«Y^ILIg«¥]MII¥EI^SlIir¥-

DEPOSITED BY THE

LINONIAN AND BROTHERS LIBRARY

REFORMERS

BEFORE THB

REFORMATION,

PRINCIPALLY IN

GERMANY AND THE NETHERLANDS,

DEPICTED Br

DR. C. ULLMANN,
THE TRANSLATION
EY THE
REV. ROBERT MENZIES,

Vixero 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.

EDINBUEGH :
T. & r. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.
LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO; SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO.;
WARD ANIl CO. ; JACKSON AND WALFORD, ETC. DUBLIN :
.TOHN ROBERTSON, AND HODGES AND SMITH.

M U C C C L V .

PRINTED BY
ROBERT PARK,
DUNDEE.

CONTENTS OF THE FIRST VOLUME.

GENEEAL INTEODUCTION.
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 15th 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. 1.5-^167.

PART FIRST.
The Life of John 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 — 61
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 phUosophy. Its causes, 32—38
Outlines of Goch's fundamental convictions, . . . 39—42
General principles. Predominantly practical point of view. Love,
liberty, evangeUcal sentiment, .... 42—51

CONTENTS.

PART SECOND.

Ouch's theology in particular, first in its positive aspect. The Book on Chns
tian liberty. P. 52—82. Page.
General remarks on the Book on Christian liberty, . . 62—53
Chapter First. The authority and interpretation of Scripture.
Scripture and philosophy, .... 54 63
Chapter Second. Goch's doctrine on human nature, and the
method of salvation. Nature and grace. Sin and redemption.
Human merit and the merit of Christ. Controversy with
Thomism and Pelagianism. 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 — 96
Chapter Third. 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 — 106
Chapter Fourth. Factitious and genuine Christianity. Contro
versy with holiness by works and self-righteousness, especiaUy
in Monachism. Refutation of Aquinas' s statements respecting
ecclesiastical and especially Monastic vows. Import of Mo
nachism  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 — 167.
Chapter First. Goch's connexion with the Reformation. Cor
nelius Grapheus edits his works and spreads their reformatory
principles. The judgments passed upon Goch, as a reformer,
by other writers, from the sixteenth century to the present day, 133  148
Chapter Second. 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  167
• Retpecting the Epistola Apolosctica, see 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. 169—374.

Introduction. Pass.
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 j, .
which may have contribute to form the mind of Wesel at Erfurt, 21 7— 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 ofthe doctrine at the
time. Critical observations. Opposition ; Jacob of Jiiter
bock, who probably influenced the mind of Wesel. Wesel's
o-svn 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 difierence
between the Church general and the Church of Christ, . 243 — 276

CONTENTS.
PART SECOND.
John of Wesel and the depraved clergy, P. 277—328

Page.

Chapter First. Wesel as preacher at Mayence and Worms. The
Rhineland. Its ecclesiastical and theological state. The main
seats 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 Wesel laboured, ...... 277 — 287
Wesel's position under these circumstances. He was alive to the
threatening dangers. His ideal of an apostolical raan and
preacher. His theological principles and pastoral practice,
especially their reformatory elements, .... 287 — 300
Chapter Second. Wesel 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 ofiices 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.
Wesel's trial for heresy and his relation to after times. P. 329 — 374.
Chapter First. Wesel's trial for heresy. Antecedent persecutions
on the part of Reinhard of Sickingen. Causes of dislike to
Wesel. 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
duct of Wesel. General sketch of his spirit and deportment, 338 — 362
Chapter Second. Wesel's connection with the Reformation.
Opinions expressed respecting him by cotemporaries, by the
Reformers, particularly Luther, by Catholic and modern Pro
testant Theologians, . . .... 362  370
Wesel's Writings and their Editions, . 370—374

CONTENTS.

APPENDIX,

I.
Page.
Hans Boheim of Niklashausen, a Forerunner of the Peasant War. 375 — 393
The Peasant War 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 Reforraation 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
Wicklifte, Lord Cobham, Huss, and Jerome of Prague, whom he
entitled the best-known of the Eeformers 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 Eeformers. Li 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 Eeformers, 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 Eeformation
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 Eeformation, in one aspect, was
a fresh conception ofthe faith and doctrine ofthe Gospel, formed
from a central point of view, then for tlie first time clearly and
-dvidly 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 Europe 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

PUEFACK.

had no true significance, taken nO certain hold, and must have
passed fruitlessly away. On the other hand, unless faith and
doctrine had 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 aff'airs, no Cliurch-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 Eeformation 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 vfhole. For this reason, we find the Eeformation
preceded by two descriptions of men, by some who privately,
in either a popular or scientific way, seek to impress deeper
convictions of the Eeformatory 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 Churcli
— 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
their 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
sentiraent, 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. Xl
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 Eeformation 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 fiame. They may per
haps have produced greater, but they by no means produced deeper
and purer eflFects, than the quiet and intellectual Eeformers ofthe
14th and loth centuries. For, if we consider what it was, which,
ere they appeared upon the stage of the Eeformation, 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 Wickliffe, 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 loth 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 Eeformers,
we find ourselves again directed not to the more famous and
heroic pioneers of the Eeformation, 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 iu the way of enlightening and educating the

PEEFACE.

people in Christianity by Gerhard Groot, and the Brethren ofthe
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
Goch, a John of Wesel, and a John Wessel, than from the very
nature ofthe case was possible forthe 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 Eeformation, -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 tlie Netherlands, was indisputably the centre of that
great movement in the history of the world, which we call thc
Eeformation. 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 the widest sense, as comprising those countries connected
with the fatherland by the Ehine, the most German of rivers,
and by the German language, moulded though it be into a pecu
liar dialect. Is it possible that Luther and his confederates, or that
Zwingli and his, or that the men whom we see taking the field

PREFACE. Xlll
for the pure evangelical doctrine on the banks of the Ehine,
downwards to the Netherlands, should have dropped as Ee
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 offact, that in both Germany and the Nether
lands, there were very distinguished precursors of the Eeforma
tion, who unquestionably exercised a far greater influence upon
our Eeformers than any foreigners ever did. To give but a few
instances, Where do we 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 (lAither) had derived from him all he knew — of Tauler, that,
neither in the Latin nor German tongue, does there exist a more
sound or more evangelical theologj- 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 1 So far as I know, Luther says nothing like "
this of any pioneer ofthe Eeformation 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
Eeformers 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
Eeformation. 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 Eeformation, and particularly to throw new light

PHEFACE.

upon 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,
profound, and correct knowledge of the Eeformation 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 Eeformation by means ofa 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
spicuous than in the initiatory efforts of the Eeformers them
selves, which were sometimes made under inward and outward
conflicts. Let us indicate this in a few chief points.
The Eeformation, viewed in its most general character, is the
reaction of Christianity as gospel against Christianity as law*
During the Middle Ages, 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
I Church, however, a heretical and generally pantheistical Antino-
i mianism had been formed, and between these two tendencies, the
I false letter and the false spirit, the Eeformation took the proper
medium. Evolving from the word of Scripture more purely and
i strictly interpreted, the vital spirit, it taught men once more to
recognise 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
restored 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 Eeformation, can scarcely be con
ceived by any other means than an acquaintance with the spiri-
; tual manifestations which preceded it. Its forerunners were

PUEFACE.

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
Eeformers 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 Eeformers 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 betw-een
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 ca.se, 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 ofa 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 diff'erences between the Old and New covenant, runs, no
less than that between law and gospel, through the whole of
Chnrch history. Besides being legalized, the mediseval Church
had raore 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 Eeformation —
asserted the principle of internalism. This it not unfrequently ,
did in a sound and vigorous way, and with great success, but
sometimes also with a partial and morbid spiritualism, which by \
falselysevering the outward from the inward, laid the whole strain
upon the latter, and by this means sank into pure indifference .
b2

PREFACE.

j respecting moral actions, and wholly lost sight of the necessity
I of imbuing with the Christian spirit all that belongs to life.
The true pioneers ofthe Eeformation occupy the sounder stand
point of an internalism strictly moral and thoroughly consonant
ito the practical genius of Christianity. They recognise the
love 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; AVhile at the same time they require no self-seques
tration inwards, or monkish retreat from the world, but a vigorous
infusion ofthe Christian spirit into all the relations of life. This
principle of a truly moral and sound internalism breaks forth
in the Eeformation upon a large scale. In how far, however, it
belonged to the essence, is most evident from the recognition of
its importance in all the preparatory rudiments, ofthat event.
It is the centre of all the controversy waged by its precursors
against works of righteousness, merit, and supererogation, against
indulgence, the opus operatum, 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 Eeforma-
I 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 Eeformers, and here, too,
the tendency of their precursors casts an iraportant and illustra
tive light upon the Eeformation itself. No doubt the Eeforma
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
1 principle, not by any means of liberty in general, but of Chris-
, tian liberty alone. The liberty for which the Eeformers, 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
Christianity, but, like all rational liberty, it is a definite and con-
j Crete thing, and possesses as its vital content that which the
Eeformers considered Divine truth, viz., substantial Christianitv.

PREFACE.

The soil in which their notion of liberty was rooted is the (Jhris- '
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 Ee
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 f.ir 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 andfrom God, and
included within the bounds of His revelation and law. Were .
there any doubt, that what the Eeformers 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 leamed frora their forerunners.
It is a point on which there is essential agreement betw-een
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 judging from many of the speakers, there is a constant
disposition to consider the libertyof the Eeformation 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 Eeformers and their predecessors. It is true, that the
Eeformation contains essentially the principle of vital progress,
of a continual purifying and perfecting alike of practice and of
doctrine, of the Churcli and of science, but then this advance is
always to be made upon the foundation ofthe Gospel. The Ee
formers could not possibly have had anything else in view, either
before or after the great achievement. No doubt the principle
of the Eeformation 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 a way irrecon
cilably contradictory to Protestantism as a fact, or so as to make
philosophical Protestantism destructive of that of history. At
least 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
tiie things to which they are customarily given. The recollec
tion ofthe idea of liberty, entertained by the Eeformers, 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, leaving the opinion of the day to sort with it as it best can.
As to the view which history takes of the Eeformation 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 tlie antithesis, between Catholi
cism and Protestantism. In spit€, however, ofthis general advance

PREFACE.

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, i
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 ofthe 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 Eeformation. The two wrong
conceptions of the Eeformation leave, the one the first, and the
other the second, of these particulars disregarded. Tiie narrow
Protestant view, occasioned partly by the authors of the Eefor
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 ofthe world. It beholds in the hierachy mere depravity, in
the Mediseval Church mere darkness; while, on the contray, in the
Eeformation 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 importanceof the Eeformation
—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-

PREFACE.

quently sees in the Eeformation 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 developraent of the Medieval period, and was a
gradual growth, leaves the Eeformation historically unexplained.
The new light, without being kindled by a previous one, appears
as pure 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 Eeformation,
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-souled 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 raore
corapletely the preceding centuries are studied, that in spite of
its originality and freshness, the Eeformation by no means inter
rupted the continuity of huraan affairs — that, on the contrary, it
was, on the one hand, preceded and its way prepared, by pious
and enlightened raen, who preached almost the very doctrines that
distinguished the Eeformers, 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
Eeforraers, and resigned themselves to their influence — all tend
ing to prove that the Church, never wholly forsaken by the spirit
of Christ, was reformed by itself from within, to a much greater
extent, than by any parties disconnected with its antecedents
from without. Nor does impartial history less evidently show,
that into the hierarcliy and the dominant ecclesiasticism in gene
ral, in spite of some mixture of what was relativelv 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 Eeformation 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 thera
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 Eeformation, 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 Eeformers severally, more is done for one and
more for another of these, while none is wholly overlooked, the same
happens in the histoi-y 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 those main ends Along with its

PREFACE.

great importance for the development of mind in the higher
regions, especially of science, the Eeformation was also of im
measurable consequence for the moral, the religious, and in
general the intellectual life ofthe people. Nor is even this popu
lar element wanting in the phenomena which paved the way
for the Eeformation. We discover it particularly in its religious
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 Eeformatory
element in Mysticism, and still more, because still more widely
operative, that in the Institute ofthe Common lot, and in its chief
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 Eeforraation 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 Eeformation, 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 Eefor
mation, made by the Brethren of the Common lot, and by the
Dutch and German Mystics. The fourth exhibits in John Wessel,
the theology prior to the Eeformation in its most highly finished
form. I have begun with Goch, because I was thus necessarily
led to treat of the spirit and essence ofthe 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.
On the 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 strenuouslyfought the ecclesiastical battle.

PREFACE. xxm
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
be 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 of
the Coramon lot are one of the most pleasing phenomena in the
annals of spiritual life. Gerard Groot and ITiomas a Kempis
awaken general sympathy by their very names. The German
Mystics, in their connection with the Eeformation, are ofthe
highest importance, — an importance which has not been hitherto
suflSciently 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 ofthe age, to do it through the raediura 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 diff'erent modes of thought, or
varieties of the same raain mode, they implement each other and
furnish a collective picture of the age. The work may perhaps be
more justly blamed for an exces.sive fiilness 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.
fault which is not without advantages. It may also serve to
recommend the work to scholars, that, on several points, I have
been able to consult manuscripts and rare books. This was
particularly the case in the instances of Goch, John of Wesel,
Hans Boheim, the precursor of the peasant war, and even of
Wessel. To the respected keepers of the libraries of Heidelberg,
Carlsruhe, ISIunich, Darmstadt, Bonn, and Eraden, 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
so 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 Eeformation. Forthat reason I have inten
tionally entitled them not, " The Eeformers before the Eeforma
tion," but simply, " Eeformers before the Eeformation." 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 Eeformers. 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 defined and fixed formula of Christianity, and are
destitute of desire for advancement and ofthe spirit of vital reform.
The former repudiate stability, the latter progression, and neither,
probably, 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
solely 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 naiure of the Eeformation, and depicting it
in its entire historical truth, or yet from holding fast its true
principle, in the promotion of science. Probably raany 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 ofthe 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 destruction
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 Eeformers, 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 GOCH

JOHN OF WESEL

OTHER PROMOTERS OF REFORMATION CONNECTED
WITH THEM,

especially

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS, GREGORY OF HEIMBURG,
JACOB OF JUTERBOCK,
AND
MATTHEW OF CEACOW.
DELINEATED BY
DR C. ULLMANN.

THE TRANSLATION BY THE
EEV. EOBEET MENZIES.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION.

THE XATURE OF THE REF( )RMATIOX, ANU WHAT LEU TO IT.

In undertaking to give an account of several remarkable persons
who, in the 1.5th century, paved the way for the Eeformation, we
have first of all to explain what the Eeformation really was. This
is by no 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 Eeformation — 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 Eeformation on
foot. Here, then, at the very outset, we observe, that no genuine
Eeformation can be produced at will, and that what raay be so
produced has no title to the honourable name. A Eeformation
in the higher sense ofthe word is always a great historical result,
the issue ofa spiritual process, extending through centuries. It is ;
a -widely-felt and overpowering necessity, entered into, no doubt,
spontaneously by the Individual, and carried into eff'ect 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

2 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
' lasting process of formation, the one thing needful is a quickening
centre — a jKjsitive kernel. No raere negative, such for example
as 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 orgnnic 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 Eeformation may be rightfully applied. Eeformation 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
_origina] ; for the Eeformation, 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 Eeformation 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
vation 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 obstritctive. Bi;t never is a true

(iENERAL INPRODUCTION. tJ
Eeformation a mere process of destruction. On the contrary it
is ahvays a process of construction, effected through only as much
destruction as is unavoidable.
These definitions pertain to the nature of all Eeformations, and
nobody will deny their applicability to the change undergone
by the Church in the 16th century. Bearing the narae of Eefor
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 no doubt 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 raerely
subservient to it, and are great and infiuential only when, and in
as far as, they are so from clear conviction, and with a perfectly
decided will.
If a Eeformation 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 Eeformers make
A 2

GENERAL INTRODUCTION.

their appearance. The reason is, because under no other circum
stances can they be thoroughly successful.
That, during several centuries prior to the Eeformation of the
Church in Germany and Switzerland, the cori-uption of Chris
tian faith and practice was great and extensive, is a fact which it
would occupv a special work to demonstrate. Abundant contri
butions to such a task will occur in the sequel of our delineation.
Here w-e 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 storras of tirae, it
required to have a vessel to contain it, and, as is likewise involved
in the natm-e of living faith, to form for itself a body. The
body for the spirit implanted by Christ in mankind is the
Church. 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 worid — an end designed and predicted for
it, both by its author and by the great Apostle of the Gentdes. 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 supphes
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
hghtened and embued by the spirit of Christianity. In canning
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 raeasure from the existing
systeras of rehgious, 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 comraonwealth. 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 w-hich was no more really governed by the spirit
of the Gospel.
This appeared in the three elements which enter iuto the
Church's Hfe, — 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 ofa special
order of priests. And finally, as regards the worship, — a subject
closely connected with govemment, inasmuch as the priest must
have an actual sacrifice to offer, — the simple heart-aff'ecting 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 ofthe West, and at first
with a quickening influence and grand effects. Gradually, how
ever, it stifiPened into formulas, and to such an extreme was this
carried as necessarily to evoke a powerful opposition, unless'.

6 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 ofthe Gospel of grace into a doctrine of salvation by outward
acts meets 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
of 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 inainlv
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 ofthe several Churches, were an external growth
from it. In fine, the idea of a sacrifice in the Holv Supper
becaine the central point of that mysterious and splendid ritual
which, so long as men retained a Hving 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 ofthe 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 sheH,
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
awe of 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
avhole 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 thein 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 aflSrm 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 raanifestations, is corapetent 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, takmg
the field against the ever-increasing multitude of ceremonies and
ecclesiastical decorations, and the false and excessive value placed
i 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
I the practice of the duties of Christianity. This was the path
pursued, as early as the Ilth century, by several minor sects in
France and Germany which are usually branded by the Church
as Manichaean. We allude in particular to the Petrobrusians and
Henriciaiis, 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
aU 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-
v.ition of Christian piety. The resuscitation of the Bible in its

GENERAL INTRODUCTION. i)
turn led ultimately and necessarUy to what constituted the soul
of the opposition — viz., denial of the prevaihng 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 raainly directed their
attention. This accordingly was the way in which such men
as Wickliffe, Huss, Jerome of Prague, several ofthe 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
theireff'orts, 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 Eeformation
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 Westem CouncUs, 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 Chm-ch 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 generaUy felt. The negative condition therefore in
dispensable to a reformation was fulfilled.
StUl more indispensable, however, was something else of a
positive kind, viz., a preparatory basis for what the Eeformation
was actually to call into existence. The spirit now once more

10 GENERAL INTEODUCTION.
to be shed forth and universally difflised, 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 in
i certain definite modes, in order that from these the theology of
the Eeformation 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 Eeformers, although bearing almost universally
the impress of originaUty, 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 \vith vital faith, as their true and governing
centre,to introduce into Hfe what had been previously mere desire
and sentiment, and to raake the better theology pf a few, the basis
of the convictions of a vast community.
The principle that Salvation flows not from man but from God,
may be considered as the ultimate and comprehensive basis of
the Eeformation ; and the main tendency in which all the
Eeformers 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 forraal as well as the
material principle of the Eeformation 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 raoral 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 Hving 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 Eedeemer, 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 Eeformation, 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 Eeformers will likewise be found in their precursors, not
indeed in the same fulness, combination and harmony, for in that
case they would have been Eeformers theraselves, — but still, to
a certain extent, and in certain main aspects. This, in fact,
was what raade them the pioneers of the Eeformation. If we
apply the remark to particular instances, we are supplied with
a twofold division. Among the Eeformers we find, and in a
greater or less degree proportioned to the extent of their infiu
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 predorainated 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 raore retired,
and raove 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 includes Huss, Jerome of Prague, and Savonarola ;
the other John of Goch, John of Wesel, and John Wessel. It is

12 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
of the more quiet pioneers of the Eeformation, those who directed
their theological labours inwards, that we shall here treat. They
belong chiefly to Germany, including therein the Netheriands,
and in all respects evince the national character. A further dif
ference, however, may be drawn between the two in the following
respect. The Eeformers unite the thetical with the antitheti
cal, position and opposition, in beautiful proportion. The same
feature is likew-ise conspicuous in their true precursors, although
some of these labour more to estabhsh 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
Eeformation was the raeans 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 Hfe. 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 generaUy 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 ofthe
Eeforraation, 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
Kempis, — the learned philologists such as Agricola, Eeuchlin, and
Erasraus, — and the theologians properly so-called. These persons,
with the exception ofthe philologians, w-e shall here delineate, with
more or less detail in each case, according to their respective im
portance for the Eeformation. The plan we shall pursue is to cora
prehend in the first volume John of Goch and John of Wesel,
along with the men of their circle. The sequel of the work will
be devoted to .Tohn Wessel, as the most important in a theolooical
respect, associating w-ith him the Bretliren ofthe Common Lot in
whose schools he was trained. The case of .Tohn of (ioch will

GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 13
bring under review the need of the Eeformation 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 wUl exhibit the controversy carried on against the de
praved manners of the clergv and the system of indulgences.
In John Wessel we behold a portrait of the accomplished Theo
logian of the age prior to the Eeformation. If to these we
add the Brethren of the Coramon 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, especiaUy in more recent times,
that we may reasonably pass them over^ and, accordingly, w-e
comraence our narrative with John of Goch.

BOOK FIRST

JOHN OF GOCH,

THE NEED OF THE REFORMATION IN REFERENCE TO
THE GENERAL SPIRIT OF THE CHITRCH.

Johannes Gocchius, vir singular! eruditione ac suo tempore nulli secundus, llbertatis Chriptianee
propugnator acerrimus, interpres legis ETangeliccD diligentissimus. Hune nocturna versate
manu, rersate dium&. Cornelius Graphtcus.

( 17 )

PART FIRST.

THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH,
AXD 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 eamest 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 k 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 bom about the commencement of the
fifteenth century at the little town of Goch, in the Duchy of

is THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
Cleves.i He seeras hiraself to have seldom taken the family
name of Pupper, but, according to the coraraon 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 Httle, except that it
probably was not of high rank. Neither is our positive know
ledge respecting his early education much more abundant, and
we raust have recourse to conjecture to supply the blank. In
his writings Goch shews hiraself to be possessed of no ordinary
theological acquirements. He is familiar with Scripture, well
read in the Latin ecclesiastical fathers, especiaUy Jerome and
Augustine, and versed in the doctrines of the Scholastic Divines,
particularlyof 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 leamed
he expresses himself, if not elegantly,^ yet with propriety, clear
ness, and distinguished precision. He even attempts etymologies
of his own, and in general deraonstrates 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
' 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,
li., p. 187), as an inhabitant of Mechlin. But the constant appellation
of von Goch, and the most reliable ancient accounts, indicate the little
tow-n 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
spent in that city. In calling him a Belgian, Fabricius means gene
rally an inhabitant of the Netherlands, i'he 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 Grapheus, otherwise a great admirer of Goch, likewise says of hira,
in his preface : Mir.ibar, id aetatis hominem tametsi stilo incultiori,
tantum potuisse. Walch. Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. '^raef.
p. xiii.

THE LlFi; OF .TOHN 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^), 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 stUl raore 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, fmmishes rnere probability,
and by no raeans 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,^ which it was usual
' 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 nostrura redeamus, demirari nunquam satis possum,
qui fieri potuit, ut unus ille, sic divino lumine illustraretur, tam aereo
et indocto seculo, ut solemnium doctorum errores tam audenti pectore
confutaret et refelieret, cum gentilem illam duarum liiterarum 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, ihat he had attended more than
b2

20 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
to carry away from those seats of learning. StiU it is possible
that raany quitted thera without this honour, and the want of
it onlv appears strange in the instance of so distinguished a raan.
If, however, Goch did study at a University, there were three at
hi^ption. 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 Paiis, to which raultitudes of youths and scholars
frora 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 aU his writings
the slightest notice, not even once the mention of its narae. 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 raaintained be
tween the theologian Heni-y von Zomeren, another acquaintance
of John Wessel, and the great majority of the members of the
University, on the subject of future contingencies.-^ 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 forraer residence at the place account for his
lively interest in its subsequent history. The probability in
favour of Paris, 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.^ 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.
' De libertate Christiana. Lib. i. cap. 26.
' De libertate Christiana. Lib. i. cap. 17, 18.

THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. ' 21
John Gerson simply as " the Chancellor,"' and without further
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 seeras 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, ha-ving 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 tirae much was there said about
" the ChanceUor" for several decennia after his death, and it was
very long before the irapression 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 sometiraes
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 inforraation. One John of Goch
is mentioned along with Godfrey a Kerapis, as head governor of
a house of the Brethren of the Common Lot at Harderwick^ founded
in 1448, and it is raost natural to suppose that this person was
the subject of our narrative, as raay be done without occasioning
any chronological difficulty. By his own exertions and with the
help of Godfrey a Kempis, and Herman von Schurrenburgh,
' De liber. Christ. Lib. ii. c. 52 in fine.
^ Delprat die Briiderschaft des gemeinsamen Lebens, ubersetzt von
Mohnike,Lei-pzig, 1840,8. 58.

22 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
Eector 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 ofthe office. This he jjrobably
did at Sluys,^ 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
j we reckon of most consequence, the coraposition 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 iraport
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.^ At the partition ofthe kingdom, under
Lothario, in 870, the city was allotted to Charies 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,* 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,
Sims, Schleuss, Slusae, I'Ecluse), in the vicinity of Bruges, and Mid
dleburg. The latter, celebrated in the history of the wars, is the one
here meant. The uant 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
G-esfeZ Historia sacra et prof. Archiepiscopatus Mechliniensis. Hae.
Com. MDCCXXV. fol. °
3 V. Gestel, s. 1 sq.
* Ibid. s. 13 sq.

THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 23
of Flanders parted with it to John 3d, Duke of Brabant.' Sub
sequently, in 1369, Mechlin came by marriage into the hands of
Philip the Bold of Burgundy, and continued for some time under
the dominion of his family,^ until by the raarriage 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,^ and
after him to St Euraold (f 775) ;* to the la&r 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.^ This connexion existed until
1559, when Pope Paul the 4th elevated Mechlin to an archiepis-
' Ibid. s. 17.
- Ibid, s 18 sq.
* St Lambert, or Landebert, born of noble parents at Msestricht, and
Bishop of that town, is said to have doue much for the spread of
Christianity in these quarters, partly in connection with Willibrod, 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.
Leet. 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.
"* The holy Rumold was either a Scotchman (Chronicon. Cameracense,
Apud Maslinas quoque Monasterium est oauonicorum, ubi quiescit pre-
ciosus Martyr Rumoldus, genere Scotus, qui vitam heremiticam ducens
inibi martyrisatus est), or as is maintained with greater probability (v.
Joh. SoUerii Acta S. Rumoldi. Antw. 1718 fol.), 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 t) 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 der Vater und Martyrer, deutsche Ubers. B. 9,
s. 15. s Van. Gjstel s. 24.

24 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
copal see, with a ver}' extensive jurisdiction. The roll of its
Archbishops coraraences with Anthony Perrenot, afterwards the
far celebrated Cardinal Granvella.'
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 Euraold,
we find raembers of the most distinguished famUies of the place,'
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^ were in Ec
clesiastical connexion with the town. Besides, there were nume
rous monasteries and Eeligious 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 sarae tirae serve as a
contribution to the characteristics of the age.
Till the end of the 1 5th century, the monastic Institutions* at
Mechlin included a commandery of the Teutonic order occupy
ing since 1198, the Pitzenburgh House — a monastery of Mino
rites dating frora 1231 — of CarraeHtesfrom 1303 (after estabhsh
ing theraselves in the city in 1254) — of Herraits of the order of
St Augustine from 1305 — of Alexians from the same date with
a Fraternity ofthe Brethren ofthe Coramon Lot, founded in 1490,
and in the 16th century transformed by Archbishop Matthew
Hovius into an Archiepiscopal Seminary.^ Not less numerous
were the female coramunities. Up to the close of the 1 5th century
we may enuraerate the following^ ; the Priory of Lillydale (LUien-
dale, Prepositura vallis liliorum), the principal and wealthiest of
the 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—66.
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.
* There is a catalogue of the Monasteries for males in Mechlin in
Van Gestel, p. 71— 71. '
5 Van Gestel, p. 79.
* Van Gestel, p. 79—86.

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 raonasteries an iraportant
place was occupied by certain feraale 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 perforraed
the same duties which in our day fall to the share of hospitals,
infirmaries, and all the varieties of benevolent male and female
societies. Araong the institutions of this sort, Mechlin could
boast ofa very extensive establishraent of Beguines founded about
the year 1249, without the city walls, and which gradually grew
to be a Httle waUed town of itself;^ 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 ofthe 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 frora their dark dress,
who foUowed 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.^ 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 nonnuUis 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 Mrchlin a jubilee, and calling it the "blessed."

2li) THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.

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
raind was constantly turned by the force of circumstances to the
consideration 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 subiect
we have the following notice in the history of the Archbishopric
of Mechlin.' "The PrioryoftheCanonessesof St Augustine called
Tabor 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 he purchased the Wilderenhaus,^ 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 ]\Iount
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 1567, 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 Netheriands, he was expelled by the
Calvinists ; but the town of Herzogenbusch, which remained
faithful to its Catholic Prince and the orthodox religion, gave

' Van Gestel p. 81.
- Praetorium \V ilderense.

THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH. 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' to the effect that Jolm of Goch translated the first
Nuns frora 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 tirae its
raembers 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 hira 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 araple 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 Eector 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 stUl standing without the walls of Mechlin.
Sorae scholars, especiaUy Conrad Gesner,^ affirm that he sur-
-vived Wessel, and was alive in 1490. This statement, however,
when -weighed with others more precise,^ 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 writings, and the following
appear to be its leading features. Goch was a man of great sensi
bUity, 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.
' Joh. Franc. Foppens BibUoth. Belg. Brux. MOCCXXXIX. 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 hira to solitary contempla
tion, and to his connexion with Nuns was probably due the gentle
and sensitive caste of his character. But, at the sarae 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 aira 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 Ee
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 Thomas
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 raore luminous and penetrating mind, and was in
general greater as a theologian, and raore decided and zealous for
an iraraediate 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 OF JOHN OF GOCH. 29

CHAPTEE 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 ofthe 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 deversities 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 iraraediately 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
phUosophy, which was also foUowed 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
phUosophic 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 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
' ages. The principle he laid down, that faith necessarily precedes
reasoning, and that reasoning is as necessarily the offspring of
faith, ^vas the initial basis of the most important forms which
scholasticism assumed. The middle ages, however, subsequently
receiv.ed new theological impulses, and in particular were power
fully influenced by the Aristotelian philosophy, in conseqaence of
which the love of theory and spieculation re-appeared with in
creased vigour. 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 becorae in Scholasticism, as
raaterially 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 moveraent which thus arose em
braces all the raen who helped to pave the way for the Eefor
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 w-ith the mediaeval 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 forras which it assumed. Its essential character
wUl be found in the fact, that whUe 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
I 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
Medieval 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 GOCH. 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 off'spring 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 Eomanic tribes, devoted its
chief attention to the formal elaboration of Christian ideas, and
the exercise of argument in the schools ; and are conciliation
bet-wixt them was indispensable, unless two things essentially
related, and each necessary as a compleraent to the other, were
to be wholly dissevered. Scholastlcisra, 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 m.ore 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.
AUying itself with the freshly eraerging love of the Bible, it
had the chief hand in effecting the transition to the Eeforma
tion, whereas Scholasticism, as a thing essentially antiquated,
was assailed and driven frora 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 Eeforma
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 aU 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 JOHN OF GOCH.
ruling authority, Goch in every case refers, and in so far he too
claims a share in the introduction of the Eeformation. It is,
f however, likewise, a theology of reflection, for he endeavours to
I develop and establish 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 eleraents, however, raust be re
garded as the raost essential. The first manifests its influence
only in his style and raethod 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 iraport. Whereas, in refutation, he first states clearly
the false doctrine, then confronts with it the true one which he
expresses in Scripture texts, and finaUy 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
irespects anti-philosophic. In the second place, it is substantiaUy
^ Augustinian and therefore decidedly Antipelagian. At the same
tirae, however, as Pelagianlsra 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 fe-vv stateraents. Even
the fundaraental conception, which he forras of the true spiritual
I 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 concems man ought to be independent of his fellow-
men, and dependent upon God alone. In God are to be found
supremacy, Hberty, aU-sufficiency, and perfection. He needs no
superior from whora to derive what he does not possess, and,
consequently, no instruction. Instruction, however, especially
in Di-vine things, is of indispensable necessity to man, and
as conformity to God is the end of his being, it foUows, that
he is the most perfect man, who wholly resigns himself to
the guidance of the Divine Master,^ 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,' — " 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
phUosophy is to know how to act,^ for it is not the teachers of
the law, but the doers of it, that shall be justified." He like
wise practically shews that his stand is upon the Bible by the
fact, that in aU 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,"* and he applies it likewise in opposing the
1 Dialog, de quatuor erroribus. cap. 22. p. 237.
2 Dialog, de quatt. err. cap. 10. p. 131.
' . . . abundent alii in scientia dicendorum, nobis sit summa philo
sophia habere scientiam fiendorum.
* Dialog, de quatt. err. cap. 22. p. 227. c

34 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 lo philosophi, especially to
the reigning philosophy of the times. This is a point the special
consideration of which, in all its bearings, is indispensa.ble in
order to form a just estimate of Goch, and the men of kindred
spirit, and even of the Eeformers. In consequence of the con
flict they waged with philosophy, especially Aristotelianism, the
precursors of the Eeformation, and, still more, sorae of the Ee
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 hostUity, 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 raerely in our judgraents of history,
but even in the domain of practice, there may be what is relatively
a retrograde moveinent, 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. A^^e, who stand upon the ruins of the
religions of antiq uity, and contemplate them in the mirrors of his-
tor^', 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 diflFerent 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 raerely 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 w-ell 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 w-hich
the Eeformation 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 finaUy became at the end
ofthe 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 iraproveraent. 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 raore 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, becarae 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 C 2

36 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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-
trae, the mind required to escape, and concentrating itself within,
to seek in the simple and really quickening truths of primitive
Christianity that refreshraent, purity, and vigour which were
i 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 forra 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 sorae degree sceptical, — a phi
losophy which decidedly prefers theory to practice, treats Divine
things raerely as objects of analytical reflection, and neither
teaches a Divine providence over huraan 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 ofthe world, could never permanently blend -with
a religion which, on the contrary, is thoroughly ideal, and full ofthe
inspiration offaith, 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
phUosophy. For Christianity, which was stUl as awhole and within
its own domain of Christendom, pervaded by faith, to have been
consumed by Aristotelianism, was, considering its intrinsic force
of tmth and life, an impossibility. The latter alternative there
fore alone remained, and could not but take place, whenever as
was the case in the course of the fifteenth centurv, the discre
pancy between the two becarae a distinct object of consciousness.
FinaUy,we have to consider the actual aspect which philosophy

goch'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 coraplete disrelish for |
it. John of Goch himself relates a remarkable exaraple of the
use which the young France, or — when we consider the body of
students in Paris as an asserablage frora all countries — the young
Europe of those days, raade of philosophy, as a cloak under which j
to propound the most licentious and imraoral principles. In the I
year 1376, the philosophical students in Paris, proceeding on the '
principle, as false as it is pernicious in its raanifold 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 ofthe 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 wUl 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 but the acquired
and the innate. Continence is not essentially a virtue. Siraple
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 phUosopbers 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.^
Viewing aU this conjointly, it is irapossible 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 is a long accouut of the affair in Goch's work De libertate
chi-istiana 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 requireraent
' 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, howe\'er, was not even the task of the
Eeformers, to say nothing of their forerunners, but was reserved
to a much later p.eriod. 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-
I 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 Hving
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-
j ever, speculation is a free and independent exercise of thought
I based exclusively upon Scripture, and hence essentially theolo-
' gical. It is fi-ee from the excrescences, traditions, and dead for
malism of the Schoolmen, and reserables the better theological
raethod of the early founders of Scholasticism, and tbe more dis
tinguished Fathers of the Church.
What reraains for us to contemplate in the theology of Goch
is its Augustinian and Antipelagian eleraents, 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-sufl5cient 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 law, 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 medieval church had lapsed into a state of mere legalism, and '
thence, as could not but happen, into a pursuit of righteousness
by w-orks, 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 Paw^ as its main basis,
and, inasmuch as Augustine was not only in other respects the
most eminent and revered of the Western Fathers ofthe Chiu-ch,
but was likewise the most determined advocate of the principles
ofthe 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 Eeform
ers, but all who helped to pave their way, and among these, the
subject of our narrative. A\ ithout 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 Eomans 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 raatters, the
Chancellor Gerson, still Augustine is the one to whora 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 (ind, through (Ind, to God. God is the ;

40 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
fountainaHkeof aUbeing,andof all well-being. Deriving as he does
his existence from God, the chief end of man is feUowship 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 essentiaUy
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 supematurally iraparted, in
the course of his developraent, in order to the further end of his
becoraing 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
wUl, 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 frora the
first raan, 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 comraon connexion, is entailed upon all the
merabers of the race ; and it spreads by imitation, inasmuch as in
every member of the race, no less than in its founder, inflaraed
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 possibUity of recovery. For man, however, once faUen 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, reaUy 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 reconcUed 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 aU 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 wiU 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 Di-yine 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 becoraes 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 itselfj by which
these were all ordained and overrated. This we shall learn more
fiilly in the sequel.
Leaving, however, these generalities, we will allow Goch him-

42 THE LlFIi OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 betwi.rt 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 ? The parent of Scholasticism, fol-
lowiuii the lead of Augustine,^ 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.^ 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.' In opposition to this principle, which unquestionably
does not sufficiently recognize life as the basis upon which re
ligious know-ledge must be reared, and which appeared in the
eyes of the Church, still urgent for faith, as the height of arro-
Igance, practical Mysticism felt itself called to combat spucu-
I lation, and to lay the stress upon belief, love, and contemplation,
' The fundamental principle of the Augustinian Theology was, as is
well known. Fides praecedit intellectura.
- The known words of Anselm, Neque enim quaero intelligere, ut
credam sed credo, ut intelligam . . . Nam qui non crediderit, non ex-
perietur, et qui expertus non fuerit, non intelliget. Prosolog. i. de fide
trinit. 2. The well-known work in which Anselm states the ontologi-
cal proof bears the title, Prosologiuin, sive Fides quaerens intellectum.
3 Abalard frequently warns against credulity, citing the text Ec
clesiasticus xix. 4, qui credit cito, lenis est corde. Introd. ii. 3. et ina. 1.
His disciples asserted the principle, nihil credi posse, nisi primitus in
tellectum. Hist, calamit. 9. And upon this principle he himself acted.
He preferred starting from the stand-point of doubt, rather than from
that of faith, as his words evince, Dubitando ad inquisitionein'venimus
inquii-endo veritatem percipimus. The following passages are specially
significant, Introduc. ad Theol. 1. ii. p. 1055 : Quid prodest clavw
aurea, si aperire quod volumus non potest. Epit. cap. v. p. 9 : Quid ad
doctrinam loqui proficit, si quod dicimus exponi non potest lit 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 aeque tam falsa, quam vera praedicentibus
acquiescamus . . . Alioquin cuiusque populi fides, quantamcunque
astruat falsitatem, refelh non poterit . . . Pag. 1064 : Legere et non
inti.lligere, negligere est.

GOCH S GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOG l.iN. 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 Tliomas Aipdnas 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.' In \
this way, by exalting theory as the culminating point of religious '
Hfe, he had Hkewise assigned to it the superiority over practice |
in the whole development of religious Hfe. This appeared to' .
' Thomas Aquinas treats largely of the scientific development of the
powers aud capacities of the human mind, in the first part of the
Summa, but states the relation between the Intellectus and Voluntas,
more particularly from the 79th Quaestio, and onwards. In the course
of this weighty disquisition, which 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 efl'ect, 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 tlie 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 alterum 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 simplicius et magis absolutum, quam objectuin 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 ;id
alterum, 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.

44 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
Goch to be without foundation either in Christianity or in the
nature of piety. On the contrary, he affirms that the supreme
perfection of the soul rather consists in the action of the wiU, and,
treading in the footsteps of Augustine, endeavoured in the fol
lowing manner* to demonstrate his conviction. The soul, ho
says, has in the state of bliss three high and ultimate operar
tions. These are to apprehend God by the memory, to see and
know him by the intellect,^ and to enjoy him by the wUl. Of
these three the two former, -viz., the apprehension and know
ledge of God, are subservient to the third, which is the fruition of
him, and which constitutes the consuraraate blessedness and feli
city of the soul, as St Augustine declares,' 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 ofthe -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 yvill Augustine likewise attests when he says* that
" It is to unite oneself in love -with any object for that object's
sake," and in another passage,^ " 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 theyare acts of the sarae 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 are accustomed to call the reason.
' Augustin. de trinit. 1. i.
* Augustin. de doctrina Christ, lib. i. cap. 4 . Frui est amore alicui
rei innaerere propter se ipsam.
^ Augustin. de trinit. lib. x.

goch's general POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 45
Saviour,' " 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 (visus et gustus, vel in-
tellectionis et fruitionis). The former is a pure act of the
intellect ; the latter, however, as it cannot take place without an
afiPectionate 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 inteUect 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 bUss, 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 -svUl, and when the Apostle says, " We shall be like
him, for we shaU 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 fiiUest
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 fuU cognizance of the
apple, as far asthe 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 fiiUy 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' 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 xvii. 3. ^ John xvii, 3.

40 THE LIFE OF J( HN f)F GOCH.
wisdo7n.^ 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 whora simpli-.
city of mind is just as Httle 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 faUs 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."^ As for the true simpHcity 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' 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
ofthe truth ofthe 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 of 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 iu English : Ipsa denique
est summa 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 et 136.
- 1 Cor. viil. 1.
' Dialog, cap. 10. p. 137 sqq.

goch's general position as a theologian. 47
philosophers, but only by the imitation of the humble and cruci
fied Jesus.
The will is accordingly the power which Goch regards as
chiefly determining the bent of man's spirituallifc, 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.' One is the state of terror under the law, which
the Apostle calls the spirit of bondage, because therein works of
righteousness are done frora 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 rao
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.' The wiU, however, is based upon another
power, which influences its raotions. It has its root in the
aff'ections, 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
\\-ings are to the bird, love is to us. They seera to add to the
weight of the body. In reality, however, so far from depressing,
they elevate it into the air. In like inanner 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' .... Take from them their wings, and you take
from birds the power of flying. Even so, separate love from the
will, and the wiU 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.
' Ibid. cap. 11. p. 14G,

48 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 wit hthe subjugation of the flesh, and even
of nature itself .... Much more aU things done from
love are necessarily done with delight (cu7n dulcedine). Love
sweetens even the sharp bitterness of death. Truly, it is a
light and gentle yoke strengthening and refreshing hira who
bears it, and with pleasing raotion raising him above the range
of his natural faculties, to God."^ StiU 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.' " 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,* 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 wUl, 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 raere will, but as -vyill imbued -with love,
without which it would be incapable of anything of the kind."
To the same effect Goch elsewhere says,® " Inasmuch as the
Gospel law is the law of love, according to the declaration of
the Apostle, that love is the fulfiUing 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
' Dialog, s. 149.
2 Ibid. s. 147 and 148.
3 Ibid. cap. 16. p. 172. 173.
' . . . tamen charitas est multo principalior
» 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 freedora of the
huraan will, but perfects it, because whatsoever is done from love
is most of all considered free."
This leads us to another point to -n'hich, in the foregoing pas
sages, allusion has already been made. It is, that tme freedom ;
springs only frora love, so that in this respect also, love appears
to be the fountain and centre of the higher life. Love and free
dom are the constituent elements of our being, and they are also the I
fimdamental prineijiiles of the (jrospel. Here again, however, love
claims the superiority, as that which alone makes us truly free. If
we coUect the thoughts which Goch has expressed in various pas
sages to this eflfect, 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 approxiraation and con
tinual assirailation to him. He is to all intelligent beings the
creative principle of love and freedom, and it is by love that he
makes them free. The state of the raatter is this : All existing
things have emanated frora the Divine freedora, 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,
bythe fr^ exercise of his will, they must, by the free exercise of their
own, turn towards hira and return to him.' 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
' 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 Deura.

50 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
productive principle (principium elicitivum 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 bythe way of freedom, results from
the nature of the Gospel law.' 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 freedora. Indeed, no
other actions are so free. All things are moved and brought to
their own place by their gravity,^ the light up and the hea-vy down.
But the gra-vity of the rational soul is love, the first and pro
per motive which inclines the will to its object. That which
is done frora 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 frora 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."'
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,* " 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 di-vides them to every man seve-
' This is expounded, Dialog, cap. 11. p. 141, sq.
2 Ibid. p. 144.
8 Ibid. p. 144 at bottom, and 145 at top.
" Ibid. cap. 21. p. 218.

goch's GENERAL POSITION AS A THEOLOGIAN. 51
rally as he will.' 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 fi-eedom to all, and
with the fullest right may his religion be designated the religion
of liberty.- 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 earthh- pilgrimage,' and in as rauch 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 :* " 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 ^-ihich the soul loves, so is this love of the soul,
in its nature, eternal too."
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 ordlnata.
' Dialog, cap. 16. p. 174.
* Ibid. p. 174 and 175.

2l>

( 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 eraanated 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 Hberty. This rudimental thought is unfolded in a great
variety of ways, both thetically and antitheticaUy ; and it is now
time to enter upon 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 intemal
organism of his thoughts, and his method of exposition. These
two works are the Book on the Liberty ofthe Christian Religion^
and the Treatise, written in the form of a dialogue, on the four
' De libertate Christiana or de hbertate christianse rehgionis, edid.
Corn. Grapheus Antwerp. 1521. On the literary character of the book,
see the sequel.

goch's POSITIVE THEOLOGY. 53
errors touching the evangelical Law.^ The first chiefly contains
Goch's 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 raay
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 raind and language, and consequently appears to
belong to a riper stage of life, than the more scholastic book on
Christian Hberty. In fine, account must also be taken of the
circurastance, that when old authors enumerate the writings of
Goch, the Book upon Christian liberty is usually mentioned
first, and as it is Hkewise 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 ofthe fourth, are all that
have been preserved.^ We must not, however, overrate the loss
of the rest, because the subjects of thein are discussed by Goch
in his Treatise on the four errors. The substance of the books
before us is as foUows.
' Dialogus de quatuor erroribus circa legem evangelicam exortis — we
shall allude to it in the course of the work.
2 There stands at the end. Finis horum, rehqua desyderamus.

THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.

CHAPTER FIRST.
THE AITHORITY AND INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.
SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY.'
Scripture, says Goch,^ 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 Seriptwe, the rule uf the Church general,
and the foundation, upon wliich, 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 interpi-etation. 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.' Having been vouchsafed by God, for the purpose of
implanting in man, f'aith, 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 wUl, when moulded by love, it is his duty to do. The
' The discussion of these subjects forma the contents of the First
Book. ^ Book i. cap. 1.
' He makes use of the well-know n lines :
Litera gesta docet, quid crtdas AUegoi-ia,
Tropologia quid agas, quid speres Anagogia.

SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 55
three last are comprehended under 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, primai-ily intended by God, is to be found in all those pas
sages, whether historical, prophetical, or didactic, in which his
wiU 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
veUed 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 Hteral without a mystical meaning, and raany a mystical without
a literal.' Although, however, this be the case,^ yet, when a dispute
arises among the leamed, 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 HteraUy 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.' 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 sorae 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
' In Goch's opinion, the literal interpretation ought to be applied
in almost every case to the Epistles nf Paul. De Lib. christ. 1. iii.
cap. 2.
2 Book i. cap. 2.
•' Cap. 5.

,56 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
must principally decide. 2. That sense is most to be approved'
which is given by those Catholic teachers, who 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 other,s, whereas the light of natural reason, which is the only
guide of unbelievers, however acute, does not suflfice for an ac
quaintance with the supernatural things which are taught in
Scripture. 3. That sense appears to merit the preference^ 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,
whereas 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' which has
most foundation in sound reason, because God, being the highest
wisdora 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,* 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, -nhich is eternal Hfe. Moreover, a text which,
according to the letter, relates to the Church, may Hkewise be
interpreted morally and anagogically. And a passage of raoral
iraport 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, Goch's piinciples of interpretation, we see upon
the one hand, how necessarily they led to the position he mainr
' Cap. 8. -' Cap. 9. ' Cap. 10. ' 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 Hved. For
he sanctions the mystical interpretation of Scripture, -vvhich had
prevailed fi-om 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 ofthe Church. On the other hand, we also discover
in his principles of interpretation, the commencement of some
thing new and i-eformatory, 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 refo7'matory
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,' 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^ affirmed, and also corroborated by the authority of the
Church, and what is only derivatively and indirectly' 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, frora 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 raeans. 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
' Cap. 11. - Principaliter et directe. ' Sccundarieet indirecte.

58 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
of canonical Serijiture, in opposition to what he calls natuiul
Scripture, raeaning thereby the as.sertions of philosophers and
modern teachers, who attempt to demonstrate or confute re
vealed and supernatural truth by proofs derived from natural
reason. To establish this relation more correctly, Goch discusses three
points :' 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 fii'st point, and to distinguish them broadly from the
Scriptures, as the book of life, Goch denominates^ the writings
of the philosophers, books of death, and believes himself able to
prove them to be so in three ways, and first, bythe manner of their
production. The writings of philosophers are all produced by men
from the reflections of their intellect. The insight, however, which
isderived 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* 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 hiin. 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 aira. In
their pursuit of Divine knowledge, philosophers propose to them
selves no other object to be gained but the knowledge they
• Book i. cap. 13—26. 2 q,^^ ^3
' Ex cffcctu operandi. • Ordinare.

SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 59
pursue, regarding tliat as an ornament of the mind. Hence,
to them the chief good is of an intellectual nature.' 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 govemment and
happiness of the present life, and as tbe present life, compared
with eternit}-, 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 Sc7ipture,^ Goch
defines the word authority to mean a positive assurance of what
is infallibly true, and for this he requires tliree things ; a firm
foundation for faith to rest upon, convincing evidence, and infal
libility. He then proceeds. These properties belong to canonical
Scripture. Itrestsupontherockof Divine revelation. It possesses
the e-vidence of knowledge — a knowledge which shall one day be
perfect andintuiti^-e 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 raerely as one
travelling to a place (viator) in a prophetic way, but as one fully
comprehending it (comprehensor) by intuitive perception)'— 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
frora 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
foUows that their writings can possess only a natural authority,
1 Optimum intelligbile. '- Cap. 14. 15. 16. ' Cap. 15.

60 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 1 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 niodern, 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,' and were the offspring
of a most objectionable distinction between philosophical and
theological truth, and then expresses himself substantially as
follows :^ There is but 07ie truth,' 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
' Cap. 17. 18. See above.
2 Cap. 19.
' Goch, here, of course speaks solely of the province of religion.

SCRIPTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. 61
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 moraHty,
the subject of so great a diversity of sentiment, that opinions,
not to caU 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, exclaira : 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,' 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 erabrace, 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 w-e are not as raany, 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 raade. Many allege^ that
the doctrines of philosophy are derived, though not frora Divine
revelation, still frora the Hght of sound understanding, and con
tend, that as sound understanding is itself derived from God,
nothing that emanates frora 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
• Cap. 20. Cap. 21.

62 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
light ; and the proper way to argue is as foUows : 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 is let in upon
it, and restores its health. Hence even that soundness of under
standing which is alleged, is not natural, but is the work ot
grace, and transcends nature. The Apostle speaks to the same
effect in the Epistle to the Romans i. chap. Others maintain'
that the writings of philosophers, although perhaps of no use as
respects faith, raay yet be profitable for morals and instruction in
virtue. The answer 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^ 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 diflS-
cult)', 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 assaUed, 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, a Manichaeus, 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 hira, 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,
' Cap. 22. 2 Cap. 26.

GOCH S VIE-WS ON HUMAN NATURE, ETC. 63
bidding hira refute them by the faithful word, and sound doctrine,
without entangling himself in fooHsh questions and useless dis
putations. Having thus secured the foundation, identical with that frora
which the Reformation afterward proceeded, he rears upon it
the -views evolved in the Second and Tliird Book, and which we
sum up as follows.

CHAPTER SECOND.
goch's doctrine ON HUMAN NATURE AND THE METHOD OF
SALTATION. 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 mi Cliris-
tianifii, between nature and grace. Hence, Goch sets out with an
exact statement of this antithesis,' and defines the relative ideas
in the following way. All that is given by God to man, in order
to his eristence, is nature, and all that was given to hira 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 cou7^se
of life,^ in order to make him good, by virtue of supematural
goodness, is grace. In fine, what is given to the elect in the
perfect state,' in order to their being perfected in supernatural
goodness, is glory.* In this raanner, the Creator has provided
' Book ii. cap. 1. ^ In via. ' In patria. ^ Gloria.

64 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 raakes 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,' whatever has been brought into existence by God
in creation, is, in as fir 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 evU 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 w-hich 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, likew-ise good, for
although it raay 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 raan raay be said to be both good and
bad, good as raan, but bad as a sinner. A wicked man is accord
ingly a perverted good,^ and violates the rule of the logicians,
who maintain, that opposites cannot exist simultaneously in the
same subject.' Nay it raay 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 whicli
cannot possibly be corrupted is the perfect ; that, however, which
1 Cap. 2.
^ Malum bonum. s An echo of the raodern speculative Logic.

goch's views on human NATUKK, ETC. 65
can be so greatly corrupted, as in every respect to be despoiled of
good, is no longer competent to exist.'
Here also it might be objected,^ 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 wiU become depraved ?
In order to solve this difficulty, a distinction must be drawn be
tween the wiU as a faculty, and the wiU 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 possibUity of evil,
or sin, within the bounds of what God created good, -yiz., nature,
Goch proceeds' to explain the actual origin of evil, and as he
virtuaUy traces it back to the will of the creature, he requires to
start with a definition of the will. The loill, he says, is that
movement by which the mind, without external constraint, re
jects or aspires to an object. It is either a power,* or it is an
operation^ of the power. As operation in reference to good, it is
either natural, or sanctified,^ or glorified^ wUl. The natural and
the sanctified -wUls are both liable to change ; the glorified is ex
alted above aU change. When God created man from a clod of
earth, and breathed into him a living soul,* he, at the same tirae
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 fi^eedom it was possible for man to stand, and retain
the goodness of his nature. He might never have deviated frora
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
' According to this, Goch, to be consistent with himself, must either
have denied the existence of the Devil, or ascribed to that Being some
good qualities. Of these ideas, however, there is no trace elsewhere in
his works .
^ Cap. 4. ' Cap. 5. * potentia. ' actus potentiae.
" voluntas gratuita. ' voluntas glovificata. " Cap. 6.
E

66 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
freedom of the will, the will's incorrupt rectitude,' the soundness
and vigour of all the powers of the soul. This was no innate
quality of nature, but was superadded by God^ 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, raan 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, however, gave
birth to two other e-idls, 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 raisery of the rational nature proceeds.
In thus inculcating the doctrine of a corruption propagated
frora the first transgression, or in other words, of original sin, and,
unlike most of the Schoolmen, conceiving it not as a raere 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 capability of salva
tion, even in the sinful state, and for this capability he finds a
basis in freedom. Freedora, says Goch,' 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 raan's re
sponsibility for his actions, is the will's exeraption from constraint,
which is found equally in the good and the bad. The second
consists in being free frora 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 FaU, aU
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
' rectitude.
2 The donum superadditum of the Scholastics and the Catholic
Doctrinalists. ' Cap. 7. 8.

GOCH S VIEWS ON HUJIAN NATURE, ETC. ('i7
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 sinfiilness,
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.'
Just as in the case of our first parents, there was a concurrence of
three parties, ofthe enticing serpent, ofthe woman who yielded to
the enticement, and of the man who listened to the woman more
than to thevoice of God, the same still happens every dayin every
indi-vidual, 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 assaUs 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 circurastances, the sin
raay 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,' is not
in these cases to be conceived, as the intelligent faculty' of the
' Cap. 9. 10. Cap. 11. ' virtus appreliensiva. K 2

68 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 Meraory, Judgment and Will, is a type of the Divhie
Trinity,' and as the works of the uncreated Trinity are undi-yided,
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 frora all this is,' 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 wUl 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 any 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,' 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 e-vil of the
bodily nature originated in that of the spiritual. By man's
' Cap. 13 — IS. Here follows a further exposition of the proposition,
that man, although merely an analogous and not a perfectly adequate
Image, is yet a true image not only of the Deity generally, but of the
Triune God, aud in fact not of the Father, Son, or Holy Ghost seve
rally, but of the Trinity 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 ui fact this conception of
human nature, as the creature — image of the Trinity, which mainly
guarded the Psychology of Goch, John Wessel, and other mediseval
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 \vith the Divine will, the harmony in the
powers of his bodily nature was destroyed, and a languor' 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 chUdren (and is the basis of actual sin). In the
former, it proceeded frora 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.' For this reason, it does not contain within it the
cause of sin, but catches defilement from sin through the medium
ofthe 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 the off'spring 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,' in which he treats of saving and sanc
tifying grace and of their operations.
He defines grace generally to be* the gift of God imparted to
man in the course of his development,^ for the purpose of eman
cipating his will from the bondage of concupiscence, and inflam
ing it yyith the love of that righteousness, which renders him
worthy of etemal salvation. The various definitions given of the
1 Languor.
- Goch, as we hence perceive, was not, as might be inferred from his
Augustinian principles, a Traducianer, bnt a Creatianer.
' Book ii. cap. 23—42. * Cap. 23. * in via.

70 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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, aud especiaUy 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
causing 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, anymore
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 wliich 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 ^^e read,' 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 itselfj that is faith ^vithout life,^
can possibly justify, or any other faith but that which worketh by
love. For grace is faith taking its mould in love.' 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* produces the sanctified ivill,^ 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 wUl of the sinner its
preternatural power and liberty, by virtue of which, it is emanci-
' Cap. 25. 2 fijgs informis. ^ gjgg formata. * Cap 26.
* 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 frora sin and all teraptation to it, for
sin still lingers in the flesh. At the sarae tirae the dorainion of sin
is broken, and it no longer injures the man who is dead in Christ,
as it once injured him, when, though bom in Adam, he was not
yet born again in Christ. If in this view, however, primseval
liberty was of a purer kind ; on the other hand, that which is
recovered by the believer is proportionally the raore exalted ; for
by it the nature of the will is not merely released fi-om the fetters
of concupiscence, in which, bythe sin of Adam, it was entangled,
but it is even elevated to the Hberty 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
con-esponded 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,' the power of
the natural -will consisted in exeraption from constraint, and the
possibUity 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 etemal things.
To sum up aU,' there are two principles which regulate men's
actions in this Hfe, 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 eam eternal life. Grace
is the principle of the actions which are perforraed by pre
ternatural power derived frora 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 raan
are the work of free grace, without co-operation of the natural
1 Cap. 2h. -' Cap. 31.

72 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 huraan action with a disquisition as to the matter of it, the
opposites of good and evil, and the possibility of things indiffer
ent''- lying betwixt the two. Many teachers had maintained'
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 wiU 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 e-yil, 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 :' There are, he says,
certain acts of the wiU 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 e-yil, 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 are neither good nor bad, but which derive the
1 Cap. 32—42. ^ Cap. 32. > Cap. 33.

goch's views on human nature, ETC. 73
one or other quality from their cause and intention, and such
actions are termed indiflFerent. 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
he 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,' 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,
however, in the main, three kinds of good works which have not
their worth in themselves, but derive it from their intention and
aim.' 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 huinan 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,' pro-yided the inferior ends
are really subordinated to that which is supreme.

If by these disquisitions, Goch's chief intention was to lower
the exaggerated estiraate in which all ecclesiastical works, such
1 Cap. 37. 2 Cap. 39. ' Cap. 41.

74 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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,' he specially instances entrance and reception
into a monastery, as things which, according to the intention
with which they are done, raay be either good or bad, and may
even amount to simony and heresy,') he proceeds, with the
same polemical tendency, to append, in the 3d Book, a Disquisi
tion upon a kindred subject ; viz., the merit of huma7i actions.
Here he has chiefly in view the Pelagicmism 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 stateraent and refutation of the
false doctrine, in order to place the right and canonical one in
clearer contrast with it. He says,' with evident reference to the
Thomists, Many theologians allege that merit is a human action
or effort, to which a reward is dueoii 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.* 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 estabhshed by Divine justice between merit and
reward.' This doctrine is in many respects contradictory to
canonical truth. The first error contained in it reminds us of the
Pelagian heresy. For after aU other heresies had been extirpated
as perverse, that of Pelagius, relating chiefly to practice and
behaviour, on which subjects the distinction between natural
and supernatural is most diflficult to draw, has maintained its
ground with many teachers, and spread like a cancer. While
' Cap. 42. Conclus. 1—9. 2 Conclus. 9. 3 Book iii. cap. 1.
* meritum digni, congrui, condigni.
^ The fullest exposition of Thomas' doctrine of Merit is contained
in the Summa, Prima Secundae, Quaest. cxiv.

GOCIl'S VIEWS ON HUMAN NATURE, ETC. 75
this heresy derives the merit, whichjentitles 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
raan 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 raen of piety and erainence like St
Thoraas should ever have erabraced it. It involves essentially
four errors. The first^ 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
whora 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 raay suppose he can be justified against
his wUl. But grace precedes man, in order that man may
will, and foUows the act of volition, that that may not be in
vain. The second error, which results frora the first, is,' 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 wUl'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 etemal 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 etemal truth, there
¦virtue is false, even though the raorals are excellent. The third
error is,' that merit receives acertain 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
' Cap. 2. '- Cap. 3. ' Cap. 4.

76 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 eraanate from the sanctified will, and point to God as
its ultimate aira. In that case, however, the merit does not
flow frora the vow, but from the sanctified will. Moreover, that
no one description of good works is more noble than another,
but rather that aU 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, — fromthe unityof the actuating principle,' which
is love, and which either actuates all the virtues or none, — from
the inward harraony of the several virtues, — and from the unity
of their operation, which is especially evident in the theological
virtues, for a raan's hope is always commensurate with his faith,
as his love also is with his hope, and the converse. Finally, the
fourth error is,' that an action performed from love,' w-hen weighed
in the scale of justice, bears sorae 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 hiraself; 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 work of Christ.'^ He starts with what appears to hira
a more correct definition of the idea of merit,^ to the effect, that
it is an action of the sanctified wiU directed with right intention
to God, and accepted by hira, and to -which, in the fulness of his
' formae informantis. ' Cap. 6. ' actus chartitate informatus.
* Cap. 7—13. « Cap. 7.

goch's V1E-\VS 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
dii'ected 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 originaUy only in Christ, and hence he represents
aU merit and all salvation, as procured through him. A fuller
exposition of this is given in four propositions, or truths, as
foUows : —
First truth. — Merit can be earned only by a party who is abso
lutely free, and in other respects not bound and obliged.' But
this can be said of no meraber 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 kingdora of heaven, but the being
spirituaUy bom 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,' is described by the Apostle in Rom. v., where he
says, that " As by the obedience of one man many were raade
sinners, so by the obedience of one shaU 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 wiU 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 aU 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 raust 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. 8. ' obligatus. - Cap. 9.

78 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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. Clirist accordingly has
reconciled us to God, not as foe is reconciled to foe. The method
rather is, that our sin, through which 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 deraonstrates his lo-^-e to us by the
death of his Son, that w-e, receiving such a pledge of his love,
should, on our part, also be stirred up to love him. In this way
the raerit of Christ is transferred to us by the appropriation and
imitation of his love. We are set free from sin and the De-vil, 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 raen, nor ever was, nor ever can be, save that one,
who was raan 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 raan 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 overcoraes 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 wiU
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.

GOCH S VIEWS ON HUMAN NATURE, ETC. 79
known and believed.' 2. A perfect love of righteousness, by
means of which the good, perfectly known as suoh, so highly de
Ughts 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.' For although it is not impossible for
God, in virtue of his sovereign power, to impart to a pure man aU
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 frora 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 ?
Third truth? — No one can acquire merit on the score of justice,
to whom it has not been given of the Father. According to
Scriptm-e, 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 woraan.
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.
Fourih truth.* — No one shaU 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 etemal 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 raany passages
of Scripture, and may be stated as follows : In order that any one
' Cap. 11. ' nisi fuerit simul viator et comprehensor.
' Cap. 12. * Cap. 13.

80 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
may merit eternal salvation, it is requisite that there shaU be a
perfectly equal proportion between the meritorious works which
he 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 raentioned in the New
Testaraent nor in the infancy of the Church.' He also shows,
however, that from the nature of the Gospel law,'' 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 hke
that which a vow involves ; otherwise contradictory things would
be combined in one and the same law. It is further, however,
a law of the heart, that is, it leaves an option to the will' which
distinguishes it especially from the Mosaic Law, that having
been a law of works, under which the will was in bondage.* For
the New Testament, given not like the Old, merely to the House
of Israel, but to aU 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
' Book iv. cap. 1. ' Cap. 3. ' deliherativae voluntatis.
* voluntatis servitiae.

goch's VIEWS ON HU3IAN NATURE, ETC. 81
bond of affection, to unite the creature with his Creator, who is
himself reconcUed as Love. And if the new law is set down in
writing, in the works of Evangelists and Apostles, stUl 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.' In
fine, the essential object of the Gospel Law'' is to emancipate
man from aU bondage and constraint, and to exalt him to the
fuU Hberty of the chUdren of God, and, therefore, all that it
requires of him is, with genuine and holy aflPection, 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 chUdren 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 Hght, — the reader, who knows its
actual forra 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 goveming centre, in the
same degree as was the case with the Reformers, still this is
the only one of their pecuUar characteristics which is wanting.
There is the same conflict -with the spurious philosophy of the |
Schoolmen, and aU human authority, waged from the same |
stand-point of a Hvely faith in Scripture to which a sound
exegesis had given birth. There is the same preference of the j
practical doctrines of salvation to the predominantly theoretic ;
and speculative predeHctions of the reigning theology. There [
is, in the whole treatraent of Christianity, the same spirituality j
as opposed to the legal views of the Mediseval 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, ;
' Cap. 5. ' Cap. 6.
F

82 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 raerit, that pious recognition and exaltation of the grace
jof God procured by Jesus Christ, as the only fountain of all that
iis tridy 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 Hke 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 Melanchthon! s expositions of doctrine. In skort, 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 )

V.\ RT 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 controversicd 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 supei-ficial points, but, consonantly with the deeper impulses
of his nature, took into view the action of the Church in it^ full\
extent and inmost springs. Wickliffe had assailed the mendicant i
monks, the usurpations of the Hierarchy, and the perversion of
the doctrine of the sacraments. Huss had sketched the beau-
ideal ofthe Church, ofthe 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 Church,
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 raore contemplative F 2

84 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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
I four erro7-s touching the Gospel Law.^ In the same way in which
a celebrated teacher of the Church iu modern times' 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
Hberty 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.
' Schleiermaeher in his Glaubenslehre Th. i. s. 137 § 22. The
heresies are the Docetian, the Nazaraan, the Mannichian, and the
Pelagian. ' 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 La-vy was, from the very comraenceraent of the Church,
confined within the obligation of vows, and liraited by these, so
that, without the obHgation 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 hiraself 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 5
shall find fault, if what he says contradict particular statements
of the Fathers, for in such a case, he proraises 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 eflScacy and invincible force, and gives authority
to aU 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 aU, 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 w£|,s 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
' Dialog, p. 79—82.

86 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 ofthe Creator, his wisdora 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
ofthe 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 attainraent of that light, however,
it is not requisite to explain the aberrations of all, even of such
as have cast oflf every restraint. It is sufificient to know the
essential errors of those, who, although owning subjection to the
Gospel Law, contravene in various ^^ ays the true Christian Hfe.
There are four kinds of errors, which frora 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 ofthe 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 Netheriands. In this manner,
the Treatise is calculated to fumish us with an excellent thread
in our enquiries, on the one hand, into the corruptions of Chris
tian life as raanifested 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 frmdamental distinction between Judaisra and Christianity
is, that the one is Law and letter, the other is Gospel and spirit.
The nature of Law consists in its being soraething 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 off'er 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 irapulse 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
comraandment, leads to the ftdfiUing 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 diflferent 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 EvangeUcal results historically frora 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 Testaraent, the eleraent of the
legal frame of mind had been largely transplanted into the sphere
of the Gospel, and hence we find frora the outset, and through
the whole course of the Christian Church, the traces left by a
Legal kind of Religion. First of all we raeet 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 being abolished in the Church ; it only
raanifested itself in new shapes and combinations. Small parties
here and there still exhibited a strong legal hue, as, for example,
the Hypsistarians of early Christianity and the Passagians of the
middle ages. The last observed the whole Mosaic Law, and
even bound themselves to its observance by circumcision (hence
called circurncisi). 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 thera the way was opened for Pelagianism, which
treated Christianity, as Socinianism and Rationalism afterwards
but stUl 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 raore 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, ha-ying more than
fulfiUed its utmost requirements. As the basis of the whole
system, an Ecclesiastical legislation was developed, more orga
nized and comprehensive than even the ci-vil law. So general
and all-pervading indeed did the Legal conception of Christianity
become, that we find it, although perhaps in a mUder 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 ; stiU 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 :^ " 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 ofthe 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
ofthe Christian life ; whereas the observance ofthe Mosaic Law,
although obHgatory while it lasted, so far from promoting that
great end, is, on the contrary, very disadvantageous for it. To
this eflfect, he says to the Galatians : ' I, Paul, say unto you,
that if ye be circumcised, Christ shaU 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.' '"
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 afready 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 wUl directed towards God, or that is not done in faith
' Dialog, p. 83 and 84. ' Galat. v. 3—6.

90 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 oflfspring, of
love, he recognizes the iraperishable 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 usuaUy foreign to the stern and exclusive
rigom- of the legal stand-point. On this subject be very forcil^
says :' "Many in the Church of God are led, by a variety of
motives, to the exercises ofthe 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 sarae 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 raen, but are found
to omit the weightier matters of the Law. To thera applies what
the Lord said of the Scribes and Pharisees, ^'iz., 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 raen'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 evU, he who seeks to do good should be admonished
to seek also to do it in a good way."
' 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.
AVhen we say that, to conceive and handle Christianity as ifit
were a Law, was the prevailing tendency of the Mediaeval
period, w-e raust 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 raen 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 raany warm-hearted Schoolmen, such as
Anselm of Canterbury, and with the nobler class of Mystics,
such as St Bernard, Hugo de St Victore, and Bonaventura.
Besides, the prevailing Nomianism called fortii another extreme,
viz., decided Antinomianism, or /ree tlwiking, which overlooked
the amount of Law involved in the nature of the case, and which
is the condition of aU true liberty, viz., self-restraint. The rudi
ments of this tendency may likewise be discovered in a great
variety of forras 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 weU
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 upon the people, became
associated with Phantasticism. Stirred up probably by the more
speculative and deliberate Pantheism of the great Scotus Erigina,
tliere arose in the course of the twelfth, thirteenth, and four
teenth centuries, certain Pantheists who departed farther and
farther frora Deisra, and the historical foundation of Christianity,

92 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
and at the sarae time operated powerfully upon the popular
mind. We here speak of David of Dinanto, Amalrich of Bena,
and Eckard,' who formed, or at least occasioned the formation
of, parties and associations araong 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 ofa 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 meraoir. He designates as the second fundamental error'
the doctrine of those who raake 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 things
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." Relying 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
beUevers ; -for it is love alone which induces men to believe in
Christ, by liberating the aflfection of the heart frora aU created
objects, and by gi-ying it, when liberated, its freedom in God.
When the Apostle, however, further adds : ' Only use not Hberty
1 On this remarkable man see the beautiful treatise of Dr Schmidt in
the Stud, und Krit. 1839. Heft 3. s. 663.
' 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 wiU, 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 -wiU, when moved, acts
by means of the aniraal spirits, upon the raembers 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' a twofold act ofthe 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,' by
which the soul is assimilated and rendered acceptable to God ;
and the other required by law and external, which has no doubt
an inward basis, but which at the same time depends upon other
conditions,' and makes a man not only pleasing to God, but, for
the Divine honour, exemplary to others. This act offaith (which
is just the practical principle manifesting itself in life) is no less
indispensable for the perfection ofthe will, in every case in which
there is the possibUity of carrying its inward moveraent into out
ward effect ; where this, however, is wanting, the good will is
accepted for the deed.
But, proceeds Goch,* In proof of the indiflference 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 eflfect of
which ought to be to humble the pride of man in the sight of
' Dialog, p. 86. sqq. ' the fides formata in and of itself.
' actus fidei formatae exterior. * Dialog, p. 88 — 90.

94 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
God, it ought, as Goch pertinently observes, to be well con
sidered. First, that the Apostle does indeed say, A man is jus
tified wdthout 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 ofthe Law, he acknowledges at the same
time, how necessary the works of faith are, if there be any possi
bility of performing thera. For how could he require of us, To
do good and not be weary, if the inward movement of faith alone
sufficed 1 To will that which is good, is one thing, and to do it
is another. By the inward raoveraent of faith, we will and choose
that which is good ; by the outward perforraance of the work,
we do it. It is accordingly clear that to the perfection of the
Christian Hfe, 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 aUeged, that John of Goch may hi7nself
have partaken the erroneous views of the Free Spirit.'^ Such an
aUegation, 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
labom-ed, abettors ofthe errors of this sect raade their appearance.
Neither reason, however, is conclusive. Let us beware of sepa
rating single sayings of Goch from the connexion in which they
stand, and let us 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 leveUed against a legalism
' 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 GRACE.
The erroneous tendencies which we have hitherto shown to have
been contro-verted by Goch, are chiefly objective, and rest upon a
misunderstanding of what Christianity essentiaUy is, inasmuch
as they overlook either the inward liberty of spirit, which it
imparts, or the obedience to law, and respect for morality of Hf^
which it involves. There are, however, and frora the first have
been, -wrong tendencies of a raore subjective nature, which place
man in a false position towards Christianity, as a thing which he
ought to appropriate and introduce into Hfe. In so doing, he
may either from want of a suflficiently 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 Hfe, he likewise and above all things
requires an outward support, an Ecclesiastical obligation, or vow,
or sorae 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 fundaraental 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'

96 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
Goch's objections to them, first singly, and then in their inward
and historical connexion.
First, as regards Pelagianism, its gradual grovyth, especially
after the tirae 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 suflficiently known. We intend here to
direct particular attention solely to the manner in which the
Pelagian principle aflfected even the orthodoxy of the Church
during the Mediseval period, and thereby produced extensive
and by no means desirable consequences. We shall shew this
in the instance of the most influential of the Schoolraen, 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 oflfer a concise
sumraary. 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 soraething 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 soraething positive, as sensual desire (concupiscentia) resisting
that which is good. This positive conception of hereditary sin
fiilness 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 diflferent state
ments of preceding teachers, adopted both views into his concep
tion of original sin,' and taught, that it consists, substantially,
in sensual desire, and the consequent disordered or perverse state
' He treats of original sin in the Summa prim. seo. Quaest. Ixxxi.
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).^ It affects principally the will, and in a less
degree, the intellectual faculties.' 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 ;' 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.* Original sin is therefore a wound in
flicted upon nature, a diseased and discordant state of it, (vul-
neratio naturae)^ 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 Tliomas
of grace and its operations naturally required to correspond.* 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 etemal life, — these are things which in
the sinful state, afifecting 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 tirae, this is done, in
' Quaest. Ixxxii. Art. 1.
' Quaest. Ixxxiii. Art. 3.
' . . . . Aliud denique, cujusmodi est ipsa naturalis inclinatio
ad virtutem, sublatum quidem non est, verum valde diminuitur per pec
catum. Quaest. Ixxxiv. Art. 1.
* Ibid. Art. 2.
5 Ibid. Art. 3.
8 Summa Theol. prim. sec. Quaest. cix. sqq. G

98 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
the exercise of man's liberty, and in so far, he is commanded to
convert himself to God. It lies with hiraself to prepare his
raind, because this is done by free wiU, 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.' It is true
that Thomas expressly refers all human merit to the grace of
God,' as its chief and final cause ; but inasrauch 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,' has the power of meriting something from God, not so
rauch 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 frora 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 (meritum ex condigno or condigni) ; that, however,
which is connected -with 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.' 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, see Summa Theol. prim. sec. Quaest. cxiv.
' Quaest. cxiv. Art. 2.
' Ibid. Art. 1. * Ibid. Art. 3.
' Videtur congruum, ut homini operanti secundum suam virtutem
Deus recompenset secundum excellentiam suae virtutis.

FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 99
by one man for another ;' for inasrauch 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,
caiTy into execution the will, which is pointed to the salvation of
others. It is true that this theory of St Tliomas 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 raerit of huraan 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 ofthe 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 thera 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 e-vil, 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 capabUities of human nature, are perfectly sufficient for
' Quaest. cxiv. Art. 6.
^ g2

100 THE 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 alo7ie, 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 fi-ora its debasement to its lofty and glorious destina
tion, and this means is called gi-ace. 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 ofthe fact
by intrinsic reasons, and in his exposition brings forward the fol
lowing thoughts.' 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. Inasrauch, however, as no power is brought into activity
by its object, unless it be influenced by it (informatui') ; 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, inasrauch 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 o'elation between the powers, 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-
' Dialog, p. 93 sqq.

FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 101
ties ofthe intellect and the will are finite and circumscribed. The
finite is manifestlyinsuflficient 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.^ The same fundamental thought, which is true, although it
overlooks the fact that there is an infinity also in the raind, and
that this requires the matter to be more deeply conceived, is
brought forward by Goch in another way. He says,' " 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 supematural order, it must derive
some other assistance from without, and that is grace."
In fine, Goch illustrates the raatter by the following proposi
tions,' which at the same time speak for his strict supernatu7'alism,
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
Di-yine 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 obseA-ance of the Divine comraandraents 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 be
corae 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 are freely done. "
2 Dialog, p. 95.
' Dialog, p. 95—9.

102 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
tion, as was shown in the case of the martyrs. The task of the
intellect is to assent to the revelations raade by God respecting
articles offaith, even when contrary to the natural apprehension
of the reason. Inasmuch, however, as to beUeve the articles
of faith necessary for salvation, is not done by the natural ap
prehension of the inteUect, seeing that the intellect can beUeve
nothing supernatm-ally, 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 inteUect needs to obtain other
helps for the performance of this saying 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,' 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' : — 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 moveraent as in itself nugatory,'we must
inevitably affirm that nature is competent, of her own ability, to
compass the object towards which she naturally aspires. The Spirit,
recognising in this objection a proof of the continued operation
of the Pelagian error, proceeds with its instruction as follows :'
" There are many persons in the Church of God who, with a
' The justitia civilis, as the Augsburg confession expresses it, in
contrast with the justitia spiritualis.
2 Dialog, p. 97 and 98.
' 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 raost scrupulous exact
ness also, they perforra 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 suflfices to do them well' 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 perforra, not in the strength of nature and in as far as I ara
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 conteraplates
things in the Hght of God, who is truth. The whole appetence
ofthe 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,' 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 eraanating frora hira, 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 ;' and hence the more
it resembles God, the raore it becoraes united to him, and the
more unlike him it becomes, the more it is separated from
hira. AU 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 lo-ying party from himself, and translate him into the
' The justitia spiritualis.
' duorum appetit uum.
' Per habitum deiformem.

104 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
object of his love ;' and the eff'ect 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 dissimUarity which separates it frora Him, is to be sought
in the appetence (desire or aspiration) of its intellect.' And
here we flnd the point of right discrimination. For, continues
the Spirit,' appetence (appetitus) is excited in various ways, and
by these w-e may distinguish the diflferent 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 beautifiil
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 o-n-n love, cannot grow
raore like to God, nor be drawn nearer to Hira. For if nature
be enamoured of herself, she can never possibly be ameHorated
by the raere transmutation of herself into herself;* and in vain
eflforts of this sort many wear themselves away. The criterion
' In amatum transferre.
' The appetitus rationalis.
' Dialog, p. 104.
* Quia enim appetitus pondere amoris in amatum transfertur, si tunc
natura est ipsum amatum, in quod appetitus appetentis transfertur,
manifestum est, naturam ex translatione sui ipsius in se ipsam non
meliorari, ac per hoc Deo similiorem, quam prius fuerat, non fieri.

FALSE CONFIDENCE IN SELF, AND THE NEED OF GRACE. 105
of true love is to be found in the eflfect 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 of
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
retum. 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 Di-vine 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 oflfspring
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' : " 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
' Dialog, p. 122—24.
1

106 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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
sumraation 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, raore or
less coarsely conceived, of self-righteousness and righteousness by
works ; and ifit was the doctrine of Pelagianlsra respecting Chris
tians in general, that they required to merit their salvation from
the Di-yine justice, by raoral worth and virtuous deeds, Mon-
achisra 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 hoHness 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 merabers of any one. Even in the doraain

FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 107
of Monachisn, we find a more profound and raore purely Chris
tian conception of the matter. In particular, a somewhat general
diflference, or rather opposition on the subject, seeras to have ob
tained between the Dominica7is and the Augusti7iians. The Domi
nican order had taken its rise in a decided contradiction to the
prevaiUng heresy of the 12th century. Indeed its raain object
was to irapugn and extirpate it. The heretical parties of that
and the following age, however, advocated predorainantly the
principle of religious sentiraent, and an evangeUcal frame of
mind, and hence the Dominican order necessarily sank more and
more into the principle of outward observance and legality which
prevaUed 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-
ticisra, such for exaraple as Tauler, count for little against the
whole spirit of the order. In general we find araong thera 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 thefr principles with dreadful violence against
all who differed in opinion from themselves, especially the advo
cates of change. Wherever any symptoras of life, Hberty, or aspfra-
tion above the common appeared, as for example, in the instances
of John of Wesel, ReuchHn, and subsequently Luther himself, we
see theDominicans engaged raost zealously in opposition. Certain
localities, however, were in a particular raanner the seats of their
spirit, as for instance, Cologne in Germany, which thereby became
a fortress of obscurantism against all the eflforts 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 calra contemplation, and the
sanctification of their own souls, and cultivated, by 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 Luther. In par
ticular the letters of Luther in the early period of his Ufe, breath
ing as they do a deep sense of religious want, and an eamest
evangelical spirit, manifest that, in this respect, there were, within
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 Coramon 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 Hfe,
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
' This Apologetic Epistle, declarans quid de Scholasticorura seriptis
et religiosorum 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 founded 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
ments of later teachers ; the second, p. 14 — 24, treats ofthe 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
far 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 tmth ? 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 show-s 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 here
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 all
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 by 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 witb
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. For as the
will of God is the rule and measure of all that is good in the will of the
creature, the goodness of the latter is recognized by the degree in which

110 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
it, he had expressed his views. He designates' as the fourth
radical error the opinion of those, who reckon the twofold act of
faith, both that of inward voUtion and that of outward operation,
as essential to the perfection of the Christian Hfe, 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 insuflficient, and that the obligation of a
voiv is likewise indispensable, so that, reducing Evangelical free
dom to an obligatory servitude, they are not far reraoved from
Pha7isaical 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 etemal life,
the natural power of the wUl 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 ofthe whole Ecclesiastical system
of vows and obligations with the principle of Pelagia7iism. 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 ofthe will,
in virtue of which, it controls the other powers of the soul and mem
bers of the body, but 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 reference 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 w-ork 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 free.
(Ibid. p. 24.)
' Dialog, p. 109.

FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. Ill
tion that logical skill, which is always more or less at his com
raand. Inasmuch as Thomas Aquinas, the main representative of
the medifeval theology, is here chiefly in view, it will be requisite
to give a concise summary of his doctrine, on the subject of
vows, the foundation on which Monachism is built.' 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 perfonn to God some eminently good work' which is
whoU}' in the power of his will. According to Thomas, a vow is
an act of worship' 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 consuramated. The very nature of a vow, however, involves
that it shall always relate to sorae work of special excellence,* as
aU things generally necessary for salvation are. Every vow points
ultimately to God, and determines respecting such matters as are
to 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,^ than that which is done without
it.* 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
' Thomas treats of this subject in the Summa Theol. Sec. sec.
Quaest. Ixxxviii. in 12 Articles.
' aUqnod excellens bonum.
' latriae actus.
* a melius bonum, as Thomas often designates it.
5 laudabilius et magis meritorium.
^ This is the raain question, and is discussed by Thomas, especially
in the 4th Article of the 88th Quaestio.

112 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
performed with a depressed and sorrowful mind, and because the
vow has 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 raeritorious 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 vfrtues. 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 wilh 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 hiipself 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 the
action, but in respect also of his Hberty 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
firraed 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 :' " 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 ofthe wUlto good in amore
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 falling
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, raade without
the raovement 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 corapelled by the Church to observe his
vow, while it is clear that raany of them have in no degree
been raoved 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' openly maintains, then another question emerges, to
wit. Inasmuch as grace is related to the wUl in the same way as
light is to the object on which it shines, and must therefore put
something into the wUl, just as light puts soraething into the
iUuminated object, — further, inasmuch as that which grace puts
into the wiU is nothing else but a certain conformity of the will
of man to the wUl of God, — and inasrauch as, finaUy, this con
formity daily grows by increase of grace, until the susceptibility
of the wiU 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, Liberum
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, scx;undum quod est motus a Deo), he raust necessarily also
maintain that the higher good which is wrought by means of a vow,
although proceeding frora 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. H

114 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 puts
into the will of hira who, wthout 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
who 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
words of their master,' 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 confirraed state of the
blessed." But that this argument is unsound we may certainly
convince ourselves.' If any such confirmation actuaUy 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, iraparts no such confirraation ; on the contrary, the most
distinguished doctors openly affirm, that many who have taken
the monastic vow will be subjected to damnation, and no man
of sound mind yyill venture to affirm, that all monks will be
saved. Just as little can we ascribe to parties taking a vow
such a confirmation of the will in what 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 ofa vow, for monks can very easily fall from
¦yirtue and become raost 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.
sec. Quaest. Ixxxviii. Art. 4, Ad primum ergo dicendura, quod sicut non
posse peccare non diminuit libertatem, ita etiam necessitas firmatse
voluntatis in bonura non diminuit libertatera, ut patet in Deo et in
beatis. Et talis est necessitas voti, similitudinem quandam habens cum
confirmatione beatorum.
' Dialog, p. 1 14—124.

FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 115
detestable, that it is proverbially said, " AVhat a monk ventures
to do the devil himself would blush to conceive." Least of all,
however, do we find, in those w-ho 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 aflfirra that this is the case with raonks
who, daily, and in all manner of ways, commit sin and indulge
in the embraces of harlots, more than in spiritual enjoyments
and Divine deUghts, 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 particiUar cases, just as chains and bonds may some
times be serviceable to one who is infirm.
The Soul, starting with another saying of Aquinas,^ 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
diflficult to persevere in what is good. To this, the Spi7it
answers, and most justly, that that is not genuine good which is
done in such a way,' because genuine good can only proceed
from liberty, and liberty receive its direction only from love.
" It is clear," ' he says, " that they, whora it is necessary to cora
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 wUl,
and as that which forms the distinction between the rational
creature and aU 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 Summa contra gentiles.
' Dialog, p. 118—122. ' Dialog, p. 120 and 121.
h2

116 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 iraparts to the
will is greater and stronger than that which is the oflfspring 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 fundaraental 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' 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'' answers,
and draws a distinction between the Baptismal and the Mo
nastic vow. The vow of faith at baptism is essential to salva
tion, as the observance of the comraandraents 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 gr^ce 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 suflfer 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,' 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 frora unbelievers. In order to
this, however, it is requisite that there shall be an Inward sus-
' Dialog, p. 152. 2 Ibid. p. 153 sqq.^
2 Dialog, p. 156.

FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. 117
ceptibility 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 raeasure 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 becorae the ChUdren of God,
it is diflficult to see how any proraise 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
eflfect of harmonizing the huraan will raore corapletely 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' in a vow two
things, the oblation and the obligation (oblatio et obligatio) of
the wiU 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 perforraance of virtuous actions, and
this is not essentially diflferent frora 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 hira who raakes the vow, but is common to
every truly virtuous wiU. The obligation ofthe 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 obHga
tion can be undertaken equally by a sinner and a virtuous person,
no motion of grace takes place, but merely a deterraination 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.'

All this is essentially hostile to vows, shewing, as it does, in
' Dialog, c. 13. p. 159—161.
- 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. Inasrauch, however, as the public
opinion and raoral judgment of the whole Christian worid, 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, raoreover, as the Monastic life had its ultimate and
binding fbundation in the vow, and what the vow imparted, this
controversy was of gi-eat 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 hiraself, as being the
Superior of a raonastic 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 reraarkable way. " The Church" he says,'
" is the mother of believers. In mothers, however, abundance of
affection is raore frequent than strength of intellect,^ and hence
in sorae acts of the Church we may observe more fervour of
piety than light of discretion. Thus it is that the Church mUi
tant, just because she is militant, may sometimes err in insight, but
she never errs in aflfection, for there can be no doubt, that what
ever she ordains for her chUdren, she labours to regulate with
motherly love. And so it is with iheMonastic roti-, which, although
it may not be calculated to confirm the will in that which is good,
may yet afford the opportunity of doing it, for, just as raany 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
' Dialog, c. 14. p. 164 and 165.
' In raatribus autera plus solet abundare affectus, quara vigere intel
lectus.

FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHRISTIANITY. Hy
of something better. Thus the sUence 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 cfrcumstances to be sUent ; 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,' 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.' The wiU, that
gives itself up to a carnal freedora, must sometimes be forcibly
restrained from the works of the flesh, by depri-ying it of the
opportunity of committing them. No doubt this does not trans
form the wUl, 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 wUl 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 thefr vows, not so much to compel
them to do good, as rather thereby to draw from thera a good that
is spontaneous. This is said, not to underrate the ordinance of the
Church, but only to ob-yiate 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, raaking the exigencies of individuals her
own,' studied to provide aU with incentives to piety. With this
view, she has ordained the Monastic vow for the weak and
' Yea, he who does good only under the spur of a vow, from fear of
punishment and without love, rather coraraits sin. Dialog, cap. 22. p.
229, Religiosus faciens actus voti sui, ad quos se obligavit ex timore
poenae, transgressoribus oppositae, nullo eura adjuvante amore justitiae,
peccat. ' Dialog, cap. 15, p. 165 — 171.
' Singulorura necessitates in se transformans.

120 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
unstable, who could not, by means of ordinary institutions, be
brought to the perfect observance of the Gospel law, that they
might be accustoraed by an outward obHgation to live under the
yoke of Gospel freedom. It is, therefore, a very great mistake
in many raonks, 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,' raentioned 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 sorae 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
iraposed, 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 mediseval 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, a7id, those of God, with reference to the
Christian life, and on this subject he says,' The Divine ordi
nances and constitutions are absolutely sufficient for the highest
and raost perfect observance of the Gospel law, and require no
addition. For this reason, the positive constitutions of the
Church, wdiich 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 w ith an empty stomach, and to perform the marriage service
in face of the Church, things which do not add to the truth, but
' vagi et inconstantes. - Dialog, cap. 17. p. 177 — 182.

FACTITIOUS AND GENUINE CHKISTLANITY. 121
merely to the dignity of the Sacraraent. 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 moveraent 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 Monasticvow
how-ever 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 tirae 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
etemal salvation may be earned by outward actions, and without
the aid of grace. It is in point of fact aflfirming 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 stateraents respecting the j
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 aff'ection than prudence, and had drawn a distinction
between its enactraents and the Divine law. In one word, he had
acknowledged the Church's fallibility. To us, at the present tirae,
this may appear a very smaU and unimportant matter, but in that
age, 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-
medieval 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 GOCH.
point of Catholicisra 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 great, and the responsibUity, under existing circumstances,
too serious. Nevertheless he does emit certain hints, and these,
as the dawning rudiments of the thoughts, which afterwards at
the Reforraation ripened into full conviction, are very impor
tant. Here too, not confining himself to mere negation, he exercises
i enqufry and expresses his opinion. In place of simply advancing
1 stateraents contrary to the prevailing doctrines on the subject of
; the Church, he endeavours to ascertain what the Chm'ch reaUy
i is, and to evolve frora general principles the definitions he gives
: of it. At the sarae tirae, the natural affinity ofthe subjects leads
hira 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,
frora which he derives everything, and liberty, which spontaneously
springs frora love, are with hira 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-
I gion of liberty, and if the Church be the manifestation of Chris-
i tianity, then the sarae principle which reigns in Christianity must
i 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
2

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,' in the universal
Catholic Church a consummate perfection, excelling all kinds of
perfection, claimed by self-de-vised modes of religious life,' 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 comrauni- I
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 yyith 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 wiU in Christ. Proportion signi
fies the commensurateness of one thing with another. The
perfection or imperfection, however, of virtue is not measured
hy quantity but by quality. Here the greater is synonymous
with the better. If then the CathoUc 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
conforraed in all things to the wiU 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 aU depends upon faith, work
ing by love, and consequently exercising a liberty begotten of the
spirit, and circumscribed by no bound, are traths which Goch
elsewhere declares and clearly Ulustrates. The chief vocation of .^
' Dialog, cap. 19. p. 196 and 197.
' religionum facticiarum, as they exist in the Monastic orders.

124 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
the Church accordingly consists in appropriati7ig and propagating
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 suprerae 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
enactraents ; but, according to what we have said, these can he
regarded merely as decent outward customs, which contribute
inothing essential either to the completeness or yet to the exe
cution ofthe Gospel law, and only serve to heighten the solemnity
, of ecclesiastical transactions.' Yea, the Church militant, which
1 is not raised above eri^or, 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 iraproveraent.' In
this sense she may even, by vows or other obligations, " compel
them to corae in." In the communion of the Church, however,
a distinction w-ill always have to be drawn between those who
come of their o-wn 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 etemal
salvation, whereas the rest are impelled by the mere stress of obli
gation, and an outward and accidental cause.' Such, however, is
ithe nature ofthe kingdom of heaven that it is 7iot to be filled with
I reluctant subjects, but only with such as, of free choice, follow the
J call ; because that which is truly good can eminate only from
love, and consequently only from liberty, for there is no liberty
i like that of love.*
] In assigning the highest place in the Church to Christ,
I as its Head and Pattern, and in regarding his priesthood as the
• <^^««/ of ^'*'« 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.
' Ibid. cap. 14. p. 164 and 165.
' Ibid. cap. 15. p. 171. — Comp. also the preceding pages 165 — 169.
* Ibid. cap. 17. p. 181 and 182. 1

PRIESTHOOD AND EPISCOPACY. 125
age, at least in its first stadiura, 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 raonarchy of the Pope
was evolved through the raediura 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 becarae 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 frora it was to recognize and
establish the essential equality between the Episcopal and Presby
terial oflBces. It would have been a step still further in advance
to have recognized the unixersal 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-erainence.
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- \
tum 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.' The sacerdotal is the siraply 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 railitant. 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 pattei-n, it belongs to the
' Dialog, cap. 20. p 199 sqq.

126 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
priests to be 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 dit.r, vel sacra dans, vel sac7-amento7'um dispen-
I sator. It is the duty of Priests to preach to God's people the
doctrine of salvation, aiid araidst the perils of this world, to point
out to them, both by the word of truth and a holy example, the
way of life. They are therefore called sacri duces, their oflfice
being to go before us in the paths of righteousness. In like
manner, it is specially incumbent upon them to administer the
sacraraents, 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
i 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
aflfairs of the world and the flesh, and consecrated to the service
of God, he is bound to devote himself whoUy 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 perforraance of his priestly fiinctions. Unquestionably,
1 this high and heavenly purity of raind must be required by him,
because, he who is not himself advanced and perfected, cannot
i advance and perfect others, nor he who is in darkness enlighten
1 them. This last reason is likewise a proof that the priesthood is
the highest rank in the Church militant, and that a Hfe, 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' 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 aU graces, and hence
the sacraraent of the altar is the sacrament of sacraments, and
the consecration of it the highest and noblest act of the Church.
' Dialog, p. 105 sqq.

PRIESTHOOD 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 consumraation and the channels of
grace.' It might here be objected' 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 hira 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 oflfspring either of custom, or ofthe appoint
ment of the Church, which have abstracted fi'om the sacerdotal
order much that was conferred upon it by Divine institution. For
instance, the power of absolution in all important cases (casibus
criminalihus) 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 sarae eflfect
Christ, after his resurrection, said, " Receive ye the Holy Ghost ;
whosoever's sins ye remit, are remitted unto them, and whoso-
' The words of this passage, which are difficult to translate, run as
follows : Ordo sacerdotalis est summus in ecclesia militante ; quia
ipsius est consecrare corpus Christi et sanguinem, in quo est plenitude
omnium gratiarum. Et ideo hoc sacramentura altaris, quod est sacramen
tum sacramentorura, consuramatur in ordine uno, tanquam in fine
ultimo et complete, ut nihil desit ministerio ordinato, quia ipse ordo
est superior aliis et consummativus aliorum omnium ordinum, quare
merito sibi corapetit nolilissimus et summus actus Ecclesiae, qui est
consecrare corpus Christi et sanguinem.
' Dialog, cap. 20. p. 206:

128 THE LIFE OF .TOHN OF GOCH.
over's sins ye retain, they are retained." This plenai-y authority,
however, has been greatly circumscribed by the enactments of
the Church, for many cases are reserved, some to the ordinary'
(Bishop) and others to the apostolical authority (the Pope). But
althougli, 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,' 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
araong 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 em,
which raeans over, and (tkotto'^,^ a watcher, as being one who is
charged with the duty of superintendence. To exercise the
oversight in any comraunity, however, does not exclude him,
whose duty this is, frotn 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 oflfice 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 tiraes used to
live in coramon 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,
1 but, downwards, he holds a rank superior to that of the monk.
' autoritas ordinata. 2 Hjjj^ p 209.
' This expression alao occurs in pure Greek, in the acceptation cf
" spy." No stress is here to be laid on the sort of etymology.

PRlKSTHOOD 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 medieval 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 hostUity to Monachism, he was just as far from sharing the
blind reverence -nith which it was regarded by the multitude.
He makes a decided diflference between the clergyman (clericus)
and the devotee (religiosus), between sacerdotal orders and \
the Monastic vow.' 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 raonk 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 else be a diflference in the perfection of their
respective lives. This diflference, 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,' was
that the Monastic life manifects its superio7ity in the total renun
ciation of property which it involves, whereas the priest, without
injury to his sacerdotal rank, can hoth possess property and legally i
bequeath it. To this objection he answers as follows, "Property
is only possible in respect to temporal things ; for that which is j
etemal and universal belongs to no one in particular. It is,
however, one thing to possess temporal, and another to possess
personal property.' To possess temporal things is a necessity ofl
' Dialog, cap. 20. p. 211 sqq. ' Dialog, cap. 21. p. 213 sqq.
' Comp. here the passages. Dialog, p. 233, 235, and 237. I

130 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
this present life, which cannot otherwise be supported. To possess
personal property is, in respect of the possessor hiraself, unques
tionably a fault of corrupt nature, but, in respect of the entire
huraan race, a raeans 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, by 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 ofthe soul, which
is only to be acquired by the love of thatwhich is Divine. If, there
fore, a priest possess a teraporal estate, and fix upon it his chief
aflfection, he does not possess it, according to the dignity of the
Christian life, for, as even the tonsure intiraates,' 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 ofthe brethren,
he does not thereby undergo any loss of perfection, provided he
keep free the bent of his will, according to the word ofthe Psalmist,
" If riches increase set not your heart upon them." On the other
j hand, the renunciation of property in consequence of his vow,
! cannot promote perfection of life in the member of a reUgious
lorder, unless he keep the bent of his will unfettered by the
desire of temporal possessions,' 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
1 Superior rasura capitis.
' Nee etiam nihil vel proprio vel commmuniter habere, says Goch,
elsewhere (Dialog, cap. 19 p. 192) pertinently, ut faciunt fratres minores,
est summa perfectio 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 perfectio Christianae religionis.

PROPERTY AND PRIVATION. 131
the Lord himself say, " A lich 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 T 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 fiUed 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, w-ho hardly enters into the
kingdom of heaven. On the contrary, the evangelical rich raan is
he who, deUvered from the desire of transitory things, rises with the
entfre 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 enjoyraent of those
which are eternal. The evangelical poor, on the other hand, are
they who, destitute of teraporal things, or, at least, using the
little of them which they possess, yvith affections so loose, as to
escape all the snares which threaten the conscience, aspire with
out impediment or pause to the love of etemal 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 wiU free and unfettered. These are also they of whora 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
ofthe matter, to proraote the Reformation, but without causing any
outward disturbance. To the legality of the dominant Church,)
degenerating often into mere Pharisaism, he opposed the free,!
fiUal, and devoted spirit ofthe Gospel ; to the liberalism of Antino-;
mian principles, the strict obedience and active raoral practice of
1 Dialog, cap. 21. p. 217—222. i2

lH-2 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
Christianity ; to false reliance upon ecclesiastical arftl outward
works of virtue and their raerit, 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, w-here 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 oflfice 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-
i 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 )

PAR T FOUR T H

RELATION OF GOGH

HIS 0 W N A N D 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 befel
him was a literary attack on the part of the Dominican against
whom he wrote the Epistola apologetica. With this single
exception, he 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 i
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 iraproveraent, rauch less than many
of his predecessors and cotemporaries. His writings, so richly j
stored with the elements of the Reformation, were, no doubt, j
at first read only within a confined circle, and by persons ofj
congenial sentiments, who, in place of taking offence, found in

134 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
them plentiful sources of instruction and comfort. That suscep
tible minds of this kind existed at the time, and in no smaU
number in these districts, is evident from many circumstances
in the history of the Brethren of the Comraon Lot, and the
Hves of Wessel, and Erasmus, as was also the case at the first
commencement of the Reformation in the Netherlands. Beyond
his own imraediate 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 deterraining the bent of their
'rainds. 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.^ Notwithstanding of this, however,
Goch's intiraate connexion with the Reforraation 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 due 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 ofthe word Reformatory, that is, the sort
of preparation for the Reformation required by the times, does not,
frora what we have said, appear to adrait 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 asthatof man's sinfulness, and
absolute need of salvation, of Divine grace as the only source of
pardon and the only foundation of good in raan, of faith, and its
inseparable concomitant love, as the fountain of all true morality,
' Walch says in his preface to the Monim. med. jev. vol. i. fasc.^4. p.
xxiv., Num legerit Lutherus libellos Gochianos, dubitandi causa est.
Quamvis enim fieri potuerit, ut in Erfurtensi bibliotheca illi una cura
Wesselii similiumque scriptorum opusculis servarentur ; nullam tamen
unquam a Luthero nostri, niemini, 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 w-ith raore energy and, doubtless, with greater success. He
corabatted the errors of the Schoolraen, of Pelagianisra, and of
Monachisra, which were the basis of the Church's doctrine respect
ing raerit, as they also were of the hierarchy. He asserted the
principle of the fallibility of the Church, and frora that position,
contested raany 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 prevaUing 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 frora many pernicious and deeply-rooted priestly fie- ;
tions, and from the institutions based upon these, and to bring it |
back to the simplicity and purity of the Apostolic faith.' If all this ;
was not to promote the Reformation, it would be diflficult to say to
what else that language can be applied. Much speaking about
the matter was not absolutely requisite, and was likewise foreign
' Walch 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 sacrara unicum esse rerum creden-
darmu fontem unicaraque regul ara, ad quara patrura aliorumque doc
torum opiniones sint dijudicandae. II. Impium esse et pelagianam
haeresin revocare, qui credat, naturales vires liberi arbitrii sine auxilio
gratiae ad internae et externae pietatis opus sufficere. III. Peccare,
qui variis cultus extemi partibus, immo f6e\o6pr]a-K(ias generibus et exer
citiis corporis virtutem christianara absolvi putant omnique erga alios
carent amore. IV. Ecclesiam posse errare. V. Doctrinam Thomae de
votis monasticis eoruraque virtute esse erroneam sibique contrariam. VI.
Praedestinationera non ponere impossibilitatem peccandi, sed impossi-
bUitatem 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, nou esse jure divino constitutum,
sed ab ecclesia injuria introductum. IX. Paupertatera evangelicam non
requirere, ut quis nihil possideat, sed ut animum a niraio divitiaruni
amore revocet : hinc fictara raonasticam paupertatera legibus Christi
esse contrariam.

136 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
to Goch'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-
Imation, heyet unquestionably exercised a most important influence
Iupon those immediately around him, as well as upon several who,
in their turn and in the same way, stirred up others. He w-as
Ithe commencement of a Refo7'matory 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 frora after tiraes, in the efforts that were raade for
the discovery and publication of his writings, and in the interest
awakened by such of thera as were actually published.
And here in particular we have to raention a raan, who wiis
eminently serviceable in spreading his works and doctrines, but
who, being of a keener temperament than their author, involved
hiraself thereby in trouble. We speak of Cornelius Grapheus (Scri-
bonius, or in the common dialect, Schryver) born in 1482 at Alost
(Aelst) in Flanders,' and a person distinguished in many ways.'
He was secretary to the city of Antwerp, but at the same tirae emi
nent in the arts and sciences, a historian, orator, poet, and musician,
master of several languages, and on terms of intiraate 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 tirae of the diet
at Worras, Grapheus published Goch's book. On the liberty of
the Christian religion, with a very spirited preface. By the spread
' Alostanus Flander in Gerdes.
- 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 Scriniura Antiquarium sive Miscellanea Groningana. Gron. et
Brem. 1756. Tora. 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 Biblioth. Belg. T. i. p. 201.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 137
of the work itself, and especially bythe 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 oflfice, and
imprisoned at Brussels. His confinement was of considerable du
ration. During the course of it, he addressed an Epistle to John
CarondUetus' 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 Httle 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 frora 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 Reforraation,
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 vouno- 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
Eeformation, 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 affai7-s
of the Church and of Christianity. After shewing how believers
' 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 terras the state into -which the Christianity of the middle
ages had sunk, " We have declined from Cli7ist to Moses, and
backslidden from Moses to Pharaoh. We have rejected the light
food of evangelical liberty, and frora the quietness ofthe 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 aU 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, frora eamest pijty to cold ceremo-
niaUsnV-from Christ to Moses7 f^'ornTilie 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 becorae a despic
able race, no longer a royal priesthood, we have becorae a vulgar
folk. Once we w-ere 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 ofthe earthly
Adam, and prefer taking our name frora 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-rainded, purely and freely instructed in the word of
God, now we are vexed and deluded \\\t\\ controversies, and

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 139
sophisras, 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
things, 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
oflSce, and enter otherwise than by the door. Nor is even that
sufificient. Ignorant hfrelings, 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
stdl more the work of God, and in place of the Gospel and the
doctrine of Paul, inculcate dreams of their own, and coramend to
the people their subtUe, enlightened, holy, seraphic, hierarchical,
invincible, and most profound doctors, their suras (summulas),
canons, and laws, their Aristotle and Master of Sentences. . .
. . Once the doctrine of Christ was coramon to all promiscu
ously, the only exception being that woraen were not aUowed to
speak in public ; now, however, our raasters, licentiates, and
bachelors, our haughty Thoraists, 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
subtUe Scotus, or the unanswerable Alexander of Hales ; they

140 THE LIFE OF JOUN OF GOCH.
cannot even form a syllogism; they are but painters, poets,
orators,' 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
whora he taught his Divine philosophy 1 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 aU flesh.' Where are laymen here excluded?
Or perhaps is the Spirit of God extinct ? Is it no longer com
petent to do what it then did ? Much do I wish that Christ's
philosophy, being common to all, were Hkewise 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 hiraself, and by the
preparation of the spirit (per spiritus promptitudinem) he 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 raight 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 AVord of God to their own gain. But I shall not be
restrained by them frora 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,
' Grapheus here manifestly alludes to himself, and to what wa?
currently said of hira among the clergy. 1

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 aflfection 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 puflf up but do not edify, who
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'
to another smaller work of Goch, viz., the Epistola Apologetica,
which he seems to have subsequently' edited. This preface is
dedicated to the priest and doctor, Nicolaus von Herzogenbusch,^
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 Thi* is printed in Walch Monim. med. aev. vol ii. fasc. 1. Praef.
p. xii. — xvii.
' The preface is, without assignation of the year, merely dated Ant-
werpiae X. Calend. Sept.
3 With the predicate, verae christianae theologicae candidato, acade
miae Antwerpiensis moderatori vigilantissimo.

142 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH
that even the last century, agreeing with us, had diverged so freely
from the Scholastic phUosophy, 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 subtUties 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 sarae class almost to the Gospel
itself, who ascribe more weight to their dreaming little doctors
(doctoirulis) 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 flaraes, whatever does not smack
of thefr 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." Grapheus
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 phUosophy 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 wUl with honest minds embrace
the pure doctrine of Christ, drawn from the wells of Holy Scrip
ture, and not fi-om the marshy puddles of Thomas or Aris
totle. That is what we honour and will endeavour to restore,
whUe with the warmest sympathy of Christian aflfection, 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 adrafrer of the works of Goch, and has left us
a letter on those of thera that survive.' This letter was evidently
' The letter is printed in Walch Monim. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4.
Praefat. xxxi. — xxxiii.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 143
w-ritten subsequently to the fore-raentioned prefaces of Grapheus,
for it alludes to sorae 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 ofthe 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 stUl acquainted with the particulars
of his Hfe, either from personal knowledge or direct tradition.'
This shows, on the one hand, that the impression raade 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 letter 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 doubtfiil question respecting Monachism and the
worth of vows, inasmuch as he does not reject and condemn the
whole system, but only seeks to lop oflf 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 suflficiently
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.' At the
same time it would be high presumption were any one so inflated

' . . .id quod testantur, qui etiamnum vivunt apud Mech
linienses, Gochianae vitae et status probe gnari.

144 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
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 loncf after this Epistle was written, we find a brief histori
cal sketch of Goch and his labours, in the well know-n Catalogue
of the Witnesses of the truth prior to the Reformation, by Mat
thias Flacius, which was first published at Basle in 155G. Here'
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 Thoraas, Albert, and other
sophists, being derived frora the rauddy 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 raust be subjected
even the decrees of Popes and Councils. He w-holly 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, andnot by any
deserts of our own. He says that sin still cleaves to good men,
but that it is forgiven to thera 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
' Catalog. Test, verit. lib. xix. tom. ii.p. 887. edit. Lugdun. Comp.
Walchii Monini. med. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4. Praefat. p. xix.

OPINIONS RESPECTING 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
ofthe most learned promoters ofthe 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
foUowing centuries by the historians of literature, or of the Re
formation. Conrad Gesner, in his Universal Library,' gives a
catalogue of his writings \vith a few extracts. Henry Pantaleon,^
in his Sketch of the illustrious men of Germany, makes honour
able mention of hira as a raost learned and pious man, and suc
cinctly repeats what is said by Flacius. Von der Hardt^ gives a
summary of his w-ritings. Lewis of Seckendo7f, in his celebrated
History of Lutheranism, alludes to him in a cursory manner,*
but forms a just estimate of his value as a distinguished pioneer
ofthe Reformation. Gerius, in his Appendix to Cave's History
of Ecclesiastical Authors,* coraraends Goch, calls him the friend
1 Biblioth. univers. Tigur. MDXLV. p. 442.
' Prosopographia Heroura atque Ulustr. viror. totius Germaniae.
Basil. 1565. p. 461.
3 Antiqua literar. moniraenta autographa Lutheri alioruraque a')
anno 1517 usque ad annura 1546. Helrasc. 1690. sqq. t. ii. p. 76.
* Historia Lutheranisrai. Francof. et Lips. 1692. Lib. i. sect. 54. §
133. Supplement ad indie, i. nura. 30. Seckendorf denies any outward
connection of Luther with Goch, and contends only for a congeniality
of spirit. He derived his knowledge of Goch frora the Catalog.
BibUoth. Rudolph, tora. u. p. 77 sqq.
¦5 Cave Hist. Lit. vol. ii. Append, p. 187. ed. Basil. 1745. K

146 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
of Wessel, 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,^ Guicciardini,^ Van
Gestel,* and the two learned Dutchmen, Daniel and David
Clemens Gerdes?
The most of these writers were Protestants, and speak of Goch
in laudatory terras. It is natural, that as the obverse of the high
estimation in which he was held by thera, we should find him re
pudiated by the Catholic Church and its merabers.^ 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.' Van Gestel, at the least, says nothing in his
favour, and Foppens rauch that is decidedly of an opposite
character. His words are : " John Pupper was a fiiend of Wessel
of Groningen, and a priest of some learning, but fond of innovar
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."*
This treatment on the part of the Catholics araounts to a valuable
testimony in favour of Goch's character as a Reformer.
' Biblioth. Lat. raed. et. inf. aetat. Lib. ix. t. iv. p. 228.
' Biblioth. Belg. Bruxell. 1739. t. ii. p. 714. 715.
3 Description de tous les Pais-bas. Arnh. 1613. p. 214.
* Hist. Archiep. Mechlin. 1725. p. 81. See above.
5 Daniel Gerdes in Serin, antiquar. sive Miscellan. Groning. t. v.
Pars 1. p. 497. not. 6. Groning. et Brera. 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
nim. med. aev. ii. 1. p. Iv. — xii.
6 Dav. Clera. 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 etk iletris avec tant de severite, si Ton se donne la peine d'en Ure quel
ques feuillets, puisqu'on y remarquera une Uberte de "penser qui ne pou-
voit etre que prejudlciable aux opimons regues dans I'eglise avant la
reforrae. 7 Walch raonira. raed. aev. i. 4. Praef. p. xxv. Walch quotes all
the passages in which the narae of Goch is raentioned in the various
editions of the Index libr. prohib. Cologne 1597, p. 26 Paris 1599.
p. 159. Madrid 1583. p. 40. Rora. 1664. p. 260.
* Foppens Biblioth. belg. t. ii. p. 715.

OPINIONS RESPECriNG G(H!H. 147
More recently, however. Christian Will. Fran. 11 aZc/t lias ren
dered the most important services to Goch and his writings. Two
ofthe most valuable of these, he has reprinted in his Moniraenta
Medii ^'Evi, and in prefaces to thein,' has erabraced the oppor
tunity of expatiating upon their author. He justly discrimi
nates' 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 Chm-ch, but as the latter were fewer in number, they and
thefr writings have a proportionally stronger claira 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 Sclwoeckh and Gieseler.
The former^ gives a summary ofthe contents of the work on the
Four errors touching the Gospel law. The latter* associates him
with John of Wesel, and the still more profound John Wessel, as
the leading champions ofthe 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 vfrtue, and he gives well-selected and cha
racteristic extracts from his works as reprinted in the collections
of Walch.* With these exceptions, however, which ought to be
gratefiiUy acknowledged, modern writers have unduly neglected
Goch, so that hitherto not only has no separate work been
' Monira. raed. aev. Goetting. 1760. vol. i. fasc. 4. Praef. p. xiii. —
xxxvii., and vol. ii. fasc. 1. Praef. p. ii- — xxiv.
' Vol. i. fasc. 4. Praef. p. xxxiv.
3 Christi. Kirchengesch. Th. 33, s. 303—308.
* Lehrbuch der K. Gesch. B. 2. Abth. 4. s- 488—492.
^ Goch's principal work on Christian liberty appears not to have been
accessible to Gieseler. K 2

148 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
devoted to him, but he has even been passed in sUence in works
where some notice of him might justly have been expected.'

CHAPTER SECOND.
goch's writings. THEIR VARIOUS EDITIONS.
As he did not cause any imraediate sensation during his life
time, and as for half a century his works existed raerely in raanu
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 corapare 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
raaterial. 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 meraber of a Church in many respects corrupted,
served to confirm him. With all his depth, vigour, and acute
ness of raind, it is impossible to overlook a certain sameness. A
few leading thoughts have dorainion over him, and under various
forras are constantly recurring in his writings. They relate to
the norraal 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 oflfspring of love, and to the
conditional value of all ecclesiastical works and obUgations, espe
cially ofthe Monastic vow. It is probable that Gochhad 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 coraplete and comprehensive form. This
' e.g. in Henke's Gesch. der christi. Kirche. B. 2. s. 517, der 5ten
Ausgabe, in Erhard's Gesch. des Wiederaufbl ii hens 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
heen of substantially the same import ; nay it would seem
that the topics of them were Ukewise 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 do-wn 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 coraplete
view of his religious and theological opinions. What we have
most to lament is the loss of a Ti^eatise 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
diflficulty in inferring what his convictions respecting the ever
lasting life really were.
In noticing Goch's writings,' we comraence with those which
are the most authentic, and which still survive. No doubt
attaches to the disquisitions, De Libertate Christianae Religionis,
and De quatuor Erroribus circa Legem Evangelicam, or to the
Epistola Apologetica, declarans quid de Scholasticorum, seriptis 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

' 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. monim. 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 ofthe 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 sarae mind, and that such a mind as tradition
must lead us to infer Go(;h'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 inforraation is the Letter of the
anonymous writer, who probably between 1520 and 1530, or
certainly not rauch 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 tbe treatises De
Libertate Christiana and De quatuor Eri'oribus, 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,' and Walch
also possessed other manuscripts under Goch's name, entitled De
Gi'citia et Libe7'o Arbitrio and De Gratia et Christiana Fide,
which it w-as his intention to have published.'
At an early period catalogues also were made of his writings.
Gesne7''s^ contains the following : Epistola apologetica adv. quen
dam Praedie. Ord. — Dialogus de quat. erroribus ci7'ca legem evan-
gelica7n e.vortis, — De votis et religionibus factitiis, sive de libertate
Christianae religionis conclusiones novem, — Insunt item huic operi
fragmenta quaedam : de gratia et meiitis, de fide et operibus, de
perfectione legis evangelicae, — De libertate Chiistiana.
' Dialog, de quat. errorib. cap. 17. p. 180 : . . . quod Thoraistae
affirmant omnino negamus, immo falsum esse et haeresi Pelagianae
vieinum dicimus, quod partim superius, partim alias copiosis et efficaci-
bus autoritatibus et rationibus declaraviraus.
' Monira. raed. aev. vol. i. fasc. 4. Praefat. p. xxx. Praeter dialogum
ejusque additamenta nihil ad raanus meas pervenit, e.x;ceptis 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 raerita
operum 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.

GOCH S WRITINGS. 151
Fabricuis' enumerates them thus : De S. Scripturae dignitate
et irrefragabili auctoritate, et quo judicio aliorum scripta, prae-
serti7n Scholasticorum et Philosophorum legenda sint, ad En
gelbertum Ord. Praed. — De quat. error, circa leg. evang. exortis. —
De votis et religionibus factitiis sive de libe7'tate Christianae reli
gionis, conclusiones novei?).
Foppens' gives us the following list which is the most complete :
De libertate Christianae religio7iis.
De gratia etfide.
De Scripturae sacrae dignitate.
De Scholasticorum seriptis.
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
concemed, may be identified with those which we still possess.
The one De Gratia et Fide can scarcely have been different frora
the essays found bythe anonymous person on the subject J9e Gratia
et Meritis and De Fide et Ope7ibus, or from that possessed by
Walch,Z>e Gratiaet Christiana Fide, and can hardly have contained
much important matter which is not still to be found in the book
De Libertate Christiana. The two treatises, De Scripturae sacrae
dig7iitate, and De Scholasticorum seriptis, are in like raanner, 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, De Libertate Christiana;
while the disquisition De votis et obligationibus may have been,
and as the statement of T'abricius shews, probably was, identi
cal with that work De Libertate Christia7ia, or more probably, as
shown by Gesner and Foppens, with the Dialogus de quatuor
Erroribus. This too bore the title, Et de votis et 7-eligionibus
' Bibfioth. lat. med. et inf. aet. Lib. ix. t. iv. p. 228.
2 Biblioth. belg. t. ii. p. 714 and 1.'').

\'y2 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF GOCH.
tacticiis, 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 w-ork 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 Z>e quatuor Errori
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.' 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 fii'st the Book upon Christian liberty. The 07ily edition,
so far as is known to me, of this work, was brought out by Cor-
Letter of Grapheus in Walch Monini. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1.
Praef. p. xii. xiii.

goch's WRITINGS. 153
nelius Grapheus, at Antwerp 1521, in a medium form' between
quarto and octavo. The title, ornamented with wood cuts, runs
as follows : —
DE LIBER
TATE CHRISTIANA
prestantissimi Viri, Did loan
nis Pupperi Gocchiani.
Hic videre licebit De vario et multiplici intel
lectu sacrae scripturae,
De libertate voluntatis et ei? opationibus,
De eo in quo sit meritum humani operis,
De voto religionis longe aliter g Thomas
aliiq ; scholastici tractarunt.
Introspice hospes, nam et hic dij sunt.
An. D. XXI. Mensis Martii.
CUM GRATIA et PRIVILEGIO.
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 ChristianonataliMDXXI.
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 Tliabor, and occupies 124 leaves
or 247 pages. At the close there stands
FINIS HORUM,
Relicqua desyderamus.
Antverpiae per Michaelem Hillenium,
in intersignio Rapi.
' Gesner also probably alludes to this edition, when he says, De
libert. Christiana, liber impressus, sed ab auctore, ut videtur, non ab
solutus.

154 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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,' I have thus fully
described, exists in the Library kept in the hall of the great
Church at Emden.'
Of the Dialogus de quatuor erroribus circa legem evangelicam
exortis et de votis et religionibus facticiis, the second in rank of
Goch's ti-eatises, 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.'
This, however, he afterwards discovered to be a mistake. He
leamed from Von der Hardt and others,* 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 leamed manner, Walch makes for himself, may be read
in the preface to the first Fasciculus of the second part of
the Monimenta Med. yEvi, 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 raust be assigned to the sarae period as the one afready
' Dan. Gerdes styles the writings of Goch in general libros rarissimos;
Dav. Clemen. Gerdes, although he employed himself zealously in the
search of thera, could not obtain a sight of the book de Ubert. christ.
Walch. Monira. ii. 1. Praef. p. x. Few raoderns have ever seen it.
' Catalogue of all the books in the library of the great church at
Emden 1836. Erstes Heft : Theologie S. 45. Nura. 193. The library
contains various works on Church history, especially the history of
the Reforraed churches, as well as of the Reforraation in general.
3 Monim. raed. aev. i. 4. Praef. p. xxx. : Accedo ad dialogura, quem
primura in conspectura doctorum a me proferri, mihi persuadee.
* 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. — Saramlungen von alten und neuen Theol. Sachen,
1736. s. 499. Catalogue des livres iraprimes 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 Christia7ia, and there
fore at the commencement of the third decennium of the 16th
century. Tlie third work of Goch, which exists in print, is the Epistola
Apologetica, declarans, quid de Scholastico7'um seriptis et religioso
rum votis et obligationibus sit censendum et tenendum. It is also
contained in Walch,^ 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 Gocliii, Presbyteri, praefecti monialibus monasterii in
Thabor celeberrimi oppidi Mechliniensis in Brabantia adversus
quendam praedicatorii 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' the preface
which Grapheus wrote to this Httle 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 f " 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 comer 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.

' Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. i. p. 1 — 24.
' Ibid. Praefat. p. xii. — xvii.
'' . . . idque pervetusto charactere 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 De
quatuor Erroribus, and finally in March 1521, the work De 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 frora 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,^ Dav. Clemens Gerdes,^ and Walch^ all
raention it, and Gerdes had even the printed copy in his hands.
The title is : Indivince gratice et Christiance fidei commendationem,
contra falsam et Pharisaicam multorum de justitiis et meritis
operum doctrinam, et gloriatioriem, 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, quce hoc opusculo continentur, folio sequenti, lector,
reperies. Ad Roma. X ignorantes dei justitiam et suam quaerentes
statuere, justitice dei non sunt subjecti. The copy which Gerdes
had in his hand was printed forma secunda without assignation
of the year. The Parisian catalogue raentions 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.
' Autogr. Luth. vol. u. p. 76.
' Biblioth. cur. t. ix. p. 164.
' Monim. raed. aev. ii. 1. Praef. p. x.

goch's WRITINGS. 157
In fine, Von der Hardt^ states that fragments of Goch's trea
tises Z)e jfj-aiza 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.
' 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.

I scorn the Pope, the Church, and Councils, and I extol Christ ; let his Word dwell in us
richly.— John of Wesei,, in a sermon at Worms.

INTRODUCTION.

THE CHURCH OF THE WEST, AND IN PARTICULAR OF GERMANY,
IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY.

In John of Goch we have made the acquaintance of a Theo
logian, who, being of a predorainantly reflective nature, devoted
himself almost exclusively to the contemplation of the raore in
ward condition of the Christian bodj-, traced the deep roots of
its corruption, and pondered upon the reraedies 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 tum of mind, and who, i
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 iraprove- i
ment. At the same time, ha-ying been born upon the Phine, and
ha'ving 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, \\-itliout taking into account the
state of the Church with which he was connected, he will
thus becorae our guide to a fuller acquaintance -with the eccle
siastical affairs ofthat country.
It isnot to subjects of science or of doctrine that our attention
wUl here be called, but rather to the constitution of the Church.
The task and labour of our forefathers, tUl the time of the Eefor
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
L

162 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
the depths of the spirit, and was pursued by men of a contem
plative nature ; the other was more outward, with appUcation to
life, and was taken by men of an active tum. The inward prac-
, tical direction produced the Theology of experience or Mysti-
t-isra, which, while the cultivation of Logic in the Schools
'chiefly occupied the Eomanic nations, nourished and satisfied
the German heart, and especiaUy in the 15th century, after the
decHne of Scholasticism carae to be sensibly felt, manifested
itself more and more victorious, and influential for the future,
as the " 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 Gerraany and Eorae, we find a raultitude 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 uuion 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
ofthe 15tli 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 tiraes, 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 frora 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

AVESTERN 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-
lo\-ingian era, and during the whole course of German history.
The Empfre evolved itself by the side of the Papacy, and the
Papacy siraultaneously with the Erapire. Each presupposes the
other. Thefr rautual relation and reciprocal influence constitute
the great heart throbs in all the transactions of the raiddle 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 Eome. At the time when Christianitj^ was
successfuUy spread between the Ehine and the Elbe, the Bishop
of Eome 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 raonasteries, who felt the irapulse to carry the
Gospel to their kinsraen on the contment, betook themselves,
with few exceptions, to Eome, 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 Eome was the centre. The same deep devotion with
which they erabraced Christianity, the Gerraans likewise paid to
the visible head of the Church. No nation was ever more sub
missive to the Eomish 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
scandaUzed by the secularized hierarchy, no nation ever waged
with Eome a more angry, persevering, and general war.
The superior authority of the Eoman Bishop among the
Western nations was founded upon a variety of traditional
grounds. The cause, however, which was chiefly instrumental
in buUding up the politico-ecclesiastical power of the Papacy,
was the connexion of the Eomish chair with the Carlovingian l2

164 THE LIFE OP 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
jiower, and, on the other, upon the sanction of the Eomish
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 Eomish 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.'
Frora that tirae, the most intiraate alliance was forraed between
the Eomish chair and the new dynasty, as the powers aspir
ing to the dominion of Europe. It was again a bishop of Eorae
by the word of whose mouth the Western Empire, then practi
cally extinct, was transferred to one who had sufificient strength
to uphold it, -viz., Charlemagne, and Charlemagne, in his turn,
elevated the Eoman Bishop to the rank of a gi-eat and wealthy
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 iraportant
position, closely connected with the life of the State, as is proved
by the Capitularies which relate to ecclesiastical matters. The
comraanding spirit of this monarch, however, repressed every
attempt on the part of the clergy at intrusion into tbe civil
domain, and endeavoured rather to guide them back to their
apostolic vocation.^ He also kept his strong hand over Eome,
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 : AHus Romanus Pontifex Regem
Francorum, non tam pro suis iniquitatibus, quam pro eo, quod tantae
potestati non erat utilis, a regno deposuit et Pipinum Caroli M. Impe
ratoris patrem in ejus loco substituit, omnesqne Francigenas a jura
mento tidelitatis, quod illi fecerant, absolvit.
2 Comp. especially the very characteristic 2d Capitulary of A.D 811.
T. 1. 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 Eome, 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
Eomish Bishop. Circumstances were peculiarly favourable forthe
introduction ofthis notion. The posterity of Charlemagne lacked
their great ancestor's genius for government, and even under Louis
the Pious, the Bishop of Eome could aspire to settle the dispute
between the Eraperor and his rebellious sons, by asserting the
principle, that the rule of the Pope over the souls of raen is
superior to the temporal dominion of the Monarch. It is true,
that Lothario atterapted to recover the iraperial privileges. The
canonical election of the Pope was to be ratified by the Emperor,
to whom also the Eomans were to swear allegiance ;' But Popes
were consecrated before the sanction of the Emperorwas obtained,
and his sway at Eome 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, Gerraany becarae the centre of all politico-ecclesias-
' " I proraise," such is the form of the oath, " that I wiU be faithful
and obedient all ray life to the Emperors Louia and Lothario, yet without
prejudice to the oath by which 1 am already bound to my Lord the
Pope."

166 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
tical afiairs ; whereas in France, as we have observed, the culti
vation of science becarae the chief interest. Under the great
Saxon Eraperors, Henry I. and Otho I., the foundations of the
stabUity and order ofthe Gerraan Erapire were laid. In the elec
tion of these Eraperors, 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 frora 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
predorainating 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 oflfices, and even
several of the Popes had been raised by his good pleasure to the
Eomish chair. On its becoming vacant in 1048, an embassy
from Eorae had supplicated hira to appoint a person to fill it,
when he selected the Bishop of Toul.' In the reign of this
Pope, Leo IX., a monk from the monastery of Clugny arrived at
Eome, and under several of his successors, prosecuted a powerful
reaction in favour ofthe Papal authority, until at length as Gre
gory VII. he completed the work.
The Papacy, afready 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
' A man -ivho was related to him by the mother's side.

GROWTH AND BLOSSOM OF THE HIERARCHY. 107
the life time of the stern and resolute Henry IIL' 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 were promulgated against simony, and zealous endeavours
made for a reformation of the morals of the clergy, and a con
sequent increase of their respectabUity 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 with 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 vn., and allowed his imperatorial energy, now in arras
agaiust him, to acquire an iraraeasurable ascendancy. The con
flicts betwixt the two are well known. Gregory, after great
triuraphs, died in exile, and Henry, crowned at Eome 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
vnth the most powerful tendencies in the progress of society;
and when he fled from Eorae, they took possession of the world.''
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 irapossi-
bUity. It behoved that one should predorainate, and as the
Papacy had hitherto been dependent on the Empire, their rela
tion was henceforward to be reversed, the temporal was to serve,
' 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 Ranke in his excellent, Deutschen Gescliichte im
Zeitalter d"'' 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
coraraissioned 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 coramon spfrit which ventured to devise,
and carry it into effect. Human nature, however, is insuflficient
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 teraporal sword, and inspiring the dread of a higher power,
a bulwark of public freedora. Such was in fact the position
occupied by the Popes, when they understood their vocation.
Moreover, the Papacy was better adapted, than any raere poUtical
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 cHscipline. If Christianity was destined
once more to become a law to tbe rude nations, and gradually to
train thera for the enjoyraent 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 oflfice 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 ofthe Popes. But times changed, and the Papacy
did not restrain itself within due bounds. Eaised to a still loftier
height by the general coraraotion 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 Eoraan 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. 169
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 ;' and alas for him when he did otherwise ! Upon this
pinnacle of theocratic glory we behold Innocent IIL, artd several
more both of his predecessors and successors. Entangling itself,
however, -ndth politics and temporalities, the Papacy fell from its
moral and patriarchal dignity, and by degrees became thoroughly
secularised.^ The Pope, origmally the protector of the persecuted,
became more and more a persecutor himself. In place of uniting
the nations, he irritated thera against each other, and sowed dis
cord between subjects and their rulers. His iraportance as an
educator vanished with the growth of national civilization and
independence. The pupil advanced while the raaster reraained
belund, 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
' Thoughts, which run through the whole middle ages, but in par
ticular are openly avouched in the well-known Bull Unam Sanctam of
Boniface VIIL
2 This cannot be more beautifully expressed than in the words of
the subhme Poet of the mediseval 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 I-IFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
society, which, in some instances, were hostUe to the Church.
The more imperious the Papacy outwardly appeared, the more
rapidly and surely it hastened to its fall.

2. THE DECLINE OF THE PAPACY.
Boniface VIII. forms a turning point. Proud and daring
above aU other Popes, he endured worse humiUation 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. PhiHp 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
degree a mere instruraent of the policy of France. The Gibel
lines, the charapions of the Erapire, arose more boldly than ever,
and taught men, by Scripture and example, to resist the Papal
decrees.' 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 aUenated from it the minds of all well-dis
posed and inteUigent raen. It applied itself to the acquisition
of wealth. A systera 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 he
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
' 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 Papacv.

DECLINE OF THE PAPACY. 171
the Pope, immediately be acknowledged Emperor.' 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, aud 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.
StUl 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 mutuaUy attacking, excommunicating, reviUng, 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
ofthe 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 Chm-ch,
required to possess an unliraited and supreme judicial and legis
lative authority. Such an authority was, in fact, vindicated for
them, by the most inteUigent 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,^ should be committed the task of its reformation,
both in its head and members. All seemed to proraise that a
' Ranke, deutsche Gesch. ira Zeitalter der Reforraation. Th. i. s.
45 ff.
^ There are in von der Hardt T. iv. p. 86 and 96 several decrees ofthe
Ecclesiastical Synod of Constancii which are classcial in this respect.
They were passed in Sess. quart, ofthe SOth March 1415 and in Sess.

172 LIFE OF JOHN OF -WESEL.
coraplete 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 secm-ed, it did not swerve a
foot's breadth, and by violent raeasures succeeded in keeping
down the opposition raised by the advocates of the representar
tative systera. 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 thera from different points of view set up systems of
their own respecting the Papacy, the old party, the so-caUed 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 TIIE RIVAL
SYSTEMS.
The Papal system contemplated the Pope as the rightful Lord
and ISIonarch of the whole world, fi-ora 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,' founding upon the notion of a vice-
quint, of the 6th April of the sarae year, and confirm the authority of
Councils as supreme in the Church. The sarae may be said of the
decree Frequens of the 9th Oct. 1417 in von der Hardt T. iv. p. 1435,
which enjoins their stated recurrence. Comp. also the Decrees T. i.
p 650.
1 The advocates of this opinion are Johannes de Turrecremata, Magi
ster S. Palatii, a Dorainican, who took an active pan in the Councils of
Basle and Florence, and died as cardinal in the year 1468. See his
Suinraa de Ecclesia et ejus auctoritate Lib. iv. esp. Lib. i. de Potestate
Papali and Lib. iii. de Conciliis. Rodericus Sancius, Bishop of Zamora
and papal Referendary, in the Speculum vitae humanae, edited Rome

THE PAPACY ACCORDING TO THE RIVAL SYSTEMS. 1 73
gerency ofthe Divine Being, on this lower world, and of its being
committed to the Pope, affirmed thatthere 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 teraporal and spiritual autho
rities are conjoined. He stands at the suramit of both,' 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 thera, and gives validity
to their decrees. There can therefore be no appeal frora the
Pope to a Council, but there raay be an appeal from a Council
to the Pope. He has the right to reject, to cashier and excom
municate Councils, which have caused raischief 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, raore particularly the 2d Book. Dorainicus Vene
tus, Bishop of Brixen in 1475, in his work de Cardinaliura legitiraa
creatione, and in other treatises, printed in Marci Antonii de Dorainis
de republica eccles. T. i. Theodoras Laelius, Bishop of Feltre, in his
controversial paraphlet against Gregory of Heiraburg, Pro Pio Papa ii.
et sede Romana, in Goldast Monarch. S. Rom. Imp. T. ii. p. 1595.
There are extracts from the three above-raentioned authors in Gieseler
ii. 4. s. 218 seq. The sequel will contain further notices of Theodorus
Laelius. ' Utriusque potestatis apicem tenet says Turrecremata.

174 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
for it is proper that that Church, which is the corner-stone of all
the rest, should be Di-yinely endowed with the peculiar gift of
infallibility. The Representative, or as it is also called, the Monarchic-
aiistocratical, system offers a decided antithesis to most of these
averments.' 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
frora 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 suprerae govemment 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.^
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 CouncUs. 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
Spfrit. The Pope, being a fallible man,' may err and abuse his
power to the Church's detriment. There must therefore exist
' It was defended by the Councils of Constance and Basle, and by a
succession of distinguished Theologians, among whom the French
occupy the foreraost rank, but which contains also Dutchmen and
even Italians. Its raost 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
raust place Nicolaus von Cusa, who afterwards becarae a convert to the
Papacy. His work is entitled, De Concordantia cathoi. Lib. ii. iii. in
Schardii Syntagraa tractatuura, p. 356. There are nuraerous Treafises
on the subject in Von der Hardt's Hist. Concil. Constant. We shall
ourselves afterwards notice several men of thi.s school. See extracts in
Gieseler ii. 4, S. 209 ff.
2 caput ministeriale, the highest servant.
^ homo peccabilis.

THE PAPACY .V.CCORDING 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 raay 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 aU 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 e-vident 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
modem 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 cliief 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.

176 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
He is at every moment exalted above it, and wields over it an
unliraited control. The representative system gives the Pope a
position consonant with the real nature of things. It looks upon
him as a huinan being subject to error and sin. It makes him the
Church's creature, and not the Church his. It considers him
as existins for the Church's sake, and not the Church as
existing for his, and subordinates him as a meinber, the highest
but StUl a ministerial meraber, 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 REALLY AVAS 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
Eoman 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 reconcUe the more matured minds of men
with an authority aristocratic in its nature, but at the same
time wielded ^^-ith a paternal spirit, and an eye to the inte
rests of the Chm-ch. Scarcely had the iUustrious 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 ofthe Alps. With a show of courtesy, he by no means
reftised that reforraation of the Church in its head and raerabers,
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 irarae
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 w^ith the highest eccle-
siastical authority, forbade at once all appeals frora Popes
to General Councils, and used every effort to liberate the
Papac}- 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 raiser. The ecclesiastical
Council which, after raany 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 cf
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
IIL, 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 bis main object to resist and
crush the efforts at reforra, and during his reign, (Nicolaus f 1445)
we hear eai-nest raen uttering bitter and despairing complaints
of the hopelessness of thoroughly remodelUng 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 1464), a man of splendid talents,
and highly accomplished in science, of large experience and libe
ral views in life, and capable of accoraplishing the greatest enter
prises, if his genius had only been seconded by a corresponding
character. Once the leader of the raoveraent for reform, Pius IL,
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 soleran 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 Eomish 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 -svith 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 IStII CENTURY. 179
instance that of Gregory of Heimburg. The bull of retrac
tation, dated 1463, by which, comparing himself with Augustine,
he condemned his foi-mer sentiments and views, could not obviate
the doubts entertained respecting him, and served rather to excite
indignation, than tq reconcile the contradictions which his life
displayed. In this manner, Pius II. disappeared, like a phantom
(-j- 1464), and notwithstanding the vast resources of his mind,
was not successful in effecting a new creation. His successor,
Paul IL, a zealous persecutor ofthe 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 Eomish 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 Eomish court, especially of the conclave, while
they served to degrade the Papacy still deeper in public opinion.
Sixtus LV. (1471 — 84) strove for alraost nothing but the aggran-
dizeraent 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 hira frora
contempt. Innocent VIIL, addicted to the same vice of nepot
ism, and ind-uced by the number of his posterity to practice it
to a StUl 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 (-}- 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
havebeeu, 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
m2

] 80 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
aU, Pius IL, was not altogether free from reproach on the score
of morality' ), by the use of overstrained and 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 stiH raore the catastrophe, which was
being prepared by the force of cfrcumstances 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 Slate, the Prince-bishops were
wholly dependent on the Pope, and styled themselves by the
grace of God and of the Apostolic chafr. 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, frora the Pope to the humblest
ecclesiastic. It is notorious what immense sums found their way
to Eorae 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
with other high offices. Even the humblest appointraents, however,
still produced soraething. " No corapetition," says a serious
rainded Bishop, at the commencement of the 15th century,'' " for
any situation however low, or by any candidate however poor,
1 Comp. his 15th letter to his father and Heimburg's Appellatio in
Goldast's Monarch. T. ii. p. 1593. Iin. 55, 62.
2 Mathew of Cracow, Bishop of Worms, in his Tractatus de squalori-
bus Romanae Curiae in Walch Monim. med. sev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. 1.
sqq. cap. 7.

THE CLERGY AND MONKS. 181
meets with success at Eorae, unless a ducat be first paid, and paid
to the last penny. In applications for the reversion of benefices
— for these are alraost all disposed of before they are vacated, — so
much as 30, 40, and 50 ducats, is sometiraes given. For a
place afready 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 sura has been agreed upon, and
security taken in legal form for its payraent." These siraoniacal
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 oflfices,"
says the Bishop whom we have just mentioned,' " 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 wiU you find a groom,^ or any mean and
unworthy feUovv, who does not hold one or raore spiritual oflfices,
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 firraly 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 tirae, an inexhaustible
source of barbarism and profligacy. The obverse side of celi
bacy, was concubinage, and in general the Ucentious Hves 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,^ "is publicly and formaUy practised by the
clergy, and their mistresses are as expensively dressed, and as
' In a. 1. cap. 4.
^ stabularius.
3 Mathew of Cracow de squalor. Cur Romanae, cap. 2.

182 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
respectftiUy 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
adraitted into the spiritual oflfice. No attention is paid by those,
who have the power, to the correction of such offenders. To
breathe a word on the subject would seera 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 Eome;
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 XXIIL, Innocent VIIL,' and Alexander
VI. , rose to the highest dignity in the Church ? Accordingly
during the whole of this century, we hear the bitterest cora
plaints of their rude ignorance, debauchery, iraraorality, and
avarice. The indignation of the nobler merabers of the body,
and of well disposed layraen, 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 Spanheim, John Trithemius, who
exposed the deep and universal corruption of the priests and
pastors of their time. In fine, let us collect and corabine into
one pictm-e the traits^ with which the last of these authors
depicts the ordinary raanners of clergy. " Unlettered and
rude raen," 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 " Hune merito poterit dicere Roma patrera."
2 They are scattered in the work of Trithemius, written in 1485,
Institutio vitae sacerdotalis. Opp. pia et Spirit, ed. Rusaeus. Mayence
1605. p. 765, sq.

THE CLERGY AND MONKS, 183
ral aff'airs, 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,' 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 Gerraan 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 oflfices, not
for superiority in leaming, but for superior skUl in raaking
money. Even they are seldom or never possessed of a bible,
and plainly shew a hatred of science. They are blind leaders of
the bUnd, 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 hostiUty and persecution.
The place next to the clergy is claimed by the monks, already
no doubt somewhat declined in iraportance, 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 auxUiary 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 ofthe Crusades. In those expeditions, indeed, the spirit of
chivalry, enlisted in the service ofthe Church, was almost entirely
' pro libris sibi liberos comparant, pro studio concubinas amant.

184 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
extinguished. The abortive attempts of Pius II. and other
Popes and personages of exalted rank to re-yive 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
raonks, however, was nothing raore than the standing army of
the absolute Papal power, and a mass of intellectual stupidity
and moral putrefaction. They were tainted with alraost 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,'
" 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
de-yil would be afraid to do, a bold and profligate monk will
commit without scruple.^ They also mislead the common
people into much wickedness, and into an obstinate paUiation of
it. For every one alleges, "Why do you blame me for doing what
is done by so many monks although they ai-e bound to a more
perfect rule 1 " Besides the vow of chastity, however, that of
poverty was also trodden under foot by the monks of that
day. For aU 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
' Jacob von Jiiterbock (See more of hira in the sequel) in bis Treatise
de NegUgentia Praelatorum in Walch Monim. med. sevi. vol ii fasc 2
p. 157—202. V. cap. 3.
^ Quod agere veretur obstinatus diabolus, intrepide agit reprobus et
contumax raonachus.

THE CLERGY AND MONKS. 185
means to support thefr effeminate and luxurious mannerof living,
and hence we find, during the whole of this age, complaints of
numbers of thera possessing private property,' and ofthe extensive
prevalence among them of avarice. We have a work from the
middle of the 1 Sth century which treats of the matter.^ It shows
us how general in this respect the departure from the rale had
become, the sophistries urged in excuse of it,^ and at the same
time, the sentiraents held on the subject by the more serious monks.
The author, hiraself a raonk, 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 reforraer of the German monasteries, who, in
a public serraon, had called such recreant monks "incarnate
devUs."* It is true that during this period we hear of many at
tempts to reform the monastic establishraents, 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 ofthe monastic life. These
' Proprietas, individual Monks who possessed private property, pro-
prietarii. 2 The above quoted little work of Jacob von Jiiterbock de Negligentia
Praelatorura. Felix Hammerlein also has written a special Tract de
Religiosis proprietariis. V. Opusc. et Tractat. fol. 46 sqq.
' 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 hira, or does not allow, hira to possess — therefore, whatever
the abbot allows him to possess that he raay possess." See Jacob von
Jiiterbock de Neglig. Praelat. c. 9., and Anonymi Ordinis Cisterc. pro-
positio affirmitiva in Constant. Cone. aun. 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 Jiiterbock pertinently answers the
above-raentioned sophisra in the following way, "This inference does
not hold, because the affirmative does not necessarily result frora the
negative. The proposition, however, is in itself substantially wrong,
for the abbot raight 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 raortal sin. . . . The Pope, as Vineentius says, raay
make the monk no monk, but he cannot give him a dispensation for
possessing private property, so long as he continues a monk."
* .Jacob. Jiiterb. de Negligent. Prael. c. 27.

186 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
reforraatory efforts, however, were all partial, and were coramonly
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
developraent of the future age, but were, for the time, of little
account when corapared 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 raultitude.

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 raonks such as we
have just described. Apart altogether frora 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
atoneraent 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 raore sound piety and moral feeling than their
ecclesiastical leaders, who by their vices had rendered thera
selves objects of derision. At all periods, and in every nation,
there is a mixture of good and of evil, and it is diflficult 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 refineraent, and only at tiraes of singular cor
i-uption 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. Eude un
bridled power manifested itself partly in an iraraoderate 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 arras against the princes and cities.
The citizens themselves were split into constant factions, or, in
episcopal seats, embroUed 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 flnery and pleasure, which began
to prevaU, and respecting which, we find serious men uttering
the bitterest coraplaints 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 all countries, that assembly, never
theless, found leisure and inclination to arause 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 ofthe 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

b

188 THE 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 sirailar records of all other tiraes, 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 arras against it with a noble indignation ;
Whereas the raen 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 Gerraan Minnesingers,' 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 fortii then-
remarks, in the shape of jests and pleasantries, and even the
preachers of morality, frora 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 hira, as its obverse, true yvisdom 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 vritty 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, attamed
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
Uhland's Walther von der Vogelweide. Stuttg. 1822. a. 114. tf.

THE CLERGY AND MONKS. 189
representative of the sarcastic school, and flourished at the close
of the fifteenth century, -yiz., Sebastian 5mwi,' no less distinguished
as a scholarand lawyer, than as apatriot and manof thepeople,and
look into his celebrated " Ship of Fools" (Narrenschiff), 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.^ Bi-ant depicts with force and keen mockery,
not only the comraon sins prevalent in public and private life,
' Sehastin Brant (latinized Titio) was born at Strasburg in 1458,
and studied at Basle, where 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 ci-vic 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. TheEraperor Maximilian, who highly esteemed, and was esteemed
hy him, nominated him Iraperial 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
(Narrenschiff), which was received with rapturous applause by con
temporaries, and so highly esteeraed as a treasury of sound obser
vation, and practical wisdora, that the faraous Strasburg preacher
Geiler of Kaisersberg (-{• 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 discrirai
nate the tiraes 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. BibUothek der
Deutschen National-Litteratur. B. 17. Quedlinb. und Leipz. 1839.
^ I use the Latin edition of the Narrenschiff, corrected by the author,
but published by Jacob Locher (cognomento Philorausus, Suevus),
Stultifera navis Narragonicse profectionis per Seb. Brant, Latine per
Jac. Locher. Ann. 1497. The traits here given are collected from the
whole of the little work. Quotatations would accuraulate to too great a
number.

190 LIFE OF JOIIN OF WKSKL
and in the conduct of individuals, such as excesses of lascivious
ness and gluttony, laxity of morals, the bad education of chil
dren, the faithlessness of finiends, marrying for money, envy,
loquacity, and such like, but he enters still raore narrowly into
the individual characteristics of the age. Fired with pious
indignation, he speaks of the desecration of the festivals and the
pubUc worship on the Sabbath, describes how the knights and
gentleraen usuaUy come to church,-vvith 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 trasting
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
clergyraan, not in order to his serving God, but merely leading
a corafortable 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 Feli.K
Hammerlein' 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.^ Even the state of the universities
does not escape his keen observation. And here especially he
' See Opuscula et Tractatus Felicis Hammerlein, cantoris quondam
Thuricensis, edited by Sebastian Brant, Basil 1597, in mult. loc. esp.
fol. 1 sqq., fol. 10 sqq., fol. 15 sqq.
2 See the suppleraent to Sebastian Brant's Latin translation of the
Ship of Fools, Nro. cxi : de singularitate quorundara novorura fatu-
orura. Brant thus expresses the fanciful principles of those freethink
ing sects : Vos hominem ex toto praesenti in carne putatis
Perfectura, et suramum tangere posse gradum ;
Usque adeo, ut nunquam deinceps mortale patrai-e
Crimen, et ut nequeat proficere ulterius.

THE CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. 191
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
leaming, such as Vienna, Erf\irt, Basle, Leipsic, Heidelberg,
Mayence, and even as far as France, Italy, and beyond the sea,
decorated with the badges of students and masters, but occmpied
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 aUke ofthe State, the Church, and the Catholic
faith, and Christendom occupyinga humbling and dangerous posi
tion, as regards its hereditary enemy, the Turk ; to repel whom,
he, in the overflow of his patriotic enthusiasra, loudly summons
the noble German nation to take arms under its chivalric head,
the Emperor JIaximilian, whom he elsewhere highly extols. In
short, the signs of the times appear to hira so critical, and his
cotemporaries so perverse and wicked, that he expects the world
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 hira expressing his firra 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.'
' 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 taraen ad nihiluni spreta redacta jacet ;
Copia librorum : qui falso interprete marcent,
Atque bono legis expositore carent ;
Sunt et doctrinae : quibus et nunc gloria nulla
Praestatur ; tenebras discimus usque raeras.
Copia librorum totum est jam sparsa per orbem,
Pauperis et libros bibliotheca tenet.
Nemo taraen veri sinceras diligit artes.
Dogmata nemo colit 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 Pseudopropheiae
Omnia subvertent : tempora prava patent.
The false Prophets who already arose in crowded ranks and pitched

192 LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
Under these circurastances, 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 remodelUng of the Court of Eome, had in those
days, and especially during the period of the schism and the
reforming CouncUs, roused many intrepid voices in almost all
' parts of Europe. Foreraost, and as directors of this raovement,
stand the French theologians, many of them men occupying the
higliest positions in the Church and Universities, such as Peter
d' Alliaco and .John CharUer de Gerson. Neither, however, were
champions wanting in Germany, who with great boldness of speech
assailed the secularity of the hierarchy. We raight here mention
.nnd characterize Henry of Hessen, who tenninated his career
as teacher of theology at Vienna in 1397, Mathew of Cracow,
Bishop of Worras ("t" 1410), Jacob of Jueterhock, a Carthusian
Monk, and Professor in the University at Erfurt, who flourished
the carap 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,
Quara textus planus edocet atque sonat.

OPPOSITION TO THE HIERARCHY. 193
about the raiddle ofthe 15th century. Eeserving, 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 ofthe Eeformation.
And here we must take into account an element which,
although of high iraportance, has not as yet been specially men
tioned, viz., nationality. The Eeformation is the outburst of the
purer spfrit of Christianity in close affiliation with the spirit of
German patriotism. It is the vigorous reaction ])articularly of
the mind of Germany against the mind of Eome ; and although
the religious efforts, both practical and scientific, which helped
to promote it, should not be overlooked, we must nevertheless
aflfirm, that the Eeformation became a popular cause, chiefly in
consequence of the appeal it made to the national sentiment of
German}-. 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 raore brilliant speciraen of
it than his address to the Gerraan nobility. In Worras 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 matiers of
religion are continued, no man under the canopy of heaven will
henceforth be afraid of us Germans.'" The moveraent, a heri
tage frora the period of the Hohenstaufen, rans 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 ofthe diets, were full of it. The grievous com
plaints which, about the middle of the 1 5th century, were presented
to John, Cardinal of St Angelo,- the Nuncio of Nicholas V., and
' Luther's warning to his dear Germans in Walch xvi., 1975.
- Gravamina Nationis Germanicae adversus Curiam Romanam Jo-
anni Cardinal! S. Angeli, Nicolai V. P. R. Legato exhibita. They
N

194 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
the Still more celebrated Hundred grievances' drawn up bythe diet
of Nuremberg in 1522, were aU its offspring. Their ignominious
subjection which was felt to be unworthy ofa 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 paraphlet of the age,^ " was in days of yore a free country, but
now it is raore tributary and subject to the Italians, than it ever
was in the time of the ancient Eomans. 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." StiU
more strongly does Martin Meyer, the Chancellor to Dietrich
von Erbach, Archbishop of Mayence, express hiraself, in a letter
addressed, about the year 1457, to the new Cardinal Aeneas
Sylvius^ : " A thousand ways (many of them he had just enume
rated) are devised, by which the Eomish 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 Eoman Erapire, 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 Walch Monira. raed. aev. ii. 1, p. 103 — 110. Of their
literary character Walch treats in his Praef. p. xxxviii. sqq.
' Die 100 Beschwerden der deutschen Nation, mit Anmerk. v. G.
M. Weber. Frankf. 1829.
2 Ettlich Artikel Gottes lob und des heil. Ri5m. Reichs und der gan-
zen teutschen Nation Eere und Nutz belangend. Hagenau bei Thomas
Anselm. Febr. 1521. (To be found in the Schopflin Ubrary at
Strasburg.) ' The letter is in Von der Hardt Acta Concil. Const. T. i. p. iv. p.
182. Iu reply to it Aeneas Sylvius pubUshed his well-known book
de ritu, situ, moribus etc. Germaniae, which Wimpheling followed
with his reraarks, "I raust answer," says he, "as a German forthe
Gerraan, and as a Heidelberger for the Heidelberger who is never at a
loss for an answer" (Meyer was raeanwhile dead). About Meyer see
Elenchus Cancellariorum Moguntin. in Gudeni Sylloge dipl. p. 530.

GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 195
the Papal court if the princes of the Eoman 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' 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, ha-ying 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.^ 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 sarae 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 stUl higher and
more general interests. Three tendencies, different in kind, but
yet auxUiary to each other, are prominently conspicuous in his
life ; first, Uvely 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 peacefiil and indus
trious citizens in opposition to the martial power of the princes ;
' The character of this man raay 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 faraous scholar and poet, Conr. Celles, 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 gubement.
Inter quos fueras primus Heimburge Georgi,
Cognate mihi sanguine junctus. N 2

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 corabined in the one great aun of his Ufe, 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,' and confine ourselves to the last, that is, the
I 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
Council 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,^ but also for his sentiraents and principles.
They were soon, however, separated, although still occasionally
belonging to the sarae party. Heimburg continued trae 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 then:
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 raan of deep convictions,
integrity, and fortitude ; in the other, the mere possessor of bril
liant and supple talents,' but destitute of character.
' They are further treated of in the article by Dr Hagen, p. 419 and
427 sq.
2 Corap. the remarkable letter of Aeneas Sylvius to Heimburg, printed
in Goldast Monarch. T. ii. p. 1632 and 33. Here the ItaUan writes
to the German (Juris consultissimo viro) after be had been present at
a disputation : Nam et Legistam et Teuthonem superabas, et Italicam
redolebas oratoriamque facundiara — 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 : Revixit etiara eloquentia, et nostro qui
dem seculo apud Italos maxirae floret. Spero idera in Teutonia futurum,
si tu tuique simUes continuare et amplecti totis conatibus oratoriam
decreveritis. ^ Hagenbach 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 Eome to threaten and remonstrate. At the
head of this embassy stood Gregoi^y 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 j
of unparalleled intrepidity, and as his Holiness' answer wasj
evasive, gave the utraost^freedom to his tongue, in other parts
of the city, when speaking of the conclave, and generally of
the ItaUans and their country. Even in his dress and beha
viour he deUghted 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 reraarkable controversial
works, which is still extant. It bears the title, " An adraonition
touching the unjust usurpations of the Popes of Eorae, addressed
to the Eraperor and all Christian kings and princes. '" And
as it is singularly Ulustrative of the views not merely of the
author himself, but of a large number of his cotemporaries, we
shaU here give its substantial contents.
Although aware that "for a long time it is much raore dangerous
to question the power of the Pope than that of God Alraighty,"^
Heimburg notwithstanding ventures to give the following pic
ture of the state of the Church. The Head of the Church, he j
says, wishes to humble the whole world, and subject it to him- 1
self Everywhere he exposes benefices for sale, and offers the cup
of ignominy, always so sweet to favoured ecclesiastics, and now *
distinguished Pope in the Erinnerungen an Aeneas Sylvius Piccolo
mini. Basel 1840.
' Admonitio de injustis usurpationibus Paparum Rom. ad Impera-
torem, reges et principes Christianos, sive Confutatio Primatus Papae
— printed in Goldast Monarchia S. Rom. Imperii tom. i. p. 557 —
563. 2 Liberius fuit a multis annis de potestate Dei, quam Papae praedi-
care et disputare — as is said, p. 557. Iin. 52.

198 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
gradually become palatable even to princes and laymen, to whom
at first it was bitter. Intoxicated by 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 hiraself to be Christ's -vicegerent, and possessed of
plenary power. Although knowing well enough, frora the words
of Christ hiraself, that the opposite of this is true, he yet does not
blush to assert it, and as no teacher ventures to gainsay him — for
sorae are hunting for proraotion, and others are afraid of losing
what they have afready obtained' — he has actually succeeded in
subjecting the whole world, curtailing the authority of the Em
peror and civU raagistrate, and putting all things into confusion.
Emperors and kings, princes and commonwealths, either from
ignorance of the raatter, or prevailing love of the world,'
have been reduced to a state of slavish dependence, and com
pelled to erabrace, as an essential article of saving faith, the
doctrine that Jesus Christ has invested the Bishop of Eome 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?
' • • • ¦ alus tacentibus ob spera proraotionis 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 (Walch. monim.
med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 2. p. 43) it is said. No one opposes the Re
formation more than the Italians, and indeed, spe promotionia aut
lucri, aut temporalis coinmodi, aut timore araissionis dignitatem—
further by Thomas de Corsellis, in a speech deUvered before the
Couucil of Basle in Aen. Sylvius de Concil. Basil. Lib. i. p. 19. edit.
Cattop. 1667. — a,nd by Joannes Major Comment, in Matth. c. 18. in
Gerson. Opp. t. U. p. 1144, where he says with great naivete, ConciUum
raro congregatur, nee dat dignitates eeclesiasticas. Papa dat eas : hinc
homines ei blandiuntur, dicentes, quod solus potest omnia quadrare
rotunda, et rotundare quadrata, tam in spiritualibus quam in tempo-
ralibus. 2 ... vel propter ignorantiam et studu et scientiarum in adsue-
factione provenientem, vel propter nimiara lasciviara mundanam eos
occupantem. 3 ... cum etiam (ut terminis utar suorum adulatorum) ipse Papa
Angelis habeat imperare.

GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 199
In the first part of his treatise, Heimburg then takes up the ;
proofs from Scripture and the Fathers of the supreraacy of the j
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, but only spiritual authority to :
teach. He has even expressly commanded them to be subject !
to the temporal powers, to give to Caesar that which is Csesar'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 govemor 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 obHgatory 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."'
Heimburg looked with ridicule upon the argument so fre--
quently used^ by the flatterers of the conclave, and drawn from '
the analogical coraparison of the Pope with the sim. " For," he
observes, " although the raoon does receive her light from the
sun, she does not receive her motion, and in like manner though
temporal princes may submit to be corapared to the moon, in
respect that they obtain from the Pope and the Church the Ught
of doctrine, they are not on that account subjected to his domina
tion. On the contrary, the similitude, wheu rightly understood,
proves the very opposite, for as these two lights have been
OTdained, the sun to rale the day and the raoon to rule the night,
so do the Pope and the clergy preside over doctrine and prayer
and the dispensation of Divine grace, but the Eraperor over
secular things. In fact it is not desirable that spiritual teachers,
lUce 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. ' Goldast Monarch, t. i. p. 559. Iin. 60.
2 Ibid. p. 558. line 37.

200 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
The second part of the treatise is of great weight,' and con
tains especially the historical exposition of the subject. The
primitive Church, says Heimburg, by sanctity of morals and
doctrine, edified the Eoman world, converted it to the faith, and
inspired reverence for the priesthood, whereas the modem 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."
Thenceforward, till the reign of Otho I., the Emperor treated
the Popes with great respect. They waited upon them, either
personally or by arabassadors, supplicated their blessing, and
recoraraended theraselves 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 Otlios, 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 IIL the Popes reflected
by what means they raight bring the Eraperors into subjection,
and none appeared to thera 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 stUl filled up by the emperors and princes, and the bene
fices by the bishops, with the princes' consent. From the days
' Goldast. Monarch, p. 560—63.
- Incoepit Ecclesia mixta — by the pretended donation of Constantine,
in which Heimburg still believed.

GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 201
of Henry TV., however, the Popes interfered more and more
with the affairs of the empire, till at last, under Innocent HL,
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.' 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
ricar 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,^ 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 raanner, by a single headstrong in
dividual,' the Eeformation is obstructed and the Chm-ch 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 Heimburg,* " awaken from your stupor. Shake
off the dust. Break the yoke from your neck. Eecede frora
your shameful position of neutrality.^ Convoke the Council
' The contradiction is sharply stated in the single passage, p. 265.
Iin. 24., where among other things it is said : Christus regnum mun-
danum exclusit : Vicarius illud ambit. Christus regnum fugit : Vica
rius ingerit, ut habeat negatum. Christus se negavit constitutum se-
cularera judicera : Vicarius praesurait judicare Caesarera. . . Christus
discordes Judaeos et gentes in unum regnum congregat : Vicarius Ger
manos olim Concordes saepe seditionibus conturhavit.
^ Here, as in other passages, Heimburg has especially in his eye
Aeneas Sylvius and Nicolaus of Cusa.
' . . . propter unum captiosum hominem, tamdiu reforinationi
Ecclesiae Roraanae se opponentem.
* P. 562. Iin. 62 sqq.
•' . . postponendo damnabilem neutralilatem. The German

202 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
afresh, which, with the bark of Peter, is now floundering in the
waves ; and by raeans of it reforra the Church."
Such was the appeal which Heimburg uttered in the ears of
the princes and nobUity of all Christendom, with an intrepidity
and -yigour 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 IL, 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. Heimbui'g, 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 raoney.' 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 hiraself 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, 1460,
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. ' In his Appellatio in Goldast Monarch, t. ii. p. 159. Iin. 52. Heim
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-
rippinara et Austriam, ac rursus inter Daciara et Alpes raedullitus 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.' Pius II. looked upon the proceeding as cri
minal rebeUion, 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 Heimbui'g? The city
of Nuremberg was formally required to expel the irapious raan,
confiscate his 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 stUl extant,' 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 abUity 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 foUo-sving general proposition. It was not i
to Peter alone, but to the whole Apostles in common, that Christ
committed the keys. TheApostlesarethen,intheir turn, supposed
to have acknowledged Peter as their chief, and raised hira to the ¦
chair of Antioch. They did not thereby, however, renounce any
portion of thefr 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 coraraissioned 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 ?* No doubt, the Pope
' According to the Papal letter to be soon quoted, Heimburg bad
pasted up the original of the Appellatio in the church at Florence.
^ The letter of excoraraunication is in Goldast Monarch, t. ii. p. 1591.
' In Goldast t. ii. p. 1592—1595.
* Inal. loc. p. 1592 and 93.

204 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
is as much afraid ofa Council, that stronghold of Christian free
dom, as he is of the plague,' and before it meets, endeavours to
oppose to it a worthless decree. This, however, wUl only help
to call it together. For the raore he shows hiraself afraid of it,
the raore he wiU stimukte the desfre for its convocation. The
objection that no Council was then sitting,^ Heimburg obviates
by saying, I maintain that, as an appeal can be raade to the Papal
chair when unoccupied, so raay 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 moraent is of urgent necessity, no one acquainted
with the raiserable 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, for the world is surely
larger than the city of Eome.' His only object, however, is to
rule us as slaves, and his only ground of complaint that we will
not subrait to be ruled peaceably.
This appeal of Heimbu7'g was answered* by the Apostolic Eefe-
rendary, Tlieodo7'e Laelius, Bishop of Feltre, who stoutly raaintains
the absolute raonarchy 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 sarae tirae 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-
' Sicut iliacara passionem.
2 Ibid. p. 1593 at the foot and p. 1594.
' Siquidera orbis raajor 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.
¦* Replica Theod. Z/aeZi/ Episc. Feltr. pro Pio Papa II. et sede Romana
—in Goldast t. ii. p. 1595 -1604. 2

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.'
Heimburg did not fail once more to defend his convictions.
This he did in an apology,^ which enters minutely into all the
arguments of Laelius. To shew the character of the work, we
cite a single passage iu which he expresses himself on the rauch
disputed relationship of Peter to the rest of the Apostles. " You
seek," says he to Laelius,' " to lower the other eleven Apostles
in order to accuraulate 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 CouncUs are the raain pillars of the Christian
faith, and that they have been established by Christ over all
beUevers, even when these glitter with the Papal dignity. What
disease of the raind has sraitten you with such stupidity, as that
you have fallen frora the evangelical truths I asserted, into such
errors as these ? Can truth ever contradict itself ? Tell me
then, you who assign the pastoral oflfice to Peter alone, for what
purpose was it that John, the favourite disciple, was taught the
holy traths, and imbibed thera directly from the breast of the
Sa-viour ? 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 loe should leave the
word of God." To preach, however, is to do the shepherd's
part, fijr 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
his Church.*
Heimburg defends the same principles in a -violent invective,
' In al. loc. p. 1604. Iin. 25. sq.
2 Apologia contra detractiones et blasphemias Theod. Laelii in Gol
dast t. n. p. 1604—1625.
' In al. loc. p. 1616 top.
* In al. loc. p. 1619 bottora.

206 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL
which he wrote in the year 1461 on the dispute between Duke
Sigismond and Nicolaus of Cusa.'- In this he upbraids that
prelate, as he had done Pius IL, with deserting his principles,'
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 :' " And now you
sacrilegious and shameless man," says Heimburg, 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 dra-wing arguraents from a form of courtesy. Yon
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.* ... In point of fact the great synod
of Constance surrendered nothing when it designated Pope
' Invectiva in Rever. Patrem, Dom. Nicolaum de Cusa — in Goldast
t. ii. p. 1626 — 1631. The coraraenceraent is equally pointed. Cancer
Cusane Nicolae, qui te Cardinalera Brixiensera 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 eariier period the
friend of Heimburg. In the year 1 457, as newly -elected Cardinal, he
had invited hira 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. Seio com-
plures esse, qui te videre, audire et sequi cupiunt, inter quos me sem
per auditorem discipuluraque obsequentem invenies. Goldast t. ii. p.
1632. Iin. 37.
' In Goldast t. ii. p. 1627 bottom.
* The title of Nicolaus as Cardinal was, S. Petri ad vincula S. Rom.
Ecclesiae Presbyter Cardinalis.

GREGORY OF HEIMBURG. 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. . . . 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 ofthe provincial synods which he convokes.
The parliament judges the kings of the French, and the Count
Palatine of the Ehine, the Eoraan Emperor, and yet deferenti
ally they gave them the name of lords."
Though already excommunicated, Gregoi'y of Heimburg
found himself entangled in a new dispute between 1461 and
1463. Diether of Isenburg, 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
ofthe Papacy was called in as an auxiliary. Although rejected by
the Papal nuncios, Heimburg was yet admitted by Diether into
his councU, 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 Eraperor, was
reconciled to the Pope. But in these arrangeraents, 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 forritude. Podiebrad, for whom
he composed a series of controversial works,' died in the
year 1471. Heimburg then went into Saxony, and there found
a protector in Duke Albert, who effected his reconcUiation
with Sixtus rv. 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 raay
' They are in Eschenlor's Geschicte v. Breslau, herausgegeben v.
Kuinisch. Breslau 1827. B. 1 and 2.

208 THE LIFE OF JOHN OP -WESEL.
occasionally have overstepped the bounds of moderation,' always
acted from sincere conviction, and contended for the highest in
terests  who could say of hiraself, that he never swerved from the
independence ofa Diogenes ora Cato, nor eamed in the cause of
Uberty as large a share of temporal blessings as was his due'—
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,' 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.*

8. THE HOPE OF REFORMATION. JACOB OF JUTERBOCK.
Ha-ying 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 sentiraents were very general
araong other classes will appear from many proofs in the sequel —
it is not less remarkable to see, what the prevaUing opinions were
respecting the need of ecclesiastical reformation, and the means by
which that might be effected. And here we come in contact
Vidth a man of quite a different stamp, with one who did not,
like Heimburg, apply a strong hand to public affairs and fight

' e.g. as ambassador of the Electors at Rorae.
2 Heimburg's Appellatio in Goldast t.ii. p. 1593. Iin. 60 and p. 1594.
Iin 33.
' 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. * Conrad Celtes, the relation of Heimburg, coraposed for him the fol
lowing epitaph, (Epigrara. 89. Lib. iv.)
Hic jaceo He'imburgus, patriae qui priraus in oras
Invexi leges, Caesareosque libros.
Romanae praesul rae condemnaverat urbis :
Consilium dixi, quod sibi majus erat.

HOPE OF REFORMATION. 209
his way through the world, but who Uved 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 raini
sters and teachers, and practised the rigours of monachisra,
with a devotion so entire, that Luther's saying may well be ap
pUed to him ; " If any one ever entered the kingdom of heaven
by monkery, it was he."
This person, whose narae well deserves to be rescued from un
just oblivion, was called Jacob of Jiiterbock. He was a native
ofthe 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 Eeformation, 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 Erftirt.
Born about the year 1383, Jacob'- entered the Polish monastery

' The man of whora we here speak is mentioned among the older
writers under very difi'erent naraes. In the manuscripts which contain
his treatises, he is coraraonly styled Jacob Junterburg, also JunterbocJc,
both of which are antiquated and unusual forms ofthe narae Jiiterbock.
From the two orders to which he belonged, he is called Jacobus Cister-
ciensis or Carthusianus ; frora the Cistercian Monastery, where lie
at first lived, Jacobus de Paradiso ; and because tbis 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 Guytrodius (Guytrode) , who also bore the cognomen Carthu
sianus, but who was a Dutchman, and respecting whom, consult Foppens
Biblioth. Belg. t. i. p. 51 4. — 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. Fabr. Heis also
spoken of by Matth. Flacius in Catalog, test, verit. Lib. xix. p. 883
(who confounds him vvith 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. biblioth. ascet. num. 8. Casim, ; by Oudinus in Comment, de
scriptor. eccles. t. iii. p. 2647 ; by Sim. Starovolsci.us in Centur. scriptor.
Polon. p. 103 ; by Carol. 'Visch'ius in biblioth. Cisterc. p. 165 ; by
Christoph. Motschmannus in Erford. literat. Pars. vi. p. 913; and by
Walch in praefat. ad. raonira. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. Ixv. — Ixxvii.
The writings of Jacob of Jiiterbock, which Walch bas printed, are, De
O

210 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
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 sorae time, either as visitor or regular inmate, of a
monastery at Prague.' For forty years he continued a Cistercian,
but as the rule was not suflficiently 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,^ 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 hira' as a man full of zeal and
well versed in Holy Scripture, of large experience in Canon-
law, possessed of a clear and discrirainating intellect, affable in
speech, raodest in manners, celebrated both as an author imd
speaker, and held in so high estimation, that all he said and
wrote was reverenced like the Delphic oracles. Flacius* assigns
to him his due place araong the witnesses of evangeUcal truth
prior to the Eeformation. His writings evince acquaintance
with the Holy Scriptures, and a deep reverence for them. A
certain tincture of mysticisra in his interpretation we raust equit-
, ably excuse, in consideration of the age. That he possessed a
thorough acquaintance with the state and circurastances of the
Church, especiaUy of the clerical and raonastic orders, dannot he
denied. His statements receive full corroboration from the testi-
septem ecclesiae statibus^ — De negligentia Praelatorum — and De In
dulgentiis. Those which he adduces as printed, are Sermones nota-
biles et foi-males de tempore et de Sanctis — Libelli tres de arte curandi
vitia, added to tbe Edition of the works of Joh. IVessel, by Lydius
Amsterd. 1617 — Liber de veritate dicenda — Tractatus de caussis inul-
tarum Passionura, printed in Pezii biblioth. asc. t. vu. p. 389. — aud
De apparitionibuR animarum separatarura ex corporibu.s liber, which
work bears the name of a Jacobus de Clusa, but is ascribed by Oudinus
and Motschmann to our Jacob of Jiiterbock.
' De Indulgent, cap. 2., De quorum numero, says he, ego olim fui,
cum in solenni monasterio aulae regiae degebam prope c'lvitatem Pra-
gensem, ubi abundantissiraae indulgentiae in reliquiarura ostensione
conferebantur. 2 Trithemius styles hira Vicarius domus montis sancti salvatoris
prope Erfordiam De Scriptor. eccles. cap. 814. p. 191. ed. Fabr.
' Catalo.g. illustr. viror. in Trith. Opp. t. i. p. 158.
* Catalog. Test, verit. Lib. xix. p. 883.

JACOB OF JUTERBOCK. 211
monies of cotemporaries. It is remarkable tbat, although so
zealous a monk, he avows the opinion, that monastic property
might law-fully be applied by the magistrate to other benevolent
objects,' 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 statesof the Church,"^ written about the year
1440, and of which, as exhibiting his reformatory views, we shall
state the subject matter.
Jcuiob of Jiiterbock, 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 forra the present time.
In it the peculiarities and evils of earlier times are in sorae raea
sure to be found. Its leading feature, however, is hypocrisy.
Whether a reformation will take place at present, or whether it
wUl 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 raembers, to the wars
and conflicts raging in all parts of the world, to the persecution
of spiritually rainded raen, to the prevalence of siraony, and to
the moral corruption among princes and ])eople, clergy and
laity. The extreme necessity of a reformation is proved by the
corrupt state of the whole world, bnt the means of accomplishing
it have not yet been discovered. " General Councils," says this
liberal-minded monk,' " 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
' De negligent. Praelator. cap. 30. Walch monim. ii. 1. p. 196.
^ De septem ecclesiae statibus opusculura— in Walch Monim. med.
aev. vol. u. fasc. 2. p. 23 — 66.
' In al. loc. p. 38 sq.
o2

212 THE 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 Eeformation, to death, but even the
mother who bore it, viz., the authority of Councils, and the right
of convoking them, by raeans of which alone there can Jje any
hope of accoraplishing a reformation."
It is interesting to observe how Jacob of Juterbock attempts
to combine the results of past experience, and thereby to divine,
as it were, the way in which a reformation raight possibly be
introduced, and how, while his insight as to what could not be
expected was raost correct, there was yet a veil before his eyes,
respecting that which was ordained by heavenly wisdora, and
afterwards actually took place. A reformation, he says, if it
were possible,' 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 corapetency 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 Eeformation is to be effected by men,
'the hope of it rests mainly upon those in authority,^ both spiri-
jtual and temporal, possessing, as they alone do, the power to
I effect it not only by persuasion but by threats of punishment.
In this case, the Eeformation would be accompHshed either by
one or by many.' It will not be accomplished by one, however
eminent he may be for pleasing manners, attainments in science,
and outward rank, nay, perhaps, even for miraculous powers.
We Ivuow 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 accompUshed 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.
- spes reformandi maxime residet apud praesidentes.
¦^ In al. loc. p. 41.

JACOB OF JUTERBOCK. 213
recent councils loudly declare. But if the Pope cannot or i
w ill 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 aU ecclesiastical refomi 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, kno-wing from experience, that these asserablies
do not understand how to flatter or fawn, but correct and araend
-without respect of persons. The reason is, raen congregate there
from aU parts of the world, and unseduced by love or fear, do not
spare -rice.'
Ha-ying mentioned that, in recent times, after the wound in
fficted upon the Church, by the tragical fate of the Council of
Basle, and of whose cure there was yet no prospect, raany men
of great leaming 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 Juterbock proceeds to say,^ " Persons who dograatize in
this way, imagine that they are serving the Eoman pontiffs,
and do not consider that, on the contrary, they are obstruct
ing thefr salvation. They deprive them of a thing which,
above aU others, is most desirable and salutary for any man,
but of which the Pope stands in special need, in order to the
good ofthe Church, and that is brotherly correction ; for no one
surely -wUl be so insane as to aflfirm, 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. AU ecclesiastical and ci-vil 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 Iliid. p. 45.

214 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL.
deprive him of even the pouer of demitting his oflfice, is the height
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.' Frora this quarter, accordingly, all hope of reforma
tion is cut off. It would be trusting to a fallible man,^ who may
bring the Church and himself into the ways of error. Unless
some stop be put to so pernicious doctrine, the greatest evds
will arise.' 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 CouncUs, his subjects
w ill fancy themselves absolved from the necessity of obeying the
Papal constitutions, and will murmur and say, " Father, leam
first to keep thine own law." In fine no one, especially of the
Gerraan nation, will henceforward attend a Council,* for if the
raanageraent of the Church is to be in the hand of a single fal
lible man, it seeras 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 deUnquent who has fallen frora the papal dignity 1
If, according to thc 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 tho punishment but that court of which Christ spoke
when he said, " Tell it to the Church V Moreover the fact, that
the rainisterial 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."^
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
1 Ibid p. 46, 47. 2 peccabili. 3 p_ 43 gq
' F- 49. 5 p. 55—57. « p. 57 sq.

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,'
the Chm-ch has in modem tinies 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,^ 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,'
which recommends the repetition of General Councils, to fall
into obUvion ; and although there be many who resist it, }-ct,
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 trath, 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 frora Scripture, fell into error, both
before and after the effusion of the Holy Ghost.
' p. 60 sq.
2 p. 64.
' A famous and important decree of the Council of Constance of 9th
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
haeresiura, errorum et schisiuatum exstirpat, excessus corrigit, defor-
mata reformat, et viara Domini ad frugem uberriraae fertiUtatis addu-
cif — and then gives the deliverance, that from thenceforth a general
Ecclesiastical Council should be regularly held in five years from the
close of the present, in seven years frora the close of the next, and every
ten years afterwards.

216 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
AU 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.' 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 clearerginsight,
instruct him better. Accordingly, we have here a man, deeply
impressed with the need of reforraation, but looking upon it as
soraething so great and diflficult, 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
xraeriting the narae of a prophetic spirit, was yet at the sarae time
sufficiently raodest not to predeterraine in what way, nor under
what shape, the event would corae. 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
Eeforraation will not corae 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 vrith the best intentions, thev want the
power to carry it through ; and yet, in point of fact, the Eefor
mation did come both by one and by many, and proved not less
s single than it was a conjoint act. That one, however, was
not a Pope, nor these many a Council, and the whole raovement
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 irapending, and his words yet remain as an important
testimony how irresistibly the necessity of a reforraation had
forced itself upon the minds of even the most pious Churchmen,
or rather of Churchmen above aU.
It was under these circumstances, and at a time when the wide
spread corruption of the Church was recognized by many, and a
reformarion 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.
aestimative dictura, s. 66.

( 217 )

PART FIRST.

JOHN OF WESEL
AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF ERFURT,
AND AS THE OPPONENT OF INDULGENCES.

CHAPTEE FIEST.
ERFURT UNIVERSITY. WESEL'S TRAINING AND PROFESSORIAL
LABOURS THERE.
John of Wesel's proper name was the family one of Ruchrath
or Richrath? Usually, however, he is called, after his native
place, the Httle town of Ober-Wesel,^ so beautifully situate upon
' The faraily name of this man is written in many different forms,
Ruchard, Ruchrad, Bucherath, in Latin also Burchardus. The form
given in the text is the one most in use. The reading Richrath de
rives additional probability frora the circurastance, that this narae is
still in use in the Provinces of the Rhine.
2 Many more ancient and modern writers give Nieder-Wesel in the
Duchy of Cleves as the birthplace of Wesalia. We are, however, in
clined to rely upon the old and authentic testiraony of Butzbach, a monk
in the Abbty 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 raust bave been a rauch
more considerable town in the raiddle ages than it is at the present day,
appears from the extent of its old walls and the magnificent churches
and towers whieh adorn it.

218 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
the bank of the Ehine 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 he
obliged at the outset to take a view of that institution, highly
important at the tirae for the education of Gerraany, in order to
1 ascertain in how far the peculiar circumstances of the place may
serve to explain Wesel's turn of raind, or the status which he
occupied in it as professor. In doing this we also step upon a
raain theatre of the reformatory movements in Gerraany, for
Erfurt was the place from which, prior to the institution of the
University of Wittemberg, all that was important in this respect
originated. The University ofErfui-t 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
ill its northern parts of the light of scientific culture. It did not,
like its predecessors, owe its institution to a teraporal or to a spiri
tual prince, but was the w-ork 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.' 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
' Comp. Joann. Maurit. Gudeni (Doctor Juris, counsellor of thc
Elector of Mayence, Professor of Civil Law and magistrate in Erfurt)
Historiae Erfurtensis Lib. iv. Duderstad. MDCLXXV. and Johann
Ileinr. von Falkenstein (privy-counsellor in Brandenburg- Anspach)
Historic von Erffurth, in 5 Buchern 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 privUeges. It so happened, how
ever, that, at the time (1378), the schism between Urban VI.
and Clement VIL was at its height, the former of whom, being
elected by tlie ItaUan party of the Cardinals, vindicated his
right in Eome, 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 iraportant city of Gerraany to his cause, accorded
to them, without hesitation, and in the most agreeable terms,
permission to erect a University.' 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 Perig-uano, formerly Ai-chbishop of Bari (the
rival Pope), who, iu contravention of the Canon-laws, has taken
possessioii of the apostolical chair to the perdition of himself and
all his adherents." In these prelirainary steps to the foundation
of the University, Adolph, the reigning Archbishop of Mayence,
by bfrth 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.^ For a time indeed
no use was made of the papal favour. Eleven j-ears elapsed
before the University was actually founded, and as in this interval
Clement VII. lost all authority in Germany, the town of Erfurt
' The Papal letter, granting the concession, bears the date, which,
however, can no longer be deterrained by documentary evidence of 1 st
Oct. in the first year of the pontificate of Clemens VIL, 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 elected 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.1. p. 158, 159, and 162.
" Gudenus B. ii. c. 18, p. 122. Is solenni diplomate petitis assen-
serat, ct cura de Adolphi fide dubitaret, eo rescusante (?), Archican-
cellariatnra Clero Mariano detulerat.

220 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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
privUege 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,'
At first the Chancellor of the University was the Archdeacon of
St JVlarys. In a new bull of confirmation, however, which, on
the petition of the raagistrates, Boniface IX. eraitted on the Sth
of July 1396, it was pro-yided that, henceforth to promote the
importance of the University, the Archbishop of Mayence for
the time should be its Chancellor.^ 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 gi-anted to the Arch
bishop, so that the pay of all the professors at this period amounted
to 62 merks or 434 florins.' The first Eector was Master Louis
Miilner (caUed also Miiller) from Amstadt, 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-Eector ;* and about the
year 1507, a twelvemonth before Luther left Erfurt, by Count
George 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
' On this feast 37 florins were spent. Falkenstein p. 280.
2 Falkenstein p. 281.
3 Falkenstein, ibid. On the salaries of the Professors see also Fal
kenstein p. 292. In the year 1412, the amount of all of thera
275 Thalers 14 Groschen. The highest was 59 Thalers. Mag. J.
Zachariah, at that time a distinguished theologian, received 31 Thalers.
* Falkenstein p. 315-

AVESEL'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, comraon elsewhere, was here also
adopted. The Eector was chosen by the four faculties, each of
them naming three voters, with the exception of thatof 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.' Besides these arrangements, pro
rision was also made for the maintenance of the students, and
their progress in leaming, in the same way as at other univer
sities, by founding colleges and bursaries.^
Its favourable site and judicious arrangements secured for the
University of Erfurt the happiest success. For a time, it stood
alone in the wide cfrcuit of central and Northern Gerraany, and
before the foundation of Wittemberg, to which Erfurt resigned
her most distinguished pupU, the great Eeformer, Luther, was
the most efficient nurse of civilization in those coimtries. 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.' At the first, it
appears to have attracted many of its members from the Univer
sity of Wurtzburg (founded probably in 1403), where the
' Gudenus in a. 1. p. 123, where the proceedings of the election are
particularly related.
^ Respecting the different colleges and bursaries see Gudenus ii.
23. p. 135. ii. 28. p. 146. iii., 17. p. 200. Falkenstein p. 296. 301.
304.332. Erhard^. 171. The following are specially mentioned.
The College of Jurists (Schola Juris or Collegium Juris Marianum),
instituted in 1410 by Henry of Gerbstet, a Doctor of Decretals,
and Dean of St Mary's. He wasa native of Anhalt, and for that
cause principally attended to his fellow countrymen. The College at
Porta Coeli (Collegium Porta Coeli or Amplonianum), founded in 1420
by Araplonius Rutinger de Fago, Doctor of Medicine, a native of Rhine-
berg, who, in 1394, had been 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
maguum or majus). Ofthis we have no particular information, but it
was probably the sarae 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.
' Gudenus in a. 1. p. 123.

222 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
Students were frequently embroiled with the inhabitants.' The
greatest accession to its raerabers, however, was made from
Prague, for when, in the year 1409, under the rectorship of the
zealous Bohemian, John Huss, the famous schisra took place be
tween the native and foreign students, who were raostly Germans,
an immense multitude of the latter (the chroniclers^ speak of
them, but no doubt with exaggeration, as amounting to many
thousands) migrated to Erfurt, where they were received with
the utraost kindness by the magistracy, and met with encourage
ment of every kind, after having pledged themselves never to
atterapt the introduction of any statute injurious to the liberties
and la\\'s 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,' to that
of Leipsig, established in 1409, and to the Acaderay at Eostock,
when instituted in 1419, Mr Peter Steirabeck,* 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 attendedthis University, and was settled at it as one ofthe
professors. And in order to form a distinct conception how far
the institution was calculated either to awaken or confirm in
him an anti-liie7^avcliical and reformatory spirit, we must take into
view first, the general condition of the University, at its origin,
and during its development, and then the jjersons, especially the
most influential of them, who laboured there.
I As respects the general condition of the University of Erfurt,
the particulars which our object requires us to consider are as
follows : The LTniversities of the middle ages have aU fiinda-
' 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 Wurtz-
burgh." ' Erhard Tp. 171. Of the foundation of the University v. Schrockh
K. Gesch B. 30. s. 110 sq.
* Falkenstein p. 300. Founding of the University, Schrockh B. 30.
s. 115. Jul. Wiggers Kirchengeschichte Mecklenburgs. 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 tirae rauch
depends upon the circumstance, whether at their institution
severally, they were the direct or merely the indirect offspring of
ecclesiastical power. It is raanifest that they assurae a difference
of physiognoray, 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 raay adduce the three German
Universities of Cologne, Heidelberg, and Erfurt. Under imrae
diate ecclesiastical governraent, Cologne assumed towards the
new developraent of science in the fifteenth century an attitude
either raerely negative, or decidedly hostile. In that develop
ment Heidelberg, frora 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 Eeformation, 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 THE 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
briiio- home with them some tincture ofthe 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 raerabers 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
reforraing spirit. For although the great body of the fugitives
from the Bohemian capital at that time were opponents of Huss,
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.' In fine, as a necessary condition of the
development, if not of the reformatory spirit, yet still of that of
I Gei'man patriotism, we raust take into account the circumstance
that the University of Erfurt, situated in the raiddle of Germany,
was frequented chiefly, or indeed alraost exclusively, by natives,
and that there was no division of the students into nations. In
this way, the raain source of party spirit was stopped, and the
opportunity given for a powerful development of patriotic feel
ing among the German youth there living unraixed and undi
vided. The importance of this will be understood by every one
who is aware, that the great ecclesiastical revolution of the 16th
' John Hagen, an Erfurt Professor, who flourished in the middle of
the fifteenth century, the contemporary of Wesel, left several writings
which were intended to confute the doctrines of the Hussites aud
heretics in general. Contra errores Bobemorura. — Ad Episcopum Ratis-
ponensera contra eosdera. — De doctrinis peregrinis cavendis.  De falsis
prophetis. — De communione sub utraque specie. See Trithem. de script.
eccles. cap. 822. p. 196 ed. Fabric. Wesel himself was latterly accused
of holding Hussite principles. One of the significant prophetic sayings
so common in that age related to the University of Erfurdt "Erfordia
Praga." Falkenstein p. 577.

wesel's TRAINING AND PROFESSIORTAL L.VBOURS. 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 fiict, Hutten and
Luther, the two persons whora we consider as the most erainent
representatives of this corabination of Germanism with Chris
tianity, although in each the ingredients were differently mixed,
were pupils of the University of Erfiirt.
If we look to the persons who either as originators of the spirit
of the University, or as professors and cotemporaries, raight have
contributed to the training of Wesel, it must be confessed, that Er
fiirt, w-hich afterwards sent forth its great intellectual heroes, had
not, at an early stage, many distinguished personages to boast of.
At the close ofthe I4th, and in the first half of tbe following cen
tury, the scientific spirit of Germany was still in its chUdhood,
and naturally required to pass through a stage of gradual growth
in order to enter into that of ripeness and manhood in the 16tli
century. At the same time Erfurt was not, even fi-ora 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 Jolm of
Erfurt, 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.' .Vs the earliest Professor of Theology, in the newly
erected institution, we meet with Angelus 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.^ Beside hira we have to place
John Zacharia,^ apparently somewhat younger, but yet a cotem-
' Jo. Trithemius de scriptor. eccles. cap. 630. p. 149 ed. Fabric.
Trithemius ranks John of Erfurt among the men who lived in tlie
middle of the 14th century.
^Erhard's. i. s. 186.
' Ibid. P

226 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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.' Both of these men
not only acquired a literary reputation by writing — the first, a
comraentary upon the Sentences and a Treatise on Logic, and the
second, a sirailar work upon the Sentences, and various exegetical
disquisitions and sermons •? but they also won for themselves a com
mon and special reputation, as Commissioners from the Univer
sity to the Council at Constance. ^Aere Angelus of Dobelin is
said to have made so deep an impression upon the Pope that the
latter called hira, " a real angel."' Zacharia, whora 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
hira with the consecrated rose to be worn upon his cap, as a
memorial of his services to the Church.* 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 raost distinguished as a Theologian was Matthew
Doering? 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
CouncU of Basle, however, he joined the opposition, and for that
' Falkenstein a. 292.
2 Jo. Trithem. de scriptor. eccles. cap. 733. p 170. The exegetical
works are upon the three first books of Moses and the Epistles of Paul.
^ Erhard B.i. s. 171.
* Falkenstein 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.
^Erhard s 171. His corapanions 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 raerabers 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. He 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 haying 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 soraewhat later, is John Kannemann, a Minorite at
Erfiirt, who flourished as a learned theologian and professor,
about the same time (1460) as Wesel. As, according to the
account of Trithemius,' 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
Gi-esemunt,^ 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 oflfice of Eector. 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 Wesel's
studies. Trithemius commends hira^ for acuteness of intellect,

' Trithem. de script, eccles. c. 813. p. 190  qui depotestate
ecclesiastica male sentiens, cum a ministro Saxoniae (Provinciali Ordinis
minorum per Saxoniam) quaereretur ad carcerera fuga lapsus ad obser-
vantiales ccmfugit, et errorera cura vita deinceps eraendavit. Corripue-
rat eura .lohannes de Hagen (of bim see the sequel), Carthusiensis vir
doctissimus jarapridera et ad semitas aequitatis revocavit. Trithemius
mentions the following treatises as compositions of Kannemann : De
fensorium sui. — Depassione Doraini. — Sermones varii. —Quaestiones
quaedam. 2 Erhard s. 189.
3 De Script, eccles. cap. 83 1 . p. 198 and 199. The Works of Grese-
munt, which Trithemius quotes, are : Quaestiones Sententiarum Libr. iv.
p2

228 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
familiarity with Scripture, acquaintance with profance philo
sophy, an exeraplary Hfe, and a sound method of theological
instruction, by means of which he acquired for hin-iself a great
name araong his cotemporaries. lie also mentions several pro
ductions of his pen on doctrinal subjects ; but takes no notice of
any characteristic, by raeans of which he could have influenced
the direction of Wesel's mind. In particular there is no trace of
his connexion with the Eeformatory tendencies, which at that
time were so widely spread. With all the greater certainty, how
ever, do wc 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 ofthe 4tli decennium ofthe 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 Eeformation, ardently longed for it,
and although quietly, and with little hope of immediate success,
zealously laboured to carry it into effect. Such a raan could
not but exercise a general influence upon the spirit of the Uni
versity, and even they, who were not his iraraediate auditors,
beheld in hira tbe 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 raarked 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 Jixter-
Sermones et CoUationes Lib. i. Quaestiones variae disputatae Lib. i.
Et aha complura. Immediately before Gresemunt, Trithemius mentions
Benedict Stendel from Halle as another Theologian of Erfurt distin
guished in his time, w-hose Commentaries on the Pentateuch are much
quoted. De script, eccles. cap. 830. p. 198.

wesel's TRAINING AND PROFESSORIAL LABOURS. 229
lock, and for a tirae at least John Kannemann. These raen
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 raay pre
sume that when Wesel arrived at Erfiirt, he found there, as was "
the case in many other places, a decidedly papal, and a decidedly
opposition party, commingled with a raultitude who cared for
neither one nor other. We raay likewise infer that consonantly
with the progress of the age the former graduaUy 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. Dui-ing 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.' 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 whUe the abode of Conrad Celtes,^ and
the scene of study to Eudolph Lange and John of Dalberg,^ 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 coraraenceraent of these events, Wesel was
too far advanced in life, and his raind 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,
' Corap. Erhard Gesch. des Wiederaufbliihens wissensch. Bildung
in Deutschland, B. i. s. 302. The said Luderus raay possibly have
belonged to tbe sarae Thuringian faraily from which Luther was des
cended ; for tbe latter frequently wrote bis name Luderus or Luder.
We have, however, no further historical proof to confirra this con
jecture. '' Erhard B. 2. s. 13, and esp. s. 19 sq.
' Erhard B. i. ss. 302 303. 309. C. Ullmann Memoria Jo. Dal
burgii, surami Univers. Heidelb. patroni. Heidelb. 1840. p. 5. 6.

230 THE 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 sarae tirae it is scarcely to be
doubted, that Wesel must have been influenced by Jacob of Jiiter
bock, who then laboured at Erfurt, for this Theologian wasof 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 imraediate vicinity of an older, and adopting a
congenial course, there are natural grounds to conjecture, that he
mustto a certain extent have been influenced by him. Wecannot,
I tiierefore, go far astray in supposing that Wesel imbibed from
Gresemunt the raaterial of the sciences of Philosophy and Theo-
' logy, but caught the general bent of his raind chiefly from
, Jacob of Jiiterhoek. It is possible that the John Kannemann
raentioned 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 raade, 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 .lubilee year, 1450,' he already speaks of hiraself 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, Wimpheling,
calls hira an ornaraent of Erfurt, and the raost celebrated pupU
of its University. Luther says,^ " John Wesalia ruled the Uni
versity of Erfurt by his books, and it was out of these that I
studied for ray raaster's degree." A stateraent from which we
learn two things. First, that Wesel's reputation as a man of
' Motschmanni Erfordia litter, contin. p. 23.
^ In the Work de Conciliis, Walch xvi. 2713.

WESEL S TRAINING A-ND 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 depai'ture, and till the coraraenceraent of the 16tli century ;
and, secondly, that Wesel, as a philosopher, was attached to the
Nominal opinions, which at that period were generally affiliated
with a raore liberal turn of mind. We know that Luther, in his
early days, was a Nominalist,' 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 frora
the period of WeseFs 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 Westem Christendom. Countless multitudes made
the pilgrimage to Eome. 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 Gerraany to
preach Indulgences, and to collect the gifts made by the penitent
to the Pope in retum, and which were cast into a chest pre
pared for the purpose. This prelate, wbo had high personal
quaUties 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 conimon
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 jom-ney 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 sarae
the following day on the Petersberg, on which occasion the
throng was so great that several persons lost their lives.' We
need not doubt that Wesel was one of the celebrated cardinal's
' Jac. Thomasius de doctorib. scholastic, latin. § 17.
- Falkenstein s. 313.

232 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
auditors. It is as certain, however, that neither the ostentations
display of the ecclesiastical prince, who had betrayed the liberal
principles of his 3-outh, northe discourses he delivered, made the
Siime impression upon hira as upon the raass of the people.' We
know from his work upon Indulgences how widely his opinions
differed from the doctrines prevalent 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 samo scenes were repeated in
1454, when the well-known preacher of penitence, the Italian
Franciscan raonk, John of Capistrano, arriyed at Erfurt, and
there discoursed for two successive hours.' This person, born
in the Abruzzi, a scholar of St Bernardino of Sienna, not
destitute of theological learning, but of great and even uni
versal celebrity as a popular orator,' 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 eraployed on a similar
mission in Gerraany 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, raaking 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
' He probably experienced the sarae feelings, which inspired Luther
with his 55th Thesis. " The Pope can only mean, If Indulgence, which
is a very trivial affair, is gone about vvith 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 Falkenstein s. 315.
3 Trithemius describes him as divini verbi praedicator celeberrimus,
qui multos verbo et exemplo ab iniquitatc convertit. De script, eccles.
cap. 804. p. 187, ed. Fabric. Comp. Schrockh K. Gesch. Th. 33. s.
121. Tb. 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 Wesel's reputation at the University ; for having,
in the year 1456, 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.' 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 raan con
nected by raany 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 hira.' Whether this was one
of the raany works of Hagen enumerated by Trithemius,' and
which one of thera, 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
w-e 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
' Falkenstein s. 315 : " In the year 1458 Count John of Henneberg
was Rector Magnificentissiraus, whose Vice-rector was the then famous
and learned theologian M. .lohn Wesel, coramonly styled Vesalia. His
Leetiones and Quaestiones on the Sententias Lombardi were afterwards
held in singular esteem in this University."
^ See Falkenstein ibid.
' De script, eccles. cap. 822. p. 195. Trithemius says of him,
Johannes Hagen, alias de Indagine, natione Teutonicus, ordinis Car-
thusiensiura, doraus raontis Salvatoris prope Erfordiam, Prior in
Ysenach, et in Stetyn, vir in divinis Scripturis studids-s-simus et valde
eruditus atque in jure canonico egregie doctus, ingenio clarus, concilio
promptus et providus. Scripsit aperto serraone 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 .Job. 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 tho opposition party in the Church.

234 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
leads us to further considerations, for which we have a more
definite historical basis than for the foregoing.

CHAPTEE 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 of
the Church. Nothing could be more natural than that it should
prove the origin of the Eeformatory moveraent of the sixteenth
century. Luther and his coadjutors opposed the inward and
spiritual to that which was outward and carnal, and in at
terapting 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 e-vil 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 Eeformation. 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, Jolm 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 of
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 ho carried on, it is necessary to
give a particular account both of the growth of the doctrine
upon the subject, and of the coraraenceraent of the theological
war against it.
Indulgence'- is originally the remission of ecclesiastical pains '
and penalties, and in as far as it is connected with penitance 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 raerabers, 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 traly 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 excomraunicated, 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 raerabers of
the Christian society increased among the upper and even the
highest ranks, it became raore indulgent and raore lax. During
the mediseval period, in fact, it was no longer regarded as a
spiritual and moral matter at aU,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-
stracting the doctrine, as of the other sacraraents, so likewise of )
that of penance. No doubt they drew a distinction between in- I
' On the History of Indulgences consult especially : Amort de origine
progressu, valore et fructu indulgentiarum. Aug. Vindel. 1735.

236 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
ward and outward penitance, and asserted that the latter was only
valid and efficacious when founded upon the forraer. 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 inouth, 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 ofthe
sins which we corarait in the course of our lives. Such sins being
personal, require a personal satisfaction, and this is eff'ected by the
good works, which constitute the third part of penitance. These
good works are, according to the raeasure of the trespass, fixed
and iraposed by the priest, acting as the steward ofthe sacrament,
and the judge armed with the power of the keys, in the room
of Christ and God. They consist chiefly of fasting, praj^er, and
alms, and are efficacious not merely in doing away the sins of the
past, but as a preservation fi-om those of the future. And just as
in early times the penances of the excomraunicated 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.
Sometiraes, in place of doing penance himself, the party was
allowed to employ a substitute. And soraetimes, 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 becarae more
and more comraon, until at last the matter assumed the shape of
: a mere raoney speculation. Initiativelv thc abuse crrew 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 aU who took
part in the Crusade, which he proposed as a highly raeritorious
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.' The same favour was ere lono-
extended to the militai-y expeditions set on foot against the here
tics in Europe, and at last, by Boniface VIII. in 1300, to the
year of the Eoman jubUee. Subsequently to that date, several
monastic orders and holy places likewise received frora successive
Popes special privileges in the raatter of Indulgence.
The practice was afready in fiiU vogue, when the Scholastic
Theology obsequiously offered to justify it in speculation. It is
of special iraportance for a right understanding of the sequel to
know how that was done, and to this end there are three raen
who chiefly claim our attention, Alexander of Hales, Albert the
Great, and Thomas 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 ofthe
so-called Treasure of the Chu7xh. That doctrine rests npon the
following train of thoughts : Christ, the God-man, by his infi
nitely meritorious sufferings and death, has not only raade a
sufiicient, but a raore than sufficient satisfaction for the sins of
mankind.' He has acquired a superabundance of merit. This
' Coelum, non anininra mutant, qui trans mare currunt, — says Albert
of Stade in his Chronick. Helrast. Ausg. fol. 188.
' 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
guttain sanguinis modicam, quae tamen propter unionem ad Verbum

238 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
superfluous raerit of Christ is conjoined with that of the martyrs
and saints, which is similar in kind, though smaller in degree,
for they Ukewise performed more than the divine law required of
tliem. The sum of these supererogatory raerits and good works
forms a vast Treasure, which is disjoined from the persons who
won or performed thera, exists objectively, and having been
accuraulated by the Head and Merabers of the Church, and in
tended by thera for its use, it belongs to the Church, and is neces
sarily placed under the adrainistration of its representatives, especi
ally the Pope, who is supreme. It is therefore corapetent for the
Pope, according to the raeasure 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,' " are raade from the superero
gatory merits of Christ's raembers, but raost of all from the super
abundance of Christ's own, the two constituting the Church's
spiritual treasure. The adrainistration of this treasure does not
pertain to all, but to those only who occupy Christ's place, riz.,
the Bishops." It appears to Alexander of Hales that this trans
ference of raerit 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 ofthe
Church. "For," he says, " when the Pope grants plenary Indul
gence, he inflicts a penalty, inasmuch as he obliges the Church or
oneofits merabers, to make satisfaction. Or it mayalso besaid,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."' To the objection raised by some thatthe absolution ofthe
Church availed only before the Church's tribunal, and not before
God's, Alexander of Hales answers by saying,^ that if that were
pro redemptione totius humani generis suffecisset, sed copiose velut
quoddam profluviura noscitur effudisse, ita ut a planta pedis usque ad
verticem nulla sanitas inveniretur in ipso — is tbe language of Clemens
VI. in his Jubilee-Bull of 27th Jan. 1343, which first gave the
sanction of the Church to the theory of [ndulgences elaborated by the
Schoolmen. ' Alexand. Hales. Suniraa. P. iv. Quaest. 23. art. 2. raerabr. 3.
' 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 vaUd before the Divine
tribunal, seeing that God considers as reraitted what the
Church remits.' As regards the extent of Indulgence, Alex
ander of Hales is of opinion that it reaches even to the souls '
in Purgatory,' 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, (-}• 1280), adopting the opinions ofthis prede-'
cessor, designates Indulgence^ the reraission of sorae 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 whora it is due, on
condition that some other party, who has done more than was
obligatory upon him, fiimishes 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 perforraance of
good works, such as pilgriraages and alrasgiving. These, How
ever, reduce the action of the Church to child's play, and fall
into heresy. Others, carrying the contrary opinion farther than
' Instead of coraing 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
raen rather infer as follows, — Inasmuch as, if tbe judgment of tbe
Church did not coincide with. that of God, Indulgence would be a cruel
deception, it foUows that, as the infallible Church grants Indulgence,
its judgraent must be in unison with that of God.
' Ibid. art. 2. membr. 5.
' Albert. Magn. in Sentent. Lib. iv Dist. 20. art. 16, 17.

•^40 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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.' The true medium
is, that Indulgence has that precise araount 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' and faith in the power of the keys ;
and two on the part of the Church, aIz., the superabundance of
the treasure of merits, and a proper appreciation of the deliver
ance for which Indulgence was instituted.'
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 rautual 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 ira
port ofthis doctrine as it had come to be taught in the Church
and the schools.'*
Tliomas views Indulgence first as it is in itself, secondly with
reference to the party dispensing, and thirdly vvith reference to
the party receiving it. As for Indulgence in itself, he deduces its
efficacy indirectly from Christ.^ The history of the adulteress
shews, that it is in Christ's power to rerait 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
' . . . nimis bonum forum dant de misericordia Dei.
' . . . et ideo semper in litteris indulgentiarum continetur : omnibus
contritis et confessis.
'justa aestimatio solutionis ejus, pro qua indulgentia est instituta.
* The treatise of Thomas Aquinas referring to this point is in the
Supplementura tertiae partis Summae Theologiae, Quaest. xxv. —
xxvii. ^ In a. 1 Quaest. xxv. art. 1.

IN1>ULGENCES. 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 nugatoi'y. Many, however, allege that it
does not absolve from UabiUty 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 conderan, 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. Tlie reason f
of its efficacy, however, Hes in the oneness of the 7nystical body,^
¦within the limits of which there are many who," as respects
works of penitence, have done more than they were under
obUgation 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 ofthe guilt of all the living, especially'
when augmented hythe merit of Christ, which, although operative!
m 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 whora
there is an overplus of works of satisfaction, did not perforra them
on account ofthis or that individual, who needed pardon, but on
account of the whole Church ; as the Apostle declares (Col. i.
24) : " I fiU 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 \
' Quaest. xxv. art. 1 : Ratio autem, quare valere possint, est uiiilas
corporis mystici, in qua multi in operibus poeiiitcmtiae supererogave-
runt etc. Q

242 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
\ apportioned to the individuals of it, according to the good pleasure
\of himwho pi-esides over the whole? 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 thfrd having
competent authority to do so.
On the e.vtent of the efficacy of Indulgences, St Thomas adopts
I the opinions of his forerunners,' to the effect, that Indulgence
! possesses all the validity which the Church declares it has, and
that it raust be valid, in every case in which there is authority on
the part of hira who dispenses, love on the part of him who ob-
, tains it, and piet\- in the reason for which it is vouchsafed. On
the other hand, he rejects two other \-iews, one, that the efficacy
of Indulgence is regulated by the raeasure 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 raeasure ofthe efficacy of Indulgence — this
St Tliomas reckons to be the truth — is determined by the raeasure
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
' . sic praediota merita sunt comraunia totius Ecclesiae. Ea
autem, quae sunt alicujus raultitudinis communia, distribuuntur singufis
de multitudine, secundum arbitrium ejus, qui multitudini praeest.
^ Quaest. xxv. art. 2.

IKDULGENCi;.'*. 243
purpose of those by whom they were collected. They were
coUected, 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 I
of the Church,' 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 '
Thomas asserts' 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 excomraunicate, 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 frora 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.'
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 jurisdictionis non ad clavem ordinis.)*
The efficacy of this latter power of the keys, however, does not,
' Quaest. xxv. art. 3. ^ Quaest. xxvi.
-^ Quaest. xxvi. art. 1. : . . . in una persona vel in una congre-
gatione non est indeficienlia meritorura, 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
deficienlia raeritorura, praecipue propter meritum Christi ; et ideo solus
ille, qui praeficitur Ecclesiae, potest indulgentias facere.
* Quaest. xxv. art. 2.
Q2

244 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF AVESEL.
like that of the sacraraents, depend solely upon God, but is suh
ij ect also to the judgment of men.' But although bishops and
other parties, invested with jurisdiction, are corapetent 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 power of Indulgence in plenitude.
Let a sufficient cause be presupposed, and in this raatter he can
act according to his good pleasure; whereas the Bishops can only
do as much as the Pope directs, and no more.^ As for the
fi-ame of raind of the dispensing party, an Indulgence is not ren
dered ineflficacious, even though that party should happen to be
in raortal sin,^ for it is granted in virtue of jurisdiction which
raortal 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 i^ecipients of Indidgence, St Thomas
delivers the following judgraent :* In their case, no doubt, the
efficacy of the grace is obstructed by the presence of raortal sin,
for, although on that account they have all the more need, they
are yet all the less susceptible, of it.'^ He who commits a mortal
sin is to be regarded in the light of a dead raember ; 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 Hving members of the Church ; and as
there is no remission of penalty unless there be a pre-vious remis
sion of guilt, so Indulgence cannot profit those who live in the
guilt of mortal sin, but those onlj' who have repented of it and
confessed it.*' The question, whether Indulgence can benefit
monks, is answered by St Thomas in the affirmative,' 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
' . . . clavis jurisdictionis non est quid sacramentale, et
effectus ejus arbitrio boniinis subjacet.
- Quaest, xxvi. art. 3. 3 Xbid. art 4.
¦> Quaest. xxvn. 5 Quaest. xxvii. art. 1.
•* contritis et confessis. " Quaest. xxvii. art. 2.

INDULGENCES. 245
contradiction, if the ^lonastic vow, which is a benefit, were con
nected with a disadvantage. N.-iy, even to the person who dispenses
it, Indulgence may be profitabh'.' For although he cannot ap
point it for himself alone, still, if Indulgence be granted at aU, 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.'- With this, however, is connected a still
more important question,' which St Tliomas answers elsewhere.
If all Indulgence is given on account of sorae 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 go^d 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 *
usefiil 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 hira in whose
behalf the service is done, which is the pi-ocuring cause of the In
dulgence. To this-end, however, a special anfl appropriate forra
of Indulgence is requisite. It raust, for instance, be said, " If
the party perforra 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 raerely the living but also the dead. For there is no
reason why the Church should be able to transfer the coraraon
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 Tliomas, 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 raodura 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. - Ibid. art. 3.
2 Ouaest. l.-^xii. art. 10.

246 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF WESEL.
of absolution upon the dead,' while others fancied that tliere
was here also an immediate judicial decision of the Pope.'-'
In this raanner, the doctrine of Indulgence had been fully
elaborated so early as the second half ofthe 13th century. What
had been wTitten upon it, especiall}- by St Tliomas, continued
thenceforward the type of the Church's teaching, and was
neither superseded nor changed by the Council of Trent. A
criticisra 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 erainent doctors, and sanc
tioned by Papal bulls, the doctrine of Indulgence not only
introduces a contradiction into the Catholic systera, in respect
that works of satisfaction, which were originally an integral part
of the sacrament of penitence, are entirely disconnected -vrith it,
and viewed as a raere raatter of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; but
it has this fiirther radical defect pervading all its constituent
\ parts, that moral and religious things which can only be taken
las spiritual magnitudes, are considered as material ones, quality
being treated wholly as quantity, and consequently a standard of
external coraputation, and a sort of religious arithraetic applied,
which involves contradiction.^ Even in order to establish the
superabundance of the raerit of Christ, it was aflfirmed 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
' 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. s. 355. Note q.
^_In this point ofview, Indidgences also show the legal tendency of
the Catholic Cburcb in the middle ages, audits 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 tbat of the particular transgressions in the
life of men, whereas the New Testament says nothing of any snch
relation of quantity, but rests everything upon the unity of the dispo
sition and bpnf of the will. Si e the shrewd remarks of Guriitt 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 Uke 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 raerits of Christ and the saints was described as a
purely external transference of a portion of that sura 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 frora a religious personage as
snch, for he might be in mortal sin at the tirae, but only frora
such a personage in as far as he possessed or shared the judicial
power ofthe Church. The whole was thus a legal proceeding, a !
computation of magnitudes, which, under such a forra, had no
existence in this field, an extemal work in glaring contrast
with the essentiaUy spiritual nature of Christianity. At the sarae
time, as respects the merits of the saints, the theory of Indulgence
rests on the supposition, that a raan, wbo is sriU human, although
a saint, may not only possess a sufficiency of merit to answ-er his
own need before God, but may lUie-wise do raore than the Divine
law deraands 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 tbe glory of God. In point of fact, the doctrine ^ ^
and practice of Indulgences gives the Church a position as an —
absolutelv unerring and omniscient judicial power. It identifies
the tribunal ofthe Church with that of God, and the tribunal
of the Pope with that ofthe 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 THK 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
nnd the dead, according to his mere good pleasure. Granting,
however, that tiie 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. Wliat an infinite araount of obligation would it impose
\upon the Papacv, and with wdiat conscientiousness sharpened to
the utmost, ought thePopes, ifthey were bold enough to believe
tbat such plenitude of power had actually been lodged in the
bands of any child of the dust, tohave dispensed the lofty bless-
'ings committed to their trast ? How careftiUy ought they to
have guarded them frora perversion and debasement 1 And yet
what do we see ? Abuse upon abuse, and profanation upon pro-
I 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.' 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 pri-vilege of the
Eomish 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 wdth one word
release all souls from Purgatory ?^ was at that time debated by
tbe theologians with solemn earnestness. The ans-wer they gave
¦was : if God himself exercises his compassion in such a manner
' References in Gieseler B. n. Abth. 2. § 82. s. 497.
- Not quite in mockery, but as one of the " acute and cunning ques
tions of tbe 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 frora Purgatory for the sake of sacred charit^•, and in compassion
of their pains, than which tbeit: can be no holier reasons, while for the
sake of perishable pold, wbicb is the very worst reason, he frees num
bers ?"

INDULGENCES. 249
as not to do away with tbe 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 witii discretion and raode
ration. For if this were not the case, God would w-ithhold his
approbation.' During the 14th centuiy Indulgences were raulti
plied frora the raost multifarious causes, and more and more came
to be granted fiir money ; at last, indeed, a regular list of prices
was dra^vn out, so that what had been already treated in theory
as a sort of traffic witb ecclesiastical blessings no-w also assumed
in practice the shape of a mercantile transaction, and the busi
ness was carried on with a punctuality and attention which^ would
have done honour to the first comraercial house in the world.
The mischief attained a still greater height under the Popes of
A\ignon, and those of the schism. Divested of their old Eoraan
dignityand independence, the former generaUy tumed their atten
tion to pecuniary speculations ; while the latter, di-viding between
them the countries of Christendom, endeavoured, each within his
own jurisdiction, to raise as large an amount as the single Pope
u.^ied to collect ft-om the whole domain of the Church. The
Council of Constance recognising the evils connected with the
sale of Indulgences, endeavoured to restrain them,' 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,* never was the system raore
shamefuUy^abused than in the course ofthe 15th century.
From the first the great body of the people had looked upon
Indulgence, in a very gross and camal 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 thera
selves very little with the repentance and confession which were
insinuated as conditions ; and in point of fact, they raight very
simply argue. If contrition and repentance are of real value,
' The difficulty is solved in the Sumraa Astesana (a casuistic work of
the Minorite Astesanusin 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. R. 351. Note. b.

250 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
why is a price also deraanded ?' If a price be necessary to
implement their insuflficiency, contrition and repentance cannot
be of any great inoment. In these low views, the people w-ere
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 arguraents which
either absolutely oraitted, or at least cast into the shade, all reli
gious and moral requireraents.

An abuse of this sort could not becorae prevalent in the
Church without originating atterapts to put a stop to it, on the
part of pious and serious raen. From the 13th century, when
the system reached its maturity, loud and raany 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 frora 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 15tli century especially it spread far and wide, and assumed
a character of greater determination ; and at last, at the com
mencement ofthe 16th, gave the watchword of the Eeformation
in the Theses of Luther. But long before Luther's bold protest,
others had spoken out upon the matter withevengreaterintrepidity
and more comprehensive views, and foremost among these stands
John of Wesel. As we propose to pourtray Wesel in the character
of Luther's forerunner in this raatter, it is proper that we should
recollect at the same time who was WeseFs own, and here we
once more meet a person of whom we have already had occasion
repeatedly to speak — viz., Jacob of Jiiterbock.
Jocob of Jiiterbock, like raany divines of the period, wrote a
special Treatise upon Indulgences? For this the jubilee of 1450
1 In this sense, Luther, in his 87 th Thesis, puts the foUo-A'ing into the
inouth of the " coramon raan :" " Why does the Pope issue or dis
pense his Indulgence to those wbo, having perfectly repented, have a
right to perfect forgiveness and reraission ? "
2 .liicobi Junlerburgii de Indulgentiis Traclalio. Walch Monim. med.
aov. vol. ii.fas,-. 2. p. 163—270.'"

INDULGENCES. 251
appears to have fumished the occasion ;' as the chief object of I
the work was, to calm the minds of his monastic brethren, who '¦
were prednded fi-om travelling to Eome to obtain the promised [
benefit. The graces of the year of JubUee being at first, as
is well known, connected with a pilgrimage to that city, and
not untU, afterw-ards, extended to foreign countries, " It might
seem," says the author,- " that monks are in a worse condition
than laymen, as respects tbe remission of sin and guilt by Indul
gences, inasrauch as they are totally unable to procure tbem,
being forbidden to quit their monasteries, and much too poor to
pay the price. In point of fact many monks are deeply afifiicted
on this account," and tbe author confesses that at one tirae he was
himself among the nuniber of those who, " conscious of their faU
ings, looked fondly upon Indulgences as a means by which these
might be purged away." Persons experiencing such feelings are,
by Jacob of Juterbock, referred' 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 Eome, was a great seeker of Indul
gences ; and just as Httle 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 thefr rules, that their disciples were to hunt after
Indulgences, if they had known that that was salutary for raonks."
If we here consider that St Thomas contends for the extension
to monks ofthe benefit of Indulgence,* we will perceive in these
statements, and especiaUy in the style in which they are expressed,
a depreciation of their value. This,howe\-er, is still more distinctiy
evinced' bythe author's aflfirming in the sequel, that Indulgences,'
as being designed to cover the lack of raerit by draughts of it ;
from the Church's store, are intended properly for the poor and ]
' He refers also to the year of Jubilee, its origin and rise. Cap. 43.
fl. 252. According to Trithemius de script, eccles. cap. 814. p. 191,
Jacob V. J. wrote a separate tract entitled de anno jubilaeo.
^ Caps. 1 and 2.
3 Cap. 3.
* Surara. Suppl. Quaest. xxvii. art. 2. see p. 244.
* Cap. 11.

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.
" The treasure, however," he proceeds,' " is collected by the per
fect raen, and the life of the raonks, as being devoted to con
templation, is the raore calculated to do honour to God by charity
and good works. It is not the business of monks, therefore, to
be beggiii'j; for indulgences, but rather to be augmenting the
treasure of them. In this w-ay they ought to be rich in order to
relieve the poverty of others. Let the laity, however, who are
tbo paupers of the raonks, receive from them their supplies."
As respects the doctrine of Indulgence in general, .Jacob of
.Jiiterhoek, averse to deviate from the Doctors of theology and
tbe canon law, adheres to the received views, especially as laid
' do^'vn by St Thomas? Partly, however, he gives prominence to
a point greatly overlooked at the tirae, 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.'
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 Juterbock assigns supreme
and exclusive authority to the Pope* in dispensing Indulgences,
while to the other prelates and oflficers 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 corapetent
to every piiest, in all cases that concern hira, and so far as his
jurisdiction extends."' 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,^ and
assigns as the reason, that persons in Purgatory are not under
the authority of him who dispenses the indulgence, and could
' Cap. l-->. - Cap. 4, and tlio.se following.
•¦' Cap. 6. Cap. 40. faj) Itj.
• Cap. II. 6 Cap. 27.

INDULGENCES. 253
know nothing of it except by special revelation ; in another pas
sage' 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 Ufe, 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
guUt, he meets as foUows :'- " Where forgiveness is offered both
from guUt and punishraent, either this must not be understood
m 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 punishraent
and likevrise 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,' this is done to distinguish it from a
partial (sendplena) 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, Ffrst, that the author, although recognising
Lidulgence as a discharge frora the satisfactions imposed by the
Church, nevertheless hints* 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 satisfiic-
tion is made for the sins remitted at confession, and a compen
sation paid to the Divine justice ; and further, because such
' Cap. 30. 2 Cap. 40. » Cap. 41.
* Cap. 6. s. 174.

254 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
performance is a reraedy against future sins. In the second
place, the author in connexion with the same subject observes
at the close,' " In these days the prelates of the Churches, find
ing how hard it is to persuade the people to exercise a proper
penitence, have raultiplied indulgences, out of concern for the
salvation of their souls. In the priraitive Church, however, men
were greatly raore disposed to repentance, and for that reason far
less was said about indulgences."

In Jacob of Juterbock we see a person who, though the cor
ruption had reached a great height, speaks of it in the gentlest
and raost sparing terms, and only ventures to hint at some im
provement. On the other hand, John of Wesel has advanced
farther, coraes forward with greater power, and begins to
lay the axe to the root of the tree. The festival of the year of
Jubilee furnished hira 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 tirae Indulgences
were dispensed, and the year before."* The expression " when
Indulgences were dispensed," can only refer to the year of
Jubilee. During the period of WeseFs raanhood, however, two
such festivals took place, one in 1450 under Cleraent 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
.lubilee, however, was all the more calculated to excite and in
flame Wesel, tbat in 1451, Cardinal von Cusa visited Erfurt, as
a preacher of Indulgence, and afforded Wesel an opportunity of
witnessing its effects. The only diflficulty is that Wesel was not
made a Doctor of Divinity until 1456. StiU either this date
cannot be entirely relied on, or he was, as many then were, a
' Cap 47. s. 269.
2 Terapore eo, quando fuerunt Indulgentiae, scripsi Tractatnm de
Indulgentiis et anno praecedenti. This date is taken from the raanu
script copy of his prosecution for heresy, to be exarained hereafter.

INDULGENCES. 255
professor before he was a doctor of theology. At all events, it is
a point chronologically settied, 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
confroversy, 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 Eomish year of
Jubilee, is connected with the Jewish, although across an im
mense interval of time, and wearing a totally different sl^ape.
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,' 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.- The institution of the Eoman JubUee took place about
the commencement of the 14th century of the Christian era,
under the haughty Boniface VIIL, who at the close of his
life sustained so deep a humiliation. According to the account
of a contemporary,^ and near relative, the impulse, which origi-
' eVos i^lt alpitreias Or aCpeais.
^ Jacob of Jiiterbock de Indulg. cap. 43. p. 252, says, after havirg
raentioned its Old Testament foundation : Ex isto fundaraento coUigi-
rous, quod annus jubibieus est annus dimissionis. Et ad hujus simili
tudinem nos vocamus tempus gratiae annum jubilaeum, quia illo anno
datur a Romano Pontifice remissio plena per indulgentias per eum factas
certis locis.
3 The Pope's grandson, Jacobus Cajetanus (Gregorii ad velum aureum
diaconi Cardinalis) in the treatise, de centesimo seu Jubilaeo anno fiber.
Biblioth. Patr. Max. tora. xxv. p. 267 and 936. Raynald. Annal.

25(5 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
nated it, did not proceed from the Pope himself, but from the
inhabitants of Eorae. " 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 comraence, would have so great a virtue,
that all tbe inhabitants of Eome 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 disc-overing 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
raents relating to it had been lost, or whether there was more of
fancy than of fact at work in the whole aff'air." Nevertheless,
upon January 1st of the new century, especiaUy 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 wdien 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 ])re-
sence of the Pope und of others suraraoned for the occasion, that
he well reraembered how, 100 years ago, his father, who was a
peasant, had gone to Eome 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
sirailar vouchers started up in other places, the matter continued
a vague rumour; but, notwithstancUng, the Pope, in concur
rence with the Cardinals, considered it expedient to institute
the new devotion. In a bull,' of date 22d February 1300, his
Holiness, building upon the reliable stateraents of old men,^ in
virtue ofthe Divine mercy, with confidence in the merits ofthe
Apostles Peter and Paul, and frora the plenitude of his Papal I
Eccles. ad ann. 1300. t. xiv. p. 538. Schrockh K. G. Th. 28. s. 164 sq.
Gieseler ii. 2. § 82. s. 499 sq.
' It is in the Extravagantes comraunes 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.
'~ Antiquorum habet fida relatio etc.

INDULGENCES. 257
authority, proraises that every one who, in the course ofthe year
1300, and of every lOOtli year to corae, shall visit with reverence
the churches of the Apostles Peter and Paul in Eorae, and
there do penance and confess his sin, shall obtain not only a full,
but the vei'y fullest forgiveness of all his sin«,' 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 stirred up by the
Pope or the clergy. But w-hether that were the case or not, at
aU 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 JubUee
displayed the plenitude of the Papal power with increased bril
liancy, gave to the practice of Indulgence a new foundation and
fresh spu-it, and brought incalculable gain to the city of the
Papal residence.2 In the course of the first year, it is said, that
not less than 200,000 pUgrims visited Eome. The advan
tages, however, rendered it highly desirable tbat 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 Eome might die and never see the return of the
blessed season I' 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 raight be, the fact is, that
' . . . non solum plenam, sed largiorem, imo plenissimam omnium
suorum concedimus 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 VL, in the Bull appointing the Jubilee every 50tb year,
says : Volentes quara plurimos hujusmodi indulgentiae fore participes,
cuin pauci multorum respectu propter vitae hominum brevitatem vale
ant ad annum centesimura pervenire. . . .
K

! I

258 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
Clement VL, 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, Umited
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 tirae to which we transport ourselves iu
thought, i.e., in 1450, under Nicolaus V.' 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 appointraent of Cleraent VL, and fixed upon
1450. The concourse of pilgrims from all the countries of
Europe was again iraraense. At the garaes 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 nurabers who
made the pilgrimage to Eome, the Indulgence was in the foUow
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 coraposed his Disputation, not about, but against
'Indulgences,^ 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 monuraents of the 15th
century, we raust here give a soraewhat coraplete idea of it.
Even the introduction is very remarkable. " We read," says
Wesel,^ " the discourses of Jesus Christ the Son of God recorded
in the four Gospels. In these the raysteries of salvation, and
probably aU 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 adversus Indulgentias Disputatio ; in Walchii
Monira. raed. aevi. 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,
avrote nuraerous 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 Dorainic and St Francis insti
tuted their orders, that raen of erainence and learning wrote
upon the subject. Even they are far from being unanimous,
and express the raost 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.' Nay,
I myself have debated the value of Indulgence in the schools,
and maintained its efficacy and Di-vine 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
his opinion upon the subject, he proposes to give a deUberate
summary of his convictions. At the sarae 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,^ " 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 Sciipture,^ although the \ea%t, pro
test at the outset, tliat it is not my intention to say or wiite any
thing in any way contradictory of the trath of the faith, as that is
contained in Scripture. If, however, ray opinion or averment 1
shaU also contradict any, it may be of the sacred teachers, I ;
intend not thereby to impugn his honour or sanctity. For I can i

' . . . temporibus his, quibus ego Joannes de Vesalia in hu-
manis degi.
- Cap. 3.
' Ego Joannes de Vesalia sacrae scripturae professor vocatus, licet
minimus, ante omnia protestor. . . In a similar, though some
what prouder way, Luther commences his tract, in which he made
known to the worid the burning of the Papal Bull : -' I, Martin Luther,
Doctor of Holy Scripture, Augustinian Monk at Wittemberg, wish all
men to know."
k2

260 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 appfying them as a test
to the authority of all ecclesiastical teachers, as being otherwise
insuflicient of itself, Wesel, with copious citations from Scripture,
lays down the foUo-wing seven propositions?
1. On every one w-ho 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 mercifiil
in a w.iy 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 wdl.
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.^
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 ju.stice is also
satisfied, is by no means certain, unless it has been revealed by
God. For the Divine will ( We.sel 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 frora the merits of Christ, and the
' Cap. 4—10. pll5— 119.
^ Quia ipse est ab ecclesia constitutus juris positivi institutor, inquan
tum ad aedificationem ecclesiae facit, non ad destructionem.

INDULGENCES. 261
supererogatory works of the saints, and committed to the charge
ofthe Pope, is undoubtedly very pious, but is at the same time
an opinion to which certain modest objections may be profitably
made.' 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 transitorj'-; and
when the saints cease to labour, their works have no independent!
existence of their own,^ but in as far as, through the grace j
of God, they are in any degree meritorious, they follow their
authors frora 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 whei-e they who
. performed them reside. If, during life, the saints earned any merit
for others, it was done consonantly w-ith the will of God, who
distributes to every one severall}- as he will. Our raerit 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 Di-v-ine comraission for the purpose, it
can only be done in virtue of some agreement entered into be
tween God and hira, 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 WeseFs senti
ments upon Indulgence. Still raore weighty, however, are the
reasons which he proceeds to_ allege, because in these he enters
into an analysis of the raost 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 We.sel,^ according to the cuiTent
notion, remission of the temporal penalty for an actual sin? Of
' Opinioni doctorum de thesauro ecclesiae . . . quanquam sit
valde pia, salubres tamen sunt debiles objectiones. The word debiles is
either corrupt, or is used half in irony-
2 . . . nullum esse habent secundum se.
3 Cap 11.
4 . . remissio ponae temporalis debitae pro peccato actuafi.

262 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
the pardon and remission of sin, (7'emissio et di7nissio) he proceeds,
much is said in the Scrijjtures of the Old and New Testaments,
without any distinction being drawn between them. Now, inas
rauch as a reference to debt is not unfrequently connected with
reraission, the question arises whether sin and debt are the same.
To this it raav 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 raan, and even God hiraself, is called a debtor
without involving any reference to sin. Sin.2 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 righteous7iess which
is vouchsafed to hira 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 contravene it ; and even those who are acquainted with
it do not always know the Lawgiver's will, or in how far he
lajs any thing to the charge of the party desiring, speaking, and
acting. In as far, how-ever, as obedience to the law arises from
grace, he who \'iolates 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 e-vil resulting from sin is the being dispossessed
of that which is good, and it is the destitution of that w-hich is
good, when such destitution is felt, which engenders punishment.'
There are therefore in sin two things, the guilt and the penalty.
It is not that sin consists of the two : on tho contrary, sin is guilt
) Cap. 11— 15. 2 Cap. 17. ^ Cap. 15.

INDULGENCES. 263
conjoined with punishment, (culpa et debitum eum counotatione
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 w^rong 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 fiirther explain,' in as far as this
can be known without injury to faith — for faith is the knowledge
of what we may in thought a;:iprehend,^ but cannot comprehend
—we must, I say, furtiier 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 comtnunication and infusion of gi'ace which
makes man iv ell-pleasing to God.^ And inasmuch as it is God alone
who coraraunicatesand infiises grace, it is asked in Scripture,
" Who can forgive sin but God only ?* Even, however, if God do
irapart and infuse grace, without antecedent raerit, he does not
do so to persons who offer obstruction to it, (obicem ponentihus),
but only to those who do their utraost to prepare for its recep
tion. How this preparation should be raade,* 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. Eepentance,
however, is voluntary sorrow for sins coraraitted, and this is the
only frame of mind which corresponds with the forgiveness of
sins, consisting as that does in the comraunication of grace.
If then, in the New Testaraent law, the pardon of sin by God
has annexed to it the condition, that the recipient shall forgive
bis neighbour, the question arises, in how far it is possible for a
man to forgive sin '? Here We.sel' 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

J Cap 17.
- Fides enim est notitia eorum, quae per inteUectum nostrum com-
prehendi non possunt, possunt autem aliqualiter arfprehendi.
5 Cap. 18.
*Markii 7. Js. xliu. 25. Hos. xiii. 4 — 14.
¦' Cap. 19. and 20. " Cap. 21 and 2-2.

264 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
he injures him either in his person, property, or relatives. He
sins against God in as far as lie 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 abUity 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 bis sin, even when the off'ended 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' that
no priest can dispense pardon originally and effectually (princi
paliter et eff'ective), but only by the Divine assistance, which lies
in the comraunication of grace. Hence the priestly absolution is
a sacramental service (quoddam ministeiium saci'amentale) which
is rendered to the penitent sinner, and thus it coincides wdth the
adrainistration ofthe sacraraent of penitence, the effect of which
is forgiveness of sin, and in which forgiveness Ukewise rests upon
the coraraunication of grace by God, in virtue of an agreement
entered into w-ith the priest.
We.sel lays a marked stress upon the principle,^ that there is
no -virtue in the sacrament of penitence to produce any effect,
prior to the comraunication of grace. Aware that in this opinion,
he differs frora 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, We^el, on the con
trary, took his stand upon the siraple 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 tbeir nature, substance (quidditate) and subject, (and conse
quently in a transaction so corapUcated as the sacrament of
penitence) there should reside one and the same undivided eflS
cacy, an essential unity, as the sacramental operation inigbt be
' Cap. 24 and 2.T. 2 Cap. 26.

INDULGENCES. 265
called. Accordingly the truth, which seemed to him to result,' is
that w-hen the priest, with right intention and suitable words,
dispenses the sacraraent of penitence to a person in a penitential
frame of mind, God himself works, p>-oduee.i, 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^
the conflicting opinions of the teachers, and then states as his
own, that a man coraraitting 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 Hfe etemal, so that whoever receives grace,
is fi-eed frora UabiUty to everlasting punishraent. The case, how
ever, is different with respect to the teraporal penalty. On that
point' sacred Scripture says nothing positive. So rauch, how
ever, we raay learn f'rom 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 aflfiictions 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,* 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 etem.al and teraporal punishment. But then
when the work of Divine grace is designated perfect, this must
not be understood absolutely, but in a way of its own, and to the
1 Cap. 23. 2 Cap. 27—23. ' Cap. 29. ¦• Cap. 30.

266 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
effect that grace restores man to a condition in which it is pos
sible for him to raerit eternal life.' "With such a condition, how
ever, liabUity to teraporal 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 this leads him to the chief subject
of discussion, naraely.
Indulgence. The first question which he here encounters is,
whether such a thing exists at all? This question he answers as
follows ? If there be anything w-hich answers to the definition
we have given of Indulgence, that thing raust 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
inspfred 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' 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 w-hat 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 suprerae agent in the
raatter (principalis) does. Inasrauch, lioAvever, as, in dispen
sing the grace which consists in the forgiveness of sins, God does
not abolish, but rather iraposes, thefr temporal penalties, so neither
is any one, in virtue of the oflfice of the keys, invested with the
power of dispensing Indulgence. This appears to me to be an
arguraent of demonstrative force in Theology.
1 Cap. 32. 2 Cap. 34. ¦" Cap. 35.
2

INDULGENCES. 267
Others on the contrary aUege' — and this was the prevaiUng
opinion, and was laid by St Thomas at the foundation of his ex
position on the subject'^ — 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 aflfirm, but tbey 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. Ixvii., a statement is
only trae 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 fiirther basis
for Indulgence by the proposition, that the penalties due for sin
are compensated by those which Christ and all other innocent
sufferers have bome, and by the supererogatory merit of the
works of Christ and ofthe saints, both those who have departed
this life and those w-ho stiU survive. They who entertain this
opimon, says Wesel,^ 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 suppUes are allotted
to those who Hve in charity, but who are still wdthout 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 Eome dispenses the treasure, and has
the pri-vileges of Indulgence at his disposal. " O how blessed
a thmg 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 fiirther
urged.* . In the first place, if the penalties due for sin are compensated
by means of those of Christ and the saints, it miglit be asked
by whom are they compensated? If it be said, that God is the
' Cap. 42. ^ Supplem. Quaest. xxv. art. 2. see above p. 243.
' Cap. 43. * Cap. 44.

268 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
punishraent. 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
judgraent 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 w-hen, from the treasure ofthe Church,
he allots to him a suitable equivalent, he accepts of the same
(as a satisfaction), the que-^tion arises, ^Vlio 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,' 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,"^ that maiij' more than two have agreed in
the prayer that God would perrait 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 coraraitted the distribution to the Pope, so
that to hira the work of corapensation pertam s, we have to answer,'
that the Lord hiraself expressly restricted his words, by the
saj-ing which iraraediately follows, viz., " Where two or three
are gathered together in my name, there am I in the raidst of
them."* Now all do not meet together in the name of Jesus,
who say " Lord, Lord," or " Jesus, thou art our God ;" for
many meet in that way who do not obtain the object of thefr
prayers ; but only they are meant, w-hom the Di\-ine will, antici
pating their prayers, brings together. That this is the raeaning
no one -will doubt who believes that God confers his graces ac
cording to the fi-eedora of his will.^ 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 pmiishment of the innocent in place
of the guilty party, would be a violation of the Divine justice ;
1 Cap. 45. 2 Matth. xviii. 19. 3 Cap. 46.
* Matth. xviii. 20. .5 1 Cor xii. 11, 18.

INDULGENCES. 269
whereas the very smallest penalty endui-ed by the transgressor
himself may- be acceptable and pleasing to God, even for many
and great sins.
In the second place, '^ 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 Ufe. There
does, however, exist a pu.rgatoi-}-, and consequently certain
punishments must be kept in reserve for it. That the expecta
tion ofa purgatory after the present life is well founded,^ appears
in the first place by the saying of the Lord :' " Agree with thine
adversary . . . lest at any time the adversary deliver thee
to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the oflficer, and thou
he cast into prison." The place ofthis prison raust not be sought
in the present life, but in the life to corae, and in that, it cannot
be hell (inasrauch as a prospect of escape fi-ora it is held out.)
It must, therefore, be purgatory. It is also shewn by the say
ing of Christ,* " Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost,
it shall not be forgiven hira, neither in this world nor in the
world to come." For here a possibUity of forgiveness is supposed,
and somewhere in the world to corae. 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,® "The fire shall
trv every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work shall
he 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."
In fine, Wesel also refers' 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 recoUected 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 con-victions, settied 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. ' Matth. v. 25.
* Matth. x 32 M Cor. iU. 13, 15. « 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
such penances, punishraents, and works, satisfaction was made
to God, who for that reason either whoUy or in part remitted
his punishraent. As these notions, how-ever, are not autho
rized by Holy Scripture, their weight depends upon theraselves,
and it raay be said' that the sort of remissions which we call
Indulgences, are a pious fraud practised upon believers, as
many priests have already declai-ed. 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 fi'aud. 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- in giving a
negative answer to the question : Can the truth of Indulgence
be demonstrated from Scripture ? The age in which he Uved,
however, recognized another authority, as superior to that of
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 aUeged, The Church
is infallible, and the Church sanctions indulgence, therefore indul
gence raust 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,
whUe 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 :' 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
' 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 coUective 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 SrajTua, 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
hy Peter. Universal is synonymous with CathoUc, 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.' 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 heU shall never prevaU,^ and inasmuch as this Church
(the Christian Church in a narrower sense) is holy and unde
filed,' there exists no error in it, none at least that is self-
induced, because that would be a spot or wrinkle. In vfrtue,
therefore, of the Church of Christ being a part of that which is
CathoUc, the proposition that the Catholic Church does not en-
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, liowever, there is another,* viz.. That the
Universal Church does err, and that she is an adulteress and
whore, the reason being that she is in part coraposed of wicked
men. The result is, that the argument drawn frora the infallibi-
Uty of the Church is inconclusive, because it applies only to a part
of it. The proposition, however, that the Church grants indul-
' Cap. 53. 2 Mat. xvi. 18. ' Eph. v. 27. * Cap. 54.

272 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
gence, comes from that part of the Church which does err. The
other arguraent, that the Chm-ch in incompetently granting in
dulgence would do more harm than good, Wesel fully admits,'
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. He says that the Church ought not to
dispense it, because it is founded upon error.

Such is the substance of John of WeseFs treatise against In
dulgence, — a treatise which likewise derives high iraportance from
the style of its controversy. It is interesting to see, how he
penetrates into all the joints of the Scholastic and Ecclesiastical
systera, inserts the w-edge 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 w-hat is raost important of all, he does this,
not, like so many in the same ranks of the opposition both
before and after bira, 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 Eeformer,
j and constituting the basis of his entire theology. The radical
ideas, which were the starting point of WeseFs controversy, are
manifestly those of the Divine justice, and the Divine mercy,
especially the latter. To keep these ideas pure, unimpafred, 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. Kthen,
on the one hand, Divine justicec alls for punishraent, and this
punishment cannot, by human satisfaction or imputation, be done
' Cap. 53.

INDULGENCES. 273
away, recovering and succouring inercy 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
guUt ; and this effect it substantially produces by coraraunicating
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 comraission, to raediate, and with
its priesthood, to rainister 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 hiraself. 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 tbe 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 raade a distinction between the key of priesthood
(chms ordinis), and the key of jurisdiction (clavis jurisdictionis),
and a question arose to which of the two keys pertained the
plenary pow-er of Indulgence. The Schoolmen decided in favour
of the forraer, Wesel in favour of the latter, but in a way which ;
led him to subvert Indulgence altogether. This is a raain point'
in his controversy. What he eays 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

274 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
their rise ;' and the priest is but the minister who announces
the Divine pardon of sin, and the aboUtion of its punishment,
\vhen its punishment is really abolished. If it emanate, however,
f'rom the key of jm-isdiction, 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 ])()ssesses anv special revelation on the subject. More-.
over, the title to assume a key of jurisdiction would require tobe
first demonstrated, and that cannot be done, for there is no trace
of anything of the kind either in Scripture or the ancient Church.
'lln this raanner, 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 tlu-ory of Indulgence,
viz. the doctrine ofthe treasure of good w-orks and of its objective
existence ; and when at last, from lack of sufficient scriptural
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 \isible and invisible Church
of God, he draws a similar distinction between the Church
universal and the Chm-ch 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 tirae suflficiently equitable to
acknowledge, that raixed up with the deception there was some
thing at least subjectively pious in the case of every work per
formed from love to God.
A^' hether WeseFs 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
' 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 ordinis
in foro confessionis de poena debita diraittatur ; sed tantum dimittitur,
quantum Deus ordinavit.

INDULGENCKS. 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 ]VeseFs 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 upon the Di\-ine mercy on the one hand, and upon repen
tance on the other. He says in the 36tii Thesis, "Every Christian
who truly repents of his sins, and mourns over thein, 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, or departed
from it, is made partaker of all the blessings of Christ and the
Church, by the gift of God and w-ithout any letter of indulgence."
In Luther's view- also, the relation of Divine grace to the sinner is
direct, for he says, m the 58th Thesis, " The merits of Christ and
the saints produce, at all times and without the Pope's interference,
grace in the inner raan. Equally with Wesel, he denies that Indul
gence, in and of itself, has any efficacy in procuring the forgi-icness
of sin ; '' On the contrary, we aflfirm," is the language of the 76tli
Thesis, " that the Pope's Indulgence cannot take away the very
smaUest of our daily sins, so far as its guilt is concerned." The
two Ukewise entirely agree in making the personal qualification
for dispensing indulgence, depend upon the sentiments w-ith which
the power is exercised. For, as Wesel says, " the work of
Indulgence may be a pious and profitable w-ork, ifit be done frora
the love of God ;" so is the language of Luther to the sarae eff'ect
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 raore 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, raore self-reliant and coraprehensive.
The riew he took ofthe whole .systera and its ultimate reasons was
wider than Luther's, w-hich, 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 7 1st Thesis,
and said, as there can be no doubt, at the time, with the deepest

276 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 ofthe
author with raore erainent 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 DEPKAVED CLEKGY.

CHAPTEE FIEST.
WESEL AS PEEACHEE AT MAYENCE. THE RHINELAND. WOEMS.
wesel's theology AJJD PEACTICE.
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 caUed — probably about 1460 — as a preacher to Mayence?
' Luther, in his disquisition De ConciUis § 192. Th. 16. s. 2743 in
Walch, says of Wesel, " Who was preacher at Mayence." This is
considered by Christ. Wilh. Franz Walch (Monira. med. aev. ii., t.
Praef. p. Ivi.) as an error. He says that it was at Mayence that
Wesel was conderaned, but that he was a preacher only at 'Worras.
fValch'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
ofthe Monography on Diether of Isenburg, Frankf. 1792, believes that
Wesel was preacher in the Cathedral of Mayence in 1468. This, how-

278 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF ¦\VESEL.
Owing to the close connexion of the two places, it seems to have
been customary to call distinguished teachers and preachers from
the seat ofthe University to that ofthe archiepiscopal residence.
We find two additional instances occurring in the course of the
15th century. The first w-as Jolm of Lutter, '^ a man who had
gained distinction as a preacher at Erfurt, and who continued in
the zealous exercise of the oflfice until his death in 1479. The
second -was Master Eggeling or Engelin from Brunswick,^ who
was even greater than the former as a theologian, enjoyed also
au extraordinary rcjmtation as a jjreacher, and, after labouring
for a considerable period at ^layence, terminated his life at Stras
burg in 1481. These two persons were preceded at Mayence by
John of We.sel, w-ho did not, howe\-er, hold the oflfice 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 w-e shall aftenvards see, to end his days in
prison. As, next to Erfurt, Worms was the chief theatre of WeseFs
labours, and as these raainly 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,
thechief seat of culture and intellectual activity lay in the Southern
districts, on the Rliine downward,-!, and extended in the central, as
ever, cannot be true, because on tbe supposition thatit is, tbe seventeen
years could not be made up, which, we know for certain, ll'ese? after
vvards passed at Worms, previous to bis trial for heresy.
' Trithemius calls bim Johannes de Lvtria, 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.
Quaedara in Philosophia.
2 In his Book, de script, eccles. c. 854. p. 203. Trithemius speaks of
him under tlic name Angelus Saxo de Brunsvico— in the work de
script. Germ, c 219 under the name 'Magister Engelinus. In tbe first
passage he predicates of him : ingenio acer, vi(a praeelarus, in decla-
mandis sermonibus ad populum celeberrimae opiniouis. His writings :
In Canonem inissae.— Serraonrs varii. — Quaestione.^ diversae.— Quae
dam alia.

THE KH1M.L.\NI). 279
far as the Elbe. ^Ve have afready become acquainted with Erfurt
as a centre of scientific, and especially of theological, life, for the
North of Gerraany. Leipsic and WItteraberg became its associ
ates at the coraraenceraent, in the one case, of the IStli, 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 Ehine. This country, as designated by the popular wit, was
the priest-gait of the German empire. Here the clemency of the
governraent 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
especiaUy rich in monasteries, and of these, there were always
some which shone as nurseries of erudition, and harboured within
their silent enclosures men w-ho, 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 earUer mediaeval period, to be found exclu
sively in the circle of the clergy and the monks. Education
became more and more a comraon 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, w-hose connection
with the Church was feebler than in former years. The locali
ties, however, in the great valley of the Ehine,' which claim
special attention, as scenes of ecclesiastical and civil life, of
science and of art, are the folio-wing. In Constance and Basle, the
great reforming councils w-ere 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 Friburg, which was adomed with a university about
the same date. Strasbu7-g w-as 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

' Comp. an older treatise iu llagtn, Deutschlands liter, mid relif;
Verhaltni.sse iin Kelonn. Zeitaltfr. 1841. li. i. s. 197 sqq.

280 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WE*SEL
Hagenau, the nurse of the newly invented art of printing. In
the middle district of the Ehine Speyer, Worms, and Mayence
flourished as ancient and famous tovms,' 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 Ehine, stood the town
of Heidelberg, the abode of princes, distinguished both for bravery
and love of science, and adomed (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 Ehine 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, stiU, by
raeans of its monuments, shedding a powerful and quickening
influence over the present.^
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 Tiitheim,^ the celebrated
Abbot of Sponheim, who was himself one of them, mentions, in
his work on ecclesiastical authors,* 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
' Aeneas Sylvius gives a beautiful description of these lovely towns on
the Rhine in his remarkable work, De ritu, situ, moribus et conditione
Germaniae. Bzovii Annal. eccles. T. xvii. p. 194.
2 Of Cologne e.g. Aeneas Sylvius says in the afrre-mentioned descrip
tion. Quid ea Colonia ? Nihil ilia magnificentius, nihil ornatius tota
Europa reperias. Templis, aedibus insignis, populo nobilis, opibus elara,
plumbo tecta, praetoriis ornata, turribus munita, flumine Rheno et Isetis
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 nf Dalberg. Edition in Fabricii Bibliotheca eccles.
Ilamb. 1718.

THE RHINELAND. 281
around the scene of WeseFs labours. In Speyer we find the
Augustinian monk Peter of Spira, well versed in Scripture
and PhUosophy, and enjoying extensive celebrity as a preacher.'
In Heidelberg, Marsilius of Inghen (-)¦ 1394), the first professor
of Theology in the University, had had the following eminent
successors : John Plath, a theologian and dograatic author,
thoroughly trained in the study of Scripture and the Aristo
teUan philosophy, who rose to celebrity about the year 1430,
and is designated by Trithemius,'^ an ornament and pillar of
the University ; John Dieppurg, or, as he is otherwise called,
John of Frankfort, Hkewise a scientific theologian, an acute
controversialist, and an eminent preacher. As chaplain and
secretary to Count Palatine Louis, he was employed in diflfi
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 •? 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.* John Ernesti, familiar with
Scripture and ancient literature, acute, eloquent, and the author
of several doctrinal and ascetic works laboured about 1440 ;'
Stephen Hoest from Ladenburg, a canon at Speyer and for a
whUe 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 coUection of sermons (f
1471) f 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 f and Qnally Jodocus Eichenmann,usual]y
' Trithem. de script, eccles. cap. 714. p. 165. ed. Fabric.
2 De script, eccl. c. 763. p. 178.
3 Ibid. cap. 764. p. 178.
* 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 Uved in Heidelberg, are raen
tioned in Kremer's history of Frederick the victorious.
' Trithem. de script, eccles. cap. 864. p. 206.

282 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF AVESEL.
called Jodocus of Cairo 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,' he was anian of a some
what keen teraperaraent, acted a prondnent part in the Sth
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 Ehine downw-ard.s, we find in Tri
themius notices of the following persons : Conrad of Altzei,^
known in the second half of the 14th century, vvell 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 coramendatory of the Virgin Mary and the re
demption of the world ; John Fust of Kreutznach,^ was towards
the end of the 14tli century prior at Strasburg, and reader in a
Carraelite monastery in his native town. He exercised a great
influence by his sermons, of which several coUections survived
himself ; Nicolaus of Ki^eutznach* lived about a century later,
and was distinguished as a professor of theology at Vienna ;
John Gauwer,^ a Carmelite, was a reader of Sacred Scripture at
jNIayence, eminent as a preacher and as the author of several
doctrinal, exegetical, and ascetic works, and flourished about
1440 ; Conrad of Rodenbm^g,^ abbot of the monastery of Jolian-
nisberg in the Eheingau, was a Benedictine monk, of great learn
ing and piety, austere in his habits, and the author of several
ascetical works (¦{• 1486) ; Hen7-y of Andernach,'' a CarmeUte, was
celebrated as a preacher and theological author about the end of
the 14th century ; Rheinhard of F7'07ithoven, Henry Kaltysen, a
I Tritheim describes him as ingenio promptus et veheraens, qui in
Gymnasio Heidelbergensi legendo, docendo et praedicando multis annis
in pretio fuit. He states his works to be : De diversis Sermones varii
Lib. i. — Vocabularius praedicantiura Lib. i. et varii Tractatus. De
Scriptor. eccl. c. 873. p. 208.
- Trithem. de script, eccles. c. 660. p. 155.
3 Ibid. c. 665. p. 154. < Ibid. e. 874. p. 208.
¦'• Ibid. c. 793. p. 185. e £i,id_ ^ ggo. p. 206.
- Ibid. c. 688. p. 161.

¦WORMS. 283
Dominican, and Tilmann of Hachenberg, a Minorite, were all
three' greatly beloved as preachers in their several monasteries
at Coblentz, the two first at the beginning, and the third at the
end ofthe 15th century. Finally, John Rode' 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 pow-erfully 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 bi-ancbes 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 weU known that the ancient city of the Vangions
was one of the earhest seats of Christianity in Gerraany. It
probably possessed a bishop about the middle of the 4th century.'
Towards the end of the 6th, St Eupert took his departure frora
it to convert Bavaria.* 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.-' Till the Ilth
century the citizens of Worras had lived in peace and obedience
under the crozier. In the reign of Adelbert (1068 — 1107) they
became embroUed with their Bishop. Endowed with pecuUar
privileges by Henry IV., and several of his successors— as, for
example, Charles IV. and Wenzel,— tiiis city endeavoured more
' About thera see Trithem. c. 715. p. 165. c. 808. p. 189, c. 700. p.
163. 2 Ibid. c. 806. p. 188. . ,
3 Hefele Geschicte der Einfuhrung des Christenthums ira sudwest-
lichen Deutschland. Tub. 1837. s. 187.
* Hefele, s. 191. ,, „ , . .
5 Schannat Historia Episcopatus \\'orraatien8is. Irancof. ad Moen.
MDCCXXXIV. T. i. p. 310 sqq.

284 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
and more to cast off the Episcopal government.' Within the
walls of Worms, the same conflict arose which is also witnessed
in Speyer, Cologne, and other episcopal seats, between the old
and pri-vileged hierarchy and the class of citizens now inflamed
with youthfiil ambition and the thirst of freedom. This state
of things lasted, with occasional fluctuations, during the whole of
the 15th century, at the close of which it became so violent that
John of Dalberg,^ 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
hira the magistrates and citizens endeavoui'ed in every way
to restrict the spfritual jurisdiction and ancient rights of the
Bishop.' The prirae subject of dispute was a claira 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, pereraptorily refused, and ere long car
ried matters still farther, by calling in question other privileges
of the clergy, insisting upon thefr taking a ci-vic 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,* 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
thera, 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 frora being established, and Echard, weary of the struggle,
withdrew from Worms to Neuhausen, where he died, upon the
' Schannat T. i. p. 342 sqq.
2 Schannat T. i. p. 417 — 422. Ullmann Meraoria Dalburgii p. 7.
3 Schannat T. i. p. 401—406.
' . . . . toti civitati sacris interdixit.
1

AvouMs. 285
14th May, 1405. He was succeeded by a person, remarkable
not only among the bishops of Worms, but among the learned
and Uberal-minded raen of the age, Matthew of Cracau, or Cra
cow (r. 1405 — 1410).' Descended from a noble family, emi
nent as a theologian, and of great experience in the manage
ment of business, Matthew, by favom- of King Eupert, whose
chanceUor he was,^ 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 Eupert 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 Eupert, he strove, but without success, to resist the
- deposition of Gregory XII. He departed this Ufe in the follow
ing year. The epitaph upon his tomb in the choir of the dome
calls him a distinguished Doctor of Theology, and inthis charac
ter w-e 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 leaming and high celerity for his free opinions
in Theology, Master Henry of Langenstein, usually called Henry
of Hesse (f 1428) was canon in Worms.' And about the same
time, Philip,* 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 Erapire and the
Church, great disturbances took place under the Bishop who suc
ceeded Matthew of Cracow. John II. of Fleckenstein^ (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 diflficulties of the
' 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.
' Trith. de script, eccl. c. 684, p. 159 sqq. Hune, queraadmodura
ex quadam ejus Epistola reperi, Canonicura Wormaciensis ecclesiae
fuisse crediderim.
* Trithem. c. 697. p. 162.
!>. 'Schannat T.i. p. 409—411.

286 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
situation.' Frederick JI. of Dumneck (1427 — 45)'-^ deemed it
best to relinquish many privileges which it w as diflficult 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,^ whose election had
been contested, resigned the oflfice after a reign of forty days.
He was succeeded by a man who once raore took the field with
energy, and whose episcopal admuiistration claims our attention,
as ha-ving been coincident with the period of WeseFs residence at
Worras. We speak of Reinhard J. of Sickingen (r. 1445—82).*
After receiving soleran consecration at the hands of Archbishop
Dietrich of ^layence, upon the Ehrenfels, Eeinhard raade a
pompous procession into the city. Endowed with great streng-th
of will, and considerable talents, proud of his ancient and noble
extraction, and little disposed to make concessions, he struck ont
for hiraself a path very different frora 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 ^A^orms, when they had a malefactor to hang,
to petition the bishop for the halter. This obligation involved
an acknowledgment of his jurisdiction, and seeraed to be humi
liating, and therefore, in order to evade it, they caused chains to
be fastened permanently to the gaUows. The indignant Bishop
iraraediately suraraoned the Provost and Council into his pre
sence, and admonished them to abstain in future from all sueh
innovations, adding that " neither he nor yet his bishopric wci-e
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 Schminat p. 142—414. 3 n,id. T. i. p. 414.
Ibid. T. i. p. 412. 1 Ibid. T. i. p. 415—417.

w-ORMs 287
doubtful of his ability to assert w ith arms his riixht to the territorx
which was a feu of tbe Church of Worms, he applied for aid to his
powerful neighbour, Frederick the \^ictorious, with whom he
stood on the best footing, and whose counciUor be was,' promis
ing him a half of the possessions, which were all, however, to
continue feudatory to the Bishopric. Reinhai-d of Sickingen also
applied himself with great zeal and yigour to the improve
ment of the morals ofthe 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,'- who were eminent for their
piety, and extended his reformatory zeal even to the Nuns of
tbe rich Franciscan Convent at Worms.' But with all his love
of improvement in this way, he cared for it only when strictly
confined within the Church's Hmits. The moraent it crossed
these he encountered it with a no less yigorous hostility.* Hence
we find hira a decided opponent of Wesel, and delivering hini
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 leamed 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
' Cremer's Geschichte Kurfurst Frederichs I. Mannh. 1766. Th. 1.
8. 393 and 625 sqq.
2 See this singular document which breathes a fine and pious spirit,
in Schannat T. ii. p. 244. Prob. 267.
' Ibid. p. 245. Prob. 268.
* Schannat T. i. p. 416 : Deraura in raores ac doctrinam Joannis de
Wesalia, concionatoris famigeratissimi, altius investigans, quod is tiira
scripto tnm viva voce quaedam sparsisset in vulgus, quae ex Hussito-
rum sentina videbantur deprorapta, ipsura Moguntiae in manus Inqnsi-
torura tradidit.

288 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF \VESEL.
from giving the freest expression to his sentiments. Indeed,
although not destitute of modesty, still in the enimciation 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, in his age and
circumstances, were opposed to a faithftil 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.
" The Church," he says in a treatise written during his residence
at Worms,' " 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 erapty and ostentatious display of works,
void of the least spark of faith, the Pharisaic pride of the Eabbis,
cold ceremonies, and vain superstition, not to call it idolatry.
All seem intent on reaping a golden harvest, pursue only their
o-wn 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,' " a hard task to be one of the princes
and rulers of the people, for they have to answer not merely
for their o-wn sins, but also for the errors of others, and if men
would reflect upon this, they would never canvas for the office ofa
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, ha'ving entered in by another way and not
by the door of Christ. The preachers of eternal wisdora ought
to be the salt of the earth. ' But if the salt have lost its savour,
wherevrith shall it be salted ? It is hencefi)rth good for nothing,
but to be cast out and to be trodden under foot of men.' The
nieaning of which is, if the doctrine of the priests and prelates be
not the genuine doctrine of Christ, it ought to be rejected and
' De auctoritate, officio et potestate Pastorum ecclesiasticorura
Walch Monim. med. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 2. p. 142 — 143.
- Ibid. p. 136 and 137

PREACHER IN MAYENCE .A.ND W0115IS. 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 bas lost
its rirtue. Eare as a black swan is the priest who discharges
the apostolical oflfice with apostolical fidelity. And the reason
is, because the Word of the Lord is fettered by huraan devices
and cannot be freely preached. Tyranny and oppression on
every side cry out against it, and the ordinances of raany
bishops are opposed ; not to speak of the legends of the saints,
the iraposture 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.'
' Speak to us what we like to hear,' say the people in their folly,
' or we wUl call down the wrath of God upon your head.' The
consequence is, that (as good pastors either hide in a comer,
or are proscribed and shamefully banished), the great majority
discharge thefr oflfice 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 sometiraes not satisfied with
their wool and milk, they flay and wholly devour thera. 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 a7id 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 oflfice of prince and pastor,"
he says,^ probably in allusion to his imraediate 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 nuraber
of their sateUites, not to play the Sybarite in idleness and luxury,
and labour to regain lost power ;' but with his whole heart to
' This refers especially to the situation of Wesel in Worms. See in
the sequel Wesel's letter to Bishop Reinhard of Sickingen.
2 Ibid. p. 138—140.
' The last words are particularly suited to Bishop Sickingen, whose
endeavours in one direction aimed at the restoration of the Episcopal
authority. T

290 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 wdiom he governs,
measuring all with one line, viz., the communion of faith and
the confession of Christian charitj-. In this religion there is no
difference, the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesns
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.' Yea, the Lord commands, Whoever wiU
be chief among you, let him be your servant. " The ruler," says
Jerome, " ought, by bis huraility, to be the corapanion of them
that do well, and by his zeal for justice, to stand boldly up against
the sins of the vricked, yet so as never to prefer himself to the
; good." The first qualification, including all others, which IVesel
requires in him who preaches the Gospel, w-hether pastor or
I bishop, is complete dedication to his office and his Church. He
ought to delight,^ not in being superior to others, but in doing
thera good.' "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
Saviom-, so ought we also to strive to be sa-yiours of others."*
And this helpful sympathy ought, in his opinion, to be directed
no less to their spiritual than their teraporal good, and more
especially, according to the pattern of Jesus and the Apostles,
to the care and succour of the poor.^ Even more iraportant,
however, in Wesel's eye is the radical and objective require
raent which he sets before every other, that the preacher shaU
deliver uncnrtailed and unalloyed the pure Gospel as it is
co7itained in the Word of God. " The Eedeeraer," he says,"
" proraises the glory of the apostolic narae to those who shall
abide in his word. He whom God hath sent must preach God's
' In this passage also the admonition appears addressed to the then
Bishop of Worms.
^  non praeease hominibus, sed prodesse.
3 Ibid. p. 139. 5 Ibid. p. 141.
* Ibid. p. 148. 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 frora his discipline. ... It
is clear' 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 tbe raoral law-, nor a righteousness by ;
works arising frora it, but Christ and Cluist's righteousness, and '
emanating fi-ora these, a life of love and of free and spontaneous
obedience to the law. " Whoever," he says,^ " 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 fulfilUng of the law, but the shedding abroad of
the love of Grod in the heart. He who has obtained this has
become one Spfrit 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 raere carnal
way, and does not really satisfy its demands, but whoever, ft-om
the spiiit 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 Spfrit 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 raore, in opposition to his age, in wdiich the
legal principle ofthe 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 aU who embrace him by Hving
faith, becomes a source of peace, love, and true morality. He
recognized the love, which is the offspring of faith, as the sole
true fulfilUng of the law ; and this knowledge, embraced with his
whole soul, gave him confidence and alacrity, both to labour
' Ibid. p. 123. ' Ibid, p 124.
'Ibid p. 150—152.
^ t2

292 the LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
undauntedly amid the diflficulties of the present, and hopefuUy
and joyfully to anticipate the futm-e. 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 ? " The language of our
Eabbis is like that of the Jews in the days of the Sariour,
' 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 pcstes.'
If, however, thou art enjoined to teach evangelical and Christian
piety, than which nothing is so greatly disrelished, then suffer
not yourselves to be frightenefl and discouraged by the Papal
fulminations, curses, and interdicts. From bulls (raade of paper
and of lead) they dart but a harraless flash. The excommuni-
cator was himself under excoraraunication by the Di-vine 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 w-ho 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
seeraed conducive to edification in the faith, and calculated to
promote love. He deemed it a Christian duty, as far as it was
practicable without coraproraising truth, to abstain frora wound
ing the brethren ; but where tmth was at stake, he cared for
no one. " When we are placed in such straits," he says,'
" that we raust choose between disobeying a superior, upon the
one hand, and thereby causing a scandal, and injuring truth
upon the other, it is rauch better that our neighbour should
' Ibid. p. 149 : quod verbum doraini hurailibus ludibriosit et probro,
utnon liceat libere, nisi capitis paratus sis adire pericula, praedicare.
- Ibid. p. 149 and 150.
' Ibid. p. 141.

PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 293
suffer, for to him w-e imi}' possibly raake compensatiim, than that
truth should be injured which it is irapious to do.'' This confi
dence in the Divine word enabletl hira to look with assurance to
the future. Like Jacob of J't'itei'bock, his cotemporary and a man
of congenial sentiments, when burdened with the painful experi
ences of the present, he stands erect, but w-ith greater vigour, and,
¦without giving way to distracting conjectures, takes a firmer hold
of the fiiture, and anticipates the approach of the hero who was '
to deliver them. " Come it will," he says, in a short but very
remarkable passage,' " 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,
hy either guiding these workers of iniquity, these slowbellies, these
dogs and e-vil beasts, these gluttons, and devourers of vridows'
houses, to the eternal truth, or if not, by plunging them into
heU, lest we aU go down together into the same pit. DeUver, O
God, thy people from aU their tribulations."^
Such are the principles laid down for the guidance of his minis
terial labours, such the spirit in which he worked. TTie 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 " The
Paradoxes of Dr John Wesel,"^ 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 addresses (iod, " set men over us, who load us with burdens
grievous to be bome, 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, br^ak the yoke that oppresses us. Hear the
sighs of the prisoners, and loose the fetters of thera that are
destroyed." ^ Paradoxa D. Joannis de Wesalia, quae feruntur a quibusdam
Thomistis ex iUius concionatoris ore fuisse excepta— first printed inter
varia scripta ad calcem Coraraentariorum de rebus gestis in Concibo
Basil, ab Aenea Sylvio conscriptorum adjecta, sine anno et loco— then
in Ortuini Oratii Fasciculus rerum expetendarum etfugiend.mira, edit.
i. fol. 163. edit. n. T. i. p. 325; lastly, in D'Argentre Collectio judi
ciorum de novis erroribus. Paris. 1728. T. i. p. ii. p. 291. 292. Ihe
last imprint is here used.

294 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF "WESEL.
from his trial before the court of Inquisition. In this way, we
Hkewise 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 raen connected with the Eefor
raation, we can distinguish in the views of Wesel two fundamental
elements : 1st, Eeverence 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 vrith referring all things to
Scripture, and then proceeds to deduce them more specifically
fi-ora the idea of the Divine grace, as in every case decisive.
Every thing in the doctrine or practice of the Church, which
; seeras 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 stateraents have been reported
to us only in a brief and fi-agraentary^ "'"/> ^^^ probably are
bere and there likewise disfigured. Neither is their connexion
with the whole systera of his views always perceptible. From
the two fundaraental principles, which we have specified, how
ever, it is possible to derive thera with tolerable fulness.
Scripture, according to Wesel, is, in the first place, the only
sufficient guarantee for unity of faith. " Seldora," says he, " do I
find that any two learned raen agree in faith. No one coincides
in opinion with me, if we take away the Gospel. In it, however,
we are all at one.'" For this reason it was his sreat desire that
all should hold fast by Scripture, and by that alone.^ 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 ofthe Gospel.' StUl 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.* If
' Paradoxap. 291, b.
'- In the Exaraen magistrate s. 296, it is said of If'esel : Item
credit, quod nihil sit credendum, quod non habeatur in Canone
Bibliae. 3 Parad. 291, a.
* Ibid 291, b.

PREACHER IN M.iYENCE AND WORMS. 295
Scripture, however, is to hold sway as the only law of Christian •
life, all depends upon its interpretation, and here We.sel believes
neither in the Glosse' nor in the writings of anv teacher, how-
ever holy and highly esteemed he may be. He is afraid " of
the Doctors giving a wrong, deceptive, and false interpretation.^
He would prefer having the Bible explained solely by itself No
authority of even the wisest and raost learned Christian can
here avail. For w-ho araong raen w-ould venture to determine
the meaning which Christ put into his w-ords, except himself?
Cautious expositors, however, will compare passages together
and explain the one by the other."' That, however, which
Wesel finds to be fundamental in the teaching of Scripture is thd
grace of God. It is by the grace of God alone that all are saved
who are ever saved at all.* They are destined to it from eternity.
" From eternity^ God has inscribed all his elect in a book. In that
book no name w-hich is not there will ever be written. Neither
wiU any name once -written in it ever be blotted out."^ 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 whora 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 hira saved. Though there
never had been a Pope,* all who really are saved would have been
saved as well." Whether Wesel actually enunciated the doctrine
of predestination in terras 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 assuraed, Wesel was neces-
' Glossae non credit. Parad. 291, b.
2 Pard. 291, b.
'Pard. 291, b., above.
* Sola Dei gi-atia salvantur Electi. Parad. 291, b.
5 Ibid. 291, b.
" Si nullus unquam Papa fuisset, adhuc salvati fuissent hi, qui salvati
sunt. Parad. 291, b.

29() THE LIFE OF JOUN OF WESLL.
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
w-orks ; 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 tiie addition of the ejdthet Catholic to the words,
" I believe in the Holy Church," as Jerome also did, and which
was an after interpolation, " For," he said,' "the Catholic Church,
understanding by that the whole body of baptized person.?, so far
from being holy, consists for the most part of reprobates."^ And
generally his o]:)inlon of the doctrines, institutions, and practices
ol the Church was, that the greater part of them were contrary
ahke 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 tbe articles of transubstantiation and the proccs-
¦ 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 raight exist under the form
of the bread, though the substance of the bread remained."'
With reference to the second, he is disposed to adopt the view
held by tbe Eastern Church, to the effect, that the Holy Spirit
proceeds only from the Futiier ; at least he contends it is irapos
sible to show from Scripture that he proceeds also fiom the Son.*
In both instances, WeseFs views seem to flow from his strict
Scriptural principles. He took rauch greater offence, however, at
many ofthe Ecclesiastical institutions, which encroached upon the
doctrine of free grace, and favoured that of hoHness by works.
His objection to indulgence we have already seen. But in other
ways, he considered that Christendom was hearily burdened with
merely human ordinances and customs.'' " Christ," he said,
1 Parad. 292, a.
^ . . . major pars reprobata.
' Exaraen magir>tr. p. 294 : Item credit, quod corpus Christi possit
esse sub specie panis, manenle substantia panis.
' Parad. 292, a : Scriptura sacia uon dicit, Spiiitum sanctum proce-
dere a Filio. Comp. Exam, magihlr. p. 296. 298.
¦' Sic gravata est Cbristianitas per huinanas leges et constitutiones.
Parad. p. 292.

PREACHER IN MAYENCE AND WORMS. 297
" did not appoint fasts. He never forbade the use of cUverse kinds
of food, as, for instance, flesh upon particular days. Just as littie
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.' In these
days, over aU Christendora, the mass has been made a most burden
some service. St Peter went rauch raore expeditiously to work,
and siraply 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 "^ The same spirit in
which Wesel combatted indulgences bred in his raind an indig
nant zeal against other kinds of penances and good works. He
is further reported to have said,' " When a penitent confesses, he
IS subjected to a rigorous penance, such as a pilgriraage to Eorae
or some more distant place, abstinence from food, or the repetition
ofa multitude of prayers. Christ did nothing of the sort. He only
said, ' Go and sin no more.' Pilgrims to Eome, however, are
fools, for they raight easUy find and keep at horae what they seek
in a foreign land." Wesel even called in question, " whether it
was the Church which had originaUy appointed Fasts, and in
Kke manner whether it had forbidden marriage during Septua-
gesima."* 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 WeseFs tum of mind is very clear. We raeet, however,
with two other paradoxes w-hich are raore isolated, and yet at the
same time not wholly foreign to his principles. In the first place,
he is said to have affirmed,-' " that in the petition ' Thy kingdom
come,' we do not pray for the kingdom of heaven, because that
kingdom does not corae to us at all." Now, there are two differ
ent meanings which he may haye 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
1 Parad. p. 291, b. 2 Ibid. p. 292, a.
3 Ibid. 292, a. * Ibid. 292, a.
* " Adveniat regnum tuum ;" ibi non petimus regna Coelorura, 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 aU,
its present manifestation being always mingled with eleraents of
sin. In both cases, the words have a good meaning. The first
is the way in which Luther^ understood them ; but the second
harmonizes better with WeseFs 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^ 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.'
This exegetical scruple, although not directly connected with
his substantial views, would still be a proof of his haring 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
Eationalism), and been the offspring of his opposition to a
common and coarse view adopted chiefly by the Schoolmen, pos
terior to the days of Thoraas, respecting the value and conse
quence of the quantity of blood shed by Christ, as if on that its
eflicacy depended, — an interpretation strictly connected with the
doctrine of supererogatory merits, and through that with Indul
gences, which Wesel so zealously combatted.
Such doctiinal matter, in the existing condition of the Church,
could not but give offence, and greatiy more, no doubt, the
manner in which Wesel delivered it to the people. The style of
' See in the sequel, 3d part, 2d chap.
2 The feet are not expressly raentioned, but the question is put gene
rally. 3 Exara. Magistr. p. 295 : Vicesimo quinto, an praedicaverit publice
populo, dubium esse, an Christus fuisset funibus cruci aUigatus, aut
clavis affixus ? Fatetur, se dixisse, quod non habeatur in Evangelio
passionis, an clavis sit afiixus, an funibus. Credit taraen, quod clavis.

PREACHER IN M.VYENCE AND WORMS. 299
his 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 aU allowance for the rude spfrit of the age, we cannot
consider but as too strong for a raan of otherwise so eamest a cha
racter. When corabatting the exaggerated estimate which was
formed of priestly rites, such as unction with consecrated oil, hel
would venture to say, " The consecrated oil is no better thanj
that which is in daily use in your kitchens."' Or, when dis4
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 ;"^ 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 la-wfully eat, and there is no sin in even
dining upon a fat capon on Good Friday.'" He expressed
bimself from the pulpit -with more moderation, but stUl 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 vrill 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 CouncUs, and extol Christ. Let His word dwell in us
richly." He used also to say, " It is now more diflficult than
ever to be a Christian."* These expressions of Wesel are reported
to us by one of his admirers, and we have no reason to doubt
' Paradoxa, p. 291.
" In the same place.
3 Flacius Catalog. Test, veritatis. Lib. xix. t. n. p. 885.
* All these expressions occur in tbe 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 soraewhere else, he had blaspheraously declared
that " He who sees the sacraraent of the Mass sees the DevU."'

CHAPTER SECOND.
WESEL, AS A WRITER ON THE DEPRA-yED MORALS OF THE
CLERGY. MATTHEW OF CRACOW, A REFORMING
BISHOP OF WORMS.
WeseFs reforraatory 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 tiraes 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
' 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 Uttle work on " Tlie
authoiity, 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 raore than the expe
riences and wishes which raust have been forced upon his raind,
in the course of his ecclesiastical and pastoral labours, and araong
these there is rauch which may quite naturally be considered,
as an allusion to the particular cfrcumstances under which he
laboured in Worms. Before we proceed, however, to give an
account of this work, we must advert to a very mteresting
parallel. A Bishop of Worms, whom in one aspect we raay
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,
whUe the preacher's rather paints and assails the abuses which
pervaded the whole clerical body, and produced the most bane-
fiil 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 ofthe 16th century, much more generally celebrated.

The Bishop of Worms to whora we allude is Matthew of
Cracow? Of this raan, vvho died almost half a century before
Wesel made his appearance in Worms, we have already had
' About him we may corapare Trithemius de scriptor. eccles. c. 654.
p. 153 and 154. ed Fabric, and de scriptor. German, c. 124. Oudinus
commentar. de scriptor. eccles. T. iii. p. 1110 and llll. Schannat
Hist. Episcop. Wormat. T. i. p. 407. But especially Walchii Monira.
med. aev. ii., 1. Praef. p. xii. — xxxviii. and the citations there.

302 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 soinewhat more fully. Alatthew was not,
as many have been' 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.^ We have no specific
inforraation respecting his parents or the date of his birth. It
is highly probable that he pursued his studies at Prague and
Paris.' Tritheraius states* that at the time of the raigration of
the German students from Prague, and the disturbances w-ith
the Hussites, he was in the capital of Bohemia. This, however,
is a raistake ; for these events took place long after Matthew had
left that city. All that we know is that, at an archiepiscopal
synod which asserabled there in the year 1384, he delivered a
discourse on the iraproveraent of the morals of the clergy and
the people.^ At both the Universities of Prague and Paris, he
delivered lectures, and at the latter presided for a while over
the theological faculty f but which of the two he ultimately
adorned as professor cannot be accurately determined. We
are disposed to believe that it was Paris.' From that seminary,
he was invited by the enhghtened Elector and Emperor Eupert,
as afready an eminent preacher and teacher of theology, to the
' e.g. Tritheim de script, eccles c. 654. p. 153, also Conr. Gesner,
Rob. Gerius, and others.
2 A raeraber of this faraily, Frederick of Cracow, was also, about the
year 1430, provost of the Cathedral of Treves. Schannat Hist. Episc.
Wormat. T. i. p. 408.
3 Oudinus Comment, de script, eccl. T. iii. p. 1110.
* De scriptor. eccles. c. 654. p. 154. The assertion of Trithemius
that Matthew was a master in Prague, seeras nevertheless corre. t.
5 Pezius Thesaur. anecdot. T. i. praefat. p. 6. Walch Monim i., 1.
praef. p. 15.
^ Bouleaus Hist. acad. Paris. T. iv. p. 975.
' The order in which raost 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 seeras, however, more
natural for Matthew to have attended first at Prague, and in conse
quence of tbe 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.' His academical
laboirrs there, however, seera not to have been of great ira
portance, or at least great duration.^ Eupert, 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 Eupert's
influence. Bishop of Worms.' In particular, the Emperor used
his services as arabassador in the year 1403 to Boniface IX., in
whose presence JJatthew delivered two discourses, and again in
1406 to Gregory XIL, on which occasion, as is said, but with
no great probability, Matthew was raade a cardinal,* and finally
iu 1049 to the Council at Pisa. Shortly after his return from
this last mission, he departed this life 1410, in his episcopal city,
and w-as buried in the Cathedral, where an epitaph still raarks
the place of his repose.^ Matthew of Cracow conjoined with his
lofty station qualities which secured to hira personal weight.
Endowed vrith a clear and sound raind, he had enjoyed the
benefit of an excellent education in the schools of philosophy and
theology.* In him a high reputation as an academical professor
was combined -with that of an adrairable preacher, and although
a strict, and as it even appears an ascetic, clergyraan— for he was
connected with the recently instituted order of St Birgitte' — he
' Rupertus ordinavit et fovit Heidelbergense studium, coUigens
nndecumque doctores et raagistros potiores, Magistrum Alatthaeuni de
Cracovia sacrae theologiae professorem et praedicatorem eximium fecit
episcopum Vormatiensem. Theod. Engelhusii Chronic, in Leibniiii
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 hira s.
39 : Joanni Noyt in Rectoratu successit Mattheus de Cracovia, factus
postmodum Episcopus Worraatiensis.
3 Schannat Hist. Episc. Wormat. T. 1. p. 407, 408.
* Walch Monim. med. aev. ii., 1 praef. p. 17 sqq.
5 Schannat Hist. Episc. Wormat. T. i. p. 408.
* Trithemius pourtrays him in the following words : 'Vir in divinis
scripturis eruditus, secnlaris philosophiae non ignarus, ingenio promptus,
eloquio scholasticus . . . raagnam ab omnibus doctrinae suae
laudem commeruit.
' Oudinus (Comraentar de scriptor. eccles. T. iii. p. 1110) describes
Matthew as Sanctae Brigittae familiaris. The expression familiaris
might iraply personal acquaintance ; and as the Holy Brigitta (f
1373) was still alive when Matthew had reached manhood, and
Pomraerania and Sweden are near, this might be inferred. Our

304 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
had no less in his travels and raissions 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 Eoman Court, and the whole hierarchy.
The opinions he expresses upon these subjects have consequently
a pecuUar 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 stiU
lying unprinted in Ubraries, 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 mth
the circumstances of the time, wdth 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 docuraentary statements which point to him as its author.'
Matthew, as it seems, is once designated, Matthias de regno Suociae
(Oudinus 1. 1. p. llll). The comraon meaning of faraiUaris, 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
alraost what the .lesuits in after times meant by the affiliated mem
bers of their order.
' Trithemius, Schannat, 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
taraen pauca ad raanus nostras pervenerunt. Vidi ejus ad Henricum
Episcopura Wormiensis [Worraatiensis] Ecclesiae non abjiciendum opus
de praedestinatione, et quod Deus orania bene fecerit, cujus Dialogi in-
terlocutores sunt pater et filius, quera praenotavit : Rationale divinorum
operum Lib. vii. Besides this, Trithemius enumerates : De contraciis
L. i. — De celebratione missae L. i. Ad Episcopura Wormiens. L. i.—
Epistolarura ad diversos L.i — Sermones etcoUationes. — &Aannai (Hist.
Ep. Worm. i. 408.) represents the Dialogus de praedestinatione and the
Rationale divin. operum as two dilferent writings, and supplements the
catalogue of Trithemius with : Dialogus inter conscientiam et rationem.
OudinMS (Corament descript. eccl. iu. IUO.) 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 CRACOW. 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 tbe others
under the ^ general title of Sermones), also a work, Expositio in
Apocalypsin, rendered doubtful by the designation of tbe author as
Matthias deB,egno Sueciae. It is most of all reraarkable 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 thera 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 tbe question are these. Two
reasons appear to speak raost strongl}' against its coraposition by Mat
thew of Cracow : 1. Flacius found it ascribed in a raanuscript to another
author, Dr Lurtzen, Catal. test, verit. Lib. xviii. t. ii. p. 801. 2. In
the course of the work several things are raentioned which belong to a
later period, as for example, the reigns of Popes John XXIII. and
Martin V., the work of Peter D'AiUy de potestate ecclesiastica, and
the fact pf his being at tbe time a cardinal, which he did not become
tiU 1411, with several other particulars. Respecting the first point, it
must be remembered that Flacius found in other manuscripts the narae
of Matthew of Cracow, and tbat 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 tbe name of Lurtzen. 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 raay
have subsequentlyjudged it expedient, forthe interests of the Church or the
conclave, to substitute for the bishop's a narae that w-as wholly unknown.
On the contrary, it is more difficult to understand how it could happen
that, without any historical ground, the work waa ascribed to Matthew of
Cracow. It is also clear that during his sojourn at Paris, Matthew might
easily have acqufred the opinions which are here delivered. As for the
anachronisras, which forra the second point, they stand in contradiction
to the very decided passage, cap. 18. p. 79, in which tbe author de
clares, in the raost distinct raanner, 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 anachronisras 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 raore probable. 'There was no reason for antedat
ing the tract, but there was good reason for appending to it at an after
time any reraarks which referred to then existing circumstances. Be
sides, in a manuscript at Wolfenbiittel, all the passages are wanting
whicli 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

30G THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL
The work treats of the Pollutions of the Romish Court,'- 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'' of Cracow believe him
self to be the spectator of a still greater miracle, when beholding
the clerical body enveloped for a long time in flaraes, blown to
violence by a strong wind, and yet continuing undestroyed. The
one phenoraenon 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 unraoved and unconcerned. To convince hiraself that
he is not drearaing, he proposes to relate the results of his obser
vation to others.
In order to judge of the wrong condition of a thing,^ says
Matthew, we raust 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 ApostoUc chair and the Court of Eome
are the root of the Church general. The Eomish 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 rainister 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 raade. If, however, we observe the
outward acts of the chair of Eome,* and infer frora these what
passes within, we cannot but raark that there is a coraplete neglect
of all tbat is most needful for the Church. Earely if ever is a
conclave held to promote purely spiritual objects, or, if it be, it
name of the Bishop of Worras is affixed to it. For the rest, the work
was ushered into light by the press, before the days of Walch, by Wolfg.
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
—607. ' Tractatus de squaloribus Romanae Curiae in Walchii Monim. med.
aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. 1 — 100.
^ De squalorib. Rom. Cur. Introductio.
^ De squalorib. c. 1.
De squalor, c. 2.

ilATTHEW OF CRACOW. 307
has no effect or success. But when, on the contrary, any tera
poral loss or advantage coraes before thera, the sentences and
I penalties are of the raost rigorous kind. Their whole time is
spent in disposing of benefices and of the emoluments connected
with them ; and no man, however ricious his habits and scandal
ous his life, but is admitted to a clerical oflfice if he have raoney
to offer. About the improvement of the clergy or the extirpa
tion of heresy and so forth, oiu- magnates of Eome never waste a
thought. Lest any, however, should fancy that this raust needs be,
Matthew enquires' into the light 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 privUege 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 oflfices 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 Eomish 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 entfre body of their justly acquired privileges,
but to prevent the abuse of them. It may likewise be asked,
proceeds Matthew, if the chair of Eome, when it commenced
these proceedings, believed, or if it now believes, that it can
appoint to vacant oflfices 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 oflfices, and all interested in thera, the benefit which
would result from one of an opposite character. If, however,
this be believed, it involves the highest presumption.^ For, in
no human way, can the Eomish chair know as much ofthe cir
cumstances of the bishoprics, monasteries, benefices, and candi
dates, (although on such knowledge a right choice depends), as
' Ibid, from the third chapter. ^ Magna praesumtio.
U2

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 wiU be
raore ivilling, and take greater pains, to raake 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 Uttle 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 circurastances 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 oflfices, than to the
souls of the flock. Nor can it be said that the Eomish chair
has taken upon itself the nomination to these oflfices, 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,' however, although it is not admitted, that
the Pope possessed the universal right of noraination, what good
would arise frora it ? The only apparent result seeras to have
' De squalor, c. 4.

MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 309
been, and daily to be, the introduction of raanifold evUs into the
Church. The clergy are plunged unnecessarily into great
expense, trouble, and danger. A worldly zeal, and an irapatient
pursuit after promotion, are kindled in their hearts. Ambition is
powerfully fomented. Everj' one hopes for the death of another,
perhaps even of many, whose oflfices 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 lawdul a year ago is now unlawful and
condemned, and all is uncertainty with those who are the court's
ad-yisers. 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 frora an oflfice which he had procured at great cost
hoth of labour and money. For there is nothing which the
laws more disUke 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 raoney.
But, however this may be, I well know, that it gives rise to scan
dal, and brings disgrace upon the Court of Eome 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 raany worthy men are restrained from entering the
sacred profession, and so raany worthless characters find admis
sion into it,' it is necessary, in the opinion of Matthew of Cracow,''
to retum to the original state of the law, wholly to abolish re
versions and never to appoint to offices, until they are actuaUy
vacant. Should any one suggest that in that case many candi
dates would hie to Eome in pursuit of the same benefice, and all
1 See the end of the 4th chapter, and p. l80.
2 De squalor, c. 5.

310 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF \yESEL.
but one get their journey for their pains, and that thus the sarae
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 w-ith the conclave 1 But at the same time he
demands, that good bishops be given to the Church, and meets
the allegation that this is diflficult 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 diflficult 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 \iew of the raatter and
object, that were the Pope to be left without favours to bestow, men
would no more care about hira ; they would neither respect, nor
apply to hira, and he raight even be reduced so low as to want
the raeans of subsistence, Matthew replies :' The reverence which
is undoubtedly due in the highest degree to the Pope raust be
sound, i.e., it raust be based upon corresponding qualities, such
as justice, cleraency, 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 ofiice,
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
frora the practice which has hitherto obtained ? Nothing but a
raass of simony? Simony, however, is heresy, and no venial, but
a very heinous sin. It robs all who commit it of grace, and places
thera in the state of eternal perdition, so that the Pope and all
who take part in the sale of oflfices are living in a state of
condemnation ; for the practice and encouragement of simony,
as now carried on in the court of Eome, 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
' De squalor, c. 6. - Ibid. c. 7. comp. p. 180.

MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 311
unpardonable. This assertion, says Matthew, will appear harsh
to many, and I myself at first shrank not merely from the
words, but even from the thought.' Certain it is, however,^ that
he who becomes a suitor to the Pope seeks to acquire the right to
an ecclesiastical charge or dignit}-, and consequently to something
spiritual, andthatthe PopL-, either directly, or through the medium
of some third person, bestows it upon him. This is not done,
however, unless sorae teraporal gain be previously given upon
the one side, and received upon the other, or, if not given, at least
stipulated and secured b\- contract. Accordingly, to the utraost
of their power, the one party sells, and the other purchases,
that which is spiritual ; and inasrauch as it is in the intentional
sale or purchase of spiritual things that simony consists,' both
parties are siraoniacal, 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 I* The churches are cheated with unworthy priests ; the
spiritual oflfice is abused ; able and godly men are excluded from
it; the universities and schools^ fall into decUne, 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 custoraary 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 diflficult 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 m-ged by the
Eomish courtiers for their simony. The notion that this is a sin
which the Pope cannot commit justly appears to him to need no
answer.'' The aUegation that the money is taken, not for the
place, but for the trouble of bestowing it (Matthew thinks that in
1 De squalor, c. 8. ^ Ibid. c. 9.
3 De squalorib. c. 13. p. 56. * Ibid. c. 9. near tbe end.
5 Studia generalia et particularia.
6 De squalorib. c. 11. Matthew says on the contrary: " Seeiug an
Apostle could sell Christ, there is no reason why an Apostohcal 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), he, no less
justly, considers' 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 hira
occasion to make several very weighty remarks.^ 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^ 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 chUdren, 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
-ricar of Christ. This implies that he holds the oflfice 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 comraon weal, or
which wUl prove a bad exaraple, or create a scandal. In order, how
ever, that the Pope raay the more certainly accomplish the objects
of his government, another legal restriction and law have been im
posed upon hira, viz., the Gospel and the whole canon of Sacred
Scripture, and no less the CouncUs, which have been solemnly
sanctioned hy the Church. And as it is impossible for anysingle 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,* and in many
respects, insufficient for such a lordship. He ought, therefore, to
' De squalorib. c. 14. ^ Ibid. c. 16. ¦'' praeerainentia.
* hominem defectuosum — who is not sufficient of himself.

MATTHEW OF CRACOW. 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 raay
possibly be ignorant and ill-disposed, but who, at any rate, is
subject to raistake and error, should govern it merely according
to his own fancy ? Supposing also that Ecclesiastical affairs and
preferments do really Helong to the Pope, still he can use thera
ouly within the limits imposed upon his sovereignty, and there
fore only according to the rale of Scripture, for the edification
of the Church, on certain rational grounds, and in due form. In
Scripture,' 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 w-ho are the foundation on which Christ has
reared it, viz., the poor, however fit they raay be, for the duties,
and it fosters avarice and cupidity. And to raaintain 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^ does
not scruple to admit that the Pope, as well as any other prince,
must have sufficient means to Hve 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 raanner,
and not by siraoniacal corapacts, 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 asserable the bishops
and advise with them. Were they indeed to refuse to asserable,
it would be no more than the Church of Eome deserved, because
by her neglect of the holy Councils she has dishabituated the
prelates frora attending thera. It is a righteous judgraent upon
that Church, that having chosen to govern without the advice of
' De squalorib. c. 17. - Ibid. c. 18.

314 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF -WESEL.
others, others have also withdrawn their support from her. From
the 7ieglect of the (^ouncils numerous evils have arisen both in
past and present tiraes, 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
terrainated it long ago.'
JJatthew, in conclusion, finds another important point to dis
cuss, naraely, the allegation, that though the evils cannot be
justified, neither can they be resisted or punished. Many of his
coteraporaries w-ho 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 w-hich is wrong, it is
right to obey him. He cannot be resisted. We ought not even
to pass judgraent upon the -\-icegerent of Christ. It is not the
raerabers who should govern the head, but the head who should
govern the raembers. If every one were to take upon him to
censure the conduct of tbe prelates, and at his pleasure to resist
them, what would become of the authority of their office ? Now
here Matthew draws a distinction^ between two kinds of judg
ment, one of winch 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' upon persons
and actions, is entrusted mainly to the higher judges and pre
lates, and in an eminent raanner to the Pope. In this case, the
inferior ought not to pass judgment upon the superior. Even
the general body ought not to do it, so long as there is a superior
to whom that right pertains, and w-ho is willing to execute
justice. If, however, there be no one w-ho is either entitled, or
disposed to do it, then the society collectively, or they w-ho are
its representatives, raay 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* with the
Pope, then, as he has no superior, the Church, or the Church's re-
' This passage shows in the clearest manner that the treatise was
written prior to the Council at Pisa, and consequently before 1409.
- De squalorib. c. 20. 3 auloritativa definitio.
^ De squalorib. c. '22. 1

.M.V.TT11EW OF CRACOW. 315
preseiitatives, would, according to the Scripture' itself, be autho
rized to pass sentence upon him. Tlie 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 w-ould 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 w-ho 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 " ^^'hosoever 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 Uttle is the text of the Apostie, Eom. 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 frora her feUowship. The further objection, that sub
jects ought not to judge their inilers, is answered hy 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. AVhen 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 everj- one
to criticise the motives of their conduct ? Matthew says,^ 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 wdien we
have once tasted it, we cannot possibly refrain from judging
between good fruit and bad, and so exercising the faculty of rea-
' Matth. xviii. 17. - 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 faUacious
and vain, he entreats that this raay be shewn. " If, however,"
he concludes, " ray -rision is true and raanifest to every one, who
pleases to use his eyes, then let us all arise and lift our voice,
that no one raay remain in ignorance of so destructive a fire and
of its terrible spread."
AVhat Matthew of Cracow had witnessed was in fact no
dream, but, as nuraerous voices frora alraost all the countries of
Europe, during the 15th century, testify, a bitter and most de
plorable reaUty. 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 Eeformatory Councils of the age. We have
here w-hat may be considered characteristical of the tendency
which aimed and strove after a Eeformation upon the basis of the
Church and Hierarchy, viz., a deep and pervading conviction of
the corruption in the Church, especially in the Eomish 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 huraan frailty and fallibility of the Pope, and of his being
amenable to trial and deposition,' by the representatives of the
Church. We have the acknowledgment of the indispensable neces
sity of General Councils to ad-rise 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 Uke a continuation of that of
the former, although, as was natural, it expatiates less upon the
' Gerson, as is notorious, used for this the term, auferibilitas.

HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 317
basis of the Church's aristocracy, and goes decidedly further in
a reformatory course. AVe 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 Chu7'ch? There \
can be no doubt, as we have already observed, that it was written
during the author's sojourn at AVorras, and it is the most impor
tant monuraent of his reformatory efforts for the good of the
whole Church. Less methodical and scholar-like than the treatise
against Indulgences, and sometiraes harsh and intemperate in
expression, it is yet a lively testimony of WeseFs 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^ " 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 iraposed upon thera, under
the authority of princes ; and finally, to shew that the tyranny
of the great ought to be endured and thefr coraraands not unad
visedly resisted, in as far as the cause of the Gospel is not
imperiUed by submission to wrongs.".
"Christ," says Wesel,^ "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 et potestate Pastorum ecclesiasticorura Opus
culura — in WalchM.oniin. raed. aevi. vol. ii. Fasc. 2. p. 115 — 162.
2 De auctoritate, officio etc. p. 117.
'Ibid. p. 118.

318 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
despiseth you, despiseth me :' And so, finally, does the Apostie
in the words, ' Whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordi-
'uance of God.' It follows that, if priests really occupy the seat of
Moses, they teach the law- of God, and God teaches through them.
AVhen, however, they please to teach that which is their own, then
don't listen to them nor do w-hat they say. AA'hatsoever, 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 ofthe priest enjoins in such a case proceeds from
God. On the contrary, whatever they speak of theraselves, 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 raask the name and title, the honour and
quality of whomsoever they raay 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' should be
an anathema to the godly. So far am I from believing that out
ward shew, and vain splendour, and pompous w-ords, and the
heathen salutation of Master, have any weight." In proof of the
manifest truth of what he said, Wesel adduces in particular the
exaraple and words of Paul.^ That Apostle withstood Peter to
his face, and thereby testified that God does not respect the per
son of a raan. In like manner, tbe Papal title, the reputation of
scholarship, and the fame of science, are purely personal things.
All that such raasks 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 coraraands us to hear. The Apostle
Paul hiraself clairaed the belief of men solely for the sake of the
Gospel entrasted to him by God, not on account of his person,
' hujusmodi faciebus et personis.
' Dc auctoritate pp. 119. 120. 121. 122.

HIS -WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 319
and not for the w-eight of his name. Even he aspires to no more
than to be a rainister, 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 Eome permits to honour him with the
titles of " Holy" and " ^lost holy," be silent and not breathe
a word. Let the truth of the Gospel be proclairaed, and the
work of faith extolled, and then we shall bow the neck to Christ,
and to the Pope, as Christ's arabassador and faithful servant.
That which Christ says, " The word which ye hear is not mine,
but the Father's which sent rae," ought the Pope also to be able
to say. He only who teaches the word of the Lord,' 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
raan frora whora I hear nothing of Christ's righteousness, and in
whom I 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. AVhat 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 poraps, raiserably irapose upon the people. Ij^are
not,,Jiewe*:eiV_fcr_the two-horned injtre^ _ The shining infula
affects not rae. _I aborainate'thie priestly slippersdecorated with.
precious stones and gold. I laugh at the high-sounding naraes,
the tragic titles, the lofty triuraphs. 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 a7itiquity, and the long ob
servance of them by our forefathers, ITese^ meets as follows.^ "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

I De auctoritate pp. 123. 124. 125.
2 Ibid. pp. 126. 12.

320 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
precepts show themselves not arabassadors of God and stewards
of his word, but assurae the airs of masters and usurp dominion.
Avherefore, 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 frora 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 thera as to the Lord
himself, but if not, then w-iU we not adrait them to dweU in our
hearts, that so we may not seem to have fellowship with their
wicked works and lying words."
Wesel then proceeds, in the reraainder of his work,' to depict
Ithe contrast between the actual state of raanners in the Church,
and that which, according to the word of God, raight be required
land expected of the pr'iests. " Let everyone," 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 wUlingly,
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 raischief!) 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 aU. 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
ofthe mysteries, even as Christ, the true lord and shepherd, took
upon him the form ofa servant and bequeathed tous an example
of hurable ministering. ... If, however,^ we contrast with this
the pm-suits 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 Hfe ? 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
' Especially from p. 128. 2 pp 132. 133. i34_ 135.

HIS WORK ON THE CORRUPTION OF THE CLERGY. 321
sword is likew-ise 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. Ofthe 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,' the Lord working with them and confirm
ing the word with sign^ following.' He had, however, preriously
commanded them, 'Go ye and teach all nations.'^ 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 youf
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 frora the pasture of evangelic truth. For
if, in consequence of your negligence, any of them fall a prey to
tlie 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 circurastances of the times required, Wesel expresses^.
himself most strongly and fully upon the ambition of the clergy. )
He says ? " Originally and by nature all men were bom equal.
The difference between them is a defect which has arisen from
their moral diversities — from the raerit of one and the guilt of
another. This, no doubt, has rendered it necessary that one raan
should be govemed 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 equaUty. 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 ambitir"? -gfiay
be inferred from the fact,* that he does not leave his followers at
Uberty to take a name designative of pre-eminence, but ex-
' Mark xvi. 20. 2 Matth. xxvui. 29. ' De auctoritate p. 139.
* Ibid. p. 140.
X

322 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
pressly forbids them to assurae 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 ofthe Church, and that
theologians and philosophers assume them as their pecuUar privi
lege ; although there is but one who is our Lord and Master, and
in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdora and knowledge ;
not to speak of the blaspheraous and fulsome titles of Most wise.
Most venerable. Most blessed. Vicar of Christ, Hero, Demigod,
and even Most godly, with which his flatterers fawn' 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."^ Wesel then infers from the ambitious and haughty man
ners of the clergy of all ranks, their undutiful neglect of the poor?
He calls to raind 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."* In fine, taking a view of the raanner in which the
Divine woi-ship is conducted, Wesel concludes with these words,'
" 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 Ukewise 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."
Ha-ring thus depicted the demoralized state of the clergy,
Wesel proceeds to shew^ of what sort the commaiidments of the
' cauda adblandiuntur. 2 thrasonico more.
^ De auctoritate p. 141. ^ spiritus sancti administratores.
' De auctoritate p. 142. « stentores et mussatores.
' De auctoritate p. 143.

HIS AVORI^ 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 raay 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 coraraands, accordingly, in so far as they proraote charity,
are to be carefiilly observed, though certainly not on account of
the sovereign power of their author, but in freedom of spirit.
When, however, the cause of Christianity on any occasion
requfres us to act contrary to them, it is lawful for every Chris
tian^ to protest and to subordinate the comraandraents of raen to
the duties of charity. Nor is it difficvdt for the spiritual raan,
who judges all things and is himself judged by none, to deter
mine when such a case occurs. No doubt there is reason to
fear, that an act of disobedience ofthe kind raay 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. " If then^ 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, especiaUy if we feel no reluc
tance inwardly from the testimony of the spirit and of faith.
For that which is not offaith 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 obHgatory, if such enact-
' De auctoritate p. 144. ^ Ibid. pp. 146, 147.
^ x2

324 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF -WESEL.
ments be indiscreet' or unjust, or if they be a violation of charity
and deserve the narae of cruelty and tyranny. Moreover the
Pope, although he be Pope, and as sorae imagine a Demigod, is
subject to the rebuke of the humblest Christian who has more
insight and wisdora than himself Every one is, for Christ's
sake, bound to endeavour, by brotherly admonition, to hring
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. AVhy should it seera strange there
fore, if, when he plays the fool, the raeraber 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.^
Daniel, one of the least of the prophets, judges the elders. The
humUity 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 raost 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 hurable.
The genuine fulfilUng of the Law, that which alone is accept
able to God, raust flow frora 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,^ to burden with
new commandments a Christian, governed as he is by the etemal
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 ? AVho is
entitled to prescribe laws to the soul except Hira who worketh
; all in all ? God forbid ! .... It hence follows* that if
you are a believer, you have nothing to do with the Pope, who
is a man, and nothing to hope from raan at aU. Nay, so far as
spiritual gifts and things which tend to salvation are concemed,
' indiscretura. 2 De auctorit. p. 149.
2 Ibid. p. 152. ^ Ibid. p. 153.

HIS W^ORK ON TIIE CORRUPTION OF TIIE CLERGY. .",25
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 iramediately by God himself, who is
liberal to all who call npon His name."
Such is WeseFs view- of spiritual power. He restricts it so
exclusively to the ministry of tbe word and to the exercise of
charity, that in bis opinion the moraent it oversteps these bounds,
it ceases to be episcopal, and becoraes tyranny. He then treats
also ofthe duty we ow-e 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- 1
prehending as it does both the good and bad, cannot subsist \
w-ithout ciril govemment 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.^ The Lord
himself, however, enjoins us to ' Eender 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. W'e find
the Apostle Paul doing the same, in the Epistie to the Eomans,
and Peter, in the 2d chapter of his 1st Epistle. The commands
of princes may be divdded into three classes. In the first place,
either they are purely Christian and heavenly, as tending to the
pubhc peace,or as subservient to the unityof tbe Church, or as esta
bUshing reciprocal benevolence. In this case, it is proper to obey
the commands ofthe 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 coraraands of that charity which seeks not its own.
Or, secondly, they inculcate things which are diametrically oppo-
' De auctorit. pp. 155. 156. 157.
2 According to this we must understand correctly what one of tbe
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. 29 1 b. Wesel thought that in the prirai
tive and pure condition of mankind, there was no ruling power, and that
in tbe ideal condition ofthe kingdora of God, there would be none. But
inasrauch as it is now necessary, in consequence of tbe actual condition of
the world, the Christian should freely and fairiy 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 wUl. 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. AA'^e have exaraples of
such conduct in the prophets, apostles, and raartyrs, nay in
Christ hiraself Lastly and thii'dly,'- the raagistracy 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 judgraent. 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,^ I 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 recoraraend obedience. .
. . Yea, if they (the civil magistrates) sometiraes even harshly
oppress us, still we ought to tolerate the wrong, although they
shall not be held blaraeless for the abuse of their power in the day
of judgraent. It is true, the princes little deserve that we should
endure their tyranny, and bow our necks to their oppressions,
but Christ vrills, charity requires, and a good conscience towards
God^ coraraands us to do so. Even the worst princes reign hy
Christ's consent, and so serve as instruments to correct our sins.
Neither ought the public peace to be thoughtlessly imperiUed,
under the pretext of Christian liberty. Eather than do so,
we ought, for the glory of God, and in compliance with the
exaraple of Christ, to bear any burdens, annoyances, persecu
tions, and robberies. . . . Let the flesh be beaten to pieces,
let the old raan 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
' Ibid. p. 158. 2 Ibid. pp. 159, 160, 161, 162.
' 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 w-ill be strictly judged themselves, and they shall
have judgment without mercy who have not exercised mercy."

If we look back to the tw^o men whose -writings we have
reriewed, we find, that Matthew of Cracow and John of Wesel
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 ofthe 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 raoderation ; whereas Wesel, although, Uke
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 Ibth
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 ofthe 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 vrith 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

CHAPTEE FIEST.
wesel's trial for HERESY.
For seventeen years Wesel had prosecuted his labours in
AV^omis, 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 preHminary kind.
We StUl possess in manuscript the fragment of a letter' addressed
' It is to be found in a volurae of promiscuous ecclesiastical writings
in the University Library of Bonn, under the Rubric Histor. Ordd.
¦"^Ugg- Nro. 46fi b., after the manuscript copy of the trial of Wesel,
bears the superscription, Subscriptam epistolam scripsit Doctor We-

330 the life of john of wesel.
by hira to his iraraediate superior. Bishop Eeinhard 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 stUl 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 Eeinhard of Sickingen, from
whom, it is true, we have no justification. The hostiUty ofthis
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,' his honour, and his fortune, — of his
Hfe, because, by innumerable vexations,^ 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 frora ray 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.^ 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.* From which circurastance I
conclude that it is of your own fabrication, miless the person
salia gracioso duo Eeynhardo Epo Worraaciensi. The littie col
lection, containing both printed and unprinted articles, was bequeathed
to the University of Bonn by the late counsellor Bruch in Cologne.
' . . . Reverende Praesul, indies te fuisse et esse inimicum et
adversarium corporis, honoris et bonorura meorum.
^ vexationes nimias, innuraeras.
' ... in quibus seraper protestatus sura salva fide Christiana
et veritate sacrarum scripturarum.
* delatorera.

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 he 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.' 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
fiirther charges the Bishop with having set on foot the attempt
to defame hira as a heretic, in order that his salary might be
stopped, for the benefit ofthe 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.*
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 raind of a
man like Reinhard of Sickingen in WeseFs favour. Whatever
he had been before, he could not but be his enemy now. Other
cfrcumstances 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 "riews of Thomas Aquinas.^ He was an ardent friend of
the more simple and practical doctrine of the Bible, a determined
opponent of aU 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
' faraam me accusasse de errore in materia fidei.
^ This is done in the last part of the letter, where among other
things it is said, hanc diffamationem contra me excitasti, ut praefati
(the Chapter and a certain John Utzlinger or Etzlinger) habeant contra
me acturi pro debitis locum excipiendi de infamia. In the sequel also,
where mention is raade of a letter iraportant for Wesel, has literas tu
fecisti et disposuisti coraburi per Henricum Urtenberg scribam tuum.
In hac tua contra me machinatione damnificasti me in centum et quad
raginta flor. The rest is very illegible.
' Thomam peculiariter non coluerat, says an eye-witness of the trial
for hersey, with whom we shall afterwards becorae 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, vvhich 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 raultitude of other charges wholly groundless, or raerely
ju'obable, should fasten to it and aggravate the accusation. It was
also requisite to stir up against hira the passions ofthe 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
tbe pulpit, that whoever sees the holy sacrament sees the DevU,'
that he lived on familiar terras with Jews^ and Hussites,^ 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
deraand 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 raiddle ages. They were
regarded in no other light than as infidels and enemies of Christ,
the refuse of raankind, on which God had set his brand. The
magistrates merely tolerated them, and treated them as Uttle
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-
christianisin, and heresy. The fact was, however, that almost
since the days of Jerome, the transmis.sion of the Hebrew tongue
and Scriptures had almost whoUy ceased among the Christians,
' Exaraen magistrale art. 20.
^ Tbis point 1 do not find raentioned any where except in Erhard
Gesch. des Wiederaufbliihens, Th. i. s, 291. But presuming that one,
in other respects a most conscientious enquirer, bad good grounds for his
assertion, and as it accords very well with the circumstances, I adopt
tbe trait into my narrative, leaving it to the reader's option to consider
the fact as hypothetical.
' Examen 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 Uterature were ob
liged to gather their knowledge in the first instance frora learned
Jews, and it is weU known how- laboriously Reuchlin collected
his Hebrew learning by associating with learned Eabbins in
Germany and Italy, or, as he himself said, fished it together in
fragments.' The strong prejudice, however, to which we have
alluded, greatly obstracted intercourse with Jews, and all endea
vours to turn their learning to account ; And so it came to pass,
that the rerivers of the study had a sore conflict to wage with the
mistaken piety of Christians and churchmen, and the fanati
cism ofthe clergy and the people. The most celebrated instance
of this is the ' attack made by the Inquisitors of Cologne upon
Reuchlin. Eeuchlin, 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 seeras also to have
been by WesseFs acquaintance, JbA h of Wesel. AVhen 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
tnct, however, a keen hatred of the Jews prevailed among the
people, and during the reign of Bishop Frederick (of Dumneck^)
had burst into a storm, which could only be calmed by the helj)
ofthe Archbishop of Mayence and other princes.^ In place, there
fore, of recognising in WeseFs conrluct a noble thirst of knowledge,
his enemies brought it as an accusation against him, and one
eridently 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 WeseFs doctrines to perceive that they are, in no wise,
dfrected against Christianity, but solely against ecclesiastical
' Preface to the third book of the Rudimenta liebraica. Erhard
Geschichte des Wiederaufbliihens, B. 2. S. 211.
2 Between 1427 and 45.
' Schannat Hist. Episc. Wormat. T. i. p. 413. For other persecu
tions of the Jews during the same period, see Gieseler K. Gescb. ii.
3. s. 314.

3 34 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 Eeformation, 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 earlyas the 13th century,
the Waldenses, their pioneers, had spread into Germany. Numbers
of them were to be found in Switzerland, on the Ehine, in Sua
bia, Thuringia, and Bavaria. They had here formed themselves
into societies which corresponded with each other and endeavom-ed
to propagate their tenets. They were particularly numerous in
the district of the Upper Ehine, in and around Strasburg, where
theywere called the "Friends of God," and " Winkeler" (lurkers)'
and they may be traced also in other places, such as Mayence,
Augsburg and Dunkelsbuhl. 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.'^ That was the
date ofthe i?MSsite commotion which Hkewise spread over Germany
from another quarter. The Hussites, no less than the Morarians
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,^ and we know in particular that when
Luther's farae began to spread, they sent deputies to waituponhim.
The minds of men were at the time susceptible of impressions of
the sort, and hence, in the course ofthe 15th century, we find the
doctrines and principles of Huss springing up in many quarters
of Germany.
From yarious causes,* Franconia became a principal seat of
these free movements. Here at a very early period we find
' Rohrig die Gottesfreunde und Winkeler am Oberrhein, in lUgens
Zeitschrift fiir hist. Theol. 1840. Heft. i. s. 122.
2 Hagen Deutschlands lit. und relig. Verhaltnisse im Ref. Zeitalter,
B. i. s. 20. 66 ff.
3 Gieseler K. Gesch. B. 2. Abth. 4. s. 479. Anmerk. i.
* Hagen 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.' Huss
hiraself entered Franconia on his journey to Constance, and
was well received, especially at Nuremberg? In Bamberg so
strong was the leaning to the heretical opinions, that the CouncU
found it necessary to restrain the citizens by oath from embrac
ing them? In Aischgmnde and Taubergrunde, about 1446, a
certain Frederick Miiller preached the doctrines of Huss, and
found nuraerous adherents among the people.* Above all, how
ever, the unpression produced in this district, at a somewhat later
period, bya certain peasant boy whom they called"the drummer,"
was very remarkable. About the middle of the 15th century,
at the rillage of Niklashausen, in the diocese of Wurtzburg,
there appeared a poor and UUterate peasant youth, called John
Behem,^ pretending to be acting by the command of the Holy
Vfrgin, who,he said, had revealed herself to him, in white raiment,
as he fed his flock, and had communicated to hira 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 Ucentious inanner of Hfe, and threatened them
with the impending judgments of God. He rejected tithes, and
contended that aU 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,* tolls, servitudes,' and other oppressive burdens,
claimed by spiritual and temporal superiors, should be done away,
' Ibid. 8. 169.
2 Theobalds Hussitenkrieg, Niirnb. 1621. Th. 1. s. 40 ff.
' fiisKers Bamberg. Reforra. Gesch. Bamb. 1825. s. 11.
* Hagen in a. 1. s. 169, 170. Gropp. Annal. T. u. p. 112.
' The history of this reraarkable raan is fully detailed in D'Argentre
Collectio Judicior. de nov. erroribb. T. i. pars 2. p. 288 — 290, and in
a Gerraan 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 hira an Appendix.
* pedagia. See Ducange s. v. pedagium. T. iii. p. 248.
^ precariae exactiones. See Ducange s. v. Precaria. T. iii. p. 448.

336 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
and, on the other hand, insisted that hunting and fishing, and
the free use of the forests, should be comraon to every Christian
man, without distinction, wbetiier rich or poor, peasant, bishop,
or prince. It is true that Eudolph of AVurtzburg 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 araong the people, who
reverenced hira as a saint, and flocked to hear hira in inconceiv
able crowds fi-ora Franconia, Bavaria, Suabia, Hesse, Thuringia,
Saxony, and Meissen,' and ere long that seed struck root, and
ripened into a bloody harvest in the war of the peasantry.
But to a rauch greater distance, as far even as the Neckar and
the Rhine, the sarae 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
jieople were infected with the Hussite heresy. To Heidelberg
Jei'ome of Prague, Huss's friend, had paid a visit in 1436,^ and
there posted up a list of propositions, araong w-hich there was
(me denying the doctrine of transubstantiation.* Shortly after,
John Draendorf, or von Schlieben,* also laboured in this district.
He was of a noble Saxon family, and had received ordination at
' Tanta raultitudo hominum, non solum ex Francia ipsa Orientali
(Franconia), sed etiam ex Bavaria et Suevia, ex Alsatia et partibus
Rheni, ex Wetteraugia, ex Hassia, ex Buchonia, ex Thuringia, ex
Saxonia et Missnia, quotidie ad miseraudum Fatuellum bunc turmatim
fluebat, ut frequenter uno die 10,000 hominum, aliquando 20,000
nonnunquam etiam triginta millia convenisse apud villulam Niclaus-
hausen sit proditura. In D'Argentre p. 288. The nuraber may be
soraewhat exaggerated, still that a very large throng came to this
place is not to be doubted.
2 Comp. Hist. Univers. Heidelb. mscr. p. 43. Struve Pfalz. Kirch-.
Hist. s. 2.
' Royko Gesch. des Const. Cone. Th. 3. s. 340. v. der Hardt Acta
Cone. Const, iv. 645 sqq.
* With respect to this J. Draendorf (called by Luther Dramsdorf,
bv Melancthon Drandorff) corap. Kapp Nachlese von Ref Urkunden
Th. 3. s. 13. and s. 38 — 60, where the trial by the Inquisition is de
tailed, and Beesenmeyer in the theol. Studd. und Kritt. 1828. H. 2. s.
399, where the passages of Luther and Melancthon, which refer to him,
are cited.

HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 337
Prague. For reasons unknown to us, he 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' at Heidelberg, and condemned to be burnt to death-
He suffered at AA'orms upon the 3rd of February 1425. The
same fate befel Peter Turnaii' in 1426 at Speyer, and also
Frederick Reiser, commonly called Tunauer,* in 1458, at Stras
burg. The latter was at fii-st 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. He preached this doctrine in clan
destine meetings of adherents at Wui-tzburg, HeUbronn, Pforz
heim, Basle, and Strasburg. 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 feraale, some
shared his fate, and some were banished. Among others, his
patroness, Anna AA^eiler, an old lady engaged in mercantile pur
suits, died along w-ith him.
We thus see, that there w-as 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
' It consisted principally of Heidelberg professors, among whom
John of Frankfort is specially mentioned.
2 Flacius Cat. test. Verit. ii. 853. edit. Francof. 1556.
' 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 " Tutscb-
land," written by Jacob Wimpheling (1501), and published at Strasburg
in 1648 by Joh. Mich. Moscherosch, the author mentions, in the chapter
entitled "What things ought to be punished frora a regard to the ser
vice of God," as among the meritorious actions of fornier citizens of
Strasburg, that " in defence of the Papal chair, they had burned to death,
a certain leader of heretics, called Frederick Tunawer, for speaking ill
of the donation of Constantine, and had condenmed and sentenced several
of his followers, partly to death and partly to exile in the year 1458."
Jung in his journal" Tunotheus Strasburg 1821. Th. 2. Rohrichs
Gesch. der Ref. im. Elsass. Tb. 1. s. 35. and dissertation by the same
author, Uber die Gottesfreunde und Winkeler bei Rlgen 1840, 1. s. 160-
Y

338 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
held intercourse with one of their emissaries, a certain Nicolaus
of Bohemia, (ov Poland). It is not, how-e\-er, probable' that this
intercourse was, either solely or principally, the cause ofthe Inqui
sitorial proceedings, partly, because the point does not appear
with sufficient prominence in the foreground of the trial itself,
and partly because there w-ere 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 raerely to furnish a nicknarae, readily intelligible to
the raultitude, and calculated at once to excite dark suspicions in
their minds. In spite of the spread of their views, a Hussite was
a narae 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 tbat 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 of Thomas are raentioned' as
taking the lead in preferring the accusation against Wesel before
Diether von Isenburg, the Archbishop of Mayence. This pre
late,' who had been forced to expiate his own intrepid opposition
to the Eomish see, by the railitary devastation of his capital,
show-ed no disposition to expose himself and his bishopric to
fi-esh dangers for the sake of a single daring preacher.* He
entered into the proposal, and made the necessary preparations,
1 As Gieseler also observes, K. Gesch. B. 2. s. 481. Anmerk. o.
_ 2 Examen. magistr. at the very beginning, instigantibus, imo cogen-
tibus Thoraistis quibusdara.
* Corapare respecting him, the monography, Diether von Isenburg,
Archbishop of JIayence. Frankf. 1792. 2 Theile.
* Exara. magistr. p. 292 : veritus, ng denuo ab episcopatu ejice-
letur.

HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 339
by inviting theologians frora 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 afready shewn other marks of special confidence,'
is StUl extant in manuscript,^ and Ishall here givethe most import
ant and characteristic passages. After alluding to the obligation
he lay under to endea'\-our to preserve the purity of the Lord's
vineyard, the prince-bishop proceeds : "We have recentiy 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 rae iraproper to
pass thera in sUence. 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, w-e appoint a legal investigation
to be raade into his religious opinions, that they raay be ascer
tained. At the sarae time, as he is a person of great subtilty,'
we need the help of sorae 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 Johu, upon the
following day, and that their learning may help and promote the
refiitation 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 w-hich 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 Eector and the
whole body, it extols* the excellent prelate for his zeal in pre
serring the purity of the faith, and then proceeds as follows :
"Although your Highness has already acquired distinction by
' Hist. Univers. Heidelb. mscr. p. 54. ^ Ibid. s. 82.
' propter hominis illius argutias.
* Hist. Univ. Heidelb. mscr. p. 83.
y2

240 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 coraply with this so holy and
salutary wish, and to send to you the raen you request. Not
merely in this matter, however, but in every other agreeable to
your Alajesty,' and w-hich does not exceed our abilities, will you
find us at all times and in the highest degree wilHng to serve you."
In lact, on the day appointed, the University despatched three of
her divines, the Doctors Nicolaus of Wachenheim, Herwig of
Am.sterdam, and Jodocus of Calw,^ accompanied by several ofthe
Masters. After a sirailar correspondence with the Archbishop,
the University of Cologne did the same, delegating the Domini
cans and Inquisitors, Master Gei^ard von Elte7i and Master Jacob
Sprenger, and a third person of the same order.' The process
could therefore commence in due form.
Before entering upon the narration of it, however, we crave
permission to say- a w^ord or two respecting the chief actors.
The one of most exalted rank, though certainly not the best
qualified for such an affair, w-as Archbishop Diether himself
Possessed of energy and patriotism, he was yet no theologian,
and of slender attainments in any branch of learning.* The
position he held in the Church, and the relation in which he stood
to the Eomish see, deterred him from actually interesting himself
in WeseFs favour. At the same time, his better convictions must
equally have restrained the man who had been the early friend
and protector of Heiraburg, the advocate of the principles of
the Councils of Constance and Basle, and tbe charapion of the
' The University employs towards the Elector not only the expres
sions, Celsitudo et Dominatio, but also Majestas vestra.
^ Exam, magistr. p. 298.
' Ibid.
* It was said of him what at tbat time was highly disparaging, tbat
he could not speak two words of Latin. Schrockh R. Gesch. Tb. 32. s.

HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 341
rights of the German nation against the claims of Eome, 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 ofthe University of Mayence, appear to have come
prominently forward on the occasion. The active promoters of
the inquest were the coraraissioners frora 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 Alten,
who discharged the office of Inquisitor, and conducted the exarai
nation. According to the character given hira by Tiithemius,^ 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 becoraing
weary of the world, had retired frora it into the Dorainican order,
where he was soon appointed to the office of an Inquisitor. With
him as junior coUeague was associated Jacob Sprenger, who had
heen raised to the same office by Innocent VIII. This person has
left to posterity no other evidence ofthe theological erudition, for
which Trithemius gives hira credit,'^ except the authorship of the
so-called " Hammer of Witchcraft," i.e., a form of process forthe
trial of witches, a work which is said to belong in common' 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 Wachenheim,'^
a man who had now reached an advanced stage of life, and been
' Trithemius de scriptor. eccles. c. 845. p. 201.
2 Ibid. cap. 957. p. 229.
' Trithemius ihid. Altamurae BibUoth. Dominicana p. 205 and 215.
Schrockh K. Gesch. B. 30. s. 474 and 477.
* See respecting him Trithemius de script, eccl. c. 864 p. 206. _ We
shaft say more of bim in the sequel, when speaking of Wessel s sojourn
at Heidelberg.

342 TIIK LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
for nearly fifty years a professor at Heidelberg. He was a sldlful
scholastic, and zealous theologian, and the sole meraber of the
court who, like Wesel hiraself, belonged to the party of the Nomi
nalists.' Of his two colleagues, Jodocus of Calw is the only one
with whom we have any particular acquaintance. Trithemius pic
tures him,'- as we have already seen, as a learned theologian and
a manof great activity of mind. All of these persons decidedlyheld
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 thera was arraigned John Wesel, now old, infirm,
and bent «ith raany a cross, a truly affiicted man. In his
better days of youth and vigour he had uttered the beautiful
words :' " 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
w-aves of temptation break in, but do thou give strength to sur
mount them ; let persecutions arise, but do thou send "rictory
frora heaven." Now, however, when persecution had actually
arisen, it raust be confessed, he did not exhibit all tbe bravery
which we love and adraire in a determined confessor of the truth.*
The courage, which, like WeseFs, mounts on certain occasions to
presumption, is also apt on others to sink into tiraidity. It is
painful to see raen w-ho know better yielding unconvinced to
raere power. But instances of the kind do unfortunately occur
in the history of the Church's despotisra, 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
' He is described. Exam, magistr. p. 298. as, solus de via (ut dicunt)
Modernorum. 2 De script, eccl. c. 873. p. 208.
' De auctorit. officio et potest. Pastorura, 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 uord.

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-w-ishers, who took the responsibiUty upon their consciences,
and probably also by the request of the Elector, who would cer
tainly have been grieved to see the old raan 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 tiial 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 stUl con
tinues in manuscript.' Both of them are by unknown authors,
but both present us with a very lively pictm-e of the scene, bear
generaUy the impression of truth and fideUty in the details, and
perfectly agree with each other in the main circumstances. They
differ only in the following points : The printed repoii, drawn up
by one of the merabers, probably, ofthe University of Heidelberg,
is more exact in its statements of the facts and the names of the
persons. It gives at the comraenceraent 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 ofthe parties did and said.
Frequently, too, it is written in a Hvely, but at the same time

1

' The printed Narrative which Ortuinus Gratius previously published,
is to be found m D'Argentre Collect, judicior. de nov. 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-CouncUlor^racA, in Cologne, for the copy
I bave now before me.

344 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
also a ruder style. The unpri7ited report, which rather resembles
a protocol, and which, as we may infer from the marked distinc
tion it confers upon Gerard von Elteri,^ was probably drawn up
by sorae one from Cologne, is raore full in reporting what was
spoken, begins at once with the exaraination, abstains from the
expression of any personal opinion, is written in somewhat better
Latin, and only here and there gives those individual aud 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 F7-iday the Sth of February,^ the parties connected with
the process met for the first tirae in consultation.' There were
present all the doctors and raasters from Heidelberg, the
Archbishop's suffragan, the Vicar Count of Wertheim, the
Custos Count of Solms, the two canons Breitenbach and Maca-
rius, the Minister of Frankfort,* the Eector 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, riz., 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 day, Saturday, the doctors of Heidelberg and
Cologne presented their extracts to the Archbishop. There was,
however, no suraraary of them, and therefore he did not inspect
1 He is e.g. at the very beginning, p. 1, called Theologus egregius.
^ Feria sexta post Purificationem.
' Printed account in D'Argentre s. 292.
* He is called, without specifying his name, Plebanua Frankfordien-
sis through the whole narrative.

HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 345
them.' 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, -vrith the masters from Heidelberg,' dined at the Arch
bishop's. On Monday the Ilth Feb. at seven in the raorning, the Arch
bishop, the Inquisitor, all the doctors and masters from Cologne
and Heidelberg, the Eector and Dean ofthe 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 rainister 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 beeii
called by our venerable father the Elector, for the purpose of
hearing what Master John Wesel has to say touching certaui
opimons he is suspected of holding on articles ofthe 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, -vrill take in hand to admonish
him to renounce his errors, retum 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 vrithout mercy.'" 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 raust present hiraself personally, and express
his gratitude for the off'er of mercy. But just as the Fiscal was
on the point of departing, tiie three coraraissioners made their
' 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.
' Unprinted account, " He wiU then find mercy without mercy."

346 THE LIFE OF JOUN OF Wi:?EL.
appearance, and mtroduced, according to his own request. Master
John himself
John Wesel then came forward between two Minorites, pale,
looking Uke a corpse, and with a staff' in his hand.' A place in
the centre of the circle,^ exactly opposite the Archbishop and
Inquisitor, was pointed out for him to sit down upon the floor.
The Inquisitor then addressed to him in person the offer of
mercy. Wliereupon 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
repUed, 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 inercy f to which Wesel rejoined, " AA'hy should I ask mercy,
having as yet been convicted of no crinie, 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. AVhereupon the pro
ceedings commenced.
The first question asked of Wesel by the Inquisitor was, " If
he believed himself bomid by the oath he had sworn to speak the
truth, though contrary to his own or another's interest V Wesel :
" I knoxv 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.
- 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 exclairaed
"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 raany scholars, and in particular that he had
sent the work on Fasting to the Bishop of AVorras.
4. Interrogated, AA^hether 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 raedicine, and of taking the
communion under both species, and that he had done this
at Alayence, 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
beUeves their doctrines, patronizes thera, 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
frora the Father and the Son, and what he does believe upon this
point f 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 frora the Father and the
Son as one and the same principle, because in his opinion this
cannot be proved from Scripture.
8. Interrogated, AVhether he believes in one Holy Catholic

348 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
and ApostoUc 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 latio-
nalis,'- &c., has been improperly inserted in the Athanasian
creed ? Wesel 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
Chri.st 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. InteiTogated, 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,^ or that synods and assem
blies' of priests are sufficient (to vrit for the govemraent 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
sin.s-,* 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 tbe Athanasian creed here referred to is, Nara sicut
anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita et deus et homo unus est
Christus. 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 raatter araounts to only a critical doubt, as to the originality of
that passage in the creed.
2 Praesidentem — the expression is used in both narratives.
' Con\-entus et congregationes.
* Papa peccator. 1

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 beUeves that the laws do not require the assent of
subjects, and that the ordinances of the Church are obligatory
npon those who would avoid mortal sin. On this article, how
ever, he w-avered.'
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^ between a bishop and a priest.
17. Interrogated, Whether he beUeves, 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 sarae Holy Spfrit by whom, according to
the faith, the Scriptures were delivered and revealed ? The first
article Wesel considers false, and he does not beUeve 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 -yirtue of his essential being and power I And
whether he believes that in the sacrament the very substance of
the bread, or its substantial form,^ reraains, or that after the con-
1 varius taraen fuit ad istura Articulum.
2 credit differentiam esse— the expression is very arabiguous, and
adraits of several senses.
2 In the unprinted account, formara sacramentalem.

350 THE 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 Hkewise under
that of the wine ? He beUeves this, but believes likewise that
the body of Christ raay exist under the forra of the bread,
although the substance of the bread reraain.
20. Interrogated, AA'^hether 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,' AA''hen he had last confessed, read the
Mass, and received the Supper I ( 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, AVhether he believes that abstinence is im
posed by law- upon the clergy of the AVestern 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 thera to both.
22. Interrogated, AA^hether he had preached to raonks, nuns,
or Beguines, that they were not bound bythe 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 sayed."^ 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
' This happened at the coraraenceraent of the exaraination, but is
introduced here as kindred matter by the author.
2 According to the unprinted account, Religio (Monachism) nullum
salvat sine gratia Dei.

HIS TRIAL FOR HERESY. 351
as such in the Bible ? Wesel certainly does believe this, and will
believe it till better taught.
25. Interrogated, AVhether he had preached to the people that
it is doubtful whether Christ was bound with cords, or fastened
with nails' to the cross ? He confesses bavins said that in the
histor}- 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 w-hether he had written a treatise
upon the subject ? He ackowdedges 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
w-ith you always," inasmuch as these words distinctly intimate
that he did not intend to appoint any one as his substitute. i If
a ricar signifies one who in the master's absence is to perform his
work, then Christ has no vicar upon earth.
At the close ofthe examination, Wesel was led back to prison.
The Archbishop, the Inquisitor, and the doctors, then resolved to
appoint a comraittee to advise what further steps should be taken,
and for that purpose norainated the doctors of Heidelberg and
Cologne, the Chancellors of the Archbishop and the Count Pala
tine George Pfeffer and Thomas Domberg, the Suffragan, the
Eector of the University of Mayence, and the canons Count of
Solms and ]Macarius, the Fiscal and two notaries. After dinner
they held a sederant at two o'clock, and settied the procedure for
the following day.
On Tuesday moming, the same parties, as on the day before, raet
again in the Monastery of the Minorites, and on this occasion, the
laity were indiscriminately admitted and no one refused. Wesel
' The unprinted account adds, " because it is his wiU to be pn-
.sent and do every thing himself."

352 THE LIFE OF JOHN 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 ;'
secondly, to ask him certain questions which were not asked the
day before ; and, thirdly, to learn fi-ora 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^ 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 beUeves, 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 iraposed 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 raanner, 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 thera, the Church
does raore 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 beUeves, that holy water has no more efficacy than other
and common water.
' Printed account : non satis resolutus. Unprinted : non satis recol-
lectus. 2 These corae in the unprinted account after the repetition of the
articles ofthe 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 irapart 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 asked 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 reraarks. 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 frora 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 beUeves that the doctrine ofthe procession ofthe 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 stUl defined it to be the fellowship of aU 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 beUeve either in theSaints, 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.' In
aU 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. See
likewise the unprinted account.

354 THK LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
The same day, in the course of tiie examination, he also said,
" Though all forsake Christ, I, though I should do it alone, wUl
adore him as the Son of God, and continue a Christian." To
which the Inquisitor answ^ered : " All heretics say tiie 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 ;'
nnd 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'' the Inqui
sitor exhorted hira in respect of his errors to ask for mercy,
wdien 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 raore 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 raust of your own accord sue for pardon, and
I protest against the charge you raake.'— Other members of the
court also encouraged Wesel to this step, and he at last said,
" AVell then I do ask for raercy." Upon w-hich the Inquisitor
concluded wdth the words, " Not so, you raust come voluntarily
and ask it."]
At the close of the examination,* Wesel was once more con
ducted to prison, and it was then determined that three of the
doctors of theology, the suflragan, Herwig, and Sprenger, should
be deputed to wait upon him, and amicably exhort hira to
renounce bis errors and heretical opinions. [They were told,
however, not to enter into any statement of reasons, as that would
give hira the opportunity of further discussion, and so the matter
would never corae to an end.]
' Refers undoubtedly to sorae 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 bis protest to be minuted.
* The unprinted narrative adds, " having taken time for considera
tion (deliberationem cepit)."

-wesel's TRIAL FOR HEllESV. 355
The deputies accordingly, at an early hour on Wednesday,
raet, 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. — JFesel : 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 adrait the authority of the Church,
asked : AA^hy 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
deputy : But why do you not believe the Fathers of the Church ?
Wesel : Because tbeir 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 rayself whether they believed
my words or not. The deputies becoming then more importunate
with him, he said : " AA^ere 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 sraile. He would be too acute for
you. [In fine, after rauch talk on both sides, Wesel declared, I
will recant, if you will take the responsibility upon your consciences.
— The deputies; That wUl 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 JVesel the chief articles w-hich
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 hira. He
intimated his wUlingness to comply with all that was required of
him, and to make his recantation, first in the refectory of tbe
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 deUvered a
z 2

356 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
short address, in vvhich 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 aUowed 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 w-liich you have brought a stain upon the Church
and given offence to the people. Such a tirae 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 ara also
ready to recant them publicly. I subrait myself to the com
mandments of the Holy raother Church, and to the tuition of the
Doctors. I will endure the penance which has been iraposed
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 1 Answer : Seven
teen years at Worms. — When he wrote the treatise upon Indul
gences ? Answer : At the time when the sale of Indidgences
was preached, and the year before. — Wheu he had formed his
opinion respecting the Holy Ghost ? Wesel believes that it might
be about six j^ears 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.]
Tbe public recantation was appointed to be made on the ensu-

avesel's trial for heresy. 357
ing Sabbath of Estomibi, and was actually made by Wesel, accord
ing to the form prescribed.' He, no doubt, expected that he would
then be fiilly set at liberty, and restored to his forraer position.
In this, however, he was disappointed. Fanaticisra 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 harraless, to be iraprisoned for life in the Augustinian
monastery at Mayence. AA'hen 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,- " O thou God of raercy, raust all the many good things
I have written, bear the punishment due to the little that was
eril ? 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 fi-om 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 what 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 j
principles; first, as respects the rule offaith, that nothing ought I
to be believed which is not contained in Scriptiire, in the canon
of the Bible, and for this reason he rejected tbe authority of tbe
ecclesiastical teachers, and denied that Scripture has been inter
preted by the Fathers in the same spirit in w-hich it was revealed ,
and inspired ;' and 2cUy, as respects the subject matter of the s
' This is also taken from the unprinted report.
2 Accordin- to the report of .John Butzbach, Monk at Heisterbacb,
(see in the sequel) '" '''•e -'^"cta''- '" !'•"•• Tnthemii de script, eccles. p.
79. vers.
¦5 Art. 17.

bjb THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
i faith, that only Di\-ine 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,' 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 itis
a point of material iraportance, 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 raeans either infallible or free frora defects.
Tbis 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 Chm-ch, 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.- 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. AA''ithin 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 stUl act and do
all that is necessary for salvation, and needs no substitute to do for
him things which he cannot himself accoraplish.' 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 ofthe visible Church, and its
suprerae and rightful magistrate. He did not in fact absolutely
repudiate the Pope and all power ecclesiastical and temporal in
1 Art. 22.
'' See the repetition of the questions asked the previous day. Art. 8.
Compare p. 353.
' 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 coramandraents
offensive to Christian truth or charity.' No doubt, however, the
Hierarchy, like the visible Church to which it belongs, is in his
eyes not of Divine but of huraan origin. Holding fast this dis
tinction, Jf'esel could assert upon the one hand, that as the
Apostles had no authority to legislate tor the Chm-ch,^ 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,' 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,* and the transgression of them
to be sin, and in this sense, designate as obligatory the AVestern
Church's law of celibacy and the appointraent of the seven
canonical hours.' 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,^ and
even, on particular points, declared his opinions to be conformable
to the earUer statements he had made upon this article of doctrine,
although he could no longer recollect' some minor propositions
which the treatise no doubt virtually contained ; Inasmuch also
as he designated to be destitute offeree and meaning* many ofthe
prevailing ecclesiastical usages, espegially the benediction of inani-
1 See the citations given, p. 323 and 325, frora the Treatise, De
auctoritate off', et pot. Pastorum.
2 Parad. p. 291.
3 See above, p. 323.
i Art. 15.
« Art. 21.
6 Art. 27.
' The additional articles at the beginning. .See p. 352.
" Ibid.

360 the life OF JOHN OF WESEL.
mate objects, wdiich was connected with much superstition, and
Finally, inasmuch as, although not decidedly denying the strict
dograa of transubstantiation, he still expressed a doubt of it,' and
hints at the form into which it was cast by Luther. The view
which he held, in comraon 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,^ is unquestionably connected w-ith his views of spiri
tual and relig-ious developraent 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 andhe 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 hiraself confesses that he
made it, while stUl 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 Ee
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 ofthe 19th Art. See p. 535. - Art. 18.

AVESEL's trial for HERESY. 361
conviction requires, is ready to go, Hke Huss, to the stake, or
to say with Luther : " Unless persuaded by the testiraony 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. WeseFs
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 w-hen he was worn with age and broken down
by bodily infirmities. In fact it was rather done for hira, 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 conriction. Certain it is that no raaterial 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 fiiture, cut him off from all intercourse
with the world. In spite of these palliations, however, the final
stage of WeseFs life continues raarked with a stain, and the
preacher of AA'orras before the Court of inquisition is a very
different personage from Luther, the great hero ofthe 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 thfrty-eight, imbued with an unparalleled
strength of faith, upheld by inbom 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

362 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 po7'traiture of Wesel, his occasional arrogance in
controversy, and his transient tiraidity 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 ofthe foremost
personages of the Eeformation. 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 w-ith 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 heconsumed 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, "AA^ith sobriety
towards ourselves, justice towards our brethren, and piety towards
God'" — words which, if he had hada torabstone, raight with truth
have been engrav-ed upon it.

CHAPTEE SECOND.
wesel's connexion with the reformation, opinions
respecting him. notices of his writings.
The connerion of Wesel vrith the Reformation is sufficiently
obvious frora what has already been said. Agreeing with Goch
and Wessel in his leading tendency, his zealous endeavours to
give a scriptural raould to Christian truth and practice, and in
1 Sobrie nobis, juste fratribus, pie Deo.— De auct. ofticio ft potest.
Past. p. 1-Ki. 1

WESEL S CONNECTION WIl'H THE KEFOlt-M ATION. 363
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 Eeforraation
really and iraraediately originated, viz., hostility to Indulgences
and other ordinances ofthe 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 raanner he
became, if not so thorough, yet a more direct and conscious pre
cursor of the Eeformation.
His importance for the age in which he lived, and his con
nexion with the Eeforraation, may likewise be inferred from the
testiraonies of his coteraporaries and raore imraediate successors,
and from the opinions deUvered respecting him in later tiraes.
There is rauch in the judgraent passed by that eye-witness to whom
we are indebted for the printed narrative of his trial. He concludes
it with the following words.' " 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^ with
whora to advise, and if all his judges, wdth a single exception
(Nicolaus von Wachenheim), had not been EeaUsts. 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, Thoraas 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 raen, Alaster Engelin of Brunswick, and Master
John Kaisersberg? Especially was Master Engelin of opinion
that the proceedings against so distinguished a person had been
1 In D'Argentre CoUect. Judicior. T. I. P. ii. p. 298.
2 Consultores.
3 Both were at this tirae ministers in Strasburg. Engelin, who vvas
erainent as a Scholastic Theologian, had previously (See above p. 278)
been Wesel's colleague at Erfurt, and his predecessor at Mayence.
The celebrated pulpit orator, Geiler of Kaisersberg (y 1510) had, since
1478, been preacher in Strasburg.

364 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
too hasty. He did not scruple to maintain that many, nay even
the most of We.seFs doctrines, were quite defensible. Neither did
he conceal that the jealousy ofthe Thomists against the moderns,
and the dislike of the monks to the secular clergy, had had much
to do in the whole affair. And who, if not the devil himself, could
have 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 weighty corament, 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 sirailar danger, and therefore had
recourse to an acquaintance who was a learned jurist, viz.,
Eudolph van Veen, for advice as to ¦v\'hat might befall. In the
letter which he wrote for this purpose,' he deplores the fate of
Wesel, beUeving hira 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 style of ex-
' Wesseli Opp. p. 920. It may be read in full in the life of Wessel.

OPINIONS RKSPECTING 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 undi.s-
ceming raultitude. 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 w-ould 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 EeaUsts and For-
maUsts, 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 refiised 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,' and under date 1479, he makes the
following brief mention of him :— " John Ruchard of Upper-
We.sel 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 iu the Augustinian Monastery, where he pined
with sorrow and soon died."^ 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 raan is not afraid to bear the most favourable
testimony to the victim of persecution, and to speak of him as
follows:' "John of Upper-Wesel, a Ehinel ander, 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 preacher7,
' Chronicon Sponhem. in Trithemii Opp. historic, ed. M. Freher. p. ii.
p. 391.
" Then follows an outline of his doctrines, which has been literally
engrossed in Bzovii Annal. eccles. T. xvin. p. 158. 228.
3 In the work, Auctarium in libr. Joh. Trithemii de scriptoribus
ecclesiasticis, a raanuscript belonging to tbe Ubrary of the University
at Bonn, fol. 79 verso.

366 THK LIFE OF .lOHN OF 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
Comraentaries upon Holy Scripture, and of other treatises upon
various subjects, but which contained sorae errors against the
Catholic faith. The.se, at the instigation of several Germans of
rank and learning, by comraand of Archbishop Diether, and
after a forraal 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 w-ritings 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 AVickliffe. Some overw-helm him, as a sectarian,
with all raanner of blame, as for instance Wigand, but there are
others who highly commend him."'
In the ranks ofthe 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 Eeformer and Divine, really was the
superior of the two, butpartly also, and in a higher degree, bythe
' At the end of tbe 15th or tbe beginning of the IGth century, there
appeared an Apology for John of Wesel, by a certain Wigand Tribellius,
to which Wigand IF/rt^ (synonymous with Cai/po,) 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 IVesel 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 ofthe Hussites, and attacking in tbe raost shameful inanner the
orthodox faith, the Romish chair, the prelates of tbe 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 otbers also which are not there It
is pos.sible that the letter ad Bohemorum suramum antistitem et
baeresiarcham raay be a fiction of the bere.sy-hunter. See upon
all this Walch Monim. med. aev. ii., 2 Praef. p. xvii. sqq. Re
specting Wigand Wirth., consult Rotermund's edition of the Epist.
obsc. viror. Hannov. 1830, preface p. 95, and Gieseler's K. Gesch.
ii. s. 342, note u.

OPINIONS RESPECTING HIM. 367
fact that to the reforraer and his associates, Wessel was a new and
astonishing phenoraenon, a cheering echo from afar, whereas Wesel
was one vrith whom, from an early period, they were acquainted
and familiar. At the same time, Luthe7-'v,'as far from repudiating
the man w-ho had gone before him, and by raeans of his writings
had even, as it were, been his teacher. Not only does he acknow
ledge that it was frora WeseFs 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 raaster's
fate. " I call to mind," he says,' " how Master John Vesalia, who
was a preacher at ^Mayence, was by the desperate and haughty
murderers, called liaei'eticae po-avitatis inquisitores {inventores
would be a more proper word,) the preacher-monks, condemned
for nothing but refusing to say, ' I believe there is a God,' and
saying, ' I know there is a God.' " Not less kindly does Luther
espouse the cause of Wesel, in a letter to Spalatin.^ 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,' 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, " Wesalia's remark upon the petition for the
kingdom of God, I consider as having no other design but to
drive from men's heads the comraon opinion, according to which
they understand the kingdom of God to mean merely fhe state of
future glory, and therefore give themselves no concern about the
kingdom of God, which has already comraenced, and is highly
extolled in Scripture. Although it be the same kingdora 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? This
1 In the work de ConciUis, AValch. Ausg. Th. 16. s. 2743. Luther's
remark about Wesel's 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
2 Letter of the 23d March 1524. Nro. 588. Th. 2. p. 492. in De
AVette's work.
3 See at p. 297.
* Catalog. Test, verit. Lib. xix. T. ii. p. 884, 885.

368 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WESEL.
author justly places Wesel among the wdtnesses of the truth prior
to the Eeformation, gives a list of his pecuUar 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 serraons several of the
peculiarities which we have already noticed. Flacius very perti
nently reraarks, 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 hira 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, especiaUy Martin Chem7iitz,^ who, however,
erroneously represents him as having been condemned to be
burnt to death ; Francis Buddeus,'' who praises him as the friend
of Wessel, and the sharer of his sentiraents ; Weismann,^ who
describes hira as a theologian celebrated for his independence
of mind ; and Hottinger,* who likewise assigns him a place among
the most notable pioneers of the Eeformation.
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 Trithemius ;
of the second, in Butzbach, and the Conti7iuator 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? But when the conse
quences of the tendency which he had helped to promote came
to Hght in the Eeformation, and the two parties were sharply
' Examen Concil. Trident. T. iv. p. 87.
^ Isagoge, P. ii. p. 1175.
3 Hist, eccles. T. i. p. 1213.
* Hist, eccles. P. iv. p. 53—61. Hottinger aho 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 Worraatiensis.
* Paralipomena rerura memorab. ab a. 1230 usque ad a. 1538, histo
riae Abbatis Ursperg. per quendam Studios, annexa.

OPINIONS RESPECTING HIM. 369
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,^ foUowing
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,^ but with an asser
tion of which we may be quite certain that, in the form in which
he gives it, it never entered WeseFs raind,' 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 Uke manner, that he himself (Wesel) never was subject
to original sin." Serrarius, in his History of Mayence,* 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
^ves a summary of WeseFs articles of belief, wherein, besides the
rejection of original sin and extreme unction, we find the follow
ing •? " 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 WeseFs importance : " It is
therefore e-rident that the Devil intended to have commenced
vrith 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 instmment, had not been
prevaUed upon to repent and retract."
In the course of the 18th century, and in recent times, we
find a more correct estimate of Wesel ; and here, besides the
' Annal. eccles. T. xviii. p. 158, 228.
2 Octavus articulus, quod exireraa unctio non sit sacramentum, quia
non per Christum, sed per homines sit instituta, sed sit oleum et maneat
oleum sicut antea fuit.
' Articulus quintus.
* Nic. Seriarii Rerum Moguntinar. Libr. v. Mogunt. 1604. 4o. p.
144. 145. 877.
¦5 Art. 5. 2 A

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,^ Christ. Wil. Fran. Walch,'' Schroeckh,^ Ei-hard,* and
Gieseler? Here too we may also rank the anonymous author of
the j]fonngrapliy upon Diether of Isenburg,^ 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 Wesel?

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,' that he had sent his treatises on Ecclesias
tical power. Indulgences, and Fasting, to raany learned men, and
in particular the last mentioned of thera, to the Bishop of Worras.
No doubt, therefore, copies of them must have been circulated in
Germany, and owing to the author's connexion with tbe Nicolaus
who is raentioned in the trial, and the interest which the Hussites
must have taken in his productions, probably Ukewise in Bohemia.
' Diction. T. iv. p. 502 and 506.
^ Monim. raed. aev. vol. ii. fasc. 1. Praef p. lii. sqq. fasc. 2. Praef.
p. xv. sqq.
' K. Gesch. Th. 33. s. 295 ff.
* 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
^ We might bere also raention Conr. Gesneri Biblioth. univers. ed.
Tigur. 1545. p. 462. Johann. Wolfii Rer. raemorab. Centenar. xv.
ad. ann. 1464. p. 874. edit. 1600. PhUipp. Jforaaei Mysteriura iniqui-
tatis s. histor. papatus rom. edit. 1611. p. 605. Oud'ini Corament. de
scriptor. eccles. T. iii. p. 2715 sqq. Fabricii Biblioth. raed. et inf. Lat.
T. iv.p. 168 and 491. Schunks Beitrage zur Mainzer Geschichte
1788, 3tes Heft. Mainzer geistlicbe Monats sehr ift 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. 191, and P. Frehtr Theatr. viror. illustr. p. 1431, raake raany false
and confused statements, by confounding, John of Wesel, and John
Wessel. ' Examen, art. 3.

HIS WRITINGS. 371
In this manner, they were preserved, and have come down
though but partially to us.'
During his long career as professor and preacher, Wesel had
written much.^ 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.
Ofthis description, seem to have been the books of Wesel, which
Luther speaks of having studied' 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 ^lathematics 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 w-ere still in existence at Erfurt.* 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^ (in the year 1827), "A conjecture has
been expressed that some ofthe manuscripts of Wesel raight still
exist, but after the union of the raonastic libraries into the pre
sent Eoyal library of Erfiirt, I have not found this conjecture
verified." At the trial we find Wesel himself owning the following /owr
works? 1. Super modo ohligationis legum humanarum ad quemdam
Nicolaum de Bohemia (vel Polonia).
' Walch. Monim. med. aev. n. 1. Praef. Iviu. Nihilominus quura
multa iUorum exempla antea per universara Germaniam et Bohemiain
essent dispersa, non potuit fieri, quin maxima illorum pars salva ad
nostram aetatera transmitteretur.
2 It is said in his praise that not raerely docendo, but also scribendo
scholam Erphordensem non parum iUustrasse. Flacius Catalog test.
ver. L. xviii. t. ii. p. 885.
' See supra 230. „ , ,.
* He says in the passage quoted : Audio Erphordiae ejus scripta
adhuc inv'enin posse. Ego tantum ejus libellum contra indulgentias
habeo. 5 Geschichte des AViederaufbliihens, B. i. s. 293.
^ Examen, art. 3.
2 a2

H72 THE LIFE OF JOIIN OF 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.' It is possible that
be may have composed two other disquisitions, the one De pro
cessione Spiritus Sancti,^ the other, De peccato mortali? 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 IVesel 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 sarae
is the case wdth the disquisitions. Super modo obligcUionis legum
humanarum and De jejunio.
In this way, therefore, besides the sayings of Wesel, which
have been delivered orally, and 'the fragments of his Epistle
to Eeinhard of Sickingen, we have only two works of any con
siderable length from his pen, the Ti'eatise against Indulgences,
and that upon the Authority, duty, and power, of the pastors of
the Church.
1. The Disputatio adversus indulgentias, composed, as we have
already shewn, about the year 1450,* consists of two small essays
written at different tiraes, but now- forming a whole ; Or rather it
has for its basis an older and short piece, a compendium,^ contain
ing the principal propositions of Wesel respecting Indulgences
which was subsequently, and as he advanced in knowledge,
extended, and in particular passages explained.* The substance
of this treatise we have already stated at length. The only im
pression which we possess is in Walch's Monimenta medii aevi,
' Examen, art. 5. ^ Exaraen, art. 7.
' Examen, art, 24. i See p. 258 f.
' 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.
^ This enlargement comprehends in the work just quoted from p. 1 19
—156.

Ills WRITINGS. ;i73
Goetting. 1757. vol. ii. fasc. 1. p. Ill — 156. For this impression
IValch assures us he used the copy which had belonged to
Fladus,^ but which is now in tiie Eoyal Library of Hanover.
The Httie 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
WeseFs pastoral labours in AA^orms,- was first discovered by Von
der Hardt in an imprint' belonging probably to the 16th century.
Here, without mention of the author, it bears the title : Epistola
cujusdam sacrarum literarum studiosi responsiva, tractans de ponti
ficii muneris functione, et auctoritate superiorum in subditos, et
subditorum in superiores obedientia. At the conclusion, a passage
from Melanchthon's Loci (ofthe edition 1521) is annexed, as an
appendix, — a typographo adjecta — a circumstance which proves
that the edition belonged to the circle of the fi-iends of Luther.
His thorough acquaintance with the literature of the period of
the Eeformation, soon enabled Von der Hai'dt to divine the author,
and in fact the whole contents and many particular passages so
perfectly suit the position of Wesel in Worras, as to leave no
room to doubt that the treatise is really his. The older edition
1 never saw. Walch 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* 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 sarae sentiments as the
author.^ The letter to Nicolaus, however, answerably to the
superscription, expatiated super modo obligationis legum humana
rum, and although the subject is also touched iu the treatise,
still that was at WeseFs triaP too distinctly discriminated from
' Praef. p. Iviiii. : Libere nunc suo jure utatur libellus, ereptus ex
tenebris et ex eodera codice, qui Flacii possessione fuit, deacriptus,
occupet locura, qui ipsi debetur.
2 See p. 301.
' Walch Monira. med. aev. ii. 2. Praef. p. xvi.
4 In the work quoted, p. xvii. sqq.
' He begins with the words : Lectis tuis literis, charissirae confrater,
mirura in modum sura delectatus.
6 Art. 3.

374 THE LIFE OF JOHN OF WnSEL.
another De 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 confrater whom
Wesel addresses is some other Christian man, probably a clergy
raan or monk in his vicinity, and not the Hussite Nicolaus.

APPENDIX.

I.

HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN,

CALLED THE HOLY YOUTH.

A FORERUNNER OF THE PEASANT-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 Fooh .'*
On the Contempt of Scripture.

( ••5'7 )

HANS BOHEIM (OR BEHEM) OF NIKLASHAUSEN,

A FORERUNNER OF THE PEASANT WAR.

The couise of the narrative has already' led us to mention this
remarkable person. Here we intend to speak more fully, and
communicate all the information extant respecting him. The
inducement to this is not raerely the discovery we have made
of a cotemporaneous, and as it appears, oflScial document on tbe
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 bearing upon fhe 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 Uberty into the political
domain ; it was wild fanaticism side by side with sound piet) ,
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 fall 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 Peasanf^war. While the dawn of the one
brightens the sky, the fiery signals and cloudy pillars of the otlier
also shoot into the air. Nay more, just as the Eeforraers take thc
' .See p. 33.5.

378 APPENDIX.
field against the prophets of Zwickau, Thomas Munzer and the
other fanatics of their time, so do we find the raore noble of their
pioneers occupying the same hostile attitude towards those who in
an earlier day paved the way for -riolent revolutionary movements.
It is not our intention unfeelingly to condemn the commotions
which arose among the rural population of the 1 Gth 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 raere fact that the raost of what they then
claimed with violence was in the course of centuries cheer
fully conceded to them. At the sarae time, it is undeniable that
the whole movement was ill-ad\ ised 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 enUghtened 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 -vrith piety
strongly excited, but often pushed the length of tempting God
and coraraitting crirae, 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 comraixture and ferraentation 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 raade, corabined -with the most
confused notions of the way to make them, of overstrained self-
excitement and of violent agitation, or fraudulent seduction of
the comraon 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 rillage pleasantly situate two
leagues frora Wertheim, and then belonging to Eastern Fran-

HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 379
conia,' and the diocese of Wurtzburg, but which is now included
in the Duchy of Baden, there appeared after the middle of the IStli
century (1476) a youth connected by birth with the common
people,- 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
Boheira or Behera (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 Boheraia still supplies so
many of our itinerant musicians. From this circurastance he
derived the narae of the kettle-drummer, the piper, and piper
Jack. Afterwards, when he had acquired celebrity among the
people by his discourses, they called him "the Holy Youth ."^
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 tbe Ann.
Hirsaug. : apud Francos Orientales in dioecesi Wirtzburgensi.
2 Compare for information respecting him the Nuremberg Chronicle,
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, vvhich 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 virtuallv reprinted in D' Argentre Collectio judicior. de novis error.
T. i. P. 2. p. 288—290). Lor. Friess Historie der Bischofe zu Wiirz
burg 1544. s. 852 — 855. Will Beitrag zurfrank. Kirclienhistorie in der
Gesch. der Wiedertaufer, s. 57 ff. Bensen Geschichte des Bauernkriegs
in Ostfranken, Erlangen 1840 s. 189 — 192. Z/a^en Deutschlands lit. und
reUg. Verhaltnisse im Eeformat. Zeitalter, B. 1. s. 170 and 171. Ofthe
olderwriters Trithemius and Fries8,andof themoremodern, 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 caUs him the "Bagpiper;" the
Chronicler Kreutzer, " a herdsman and kettle-drummer ;" which Miill
ner also does, annexing the popular narae 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."

380 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 caUed 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.i Frora revelations made by the Holy Virgin, however, who
had disclosed herself to his view,^ in white raiment, as he fed his
cattle on the plain, he had leamed the following doctrines,^ and
preached them to the lower orders, with remarkable boldness and
skUl. It is a time of visitation. The wrath of God is threatening
raankind and especially the priesthood. Nothing but his (Hans
Boheira' s) prayers had recently withheld God frora destroying with
frost the wine and corn.* Men ought to forsake their sins, cast off
their gay attire, their collars, silSen laces, their doublets andpointed
shoes, and raake 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
Rorae or any other place.* 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.*
The spiritual and teraporal 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.'" But things, he
' This is related by Friess in 1. c. s. 852.
- Tritheim in D'Argentre CoUect. p. 289.
3 They are collected from the Old Record, from Trithemius Annal.
Hirs. in D'Arg. p. 289 and Friess s. 852.
* Old Record. ' Old Record: Friess. s. 852.
« Old Record. " Ibid. 1

HANS BOHEIM OF MK I..\S11 VUSEX. 381
thought, could not remain in that state. There would soon be no
Pope nor Eraperor, no prince, bishop, spiritual or temporal magis
trate, but everyone would be his neighbour's brother.' "Princes,
civU and ecclesiastical, ought to possess no more than common
folk, and then all would have plenty. The time would corae
when princes and nobles would have to labour for a day's wage.^
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.""'
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."* . .
. . " The clergy have too many benefices."' . . . They
ought never to have raore than one. " But go thou," was the
voice, and command of the ^Mother of God to him,* "go and
proclaim to my beUeving 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 sufier afldiction 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."* When the priests reviled hira 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 !* They will soon find out what they have done, and be
brought to nought." Even excoraraunication he regarded with
conterapt. Divorce by a priest appeared to hira an infraction of
the laws of God, to whora alone it pertains to dissolve the raarriage
tie. He also rejected the doctrine of Purgatory ; for, as he well
said, if an Eraperor or a Pope be a good raan, and be found to be
1 Miillner Numb. Annalen z. J. 1476. Friess. s. 852.
2 Old Record.
3 Ibid. ¦ Trith. Chron. Spanh. -. Neque decimas dandas esse, neque
census aiicui. Also Annal. Hirs. in D'Arg. p. 289. Friess s. 852. 853.
1 Old Record. ^ Old Record. * Trithemius in d'Ai-g. p. 289.
^ Old Record. * Old Recora.

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.^ Doctrines like these were at the time far from being isolated,
and it is proper tbat we should first enquire into their source.
They never could have been bred in the brain of a young herds
man.^ 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 Boheraian,
and may, even as a boy, have been educated in the principles of
the Hussites.^ During his subsequent residence in Franconia,
-i agrant and seditious demagogues seem to have wrought upon
his raind and used him as their instruraent. Tritheraius speaks
of a Mendicant friar who taught hira his doctrines, and often,
when he was preaching frora the window, stood in the apartment
behind, and dictated to him what to say.* 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 sarae record, the clergyraan of Niklashausen was in
league with the druraraer, 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.'
1 Old Record.
2 Trithemius says in tbe Ann. Hirsaug. of Boheim : qui nescio, quo
spiritu suo seductus, an alieno.
3 Kreuzer in "VValdau iii. 419 : He pretended that the Virgin
Mary had revealed to him tbese things. My opinion is that he
received and learned them from one ofthe disciples of Huss.
* Annal. Hirs. : Ferunt ilium aliquoties hominis cujusdam claustralis
mendici occulto susurro, quid praedicaret, edoctum, et ob id frequentiua
per fenestrara lequebatur ad plebein, ut Doctorem suum ad aurem sine
nota posset habere praesentem. In dArg. p. 288. Here (p. 289) the
trial of the drummer is also related, and among other particulars tbat :
Interrogatus per chordam, omnia ficta esse falsaque et ementita con
fessus est, et Monachum supradictum vagura, mendicum et versipellem
excogitavisse omnia voce libera dixit.
5 Is all gleaned from the confessions of the prisoners from Niklas
hausen iu tbe old Record.

HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 383
StiU more remarkable is the impres.rion 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 Gerraany. In Franconia Huss hadbeen well-received,
and his notions widely embraced. Here too, in the course of the
15th centun-, men eminent in various wajs 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 tbe comparatively favourable
posirion of the citizen and peasant class, had laboured with
remarkable success.^ 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 eflForts. Thus about the raiddle of the 14th century,
and under the governraent of Bishop Otho, Master Conrad Hager,
a layraan well versed in Scripture, had publicly taught at Wurtz
burg, That money paid for masses, and other gifts raade 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.'' 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."^ 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 Miiller again preached
the doctrines of Huss at Windesheim, Neustadt upon the Aisch,
Eotenburg upon the Tauber, and Onoltzbach, held secret raeet
ings, and gained a large party among the common people. On
a threat of persecution the master fled, but 130 of his adherents
• See more proofs in Hagen Deutschl. lit. und relig. Verb. B. 1. s.
164 if.
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^ by the Abbot John of Grumbach, a Doctor
of Dirinity, 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 diflFerent in con
tiguous territories, and even farther ofiF. " The people," as
Trithemius obseryes,^ " 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 Tritheraius says,^ " 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 frora greater distances, the people fiocked 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,* from Thuringia, Saxony, and Aleissen,^ the appren
tices, as a chronicler very graphically describes it,* " made their
escape from the workshops, and the hinds from the plough. The
hay-makers, -vrith the sickles in their hand, and without leave of
their masters asked or given, set oflF 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
' 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.
5 In the Chron. Spanhem. p. 390.
* ex Buchonia.
5 Friess s. 853. Tritheim Ann. Hirs. in d'Arg. p. 286.
* Friess in 1. c.

HANS BOHEIM (IF NIKLASHAUSEN. 385
called. The only naraes they addressed to each other were
brother and sister. Scai-ce a lady or servant girl who did
not leave her locks at Niklashausen as a useless and sinfiil
ornaraent. The crowd was particularly great upon Sundays and
holidays.^ Soraetimes there were as many as 10, 20, nay, 30,000,*
congregated. The viUage of Niklashausen, of course, had
no accommodation for so vast a multitude, and they slept in the
fields and woods around it. Innkeepers, cooks, raerchants, trades
men, yrith their utensils, soon collected, and the place assumed the
appearance ofa vast encampraent.^ Under such circumstances,
of course, irregularities and excesses could not but occur, and
we might easily have imagined, even although Tritheraius had
not expressly said, that much that was indecent took place.*
When the assembled crowd was considerable, the prophet
came forward. He chose an elevated standing place such as an
inverted cask,' or even climbed into a tree.* He was, however,
particularly fond of preaching from a window, becanse then his
master, the mendicant friar, or the clergyman, could stand behind
him unseen, and suggest to him what to say.' Trithemius, it is
true, tells us that he could neither think consecutively nor speak
correctly,® 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 usuaUy called upon the people to
1 Friess s. 853.
2 Miillner gives 40,000 ; Friess the same number, s. 853 ; Trithe
mius 10, 20, to 30,000.
' Friess ibid.
* Jacebant homines utriusque sexus et aetatis noctu in campie, pratis
et nemoribus vicinis et multae fiebant impuritates. Chron. Spanh. p.
390. * Friess s. 853.
6 Trithemius in the Ann. Hirs. in d'Arg. s. 288 : PubUce in carapis
et in pratis, nonnunquam etiam per fenestrara e domuncula aliqua rusti-
cana et in arboribus praedicabat.
' Tritheraius Ann. Hirs. in 1. c. p. 288. See the passage at p. 382. He
adds in the Chron. Spanh. : Stabat homo Uie fatuus in domo aliqua
et per fenestrara, quodam fugitivo raonacho verbum suggerente, populo
praedicabat. Friess, " The clergyman of the place usuaUy stood be
side him and prompted him."
8 Annal. Hirs. in 1. c. Cum nee loqui potuerit, nee apte ad proposi •
tum aliquid cogitare.
2e

386 APPENDIX.
return upon the next Sabbath, hoUday or festival assuring them
that the attendance would then be twice as numerous.^
The people were powerfuUy 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,'
and a divinely inspired teacher of truth, and called him the holy
youth. At Holzkirchen, it was said, a person feU upon his
knees before him,^ 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
suppUants.* 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
sometiraes the throng around hira, that he could neither eat nor
drink, nor attend to other bodily wants.* Keepsakes and rae-
raorials of hira were in great request. His bonnet was rent into
shreds ; his clothes cut and tom 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,* for as at a place of pilgrimage rich
offerings of money, jewels, and clothes, were made, wax candles
consecrated, and other such obligations presented.'
1 Friess in 1. c. s. 853.
* Trithemius says : Miserura hominem flexis in terram genibus adora-
bant, clamantes, eo audiente et tolerante : Vir sancte, ineserere nobis.
Chron. Spanh. p. 390.
3 Old Record.
* Trithemius in d'Arg. s. 289, Friess s. 853.
5 Tritheraius p. 288.
* Ibid, and in the Chron. Spanh. p. 390, where it is said : Sed et pecias
vestimentorum ejus pro sanctuario et reliquiis diripiebant, seque feUcem
aestimabat, qui eum tangere, videre vel audire meruisset. Friess s. 853,
" The drummer went about with tufts on his cap, which the pilgrims torei
off, and whoever succeeded in obtaining the smaUest shred of one of
them, fancied he had got hay frora the raanger at Bethlehem, or some
other precious relic."
" Trithemius in the Chr. Spanhemiense : Multae pecuniae oblatae^

HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 387
In 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.^ At Niclashausen a drowned
chUd was said to have been brought to Ufe; 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 hUl 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 ricegerent 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 most rude
and arbitrary kind, and established it by the same iraproper raeans
which hitherto hadbeen often used by the priests against the people.
Preaching repentance, he spread araong 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 fanaticisra.
Of course the ma^tsiraci/ couldnotremainquiet spectators ofsucli
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 the sarae
prohibition, threatening transgressors with the highest pains of
law, for which conduct tho magistrates of that city are highly
praised by Pope Sixtus, in a bull dated 4th February 1482.^ A
miracula confida et multa contra puritatem Christianae fidei patrata.
The several pretended miracles are related in the old official Record.
1 Friess s. 853.
''Kreuzer: "The authorities of Niirnberg then forbade all the
citizens, under severe penalties, either to go or make a pilgrimage to
2b2

388 APPENDIX.
special occasion, however, rendered it necessary for the Bishop
of Wurtzburg to interfere with a high-hand. On the Sabbath
before St KilUan'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 raen were to return the next Saturday
towards evening. He had a word or two to say to thera. They
were to bring with them their arras, but to leave their wives and
children at home.^ 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 hira on horseback to
Wurtzburg. In that town 4000 pilgriras had already raet, 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 raultitudes, at Niklashausen. They
were estiraated at above 34,000. On leaming that the holy
youth had been apprehended, raany of them retumed home ;
others who were more closely connected with him, resolved to
attempt his rescue. One in particular stood up, pretending
to have received a coraraand 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 pUgrims 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 raade in all churches and monasteries, forbidding their
citizens and subjects to make either pilgriraages or journeya to Niclas
hausen— 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 o*" a conjuror or exorcist, who was
accustomed to appear to him dressed in white, and in the shape of the
Virgin Mary."
* See the whole narrative in Friess ss. 853 and 854.

HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 389
hundreds of them with burning tapers.^ 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 becorae, and is another point
of reserablance with the subsequent war of the peasantry. The
Bishop sent his Marshal, George von Gebsattel, to raeet them,
to whom they signified that they wished the holy youth given
up to them ; if the Bishop surrendered hira freely, it would be
weU ; 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 intiraated
to thera that the Bishop had no intention to release the pri
soner but rather to punish hira as he deser\'ed ; 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
leamed, 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 Church, but were obliged to surrender, conducted to Wurtz
burg and imprisoned in the tower.^
The minister of Niklashausen and the Beghard, with whom
Hans Boheim was connected, were likewise seized.^ We possess,
in the old, and, as regards this part of the history no doubt, the
oflBcial report, the confession of the prisoners. They acknow
ledged that at the outset of the affair, they had often stuck up
Ughts 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 jHuilner : 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 deUvered up, but in vain. Friess states,
s 854, that 400 carried lights.
¦2 Friess s. 854. ¦' Old Record.

390 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 examinarion, 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 ofthe 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 narae of the Holy Trinity,
suminoned the crowd to march to Wurtzburg.^
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.^ 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.^ These three were committed for trial.
Bishop Rudolph, the last of the family of Schernberg, was in
other respects no harsh raaster. He is rather celebrated as " a
sensible, wise, peaceable, and truthful prince, who greatly loved
his subjects.*" This was a case, however, in which it was
scarcely possible to adrait grace, and where law and prudence
1 Friess s. 854. ^ old Record. ' Friess s. 854.
* Friess Gesch. der Bisch. v. Wiirzb. s. 864. Bishop Rudolphdiod
19th April 1495. Friess relates tbe following anecdote of hira. Being
once in a state of great debility, he was entreated by the Canons to
choose from among thein, 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 be 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 whora this cap better becoraes, 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 raind he
was, bade hira adieu, and went home -with something like a blush in
their faces.

HANS BOHEIM OF NIKLASHAUSEN. 391
alike required that an exaraple should be made. The two pea
sants were accordingly condemned to die by the sword, and the
piper himself by fire.' 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 raany
of his relatives on his behalf, he was corapelled to consign seve
ral of his possessions in feu to the bishoprick of Wurtzburg.'-'
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
Uved not many years after, viz. the pious Tritheraius.' At the
commencement of the 16th century,* 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.* He relates,
and no doubt from the report of eye-witnesses, the foUowing par
ticulars. There were raany 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 speedUy 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 crirainal to be. The sentence was nevertheless
carried into eflfect. The youth was led forth to the open place
behind the monastery of St James, not far from the hospital,*
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 behokUng theirfate,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
- The deed raay be read in Friess. s. 854.
3 In the AnnaL Hirsaug. in D'Argentre pp. 289 and 290.
* From the 15th Oct. 1506. Cave Hist, liter, t. II. p. 203,in Ap
pend. H. Wharton.
* Ductus est ergo, says Trithemius, in eara plamtiem, quae retro
Monasterium est meum, circa domuin lepiosorum
6 circa domum leprosorum.

392 APPENDIX.
enquired ofthe executioner, " Is that what you will do to me?"
" No," was the reply, " for you a diflFerent 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.^ Many araong the specta
tors looked upon him as a saint, and for that reason proof against
fire, and were afraid of standing near, iraagining that the flames
might by Divine power dart forth, and take hold of them. In
like inanner others were in terror for some trick of the evil
one ; and the executioner, who was of this nuraber, had shaven
off the hair of the victira, to prevent anything devilish from
harbouring there. The youth hiraself, 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 suflFerer ;
and hence, in a very short time, the concourse of people to
Niklashausen entirely ceased.^

That this whole phenoraenon was a prelude of the war ofthe
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 ofthe peasantry, at least as expressed in the 12 Articles,'
1 Carmina quaedam seu rythmos de Doraina nostra, in lingua Theu-
tonica corapositos 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 eariier 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 ^Yalch Ausg. Th. 16. s. 25. Of the former, Article 7th,

HANS BOHEIM OF NICKL VSHAUSEN. 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 Munzer and others
did, at first with audacity and fanaticism, and then with cowardice,
and in so far is infinitely diflFerent from Huss and other true mar
tyrs. In like raanner, the judgment forraed 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' of the " bag-piper," and says that he who adheres to the
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaraent, requires no fiirther
revelation, nor yet to visit the chapel or the cell of Nicklashausen.
Though not properly a Reforraer, Trithemius was one of the raost
enUghtened and serious raen of his age, and anything but satisfied
with the ruling clergy, and yet we have seen with what conterapt
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 Eeformation.
that " Every priest is to have only one benefice ;" Article 8th, that
" bird-catching, fishing, hunting, and wood-cutting are tobe free;" and
Article 9th, that " all unjust taxes and tolls areto be abolished," all coin
cide with the preaching of Boheira. 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 afier it
happened, is a proof of its general importance.

II.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS,
THE FIRST PROPAGATOR OF THE WRITINGS AND
OPINIONS OF GOCH.

Discratiat me fortuna tua, quanquam ipsum afflictissiraum ; aed qnod divinitus gcri videtur,
forti animo perferendom censeo. Ebasmus in an Epistle to Grapheus.
. . Si vobiscum sit Christus, inanis
Est omnis timor, hand possit contingere quicquam
Adversum Christo ex animo lidentibus. .
Geaphkus himself in the poetical lamentation ho
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 Eeformation itself, ha-ring survived Erasmus twenty-
two years, and Luther twelve, but who at the sarae 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 Ufe in
which he was connected with Goch.^ We intend here to take a
more independent and comprehensive view of hira.
He was, as we have already said, born in 1482,^ 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 was 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.
» 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 raore than repeat Andreae) Bibl. Belg. T. i. p. 201 and 202.
Swertius Athenae Belg. p. 195. 196. Brandt Rist. Ref. Belg. T. i. p.
71—79. Dan. Gerdesii Hist. Ref. Gron. et Brem. 1749. T. iu. 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 MemoireR,
T. vi. p. 187—196. Catalog. Bibl. Bunav. T. I. vol. u. p. 1599.
Saxii Onomast. T. ui. p. 122. Hoeufft Parnasus Latino-Belgicus p. 9.
P. Hofman Peerlkamp Vita Belgarum, qui latina carmina scripserunt,
in the Memoires de I'Acad. Roy. de Bruxelle<), T. n. p. 56. Brux. 1822.
 Schrockh K. Gesh. seit der Reform, ii. 353 and 358. Gieseler K.
Gesh. iii. 1. >• 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 ofthe 15th century, which both foretold, and helped to bring
about, the raore 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 Iiuysbroek,;Gerhard
Groot, Florentius Kadevins, Thomas a Kerapis, 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 faithfally devoted to the Catholic Church? and'its head,
and in the last decennia of the fifteenth century, and the com
mencement of the sixteenth, were kept in obedience, by tlie°zeal
of the CathoUc 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, conderaned so early as the
7th Nov., 1519,^ 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.^ 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.^ 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 Turenliolt, 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 Griiningen is specially mentioned : Graaf Edzard hield
zich dikwijls in Groningen op, trok vrienden en leerling van Gansfort,
onder anderen Johannes Agricola, Rudolfs breeder, en Georg Aportanus,
een ZwoUenaar 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 gebied, die het Evangelic predik-
ten, beschermde hij tegen de w-oede bunner dweepzuchtige ambtgenooten.
Zoo werd door hem in Oostfriesland het eerst van alle Europesche
Staten, sedert 1520, de Kerkhervorndng gelukkig lot stand gebrao-t
3 Dan Gerdesii Hist. Ref. T. iii. p. 21.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 399
opponent, praised even by Erasmus for the decorous character
of his controversy.! 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^ (the Provost), enlisting
under Luther,^ preached free Gospel principles. He was brought
as a prisoner to Brussels, and induced by the threat of being
bumed 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 beUeve that the works of the saints are in
so far meritorious of etemal 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 guUt, merit etemal life,
and consequently do not need pardoning inercy." 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 firiendly
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 (Sectewrfor/ Hist. Luth. L. i. § UO. p. 179.
Gerdes in 1. c. 8. 22— 25.
3 Erasmus writes of him to Luther on the 30th May 1619 (Ep. 427.) :
Est Antverpiae Prior ejus Monasterii vir pure christianus, qui te unice
deamat, tnus oUm discipulus, ut praedicat. Is omnium paone solus
Christum praedicat, cseteri fere aut hominum fabulas, aut suura quaes-
tuni praedicant.

400 APPENDIX.
Luther at Wittemberg,^ he continued to labour for the Gospel
as preacher in St Mai-y's Church in Bremen.^
Shortly after, in the year 1521, there appeared in the town
where John Wessel began and terminated his Ufe, and as
there can be no doubt left behind him the tradition of his
Reformatory principles, an evangeUcal teacher of similar
¦rie-v^s, Williara Frederici, preacher in St Martin's in Groningen?
a man, as it appears, of extraordinary gifts and learning. In a
letter* addressed to him in the year 1521, from Louvain, Erasmus
extols him as the pattem 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
fiock with Gospel doctrine,' and by collecting around you such
of the clergy as by pure morals, and sacred learning, are both 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 raany such raen, in
order that the world might either indignantly repugn the raany
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.
Coteraporaneously with these raen, whora we may safely con-
1 Luther's Brief an Spalatin in de Wette ii. 182. Seckendorf Hist.
Lutheran, i. 179.
2 Gerdes Hist. Ref. T. n. p. 131.
^ Gerdes pp. 25 and 26.
* 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 frora the
pen of an anonymous author, in which we read : Tu patriae honos,
Phrisiae decus, sacerdotum disciplina, plebis auctoritas, senatus consi
lium, orphanorum spes, egentium asylura, viduarum tutor, omnium
recte viventium asserter.
5 The EvangeUcal principles of Frederici and of his associates, the
preacher of the Church, and the rector of tbe School, of St Martin, are
stated in a work already quoted, Hofstede de Groot iiber die Briider-
kirche zu Groningen s. 21 and 22. ?

CORNELIUS GRfVPHEUS. 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 evangeUcal doctrine. In the
year 1520, he published Goch's work on Christian liberty, trans
lated into Dutch, with a polemical preface •? 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 comraunicated the substance.
Shortly afterwards the diet at Worras was held ; and there, as is
well known, Charles V., with part of the princes, laid the ban of
the empire upon Luther, and eraitted a severe edict against his
doctrines, and all who adhered to thera. Under the same date,
and at the same place as that edict (which, however, was not
pubUshed until the 26th of May), upon the 8th of May, 1521,
Charles passed a severe penal law against heresy in the
Netherlands.^ The young Emperor, who in Germany yielded
to circurastances 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' suff'ered
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 HuU, 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 awees in substance, and generally in language, with the edict
of Worms. See Ordonnantien, Statuten, Edicten ende I laccaerten.
van Vlaendei-en. 2te Ausg. Antw. 1662. 1. 88.
3 Grotius says 100,000. Annal. et Hist, de reb. Belg. L. i. p. 11.
12. Tbis appears an oratorical exaggeration.

402 APPENDIX.
the iraperial edict, and before the noraination of the Inquisitors,
Grapheus had been seized and coraraitted to prison at Brussels.
On the Sth October 1521, he wrote from his prison a letter
to John Carondiletus,^ the Archbishop andChancellor of Brabant,
a person of great influence, and who, he hoped, would intercede
for him with the Regent^ 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 raore the consequence of an
error of understanding, than of bad intentions. He adjm-es
Carondiletus, for the sake of his innocent children, of his young
wife, of the services he had rendered to the Eraperor, and finally
of love to God and Christ, to take pity upon his condition, which
was worse than that ofa Jew or Heathen, the declared eneraies 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 suftering shame and raisery, into
another at Antwerp.
This sorrowful and alraost too lugubrious epistle appears to
have had no eff'ect. 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.' 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 bave, 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
foUowing anecdote is related of her. The theologians of Louvain
were complaining to her of tlie ruin of the Christian religion which
Luther was occasioning. And who then ia Luther ? she enquired. The
theologians informed her that be was an illiterate monk. To which
she repUed, " Well then, do you men of learning, who are many,
write against the illiterate raonk, wbo is but oue, and assuredly the
worid 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 ofthe Archief voor kerkelijke Geschiedenis
von. Kist und Royaard s. 154—167, aud fi-om 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 GRAPHEUS. 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 is to
suppose this higher composure and resignation, as fidlowing 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 laraent, as being characteristic ofthe author. The
Querimonia, in carceris angu,stia, as the inscription bears, non sine
lachrymis effusa, is addressed to God and coraraences in the fol
lowing raanner :
0 Pater, o rerura domltor, qui cernis ab alto
Omnia, quae terris fiunt, quaecunque profundo
Aequore, nura atteiidls, quanta heu nos undique cingat
Teinpestas ? Cur, o ge .itor, tua piguora, cur sio
Deseris heu miseros tanto in disorimine ? Num quid
Respicis haec? Eia haec tu respice, respice ! Clemens
Eripe nos genitor, vel saltem numine sacro
Immisso oraraus quemquara instigate, benigno
Qui monitu offensi coraponat 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 raanifests a mind freshly wounded; the poem, on the
other hand, a mind which has already experienced healing, inasrauch
as there is in if a Uvelier trust in God and Christ, aud greater resignar
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 Laraent cannot possibly have
been composed after 1524, because that was the year of the death
of PhUip of Burgundy, the Bishop of Utrecht, with whora Gelden
hauer, the person to whom it was sent, was to treat in its author s
favour. Geldenhauer then passed, as secretary, into the services ot
MaximiUan of Burgundy. I beg leave to correct a small error in the
learned epistle of Janssen. At p. 159, he enumerates, as fnends of
Grapheus, Erasmus, Geldenhauer, and {Gonr. ) Goclemus, who no
doubt, were so, but he adds to them the name of John of GocA. Ihis
is clearly a mistake, for Goch was already lu his grave (f 147 .i) when
Grapheus was born (1482). ^ O w

404 APPENDIX.
. Genua aegra labant, vix osibus haereut
Ossa, inculta borret 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 noctuvc dieve
Ulla quies.
The picture which he proceeds to draw of his prison, of the dim
Ught, the oppressive air, and the total solitude, unbroken except by
mice, spiders, and other vermin, we shall not here detail. As Uttle
shall we touch the affecting coraplaints which he makes of separa
tion from his friends and relatives, or those, still raore bitter, of
the unceasing craft and actirity of his eneraies, by raeans of
which he and his fellow-prisoners, (for, as the subscription shews,'
they also are associated with hiraself 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 1 " and answers very beautifully :
Ah non,
Non desperandura est, nam si nos deserat orbis,
Optimus baud quaquam Christus uos deserit ! Ecce,
Christus adest, micuit paries, micuere coluinnae
Carceris et tremulo resplendent lumine diri
Fomicis anfi-actus ; medio stans lumine Christus
• Accedit moestos, dextraque huraaniter aegros
Ccelesti raulcens, raoerentia pectora curat
Unguine divino, languentesque erigit artus.

Tanti est meliflui dulcis praesentia Christi.
Ipse enim nobiscum una comeditque bibitque,
Nobiscum vigilat, nobiscum dulce quiescit,
'- He subscribes C. Grapheus una cum concaptivis. . . These
were no doubt persons suffering confinement for their religious con
victions.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 405
Supponitque manum blandus, si omnia terrent
Occurrit, tetros abigens ea somnia visus.
Si quicquam petiinus, nobis respondit amice ;
Si legimus, lecturam aperit ; si plaudimus, ipse
Applaudit nobis ; moeror nos oecupat, atrum
Moerorem extinguit ; si desperaraus, 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 timer, baud possit contingere quicquara
Adversum Christo ex anirao fidentibus.
At the sametime, 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 frora his prison, either by the direct aid of his
Almighty hand, or by raeans 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,
. . . moUi qui afSamine mentem
Caesaream tentet, Majestatemque tremendam
Blanditus flectens, veniam pacemque misellis
Impetret.
It is this passage at the closewhich brings to Ught 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 Geldenhauer of Nym
wegen .^ This person was secretary to Philip of Burgundy, the
1 Gerhard Geldenhauer, from Nymwegen (Noviomagus), originally
a member of the Order of the cross, afterwards, like so raany of the
monks of the Netheriands, 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.

400 APPENDIX.
Bishop of Utrecht, a man who was himself not inaccessible to
more liberal riews, and who, on the other hand,' was held in great
esteem by Charles V. Gi-apheus 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 hiraself, 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 wilh
this view. After saying,
Neque enim (confidimus, irarao
Et scimus) Caesar, cujus pulcherrima virtus
Parcere subjectis el debellare superbos.
Est tam vindictae cupiens, ut perdere malit
Quam servare hurailes —
In the last of tbese cities, he was for some time a professor of
history and tben of theology. On a journey to Wittenberg he was at
tacked and raurdered by robbers on tbe 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 Andreae and Foppens, who are very hostile to its author as an apos
tate, declare, that it is full of heresies (libellus hic totus hBereticus 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 tbe citizens of Marburg erected a monuraent to his memory
in the Church of St Elizabeth, side by side witb that of the celebrated
Hyperius — and engraved upon it the following inscription :
Hic Noviomagi requiescunt membra Gerhardi,
Juxta hune Andreas conditur Hyperius.
Ut pia doctrinae concordia junxerat ambos.
Sic idem amborum contegit ossa locus.
Quos social 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.
Ref. T. iii. p. 41. Not. a. Adami, ignorant of his violent death, speaks
of him as ending his days in peace at Marburg.
' Sec Geldenhauer' s testimony respecting him in his Vita Philippi
Burgundi in Matthaei Analect. Vol. I. p. 192 — 203, and in Gerdesii
Hist. Ref. T. in. 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 acerbara
Vindictam ? Ah absit, quin et pietatis amore
Consuetae accensus, paulo sedatior, ira
Neglecta, offensam cleinens donaverit omnem ;
Nam qui aliter potuit, cujus natura vel ipsa
E>^t 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 irapression in higher
quarters. At last severe confinement and separation from his
distressed family wholly broke the firraness of the poor man. He
consented, probably at the instigation of the Inquisitors Hulst
and Egmont,' to make a recantation. The act which for this
purpose he executed with his own hand^ on the 25th March
1522, is of great consequence 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 ofthe doctrines of Grapheus than we can derive
frora any other source, and at the sarae time, shew vividly what
sort of proposals were made to such afflicted men, and what in
their miserj' they were induced to do.
Respecting the stateraent of the principles of Grapheus, the
deed of recantation agrees substantially with what we know from
the Latin preface, to GocKs treaUse De Libertate Christiana, of
' Their names are not indeed expressly mentioned, but the act of re
cantation bears, . . . cum essem interrogatus et examinatus per
Commissaries 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 raany supplementary particulars which
must have been taken' either frora oral stateraents, or from the
preface to the Dutch translation of the book, of the year 1520,'^
and in which the author seems to have embraced the side and
doctrines of Luther, still more decidedly than appears from any
other surviving document. As the sum of the Reformatory
doctrines delivered by hira at an earlier date, we meet with the
following :' " We Christians have, for SOO years and more, been
reduced from freedora into wretched slavery, naraely, since the
days of Boniface IIL, who first received from the Emperor
Phokas the name of Supreme Priest. For, in -virtue of this
designation, his followers have usurped authority to raake laws,
and yet no pope has the right to irapose upon raen, not to say
upon Christians, anj- laws which shall be obligatory under penalty
of raortal sin. It is doubtful whether Peter possessed any
higher authority than the other Apostles, and least it is irapos
sible to demonstrate from Scripture that he did. The Pope is set
up to us as an idol. AU laymen are priests, and, if we except
women and children, have equally a legal right to consecrate the
Sacraraents, although they would commit sin ifthey did it without
permission. Just as of old, all with the sarae exception of
women, were witiiout distinction permUted publicly to teach and
explain the Scripture, so is this now lawful for all, and not raerely
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 supersritious, 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 de la Reformat, des Pais bas, traduite du Hollandois
de Ger. Brandt, T. i. p. 18. Gerdes. Hist. Reform, ni. 20. Schrockh
K. Gesch. seit der Reforra. ii. 353.
2 Both of these sources are mentioned in the Revocatio, the latter not
quite expressly : Specialiter autem reprobo quosdam articulos, quorura
aUquos scripsi in quadam Praefatione ad quendara librum intitulatura
de libertate Christiana, editum a Johanne Pupper, de Gochi, quosdam
^¦ero me tenuisse inter confabulandum atque sensisse confessus sum et
propria manu scripsi.
' Revoc. in 1. c. p. 500—502. I have arranged tbe propositions,
w-hich are somewhat arbitrarily collocated, in proper order.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEU.*. 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 obUgation to confess once a year, or that which sanctions the
monastic vow. Nothing of the kind, unless expressly contained
in Scripture, obliges any raan 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 raeans 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 raore than all the
works 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 proposirions, which with sorae slight exceptions and
modifications, contain a general sumraary of Gospel truth, Gra
pheus, in his recantation, recalled, as either openly heretical, Or
secandalous, or offensive to the pious, and deceptive to tbe siraple.
He conderaned 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 CathoUc Church, and

410 APPENDIX.
declared all who were in contradiction with it to be worthy 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.' It appears to me that this recantation broke the true moral
vigour of Grapheus, and that his subsequent life, although he
was StiU in the fortieth year of his age,^ 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
earUer 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
tbe corruption of the Church, and yet his inward inclination
could not but be always tempting hira 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 whj', after the catastrophe, he
attached hiraself particularly to that celebrated scholar, and was
honoured by hira with intiraacy and confidence. It was after
his recantation, that the raost powerful Reforraatory effbrts were
made, and the boldest champions of the evangelical doctrine
came forward in the Netherlands. Henry of Ziitphen,* Prior
of the Augustinians at A ntwerp,* appeared as a bold confessor
upon the field. Henry Voes and John Esch, the two youthful
raartyrs, whom Luther has so beautifully celebrated, and who also
' Then foUows p. 502 — 508 a further statement in which the several
propositions are refuted and retracted. But as this statement manifestly
proceeds not from Grapheus 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. ^ In page 137 of this work, Grapheus is inadvertently spoken of in
1521 as still twenty-nine years of age. It ought to have been thirty-
nine. 3 See Gerdes,'H.ist. Ref. Ui. 28—30.
1 Almost all the Augustinians at Antwerp took Luther's side. Their
monastery was in the raonth of October 1522 wholly destroyed.
Luther's letter to Wenc. Link, 19tb Dec. 1522, in De Wette ii. 265.
This is another proof that the merabers of this order were more liberally
and evangelically disposed than tlie rost ofthe monks. See supra, p.
107. 108.

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 411
^longed to the Augustinian order, were burnt at Brussels in 1523.'
In the same year several worthy ecclesiastics and men of rank at
Groningen, Herm. Abring, J. Alb. Timmermann, Gerh. Pistoris,
' They are mentioned by Gerdes in his Ref. Gesch. B. 3. s. 31 ft".
Seckendorf Hist. Luth. Lib. 1. fol. 280. Sleidanus Commentar. p. 52.
53. Schelhorn Anioen. iv. 412. But more particular attention is due to
what Luther says of them first in a letter to tbe 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. Tbis poem, of which
a Latin and Dutch translation are to be found in Part V. of Kist's and
Royaard's kirchenhist. Archiv. s. 463 ff., begins witb 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 w-hich the translator
has attempted to reflect the sense. The pith and simplicity are inimi
table : These ashes on tbe 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 gUd tbeir 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 tbeir doom
The youths the truth denied.
But let them lie — their wicked lies
Will but augraent tbeir pain.
For us, our thanks to God shall rise
Whose word returns again.
Yes, winter's past, and sumraer sweet.
Stands waiting to corae in.
The flowers awake, God will complete
Who did the work begin.

412 APPENDIX.
and Nicol. Lesdorp, held a formal dispute with the Dominicans
upon the power of the Pope and the institutions of the Catholic
Church.' The Jurist Com. Honius and Will. Gnapheus, rector
of the school at Haag, subjected themselves, as patrons of the
Reforraation, to imprisonment.^ 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 conric-
tions. On the contrary, it appears by a letter from Erasmus,
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 deterrained champion in its cause.
In periods of great coraraotion and rapid change, there are
raany whose mission is confined to a single and often a brief
period of their Uves, and who, when they have ftilfilled 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 oym bosoms. This was the case on a great scale
with Ei'asmus, 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 Reforraa
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 Uttle 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 LutJier 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 reforraer 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

' Gerdes in 1. c. pp. 32 and 33.
- Ihid. n. 33— .S.'S

- Ibid. p. 33—35. 1

CORNELIUS GRAPHEUS. 413
his place. We have therefore nothing further to relate con
ceming him, except his connection with Erasmus and his labours
as an authoi:
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 Ufe.
So much the more beautifiil 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' " My
very dear Cornelius, readily would I have complied with your
wish and edited yom- 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 Uttle which would have increased the hostile disposition towards
you,^ and that appeared to me disadvantageous for your circum
stances, especially as matters at present stand. Your situation
fiUs me, although myself not unassailed, with greatanxiety ; but the
lot which God appoints to us we must, I believe, bear with for
titude of mind. It is wickedness' which has called forth this storm,
but it seems to me that a diflferent race of monks are rising up worse
than the former, and that, on both sides, men are committing greater
and more conspicuous acts of madness.* 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, ttoX-
Xal pop<f)al rwv Saifiovicov. Meanwhile it appears to me the
most ad-risable 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, Thom. Mori et Lud.
Viris, Londin. MDCXLII. Lib. XX. Ep. 106. p. 1058. The letter
is dated BasU. Non. Mart. MDXXIX.
2 invidiam. This is a suflScient indication that the poem expressed
Uberal sentiments.
' improbitas.
* in utraque parte fortiter atque insigniter insanitur.

414 APPENDIX.
to that I 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 raatters stand, however, I see
not what I could do, and the confusion that reigns around us in
this quarter, ruraour has no doubt long ago carried to your ears.
I wish it raay go well with you and with all of yours." The signi
ficant passage which speaks of the madness of both parties, and
ofa 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 Uteral sense of the word, but
inasrauch as he feared or believed that, like the obscurantist monks
of a former day, they might create a dislike and contempt for the
study of classical literature and the huraane sciences, the only
things dear to hiraself. 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.'
Erasmus is delighted with the news brought to him by a com
mon friend, that Grapheus is " in a better condition both of raind
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 panagra,^ because it goes through all
his raembers, 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.' He
wishes one who is not young, but healthy, not superstitious, and
1 Dat. Frib. in. Id. Mart, in the edit, cited Lib. xxx. Ep. 64. p.
1952 and 1953. The title bears : Eruditissimo viro Cornelio Grapheo.
2 All-sick, a pain over the whole body.
•^ Erasmus will not have a German. The Germans he says are a ndv-
vov -yivos.

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 fr-iend, wishing to hira and his family all happiness,
and recommending to him the care of his health.
The sarae aflfectionate interest for Grapheus, Ei-asmus retained
untU his death. On the 12th February 1536, he raade his wiU.
In this he ordains, araong other things, that the money deposited
with Eberhard Goclenius' should be distributed in the manner
which he shall aftervvards point out. On the Sabbath after
Easter, in a very remarkable docuraent, 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 intiraate friend
of Grapheus, 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.'" Not long afterwards, upon the 12th July 1536, Erasraus
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.* He was a poet, an orator, a historian, a linguist,
' See Foppens Biblioth. Belg. i. 189.
^ 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.
' Quinquaginta Floreni aurei et quadraginta sex Renenses cum
dimidiate (sint) Cornelio Grapheo, quem suspicor egere, virum dignum
meliore fortuna. And in a subsequent passage : Jussi, ut de mea
pecunia numeres Ceratino Florenes aureos XXV. Id si factum est,
Graphei summara sarciam ex ea pecunia, quae est Antverpiae.
* The earliest enumeration of the works of Grapheus is to be found
in Yaiev. Andreae Biblioth. Belg. p. 150, 151, the next in Fy/j^ews
Bibl. Belg. T. i. p. 201, 202. Grapheus appears to have entered the
field as author for the first tirae, in 1515, at the age of 33, with the
Exprobratio in Diocletianum pro Divo Pancratio, Lovan. ap. Theod.
Martinum, and for the last tirae in l.')50, consequently when be w-as 68
years of age, w ith a Porapa Spectaculorura in susceptione Philippi 1 1.
Antverp. 1550. fol. Between these works lie the following: Conju-
gandi et DecUnandi Regulae, Antverp. 1529. 8. — Conflagratio Templi

416 APPENDIX.
and musician,' 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 poeti(.-al way, than to promote
any particular tendency. G)'apheus 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.' Among his children there was a son called
Alexander, who upheld his father's fame, and acquired some cele
brity as a poet. A poiirait of Grapheus has also corae down to us.'
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 deepfy furrowed. His hair thick and curly,
and worn somewhat short, covered the whole of his raassive head,
and encircled his cheek aud chin with an equally thick and curly
beard. D. Mariae Antverpiensis, versu heroico. Antv. ap. Joh. Grapheum,
1534. — Monstrum anabaptisticum, rei Christianae perniciem, 1535. —
Sacrorum Bucolicorum Eclogae III, Antv. ap. J. Grapheum 1536. 8.
— Descriptio Pacis inter Franciscum I. et Carolum V. Antv. ap. J.
Cocciura. 1540. 4. — Gratulatio Carolo V. Imp. pro reditu iU ius ex His
pania in Belgium (1520) : itera alterara pro reditu per medias Gallias
(1540), Antv. exe. Coccius, 1540.8. — Descriptio Senatus Antverpiani,
a Carolo V. instituti, Antv. ap. Coccium, 1541. — Enchiridion Principis
ac Magistratus Christiani, Colon, apud Cervicornura, 1541. — Para-
phrasis Psalmi cxxiii. contra Mart. Rossemium, Antv. 1543. — Without
date: Carmen Pastorale, quo Christi Nativitas describitur. — Querela
proditi Christi, contra Turco-Christianos. — CoUoquiorum Formulae, e
Terentii Comoediis.
' Andreae and Foppens call him Cantor eximius.
2 See the epitaph upon the .spouses in Foppens BibUoth. Belg. i.,
202. Here the wife is designated Matrona et prudentissima et pietatis
cultrix eximia.
' I have it before rae in two forms Foppens Biblioth. Belg. T. i.
between p. 200 and 201, and in Gerdes. Hist. Ref. T. iu. p. 120.

END OF VOL. I.

zca
o