the bishops, and 
 the priests can do nothing essential. All to which they look is 
 concord and peace with men, and a quiet life. " He whom God 
 is pleased of his grace to save will be saved, even though all the 
 priests in the world were to condemn and curse him ; but he 
 whom God condemns, will be condemned, though Pope and 
 priest were unanimously to pronounce him saved. Though there 
 never had been a Pope, 6 all who really are saved would have been 
 saved as well." Whether Wesel actually enunciated the doctrine 
 of predestination in terms so hard we may leave undetermined. 
 There can, however, be no question that he did his best to exalt 
 the grace of God in its purity, and to exclude the works of men 
 from being a ground of salvation. 
 
 From the position of firm adherence to Scripture and the 
 doctrine of grace which he had thus assumed, Wesel was neces- 
 
 i Glossae non credit, Parad. 291, b. 
 
 2 Pard. 291, b. 
 
 s Pard. 291, b., above. 
 
 4 Sola Dei gratia salvantur Electi. Parad. 291, b. 
 
 5 Ibid. 291, b. 
 
 6 Si nullus unquam Papa fuisset, adhuc salvati fuissent hi, qui salvati 
 sunt. Parad. 291, b. 
 
296 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 sarily led into a determined opposition, not only to all the un- 
 scriptural additions -which time had made to the primitive Church, 
 but to every institution which seemed to restrict the acknowledg- 
 ment of grace, or in any way to open the door for righteousness by 
 works ; and consequently to a great many things in the Church 
 of his age. Even the notion of the Catholic Church, as a Church 
 essentially holy, was to him a subject of doubt. In the creed he 
 disapproved of the addition of the epithet Catholic to the words, 
 u I believe in the Holy Church," as Jerome also did, and which 
 was an after interpolation, " For," he said, 1 "the Catholic Church, 
 understanding by that the whole body of baptized persons, so far 
 from being holy, consists for the most part of reprobates." 2 And 
 generally his opinion of the doctrines, institutions, and practices 
 of the Church was, that the greater part of them were contrary 
 alike to Scripture and to Grace. It is true that he devoted less 
 of his attention to doctrines; but at the same time, he had great 
 scruples upon the articles of transubstantiation and the proces- 
 sion of the Holy Spirit. As respects the first of these — antici- 
 pating in germ the doctrine of Luther — he expresses his opinion 
 to the effect -" that the body of Christ might exist under the form 
 of the bread, though the substance of the bread remained.'' 5 
 With reference to the second, he is disposed to adopt the view 
 held by the Eastern Church, to the effect, that the Holy Spirit 
 proceeds only from the Father ; at least he contends it is impos- 
 sible to show from Scripture that he proceeds also from the Son.* 
 In both instances, WeseVs views seem to flow from his strict 
 Scriptural principles. He took much greater offence, however, at 
 many of the Ecclesiastical institutions, which encroached upon the 
 doctrine of free grace, and favoured that of holiness by works. 
 His objection to indulgence we have already seen. But in other 
 ways, he considered that Christendom was heavily burdened with 
 merely human ordinances and customs. 5 " Christ," he said, 
 
 1 Farad. 292, a, 
 
 2 . . . major pars reprobata. 
 
 3 Examen magistr. p. 294 : Item credit, quod corpus Christi possit 
 esse sub specie panis, manente substantia panis. 
 
 * Parad. 292, a : Scriptura sacra non dicit, Spiritum sanctum proce- 
 dere a Filio. Comp. Exam, magistr. p. 29G. 298. 
 
 5 Sic gravata est Cliristianitas per humanas leges et coqstitutiones. 
 Parad. p. 292. 
 
PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 297 
 
 " did not appoint fasts. He never forbade the use of diverse kinds 
 of food, as, for instance, flesh upon particular days. Just as little 
 did he ordain the celebration of stated festivals. He prescribed 
 no set prayers, except the Paternoster, and still less did he 
 enjoin priests to sing or read the Canonical psalms. 1 In these 
 days, over all Christendom, the mass has been made a most burden- 
 some service. St Peter went much more expeditiously to work, 
 and simply consecrated the communion with the Lord's prayer. 
 Now-a-days, on the contrary, the priest who celebrates must 
 stand for an hour and more enduring the cold, which injures his 
 health, and thus man destroys himself." 2 The same spirit in 
 which Wesel combatted indulgences bred in his mind an indig- 
 nant zeal against other kinds of penances and good works. He 
 is further reported to have said, 3 " When a penitent confesses, he 
 is subjected to a rigorous penance, such as a pilgrimage to Rome 
 or some more distant place, abstinence from food, or the repetition 
 of a multitude of prayers. Christ did nothing of the sort. He only 
 said, ' Go and sin no more.' Pilgrims to Rome, however, are 
 fools, for they might easily find and keep at home what they seek 
 in a foreign land." Wesel even called in question, " whether it 
 was the Church which had originally appointed Fasts, and in 
 like manner whether it had forbidden marriage during Septua- 
 gesima." 4 All these things appeared to him to have crept in in 
 after times, and in opposition to law. 
 
 The connexion of the things, of which we have hitherto spoken, 
 with WeseVs turn of mind is very clear. We meet, however, 
 with two other paradoxes which are more isolated, and yet at the 
 same time not wholly foreign to his principles. In the first place, 
 he is said to have affirmed, 5 " that in the petition ' Thy kingdom 
 come,' we do not pray for the kingdom of heaven, because that 
 kingdom does not come to us at all." Now, there are two differ- 
 ent meanings which he may have intended to express by these 
 words. He may have meant to say either that the kingdom of 
 God should not be prayed for as something still future, inasmuch 
 
 i Parad. p. 291, b. 2 Ibid. p. 292, a. 
 
 3 Ibid. 292, a. 4 Ibid. 292, a. 
 
 6 " Adveniat regnum tuum ;" ibi non petimus regna Coelorum, quia 
 illud non venit ad nos. Parad. 291, b. 
 
298 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 as it is already here, or that the kingdom of God, in the highest 
 and fullest sense of the term, does not come to us on earth at all, 
 its present manifestation being always mingled with elements of 
 sin. In both cases, the words have a good meaning. The first 
 is the way in which Luther- 1 understood them ; but the second 
 harmonizes better with WeseVs leading views on the subject of 
 the Church, inasmuch as he may have wished to intimate, that 
 the Church visible, being commingled with sinners and repro- 
 bates, was not the true and perfect kingdom of God, a pure com- 
 munion of saints. The second paradox relates to the exegetical 
 question, which to this day continues a topic of much debate, 
 viz., whether Christ at the crucifixion 2 was nailed to the cross, or 
 merely bound to it with cords. Wesel admits that the narrative 
 of the Evangelists contains no positive statement on the subject. 
 Afterwards, however, at his trial, he expressed his readiness no 
 longer to call in question the fact of the Saviour's having been 
 nailed, as he had formerly done even in addressing the people. 3 
 This exegetical scruple, although not directly connected with 
 his substantial views, would still be a proof of his having pos- 
 sessed a spirit of enquiry, independent of the traditional and 
 current opinions. At the same time the scruple may have in 
 volved a doctrinal bearing (very different indeed from modern 
 .Rationalism), and been the offspring of his opposition to a 
 common and coarse view adopted chiefly by the Schoolmen, pos- 
 terior to the days of Thomas, respecting the value and conse- 
 quence of the quantity of blood shed by Christ, as if on that its 
 efficacy depended, — an interpretation strictly connected with the 
 doctrine of supererogatory merits, and through that with Indul- 
 gences, which Wesel so zealously combatted. 
 
 Such doctrinal matter, in the existing condition of the Church, 
 could not but give offence, and greatly more, no doubt, the 
 manner in which Wesel delivered it to the people. The style of 
 
 1 See in the sequel, 3d part, 2d chap. 
 
 2 The feet are not expressly mentioned, but the question is put gene- 
 rally. 
 
 3 Exam. Magistr. p. 295 : Vicesimo quinto, an praedicavcrit publice 
 populo, dubium esse, an Christus fuisset funibus cruci alligatus, aut 
 clavis affixus ? Fatetur, se dixisse, quod non habeatur in Evangelio 
 passionis, an clavis sit affixus, an funibus. Credit tamen, quod clavis. 
 
PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 299 
 
 Ms preaching was, in many respects, of distinguished excellence. 
 He possessed intellect, fervour, and vivacity. His theological 
 training raised him above the great majority of cotemporary 
 preachers. The effects which he produced, and the celebrity which 
 he attained, give us ground to conclude that even in this respect his 
 gifts were considerable. But pure and irreproachable as a preacher 
 he certainly was not. His boldness sometimes degenerated into 
 arrogance, his popularity into pungent and provoking jests, such 
 as, making all allowance for the rude spirit of the age, w r e cannot 
 consider but as too strong for a man of otherwise so earnest a cha- 
 racter. When combatting the exaggerated estimate which was 
 formed of priestly rites, such as unction with consecrated oil, he 
 would venture to say, " The consecrated oil is no better than 
 that which is in daily use in your kitchens." 1 Or, when dis- 
 coursing on fasting, he would observe, " If St Peter did intro- 
 duce this practice, it could only have been to obtain a readier 
 sale for his fish ;" 2 or, " When it is said that the holy Church 
 appointed fasts, and that at these seasons no one ought to take 
 home a wife or celebrate a marriage : These are pure falsehoods ;" 
 or, " The fathers who instituted fasts, if they did mean to pro- 
 hibit the use of certain kinds of food, certainly did not intend 
 that a man should not eat when he was hungry. As long as he 
 is hungry a man may lawfully eat, and there is no sin in even 
 dining upon a fat capon on Good Friday." 3 He expressed 
 himself from the pidpit with more moderation, but still strongly 
 enough, against other ecclesiastical enactments, the authority 
 of the Church in general, and the Pope. " What is not in 
 Scripture called sin," he said, " I for one will not reckon sinful. 
 If another man knows more and better, he is welcome to his 
 opinion." And again, " I despise the Pope, the Church, and 
 the Councils, and extol Christ. Let His word dwell in us 
 richly." He used also to say, " It is now more difficult than 
 ever to be a Christian." 4 These expressions of Wesel are reported 
 to us by one of his admirers, and we have no reason to doubt. 
 
 1 Paradoxa, p. 291. 
 
 2 In the same place. 
 
 3 Flacius Catalog. Test, veritatis. Lib. xix. t. ii. p. 8S5. 
 
 4 All these expressions occur in the passage above quoted from 
 Flacuis. 
 
300 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 their authenticity. Others, as is evident, however, have been 
 falsely laid to his charge, for example, when it was said that at 
 Wiesbaden, or somewhere else, he had blasphemously declared 
 that " He who sees the sacrament of the Mass sees the Devil." 1 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 WESEL, AS A WRITER ON THE DEPRAVED MORALS OF THE 
 
 CLERGY. MATTHEW OF CRACOW, A REFORMING 
 
 BISHOP OF WORMS. 
 
 WeseVs reformatory efforts were not confined to his own con- 
 gregation, or within the walls of Worms. He had learned to 
 know and to contemplate the Church at large with too lively an 
 interest not to attempt to influence its general circumstances. 
 And of these, the condition of the clergy presented itself as the 
 most important. In former times it could be said that all 
 depended, as even now it may be said that much depends, upon 
 them. At all times, no doubt, the demoralization of the clergy 
 and that of the people are mutually connected and reciprocally 
 influence each other, as is also the case with their amendment. 
 It is said, with truth, of the fine arts, that they are either ruined 
 or promoted by the artists, and we may apply the same remark to 
 the relation between the clergy and the Church. To them, more 
 than to any other cause, it is always owing whether the life of the 
 Church is to sink or whether it is to ascend. Hence if at that 
 time there was to be any amendment in the Church, it was 
 necessary to direct strict attention to the clergy, and in the 
 first place to their corruption. The fact that, with a few honour- 
 able exceptions, the whole body, from the head to the humblest 
 member, were very greatly depraved, was one which no serious 
 minded and observant man could conceal from himself. Wesel 
 was among those who felt this with deep sorrow, and, being firmly 
 convinced that it concerned the Church's very life, he devoted 
 
 1 Exaraen magistrale, p. 294 and 295. 
 
MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 301 
 
 to the subject a special treatise, which, from the nature of the 
 case, explains to us what his opinions respecting the Church 
 really were. We have no doubt that the little work on " The 
 authority, duty, and power of the pastors of the Church" belongs 
 to this later period of his life, when he resided at Worms. It is 
 written with greater zeal and boldness than the treatise against 
 Indulgences, expresses more decidedly and urgently the need of 
 a reformation, and thereby indicates that he had progressed in 
 his reformatory tendency. It contains little more than the expe- 
 riences and wishes which must have been forced upon his mind, 
 in the course of his ecclesiastical and pastoral labours, and among 
 these there is much which may quite naturally be considered, 
 as an allusion to the particular circumstances under which he 
 laboured in Worms. Before we proceed, however, to give an 
 account of this work, we must advert to a very interesting 
 parallel. A Bishop of Worms, whom in one aspect we may 
 designate the precursor of Wesel, has written upon a kindred 
 subject, the Pollutions of the Roman Court ; and as both works 
 in some measure supplement each other, the Bishop's treating 
 what was wrong in the position of his episcopal brethren, and in 
 their relation to the Pope, and expatiating in the higher regions, 
 while the preacher's rather paints and assails the abuses which 
 pervaded the whole clerical body, and produced the most bane- 
 ful effects even among the people, it is certainly not out of 
 place to take them here together, and in the order which appears 
 natural, beginning with that of the dignitary, who is less known 
 to posterity, and then passing to that of Wesel who, though a 
 humble preacher, was yet from his connexion with the revolu- 
 tion of the 16th century, much more generally celebrated. 
 
 The Bishop of Worms to whom we allude is Matthew of 
 Cracoiv. 1 Of this man, who died almost half a century before 
 Wesel made his appearance in Worms, we have already had 
 
 1 About him we may compare Trithemius de scriptor. eccles. c. 654. 
 p. 153 and 154. ed Fabric, and de scriptor. German, c. 124. Oudinus 
 com mentar. de scriptor. eccles. T. iii. p. 1110 and 1111. Schannat 
 Hist. Episcop. "VVormat. T. i. p. 407. But especially Walchii Monim. 
 med. aev. ii., 1. Praef. p. xii. — xxxviii. and the citations there. 
 
302 TIIE LIFE OF JOnN OF WESEL. 
 
 occasion to speak ; but as he was of some note, not merely as a 
 prince-bishop, but as a theologian, and even, when judged by the 
 standard of the age, as a reforming theologian, it is proper that 
 we should treat of him somewhat more fully. Matthew was not, 
 as many have been 1 misled by the designation de Cracovia to 
 suppose, a native of Poland, but took the name of Cracow, as the 
 descendant of a noble Pomeranian family. 2 We have no specific 
 information respecting his parents or the date of his birth. It 
 is highly probable that he pursued his studies at Prague and 
 Paris. 3 Trithemius states 4 that at the time of the migration of 
 the German students from Prague, and the disturbances with 
 the Hussites, he was in the capital of Bohemia. This, however, 
 is a mistake ; for these events took place long after Matthew had 
 left that city. All that we know is that, at an archiepiscopal 
 synod which assembled there in the year 1384, he delivered a 
 discourse on the improvement of the morals of the clergy and 
 the people. 5 At both the Universities of Prague and Paris, he 
 delivered lectures, and at the latter presided for awhile over 
 the theological faculty ; 6 but which of the two he ultimately 
 adorned as professor cannot be accurately determined. We 
 are disposed to believe that it was Paris. 7 From that seminary, 
 he was invited by the enlightened Elector and Emperor Rupert, 
 as already an eminent preacher and teacher of theology, to the 
 
 1 e.g. Tritheim de script, eccles c. 654. p. 153, also Conr. Gesner, 
 Rob. Gerius, and others. 
 
 2 A member of this family, Frederick of Cracow, was also, about the 
 year 1430, provost of the Cathedral of Treves, ^channat Hist. Episc. 
 Wormat. T. i. p. 408. 
 
 3 Oudinus Comment, de script, eccl. T. iii. p. 1110. 
 
 4 De scriptor. eccles. c. 654. p. 154. The assertion of Trithemius 
 that Matthew was a master in Prague, seems nevertheless corre.t. 
 
 5 Pezius Thesaur. anecdot. T. i. praefat. p. 6. Walch Monim i., 1. 
 pracf. p. 15. 
 
 c Bouleaus Hist. acad. Paris. T. iv. p. 975. 
 
 7 The order in which most of the older authors place the Universities 
 attended by Matthew is, first Prague, then Paris, and lastly Heidel- 
 berg ; Oudinus puts Paris before Prague. It seems, however, more 
 natural for Matthew to have attended first at Prague, and in conse- 
 quence of the connexion in which the University of Heidelberg stood 
 with that of Paris, in its foundation and during the first period of its exist- 
 ence, it is more likely that he would be summoned to Heidelberg from 
 Paris, than from Prague. 
 
MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 303 
 
 newly founded University of Heidelberg. 1 His academical 
 labours there, however, seem not to have been of great im- 
 portance, or at least great duration. 2 Rupert, who entertained 
 for him a high degree of personal attachment, soon transferred 
 him to other spheres of usefulness and distinction. He became 
 his chancellor, canon at Spiers, and in 1405, through Rupert's 
 influence, Bishop of Worms. 3 In particular, the Emperor used 
 his services as ambassador in the year 1403 to Boniface IX., in 
 whose presence Matthew delivered two discourses, and again in 
 1406 to Gregory XII., on which occasion, as is said, but with 
 no great probability, Matthew was made a cardinal, 4 and finally 
 in 1049 to the Council at Pisa. Shortly after his return from 
 this last mission, he departed this life 1410, in his episcopal city, 
 and was buried in the Cathedral, where an epitaph still marks 
 the place of his repose. 5 Matthew of Cracow conjoined with his 
 lofty station qualities which secured to him personal weight. 
 Endowed with a clear and sound mind, he had enjoyed the 
 benefit of an excellent education in the schools of philosophy and 
 theology. 6 In him a high reputation as an academical professor 
 was combined with that of an admirable preacher, and although 
 a strict, and as it even appears an ascetic, clergyman — for he was 
 connected with the recently instituted order of St Birgitte 7 — he 
 
 1 Rvtpertns ordinavit et fovit Heidelbergense studium, colligens 
 undecumque doctores et magistros potiores, Magistrum Matthaeum de 
 Cracovia sacrae theologiae professorem et pvaedicatorem eximium fecit 
 episcopum Vormatiensem. Theod. Engelhusii Chronic, in Leibnitii 
 scriptor. rer. Brunsvic. T. ii. p. 1136. 
 
 2 Still he was in Heidelberg long enough, to hold at one time the 
 office of Rector. The Hist. Univers. Heidelb. mscripta says of him s. 
 39 : Joanni Noyt in Rectoratu successit Maltheus de Cracovia, factus 
 postmodum Episcopus Woi'matiensis. 
 
 3 Schannat Hist. Episc. Wormat. T. 1. p. 407, 408. 
 
 4 Walch Monim. med. aev. ii., 1 praef. p. 17 sqq. 
 
 5 Schannat Hist. Episc. Wormat. T. i. p. 403. 
 
 6 Trithemius pourtrays him in the following words : Vir in divinis 
 scripturis eruditus, secularis philosophiae non ignarus, ingenio promptus, 
 eloquio scholasticus . . . magnam ab omnibus doctrinae suae 
 laudem commeruit. 
 
 7 Oudinus (Commentar de scriptor. eccles. T. iii. p. 1110) describes 
 Matthew as Sanctae Brigittae familiaris. The expression familiaris 
 might imply personal acquaintance ; and as the Holy Brigitta ("i- 
 1373) was still alive when Matthew had reached manhood, and 
 Pommerania and Sweden are near, this might be inferred. Our 
 
304 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 had no less in his travels and missions and by his intercourse with 
 the great and the humble, collected a rich and extensive know- 
 ledge of mankind and experience of the world. In particular his 
 situation as bishop, and his repeated missions to Italy on affairs 
 of the highest importance, could not but make him familiarly 
 acquainted with the Roman Court, and the whole hierarchy. 
 The opinions he expresses upon these subjects have consequently 
 a peculiar weight, and in that point of view, as the testimony of 
 a prelate of high rank, and great knowledge of the world, and at 
 the same time of distinguished seriousness and piety, they justly 
 claim special consideration. 
 
 Among the numerous productions of his pen left behind him 
 by Matthew of Cracow, but of which the most part are still 
 lying un printed in libraries, there is one which, on account of its 
 singularity, has been repeatedly published, and which, in spite of 
 the obscurity which involves its origin, corresponds so well with 
 the circumstances of the time, with the situation of a German 
 Bishop, and with what we know of the personal characteristics of 
 Matthew, that we cannot but receive as correct the many and 
 reliable documentary statements which point to him as its author. 1 
 
 Matthew, as it seems, is once designated, Matthias de regno Sueciac 
 (Oudinus 1. 1. p. 11 11). The common meaning of familiaris, how- 
 ever, if the foundress of an order of sisters is alluded to, (Du 
 Cange Glossar. med. et. inf. Latinit. T. ii. p. 398. s. v. Familiares) 
 points only to connexion with that order. Familiares designates 
 almost what the Jesuits in after times meant by the affiliated mem- 
 bers of their order. 
 
 1 Trithemius, Scliannat, Oudinus, and Walch, treat of the Writings of 
 Matthew of Cracow, the two last with special detail. Trithemius says 
 (de script, eccl. c. 654): Scripsit multa praeclara opuscula, de quibus 
 tamen pauca ad manus nostras pervenerunt. Vidi ejus ad Henricum 
 Episcopum Wormiensis [Wormatiensis] Ecclesiae non abjiciendum opus 
 de praedestinatione, et quod Deus omnia bene fecerit, cujus Dialogi in- 
 terlocutores sunt pater et filius, quern praenotavit : Rationale divinorum 
 operum Lib. vii. Besides this, Trithemius enumerates : De contractis 
 L. i. — De celebratione missae L. i. Ad Episcopum Wormiens. L. i. — 
 Epistolarum addiversos L. i — Sermonesetcollationes. — Schaimat (Hist. 
 Ep. Worm. i. 408.) represents the Dialogus de praedestinatione and the 
 Rationale divin. operum as two different writings, and supplements the 
 catalogue of Trithemius with : Dialogus inter conscientiamet rationem. 
 Oudinus (Comment, de script, eccl. iii. 1110.) with still greater pre- 
 cision, designates this last writing as Conflictus rationis et conscientiae 
 de sumendo vel abstinendo a corpore Christi, restores the title : de 
 
MATTHEW OF CKACOW. 305 
 
 Praedestinatione and Rationale divin. operum [also opificiorum] to a 
 single treatise, and mentions besides : Sermo de peccatis alienis and 
 Sermones latini per circuitum anni (probably included by the others 
 under the general title of Sermones), also a work, Expositio in 
 Apocalypsin, rendered doubtful by the designation of the author as 
 Matthias de Regno Sueciae. It is most of all remarkable that Oudinus, 
 who furnishes the fullest information respecting even the manuscripts of 
 Matthew of Cracow's works, does not hesitate to cite as one of them the 
 reformatory treatise de Squaloribus curiae Romanae, which Trithemius 
 and Schannat omit, for reasons which it is easy to understand. The 
 authenticity of this treatise is discussed in a very satisfactory manner 
 in the preface to the Monim. med. aev. ii. 1. p. xxi. — xxxii. The chief 
 points in the critical determination of the question are these. Two 
 reasons appear to speak most strongly against its composition by Mat- 
 thew of Cracow : 1. Flacius found it ascribed in a manuscript to another 
 author, Dr Lurtzen, Catal. test, verit. Lib. xviii. t. ii. p. 801. 2. In 
 the course of the work several things are mentioned which belong to a 
 later period, as for example, the reigns of Popes John XXIII. and 
 Martin V., the work of Peter D'Ailly de potestate ecclesiastica, and 
 the fact of his being at the time a cardinal, which he did not become 
 till 1411, with several other particulars. Respecting the first point, it 
 must be remembered that Flacius found in other manuscripts the name 
 of Matthew of Cracow, and that it is much less likely that his name 
 should be without sufficient cause prefixed to a work, than that the same 
 should be the case with the name of Lurlzen. The Bishop of Worms 
 himself might have had quite sufficient reason to emit his work under a 
 fictitious appellation, and even though that were not the case, others may 
 have subsequently judged itexpedient, for the interests of the Church or the 
 conclave, to substitute for the bishop's a name that was wholly unknown. 
 On the contrary, it is more difficult to understand how it could happen 
 that, without any historical ground, the work was ascribed to Matthew of 
 Cracow. It is also clear that during his sojourn at Paris, Matthew might 
 easily have acquired the opinions which are here delivered. As for the 
 anachronisms, which form the second point, they stand in contradiction 
 to the very decided passage, cap. 18. p. 79, in which the author de- 
 clares, in the most distinct manner, that he is writing in the period of 
 the schism, and consequently before the Council of Pisa, or at least 
 before that of Constance. We have therefore no option, save either to 
 suppose, that the anachronisms originated in interpretations made after- 
 wards about the time of the Council of Basle, to which copies of^the 
 work were sent, or that the passage, in which its composition is ascribed 
 to the period of the schism, was a later and fraudulent addition. And 
 here again the first alternative, which agrees with Matthew of Cracow 
 being the author, is the more probable. There was no reason for antedat- 
 ing the tract, but there was good reason for appending to it at an after 
 time any remarks which referred to then existing circumstances. Be- 
 sides, in a manuscript at Wolfenbuttel, all the passages are wanting 
 which infer a later production of the work, after the death of Matthew. 
 ( Walch 1. s. p. xxvii.). We have to add the decisive diplomatic reason, 
 that in a succession of ancient manuscripts (see Oudinus and Walch) the 
 U 
 
306 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL 
 
 The work treats of the Pollutions of the Romish Court, 1 and its 
 contents are substantially as follows. 
 
 Moses beheld a miracle in the bush which burned and yet was 
 not consumed. And even so does Matthew 2 of Cracow believe him- 
 self to be the spectator of a still greater miracle, when beholding 
 the clerical body enveloped for along time in flames, blown to 
 violence by a strong wind, and yet continuing undestroyed. The 
 one phenomenon seemed only contrary to nature, the other 
 seems to him to be a violation of the Divine justice. So strange 
 indeed does it appear to Matthew, that he had expected it would 
 cause a general outcry and alarm, and yet he finds his cotem- 
 poraries unmoved and unconcerned. To convince himself that 
 he is not dreaming, he proposes to relate the results of his obser- 
 vation to others. 
 
 In order to judge of the wrong condition of a thing, 3 says 
 Matthew, we must compare it with the right and opposite one, 
 and we especially require to know the root from which the good- 
 ness of it springs. The Apostolic chair and the Court of Rome 
 are the root of the Church general. The Romish chair has 
 received as its vocation to make laws, to dispense spiritual bles- 
 sings, to correct the wicked, to reclaim wanderers, to punish vice, 
 and to defend the oppressed. It is (according to its destination) 
 the head and minister of all that is good, the pattern of morality, 
 the model of virtuous conduct, and the quarter to which in all such 
 matters the ultimate appeal is made. If, however, we observe the 
 outward acts of the chair of Rome, 4 and infer from these what 
 passes within, we cannot but mark that there is a complete neglect 
 of all that is most needful for the Church. Rarely if ever is a 
 conclave held to promote purely spiritual objects, or, if it be, it 
 
 name of the Bishop of Worms is affixed to it. For the rest, the work 
 was ushered into light by the press, before the days of Walch, by AYolfg. 
 Wisseburg, in connection with Petri de Alliaco Canonibus de emendatione 
 ecclesiae Basil. 1551, and by Edw. Brown in the Appendix ad Ort. 
 Gratii Fascic. rerum expetendarum et fugiendarum Lond. 1690. p. 584 
 — G07. 
 
 1 Tractatus de squaloribus Romanae Curiae in Walchii Monim. med. 
 aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. 1 — 100. 
 
 2 De squalorib. Rom. Cur. Introductio. 
 
 3 De squalorib. c. 1. 
 
 4 De squalor, c. 2. 
 
MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 307 
 
 Las no effect or success. But when, on the contrary, any tem- 
 poral loss or advantage comes before them, the sentences and 
 penalties are of the most rigorous kind. Their whole time is 
 spent in disposing of benefices and of the emoluments connected 
 with them ; and no man, however vicious his habits and scandal- 
 ous his life, but is admitted to a clerical office if he have money 
 to offer. About the improvement of the clergy or the extirpa- 
 tion of heresy and so forth, our magnates of Rome never waste a 
 thought. 
 
 Lest any, however, should fancy that this must needs be, 
 Matthew enquires 1 into the right claimed by the Romish chair 
 to fill the higher offices, and to collate to the benefices of the 
 Church, when these are in the patronage of the clergy. He 
 denies any such right, and represents it as an encroach- 
 ment upon the long-established and statutory privilege of elec- 
 tion partaining to the chapters, as well as upon the prerogatives 
 of the bishops and other dignitaries, to whom the nomination to 
 the inferior offices belongs. If it be said that this is done to 
 punish the chapters and prelates for having exercised badly their 
 right of election and provision, the Bishop of Worms replies, that 
 for the same reason, the right ought also to be withdrawn from 
 the Romish Court, which has exercised it no better. Besides, it is 
 not conceivable, that all the prelates had made a bad use of their 
 right, and if many had done so, the part of a righteous judge is 
 not to deprive an entire body of their justly acquired privileges, 
 but to prevent the abuse of them. It may likewise be asked, 
 proceeds Matthew, if the chair of Rome, when it commenced 
 these proceedings, believed, or if it now believes, that it can 
 appoint to vacant offices better than the bishops, prelates, and 
 chapters ? If it does not so believe, it is the height of madness 
 to usurp the power of a bad appointment, and thus to withhold 
 from the offices, and all interested in them, the benefit which 
 would result from one of an opposite character. If, however, 
 this be believed, it involves the highest presumption. 2 For, in 
 no human way, can the Romish chair know as much of the cir- 
 cumstances of the bishoprics, monasteries, benefices, and candi- 
 dates, (although on such knowledge a right choice depends), as 
 
 1 Ibid, from the third chapter. 2 Magna pracsumtio. 
 
308 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 those who have informed themselves about these matters on the 
 very spot. If it be said : It is more likely that the Pope will be 
 more willing, and take greater pains, to make good appointments 
 than the bishops and prelates, I reply : On the contrary, it 
 is far less likely that all bishops are wicked, than that a single 
 individual is so. Supposing, however, a Pope to be wickedly 
 inclined, which is not an impossible case, the whole affair would 
 then go to ruin. As respects the bishops, this supposition is not 
 probable, because the consequence of its truth would be the sub- 
 version of the Church, and that is incredible, because the Church- 
 general, and the communion of saints, represented by the bishops, 
 is infallible. Just as little will the Pope take greater pains. 
 For even supposing his intentions good, still, owing to the incom- 
 parably greater extent of his business, and his imperfect acquaint- 
 ance with the circumstances of each particular case, there is no 
 possibility of his carrying them into effect. If, on the other hand, 
 the bishops, though better acquainted with local circumstances, 
 are really careless and negligent in the appointments, they ought 
 to be deprived not merely of their right of nomination, but -of 
 their whole power. The fact, however, that the pastoral care, 
 though a far more important trust, is left to them, and only the 
 right of nomination taken away, excites a strong suspicion, that 
 more attention is paid to the revenues of the offices, than to the 
 souls of the flock. Nor can it be said that the Romish chair 
 has taken upon itself the nomination to these offices, from pure 
 brotherly love and piety, and in order to liberate the prelates 
 from cares and dangers. For charity, when well regulated, 
 begins at home, and loves a neighbour, only as much as oneself. 
 The love supposed, however, would be loving a neighbour more 
 than oneself, and consequently would be extravagant, irrational, 
 and absurd. It would also be a very strange kind of piety 
 which exposed itself to a danger, from which it was anxious to 
 deliver a brother, and more so, if this could only be done at the 
 expense of the Church." 
 
 Let it be supposed, 1 however, although it is not admitted, that 
 the Pope possessed the universal right of nomination, what good 
 would arise from it ? The only apparent result seems to have 
 
 1 De squalor, c. 4. 
 
MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 309 
 
 been, and daily to be, the introduction of manifold evils into tlie 
 Church. The clergy are plunged unnecessarily into great 
 expense, trouble, and danger. A worldly zeal, and an impatient 
 pursuit after promotion, are kindled in their hearts. Ambition is 
 powerfully fomented. Every one hopes for the death of another, 
 perhaps even of many, whose offices have been promised to him. 
 Hence arise a multitude of disputes, difficulties, and new decisions 
 of the court, which require to be again explained, altered, or 
 revoked ; so that what was lawful a year ago is now unlawful and 
 condemned, and all is uncertainty with those who are the court's 
 advisers. The apostolic chair itself confesses that its graces have 
 been conferred without sufficient cause. It makes a multitude 
 of exceptions, imposes silence, recalls what it formerly granted, 
 reforms, annuls, quashes, I venture not to say, falsely and men- 
 daciously, and yet I cannot say, without falsehood and menda- 
 city. Were I to speak boldly, I would call it fraud, when a man 
 is excluded from an office which he had procured at great cost 
 both of labour and money. For there is nothing which the 
 laws more dislike than that any one should be cheated out of his 
 right ; and if for once such revocation be justly done, why is the 
 same thing constantly repeated, unless it be to obtain money. 
 But, however this may be, I well know, that it gives rise to scan- 
 dal, and brings disgrace upon the Court of Rome to such a degree, 
 that its proceedings are looked upon as child's play and absurdity. 
 The laity obtain a handle for insulting the whole clerical body ; 
 While strong-minded men, who take the thing to heart, must 
 look down and keep silence, and retire abashed, or openly admit, 
 lest they should appear to sanction, such disorders. 
 
 Now, for the purpose of obviating all these scandals and evils, 
 by which so many worthy men are restrained from entering the 
 sacred profession, and so many worthless characters find admit 
 sion into it, 1 it is necessary, in the opinion of Matthew of Cracoio y 
 to return to the original state of the law, wholly to abolish re- 
 versions and never to appoint to offices, until they are actually 
 vacant. Should any one suggest that in that case many candi- 
 dates would hie to Rome in pursuit of the same benefice, and all 
 
 1 See the end of the 4th chapter, and p. 180, 
 
 2 De squalor, c. 5. 
 
310 TIIE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 but one get their journey for their pains, and that thus the same 
 evils would return, the remedy is very simple. It is to leave the 
 nomination to the ordinaries, to whom it formerly belonged. The 
 objections which might be raised to this proposal, he obviates 
 seriously and wittily, but always with point. If it be alleged, 
 that the bishops would then give the situations to their nephews, 
 kinsmen, and servants, he asks in reply, Whether that would not 
 be better, than giving them to the relatives of cardinals and 
 others connected with the conclave ? But at the same time he 
 demands, that good bishops be given to the Church, and meets 
 the allegation that this is difficult to effect, with the just remark, 
 that if the Pope cannot make a good election in the single instance 
 of the bishop, it must be much more difficult for him to do it in 
 the thousand or more instances of the other clergy (of a diocese). 
 Were any one to take a very secular view of the matter and 
 object, that were the Pope to be left without favours to bestow, men 
 would no more care about him ; they would neither respect, nor 
 apply to him, and he might even be reduced so low as to want 
 the means of subsistence, Matthew replies -} The reverence which 
 is undoubtedly due in the highest degree to the Pope must be 
 sound, i.e. } it must be based upon corresponding qualities, such 
 as justice, clemency, holiness, and benevolence : When by other 
 means, as for example by violence, he seeks to secure honour, 
 that is not true honour but tyranny. If, however, he exercise 
 justice, punish crime, fulfil the sacred obligations of his office, 
 then he will not lack true honour, and if in that way he seek to 
 earn his bread, God, who never forsakes any of his people, will not 
 suffer his vicegerent to seek it in vain. But what has resulted 
 from the practice which has hitherto obtained ? Nothing but a 
 mass of simony. 2 Simony, however, is heresy, and no venial, but 
 a very heinous sin. It robs all who commit it of grace, and places 
 them in the state of eternal perdition, so that the Pope and all 
 who take part in the sale of offices are living in a state of 
 condemnation ; for the practice and encouragement of simony, 
 as now carried on in the court of Rome, is neither accidental, 
 nor proceeds from want of thought, but on the contrary is deli- 
 berate and intentional, has grown into a habit, and is therefore 
 
 1 Dc squalor, c. 6. 2 Ibid. c. 7. corap. p. 180. 
 
MATTHEW OP CEACOW. 311 
 
 unpardonable. This assertion, says Mattheio, will appear harsli 
 to many, and I myself at first shrank not merely from the 
 words, but even from the thought. 1 Certain it is, however, 2 that 
 he who becomes a suitor to the Pope seeks to acquire the right to 
 an ecclesiastical charge or dignity, and consequently to something 
 spiritual, and that the Pope, either directly, or through the medium 
 of some third person, bestows it upon him. This is not done, 
 however, unless some temporal gain be previously given upon 
 the one side, and received upon the other, or, if not given, at least 
 stipulated and secured by contract. Accordingly, to the utmost 
 of their power, the one party sells, and the other purchases, 
 that which is spiritual ; and inasmuch as it is in the intentional 
 sale or purchase of spiritual things that simony consists, 3 both 
 parties are simoniacal, and so are all who help to make the bar- 
 gain, and knowingly promote the shameful traffic. . . And 
 how ruinous are other consequences which flow from such prac- 
 tices ! 4 The churches are cheated with unworthy priests ; the 
 spiritual office is abused ; able and godly men are excluded from 
 it; the universities and schools 5 fall into decline, because the 
 men of talent and science, who have spent their fortune and their 
 strength in study, are not promoted, but passed over for the sake 
 of worthless persons, who stoop to employ the customary arts of 
 intrigue. Of course, others who perceive that it is not merit but 
 vice which meets with reward, withdraw from study altogether, 
 and the sciences fall into a state of declension, from which it will 
 be difficult or perhaps impossible to revive them. And this is 
 an incalculable loss for the Church, which indispensably requires 
 learned men to manage her affairs. 
 
 Matthew now takes up the sophistical excuses urged by the 
 Romish courtiers for their simony. The notion that this is a sin 
 which the Pope cannot commit justly appears to him to need no 
 answer. 6 The allegation that the money is taken, not for the 
 place, but for the trouble of bestowing it {Mattheio thinks that in 
 
 1 De squalor, c. 8. 2 Ibid. c. 9. 
 
 3 De squalorib. c. 13. p. 56. 4 Ibid. c. 9. near the end. 
 
 5 Studia generalia et particularia. 
 
 6 De squalorib. c. 11. Matthew says on the contrary: " Seeing an 
 Apostle could sell Christ, there is no reason why an Apostolical man 
 should not sell the sacrament of his body." 
 
312 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 that case a florin would be quite a sufficient fee), lie, no less 
 justly, considers 1 low-minded and unworthy of so great a prince. 
 A third excuse, — to the effect that, the Pope being lord of all, and 
 particularly of the clergy and their benefices, what he takes from 
 them cannot, in any particular case, be reckoned the price of the 
 benefice, but is really a portion of his own property — gives him 
 occasion to make several very weighty remarks. 2 Matthew admits 
 that the Pope is Lord of all, not merely of the clergy, but, as 
 Christ's vicar, of all Christians, yea, of all who are called to 
 Christianity. In this case, however, sovereignty is, in his opinion, 
 nothing more than a certain dignity and pre-eminence 3 of rank, 
 by virtue of which, one man has power and authority over others 
 and others are subject, but only to a definite extent, to him. He 
 distinguishes various kinds of rule, as, for instance, that of the 
 husband over the wife, that of the father over the children, that 
 of the master over the servant, and, in like manner, that of the 
 Pope over an independent prince, over a vassal of the Church, 
 over a clergyman, and over a servant in his palace. " God 
 alone," he says, " is the absolute Lord of all. All other lord- 
 ship is limited. No man, not even the Pope, has any more 
 power than what God has given him. Tlie first restriction, as 
 regards the Pope, consists in his being appointed the supreme 
 vicar of Christ. This implies that he holds the office for edifi- 
 cation, and not for destruction. He has, consequently, no power 
 to do anything which he knows, or ought to know, will tend to 
 the injury of the Church, or to the ruin of the common weal, or 
 which will prove a bad example, or create a scandal. In order, how- 
 ever, that the Pope may the more certainly accomplish the objects 
 of his government, another legal restriction and law have been im- 
 posed upon him, viz., the Gospel and the whole canon of Sacred 
 Scripture, and no less the Councils, which have been solemnly 
 sanctioned by the Church. And as it is impossible for any single in- 
 dividual to possess discernment, knowledge, and constant recollec- 
 tion sufficient for all his duties, the Pope is in so far also restricted, 
 and obliged to acknowledge himself a fallible man, 4 and in many 
 respects, insufficient for such a lordship. He ought, therefore, to 
 
 1 De squalorib. c. 14. 2 Ibid. c. 16. 3 praeeminentia. 
 
 4 honiinem defectuosum— who is not sufficient of himself. 
 
MATTHEW OF CEACOW. 313 
 
 seek and take advice, and apply for it to good and wise council- 
 lors. How could it ever have been the will of the Lord, who 
 bought the Church with his blood, that any one man, who may 
 possibly be ignorant and ill-disposed, but who, at any rate, is 
 subject to mistake and error, should govern it merely according 
 to his own fancy ? Supposing also that Ecclesiastical affairs and 
 preferments do really belong to the Pope, still he can use them 
 only within the limits imposed upon his sovereignty, and there- 
 fore only according to the rule of Scripture, for the edification 
 of the Church, on certain rational grounds, and in due form. In 
 Scripture, 1 however, not a word is said of the right of the Pope 
 to keep benefices in his own hand, or to put them into his purse. 
 Nor does this tend to edify the Church, for it drives away from 
 its offices those who are the foundation on which Christ has 
 reared it, viz., the poor, however fit they may be, for the duties, 
 and it fosters avarice and cupidity. And to maintain that the 
 clergy, both high and low, are so slavishly dependent and venal, 
 that the Pope, without any rule of law, may rob them of their 
 property and reduce them to indigence, — what is that but 
 lowering the priestly dignity and giving up both the clergy and 
 the sacraments to contempt?" 
 
 Liberal-minded as he was, it is true, the German Bishop 2 does 
 not scruple to admit that the Pope, as well as any other prince, 
 must have sufficient means to live respectably, and enable him to 
 devote his whole attention to the public weal. But he insists 
 that the funds for that purpose shall be raised in a proper manner, 
 ancftiot by simoniacal compacts, deception, and fraud. And to 
 the objection that it cannot be otherwise, and that the Pope must 
 endeavour in every way to secure his rights, he replies, If the 
 necessities of the Pope be really urgent, and if his object be not 
 the mere accumulation of treasure, all he needs to do, in order 
 to raise money in a pious way, is just to assemble the bishops 
 and advise with them. Were they indeed to refuse to assemble, 
 it would be no more than the Church of Rome deserved, because 
 by her neglect of the holy Councils she has dishabituated the 
 prelates from attending them. It is a righteous judgment upon 
 that Church, that having chosen to govern without the advice of 
 
 i De squalorib. c. 17. 2 Ibid. c. 18. 
 
314: TIIE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 others, others have also withdrawn their support from her. From 
 the neglect of the Councils numerous evils have arisen both in 
 past and present times, and though there had been nothing else, 
 this destructive schism, which for so many years has kept all 
 Christendom in darkness and terror, is bad enough. A General 
 Council, if it had been held (as used to be the case), would have 
 terminated it long ago. 1 
 
 Matthew, in conclusion, finds another important point to dis- 
 cuss, namely, the allegation, that though the evils cannot be 
 justified^ neither can they be resisted or punished. Many of his 
 cotemporaries who perceived the errors of the Popes, but who 
 also desired to uphold the absolute authority of the Papacy, 
 pleaded that although the Pope does that which is wrong, it is 
 right to obey him. He cannot be resisted. We ought not even 
 to pass judgment upon the vicegerent of Christ. It is not the 
 members who should govern the head, but the head who should 
 govern the members. If every one were to take upon him to 
 censure the conduct of the prelates, and at his pleasure to resist 
 them, what would become of the authority of their office ? Now 
 here Matthew draws a distinction 2 between two lands of judg- 
 ment, one of which is purely inward and confined to the mind, 
 the other public and judicial. Of the former, he affirms that no 
 person whose acts are public, not even the Pope, can escape it. 
 The second, as being an authoritative sentence 3 upon persons 
 and actions, is entrusted mainly to the higher judges and pre- 
 lates, and in an eminent manner to the Pope. In this case, the 
 inferior ought not to pass judgment upon the superior, men 
 the general body ought not to do it, so long as there is a superior 
 to whom that right pertains, and who is willing to execute 
 justice. If, however, there be no one who is either entitled, or 
 disposed to do it, then the society collectively, or they who are 
 its representatives, may judge and condemn the transgressor for 
 that in which he has transgressed, and as to which he shows 
 himself incorrigible. Supposing this case to occur 4 with the 
 Pope, then, as he has no superior, the Church, or the Church's re- 
 
 1 This passage shows in the clearest manner that the treatise was 
 written prior to the Council at Pisa, and consequently before 1409. 
 
 2 De squalorib. c. 20. 3 autoritativa definitio. 
 4 De squalorib. c. 22. 
 
MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 315 
 
 presentatives, would, according to the Scripture 1 itself, be autho- 
 rized to pass sentence upon him. TJie Church receives her power 
 and honour directly from God. She is connected in the closest 
 way with her bridegroom Christ. She elects the Pope, and if the 
 Pope be united with Christ, he is so really but as the member, 
 minister, and son of the Church. Except for her he would never 
 have been Pope, and would as such be nothing. When, for the 
 sake of his office, and out of flattery and devotion, he is called the 
 bridegroom, the lord or the head of the Church, the language 
 is always to be understood as figurative. The Church has not 
 two heads. It has one only, and that one is Christ and not 
 Christ's substitute, who has been appointed merely to protect the 
 bride, and who is called her head only as being her chief member, 
 and not for his own sake, but solely on account of his office. 
 No doubt the Apostle justly says, that " Whosoever resisteth the 
 power resisteth the ordinance of God," but the Pope has no 
 power to govern badly or to destroy, and he who resists him in any 
 such attempt, resists not the power but the abuse of it, and so 
 does not resist God from whom the abuse does not come. Just 
 as little is the text of the Apostle, Rom. xiv. 14, " Who art 
 thou that judgest another man's servant," capable of application 
 here, for the Pope is not another's. He is the Church's servant, 
 son, and protector ; or if he be another's, then has she the right to 
 exclude him from her fellowship. The further objection, that sub- 
 jects ought not to judge their rulers, is answered by Matthew to this 
 effect. The principle is true in all matters that are either good 
 or indifferent ; but where there is a manifest mischief, the case is 
 altered. The head ought to govern the members, not to mislead 
 or destroy them. When he does that, he does not govern them, 
 and then neither are they bound to obey him, because he thereby 
 ceases to fulfil the duties of the head. Finally, as to the question, 
 What would become of the office of the prelates, were every one 
 to criticise the motives of their conduct? Matthew says, 2 Even 
 though the root or motive of their actions were not to be en- 
 quired into, the fruits would still bring it to light, and when we 
 have once tasted it, we cannot possibly refrain from judging 
 between good fruit and bad, and so exercising the faculty of rea 
 
 1 Matth. xviii. 17. 2 De squalorib. e. 22. near the end. 
 
316 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 son as either to approve or reject it, for reason was given us 
 to be the rule of our actions. 
 
 Such is the vision of the Bishop of Worms. If it be fallacious 
 and vain, he entreats that this may be shewn. "If, however," 
 he concludes, " my vision is true and manifest to every one, who 
 pleases to use his eyes, then let us all arise and lift our voice, 
 that no one may remain in ignorance of so destructive a fire and 
 of its terrible spread." 
 
 What Matthew of Cracow had witnessed was in fact no 
 dream, but, as numerous voices from almost all the countries of 
 Europe, during the 15th century, testify, a bitter and most de- 
 plorable reality. His experiences are substantially the same as 
 we find expressed by independent men in England, Bohemia, 
 France, and even Italy, and his principles identical with those 
 which were maintained especially by the great French theolo- 
 gians, and by the Reformatory Councils of the age. We have 
 here what may be considered characteristical of the tendency 
 which aimed and strove after a Reformation upon the basis of the 
 Church and Hierarchy, viz., a deep and pervading conviction of 
 the corruption in the Church, especially in the Romish court, and 
 a persuasion of the necessity of some restriction, to be applied by 
 the Church and her representatives, to the Papal power, and by 
 means of which the Papacy might be reduced to its pristine, 
 religious, and salutary intention. We have here the doctrine of 
 the human frailty and fallibility of the Pope, and of his being 
 amenable to trial and deposition, 1 by the representatives of the 
 Church. We have the acknowledgment of the indispensable neces- 
 sity of General Councils to advise and watch over and supply the 
 deficiencies of the Papacy. That which excites our wonder is, 
 — First and in general, that these doctrines were propounded 
 so early, in so intelligent and decided a manner, and by a 
 German bishop. Secondly and relatively to our present sketch, 
 that this bishop should have laboured in the city which was 
 afterwards the scene on which our reformer, John of Wesel, 
 acted his part ; and that the work of the latter upon the state of 
 the clergy should be pretty much like a continuation of that of 
 the former, although, as was natural, it expatiates less upon the 
 
 1 Oerson, as is notorious, used for this the term, aufer Hildas. 
 
HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OP THE CLERGY. 317 
 
 basis of the Church's aristocracy, and goes decidedly further in 
 a reformatory course. We thus find, both from above and 
 from below, certain radical convictions, different as to the mode 
 in which they were to be executed, and yet the same in tendency, 
 joining hand in hand, and may thence infer their consequence at 
 the time, and the future issue which awaited them. 
 
 The work of Wesel which we have here in view treats of The 
 authority, duty, and power of the pastors of the Church. 1 There 
 can be no doubt, as we have already observed, that it was written 
 during the author's sojourn at Worms, and it is the most impor- 
 tant monument of his reformatory efforts for the good of the 
 whole Church. Less methodical and scholar-like than the treatise 
 against Indulgences, and sometimes harsh and intemperate in 
 expression, it is yet a lively testimony of WeseVs ability and 
 ecclesiastical zeal, and no doubt also an exponent of the senti- 
 ments of many of his cotemporaries. For this reason, the sub- 
 stance shall here be somewhat fully stated. Induced by the 
 letter of a friend, whose scriptural knowledge and Christian 
 sentiments he commends, Wesel proposes to determine 2 " what 
 really are the functions of the office of priests, and in how far 
 their enactments are obligatory upon Christians. Next what duties 
 may, in the name of the magistracy, be imposed upon the people, 
 or at least ought rightfully to be imposed upon them, under 
 the authority of princes ; and finally, to shew that the tyranny 
 of the great ought to be endured and their commands not unad- 
 visedly resisted, in as far as the cause of the Gospel is not 
 imperilled by submission to wrongs.". 
 
 "Christ," says Wesel, 3 "the restorer of the true law, nay 
 himself the very law of life, defines the authority of priests when 
 he says, ' The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat : All 
 therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, 
 and elsewhere, ' He that heareth you, heareth me ; and he that 
 
 1 De auctoritate, officio etpotestate Pastorum ecclesiasticorum Opus- 
 culum — in Walch Monim. med. aevi. vol. ii. Fasc. 2. p. 115 — 162. 
 
 2 De auctoritate, officio etc. p. 117. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 118. 
 
318 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 desplseth you, clospiseth me:' And so, finally, does the Apostle 
 in the words, * Whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordi- 
 nance of God.' It follows that, if- priests really occupy the seat of 
 Moses, they teach the law of God, and God teaches through them. 
 When, however, they please to teach that which is their own, then 
 don't listen to them nor do what they say. Whatsoever, therefore, 
 they say, sitting upon the chair (i.e., judging according to the 
 Divine law), that do, not because it seems right to them, but because 
 what the mouth of the priest enjoins in such a case proceeds from 
 God. On the contrary, whatever they speak of themselves, is a 
 lie, for all men are liars, and the children of men, vanity." 
 
 And here Wesel will not permit the mere character of priest or 
 even of Pope to be objected to him as constituting a sufficient 
 guarantee that what is dictated to us is Divine. " Because," says 
 he, " I despise as a vain mask the name and title, the honour and 
 quality of whomsoever they may be, were it even an angel, not to 
 speak of the Pope, or a human being, provided they do not utter the 
 words of life, but merely vaunt their office and dignity, and pretend 
 that by these they have received authority to ordain what they 
 please. Christ himself despised all this in the apostleship of the 
 traitor Judas ; and St Paul would have all honour withheld even 
 from angels, unless they minister as messengers to Christ, so 
 far as to require that such masks and pretenders 1 should be 
 an anathema to the godly. So far am I from believing that out- 
 ward shew, and vain splendour, and pompous words, and the 
 heathen salutation of Master, have any weight." In proof of the 
 manifest truth of what he said, Wesel adduces in particular the 
 example and words of Paul. 2 That Apostle withstood Peter to 
 his face, and thereby testified that God does not respect the per- 
 son of a man. In like manner, the Papal title, the reputation of 
 scholarship, and the fame of science, are purely personal things. 
 All that such masks and spectres write and command, can be 
 regarded as true only in as far as the word of God prescribes, 
 which word alone the Lord commands us to hear. The Apostle 
 Paul himself claimed the belief of men solely for the sake of the 
 Gospel entrusted to him by God, not on account of his person, 
 
 1 liujusmodi facicbus et personis. 
 
 2 De auctoritate pp. 119. 120. 121. 122. 
 
HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 319 
 
 and not for the weight of his name. Even he aspires to no more 
 than to be a minister, apostle, and herald, and glories so little in 
 what he suffers for the Gospel, that he declares it to be folly to 
 speak of his labours. Before such a pattern, let the flatterers, 
 whom the Bishop of Rome permits to honour him with the 
 titles of " Holy^' and " Most holy," be silent and not breathe 
 a word. Let the truth of the Gospel be proclaimed, and the 
 work of faith extolled, and then we shall bow the neck to Christ, 
 and to the Pope, as Christ's ambassador and faithful servant. 
 That which Christ says, " The word which ye hear is not mine, 
 but the Father's which sent me," ought the Pope also to be able 
 to say. He only who teaches the word of the Lord, 1 he only 
 who, with insight and skill, feeds the flock, is a true apostle, a 
 shepherd, and bishop, according to God's own heart. " But the 
 man from whom I hear nothing of Christ's righteousness, and in 
 whom 1 perceive no insight and knowledge, I refuse to confess as 
 a master, I own not in him the authority of a bishop, nor rever- 
 ence him as a pastor. What then remains but that all such are 
 dumb idols, serving only their belly and not Jesus Christ, nomi- 
 nal shepherds and mere titular bishops, who, by vain semblances 
 and outward pomps, miserably impose upon the people. I care 
 not, however, for the two-horned mitre. The shining infula 
 affects not me. I abominate the priestly slippers decorated with 
 precious stones and gold. I laugh at the high-sounding names, 
 the .tragic titles, the lofty triumphs. They are mere semblances, 
 and any thing rather than the badges of a true pastor, bishop, or 
 teacher, when that is lacking which alone gives them worth, and 
 renders them tolerable." 
 
 The main ground on which the Papal devices and traditions 
 were defended, and which was their antiquity, and the long ob- 
 servance of them by our forefathers, Wesel meets as follows. 2 "It 
 is," he says, " an argument which will be easily parried by any 
 one who reflects that the Babylonian Empire is not commended 
 for having stood for several centuries. . . Besides the Lord 
 curses those who for the sake of human traditions transgress 
 the Divine commands. They who burden the people with new 
 
 1 De auctoritate pp. 123. 124. 125. 
 
 2 Ibid. pp. 126. 12. 
 
320 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 precepts show themselves not ambassadors of God and stewards 
 of his word, but assume the airs of masters and usurp dominion. 
 Wherefore, dear brethren, let us follow the exhortation of the 
 Apostle, and be no longer children tossed to and fro by every 
 wind of doctrine. We have a right to require from the Pope and 
 the priests, as successors of Christ and the Apostles, the word of 
 God. If they feed us with that, let us listen to them as to the Lord 
 himself, but if not, then will we not admit them to dwell in our 
 hearts, that so we may not seem to have fellowship with their 
 wicked works and lying words." 
 
 Wesel then proceeds, in the remainder of his work, 1 to depict 
 the contrast between the actual state of manners in the Church, 
 and that which, according to the word of God r might be required 
 and expected of the priests. " Let every one," he says, " to whom 
 a bishopric or pastoral charge is entrusted, hear the words of the 
 Apostle, 'Feed the flock of Christ, not by constraint but willingly, 
 not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind, neither as being lords 
 over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.' Now-a- 
 days, however, (alas for the mischief!) there are in the Church 
 more who feast and hunt than who labour, and who, in this respect, 
 are very different from the Apostle, who sought not gifts but 
 fruit. All are engaged in the pursuit of money. Not only 
 is the salvation of souls little attended to, it is not attended to 
 at all. The prelates ought not to be lords over God's heritage, 
 which means that the magnates of the Church are not to be 
 sovereigns and monarchs over subjects, but servants and stewards 
 of the mysteries, even as Christ, the true lord and shepherd, took 
 upon him the form of a servant and bequeathed to us an example 
 of humble ministering. ... If, however, 2 we contrast with this 
 the pursuits and manners of the Bishops, and even of the Pope, 
 where shall we find zeal for the flock of Christ ? where patterns 
 of an evangelical life % where morals worthy of a Christian ? In 
 point of fact all order and rule are completely subverted, and you 
 will see pastors who care for nothing less than to guide the flock 
 with their doctrine and holy lives. Christ entrusted his sheep to 
 Peter, not to exhaust, slaughter, and scatter them, but to feed them 
 with the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God. The same 
 
 1 Especially from p 128. 2 pp. 132. 133. 134. 135. 
 
HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 321 
 
 sword is likewise given to the bishops, in order that they may use 
 it to smooth the rough places, to strengthen that which is weak, 
 and bind up that which is broken. The temporal sword, how- 
 ever, which Peter drew vindictively, the Lord commanded him 
 to sheathe. Of the spiritual sword our bishops are now ashamed, 
 but the other they plunge into the entrails of their brethren. 
 Worthy shepherds truly ! In like manner the diligence of the 
 Apostles is thus depicted in the Gospel, ' They went forth and 
 preached everywhere, 1 the Lord working with them and confirm- 
 ing the word with signs following.' He had, however, previously 
 commanded them, 'Go ye and teach all nations.' 2 Do you under- 
 stand this, ye shepherds of the people % Do you hear it, ye 
 bishops of souls % If you are thus called bishops or pastors, if 
 you bear even the lofty title of Pope, study to be that which your 
 names import. These express far less of sovereignty than of 
 guardianship. Guide, therefore, (for this is the only sort of 
 sovereignty which benefits the Church) guide your sheep, that 
 they may never wander from the pasture of evangelic truth. For 
 if, in consequence of your negligence, any of them fall a prey to 
 the wolf or the lion, the Lord will require from you its blood. We 
 owe to superiors obedience. Superiors owe to us a watchful care." 
 But as the circumstances of the times required, Wiesel expresses 
 himself most strongly and fully upon the ambition of the clergy. 
 He says : 3 " Originally and by nature all men were born equal. 
 The difference between them is a defect which has arisen from 
 their moral diversities — from the merit of one and the guilt of 
 another. This, no doubt, has rendered it necessary that one man 
 should be governed by another. Those who stand at the head of 
 affairs, however, ought not to look merely at their present power, 
 but likewise at their original equality. They ought not to rejoice 
 so much in being superior to others as in doing them good. If the 
 rulers of the people and the dignitaries of the Church were of this 
 mind, the Church would be in a much better condition. The 
 zeal with which the Saviour sought to extinguish ambition may 
 be inferred from the fact, 4 that he does not leave his followers at 
 liberty to take a name designative of pre-eminence, but ex- 
 
 l Mark xvi. 20. 2 Matth. xxviii. 29. 3 De auctoritate p. 139. 
 4 Ibid. p. 140. 
 
322 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 pressly forbids them to assume the proud titles of Master and 
 Lord. " For this reason, I am often surprised that these names 
 have found their way to the spiritual heads of the Church, and that 
 theologians and philosophers assume them as their peculiar privi- 
 lege ; although there is but one who is our Lord and Master, and 
 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge ; 
 not to speak of the blasphemous and fulsome titles of Most wise, 
 Most venerable, Most blessed, Vicar of Christ, Jrlero, Demigod, 
 and even Most godly, with which his flatterers fawn 1 upon the 
 Pope, and which, considering the innate self-love of man, can 
 scarcely fail to make the be-purpled ape vain of his ornaments, 
 and lead him to fancy himself beautiful, and to exult like a brag- 
 gart." 2 Wesel then infers from the ambitious and haughty man- 
 ners of the clergy of all ranks, their un dutiful neglect of the poor? 
 He calls to mind what the apostles had done in this respect, 
 and then adds : " Of all this there is not a trace in the bishops 
 and priests of our day, so that the deacons and sub-deacons no 
 longer know the purport of their office, or neglect it and devolve 
 their duties upon others usually called dispensers of the Holy 
 spirit." 4 In fine, taking a view of the manner in which the 
 Divine worship is conducted, Wesel concludes with these words, 5 
 " Behold, Christian brother, how the whole face of the primitive 
 Church of Christ has been changed! It is considered priestly 
 merely to move the lips, and coldly andunintelligently to mumble 
 the prayers. It is thought a glorious thing when the deacons in 
 Churches bray forth the Gospels and Epistles. They only are 
 considered to have done their part well, and gain the public 
 applause, who, in chaunting, lift their voice to the loudest pitch. 
 None cares whether the psalm is likewise sung with the spirit 
 and the heart, so that one is disposed to believe, that theirs is no 
 mistake who look upon human life as a mere comedy, and imagine 
 that this is nowhere more manifest than in the Church, and 
 among the clergy." 
 
 Having thus depicted the demoralized state of the clergy, 
 Wesel proceeds to shew 7 of what sort the commandments of the 
 
 1 cauda adblandiuntur. 2 thrasonico more. 
 
 De auctoritate p. 141. 4 spiritus sancti admiuistratores. 
 
 6 De auctoritate p. 142. 6 stentores et uiussatores. 
 
 7 De auctoritate p. 143. 
 
HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 323 
 
 bishops ought to be and in how far they are obligatory upon Chris- 
 tians, and here again his chief criterion is the word of God as 
 contained in Scripture. Nothing but what is there laid down 
 binds and obliges Christians. The prelates may inculcate other 
 things, but the transgression of these by no means involves the 
 guilt of mortal sin. Besides, all spiritual authority is given for 
 the purpose of building up, and not of destroying the faith, and 
 according to this rule we must judge of their enactments. The 
 Papal commands, accordingly, in so far as they promote charity, 
 are to be carefully observed, though certainly not on account of 
 the sovereign power of their author, but in freedom of spirit. 
 When, however, tke cause of Christianity on any occasion 
 requires us to act contrary to them, it is lawful for every Chris- 
 tian 1 to protest and to subordinate the commandments of men to 
 the duties of charity. Nor is it difficult for the spiritual man, 
 who judges all things and is himself judged by none, to deter- 
 mine when such a case occurs. No doubt there is reason ta 
 fear, that an act of disobedience of the kind may give offence to our 
 neighbour, and if it be possible to obey the governing power 
 without endangering the truth, it is wrong not to obey it. In 
 the opposite case, however, when there is a risk of injuring the 
 truth, we must not shrink from giving offence. i( If then 2 the 
 commandments and traditions of the higher powers do not run 
 counter to the interests of mutual charity and the public peace, 
 and if they are consonant with the cause of Christianity, we shall 
 observe them not from a regard to them as laws, but from the 
 free spirit of love, that we may live soberly, righteously, and 
 godly, in this present world, — soberly as respects ourselves, 
 righteously as respects our brethren, and piously as respects our 
 Maker. If, however, the mandates of the prelates cannot be 
 kept without prejudice to charity, it is then, in my opinion, no 
 mortal sin to digress from them, especially if we feel no reluc- 
 tance inwardly from the testimony of the spirit and of faith. 
 For that which is not of faith is sin." 
 
 The Pope, the bishops, and prelates, can make no law on 
 which a Christian is not at liberty to form his judgment. So that 
 obedience ought not to be considered obligatory, if such enact- 
 
 1 De auctoritate p. 144. 2 Ibid. pp. 146, 147. 
 
324 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 ments be indiscreet 1 or unjust, or if they be a violation of charity 
 and deserve the name of cruelty and tyranny. Moreover the 
 Pope, although he be Pope, and as some imagine a Demigod, is 
 subject to the rebuke of the humblest Christian who has more 
 insight and wisdom than himself. Every one is, for Christ's 
 sake, bound to endeavour, by brotherly admonition, to bring 
 his fellow-believer to a right mind. Even the Pope is our 
 brother, and a fellow-heir with the very humblest Christian, being 
 incorporated with every believer into the same body of the church, 
 of which Christ is the head. Why should it seem strange there- 
 fore, if, when he plays the fool, the member which has the 
 more abundant honour should be set right by the member which 
 seems to be the more feeble ? . . . It is not his name which 
 makes the Pope a Christian, but faith by the grace of Christ. 2 
 Daniel, one of the least of the prophets, judges the elders. The 
 humility of Christ puts to shame the pride of the Pharisees. The 
 man who instructs and corrects us with the word of God, he is 
 our Pope and Bishop, Pastor and Lord, though the most illiterate 
 and humble of all the people. On the contrary the triple crown, 
 the glittering bulls, the proud hats, and priestly decorations, are 
 all to blame for the disregard into which the word of God is 
 fallen among the humble. 
 
 The genuine fulfilling of the Law, that which alone is accept- 
 able to God, must flow from an inward source, from the spirit, 
 from faith, from love. If this be true of the Law of God, it is 
 much more true of that of man. It is hence a strange and in- 
 tolerable presumption on the part of the prelates, 3 to burden with 
 new commandments a Christian, governed as he is by the eternal 
 and true Law of God's spirit, of faith and of charity. What 
 defect is there in the righteousness of the righteous which can be 
 made up by the observance of human institutions % Who is 
 entitled to prescribe laws to the soul except Him who workcth 
 all in all ? God forbid ! .... It hence follows 4 that if 
 you are a believer, you have nothing to do with the Pope, who 
 is a man, and nothing to hope from man at all. Nay, so far as 
 spiritual gifts and things which tend to salvation are concerned, 
 
 1 indiscrctum. 2 De auctorit. p. 149. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 152. 4 Ibi(L p> U3 ' 
 
HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 325 
 
 you yourself have received quite as much as the Pope and 
 the prelates. Any help that human laws and Papal decrees 
 could possibly give you in the attainment of salvation is given 
 more freely, richly, and immediately by God himself, who is 
 liberal to all who call upon His name." 
 
 Such is WeseFs view of spiritual power. He restricts it so 
 exclusively to the ministry of the word and to the exercise of 
 charity, that in his opinion the moment it oversteps these bounds, 
 it ceases to be episcopal, and becomes tyranny. He then treats 
 also of the duty we owe to the temporal power, or that which relates 
 to the body and to its employments. And here he lays down the 
 following propositions :' — " The condition of the .world, com- 
 prehending as it does both the good and bad, cannot subsist 
 without civil government and the rule of princes. If all were 
 true Christians, one and the same law of charity would reign, and 
 connect them in the unity of the faith by the spirit. 2 The Lord 
 himself, however, enjoins us to 'Render to Caesar the things 
 that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's,' and 
 thereby appears to admit the claims of earthly power. We find 
 the Apostle Paul doing the same, in the Epistle to the Romans, 
 and Peter, in the 2d chapter of his 1st Epistle. The commands 
 of princes may be divided into three classes. In the first place, 
 either they are purely Christian and heavenly, as tending to the 
 public peace, or as subservient to the unity of the Church, or as esta- 
 blishing reciprocal benevolence. In this case, it is proper to obey 
 the commands of the twofold power, and to do it at once, not from 
 fear or with reluctance, but with a cheerful and a ready mind, 
 for they are commands of that charity which seeks not its own. 
 Or, secondly, they inculcate things which are diametrically oppo- 
 
 1 De auctorit. pp. 155. 156. 157. 
 
 2 According to this we must understand correctly what one of the 
 Paradoxes puts into Wesel's mouth, '' Whosoever resisteth the power 
 resisteth the ordinance of God, so, however, as to wish that the 
 power did not exist," Parad. p. 291 b. Wesel thought that in the primi- 
 tive and pure condition of mankind, there was no ruling power, and that 
 in the ideal condition of the kingdom of God, there would be none. But 
 inasmuch as it is now necessary, in consequence of the actual condition of 
 the world, the Christian should freely and fairly submit to it as an 
 ordinance of God, obeying the example and verdict of Christ and His 
 Apostles. 
 
326 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 site to the law of charity and good will. In that case, we must 
 obey God rather than man, and with body and soul resile from 
 that which the princes enjoin, that we may not appear to have 
 fellowship with their wicked works. It will even be lawful to 
 protest, to resist them in season and out of season, and openly to 
 rebuke the tyrants and soul-murderers. We have examples of 
 such conduct in the prophets, apostles, and martyrs, nay in 
 Christ himself. Lastly and thirdly, 1 the magistracy may ordain 
 things which stand, so to speak, between these two, being neither 
 sinful, on the one hand, nor yet of any great or certain worth on 
 the other. In this case, the command should be a sufficient 
 reason for us to obey, but with reserve of our judgment. For 
 everything ought to be squared by the rule, and weighed in the 
 balance of charity and the public good, if we expect to reap the 
 fruit of our obedience. In a word, 2 1 acknowledge the authority 
 of rulers in things which may be required of us without prejudice 
 to piety. In such cases we have the example of Christ ; for 
 although bound by no law, he yet paid tribute to Caesar ; and 
 in such cases no less do the Apostles recommend obedience. . 
 . Yea, if they (the civil magistrates) sometimes even harshly 
 oppress us, still we ought to tolerate the wrong, although they 
 shall not be held blameless for the abuse of their power in the day 
 of judgment. It is true, the princes little deserve that we should 
 endure their tyranny, and bow our necks to their oppressions, 
 but Christ wills, charity requires, and a good conscience towards 
 God 3 commands us to do so. Even the worst princes reign by 
 Christ's consent, and so serve as instruments to correct our sins. 
 Neither ought the public peace to be thoughtlessly imperilled, 
 under the pretext of Christian liberty. Rather than do so, 
 we ought, for the glory of God, and in compliance with the 
 example of Christ, to bear any burdens, annoyances, persecu- 
 tions, and robberies. . . . Let the flesh be beaten to pieces, 
 let the old man suffer affliction, let the body of sin die, if by 
 these means the soul may be rescued, and the new man rise 
 again. . . . This we say, however, not to excuse the 
 
 1 Ibid. p. 158. 2 Ibid. pp. 159, 160, 161, 162. 
 
 s conscientia Dei. 
 
HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 327 
 
 princes, who thus vex and destroy. Let them see to it, that 
 they do not abuse their power, nor wear the sword in vain. The 
 judges of others will be strictly judged themselves, and they shall 
 have judgment without mercy who have not exercised mercy." 
 
 If we look back to the two men whose writings we have 
 reviewed, we find, that Matthew of Cracoio and John of Wisel 
 concur in opinion that the Church in all its members was 
 infected with corruption, and stood in need of a radical improve- 
 ment ; and, in particular, that the Papacy, as the chief seat of 
 the disease, required to be brought back to its original destina- 
 tion and to the true spirit of Christianity. Still there is this 
 essential difference between them. The Bishop, more aristocratic 
 in his position and sentiments, expects that the amendment of 
 the Papacy will proceed mainly from a restriction of its powers, 
 and better advice, on the part of the Church's representatives, the 
 whole body of bishops and prelates — but still, no doubt, upon the 
 basis and according to the rule of the Gospel ; Whereas the 
 preacher more democratically goes back to. the Gospel at once, 
 and to the liberty of the Christian founded thereon, assigns to all, 
 even the humblest member of the Church, when standing upon the 
 Word of God, and wielding the authority of the spirit of Christ, 
 the right to contradict the unscriptural enactments of his eccle 
 siastical superiors, and even of the Pope, and in general to instruct 
 every wanderer from the way of the Gospel. There is this second 
 and kindred difference, that, as usual with men of his class, 
 Matthew of Cracow tempers the sharpness of his opposition with 
 more dignity and moderation ; whereas Wesel, although, like 
 Luther, strenuously insisting upon obedience even to an unjust 
 magistracy, provided only the truth of God's Word remains 
 unimpaired, gives way in a greater degree to violence and intem- 
 perance. In this respect they severally represent, both in substance 
 and manner, the two main tendencies of the opposition in the 15th 
 century. In both we find a praiseworthy and zealous attach- 
 ment to the Church. Their object is the same, although they 
 differ in the choice of means. The first of these tendencies was 
 the more important for the time, and in the Councils of the 15th 
 

 328 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 century, was at last legitimized by the Church. The second had 
 to win its way upwards, occasionally through severe conflicts, 
 and not unfrequently persecutions, on the part of the former, as 
 was the case with Huss in Constance. It contained in its bosom, 
 however, most of the elements of the future, and history has 
 declared in its favour. 
 
( 329 ) 
 
 PART THIRD. 
 
 WESEL'S TRIAL FOR HERESY 
 
 RELATION TO AFTER TIMES. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 WESEL'S TRIAL FOR HERESY. 
 
 For seventeen years Wesel had prosecuted his labours in 
 Worms, and endured no ordinary share of difficulties, molesta- 
 tion, and conflict. By degrees, however, his reformatory 
 writings, the unusual and often offensive license which, in 
 preaching, he gave to his tongue, and the general line of con- 
 duct he pursued, had awakened a host of adversaries, and thus a 
 violent end was put to his labours, which the course of nature 
 must otherwise have speedily terminated. In February 1479, 
 he was formally arraigned before a court of Inquisition in the 
 archiepiscopal city of Mayence. This last step, however, seems 
 to have been preceded by certain others of a preliminary kind. 
 We still possess in manuscript the fragment of a letter 1 addressed 
 
 1 It is to be found in a volume of promiscuous ecclesiastical writings 
 in the University Library of Bonn, under the Rubric Histor. Ordd. 
 religg. Nro. 466 b., after the manuscript copy of the trial of Wesel, 
 bears the superscription, Subscriptam epistolam scripsit Doctor Wo- 
 
330 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 by him to his immediate superior, Bishop Reinhard of Worms. 
 The document wants both the conclusion and the date, and con- 
 tains no distinct intimation that Wesel had yet been subjected to 
 the Inquisitionary trial, and therefore it was probably written in 
 1478, while the storm was still impending. At the same time, it 
 shows that already for a long time he had been enduring dis- 
 tresses of all kinds, and in particular it exhibits, in a most 
 unfavourable light, the conduct of Reinhard of Sickingen, from 
 whom, it is true, we have no justification. The hostility of this 
 Bishop to Wesel, and the hand he took in his suppression, were 
 natural consequences of his position and character, and are mat- 
 ters of positive certainty. The substance of the letter is as 
 follows : Wesel accuses the Bishop of having been for a long 
 time the enemy of his life, 1 his honour, and his fortune, — of his 
 life, because, by innumerable vexations, 2 he had robbed him 
 of sleep, and induced a state of body, which threatened him 
 with early death, — of his honour, because he had brought upon 
 him the imputation of heresy, — and of his fortune, because he 
 had caused various portions of his salary to be withheld, and 
 other plots to be forged against him. On the second of these 
 particulars, which chiefly concerns us here, Wesel appeals to God 
 and his conscience, denies that he ever taught error or false doc- 
 trine, and then proceeds, " Nothing of the kind can possibly be 
 derived from my discourses, in which I have always protested, 
 that it was not my intention to teach anything contrary to the 
 Christian faith, and the truth of the Holy Scriptures. 3 And yet, 
 most venerable Bishop, you have averred, that I have been 
 denounced to you as a teacher of false doctrine on matters of 
 faith. You have not, however, proved the charge, nor ever even 
 named the party who made it. 4 From which circumstance I 
 conclude that it is of your own fabrication, unless the person 
 
 salia gracioso duo Reynhardo Epo Wormaciensi. The little col- 
 lection, containing both printed and imprinted articles, was bequeathed 
 to the University of Bonn by the late counsellor Bruch in Cologne. 
 
 1 . . . Reverende Pi-aesul, indies te fuisse et esse inimicum et 
 adversarium corporis, honoris et bonorurn meorum. 
 
 2 vexationes nimias, innumeras. 
 
 . . . in quibus semper protestatus sum salva fide Christiana 
 et vcritate sacrarum scripturarurn. 
 4 delatorcm. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 331 
 
 who is dean of your Church, and your vicar in spiritual affairs, and 
 of whom I have great suspicion, may have informed against me, 
 which lie must have done to the prejudice of his soul's salvation, 
 and in violation of his oath, to study the interests of the churches 
 of Worms and of all belonging to them. No doubt, you say, 
 that public rumour has accused me of errors in doctrine. 1 Even 
 that, however, I do not believe, because you have never taken 
 the trouble fairly to investigate the truth of the report, if indeed 
 there be any truth in it at all." This is strong enough, but Wesel 
 further charges the Bishop with having set on foot the attempt 
 to defame him as a heretic, in order that his salary might be 
 stopped, for the benefit of the chapter. Nay he does not scruple 
 to accuse the head of the Church of Worms of having burned 
 one of the documents favourable to him in a law-suit, and of 
 similar machinations. 2 
 
 A letter like this, whether it was, as is certainly probable, the 
 outcry of truth, or was founded, in part at least, upon the con- 
 jectures of suspicion, was not calculated to dispose the mind of a 
 man like Reinhard of Sichingen in Wesel' s favour. Whatever 
 he had been before, he could not but be his enemy now. Other 
 circumstances conspired to aggravate the storm gathering around 
 the head of Wesel. He was a Nominalist, keenly opposed to the 
 prevailing Scholasticism, and, in particular, to the now widely 
 spread views of Thomas Aquinas. 3 He was an ardent friend of 
 the more simple and practical doctrine of the Bible, a determined 
 opponent of all the corruptions of the Hierarchy and Monastic 
 orders, and the advocate of principles which robbed of all 
 worth the entire system of ecclesiastical works, graces, penances, 
 and punishments. Even this was quite sufficient ground to bring 
 
 1 famam me accusasse tie errore in materia fidei. 
 
 2 This is done in the last part of the letter, where among other 
 things it is said, hanc diffamationem conti'a me excitasti, ut praefati 
 (the Chapter and a certain John Utzlinger or Etzlinger) habeant contra 
 ine acturi pro debitis locum excipiendi deinfamia. In the sequel also, 
 where mention is made of a letter important for Wesel, has literas tu 
 fecisti et disposuisti comburi per Ilenricum Urtenberg scribam tuum. 
 In hac tua contra me machinatione damnificasti me in centum et quad- 
 raginta flor. The rest is very illegible. 
 
 3 Thomam peculiariter non coluerat, says an eye-witness of the trial 
 for hersey, with whom we shall afterwards become acquainted. 
 
332 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 upon him the irreconcilable hatred of the most powerful corpora- 
 tions both of the Church and of its universities. We must 
 likewise, however, take into account the style in which he 
 delivered his convictions, his recklessness, severity, and coarse 
 popular diction, which was highly irritating. In the existing 
 position of the Church, and regard being had to the interests ot 
 the Hierarchy, there was every cause for impeaching him : And 
 when a just ground was once obtained, the inevitable consequence 
 was that a multitude of other charges wholly groundless, or merely 
 probable, should fasten to it and aggravate the accusation. It was 
 also requisite to stir up against him the passions of the people, with 
 whom he was so great a favourite, and for this purpose, several 
 very odious and flagrant charges were circulated. It was 
 reported that at Wiesbaden and other places he had said from 
 the pulpit, that whoever sees the holy sacrament sees the Devil, 1 
 that he lived on familiar terms with Jews 1 and Hussites, 3 and that 
 he was clandestinely a bishop of that sect. The first of these 
 particulars we hold to be a pure slander, but the other two 
 demand a brief consideration, before we pass to the trial itself. 
 
 It is notorious in how wretched a state of oppression and con- 
 tempt the Jews were kept during the middle ages. They were 
 regarded in no other light than as infidels and enemies of Christ, 
 the refuse of mankind, on which God had set his brand. The 
 magistrates merely tolerated them, and treated them as little 
 better than outlaws ; while they were frequently the object of 
 cruel persecution and inhuman torture on the part of the people. 
 Consonantly with these views, any degree of acquaintance with 
 the Hebrew language and literature, which might be gained from 
 them, was looked upon as of itself savouring of impiety, anti- 
 christianism, and heresy. The fact was, however, that almost 
 since the days of Jerome, the transmission of the Hebrew tongue 
 and Scriptures had almost wholly ceased among the Christians, 
 
 1 Examcn magistrate art. 20. 
 
 2 This point I do not find mentioned any where except in Erhard 
 Gesch. des Wiederaufbliihens, Th. i. s. 291. But presuming that one, 
 in other respects a most conscientious enquirer, had good groundsfor his 
 assertion, and as it accords very well with the circumstances, I adopt 
 the trait into my narrative, leaving it to the reader's option to consider 
 the fact as hypothetical. 
 
 3 Examcn art. 3. 4. 5. and esp. art. 6. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 333 
 
 and even the most learned theologians, of the West. The 
 consequence was, that the restorers of Hebrew literature were ob- 
 liged to gather their knowledge in the first instance from learned 
 Jews, and it is well known how laboriously Reuchlin collected 
 his Hebrew learning by associating with learned Rabbins in 
 Germany and Italy, or, as he himself said, fished it together in 
 fragments. 1 The strong prejudice, however, to which we have 
 alluded, greatly obstructed intercourse with Jews, and all endea- 
 vours to turn their learning to account ; And so it came to pass, 
 that the revivers of the study had a sore conflict to wage with the 
 mistaken piety of Christians and churchmen, and the fanati- 
 cism of the clergy and the people. The most celebrated instance 
 of this is the attack made by the Inquisitors of Cologne upon 
 Reuchlin. Reuchlin, however, was not the first who devoted 
 attention to the Hebrew tongue. In this walk he was preceded 
 and also encouraged by John Wessel, as he seems also to have 
 been by WesseVs acquaintance, John of Wesel. When Wesel there- 
 fore is accused of holding intercourse with Jews, and of adopting 
 their principles, we can scarcely construe this in any other sense, 
 than that, desiring as a scriptural theologian to learn the Hebrew 
 tongue, or add in general to his information, he had cultivated 
 the acquaintance of learned Jews in Worms. Even in this dis- 
 trict, however, a keen hatred of the Jews prevailed among the 
 people, and during the reign of Bishop Frederick (of Dumneck 2 ) 
 had burst into a storm, which could only be calmed by the help 
 of the Archbishop of Mayence and other princes. 3 In place, there- 
 fore, of recognising in WeseVs conduct a noble thirst of knowledge, 
 his enemies brought it as an accusation against him, and one 
 evidently calculated to tell upon the popular dislike of the Jews, 
 that he had been misled by persons of that nation into anti- 
 christian heresies. It needs, however, a very slender acquaint- 
 ance with WeseVs doctrines to perceive that they are, in no wise, 
 directed against Christianity, but solely against ecclesiastical 
 
 1 Preface to the third book of the Rudimenta hebraica. Erhard 
 Geschichte des WiederaufblUhens, B. 2. S. 211. 
 
 2 Between 1427 and 45. 
 
 3 Schannat Hist. Episc. Wormat. T. i. p. 413. For other perfceu 
 tions of the Jews during the same period, see Gieseler K. Gcsch. ii. 
 3. s. 314. 
 
334 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 abuses, and that, as respects a reaction in favour of Jewish prin- 
 ciples, at least on a great scale, there was much more of that on 
 the side of the Church now lapsed into legalism, than on the 
 side of the reformers before the Reformation, who combated every 
 trace of it. 
 
 There was more weight in the other charge, that he was a 
 Hussite. This was no mere bug-bear, but founded upon actual 
 facts. The doctrines which the Hussites professed had taken root 
 extensively in these quarters. Even so early as the 13th century, 
 the WdldenseSj their pioneers, had spread into Germany. Numbers 
 of them were to be found in Switzerland, on the Rhine, in Sua- 
 bia, Thuringia, and Bavaria. They had here formed themselves 
 into societies which corresponded with each other and endeavoured 
 to propagate their tenets. They were particularly numerous in 
 the district of the Upper Rhine, in and around Strasburg, where 
 they were called the "Friends of God," and " Wiukeler" (lurkers) 1 
 and they may be traced also in other places, such as Mayence, 
 Augsburg and Diinkelsbuhl. Detected, persecuted, and slain (for 
 in these centuries vast multitudes of both sexes were burned to 
 death without being, like Huss and Jerome, much spoken of), they 
 kept their ground until late in the 15th century. 2 That was the 
 date of the Hussite commotion which likewise spread over Germany 
 from another quarter. The Hussites, no less than the Moravians 
 and the brotherhoods to which they gave birth, exhibited a lively 
 zeal in the propagation of their principles. They had emissaries 
 in all parts of Germany, 3 and we know in particular that when 
 Luther's fame began to spread, they sent deputies to wait upon him. 
 The minds of men were at the time susceptible of impressions of 
 the sort, and hence, in the course of the 15th century, we find the 
 doctrines and principles of Huss springing up in many quarters 
 of Germany. 
 
 From various causes, 4 Franconia became a principal seat of 
 these free movements. Here at a very early period we find 
 
 1 Rohrig die Gottesfreunde und Winkeler am Obcrrhein, in Illgcns 
 Zcitschriit fur List. Theol. 1840. Heft. i. s. 122. 
 
 2 Ilagen Deutschlands lit. und relig. Verkaltnisse im Ref. Zeitalter, 
 B. i. s. 20. 66 ff. 
 
 3 Gieseler K. Gesch. B. 2. Abtk. 4. a. 479. Anmerk. L 
 
 4 Ilagen in a. 1. s. 164 ff. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 335 
 
 the Waldenses and Friends of God. Even prior to Huss, and 
 about the year 1342, a layman, called Conrad Hager in Wurtz- 
 burg, publicly impugned the sacrifice of the Mass and the similar 
 institutions which ministered to the cupidity of the clergy. 1 Huss 
 himself entered Franconia on his journey to Constance, and 
 was well received, especially at Nuremberg. 2 In Bamberg so 
 strong was the leaning to the heretical opinions, that the Council 
 found it necessary to restrain the citizens by oath from embrac- 
 ing them. 3 In Aischgrunde and Taubergrunde, about 1446, a 
 certain Frederick Mliller preached the doctrines of Huss, and 
 found numerous adherents among the people. 4 Above all, how- 
 ever, the impression produced in this district, at a somewhat later 
 period, by a certain peasant boy whom they called "the drummer," 
 Was very remarkable. About the middle of the 15th century, 
 at the village of Niklashausen, in the diocese of Wurtzburg, 
 there appeared a poor and illiterate peasant youth, called John 
 Behem, 5 pretending to be acting by the command of the Holy 
 Virgin, who, he said, had revealed herself to him, in white raiment, 
 as he fed his flock, and had communicated to him certain doctrines 
 congenial alike with those of the Hussites, and with those which 
 afterwards laid the foundation of the peasant-war. He vehe- 
 mently rebuked the corruption of the clergy, especially their 
 avarice, pride, and licentious manner of life, and threatened them 
 with the impending judgments of God. He rejected tithes, and 
 contended that all taxes should be paid voluntarily and for God's 
 sake. He spoke against the jurisdiction of the Church, and the 
 obligatory force of the commands of priests. He insisted that 
 all road-money, 6 tolls, servitudes, 7 and other oppressive burdens, 
 claimed by spiritual and temporal superiors, should be done away, 
 
 1 Ibid. s. 169. 
 
 2 Theobalds Hussitenkrieg, Nurnb. 1621. Th. 1. s. 40 ff. 
 
 3 Hellers Bamberg. Reform. Gesch. Bamb. 1825. s. 11. 
 
 4 Hagen in a. 1. s. 169, 170. Gropp. Annal. T. ii. p. 112. 
 
 5 The history of this remarkable man is fully detailed in D'Argentre 
 Collectio Judicior. de nov. erroribb. T. i. pars 2. p. 2S8 — 290, and in 
 a German narrative in manuscript from the 15th century, contained 
 in the collection above alluded to, as in the College Library at Bonn. 
 Hist. Ordin. relig. Nro. 466. b. See as regards him an Appendix. 
 
 6 pedagia. See Ducange s. v. pedagium. T. iii. p. 248. 
 
 7 precariae exactiones. See Ducange s.* v. Precaria. T. iii. p. 448. 
 
336 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 and, on the other hand, insisted that hunting and fishing, and 
 the free use of the forests, should be common to every Christian 
 man, without distinction, whether rich or poor, peasant, bishop, 
 or prince. It is true that Rudolph of Wurtzburg soon put a 
 stop to the harangues which the shepherd lad was accustomed 
 to deliver, on fields and meadows, from the windows of farm- 
 houses, and even from the branches of trees. He caused 
 him to be apprehended in 1475, and miserably burnt to death, 
 but the youth had already scattered seed among the people, who 
 reverenced him as a saint, and flocked to hear him in inconceiv- 
 able crowds from Franconia, Bavaria, Suabia, Hesse, Thuringia, 
 Saxony, and Meissen, 1 and ere long that seed struck root, and 
 ripened into a bloody harvest in the war of the peasantry. 
 
 But to a much greater distance, as far even as the Nechar and 
 the Rhine, the same principles were early scattered. In a Bull, 
 emitted against the Council of Basle in the year 1431, Eugene 
 IV. insists upon the fact, that in and around that town, the 
 people were infected with the Hussite heresy. To Heidelberg 
 Jerome of Prague, Huss's friend, had paid a visit in 1436, 2 and 
 there posted up a list of propositions, among which there was 
 one denying the doctrine of transubstantiation. 3 Shortly after, 
 John Draendorf, or von Schlieben, 4 also laboured in this district. 
 He was of a noble Saxon family, and had received ordination at 
 
 1 Tanta multitude) hominum, non solum ex Francia ipsa Oriental! 
 (Franconia), scd etiam ex Bavaria et Suevia, ex Alsatia ct partibus 
 Itheni, ex Wetteraugia, ex Hassia, ex Buchonia, ex Thuringia, ex 
 Saxonia et Missnia, quotidie ad miserandum Fatuellum hunc turmatim 
 fluebat, ut frequenter uno die 10,000 hominum, aliquando 20,000 
 nonnunquam etiam triginta millia eonvenisse apud villulam Niclaus- 
 hausen sit proditum. In D'Argentre p. 288. The number may be 
 somewhat exaggerated, still that a very large throng came to this 
 pla e is not to be doubted. 
 
 2 Comp. Hist. Univers. Heidelb. mscr. p. 43. Struve Pfalz. Kirch-. 
 Hist. s. 2. 
 
 3 Roylco Gesch. des Const. Cone. Th. 3. s, 340. v. der Hardt Acta 
 Cone. Const, iv. 645 sqq. 
 
 4 With respect to this J. Draendorf (called by Luther Dramsdorf, 
 by Mclancthon Drandorff) comp. Kapp Nachlese von Ref. Urkunden 
 Th. 3. s. 13. and s. 38 — 60, where the trial by the Inquisition is de- 
 tailed, and Bcesenmeyer in the theol. Studd. und Kritt. 1828. II. 2. s. 
 399, where the passages of Luther and Melancthon, which refer to him, 
 are cited. 
 
UTS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 337 
 
 Prague. For reasons unknown to us, lie came to Weinsberg, 
 and called upon the citizens to defy the Papal interdict, which 
 had been issued against them. For that offence, however, and 
 for recommending the use of the sacrament under both species, 
 he was apprehended at Heilbronn, arraigned before a Court of 
 Inquisition 1 at Heidelberg, and condemned to be burnt to death. 
 He suffered at Worms upon the 3rd of February 1425. The 
 same fate befel Peter Turnau 2 in 1426 at Speyer, and also 
 Frederick Reiser, commonly called Tunauer, 3 in 1458, at Stras- 
 burg. The latter was at first probably a disciple of Tauler, or 
 one of the " Friends of God," but during an imprisonment in 
 Bohemia had imbibed the doctrine of the Hussites, and was con- 
 secrated one of their priests. Pie preached this doctrine in clan- 
 destine meetings of adherents at Wurtzburg, Heilbronn, Pforz- 
 heim, Basle, and Strasbiirg. In the last of these towns he was 
 tracked by the Dominicans and brought to the stake. Of his 
 numerous followers at Strasburg, both male and female, some 
 shared his fate, and some were banished. Among others, his 
 patroness, Anna Weiler, an old lady engaged in mercantile pur- 
 suits, died along with him. m 
 
 We thus see, that there was in these districts ample oppor- 
 tunity of connexion with the Hussites and their doctrines, and 
 from what appears at the trial of Wesel, and indeed, according to 
 his own acknowledgment, there can be no doubt, that he had 
 
 1 It consisted principally of Heidelberg professors, among whom 
 John of Frankfort is specially mentioned. 
 
 2 Flacius Cat. test. Verit. ii. 853. edit. Francof. 1556. 
 
 3 Properly Donauer (Danubianus), because he was born in the dis- 
 trict of the Danube (at Deutach). The original records of his trial, in 
 the year 1457, are still extant in Strasburg. In the work " Tutsch- 
 land," written by Jacob Wimphding (1501), and published at Strasburg 
 in 1648 by Joh. Mich. Moscherosch, the author mentions, in the chapter 
 entitled " What things ought to be punished from a regard to the ser- 
 vice of God," as among the meritorious actions of former citizens of 
 Strasburg, that. " in defence of the Papal chair, they had burned to death, 
 a certain leader of heretics, called Frederick Tanawer, for speaking ill 
 of the donation of Constantine, and had condemned and sentenced several 
 of his followers, partly to death and partly to exile in the year 1458." 
 Jung in his journal Timotheus Strasburg 182 J. Th. 2. Rdhrichs 
 Gesch. der Kef. im. Elsass. Th. 1. s. 35. and dissertation by the same 
 author, liber die Gottcsfreunde und Winkeler bei Illgen 1840, 1. s. 160. 
 
 Y 
 
838 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 held intercourse with one of their emissaries, a certain Nicolaus 
 of Bohemia, (or Poland). It is not, however, probable 1 that this 
 intercourse was, either solely or principally, the cause of the Inqui- 
 sitorial proceedings, partly, because the point does not appear 
 with sufficient prominence in the foreground of the trial itself, 
 and partly because there were other and more notorious things 
 in the writings, and especially the discourses of Wesel, available 
 as grounds for instituting a process against him. His connexion 
 with the Hussites, like that with the Jews, was probably taken 
 advantage of merely to furnish a nickname, readily intelligible to 
 the multitude, and calculated at once to excite dark suspicions in 
 their minds. In spite of the spread of their views, a Hussite was 
 a name still generally hated and feared. The mention of it 
 instantly conjured up the idea of a blazing pile. Even Luther, 
 free although he was from prejudice, at first repudiated all fellow- 
 ship with the sect and their doctrine ; for, when accused by Eck, 
 in the disputation at Leipsic, in the same way as Wesel was, of 
 abetting the Hussite heresy, he called his opponent for his pains 
 an " insolent and malicious sophist," and having in the course of 
 the dispute admitted that among* the Hussite doctrines there 
 were some really Christian and evangelical, this so incensed 
 Duke George, that he exclaimed " The man is mad." 
 
 Several theologians of the school ef Thomas are mentioned 2 as 
 taking the lead in preferring the accusation against Wesel before 
 Diether von Isenburg, the Archbishop of Mayence. This pre- 
 late, 3 who had been forced to expiate his own intrepid opposition 
 to the Romish see, by the military devastation of his capital, 
 showed no disposition to expose himself and his bishopric to 
 fresh dangers for the sake of a single daring preacher. 4 He 
 entered into the proposal, and made the necessary preparations, 
 
 1 As Gieseler also observes, K. Gesch. B. 2. s. 481. Anmerk. o. 
 
 2 Exaraen. magistr. at the very beginning, instigantibus, iino cogen- 
 tibus Thomistis quibusdam. 
 
 3 Compare respecting him, the monographv, Diether von Isenburg, 
 Archbishop of Mayence. Frankf. 1792. 2 Theile. 
 
 4 Exam, magistr. p. 292 : veritus, ne denuo ab episcopatu ejice- 
 rctur. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 339 
 
 by inviting theologians from Cologne and Heidelberg to help to 
 constitute a court of inquisition, before which Wesel was to be 
 arraigned. The Archbishop's letter of invitation, dated Mayence, 
 17th Jan. 1479, to the University of Heidelberg, towards which 
 the prelate had already shewn other marks of special confidence, 1 
 is still extant in manuscript, 2 and I shall here give the most import- 
 ant and characteristic passages. After alluding to the obligation 
 he lay under to endeavour to preserve the purity of the Lord's 
 vineyard, the prince-bishop proceeds : " We have recently perused 
 some writings from the pen of John of Wesel, Professor of Theo- 
 logy, and, for many proofs and reasons, could not help regarding 
 them with suspicion. They attack the articles of our religion, 
 and with so much bitterness, that it seems to me improper to 
 pass them in silence. For this reason, we have caused the afore- 
 said John of Wesel to be apprehended and kept in decent custody, 
 and there to await our further deliberations, and as he is obsti- 
 nate in what he says and asserts, we appoint a legal investigation 
 to be made into his religious opinions, that they may be ascer- 
 
 tained. At the same time, as he is a person of great subtilty, 3 
 we need the help of some men well-versed in Holy Scripture, and 
 of sound judgment and discretion. In such your University 
 abounds, and therefore we earnestly entreat and exhort you, for 
 the sake of religion, to send to our city of Mayence, upon the 3d of 
 February ensuing, several well-instructed divines, that they may 
 be present at the examination of the said Dr John, upon the 
 following day, and that their learning may help and promote the 
 refutation of his errors." The Archbishop has no doubt of the 
 willingness of the University to comply with his wishes, and 
 thereby respond to the special favour which on his part he had 
 always shewn to it, and he concludes with requesting an answer. 
 This answer the University returned on the 23d January 1479, 
 and, as might be expected, cheerfully complied with the Electoral 
 Archbishop's request. In the name of the Rector and the 
 whole body, it extols 4 the excellent prelate for his zeal in pre- 
 serving the purity of the faith, and then proceeds as follows : 
 " Although your Highness has already acquired distinction by 
 
 1 Hist. Univers. Heidelb. mscr. p. 54. 2 Ibid. s. 82. 
 
 3 propter hominis illius argutias. 
 
 4 Hist. Univ. Heidelb. mscr. p. 83. 
 
340 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL. 
 
 the general success of your government, the zeal you show in 
 voluntarily and instantaneously hastening to encounter daring 
 enemies, deserves, in a particular manner, the highest honour, 
 unbounded praise, and immortal glory ; and if, in general, your 
 great and fatherly heart can cherish no wish, to which we are 
 not ready at once, and to the utmost of our poor ability to 
 respond, so especially do we promise, for the sake of the Church's 
 glory, merit, and usefulness, to comply with this so holy and 
 salutary wish, and to send to you the men you request. Not 
 merely in this matter, however, but in every other agreeable to 
 your Majesty, 1 and which does not exceed our abilities, will you 
 find us at all times and in the highest degree willing to serve you." 
 In fact, on the day appointed, the University despatched three of 
 her divines, the Doctors Nicolaas of Wachenheim, Hencig of 
 Amsterdam, and Jodocus of Calw, 2 accompanied by several of the 
 Masters. After a similar correspondence with the Archbishop, 
 the University of Cologne did the same, delegating the Domini- 
 cans and Inquisitors, Master Gerard von Elten and Master Jacob 
 Sprenger, and a third person of the same order. 3 The process 
 could therefore commence in due form. 
 
 Before entering upon the narration of it, however, we crave 
 permission to say a word or two respecting the chief actors. 
 The one of most exalted rank, though certainly not the best 
 qualified for such an affair, was Archbishop Dietlier himself. 
 Possessed of energy and patriotism, he was yet no theologian, 
 and of slender attainments in any branch of learning. 4 The 
 position he held in the Church, and the relation in which he stood 
 to the Romish see, deterred him from actually interesting himself 
 in WeseVs favour. At the same time, his better convictions must 
 equally have restrained the man who had been the early friend 
 and protector of Heimburg, the advocate of the principles of 
 the Councils of Constance and Basle, and the champion of the 
 
 1 The University employs towards the Elector not only the expres- 
 sions, Cclsitudo et Dominatio, but also Majestas vestra. 
 
 2 Exam, magislr. p. 298. 
 
 3 Ibid. 
 
 4 It was said of him what at that time was highly disparaging, that 
 he could not speak two words of Latin. Schrbckh K. Gesch. Th. 32. s. 
 2G9. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 341 
 
 rights of the German nation against the claims of Rome, from 
 acting with zeal against him. He was accordingly passive in the 
 transaction, attended the sederunts, lent the court the sanction 
 of his authority, subordinated himself to the Inquisitors, and 
 repeatedly entertained the parties engaged in the trial at his table. 
 Neither do any of the archbishops, clergy, and councillors, or of 
 the members of the University of Mayence, appear to have come 
 prominently forward on the occasion. The active promoters of 
 the inquest were the commissioners from the two Universities of 
 Cologne and Heidelberg. These evidently shared the business 
 between them, the delegates from Cologne, consonantly with the 
 whole character of their University, taking chiefly the inquisi- 
 torial part, and leaving to those of Heidelberg, the scientific. The 
 main burthen devolved upon the Dominican, Gerard von Alien, 
 who discharged the office of Inquisitor, and conducted the exami- 
 nation. According to the character given him by Trithemius, 1 and 
 which is probably too favourable, as during the trial he certainly 
 showed no great proof of erudition, he was a learned and acute theo- 
 logian, well versed in Scripture and philosophy, had long filled 
 a professor's chair in the University of Cologne, and becoming 
 weary of the world, had retired from it into the Dominican order, 
 where he was soon appointed to the office of an Inquisitor. With 
 him as junior colleague was associated Jacob Sprenger, who had 
 been raised to the same office by Innocent VIII. This person has 
 left to posterity no other evidence of the theological erudition, for 
 which Trithemius gives him credit, 2 except the authorship of the 
 'so-called " Hammer of Witchcraft," i.e., a form of process fortho 
 trial of witches, a work which is said to belong in common 3 to 
 him and another Inquisitor, Henry Institoris, the two original 
 founders of trial for witchcraft in Germany. Among the Hiedel- 
 berg theologians, the most eminent was Nicolaus of Wachenheimf 
 a man who had now reached an advanced stage of life, and been 
 
 1 Trithemius de scriptor. eccles. c. 845. p. 201. 
 
 2 Ibid. cap. 957. p. 229. 
 
 3 Trithemius ibid. Altamurae Biblioth. Dominicana p. 205 and 215. 
 Schrockh K. Gesch. B. 30. s. 474 and 477. 
 
 4 See respecting him Trithemius de script, eccl. c. 864. p. 206. We 
 shall say more of him in the sequel, when speaking of Wessel's sojourn 
 at Heidelberg. 
 
342 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 for nearly fifty years a professor at Heidelberg. He was a skilful 
 scholastic, and zealous theologian, and the sole member of the 
 court who, like Wesel himself, belonged to the party of the Nomi- 
 nalists. 1 Of his two colleagues, Jodocus of Cairo is the only one 
 with whom we have any particular acquaintance. Trithemius pic- 
 tures him, 2 as we have already seen, as a learned theologian and 
 a man of great activity of mind. All of these persons decidedly held 
 the principles of the Church, some of them in a narrow, others 
 in a more enlarged and philosophic spirit. They had the advan- 
 tages of learning, of judicial station, of the support of the civil 
 power, and they were appointed for the purpose, not of dealing 
 kindly with an erring brother, but of silencing and judging a 
 heretic. 
 
 Before them was arraigned John Wesel, now old, infirm, 
 and bent with many a cross, a truly afflicted man. In his 
 better days of youth and vigour he had uttered the beautiful 
 words : 3 " Let the flesh be beaten to pieces and the old man 
 suffer affliction ; let the body of sin die, that the spirit may be 
 saved and the new man rise again ; let the rod of correction 
 smite ; but do thou, O Lord, grant courage to bear it ; let 
 waves of temptation break in, but do thou give strength to sur- 
 mount them ; let persecutions arise, but do thou send victory 
 from heaven." Now, however, when persecution had actually 
 arisen, it must be confessed, he did not exhibit all the bravery 
 which we love and admire in a determined confessor of the truth. 4 
 The courage, which, like WeseVs, mounts on certain occasions to 
 presumption, is also apt on others to sink into timidity. It is 
 painful to see men who know better yielding unconvinced to 
 mere power. But instances of the kind do unfortunately occur 
 in the history of the Church's despotism, amidst opposite ex- 
 amples of lofty and shining faith and fortitude. And although 
 we must not draw a veil over them, still it is our duty to judge 
 
 1 He is described, Exam, magistr. p. 298. as, solus de via (ut dicunt) 
 Modernorum. 
 
 2 De script, eccl. c. 873. p. 208. 
 
 3 De auctorit. officio et potest. Pastorum, p. 161. 
 
 4 Walch Monim. med. aev. ii. 1. Praef. p. liii. calls Joh. of Wesel 
 a Confessor ; but scarcely with truth, according to the ancient signifi- 
 cation of the word. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 343 
 
 them humanely, especially when accompanied with such pallia- 
 tions as are found in the case of Wesel. It is evident, from his 
 letter to the Bishop, that he had already endured innumerable 
 vexations. He was old and weary, and reduced by sickness to 
 extreme debility. He had no wish to return back to life, but 
 only to be allowed to die in peace. He declared that his judges 
 had failed to convince him, but, induced by the persuasions of 
 well-wishers, who took the responsibility upon their consciences, 
 and probably also by the request of the Elector, who would cer- 
 tainly have been grieved to see the old man committed to the 
 flames, he made what appears a very general recantation, and 
 submitted to the Church. 
 
 It is time, however, to enter on the trial itself, and we shall 
 relate it at considerable length, as scarcely a case could be found 
 furnishing more satisfactory materials for forming a full and cor- 
 rect conception of a proceeding of the kind. There are extant 
 two narratives of this Inquisitory process, from the pen of eye- 
 witnesses, one which has been printed, and one which still con- 
 tinues in manuscript. 1 Both of them are by unknown authors, 
 but both present us with a very lively picture of the scene, bear 
 generally the impression of truth and fidelity in the details, and 
 perfectly agree with each other in the main circumstances. They 
 differ only in the following points : The printed report, drawn up 
 by one of the members, probably, of the University of Heidelberg, 
 is more exact in its statements of the facts and the names of the 
 persons. It gives at the commencement a collection of paradoxes 
 from the sermons of Wesel, and at the end, a variety of judg- 
 ments passed upon him, and in general, it contains more specific 
 and characteristic traits of what several of the parties did and said. 
 Frequently, too, it is written in a lively, but at the same time 
 
 1 Theprinted Narrative which Ortuinus Gratius previously published, 
 is to be found in D'Argentre Collect, judicior. denov. error. Paris. 1728. 
 T. i. P. ii. p. 291 — 298. The unprinted is in a volume of promiscuous 
 writings in the College Library at Bonn, under the Rubric, Hist. 
 Ordin. religios. Nro. 466 b. Besides this original, I am indebted to the 
 kindness of the Consistorial-CouncillorZ?rwcA, in Cologne, for the copy 
 I have now before me. 
 
£44 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 also a ruder style. The imprinted report, which rather resembles 
 a protocol, and which, as wc may infer from the marked distinc- 
 tion it confers upon Gerard von Elten, 1 was probably drawn up 
 by some one from Cologne, is more full in reporting what was 
 spoken, begins at once with the examination, abstains from the 
 expression of any personal opinion, is written in somewhat better 
 Latin, and only here and there gives those individual and charac- 
 teristic traits which so agreeably fill up the printed report. In 
 the following narrative we shall found upon the first report, and 
 at the proper places introduce, as annotations, or in parenthetic 
 clauses, supplementary matter from the second. 
 
 On Friday the 8th of February, 2 the parties connected with 
 the process met for the first time in consultation. 3 There were 
 present all the doctors and masters from Heidelberg, the 
 Archbishop's suffragan, the Vicar Count of "YVertheim, the 
 Custos Count of Solms, the two canons Breitenbach and Maca- 
 rius, the Minister of Frankfort, 4 the Rector and Dean of the 
 Faculty of Arts in the University of Mayence, and several other 
 prelates and councillors of the Archbishop. They settled the 
 course of procedure, and resolved that Master Wesalia should be 
 sworn to deliver up all and every one of the writings and tracts 
 of which he was the author, in order that he might be convicted 
 by his own words. The Count of Wertheim, the Archbishop's 
 Fiscal, Michael Heim, the Dean of the church of St Victor, 
 and a notary, were appointed to administer the oath. The 
 Heidelberg doctors, with three others, viz., the Canon Macarius, 
 the Dean of St Victor, and a third, were appointed to peruse the 
 writings, extract from them the errors, and arrange these in a list. 
 Meanwhile the Masters' Elten and Sprenger arrived from Cologne, 
 and among them, also, the writings were distributed for the pur- 
 pose of extracting the heresies. 
 
 The very next clay, Saturday, the doctors of Heidelberg and 
 Cologne presented their extracts to the Archbishop. There was, 
 however, no summary of them, and therefore he did not inspect 
 
 1 He is e.g. at the very beginning, p. 1, called Theologus egregius. 
 
 2 Feria scxta post Purificationem. 
 
 3 Printed account in D'Argentre s. 292. 
 
 ^ 4 He is called, without specifying his name, Plebanus Frankfordien- 
 6is through the whole narrative. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR IIERESY. 345 
 
 them. 1 The doctors also formally proposed that Master Gerard 
 Elten should act as Inquisitor, and the Archbishop accepted his 
 credentials. After further appointing the time and place for the 
 examination, viz. that it was to proceed on Monday at the con- 
 vent of the Minorites, where Wesel was in custody, the whole 
 doctors, with the masters from Heidelberg, 2 dined at the Arch- 
 bishop's. 
 
 On Monday the 11th Feb. at seven in the morning, the Arch- 
 bishop, the Inquisitor, all the doctors and masters from Cologne 
 and Heidelberg, the Rector and Dean of the Faculty of Arts, with 
 many other members of the University of Mayence, the canons 
 and doctors, the Archbishop's Councillors and Chancellor, the pre- 
 lates and students, the suffragan, the minister of Frankfort, the 
 fiscal and beadles, met, in the refectory of the Minorites, for the 
 examination of Wesel. The Inquisitor occupied the highest seat, 
 the Archbishop the next, and then the rest in their order. Before 
 commencing, the Inquisitor spake as follows : — " Most reverend 
 father, and honoured doctors ! The present meeting has been 
 called by our venerable father the Elector, for the purpose of 
 hearing what Master John Wesel has to say touching certain 
 opinions he is suspected of holding on articles of the Catholic faith. 
 I shall begin, however, by pleading in his favour. I have therefore 
 to request, that two or three who are favourably disposed towards 
 him, and any others who please, will take in hand to admonish 
 him to renounce his errors, return to a better mind, and sue for 
 mercy, if he ask mercy he shall obtain it, but if he will not ask 
 it, we shall proceed without mercy." 3 Thereupon the suffragan 
 Macarius, and the minister of Frankfort, were commissioned for 
 the purpose. They remained, however, so long absent, that the 
 Inquisitor despatched the Fiscal to recall them, and to say that 
 Master John Wesel must present himself personally, and express 
 his gratitude for the offer of mercy. But just as the Fiscal was 
 on the point of departing, the three commissioners made their 
 
 1 Praesul, it is there said, p. 292, nihil eorum inspexit, quia in unum 
 non erant redacti. We see from this how indifferent Diether was to 
 the whole affair. 
 
 2 I look upon one of these, to whom it so expressly alludes, to have 
 been the author of the printed narrative. 
 
 3 Unprinted account, " He will then find mercy without mercy." 
 
346 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 appearance, and introduced, according to his own request, Master 
 John himself. 
 
 John Wesel then came forward between two Minorites, pale, 
 looking like a corpse, and with a staff in his hand. 1 A place in 
 the centre of the circle, 2 exactly opposite the Archbishop and 
 Imjuisitor, was pointed out for him to sit down upon the floor. 
 The Inquisitor then addressed to him in person the offer of 
 mercy. Whereupon Wesel was about, to reply, and commence a 
 full protestation and defence, but he was interrupted by Master 
 Gerard, who told him to be brief in what he said, and to declare 
 at once whether he meant still to adhere to his opinions, or was 
 willing to subject himself to the decision of the Church. Wesel 
 replied, that he had never taught anything contrary to the deci- 
 sions of the Church, and that if in his writings he had erred or 
 said what was wrong, he was willing to recant, and to do what- 
 ever was right. On this the Inquisitor enquired, " Do you then 
 ask mercy 1" to which Wesel rejoined, " Why should I ask mercy, 
 having as yet been convicted of no crime, fault, or error?" 
 " Well," said the Inquisitor, " we shall recall it to your remem- 
 brance, and commence the examination." Meanwhile other 
 members of the court joined in exhorting Wesel to sue for mercy, 
 and at last he did utter the words, " I ask for mercy." But the 
 Inquisitor nevertheless proceeded with the examination. As a 
 preliminary step, he caused his own credentials to be read by 
 the notary, and John of Wesel to be formally cited before his 
 tribunal, and he also commanded him, on pain of excommuni- 
 cation, simply to answer the questions, and to speak the truth 
 without evasion or sophistry. The notary of the Archbishop was 
 also sworn faithfully to take down what was said, and two persons 
 were appointed as witnesses of the trial. Whereupon the pro- 
 ceedings commenced. 
 
 The first question asked of Wesel by the Inquisitor was, " If 
 he believed himself bound by the oath he had sworn to speak the 
 truth, though contrary to his own or another's interest I" Wesel : 
 il I know it." Inquisitor : " Say, I believe it." Wesel "What is 
 
 1 • , . . pallidus, silicernius, habens baculum in manu. Let the 
 reader reflect on what Wesel had endured prior to his apprehension, and 
 during his long imprisonment. 
 
 2 It is expressly said, locatus est ad medium in terra. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 347 
 
 the use of saying I believe it, when the fact is that I know it." 
 This irritated the Inquisitor, who with a sharp accent exclaimed 
 " Master' John, Master John, Master John, say I believe, say I 
 believe it." Wesel answered " I believe it." 
 
 Secondly, being interrogated if he believed that by the fact of 
 not speaking what he was convinced to be the truth, he at once 
 rendered himself liable to the penalty of excommunication, and 
 committed a mortal sin, he replied, first, "I know it," and then, 
 " I believe it." 
 
 3. Being interrogated, Whether he had written a treatise on 
 The nature of the obligation of human laws, to a certain Nicolaus 
 of Bohemia or Poland, and whether he was the author of several 
 treatises on the Spiritual power, Indulgences, Fasting, and other 
 subjects ? Wesel believes that he did write these works, and that 
 he showed them to. many scholars, and in particular that he had 
 sent the work on Fasting to the Bishop of Worms. 
 
 4. Interrogated, Whether he had held intercourse with the 
 aforesaid Nicolaus in his own house or elsewhere, and how often ? 
 Wesel believes and acknowledges that he has often conversed 
 with that person on the subject of medicine, and of taking the 
 communion under both species, and that he had done this 
 at Mayence, adding that he had refuted Nicolaus out of the 
 Gospel. 
 
 5. Interrogated, Whether he had written other tracts or letters 
 to any one, and in particular to Bohemians or other schismatics 
 or heretics ? The defendant believes that he has not done so. 
 
 6. Interrogated, Whether he had ever received treatises or 
 letters from Bohemians or any other heretics, and whether he 
 believes their doctrines, patronizes them, or is their Bishop % 
 Wesel avers that it is not the fact. 
 
 7. Interrogated, Whether he had ever taught or preached 
 that the Scriptures do not say that the Holy Ghost proceeds 
 from the Father and the Son, and what he does believe upon this 
 point ? Wesel confesses that he had written, but declares that 
 he had never preached, to that effect, and that he does not 
 believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the 
 Son as one and the same principle, because in his opinion this 
 cannot be proved from Scripture. 
 
 8. Interrogated, Whether he believes in one Holy Catholic 
 
348 THE LIFE OP JOHN OP WESEL. 
 
 and Apostolic Church, and whether he had ever written or 
 preached anything against it? Likewise if he believes or has 
 written or preached that the clause, Nam sicut anima ratio- 
 nalist &c, has been improperly inserted in the Athanasian 
 creed ? IVesel believes in the one Holy Church, never intention- 
 ally wrote any thing against it, but certainly considers the 
 clause referred to to be spurious. 
 
 9. Interrogated, Whether he considers the Church to be 
 Christ's spouse, and governed by the Holy Spirit ? Certainly. 
 
 10. Interrogated, Whether he believes or has written or 
 preached that the Church is fallible in articles of faith and 
 things necessary for salvation? He answered, the Church of 
 Christ cannot err ; but is informed that he had written the con- 
 trary. 
 
 11. Interrogated, Whether he believes that the Romish Church 
 is the head of all others, and that the faith which it confesses 
 and maintains is the true faith delivered by Christ ? This Wesel 
 believes. 
 
 12. Interrogated, Whether he believes that the Bishop of 
 Rome is the true vicar of Christ upon earth, and that it is neces- 
 sary for the Church to have a head, 2 or that synods and assem- 
 blies 3 of priests are sufficient (to wit for the government of the 
 Church) ? He does believe that the Bishop of Eome is Christ's 
 vicar, and that a head is necessary for the Church. 
 
 13. Interrogated, Whether he believes that the Pope, when he 
 sins,* forfeits the use of his power and jurisdiction ? He does not 
 believe this. 
 
 14. Interrogated, Whether he believes, or has written or 
 preached, that the Apostles received no authority from Christ 
 
 1 The article of the Athanasian creed here referred to is, Nam sicut 
 anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita et deus et homo unus est 
 Chx-istus. That Wesel taught what was contrary to the standards of the 
 Church or heretical respecting the Person of Christ, we have no 
 evidence. The question whether Christ was nailed or bound to the 
 Cross, which afterwards occurs, is no proof to the contrary. The 
 whole matter amounts to only a critical doubt, as to the originality of 
 that passage in the creed. 
 
 2 Praesidentem — the expression is used in both narratives. 
 
 3 Conventus et congregationes. 
 
 4 Papa peccator. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 349 
 
 to legislate for the Church ? He confesses that he has preached 
 and written that this is not said in the Gospel, and that he does 
 not believe that the Apostles received any such authority. 
 
 15. Interrogated, Whether he believes, or has written, or 
 preached, that the Pope, Emperor, or other princes and prelates 
 have no plenary power to enact laws binding on the consciences 
 of their subjects, unless with the subjects' assent — that subjects 
 assenting to any particular, law thereby pledged themselves to 
 keep it, and that only when they trespass against a law to which 
 they have so assented, are they transgressors and guilty of mortal 
 sin ? Wesel believes that the laws do not require the assent of 
 subjects, and that the ordinances of the Church are obligatory 
 upon those who would avoid mortal sin. On this article, how- 
 ever, he wavered. 1 
 
 16. Interrogated, Whether he believes, and has written or 
 preached, that every priest is substantially a bishop, and that 
 the difference between the two is merely nominal % He believes 
 that there is a difference 2 between a bishop and a priest. 
 
 17. Interrogated, Whether he believes, and has written or 
 preached, that no Christian, even the most learned, has authority 
 to interpret the words of Christ ? Likewise, whether he believes 
 that, in interpreting the Scriptures the holy Fathers and Doctors 
 received the aid of the same Holy Spirit by whom, according to 
 the faith, the Scriptures were delivered and revealed ? The first 
 article Wesel considers false, and he does not believe the second. 
 
 18. Interrogated, Whether he believes, and has written or 
 preached that children, although conceived in their mother's 
 womb, are yet without original sin ? Wesel certainly believes 
 this. 
 
 19. Interrogated, Whether he believes that in the holy Sacra- 
 ment of the altar, Christ is really and sacramentally contained, 
 or that he is merely there in the way in which God is present in 
 every place, by virtue of his essential being and power % And 
 whether he believes that in the sacrament the very substance of 
 the bread, or its substantial form/ remains, or that after the con- 
 
 1 varius taraen fuit ad istum Articulum. 
 
 2 credit differentiam esse — the expression is very ambiguous, and 
 admits of several senses. 
 
 3 In the unprinted account, formam sacramentalem. 
 
350 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 secration the whole Christ, his body, blood, and deity, is present 
 under the form of the bread, and that he is so likewise under 
 that of the wine ? He believes this, but believes likewise that 
 the body of Christ may exist under the form of the bread, 
 although the substance of the bread remain. 
 
 20. Interrogated, Whether he had preached in Wiesbaden or 
 elsewhere, that whoever sees the holy sacrament of the altar, 
 sees the Devil ? He does not believe it. And being likewise 
 asked by the Inquisitor, 1 When he had last confessed, read the 
 Mass, and received the Supper 1 ( Wesel appeared, from age 
 and weakness, scarcely capable of officiating in the Mass.) He 
 replied that he had last confessed on Christmas eve, and even 
 received the sacrament, and likewise, that he considered that 
 every Christian was bound to confess and take the communion 
 once a year. 
 
 21. Interrogated, Whether he believes that abstinence is im- 
 posed by law upon the clergy of the Western Church, or that 
 they are bound to chastity, and likewise, whether they are obliged 
 to keep the seven canonical hours ? He believes that the law 
 binds them to both. 
 
 22. Interrogated, Whether he had preached to monks, nuns, 
 or Beguines, that they were not bound by the vow of chastity or 
 by any other vow ? and whether he had asserted that the Monastic 
 state is not favourable to salvation, or had said to the Minorites : 
 " I cannot think you will be saved in your state ?" Wesel believes 
 that Monastics are bound by their vows. He may have said, 
 " that it is not by Monachism, but by the grace of God, that we 
 are saved." 2 He also considers the Monastic life to be a way 
 of salvation, and added, If they are not saved, who then shall 
 be so? 
 
 23. Interrogated, Whether he had ever said to a priest at 
 Coblentz or to any other person, that he might cohabit with a 
 woman without sin % He denies that he ever did. 
 
 24. Interrogated, Whether he believes or has written that 
 there are no kinds of mortal sin, except those which are designated 
 
 1 This happened at the commencement of the examination, but is 
 introduced here as kindred matter by the author. 
 
 2 According to the unprinted account, Religio (Monachism) nullum 
 ealvat sine gratia Dei. 
 
HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. I 351 
 
 as such in the Bible ? Wesel certainly does believe this, and will 
 believe it till better taught. 
 
 25. Interrogated, Whether he had preached to the people that 
 it is doubtful whether Christ was bound with cords, or fastened 
 with nails to the cross 1 He confesses having said that in the 
 history of the passion nothing is stated for certain upon the 
 matter. He believes, however, that he was nailed. 
 
 26. Interrogated, Whether he has met with persons who em- 
 braced or favoured these and other of his opinions % Wesel 
 declares that he has not. 
 
 27. Interrogated, Whether he believes that the Indulgences 
 of the Church are efficacious? what in general his opinion 
 respecting Indulgence is ? and whether he had written a treatise 
 upon the subject ? He ackowledges that he had written such a 
 treatise, and believes what is therein contained. 
 
 28. In fine, being interrogated respecting the vice-gerency of 
 Christ upon earth, he answers that he does not believe that 
 Christ has left any vice-gerent, and appeals for proof to what 
 Christ himself said, when about to leave the world, " Lo, I am 
 with you always," inasmuch as these words distinctly intimate 
 that he did not intend to appoint any one as his substitute.! If 
 a vicar signifies one who in the master's absence is to perform his 
 work, then Christ has no vicar upon earth. 
 
 At the close of the examination, Wesel was led back to prison. 
 The Archbishop, the Inquisitor, and the doctors, then resolved to 
 appoint a committee to advise what further steps should be taken, 
 and for that purpose nominated the doctors of Heidelberg and 
 Cologne, the Chancellors of the Archbishop and the Count Pala- 
 tine George Pfeffer and Thomas Dornberg, the Suffragan, the 
 Rector of the University of Mayence, and the canons Count of 
 Solms and Macarius, the Fiscal and two notaries. After dinner 
 they held a sederunt at two o'clock, and settled the procedure for 
 the following day. 
 
 On Tuesday morning, the same parties, as on the day before, met 
 again in the Monastery of the Minorites, and on this occasion, the 
 laity were indiscriminately admitted and no one refused. Wesel 
 
 1 The unprinted account adds, " because it is his will to be pre- 
 sent and do every thing himself." 
 
352 THE LIFE OF JOTTN OF WESEL. 
 
 was brought forward, and the Inquisitor informed the Court that 
 there were three things which they had that day to do. First, 
 to propose afresh to the panel certain articles to which his 
 answers on the previous day had not been sufficiently precise ; x 
 secondly, to ask him certain questions which were not asked the 
 day before ; and, thirdly, to learn from him once more, whether 
 he meant to adhere to, or to depart from what he had yesterday 
 said. The oath having been again administered, the following 
 additional articles 2 were taken down. 
 
 Interrogated respecting his Treatise on Indulgences, he believes 
 that the treasure of good works cannot be distributed by the Pope, 
 because no such treasure has been left upon the earth, inasmuch 
 as Scripture declares of departed saints, " That their works do 
 follow them." Likewise he believes, that there is no commuta- 
 tion of the penalties due on account of sin, for the sufferings of 
 Christ and the saints, because the merits of the latter are not 
 transferable, so as to be satisfactory for others, and hence it is 
 not in the power of the Pope or any prelate, to distribute to 
 others the treasure containing them. Moreover, he does not 
 believe that his treatise contains the statement that " Indul- 
 gences are not remissions of the penalties imposed by law or 
 human authority for sins, and consequently that such remis- 
 sions usually termed Indulgences, are a pious fraud upon be- 
 lievers." In like manner, he does not believe, that his treatise 
 contains any such article as the following : " That the Church 
 grants Indulgences, is a proposition only true of that Church 
 which is fallible, and, therefore, by granting them, the Church 
 does more harm than good." 
 
 Being further interrogated, what are his sentiments respecting 
 the consecration and benediction of altars and cups, church orna- 
 ments, lights, palms, herbs, holy water, and other inanimate 
 objects ? He believes that there is no virtue in them to drive 
 away evil spirits, or to effect the forgiveness of venal sins ; He 
 likewise believes, that holy water has no more efficacy than other 
 and common water. 
 
 1 Printed account : non satis resolutus. Unprinted : non satis recol- 
 lcotus. 
 
 L ' These come in the imprinted account after the repetition of the 
 articles of the previous day. 
 
WESEL'S TRIAL FOR HERESY. 353 
 
 Further, with respect to marriage and degrees of consan- 
 guinity, he believes that the Pope has no power of dispensation 
 as respects the degrees forbidden in the Old Testament, but 
 that he has that power as respects those forbidden by the New 
 Law ; likewise that believers are under obligation to abstain in 
 the forbidden cases, if they would avoid mortal sin. 
 
 In fine, he avows his belief in the following articles : It is in the 
 power of God to impart his grace to any one who has the use of 
 reason, without the motion of his free will. One instance of 
 this is the Apostle Paul. He did nothing by his free-will for his 
 conversion. It is solely by the grace of God, that the elect are 
 saved. Nothing ought to be believed which is not contained in 
 Holy Scripture. 
 
 The questions ashed upon the former day having been asked 
 again, Wesel adhered in almost every instance to his previous 
 answers, especially with reference to articles 1—6, 9 — 18, 20 — 28. 
 On articles 7, 8, and 19, he made some additional remarks. As to 
 article 7th, on the procession of the Holy Ghost, he believes that 
 the clause in the Nicaean Creed, which says that the Holy Spirit 
 proceedeth from the Father and the Son, is false, and that the 
 words of St John, who affirms that the Spirit proceedeth from the 
 Father, are more worthy of belief, because it may well be doubted, 
 whether every council, though lawfully convoked, is under the 
 immediate influence of the Holy Spirit and of Christ. He like- 
 wise believes that the doctrine of the procession of the Spirit from 
 the Father and the Son, is not contained in Scripture, either as 
 regards the words or the meaning. On the 8th article respect- 
 ing the Church, he still defined it to be the fellowship of all who 
 believe, and are united together in the bands of love. This is the 
 true Church of Christ, and it is known to none but God. He also 
 observed that we should not believe either in the Saints, Augustine, 
 Ambrose, or any other, or in General Councils, but only in the 
 Sacred Scriptures, the canon of the Bible, On the 19th article, 
 respecting the Lord's Supper, he believes, that in the conversion 
 of the substance of the bread into the body of Christ, the body 
 is the prime matter and the naked substance of the matter. 1 In 
 all other respects he adheres to his former statements. 
 
 1 . . . . credit, quod in conversione substantiae panis in corpus 
 Christi, corpus est materia prima, et nuda substantia materiae. !5ce 
 likewise the unprinted account. 
 
 z 
 
354 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 The same day, in the course of the examination, he also said, 
 " Though all forsake Christ, T, though I should do it alone, will 
 adore him as the Son of God, and continue a Christian." To 
 which the Inquisitor answered : " All heretics say the same, even 
 when already fastened to the stake." As he denied having written 
 certain statements, his own treatises, in his own handwriting, 
 were shown him, when he could no longer persist in the denial j 1 
 and having on one occasion frequently repeated that he never 
 heard such a thing, Master Gerard said to him, " You a doctor 
 of Holy Scripture, and don't know that !" [In fine 2 the Inqui- 
 sitor exhorted him in respect of his errors to ask for mercy, 
 when the following colloquy ensued. Wesel : Must I ask for 
 pardon, though I have not been convicted of guilt ? — Inquisitor : 
 You must either ask for pardon, or expect a more severe sen- 
 tence ; but if you ask for pardon, you will obtain it. — Wesel: 
 You force me to confess and ask for pardon, and yet you have 
 never proved me guilty. — Inquisitor: I do not force you. — Wesel : 
 Yes, you do constrain me. — Inquisitor : I do neither the one nor 
 the other, but you must of your own accord sue for pardon, and 
 I protest against the charge you make. 3 — Other members of the 
 court also encouraged Wesel to this step, and he at last said, 
 " Well then I do ask for mercy." Upon which the Inquisitor 
 concluded with the words, " Not so, you must come voluntarily 
 and ask it."] 
 
 At the close of the examination, 4 Wesel was once more con- 
 ducted to prison, and it was then determined that three of the 
 doctors of theology, the suffragan, Herwig, and Sprenger, should 
 be deputed to wait upon him, and amicably exhort him to 
 renounce his errors and heretical opinions. [They were told, 
 however, not to enter into any statement of reasons, as that would 
 give him the opportunity of further discussion, and so the matter 
 would never come to an end.] 
 
 1 Refers undoubtedly to some passages in the treatise on Indul- 
 gence. 
 
 2 All enclosed within brackets here, and in the sequel, is from the 
 unprinted narrative. 
 
 3 He caused his protest to be minuted. 
 
 _ 4 The unprinted narrative adds, "having taken time for considera- 
 tion (deliberationem cepit)." 
 
WESEl/S TRIAL FOR HERESY. 355 
 
 The deputies accordingly, at an early hour on Wednesday, 
 met, and exhorted and dealt with him. [He replied : Ought I to 
 act against my conscience % — The deputies : No, for the articles, 
 as you yourself see, are false. — Wesel : You say so, indeed, but 
 you do not prove it. — The deputies : No proof is necessary, for 
 they are condemned by the Church. — Wesel: Of that I am not 
 sure. — The deputies : Your uncertainty will not exempt you 
 from punishment.] Dr Herwig also, among other things, and 
 probably to incline him to admit the authority of the Church, 
 asked : Why he believed in the four canonical Gospels more 
 than in that of Nicodemus ? Wesel : Because I choose to do so. — 
 The deputy : But why do you believe in the four Gospels ? 
 Wesel : Because I have so received it from my parents. — The "C 
 deputy : But why do you not believe the Fathers of the Church % 
 Wesel : Because their doctrine is not canonical Scripture. — The 
 deputy : But how can you expect that people will believe you in the 
 pulpit, if you yourself do not believe the holy teachers ? Wesel: 
 I preached, but I never troubled myself whether they believed 
 my words or not. The deputies becoming then more importunate 
 with him, he said : " Were Christ himself to be present, and to be 
 treated in the manner you treat me, he would be condemned as a 
 heretic ; but, he added with a smile, He would be too acute for 
 you. [In fine, after much talk on both sides, Wesel declared, I 
 will recant, if you ivill take the responsibility upon your consciences. 
 — The deputies : That will we do, and bear all the guilt that 
 might otherwise burden yours. — Wesel : If, however, I lose 
 my wits, it is not I that do it.] After dinner at noon it was 
 resolved next day to present to Wesel the chief articles which 
 he was to recant and abjure. 
 
 Accordingly, upon Thursday, a list of the errors laid to his 
 charge and a form of recantation were presented to him. He 
 intimated his willingness to comply with all that was required of 
 him, and to make his recantation, first in the refectory of the 
 Minorites before the Bishop and Clergy, and then with due 
 solemnity in the cathedral before the people, after notice had 
 been given in all the other churches of the city. 
 
 On the Friday, about seven in the morning, the Archbishop 
 and Inquisitor, the doctors, prelates, and many both of the clergy 
 and laity, assembled once more. The Inquisitor delivered a 
 
356 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 short address, in which he stated that Wesel was now ready to 
 recant. Wesel was then conducted into the apartment by the 
 Archbishop's Fiscal, and the Inquisitor thus addressed him : — 
 " Dear Master John, you requested to have time allowed you for 
 consideration, on the subject of your prayer for mercy, and your 
 recantation of the several tenets on which you have been found in 
 error, and by which you have brought a stain upon the Church 
 and given offence to the people. Such a time for consideration 
 you have got, and now that the present company have been 
 called together for the purpose, you may freely say what you 
 have in your mind." Wesel thereupon wished to fall upon his 
 knees in presence of the Archbishop, and the rest of the company, 
 but being too weak to do so, the Inquisitor called to him to keep 
 his seat and speak on. Accordingly, after his fear and trembling 
 had subsided, with a distinct voice, and from his inmost breast, 
 he uttered the following words : — " Most honourable Father in 
 Christ, Archbishop of this renowned diocese, reverend father In- 
 quisitor, and you Doctors, Masters, and other reverend gentle- 
 men, I voluntarily confess that errors have been found in my 
 writings and sermons. These errors I now recant, and am also 
 ready to recant them publicly. I submit myself to the com- 
 mandments of the Holy mother Church, and to the tuition of the 
 Doctors. I will endure the penance which has been imposed 
 upon me, and I supplicate forgiveness and mercy." 
 
 [The Inquisitor now asked of him the following supplementary 
 questions : — How long he had been a preacher % Answer : Seven- 
 teen years at Worms. — When he wrote the treatise upon Indul- 
 gences % Answer : At the time when the sale of Indulgences 
 was preached, and the year before. — When he had formed his 
 opinion respecting the Holy Ghost % Wesel believes that it might 
 be about six years ago. — He then declared himself ready to recant 
 and abjure publicly in the cathedral, and entreated that, he might 
 not again be sent to the dark and filthy prison, but allowed 
 to occupy a decent house. The Inquisitor, however, put him off 
 until his recantation should have been made. He would receive 
 absolution, but till then it was not proper for him to keep com- 
 pany with any one. He was accordingly conducted back to the 
 place of his previous confinement.] 
 
 The public recantation was appointed to be made on the ensu- 
 
wesel's trial for heresy. 357 
 
 ing Sabbath of Estomihi, and was actually made by Wesel, accord- 
 ing to the form prescribed. 1 He, no doubt, expected that he would 
 then be fully set at liberty, and restored to his former position. 
 In this, however, he was disappointed. Fanaticism was far from 
 being satisfied with a mere recantation. His writings were 
 further sentenced to be burned, and he himself, that he might be 
 perfectly harmless, to be imprisoned for life in the Augustinian 
 monastery at Mayence. When Wesel beheld his writings carried 
 to the pile, he recollected the good which they contained, and 
 the labour which they had cost him, and weeping bitterly, ex- 
 claimed, 2 " O thou God of mercy, must all the many good things 
 I have written, bear the punishment due to the little that was 
 evil ? Such is not thy sentence, O thou God, who wast ready at 
 Abraham's prayer to have spared an innumerable multitude for 
 the sake of ten righteous persons. It is the sentence of men 
 inflamed against me with, I know not what zeal." 
 
 From the severity of man's sentence Wesel was, ere long, 
 rescued by the higher and more benignant Judge. As might 
 have been anticipated from his great bodily infirmity, he died 
 before he had spent two full years in confinement, in 1481. 
 
 If from our present position we now look back upon the trial, and 
 compare tohat Wesel then said with what he had formerly asserted 
 in his writings and sermons, we only require to put his statements 
 into their proper place, and to discriminate correctly their right 
 meaning, in order to see that in all essential points he remained 
 true to himself. In the first place, he adhered firmly to his main 
 principles; first, as respects the rule of faith, that nothing ought 
 to be believed which is not contained in Scripture, in the canon 
 of the Bible, and for this reason he rejected the authority of the 
 ecclesiastical teachers, and denied that Scripture has been inter- 
 preted by the Fathers in the same spirit in which it was revealed 
 and inspired ; 3 and 2dly, as respects the subject matter of the 
 
 1 This is also taken from the imprinted report. 
 
 2 According to the report of John Butzbach, Monk at Heisterbacb, 
 'see in the sequel) in the Auctar. in libr. Trithemii de script, eccles. p. 
 79. vers. 
 
 3 Art. 17. 
 
358 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 faith, that only Divine grace, and not the merit of works, saves 
 the sinner. In this sense, for example, he maintained, that even 
 monks are not saved by Monachism, but only by grace, 1 although 
 he admitted that their works, in as far as they are based upon 
 grace, may be conducive to salvation. In the next place, and it is 
 a point of material importance, neither did he betray his principles 
 respecting the Church, the Hierarchy, and the Church's legisla- 
 tion. Here, however, it is particularly requisite to understand 
 how to read between the lines and catch the true sense which he 
 attached to his explanations. Wesel had always, and especially 
 in the treatise against Indulgences, distinguished between the 
 Church of Christ and the visible Catholic Church. The former 
 alone was in his eyes a really Divine institution, exalted 
 above error and defilement. The other he looked upon as a work 
 of man, and by no means either infallible or free from defects. 
 This distinction was upon his mind, when he gave his answers, but 
 in place of clearly enunciating, he only hints at it. He designates, 
 as the true Church, the communion of saints united together in 
 love, but declares it is known only to God, or, in other words, that 
 it is a spiritual and invisible society. 2 He could aver with per- 
 fect truth, that against this Church he had never spoken, written, 
 or acted. With a good conscience he declared it to be the bride 
 of Christ, animated by his spirit, and therefore elevated above all 
 error. Within this Church, he referred all things to the one 
 invisible head, to Christ, the living, exalted, and ever-present Son 
 of God, and therefore, he said, that just as at the first Christ alone 
 gave the new Law, and the Apostles had no sort of authority to 
 enact new statutes for the Church, so does Christ still act and do 
 all that is necessary for salvation, andneeds no substitute to do for 
 him things which he cannot himself accomplish. 3 It was perfectly 
 consistent with this, however, for Wesel to recognize the Eccle- 
 siastical Hierarchy, and their relative authority and use, and to 
 acknowledge the Pope, as the head of the visible Church, and its 
 supreme and rightful magistrate. He did not in fact absolutely 
 repudiate the Pope and all power ecclesiastical and temporal in 
 
 \ Art. 22. 
 See the repetition of the questions asked the previous day. Art. 8. 
 Compare p. 353. 
 3 Art. 28. 
 
wesel's trial for heresy. 359 
 
 and of themselves, but only in so far as the one or other is 
 repugnant to the word of God, and its laws and commandments 
 offensive to Christian truth or charity. 1 No doubt, however, the 
 Hierarchy, like the visible Church to which it belongs, is in his 
 eyes not of Divine but of human origin. Holding fast this dis- 
 tinction, Wesel could assert upon the one hand, that as the 
 Apostles had no authority to legislate for the Church, 2 as little 
 and even less of such authority could belong to their professed 
 successors, the Bishops : nay, more, that nothing was to be con- 
 sidered as a trespass against the Divine law, 3 and a mortal sin, 
 except what was declared in Scripture to be so. On the other 
 hand, however, as he had always inculcated obedience to magis- 
 tracy of every kind, even the most tyrannical, and had charac- 
 terised rebellion against them as resistance to a Divine ordinance, 
 he could at the same time pronounce the laws of the spiritual 
 and secular magistracy to be binding, at least humanly, even 
 without the assent of the people, 4 and the transgression of them 
 to be sin, and in this sense, designate as obligatory the Western 
 Church's law of celibacy and the appointment of the seven 
 canonical hours. 5 Of course, however, this obligatory force was 
 in his view to be always confined within the bounds which he had 
 elsewhere assigned to it, and never suffered to wound Christian 
 truth and charity, nor restrain and curtail the Gospel. Wesel 
 further maintained his former principles, inasmuch as he adhered 
 to the whole substance of his treatise against Indulgences, 6 and 
 even, on particular points, declared his opinions to be conformable 
 to the earlier statements he had made upon this article of doctrine, 
 although he could no longer recollect 7 some minor propositions 
 which the treatise no doubt virtually contained ; Inasmuch also 
 as he designated to be destitute of force and meaning 8 many of the 
 prevailing ecclesiastical usages, especially the benediction of inani- 
 
 1 See the citations given, p. 323 and 325, from the Treatise, De 
 auctoritate off. et pot. Pastorum. 
 
 2 Parad. p. 291. 
 
 3 See above, p. 323. 
 
 4 Art. 15. 
 
 5 Art. 21. 
 
 6 Art. 27. 
 
 7 The additional articles at the beginning. See p. 352. 
 
 8 Ibid. 
 
360 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 mate objects, which was connected with much superstition, and 
 Finally, inasmuch as, although not decidedly denying the strict 
 docmiaof transubstantiation, he still expressed a doubt of it, 1 and 
 hints at the form into which it was cast by Luther. The view 
 which he held, in common with the Eastern Church, respecting 
 the procession of the Holy Ghost, appears on the whole to be 
 somewhat isolated, and was no doubt based solely upon his 
 endeavour after complete conformity to Scripture. On the other 
 hand, his opinion that original sin does not infect children still in 
 the womb, 2 is unquestionably connected with his views of spiri- 
 tual and religious development in general, and especially of the 
 operations of grace. Holding, as Wesel did in the main, the 
 principles of St. Augustine, and tracing all that is salutary and 
 good to grace as its only source, he never could have meant to 
 deny original sin itself, but merely its development anterior to 
 the conscience; and his real persuasion appears to have been, that 
 without the use of reason nobody is capable of either sin or grace, 
 and that only a rational being can commit the one and be a reci- 
 pient of the other. 
 
 So far all would have been well ; for even though there might 
 be some wavering on minor points, and perhaps even a degree of 
 reticence, still, in the main, Wesel, when examined, kept himself 
 strictly within the sphere of his convictions. But then comes the 
 recantation on insufficient grounds. He himself confesses that he 
 made it, while still imperfectly persuaded and convinced, and 
 made it upon the authority of the mother Church, an authority 
 which he had hitherto repudiated, and had not been induced 
 in any effectual way to recognize. He yielded to power and 
 devolved the responsibility upon the consciences of those who 
 stood opposed to him as its instruments. Here — as we must 
 not conceal — in a decisive crisis he betrayed the cause of Re- 
 formation. That cause demanded of him personally, and above 
 everything else, an inviolable adherence to truth, that pure 
 and strict conscientiousness, which is bound only by the word of 
 God, and is inwardly free from all human authority and power — 
 which, devolving nothing upon another's conscience, takes all 
 upon its own, — which, when the purity and truth of the inward 
 
 1 On the repetition of the 19th Art. See p. 535. 2 Art. 18. 
 
tvesel's trial for heresy. 361 
 
 conviction requires, is ready to go, like Huss, to the stake, or 
 to say with Luther : " Unless persuaded by the testimony of 
 Scripture, or upon clear and evident reason, I can and will recant 
 nothing. Because it is neither safe nor wise to act against 
 conscience," and which at last, when it can do nothing else, 
 simply commits itself to the Divine aid. But if we cannot justify 
 the fall of Wesel, especially as it was not like that of Jerome of 
 Prague repaired by a subsequent and all the nobler recovery, 
 still neither ought we to overlook what helps to excuse it. WeseVs 
 recantation was of a very general kind. He acknowledged, as in 
 fact every author or speaker may do, that there was erroneous 
 matter in his writings and discourses, but without designating or 
 repudiating particular propositions, and subjected himself, as any 
 one may also do, to the tuition of the Doctors. Even this recan- 
 tation, general though it be, was forced from him by over persua- 
 sion, and at a time when he was worn with age and broken down 
 by bodily infirmities. In fact it was rather done for him, than 
 a proper act of his own. And in fine, he may probably have 
 looked upon the whole affair — though he had no right to do so — as 
 a mere formality, with which he might comply without injury to 
 his inward conviction. Certain it is that no material change 
 had taken place in his mind. This was the view taken even by 
 his adversaries, as is evident from the fact that they were not 
 satisfied with his recantation, but in order to prevent him occa- 
 sioning any trouble in future, cut him off from all intercourse 
 with the world. In spite of these palliations, however, the final 
 stage of WeseVs life continues marked with a stain, and the 
 preacher of Worms before the Court of inquisition is a very 
 different personage from Luther, the great hero of the faith stand- 
 ing — no doubt forty-two years later — before the Diet in the same 
 city. But in fact there can be no proper comparison between a 
 solitary and feeble old man, still conflicting with inward doubts re- 
 specting the authority of the Church and the legality of its ordi- 
 nances, and the man of thirty-eight, imbued with an unparalleled 
 strength of faith, upheld by inborn courage, supported by the 
 assent of all the best of his countrymen, when, at a period 
 considerably more advanced, and animated by the situation, 
 he was permitted to stand, as champion of the faith, before the 
 representative of the civil power, and to speak a word whose 
 
3G2 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 importance was felt by all Germany, and even by the whole 
 Christian world. 
 
 Having thus, however, exhibited without disguise the dark 
 shades in the portraiture of Wesel, his occasional arrogance in 
 controversy, and his transient timidity in danger, we may now 
 in conclusion recall some of the fairer features of his character as 
 a Christian and a man. After all, he remains one of the foremost 
 personages of the Reformation. Less profound, sentimental, and 
 tender than Goch, and inferior in genius, theological acquirement, 
 and sagacity to John Wessel, he was, on the other hand, more 
 practical than both, more zealous in his efforts to influence life 
 around him, penetrated in a higher degree with a strong and 
 invincible conviction of the necessity of directly modifying the 
 state of the Church, and always ready to labour for these objects 
 among the high and low, among friends and adversaries, by 
 scientific disquisitions and popular paradoxes, in writing, discourse, 
 and action. It is his honour that he consumed himself in labours 
 like these, and if it was not given to him to take the last and 
 crowning step, we must never forget that he had spent a long 
 life consistently with his own beautiful apothegm, "With sobriety 
 towards ourselves, justice towards our brethren, and piety towards 
 God" 1 — words which, if he had had a tombstone, might with truth 
 have been engraved upon it. 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 wesel's connexion with the reformation, opinions 
 respecting him. notices of his writings. 
 
 The connexion of Wesel with the Reformation is sufficiently 
 obvious from what has already been said. Agreeing with Goch 
 and Wessel in his leading tendency, his zealous endeavours to 
 give a scriptural mould to Christian truth and practice, and in 
 
 1 Sobrie nobis, juste fratribus, pie Deo. — De auct. officio et potest 
 Past. p. UG. 
 
tvesel's connection with the reformation. 3C3 
 
 the stress which he laid upon the doctrine of love and grace, as 
 taught by St Paul and Augustine, and as opposed to the prevail- 
 ing doctrine of law and works, the energy of his mind impelled 
 him to direct his chief attention to that in which the Reformation 
 really and immediately originated, viz., hostility to Indulgences 
 and other ordinances of the kind, as the worst of the manifestations 
 of that doctrine of works, and in general to the whole secularized 
 and hierarchical system of the Church. In this manner he 
 became, if not so thorough, yet a more direct and conscious pre- 
 cursor of the Reformation. 
 
 His importance for the age in which he lived, and his con- 
 nexion with the Reformation, may likewise be inferred from the 
 testimonies of his cotemporaries and more immediate successors, 
 and from the opinions delivered respecting him in later times. 
 There is much in the judgment passed by that eye-witness to whom 
 we are indebted for the printed narrative of his trial. He concludes 
 it with the following words. 1 " If we except the single article 
 respecting the Holy Ghost, Wesel seems not to have deserved so 
 harsh a sentence, and might have escaped it, if he had been 
 allowed a sufficient pause for reflection, and counsellors 2 with 
 whom to advise, and if all his judges, with a single exception 
 (Nicolaus von Wachenheim), had not been Realists. Probably, 
 too, he would have met with a more gentle, humane, and 
 indulgent treatment, if the monks had not been instigated by a 
 vehement zeal to triumph over a secular clergyman, especially 
 one who did not pay due honour to their idol, Thomas Aquinas. 
 I testify before God, the omniscient being, that these proceedings, 
 pushed as they were to the length of a recantation, and burn- 
 ing of his books, excited the utmost displeasure of two learned 
 and equitable men, Master Engelin of Brunsivick, and Master 
 John Kaisersberg. 3 Especially was Master Engelin of opinion 
 that the proceedings against so distinguished a person had been 
 
 1 In D'Argentre Collect. Judicior. T. I. P. ii. p. 298. 
 
 2 Consultores. 
 
 3 Both were at this time ministers in Strasburg. Engelin, who was 
 eminent as a Scholastic Theologian, had previously (See above p. 278) 
 been WeseVs colleague at Erfurt, and his predecessor at Mayence. 
 The celebrated pulpit orator, Geller of Kaisersberg (f 1510) had, since 
 1478, been preacher inStrasburg. 
 
364 THE LIFE OF JOI1N OF WESEL. 
 
 too hasty. He did not scruple to maintain that many, nay even 
 the most of WeseVs doctrines, were quite defensible. Neither did 
 he conceal that the jealousy of the Thomists against the moderns, 
 and the dislike of the monks to the secular clergy, had hadmuch 
 to do in the whole affair. And who, if not the devil himself, could 
 iiave sowed tares like these among philosophers and theologians, 
 by which so fierce a discord has been introduced between the 
 parties holding different views, the disciples of Thomas, of Scotus, 
 and Marsilius, as that one who denies the reality of universals (a 
 Nominalist as was Wesel) is reckoned to have committed the 
 sin against the Holy Ghost, and to be a heinous transgressor 
 against God, Christianity, and the peace of society? From 
 whom but the devil can such blindness proceed? It is he 
 who, in order to keep us from learning what is better and 
 nobler, and more conducive to morality, virtue, and the sal- 
 vation of souls, mocks us with fancies, and seduces us into 
 useless and cold controversial speculations which neither warm 
 the heart with piety to God, nor with love to our neighbour, and 
 that is the reason why, in the Church, there is no edification, 
 and why Christian zeal, instead of increasing, seems daily to 
 diminish." 
 
 This weightycomment, which unanswerably proves that among 
 the parties who attended the trial, Wesel had some secret and 
 influential friends, and that among the deputies from Heidelberg 
 (to whose number the author seems to have belonged), there was 
 one at least who, in the main, shared his sentiments, is appro- 
 priately followed by an opinion still more remarkable, viz., that ' 
 of John Wessel. Wessel, who by this time had returned to his 
 native country, seems, after the condemnation of his friend, to 
 have been threatened with a similar danger, and therefore had 
 recourse to an acquaintance who was a learned jurist, viz., 
 Rudolph van Veen, for advice as to what might befall. In the 
 letter which he wrote for this purpose, 1 he deplores the fate of 
 Wesel, believing him to have been sentenced to death by fire, 
 and describes his own relative position in a very characteristic 
 way. He owns that, possessing a greater share of prudence, he 
 had often felt anxious at the bold and inconsiderate sMe of ex- 
 
 1 Wesseli Opp. p. 920. It may bo read in full in the life of Wessel. 
 
OPINIONS RESPECTING HIM. 365 
 
 pression which Wesel used, and had always looked upon it as an 
 odious thing, to bring such matters as he did before the undis- 
 cerning multitude. But he afterwards characterises Wesel as a 
 "venerable man," and speaks of him as follows : "Although I 
 disapprove of his extravagant, and for the people offensive, 
 absurdities, still his learning and acumen are so great, that I 
 cannot help loving him and taking an interest in his fate. O 
 how much better would it have been for him, if, in our way, as 
 I often expressed myself to you at Paris, he had practised him- 
 self beforehand, in the conflicts between the Realists and For- 
 malists, and then not without some measure of foresight and 
 preparation, but, as if from a fortress and watch-tower, con- 
 templated the approaching assault !" 
 
 Trithemius, the zealous scholar of the 15th century, has no 
 doubt refused to Wesel, as a heretic, a place in his work on 
 Ecclesiastical authors. On the other hand, in his Chronicles of 
 the Monastery of Sponheim, 1 and under date 1479, he makes the 
 following brief mention of him : — " John Ruchard of Upper- 
 Wesel was, in this year and under John Colnhausen, the 10th 
 Abbot of Sponheim, compelled to recant at Mayence certain 
 articles, which he had preached at Worms, and to witness the 
 committal of all his writings to the flames, and was then, as a 
 penance, confined in the Augustinian Monastery, where he pined 
 with sorrow and soon died." 2 We have, however, a fuller and 
 more interesting notice of Wesel from the pen of an author who 
 supplemented the work of Trithemius, Johann Butzbach. This 
 bold spirited man is not afraid to bear the most favourable 
 testimony to the victim of persecution, and to speak of him as 
 follows : 3 " John of Upper- Wesel, a Rhinelander, was a person 
 eminently well-versed in sacred Scripture, thoroughly trained in 
 the Scholastic philosophy, distinguished as a Professor of Theo- 
 logy, and in his discourses to the people (for he was a preacher), 
 
 1 Chronicon Sponhem. in Trithemii Opp. historic, ed. M, Freher. p. ii. 
 p. 391. 
 
 2 Then follows an outline of his doctrines, which has been literally 
 engrossed in Bzovii Annal. eccles. T. xviii. p. 158. 228. 
 
 3 In the work, Auctarium in libr. Joh. Trithemii de scriptoribus 
 ecclesiasticis, a manuscript belonging to the library of the University 
 at Bonn, fol. 79 verso. 
 
366 TIIE LIFE OP JOHN OP WESEL. 
 
 an orator of great skill and repute. He had an acute intellect 
 and an eloquent tongue, and was no less noted for his life and 
 morals, than for his learning. He was the author of several 
 Commentaries upon Holy Scripture, and of other treatises upon 
 various subjects, but which contained some errors against the 
 Catholic faith. These, at the instigation of several Germans of 
 rank and learning, by command of Archbishop Diether, and 
 after a formal recantation on the part of the author, were publicly 
 consigned to the flames." Butzbach relates the exclamation we 
 have already cited, as uttered by Wesel when his writings were 
 burned, and then proceeds : " It is said that Wesel, on the invita- 
 tion of a learned native, paid a visit to Bohemia, and was there 
 seduced into the errors of the Hussites, which took their origin 
 from John Wickliffe. Some overwhelm him, as a sectarian, 
 with all manner of blame, as for instance Wigand, but there are 
 others who highly commend him." 1 
 
 In the ranks of the latter, the foremost place is due to Luther 
 and his Protestant followers. It is true that Luther has nowhere 
 pronounced so high a panegyric upon John of Wesel as upon 
 John Wessel. This, however, is explained not merely by the fact 
 that Wessel, as a great .Reformer and Divine, really was the 
 superior of the two, but partly also, and in a higher degree, by the 
 
 1 At the end of the 15th or the beginning of the 16th century, there 
 appeared an Apology for John of Wesel, by a certain Wigand Tribellius, 
 to which Wigand Wirth (synonymous with Caupo,) a, Dominican of 
 Frankfort, who acquired celebrity at the latter of these dates, and was a 
 keen zealot, replied by a Dialogus Apologeticus, and states as follows : — 
 That it was in consequence of his treatise addressed to Nicolaus the 
 Bohemian, that Wesel fell into the hands of the Inquisition, and that 
 Nicolaus was put into prison : That an epistle was afterwards discovered 
 in Wesel's hand-writing, full of the worst heresies, addressed to the 
 leader of the Hussites, and attacking in the most shameful manner the 
 orthodox faith, the Romish chair, the prelates of the Church, and the 
 spiritual jurisdiction. Wigand quotes several passages from the work, 
 De auctoritate past, eccl., and it might be supposed that that was the 
 work he meant. But he quotes others also which are not there. It 
 is possible that the letter ad Bohemorum summum antistitem et 
 haeresiarcham may be a fiction of the heresy-hunter. See upon 
 all this Walch Monim. med. aev. ii., 2 Praef. p. xvii. sqq. Re- 
 specting Wigand Wirth., consult Iiotermund's edition of the Epist. 
 obsc. viror. II anno v. 1830, preface p. 95, and Gieselers K. Gesch. 
 ii. s. 342, note u. 
 
OPINIONS RESPECTING HIM. 367 
 
 fact that to the reformer and his associates, Wessel was a new and 
 astonishing phenomenon, a cheering echo from afar, whereas Wesel 
 was one with whom, from an early period, they were acquainted 
 and familiar. At the same time, Luther was far from repudiating 
 the man who had gone before him, and by means of his writings 
 had even, as it were, been his teacher. Not only does he acknow- 
 ledge that it was from WeseVs books, which then ruled the Uni- 
 versity of Erfurt, that he derived the learning which procured 
 him his degree, but he speaks with great interest of his master's 
 fate. " I call to mind," he says, 1 " how Master John Vesalia, who 
 was a preacher at Mayence, was by the desperate and haughty 
 murderers, called haereticae pravitatis inquisitores (inventor es 
 would be a more proper word,) the preacher-monks, condemned 
 for nothing but refusing to say, ' I believe there is a God,' and 
 saying, < 1 know there is a God.' " Not less kindly does Luther 
 espouse the cause of Wesel, in a letter to Spalatin. 2 Here he 
 explains one of his paradoxes, in a way no doubt consonant to 
 the meaning of the author. Among these paradoxes, as I have 
 already mentioned, 3 there is the following : " When we say, 
 ' Thy kingdom come,' we do not pray for the kingdom of 
 heaven, because that kingdom does not come to us." On this 
 Luther observes, " Wesalids remark upon the petition for the 
 kingdom of God, I consider as having no other design but to 
 drive from men's heads the common opinion, according to which 
 they understand the kingdom of God to mean merely the state of 
 * future glory, and therefore give themselves no concern about the 
 kingdom of God, which has already commenced, and is highly 
 extolled in Scripture. Although it be the same kingdom which 
 now is, and which is also to come, being here begun in faith, 
 and hereafter consummated in glory. 
 
 Next to Luther, we rank his zealous disciple Flacius.' 1 This 
 
 1 In the work de Conciliis, Walch. Ausg. Th. 16. s. 2743. Luther's 
 remark about WeseVs unwillingness to say, " I believe there is a God," 
 instead of " I know there is a God," alludes no doubt to the fact that 
 in his trial he was obliged in all cases to say he believed in place of 
 knew. 
 
 2 Letter of the 23d March 1524. Nro. 588. Th. 2. p. 492. in De 
 Wette's work. 
 
 . 3 See at p. 297. 
 
 4 Catalog. Test, verit. Lib. xix. T. ii. p. 884, 885. 
 
3G8 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 author justly places Wesel among the witnesses of the truth prior 
 to the Reformation, gives a list of his peculiar opinions, among 
 which, besides those already noticed, he mentions that he repu- 
 diated the sacrament under a single species, confirmation, extreme 
 unction, auricular confession, satisfactions, celibacy, and the 
 doctrine of free will, and cites from his sermons several of the 
 peculiarities which we have already noticed. Flacius very perti- 
 nently remarks, that Wesel experienced the truth of his own 
 words : " Now-a-days it is hard to be a Christian." Of his writ- 
 ings, the only one known to him was the treatise against Indul- 
 gences. He believed that the others were still to be found at 
 Erfurt, a supposition probably correct at the time, but which 
 recent investigations have not confirmed. 
 
 Protestant theologians of a still later date likewise mention 
 Wesel with applause, especially Martin Chemnitz, 1 who, however, 
 erroneously represents him as having been condemned to be 
 burnt to death ; Francis Buddeus, 2 who praises him as the friend 
 of Wessel, and the sharer of his sentiments ; Weismann, 3 who 
 describes him as a theologian celebrated for his independence 
 of mind ; and Hottinger* who likewise assigns him a place among 
 the most notable pioneers of the Keformation. 
 
 Catholic writers required of course to speak of him in another 
 strain. At first they mentioned him in their histories with 
 indifference, or even praised him as a liberal-minded, zealous, 
 and pious man. Of the first, we have an instance in Triihemius ; 
 of the second, in Butzbach, and the Continuator of the Chronicle 
 of Auersberg, who extols him as a theologian of the most approved 
 walk, and cites with predilection the favourable testimonies al- 
 ready quoted of Engelin and Kaisersberg. 5 But when the conse- 
 quences of the tendency which he had helped to promote came 
 to light in the Reformation, and the two parties were sharply 
 
 1 Examen Concil. Trident. T. iv. p. 87. 
 
 2 Isagoge, P. ii. p. 1175. 
 
 3 Hist, eccles. T. i. p. 1213. 
 
 4 Hist, eccles. P. iv. p. 53 — 61. Hottinger also gives Wesel's Para- 
 doxa and the Examen magistr., but he too confounds this author with 
 Wessel, for his narrative begins, Joh. Wesselus, GrOningensis, concio- 
 nator Wormatiensis. 
 
 5 Paralipomena rerum memorab. ab a. 1230 usque ad a. 1538, histo- 
 riae Abbatis Ursperg. per quendam Studios, annexa. 
 
OPINIONS KESPECTING HIM. 3(59 
 
 divided, only a hostile estimate could be expected from Catholics. 
 And such in fact are the judgments which we find in the Do- 
 minican Bzovius, and the Jesuit Serrarius* Bzovius, 1 following 
 Trithemius's Chronicle of Sponheim, speaks of Wesel as a justly 
 condemned heretic, and not only charges him, as others do, with 
 rejecting the sacrament of extreme unction, 2 but with an asser- 
 tion of which we may be quite certain that, in the form in which 
 he gives it, it never entered WeseVs mind, 3 viz., " That there is 
 not now, and never was, any such thing as original sin, and that 
 children are not conceived in, nor condemned on account of 
 it; in like manner, that he himself {Wesel) never was subject 
 to original sin." Serrarius, in his History of Mayence, 4 praises 
 its University as contrasted with that of Tubingen, the latter 
 having been the first to abandon the old faith, while the former 
 had constantly and steadfastly adhered to it, and, under Arch- 
 bishop Diether, made an example of one of the forerunners of 
 the opinions which are now destroying so many souls. He then 
 gives a summary of WeseVs articles of belief, wherein, besides the 
 rejection of original sin and extreme unction, we find the follow- 
 ing : 5 " All priests are properly bishops and Popes, and differ 
 from them only by name and human authority," and he then 
 concludes with a statement, which, though dictated by a most 
 hostile spirit, amply recognizes WeseVs importance : " It is 
 therefore evident that the Devil intended to have commenced 
 with this person the tragedy, which he afterwards performed with 
 Luther, if he had not been here in Mayence, seasonably and wisely 
 prevented and if the miserable man whom he had seduced, and 
 in self-deception, selected as his chosen instrument, had not been 
 prevailed upon to repent and retract." 
 
 In the course of the 18 th century, and in recent times, we 
 find a more correct estimate of Wesel ; and here, besides the 
 
 1 Annal. eccles. T. xviii. p. 158, 228. 
 
 2 Octavus articulus, quod extrema unctio non sit sacramentum, quia 
 non per Christum, sed per homines sit instituta, sed sit oleum etmaneat 
 oleum sicut ^ntea fuit. 
 
 3 Articulus quintus. 
 
 4 Nie. Serrarii Rerum Moguntinar. Libr. v. Mogunt. 1604. 4o. p. 
 144. 145. 877. 
 
 s Art. 5. 
 
 2a 
 
370 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL. 
 
 many Church-histories, and histories of doctrine, which casually 
 allude to him, we meet with notices more or less full in 
 Bayle, 1 Christ. Wil. Fran. Walch? Schroeckh* Erhard* and 
 Gieseler. 5 Here too we may also rank the anonymous author of 
 the Monography upon Diether of Isenburg, 6 who gives a tolerably 
 detailed account of the trial for heresy, but with little historical 
 tact and discrimination, and intermingles it with some very silly 
 reflections and opinions. It appears unnecessary to quote other 
 authors who casually mention John of WeseV 
 
 As for the writings of Wesel, we know that they were burnt in 
 Mayence before his own eyes. The nature of the case, however, 
 rendered it an impossibility to destroy all the copies. Wesel him- 
 self said at the trial, 8 that he had sent his treatises on Ecclesias- 
 tical power, Indulgences, and Fasting, to many learned men, and 
 in particular the last mentioned of them, to the Bishop of Worms. 
 No doubt, therefore, copies of them must have been circulated in 
 Germany, and owing to the author's connexion with the Nicolaus 
 who is mentioned in the trial, and the interest which the Hussites 
 must have taken in his productions, probably likewise in Bohemia. 
 
 1 Diction. T. iv. p. 502 and 506. 
 
 2 Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. Praef. p. lii. sqq. fasc. 2. Praef. 
 p. xv. sqq. 
 
 3 K. Gesch. Th. 33. s. 295 ff. 
 
 4 Gesch. des Wiederaufbliihens, Th. 1. s. 289 ff. 339 ff. 
 
 5 K. Gesch. B. 2. Abth. 4. s. 481 ff. 
 
 6 Frankfurt 1792. 2 BB. 
 
 7 We might here also mention Conr. Gesneri Biblioth. univers. ed. 
 Tigur. 1545. p. 462. Johann. Wolfii Rer. memorab. Centenar. xv. 
 ad. ann. 1464. p. 874. edit. 1600. Philipp. Mornaei Mysterium iniqui- 
 tatis s. histor. papatus rom. edit. 1611. p. 605. Oudini Comment, de 
 scriptor. eccles. T. iii. p. 2715 sqq. Fabricii Biblioth. med. et inf. Lat. 
 T. iv. p. 168 and 491. Sckunks Beitrage zur Mainzer Geschichte 
 1788, 3tes Heft. Mainzer geistliche Monatsschrift 1789, Februar bis 
 Mai. Nik. Bogts Gesch. von Mainz. Frankf. 1792. 1. 143—149. Busch, 
 Zugabe zu den hannoverschen gelehrten Anzeigen. s. 149. Several 
 writers, as for instance, Wharton in append, ad Cavei hist, liter, vol. ii. 
 p. 19], and P. Freher Theatr. viror. illustr. p. 1431, make many false 
 and confused statements, by confounding, John of Wesel, and John 
 Wessel. 
 
 8 Examen, art. 3. 
 
nis WRITINGS. 371 
 
 In this manner, they were preserved, and have come down 
 though but partially to us. 1 
 
 During his long career as professor and preacher, Wesel had 
 written much. 2 It was also the custom of the times, when as 
 yet the distinction between manuscript and print did not exist, 
 to reckon their college lectures among the works of professors. 
 Of this description, seem to have been the books of Wesel, which 
 I/uther speaks of having studied 3 for his degree at Erfurt. As 
 being calculated to prepare for a master's degree, these books were 
 no doubt chiefly philosophical, i.e., they treated of Logic, Dialec- 
 tics, and probably also of Mathematics and Physics. They must, 
 however, have been supplanted by other and later text books, and 
 not a trace of them has been preserved. Flacius was acquainted 
 only with the treatise against Indulgences, but had heard that 
 other writings of Wesel were still in existence at Erfurt. 4 This 
 might very possibly be true in the 16th century, so far at least 
 as regards the works which he wrote as professor. By degrees, 
 however, even these were lost, and in the 19th century, none of 
 them was extant. Doctor H. A. Erhard, who was then himself 
 Librarian in Erfurt, says 5 (in the year 1827), "A conjecture has 
 been expressed that some of the manuscripts of Wesel might still 
 exist, but after the union of the monastic libraries into the pre- 
 sent Royal library of Erfurt, 1 have not found this conjecture 
 verified." 
 
 At the trial we find Wesel himself owning the following four 
 works? 
 
 1. Super modo obligationis legum humanarum adquemdam 
 Nicolaum de Bohemia (vel Polonia). 
 
 1 Walch. Monim. med. aev. ii. 1. Praef. lviii. Nihilominus quum 
 multa illorum exempla antea per universam Germaniam et Bohemiam 
 essent dispersa, non potuit fieri, quin maxima illorum pars salva ad 
 nostram aetatem transmitteretur. 
 
 2 It is said in his praise that not merely docendo, but also scribendo 
 scholam Erphordensem non parum illustrasse. Flacius Catalog, test. 
 ver. L. xviii. t. ii. p. 885. 
 
 3 See supra 230. 
 
 4 He says in the passage quoted : Audio Erphordiae ejus scripta 
 adhuc inveniri posse. Ego tantum ejus libellum contra indulgentias 
 habeo. 
 
 5 Geschichte des Wiederaufbliihens, B. i. s. 293. 
 Examen, art. 3. 
 
372 THE LIFE OP JOHN OP WESEL. 
 
 2. De potestate ecclesiastica. 
 
 3. De indulgentiis. 
 
 4. De jejunio. 
 
 He denies having written any other tracts or epistles, at least to 
 Bohemians, or other heretics and schismatics. 1 It is possible that 
 he may have composed two other disquisitions, the one De pro- 
 cessione Spiritus Sancti, 2 the other, De peccato mortali. 3 But 
 the terms both of the interrogation, " an scripserit," and of the 
 answer, "fatetur," or " dicit se scripsisse," are too vague to 
 admit of any certain inference being drawn from them. It is 
 possible that Wesel never wrote any separate work upon these 
 subjects, but had merely touched upon them casually, although 
 at some length, in other writings. If, however, any such treatises 
 ever existed, they have disappeared without a trace. The same 
 is the case with the disquisitions, Super modo obligationis legum 
 liumanarum and De jejunio. 
 
 In this way, therefore, besides the sayings of Wesel, which 
 have been delivered orally, and the fragments of his Epistle 
 to Reinhard of Sickingen, we have only two works of any con- 
 siderable length from his pen, the Treatise against Indulgences, 
 and that upon the Authority, duty, and power, of the pastors of 
 the Church. 
 
 1. The Disputatio adversus indidgentias, composed, as we have 
 already shewn, about the year 1450, 4 consists of two small essays 
 written at different times, but now forming a whole ; Or rather it 
 has for its basis an older and short piece, a compendium, 5 contain- 
 ing the principal propositions of Wesel respecting Indulgences 
 which was subsequently, and as he advanced in knowledge, 
 extended, and in particular passages explained. 6 The substance 
 of this treatise we have already stated at length. The only im- 
 pression which we possess is in Watch's Monimenta medii aevi, 
 
 1 Exainen, art. 5. 2 Examen, art. 7. 
 
 3 Examen, art, 24. 4 See p. 258 f. 
 
 5 Walch Monim. med. aev. ii. 1. p. 114 — 119 : Hoc est compendium, 
 quod volui huic tractatui inserere, in quo longius latiusque de indul- 
 gentiis sum dicturus. 
 
 G This enlargement comprehends in the work just quoted from p. 119 
 — 156. 
 
HIS WRITINGS. 373 
 
 Goetting. 1757. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. Ill — 156. For this impression 
 Walcli assures us he used the copy which had belonged to 
 Flacius, 1 but which is now in the Royal Library of Hanover. 
 The little work had existed about 307 years before the art of 
 printing gave it a wider publicity. 
 
 2. The Opusculum de auctoritate, officio et potestate pastorum 
 ecclesiasticorum, probably written at a later date, and during 
 WeseVs pastoral labours in Worms, 2 was first discovered by Von 
 der Hardt in an imprint 3 belonging probably to the 16th century. 
 Here, without mention of the author, it bears the title : Epistola 
 cujusdam sacrarum literarum studio si responsiva, tractans de ponti- 
 ficii muneris functione, et auctoritate superiorum in subditos, et 
 subditorum in superior es obedientia. At the conclusion, a passage 
 from Melanchthon's Loci (of the edition 1521) is annexed, as an 
 appendix, — a typography adjccta — a circumstance which proves 
 that the edition belonged to the circle of the friends of Luther. 
 His thorough acquaintance with the literature of the period of 
 the Reformation, soon enabled Von der Hardt to divine the author, 
 and in fact the whole contents and many particular passages so 
 perfectly suit the position of Wesel in Worms, as to leave no 
 room to doubt that the treatise is really his. The older edition 
 1 never saw. Walcli bestowed his care upon a new one in the 
 Monimenta medii aevi., vol. ii. fasc. 2, p. 115 — 162. Both he and 
 Von der Hardt seem to suppose 4 that this was the treatise addres- 
 sed by Wesel to Nicolaus of Bohemia or Poland, and it does bear 
 an inscription to a brother cherishing the same sentiments as the 
 author. 5 The letter to Nicolaus, however, answerably to the 
 superscription, expatiated super modo obligationis legum humana- 
 rum, and although the subject is also touched in the treatise, 
 still that was at WeseVs trial 6 too distinctly discriminated from 
 
 1 Praef. p. lviiii. : Libere nunc suo jure utatur libellus, ereptus ex 
 tenebris et ex eodem codice, qui Flacii possessione fuit, descriptus, 
 occupet locum, qui ipsi debetur. 
 
 2 See p. 301. 
 
 3 Watch Monim. med. aev. ii. 2. Praef. p. xvi. 
 
 4 In the work quoted, p. xvii. sqq. 
 
 5 He begins with the words : Lectis tuis Uteris, charissime confrater, 
 mirum in raodum sum delectatus. 
 
 6 Art. 3. 
 
374 TIIE LIFE OF JOHN" OF WESEL. 
 
 another l)e potestate ecclesiastica, to admit of their being identi- 
 fied, and so we may with tolerable certainty suppose, that we 
 have here the treatise alluded to in the trial, under the title De 
 potestate ecclesiastica, and that the charissimus con/rater whom 
 Wesel addresses is some other Christian man, probably a clergy- 
 man or monk in his vicinity, ani not the Hussite Nicolaus. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN, 
 
 CALLED THE HOLT YOUTH. 
 
 A FORERUNNER OF THE PEAS ANT- WAR,. 
 
 Of Scripture we have now good store, 
 And Testaments, both Old and New ; 
 We need no revelations more, 
 Nor yet to hie as many do, 
 To hear what Hans the Piper raves, 
 In Niklashausen's church and caves. 
 
 Sebastian Brant, in his " Ship of Fools: 
 On the Contempt of Scripture. 
 
( 377 ) 
 
 HANS BOHEIM (OR BEHEM) OE NIEXASHAUSEN, 
 
 A FORERUNNER OF THE PEASANT WAR. 
 
 The course of the narrative has already 1 led us to mention this 
 remarkable person. Here we intend to speak more folly, and 
 communicate all the information extant respecting him. The 
 inducement to this is not merely the discovery we have made 
 of a cotemporaneous, and as it appears, official document on the 
 subject, but the intimate connexion in which the man and his 
 doings stand with the task undertaken in the present work. The 
 importance of the Peasant-war in its bearingupon the Reformation 
 as outwardly connected with it, but at the same time inwardly 
 distinct, the sinister light which it cast upon the great event, 
 and the way in which it was repudiated and combated by the 
 Reformers in their writings, are well known. The war of the 
 peasantry was the translation of spiritual liberty into the political 
 domain ; it was wild fanaticism side by side with sound piety, 
 revolution with reformation. Far, however, from forcing the 
 Reformation from its course, this terrible blow rather served as the 
 occasion of demonstrating its higher energy, proving the means by 
 which its authors attained to a full and clear consciousness of what 
 their work was and what it ought to be. And just as the Reforma- 
 tion had its deep-seated and preparatory antecedents, so was there 
 also a prelude to the Peasant-war. While the dawn of the one 
 brightens the sky, the fiery signals and cloudy pillars of the other 
 also shoot into the air. Nay more, just as the Reformers take the 
 
 1 See p. 335 
 
378 APPENDIX. 
 
 field against the prophets of Zwickau, Thomas Mtinzer and the 
 other fanatics of their time, so do we find the more noble of their 
 pioneers occupying the same hostile attitude towards those who in 
 an earlier day paved the way for violent revolutionary movements. 
 
 It is not our intention unfeelingly to condemn the commotions 
 which arose among the rural population of the 16th century. In 
 part these were provoked by intolerable oppression, and had a 
 foundation in deep and long and painfully-experienced wants, as 
 is proved by the mere fact that the most of what they then 
 claimed with violence was in the course of centuries cheer- 
 fully conceded to them. At the same time, it is undeniable that 
 the whole movement was ill-advised and imprudent. The passion 
 for liberty was neutralized by crude and Utopian ideas of it 
 threatening destruction to both state and church. Opposition to 
 existing things rose to a fanaticism, which broke the bonds of 
 society and aimed at its destruction ; and the fortitude displayed 
 was so far from being enlightened and enduring, that it almost 
 continually fluctuated between wild presumption on the one hand 
 and pusillanimity and cowardice on the other. It was a foul 
 compound of a strong but misdirected love of liberty with piety 
 strongly excited, but often pushed the length of tempting God 
 and committing crime, and not seldom also with worldly lusts 
 and desires, which disrelished the restraints of law and order, 
 and strove with impetuous haste after some unknown good. The 
 same impure commixture and fermentation of heterogeneous 
 elements, of righteous indignation at existing corruptions and 
 abuses, of sound and often surprisingly accurate knowledge of the 
 changes which required to be made, combined with the most 
 confused notions of the way to make them, of overstrained self- 
 excitement and of violent agitation, or fraudulent seduction of 
 the common people, are also to be found in the phenomena, which 
 preceded the war of the peasantry, and foretold its calamities. 
 
 One of the most remarkable of these premonitory signs, perhaps 
 the most significant of all, is that of which we now intend giving 
 an account. 
 
 In Niklashausen, a considerable village, pleasantly situate two 
 leagues from Wertheim, and then belonging to Eastern Fran- 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN". 379 
 
 coma, 1 and the diocese of Wurtzburg, but whicli is now included 
 in the Duchy of Baden, there appeared after the middle of the 15th 
 century (147G) a youth connected by birth with the common 
 people, 2 and who preached the strangest doctrines. His chris- 
 tian name was John, and, probably from his native land, but 
 perhaps also from his opinions, he received the surname of 
 Boheim or Behem (Bohemia). Before he appeared as a prophet 
 he had, it seems, been a farm servant, and herded cattle. He 
 was also a great frequenter of fairs and wakes, where he per- 
 formed upon the drum and pipe, just as Bohemia still supplies so 
 many of our itinerant musicians. From this circumstance he 
 derived the name of the kettle-drummer, the piper, and piper 
 Jack. Afterwards, when he had acquired celebrity amonp- the 
 people by his discourses, they called him " the Holy Youth." 3 
 
 To this person — to use the language in which one of the 
 chroniclers relates his conversion — it was told, that a holy father 
 of the Franciscan order had a few years before come into the 
 
 1 Trithemius, in the Chron. Spanh. says : Rudolphus, Episcopus 
 Herbipolensis, in cujus Parochia Niclashausen est — and in the Ann. 
 Hirsaug. : apud Francos Orientales in dioecesi Wirtzburgensi. 
 
 2 Compare for information respecting him the Nuremberg Chi-onicle, 
 written by Antony Kreuzer, in Waldau's Beitragen zur Gesch. v. Niirn- 
 berg iii. 419, and Miillner in his Annals of Nuremberg for the year 
 1476. (I am indebted for extracts from both these works, which were 
 not accessible to myself, to the kindness of Dr Hagen.) Trithemius, 
 both in the Chronicon Spanhem. ad ann. 1476, p. 389 and 390 of the 
 Opp. historica, and in the Annal. Hirsaug. t. ii. p. 486 sqq. (They 
 are virtually reprinted in D'Argentre Collectio judicior. de novis error. 
 T. i. P. 2. p. 288—290). Lor. Friess Historie der Bischdfe zu Wiirz- 
 burg 1544. s. 852 — 855. Will Beitrag zur frank. Kirchenhistorie in der 
 Gesch. der Wiedertaufer, s. 57 ff. Bensen Geschichte des Bauernkriegs 
 inOstfranken,Erlangen 1840 s. 189 — 192. Hagen Deutschlands lit. und 
 relig. Verhaltnisse im Reformat. Zeitalter, B. 1. s. 170 and 171. Of the 
 olderwriters Trithemius and Friess, and of the more modern, Bensen, give 
 the fullest details. The latter, however, merely extracts from Friess. 
 
 3 The old record calls him Hans (Jack) Behem. Miillner says ex- 
 pressly that he was a Bohemian by birth. Trithemius describes him as 
 tympanista quidam, brutorum pastor animalium, homo pauper et idiota, 
 and also as pastor porcorum. Brant calls him the " Bagpiper ;" the 
 Chronicler Kreutzer, " a herdsman and kettle-drummer ;" which Miill- 
 ner also does, annexing the popular name of " Piper-Jack." In the 
 heading of D'Argentre's extract from Trithemius he is strangely desig- 
 nated Joannes Hanselinus (the words are synonymous). The old re- 
 cord calls him " the Youth," and Friess " the Holy Youth." 
 
330 APPENDIX. 
 
 district, preached to the people, and made them burn all their 
 draughtboards ; And so, about the time of Midlent, he conceived 
 the notion that he was called to act in the same way, and to 
 burn his drum. This accordingly he did, at the village of Nik- 
 lashausen, situate upon the Tauber, below Castle Gamberg, and 
 from that hour began to preach to the common people, tell- 
 ing them that the Virgin Mary had appeared to him, and com- 
 manded him to burn his drum, and that as he had hitherto helped 
 them to dance and sin, so he should now do them good by preach- 
 ing. 1 From revelations made by the Holy Virgin, however, who 
 had disclosed herself to his view, 2 in white raiment, as he fed his 
 cattle on the plain, he had learned the following doctrines? and 
 preached them to the lower orders, with remarkable boldness and 
 skill. 
 
 It is a time of visitation. The wrath of God is threatening 
 mankind and especially the priesthood. Nothing but his (Hans 
 Boheim's) prayers had recently withheld God from destroying with 
 frost the wine and corn. 4 Men ought to forsake their sins, cast off 
 their gay attire, their collars, silken laces, their doublets andpointed 
 shoes, and make a pilgrimage to the vale of Tauber. That was the 
 place where above all others the Mother of God desired to be wor- 
 shipped ; there the most abundant grace was to be obtained; there 
 all who worshipped the Virgin Mary, received the most complete 
 pardon of sin. There is more grace in the vale of Tauber than at 
 Home or any other place. 5 Whoever dies there goes at once to 
 heaven. Even children obtain this grace, and he would stake his 
 word, that he would there rescue with his hand every soul in hell. 6 
 The spiritual and temporal power were corrupt ; The clergy 
 sunk in avarice, ambition, and pleasure. The temporal lords op- 
 pressed the people. "The Emperor," he said, "is a miscreant 
 and the Pope a nonentity. It is the Emperor who gives to 
 princes, counts, and knights authority to tax and burden the 
 common people. Alas ! for you, poor devils." 7 But things, he 
 
 1 This is related by Friess in 1. c. s. 852. 
 
 2 Tritheim in D'Argentre Collect, p. 239. 
 
 3 They are collected from the Old Record, from Trithemius Annal. 
 Hire, in D'Arg. p. 289 and Friess s. 852. 
 
 4 Old Record. 5 old Record : Friess. s. 852. 
 G Old Record. 7 j^;^ 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 381 
 
 thought, could not remain in that state. There would soon be no 
 Pope nor Emperor, no prince, bishop, spiritual or temporal magis- 
 trate, but everyone would be his neighbour's brother. 1 "Princes, 
 civil and ecclesiastical, ought to possess no more than common 
 folk, and then all would have plenty. The time would come 
 when princes and nobles would have to labour for a day's wage. 2 
 The fish in the water, and the game upon the land, ought to be 
 common. Tolls, road-money, servitudes, rents, taxes, and tithes 
 to spiritual or temporal superiors were to be wholly done away." 3 
 It was chiefly against the clergy, however, that he raised his 
 threatening voice. " He would sooner," he said, " undertake to 
 mend a Jew than a clergyman or a divine. Even could a priest be 
 brought to believe him, the moment the man returned to the com- 
 pany of his brethren he would become worse than before." 4 . . 
 . . " The clergy have too many benefices." 5 . . . They 
 ought never to have more than one. " But go thou," was the 
 voice, and command of the Mother of God to him, 6 "go and 
 proclaim to my believing people, that my Son no longer can, or 
 will, tolerate their avarice, pride, and voluptuousness. If they 
 do not forthwith mend their lives, the whole world will be made 
 to suffer affliction for their sins." Nay, he foresaw the time when 
 wrath would fall upon the depraved priests. " They shall be 
 slain," he exclaimed, " and ere long it will be seen that a priest 
 will put his hand upon his shaven crown, that it may not be 
 known what he is." 6 When the priests reviled him as a heretic, 
 and threatened him with the stake, he replied, " If they only 
 knew the meaning of the word, they would discover that they 
 themselves are the heretics, not I. Woe befall them if they do 
 burn me ! 8 They will soon find out what they have done, and be 
 brought to nought." Even excommunication he regarded with 
 contempt. Divorce by a priest appeared to him an infraction of 
 the laws of God, to whom alone it pertains to dissolve the marriage 
 tie. He also rejected the doctrine of Purgatory ; for, as he well 
 said, if an Emperor or a Pope be a good man, and be found to be 
 
 1 Miillner Nurnb. Annalen z. J. 1476. Friess. s. 852. 
 
 2 Old Record. 
 
 3 Ibid. ; Trith. Chron. Spanh. : Neque decimas dandas esse, neqne 
 census alicui. Also Annal. Hirs. in D'Arg. p. 289. Friess s. 852. 853. 
 
 4 Old Record. 5 Old Record. 6 Trithemius in d'Arg. p. 289. 
 7 Old Record. s Old Record. 
 
382 APPENDIX. 
 
 so at the last, he goes directly to heaven ; whereas if he be found 
 to be wicked, he goes directly to hell, and so there is no Pur- 
 gatory. 1 
 
 Doctrines like these were at the time far from being isolated, 
 and it is proper that we should first enquire into their source. 
 They never could have been bred in the brain of a young herds- 
 man. 2 In point of fact, they were so widely diffused that he 
 might have picked them up in various quarters. Let us first look 
 to the native country of the youth. He was probably a Bohemian, 
 and may, even as a boy, have been educated in the principles of 
 the Hussites. 3 During his subsequent residence in Franconia, 
 vagrant and seditious demagogues seem to have wrought upon 
 his mind and used him as their instrument. Trithemius speaks 
 of a Mendicant friar who taught him his doctrines, and often, 
 when he was preaching from the window, stood in the apartment 
 behind, and dictated to him what to say. 4 This person may have 
 been one of the rigid fanatical Franciscans who are known to 
 have been violently opposed to the dominant Church. The 
 oldest record we possess mentions a Beghard who associated with 
 the youth, but who decamped at his apprehension, and was 
 afterwards seized. The Mendicant friar and the Beghard may 
 possibly have been one and the same person, but perhaps also 
 there was a union of several discontented characters. According 
 to the same record, the clergyman of Niklashausen was in 
 league with the drummer, and had publicly borne testimony to 
 his miracles. On several occasions also he had allowed his 
 house to be illuminated by night, in order to attract pilgrims. 5 
 
 1 Old Record. 
 
 2 Trithemius says in the Ann. Hirsaug. of Bbheim : qui nescio, quo 
 spiritu suo seductus, an alieno. 
 
 3 Krcuzer in Waldau iii. 419 : lie pretended that the Virgin 
 Mary had revealed to him these things. My opinion is that he 
 received and learned them from one of the disciples oflluss. 
 
 4 Annal. Hire. : Ferunt ilium aliquoties hominis cujusdam claustralis 
 mendici occulto susurro, quid praedicaret, edoctum, et ob id frequentius 
 per fenestram loquebatur ad plebem, ut Doctorem suum ad aurem sine 
 note posset habere praesentem. In dArg. p. 288. Here (p. 289) the 
 trial of the drummer is also related, and among other particulars that : 
 Interrogans per chordam, omnia ficta esse falsaque et ementita con- 
 fessus est, et Monachum supradictum vagum, mendicum et versipellein 
 excogitavisse omnia voce libera dixit. 
 
 5 Is all gleaned from the confessions of the prisoners from Niklas- 
 hauscn in the old Record. 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 383 
 
 Still more remarkable is the impression which the youth pro- 
 duced. There was indeed at the time a favourable soil for such 
 doctrines as he taught, first in Franconia and then more exten- 
 sively over Germany. In Franconia Huss hadbeen well-received, 
 and his notions widely embraced. Here too, in the course of the 
 15th century, men eminent in various ways as poets, scholars, 
 priests, and divines, had laboured, and owing to the more liberal 
 tendencies of the age, to the disseverence of the spiritual 
 and temporal territories, and to the comparatively favourable 
 position of the citizen and peasant class, had laboured with 
 remarkable success. 1 Here, not only Gregory of Heimburg, 
 who moved in the higher circles, and belonged to the whole of 
 Germany, but several other persons had come forward, aiming at 
 the same objects, as Hans Boheim, and leaving behind them ves- 
 tiges of their efforts. Thus about the middle of the 14th century, 
 and under the government of Bishop Otho, Master Conrad Hager, 
 a layman well versed in Scripture, had publicly taught at Wurtz- 
 burg, That money paid for masses, and other gifts made at 
 funerals, for the repose and welfare of the souls of the departed, 
 was simony, and robbery, and hindered the alms due to the 
 poor and hungry ; and had declared that though he had a 
 whole roomful of florins, he would not permit a single one to be 
 spent for masses after his death. 2 About the same time, Her- 
 mann Kuchner, a native of Nuremberg, and a priest of the 
 Beghards, had at Wurtzburg defended the proposition, " That 
 Popes and Bishops are, by virtue of their office, no greater or 
 higher than other priests." 3 It is true that in the course of the 
 year 1342, both of them recanted. Their principles, however, were 
 not thereby at once extirpated from the minds of men. About the 
 middle of the 15th century, a certain John Midler again preached 
 the doctrines of Huss at Windesheim, Neustadt upon the Aisch, 
 Rotenburg upon the Tauber, and Onoltzbach, held secret meet- 
 ings, and gained a large party among the common people. On 
 a threat of persecution the master fled, but 130 of his adherents 
 
 1 See more proofs in Hagen Deutschl. lit. und relig. Verb. B. 1. s. 
 164 ff. 
 
 2 Lor. Friessens Hist, der Bischofe v. Wurtzburg s. 626. 
 
 3 Ibid. s. 626. 
 
 
384 APPENDIX. 
 
 were apprehended, conducted to Wurtzburg, and there per- 
 suaded to recant 1 by the Abbot John of Grumbach, a Doctor 
 of Divinity, and Master Antonius, preacher in the cathedral. 
 It is also possible that the Franciscan who preceded the drummer 
 as a preacher of repentance in the district of the Tauber, may 
 have taught the same principles. At any rate we find the whole 
 country frequented by Beghards, who everywhere roused the 
 people against the Hierarchy. Nor was the case different in con- 
 tiguous territories, and even farther off. " The people," as 
 Trithemius observes, 2 " are naturally inclined to novelty, and 
 always' strive to shake off the yoke of their rulers." At all times, 
 and in every place they listen eagerly to doctrines which promise 
 them liberty and equality, exemption from oppression and bur- 
 dens, and a participation in new rights ; and they were naturally 
 peculiarly susceptible for such doctrines at a time when a sense 
 of uneasiness and a lively expectation of great changes had 
 seized upon the whole European family : " They listened to 
 him," as the same Trithemius says, 3 " all the more fondly, the 
 more boldly he ventured to attack and decry ecclesiastical privi- 
 leges and the government of princes." And so it happened, 
 that first from the vicinity, from Tauberthal and Schupfergrund, 
 and then from greater distances, the people flocked in crowds to 
 the new preacher, and soon looked upon him as a prophet. Not 
 merely from the whole of eastern Franconia, but from Bavaria, 
 Suabia, Alsace, the Rhine districts, from the Wetterau, Hesse, 
 and Fulda, 4 from Thuringia, Saxony, and Meissen, 5 the appren- 
 tices, as a chronicler very graphically describes it, 6 " made their 
 escape from the workshops, and the hinds from the plough. The 
 hay-makers, with the sickles in their hand, and without leave of 
 their masters asked or given, set off in the clothes in which the 
 frenzy seized them. Few had any means of subsistence, but they 
 were provided with meat and drink at the houses where they 
 
 1 L. Friess in 1. c. s. 801. Friess places the matter in the year 
 1446. 
 
 2 In the Annal. Hirs. in d'Arg. p. 289. 
 
 3 In the Chron. Spanhem. p. 390. 
 
 4 ex Buchonia. 
 
 5 Friess s. 853. Tritheim Ann. Ilirs. in d'Arg. p. 286. 
 
 6 Friess in 1. c. 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 385 
 
 called. The only names they addressed to each other were 
 brother and sister. Scarce a lady or servant girl who did 
 not leave her locks at Niklashausen as a useless and sinful 
 ornament. The crowd was particularly great upon Sundays and 
 holidays. 1 Sometimes there were as many as 10, 20, nay, 30,000, 2 
 congregated. The village of Niklashausen, of course, had 
 no accommodation for so vast a multitude, and they slept in the 
 fields and woods around it. Innkeepers, cooks, merchants, trades- 
 men, with their utensils, soon collected, and the place assumed the 
 appearance of a vast encampment. 3 Under such circumstances, 
 of course, irregularities and excesses could not but occur, and 
 we might easily have imagined, even although Trithemius had 
 not expressly said, that much that was indecent took place. 4 
 
 When the assembled crowd was considerable, the prophet 
 came forward. He chose an elevated standing place such as an 
 inverted cask, 5 or even climbed into a tree. 6 He was, however, 
 particularly fond of preaching from a window, because then his 
 master, the mendicant friar, or the clergyman, could stand behind 
 him unseen, and suggest to him what to say. 7 Trithemius, it is 
 true, tells us that he could neither think consecutively nor speak 
 correctly, 8 but there must have been something affecting and 
 popular in what he said, or he never could have produced the 
 impression he did, and at all events he had no lack of boldness. 
 At the close of the discourse, he usually called upon the people to 
 
 1 Friess s. 853. 
 
 2 Mullner gives 40,000 ; Friess the same number, s. 853 ; Trithe- 
 mius 10, 20, to 30,000. 
 
 3 Friess ibid. 
 
 4 Jacebant homines utriusque sexus et aetatis noctu in campis, pratis 
 et nemoribus vicinis et multae fitbant impuritates. Chron. Spanh. p. 
 390. 
 
 5 Friess s. 853. 
 
 6 Trithemius in the Ann. Hirs. in d Arg. s. 288 : Publice in campis 
 et in pratis, nonnunquam etiam per fenestram e domuncula aliqua rusti- 
 cana et in arbor ibus praedicabat. 
 
 7 Trithemius Ann. Hirs. in 1. e. p. 288. See the passage at p. 382. He 
 adds in the Chron. Spanh. : Stabat homo ille fatuus in domo aliqua 
 et per fenestram, quodam fugitivo monacho verbum suggerente, populo 
 praedicabat. Friess, " The clergyman of the place usually stood be- 
 side him and prompted him." 
 
 8 Annal. Hirs. in 1. c. Cum nee loqui potuerit, nee apte ad proposi- 
 turn aliquid cogitare. 
 
 2b 
 
38(3 APPENDIX. 
 
 return upon the next Sabbath, holiday or festival assuring them 
 that the attendance would then be twice as numerous. 1 
 
 The people were poicerfully excited both by the matter of his 
 discourse which we have already characterized, and by the man- 
 ner in which he came forward. They took him for a prophet, 2 
 and a divinely inspired teacher of truth, and called him the holy 
 youth. At Holzkirchen, it was said, a person fell upon his 
 knees before him, 3 received absolution, and was directed by him 
 to go to the minister of Niklashausen, with whom he was in 
 league. Many others are also reported to have knelt and asked 
 his blessing, saying, " Pray for me, O, holy man," or " O, man of 
 God, be gracious unto us and pity us ; " On which occasions he 
 used to lift up his hand and make the sign of the cross over the 
 suppliants. 4 All, however, desired to see, speak, and in some way 
 come into contact with him: For whoever but touched his clothes, 
 looked upon himself as blessed and sanctified. So dense was 
 sometimes the throng around him, that he could neither eat nor 
 drink, nor attend to other bodily wants. 5 Keepsakes and me- 
 morials of him were in great request. His bonnet was rent into 
 shreds ; his clothes cut and torn from his body ; and only too 
 often did this unbounded reverence cost him a new suit, which, 
 however, was easily procured by the overflowing contributions of 
 the assembled multitude, 6 for as at a place of pilgrimage rich 
 offerings of money, jewels, and clothes, were made, wax candles 
 consecrated, and other such obligations presented, 7 
 
 1 Friess in 1. c. s. 853. 
 
 2 Trithemius says : Miserura hominem flexis in terrain genibus adora- 
 bant, clamantes, eo audiente et tolerante : Vir sancte, meserere nobis. 
 Chron. Spanh. p. 390. 
 
 3 Old Record. 
 
 4 Trithemius in d'Arg. s. 289. Friess s. 853. 
 
 5 Trithemius p. 288. 
 
 6 Ibid, and in the Chron. Spanh. p. 390, where it is said : Sed et pecias 
 vestimentorum ejus pro sanctuario et reliquiis diripiebant, sequefelicem 
 aestimabat, qui eum tangere, videre vel audire meruisset. Friess s. 853. 
 " The drummer went about with tufts on his cap, which the pilgrims tore 
 off, and whoever succeeded in obtaining the smallest shred of one of 
 them, fancied he had got hay from the manger at Bethlehem, or some 
 other precious relic." 
 
 7 Trithemius in the Chr. Spanhemiense : Multae pecuniae oblatae, 
 
TIANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 387 
 
 111 fine, there was also no lack of what always accompanied 
 any excitement of the kind, especially in those days. I allude to 
 fictitious and pretended miracles. 1 At Niclashausen a drowned 
 child was said to have been brought to life ; at Ostheim a 
 cripple to have been made straight ; at Kertzenberg a person born 
 blind to have been restored to sight ; and on another occasion, at 
 Niclashausen, a dumb man to have recovered his speech. Nay, it 
 was declared that, in the vicinity of this place, a fountain had 
 sprung up on a hill on which there had never been any water 
 before, and during the night had been made to flow upwards. 
 In short, every thing was made tributary to shew off the Tauber- 
 thal as a very sacred place, more abundant and effectual in graces 
 and pardons than all the rest of the world. Nicklashausen was 
 exalted above even Rome, and there, as the scene of his 
 sojourn, the prophet comported himself like the vicegerent of God, 
 and far superior to the pope. In this way the youthful victim 
 of enthusiasm returned at last to the very point which he had 
 set out with combatting. Resisting the Hierarchy, he constituted 
 in his own person a hierarchy of the free spirit, of the must rude 
 and arbitrary kind, and established it by the same improper means 
 'which hitherto had been often used by the priests against the people. 
 Preaching repentance, he spread among the multitude disorders 
 and excesses. Promising liberty and equality, he deluded them with 
 all sorts of false miracles, emptied their purses, and caused him- 
 self to be reverenced as an idol. Few instances present to view 
 so strange and lamentable a mixture of thirst for truth, and zeal 
 for freedom, with enthusiasm and fanaticism. 
 
 Of course the wa^'sfr'ac?/ couldnotremain quiet spectators of 'such 
 proceedings. Not only did the great ecclesiastics in the neighbour- 
 hood, the bishops of Wurtzburg and Mayence, forbid their subjects to 
 go to Nicklashausen; the civic council of Nurenberg issued thesame 
 prohibition, threatening transgressors with the highest pains of 
 law, for which conduct the magistrates of that city are highly 
 praised by Pope Sixtus, in a bull dated 4th February 1482. 2 A 
 
 miracula conficta et multa contra puritatem Christianae fidei patrata. 
 The several pretended miracles are related in the old official Record. 
 
 1 Friess s. 853. 
 
 2 Kreuzer : il The authorities of Niirnberg then forbade all the 
 citizens, under severe penalties, either to go or make a pilgrimage to 
 
388 APPENDIX. 
 
 special occasion, however, rendered it necessary for the Bishop 
 of Wurtzburg to interfere with a high-hand. On the Sabbath 
 before St Killian's day, a festival held in particular reverence in 
 Wurtzburg and its diocese, the piper preached again, and at the 
 conclusion of his discourse, intimated that, by command of the 
 Holy Virgin, all the men were to return the next Saturday 
 towards evening. He had a word or two to say to them. They 
 were to bring with them their arms, but to leave their wives and 
 children at home. 1 To prevent the open rebellion which was 
 thus projected, Bishop Rudolph, in one of the following 
 nights, sent 34 dragoons to Niklashausen. They surprized 
 " the piper" while asleep, and conducted him on horseback to 
 Wurtzburg. In that town 4000 pilgrims had already met, who, 
 perceiving it was intended to carry off their prophet, attempted to 
 defend him, but in vain. The horse of one of the dragoons was 
 sorely wounded by a peasant. Persons at a greater distance, 
 knowing nothing of what had happened, congregated upon 
 the appointed day, in vast multitudes, at Niklashausen. They 
 were estimated at above 34,000. On learning that the holy 
 youth had been apprehended, many of them returned home ; 
 others who were more closely connected with him, resolved to* 
 attempt his rescue. One in particular stood up, pretending 
 to have received a command from the Holy Trinity that the 
 brethren should march with tapers and swords to the castle of 
 Wurzburg, and promising that its gates would open before them 
 Accordingly about 10,000, or as others say, a smaller number 
 arose, marched with arms but otherwise poorly accoutred, to 
 the place, and made their appearance before the episcopal city, 
 partly as holy pilgrims and partly as high-handed rebels, some 
 
 Nicklashausen. For this, one of the councillors was highly commended 
 by the Pope." Miillner : " The town council of Niirnberg caused inti- 
 mation to be made in all churches and monasteries, forbidding their 
 citizens and subjects to make either pilgrimages or journeys to Niclas- 
 hauscn— conduct which Pope Sixtus afterwards, in a bull addressed 
 14th Feb. 1482 to the Council, highly praised." To the same effect is 
 the statement of Friess s. 852. He adds, " The report circulated, that 
 the prophet was under the influence of a conjuror or exorcist, who was 
 accustomed to appear to him dressed in white, and in the shape of the 
 Virgin Mary." 
 
 1 See the whole narrative in Friess ss. 853 and 854. 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN". 389 
 
 hundreds of them with burning tapers. 1 The leaders of this 
 multitude were not mere peasants, but two knights, Kuntz and 
 Michael of Thunfeld, father and son — a circumstance which 
 shows how serious the matter had become, and is another point 
 of resemblance with the subsequent war of the peasantry. The 
 Bishop sent his Marshal, George von Gebsattel, to meet them, 
 to Avhom they signified that they wished the holy youth given 
 up to them ; if the Bishop surrendered him freely, it would be 
 well ; if not, they would take him by force. All this time the 
 Marshal was pelted with stones, and the utmost he could do was 
 to escape. The Bishop then ordered out a troop of soldiers, and 
 again sent Conrad of Hutten to the peasants. Conrad intimated 
 to them that the Bishop had no intention to release the pri- 
 soner but rather to punish him as he deserved ; and ordered all 
 subjects of the Bishopric, on their duty and oath, to return 
 home ; — if not, they would have themselves to blame for the 
 consequences. Thereupon the Wurtzburg peasantry departed 
 with one accord. Those of Wertheim, and others from the 
 Taubergrund, also retreated, but in compact bodies. Having 
 learned, however, that there were some of the ringleaders in 
 the crowd, the Bishop despatched several troopers to lay hold of 
 these. The peasantry stood on their defence, and twelve of them 
 were stabbed. Many fled to Biittelbrunn and took refuge in 
 the Churchy but were obliged to surrender, conducted to Wurtz- 
 burg and imprisoned in the tower. 2 
 
 The minister of Niklashausen and the Beghard, with whom 
 Hans Boheim was connected, were likewise seized. 3 We possess, 
 in the old, and, as regards this part of the history no doubt, the 
 official report, the confession of the prisoners. They acknow- 
 ledged that at the outset of the affair, they had often stuck up 
 lights by night in the parsonage and church at Niklashausen, as 
 a means of setting on foot a pilgrimage to the place ; that the 
 miracles were false ; that the child at Niklashausen had not been 
 actually drowned, nor the man at Ostheim lame ; that the child at 
 
 1 Mullner : Above 3000 persons appeared before the castle of Wiirz- 
 burg, more than a hundred of them bearing tapers in their hands, and 
 required that he should be delivered up, but in vain. Friess states, 
 8. 854, that 400 carried lights. 
 
 2 Friess s. 854. 3 Old Record. 
 
300 APPENDIX. 
 
 Kortzenberg had till this day a weak sight, and that the dumb 
 man had only feigned to be so for a sum of money ; and that all 
 had been done for no other purpose but to excite and delude 
 the people. The minister also confessed that he had certified 
 this and the other miracle to be true, without having any 
 certain knowledge of their truth. The prisoners further stated, 
 on examination, that a peasant at Niklashausen had cut the hair 
 of the young women, although that is only proper to be done to 
 nuns, and that after the seizure of the youth, another peasant had 
 come forward and vented many strange and unchristian things 
 against the government of the Holy Church. This appears to 
 have been the same party who, in the- name of the Holy Trinity, 
 summoned the crowd to march to Wurtzburg. 1 
 
 All of them made a penitent confession. Even the Beghard 
 seems to have behaved treacherously to the piper. For immedi- 
 ately after his apprehension, he made an attempt to escape. 2 The 
 Bishop in a few days dismissed the whole of the prisoners on 
 their oath except Hans Boheim himself, the peasant who, in the 
 name of the Trinity, had ordered the march to Wurtzburg, and 
 the other .who had wounded the horse of the Wurtemberg 
 trooper. 3 ♦These three were committed for trial. 
 
 Bishop Rudolph, the last of the family of Schernberg, was in 
 other respects no harsh master. He is rather celebrated as " a 
 sensible, wise, peaceable, and truthful prince, who greatly loved 
 his subjects. 4 " This was a case, however, in which it was 
 scarcely possible to admit grace, and where law and prudence 
 
 1 Friess s. 854. 2 Old Record. 3 Friess s. 854. 
 
 4 Friess Gesch. der Bisch. v. Wiirzb. s. 864. Bishop Rudolph died 
 19th April 1495. Friess relates the following anecdote of him. Being 
 once in a state of great debility, he was entreated by the Canons to 
 choose from among them, some competent man with whom to share 
 the weight of the government. Whereupon he summoned them into 
 his presence, took his cap into his hand, and said he would put it upon 
 the head of the one whom he considered the most able. Having then 
 inspected them all in succession, he replaced the cap upon his own 
 head, saying, " If what I hear, and the people all say, be true, then, 
 dear Rudolph, I know no one whom this cap better becomes, or 
 who has more honourably earned it than thyself. Therefore keep it 
 for a while longer." Friess subjoins s. 865. The Canons of the Ca- 
 thedral perceiving how brave and stout-hearted, and firm of mind he 
 was, bade him adieu, and went home with something like a blush in 
 their faces. 
 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 391 
 
 alike required that an example should be made. The two pea- 
 sants were accordingly condemned to die by the sword, and the 
 piper himself by fire. 1 Nor did Kuntz of Thunfeld, the principal 
 leader of the peasants, escape with impunity. In spite of his own 
 appeal to the mercy of the Bishop, and the intercession of many 
 of his relatives on his behalf, he was compelled to consign seve- 
 ral of his possessions in feu to the bishoprick of Wurtzburg. 2 
 
 Nor is the execution of the sentence itself unworthy of atten- 
 tion. Here also it is in our power to give the report of one who 
 lived not many years after, viz. the pious Trithemius. 3 At the 
 commencement of the 16th century, 4 he was abbot of the monas- 
 tery of St James at Wurtzburg, at the back of which, upon an 
 open space of ground, the execution took place. 5 He relates, 
 and no doubt from the report of eye-witnesses, the following par- 
 ticulars. There were many men of good understanding, who 
 at the condemnation of the piper at Wurtzburg, were not 
 satisfied, although for different reasons. Several, chiefly among 
 the citizens, whose over hasty faith perceived something Di- 
 vine in the business, were very reluctant to approve of the 
 execution of the youth, and expected either that were it at- 
 tempted, God would rescue him, or, that if actually accomplished, 
 his death would be speedily avenged. Others, on the con- 
 trary, and among these the Bishop and his clergy, were afraid 
 of some trick or delusion of the devil, whose instrument they 
 looked upon the criminal to be. The sentence was nevertheless 
 carried into effect. The youth was led forth to the open place 
 behind the monastery of St James, not far from the hospital, 6 
 where almost the whole citizens were present in arms. Bound 
 with cords, he was removed for a little to the side, while the two 
 other criminals were beheaded. On beholding their fate, the youth 
 
 1 Friess s. 854. The sentence pronounced upon the piper was not 
 executed without some opposition of opinion on the part of the public, 
 and, even as it appears, of those about the Bishop. Trithemius in 
 D'Argentre p. 289 
 
 2 The deed may be read in Friess. s. 854. 
 
 3 In the Annal. Hirsaug. in D'Argentre pp. 289 and 290. 
 
 4 From the 15th Oct. 1506. Cave Hist, liter, t. II. p. 203,in Ap- 
 pend. H. Wharton. 
 
 5 Ductus est ergo, says Trithemius, in earn planitiem, quae retro 
 Monasterium est meum, circa domum leprosorum 
 
 6 circa domum leprosorum. 
 
392 APPENDIX. 
 
 enquired of the executioner, " Is that what you will do to me?" 
 " No," was the reply, " for you a different bath is prepared." 
 It would seem that he either had not seen the pile of faggots, or 
 had not understood what it was. On being fastened to the 
 stake, he sang with a loud voice several verses of a hymn in the 
 German tongue to the Holy Virgin. 1 Many among the specta- 
 tors looked upon him as a saint, and for that reason proof against 
 fire, and were afraid of standing near, imagining that the flames 
 might by Divine power dart forth, and take hold of them. In 
 like manner others were in terror for some trick of the evil 
 one ; and the executioner, who was of this number, had shaven 
 off the hair of the victim, to prevent anything devilish from 
 harbouring there. The youth himself, when fixed to the stake, 
 continued his singing, but when the fire was applied, and 
 he began to feel the heat, he three times exclaimed, in dole- 
 ful accents, Woes me ! woes me ! woes me ! His voice, how- 
 ever, was soon choked, and the devouring flames reduced him to 
 ashes. Even these, to prevent their becoming an object of 
 superstitious reverence, the executioner was enjoined to cast into 
 the Maine. No miracle was wrought during the whole affair, 
 and nothing happened either before or after the execution, tend- 
 ing in the least degree to prove the innocence of the sufferer ; 
 and hence, in a very short time, the concourse of people to* 
 Niklashausen entirely ceased,^ 
 
 That this whole phenomenon was a prelude of the war of the 
 peasantry, and connected in the closest way with the commotions 
 that ensued, nobody will deny. The principles in both cases were 
 almost the same, excepting only that in the latter, when the 
 eccentricity of the previous outbreak was somewhat abated, the 
 claims of the peasantry, at least as expressed in the 12 Articles, 3 
 
 1 Carmina quaedam seu rythmos de Domina nostra, in lingua Theu- 
 tonica coinpositos alta voce canebat. 
 
 2 Friess, s. 854, says that the trooping to Niklashausen lasted for a 
 few weeks after ; but was at last stopped by order of the magistrates. 
 
 3 The earlier 12 Articles of the peasantry of the year 1513, are to be 
 found in Bensen's Gesch. des Bauernkriegs s. 50, the later, of 1525, in 
 Luther's works Walch Ausg. Th. 16. s. 25. Of the former, Article 7th, 
 
HANS BOHEIM OF NICKL\SHAUSEN. 393 
 
 were more moderate. In like manner we see in both cases, 
 the same means applied, and the same result attained. The 
 piper comports himself quite in the way Miinzer and others 
 did, at first with audacity and fanaticism, and then with cowardice, 
 and in so far is infinitely differed* from Huss and other true mar- 
 tyrs. In like manner, the judgment formed by liberal, but sober- 
 minded cotemporaries upon this enterprise, was not very different 
 from that which the Reformers, in their day, passed upon the 
 insurrection of the peasantry. Sebastian Brandt, who in other 
 matters is so liberal a man, certainly does not intend to praise the 
 prophet, when in his Ship of Fools, which appeared about 1494, 
 and consequently about 18 years after the Wurtzburg tragedy, he 
 speaks 1 of the " bag-piper," and says that he who adheres to the 
 Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, requires no further 
 revelation, nor yet to visit the chapel or the cell of Nicklashausen. 
 Though not properly a Reformer, Trithemius was one of the most 
 enlightened and serious men of his age, and anything but satisfied 
 with the ruling clergy, and yet we have seen with what contempt 
 he everywhere speaks of the prophet. And the same judgment 
 would doubtless have been passed upon the enterprise, had it been 
 reported to them, by those whom, in a stricter sense, we call the 
 forerunners of the Reformation. 
 
 that " Every priest is to have only one benefice ;" Article 8th, that 
 " bird-catching, fishing, hunting, and wood-cutting are to be free;" and 
 Article 9th, that " all unjust taxes and tolls are to be abolished," all coin- 
 cide with the preaching of Bbheim. The same things are expressed, in 
 somewhat greater detail, and partly more modified in numbers 2. 4. 5. 
 6. 8. of the later Articles. 
 
 1 It should also be considered, that the circumstance of Brant's allud- 
 ing to the affair in a popular poem composed so many years after it 
 happened, is a proof of its general importance. 
 
 . 
 
li. 
 
 CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS, 
 
 THE FIRST PROPAGATOR OF THE WRITINGS AND 
 OPINIONS OF GOCH. 
 
 Discrutiat me fortuna tua, quanquam ipsum afflictissimum ; sed quod divinitus geri videtur, 
 forti animo perferendum censeo. 
 
 Erasmus ia an Epistle to Grapheus. 
 
 . . . . Si vobiscum sit Christus, inanis 
 Est omnis timor, haud possit contingere quicquam 
 Adversum Christo ex animo fidentibus. ... 
 
 Grapheus himself in the poetical lamentation he 
 composed in prison. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 
 
 At the conclusion of this volume it may not be improper to 
 give a short account of a man, who no doubt belonged to the 
 age of the Reformation itselfj having survived Erasmus twenty- 
 two years, and Luther twelve, but who at the same time contri- 
 buted so largely to pave its way and initiate it in the Netherlands, 
 that he enjoys on that account a distinguished reputation among 
 his countrymen, and hence, also, deserves some special notice in 
 a work like the present. It is true that in a foregoing section we 
 have already spoken of Grapheus, the person whom we have here 
 in view, but we could there only allude to the phase of his life in 
 which he was connected with Goch. 1 We intend here to take a 
 more independent and comprehensive view of him. 
 
 He was, as we have already said, born in 1482, 2 one year before 
 Luther, and two before Zwingli, at Alst in Flanders. In this 
 manner his youth was passed at a time in the highest degree 
 critical for his native country, both in a political and religious 
 respect. Besides, from his entrance upon public life as secretary 
 to the city of Antwerp, he lived in a place where the warmest 
 interest wa3 felt in the religious movements and changes then 
 commencing. No city in the Netherlands, indeed, was at first 
 more deeply imbued than Antwerp with reformatory sentiments. 
 
 1 See 136—144. 
 
 2 Respecting Cornelius Grapheus the chief works to be consulted are : 
 Valer. Andreae Biblioth. Belg. Lovan. 1643. p. 150. Foppens (who 
 does little more than repeat Andreae) Bibl. Belg. T. i. p. 201 and 202. 
 Swertius Athenae Belg. p. 195. 196. Brandt Hist. Kef. Belg. T. i. p. 
 71—79. Dan. Gerdesii Hist. Ref. Gron. et Brem. 1749. T. iii. p. 20. 
 Ejusdem Serin. Antiquar. sive. Miscell. Gron. 1756, T. v. P. 1. p. 96 — 
 508. Kist en Royaards Archief voor kerkelijke geschiedenis, Th. 6. s. 
 153 — 167. Besides : Freytag Annal. litter, p. 396. Paquot Memoires, 
 T. vi. p. 187—196. Catalog. Bibl. Bunav. T. I. vol. ii. p. 1599. 
 Saxii Onomast. T. iii. p. 122. Hoeufft Parnasus Latino-Belgicus p. 9. 
 P. Hofman Peerlkamp Vita Belgarum, qui latina carmina scripserunt, 
 in the Memoires de l'Acad. Roy. de Bruxelle^, T. ii. p. 56. Brux. 1822. 
 — Schrockh K. Gesh. seit der Reform, ii. 353 and 358. Gieseler K. 
 Gesh. iii. 1. s. 553. not. 5. 
 
398 APPENDIX. 
 
 As we shall see in the following volume, many things had taken 
 place in the Netherlands even in the course ofthe 14th, and especi- 
 ally of the 15th century, which both foretold, and helped to bring 
 about, the more vigorous, free, and spiritual mould into which the 
 whole system of Christianity in the Church was soon to be cast. 
 It is only necessary to mention the names of Ruysbroek, Gerhard 
 Groot, Florentius Radevins, Thomas a Kempis, John Wessel, 
 John of Goch, and Des. Erasmus, in order to obtain a gene- 
 ral notion of this. Nevertheless, the Netherlands were on the 
 whole faithfully devoted to the Catholic Church and its head, 
 and in the last decennia of the fifteenth century, and the com- 
 mencement ofthe sixteenth, were kept in obedience, by the zeal 
 of the Catholic government. No doubt, like all the branches of 
 the Teutonic race, the inhabitants strove, and not unsuccessfully, 
 against the introduction of the Inquisition, although at first they 
 permitted without scruple the preaching of Indulgences. When, 
 however, the signal was given by Luther for the attack upon 
 that abuse, his papers and works, condemned so early as the 
 7th Nov., 1519, 1 by the Divines of Louvain, were yet eagerly 
 read in the Netherlands, and could be circulated all the more 
 generally that Count Edzard in the contiguous province of East- 
 frieslands, permitted them to be publicly sold. 2 The elements 
 of opposition, which had long existed, were now mightily stirred. 
 No doubt strenuous opponents to Luther took the field with writ- 
 ings and disputations. 3 In particular, Jacob Latomus, a doctor 
 of Louvain, whom the great reformer himself deemed worthy of a 
 refutation, Eustachius de Zichenis (van de Rivieren), a Dominican 
 from Brabant, and John Driedo (Dridoens), called Turenholt, an 
 
 1 Luth. Opp. lat. Jen. i. 466. Loscher Ref. Acta iii. 850. 
 
 2 Schrockh K. Gesch. nach der Ref. B. 2. s. 354. Compare also 
 respecting him Hofstede de Groot in der Mongographie : Geschiedenis 
 der Broederenkerk te Groningen Gron. 1832, s. 19, where this Count's 
 connection with Groningen is specially mentioned : Graaf Edzard hield 
 zich dikwijls in Groningen op, trok vrienden en leerling van Gansfort, 
 onder anderen Johannes Agricola, Rudolfs broeder, en Georg Aportanus, 
 een Zwollenaar van geboorte, aan zijn hof, en beminde zelf de schrif- 
 ten van Erasmus, Luther, en Zwingli. Overal begunstigde hij licht en 
 deugd, en de Geestelijken onder zijn gehied, die het Evangelie predik- 
 ten, beschermde hij tegen de woede hunner dweepzuchtige ambtgenooten. 
 Zoo werd door hem in Oostfriesland het eerst van alle Europesche 
 Staten, sedert 1520, de Kerkhervorming gelukkig tot stand gebragt. 
 
 3 Dan Gerdesii Hist. Ref. T. iii. p. 21. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 399 
 
 opponent, praised even by Erasmus for the decorous character 
 of his controversy. 1 The defenders of the principles of the 
 Reformation, however, were of greater weight, or at least more 
 active and successful, and their bold appearance in the field, now 
 produced an open war, which terminated, though not till after 
 long convulsions, decidedly in favour of the Reformation. At Ant- 
 werp, in the first instance, and about the year 1519, Jacob Spreng, 
 commonly called Jacobus Prepositus 2 (the Provost), enlisting 
 under Luther, 3 preached free Gospel principles. He was brought 
 as a prisoner to Brussels, and induced by the threat of being 
 burned to death, to recant, which he actually did in Feb. 1520, 
 before the Papal Commissioner Jerome Alexander, the Emperor's 
 confessor John Glapio, and several others. The doctrines 
 which he revoked were similar to those which Luther had shortly 
 before advocated in the Heidelberg disputation, and he professed 
 principles which are certainly strongly opposed to those of the 
 Reformation, e.g. " I believe that the works of the saints are in 
 so far meritorious of eternal life, that they are free from all guilt, 
 Of the works of the free will I believe that they are not all sinful, 
 but that some of them being unmixed with guilt, merit eternal life 
 and consequently do not need pardoning mercy." Like so many 
 others, Propst considered his retractation merely as the effect of 
 outward compulsion. He afterwards wrote to his hearers in 
 Antwerp that they were not to ascribe his fall to the doctrine 
 but solely to his human frailty, and exhorted them, in mat- 
 ters of faith, not to trust to man, but to the Word of God 
 alone. After the first act of persecution, Propst exposed himself 
 to fresh imprisonment in Brussels, by appearing again as the 
 defender of the principles of the reformation at Bruges. From 
 this second imprisonment he escaped by the help of a friendly 
 Franciscan, and having, in April 1522, passed some time with 
 
 1 Is, says Erasmus in a letter of the year 1520 (Gerdes in 1 c s. 
 22), publice multis diebus disputavit adversus aliquot axiomata Lutheri, 
 et disputavit ut Theologum decuit absque convitiis. 
 
 2 See respecting him Seckendorf Hist. Luth. L. i. § 110. p. 179. 
 Gerdes in 1. c. s. 22—25. 
 
 3 Erasmus writes of him to Luther on the 30th May 1519 (Ep. 427.) : 
 Est Antverpiae Prior ejus Monasterii vir pure christianus, qui te unice 
 deamat, tuus olim discipulus, ut praedicat. Is omnium paene solus 
 Christum praedicat, ceeteri fere aut hominum fabulas, aut suum quaes- 
 tum praedicant. 
 
400 APPENDIX. 
 
 Luther at Wittemberg, 1 he continued to labour for the Gospel 
 as preacher in St Mary's Church in Bremen. 2 
 
 Shortly after, in the year 1521, there appeared in the town 
 where John Wessel began and terminated his life, and as 
 there can be no doubt left behind him the tradition of his 
 Reformatory principles, an f-vangelical teacher of similar 
 views, William Frederici, preacher in St Martin's in Groningen, 3 
 a man, as it appears, of extraordinary gifts and learning. In a 
 letter 4 addressed to him in the year 1521, from Louvain, Erasmus 
 extols him as the pattern of a zealous, pure, and disinterested 
 teacher of the Gospel, and as having acquired particular merit 
 by assembling around him fellow-labourers of congenial senti- 
 ments. " You shine," says the great scholar, " before all by the 
 purity of your life, by your indefatigable zeal in feeding the 
 flock with Gospel doctrine, 3 and by collecting around you such 
 of the clergy as by pure morals, and sacred learning, are botli an 
 ornament to the Church, and able to supply your place with the 
 people, — so that here the new kind of teachers, never instituted 
 by Christ, but which have been introduced by the negligence of 
 the clergy, are quite superfluous. You are not a companion to 
 the people at their pots, but their teacher, comforter, monitor,, 
 and faithful and affectionate adviser." The celebrated letter- 
 writer also expresses a wish that there were many such men, in 
 order that the world might either indignantly repugn the many 
 licentious and vagrant priests, or these themselves be constrained 
 to renounce their sloth, their luxurious living, and pursuit of 
 pleasure, and addict themselves to true piety. 
 
 Cotemporaneously with these men, whom we may safely con- 
 
 1 Luther's Brief an Spalatin in de "Wette ii. 182. Sechendorf Hist. 
 Lutheran, i. 179. 
 
 2 Gerdes Hist. Ref. T. ii. p. 131. 
 
 3 Gerdes pp. 25 and 26. 
 
 4 The letter is in the appendix to the 3d part of Gerdes Ref. Gesch. 
 Num. i., A. s. 6. It is preceded by a eulogium of Friderici from the 
 pen of an anonymous author, in which we read : Tu patriae honos, 
 Phrisiae decus, saeerdotum disciplina, plebis auctoritas, senatus consi- 
 lium, orphan orum spes, egentium asylum, viduarum tutor, omnium 
 recte viventium asscrtor. 
 
 5 The Evangelical principles of Frederici and of his associates, the 
 preacher of the Church, and the rector of the School, of St Martin, are 
 stated in a work already quoted, Hofstede de Groot iiber die Bruder- 
 kirche zu Groningen s. 21 and 22. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAniEUS. 401 
 
 sider as the representatives of many who shared their sentiments, 
 but who are less known, in the same locality as the first, and 
 therefore probably also in connection with him, Cornelius Gra- 
 pheus began his labours for pure evangelical doctrine. In the 
 year 1520, he published Goctis work on Christian liberty, trans- 
 lated into Dutch, with a polemical preface ; l and followed it up 
 in 1521, with the original Latin text, also preceded by a pre- 
 liminary discourse of the same kind, and of which, in the fore- 
 going part of this volume, we- have communicated the substance. 
 Shortly afterwards the diet at Worms was held ; and there, as is 
 well known, Charles V., with part of the princes, laid the ban of 
 the empire upon Lutlier, and emitted a severe edict against his 
 doctrines, and all who adhered to them. Under the same date, 
 and at the same place as that edict (which, however, was not 
 published until the 26th of May), upon the 8th of May, 1521, 
 Charles passed a severe penal law against heresy in the 
 Netherlands. 2 The young Emperor, who in Germany yielded 
 to circumstances and adopted gentle measures, followed very 
 different rules in his native country. He probably believed 
 himself entitled to act in a more absolute and arbitrary manner 
 in his hereditary dominions. It is supposed that under his 
 government, and on a moderate reckoning, 50,000 men 3 suffered 
 violent death, in various ways, on account of their faith. The 
 court of Inquisition, recently instituted and forcibly introduced, 
 operated powerfully to this end. In 1522, the year after 
 the first imperial edict against the Lutheran heresy had been 
 emitted, Charles V. appointed the Councillor of Brabant, Francis 
 van der Ilulst, and the Carmelite, Nicolaus van Egmont, two 
 furious zealots, Inquisitors for the Netherlands, and it was into 
 their hands that the person with whom we have here to do, had 
 the misfortune to fall. 
 
 There can be little doubt, that shortly after the publication of 
 
 1 This translation mentioned in Grapheus' Epistle to Carondiletus 
 (Gerdes Hist. Ref. T. iii. p. 20.) I have never seen, and it may perhaps 
 be wholly lost. 
 
 2 It agrees in substance, and generally in language, with the edict 
 of Worms. See Ordonnantien, Statuten, Edicten ende Placcaerten. 
 van Vlaenderen. 2te Ausg. Antw. 1662. 1. 88. 
 
 3 Grotius says 100,000. Annal. et Hist, de reb. Bclg. L. 5. p. 11. 
 12. This appears an oratorical exaggeration. 
 
 2c 
 
402 APPENDIX. 
 
 the imperial edict, and before the nomination of the Inquisitors, 
 Grapheus had been seized and committed to prison at Brussels. 
 On the 8th October 1521, he wrote from his prison a letter 
 to John Carondiletus, 1 the Archbishop and Chancellor of Brabant, 
 a person of great influence, and who, he hoped, would intercede 
 for him with the Regent 1 and others on whom his fate depended. 
 In this letter, Grapheus expresses profound distress at his situa- 
 tion, avers his innocence and implores mercy, endeavouring to 
 show, that if he had failed, it was more the consequence of an 
 error of understanding, than of bad intentions. He adjures 
 Carondiletus, for the sake of his innocent children, of his young 
 wife, of the services he had rendered to the Emperor, and finally 
 of love to God and Christ, to take pity upon his condition, which 
 was worse than that of a Jew or Heathen, the declared enemies of 
 the Gospel, and if he could not do more, at least to procure for him 
 a transference from the prison at Brussels, where he could be 
 of no use to his family then suffering shame and misery, into 
 another at Antwerp. 
 
 This sorrowful and almost too lugubrious epistle appears to 
 have had no effect. Grapheus was still left for many a day in 
 prison. Some time after, the captive also wrote a lament (Queri- 
 monia), which has been recently printed and published. 3 The 
 poem, it is true, expresses the same sorrow and longing for deli- 
 
 1 The letter appears in Brandt Hist. Ref. Belg. Vol. i. Lib. ii. p. 
 71. This book was not accessible to me. I have, however, taken the 
 substance of the epistle from a dissertation by Janssen, which I shall 
 forthwith cite. 
 
 2 Margaret of Parma was personally anything but a fanatic. The 
 following anecdote is related of her. The theologians of Louvain 
 were complaining to her of the ruin of the Christian religion which 
 Luther was occasioning. And who then is Luther ? she enquired. The 
 theologians informed her that he was an illiterate monk. To which 
 she replied, " Well then, do you men of learning, who are many, 
 write against the illiterate monk, who is but one, and assuredly the 
 world will believe the many learned sooner than the one illiterate." 
 Gieseler K. Gesch. iii. 1. s. 558, not 8. 
 
 3 This poem was first brought into notice by L. J. F. Janssen in 
 1835 in the 6th part of the Archief voor kerkelijke Geschiedenis 
 von. Kist und Royaard s. 154 — 167, and from a manuscript in Dord- 
 recht, which contains what is either the original of Cornelius Grapheus 
 himself, or at all events a copy of it by his friend Gerh. Geldenhauer. 
 In an introductory epistle to Messrs Kist and Royaard, the editor treats 
 in great detail of the unpublished treasure and its author. Mr Janssen, 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPIIEUS. 403 
 
 verance as the letter. It is evidently, however, written in a more 
 composed tone, and contains many excellent and sublime pas- 
 sages on the Divine aid and the presence of Christ, even under 
 the most ignominious sufferings. The more natural way k + o 
 suppose this higher composure and resignation, as following after 
 the first despair, rather than to reverse that order. Nor will it be 
 out of place to give the sequence of thought and some of the chief 
 passages in this lament, as being characteristic of the author. The 
 Querimonia, in carceris angustia, as the inscription bears, non sine 
 laclirymis effusa, is addressed to God and commences in the fol- 
 lowing manner : 
 
 Pater, o reran domitor, qui cernis ab alto 
 Omnia, quae terris fiunt, quaecunque profundo 
 Aequore, num attendis, quanta heu nos undique cingat 
 Tempestas ? Cur, o getiitor, tua pignora, cur sic 
 Deseris heu miseros tanto in discrimine ? Num quid 
 Respicis haec ? Eia haec tu respice, respice ! Clemens 
 Eripe nos genitor, vel saltern numine sacro 
 Immisso oram us quemquam instigato, benigno 
 Qui monitu offensi componat Caesaris iram. 
 
 Grapheus then describes his deplorable and unhealthy condi- 
 tion, speaks of his weak breast, his hoarse throat, his parched 
 tongue, his sunken eyes, his emaciated body, and his stomach 
 that had lost its power, and then gives the following description 
 
 of his person : 
 
 
 quite correctly, as I think, dates the Querimonia subsequently to the 
 letter to Carondiletus, and at page 158 urges the following reason : — 
 " The letter manifests a mind freshly wounded ; the poem, on the 
 other hand, a mind which has already experienced healing, inasmuch 
 as there is in it a livelier trust in God and Christ, and greater resigna- 
 tion to their disposal. The letter is written in a frame bordering on 
 despair ; In the Lament the anguish is no longer so poignant." At the 
 same time, as Janssen observes, p. 159, the Lament cannot possibly have 
 been composed after 1524, because that was the year of the death 
 of Philip of Burgundy, the Bishop of Utrecht, with whom Gelden- 
 hauer, the person to whom it was sent, was to treat in its author's 
 favour. Geklenhauer then passed, as secretary, into the services of 
 Maximilian of Burgundy. I beg leave to correct a small error in the 
 learned epistle of Janssen. At p. 159, he enumerates, as friends of 
 Grapheus, Erasmus, Geklenhauer, and (Conr.) Goclenius, who, no 
 doubt, were so, but he adds to them the name of John of Goch. This 
 is clearly a mistake, for Goch was already in his grave (-j- 1475) when 
 Grapheus was born (1482). 
 
404 APPENDIX. 
 
 . . . Genua aegra labant, vix osibus haerent 
 Ossa, inculta horret facies, riget hispida barba, 
 Maxillae cedunt, nasus fit longior, horrent 
 Sqallore impexi crines, clauso aere career 
 Paedore oppletur, moeror gravis omnia, tristis 
 Omnia luctus habet, non est noctuve dieve 
 . Ulla quies. 
 
 The picture which he proceeds to draw of his prison, of the dim 
 light, the oppressive air, and the total solitude, unbroken except by 
 mice, spiders, and other vermin, we shall not here detail. As little 
 shall we touch the affecting complaints which he makes of separa- 
 tion from his friends and relatives, or those, still more bitter, of 
 the unceasing craft and activity of his enemies, by means of 
 which he and his fellow-prisoners, (for, as the subscription shews, 1 
 they also are associated with himself in his lament.) 
 
 . . . . facti sumus undique magnum 
 
 Opprobrium, risus, spectaclum, abjectio, cunctis 
 
 Fabula nota, jocus, stupor, execratio, dirus 
 
 Sibilus, et quid non tandem ? . . . 
 
 We rather turn to the passages which paint the sentiments of 
 Grapheus as elevated and Christian, and worthy of an evangeli- 
 cal man. He asks, " Ought we under these circumstances to 
 yield to despair ? " and answers very beautifully : 
 
 Ah non, 
 Non despcrandum est, nam si nos deserat orbis, 
 Opximus baud quaquam Christus nos deserit ! Eece, 
 Cbristus adest, micuit paries, micuere columnae 
 Carceris et tremulo resplendent lumine diri 
 Fornicis anfractus ; medio stans lumine Christus 
 Accedit moestos, dextraque humaniter aegros 
 Coelesti mulcens, moerentia pectora curat 
 Unguine divino, languentesque erigit artus. 
 
 Tanti est meliflui dulcis praesentia Christi. 
 Ipse enim nobiscum una comeditque bibitque, 
 Nobiscum vigilat, nobiscum dulce quiescit, 
 
 1 He subscribes C. Grapheus una cum concaptivis . . These 
 were no doubt persons suffering confinement for their religious con- 
 victions. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAriiEUS. 405 
 
 Supponitque manum blandus, si omnia terrcnt 
 Occurrit, tetros abigens ea somnia visus. 
 Si quicquam petimus, nobis respondit amice ; 
 Si legimus, lecturam aperit ; si plaudimus, ipse 
 Applaudit nobis ; moeror nos occupat, atrum 
 Moerorem extinguit ; si desperamus, abunde 
 Confirmat Sacri mulcens dulcedine Verbi. 
 
 Grapheus now breaks forth into the praise of God, who had sent 
 Jesus Christ to console the mourner, the broken-hearted and 
 imprisoned. As the comforter is so near, and seals to him so 
 certainly the Divine love, he resolves that he will no longer 
 mourn, but says : 
 
 Si nobiscum sit Christus, inanis 
 Est omnis timor, haud possit contingere quicquam 
 Adversum Christo ex animo fidentibus. . . . 
 
 At the same time, with the feelings of a man, he longs for deliver- 
 ance, and trusts that Christ, if his holy wisdom finds it good, will 
 yet conduct him from his prison, either by the direct aid of his 
 Almighty hand, or by means of some secret spiritual influence, 
 disposing the heart of the Emperor in his favour, or by sending 
 him an intercessor like a messenger from heaven, 
 
 . . . molli qui afflamine mentem 
 Caesaream tentet, Majestatemque tremendam 
 Blanditus flectens, veniam pacemque misellis 
 Impetret. . . . 
 
 It is this passage at the closewhich brings to light the outward 
 purpose of the poem. As shown by the old manuscript from 
 which the impression was made, it was dedicated in the first 
 instance to a man distinguished in his day, and who held the 
 principles of the Reformation, Dr Gerhard Geldenliauer of Nym- 
 wegen. 1 This person was secretary to Philip of Burgundy, the 
 
 1 Gerhard Geldenliauer, from Nymwegen (Noviomagus), originally 
 a member of the Order of the cross, afterwards, like so many of the 
 monks of the Netherlands, passed into the Evangelical Church, 
 and escaped from his native country into Germany, where he lived 
 and laboured in Strasburg, Augsburg, and especially in Marburg. 
 
406 appendix. 
 
 Bishop of Utrcclit, a man who was himself not inaccessible to 
 more liberal views, and who, on the other hand, 1 was held in great 
 esteem by Charles V. Grapheus might thus hope, while pouring 
 out his heart to his friend, that his friend would act the part of 
 intercessor with the Bishop of Utrecht, and through him with the 
 .Emperor, or perhaps even directly with theEmperor himself, in his 
 favour. Nay he may probably have cherished the expectation 
 that his poetical effusion would reach the Emperor's own hands, 
 for several passages at the end appear to have been written with 
 this view. After saying, 
 
 . . . Neque enim (confidimus, immo 
 Et scimus) Caesar, cujus pulcherrima virtus 
 Parcere subjectis et debellare superbos, 
 Est tam vindictae cupiens, ut perdere malit 
 Quam servare humiles — 
 
 In the last of these cities, he was for some time a professor of 
 history and then of theology. On a journey to Wittenberg he was at- 
 tacked and Inurdered by robbers on the 10th of Jan. 1542. He wrote 
 several books on the history of the Netherlands, and particularly a 
 biography of his former master, Bishop Philip of Utrecht. Of this 
 work Andrese and Foppens, who are very hostile to its author as an apos- 
 tate, declare, that it is full of heresies (libellus hie totus hsereticus est). 
 The theological works which he published in Germany are placed by 
 the Tridentine Fathers in the first class of forbidden books. On the 
 other hand the citizens of Marburg erected a monument to his memory 
 in the Church of St Elizabeth, side by side with that of the celebrated 
 Hyperius — and engraved upon it the following inscription : 
 
 Hie Noviomagi requiescunt membra Gerhardi, 
 Juxta hunc Andreas conditur Hyperius. 
 
 Ut pia doctrinae concordia junxerat ambos, 
 Sic idem amborum contegit ossa locus. 
 
 Quos sociat tumulus, sociabunt coelica regna, 
 Ut capiant fidei praemia justa suae. 
 
 Information respecting Geldenhauer may be found in Valer. Andreae 
 Bibl. Belg. p. 273. Foppens Bibl. Belg. i. 349. Melch. Adami Vitae 
 Theologorum p. 45. Biblioth. Bremens. Class, v. p. 218. Gerdesii Hist. 
 Kef. T. iii. p. 41. Not. a. Adami, ignorant of his violent death, speaks 
 of him as ending his days in peace at Marburg. 
 
 1 Sec Geldenhauer 1 s testimony respecting him in his Vita Philippi 
 Burgundi in Matthaei Analect. Vol. I. p. 192 — 203, and in Gerdesii 
 Hist. Ref. T. iii. p. 40. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 407 
 
 he praises, in the liveliest terms, the pious, gentle, and forgiving 
 disposition which the young Emperor inherited from his father 
 and grandfather, and then concludes with the words : 
 
 . . . Num clementissimus ergo 
 In nos vel solos, humiles veniamque precantes, 
 Prostratosque suis pedibus saevire superbus 
 Incipiet ? Primura in nos experietur acerbam 
 Vindictam ? Ah absit, quin et pietatis amore 
 Consuetae accensus, paulo sedatior, ira 
 Neglecta, offensam clemens donaverit omnem ; 
 Nam qui aliter potuit, cujus natura vel ipsa 
 Est pietas, est ipsa etiam dementia, cujus 
 Et posse et velle est omnis servare benigne? 
 Haec spes non vana est, certa haec solatia nobis ! 
 
 And yet even this hope was vain. The epistle produced no effect, 
 whether it was that Geldenhauer did not act the part expected 
 of him, or that he lacked ability to produce an impression in higher 
 quarters. At last severe confinement and separation from his 
 distressed family wholly broke the firmness of the poor man. He 
 consented, probably at the instigation of the Inquisitors Hulst 
 and Egmont, 1 to make a recantation. The act which for this 
 purpose he executed with his own hand 2 on the 25th March 
 1522, is of great consequeuce for our purpose. According to all 
 appearance, indeed, it was written not by Grapheus himself, but 
 by the Inquisitors. The contents, however, give us a much more 
 precise knowledge of the doctrines of Grapheus than we can derive 
 from any other source, and at the same time, shew vividly what 
 sort of proposals were made to such afflicted men, and what in 
 their misery they were induced to do. 
 
 Respecting the statement of the principles of Grapheus, the 
 deed of recantation agrees substantially with what we know from 
 the Latin preface, to GocJis treatise De Libertate Christiana, of 
 
 1 Their names are not indeed expressly mentioned, but the act of re- 
 cantation bears, .... cum essem interrogatus et examinatus per 
 Commissarios Caesareae Majestatis ad hoc deputatos. And this language 
 applies only to them. 
 
 2 This Revocatio et Abjuratio are found in D. Gerdesii Serin, antiquar. 
 T. v. p. l.p. 496—508. 
 
408 APPENDIX. 
 
 date 1521, but it adds many supplementary particulars which 
 must have been taken 1 either from oral statements, or from the 
 preface to the Dutch translation of the book, of the year 1520, 2 
 and in which the author seems to have embraced the side and 
 doctrines of Luther, still more decidedly than appears from any 
 otl'.er surviving document. As the sum of the Reformatory 
 doctrines delivered by him at an earlier date, we meet with the 
 following : 3 " We Christians have, for 800 years and more, been 
 reduced from freedom into wretched slavery, namely, since the 
 days of Boniface III., who first received from the Emperor 
 Phokasthe name of Supreme Priest. For, in virtue of this 
 designation, his followers have usurped authority to make laws, 
 and yet no pope has the right to impose upon men, not to say 
 upon Christians, any laws which shall be obligatory under penalty 
 of mortal sin. It is doubtful whether Peter possessed any 
 higher authority than the other Apostles, and least it is impos- 
 sible to demonstrate from Scripture that he did. The Pope is set 
 up to us as an idol. All laymen are priests, and, if we except 
 women and children, have equally a legal right to consecrate the 
 Sacraments, although they would commit sin if they did it without 
 permission. Just as of old, all with the same exception of 
 women, were without distinction permitted publicly to teach and 
 explain the Scripture, so is this now lawful for all, and not merely 
 for masters, bachelors, and licentiates, or those who are appointed 
 to the work by the Church. The form of prayer which eccle- 
 siastics use in reading and chaunting the canonical hours, and for 
 other things such as rosaries, &c, is superstitious, and belongs 
 to Jewish ceremonialism. It is a slavish practice to command us 
 on certain days and hours to assemble in the Church for prayer, 
 
 1 Hist, abregee do la Reformat, des Pais bas, traduite du Hollandoi* 
 de Ger. Brandt, T. i. p. 18. Gerdes. Hist. Reform, iii. 20. Schrockk 
 K. Geseh. seit der Reform, ii. 353. 
 
 2 Both of these sources are mentioned in the Revocatio, the latter not 
 quite expressly : Specialiter autem reprobo quosdam articulos, quorum 
 aliquos scripsi in quadam Praefadone ad quendam librum intitulatum 
 de libertatc Christiana, cditum a Johanne Pupper, de Gochi, quosdam 
 vero me termissc inter confabulandum atque sensisse confessus sum et 
 propria manu scripsi, 
 
 3 iZeyoc. in 1. c. p. 500 — 502. I have arranged the propositions, 
 which are somewhat arbitrarily collocated, in proper order. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 409 
 
 seeing that of old prayer was made everywhere and without 
 injunction. In like manner Christians are brought into bondage 
 by fasting, as presently practised in the Church, and by other 
 ecclesiastical enactments, such for instance as that which imposes 
 the obligation to confess once a year, or that which sanctions the 
 monastic vow. Nothing of the kind, unless expressly contained 
 in Scripture, obliges any man on pain of mortal sin. Even 
 auricular confession is not of divine, but only of human institution. 
 It is not lawful to accept - money for dispensing the sacraments, 
 preaching the word of God, or performing funeral services. The 
 preachers of the Divine word deserve to be censured for so fre- 
 quently introducing quotations from the Schoolmen. The works 
 we perform are in no way meritorious, and we ought to put no 
 trust in our merits. When Paul writes to the Galatians, * If ye 
 be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing,' he means thereby, 
 If you trust to your works Christ can do you no good. In the 
 same way indulgences are of no efficacy. The Gospel is now born 
 again and Paul raised to life, by the works of Luther and others 
 who embrace his doctrine, and hold up to light the liberty of the 
 Gospel. Hence we ought to read what these men and their suc- 
 cessors have written, because they decidedly reject the subtilties 
 of the Schoolmen and teach Christ. — And more than all the 
 woi-ks of these Schoolmen, sacred as they may be, ought the trea- 
 tise of John of Goch to be read. The Pope's sentence which 
 condemned Luther, his person, and doctrine, was unjust and 
 inequitable, and the same may be said of the Emperor's decrees, 
 for Luther's doctrine must be regarded as sound, especially in the 
 points here touched, and ought not to have been condemned, unless 
 it had been refuted with reasons." 
 
 All these propositions, which with some slight exceptions and 
 modifications, contain a general summary of Gospel truth, Gra- 
 pheus, in his recantation, recalled, as either openly heretical, or 
 secandalous, or offensive to the pious, and deceptive to the simple. 
 He condemned all heresy, especially that propounded in his 
 writings and discourses by Martin Luther, together with all the 
 articles which he had himself set down in his preface to Goch's 
 work. On the other hand, he came under an oath to adhere 
 constantly to the true doctrine of the Catholic Church, and 
 
410 APPENDIX. 
 
 declared all who were in contradiction with it to be w r orthy of 
 eternal damnation, and himself, if ever that should be his own 
 case, obnoxious to the laws of the Church and to eternal punish- 
 ment. 1 
 
 It appears to me that this recantation broke the true moral 
 vigour of GrapJieus, and that his subsequent life, although he 
 was still in the fortieth year of his age, 2 and lived thirty-six years 
 longer, was ever after destitute of its pristine higher force and 
 influence. He had not been convinced of the falsehood of his 
 earlier principles, and yet he had subjected himself absolutely 
 to the ecclesiastical power. The act of submission, and the 
 oath he swore, prevented him from again taking the field against 
 the corruption of the Church, and yet his inward inclination 
 could not but be always tempting him to act the part of a Re- 
 former. In this manner he was brought into a false and ambiguous 
 position, similar to that of Erasmus, during the latter period of his 
 life, — a circumstance which, besides their literary fellowship, seems 
 to have involved the deeper reason why, after the catastrophe, he 
 attached himself particularly to that celebrated scholar, and was 
 honoured by him with intimacy and confidence. It was after 
 his recantation, that the most powerful Reformatory efforts were 
 made, and the boldest champions of the evangelical doctrine 
 came forward in the Netherlands. Henry of Zutphen, 3 Prior 
 of the Augustinians at Antwerp, 4 " appeared as a bold confessor 
 upon the field. Henry Voes and John Esch, the two youthful 
 martyrs, whom Luther has so beautifully celebrated, and who also 
 
 1 Then follows p. 502 — 508 a further statement in which the several 
 propositions are refuted and retracted. But as this statement manifestly 
 proceeds not from GrapJieus himself, but from the Inquisitors, and con- 
 sists of a mere counter-position of the Catholic doctrines to the averments 
 of the subject of the inquest, I reckon it unnecessary to introduce it 
 here. 
 
 2 In page 137 of this work, GrapJieus is inadvertently spoken of in 
 1521 as still twenty-nine years of age. It ought to have been thirty- 
 nine. 
 
 3 See Gerdes, Hist. Ref. iii. 28—30. 
 
 4 Almost all the Augustinians at Antwerp took Luther's side. Their 
 monastery was in the month of October 1522 wholly destroyed. 
 Luther's letter to Wenc. Link, 19th Dec. 1522, in De Wette ii. 265. 
 This is another proof that the members of this order were more liberally 
 and evangelically disposed than the rest of the monks. See supra, p. 
 107. 108. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 411 
 
 belonged to the Augustinian order, were burnt at Brussels in 1523. 1 
 In the same year several worthy ecclesiastics and men of rank at 
 Groningen, Herm. Abring, J. Alb. Timmermann, Gerh. Pistoris, 
 
 1 They are mentioned by Gerdes in his Ref. Gesch. B. 3. s. 31 ff. 
 SecJcendorf Hist. Luth. Lib. 1. fol. 280. Sleidanus Commentar. p. 52. 
 53. Schelhorn Amoen. iv. 412. But more particular attention is due to 
 what Luther says of them first in a letter to the Christians in Holland 
 and Brabant (in De Wette ii. 362), accompanied by a list of the articles 
 for which the two Augustinian monks at Brussels were burned to death 
 (printed in Walch xxi. 45), and again in the incomparable heroic 
 Ode, in which he has extolled their martyrdom. This poem, of which 
 a Latin and Dutch translation are to be found in Part V. of Kist's and 
 HoT/aard's kirchenhist. Archiv. s. 463 ff., begins with the words: 
 
 Ein neues Lied wir heben an, 
 Das wait' Gott, unser Herre ! 
 
 and after relating the main particulars in the history of their martyr- 
 dom, concludes with three magnificent stanzas of which the translator 
 has attempted to reflect the sense. The pith and simplicity are inimi- 
 table : 
 
 These ashes on the winds shall float, 
 
 The world's wide surface o'er, 
 Stopped by no river, gulf, or moat, 
 
 And drop on every shore. 
 The cruel foe shall then be shamed 
 
 To hear, with voices new, 
 The truth by even the dead proclaimed, 
 
 Whom they, to silence, slew. 
 
 And yet fresh falsehoods they invent, 
 
 And scatter far and near, 
 To gild their bloody deed intent 
 
 And calm their secret fear. 
 They slander even across the tomb, 
 
 Those who so nobly died, 
 And say that ere they met their doom 
 
 The youths the truth denied. 
 
 But let them lie — their wicked lies 
 
 Will but augment their pain, 
 For us, our thanks to God shall rise 
 
 Whose word returns again. 
 Yes, winter's past, and summer sweet, 
 
 Stands waiting to come in, 
 The flowers awake, God will complete 
 
 Who did the work begin. 
 
412 ArrENDix. 
 
 and Nicol. Lesdorp, held a formal dispute with the Dominicans 
 upon the power of the Pope and the institutions of the Catholic 
 Church. 1 The Jurist Corn. Honius and Will. Gnapheus, rector 
 of the school at Haag, subjected themselves, as patrons of the 
 Reformation, to imprisonment. 2 In short, everywhere, and espe- 
 cially at Antwerp, where Grapheus lived, the combustible mate- 
 rial caught fire and blazed forth. Of Grapheus, however, we 
 hear no more. It is not as if he had wholly withheld his convic- 
 tions. On the contrary, it appears by a letter from Ei'asmus, 
 that in the later period of his life, he was made to endure fresh 
 vexations for his liberal opinions, and had to struggle with many 
 adversaries : But he no more attracted attention as a bold and 
 spontaneous confessor of the doctrines of the Reformation, and a 
 a determined champion in its cause. 
 
 In periods of great commotion and rapid change, there are 
 many whose mission is confined to a single and often a brief 
 period of their lives, and who, when they have fulfilled it, cease 
 to be influential powers, retire into the shade, and, though they 
 may long survive, are dead to public affairs, and generally 
 unhappy in their own bosoms. This was the case on a great scale 
 with Erasmus, and so was it upon a less with Grapheus. The 
 former, destined in the history of the world to effect that enlight- 
 enment of science and the Church which preceded the Reforma- 
 tion, found himself, when the decisive hour for action struck, no 
 longer at his post. He could not with his whole soul assent to the 
 movement, and yet he could as little dissent from it, and therefore, 
 while he still continued to act as the man of greatest genius and 
 learning, he was yet obliged, with the deepest reluctance, to resign 
 the leadership to Luther and his companions, who appeared to him 
 little better than barbarians. In like manner, although in a 
 lower sphere, Grapheus appears to have been destined to introduce 
 upon the stage of life the previously unknown reformer Goch, 
 and to kindle, at a period big with events, the first spark of light 
 in his native land. This he did with alacrity and spirit. The 
 unity of his nature, however, was now broken by rude power, to 
 which he could not inwardly rise superior. Others take 
 
 1 Gerdes in 1. c. pp. 32 and 33. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 33—35. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 413 
 
 Ills place. We have therefore nothing further to refate con- 
 cerning him, except his connection with Erasmus and his labours 
 as an author. 
 
 Grapheus was delivered from his imprisonment after his re- 
 cantation, but we know not whether soon or late. He returned 
 to his family and professional duties. These, however, seem 
 also to have received a blow from his persecution. He had to 
 contend with adversaries, and, as appears from a statement by- 
 Erasmus, also with poverty, at least in the evening of his life. 
 So much the more beautiful was the sympathy which the latter 
 felt for him. In 1529 he wrote to him the following letter from 
 Basle, which is in many respects highly characteristic. 1 " My 
 very dear Cornelius, readily would I have complied with your 
 wish and edited your poem, had I not been dissuaded by two 
 considerations. In the first place, it did not appear to me to 
 contain enough of the poetical vein to justify the belief that you 
 would reap from it much honour. And next, I found in it not 
 a little which would have increased the hostile disposition towards 
 you, 2 and that appeared to me disadvantageous for your circum- 
 stances, especially as matters at present stand. Your situation 
 fills me, although myself not unassailed, with great anxiety; but the 
 lot which God appoints to us we must, I believe, bear with for- 
 titude of mind. It is wickedness 3 which has called forth this storm, 
 but it seems to me that a different race of monks are rising up worse 
 than the former, and that, on both sides, men arecommittinggreater 
 and more conspicuous acts of madness. 4 Neither do I see any 
 end, unless the Lord, who is the only true actor, interfere in 
 the plot, and pronounce that solemn word of the tragedies, 7roX- 
 \al /j,op(pal t(x>v Baifiovicov. Meanwhile it appears to me the 
 most advisable course to take our stand upon that firm rock 
 which will yield to no storm, until the tumult gives place to a 
 calm. A good conscience is to one's self a great consolation, and 
 
 1 Epistolar. Des Erasmi, Ph. Melanchthonis, Thorn. Mori et Lud. 
 Vivis, Londin. MDCXLII. Lib. XX. Ep. 106. p. 1058. The letter 
 is dated Basil. Non. Mart. MDXXIX. 
 
 2 invidiam. This is a sufficient indication that the poem expressed 
 liberal sentiments. 
 
 3 improbitas. 
 
 4 in utraque parte fortiter atque insigniter insanitur. 
 
414 APPENDIX. 
 
 to that t would also invite you, did I not know that you have 
 always cherished the purest sentiments. The Lord is refining 
 his gold in this furnace, that it may be wholly freed from dross. 
 Were I near I would rejoice in being serviceable to you, and to 
 your brother in all things. As matters stand, however, I see 
 not what I could do, and the confusion that reigns around us in 
 this quarter, rumour has no doubt long ago carried to your ears. 
 I wish it may go well with you and with all of yours." The signi- 
 ficant passage which speaks of the madness of both parties, and 
 of a new description of monks that had sprung up, coming from 
 Erasmus, in the year 1529, I can refer to nothing but the 
 Reformation, which he would then, as he constantly does, desig- 
 nate as a tragedy, not yet played to the end, and awaiting the 
 Deus ex machina. On this supposition, by the new description 
 of monks he must have meant the Reformers themselves and 
 their adherents, of course not in the literal sense of the word, but 
 inasmuch as he feared or believed that, like the obscurantist monks 
 of a former clay, they might create a dislike and contempt for the 
 study of classical literature and the humane sciences, the only 
 things dear to himself. If this interpretation is correct, it is 
 scarcely to be doubted that Erasmus presupposed in Grapheus 
 similar sentiments, and consequently an intermediate position 
 between the two great conflicting parties. 
 
 We have another but less copious epistle from his celebrated 
 countryman to Grapheus, dated at Friburg in the year 1534. 1 
 Erasmus is delighted with the news brought to him by a com- 
 mon friend, that Grapheus is " in a better condition both of mind 
 and body, and in more favourable circumstances." On the con- 
 trary, he himself bitterly complains of the podagra (gout), or, as 
 he should rather call it, the pandgra, 2 because it goes through all 
 his members, and leaves his old body so little rest that it will 
 soon be worn away. The chief object of the Epistle is to ask 
 his friend to procure for him a faithful Dutch servant. 3 He 
 wishes one who is not young, but healthy, not superstitious, and 
 
 1 Dat. Frib. iii. Id. Mart, in the edit, cited Lib. xxx. Ep. G4. p. 
 1952 and 1953. The title bears : Eruditissimo viro Cornelio Grapheo. 
 
 2 All-sick, a pain over the whole body. 
 
 3 Erasmus will not have a German. The Germans he says arc a tv6v 
 
 vov ytvos. 
 
CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 415 
 
 no sectarian. Learning is not required, except that he should 
 understand Latin, and be able to write it tolerably. The com- 
 pletion of the bargain, and the terms, Erasmus entrusts in confi- 
 dence to his friend, wishing to him and his family all happiness, 
 and recommending to him the care of his health. 
 
 The same affectionate interest for Grapheus, Erasmus retained 
 until his death. On the 12th February 1536, he made his will. 
 In this he ordains, among other things, that the money deposited 
 with Eberhard Goclenius 1 should be distributed in the manner 
 which he shall afterwards point out. On the Sabbath after 
 Easter, in a very remarkable document, to which an abstract of 
 his life was appended, he gave to Conrad Goclenius? a very dear 
 friend and distinguished man, the teacher of Latin in the Col- 
 legium Trilingue of Louvaine, and an equally intimate friend 
 of Grapheusj directions how to distribute the money. In this 
 it is said, " Let fifty golden florins and forty-six and a half 
 Rhenish be given to Cornelius Grapheus, whom I suspect to be 
 in needy circumstances, and who is a man worthy of a better 
 fate." 3 Not long afterwards, upon the 12th July 1536, Erasmus 
 departed this life. 
 
 Grapheus survived him 22 years. He made repeated appear- 
 ances as an author, not however, as it appears, in the special field 
 of theology, or on any particular side, but in that of general 
 literature. 4 He was a poet, an orator, a historian, a linguist, 
 
 1 See Foppens Biblioth. Belg. i. 189. 
 
 2 It is prefixed to the London edition of the Epistles of Erasmus, 
 already frequently cited, and which, a few pages farther on, contains 
 the will. 
 
 3 Quinquaginta Floreni aurei et quadraginta sex Renenses cum 
 dimidiato (sint) Cornelio Grapheo, quern suspicor egere, virum dignum 
 meliore for tuna. And in a subsequent passage: Jussi, ut de mea 
 pecunia numeres Ceratino Florenes aureos XXV. Id si factum est, 
 Graphei summam sarciam ex ea pecunia, quae est Antverpiae. 
 
 4 The earliest enumeration of the works of Grapheus is to be found 
 in Valer. Andreae Biblioth. Belg. p. 150, 151, the next in Foppens 
 Bibl. Belg. T. i. p. 201, 202. Grapheus appears to have entered the 
 field as author for the first time, in 1515, at the age of 33, with the 
 Exprobratio in Diocletianum pro Divo Pancratio, Lovan. ap. Theod. 
 Martinum, and for the last time in 1550, consequently when he was G8 
 years of age, with a Pompa Spectaculorum in susceptione Philippi II. 
 Antverp. 1550. fol. Between these works lie the following: Conju- 
 gandi et Declinandi Regulae, Antverp. 1529. 8. — Conflagratio Templi 
 
41 G APPENDIX. 
 
 and musician, 1 and these various tastes seem to have regained 
 their dominion over him. Where his works touch the field of 
 religion, it was done more in a poetical way, than to promote 
 any particular tendency. Grapheus thus continued to be an in- 
 fluential man, but his theological character was extinguished, 
 and as a Reformer he halted, like Erasmus, behind his age. He 
 died in his 76th year, upon the 19th of December 1558, at Ant- 
 werp, and was interred in the Church of the Holy Virgin, in a 
 place of burial which he had already prepared for his wife, who 
 predeceased him. 2 Among his children there was a son called 
 Alexander, who upneld his father's fame, and acquired some cele- 
 brity as a poet. A portrait of Grapheus has also come down to us. 3 
 According to it he must have been a man of powerful frame and 
 strong features, with a bold and prominent nose, large and fiery 
 eyes, and protruding lips, partly concealed by his beard. His 
 forehead was high and deeply furrowed. His hair thick and curly, 
 and worn somewhat short, covered the whole of his massive head, 
 and encircled his cheek and chin with an equally thick and curly 
 beard. 
 
 D. Mariae Antverpiensis, versu heroico. Antv. ap. Job. Grapheum, 
 1534. — Monstrum anabaptisticum, rei Christianae perniciein, 1535. — 
 Sacrorum Bucolicorura Eclogae III, Antv. ap. J. Grapheum 1536. 8. 
 — Descriptio Pacis inter Franciscum I. et Carolum V. Antv. ap. J. 
 Coccium. 1540. 4. — Gratulatio Carolo V. Imp. pro reditu ill ius ex Ilis- 
 pania in Belgium (1520) : item alteram pro reditu per medias Gallias 
 (1540), Antv. exc. Coccius, 1540.8. — Descriptio Senatus Antverpiani, 
 a Carolo V. instituti, Antv. ap. Coccium, 1541. — Enchiridion Principis 
 ac Magistratus Christiani, Colon, apud Cervicornum, 1541. — Para- 
 phrasis Psalmi cxxiii. contra Mart. Rossemium, Antv. 1543. — Without 
 date: Carmen Pastorale, quo Christi Nativitas describitur. — Querela 
 proditi Christi, contra Turco-Christianos. — Colloquiorum Formulae, e 
 Terentii Comoediis. 
 
 1 Andreee and Foppens call him Cantor exhnius. 
 
 2 See the epitaph upon, the spouses in Foppens Biblioth. Belg. i., 
 202. Here the wife is designated Matrona et prudentissima et pietatis 
 cultrix eximia. 
 
 3 I have it before me in two forms Foppens Biblioth. Belg. T. i. 
 between p. 200 and 201, and in Gerdes. Hist. Kef. T. iii. p. 120. 
 
 END OF VOL. I. 
 
BW1820.U424v.l 
 
 Reformers before the Reformation 
 
 Princeton Theological Semmary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00070 1294