Cardinal Cajetan, the famous theologian, was, according to Luther,
“an ambiguous, secretive, incomprehensible, mad theologian, and as
well qualified to understand and judge his cause as an ass would be to
play upon the harp.”[1048] Hoogstraaten, the Cologne Dominican, “does
not know the difference between what is in agreement with and what
contrary to Scripture; he is a mad, bloodthirsty murderer, a blind and
hardened donkey, who ought to be put to scratch for dung-beetles in
the manure-heaps of the Papists.”
Of his attacks on Duke George of Saxony, the “Dresden Assassin,” we
need only mention the parting shaft he flung into his opponent’s
grave: “Let Pharao perish with all his tribe; even though he [the
Duke] felt the prick of conscience yet he was never truly contrite....
Now he has been rooted out.... God sometimes consents to look on
for a while, but afterwards He punishes the race even down to the
children.”[1049]
No one who in any way stood up for the Papal Decrees was safe from
Luther’s ungovernable abuse, not even those statesmen who followed
them from necessity rather than out of any respect for the Church.
Luther is determined, so he says, “not to endure the excrement and
filth of the Pope-Ass.... For goodness’ sake don’t come stirring up
the donkey’s dung and papal filth in the churches, particularly in
this town [Wittenberg].... The Pope defiles the whole world with his
donkey’s dung, but why not let him eat it himself?... Let sleeping
dogs lie, this I beg of you [and do not worry me with the Pope],
otherwise I shall have to give you what for.... I must desist,
otherwise I shall get too angry.”[1050]
With the real defenders of the Papal Decrees, or the olden faith, he
was, however, never afraid of becoming “too angry”; the only redeeming
feature being, that, at times the overwhelming consciousness of his
fancied superiority brings his caustic wit to his assistance and
his anger dissolves into scorn. Minus this pungent ingredient, his
polemics would be incomprehensible, nor would his success have been
half so great.
An example of his descriptions of such Catholics who wrote and
spoke against him is to be found in his preface to a writing of
Klingenbeyl’s. He there jokingly congratulates himself on having been
the means of inducing his opponents to study the Bible in order to
refute him: “Luther has driven these blockheads to Holy Scripture,
just as though a man were to bring a lot of new animals to a
menagerie. Here Dr. Cockles [Cochlæus] barks like a dog; there Brand
of Berne [Johann Mensing] yelps like a fox; the Leipzig preacher of
blasphemy [Johann Koss] howls like a wolf; Dr. Cunz Wimpina grunts
like a snorting sow, and there is so much noise and clamour amongst
the beasts that really I am quite sorry to have started the chase....
They are supposed to be conversant with Scripture, and yet are quite
ignorant of how to handle it.”[1051]
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