The dispute he had with Cochlæus in the presence of others at Worms
in 1521 shows not only that he had sufficient courage to do this but
also, that, previously, from whatever cause, he had hesitated to do
so. We have Cochlæus’s already quoted account of the incident in
the detailed report of his encounter with Luther.[454] It is true
he only published it in 1540, but it is evidently based on notes
made by the narrator at the time. In reply to the admonition, not
to interpret Holy Scripture “arbitrarily, and against the authority
and interpretation of the Church,” Luther urged that there might be
circumstances where it was permissible to oppose the decrees of the
Councils, for Paul said in 1 Corinthians: “If anything be revealed
to another sitting, let the first hold his peace,”[455] though, so
Luther proceeded, he had no wish to lay claim to a revelation. In the
event, however, as he was always harking back to this instance of
revelation mentioned by the Apostle it occurred to Cochlæus to pin him
down to this expression. Hence, without any beating about the bush,
he asked him: “Have _you_ then received a revelation?” Luther looked
at him, hesitated a moment and then said: “Yes, it has been revealed
to me, ‘_Est mihi revelatum._’” His opponent at once reminded him
that, before this, he had protested against being the recipient of
any revelation. Luther, however, said: “I did not deny it.” Cochlæus
rejoined: “But who will believe that you have had a revelation? What
miracle have you worked in proof of it? By what sign will you confirm
it? Would it not be possible for anyone to defend his errors in this
way?” The text in question speaks of a direct revelation. It was in
this sense that Luther had appealed to it before, and that Cochlæus
framed his question. It is impossible to understand Luther’s answer
as referring to a revelation common to all true Christians. Either
Luther made no answer to Cochlæus’s last words or it was lost in
the interruption of his friend Hieronymus Schurf.[456] In any case
his position was a difficult one and it was simpler for him when he
repeated the same assertion later in his printed writings quietly to
treat all objections with contempt. At any rate he never accused the
above account given by Cochlæus of being false.
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