Hence, proceeded Feige: Out with it plainly, out with the theological
grounds which “moved the theologians to grant such a dispensation!”
If these grounds were not against God, then the Landgrave could take
his stand on them before the secular law, the Emperor, the Fiscal and
the Courts of Justice. Should the theologians, however, really wish to
“repudiate” their advice, nothing would be gained; the scandal would
be just as great as if they had “admitted” it; and further, it would
cause a split in their own confession, for the Prince would be obliged
to “disclose the advice.” Luther wanted to get out of the hole by
saying he had acted foolishly! Did he not see how “detrimental this
would be to his reputation and teaching”? He should “consider what he
had written in his Exposition of Genesis twelve years previously, and
that this had never been called into question by any of his disciples
or followers.” He should remember all that had been done against the
Papacy through his work, for which the Bible gave far less sanction
than for the dispensation, and which “nevertheless had been accepted
and maintained, in opposition to the worldly powers, by an appeal to a
Christian Council.”
Hence the Landgrave must urgently request, concludes Feige, that the
theologians would, at least “until the Council,” take his part and
“admit that what he had done had been agreeable to God.”
The Saxon representatives present at the Conference were, however,
ready to follow the course indicated by Luther in case of necessity,
viz. to tell a downright lie; rather than that the Prince should be
forced to vindicate openly his position it was better to deny it
flatly. They declared, without, however, convincing the Conference,
“that a flat denial was less culpable before God and in conscience--as
could be proved by many examples from Scripture--than to cause a great
scandal and lamentable falling away of many good people by a plain and
open admission and vindication.”[139]
* * * * *
Philip of Hesse was not particularly edified by the result of the
Eisenach Conference. Of all the reports which gradually reached him,
those which most aroused his resentment were, first, that Luther should
expect him to tell a lie and deny the second marriage, and, secondly,
his threat to withdraw the testimony, as issued in error.
Luther had, so far, avoided all direct correspondence with the
Landgrave concerning the disastrous affair. Now, however, he was forced
to make some statement in reply to a not very friendly letter addressed
to him by the Prince.[140]
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