Nathin, the Erfurt Augustinian, first wrote a rather tactless letter
to Luther about it all, as it would appear in the name of the
council of the monastery. Luther was extremely angry and allowed his
excitement free play. He first expresses his surprise in two letters
to the Prior and the council, and was about to despatch a third when
he learnt that the accusations against him, with the exception of that
regarding his doctorate, had been withdrawn. While Nathin’s letter and
also the two passionate replies of the young Doctor have been lost,
two other letters of the latter regarding the matter exist, and are
professedly letters of excuse. The first is in reality nothing of the
kind, but rather the opposite. In this letter, dated June 16, 1514,
and addressed to the Prior and the council, Luther to begin with
complains vehemently of the evil reports against his person which,
according to his information, some of those he was addressing at
Erfurt had circulated previously. Nathin’s letter had, however, been
the last straw. “This letter,” he says, which was written in the name
of all, angered him so much with its lies and its provoking, poisonous
scorn, that “I had almost poured out the vials of my wrath and
indignation on his head and the whole monastery, as Master Paltz did.”
They had probably received the two “amazed replies”; as however the
other charges had been withdrawn, he would hold the majority of those
he was addressing as excused; they must now, on their part, forget
any hurt they had felt at his previous replies; “Lay all that I have
done,” these are his words, “to the account of the furious epistle
of Master Nathin, for my anger was only too well justified. Now,
however, I hear still worse things of this man, viz. that he accuses
me everywhere of being a dishonourable perjurer on account of the
oath to the Faculty which I am supposed to have taken and not kept.”
He goes on to explain that he had been guilty of no such crime, for
the Biblical lectures at the commencement of which he was supposed to
have taken the oath, and at which, it is true, in accordance with the
customs of the University, such an oath was generally taken, had not
been begun by him at Erfurt; at his opening lecture on the Sentences
in that town he had, so far as he remembers, taken no oath, nor could
he recall having ever taken any oath in the Faculty at Erfurt. He
closes with an expression of respect and gratitude to the Erfurt
Faculty. Though he was the injured party, he was calm and contented
and joyful, for he had deserved much worse of God: they too should
lay their bitterness aside, “as God has clearly willed my departure
(_excorporatio_) from Erfurt, and we must not withstand God.”[115]
This letter and Luther’s previous steps cannot be regarded as giving
proof of a harmoniously attuned disposition. He may have been in the
right in the matter of the oath, a question of which it is difficult
to judge.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account