He begs the Landgrave, “again to conceal the matter and keep it
secret; for to defend it publicly as right was impossible”; should
the Landgrave, however, be determined, by revealing it, to “cause
annoyance and disgrace to our Confession, Churches and Estates,”
then it was his duty beforehand to consult all these as to whether
they were willing to take the responsibility, since without them
the matter could not take place and Luther and Melanchthon alone
“could do nothing without their authority. And rather than assist
in publicly defending it, I would repudiate my advice and Master
Philip’s [Melanchthon’s], were it made public, for it was not a public
advice, and is annulled by publication. Or, if this is no use, and
they insist on calling it a counsel and not a Confession,[136] which
it really was, then I should rather admit that I made a mistake and
acted foolishly and now crave for pardon; for the scandal is great and
intolerable. And my gracious Lord the Landgrave ought not to forget
that his Serene Highness was lucky enough in being able to take the
girl secretly with a good conscience, by virtue of our advice in
Confession; seeing that H.S.H. has no need or cause for making the
matter public, and can easily keep it secret, which would obviate all
this great trouble and misfortune. Beyond this I shall not go.”[137]
These attempts at explanation and subterfuge to which the sadly
embarrassed authors of the “testimony” had recourse were keenly
criticised by Feige, the Hessian Chancellor, in the sober, legal
replies given by him at the Conference.[138] He pointed out, that: The
Landgrave, his master, could not now “regard or admit his marriage
to be a mere ‘_liaison_’”; he would indeed keep it secret so far as
in him lay, but deny it he could not without prejudice to his own
honour; “since it has become so widely known”; those to whom he had
appealed, “as the chiefs of our Christian Churches, for a testimony,”
viz. Luther and his theologians, must not now leave him in the lurch,
“but bar witness, should necessity arise, that he had not acted
unchristianly in this matter, or against God.” Philip, moreover, from
the very first, had no intention of restricting the matter to the
private tribunal of conscience; the request brought by Bucer plainly
showed, that he “was publicly petitioning the tribunal of the Church.”
The fact is that the instructions given to Bucer clearly conveyed the
Prince’s intention of making public the bigamy and the advice by which
it was justified.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account