Skip to main content

Full text of "History of the German people at the close of the Middle Ages;"

See other formats



U'S^^t^ ^ ■ ;.- ...» - - 

TCf-N,- .■■ ■;■■ .■ *- ■.. 

S* ;> • ' 




': r'j.-^ 

^^^' i 


w* ^ 

* ► 

t ' . ■ ' . 

5bAi, ^^ 

*- " ^ 

rittt ,'t 

* 1. 

l2S\, ' t. 

iih» ^ '.*". 


S\.' J 

Kt-vf-'-v . 

-^\7"-?' ' ^ 

^^K! ^Si^i.^^ 

■b jT^a 4^^ 

i^^'^'SF*' - ' 

■^^K^s^^* " 

■ • v^SiiA^-*. ^v ^ 

^^^Hvil^I^ji^ ^ '«/' 

^^^^^TlR?^ •* r-* ^ i 

-k^f'. -v 



Demy Qvo. 25s. per 2 Vols. 


Close of the Middle Ages. By Johannes Janssen. 

Vols. I. and II. translated by M. A. Mitchell and 
A. M. Christie. 

Vols. III.— VIII. translated by A. M. Christie. 












These Volumes {VII. and VIII.) are translated from 
Vol. IV. of the German [Fifteenth and Sixteenth Editions, 
inqoroved and added to by Ludwig Pastor]. 

(The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved) 







I. Terms of the Religious Treaty of Peace — Attitude of 
THE Protestants towards the Catholics— Religious 
Dissensions among the Protestants, and their 
effects 1 

Significance of the maxim ' Whose the land, his also the 

religion ' — Episcopate of Princes, 1-4. 
The Protestants admonished to combine against the Roman 

Antichrist and to avoid intercourse with the Catholics — 

How the Catholic youth were instructed concerning the 

Catholic Church, 4-8. 
Character of the religious dissensions among the Protestants 

— Utterances of Camerarius — The people lose all fixity of 

faith, 9-11. 
The Osianderite disputes and their influence on the people, 

George Major and his opponents, Flacius Illydcus, John 

Wigand, &c., 18-21. 
Tilmann Hesshus and his method of controversy — Tilmann 

Cragius, 21-28. 

II. The Religious Conference at Worms in 1557 . . 29 

Opinions on the effects of the Religious Conference — 
Protestant Diet at Frankfort on the Main — Proposal for a 
Lutheran Papacy — Attitude of Duke John Frederic of 
Saxe-AVeimar — Flacius against Melanchthon, 29-34. 

Religious Conference at Worms — Acrimony between the 
Protestant theologians — The Jesuit Canisius — Results of 
the Conference, 34-45. 



III. The Frankfort Recess of 1558 and the Book of 

Refutation 46 

The Protestant Princes wish ' to establish a Christian Con- 
cord ' — Melanchthon objects to a Protestant Synod, 46-48. 

The Frankfort Recess to serve as a rule of doctrine — Bnt 
only strengthens the schism among the Protestants — 
Protestant hopes of King Maximilian of Bohemia, later on 
the Emperor — Opponents of the Recess — The ' Confutation 
Book of the Duke of Saxony' — War of all against all— 
Flacius against the Landgrave Philip of Hesse — Melan- 
chthon, in 1559, again warns against a Protestant Synod, 

IV. Religious Innovations in the Palatinate after 1556 . 60 

Elector Otto Henry against ' the Popish idolatry ' — The 
Electoral Commissioners in the nuimery at Gnadenberg — 
Reports of the Electoral Inspectors on the religious and 
moral conditions among the people, 60-66. 

Religious dissensions since 1559 under the Elector Fre- 
deric III. — Hesshus and his opponents — Disputation at 
Heidelberg, 1560— Electoral Decrees, 67-72. 

Religious innovations of the Count Palatine Wolfgang of 
Zweibriicken, 72-73. 

V. Religious Innovations in Wurtemberg under Duke 

Christopher 74 

Christopher on his supreme spiritual authority — Christopher 
under suspicion of heresy with the Duke — The Wilrteni- 
berg Creed of 1559 — The new doctrine of the ubiquity of 
Christ's body — The Theologian Brenz and 'his tolerance, 

Christopher's work of secularisation — Fuller details on the 
treatment of nunneries — A contemporary on the prevalent 
oppression of consciences and the general condition of 
things, 77-92. 

VI. Position of the Empire — The Ecclesiastical Reserva- 
tion — The Augsburg Diet of 1559 . . .95 

Increasing weakness of the Empire and the decay of German 
national vigour — Insecurity of trade and commerce — 
Complaints of the towns at the Diet of Ratisbon, 1557 — 
Turkish danger, 93-96. 

The Protestant Princes declare the Ecclesiastical Reservation 
to be the most important point at issue in the Empire — 
Why King Ferdmand was opposed to its abolition, 96-104. 



Ferdinand's election to the Imperial throne, 1558 — Conten- 
tion thereon with Pope Pius IV., 104-105. 

Diet at Augsburg, 1559 — Proceedings of the French in the 
Enapire — Transactions concerning the Imperial domains 
that had come into the possession of France, 105-111. 

Conquest of German territory by Eussia — Loss of Livonia — 
The Turkish question, 111-118. 

Embitterment between the Imperial Estates — The Landsberg 
League — Politics — Ecclesiastical transactions at the Diet — 
The Emperor again refuses to abolish the Ecclesiastical 
Reservation — Attacks against the Catholic Estates — Towns 
where different creeds were allowed, 118-133. 

Violation of the Religious Peace by Protestant Estates — Plan 
of a general political League against the Catholic Estates- 
Why Melanchthon advised against such a League and a 
general Protestant Synod, 133-138. 

VII. Melanchthon on the Religious Dissensions among the 
Protestants — His Death in 1560 — The Flacians in the 
Duchy of Saxony 139 

Melanchthon's distress and anger — His utterances concern- 
ing the growing corruption of religion and morality, and 
the degeneracy of the young — His death — Rowdy students 
destroy his house — Fury of his opponents, 139-143. 

Flacians at the University of Jena^Proceedings of Duke 
John Frederic against heretical theologians — ' Bitter party 
divisions' at Jena, 143-147. 

Religious Conference at Weimar— Flacius declares original 
sin to be the substance of human nature — Opponents of the 
Flacians — Wonders and portents, 147-150. 

VIII. Religious and Moral Anarchy in Austria . . . 151 

Effects of evangelical freedom — Decaj- of the higher and 
lower clergy — Reports on the inspection of convents — 
How the nobility made use of the new evangel — Ferdinand 
on the pure AVord of God — Sectarianism in Austria, 151- 

IX. Religious and Moral Anarchy in Bavaria and in 

Ecclesiastical Territories 168 

Spread of the new doctrines in Bavaria — Increasing decay of 
Church discipline — Negligence of the bishops — The noble 
prebendaries — Concubinage — Attitude of Duke Albert V. 
— Disturbances on account of the lay chalice— Reports of 
the Church inspectors of 1558 and 1559 — Demoralisation 
of the people, 168-180. 



Disastrous conditions in the Archbishopric of Salzburg, the 
Bishoprics of Bamberg and Wiirzburg, the Abbacy of 
Fulda, &c. &c. — Causes of tlie demorahsation, 180-186. 

Eehgious disturbances in Treves in 1559 and interference of 
Protestant princes — The Nuncio Commendone on the posi- 
tion of tlie German Cathohcs, 187-195. 

X. Negotiations for the Reopening of the Council of 

Trent, 1560-1561 196 

Pope Pius IV. and his efforts for reform — Announcement of 
the continuation of the Trent Council — Counter efforts a,t 
the Imperial Court — Ferdinand and the ecclesiastical 
princes in fear of the Protestant Estates — Rumours of great 
Popish intrigues — Plan of a Protestant Union — A pamphlet 
against the Council, 196-207. 

Cardinal Bishop Otto of Augsburg on the Pope's design re- 
specting the Protestants, 208-212. 

XL Religious Disputes at the Naumburg Convention of 
Princes — The Protestants Invited to attend the 
Council in 1561 213 

What the Protestants hoped from the Naumburg Congress of 
Princes — Controversies concerning the difTerent editions 
of the Augsburg Confession — The earliest edition teaches 
' Popish doctrine ' concerning the Eucharist — The Naum- 
burg Congress intensifies the disagreement between the 
Protestants, 213-223. 

The Papal Nuncios at Naumburg — Hovi^ they were treated — • 
Rejection of the Council — The Nuncio Commendone in 
Berlin, 223-231. 

Negotiations of the Nuncios with the bishops, 231-238. 

XII. Reopening of the Council of Trent in 1562— Why the 
Spiritual Princes of the Empire did not attend it 
— The Lay Chalice — -The Marriage of the Clergy — 
The ' Reform of the Princes ' 234 

Zeal of the Pope — Attitude of the Protestants — Otto von 
Augsburg denounces the rumours that it was intended to 
proceed against the Protestants with poison and dagger — 
Fear caused by these reports keeps the ecclesiastical princes 
of the Empire away from the Council — The conclusions 
deduced from their absence — Erroneous notions, 234-241. 

Advocates of the lay chalice — Why the majority of the 
Council decided against it — Papal concession of the chalice 
— Protestant expressions of opinion on the subject, 241- 



Reasons for and against the abolition of celibacy — Decision 
of the Council, 246-253. 

Necessity for thoroughgoing reform of the ecclesiastical 
Estate and for regulating the relations between Church 
and State — Bondage of the Church to Catholic rulers — Not 
so much the bishops as the princes and their officials con- 
trol the Church government and administer the Church 
property — Utterances of conteiliporaries — Demands of the 
Council with regard to the reform of the princes — Discus- 
sions on the subject at the Council — A memorandum of 
the Government of Lower Austria — The secular rulers 
repudiate every curtailment of their power in ecclesiastical 
matters — A statement of the Cardinal-Legate Morone to 
the Emperor Ferdinand — Despairing utterances on the 
Catholic side — A consolatory utterance, 253-272. 

XIII. Results of the Naumburg Convention — Religious and 

Moral Conditions in North Germany .... 273 

Flacians in the Duchy of Saxony — Their banishment in 
1561 — Their manner of preaching and its effect on the 
people, 273-277. 

Opinions from Wittenberg on the dissoluteness of morals and 
the contempt of aU discipline resulting from the religious 
schisms, 277-278. 

The religious commotion at Bremen and its consequences, 

Religious dissensions in Magdeburg — The Catholics no 
Christians — Tilmann Hesshus, his followers and his 
opponents — The Council laid under the ban of the Church 
— Fear of a rising of the people — Reports on a Church 
visitation held in the Archbishopric in 1562-1564, 283-293. 

Religious factions in the Mark of Brandenburg— Agricola on 
Melanchthon — Andrew Musculus and the INIusculites 
against Abdias Prsetorius and his followers in Frankfort- 
on-the-Oder — The students take part in the disputes — 
Attitude of the Elector Joachim II. — An address of the 
Elector to the officials and the preachers of Berlin — The 
Provincial Estates on the side of Praetorius, the Elector 
on that of Musculus — Disputes among the people concern- 
ing the Eucharist— A decision of Joachim, 293-298. 

Musculus on the old Catholic times and the increasing 
universal demoralisation, 299-301. 

Religious and moral depravity in the Duchy of Prussia— The 
court-preacher Funk and the adventurer Paul Scalichius 
after 1561 — Despoiling and oppression by Duke Albert, 

VOL. VII. a 


iJllAPTEH I'A(il-; 

Utterances of the Duke on existing conditions — His deatli in 
1568 — The invalid Duke Albert Frederic — Bishop Morlin 
and his opponents — Controversy between Bishop Hesshus 
of Samland and Bishop Wigand of Pomerania on the 
humanity of Christ in abstracto and in concreto, and 
the people's participation in this controversy — Hesshus 
and his adherents banished -Wigand's government — His 
complaints of the epicurean sensuality of the people and 
the despoiling of the churches — Hesshus against the 
Calvinists, 305-312. 

XIV. Calvinism in the Palatinate 813 

Elector Frederic III. against the Lutheran doctrine of the 
Eucharist and against the Wiirtemberg Ubiquists — His 
utterances on the manner of life of the Protestants, 313- 

Electoral ordinances against ' witchcraft and idolatry ' — The 
Calvinistic Heidelberg Catechism of 1563 — An epistolary 
utterance of Frederic, 315-317. 

Treatment of nunnei'ies — The Elector's profanation of 
churches, 317-323. 

Lutheran Estates on Frederic and his Calvinism — Religious 
conference at Maulbronn in 1564, and its consequences — 
Frederic's appeal to the Religious Peace, 323-328. 

XV. Religious Attitude of Maximilian II. up to 1566 — 

Transactions concerning Calvinism in the Palatinate 321) 

Maximilian's leaning to the Augsburg Confession — His 
court-preacher Pfauser — His duplicity in matters of 
religion — His solemn promise to his father, Ferdinand, 
before his election in 1562 — His remarks about ' the 
Palatine poison ' — Elector Frederic explains to him the 
duties of the kingly otfice — Duke Christopher of Wiirtem- 
berg and other Lutheran princes wish to proceed against 
the Palatine Calvinism, 330-344. 

XVI. Religious Transactions at the Diet of Augsburg in 1566 
— Whether Calvinism is included in the Religious 
Peace ? 345 

The Elector Palatine Frederic demands the extirpation of 
the Catholic Faith — Transactions between the Protestant 
princes before the Diet, 345-348. 

The Imperial proposal at Augsburg — Duplicity of the 
Emperor — Libellous pamphlet of the Protestant Estates 
agiinst tiie Catholics — They insist on the suppression of 



Popish idolatry by a national council — Opinion of a 
Catholic respecting such a council, 348-356. 

The Protestant princes demand the abolition of the Ecclesias- 
tical lleservation ; the Protestant towns object to this 
demand, 356-360. 

Pieply of the Catholic Estates to the libellous pamphlet of the 
Protestants, 358-361. 

Petitions of complaint against the Elector Frederic — The 
Emperor's decision — Frederic's answer, 361-364. 

Double-faced attitude of the Elector Augustus of Saxony — 
Frederic freed by it from his perilous situation — The 
Emperor's explanations — His utterances concerning the 
wavering Lutheran Estates — Piesults of the Diet, 364-376. 

XVIL The Grumbach-Gotha Conspiracy — A Lutheran Empire 


Plans of Duke John Frederic of Saxony — The Grumbach 
plottings — jMurder of the Bishop of Wiirzburg, and the 
general insecurity — The Grumbach conspiracy and the 
appearance of the Angels — The Emperor Ferdinand and 
the Catholic Dukes of Brunswick and of Bavaria to be 
assassinated — Wiirzburg captured in 1563, 377-384. 

Fear of a general w'ar of the nobles a la Sicliingen — Alliance 
of the princes — Grumbach's manifesto — Hopes of Duke 
John Frederic — His pronouncements on the arts of Satan 
— The Angels announce the elevation of the Duke to the 
imperial throne — How the Emperor Maximilian was be- 
fooled — Grumbach means the Elector of Saxony to be 
murdered, 384-391. 

Grumbach and his associates outlawed in 1566 — A memorial 
for the organisation of a Bundschuli — The banner of the 
League — How the overthrow of the imperial constitution 
and the establishment of the true evangel is thereby to be 
accomplished, 391-394. 

Military expedition against Gotha — Barbarous punishment 
of the conspirators — John Frederic in captivity— The 
Emperor on the significance of the defeated rebellion, 

Index of Places 403 

Index of Persons 409 









According to the wording of the Recess, the so-called 
Religious Peace of Augsburg, of September 25, 1555, 
had been concluded for the purpose of removing ' the 
fatal mistrust which prevailed throughout the Empire, 
of restoring tranquillity and mutual confidence among 
the Estates and their subjects, and of preserving the 
German Empire from dismemberment and ruin.' 



But, as a matter of fact, the Treaty left the ' sub- 
jects ' altogether out of consideration. This peace had 
not been concluded between Catholics and Protestants 
generally, but between the princes who still adhered to 
the Catholic faith and those who had subscribed to the 
Confession of Augsburg, and who by this compact 
mutually pledged themselves not to molest each other 
in future on account of religion. 

As for the people, they had no alternative but to 
accept the religion of their rulers. In case of their re- 
fusing to do so, the sole right conceded them was to sell 
their possessions and migrate to some other land where 
they might hope for tolerance. Of liberty of conscience 
and religion for individuals there was no longer any 

Among the Estates which adhered to the Augsburg 
Confession, the maxim ' Wessen das Land, dessen auch die 
Religion ' ^ (whose the land, his also the religion) had 
already long held practical sway before it received legal 
sanction from the Treaty of 1555. This stipulation was 
the 'most important one in the Recess of Augsburg. The 
most insignificant of the overlords now felt justified in 
dictating the religion of his subjects, and in carrying 
out verbatim all those regulations concerning the rights 
and duties of the civil authorities which the Strasburg 
preacher Capito had laid down decades ago in a 
pamphlet addressed to the Count Palatine Rupert. 
Every prince, Capito had said, is head of the Church 
in his own territory, placed there by Christ as His 
vicegerent. To his ' power of the sword ' every- 
thing must give way ; to him are subject religious 
teaching and the forms of public worship, the priests 

^ ' Cujus regio, ejus religio.' 


and the preachers, and all their official functions. 
' Children do not belong so much to their parents as to 
the State.' Every prince has the right, and is in duty 
bound, to do away with the Catholic worship, and to in- 
troduce the new religion by main force. Whoever con- 
tinues to tolerate the Mass in his dominions is no better 
than the infidel Turk. Let haste, then, be made to 
exercise the utmost rigour against this ' abominable 
blasphemy ; ' punishment by death must even be re- 
sorted to in the case of obdurate recusants, and the 
Catholic religion must be hunted down inquisitorially 
into its most secret hiding-places. Bearing in mind this 
unlimited power of the authorities, no one has cause to 
complain of coercion of conscience, for it is merely a 
question of submission in externals ; into the recesses 
of the conscience the arm of the State does not extend.^ 
There was another clause in the Augsburg Treaty of 
Religious Peace which the Protestant princes regarded 
as an ' intrinsic reason ' for their establishment of terri- 
torial churches, and for their enactments with regard to 
doctrine, worship, and ecclesiastical legislation and juris- 
diction. This was a stipulation to the effect that the 
ecclesiastical jurisdiction of bishops was to remain in 
suspension, in the States of the Augsburg confessionists, 
until a reconciliation in religious matters had been 
finally accomplished. On the strength of this the Pro- 
testant princes assumed a legal right to act as bishops 
in their own territories, and to exercise episcopal autho- 
rity in the appointment of the clergy and in decisions 
concerning Church customs, ordinances, and ceremonies. 

^ See DoUinger's Reformation, ii, 12-13, and K. Paulus, Die Strass- 
hurger Beformatoren und die Geivissensfreiheit (Strasburg, 1895), pp. 

B 2 


The policy of these prince -bishops was directed towards 
the complete abolition of Catholic religious liberty. 
Under their sway there grew up in the Empire as many 
churches as there were Protestant territories ; and these 
churches did not become incorporated in one great 
organic system or body, but remained separate units, 
independent of — for the most part inimically opposed 
to — each other, and united only in their common an- 
tagonism to the ' accursed Antichrist, the Pope at 
Rome, and his rabble of followers.' 

' In this one thing,' says a pamphlet of the year 
1558, ' all evangelical Christians should agree in a 
brotherly manner (however greatly they may differ and 
wrangle about much else) — viz. to curse the Antichrist 
from their hearts as a true son of perdition, and to flee 
from and eschew, as far as in them lies, all intercourse 
with the execrable Papists, who are the servants of 
Antichrist and of idolatry, lest they be defiled by them, 
xind this they must do out of Christian mercy and pity^ 
according to the injunctions of Holy Writ, in order that 
the Papists may be brought to see in what a mire of 
idolatrous filth they are wallowing, and may perchance 
be turned away from it.' ^ 

The decision recorded in a ' Christian and pious 
memorandum ' drawn up at a Hessian general synod 
(also in 1558) served as, a pretty general rule of duty 
among the Evangelicals ; ' Whereas the open and 
avowed adherents of the Papacy are blasphemers, 
idolaters, and servants of Antichrist, they must not 
only nevermore be countenanced as sponsors at Evan- 

^ Der ahgottische Baalsdienst der Pafisten und die ernsthaftirjen 
Pflichten eines evangelisclien Christen, aus Gottes heiligem Worte 
dargestellt, (without locality, 1558), B'-. C. 


gelical christenings, but also, according to the command 
of the Apostle, all outward fellowship with them must 
be avoided.' ' We must flee from their presence,' said 
the superintendents ; ' we must shun their conversation 
in worldly matters ; we must neither eat with them nor 
drink with them ; and when we meet them in the road 
we must not salute them.' ^ 

Behaviour of this kind was not consonant with the 
injunction of the Keligious Treaty that the religious dis- 
putes must be settled by friendly and peaceable ways 
and means. ' Each and all,' so ran the words of the 
Treaty, ' whatever their differences of creed, must enter- 
tain kindly feelings towards the others in true friend- 
ship and Christian love.' 

But it was Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg who 
expressed the true feelings of nearly all the Protestant 
princes when he said, in a letter to the Landgrave of 
Hesse : ' If a Christian prince ' — i.e. a Protestant prince 
— ' contracts a political alliance with Catholic princes, 
it is as much as openly defying God Almighty. It 
would be only right and fitting to say to such an one 
what Jehu said to Jehoshaphat, who had allied himself 
with the godless King Ahab : " Thou helpest the un- 
godly, and thou art joined in friendship with them that 
Tiate the Lord." ' - 

The first thing aimed at all over Germany in the 
Teligious training of youthful Protestants was to fill 

'^ In Heppe, Generalsynoden, i., U rku7idensammlung, pp. 3-10. 
See i. 33-34. In the year 1593 it was decided by a synod at Cassel that 
' we must keep at a distance from the idolatrous papistical service of 
baptism ; ' the preachers were enjoined to warn the people from the 
pulpit not to act as sponsors at the ' idolatrous masquerades ' {Zeitschrift 
fii.r hessische Qescli. und Landeshunde, vi. 322-323). 

* Sattler 4, Beilagen, pp. 161-162. 


them with the deepest abhorrence of the ' godless 
Papists.' Luther had led the way in this direction. 
The whole Church, he had said, until the advent of his 
gospel, had been scourged and devastated by the devil ; 
a den of murderers had usurped the place of the Church 
of Christ. For centuries past Satan had governed the 
whole of Christendom in lieu of Christ, wham he had de- 
throned. The Pope had set himself up as the vicegerent 
of the devil ; the bishops were apostles of the devil ; 
the monks the creatures of the devil ; the Mass was the 
greatest of all abominations, a dragon's tail {sic) ; pur- 
gatory was a phantasm invented by the devil. In his 
larger Catechism also he piled up the bitterest invec- 
tives against everything that displeased him in the 
Catholic Church. He declared, for instance, that no 
Papist had ever recognised Christ as Lord, or the Holy 
Ghost as the Sanctifier. ' Before my gospel was preached 
we were verily children of the devil, like unto the 
heathen who have never heard of Cod and Christ.' In 
the passage where he insists on the necessity of not 
neglecting prayer, he goes on to say : ' Hitherto people 
have been instructed in such a fashion (in the devil's 
name) that they have said their prayers by rote without 
any attention or thought, .and have considered it suffi- 
cient, simply to have gone through the task ; God might 
answer them, or He might not.' The Papal chair at 
Rome, with all appertaining to it, was ' the head and 
chief protector of a set of thieves ; it had accumulated 
by dishonest means the property of the whole world, 
and it retained it all to this very day.' ^ 

In complete travesty of the teaching of the Catholic 

1 The larger Catechism in the Collected Works, pp. 20, 37-88,74, 101- 
103. See pp. 90, 108, 110 111. 


Church, Protestant children were indoctrinated in the 
belief that Catholics were wholly given up to idolatry. 
In the Mecklenburg Catechism, for instance, it was 
stated that ' the Papists teach that we should not adore 
God only, but also invoke the dead.' To the question, 
' What is Antichrist ? ' the children had to answer : 
' Antichrist is the whole of the Papacy, which was 
founded by the devil, and which perverts the teaching 
of Christ, compels men to adore dead saints, forbids 
marriage and many sorts of food, and goes straight to 
hell with all those of its followers who are not con- 
verted.' ^ 

A Protestant preacher writes as follows : ' It must be 
instilled betimes into the minds of our young Christian 
folk that the Papacy is nothing but rank idolatry of a 
more scandalous nature than that of the Turks and the 
heathen. The stupid Papists, as Luther teaches in his 
Catechism, have turned God into a sham god and ridi- 
culous idol ; they have exalted themselves as gods ; 
they are bound to adore, as a god, their idol at Rome, 
the incarnate Antichrist, and to give divine honours to 
aU the filth which emanates from him above and below. 
Who is there that would not be incensed at hearing that 
these people set no value on the merits of Christ, that 
they go so far as to mock and hate the Saviour, and 
fancy they can take heaven by storm with their own 
good works ? It is the most monstrous kind of idolatry, 
the most outrageous robbery of the Almighty ; it is 

^ The smaller Corpus Doctrince of Matthew Judex, a catechism of 
Mecklenbm-g : a literal reproduction from the Eostock edition by C. M. 
Wiechmanu (Schwerin, 1865), Chapters xxii. and xxxii. It affords the 
publisher ' heartfelt pleasure ' to make ' once more accessible to the public ' 
a book whose purport it was for more than a century ' to impress Luther's 
pure doctrine on the minds of children.' 


rascalism beyond all rascalism that lias ever been beard 
of since the beginning of the world.' ^ The preacher, 
Andreas Fabricius, gulled the populace into the belief 
that it was a leading article of the Catholic faith that 
the Pope was half God, half man ; that he had power 
over angels and devils to do, or leave undone, whatever 
he willed ; and that he made a point of having un- 
learned men for his priests, who knew no catechism 
whatever ; and that these priests believed neither in a 
God nor in a devil, neither in the resurrection of the 
dead, nor in heaven or hell.^ 

Doctor Bartholomew Kleindienst complains, in the 
year 1560, that ' such is the extent to which the poor 
people are deluded that they believe that we present- 
day Catholics, or Papists as they call us, think nothing 
of Christ ; that we adore the saints as gods — yea, verily, 
that we regard the Pope as very God ; that we wish to 
wring heaven from God by our good works, without the 
help of His grace. They are taught that we do not 
believe the Holy Scriptures, that we have no true Bible, 
and that we could not read it if we had one ; that we 
trust more in holy water than in the blood of Christ. 
They invent all manner of abominable, blasphemous, 
and unheard-of lies against us. Intelligent people are 
well aware how skilfully they wield their weapons of 
deceit to make the common people, otherwise so well 

^ In the pamphlet already cited at p. 4, note 1, T>~. 

^ ' Der Heiligen Teufel,' in the Theatrum Diabol., pp. 150-151. For 
the space of forty years the people had been preached to in this sort of 
way concerning ' the devil's work of the Papacy,' and yet, said Fabricius 
regretfully, the old ideas were still deeply ingrained in the Protestant 
people, in spite of the ' shining light of the Gospel.' The common people, 
he said, were so saturated with the old hypocrisy that one sermon alone 
would suffice to bring them back again to the Papacy. 


affected, loathe the Papacy as an execrable monstrosity. 
I cannot sufficiently deplore the fact that the poor 
ignorant masses have been so long unmercifully deceived 
and led astray by this fool's bridle. In my opinion it 
is a work most pleasing in the sight of God, and most 
beneficial to man, to show Christian pity and sympathy 
for these wretched, deluded, misguided people ; to pray 
for them devoutly, and to wish them and show them all 
the good we can.' 

But while the ancient uniform Catholic faith was 
being thus made hateful and despicable in the eyes of 
the German people, there were springing up in all direc- 
tions so many new teachers and new sects, each claiming 
to be ' the best and the only evangelical one,' that the 
common people scarcely knew any longer ' what they 
ought to believe.' ^ 

Hundreds of statements from Protestant lips bear 
witness to the truth of this. 

So long as the leaders and spokesmen of the religious 
revolution were only concerned with the overthrow of 
existing things, the most cordial friendship seemed to 
prevail among them. They addressed each other alter- 
nately as new prophets and evangelists, compared each 
other to EHas and Elisha, to John the Baptist and the 
Apostle Paul. But when the time came for estabhshing, 
on the ruins of the old ecclesiastical system, a new Church 
in which the new evangelical doctrines should actually 
be embodied, then former friends became bitter foes. 
Amid their never-ending strife and dissensions, the 

"' Bin recht catholisch und evangelisch Ermanung an seine Ziehen 
Teutschen (1560) (at the end it is written 'gedruckt zu Dilingen), B. F% 
P\ Kleindienst was a convert (see Paulus in the Hist. Polit. Bl, 
pp. 109, 485 ff.), and therefore particvilarly well versed in the matter 
in qiiestion. 


theologians and preachers themselves appeared to lose 
sight of what they were aiming at, and as their want of 
unity extended the evangelicals became subdivided into 
an increasing number of small sects and parties, among 
which mutual recrimination and criticism was the con- 
stant rule. This was, indeed, the worst feature of 
the struggle. The different sects entertained no re- 
spect for each other, and credited each other with 
the basest motives. The Christian virtues of meekness 
and humility were quite left out of the reckoning. 

' T scarcely dare hope,' wrote the distinguished 
schoolman and philologist, Joachim Camerarius, Melan- 
chthon's best friend, five years after the conclusion 
of the Keligious Peace, ' I scarcely dare hope, amid all 
this fierce and scandalous strife, that the Church will 
ever again attain to peace and unity. Religion, learn- 
ing, discipline, and morality must all of necessity go to 
ruin. The whole of Germany is being brought to the 
groimd in the most shameful manner, not by the pres- 
sure of foreign powers, but from the iniquity of her own 
citizens. What will other nations say of us ? or, rather, 
what are they saying of us already ? ' 

' It grieves me beyond measure,' said Camerarius, 
with special regard to the Lutheran preachers, ' to see 
how those who, above all others, are bound to stand by 
the Church in her extremity, and to protect her from 
danger, are the very ones who day by day inflict fresh 
wounds upon her. It is our own party that is to blame 
for all this misery. The fruit which would have ripened 
abundantly in the sunshine of unity and goodwill has 
all been nipped in the bud. Men, for the most part 
ignorant and uncultivated, impelled solely by their own 
insolent audacity, are fighting for their own opinions 


and claiming all the time the merit of zeal for the main- 
tenance of heavenly doctrine. Strangers or enemies to 
all scholarly culture, unacquainted with the writings of 
the ancients, and content to pin their faith to all the 
latest controversial pamphlets which are poured forth 
in shoals over the country, they abandon themselves 
unreservedly to their own lusts, and kick at every 
species of moral restraint. For very bitterness of soul 
I can write no more. We are confronted everywhere 
with such a multitude of sins that, even if there were 
any among us who turned their minds towards improving 
the general state of things, they would draw back 
terrified at the first step ; like the man in the fable who 
wanted to stop up the holes in a sieve, but could find 
no way either of beginning or ending the work.' ^ 

The nation had lost that sense of unassailable cer- 
tainty which is so indispensable an element of faith, and 
with the loss of this their moral centre of gravity had 
also disappeared. The theologian, Matthias Flacius, 
from his home in Venetian lUyria, called lUyricus, 
wrote : ' We hear universal complaints of confusion in 
religious doctrine and perplexity in the Church, of the 
helplessness and indecision of professing Christians. 
Error and heresy are gaining the upper hand ; dissension 
increases and corrodes the hearts of men, and our inex- 
perienced youth takes in the seeds of falsehood.' - The 
bulk of the people no longer knew what they ought to 
believe and what to condemn.^ 

^ For these and similar utterances of Camerarius, see Dollinger's 
Reformation, ii. 586-594. 'In Germania omnia convulsa sunt,' wrote 
Bullinger to Calvin on March 9, 1556. Calvini Opx). pp. 16, 66. 

2 See Dollinger's Beformation, ii. 249-251. 

•' Schumacher, ii. 276. 


The duchy of Prussia, through the agency of Andreas 
Osiander and his partisans and opponents, had become 
a prolific soil of fierce dissension, which went on raging 
even after the conclusion of the Religious Peace. 

Osiander, since 1549, had held the post of professor 
of theology at the Konigsberg University. Taking 
alarm at the effects of the Lutheran doctrine of imputed 
righteousness, he had set up the theory that justifica- 
tion is not a mere imputation of the righteousness of 
Christ, spreading His mantle of grace over the sinner, but 
that it is a real indwelling of the divine righteousness in 
man ; that the notion of justification without regard to 
the condition of our souls was apt, he said, as experience 
showed, to make people presumptuous and reckless. 
' Most persons who accept this doctrine,' wrote Osiander, 
' are despisers of authority, oppressors of the poor and 
the weak, usurers, liars, thieves, drunkards, and disso- 
lute livers ; and it is very pleasant to such people to 
hear the hypocrites preach that " our righteousness is 
only reckoned unto us by God, and this, all the same, 
even if we are scoundrels ; that it is only outward, and 
not within us." For, according to this, the worst sinners 
may pass of! as saints. " Preachers of this description 
are most welcome to the people ; they set Christ aside 
and put the devil up in His place ; they are full of envy, 
hatred, lying, and malice." I wonder more than I can 
say that they do not themselves perceive, as even the 
children in the streets see plainly, that under such 
teaching they only grow daily more wicked and pro- 
fligate.' 1 

Foremost among Osiander' s opponents were Melan- 

^ Dollinger's Reformation, iii. 399-412 ; Hase, Albrecht von Preussen, 
pp. 139 ff. 


chthon, Flacius lUyriciis, John ^Epinus, Joachim West- 
phal, and Joachim Morlin. These men declared his doc- 
trine to be a snare of the devil. Satan, they said, seeing 
that the Papists' error of inherent righteousness had been 
effectually overcome by the Lutherans, resorted to more 
skilled tactics, and made justification consist in the 
essential justice of Christ dwelling in us through faith. ^ 

By command of Duke Albert of Prussia, Osiander 
published his ' confession of faith,' which, however, was 
pronounced in all directions an abominable and diabolical 
piece of work. The Duke of Saxony's theologians de- 
clared that ' we must be on our guard against it as 
against the pit of hell, where only fiends and demons 
are found.' - The Margrave Haus von Ciistrin told Duke 
Albert that Osiander must be shunned as the devil 
incarnate by all good Christians.'^ Albert, however, 
took the new teacher under his protection. ' Under 
penalties affecting body and life, and by the value they 
set on the grace of God,' he forbade the enemies of 
Osiander to condemn his teaching.^ Supported by the 
friendship of the Duke and ' firm in his own opinions,' 
Osiander defied all his antagonists. He even dared to 
speak in disparaging terms of Melanchthon. Never since 
the apostolic days, he said, had the Church been afflicted 
with so pestilential a man as Melanchthon, who was so 
skilful in giving his teaching the semblance of genuine 
truth, while all the time he was in reality repudiating 
the truth. He called him the most shifty of theologians, 
and accused him of throwing dust in people's eyes with 
his sophistry, and of having in his writings advocated at 
least fourteen different doctrines of justification. At 

1 Dollinger's Reformation, iii. 421 f. - Salig, ii. 996. 

3 Hase, p. 188. •* Vulpius, x. 46, note. 


Wittenberg, said Osiander, Melanclithon carried on the 
most intolerable intellectual tyranny ; to secure a 
doctor's degree at that university it was necessary to 
bind oneself by oath to every word he taught. ' Parents 
flatter themselves that when their sons leave the uni- 
versity they are admirably equipped with sound know- 
ledge of the Scriptures, and fitted to stop the mouths 
of all fanatics and heretics ; while in reality they are 
poor handicapped wretches, with their consciences en- 
tangled and perplexed by extorted oaths ; for they have 
foresworn the word of God and pledged themselves to 
Philip's teaching ; they have suffered themselves to be 
gagged by the tyrant Melanchthon. A stand must be 
made against the " Wittenberg Bundschuh." ^ Melan- 
chthon and all his followers were downright slaves of 
Satan.' ^ 

The invectives and insults which Osiander and the 
pastor, Joachim Morlin, ' thundered out at each other 
from the pulpit at Konigsberg ' were almost maniacal, 
and utterly subversive of all peace and order. They 
called each other reciprocally liars and blasphemers. 
Osiander stirred up the people against Morlin as against 
a common thief and calumniator, crying out to them 
' to arm themselves with pikes and poles.' ^ Morlin, in 
return, exclaimed to his congregation : ' If we had but 
the power, we would call down thunder and lightning 
on him and his followers, and command all the legions 
of devils to plague and torture them.' Osiander, he 
said, was the incarnate Antichrist, through whom, in a 
short time, the world would come to an end. In the 

^ The peasants' lace boot and military badge in the wars of religion. 
= Salig, ii. 984-986; DOUinger's Reformation, iii. 421 -423, 42G. From 
Osiander's Klagen, A-. 
3 Salig, ii. 948. 


presence of Osiander lie called out from the pulpit : 
"■ Shame on thee, thou coal-black devil with thy vaunted 
righteousness ; may God cast thee into the nethermost 
abyss of hell ! ' 'Do not suffer this abomination to 
continue in the land, dear sons and daughters,' he said 
to his audience ; ' see to it that your children do not 
get poisoned by this diabolical heresy. It would be a 
thousand times more profitable for you to wallow in 
blood up to your knees, to have the Turk at your gates 
massacring you all ; yea, it would be more profitable to 
you to become Jews or pagans than to put up with 
what you are now suffering from. For by this teaching 
you are in as great danger of damnation as are the 
heathen. He who will not be warned, let him go straight 
to the devil ! ' ^ 

Osiander no longer felt his life safe. Whenever he 
went out, he had a servant following him with a loaded 
musket under his coat. He even carried arms with him 
to the lecture-hall and the pulpit. His enemies caused 
it to be set about that Osiander was always accom- 
panied by ' two devils in the form of black dogs, who 
were not seen by everybody, and that he had one devil 
that always wrote for him in an upper room while he 
was eating and drinking downstairs with his com- 
panions.' - 

Among the people everything was altogether topsy- 
turvy by reason of hatred and ill-will. Brothers, 
cousins, the best friends and neighbours, would spit at 
each other in the public streets and cry out : ' Shame 

1 Salig, ii. 966-967 ; Hase, 179-180 ; DoUinger's Reformation, ii. 454. 
See Duke Albert's letter of October 4, 1551, to his son Philip of Hesse, in 
Neudecker, Neue Beitrdge, i. 2-7 ; Morlin to John Frederic of Saxony in 
ErUiutertes Preussen, ii. 660. 

2 Salig, ii. 1013. 


on you ! be off with you, you devil, you Osianderite 
ranter, heretic, traitor, rascal, scoundrel, villain ! ' Riots 
were of constant occurrence in and outside Konigsberg. 
' One party contended against the other with lies, riot, 
and murders in order to oust them from and to seize 
their property. Whoever should attempt to describe all 
the misery that was rampant would fill an extraordinarily 
large book. It is not possible indeed to record all the 
quarrelling and ill-feeling that existed.' ^ 

The fashion which prevailed at this time of preaching 
almost solely about the devil and his wicked deeds, of 
making his Satanic majesty the author and the cause 
not only of heresy, but also of thunder and hailstorms, 
of the destruction of crops, of epidemics, murder, man- 
slaughter — of this man's broken neck, of that one's 
lunacy — resulted in the people's coming to beheve that 
it was no longer God but the devil who ruled the 
world ; and when Osiander died in 1552, and it was said 
of him that on his death-bed he had bellowed like an 
ox possessed by the devil, and that the devil had 
twisted his neck and torn his body in pieces, there was 
little doubt in the popular mind that all this rubbish 
was gospel truth.^ In order to refute this report, 
Duke Albert caused Osiander' s corpse to be disinterred 
and examined by a jury, and the verdict that it had 
not been torn to pieces to be made publicly known.^ 
To protect the corpse from outrage the Duke ordered 

^ Salig, ii. 966. The Konigsberg Chronicles, published by Meckel- 
burg (Konigsberg, 1865), p. 272, See v. Liliencron, Mittlieilungen aus dem 
Gebiet der offentlichen Meinung, &c., in the Transactions of the Historical 
Section of the Bavarian Academy of Science, xii. 120. 

* Bericht von allerlei Zauberei, Besessenheit und Teufelskilnsten 
(Lich, 1583), p. 17 ; Hartknoch, pp. 353-354. 

^ Bericht &c., p. 18. 


that it should be dug up privately and carried away 
afterwards to some secret spot.^ 

The dissensions still went on after Osiander's death. 
The Duke issued a fresh mandate upholding Osiander's 
doctrine of justification, and ruling that it should be 
taught in Prussia. He also prohibited the practice of 
slandering and anathematising from the pulpit. Morlin, 
however, declared in a sermon that ' nobody must think 
of obeying this mandate, for it was neither reasonable 
nor human, but an emanation from Satan himself. He 
intended, he said, to speak and to preach against it so 
long as he was able to open his lips.' " In consequence 
of this appeal to sedition he was banished from the 
land, and at the Konigsberg University all Osiander's 
opponents were deposed from office. The philosophical 
faculty was thus almost completely broken up.^ 

The same reason that had influenced Andreas 
Osiander induced George Major, professor of theology 
and preacher at the castle at Wittenberg, to come for- 
ward in strong opposition of the Lutheran doctrine of 
imputed righteousness, which he, too, condemned as the 
cause of serious moral degeneration. He defended the 
thesis that ' good works were necessary to salvation, 
and that no one could be saved without them.' It was 
only, he wrote, by the propagation of this teaching that 
any headway could be made against the ' false and 
trumped-up creed ' now universally accepted, which 
' was undermining all obedience both to God and man. 
The majority of the people nowadays fancy that the 
law has been abrogated by faith. When they are told 

1 Erldutertes Preussen, ii. 69-71 ; Haiiknoch, pp. 353-354. 

2 Hase, pp. 209-210. 

3 Toeppen, Die Grilndung der Universitdt Konigsberg tend das Leben. 

des Sabinus, p. 217. 



that through, grace we can be justified, and saved by 
faith alone, without any works of ours, they will no 
longer listen to a word about any single law, or about 
good works, but they give themselves up to godless 
living, by which they dishonour God and His teaching.' 
' Our people,' he wrote from long experience, ' are 
strangers to all preaching on law and good works, and 
will not put up with it. In these miserable times 
nobody will hear a word about good works, let preachers 
define these as they will ; it is perfectly futile, for every- 
body makes use of the Gospel for carnal liberty and for 
covering their scandalous deeds. Most men have be- 
come shameless epicures ; they believe in no divine 
retribution, and laugh at all mention of a judgment to 
come and eternal punishment, and treat these things as 
fables.' 1 

Major's teaching threw both theologians and people 
into a frantic state of excitement. 

Although not one among the divines questioned the 
general increase of immorality complained of by Major, 
they nevertheless all of them repudiated with horror 
his ' ruinous heresy which threatened to bring back all 
the Popish atrocities.' The Mansfeld theologians de- 
clared ' Major's assertion that men were saved by faith, 
charity, and hope to be a veritable utterance of Anti- 
christ.' ^ Even the statement that ' good works, which 
the Holy Ghost Himself performs in believers, are neces- 
sary to the preservation of faith,' was denounced as 
erroneous doctrine by the strict Lutherans. John 
Wigand, one of the leading divines, said of it ' that it 
scame from the workshop of the Antichrist. There 

'^ DoUinger, Reformation, ii. 167-172 and iii. 493 f. 
^ Schliisselburg, Catal. hceret., vii. 36. 


•could be no more abominable sign of the Antichrist in 
a man than that he should believe and assert that good 
works were necessary to salvation, even if he only had 
in his mind the fulfilment of the Ten Commandments. 
This dogma was the terrible murder-cry of the Roman 
wolf.' ' The object of such teaching,' Joachim Morlin 
assured the people, ' was to drive the whole human race 
at one fell swoop into the jaws of the devil.' ^ Alexius 
Praetorius, superintendent in Meissen, tried to show that 
Major was ' a more cruel and terrible enemy of the 
Church than the Turks ; yea, that he came straight from 
the devil.' ^ Nicholas of Amsdorf, former Lutheran 
bishop of Naumburg, described Major's assertion as ' the 
first, the last, the most scandalous, and most mis- 
chievous heresy ever known on earth ; ' ^ he called Major 
' a seditious demon,' and in his ardour to strengthen 
his case against Majorism he went so far as to declare 
that the statement ' good works are harmful to salva- 
tion was a genuine Christian proposition preached by 
the saints, Paul and Luther.' Flacius lUvricus and 
John Wigand took this last assertion under their pro- 
tection. ' If,' wrote the latter, ' we say that good works 
are harmful, we raise the merits and obedience of Christ 
to a grandly exalted position ; but if we take up the 
opposite ground, we belittle the awfulness of sin and 
the solemnity of the divine judgment.' ^ 

Justus Menius, a disciple of Major's and superinten- 
dent at Gotha, was attacked with as much violence as his 
leader. Menius, so Amsdorf declared, ' was wholly pos- 
sessed by devils, and was more wicked and abominable 

^ Schliisselburg, Catal. hceret., vii. 68, 168. 

* Dollinger, Beformation, ii. 166. 

' In the preface of the Jena edition of Luther's Worlcs (1555), BL 4\ 

■* Dollinger, Beformation, iii. 810. 

c 2 


than any cut-tliroat rascal who had abandoned him- 
self wholly to Satan.' ^ He said openly — so Men ins 
writes in 1558 — that ' if he were reigning prince he would 
have Menius's head cut off.' - ' In the churches there 
was an infernal hubbub,' for Major and Menius paid 
back their revilers in the same coin. Menius warned all 
pious ' Christians ' against Flacius, who belonged to the 
category of ' unclean swine, hungering after filth ; ' he 
adjured them to supplicate God, that He would ' drive 
such filthy sows, which so scandalously defiled His 
sanctuary, out of His temple into a pigsty or a cloaca, 
which was their proper place.' ^ Major retaliated by 
calling Amsdorf, Flacius, and all their associates ' Mame- 
lukes, liars, murderers, and companions of the devil.' ^ 
When he heard that the theologians of Jena and Bruns- 

^ "Walch, Einleitung, v. 347. 

■^ Bericht der hitter7i Walirlieit (Wittenberg, 1558), 0'. 

' Schmidt, Justus Menius, ii. 259, note. The following whole passage 
from the Verantwortung Jiisti Mcuij, D-, will serve as an illustration of 
the polemics of the daj' : ' The calumniator Illyricus and all his crew fumble 
and grope up and down in this book, sniff about through all the articles, 
in the hopes of finding some stinking stuff which they can stir up with 
their disgusting pig snouts, so that the stench of it shall spread throiigh 
the whole world, and every one be obliged to stop up his nostrils. But 
whereas these unclean, filth-hunting swine can find nothing, they poke in 
and rub in their own dirt— that is to say, thej- have the impudence to 
deface and disfigure and interlard what is well and truly written with 
their venomous, perverse interpretations and calumnies, and to twist it 
all into a false and evil meaning ; but they cannot do it openly and with 
a good conscience, must rather have a care that they do not bring on 
themselves more dishonour than honour ; so they cackle and gloat 
together over their lies and calunmies, and one unclean sow fondly rubs 
the snout of another. In order, however, that their Cainish brotherly 
love should not be left to lie idle, they exercise it upon secret schemes of 
assassination, in the hopes (from which may the good Almighty God 
graciously hinder them) of living to see the death of the Lord Philip, 
when they will be able to go on all the more freely and gaily with their 
lying, slandering, and calumniating, yea, even to their hearts' content.' 

^ Walch, Einleitung, v, 347. 


wick had demanded a public condemnation of his doc- 
trine, he exclaimed from the pulpit at Wittenberg : ' I 
will go on anathematising them until they mend their 
ways. I will remain Magnus, Major, and Maximus 
against them all, even at the risk of forfeiting my 
life.' 1 

While the theologians, both in their writings and 
from the pulpit, were ' letting fly at each other in such 
a manner that there could be no other result than hatred, 
quarrelling, and wretchedness among the people,' ^ each 
laid on the other the blame of the general disturbed 
state of affairs. 

One of the leading assailants of Osianderites, 
Majorites, ' and all other devilish rabble that digressed 
from Luther's pure doctrine,' was Tilmann Hesshus of 
Wesel on the Lower Rhine. He belonged to the 
number of those militant theologians who in every word, 
thought, and action of Luther, their ' holy father,' 
recognised ' the all-illumining strength and majesty ' 
of God ; who claimed canonical authority for Luther's 
writings, and who were cheered and encouraged by the 
hope that ' after a well-fought fight they would see 
Dr. Martin up in heaven, seated among the Apostles, 
judging the twelve tribes of Israel and the impious 
Papacy with all its rabble.' According to Hesshus, 
whatever deviated from Luther's doctrine was at vari- 
ance with the teaching of the Holy Ghost. On his 
promotion to the rank of Doctor at Wittenberg, in the 
year 1555, he entered a vehement protest against the 
devil and all the devil's officials — heretics. Papists, 

1 Salig, iii. 324. 

2 Christliche Klage cles einfeltigen Volhes (1559), CK 


pagans, and Mohammedans ; and later on he confessed 
openly that he had sinned grievously in receiving his 
doctor's title from ' that plague spot among theo- 
logians,' George Major. 

As superintendent at Goslar, Hesshus came into 
violent collision with the town council for having, with- 
out the consent of that body, formulated a new code of 
Church regulations. The conditions of the town as re- 
gards religion, morality, and government were deplo- 
rable. Crime went altogether unpunished. The son of 
the chief burgomaster had deserted his wife. His father 
had not inflicted any penalty on him, and his uncle, for 
daring to reproach him, was stabbed by the offender at 
a supper party. The second burgomaster was in the 
habit of retaining Church revenues. Hesshus spoke 
from the pulpit in condemnation of this dishonest con- 
duct, and was consequently banished from the town in 
the year 1556.^ He went to Rostock, where he was 
appointed professor of theology and preacher at the 
church of St. James. 

At Rostock also dissensions promptly began, and 
' for many years to come the Christian life of the com- 
munity was in a state of complete upset.' The history 
of these religious disturbances is of wide significance as 
exemplifying the manner in which the struggles for ' true 
doctrine and Church government ' were frequently 
carried on in Protestant towns. 

Some years before, the town council of Rostock, on 
the plea of ' not being able to cope with the populace in 
the matter of religion,' had brought about a forcible dis- 
ruption of the local church, and taken possession of the 

1 Wilkens, pp. 6 fi'. 25-28 ; Helmolt, pp. 16-25. 



ecclesiastical property.^ The council wanted to be inde- 
pendent of all clerical influence. Hesshus, on the other 
hand, and his colleague at St. James's, Peter Eggerdes, 
claimed ' the full power of the keys ' with regard to 
exclusion from the Eucharist, from sponsorship, and 
from Christian burial. They opposed the celebration of 
marriages on Sunday, saying that weddings were a 
desecration of the holy day. When Peter Briimmer, 
one of the burgomasters, gave it as his opinion that 
' these same preachers wanted to start a new Pharisaical 
sect,' Hesshus, according to his own narrative, thundered 
out from the pulpit, before all the congregation, that the 
burgomaster was ' a lying, disreputable, blasphemous 
man, a child of the devil, and an enemy of the Holy 
Ghost, and that if he did not repent of his blasphemy 
he would have to suffer the torments of everlasting hell- 
fire.' ' In like manner,' so the narrative goes on, ' did 
my colleague, Peter Eggerdes, denounce the blasphemer 
in the parish, using almost the identical words, but 
adding further that Peter Briimmer was not only a 
godless liar but also a perjured violator of oaths, for by 
his blasphemy he had broken the oath which he had 
made to Almighty God at his baptism.' 

In consequence of these diatribes the town council 
deposed the preachers and ordered them to leave the 
town, and on their refusing to do so and appealing to 
Duke Ulrich of Mecklenburg, he caused them to be ex- 
pelled by force. ' On Sunday, October 9, 1557,' writes 
Hesshus, 'the council despatched a band of thirty men, 
servants and burghers, armed with muskets, poles, and 

1 Fuller details in Lisch, Jahrbiicher, xvi. 10 ff., concerning the dis- 
sension among the preachers which arose immediately on the introduction 
of the new doctrine in 1531 ; cf. Jahrbiicher, xxiv. 140-155. 


spears, like the Jews who fell upon the Lord Christ in 
the garden ; and they came in the dead of the night and 
attacked my friend and his fellow-helper, Herr Peter, in 
his house with great tumult and bellowing, and broke 
the door open with poles ; and when the honourable and 
virtuous lady, the wife of the preacher, who through 
God's blessing was pregnant, became greatly terrified 
and screamed piteously, the ruffianly scoundrels, taking 
no heed of her condition, threatened her with hard 
words ; and one of them held his spear at her breast 
and also dragged the man out of the house, and led him 
three miles away from the town. Then, because I saw 
that they were quite mad and beside themselves, and 
possessed by the devil that ruled the council, I took 
away my wife and my little child, and also Mein Herr 
Peter's wife. This is how they behaved at Rostock, and 
the like has not been heard of in the towns where the 
Gospel is proclaimed since the time when Luther began 
to preach.' 

On October 17, 1557, the members of the council 
issued an edict in which they endeavoured to justify 
the expulsion of the two preachers, charged these men, 
as well as the collective body of town preachers, with 
spreading false doctrine and fomenting riots, and at the 
same time commanded all the citizens to avoid their 
company and their sermons. The preachers themselves 
were enjoined to read this document from their pulpits. 
Among other things it stated that ' some of the 
preachers presume to speak from the pulpit as if the 
town council had acted unjustly, and they have the- 
insolence to wish that the town may be blasted by hell- 
fire, thunder, and lightning ; they anathematise and 
curse, jump and bang about in the pulpit like madmen ; 


they torture and strangle consciences, condemn men's 
bodies to the gallows and their souls to the devil.' 

In answer to these accusations Hesshus published a 
pamphlet, in his own and Eggerdes' name, in which he 
reproached the council with all manner of shameful 
deeds, and accused it of allowing itself the liberty ' of 
shameless lying and cursing, of murder and profligacy, 
and all the other works of the devil.' Joachim Schliiter, 
he said, who was the first preacher of the ' Gospel ' at 
Rostock, had been poisoned by the council. The 
preacher Henry Schmedenstedt had been betrayed and 
sold by ' the accursed, bloodthirsty burgomasters.' 
' You were rather milder that time than Annas and 
Caiaphas ; for I have been informed that the blood of 
this righteous man brought you in five hundred florins. 
It is verily a shame that the servant should have been 
valued more highly than his Lord and God.' The 
preacher Adeler also had suffered daily ' torture and 
martyrdom at their hands.' In short, they had per- 
sistently shown themselves ' murderous, bloodthirsty 
hounds, and enemies of God.' Finally, Doctor Johannes 
Draconites, the present superintendent appointed by 
the town council, was ' a jackass and an unmannerly 
blockhead, a desperate and damnable preacher of lies.' 

Draconites, immediately on assuming office, had got 
into hot water with several preachers, and the quarrel 
had waxed fiercer year by year. He had preached in 
favour of Sunday weddings, and had declared that 
Christians must never have the law held over their 
heads. ' Whoever preaches the law to Christians,' he 
had said, ' commits an offence against God in heaven. 
Away with you, Moses ; away with you ! Whosoever 
calls others sinners according to the law, himself sins 


doubly.' ' Off to the devil with the Sabbatarians,' he 
exclaimed against the other town preachers, ' who teach 
that we need only to be pious on Sunday and that we 
may live like beasts all the rest of the week ! ' For all 
these offences they called the superintendent a wicked 
hypocrite, a hellish dragon, a shameless scandalmonger. 
They fell foul of him also on account of another dogma 
which he had taken up from the Hamburg superinten- 
dent, John iEpinus — namely, that ' the soul of Christ, 
after His death, had suffered pain and martyrdom in 
hell, and that every Christian was bound to believe this 
at the risk of losing his salvation.' The town and the 
university split up into two hostile parties, and on one 
occasion matters came almost to a hand-to-hand fight in 
the church. Peace was not restored even when Draco- 
nites was deposed from his office and left the town. 

The burgomaster Briimmer had already been re- 
moved from the council in 1558, and no preacher would 
administer the Sacrament to him ; for he was ' an im- 
penitent blasphemer ' because he had asserted that 
Eggerdes and Hesshus had wanted to establish a new 
Pharisaic sect, and had further been the chief insti- 
gators of the banishment of these two witnesses of God 
and of the mandate issued by the council. There was 
moreover another way in which Briimmer had been 
guilty of blasphemy. In spite of the injunction of the 
preachers that the Catholics remaining in Rostock were 
to be treated as ' blasphemous Papists,' and as such 
excluded from the privileges of sponsorship and Chris- 
tian burial, Briimmer had once ' strictly charged the 
schoolmasters and clerks ' at the funeral of a Catholic 
canon to ' observe all the usual ceremonies with which 
it was customary to honour pious Christians.' He had 


even himself ' taken the lead in following the coffin of 
this godless blasphemer.' Hesshus considered that the 
burgomaster deserved stoning for this proceeding. ' If 
thieves and murderers,' he said in a pamphlet against 
the edict of the town council, ' are considered infamous 
because they are destitute of righteousness, how much 
more should a blasphemer of God be reckoned an 
infamous scoundrel, for he is not only without righteous- 
ness himself, but is the declared enemy of the fountain 
of all righteousness. For is any act of theft, murder, or 
incest so monstrous and abominable, even were it the 
strangling of a father by a son, as is blasphemy ? How,, 
then, is it possible that such a one as Briimmer should 
any longer command our respect ? Remember what 
sort of sentence Moses pronounces on blasphemers of 
this sort. He not only declares them to be rogues, but 
also condemns them to death and to the flaying-place, 
and says that God had commanded them to be stoned ; 
and in fulfilment of this sentence an Egyptian who had 
blasphemed the name of God in the same way that 
Briimmer has done, was led outside the camp and 
stoned by the children of Israel.^ 

Contests of the same violent description as at Ros- 
tock went on in nearly all the Protestant towns, and 
everywhere the populace was stirred up to hatred, for 
the pulpit was used by each preacher in turn to push 
forward his own particular doctrines (with imprecations- 
on his opponents) as the only one that could lead to 
salvation. The town of Stargard, for instance, after the 
year 1556, was ' in a constant state of anarchy owing to 

1 See this and other more detailed accounts of the Eostock Church 
quarrels in the treatise of J. Wiggers entitled ' Tilmann Heshusius und 
Johann Draconites,' in Lisch, Jahrbiiclier, xix. 65-137. 


the dissensions among its preachers, the disorder of its 
schools, and the insubordination of the people ; ' ' so 
miserable a state of anarchy that it could not be suffi- 
ciently deplored, nor is it possible to describe it.' ^ At a 
provincial diet at Stettin it was brought to the notice 
of the members that ' by all sorts of deeds of violence 
and unbecoming procedure the pastors were insulted in 
church and even in the pulpit, and that this was done 
everywhere with impunity.' " At Hildesheim, in the 
year 1557, the preachers quarrelled with their super- 
intendent, Tilmann Cragius, over the doctrines of justifi- 
cation and of the Eucharist. Cragius opposed as an 
undoubted superstition the regulation of the preachers 
that ' if, when a man was receiving the Sacrament, any 
of the wine remained clinging to his beard, he ought to 
tear out his beard.' The preachers further complained 
that, ' because they had treated the bread in the Holy 
Sacrament with especial reverence,' the superintendent 
had publicly insulted them and called them opprobrious 
names, ending with the blasphemous remark : ' Go to, 
then ; devour it, lick it, munch it, and worship it.' 
Cragius was hunted out of the town, and he vented his 
feelings in a pamphlet in which he denounced the whole 
body of preachers as ' scoundrels and blasphemers, 
scandalmongers, mad dogs, and brutish Cainites.' ^ 

It was at the religious conference of Worms, and in 
the presence of the supreme imperial authority, that 
the division in the Protestant camp first came under 
the cognisance of the Empire at large. 

1 Cramer, iii, 135-136. - Ibid. iii. 145. 

^ Salig, iii. 411-413. For the quarrels of preachers in Schweinfurt, 
see Sixt, Schweinfurt, pp. 182-183. 




At the time of the conclusion of the Religious Peace it 
had been agreed that ways and means of settling the 
religious disputes should be discussed at another imperial 
assembly. King Ferdinand had summoned a Diet at 
Ratisbon for this purpose, and also with a view to 
obtaining a Turkish subsidy. It had been opened on 
July 13, 1556, and had proved ' just as discordant as all 
former ones.' The ecclesiastical Estates had declared 
emphatically that the existing schism could only be 
healed by means of a general council. But the Pro- 
testants, although pre-determined not to make ' the 
slightest concession to the Papacy, which was cursed in 
the Word of God,' were in favour of holding another 
religious conference, in the hopes that thereby ' some 
injury might accrue to the Antichrist.' ' Former con- 
ferences,' insisted the Palatine Elector, ' have not been 
without fruit ; for through them the knowledge of the 
Word of God has been extended.' ^ Melanchthon, too, 
hoped, by means of a conference, that ' some of the 
princes and bishops might be brought round to the true 
doctrine.' One point, however, must, it was said, be 
settled beforehand among the Protestants. ' The Em- 
peror, the King, and many others,' he wrote, ' feel very 

^ BucJwltz, vii. 361. 


strongly about the article concerning the ordination of 
priests ; for they stick to the opinion that our priests 
who are not ordained by bishops have no power to con- 
secrate. Now this motive brings much error in its train, 
and, therefore, if this conference is to take place, we 
must first of all discuss among ourselves the questions 
of ordination and episcopal jurisdiction.' ^ 

Each of the former religious conferences had only 
served to increase general bewilderment and dissension. 

' The experience of centuries,' urged the Jesuit 
Father Peter Canisius, who had accompanied the Car- 
dinal-bishop Otto von Augsburg to the Diet, ' gives 
ample proof that at such meetings time is only frittered 
away with profitless talk. At the end, neither party 
will ever allow itself to have been beaten ; each side 
claims the victory ; contradictory reports of the trans- 
actions are spread about, and the result is not tran- 
quillisation of minds and temper, but only worse divi- 
sion and embitterment.' - Ferdinand was nevertheless 
of opinion that, for the present, a colloquy would be 
the most efficient means, and on pressure from him the 
ecclesiastical Estates withdrew their opposition. They 
agreed that the conclusions of the conference should be 
unprejudiced, ' the debates conducted with meekness, 
mutual confidence, and earnest zeal, and that their re- 
ports should be brought before the next imperial as- 
sembly for further consideration.' It was insisted on 
as imperative that the Protestant theologians ' should 
renounce the errors and digressions which had crept into 
their teaching, and should become reconciled with each 

^ Corx). Reform, ix. 6, 7. Wolf, Zur Geschichte der deutschen Pro- 
testanten, p. 21 f. 
- Eiess, p. 195. 


other in a Christian manner.' ' The conference was to 
begin at Worms on August 24, 1557. 

At the suggestion of the Palatine Elector and the 
Duke of Wiirtemberg, several of the Protestant princes 
assembled at Frankfort-on-the-Main, in June 1557, in 
order to make the necessary preliminary arrangements, 
and to smooth down existing differences as much as 
possible. At this gathering the Landgrave Philip of 
Hesse moved a resolution for reform of the Augsburg 
Confession, saying that there was no obligation to con- 
form unconditionally to this creed, for ' it had not been 
accepted as absolutely certain, but only proposed for 
the better instruction of the confessionists.' - This pro- 
posal met with no approval ; neither did another resolu- 
tion brought forward by the Ratisbon divine, Nicholas 
Gallus, who moved that a superintendent-general should 
be set over all the Lutheran churches of Germany, with 
plenary power to guard the interests of orthodoxy and 
religious unity, to rebuke and prevent digressions from 
the faith, to institute legal examination in cases of dis- 
sension, and to make the necessary arrangements for 
securing final decisions. Gallus himself had not been 
very keen about placing a ' Pope ' over the collective 
bodv of Lutheran churches, and he therefore made no 
objection to an amendment on his resolution to the 
effect that the general superintendence should be divided 
between two plenipotentiaries, one of whom should have 
charge of the South German and the other of the Saxon 

1 Letter of Duke John Frederic of Saxony, in the Corp. Reform, ix. 
230. See Kutzler, ii. 55. Manche, one of the Protestant members, 
believed that Ferdinand had only consented to the conference 'ut vectigal 
hoc prsetextu ex Germania maximum colligeret.' Bullinger to Calvin, 
August 20, 1557. Calvini Ojjp. xvi. 572. 

Heppe, GescJiichte des deutschen Protestantismus, i. 151. 


churches.^ The amended resolution, however, was also 
rejected. The result of the conference was to bind the 
preachers afresh to the Augsburg Confession and the 
apology. If the adversaries, it was decreed, should 
reproach the Evangelicals at Worms with being divided 
among themselves, they were to answer that in the main 
and on the leading points of doctrine they were agreed. 
All outstanding differences were to be settled at a 
later synod, and meanwhile the theologians who were 
at strife together were not to publish any writings in- 
dependently of the censorship of the Estates or their 
delegates. - 

This Frankfort Recess gave rise to a new con- 

Gallus declared that ' the Estates would be the 
laughing-stock of the whole world, if they attempted to 
persuade people that nothing had been taught or done 
in contradiction to the Augsburg Confession in any of 
the churches or schools in their country since the year 
1530.' Flacius Illyricus called the Frankfort Recess ' a 
betrayal of the Church.' ^ There was no judgment re- 
corded in it against the Sacramentarians, whom Luther 
and all pious teachers had persistently condemned, 
neither had it bound the theologians over to the Smal- 
cald articles, which omission was a cruel wound inflicted 
on the Church. The vaunted unity of doctrine did cer- 
tainly not exist in reality. Senseless Sacramentarians 
and other sectarians, it was said, must have been the 
spokesmen at Frankfort, for they were now trying to 

1 Salig, iii. 266, 267. See Menzel, ii. 314, 315. 

- Salig, iii. 271-273. Preger, ii. 68, 64. For an account of the 
Assembly of Princes at Frankfort, see Wolf, Zur Geschichte der deutschen 
Protestanten, p. 68 ff. 

3 Cori). Beform. ix. 213-215. 


stop the mouths of the honest and zealous men who so 
far had opposed the inroad of the wolves. 

Flacius and the whole party of strict Lutherans 
found a staunch supporter in Duke John Frederic II. 
of Saxe- Weimar, who declared that he would ' live and 
die for the maintenance and propagation of the pure 
evangel revealed by God to the dear Father Luther.* 
For this object he had founded a university at Jena, 
which had become a stronghold ' of genuine Lutheran- 
ism,' and which combated with holy zeal ' that base 
apostate from the true faith, the heretical and anti- 
christian Melanchthon, together with the whole pesti- 
lential crew of the Wittenberg University.' On the 
basis of a memorandum presented him by Flacius, John 
Frederic instructed his divines and delegates at the 
Worms conference to have no intercourse with the 
divines and delegates of the other Protestant Estates, so 
long as these refused to denounce emphatically all the 
various sects and gangs of Anabaptists, Sacramentarians, 
Zwinglians, Osianderites, Majorites, and others. How 
would it be possible, wrote the Duke to the Count Pala- 
tine Wolfgang of Zweibriicken, for the theologians to 
oppose a united front to the Papists, and to speak 
against them with one voice, unless they became recon- 
ciled to each other, and renounced their respective 
errors ? The Papists would otherwise be easily in a posi- 
tion to slay them with their own weapons.^ The Duke 
informed the Palatine Elector, Otto Heinrich, that he 
would help to destroy all erroneous doctrines at Worms.- 
Flacius told Erhard Schnepp and Joachim Morlin, dele- 
gates to the conference, that no more Judas kisses must 
be tolerated at Worms ; that the doctrine, taught in 

^ Corj). Beform. ix. 230-232. - Kugler, ii. 56. 



some writings, of renewal and vivification through the 
Holy Ghost was nothing less than a pillar of Majorism. 
Melanchthon must be closely pressed ; he was delaying 
to recant his errors because he feared public shame 
and the displeasure of courts, and moreover was con- 
strained to obey his tutor. ^ By his tutor Flacius meant 
the devil. 

Melanchthon, on his part, wrote to Prince Joachim 
of Anhalt : ' The venomous teaching and the hypocrisy 
of Flacius become daily better known, and if the con- 
ference at Worms really takes place there will be some 
talk on this subject among all the electors, princes, and 
town delegates who will then be gathered together. He 
has not explained a single tenet of his faith ; he is only 
on the look-out for calumny and slander, and he helps 
to strengthen hypocrisy and error.' - 

With all these conflicting opinions it was hard work 
even to get the conference started by September 11. 

In the opening session Melanchthon opposed the 
Catholics in impassioned language. ' From the Confes- 
sion of Faith drawn up at Augsburg in the year 1530,' 
he said, ' we never have deviated, and we never shall 
deviate ; we repudiate all opinions and sects which are 
at variance with this creed, above all the godless deci- 
sions of the so-called synod of Trent ; we believe that 
the true Church is not made up of persons who wilfully 
resist the truth, but that it is found in the assembly of 
those who proclaim the unadulterated, unfalsified word 
of the Gospel, and who do not wittingly defend idolatry.'^ 
In a letter to the Margrave Hans von Ciistrin the year 
before, he had already declared that ' for the great 

1 Corp. Be form. ix. 232-234. * Ihid. ix. 116. 

•"^ Ihid. ix. 265-268. Buclioltz, vii. 871, 372. Reiss, p. 213. 


kings of the earth, according to the fashion nowadays, 
to dignify with the name of " Council " the Pope and 
his bishops, priests, and monks, who are public enemies 
of Christ and the Gospel, and to have full power to make 
new articles of faith and new gods, is downright blas- 
phemy such as Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus were 
guilty of. " The Popish blasphemy " could easily be 
appreciated by every intelligent person.' The Jesuit 
Peter Canisius, one of the Catholic collocutors at Worms, 
he called a cynic, and he classed him among his ' learned 
persecutors who against their own consciences pur- 
sued recognised truth with malicious sophistry, and 
strengthened the cause of error and idolatry,' and 
* for this behaviour* of theirs would receive the reward 
of Judas.' ^ 

While it was thus settled in advance that the 
Catholics, in defending the Catholic cause, were inten- 
tional persecutors of recognised truth, that the Catholic 
dogmas established at the Council of Trent were impious 
and blasphemous, and that at no price whatever would 
the Protestants budge a hair's breadth from the Augs- 
burg Confession, there could be no question of reconcilia- 
tion of any sort with the Catholics, even had Melan- 
chthon not gone to the length of his' flagrantly false 
assertion that there had never been any digression from 
this creed — an assertion once flatly contradicted by the 
pronouncement of thirty-four Lutheran divines, who all 
declared that this Confession had undergone so many 
changes since 1530 that the various editions were as 
different from each other as were a cothurnus (a laced 
peasant's boot), Bundschuh (a slipper), and a Polish 
boot ; indeed, the creed might now be compared to a 

1 CorjJ. Reform, viii. G88-689. 

D 2 


large and roomy cloak under whose ample folds the 
Sacramentarians and all the other sects might hide, 
dissemble, defend, and justify their errors and false- 

Melanchthon had regarded this Confession, which he 
had drawn up himself, as his own property, and, when- 
ever it had passed through a new edition, had altered it 
in accordance with the changes in his own opinions. 
Even the earliest editions differed from each other in 
one essential point,^ and the difference between these 
and the later ones was incomparably greater. 

The Protestant princes themselves were by no means 
ignorant of this. ' From the year 1531 to 1540,' we 
read in a letter to Duke Julius of Brunswick, ' the 
copies can be proved to have been altered nearly every 
year, and in the edition of 1540 some points have been 
changed and twisted in an almost dangerous manner.' 
This was especially the case, the letter goes on to say, 
in the tenth article on the Eucharist ; in the article con- 
cerning the office of preacher also ; and in the different 
editions of the apology alterations had been made, and 
in the article on ' the authority of the Church ' whole 
pages had been inserted. ' These facts, alas, are only 
too well known to the Papists, and both they and the 
Emperor have brought them reproachfully to the notice 
of the Protestants, and they cannot be denied by us.' ^ 

Owing to the alteration alluded to in the doctrine of 
the Eucharist, even the avowed or secret adherents of 
Calvinism could subscribe to the Confession ; they could 

' Hntter, p. 94^ 

2 Of this more later on in the section entitled ' The Diet of Princes at 
Naumburji;, 1561.' 

3 In Hutter, p. 162. 


appeal to it with clear consciences ; it presented no 
stumbling-blocks to them/ 

Already at the Augsburg Diet of 1555, when the 
transactions relating to peace between the Catholics and 
the Augsburg confessionists had first begun, the Elector 
of Treves had asked which version of the creed was 
meant— that of 1530 or that of 1540 ? The Branden- 
burg delegate had then answered unhesitatingly that 
' his Elector recognised only the Confession of 1530.' 
The delegate of the Elector Palatine had said that the 
peace in question related to the adherents of the Con- 
fession ' as it stood in 1530 with any later additions that 
harmonised with its general drift.' The delegate of the 
Elector of Saxony said ' his Elector also recognised no 
other edition than of 1530.' At the same time, how- 
ever, he tried to make it seem ' as if the later editions 
coincided with this one.' - And yet, no later than 1541, 
the Elector John Frederic, through his chancellor, 
Briick, had had occasion to reproach Melanchthon for 
having presumed, without the knowledge and consent 
of the Elector and the other Protestant Estates, to alter 

' This alteration was a very important one, for not only were the 
words ' at improbant secus docentes ' omitted, but also the sentence 
' De coena Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis vere adsint et dis- 
tribuantur vescentibus ' was changed into ' quod cum pane et vino vere 
exhibeantur corpus et sanguis Christi vescentibus.' See Kiesling, p. 15 ff. 
' The change in the phrase adsint et distribicantttr into exhibeantur is 
evidently intended,' said Sudhoff (p. 68), ' to make the participation in the 
body of Christ independent of the elements of bread and wine, and to 
weaken down the actual partaking of all present at the altar into a mere 
presentation to all. The addition cum pane forms also an important 
digression from the original wording. For, because the unaltered Con- 
fession represents the body and blood as present under- bread and luine, 
and therefore present in the bread, Melanchthon, now plainly inclining to 
the reformed views and aiming at reunion, added the correction cum 
pane, with the bread.' 

- Ritter, Augsburg, Religions friede, pp, 22G, 227. 


the Confession in many points, and have it printed in its 
altered form/ 

At the Worms conference Canisius, in his capacity of 
CathoHc collocutor, pointed out ' that the " Augustana " 
varied in many respects, and that very material altera- 
tions had been made in the most important of the 
articles,' - and this led the rest of the Catholic collo- 
cutors to require of the Protestants that, since they 
were perpetually appealing to the Augsburg Confession, 
they would state more particularly which of the sects 
they did not recognise and considered excluded from 
their community by the articles of the Confession. All 
the different sects, said the Catholic collocutors, the 
Bohemian Brothers, the Osianderites, the Majorites, and 
so forth, reckon themselves among the Augsburg con- 
fessionists. But if they all really profess the same 
creed, why do they write so bitterly against each other ? 
and why should not we, on the strength of the Ratisbon 
Recess, demand of the Protestants that they should 
first settle among themselves which of their number 
have remained true to the Augsburg Confession ? ^ 

The Saxon and Brunswick divines pronounced this 
demand of the Catholics just and reasonable, and they 
handed in to the president of the conference, Julius 
Pflug, Bishop of Naumburg, a written statement to the 
effect that the Wiirtemberg theologian, Brenz, was re- 
fusing to condemn the Sacramentarians in order to 

^ Loscher, ii. 46. 

'^ Salig, iii. 308 ; Heppe, Gescli. des deutscJien Profestantismus, 
i. 187. 

■^ ' Declaratio uberior super protestatione partis Catholicie,' in Salig, 
iii. 327. For the religious conference of Worms, see now "Wolf, Zur 
GeschicMe der deutscJien Proteskinten, 81 f., 90 f., 101 f., 106 f. For 
an account of Helding's exliaiistive labours at this conference, see Paulus 
in the Katliolik, 1894, ii. 490 f. 


please Melanchthon, and that Melanchthon in return 
had spared Osiander. ' Thus our two leaders,' they 
said, ' are playing into each other's hands, and truth 
and the Church are going to the ground. God have 
pity on us ! ' ^ 

The mutual hatred and bitterness of the Protestant 
theologians increased from day to day. ' Whichever 
way we turn,' wrote the Saxon delegates to John 
Frederic, ' we find love and charity extinguished, and 
we meet with nothing but sneering faces and talk, divi- 
sion, and hypocrisy.' '-^ Erasmus Sarcerius declared that 
it was a well-known fact that ' Brenz and others had 
received bribes and presents to encourage and defend 
Osianderism.' ^ Brenz, on the other hand, complained 
bitterly of the discord introduced by the Saxon theolo- 
gians, and of what he called ' the paroxysm of anathe- 
matising.' ^ Melanchthon wrote to John Frederic on 
October 1 : ' Your princely Grace's delegate. Dr. Basi- 
lius, put lying papers into the hands of the Palatine and 
Wittenberg delegates before my arrival.' '"' 

' If you want to be convinced,' wrote Flacius to the 
King of Denmark, ' of the utter state of confusion to 
which religious doctrine has come, you have only to 

' Saxonicorum Bacalium Ejjist. ad prcBsidem, of October 1, 1557, in 
Salig, iii. 314, note. 

- Planck, vi. 134, note ; Heppe, i. 162, note. See the letter of 
Erhard Schnepf in the Corp. Beforrn. ix. 255. 

3 Planck, vi. 141. 

* See the letters of Brenz to the Dukes Albert of Prussia and Chris- 
topher of Wlirtemberg, in Pressel, Anecdota, pp. 440-443. The Margrave 
George Frederic of Anspach propounded to the theologians the question 
whether (as the Anspach Superintendent George Karge asserted) the 
body of Christ in the Holy Eucharist passed into the stomach, was 
digested like other food, and also thrown off in the course of nature. 
Salig, iii. 303 ; Coi^j. Beforrn. ix. 275-278 ; Monckeberg, p. 107. 

■' Schumacher, iii. 393. 


glance at the Worms conference. There you will find 
almost as many different opinions as there are Protes- 
tants gathered together.' ^ James Andrea, of Tiibingen, 
relates of the conference at Worms : ' At an assembly of 
Protestant theologians Brenz had reminded the meeting 
of the Wittenberg Concord transactions of the year 
1536, saying " it was Melanchthon himself who had 
drawn up the formula of Concord." On Melanchthon' s 
replying that he had only written down the opinions of 
others, Matthaus Alber interposed : " Mr. Preceptor, you 
nevertheless signed it yourself." Whereupon Melan- 
chthon retorted : " Dear Matthaus, I have written a 
great deal that I no longer agree to. Do you suppose I 
have not advanced at all in thirty years ? " ' 2 

Canisius wrote to Lainez, vicar-general of the order 
of Jesuits, in September 1557 : ' The Protestants are all 
at sixes and sevens ; Melanchthon complains in despair : 
" All of you are setting upon me alone." He has more 
injustice and contradiction to put up with from his own 
party, from those who have hitherto been his disciples, 
than from our side. " All eyes in Germany are turned 
to the conference with the utmost expectation." ' ^ 

Melanchthon could give satisfaction to no one. 
While the Lutheran divines accused him of Calvinistic 
tendencies, Calvin complained of his ' detestable and 

^ ' Ibi quot ferme colloquutores Augustanae Confessionis sunt, tot etiam 
diversse sententiae.' Schumacher, ii. 276 ; Corp. Beform. ix. 297 ; 
Pontoppidan, iii. 354. 

^ Hartmann, M. Alber, p. 165. 

^ From Worms, dated September 11 and 29, 1557. A great many 
unprinted letters and statements of Canisius and others addressed to 
Jesuits, and documents relating to the latter were placed at my disposal 
by the Jesuit Fathers at Exaeten in Holland, where they are bus}' with 
the publication of MSS. left by Canisius. Meanwhile P. Braunsberger 
has brought out the first volume of the EpistulcB Canisii in a most 
exemplary manner. This volume comes down to July 1556. 


dangerous pliability ' at Worms. ' He went even further 
than I suspected,' wrote Calvin.^ 

As if to make a diversion from their own dissensions 
and reciprocal acrimony, the Protestant theologians at 
Worms began preaching seditious sermons against the 
Catholics.^ They even attempted to raise tumultuous 
scenes in the churches during the performance of 
Catholic worship. Salig, in his history of the Augsburg 
Confession, gives the following narrative : ' After the 
Bavarian court preacher, John Gressenicus, had been 
discoursing on St. Andrew's day in the church of St. 
Andrew's, Dr. Marbach seized hold of him as he came 
from the pulpit, accused him of blaspheming God, and 
began disputing with him in church before all the con- 
gregation. But a stand was made by the people, and 
the evangelicals themselves showed disapproval of Mar- 
bach's behaviour. James Andrea treated John a Via, 
the cathedral preacher, in the same manner, and chal- 
lenged him, as he was leaving the pulpit, to make a 
public defence of his sermon. But the preacher answered 
that he would make his defence at home and not in the 
church.' ^ 

Among the Protestant collocutors ' the most terrible 
fighting and quarrelling, such as had never been heard 
of before, was kept up.' ^ 

On account of their dogged insistence on the ' con- 
demnation of the false sects ' the Saxon and the Bruns- 

^ Calvini 0pp. pp. 17, 61. 

- ' The justice of the complaints raised by the Catholics concerning 
the seditious sermons preached by evangelical theologians at Worms 
cannot by any means be called in question.' So writes Heppe in his 
Geschiclde des deutschen Protestantismus, i. 228, note. See Beil, p. 60. 

^ Salig, iii. 340. 

■* Report of the Court preacher Aurifaber in the Coi'p. Beform. 
ix. 307. 


wick divines were excluded from taking part in the pro- 
ceedings. Thus it became impossible to continue the 
conference, for the Catholics naturally asked to be in- 
formed which of the parties were really considered 
traitors of the Protestant cause, and with which of them 
they were to continue negotiations.^ ' After the last 
diet,' they said, ' they had been enjoined to confer only 
with the theologians who subscribed to the Augsburg 
Confession ; now, however, they could no longer tell 
who these were, as they one and all accused each other 
of apostasy from this creed.' 

The Saxon theologians took their departure, and the 
conference broke up. By speech and by pen the Pro- 
testants blamed the Catholics for the failure of the 
attempt at unification ; but the tone of their writings 
was in itself sufficient evidence against themselves.^' 

If the Protestants had hoped that this conference 
would serve to injure the Papacy, their expectation 
was disappointed. The Catholics at Worms had shown 
themselves firm and united, whereas it had become 
abundantly evident that the other side had no solid 
objective principle of doctrine, and also that the new 
symbol of the Augsburg Confession afforded them no 
centre of unity. At the Ratisbon Diet King Ferdinand 

^ Heppe, i. 198. 

^ 'We cannot help noticing the fact ' (says Planck, vi. 1G9, note 193), 
* that in the many controversial pamphlets issued by both parties after the 
conference, as to which bore the greater share of responsibility for its 
breaking up, the Catholics had a great advantage over the Protestants, 
and that they knew how to make the best of it. This appears most 
markedly in the writings published as earlj' as 1558 by John a Via, 
court preacher at Worms ; by Bartholomew Latimer, one of the Treves 
delegates at the conference ; and especially by the famous Frederic 
Staphylus, who also had played a leading part in the conference. The 
same fact, however, is sufficiently brought out by the quite unwarranted 
bitterness of the Protestant replies, even of Melanchthon's.' 


and the secular Catholic Estates had still differed in 
opinion from the spiritual Estates, and when it had 
come to the question of a council or a conference, in 
deference to the wishes of the Protestants, they had 
voted for the latter. Not till the conference was over 
did it become evident to them that no attempt at 
union would have any satisfactory results unless it 
was conducted in the regular ecclesiastical manner. 
The Catholics,' wrote Canisius to Lainez, ' have been 
strengthened in their faith ; vacillating souls are re- 
strained from apostasy, and erring ones are more easily 
recovered. The imperial Estates will see from the pro- 
ceedings of the conference that union with the Protes- 
tants is not to be achieved in this manner, and perhaps 
the princes will henceforth renounce all idea of religious 
discussions and agree to the only e£6.cient method — a 
general council.' ^ 

For the Protestants, whose want of unity had now 
come openly to light, the conference led to still greater 
mutual acrimony. Duke John Frederic of Saxony 
threw the blame of ' all the discord and tumult ' on the 
Wiirtemberg theologians, Brenz and Andrea, who had 
been determined not to let the Osianderites be sup- 
pressed.- The strict Lutherans were ready to wreak 
vengeance on the Melanchthonians as the cause of all 
their humiliating dismissal. ' Our party has been dis- 
comfited, disjointed, proscribed, and damned in the eyes 
of the saintly Pharisees,' wrote John Aurifaber, Court 
preacher at Weimar, ' but you will soon see, we shall 

^ From Worms, dated December 6, 1557. See above, p. 40, note 3. 
For an account of the Worms conference and its results, see Mauren- 
brecher, pp. 40-46 ; also Ritter, i. 136 f. 

^ Kugler, ii. 62. 


dare publish the dirty tales and proclaim our guilt 
openly before the world.' ^ 

Flacius lUyricus, at the beginning of the year 1558, 
appealed to Christian III. of Denmark to follow the 
example of Josias, and ' set to work in good earnest to 
do all in his power ' towards rooting out from God's 
Church the abominable and most mischievous errors of 
the Melanchthonians, the Osianderites, the Majorites, 
and other sects, which were leading innumerable souls 
straight to hell.' Their errors, he said, were monstrous 
whoredoms with the Babylonish Beast. All hands must 
join together ' to preserve the holy legacy of Christ, of 
Paul, and of Luther, the third Elias.' ' We have a 
solemn command,' said Flacius, ' to flee from idolatry- 
and false prophets. But how can we do this if we are 
not allowed to judge all teaching and all teachers ? ' " 

Luther had set more store by Flacius than by all 
other theologians. It was on him, he had said, that 
after his own death ' prostrate hope would lean.' ^ And 
now Flacius was being denounced at Wittenberg as ' the 
scum and filth of humanity.' 

' Go and tame the frenzy and raging of this fellow,' 
Bugenhagen once exclaimed from the pulpit, ' that he 
may cease his lying and blaspheming.' Diaconus Sturio 
also inveighed against Flacius in his sermons as a liar, 
a rogue, and a scoundrel.^ George Major said of him 
that he had formerly wheedled himself into Melan- 
chthon's good graces by all sorts of wiles and hypocrisy 
and Pharisaic humility, and then, with villainous per- 
fidy, he had treasured up every syllable, speech, and 
letter, every mere dream even of his patron, in order 

^ Salig, iii. 339. - A2)ology, preface and leaf D-. ^ Preger, i. 35. 
^ Heppe, Gescli. des deutschen Protestantismus, i. 129, note 1. 


by their means to bring general odium on their author 
and all his friends, so that, having accomplished Melan- 
chthon's downfall, he himself might be honoured 
and worshipped throughout Germany as the Pope of 
the Protestant Church. Flacius was even accused of 
having broken open Melanchthon's coffers and stolen his 
letters, and also of having attempted his life and those 
of others. The ' Letters of Wittenberg Students,' which 
appeared in 1558, represented Flacius as the quint- 
essence of ignorance and rascality. ' What, after all, 
does it lead to,' asks Flacius, ' when one theologian 
thus shamelessly and falsely blackens and defames 
another by the narration of his private history ? ' The 
Church of God, he said, was not greatly concerned to 
know if he really was the wicked scoundrel they made 
him out. What she chiefly set store by was whether 
or no he taught true and sound doctrine.^ ' It is an 
undoubted fact,' wrote Justus Jonas the younger, pro- 
fessor of jurisprudence at Wittenberg, to Duke Albert 
of Prussia, in 1558, ' that Amsdorf and Illyricus have 
but one aim and object in all their writings — viz. to 
keep on their side the common people and the poor 
ignorant laity, who form the great bulk of the nation, 
and to whose ranks also belongs a large number of 
preachers and others who are only learned in their 
own estimation.' ' I know that among thousands of 
preachers, in Saxony especially, not one really under- 
stands the doctrine of the Sacrament.' - 

1 Preger, i. 421-434. 

- Voigt, Correspondence tvith Albert of Prussia, pp. 355-356, 364. 





After the unfortunate issue of the Worms conference, 
the Protestant princes determined, as supreme heads of 
their own churches, to try to do by themselves what 
they had not been able to accomplish with the help of 
the theologians ; and as soon as they had restored unity 
to their disjointed ecclesiastical organisation they in- 
tended bringing the theologians to order by forcible 

Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg, the son of Duke 
Ulrich, who had died on November 6, 1550, took up 
most zealously the idea of a convention of princes which, 
' by divine aid, was to re-establish Christian concord.' 
In the prosecution of his scheme he met with encourage- 
ment from most of the princes, and also from the Elector. 
Augustus of Saxony, who for some years past had always 
objected to such an assembly being held. A further 
proposal of the Duke's to summon a general Protestant 
synod was, however, rejected. Melanchthon, whom 
Christopher had consulted on the subject, was decidedly 
opposed to such a synod, for he said it would only give 
rise to fresh disaster and fresh acrimony among the 
different parties at strife with one another.' In a letter 

' Kngler, ii. 71-77. 


to King Christian III. of Denmark, dated January 26, 
1558, Melanchthon had advised that ' the sovereign ' 
Tulers should convene together a body of learned and 
God-fearing men who, in the presence of a certain number 
of Christian princes, should deliberate in proper form on 
certain important points. ' And,' he added, ' there are 
some princes in Germany who are very anxious for such 
a conference. But it is essential that they should not 
go too much into detail, and that there should first of 
all be a consultation among the princes not only as to 
the subject-matter to be discussed, but also as to the 
resolutions to be passed,' lest the princes quit the con- 
vention in disunion.^ 

The gathering of the princes was to be coincident 
with the diet at Frankfort, at which the imperial power 
was to be made over to King Ferdinand. 

On March 18, 1558, the Electors of Saxony, Branden- 
burg, and the Palatinate, the Counts Palatine Frederic 
and Wolfgang of Zweibriicken, Duke Christopher of 
Wiirtemberg, the Landgrave Philip of Hesse, and the 
Margrave Charles of Baden all came to agreement re- 
specting the so-called Frankfort Eecess, which was 
drawn up on the basis of a memorandum sent in by 
Melanchthon.^ ' The Protestants,' so ran the docu- 
ment, ' have been falsely charged with being divided in 
regard to their true creed, through which alone salva- 
tion was assured.' They all acknowledged the Confes- 
sion of 1530, and the apology for the same. Since, how- 
ever, certain controversial speeches and pamphlets had 
proceeded from the evangelicals, it was advisable that 
there should be an explanation on the matter. This 
proposed explanation related to the doctrines of justifi- 

1 Corp. Reform, ix. 432-433. - Ibid. ix. 489-507. 


cation, of good works, of the Eucharist, and of the 
Adiaphora or ' middle things,' concerning which, since 
the date of the Leipzig interim of 1548, a violent dispute 
had sprung up between the strict Lutherans on the one 
hand, with Flacius at their head, and Melanchthon and 
his disciples on the other. 

Among the number of these ' middle things ' which, 
because they were quite unimportant, had been allowed 
to be retained when most of the Catholic usages were 
abolished, those who defended them counted especially 
the use of consecrated vessels and choir vestments, 
candles on the altars, and images of saints. Flacius, 
however, and all his associates considered all this as 
' whoredom with the Antichrist,' and insisted that the 
use of choir vestments and lights was a sin against the 
Holy Ghost. The decision of the Frankfort Recess with 
regard to the ' middle things ' was that they might only 
be retained in places where ' the pure teaching of the 
Gospel ' was not adulterated or persecuted, for otherwise 
' not only the moderate ones, but all ceremonies what- 
ever, were dangerous.' 

The Recess was to be recognised henceforth as a 
fixed rule of doctrine, and the princes decided that if 
in future any dispute should arise on any of the articles 
formulated by them, they would confer together on the 
subject with the other Protestant Estates. Meanwhile 
they must not allow anything to be taught in their 
territories, churches, and schools, or preached, or in any 
way introduced among the people, that was at variance 
with their fixed and true confession of faith. No writing 
on religious matters ' must be allowed to issue from the 
press without having first been submitted to the ap- 
pointed censors, and by them pronounced in accordance 


with the right and true creed.' The publication of 
libellous pamphlets was forbidden under severe penalty. 
The consistories and superintendents were to be pro- 
vided with ' Christian ' directions as to the way in 
which, in case of dissensions, they were to proceed 
against the offending parties ; no individual, much less 
a whole evangelical church, was to be condemned with- 
out a trial. If it should come bo light that anybody 
had in reality taught, or acted, in opposition to the 
Augsburg Confession, such a recreant and misguided 
person was no longer to be retained in his office of 
teacher or in the service of the Church ; and the other 
princes and Estates must be informed of the fact, to 
prevent the possibility of any heretical teacher receiving 
promotion or a fresh appointment. 

The efforts of the Protestant princes met with hearty 
support from King Maximilian of Bohemia, the eldest 
son of the Emperor, who had openly expressed his 
approval of the Augsburg Confession to Duke Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg. Maximilian had built great hopes on 
the Worms conference, and had thought to be able to 
arrange that Ferdinand should preside over it in person. ' 
It was with great regret, he wrote to Christopher on 
December 20, 1557, that he had learnt of the fruitless- 
ness of the conference, though no doubt ' many of the 
devil's menials ' would be able to bear this news with 
great equanimity. ' That great pattern of honour, the 
Pope,' he said, had sent word to his father through an 
ambassador that he thanked God that the conference 
had been wrecked by the schism among the Protestants 
themselves, and he hoped that Ferdinand would clear 
the Empire from ' this plague of heresy,' and would 

^ Kugler, ii. 35, note 59. 


never again give in to such colloquies and conventicles. 
' This was pretty nearly his honest or, in plain language, 
his diabolical message.' In the year 1557 Maximilian 
helped on the dissemination of heresy in Poland. 
Shortly before the Frankfort Diet he had asked Duke 
Christopher to supply him with writings of Luther, 
Melanchthon, Brenz, and other theologians ' of the true 
faith.' A few months after the Frankfort Eecess had 
been drawn up he told the Duke of his wish that the 
Protestants might become united in their faith, for, said 
he, ' by union among themselves they will cut the 
Pope's throat.' Christopher replied to Maximilian on 
July 13, 1558, that he would exert himself loyally and 
strenuously to bring about unification in order that ' the 
tyranny of the Antichrist might be put down.' On 
July 17 he made inquiries from Maximilian concerning 
the health of the Emperor, adding that there was a 
rumour ' that the doctors gave little hope of his life. In 
the event of the death of Charles he promised to devote 
himself to the ser^dce of Maximilian.' ^ 

' How excellent will it be, at last, for the united 
evangelicals, and how the Popish idolaters will wail and 
lament,' wrote a preacher in 1558, ' when the noble 
Maximilian, as is to be hoped, proclaims and protects 
the pure Gospel from the imperial throne as chief shep- 
herd of the Church ! ' " 

' Letters of ^laximilian and Christopher ui Le Bret, pp. 9, 85, 107, 
110, 112, 122, 124, 126. On July 18, 1556, the Eatisbon Superintendent, 
Nicholas Gallus, wrote to Duke John Albert of Mecklenburg concerninfi^ 
King Maximilian, who had stopped at Eatisbon on his way to Brussels : 
' His Court preacher, who is a married man, and who is all in favour of 
the pure doctrine, has spoken to me in great praise of his sovereign's 
Christian understanding and temper ' (Schirrmacher, Johann Albrecht 
Herzog von MecMenhurg, ii. 358). 

^ Wider die pajiistischen Grdiiel von der Messe, &c. (1558), Bl. 7. 


But no Protestant unity resulted from the Frankfort 
Recess, which only served, on the contrary, to strengthen 
the existing schism and discord, and became now the 
butt of attacks from all directions. 

At a meeting of Mecklenburg theologians at Wismar, 
it was resolved, in accordance with a statement of David 
Chjrtraus, that in this Frankfort Recess the doctrinal 
articles had been couched in equivocal language, and 
that ' they might be subscribed to by Sacramentarians 
and other sects, as well as by the true Churchmen.' In 
consequence of this statement the Duke of Mecklenburg 
refused to sign the Recess.^ His lead was followed by 
the Duke of Pomerania, the Prince of Anhalt, the Count 
of Henneberg, and the towns of Ratisbon, Nuremberg, 
Hamburg, Liibeck, Liineburg, and Magdeburg.^ 

The theologians of Magdeburg declared that they 
could not, without consideration, accept any one of the 
articles as they stood in the Recess. ' To begin with,' 
they said, ' it was a most dangerous and suspicious 
thing ' that secular princes and lords should have under- 
taken, without the concurrence of theologians, to formu- 
late and fix a rule of faith ; all the more so as their own 
theologians had been publicly accused of being the 
authors of various errors. Such a proceeding was tanta- 
mount to ' stopping the mouth of the Holy Ghost ' so 
that He might henceforth no longer punish errors, and 
pronounce judgment against false prophets. If this 
Recess was imposed on the consistories, nothing would 
be easier than for another Papacy to spring up, as had 
been already flagrantly exemplified by other consis- 
tories. Moreover, if the consistory themselves should 

1 Krabbe, Chytnius, pp. 135-143. - Salig, iii. 368-373, 383. 

E 2 


start erroneous opinions, were other preachers not ta 
withstand them ? 

Duke John Frederic of Saxony came forward as the 
chief opponent of the Recess, and endeavoured to collect 
around him in a compact party the whole body of 
Protestants who also disapproved of it. To this end he 
invited the Estates of the nether Saxon circle to enjoin 
their theologians to meet at a convention at Magdeburg,, 
and there to pronounce wholesale condemnation on all 
the different sects. The Estates, however, were of 
opinion that this was too serious a step, and the Duke 
then followed the advice of Flacius, his chief theologian 
— namely, that he and his brothers should issue a 
pamphlet refuting and repudiating everything that was 
erroneous, and that all the clergy of the land should be 
compelled to accept the refutation. John Frederic 
caused a pamphlet of this description to be composed 
by a group of theologians, and had it revised by Flacius, 
and on November 28, 1558, he notified to the theologians 
his approval of their work. The pamphlet was sent 
round to the different superintendents as a directory 
manual of doctrine, and preachers were enjoined to read 
it out from their pulpits.^ 

This compilation, which was entitled the ' Confutation 
Book of the Duke of Saxony,' ^ although insignificant as 
a scientific work, belongs unquestionably to the most 

' Preger, ii. 77-79, 

'^ Johannes Friedrichs V. des Mittleren, Herzogen zu SacJisen, in 
Goites Wort, projyJietischer nnd ayostolischer Sclirift gegrilndete Confii- 
tationes, Widerlegungen und Verdamtnung etlicher ein Zeit her zuwider 
demselhen Gottesiuort und heiliger Schrift, audi der Augsburgischen 
Confession, Apologien und der Schmallialdischen Artikeln, aber zu 
Fordcning und Wiederanrichtimg des antichrisHschen Pajysthums 
eingcschlichenen und eingerisscnen Corrujitelen, Secten und Irrthumen. 
Jena, 1559. 


important polemical writings of the day. It gives a 
vivid insight into Protestant sectarianism at that time. 
Backed by the name of a prince, and claiming the 
authority of a rule of faith, it expounds, in sharp and 
often passionate condemnation of all diverging opinions, 
the views of strict Lutheranism, the one and only saving 
creed. It asserts that immediately after the days of the 
Apostles falsehood and corruption had crept into the 
Church, and that in the Antichrist kingdom of the Pope, 
through the working of the devil, these evils had grown 
worse and worse, until God sent forth a new apostle in 
the person of Luther and revealed His Holy Word afresh. 
Nevertheless, says the Duke in his preface, men have 
grown ' almost everywhere weary of and disgusted with 
this true. Divine Word ; they have set up all sorts of 
intermediary things in opposition to God's Word, and 
have so misled men's consciences and shaken their 
faith that they actually do not know and cannot 
decide what, in regard to God's Word, they ought to do 
and what not.' 

As false teachers, who, under the evil influence of the 
devil, were subverting the Evangelical Church, the fol- 
lowing men and sects are then discussed and repudiated : 
Servet, Schwenckfeld, the Antinomians, the Anabap- 
tists, the old and new Zwinglians, the defenders of free 
will, Osiander and Stancarus, Major, and also the Adia- 
phorists. These last, the Melanchthonians, were stig- 
matised as ' declared enemies of the Cross of Christ ; 
they were worse than snakes and venomous poison ; 
they were foxes more dangerous than those open wolves, 
the Papists.' ^ 

It was also most essential, the argument went on, 

1 Bl. 126, 129\ 


to make an open stand against those insolent and bare-^ 
faced enemies who, on account of the adiaphoristic, 
hypocritical incident, considered themselves to some 
extent victorious, and hoped to establish their idolatry ; 
* they must be made to see that God had still preserved 
to Himself a holy seed and a remnant of true believers 
who had not yet bowed the knee to Baal nor signed 
themselves with the sign of the Beast.' ^ The adia- 
phoristic ' idolatrous trafhcking ' with the Beast of the 
Apocalypse, that ' monstrous Antichrist ' the Pope, 
must be encountered by public testimony ' even should 
the world be smashed up in consequence.' ' To keep 
silence in the matter is to expose to a state of fearful 
impenitence all those who pollute themselves with 
Babylonish whoredom.' If the antagonists should 
' make much palavering about lasting peace, unity, and 
friendship, no reliance must be placed on their words,' 
neither must any heed be paid if they should threaten 
war and calamity, for every risk must be avoided of 
coming under the bondage of papal tyranny.' - All 
persons who do not agree with the confutation are under 
the influence of the devil ; the confutists alone are ' the 
holy seed and the elect of God, whom God has reserved 
to Himself unto these last days of the world.' And also 
' at the day of judgment, when all things shall be rent 
asunder, there will remain at least some among the 
teachers to whom God, through the Holy Ghost, will 
give eagle eyes that they may be able to spy heresy out 
and expose heresy.' ^ 

Duke John Frederic and his brothers made it obliga- 
tory on their subjects to renounce and abhor the errors 

1 Bl. 123\ * Bl. 112^ 12G, 127. 

s Bl. 132. 


condemned in the ' Book of Confutation,' as well as their 
defenders. If they did not comply with this injunction 
they were made to understand that they would come 
under the heavy displeasure of their sovereign lords and 
suffer the severest penalties. 

But, like the Worms conference and the Frankfort 
Recess, this ' Book of Confutation ' only widened the 
breach between the Protestant Estates. ' Now,' wrote 
Melanchthon, ' we shall see still greater dissension and 
disquietude.' ^ 

The Elector Augustus of Saxony called on the 
University of Wittenberg to pronounce their opinion on 
the ' Book of Confutation,' and Melanchthon drew up a 
memorandum in the name of his colleagues. He made 
it clear, to begin with, that he and the Wittenbergites 
must not be charged with the errors of Servet, Osiander, 
Schwenckfeld, and the Anabaptists, and appealed in his 
defence to dogmas which were certainly taught by 
Protestant theologians, but which were not in the book. 
' The confutists,' he said, ' wish to be regarded as the 
most enthusiastic of Pope devourers, but they strengthen 
the cause of idolatry and introduce doctrines which no 
one in the Church, even from the very beginning, not 
even the Papists, have ever held — for instance, that the 
Body of Christ is everywhere and in all places, even in 
wood and stone. Filthy assertions such as this have 
caused great rancour and discord in Bremen and other 
places, and have also been the cause that many respect- 
able and learned people and wealthy burghers have been 
driven away from Brunswick and Hamburg. 

' 2 

' Bl. 132. 

- Corj:). Reform, ix. 731, 738. See "Wolf, Ziir GescJiichte der deutschen 
Protestanten, p. 151 f. 


Formerly, as Luther's pupil, Melanchthon had most 
emphatically taught that everything happened through 
unalterable and eternal necessity ; that in the order of 
God's universe there was no room for the expression of 
a free created will ; and consequently no freedom either 
of outward or inward action. Now he rejected this 
doctrine as madness. ' During Luther's lifetime and 
afterwards,' Melanchthon wrote, ' I have always repu- 
diated this stoic and manich.iean folly which Luther and 
others believed in, that all works, good and bad alike, 
in all men and women, good and bad alike, happen of 
necessity. It is manifest that such a statement is con- 
trary to the Word of God, and prejudicial to all moral 
discipline, and blasphemous against God.' ' The doc- 
trine that good works are necessary is the right and true 
one, and one that no devil can have power to destroy. 
New obedience is necessary, new obedience is a debt we 
owe. And we must uphold this doctrine in the face of 
the Antinomians, who cry out senselessly that the 
regenerate remain holy even if they fall into sins which 
their conscience reproves, even if they commit adultery 
and murder.' An Antinomian had said to him some 
years ago, ' God does not concern Himself about our 
good works.' Now the poets of Weimar have not 

O J- 

declared that these propositions are right and true — 
viz. : ' New obedience is a duty, is necessary,' but they 
combat them artfully with wiles and sophistry. When, 
however, they tilt at the added words ' necessary to 
salvation,' they know well that we do not use these 
words. True, one of the great ranters, Gallus, at 
Ratisbon, has unmistakably rejected these proposi- 
tions ; against him we appeal to all God-fearing Chris- 
tians whose sentence we are willing to accept, for the 


Weimar condemnations are not the only ones to be 
heard.' ^ 

This memorandum gave rise to further condemna- 
tions of Melanchthon. At Berhn the Court preacher 
Agricola exhorted the people from the pulpit to pray 
against him : ' Pray to God, I beseech you, against this 
beautiful, new, angelic, noonday devil, who has now 
come forward again and insists that good works are 
necessary even for the righteous and for believers, 
whereby we should again lose the all-sufficient Christ 
and His Gospel.' But the Berlin Provost, George Buch- 
liolzer, wrote to Melanchthon : 'I, on my part, will 
teach the exact opposite of his prayer on Sundays, and 
will supplicate the Almighty to destroy the wicked 
black devil who is endeavouring to introduce a savage, 
lawless, dissolute mode of life in opposition to God's 
commands.' - 

It was a war of all against all. 

The Landgrave Philip of Hesse sent Duke John 
Frederic a ' censure ' of his book, which Flacius con- 
sidered very damaging, and deserving the severest 
punishment. Flacius was so merciless to Philip that 
' in an answer to the Landgrave's pamphlet ' he asked, 
with reference to the latter' s bigamy, ' if, as the " Cen- 
surer " implies, it is only those Anabaptists who have 
taken up the sword who are to perish with the sword, 
what is to be done with all the blood-relations of that 
sect — viz. the Anabaptists who are building up a new 
Sodom, and have several wives like the Turks ? ' ^ 

In order to prevent an open breach between the 

' Corp. Bcform. ix. 763-775. See Wolf, Ziir GescJdchte der deutschen 
Protestanten, p. 153. 

'^ Corp. Beform. ix. 815, 816. » Preger, ii. 81-83. 


Protestant Estates, the princes who had drawn up the 
Frankfort Recess invited Duke John Frederic to a con- 
ference. Everything was settled, and Fulda fixed on 
as the place of meeting, January 20, 1559, as the date,, 
when the Elector Augustus of Saxony raised objections, 
fearing a preponderance of the hostile party in that 
place.^ On March 20, 1559, Melanchthon, in a letter to 
Philip of Hesse, again expressed himself as opposed to 
the holding of a general Protestant synod. He granted 
that such a synod was highly necessary, but ' how it 
was possible to hold one he could not see.' ' At Ham- 
burg,' he wrote, ' there is a preacher named Westphalus 
who thunders out from the pulpit such statements as 
the following : " The God-fearing and learned men in 
England, who have punished the idolatry of worshipping 
bread, are the devil's martyrs." And at Bremen also 
there are ranters of this sort, who are encouraged by a 
numerous following.' ' If, now, a synod were con- 
voked, and if it were not managed with a very firm 
hand, the result would only be an enormous increase of 
schism. But who, I ask, is competent to preside over 
our synods when there are such endless points to be 
discussed, and the princes and preachers are all at war 
with one another ? ' ^ 

While all these quarrels and contentions were raging 
among the theologians, the preachers, and the princes, 
it was the earnest endeavour of one and all to root out 
from their own dominions ' the very last remnants of 
the hellish Papacy,' and, by all means in their power, 
to turn the Catholics from their ancient faith ; while at 
the same time they aimed, and this chiefly by the sup- 

^ Heppe, Gescli. des Protestanfismus, i. 291 ff. 
2 Corj). Beform. ix. 779, 780. 


pression of the ' Ecclesiastical Reservation,' ^ to conquer 
new territories for ' the new religion which was the only 
way to salvation,' and the doctrines of which were the 
theme of general strife among them. 

The princes who displayed most activity in this re- 
spect were the Palatine Electors Otto Henry and 
Frederic III., and Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg. 

^ Decision of the Augsburg Treaty of 1555 'that Catholic priests 
joining the Evangelical Church should give up their benefices.' 




SINCE 1556 

The new religion had already been promulgated in the 
Palatinate for the space of ten years under the rule of 
the Elector Frederic III., and in March 1556 an edict 
issued by his successor, Otto Henry, raised it to the 
dignity of sole state religion. No popish idolatry was 
in future to be tolerated in the country. The new 
Church organisation was based on the Confession of Augs- 
burg, but ' some traces of a Zwinglian spirit were also 
visible in it ; ' for instance, in the ceremony of baptism 
the exorcism was to be omitted ; and all images, with 
the exception of the crucifix, and all the altars, were to be 
removed from the churches, and destroyed as idolatrous 
abominations. When the ' idols ' had been taken away 
from the Church of the Holy Ghost at Heidelberg, the 
Elector issued an order for general iconoclasm through- 
out the land. Electoral commissaries were charged 
to remove the images and pictures from the churches 
' in the watches of the night,' to ' break in pieces the 
sculptures and to daub all the paintings with black ; ' 
also ' to destroy all windows that had painted glass.' 
The commissioners reported that, ' owing to the dis- 
mantling of churches and the removal of pictures and 
images, they had been met by the people with all manner 
of reproaches and insults.' 


On the strength of the assertion that ' all vows are 
impious, and every form of monasticism an abomina- 
tion before God,' the suppression of the still remain- 
ing cloisters was set on foot, and orders issued for 
the sequestration of their revenues. The innovators 
stopped short at nothing. In the monastery of Wald- 
sassen, for instance, although it was under the protec- 
tion of the Bohemian Crown, the Elector inhibited the 
Catholic Church service, took away the ornaments of 
the church, and appointed Lutheran preachers. In 
order to induce the monks to adopt the new teaching, 
lewd women were shub up with them in their cells. 
The abbot and several of the monks who refused to 
obey, and clung steadfastly to their faith, were led 
away to prison at Amberg by the Elector's orders.^ The 
most merciless treatment was also often shown towards 
nuns advanced in years. The proceedings at Gnaden- 
berg afford an instance of this. When the electoral 
commissioners made their appearance in this convent 
in November 1556, in order to inform the nuns that 
their ' vows were the devil's work,' their religion 
' idolatry, blasphemy, and a mere misleading human 
invention,' they met with insurmountable opposition 
from ' these stiff-necked women.' In touching language 
the abbess and the whole body of nuns urged on the 
commissioners that ' In the outside world there was. 
nothing but envy, hatred, persecution, and faithless- 
ness ; vices innumerable went on multiplying day by 
day ; they themselves were all old and useless persons ; 
they had brought their little all into the convent, and 
they intended to go on living up to their vows in willing 

^ Wittmann, Reformation in cler Oberpfalz, pp. 19, 20, 24, 25 ;, 
Beligionsnetierungen in der cJnirfiirstHchen Pfalz, pp. 72-73. 


poverty, fasting, and prayer. They knew nothing else 
from the Word of God but that their faith and religion 
were right and true, and they begged that they might 
be left in the enjoyment of these.' In vain did they 
supplicate for mercy and pity. The preacher who had 
come with the commissioners took away the consecrated 
elements from the tabernacle, and also the chrism, 
whereupon the nuns' father confessor, a feeble, sickly 
■ old man, ' got angry and protested with gruesome, 
violent gestures.' But the commissioners, ' having 
regard to the orders issued by the Elector,' took no 
notice of these protests ; ' but, for the destruction of 
idolatry, went through with their work.' The poor, 
infirm old man, in the bitter cold of the winter, was 
compelled to leave the convent at once. It was in vain 
that the nuns remonstrated, saying that ' for nine years 
long he had spent much labour and trouble among 
them, and had always behaved honourably in every 
way. And now he is accused of having misled us ! 
This is not true. Oh, dear sirs, in the name of God 
believe what we say ! ' When the sisters saw that all 
their entreaties to be left in their convent and in the 
practice of their faith were unavailing, they begged that 
they might at least be allowed to receive back what they 
had brought in with them, and to go away where they 
liked. But even this petition was refused. They were 
hurried off to the convent of Seligenporten, which had 
just been Protestantised, and Gnadenberg was taken 
possession of.^ 

^ Report of the Commission in the Histor.- Diplomat. Magazin, ii. 
395-414. See Wittmann, pp. 21-23. In October 1556 the Elector issued 
orders that all the field churches in which there was not a weekly sermon 
and administration of the Sacraments should be demolished. Such is 
the report of K. Menzel, Wolfgang von ZweihrilcJien (Miinchen, 1893), 
p. 140, according to the ^Acten des Amberger Kreis arcliivs.'' 


What the nuns of Gnadenberg said concerning the 
increase of crime and vice is fully confirmed in the 
reports of the Lutheran commissioners, as well with 
regard to the Rhenish as to the Upper Palatinate. We 
quote the following extracts from a report of Novem- 
ber 2, 1556 : ' Church discipline, as it used to be en- 
forced in olden times among the clergy, has disappeared, 
and the door has been thrown open to sin and vice ; so 
that each one companies at his pleasure, and without 
rebuke from anybody, with false doctrine and scandalous 
living.' The bulk of the people are given up to godless 
and epicurean living ; others, shocked and frightened by 
the terrible disorders and scandals that go on, attach 
themselves to any sect which has an appearance of 
respectability, and outward decorum and piety ; a very 
small number, alas, hold firmly to the revealed Word of 
God.' To the list of ' common failings and iniquities ' 
which were found in all classes and professions belonged 
first of all the careless and irregular church-going of 
so many people, who either never went at all, or else 
went reluctantly just to hear the sermon ; secondly, 
the contempt and disregard of the Holy Sacraments 
shown by the greater number of those who in other 
respects plumed themselves on being clever and intelli- 
gent. Thirdly, there were very few places where cate- 
chetical instruction was given. ' And even when 
classes for this purpose had been started in some 
parishes, they had had to be given up because neither 
young nor old attended them.' Further, ' almsgiving 
for the help and maintenance of the poor had been given 
up in many places.' The churches ' as a rule were not 
kept in repair, and their revenues were applied to other 
purposes.' The incomes of most of the ministers are 


SO small that ' they can neither buy themselves books 
nor decent clothing, and when they die their widows 
and children are reduced to begging.' A large number 
of livings were unoccupied. For instance, in the whole 
district of Llitzelstein there were only four clergymen. 
' The people are wild and undisciplined ; they live un- 
thinkingly like brute beasts, and pay little heed to the 
ministers of religion.' ^ 

The reports from the Upper Palatinate were equally 
distressing, as the following extracts will show : 

' In most cases the ministers are excessively indolent, 
so much so that up to the present time very few of 
them have given any catechetical instruction or any 
religious teaching to children. From this it will easily 
be seen how few people there must be who know how to 
say their prayers, or understand the right use of the 
Sacraments.' ' And what is even worse, we have come 
across some who knew nothing whatever about salva- 
tion and righteousness ; who could not say their prayers, 
and, indeed, did not trouble themselves about doing so, 
but said that the heavenly Father would certainly put 
into each one's heart how he is to be saved ; and that 
the Father has atoned for sins, but the Son has borne 
the suffering ' (sic). ' The parishes are so wretched, 
and in the charge of such unsuitable persons, that it is 
impossible to get rid of all the good-for-nothing parsons.' 
' In very many places we found that not only were the 
Church regulations not attended to, but that such 
fearful anarchy had crept in, that very few of the clergy 
were of the same mind, and each one ruled as he liked, 

1 Report of the Visitation of Churches by the Commissioners appointed 
by their Electoral Graces in the year 1556, dated November 2, in Schmidt, 
Part i. 39. 


and only did what was most convenient to himself/ 
' Owing to the laziness of the clergy, private absolution 
has been entirely given up ; people who are thoroughly 
wicked and quite intolerable persons are admitted to 
the Eucharist ; preaching has altogether ceased.' ' Be- 
sides all which, many ministers of the Church lead 
immoral lives, which causes scandal among the neigh- 
bours, and gives rise to disparaging talk among the 
Papists. The improvement which they have promised 
goes on chiefly in the public-houses.' The commis- 
sioners further stated that ' the ministers made a general 
complaint that contempt of God's Word and worship 
had reached such a pitch that at the very time that 
services were being held, drinking-bouts, low dancing, 
gambling, and so forth went on unpunished ; blasphemy, 
witchcraft, and debauchery were rampant ; several 
people had been three times convicted of adultery ; 
drunkenness and other vices were so terribly in the 
ascendant, that the judgments pronounced against 
these things in God's Word were mocked at, and it was 
patent to all that heathendom had grown up all around.* 
At Hirschau and in other places the members of the 
town council kept away from the Sacraments, spoke of 
them jeeringly, did not consider them necessary to 
salvation, were negligent in the punishment of crime, 
and profligacy and all sorts of wicked arts were carried 
on to excess.' ' Woe, woe unto those that shall come 
after us ! ' the commissioners exclaimed. 

With regard to Church property it was stated that 
' the founded revenues of many parishes went partly 
into the electoral coffers, partly for ordinary building 
purposes, although it was clear as daylight that Church 
property, when put to profane uses, devoured and de- 



stroyed the other rightful possessions of the despoiler. 
These revenues must now be restored as a good example 
to all the nobles and burghers, so that they also may 
deliver up all that they have taken away from the 
Church goods.' ^ 

The commissioners of the Rhenish Palatinate urged 
on the Elector with equal insistence that ' Many people, 
both of high and low degree, are kindling God's wrath 
and indignation against them and theirs, because they 
take to themselves the goods given over to God and 
His .Church, and by so doing bring loyal ministers of the 
Church to poverty and need, and cause the service of 
the Church not only to be despised, but also to perish 
from neglect and want of pastors. Experience too 
shows, alas, that these robberies of the Church have 
brought great and irrecoverable injury to the German 
nation, for those who have been guilty of them, be they 
rulers of greater or lesser importance, have not only not 
grown richer through their thefts, but have, on the 
contrary, become impoverished, and are now obliged to 
mortgage and oppress their lands and people.' 

This report was an opportunity for the Lutheran 
commissioners to pay a high tribute of praise to the 
Catholic ancestors of Otto Henry. ' Your Electoral 
Grace's parents and ancestors,' they said, ' were all 
highly renowned and powerful electors and sovereigns, 
rich in land and people, although they did not appropriate 
the goods of the Church, but, on the contrary, looked 
after the churches well, and endowed them richly out 
of their own possessions.' They went on to beg that 
the Elector would follow in their steps and leave the 
revenues of the Church for the maintenance of the 

^ In Wittmann, pp. 24-25. 


'Church worship, and thus ' give public testimony before 
all the world that he had his religion really at heart, 
and was not, like so many others, merely seeking his 
own profit under the cloak of the Gospel.' ^ 

When Otto Henry died in February 1559, the con- 
dition of ecclesiastical affairs was quite anarchical. At 
Heidelberg, Melanchthon had written as early as 1557, 
there were many heads and many opinions, and people 
from various nations — Belgians, French, and others.^ 

Strange to say, it was on the recommendation of 
Melanchthon, who afterwards greatly deplored the fact, 
that Tilmann Hesshus, who had been banished from 
Kostock, was appointed first professor of theology, 
pastor of the Church of the Holy Ghost, and super- 
intendent-general and president of the Church council 
at Heidelberg. He became the leader here of the 
strict Lutherans, while Zwinglian-Calvinistic opinion 
had for its representatives, among others, the theo- 
logian Boquin, a former Carmelite prior of Bourges, 
Thomas Erast, of Basle, professor of medicine, and the 
Court preacher, Diller. At the Court of Heidelberg, 
also, Zwinglianism boasted many adherents, much to 
the distress of the Chancellor von Minckwitz and the 
Court Judge Erasmus von Benningen, who were on the 
side of the superintendent-general. Hesshus became 
forthwith entangled in quarrels with several of his 
clergy ; only once did the whole clerical body act in 
concert, and that was on the occasion of an appeal to 
the town council of Frankfort-on-the-Main on behalf 
of a preacher who had knocked down a Catholic priest 
with his fists, and rolled him over in the mud.^ 

' In Schmidt, Division, pp. 51-52. ^ Corjj. Beform. ix. 127. 

■' Wilkens, pp. 40-46. 

F 2 


Under the new Elector, Frederic III., ' the religions 
schism broke out into raging flames.' 

Frederic III., of the Simmern Une, had been won 
over to Lutheranism by his wife, Maria, daughter of the 
Margrave Casimir, of Brandenburg Culmbach, but at 
the time of his accession he had already developed 
Zwinglian-Calvinistic views. The Electress trembled 
lest her consort should come completely under the 
dominion of ' the subtle poison ' of Zwinglianism. 
When her son-in-law, Duke John Frederic of Saxony,, 
expressed the hope that ' the Christian religion would 
be re-established in the land and the devil's rabble got 
rid of,' she answered : ' It is indeed to be desired, for I 
fear that the deyil will sow the Zwinglian seed among 
the good grain ; I know of some among the town coun- 
cillors who are undoubted Zwinglians.' ^ 

Hesshus considered it his first official duty to make a 
bold stand for the ' unaltered Augsburg Confession and 
Apology,' to which, on his assumption of office, he had 
pledged himself by oath ; but even his own followers 
asked ' whether the thousand demons that he brought 
with him to the pulpit were likely to further the cause of 
the pure Lutheran gospel.' His chief antagonist was 
the deacon William Klebitz, an equally ardent com- 
batant in defence of the Calvinistic doctrine of the 
Eucharist. Hesshus denounced him from the pulpit as. 
a second Arius, a blasphemer of the Sacrament, a new 
devil, and he also accused the university and the city 
magistrate of heretical tendencies. Klebitz in revenge 
' inveighed with equal insolence against Hesshus.' ^ 

^ Kluckhohn, Letters, i. 40. 

^ It often happened to Tilman Hesshus to have his name changed 
by his adversaries into Tollmann Geckhus (Ploughman-Woodhouse into 
Madinan-Madhouse). See Wider die schwermerischen Sacramentirer, C'-. 


Professors and students, of&ciais and burghers, 
divided into parties and fought over the questions 
whether the bread at the Eucharist was the selfsame 
actual body of Christ as that which hung on the cross ; 
whether unbelievers also partook of it ; whether one 
ought to say that the body was presented under the 
bread, or in the bread, or in, with, and under the bread ? 
One man, Magister Conrad, proposed adding to these 
prepositions the words ' round and round.' When the 
Elector interposed to calm down the general excitement, 
and in August 1559 prohibited all this reciprocal slander- 
ing and reviling in the pulpit, telling Hesshus that he 
must agree with his opponents in accepting the formula, 
' The body of Christ is presented with the bread,' 
Hesshus answered that this ' formula was not to be 
found in the first, or genuine, but in the altered edi- 
tion of the Augsburg Confession.' The Confession 
had been altered more than six times, he said, and 
in this way it had grown into a cloak of great mag- 
nitude, under which both God and the devil could 
easily hide. * It must first of all,' he said, ' be settled 
by a synod how the Confession was to be understood ; 
and meanwhile they must abide by the Smalcald 
articles, in which Luther himself had couched his 

Hesshus delivered sermons on the alterations of the 
Confession, inhibited Deacon Klebitz from all o£S.cial 
duties, and, on his refusing to submit, solemnly pro- 
nounced the ban over him, instructed the municipal 
authorities to expel him from the country, and gave 
orders that nobody was to have any fellowship with 
this accursed heretic, wholly given over to the devil. 
Klebitz revenged himself by accusing Hesshus of 


robbing the university's treasury ; another preacher 
spoke of him in the pulpit as a sow that ravaged the 
Lord's vineyard ; and a third pronounced the ban over 
him. Once, during divine service, matters ahiiost 
came to a regular fight, Hesshus having given orders 
that when Klebitz began administering the Sacrament 
the chalice was to be snatched out of his hands. ^ On 
the failure of all the Elector's attempts to effect a recon- 
ciliation, Hesshus and Klebitz, on September 16, were 
dismissed from their posts. Hesshus now tried to get a 
synod summoned. For the true Lutheran Church, he 
said, there was no longer any room among all the 
blasphemous heresies, whose seeds were being scattered 
all over the world. Insatiable craving for new ideas 
and opinions was impelling the masses ; wanton souls 
were burning with uncontrollable lust to overturn all 
established dogmas ; no law restrained their frenzy ; 
Church discipline was dead ; princes and sovereigns were 
sunk in sleep. A synod of learned, orthodox, un- 
sophistical theologians, versed in antique lore, must 
meet together to witness to the faith and to pronounce 
decision. True, it was objected that the tempers of 
teachers and hearers were so distracted that no such 
thing as unity was to be thought of ; the theologians 
were absorbed in their own private interests and pre- 
ferred playing the part of turbulent demagogues to 
acting as gentle shepherds of their flocks ; they would 
regard a synod as a theatre for fresh dramatic scenes. 

' Salig, iii. 433-460 ; Kluckhohn, Friedrich der Fromme, pp. 44-57 ;, 
Wiikens, pp. 49-58. For the abominable state of things in Frederic III.'s 
' New Jerusalem ' at Heidelberg see Alberdingk Thijm, VrooUjhe historic 
van Ph. van Marnix heer v. St. Aldegonde en zijne vrienden. Leuven, 
1876 (German edition as third Vereinsschrift der Gorresgesellschaft fiir 


Nevertheless, there was still a remnant of good and 
faithful pastors in the land.^ 

Controversial writings passed backwards and for- 
wards. Erasmus von Benningen, judge to the Court of 
the Palatinate, wrote in 1589 to his friend Marbach at 
Strasburg : ' By means of the public press we are 
making our own shame and disgrace more manifest 
than the brightest sunshine, and all with no better 
result than to trouble and perturb consciences more 
and more, and to enlarge the empire of the devil. 
There is no petty Calvinist cobbler but must needs 
write his own book to silence jurists and doctors, who 
in their turn do the same, privately and anonymously, 
or with assumed names. The earth ought to open 
and swallow up such demons, and all those Christians 
who are aware of and countenance such errors ought 
to be severely punished. It is a crime beyond every 
imaginable crime to tolerate such iniquity.' ^ A dis- 
putation carried on at Heidelberg, in June 1560, between 
the Saxon and Palatine theologians was as fruitless as 
all similar conferences had been.^ By an electoral 
decree of August 12, the whole body of preachers who 
had refused to agree to an article on the Eucharist 
formulated by Melanchthon, received their dismissal. 
The Elector at the same time instituted such violent 

^ In the dedication of his treatise on the presence of the body of Christ 
in the Eucharist ; see Wilkens, p. 60. 

- Planck, 5^ 369, note 49 ; Sudhoff, p. 77. 

^ ' Tlie detailed Protocol of the Disputation,' in Wigand, De Sacra- 
mentarismo, pp. 437-470. Caspar Peucer wrote concerning the Disputa- 
tion to Hieronymus Baumgartner on August 1, 1560 : ' Non hoc agitur, ut 
salutaria adhibeantur remedia vulneribus ecclesiae, sed ut exasperentur 
ilia et distractiones augeantur. Et in hac animorum exulceratione et 
odiorum acerbitate, quse iniri possit ratio concordise non video, prsesertiru 
singulis hoc unum conantibus, ut suis retentis ac defensis adversantes 
non audiant, sed iugulent ' (Strobel's Miscellanies, iv. 83 ; see iv. 97). 


measures against the Catholics that, as early as May 
1560, Hesshus had feared a rising/ The Jews also, 
who had been tolerated up till then, were mercilessly 
driven out of the country by Frederic III., who con- 
sidered himself ' a living member of the elect com- 
munity predestined to eternal life.' " 

While the Palatinate was ' sucking in the Zwin- 
glian poison, and becoming most foully corrupted by 
the Anabaptists,' ^ the Count Palatine Wolfgang von 
Zweibriicken ' was turning his territory into an undefiled 
habitation of the unfalsified gospel, and rooting out all 
popish atrocities and idolatry, and all heresy and error.' 
He enjoined his subjects in the year 1557 ' to show 
themselves always obedient to Lutheranism as being 
commanded by God Himself.' Throughout his domain 
he ordered the destruction of all altars, images, and 
everything that could recall the Catholic worship, and 
those who would not submit were compelled to leave 
the land.^ ' The noble Christian Prince Wolfgang,' 
said one of his followers, ' does not allow himself to be 
deterred from his labour of rooting out ill weeds and 
planting the Word of God, by the conscientious scruples 

^ 'Elector Palatinus pergit in suo instituto. Utinaiii potius sana 
doctrina papatum studeret evertere, quam igne et violentis mandatis ! 
Kes ad aliquem motum spectat, principum, nobilinm et vulgi animos 
graviter oflendit novis illis incendiis et bonorum ecclesiasticoruui, ut 
ferunt, corrasione '(Striive, p. 103). 

~ See Friedrichs Testament, published by Kluckhohn (Munich, 1874), 
pp. 22, 53 ; Bitter, i. 199-200. 

^ 3 .^(ih.ol'A,Ahleinung jiainstischer und sacramentorisclter Argumente 
(1561), ' Preface.' Concerning the further spread of Anabaptisni in the 
Palatinate, wrote the preacher, John Flimmer, in an inspectoral report of 
September 17, 1556 : ' Misera Ecclesite facies est circumcirca propter 
coUuvieni Anabaptistaruiu qui in tanta magistratus ecclesiastici et politici 
negligentia subintroierunt ' (Schmidt, Section Iviii., No. 26). 

* Remling, Reforinationsiverh, pp. 139-144. See K. Menzel, Wolf- 
gang von Ziueihr'dc'ken, pp. 149 f. 


of shoals of popish subjects, which are empty wind and 
to be despised as idolatrous. He is a true soldier of 
Christ, as is also that noble Prince Duke Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg, although he is not at all points in 
agreement with the Confession as it is taught at Wiirtem- 
berg.' ^ 

^ Scholz. See preceding page, note 3. 




Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg was impregnated 
with the idea that supreme spiritual authority was 
an inseparable appanage of secular sovereignty, and 
that spiritual rule was his first and most important 
duty. As the prince taught, so must the people be- 
lieve. If some, he said, are of opinion that only secular 
authority belongs to the secular government, he for his 
part was convinced that he was actually called, ' first 
and foremost,' to provide the people subject to him 
with the pure teaching of the Gospel, to attend seriously 
to the interests of Christ's Church, and ' only afterwards, 
and as a secondary matter,' to busy himself about the 
organisation and administration of things secular.^ 

In order to preserve purity of religious doctrine in 
his own principality, he first, in 1558, informed all the 
preachers of Wiirtemberg that they were to consider 
the confession of faith contained in the Frankfort 
Recess as the true standard of life and doctrine. He 
next issued a religious edict enjoining all public func- 
tionaries, down to the village bailiffs, to find out 
all stubborn sectarians — Sacramentarians, Anabaptists, 
Schwenckfeldians — to put them instantly in confine- 

' Schmidt and Pfister, Denl-wurdigJceiten, i. 58. 


ment, and then to notify to the chancellor that nobody, 
under pain of bodily chastisement, banishment, or 
confiscation of goods, must house or shelter such traitors 
and miscreants/ Melanchthon, who in November 1557 
still enjoyed the full confidence of the Duke," in Febru- 
ary 1558 came into ill-favour with his grace, under 
suspicion of heresy. Melanchthon, so the Duke wrote, 
in conjunction with the theological faculty at Witten- 
berg, ' had published acrid and almost heretical pam- 
phlets against Flacius and his followers.' Moreover, 
' at Wittenberg and at Leipsic, all manner of disputa- 
tions are said to have been held on the ubiquity of 
Christ, so that it was to be feared that a subtle form of 
Calvinism might creep in in these places : Philip also 
was suspected of having been concerned with the move- 

Flacius, however, and his adherents at this same 
period aroused also the displeasure of the Duke, who 
uttered the following ominous words concerning them : 
' The time might come when a severe scrutiny would be 
held with regard to these aggressive ranters ; for verily 
there was no other spirit in them than that of pride,, 
envy, selfishness, and turbulence.' ^ In the year 1559 
he drew the attention of the Elector Augustus of 
Saxony to the fact that Melanchthon, in a commentary 
on the Epistle to the Colossians, had spoken in such a 
manner of Christ's Ascension that the Zwinglians and 
Calvinists might boast that he agreed with them in this 
matter. Dangerous disturbances would follow ' if it 
were taught and contended that the Saviour sat in His 
human form on the right hand of God, His heavenly 

^ Fischlin, Siq^i^l. p. 275, See Hartmann, pp. 160-161. 
2 Kugler, ii. 163-164. ^ i^^gier, ii. 164-165. 


Father, circumscribed by space and locality.' He added 
that he considered it ' an imperative necessity ' that the 
electors and princes who subscribed to the Augsburg 
Confession should meet together without delay to 
deliberate and to take the necessary measures for esta- 
blishing unity of doctrine among the theologians, and for 
exterminating all sects and cabals/ 

In this same year Duke Christopher himself wrote 
out a confession of faith which only widened the breach 
between the Protestant parties. 

Melanchthon's reiterated insistence on the logical 
impossibility of affirming the presence of the body of 
Christ, while at the same time denying the sacrificial 
character of the Eucharist, had moved the theologian 
Brenz to set up the doctrine that the body of Christ, by 
virtue of the union of the human nature with the 
Divine, shared in the omnipresence of the Godhead, and 
did not therefore first become present at the altar 
through consecration. This doctrine of the omni- 
presence or ubiquity of the body of Christ was raised to 
the rank of a dogma in a ' confession ' formulated at a 
Stuttgardt synod, and invested with the authority of a 
symbol of faith.- Belief in the ubiquity of Christ's 
body, and in its reception by the unworthy and by 
unbelievers, became the distinctive marks of Lutheran 

To the strife and dissensions concerning the Eucha- 
rist, justification and free-will, was now added a dispute 
over the person of Christ. Melanchthon, in his private 
letters, wrote in bitter language of ' the poor Wiirtem- 

^ Pressel, Anecdota, pp. 462-464. 

- DoUinger, ii. 363-364 ; Heppe, GcscJi. des Protestantismus, i. 312- 


berg abbots who, in their uncouth Latin, wanted to 
force new dogmas of faith on the Church.' ^ The 
Wlirtemberg creed, he wrote to the Elector Augustus of 
Saxony, was as much opposed to the true teaching as 
was the doctrine of the Papists. Brenz, simultane- 
ously and fiercely attacked by the Swiss and the Melan- 
chthonians, and by the theologians of Wittenberg, 
Leipsic, and Heidelberg, grew more and more vehement 
in his abhorrence of Zwinglians and Calvinists. He de- 
clared war against the Sacramentarians and complete 
separation from their followers to be a divinely imposed 
duty. The devil, he said, was aiming at nothing less than 
by means of these teachers to introduce heathenism, 
Talmudism, and Mohammedanism into the Church. 
Even on his death-bed he exhorted the clergy of Stutt- 
gardt to cherish hatred against the teaching of Zwingli 
and Calvin, and enumerated the evils which must result 
from their doctrine and from attachment to it.^ 

By the Lutheran party it was regarded as a sign of 
patient endurance on his part that he had written in 
his will : ' I will not close the door of eternal salvation 
against those who come back honestly from Zwinglian 
error to the true faith and confession.' ^ 

A considerable portion of the property of the Church 
had already been secularised under Duke Ulrich, but 
most of the benefices and religious foundations were 
confiscated by command of Duke Christopher after the 
religious peace had been concluded, and in spite of the 
stipulation in this treaty that not only the ecclesiastical 

^ Corp. Beform. ix. 1034. '^ Dollinger, ii. 364-366. 

^ ' Nolo iis, qui a Zwingliano errore ad veram fidem confessionemque 
ex animo revertuntur, januam ceternce sahitis occludere.' See "Wvtndt, 
Magazin, ii. 90. 


electors, princes, and Estates, but also ' the colleges, 
monasteries, and men and women belonging to religious 
orders were to be left in undisturbed possession of their 
rents, revenues, tithes, and secular fiefs, and also of 
their other rights and privileges.' Christopher secularised 
as many as sixty-eight abbeys and monasteries^ without 
heeding the protests of those that could lay claim to 
immediate tenure under the Empire, and were therefore 
not subject to the Duke. 

Imperial privileges and letters of protection, whether 
bestowed before or after the religious peace, were all 
disregarded. The ducal commissioners appointed to 
reform the monasteries declared again and again to the 
monks and nuns that, even if they could produce as many 
as a thousand imperial mandates, it would not trouble 
the Duke ; they were in Wiirtemberg, and therefore 
Wiirtembergish, and no separate government would be 
created for them. What the Duke was doing, he had 
iull right to do ; he was even obeying the command of 
God, who strongly interdicted all monkish idolatry. 
The commissioners even refused to read the imperial 
charters of freedom and protection which were shown 
to them, saying that they knew beforehand what was 
written in them ; the imperial chancellery took money 
and wrote down just what each one wished. They took 
possession of all documents, title-deeds, charters of 
privileges, and registers of lands in order that the cor- 
porations might not be able to appeal to them. The 
Duke, on one occasion, gave orders to spare only those 
documents which could in no way be brought up 
against him.^ 

^ Feyerabend, JaJirb. von Ottobeuren, iii. 212-213. 
- Berichte der BothenJiausler, ii. 22, 75, 193. 


With regard to tlie monasteries, Christoplier acted 
according to the advice of his councillors ' To abstain 
from using force, so as not to be accused of violating the 
Treaty of Passau ; to leave the present abbots to die 
out by degrees, and to be always on the watch to fill 
up the vacant posts at once with men who were willing 
to comply with the evangelical religion and with the 
Duke's wishes.^ For the monastery of Murrhard, a 
man of this description was found in Otto Leonard 
Hofsess, who pledged himself solemnly to abolish all 
idolatrous usages and not to receive priest's ordination ; 
who in 1558, by the Duke's permission, took unto him- 
self a wife, and then began such a course of iniquity in 
the monastery that he was removed to the fortress of 
Neufien, and had to esteem himself lucky in having his 
life spared. At Hirschau, in 1588, in spite of indignant 
protests, a Protestant coadjutor was forced on the 
abbot ; and at St. George's the Mass was forbidden, and 
a new Church system introduced. On the abbot's 
declaring that he would rather go about begging with 
staff in hand than let himself be forced to give up his 
religion, he was answered that he had a gracious prince 
who allowed him to carry on his own religion with his 
monks outside the Church.- 

The abbeys of Blaubeuren and Adelberg held out 
the longest against fche ' Reformation.' The Catholic 
abbots were not replaced by Protestant ones till 1563 
at Blaubeuren, and 1565 at Adelberg.^ 

Like the Palatine Elector and other Protestant 
princes, Duke Christopher, so often celebrated by his 
Lutheran associates as a beneficent and righteous 

1 Sclmurrer, pp. 238-239. -' Ibid. pp. 239-248. 

3 Hartmann, M. Alber, pp. 167-168. 


prince, behaved with special cruelty and inconsiderate - 
ness towards the nuns, although the latter, shut out 
from the whole world, could least of all be accused of 
popish conspiracy. The information we have on this 
subject, and which is chiefly taken from the reports of 
the commissioners themselves, deserves, for more than 
one reason, especial attention. In all materials at 
hand there is nothing whatever to confirm the general 
charges of immorality brought against the convents of 
that period ; on the contrary, they serve as convincing 
testimony to the irreproachable lives of those German 
women. They form also an index to a general know- 
ledge of the sixteenth century, showing plainly as they 
do how little Christian toleration there was for the 
opinions of others, and how rough and rude conduct and 
character were at that time. 

At the convent of Dominicanesses at Maria Reuthin, 
near Wildberg, mass, monks, and priests, idols, bells, 
lamps, and other ' relics of superstition ' had long since 
been abolished, but still the nuns had not yielded. In 
order once for all to break their constancy in accordance 
with evangelical exigencies, Balthasar of Giittlingen 
suggested to the Duke in 1556 that a cart should at 
once be got ready to carry off two of these obstinate 
nuns. He had used all his arts of persuasion, he said, 
to convince these women of their atrocious errors and 
of the idolatrous nature of their ceremonies, but in 
vain ; in vain, too, he had represented to them how 
much easier life was under the ' Reformation.' In the 
year 1559, according to the report of the commission, a 
' private examination ' was held in the case of each 
individual nun, and ' all manner of persuasion used, 
especially with the younger ones,' but ' both in the 


public and private interviews ' they refused to be shaken 
from their faith and their vows.^ The preacher who 
had been attached to the convent, represented at Stutt- 
gardt that if these nuns were allowed to continue any- 
longer in their obstinacy, they would think there was 
no reality in the new religion. It would be humiliating 
for the Duke if they should get the better of him. The 
kingdom of God must be established, and all scandal 
avoided.' The nuns then wrote a touching letter to 
their relatives among the nobility imploring them to 
appeal to the Duke on their behalf. For many years, 
they said, they had devoted themselves heart and soul, 
and with the approval of their parents and friends, to 
the rehgious life ; and so far as God had given them 
grace they had fulfilled their duties with diligence, and 
also, so they hoped and beHeved, conducted their lives 
and actions in such a manner as to injure no one and 
give offence to no one. But now that Lutheranism and 
all sorts of different sects and religious parties had 
invaded Germany, and the Holy Mass and the Christian 
Sacraments had been rejected, they had been repeatedly 
called upon to obey the ruling authorities, and to sub- 
mit themselves to the new Wiirtemberg Church regula- 
tions. They had answered that it would not be right 
for them to forsake the holy, universal Christian Church 
which had existed for a thousand years, and had been 
handed down, in all its beauty and unity, from the time 
of the Apostles, and to take up another religion. They 
would only conform to whatever the council might 
decide. On this answer the Holy Sacrament had been 
taken out of the Church ; communion under one species 

^ Rothenhausler, p. 37 ff. ; Beilagen, pp. 158-166. 
■■^ Ibid. pp. 175-177. 



only prohibited, tlie Mass abolished, a Protestant 
preacher forced upon them, whose sermons they were 
compelled to attend, and ' finally things went to such a 
length that we had to choose between being driven out 
of the convent into misery and want, or at our souls' 
peril and against our wills, profession, and rule, deserting 
the Holy Catholic, Christian Church.' ^ 

The Clarisses (nuns of the order of Ste. Claire) at 
Pfullingen had been persecuted for eleven years under 
Duke Ulrich with a view to making them * accept the 
gospel,' and acknowledge the Duke as their supreme 
lord in ' matters of conscience.' During these years 
they had been deprived of the Holy Mass, the Holy 
Sacraments, and all their religious books ; eleven of the 
sisters had died without the consolations of religion. 
But in spite of all insults, oppression, and privations, 
not a single sister had been induced to renounce her 
faith." Finally they had been driven out of their con- 
vent. At the time of the Interim, however, they had 
been allowed by Christopher to return, though with loss 
of all their possessions. But persecution had soon begun 
again. ' We are credibly informed,' wrote the Emperor 
Ferdinand to the Duke on March 9, 1559, ' that in the 
convent of Pfullingen there are, besides the abbess, 
fourteen or fifteen pious nuns who not only continue 
zealously in the practice of their laudable, ancient, 
Christian, Catholic faith, but also, in these troublous 
times of schism in religion, maintain such irreproachable 
conduct that no one can with truth lay anything un- 
worthy to their charge.' Nevertheless, these poor nuns 
were left no peace in their religion and in their service of 

1 Rothenhausler, pp. 173-175. 

^ See our quotations, Vol. v. pp. 412, 413. 


God, and even in tlie extremity of death they were not 
allowed the ministrations of a priest ; and this in spite 
of the permission previously granted them. * Attempts 
were also made to force them to give up the habit of 
their order, and to receive the Sacrament from the new 
preacher, with threats that if they refused they would 
be banished from the country and would not receive a 
penny out of the convent revenues. Further, the 
abbess and all her nuns were obliged to listen twice a 
week to sermons in the convent from a preacher of the 
new religion, and to pay the latter a fee of half a florin 
a week.' The Emperor concluded by requiring of the 
Duke to cease these innovations and acts of tyranny in 
the convent.^ Christopher called this letter ' sharp and 
incisive.' An answer was prepared in the government 
chancellery, and it was stated, under appeal to the 
Eeligious Treaty of Augsburg, that ' The nuns at 
Pfullingen are my subjects, and as such they have no 
right to repudiate my religion and Church regulations, 
or to profess another religion in its stead. Hitherto I 
have had gracious patience with these erring sisters 
(for which they should be all the more grateful as I have 
authority to act very diiferently), and with all fatherly 
pity and lenity, for the sake of their souls' salvation, I 
have had the pure Word of God preached and presented 
to them ; they have neither been threatened nor forced 
to the Sacrament.' The imperial letter was all the 
more objected to because, as the Duke discovered, it 
had been written without the knowledge or suggestion 
of the nuns. The Duke's councillors advised that no 
answer should be sent to the Emperor. It would be 
better, they urged, to wait for another injunction ; for it 

' Besold, Vii-ff. Sacrarum Mon. pp. 163-165. 

G 2 


was to be feared that liis Imperial Majesty would 
institute an investigation, and his princely grace might 
become involved in further trouble.' ^ But the Duke 
should not any longer delay, the councillors further 
advised in this same year, to introduce the reformation 
into all the convents ' by practical steps ; ' for these 
convents did nothing else than breed ' apostasy and 
idolatry, scandal and offence to consciences.' ^ 

These ' practical steps ' were to begin at Pfullingen. 

According to the report of the commission, the nuns 
declared unanimously that ' they had no desire to treat 
with contempt the Duke's Confession of Faith, and the 
religion he had established, but they hoped these inno- 
vations were not going to be forced upon them.' ' The 
Mass and other ceremonies having been taken from 
them, they had omitted them ever since.' The preacher 
who had been forced upon them said that for four years 
past he had preached to them regularly on Sundays and 
holy days, and also once in the week, but without any 
result, although the nuns had been present at all his 
sermons ; ' they were a pack of stubborn old women, 
but if they were dealt with in sober earnest, he thought 
that some of them at any rate might be brought round.' 
Not one of them, however, was conquered. Later on 
the elder nuns implored that the steward placed over 
them might be enjoined to leave off henceforth torment- 
ing them with his unchristian, offensive talk, and leave 
them in their old age to end their days in peace.^ 

The Duke's agents met with similar experiences in 
other convents. 

1 Besoia, I.e., pp. 166-169. See Rothenhausler, pp. 21-23, 119. 

2 Besold, I.e., pp. 171-172. 

^ Ro thenhausler, pp. 23 ff. ; Beilagen, pp. 144-149. 


The Dominican nuns of Gnadenzell, at Offenhausen, 
were all of them interviewed alone, but ' with old and 
young it was the same tune : ' they could not ' let 
themselves be constrained against their conscience ; if 
they were to be turned out of their convents they must 
bear it.' In the convent of Weiler, near Esslingen, the 
Dominican Sisters had been deprived of their Catholic 
worship since 1556, and were not even allowed to attend 
Catholic services elsewhere, but were compelled to listen 
to Protestant preaching. Not one of them, however, 
would renounce her faith. As faith was a free matter, 
they urged, and moreover the gift of God, and as they 
had always been told that it was not the Duke's intention 
to coerce any one into giving up his or her faith, they 
begged that as poor women they might be treated with 
mercy and left in peace to keep their vows according to 
ancient tradition, and to enjoy their privileges as vouch- 
safed to them in imperial charters only newly received. 
Was it not, moreover, laid down in the Treaty of Passau 
and in the Augsburg Reichsabschied that people were 
not to molest each other on account of religion ? 

In the Dominican convent of Steinheim-on-the- 
Murr, there was one case, and one only, of a nun apo- 
statising. All the others remained steadfast. They 
hoped through the protection of the Emperor and of 
their protectors, the Counts of Hohenlohe, to escape the 
' Reformation.' But in 1553 the Duke caused the 
convent to be besieged by a company of sixty infantry 
and cavalry. The soldiers broke in the windows, pulled 
down the stoves, and committed all sorts of wantonness 
in the church. Yielding to force, the nuns accepted the 
protection of the Duke, and were promised the free 
exercise of their religion at Steinheim and Ritenau. 


The promise, however, was not kept. On July 14, 
1556, so we read in the diary of one of the sisters, ' the 
Prince's councillors forbade us to practise our religion, 
to hear Mass, and to ring bells, and commanded us to 
adopt the Augsburg Confession. We protested vehe- 
mently, and complained that the promise made to us in 
1553 had not been kept. We also asked for a month's 
time for reflection. This was refused us, and we were 
told we must decide instantly ; if not we should provoke 
the Prince to great displeasure with us, and compel him 
at last to resort to force. Then we said that we were 
poor weak women, and could not resist force ; but that, 
whatever happened, we should remain true to our vows 
and our profession. We also supplicated that they 
would not do violence to our consciences.' The Catholic 
Church service was abolished in the convent, and a 
preacher installed there. In November of the following 
year some more commissioners came with orders that 
the nuns were to acknowledge the Duke's Confession of 
Faith, and were also to marry. In the convent regula- 
tions of Duke Ulrich for the year 1535, it had already 
been decreed that monastic persons who ' had resolved 
to change their state in a Christian manner and go out 
of their convents ' should have a jointure settled on 
them, ' whatever estate they entered into,' excepting 
only if they continued stiU in the popish religion : ' in 
such a case their income would at once be stopped.' ^ 
At Steinheim it was now threatened to enforce this 
decree. ' Those nuns,' said the commissioners, ' who 
give up their order and accept the Augsburg Confession 
shall receive back the money they brought with them 
into the convent ; those, on the other hand, who persist 

^ Pressel, Ainhrosnis Blaurer, pp. 359-364. 


in Popery will be driven out of the country.' To these 
threats the prioress and the nuns answered that, as 
regards their faith, they could not possibly give it up, 
for their consciences entirely forbade such a course ; 
the Duke could not mean to coerce any one to act against 
the dictates of conscience. They protested against the 
forcible imposition of a preacher. But when the latter 
fell ill ' we took him food and drink twice every day for 
six weeks,' writes one of the nuns in her diary. ' May he 
rest in peace ! Amen.' When the commissioners declared, 
in the name of the Duke, that every nun in the convent 
was free to renounce her profession and the rules of her 
order, and that the prioress had nothing to say in the 
matter, ' Then,' the diary goes on, ' we all stood up 
and said that we did not want freedom from our vows, 
but only wished to Hve and die in obedience to them ; 
the abbess was our dear mother, and we wished for no 
better. The worthy Mother Abbess also said that it 
was her wish to live and die with us,' In the year 1560 
followed another attempt to convert the stiff-necked 
nuns. ' On Laetare Sunday, March 24, Jorg von 
Helmstadt, Bastian Hornolt, and Hippoljrtus Resch 
came to the convent and read out the Prince's injunction 
that we were to agree to the Augsburg Confession and 
Wiirtemberg Reformation, and further that we were to 
be forbidden the exercise of our religion both in public 
and private, and that we were to have no more power 
over our own property. They compelled our steward to 
swear obedience to them. The next day they talked to 
each one of us separately, and made many promises to 
the young ones if they would leave the convent. But 
the whole sisterhood answered : *' We humbly intreat 
that his princely grace would leave us all together in 


our convent and in the exercise of our religion ; for we 
cannot accept all the above-mentioned articles ; it is 
against our conscience, and we will yield to no one." 
Said the councillors, " But you must ! " Said we, " Then 
we are overmastered, and we will appeal to God and to 
the world." ' Later on the tenants of the convent were all 
compelled to swear allegiance. All in vain did the 
bailiff, the judges, and the whole parish protest that 
they had good rulers, of whom they had nothing to com- 
plain, and whom they did not wish to break with — 
namely, the ladies of the convent ; they had genuine 
letters, bearing the seals of many of the imperial cities, 
to witness that they were tenants-in-fief of the convent. 
Twenty mounted soldiers and a company of arque- 
busiers were despatched to teach them a different lesson. 
Bailiff, judges, and council were taken prisoners and 
carried off to Marbach, and all the villagers threatened 
that if they did not swear homage to the Duke ' their 
wives and children would be expelled from the village, 
the village would be sacked and destroyed, and all the 
men put to death.' ^ 

What were the rulers to do with this ' conventual 
vermin,' ' this vagabond, abominable, blasphemous 
crew,' ' these pig-headed women ' who held out doggedly 
and patiently, and continued irreproachable in conduct 
in spite of being deprived of all their Church services 
and all their religious consolations ; who year by year 

^ This Diary was first publislied in full from the original in the Stutt- 
gardt State Archives, by Rothenhausler's Beilagen, pp. 178-193. Pfaff, 
in his Miscellanies, pp. 49-67, reproduced the greater part of it with 
altered orthography, and the omission of single passages : ' The poor 
nuns,' he remarks, ' command our entire sympathy.' Rothenhausler's 
article contains also fuller details concerning the treatment and the fate 
of the nuns of Weiler at Blaubeuren, of Kirchheim, Lichtenstern, Rech- 
netshofer, Herrenberg, Laufen, Ebingen, and Markgroningen. 


did not refuse to attend tlie sermons of the Protestant 
ministers wlio had been imposed on them, but who, 
nevertheless, stood firmly and valiantly by their own 
faith, and kept their vows and maintained unflinchingly 
that in matters of conscience it was not the Duke of 
Wiirtemberg who was their lord and master ? All rights 
they had possessed over their own convent property, 
over the pious foundations and legacies of the ancient 
Church, had been taken from them ; should they now, 
finally, be turned out their convents, they asked them- 

In 1564 a proposal was made by the Church coun- 
cillors that all those nuns who persisted doggedly in 
the Catholic faith should either be turned out of the 
convents to which they belonged, or else shut up to- 
gether in one conventual building. But this measure 
was considered dangerous, even by such theologians as 
John Brenz, James Andrea, Dietrich Schnepf ; and a few 
of the secular councillors were of the same opinion. 
' It was to be feared,' they said in a letter to the Duke, 
' that the nuns would not let themselves be removed to 
other places, or shut up in a separate convent, without 
offering resistance, and raising a terrible feminine 
shindy ; they would be sure to fly for help to their 
friends among the nobles and the burghers, and to make 
appeal to the imperial privileges bestowed on their con- 
vent and their ecclesiastical colleges. The Emperor 
was their chief lord-protector, the Duke only second in 
authority over them, and it was contrary to the decrees 
of the Empire to eject them from their free colleges. It 
was quite likely that they themselves, or their relatives, 
would take measures by which the matter might be 
brought before the Emperor or the Imperial Chamber, 


and grave complications and trouble might ensue. 
The best course for the Duke was not only to sternly 
forbid the nuns the practice of all popish ceremonies, 
but also to have all their prayer-books and reading- 
books taken out of their cells, and all images and books 
removed from the churches. In case of any nun falling 
ill, they must, under pain of severe punishment, call in 
a preacher. Also they must be forbidden to elect any 
new abbess or prioress in future, and they must be com- 
pelled to give up all secular administration.' * The 
Lutheran steward was instructed that " in order that he 
might have better opportunities for inspection and for 
promoting Christian conversation, he and his wife were 
to have their meals with the nuns, who were not to be 
allowed any but Lutheran servant-maids. He was also 
to forbid these servants to take any letters or messages 
to the nuns without his knowledge. The keys of the 
convent gate were only to be trusted to the steward or 
his wife." *' The superintendent must be enjoined to 
be diligent in his inspection both of the religious and 
domestic affairs of the convent, and to entertain the 
nuns frequently with religious colloquies." *' For private 
colloquies of this sort are more profitable to such mis- 
guided women than public sermons." But if the nuns 
would not submit to these regulations then the Duke 
was fully warranted by the command of God to punish 
them as severely as their misconduct deserved, for the 
sake of example to others.' ^ 

In a contemporary pubUcation entitled ' A Manual 
of Christian Complaint and Consolation,' we read as 
follows : ' When the day comes, as is to be hoped it 
will, that human and Christian feehng revives among 

^ Besold, Vi7'g. Sacrarum Mon. pp. 237-240. 


the Protestant oppressors and intimidators, they will 
blush with shame at the thought of all the outrageous 
and tyrannical actions perpetrated by them during such 
a length of time ; they will blush to think how for ten, 
twenty, thirty years and more, they cruelly persecuted 
and tormented poor defenceless nuns, feeble and infirm 
with age, in order to force them to renounce their faith. 
Oh what a mockery it is that these tyrants and abusers 
of power should exclaim everywhere that their gospel is 
Christian freedom, that they have no wish to tyrannise 
over consciences, when there could never have been 
worse tyrants than those men who do not scruple to go 
on unceasingly tormenting the consciences of the people, 
robbing them of the consolation of the Holy Sacraments, 
of the religious ministrations of consecrated priests, of 
aU their prayer-books and devotional books, and even 
on their death-beds, in spite of their piteous entreaties, 
refusing them the Viaticum and Extreme Unction ! 
All the iniquities committed in German lands and cities 
are attested at the judgment-seat of God by the souls of 
thousands of consecrated nuns, who never did wrong to 
any one, and who asked for nothing more than per- 
mission to live and die in their ancient faith, even 
though their worldly goods should be taken from them, 
and they should be shut up within closed walls.' 

' Dear Christian friend, tell me, I pray, even though 
you should not belong to the one Holy Church, what 
good has come of such tyrannical actions ? The con- 
fiscated Church and convent property has crumbled 
into dust, and a curse lies on it, as the Protestants 
themselves declare, a hundredfold. Have the poor, 
perchance, gained anything ? Has poverty grown 
lighter, or has it not rather become far heavier and more 


widespread than before the schisms in religion, in the 
days of the one Christian faith ? Ask this question 
through the length and breadth of Grermany, and the 
answer will be the same ; besides, you can see for your- 
self in villages and towns.' ' Has peace increased, my 
friend, or rather have not hatred, dissension, and 
enmity among high and low, learned and unlearned, 
clergy and laity, spread and multiplied ? Does peace 
dwell in our homes ? And what have you to say about 
the discipline of the young ? Could the rising genera- 
tion be more ungovernable than it is ? ' ' While the 
great and the learned are wrangling about creeds and 
confessions, and every year setting up some new form of 
faith, each of which asserts itself as the only evangelical 
one, the common people no longer know whom and what 
to believe, and Christian love and charity have become 
things of the past. Unbelief, blasphemy, cursing, and 
swearing have grown so rampant, that numbers of 
preachers who would fain see better things, and are 
earnestly striving thereafter, are altogether in despair.' 
* Tell me frankly, dear, true-hearted Christian, 
what good has come out of this new, contradictory, 
and ever-changing gospel ? The princes, too, like the 
learned biblical scholars, who glory in the Gospel, and 
set the people squabbling, are themselves fighting about 
the faith and wanting to wield the spiritual sword, 
while they neglect the secular sword of judgment ; and 
the Holy Empire, the beloved Fatherland, has grown 
weak and miserable, and become a laughing-stock to 
strangers.' ^ 

1 Christliclie Klage- und Trostschrift fur alle Christenmenschen 
(1578), pp. 7-9, 11, 12. By the author of the ' Klage der Armen und 
Diirftigen ' (' Plaint of the Poor and Needy '), on the robbery of Church 
goods, pubHshed at Ingolstadt in the year 1577. 




The Empire had indeed become ' weak and miserable,, 
and a laughing-stock to strangers.' 

After the unity of the faith had been formally 
renounced by the Religious Peace of Augsburg, the 
universal significance of the Papacy, and with it the 
Holy Christian Empire in the old sense of the word, had 
practically ceased to be. From henceforth the terri- 
torial power of the princes asserted itself more and more 
strongly over the might of the Empire. Under the 
segis of so-called ' German liberty ' every species of in- 
subordination and resistance to the supreme head of the 
realm was palUated and defended, and there grew up 
gradually that new system of polity which dismembered 
the Empire, transformed the reigning princes into com- 
pletely independent sovereigns (tyrants, too often, over 
their subjects), and as it were ' mediatised' the nation 
and robbed it of its power and renown. The general 
affairs of the Fatherland were most shamefully neg- 
lected ; the best strength of the nation was consumed 
in degrading theological controversy. The military 
commander-in-chief, Lazarus von Schwendi, said in 
1570, ' the strength of the German nation is going 
utterly to the ground, and the imperial power has 


no longer any substance or reality in it ; it is a mere 
shadow.' Nine years before, in 1561, the Spanish 
ambassador. Count Luna, had written to Philip II. : 
* In very truth things in Germany are in such evil 
plight, not only with respect to religion, but also as 
regards loyalty and obedience, that the dignity of a 
King of the Romans is not merely nothing much, but 
actually nothing at all.' ^ 

During the reign of Charles V., Germany had attained 
to greater power and glory than ever before, but after 
his abdication the Empire not only lost its preponder- 
ating influence, but descended from the rank of great 
European powers, and withdrew altogether from foreign 

Switzerland had already separated itself from the 
Empire under Maximilian I. ; under Charles V. the 
territory of the Teutonic knights had been converted into 
a Polish fief, and, through the treason of the Elector 
Maurice and his associates, the first partitioning of 
Germany had followed. The three most important 
border fortresses, the chief bulwarks against France, had 
been lost, and Strassburg, which was the key to Alsace 
and the Upper Rhine, had almost fallen into the hands 
of the French. The French kings, themselves lusting 
for the imperial crown, had always placed themselves 
at the head of the Emperor's enemies, and in the year 
1557 ' extensive intrigues on the part of France to secure 
the Empire ' were still apprehended on the Rhine.- The 
Venetian ambassador, Federigo Badoero, reported this 
same year that the Elector Palatine Frederic II. was 
actively engaged in forming a Rhenish confederacy ; he 

^ Schmidt, Allgemeine Z eitsclirift fiir Oesch. viii. 21, 22. 
^ Schumacher, i. 305. 


had wanted to arrange a secret league between the 
Rhenish Elector and King Henry 11. of France/ 

The internal conditions of the Empire were most 
lamentable. The Venetian ambassador, Michael Soriano, 
accredited to the Court of King Ferdinand, regarded 
Germany in 1556 as the ' most corrupt and anarchical 
of States.' ^ William Melander wrote to a friend in 
Paris towards the end of 1557 : * While strife and dis- 
cord are increasing, in spite of the treaty of peace 
concluded at Augsburg, and while unholy schism and 
bitterness are dividing hearts and minds, public 
insecurity in trade and business is spreading most 
lamentably ; large districts are overrun by hordes of 
bandits, who rob and plunder the inhabitants with 
impunity.' ^ 

The town delegates assembled at the Diet of Ratisbon 
in 1556 complained, in a memorial presented to King 
Ferdinand, that, ' in spite of the mandates of Emperor 
and Empire, there had been many more robberies and 
deeds of violent aggression on the imperial highways of 
late than ever before for many years past. It has come 
to this that in many districts no honest man is safe out- 
side his own door ; much less can he journey abroad 
without serious danger to life and property. Within a 
short space of time, numbers of merchant wagons from 
the Upper and Lower Netherlands, and from other 
dependencies of the Empire, had been overturned and 
plundered, and also many respectable, unoffending 
persons had been seized on the highways, and brutally 

^ . . . ' e stato autore di far una lega che e tenuta segreta, tra loro 
elettori del Reno e S. M. Cristianissima. L' imperadore fa queste cose 
issimulando ' {Albert, ser. 1, col. iii, 216). 

- ' Guastissimo et corruttissimo ' (Schmidt, Neuere Gesch. ii. 146-149). 

^ Miszellaneen gemeinniltzigen Inhaltes, pp. 72, 73. 


shot or murdered. In some places whole villages and 
boroughs had been burnt down. Crimes so abomi- 
nable,' the work, for the most part, of vagrant, disbanded 
LandsJmechts (foot soldiers), ' will redound among all 
Christian potentates to the eternal shame of the German 
nation ; they are the ruin of all commerce in Germany ; 
they send up the prices of provisions, and cause traders 
and handicrafts to come to a standstill, as is evident in 
many places.' ^ 

In another memorial the town delegates said that 
' The new and excessive tolls imposed on traffic both by 
land and water ' had also a great deal to do with the 
falling off of trade. ' For this reason numbers of trades- 
people, here and there, especially in the towns, have 
already given up their business and handicrafts, for they 
cannot afford to pay these heavy tolls and customs 
duties.' Commerce and industry are in danger of 
becoming extinct or falling into the hands of a few 
wealthy men ; should this happen, the towns will be 
ruined, and the greatest misery will befall the subjects 
of the Empire.^ The delegates of the Lower Austrian 
Estates drew a gruesome picture, at this same diet, of 
the tyrannical behaviour of the Turks on German soil : 
' The Christian people are strangled by thousands and 
brutally massacred ; by thousands they are carried 
off into captivity.' ^ 

Meanwhile the Protestant princes represented to 
the King at the Diet that the most urgent matter for 

^ In den Franhfurter Beichstagsacten, 64'', fol. 206-208. 

^ Ibid. 64^ fol. 204-206. The Frankfort delegate, Anton zum 
Jungen, sent the Council on March 7, 1557, copies of these two memorials 
(fol. 292). 

3 Ibid. 66% fol. 47-107. See 66^, fol. 78-101, the motion of the 
Hungarian and Bohemian delegates. 


imperial consideration was the removal of the ' Ecclesi- 
astical Reservation ' from among the stipulations of 
the Religious Peace of Augsburg ; this was a question, 
they said, which concerned the beloved Fatherland far 
more closely than any other. It had been expressly 
stated in the Treaty of Religious Peace that all arch- 
bishops, bishops, and prelates might, ' without detri- 
ment to their honour,' go over to the Augsburg Con- 
fession ; but that they must forfeit the archbishoprics, 
or bishoprics, or prelacies, together with the revenues 
thereto appertaining, to which they had been appointed 
when they were Catholics.^ This stipulation was 
looked upon by the Protestant princes as ' a snare to 
consciences.' It was to be feared that any restriction 
on the clergy's acceptance of the Augsburg Confession 
might prove a serious obstacle in any future attempts 
at effecting religious unity. For ' some honest Chris- 
tians ' might be withheld from confessing the truth from 
fear of losing their dignities and emoluments, and thus 
there would be no such thing as free and open voting 
for Christian reforms and reconciliation, but only 
timid and hampered votes. Further, ' it would be no 
slight blot and disgrace to the Protestant religion, if 
those who acknowledged it and who recognised the 
truth of the Divine Word were deposed from their 
administrative posts, and ecclesiastical dignities and 
of&ces, and pronounced unworthy of the clerical name 
and status, which, nevertheless, they could not re- 
nounce.' If the Reservation was not removed, it would 
be impossible to come to any final agreement or to take 
any decisive action with regard to any other imperial 

^ Concerning the ' Ecclesiastical Reservation ' and its significance, see 
our statements, vol.;iii. 754 f. (German orig.) ; vol. vi. 495, n. 2 (Eng. transl.). 
VOL. vir. H 


matters.^ Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg had 
given instructions to his delegates not to confine them- 
selves to the question of removal" of the ' Reservation,' 
but also to require that the bishops should be released 
from their oaths to the Pope. If ' Christian freedom 
is not obtained,' said the Duke, ' we cannot hope for 
peace.' " The Protestant delegates were unremitting 
in their assertions that in thus insisting on emancipa- 
tion their one object was ' to set consciences free, and to 
promote mutual confidence among the Estates, and 
religious unity.' 

But under these fine-sounding names the princes 
meant no more and no less than complete suppression 
of the Catholics. In a memorandum of advice against 
the ' Reservation,' Melanchthon had said as early as 
1555 : ' We cannot force on religious unity in Germany ; 
the only way is to wait for the power of the pure truth 
to attract gradually a larger and larger number of 
bishops, princes, and other rulers to its cause.' ^ The 
Palatine Elector said, in a letter to the Duke of Wiirtem- 
berg, that if they both persisted in demanding the 
abolition of the Reservation, ' the harvest would be 
ready for the sickle before they had done.' "^ 

But the Protestant princes met with stubborn 
resistance from Ferdinand, ' who was still far too much 
under the influence of popish abominations and priest- 
craft.' He had asked the Estates for subsidies against 
the Turks, who were threatening another gigantic attack. 
The Sultan wanted not only to make himself entire 
master of Hungary (the possession of which was so 
important to the Empire), but he had also demanded 

' Erstenberger, pp. 18''-22. ^ gattler, iv. 24 f. 

^ CoriJ. Beform. viii. 478. "■ Kugler, ii. 29, note. 


the unconditional surrender of Transylvania ; and with 
this country another bulwark against the arch-enemy 
would be lost.^ The help of the Estates was urgently 
needed ; but the King declared that he would rather 
forego all their assistance and calmly await the destruc- 
tion of the Empire than consent to the abolition of 
the ' Reservation.' " 

The Protestants, as well as the Catholics, were of 
opinion that Ferdinand had ' good and weighty reasons ' 
for his decision. ' It is greatly to be feared,' said the 
Frankfort town council on February 24, 1557, in a draft 
of instructions for its delegates — ' it is greatly to be 
feared that the electors and princes, in making this 
demand, have private objects in view, which will not 
only be advantageous to some few ecclesiastical princes, 
but also in the future very profitable to their electoral 
and princely graces themselves, as well as to their 
belongings ; and it is also to be feared that they are 
more on the look-out for temporal things than for things 
eternal.' The delegate was therefore en]oined ' not to 
press the matter too hard.' ^ His own report as to the 
results of his mission is that ' neither with the King nor 
with the Ecclesiastical Estates was it possible to push 
the matter through.' ^ The Elector Augustus of Saxony 
objected at first- to having the question mooted at the 
Diet, because the article on the ' Reservation ' had 
nothing to do with the Protestant princes,^ possibly 
also because he mistrusted the intentions of the Palatine 
Elector and the Duke of Wiirtemberg. The latter 
thought it necessary to defend himself in a letter to the 

^ The King's address to the Estates, Eiess, pp. 182, 183, 
'^ Schmidt, Neiiere Geschichte, iii. 16. 

3 Beichstagsacten, 64^ fol. 281. * Ibid. G4, fol. 292. 

^ Eitter, Augsbarger Beligionsfriede, p. 254. 

H 2 


Landgrave Philip of Hesse against the representation 
made to the Elector Augustus that he, in conjunction 
with the Palatine Elector, intended seizing the bishoprics 
of the Empire, and delivering them over to secular 
hands. ^ 

Ferdinand was immovable. He reminded the as- 
sembly that when, at the time of the conclusion of 
the Religious Peace, a long and weary dispute had gone 
on between the Protestants and Catholics respecting 
the ' Reservation,' he had adduced many good and suf- 
ficient reasons for not depriving the Catholic clergy of 
the benefit of this clause, and had insisted that in 
accordance with the rights of the clergy, in accordance 
with the laws and constitution of the Holy Empire, 
and above all in accordance with the Treaty of Passau, 
this Reservation ought to be incorporated in the charter 
of the Religious Peace. Although the Protestants had 
at that time brought forward some arguments against 
him, the ' Reservation,' with other articles, had been 
agreed to and finally embodied among the terms of the 
Religious Peace, with ' the knowledge and consent ' of 
^the Estates of both religions. The Estates professing 
the Augsburg Confession had ' not only not opposed the 
clause any more,' but had even thanked the King for 
the peace that had been concluded more heartily than 
the Catholics had done. They too, as well as the 
Catholics, had entered in the Recess their acknow- 
ledgment that all the articles of this document had 
been passed with their approval, and that they would 
conform to them honestly and persistently. By their 
present demand for the abolition of the ' Reservation,' 
Ferdinand said, they were calling in question the treaty 

' Letter of Feb. 23, 1558, in Neudecker, Neue Beitriir/e, i. 161. 


of peace ' which had been concluded with so much 
difficulty and trouble, and after so long and wearisome 
a contest, and were giving the Catholic Estates reason 
to think that they wanted to upset the peace altogether, 
and to bring matters back to their former state of con- 
fusion.' But even should this happen, and a return 
be made to the position of affairs before the settlement 
of the peace, he, the King, would never give in to the 
abolition of the ' Reservation.' ^ 

To this the delegates of the Protestant princes 
replied that the ' Reservation ' clause had by no means 
been generally agreed to at Augsburg, but only inserted 
by command of the King. The thanks expressed by them 
to the King for the conclusion of the peace could not 
' be interpreted as consent to the " Reservation," for this 
was not an item in the terms of the peace, and had no 
relation to its main substance ; on the contrary, it rather 
hindered reconciliation in religious matters, as by it the 
clergy were cut off from all Christian reform on penalty 
of severe punishment. They had not raised a protest 
at Augsburg against the incorporation of the " Reserva- 
tion " clause in the charter of peace, because the words of 
the King, recorded there also, that on this point " the 
Estates of both religions had not been able to come to 
an agreement " showed plainly that they had not given 
their consent : their " oft-reiterated dissent " was suffi- 
ciently emphasised in the document itself.' ^ 

The chief interest of the Protestant princes in thus 
struggling for the removal of the ' Ecclesiastical Reser- 
vation ' was the spread of their own religion and the 
provision of bishoprics and benefices for their heirs and 
successors. The King's concern, on the other hand, was 

1 Erstenberger, pp. 23-24, 29-30. - Ibid. pp. 23-24, 29-30. 


to protect the imperial power, too much enfeebled 
already, and not to let bishoprics and religious esta- 
blishments fall a prey to temporal hereditary princes ; 
for the electoral princes had been, on the whole, for 
centuries past better supporters of the electoral throne 
than the hereditary princes who were always working 
for complete independence. At the same time Ferdi- 
nand recognised in the ' Ecclesiastical Reservation ' 
a most important bulwark of the Catholic Church 
in the Empire. The occupation of archbishoprics and 
bishoprics by Protestants at a time when the saying 
held good everywhere, ' Wessen das Land, dessen die 
Beligion,^ ^ would have been speedily followed by the 
Protestantisation of the territory in question ; and 
seeing that most of the temporal princes had embraced 
the new religion, the next step would have been the 
complete suppression of the Catholics. The King,, 
therefore, had ' good and weighty reasons ' for per- 
sisting in his opposition to the removal of the ' Reserva- 

On March 12 the delegates of the Protestant princes 
handed in a memorial to the King to the effect that they 
had been solemnly charged to protest and declare 
openly, in the name of their electors and princes, that 
they had never consented to the ' Ecclesiastical Reserva- 
tion,' and that for conscience's sake they never could and 
never would consent to it. If in the future, they said, 
any cleric was deprived of his dignity, benefice, and 
office on account of refusal to accept the Augsburg 
Confession, they would not help in any way in proceed- 
ings against him, ' in like manner,' they declared, ' as 
they had never consented to execute against the con- 

^ ' Whose the land, theirs the religion.' 


verted clergy the stipulations of the Landfriede 
(measures for securing freedom from injustice and 
violence throughout the land) annexed to the treaty 
of religious and profane peace.' At the same time, 
they added, it was by no means their intention to 
call in question the Religious Treaty of Peace, or to 
attempt to upset it, for the ' Reservation ' had nothing 
to do with the question of the peace, and did not lay 
them under any obligation to the other Estates ; it 
belonged to the various rules and regulations framed 
among themselves by the clergy, and it rested on their 
recommendation.^ Duke Christopher, moreover, had 
proposed a still more resolute mode of procedure. At 
a special conference of the Estates his delegate had 
said that if they did not succeed in obtaining either 
the abolition or a modification of the ' Reservation,' they 
ought to present themselves before the King and pro- 
test that ' if one or more among the Papists' party 
wished to come over to our religion, and were in con- 
sequence deprived of their benefices, dignities, and 
possessions, we could not on that account repel them 
from us, but should feel it our dutv to take them under 
our care and protection.' 

Such protection would at any rate be quite legiti- 
mate if the ' Reservation ' had been entirely done away 
with. For then it would not only not be allowable 
to take part in proceedings based on such a clause, 
but it would be a duty to try to prevent what would 
be an act of injustice, and also to take the side of the 
parties on whom the injustice fell. But the rest of the 
Estates had not been willing to go to such lengths 

1 Erstenberger, pp. 30''-32. 


as this, and so the Wiirtemberg resolution was not 

In spite, however, of the protest entered on March 12, 
the Treaty of Eeligioiis Peace was confirmed in its 
entirety in the (Recess) on March 16. Ferdinand's 
son. King Maximilian of Bohemia, wrote to Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg on April 13 that he had expected that 
his father would have been more yielding in the matter 
of the ' Reservation.' ' I cannot imagine,' he said, 
' who the people can have been who have hindered 
such a work ; but they will receive their due reward.' - 
Maximilian comforted the Duke with the remark : 
' Who knows but that everything may be changed 
again ? ' ^ 

And indeed it did soon appear to the Protestant 
princes as if there were a prospect of Ferdinand's 
changing his mind. 

After Charles V. had renounced the imperial throne 
and title, the electors met together at Frankfort and 
summoned thither King Ferdinand, who on March 14, 
1558, swore, as Emperor of the Romans, to keep firmly 
and faithfully the Religious Peace, and the public peace, 
and all the statutes and ordinances of the Augsburg 
Recess of 1555, and never on their account to oppress 
any one himself, or allow any one to be oppressed by 
others. Ferdinand set himself most strongly against 
the pretension of the Protestant electors that the 
Emperor in his coronation oath ought no longer to 
pledge himself ' to take under his suzerain care, pro- 
tection, and guardianship, Christendom and the see of 

^ Bitter, Augsburger Beligionsfriede, pp. 254-258. 

2 Le Bret, ix. 85. 

' Pfister, Herzog Christoph, i. 336. 


Rome, with his HoHness the Pope and the Christian 
Church,' and he succeeded, though not without diffi- 
culty, in keeping intact the ancient form of oath. But 
as Charles V. had abdicated without the consent of the 
apostolic see, and Ferdinand had assumed the imperial 
dignity also without the consent of Rome, a fierce 
quarrel broke out on the subject with the Pope 
Paul IV.i 

Clinging firmly to the mediaeval idea of the Empire, 
Paul declared that without the sanction of the Pope 
an emperor could not resign his dignity, and the 
electors could not accept such a resignation, or proceed 
to a new election. He (Paul) could not confirm an 
election which was null and void ; but he could cancel 
the election and then himself appoint the selected 
candidate, in consideration of his good qualities and 
services. The election, he said, was null and void 
for another reason, viz. that avowed heretics and 
apostates had had a share in it. At a consistory of the 
Cardinals, so report said, the Pope spoke quite passion- 
ately, and said that Charles V. could not have been in 
possession of his reason when he acted as having the 
plenary power of resignation. On the other hand, the 
Imperial Vice- Chancellor Seld, in a memorandum drawn 
up at Ferdinand's request, said the Pope was so furious 
that many people thought that age and other circum- 

^ What the Protestants thought of the election of Ferdinand is shown 
by a letter of Peter Martyr to Calvin on April 21, 1558 : ' Inauguratio 
novi Imperatoris forma et ratione insolita et hactenus inaudita omnibus 
admirationem incredibilem peperit. Hac enim (ut loquuntur) coronatione 
Antichristi Romani auctoritas videtur disjecta, plus quam hactenus 
unquavi fuerit : et quo pacto electores archiepiscopi adduci potuerint, ut 
eiusmodi consenserint inaugurationi, nuUus propemodum intelligit ' 
{Calvini 0_pj). xvii. 144). 


stances must have robbed him of his senses.^ The 
contest was still in full swing when the Emperor Ferdi- 
nand summoned the Estates to a Diet at Augsburg on 
January 1, 1559. ' Now that Emperor and Pope were 
so fiercely at strife,' there was more hope, so the Protes- 
tants thought, of obtaining from the Emperor freedom 
of action for the clergy.^ 

While the princes were absorbed in discussing the 
* Ecclesiastical Reservation,' which they regarded as the 
most important question of the day, the one which 
' most closely concerned the beloved Fatherland,' 
French and Russians were burning and plundering, 
unchecked, on German soil. At the Augsburg Diet, 
Bishop Rupert of Liege handed in to the Emperor and 
the notables a statement, describing the acts of violence 
perpetrated by the French in his diocese. ' If measures of 
prevention were not taken, he said, the whole of the 
bishopric would be lost to the Empire, as had been the 
case with the bishoprics of Lorraine. If France once 
got possession of the diocese of Liege, she would have 
easy access to other territories.' ^ A similar complaint 
was made by the expelled ' Regents and burghers of 
the town of Metz,' of the ' treacherous, tyrannical, and 
cruel behaviour ' of the French. ' This city, so beauti- 
ful and flourishing, so far-famed and orderly of yore,' 
was now in a most piteous condition, and reduced to 
a state of intolerable servitude. From 1400 to 1500 

' Fuller details concerning the ' Quarrel between the Papacy and the 
Empire ' in E. Reimann's article in the Forschungen zur deutschen 
Gescli. V. 291-335, and in the admirable pages of J. Schmid in the Hist, 
Jahrb. vi. 5 ff., the result of comprehensive study in Roman libraries. 

- The Diet was opened on IMarch 3, 1559, See Wolf, Znr Gescli. der 
deutschen Protestanten, p. 162. 

3 Frankfort Beichstagsacten, 69, fol. 54-56. See Haberlin, iv. 118- 


houses had been pulled down to furnish materials 
for the fortification of the town, six cloisters demolished, 
and unheard-of brutality perpetrated against the in- 
habitants. Among other enormities was the case of 
a Franciscan monk, who was accused of complicity 
with the Emperor and was tortured to death on the 
rack, and afterwards hung up in a public place. Where- 
as all their complaints to the Emperor and the Empire 
had proved fruitless, the citizens now begged that the 
Estates would come to the rescue of this oppressed 
and ruined town.^ 

These complaints of the Bishop of Liege and the 
burghers of Metz were read out to the notables on 
March 30, 1559, and the Emperor Ferdinand insisted 
that the matter should be dealt with seriously, in order 
' at last to show that the Holy Empire would not for 
ever suffer loss, insults, and persecution to go un- 

Shortly before, during the transactions connected 
with the treaty of peace, concluded at Chateau-Cam- 
bresis between France, Spain, and England, the Emperor 
had endeavoured to bring the French to renounce the 
Lotharingian towns and bishoprics of Metz, Toul, and 
Verdun, which had come into their possession through 
the treachery of the princes in 1552.^ His endeavours, 
however, had failed, and now, by the Emperor's wish, 
the Imperial Estates were to take ' this highly impor- 
tant matter in hand and insist on the restoration of 
the territories unjustly wrested from the Empire.' 
The French King, Henry II., had sent two ambassadors 

^ Frankfort BeicJistagsacten, 69, fol. 57-67. 

- Report in Kluckhohn, Letters, i. 57. Concerning this treachery in 
the year 1552, see our statement, iii. 682 ff. 


to the Diet, with instructions to express his feelings 
of ' especial love and favour ' towards Germany, and 
to promise his friendship and support. ' On the way 
to Augsburg,' so ran the King's instructions, ' the 
ambassadors were to convey his thanks to the Count 
Palatine, the Duke of Wiirtemberg, the Landgrave of 
Hesse, and Duke John Frederic of Saxony, for the help 
and friendship which they had shown of late years to 
the French crown ; they were to promise all these 
princes the King's best services for the advancement of 
their houses.' If the Estates at Augsburg, at Ferdi- 
nand's suggestion, should demand the restoration of 
the bishoprics, they were to answer that they had no 
power over them, but that they did not doubt that 
if the Emperor applied to the King himself, he would 
gain the assurance of Henry's good intentions with 
regard to the freedom and greatness of the Empire.^ 

' French palaver of this sort was well known in the 
Empire of old,' but on this occasion also there were 
many among the princes ' on whom it produced a favour- 
able impression, and to whom it afforded a pretext 
for saying that it would not be wise to offend the King 
of France.' The Palatine Elector was especially anxious 
that the King's ' proffered friendship should not be 
rejected, but gratefully accepted, that, with regard to 
the restitution of the bishoprics, everything should 
be done as pleasantly as possible, and that the French 

' Piibier, ii. 785. See Barthold, Deutschland unci die Hitgenotten, 
i. 264-265 ; and Heidenhain, Beitrdge, pp. 70, 141. The French King 
du-ected his envoys to apply constantly for advice and help to the ' many 
princes, lords, generals, and captains who were his pensioners, and for 
whom he gave them sums of money.' They were also to grant pensions 
of 200 thalers each to councillors and servants of the princes. Raumer, 
Letters from Paris, i. 33. 


ambassadors should be dismissed with friendly assur- 
ances.' ^ 

The ambassadors reported to Paris that there was 
nothing to fear from Germany. The condition of the 
Empire was such that it had enough to do to look after 
its own preservation, without thinking of foreign 
undertakings. ' The slowness of the Germans, the 
confusion in their deliberations, the lengthiness of their 
diets will give us time to put Metz and the other con- 
quered towns in such a state of defence as to preclude 
all fear of Germany's winning them back again.' " 

After lengthy debates the Estates agreed to send 
a special embassy to France to treat with Henry II. 
for the restoration of the territory wrested from Ger- 
many, ' so that the power and reputation of the Holy 
Empire might be sustained.' Two persons, if possible 
of princely rank, one of them a Catholic and the other 
an Augsburg Confessionist, were to be selected. The 
choice fell on Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg and 
the Cardinal Bishop Otto of Augsburg. But the Duke 
refused to travel with the Cardinal, and wished to be 
accompanied by Duke Albert of Bavaria. The latter, 
however, made difficulties. He said that in the present 
unsettled state of affairs he could not undertake so 
long a journey unless he had full security from the 
Emperor and the Estates that in case of any disturb- 
ance or insurrection breaking out in the Empire 
during his absence, ' his wife and children, as well as 
his lands and people, would be taken under the pro- 
tection of the Emperor and the Estates.' ^ Albert 

^ Frederic's instructions for his ambassadors, in Kluckhohn, Letters, 
i. 50, 58, 60. See Heidenhain, Beitrdge, pp. 71, 74. 
^ Rauuier, Letters, i. 34. 
* Frankfort Beichstagsacten, 67, fol. 139. 


moreover demanded 12,000 florins a month for his 
travelling expenses, whereas the Estates would not 
even vote him 4,000.^ ' So that again there was no- 
thing but unpleasantness.' ' I greatly fear,' wrote the 
Frankfort delegate, Daniel zum Jungen, on May 29, 
^ that this preposterous behaviour of Germany will 
excite a good deal of laughter in France and elsewhere.' 
On July 4 he wrote further : ' This embassy is a trouble- 
some business, which will cost an immense deal of 
money and lead to great difficulties on account of 
the indemnity, and it might just as well be given up 
as proceeded with.' " 

When, finally, after the death of Henry II., Louis 
Madruzzi, Bishop of Trent, and Louis Count zu Stolberg 
and Konigstein, were sent as ambassadors to the new 
King, Francis II., Duke Christopher and Wolfgang, 
the Count Palatine of Zweibriicken, were full of anxiety 
as to ' what intrigues they would carry on while in 
France.' ^ The ambassadors were received with due 
solemnity by Francis II. and magnificently enter- 
tained. Francis conveyed to them the assurance that 
he was delighted at their arrival because they had 
been sent as friends by friends to his Eoyal Majesty, 
who was their great friend. He also allowed that the 
bishoprics and towns of Lorraine belonged to the 
Empire, and that the Empire on the other hand had 
not taken possession of any land that belonged to 
France. * Nevertheless, he added, he could not at 

^ Schmidt, Neuere Gcschichtc, iii. 97 ; Biicholtz, vii. 135 ; Heiden- 
liain, Beitriige, pp. 80, 147 f. 

2 Frankfort Beichstagsacien, 67, fol. 44'', 63. 

^ Kugler, ii. 136, note. 

* ' . . . Libenter etiam agnoscit, sacrum Germanicae nationis imperiuni 
nihil unquam antea nostra memoria quicquam quod esset Gallicorum 
finium occupasse.' 


present consent to the restoration of tlie towns and 
bishoprics ; but so as not to awaken any unfriendly 
feelings against himself in the hearts of the German 
people, he would wait till the next Diet, when he would 
lay his claims and rights before the assembly. ^ 

' And so, in very truth, the whole business was 
absurd and disgraceful, and the Holy Empire stood 
by in helpless impotence.' ^ 

Through the outbreak of the French wars of religion 
the Empire was saved for the present from further 
losses to France ; but from its soil both the leaders 
of the French politico-religious revolution and their 
base and dishonourable opponents drew their support. 
The contest was waged on both sides by means of German 

But it was not against France alone that the Empire 
stood in helpless impotence ; it was in danger also of 
forfeiting the rest of its possessions in Russia and 

With the help of strategists of German, Polish, and 
Italian nationality, Ivan the Terrible had created 
an army on the pattern of the armies of Western 
Europe ; it consisted of 60,000 men ready to take the 
field. His large collection of artillery, cast from the 
finest metal, and stored in the arsenal at Moscow, 
excited the admiration of an ambassador of Queen 

^ Reports of the ambassadors and several of the articles relating to the 
embassy in the Zeitschrift fiir preussische Oesch. und Landeskitnde, 
Jahrgang 10 (Berhn, 1873), pp. 337-354. See Bucholtz, vii. 463 ff. ; 
Barthold, i. 310-312 ; and Heidenhain, Beitrdge, p. 81. 

^ Barthold says, i. 312 : ' As the decline of power, unity, and loyalty 
in the land unfortunately rendered an imperial war impossible, the " solemn, 
and imposing embassy " became a subject of ridicule.'. 


Elizabeth of England.^ In 1552, amid appalling blood- 
shed, Ivan had overthrown the empire of the Mon- 
golian Chans in Kasan, and two years later he had 
conquered Astrachan on the Caspian Sea and the whole 
of Cabardey as far as to the Caucasus. He had next 
attempted to subjugate Livonia and to gain dominion 
over the Baltic Sea. The Moscovite theologians told 
the people that the prophecy of St. John the Evangelist 
concerning the sixth Czar was now fulfilled, and that 
the Czar Ivan occupied the highest place among the 
princes of the earth. In a despatch to the Sultan, 
Ivan once called himself ' Emperor of the Germans.' 
Russia had become a Christian kaliphate, and the 
Czar supreme lord both over the faith and over the 
lives and property of his subjects. 

In the time of Charles V. the Heermeister (provincial 
master) of the Teutonic knights had already warned 
the Emperor and the Estates against the Czar. ' If 
this Moscovite,' he had said, ' conquers Livonia and 
thereby gets possession of the Baltic, he will not be 
long in bringing the adjacent lands also — Lithuania, 
Poland, Prussia, and Sweden — under his dominion.' - 
But how was the Czar to be resisted ? ' The poor 
anarchical Holy Empire was powerless,' and the Teu- 
tonic knights were given up to pleasure and ostenta- 
tion. ' The whole business and occupation of the 
Teutonic knights, the canons, and the nobles,' said 
the chronicler Riissow, ' consists in hunting, gambling, 
riding, and driving.' ^ 

In 1557 a feud had broken out between the Arch- 

^ Hermann, GescJi. des russisclieii Staates, iii. 354. 
- Karamsin, Geschichte des russischen Beiches (German translation 
Riga, 1825), vii. 478, note 269. 

3 Chroniha der Provinz Lyffland (Earth, 1584), p. 32''. 


bishop of Riga (Margrave William of Brandenburg)/ 
who had secretly turned Protestant, and the Teutonic 
Order, because the archbishop, in defiance of the resolu- 
tion of a provincial diet that no foreign prince should 
be admitted to the archiepiscopate, had appointed 
Duke Christopher of Mecklenburg, a Protestant, to 
be his coadjutor ; and this, as reproach said, ' in order 
to give the finishing stroke to Livonia.' The arch- 
bishop, with his coadjutor, was taken prisoner, and he 
turned for help to King Sigismund Augustus of Poland. 
Sigismund, as ' hereditary guardian of the archbishopric,' 
sent such overwhelming forces against the Livonian 
frontier, that the knights of the Order were completely 
cowed and thought it advisable to reinstate the arch- 
bishop and his coadjutor, and to conclude an offensive 
and defensive alliance with the Polish crown. Ivan, 
who in 1554 had already assumed the title of ' Lord of 
Livonia,' - made this alliance a pretext for invading 
the territory of the Teutonic Order, and in July 1558 
he was in possession of Narwa, Wesenberg, Neuhausen, 
and Dorpat. By his orders the Archbishop of Novgorod 
was compelled to ' cleanse the town of Narwa from 
the Catholic and the Lutheran religions.' By force 
of arms the ' holy orthodox Russian faith ' was esta- 
blished throughout Livonia ; the Lutheran churches 
were burnt ; the Catholics and the Jews were drowned. 
Gotthard von Ketteler, who, as coadjutor of the Grand 
Master, acted since July 1558 as the head of the Order, 
applied to the Kings of Sweden and Denmark for help 
against Russia, and as ' a member of the Holy Empire ' 
admonished the Estates assembled at Augsburg of 

^ See oiir statements, vi. 46-47. 
^ Schlozer, Verfall, p. 153. 



their duties towards Livonia. In the draft of instruc- 
tions which Archbishop WiUiam of Brandenburg sent 
to his delegate to Augsburg, it was stated that ' The 
Russians have perpetrated all sorts of inhuman tyranny 
and brutality ; they have not even spared the bodies 
of the dead, which should be left at rest in God ; they 
have driven away into perpetual servitude young men 
and old men, women and children ; they have bar- 
barously dishonoured young women and honourable 
matrons ; they have burnt down villages in all directions, 
devastated whole tracts of land, robbed the poor people 
of their goods and chattels, and inhumanly massacred 
poor little innocent children, who, most piteous to 
relate, were hacked in pieces by these monsters.' ^ 

' There was much to talk about then in Augsburg ; 
how terrible was the might of these Moscovites, and 
what a murderous, gruesome Lord, whose chief delight 
was in roasting, hanging, and spearing the people, 
stood at the head of the Empire ; ' but ' for the German 
brethren, who were crying for help against the Mosco- 
vites, nothing could be done.' The Imperial Estates 
moved a resolution that the Emperor should write and 
request the Czar to desist from warfare, to restore 
what he had taken by force, and to abstain thence- 
forth from molesting the Estates of Livonia by hostile 
proceedings. In order that the Livonian Estates 
should be made to realise what true and deep com- 
passion was felt for them in the Empire, it was pro- 
posed that the sum of 100,000 florins should be raised 
as a relief fund for their benefit in case of need. The 
towns of Hamburg and Liibeck were asked to advance 
this sum without requiring any interest on their loans. 

^ Monumenta Livonice, v. 562-563. 


The Estates promised to contribute their quota, not 
at once, but by St. John's day in the following year. 
The two towns, however, refused to make the loan ; 
the Estates sent no contributions, and the Livonians 
did not receive a farthing of the ' benevolent fund.' ^ 

Cheated thus of any help from the Empire, there 
remained no better prospect for the territory of the 
Order than to be the prize of victory in a campaign 
between Russia, Poland, Sweden, and Denmark. 

The interest felt by the Estates in the general 
affairs of the Fatherland, in the welfare and repute of 
the Empire, had fallen to so low an ebb that the Elector 
Palatine, Frederic III. for instance, regarded the 
Livonian business as a ' foreign concern,' and instructed 
his delegates to use all their efforts to oppose the send- 
ing of imperial help, in order that the Empire might 
not be constantly involved in fresh foreign affairs." 

The Czar resumed his plundering raids in the 
summer of 1559, and the Northern Estates, Branden- 
burg especially, apprehended that ' if once Livonia 
were conquered by the Moscovites, the latter would 
prove as dangerous an enemy in the north as the Turks 
were in the south.' Again and again the question 
was raised of sending troops to Livonia, and supplies 
of money for the Order, but nothing practical was done. 
An ambassador, sent by the Emperor to Moscow, 
came back without having effected anything. While 
Esthonia fell under the dominion of Sweden, the Livo- 
nians, on November 28, 1561, surrendered themselves 
to King Sigismund Augustus of Poland, ' because,' said 

^ Aufzeiclmung von 1560 ; Kriegsnbthen in Livland, fol. 2-3 ; 
Haberlin, iv. 136-138. 

^ Kluckhohn, Briefc, i. 65. 

1 2 


they, ' the poor nobles and all the other inhabi- 
tants of the land were not only abandoned by the 
Emperor and all the Estates, and left a prey to the 
unequalled ferocity, incendiarism, robbery, devasta- 
tion and slaughter of the Russians, but were also 
hostilely attacked by others who ought to come to their 
help and rescue.' The provincial master, Gotthard 
von Ketteler, followed the example of Duke Albert 
of Prussia. He was invested, as a Polish vassal, with 
the hereditary ducal dignity over Curland and Semgall, 
and he delivered up the mantle and cross of his Order, 
and the imperial and royal charters and letters patent 
to the King of Poland. The latter promised on his 
part to protect the Augsburg Confession in Livonia, 
to bestow an independent constitution on the land, 
and to insure that its submission to Poland should not 
bring on it any trouble or vexation from the Holy 
Roman Empire of the German nation.^ 

Thus Livonia was lost to the Teutonic Order, to 
the Catholic Church, and to the German Empire, ' and 
what will still further be cut off from the Holy Empire,' 
we read in the letter of a patriotic jurist of 1552, 'future 
historians will have to relate, if the crippled condition 
and the decay of the Empire, the quarrels and dissensions 
about religion and faith go on in thfe future as they 
have done hitherto.' ^' 

When it was realised at the Augsburg Diet that 
the Emperor's hereditary lands protected the Empire 
on the East against the arch-enemy, the Sultan, and 

^ Concerning Gotthai-d von Ketteler, see the article of J. S. Seibertz 
in the Zeitschrift fi'tr vaterlandische Oescli. unci Alterthumslcunde, 29 
(Munster, 1871), Heft ii. 

- MiszcUaneen gemeinniitzigen IiiJialtcs, 93 ('Miscellanies of public 
interest '). 


that Ferdinand must consequently not be left in the 
lurch, some of the Estates were eager to be more gene- 
rous even in their Turkish subsidies than they had 
shown themselves in their promises to Livonia. But 
nobody responded to the Emperor's demand for 'continu- 
ous help throughout the campaign,' ^ which he coupled 
with the assurance that he meant to send tw^o of his 
sons into the field, and that he would gladly risk ' his 
own old bones.' Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg 
was anxious that pecuniary help should be given to 
the Emperor out of the property of the Teutonic 
Knights, the Knights of St. John, the monasteries, 
convents, and bishoprics; the Jews also, he thought, 
should pay tribute.- The Elector Palatine Frederic III. 
belonged, as he wrote to his son-in-law, Duke John 
Frederic of Saxony, to the number of those Estates 
' who knew how to give nothing.' ^ He did not consider 
the Turkish business an imperial affair. If the House 
of Austria, he said, had not annexed Hungary, Ger- 
many would have been saved the expense of war against 
Turkey. And yet it was only by means of Hungary 
that Germany could be secured against further Turkish 
invasions, and against subjugation to the Ottoman 
yoke. Owing, however, to a rumour current during 
the transactions that there was hope of an armistice 
with the Turks, the only decision recorded in the 
imperial Eecess was that the money which had before 
been voted at Ratisbon, but not yet been sent in, should 
now be supplied to the Emperor for the building and 
maintenance of Hungarian border fortresses, and that 

^ Despatch of the Frankfort delegate, Daniel zum Jungen, of March 6, 
1559, in the Reichstagsacten, 67, fol. 1-3. 

^ Haberhn, iv. 51. ■' Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 88. 


the sum of 500,000 florins should be paid by the Estates 
for the maintenance of the garrisons during the next 
three years. ' No attempt at recovery of the terri- 
tories conquered by the Turks could be thought of under 
the melancholy circumstances of dissension, mistrust^ 
and schism which prevailed among the Estates.' 

' The interminable division of Germany,' wrote the 
Venetian Michael Soriano in 1556, ' is most marked 
between the Catholic and Protestant Estates, each 
party believing the other to be bent on its destruction.' 
Duke Albert of Bavaria complained in the same year 
that the Palatinate and Baden were making dangerous 
preparations. Albert, on the other hand, was accused 
of plotting the establishment of a ' popish and clerical 
league ' with a view to an attack on the Estates pro- 
fessing the Augsburg Confession.^ Ferdinand himself 
came under suspicion of intending to surprise the 
Augsburg Confessionists with the forces he was nomi- 
nally equipping for resistance against the Turks. 

' It astonishes me,' said the imperial councillor 
Zasius in the year 1557 to Christopher of Wilrtemberg, 
' that any one with a spark of human reason left should 
entertain such an idea. That there are malignant, 
mischievous people in plenty, always attempting to 
hinder and overthrow whatever tends to peace, I 
know full well from everyday experience. But what 
distresses me most grievously is that wicked and false 
insinuations and calumnies, no matter how base and 
groundless they be, should meet with credence. Could 
there be a more unjust and ridiculous notion than that 
Ferdinand would dream of creating disturbance in the 
Empire, when no one would suffer more from such a 

' Kugler, ii. 3. 


calamity than lie himself and his children ? How he 
can ever be in a position to take such a step, and what 
advantage it would be to him, even were he admirably 
equipped, with such redoubtable neighbours in Hungary, 
even a child of seven years old might be able to esti- 
mate. What cause has Ferdinand ever given any 
imperial Estate during his whole reign to mistrust 
his faithfulness to the Religious Peace, signed and 
sealed with his name ? ' 'In short,' Zasius concludes, 
' if the Almighty does not intervene to produce a change 
in men's minds, I see clearly that all will go to rack 
and ruin, for nobody is of any account save those 
wicked agitators who, day and night, devote all their 
energies to hastening on this catastrophe.' ^ 

At the instigation of Ferdinand, the Landsberg 
League was formed in the year 1556. This was a 
defensive alliance of Catholics and Protestants for 
the maintenance of public tranquillity, and for mutual 
defence, formed between the Emperor, the Duke of 
Bavaria, the Archbishop of Saltzburg, and the town 
of Augsburg. In the following year it was enlarged 
by the admission of the Bishops of Bamberg and Wiirz- 
burg. On the Protestant side it was also joined by 
the town of Nuremberg. Ferdinand made strenuous 
exertions to win over to this League the ' higher Estates 
also belonging to the Augsburg Confession,' notably 
Christopher von Wiirtemberg, and the Electors Augustus 
of Saxony and Joachim of Brandenburg ; but he was 
quite unsuccessful. Duke Christopher and the Land- 
grave Philip of Hesse advised the Elector Augustus 
most urgently not to ally himself with the Emperor 
and with the Catholic Estates. A league with Papists, 

^ Schmidt, Neuere Geschichte, iii. 30-34. 

120 nrsTORY of the people 

Christopher said, was ' not only dangerous, but repre- 
hensible before God and conscience.' He quoted the 
saying in the Bible that we must not ' help the ungodly ' 
and ' join hands with those whom God hates.' If the 
Elector Augustus joined the League of Landsberg he 
would substantiate the outcry raised against him of 
' whoredom with the Antichrist.' ^ 

During the sitting of the Diet at Augsburg ' the 
air was full of rumours of all sorts concerning attacks 
by the Catholics on the Augsburg Confessionists.' In 
1558, on the day of the Emperor's election at Frank- 
fort on the Main, the electors of both religious parties 
had mutually pledged themselves, and solemnly sworn 
to uphold the Augsburg treaty of peace, to cherish no 
ill-will against each other on account of religion, but 
contrariwise to treat each other with all friendliness, 
and to come to each other's help in case any of their 
number were subjected to aggression, in spite of the 
peace in matters spiritual and temporal that had been 
concluded. And now it was affirmed that ' the "parsons" 
liad borrowed money for warlike preparations, and that 
after France and Spain had become reconciled by the 
treaty of peace at Chriteau-Cambresis all their plans 
tended to the extermination of the evangelical teaching 
in four wars.' ' The whole greasy lot of them and all 
their followers,' wrote Christopher of Wiirtemberg in 

^ Despatch in Neiidecker, Neue Beitrage, i. 222-233 ; Sattler, p. 4 ; 
Beil, pp, 161-162 ; Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 141-144. Concerning the Lands- 
berg League and its extension, see Maurenbrechcr, pp. 34-36, 64-67, 78-83, 
and Mayer, Leben, kleinere WerTie und Briefweclisel des Dr. Wiguleus 
Hunot, a contribution to the history of Bavaria in the sixteenth century 
(Innsbruck, 1892), p. 46 f. See also GcJtz, Albrecht V. 126 f. For a 
criticism of the pamphlet of Mayer, see Schlecht in the Hist. Jahrb. 
xiii. 904 f. 


May 1559, ' mean no good ; we must keep our eyes 
open.' ^ 

Eberliard von der Thann, Duke John Frederic's 
ambassador, declared at the Diet that ' the Pope and all 
his party were the hugest, bitterest, fiercest enemies 
of the Augsburg Confessionists, and that all the car- 
dinals, bishops, and clergy were bound to the Pope 
by the most terrible and abominable oaths.' After 
such insulting attacks, the Catholics refused to take 
any further part in the transactions of the Diet until 
' this matter should have been settled.' The Frank- 
fort delegate, Daniel zum Jungen, expressed his fears 
that there would be. ' fresh turmoil in Germany,' for 
the Duke of Saxony's delegate, on being remonstrated 
with by the Emperor, had retorted that everything 
he had said was in accordance with the instructions 
given him, and ' better still will follow\' ^ In a written 
address to the Protestant Estates, the Catholics begged 
them to consider how essential it was to the Empire, 
more especially in these troublous times, to maintain 
internal peace and unity, and how disastrous to the 
welfare of Germany were such false and hostile imputa- 
tions, such offensive, injurious accusations as Eberhard 
von der Thann had made. It would be well, for the 
sake of mutual confidence and goodwill among the 
Estates, if the Protestants would prevent any more 
such proceedings in future.^ The Protestant Estates 
expressed their disapproval of the ' violent language ' 
of the Saxon delegate, and the latter was severely 
reprimanded by the Emperor in full assembly of the 

' Kugler, ii. 104-105. - Frankfort Beichstagsacten, 67, fol. 58, 62. 

■'' Frankfort Beichstagsacten, 67, fol. 136. 
■* Schmidt, Neuere Gesch. iii, 92. 


Nevertheless, ' almost all the sessions on religious 
matters displayed the same stormy character, and the 
two parties were in a constant state of mutual embitter- 
ment.' They wrangled and quarrelled as to which 
party was to blame for the break up of the Worms 
conference ; they indulged in mutual recriminations 
as to violation of the Religious Peace, and wasted 
endless time in discussing whether another religious 
conference, or a national assembly, or a Council would 
be the best means of healing the schism in the faith. 
The Elector Palatine Frederic III. had sent instruc- 
tions to his delegate on March 7 to declare uncom- 
promisingly to the Emperor and the Papists, that 
consent could not be given to any further religious 
colloquy concerning reconciliation ; and also that 
neither a national council nor an imperial assembly 
would be of the slightest use in the matter. ' Even 
should the Pope, against his own will and inclination, 
consent to summon a general or a national council, 
it would not bring them any further ; for, seeing that 
His Holiness himself would insist on being judge, the 
Protestants would have nothing to hope for from his 
antichristian, hellish mouth than condemnation of the 
true Christian religion, and execrable blasphemy such 
as, seven years before, Pope Paul III., with his dia- 
bolical crew of cardinals, bishops, monks, and parsons, 
had been guilty of at Trent.' ' For the Augsburg 
Confessionists were fully resolved in future not to let 
themselves be drawn into any discussion or trans- 
action concerning religion with the opposite party ; 
they had no intention of renouncing their creed, nor 
of altering the doctrine contained in it ; they persist- 
ing in rejecting and condemning all teaching opposed to 



it.' ^ When the Emperor, convinced by the failure- 
of the Worms conference of the uselessness of any 
more such assemblies, had agreed with the Catholic 
Estates, both lay and clerical, that a Council was the 
best means for restoring unity, the Protestants renewed 
their former stipulations and declared that they could 
only recognise such a Council on condition, first, that 
it was not convoked by the Pope, but that the Pope, 
after releasing the bishops from their oaths, should 
himself be subject to the Council; secondly, that all 
decisions were made solely in accordance with the 
Word of God ; thirdly, that the Augsburg Conf essionists 
should have decisive votes at the Council, and that no 
mere majority of votes was to decide questions ; fourth, 
that beforehand all the decrees of the Council of Trent 
should be declared null and void." 

Thus it now became ' patent to every one, as indeed 
it had long been to men of insight, that no sort of 
reconciliation was possible with the Estates who had 
separated from the Catholic religion, especially as- 
these separatists were in all matters of faith deeply 
divided and always quarrelling among themselves.' 
' Moreover such bitter, angry talk went on at Augsburg 
respecting the council, and even at convivial parties 
there was often so much wrangling and abuse, that the 
Emperor thought it best to give up the idea altogether.' ^ 
The resolution proposed by Ferdinand was registered 
in the Recess : ' Transactions concerning religion are 
postponed till another and a better opportunity.' 

As at the Diet of Eatisbon, so too now, the Protes- 

1 Kluckholin, Briefe, i. 15-19. 

- Planck, Anecdota ad hist. Concilii Trident, fasc. 25. 
^ Von Beichshandlungen su Augsburg, 1559 and 1566 (from the con- 
temporary archives of the Electorate of Mayence), fol. 7. 


tant princes directed their chief energies towards the 
removal of the Ecclesiastical Reservation ; but they 
were mistaken in hoping that the Emperor would be 
more ready to accede to their wishes on account of his 
quarrel with the Pope. 

Among other arguments brought forward by 
Duke Christopher of Wlirtemberg against the Reser- 
vation were ' the great and undeniable abuses in the 
teaching and lives of the clergy, and the monstrous 
and indefensible anomaly that a prelate who fulfilled 
the duties of his office in a Christian manner, and fed 
his sheep with the Word of God, should be forcibly 
deprived of his post ; and that the sheep should not 
only have their own shepherd taken from them, but 
should have another, whose teaching and life were at 
variance with God's Word, imposed upon them.' ^ In 
the Duke's estimation, every prelate who renounced 
his Catholic faith was a Christian shepherd, and it was 
the duty of the sheep either to conform unquestioningly 
to his new faith, when he set to work ' in whatever 
way seemed best to him, to reform his bishopric and 
principality and to abolish the abuses in the teaching 
and practices of the Church,' or else to avail themselves 
of the privilege accorded them in the Augsburg treaty 
of peace, and to leave the country. 

The Elector Palatine Frederic III. not only insisted 
on the removal of the Reservation, but also demanded 
that explanation should be given as to how the Augs- 
burg Religious Peace would affect the people. He 
said that at the special conference of the Protestant 
Estates, which was to take place on May 1, in addi- 
tion to strenuous insistence on the emancipation of 

1 Kugler, ii. 12.5-126, note. 


the clerical Estates, ' the poor people must not be 
forgotten,' for very scant provision for th^m had been 
made in the Augsburg treaty ; and they were entitled 
to as much consideration as were great personages, 
princes, and lords. ^ Freedom of religion must be 
accorded to subjects as well as to princes and rulers, 
but at the same time it must be understood that this 
statement applied only to the subjects of Catholic 
princes when they wished to go over to the Augsburg 
Confession, and not to Protestants who might wish to 
adopt the Catholic faith. Such, according to Frederic, 
was the sense in which the Emperor should be asked 
for an ' explanation ' of the Religious Peace. 

In a draft of instructions which had been drawn 
up by Otto Henry, and which was used by his successor 
Frederic for his delegate, it was expressly stated with 
regard to ' emancipation ' that this must not be under- 
stood to mean that * our subjects, and the subjects of the 
other princes professing the Augsburg Confession, were 
to be free if they liked to return to the popish religion.' 
Such a concession as this could not be made to any 
Protestant subject ; ' therefore it is our desire that 
it should herewith be made clear to you, that you are 
not to act in such a way that the doors may be thrown 
wide open either to our own subjects or to those of 
other princes of the same faith as ours, and oppor- 
tunity given them for such dangerous apostasy.' 

As his reason for insisting on this course, the Elector 
stated : ' And this we do decree and insist on because 
it is known to us that our religion is the right and true 
one, and that we rulers are not justified in allowing 
our subjects to depart from it.' - 

' Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 93. - Ihicl. i. 21-22, note. 


' The consciences of my subjects are mine : ' such was 
the epigrammatic manner in which Frederic summed 
up his full-fledged Csesaropapism, and justified to his 
conscience any amount of violence in controlling the 
faith of his subjects. 

' Tyranny over consciences ' was a phrase only used 
by Protestants when Catholic princes, in accordance 
with the right granted them in the Religious Peace, 
endeavoured to maintain the unity of the Catholic 
faith in their own dominions, and would not allow the 
exercise of the new religion side by side with the old 
one. But when the Protestants, on their side, were 
minded to lay down the law in matters of religion, 
' tyranny over consciences ' was by no means a suitable 

At the instigation of the Elector Palatine the Protes- 
tant princes and counts present at the Diet, as well as 
their delegates, resolved to petition the Emperor once 
more for the removal of the Ecclesiastical Reservation. 
The delegates of the Elector of Saxonv alone received 
orders not to take any part in this proceeding. But a 
very large majority of the Protestant town delegates 
were also unwilling to join the princes and counts in 
presenting this petition ; and consequently, as the 
Frankfort delegate reported home, they were forced 
to listen to angry words on the subject. By order of 
the princes. Count Valentine von Esbach, councillor 
of the Elector Palatine, assured them that ' the plan 
proposed would best serve the cause of the Gospel ; 
either the towns did not understand the matter or else 
their intentions were not Christian ; their refusal to 
agree to the proposal would bring great discredit on 
the Augsburg Confessionists and sadly prejudice the 


Emperor and the Catholic princes against them ; it 
would appear as if they could not succeed in being 
united either in religion or in other matters.' The 
princes did not know whether the towns were actuated 
' by gingerly or by peppery motives ' (= whether cautious- 
ness or ill-will guided them). The town delegates were 
invited to meet in the hostel of the Elector Palatine, 
when the address drawn up by the higher Estates 
would be read out to them. They found present there, 
besides the Count Palatine, the councillors of the 
Elector of Brandenburg and a few other princes, but 
not the councillors of the Elector of Saxony, who, 
according to the instructions given them, had notified 
that they intended standing by the Religious Peace 
in the first transaction. All manner of arguments and 
methods of persuasion were employed to obtain the 
signatures of the town delegates ; but the address 
itself was not read to them in spite of the promise that 
had been given them. Some of them said that they 
were awaiting instructions from their chiefs ; others 
that they intended asking for instructions. The Augs- 
burg delegate altogether refused to sign, and others 
said they wished first to hear the address.^ Augsburg 
had refused to sign because the town had secured 
itself against any aggression by a treaty with the bishop ; 
Nuremberg because ' it had got rid of the Papacy out 
of its territory.' Ratisbon, Strassburg, Schweinfurt, 
and Eisenach were the only towns which gave their 
consent to the address.- It was then sent in to the 
Emperor. It contained the grossest insults against 

^ Eeport of Daniel zum Jungen, dated May 13, 1559, in the Beichs- 
tagsacten, 67, fol. 33-36. 

^ Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 66-67. 


the Emperor and the Catholic Estates. ' It is not 
right or fitting,' so the document ran, ' that any ruler, 
whatever his rank or dignity, should presume to bind 
men's consciences, still less to withhold them from 
accepting the true religion by threats of punishment, 
and to force them into idolatry and false belief.' Whereas, 
by the refusal to remove the Reservation, ' the honour 
of God's name has been impugned, and the true un- 
f alsified religion imperilled, the anger of the Almighty will 
wax ever stronger and fiercer against the German nation ; 
and, indeed, we may already discern the wrath and 
vengeance of God in the tyrannical inroads and brutal 
ferocity of our hereditary enemy ' (the French). What 
they, the Estates professing the true religion, demanded, 
was essentially for the highest good of the other party, 
for ' the clergy were bound hand and foot by the many 
ties and duties which made the Pope's interests their 
own, and in all religious transactions they were obliged 
to vote against their consciences.' ^ 

A more bitter attack on the honour of the Emperor 
and the Catholic princes than was contained in this 
address cannot well be imagined. But the Catholics 
were used to such treatment. The Ecclesiastical Estates 
protested against the scandalous statement that people 
were led into idolatry and unbelief by the Catholic 
teaching, and against the calumnious charge that in 
religious questions they were cowed into voting against 
their consciences.- The Emperor calmly answered that 
in his opinion this new dispute struck well-nigh at 
the entire substance of the Catholic faith. He had 
remained steadfast in this religion, which was the one 
he had been born and bred in, which he had received 

^ Erstenberger, pp. 33''-37. - Bucholtz, vii. 449. 


from his pious parents and forefathers ; and not from 
them only, but from long generations also of his pre- 
decessors on the imperial throne, under whom the 
German nation had always continued in great glory, 
reputation and prosperity, and also in Christian disci- 
pline, godliness, and unity of faith. In this same religion 
he intended to persevere until his death, in spite of 
all trouble and annoyance that might befall him in 
consequence. He would never give up the Ecclesiastical 
Reservation, for he would never allow that his own 
religion was a false and idolatrous one, calculated to 
upset all Christian reform and unity, all welfare, and 
all salvation. Seeing that the Reservation did not 
concern the princes of the Augsburg Confession, as they 
themselves allowed, and that it did not rest on their 
responsibility, but that it concerned the Catholics 
only, it seemed to him that they might cease troubling 
themselves about the matter and leave it entirely to 
him, the Emperor ; and this all the more as formerly, on 
the conclusion of the Religious Peace, they had expressly 
promised not to find fault with him, or presume to 
dictate to him, on this point. ^ 

To this imperial statement the petitioners sent an 
answer, which called forth the strongest animadver- 
sion from the town delegates. Their first objection, 
they said, was that ' in religious transactions the higher 
Estates took upon themselves to forestall the towns,' 
as though the latter were bound to accept without a 
protest whatever they decided. A further objection 
was ' the acerbity of the language, for which their chiefs 
would not be in any way held responsible.' If the 
Elector's councillors proceeded any further in their 

1 Erstenberger, pp. ST^-SO. 


religious transactions and passed any more resolutions 
without consulting the towns, ' the towns would not 
give their assent.' They insisted that the wording 
of the reply must be softened down. ' But we could 
do nothing with them,' the Frankfort delegate com- 
plained ; ' on the contrary, they declared that if the 
Elector of Saxony's councillors had received their 
prince's orders sooner, they would have made their 
answer even sharper and more pointed. They indulged 
in a vast amount of unnecessary talk against the towns, 
and said that if the delegates were already so fearful 
of provoking the anger of the Emperor, what would 
they do when it came to the Recess (document summing 
up the resolutions of the Diet) ? For then indeed 
there would be hard nuts to crack.' ' Moreover, they 
hurried us on so much that we had not time for the 
necessary discussion among ourselves.' ^ 

As the towns that professed the Augsburg creed 
were, with few exceptions, not minded to gratify the 
princes and lords by voting for the removal of the 
Reservation, so these same princes and lords showed, 
for the present, no inclination to ask the Emperor for 
an ' explanation ' of the terms of the Religious Peace 
in favour of the towns of mixed creeds, in which towns, 
according to the treaty, ' both religions were to be 
tolerated.' The Protestant municipal authorities of 
such towns regarded it as ' tyranny over their con- 
sciences ' that they should be bound to allow the 
practice of the Catholic religion within their city walls. 
The town council of Frankfort, in their instructions to 
their delegates to the Ratisbon Diet in 1556, had said 

^ Report of Daniel zum Jungen, dated Jan. 15, 1559, in the BeicJis- 
.tagsacten, 67, fol. 52. 


tbat, whereas all the other secular Estates had had liberty- 
given them by the Eeligious Peace to deal with religion 
in their own jurisdictions as they pleased, it was an 
obvious injustice that the towns should be forced to 
tolerate popish abuses within their walls. This, they 
said, was a very serious grievance, ' not only on account 
of the scandalous and unchristian abominations ' which 
the towns were obliged to look on at, but also because 
of the offensive and schismatic teaching and the dan- 
gerous disturbances of all sorts which were likely to 
result from such policy. Their delegate was enjoined 
to use all his endeavours with the other town delegates, 
and with the electors and princes, for the removal 
of this restriction of the religious liberty of the towns.^ 
On May 11, 1559, the council of Frankfort renewed 
their injunction with all the more hope of a good result, 
' because,' they wrote, ' three lay electors belong now 
to our religion, and are therefore likely to be in favour 
of this measure.' ^ The town delegates brought their 
grievance before the Estates of the Augsburg Confes- 
sion, but the Elector Palatine Frederic was the only one 
among them who was ready to take any active steps 
to insure that for the future the towns should not be 
obliged to exercise tolerance towards their Catholic 
inhabitants. It was a matter of duty with him, he said, 
to work for the removal of this municipal grievance. 
He assured the delegates that he was no less anxious 
to protect their consciences in this respect, and to do 
all in his power to get popery cleared out of the towns, 
than was his predecessor. Otto Henry, who had him- 
self been anxious to give his services towards freeing the 
towns from the necessity of tolerating Catholicism. An 

^ Beichstagsacten, 66^ fol. 14-21. - Ibid. 67, fol. 27^ 

K 2 


appeal to this effect should, he said, be addressed to 
the Emperor. ' But on making inquiries,' writes the 
Frankfort delegate on July 8, ' I did not find that any 
one was ready to co-operate with his electoral grace.' ^ 

The Treaty of Religious Peace was confirmed and 
ratified, without amendments, in the Recess of the 
Diet of Augsburg, but the essential stipulations in it 
remained ' now as then, mere words on paper.' The 
Ecclesiastical Reservation was not cancelled ; but this,, 
as the Catholic Estates complained, did not prevent 
the Protestant princes from ' drawing one bishopric 
after another into their religion and into their families,, 
and, either by means of venal, pliable instruments, 
or else by force, from placing themselves in possession 
of these ecclesiastical territories.' " For instance, the 
Elector Augustus of Saxony, who * at Diets was always 
anxious that the question of the Reservation should 
be dealt with in a discreet and Christian manner,^ 
' because it was more likely that they would attain 
their object in such a manner,' now by these same 
' Christian means and measures ' as good as incorporated 
the bishopric of Meissen in his own territory. The 
Meissen canon, John von Haugwitz, before his eleva- 
tion to the episcopal see, had been employed as ' a 
pliable instrument ' in a secret treaty with the Elector,. 
had renounced his bishopric's direct allegiance to 
the Emperor, and had sworn, ' in the fulfilment of 
his official duties,' ' to plant, establish, and maintain 

^ Beichstagsacten, 67, fol. 63. Concerning the Augsburg Diet of 1559, 
see the detailed account by Wolf, Z^ir Gescliichte der deutschen Pro- 
testanten, pp. 162-214. 

- Record in the BeichsJiandlungen of 1556, fol. 21, quoted at p. 123, 
note 3, of this volume. 


by his own personal efforts, and as far as in him lay, 
the true Christian religion in all the districts of the 
bishopric of Meissen where it was not yet adopted.' 
And at the same time, to secure his appointmenb, 
this same Christian canon took a solemn oath, in accord- 
ance with rules of the bishopric, ' that he would feed 
and maintain the flock entrusted to him in the Catholic 
religion, that he would not suffer any possession or 
privilege of the bishopric to be tampered with or lost, 
and that he would render loyal and respectful obedience 
to his superiors, above all to the Pope.' He invested 
a delegate with plenary power to take an oath of fidelity 
to the Pope in his name, and to solicit papal confirma- 
tion of his election. ^ He obtained this confirmation, 
but resigned later on in favour of the Elector Augustus, 
and boasted mockingly that he had committed three 
deadly sins which the Pope would nevermore forgive 
him : namely, he had become a Protestant ; he had 
married ; and, contrary to all the marriage laws of the 
Roman Church, he had espoused a near blood-rela- 
tion. - 

And thus, in spite of the Religious Peace, the 
bishopric of Meissen was lost to the Catholic Church and 
to the Empire, and went to the Elector. 

The Elector also found means of appropriating 
the bishoprics of Merseburg and Naumburg. ^ The 
Protestant Estates themselves once alluded to the 
fact that Saxony had taken possession of the bishopric 
■of Naumburg in violation of the express terms of the 

^ Richter, Verdienste, pp. 54-60. Ritter, i. 192. 
^ Richter, Verdienste, p. 63. 

^ See Ritter, i. 193 f. The last Catholic bishop of Merseburg was not 
named Helling, as Ritter has it, bixt Helding. 


Religious Peace. ^ Besides the bishoprics of Meissen^. 
Naumburg, and Merseburg, the archbishoprics of Mag- 
deburg and Bremen, and the bishoprics of Havel- 
berg, Brandenburg, Lebus, Cammin, Schwerin, Verden, 
Liibeck, Osnabriick, Ratzeburg, Halberstadt, and Min- 
den were also gradually withdrawn from the Church, ^ 
and everything Catholic or, to use the ordinary phraseo- 
logy, all ' popish, idolatrous abominations were every- 
where swept away by Divine command.' The Catholic 
Estates were obliged to content themselves with vain 
protests. Neither they nor the Emperor had the 
power to oppose any serious resistance to the advanc- 
ing tide of Protestantism. Nevertheless, they were 
constantly accused by the Protestant party of breaking 
the Treaty of Religious Peace to which they were bound 
by holy oaths,' and declared guilty of ' most criminal 
assaults and intrigues against the Augsburg Con- 

In a petition of grievances drawn up by the Catholics 
at the Augsburg Diet in 1559, it was said : ' If means 
are not found to stop the persistent attacks made by 
the Protestant Estates, in direct violation of the terms 
of the Religious Peace, this treaty will serve no other 
purpose than the complete extinction of the Catholic 
religion.' This, however, was precisely the object 
aimed at by the Augsburg Confessionists, ' as may be 
learnt partly from the Recesses of some of the Diets 
and partly from the express statements of the Protes- 
tant delegates at the late conference at Worms.' ^ 

Among the Protestants there were not wanting some 

^ We shall refer again to this later on. " Eitter, i. 194 f., 197 f. 

' (' Gravamina Catholicormn ' of Julj' 10, 1559, a copy of which is in 
the Frankfort Beichstagsacten, 68, fol. 92-106.) Lehmann, p. 89. 


who were ready to break out in open war against the 
Catholic Estates, and who for this purpose were organis- 
ing a general political alliance of the Protestant Estates. 
The Landgrave Philip of Hesse was indefatigably active 
in this direction.^ Melanchthon, on being asked for 
advice, spoke decisively against the contemplated 
league, adding, however, that he did not think such a 
league would be possible. To begin a war in violation 
of the Religious Peace which had been agreed to, and 
which the Emperor had pledged himself to respect, 
would be a flagrant outrage of justice, he said in a 
memorandum of December 18, 1559. ' And,' he added, 
' if it should be retorted that " the persecutors of our 
Church will not abstain from fighting, therefore we 
must forestall them : it would never do to sit down 
quietly and wait for the first blow," or other desperate 
seditious arguments of the sort be used, I reply that" 
necessary defence against unjust aggression is certainly 
legitimate ; but the houses of Saxony, Brandenburg, 
and Hesse, already bound together by inherited alliance, 
do not need fresh leagues of defence. I do not under- 
stand why they want to form new confederacies. For 
I opine that the towns of Saxony, Suabia, and the 
Rhineland have learnt enough by the Smalcaldian 
war to prevent them wishing for fresh leagues on account 
of religion ; I opine also that Pomerania, the Duke of 
Luneburg, the Princes of Anhalt will not let themselves 
be drawn into any confederacy. There was also,' he 
said, ' the danger that if a strong league were formed, 
one or two members might embark on an unnecessary 
war, in which the others would be compelled to join, even 

^ Fuller details in Heidenhain, TJnionsiJolitih Philijip's von Hessen, 
p. 46 f. 


tliougli they should wish to remain inactive. Now 
there are some people who do not stop to consider 
what may be the results of a small beginning ; but it is 
to be feared that if there should be a war, the whole 
of the German Empire would be upset and changed ; 
electors and princes would afterwards fight against 
each other and attach themselves to foreign rulers — some 
to France, some to Burgundy, some to Turkey. In 
short, it is difficult to foresee where the matter would 
end. Only think of the war in 1547 ; if God in His 
mercy had not brought it to a conclusion, who knows 
what would have been the consequence ? For if these 
Lords of Saxony, Wiirtemberg, and Hesse had gained 
the victory, they would most certainly have fallen 
upon each other afterwards, and a terrible overthrow 
and change, which God mercifully spared us at that 
juncture, would have taken place. Besides all this, 
the electors, princes, and towns are so disunited in 
many ways that I cannot believe they will form alliances 
among each other ; they would never be able to agree 
as to who should be their leader. Not one of them 
would wish to strengthen the other ; nor would any 
of them trust their money to the others ; it would be 
exactly the same as in the last war, when the princes 
complained that some got more money and profit 
than others.' ^ 

The endless political intricacies of the time, the 
mutual distrust and ill-feeling that existed among the 
Protestant sects, and above all the yearly increasing 
bitterness of the contentions between the different 
sects had crippled the belligerent power of the Protes- 
tants, and it was chiefly from these causes that the 

1 Corp. Beform. ix. 987-989. Cf. Heidenhain, pp. 122 ff. 


war which many people had been expecting to break 
out under the pretext of religion was pushed back to a 
more distant period. 

But now as before it was asked by many of the 
Protestant princes whether the dissensions among the 
confessors of the true and pure Gospel could not be 
settled by pacific means, and all the evangelicals be 
united in one body against the antichristian, idolatrous 
Papacy ? Philip of Hesse's advice, given during the 
Diet at Augsburg, was that a general synod should be 
convened of all the evangelical Christians, including 
the Zwinglians in Switzerland, who were also to be 
summoned to the assembly.^ Duke Christopher of 
Wiirtemberg also again advocated the summoning of 
a ' general evangelical synod,' advising, however, that it 
should be confined to the Estates who had subscribed 
to the Confession of Augsburg. But Christopher's 
chief theologian, John Brenz, who strongly opposed 
the idea of a synod, said that these Estates would 
never come to an agreement as to who was to be the 
arbiter in the disputed points ; each one, he said, would 
wish to be the judge ; none would submit to the decisions 
of others ; ' a set of disputatious, quarrelsome, excitable 
young theologians would only increase the contro- 
versies.' " 

Melanchthon also was as decided as he had been 
before in his warnings against a synod from which, he 
said, only worse schism could result. On the same 

^ Neudecker, Neue Beitrdge, i. 193, and Heidenhain, UnionspolitiJc 
PMlipp's von Hessen, pp. 58 ff., 86 ff. 

- Brenzen's BeidenTien of May 18, 1559, in Sattler iv., Beil. No. 54. It 
• ends with the distich : 

' Curando qusedam fieri pejora videmus 
Vulnera, quae melius non tetigisse juvat 


day on wliich he sent in his memorandum against a 
political league of the Protestant Estates, December 18^ 
1559, he wrote as follows concerning the proposed 
evangelical synod : ' Many of the Estates, notably 
the Elector of Brandenburg, the Dukes of Liineburg, 
Pomerania, and Prussia, the Princes of Anhalt, the towns 
of Nuremberg, Breslau, Liibeck, Liineburg, and others 
would not send delegates to a synod. And who, may 
I ask, is to convoke it ? Who is to preside over it ? 
What is the order of procedure to be ? What articles 
are to be discussed ? Moreover, it is to be feared that 
an opposition synod may be held. If anybody imagines 
that one fixed formulary of doctrine can be drawn up, 
which all sects shall subscribe to and all potentates 
respect and defend, I for my part declare this to be 
entirely " a platonic idea." For the potentates them- 
selves are wavering and changeable, and nothing can 
be so precisely settled but that angry sophists can 
pick holes somewhere and find something to cavil at. 
Therefore the electors and princes will not be in a hurry 
to agree to a proposal of this sort.' ^ 

' Corp. Beform. ix. 989-993. 




None could know better than Melanchthon, and none 
had more reason than he to grieve deeply over, the 
innumerable divisions and controversies among theo- 
logians, and the mutual embitterment of hearts within 
the pale of the new Church. For years he had been 
revered, next to Luther, as the highest evangelical 
light, and now, in the last years of his life, he was 
denounced by many of his earlier friends and followers 
who called themselves Luther's special disciples, as an 
apostate Mameluke, a servant of Satan, a veritable 
scourge of the Church.^ Flacius lUyricus and his 
associates even went so far as to demand a public 
condemnation of Melanchthon on the charge of heresy 
and of falsifying the Confession of Augsburg. The 
orthodoxy of the Wittenbergers, said Flacius, lives 
with Tannhauser in the Venusberg.- The attacks on 
him were so frequent and ferocious that Melanchthon, 
in writing to the Landgrave Philip of Hesse in 1558, 
had no scruples in describing his Lutheran enemies as 
idolatrous, sophistical blood-hounds. His laments were 
unceasing of the general distracted state of affairs, 

^ Letter from Wittenberg, dated Aug. 23, 1559, in the Erinnerungs- 
hlatt an Melanchthon (1760), p. 5. * Wilkens, p. 32. 


* the frenzy of men's minds,' ' the Cainite bitterness 
■of their hatred.' Several times in his letters he says 
that even could he shed as many tears as the waters of 
the swollen Elbe, he should still not have wept out 
the sorrow of his heart. ^ The condition of the new 
Church appeared to him hopeless. ' Of what use is it to 
write,' he laments to his friend Hardenberg, ' since I 
am unable to suggest anything that could heal this 
anarchy ? ' " 

Seeing that in the course of years Melanchthon 
himself had materially altered his opinions on many 
points of dogma, especially on the question of free-will 
and the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament, it 
might have been expected that he would have shown 
greater consideration towards the opinions of others. 
But with increasing age he became, as his opponents 
with good reason reproached him, more and more 
bitter and intolerant in controversy. When the rulers 
and magistrates did not inflict the severest penalties 
on the authors of impious doctrines, he threatened 
them with Divine retribution ; he was for ever clamour- 
ing for the extermination of the Anabaptists ; he com- 
mended the burning of Servet ; he justified the execu- 
tion of an Osianderite who had asserted that the blood 

^ See this and many similar utterances in Dollinger, i. 394 ff. 

- Corp. Beform. viii. 504. ' Melanchthon,' says Gillet, i. 33, ' was too 
near the courts, especially the court of the Saxon Elector, not to be 
aware of the sordid and interested motives which make use of these 
religious dissensions for their own ends. He saw that personal and 
party hatred had fully as much to do with them as zeal for the pure 
doctrine. Above all must he have been alarmed at the demoralising 
influence which these dissensions exercised on the Church ; he must 
have watched with dismay the gradual advance of corruption and impurity 
into the very heart of the body ecclesiastical, to whom at last any and 
■every means seemed legitimate, if only it afforded weapons for the ruin 
of the adversary. Could any age have been more fruitful in scandalous 


of Christ cannot be our righteousness ; he made it out 
to be a matter of duty that Theobald Thammpr should 
be put to death publicly because he had expressed hi& 
opinion that even the heathens might be saved. He 
wanted to see the whole sect of Schwenckfeldiander& 
put to the rout by the might of the princes ; and even 
those among the Augsburg Confessionists who thought 
faith alone sufficient for salvation, and who set no store 
by ' the obedience of the regenerate,' deserved, in his- 
opinion, to incur the full rigour of the civil tribunal. ^ 

' Anger, grief, and excessive work,' he said, ' are 
eating out my life.' ^ ' The moral corruption which, 
in the train of religious anarchy, was penetrating ever 
deeper and deeper, filled his soul with deeper and 
deeper distress.' ' Among the bulk of the people,' he 
wrote in 1558, ' insubordination has reached such a 
pitch that they will tolerate no restraint whatever. 

abuse of confidence, in malignant watching for unguarded words, in brutal 
sin against justice and morality, than these years of fighting for a pure 
and unadulterated faith ? Interception of letters, treacherous information 
against unsuspecting hosts, literary robbery — all these were weapons 
despised by few.' 

1 Corj). Beform. vii. 523 and ix. 125, 133, 579, 798. In an article 
entitled ' Melanchthon as Jurist ' A, Haenel says : ' Melanchthon insisted 
that the civil authorities ought first and foremost to run the gauntlet 
against every form of erroneous belief, and to suppress and punish every- 
thing, either in the shape of words or of actions, which involved recogni- 
tion of such false doctrine, and that they ought to force on the people the 
adoption and practice of the true faith.' ' Freedom of religion was 
denied at every turn by dogmatic preaching of intolerance.' ' When 
Melanchthon wrote to Calvin concerning the execution of Servet : " Your 
ofiicials acted rightly when they put that blasphemous man to death 
according to law and judgment " {Corp. Eeform. viii. 362), these words 
are not, as has been maintained, the passionate outburst of the moment, 
but the hard outcome of a hard and fast doctrine ' {Zeitschr. fur 
Bechfsgesch. viii. 262, 264). 

^ ' Short Account by the Wittenberg Professors,' p. 22 ; DoUinger, 
i. 494. 


While flattering themselves that they hold the true 
iaith and are living members of the Church, they go 
on in foolhardy security and cyclopean wantonness, 
and fall a daily prey to the devil, who incites them to 
adultery, murder, and other execrable crimes. This 
terrible wickedness and immorality, if not checked 
by stern measures of reform, will be followed by fearful 
chastisement. Are we not already being visited by 
one calamity after another ? Civil war, social anarchy, 
and evils innumerable are overtaking us.' He feared 
that God would send ' even much greater punishments 
still on the nation because of the unbounded licence, 
insubordination, and wickedness of the young.' ^ 

' In the midst of this dismal anarchy and confusion 
in the Church,' he had for many years longed to leave 
the world.^ When he fell ill in 1560 he had no desire 
to recover. A solar eclipse and the conjunction of 
Saturn and Mars were interpreted by him as signs of 
his speedy departure.^ Rejoicing in his ' release from 
this sophistical age,' he died at Wittenberg on April 19, 
1560. A notice posted up by the vice-rector of the 
university told of the cruel anguish of all sorts in which 
he had ended his days.'* 

It was not without reason that Melanchthon had 
complained of the insubordination of the rising gene- 
ration. A few months after his death the univer- 
sity was called upon to pass censure on the atrocious 
behaviour of a band of rowdy students who in the 

^ Dollinger, i< 403. - Corp. Reform, viii. 674, 832. 

3 Schmidt, Melanchthon, p. 662. 

■* ' ^rumnosam vitam egit in perpetuis laboribus, fatigationibus, 
adflictionibus, exagitationibus, crimiiiationibus, insidiis et morsibus, 
quibns a summis, infimis, exteris, indig -nis, hostibus et discipulis sine 
fine et modo impetitus et laceratus est ' (Strobel, Neue Beitrdge, V\ 103). 


middle of the night attacked the house of ' the most 
beloved teacher,' then inhabited by Melanchthon's 
son-in-law, Caspar Peucer, Rector of the University, 
smashed all the windows, and broke in the walls. ^ 

The fury of Melanchthon's theological opponents 
became altogether boundless. ' More pamphlets against 
Melanchthon have already appeared,' wrote Camerarius 
to Duke Albert of Prussia in January 1561, ' and I am 
much troubled in mind as to what we may be led into 
by all this unbridled insolence, and as to what will be 
the end of all this strife and quarrelling, by which 
already all that peace which the Son of God conferred 
upon us has been scared away.' 

' 2 

The Flacians stood out at the University of Jena 
as ' the foremost theological champions of the wrath 
of God,' and as such made it their business * to maintain 
Luther's doctrine, the one pure unadulterated Gospel, 
with thunder and lightning,' and to rout out ' the 
Satanic weeds ' of Melanchthonism. The venom of 

^ ' . . . facinus perpetratum cum contumelia scelerate adversus piae 
sanctseque memoriae carissimum praeceptorem nostrum et ejus hones- 
tissimam familiam' (Strobel, ibid. 1'', 106-108). For the length to 
which the fury of Melanchthon's enemies went, see Strobel, I'', 174-176, 
The Wittenberg professor, Paul Eber, says in the preface to Melanchthon's 
Comment. Ep. ad Corinth. : ' Qui quasi parum a suis alumnis et discipulis 
esset flagellatus dum viveret, etiam mortuus conquiescere non potest, 
quin ex lis, quibuscum non modo publice doctrinam, sed privatim etiam 
quae habuit et potuit consilia et secreta sua communicavit, quibus etiam 
cor suum, si licuisset, ex pectore exemtum impertivisset, aliqui in exsangue 
corpus sepulti saeviant, vindictae studio tanto et acerbitate tanta, ut 
credam, si coram ipsis miserum et jam putrescens cadaver Philippi 
expositum sit, eos dentibus more canum irruituros, et frustulatim carnem 
ejus laceraturos esse.' Camerarius concludes his biography of Melan- 
chthon with the words : ' Tota farrago hujus libri, quid aliud complectitur 
quam curas, labores, sollicitudines, dolores, denique miserias Ph. Melan- 
chthonis ? ' 

' Voigt, Brief wechsel, p. 132. 


sacrament arism, they said, was penetrating further and 
further into the Palatinate, into Hesse, Wiirtemberg, and 
elsewhere ; Adiaphorism was the origin of all the corrup- 
tion of the day ; it was the Beast of the Apocalypse, the 
hyena which would finally bring all Germany back 
again under the dominion of the Antichrist. It was 
the duty of the rulers and magistrates, and of the whole 
nation to extirpate this heresy, and to load all the 
impenitent with anathemas, even were they the chiefest 
apostles or even angels. It was only, they said, 
because the ruling authorities had not pronounced the 
ban on these heretics, that so many false sects and 
corrupters of the truth had crept in. A synod must 
be held at which the teachers of the Church should 
pronounce decision on all the disputed points, after 
which the princes must clear away all satanic leaven.^ 
The Flacians, be it said, wished to be considered the 
sole ' teachers of the Church.' 

They were still high in the favour of Duke John 
Frederic of Saxony. Flacius was flattered and cajoled 
at the ducal court, and by command of the Duke was 
appointed chief superintendent of all the other super- 
intendents, in which capacity he was to prevent all 
innovations by pastors or other clergymen." The 
Frankfort Recess, condemned by the Flacians as a 
work of the devil, was of course also regarded with 
extreme loathing by the Duke ; he could not alter his 
opinion of it, John Frederic wrote to Philip of Hesse 
in 1559, for he could not approve of honour being 
withdrawn from God Almighty, and given to the devil.^ 

Meanwhile, ' to the great scandal of the people,' 

* Heppe, Gesch. des Protestantismus, 1 ; Beil. 34, pp. 114-126. 
^ Wilkens, p. 107. ^ Neudecker, Beitriige, i. 199. 


odious religions dissensions had broken out in Jena 
itself and through the whole duchy. The Jena theo- 
logian, Victorin Strigel, at strife with Flacius, had 
sent in to the Duke a remonstrance against the ' Book 
of Confutation,' which he accused of containing false 
assertions. For instance, it pronounced an unjust 
condemnation of the proposition that the ' Gospel is 
the preaching of repentance and forgiveness of sins,' and 
it declared repentance and acknowledgment of sins to 
be dead works of the law. If Flacius, so Strigel main- 
tained, ' rejected all co-operation of the human will 
in the process of conversion, and affirmed that the power 
of the Holy Spirit overcame even the impenitent who 
opposed him with obstinate resistance, such an asser- 
tion contradicted the 18th article of the Confession 
of Augsburg, which taught that our justification is 
wrought when we assent to the Divine Word.' Strigel 
begged the Duke not to insist that his conscience 
must be bound down by this book, but to allow him to 
remain faithful to the simple Catechism.^ The Duke 
treated this remonstrance as heresy and rebellion. On 
March 24, 1559, he issued a warrant against Strigel 
and his friend Hugel, superintendent at Jena. ' On 
holy Easter day,' writes Justus Jonas the younger to 
Duke Albert of Prussia, ' one hundred arquebusiers 
and from fifty to sixty mounted soldiers were mustered, 
and between two and three o'clock at night they were 
let in to Jena. They went straight to Victorin's house, 
and with great violence and uproar they broke in the 
doors with hatchets ; whereupon Victorin and his wife 
hurried down in their nightclothes. The soldiers then 
said, " We've come to fetch you, you villain, and to 

1 Salig, iii. 480. 


take you to the only place fit for you." The poor 
frightened wife began to scream "Murder! murder!" 
whereupon one of the Judas band pointed a musket at 
her and said : " Hold your tongue, you parson's whore, 
or I'll shoot a bullet through you ! " ^ Strigel and Hugel 
were then led away like malefactors, placed half naked 
in a cart, and taken first to the Leuchtenberg, and 
then to the Grimmenstein. All the way along they 
were subjected to maltreatment. A respectable Weimar 
burgher, who was said to have spoken against the 
Book of Confutation, was also put in chains. At the 
intercession of several Protestant princes, Strigel and 
Hugel were liberated in September, after having first 
promised not to oppose the Book of Confutation, and 
not to leave Jena until the case against them had 
been tried and settled.' 

The deacon Winter was appointed superintendent 
in place of Hugel, and this man, with the connivance 
of the theological professors, Simon Musaus and John 
AVigand, excommunicated the lay professors, Wesenbeck 
and Diirfield, because they were suspected of false 
doctrine and were friends of Strigel. Other members 
of the university also, besides town councillors, burghers, 
and burgesses, were excommunicated for the crime 
of being friends of Strigel." In Luther's days, Wesen- 
beck wrote to the Duke, even flayers and Papists were 
allowed to stand as sponsors, ' and now they reject me, 
although I am a subscriber to the Augsburg Confession.' ^ 

Bitter party divisions now took place among the 
students and the burghers of Jena. Wesenbeck was 

^ A contribution from Voigt, in Raumer's Histor. TaschenbucJi, 
1831, pp. 289-290. 

- Miiller, Staatscabinet, i. 134. ^ Salig, iii. 586. 


openly insulted by the students, and he complained 
that as an outlaw his life was not safe.^ Winter and 
his deacons, on the other hand, complained to the 
Duke, whom they called ' the vicegerent of God,' that 
on account of their attachment to the true doctrine 
their ' lives and possessions were at the mercy of their 
bloodthirsty and Cainite adversaries,' who called the 
Duke's Book of Confutation a ' book of lies.' ^ 

With a view to the settlement of these quarrels 
the Duke, in August 1560, caused a disputation to be 
held between Flacius and Strigel at Weimar. Half Jena 
came to listen. During thirteen sessions the disputants, 
in the presence of John Frederic, went on incensing 
and exasperating each other on the subjects of original 
sin and free-will. Flacius denied free-will altogether, 
and put forward the proposition that original sin was 
not only a quality but the substance or essence of 
human nature. ' Man,' he said, ' with regard to spiritual 
things, was not merely like unto a block of wood or a 
statue ; he was even lower in the scale than these, for 
a block or a statue did not hate and offend God. He 
was lower than the moon ; for this orb reflected the 
light of the sun, whereas man was wholly dead to all 
good ; through original sin the image of God in him 
had been changed into the image of the devil.' All 
psychological and anthropological arguments brought 
forward by Strigel were repulsed by Flacius on the ground 
that they proceeded from philosophy and from reason, 
which was utterly blind as far as the things of God 
were concerned ; that execrable beast. Reason, as Luther 
had so truly said, must be altogether annihilated. 
When Strigel asserted that the Holy Ghost did not 

1 Miiller, Staatscabinet, i. 51. - Ibid. i. 135-140. 

L 2 


operate in men as though they were lifeless blocks 
and stones ; that a certain synergy (co-operation) 
must be attributed to the human will, for that in many 
passages of the Bible demands and exhortations were 
addressed to this activity of the will, Flacius met his 
antagonist with the words of Luther that from Bible 
commands or exhortations the power of complying 
with them could not be inferred. After the thirteenth 
sitting the Duke gave orders that, for many different 
reasons, the disputation must now be closed, but that 
it should be resumed a little later on and continued 
to the end. Strigel declared that he should not be 
moved from his opinion, ' even though the hangman 
were at his throat,' and Flacius adhered firmly to his 
assertion that ' original sin is the substance of fallen 
man.' For if it were not the substance, then it must 
be an accident ; but no substance is corrupted by 
an accident, and yet all Lutherans agreed that the 
human substance is no longer uncorrupted. After this 
the Lutherans were divided into Substantialists and 
Accidentists, and soon the miners in the Hartz moun- 
tains might be heard asking each other : ' Are you an 
Occident or a Substanzioner ? ' and, accordino; to 
the answer received, bloody quarrels would often 
ensue. ^ 

Since the event of the Weimar disputation, the 
Flacians had sunk in estimation at the ducal court. 
Schroter, John Frederic's influential physician, called 
Flacius ' a rogue and a villain, whose writings were 
full of lies and calumnies.' " The chancellor Brlick 

^ Salig, iii. 588-615; Dollinger, iii. 444-449; Wohlex, Neiie Unter- 
siicUungen, pp. 45 ff. 
- Salig, iii. 629. 


also inclined to Strigel's views. Attacks on the 
Flacians in the shape of apophthegms, comic verses, 
pasquinades, &c., were affixed to cathedrals, churches, 
shambles, and house-doors. If these men were all 
hung together on one rope, said the people, it w^ould 
be a rare bit of good fortune for the Duke of Saxony. ^ 
The Flacians, on their part, regarded their opponents 
as poisonous weeds, and called the chancellor Briick 
a devil's messenger who used Strigel to cover his own 

At the suggestion of his physician and his chan- 
cellor the Duke now resolved to establish a consistory, 
composed of four spiritual and four temporal members, 
with himself as president, to carry on the manage- 
ment of all ecclesiastical matters ; in it the power of 
excommunication was to be exclusively vested, and 
without its sanction no writings, either of clerics or 
laymen, were to pass through the press. The Flacians 
were excluded from sitting in this court, and they 
accordingly sent an address to the Duke threatening 
him with the most dreadful punishments for his inter- 
ference in Church matters. The fate of Saul and Ozias, 
they said, might overtake him. Portents of all sorts 
had already been observed ; snakes and vipers crawling 
up fruit-trees in quantities ; pools of blood in the 
rampart ditches at Weimar ; storks leaving the town 
in the direction of the gallows ; bees with Turkish 
turbans on their heads. All these omens, they 
said, prognosticated approaching disaster, for the 
manner in which the Almighty punished mockery 
and ill-treatment of His faithful servants was exem- 
plified in the stories of the forty children of Bethel 

» Wilkens, pp. 111-112. - See the poem by Waller, ii. 38-42. 


who were torn to pieces by bears, and by tlie captains 
of the bands on whom fire fell from heaven.^ 

These ' clerical attempts at inquisition ' disposed 
John Frederic to ' religious reconciliation ' with the 
other Protestant princes in a future convention of 


The Elector Palatine Frederic and Duke Christopher 
of Wlirtemberg were now all the more strongly in 
favour of a closer union among the Augsburg Confession- 
ists, both in religious and political affairs, because, since 
the accession of Pope Pius IV. in December 1559,. 
friendly relations had existed between the papal and 
imperial courts, and the Pope was in treaty with the 
Emperor and the Catholic Estates with regard to 
summoning a general council. 

The negotiations relating to this council give a deep 
insight into the general politico-religious situation ; 
but they can only be rightly understood by means 
of closer acquaintance with the religious and moral 
conditions in the imperial hereditary lands, and in 
those districts of the Empire which were still under 
Catholic dominion. 

' Salig, iii. 636-639. 




In the imperial hereditary dominions, as in all other 
parts of the Empire, the new gospel of justification 
by faith alone had found a large number of adherents. 
' Evangelical freedom, as the new preachers proclaim 
it,' said King Ferdinand once to the Franciscan monk 
Egenolf, ' is a soft and pleasant cushion for multitudes 
of people. Year after year the number of those increases, 
both among the higher and the lower classes, who find 
it very delectable to be taught that it is right to appro- 
priate Church and convent property ; that Christians 
are not called upon to bestow endowments, or to give 
alms, or say prayers, or fast ; that the confessional 
should be fled from as an accursed abomination, and 
that no performance of good works is necessary to 
salvation.' ^ 

From the time when in 1552, with the consent of 
George Slatkonia, Bishop of Vienna, a feeble, impotent 
man, the married preacher, Paul Speratus, had inveighed 
from the pulpit of St. Stephen's against the celibacy 
of priests and ' demoralising ' monastic vows ; had 
exhorted monks to leave their monasteries and to 
marry, and had proclaimed Luther's doctrine of justi- 
fication, apostasy from the old faith had become an 

' Quoted from the warning Wider die sectirischen Bumohrmacher, 
pp. 3 4. 


open practice. ' All tlie more so,' said King Ferdinand, 
' because much of the irregularity, idleness, luxury, 
and concubinage, which so scandalise the populace, 
lies at the door of the priests, monks, and nuns. Thus, 
since the heretical sects and doctrines have taken 
deeper root, things have grown steadily worse and 
worse, so that now the really good priests have lost 
the upper hand ; divine worship and the Holy Sacra- 
ments are held in contempt ; order and discipline are 
scarcely ever enforced ; and the people become from 
year to year more uncivilised, insubordinate, and 
bestial.' ^ 

The writings of Luther and of other religious innova- 
tors were zealously reprinted and propagated in Vienna 
and elsewhere, and libellous pamphlets and carica- 
tures against temporal and spiritual rulers flooded 
the land. In Austria also, under the cloak of ' the 
beloved Gospel and Christian freedom,' doctrines sub- 
versive of all existing order were taught and put in 
practice. The nature of this teaching and practice 
may be gathered from a mandate, issued by Ferdinand 
on August 20, 1527, which decrees that, ' Whosoever 
attacks or dishonours with blasphemous talk, preaching 
or writing, the divinity or the humanity of Christ, His 
birth, passion, resurrection, and ascension, shall be 
burnt with fire ; whoever impugns, slanders, or casts 
doubts on the purity of the Virgin Mary, or says or 
writes that she was not different from other women, 
and that she committed mortal sin, that person must 
be punished either in life, body, or goods and chattels ; 
and so also must all who are guilty of destroying a 
picture of Christ on the Cross, or any images of saints.' 

^ See preceding note. 


Polygamy and the teaching of communism and anarchism 
were subjected to the heaviest penalties.^ 

As was to be expected, the turbulence of the times 
had a disastrous effect on education. We read in a 
contemporary writer that, ' The more warlike the 
times became, the more the invasions of the Turks 
increased in frequency and in barbarity, the more 
apostasy from the true religion spread among the 
clergy and the laity, so much the more did the schools 
deteriorate and decay. The practice of constantly 
preaching against the clergy and circulating libellous 
pamphlets against them brought them gradually into 
greater and greater discredit, till at last there was 
everywhere a great scarcity of priests, even in Tyrol, 
where, before the so-called new Gospel sprang up and 
j&lled the w^orld with its noise, the priesthood had been 
held in high veneration.' - These statements are con- 
firmed from many other contemporary sources. Bishop 
George von Brixen complained, in the year 1529, that 
during the last four years not more than two priests 
had been ordained through the whole diocese, and 
that if God did not intervene, there would be a great 
dearth, not only of able, efficient priests, but of priests 
of any sort. ^ Eleven years later his successor, Bishop 
Christopher, spoke even more strongly : ' It was a 
hard matter,' he said, ' to carry on divine worship 
with reverence and propriety, owing to the dearth of 
priests.' ' And those we do manage occasionally to 
procure are for the most part apostate monks who 
wander about from place to place, and are here to-day, 

^ Wiedemann, i. 25-47. Wider die sectirisclien Bumolirmaclier, 9-12. 
- Wider die sectirisclien Bumohrmacher, p. 15. 
^ Sinnacher, vii. 275-276. 


elsewhere to-morrow ; ' ^ many of the priests ' are infected 
by the tempting new sectarianism.' - ' Good God,' 
wrote George Kirchmair in 1538 respecting the priests 
of the diocese of Brixen, ' the seven deadly sins have 
become as daily bread to our clergy here ! ' ^ John 
Faber, a theologian who was appointed Bishop of 
Vienna in 1533, and was a most zealous shepherd of 
souls, gives his testimony as follows : ' From want of 
good priests everything is going to ruin. The parishes, 
churches, and parsonages are burnt by the Turks, 
and the pastors are massacred. I am a bishop without 
any clergy. The superiors of the mendicant orders 
in Vienna pay no heed to the bishops. The cathedral 
chapter and the prebendaries ought to be subject to 
the bishop both in spiritual and temporal matters, but 
they are determined to be free and independent, and 
the bishop is to them a nonentity. If I try to be more 
than a zero, I have either to quarrel and battle with 
the mendicant monks, the Viennese, the university, 
and my own cathedral chapter, or else to leave the filth 
alone. I have no power whatever.' '^ Faber's successor, 
Frederic Nausea, complained that the Bishop of Vienna 
had no authority over the cathedral chapter, which 
cared very little for the service of God, and whose lay 
members caused general scandal by their profligate 
behaviour and their unsuitable mode of dress. He 
further attested that the bishop had not the slightest 
influence over the learned institutions of his diocese, 
nor over the national schools ; that the teachers were 

1 Sinnacher, vil. 363-364. ^ jj^-^^ y^i 343-344. 

^ Kirchmair, p. 497. Hirn's account of the religious condition in the 
Tyrol is drawn from original documents, and is as exhaustive as can be 
desired (i. 71-278), 

* Wiedemann, ii. 2-3. 


left to teach just what they pleased, so long as their 
instruction was not in the spirit of the Catholic Church. 
The schools of Vienna rarely produced as many as 
one or two clergymen, although their scholars and 
students numbered nearly 600. Hence the dearth 
of priests.^ ' The young men of to-day do not care 
for Holy Orders,' wrote the Jesuit Peter Canisius from 
Vienna in 1554 ; ' I am told that in the last twenty 
years scarcely twenty priests have come out of the 
university. The livings are either unoccupied, or 
else in the hands of apostate, licentious men. If God 
in His providence does not send a large supply of 
labourers here, the people will not only become heretics, 
but will sink to the level of unreasoning brutes. It is 
a wonder to me that the right-minded among them 
have not died the deaths of martyrs.' - Four years 
later the same man wrote that Vienna was ' daily 
growing more and more like Wittenberg or Geneva. 
Indeed, all the right-minded inhabitants, above all 
the staunch Catholics at the court of the Emperor 
and the Queen, are contemplating flight.' ^ 

The extent to which the religious revolution was 
responsible for the falling-off of the clergy may be 
seen by comparison of the reports of the church and 
convent inspectors in the years 1528, 1544, 1555, and 
later. At each fresh visitation the increase of disorder 
and anarchy was shown by an increasing number of 
flagrant cases. ' All classes of people have become 

^ Nausea's BeschwerdescJirift, contributed by Sebastian Brunner in 
the Studien und Mittheilungen axis dem Benedictiner- und Cistercienser- 
Orden, Jahrg. 3 ; Heft iii. 162 164. 

^ To Pater John Polanco at Rome, Jan. 5, 1554. Braunsberger, 
EinstulcB Canisii, i. 444. 

3 To Lainez on Sept. 30, 1558. 


SO averse to the monastic life and to religion,' the in- 
spectors report, ' that scarcely any one nowadays will 
go into a cloister. The ordinaries, provincials, vicars, 
and prelates have all grown so cold and indifTerent 
that they do not trouble themselves about this terrible 
state of things, do not solicit help or advice, and are 
not even glad when any interest is taken in monasteries.' 
The convert Frederic Staphylus said in 1554, in a report 
to the King, that the secular clergy were utterly per- 
verted ; there were as many sects as there were parishes, 
and each clergyman altered the doctrines and cere- 
monies according to his taste ; moreover, among a 
hundred priests there was scarcely one who had not 
got one wife at least. In the year 1561 the Emperor 
Ferdinand wrote as follows concerning the archduchy 
of Upper and Lower Austria : ' It is with the deepest 
distress that we have heard that in nearly all the 
monasteries and convents the venerable Sacrament of 
the Altar is openly administered to the laity in both 
kinds. Also that the elements are consecrated without 
the Mass being said, and are not reserved in the Reposi- 
tory ; that the canon and the collects in Holy Mass 
are either left out or else altered and perverted in a 
strange and remarkable manner according to the will 
of the officiating ministers ; that prayer for the dead 
is no longer used, and that children are baptised without 
the ceremonies, with unconsecrated water, and without 
the chrism. We learn also with inexpressible sorrow 
that concubinage is gaining ground, not only among 
the diocesan clergy, but even in the cloisters them- 
selves ; and that many priests and monks shamelessly 
harbour and maintain their so-called wives, or con- 
cubines, inside or outside the monasteries ; whereby 


great scandal and offence is given to the laity. In all 
directions there are numbers of men, either from con- 
vents or from foreign parts, who go about preaching 
seditious, sectarian doctrine, altogether opposed to our 
true. Christian, Catholic religion, and who lead away from 
the truth and from the right path, not only the monastic 
brothers, but also the poor laity. Against such odious 
crimes as these, serious and stringent measures ought 
to be instituted.' The number of unworthy prelates 
and priests was becoming enormous. For instance, the 
provost of Klosterneuburg was one of these sectarians, 
and kept a so-called wife either within or without 
the monastery, and was often in such a state of intoxica- 
tion that no one in the house was safe in his company. 
His monks also were addicted to excessive drinking. 
At Herzogenburg all the conventuals had ' gone over 
to the sects ; ' the provost had a number of wives. 
The abbot of Molk lived with the wife of a captain, 
and allowed his monks to go in for ' sectarianism 
and excessive wine-drinking.' The abbot of Garster 
and the conventuals at Gleink were all married and 
lived in drunkenness and gluttony. The conven- 
tuals of St. Florian also lived scandalous lives of danc- 
ing and banqueting. The abbot of Geras, who lived 
alone in the monastery with his concubine, had a 
Lutheran preacher and schoolmaster, allowed the 
Sacraments to be administered in Lutheran fashion, 
wore silk apparel, and was a zealous devotee of the 

But if the monasteries and convents thus sunk 
in debauchery and materialism formed by far the 

^ For these and other instances of the degradation of the clergy see the 
reports in "Wiedemann, i. 157 ff. 


majority, there were also some wholly different ones, 
where no scandal existed. The monks of the Franciscan 
monastery at Egenburg, for instance, were shining 
examples of virtue. These friars, never more than 
five in number, held strictly to their rule, endured the 
scorn, derision, and insults of the sectarians, preached 
and taught indefatigably. It was owing to their in- 
fluence that Protestantism, after gaining a wide foot- 
ing at Egenburg, almost completely disappeared again. ^ 
The Franciscan province of Austria may be cited 
in special proof that corruption of morals went hand 
in hand with religious innovations. Up to the year 
1540 an exact register had been kept in the Order of 
all members who had distinguished themselves, either 
by services to learning and art, by exemplary fulfil- 
ment of official duties, or by a life of holiness. The 
number of these is not a mean one. But from 1540 
onwards, through fully half a century, not one monk 
is found worthy to be mentioned on this list of distinc- 
tion ; not even the superiors of the convent of Graz 
are mentioned. Not till 1585, when a genuine reform 
of the Order was set on foot, do we note the commence- 
ment of a fresh series of names worthy of being handed 
down to posterity.^ 

' The sinful, scandalous lives of the clergy are the 
chief seed of the sectarian agitation,' says a ' poor 
simple layman' in 1561, 'for experience shows that 
where the poor Christian people have good, pious 
priests, there they do not fall away from the faith of 
the Church, or if they chance to be misled they soon 
come back again. One poor Discalced Carmelite in 

^ Wiedemann, iii. 167. 

- Hurter, ii. 56-57. See also Vol. ii. 53 and 63 f. 


Upper Austria, in the course of a few years' preaching 
in different parishes, brought back many hundreds 
to the true fold ; and wherever this man of apostolic 
life preaches and administers the Holy Sacrament, 
the people flock to him. He bears with equanimity 
hunger, blows, and wounds, as I have myself witnessed, 
for I was present when a stone struck his head, so that 
it bled, and yet he went on preaching the duty of love 
to our neighbours.' ^ 

But a very special share of the blame of ' this con- 
stantly increasing demoralisation and anarchy, both 
in towns and provinces,' must be laid to the door of the 
worldly-minded and corrupt dignitaries of the Church. 
Many of the prelates and provosts took advantage 
of the disturbed state of things ' to appropriate abbey 
goods ; took to themselves wives, and aspired to tem- 
poral authority, revelled away, sectarian-like, the 
goods of the Church and the poor, and called this 
serving the cause of the Gospel.' ' Others, in outward 
appearance, remained true to the old faith,' but ' they 
troubled themselves very little,' so the Jesuit George 
Scherer said in later years, ' as to what sort of pro- 
vision was made in their parochial churches for the 
service of the pulpit and the altar ; they placed the 
parishes under the care of the most reprobate and 
incapable fellows who could neither cackle nor lay 
eggs, neither preach nor celebrate, nor rightly administer 
any of the Sacraments, and who lead such unsacer- 
dotal lives that they drive people straight to hell ; 
for not only do they make no converts, but they 
strengthen and confirm sinners and sectarians in their 
iniquitous ways ; not only do they build up nothing, 

^ Wider die sectirischen Bumohrmacher, p. 22. 


but tliey break and destroy without limit. AVoe unto 
such prelates who do not provide their sheep with 
better shepherds ! for they are the authors of eternal 
perdition and damnation to thousands and thousands 
of souls. God will avenge on them the ruin of all the 
lost souls that have perished through their neglect.' ' A 
good school,' Scherer goes on, ' is undoubtedly a great 
and precious treasure in a country ; how then can 
the building and maintenance of schools be other- 
wise than well-pleasing unto God and incumbent on 
prelates ? Woe to the prelates who care little or 
nothing about the schools of the land, who care nothing 
for the liberal arts, who cannot endure to have learned 
people around them, and who are the cause that instead 
of learning and culture there is nothing but barbarism, 
licence, and gross ignorance all over Germany ! In 
former times there were no places where study was 
pursued so diligently as in the cloisters, where the best 
and most beautiful libraries were always to be found. 
Now, however, through the fault of some of our prelates, 
in many localities, study is nowhere so little carried 
on as in the monasteries, and what few books are left 
in the libraries fall a prey to mice, beetles, and dust. 
And all the time the prelates, who not only pay no heed 
to the rules of the orders, never even read or think 
about them, still less admonish the members of their 
communities to observe them, spend their lives in pro- 
fligacy and frivolity, give themselves up day and night 
to gluttony and drunkenness, and set most terrible 
and scandalous examples to all the clergy and laity, 
to believers and unbelievers, to Catholics and sectarians. 
They have no fatherly affection for their monks and 
nuns, they do not even treat them as brethren in 


religion, but as bond-servants, as slaves, as menial 
drudges and stable-boys. They maintain no sort of 
discipline in the monasteries, they let everything 
go higgledy-piggledy, do not punish vice, abuse the 
Church and convent property, incur enormous debts, 
squander and dissipate the Church revenues in de- 
bauchery, and, in short, behave as if it was all their own 
personal property, and they were as much lords over 
it as the temporal lords.' ^ ' I must also remark,' 
says Scherer in his ' Postille,' ' that those bishops and 
prelates who exercise both spiritual and temporal 
rule ought to pay more attention to the former than to 
the latter ; for the spiritual order has not been founded 
and established for the sake of the temporal, but, on 
the contrary, the temporal for the spiritual. A prelate 
who takes more delight in fine horses and hounds, in 
shooting and hunting game, than in praying, preaching, 
and reading the Mass, or who thinks more about 
banqueting than pasturing his flock, more about good 
feeding than the care of souls — such an one is not 
deserving of praise. Nor are those ecclesiastical rulers 
to be commended who treat their subjects with greater 
severity than do the temporal princes. There is a saying 
which ought always to be made good : ' it is better to 
be subject to the cope than to the coat of mail ' " (' besser 
zu sitzen unter dem Chorrock als unter dem Panzer'). 
' Sitting under the coat of mail,' that is to say, under 
the dominion of the temporal nobility, had already 
become odious enough to the people.^ 

^ ' Eine Pralaten-Preicligt ' in the Munich edition of Scherer's Works, 
ii. 364 ff. 

- Scherer, Postille {Festtage), p. 469. See also his sermon on the 
Second Sunday after Easter, in the Postille (Sonntage), pp. 596 f. 

^ Wiedemann, ii. 646, says not unjustly : ' The Austrian nobles at 



The same purpose which, at the beginning of the 
politico-religious revolution, had animated the imperial 
knights, and which, under the leadership of Sickingen, 
they had hoped to realise precipitately by force of 
arms, now influenced a very large number of the Austrian 
nobles. The latter, however, forewarned by the disas- 
trous issue of Sickingen's enterprise, did not at once 
have recourse to armed resistance against the ruling 
house. As King Ferdinand expressed it, ' they set 
about to win their way, slowly and step by step, in a 
covered fight against all supreme government, whether 
in religious or secular matters, making use of all events 
and circumstances that could further their end.' 

Prominent among circumstances furthering the 
increase of power and possessions was ' the new Gospel.' 
Said Herr Adam von Puchheim : ' So we have decided. 
We are both lords and bishops in our own territory ; we 
have the right to appoint and depose the clergy ; we 
are the only sovereign lords whom they are bound to 
obey ; the revenues of the Church proceed from the 
endowments of our forefathers, and are therefore ours. 
Whoever cavils at this decision, or does, not submit to 
it, will be made to feel that there is still a power in the 
land.' ^ This said, Adam took forcible possession of 
the parish of Miinchenreidt, which was an imperial 
fief, placed horse and artillery in front of the church, 

that time were inexpressibly coarse. The jus glaclii was then in force in 
their dominions, and by way of doing honour to this jus, they hung, 
speared, and drowned the people at their pleasure. The Carolina was 
the cloak for these atrocities. The perpetual peasant insurrections are 
the best commentary on this godless tyranny of the nobles.' When 
Lisch {Jahrbilclier, pp. 24, 74) attributes to the Austrian nobility of that 
period ' high culture, elevation of purpose, power and moderation,' one is 
forced to ask for instances in point. 

' Extracts from Bare Schriften, p. 71. 



and sent word to the parish priest to ' come and take 
holy water.' ^ 

The nobles made free use of their privileges as 
patrons and lords of the manor to proceed according 
to this decision. The introduction of the new Gospel 
was initiated everywhere by the confiscation of Church 
property, the plunder of parishes, of benevolent Church 
institutions, and of monasteries,^' Preachers flocked 
in crowds to the support of these nobles, especially 
from North Germany : ' followers of every imaginable 
sect, at war and enmity with each other,' they were 
all one in their hatred of all things Catholic. From 
their suzerain lords the nobles they ' received a mere 
pittance for salary,' and frequently, so they complained, 
they were treated like bond-servants, for ' the lords are 
everywhere tyrannical.' They boasted of being ' good 
evangelicals,' and ' while they themselves ate and 
drank, and squandered their own and the Church's 
goods, they thought fit that the clergy should exercise 
themselves in apostolic poverty, and they left the 
pastors with their wives and children to suffer want, 
hunger, and misery.' The saying of Melanchthon held 
good for Austria as well as for other places : ' Those who 
•call themselves evangelicals take to themselves the 
goods which were bestowed on parishes, pulpits, schools, 
and churches ; and if we are deprived of all these institu- 
tions we shall end by becoming heathens.' '^ * I be- 
lieve it to be the destiny to which I was born,' wrote 
the preacher Nicholas Prsetorius (1595) respecting 
Salomon Pfefferkorn of Ottobach, who suppressed the 

^ Hammer-Purgstall, i. ; Beilagen, p. 199, No. 94. 

- Wiedemann's work affords solid proofs of this plundering. 

3 Ibid. i. 75 f. 

Ji 2 


Catholic worship in Gobelsburg, 'to be compelled 
always to live under godless, unjust, sacrilegious, 
church-plundering masters. My overlord behaves like 
nearly all the other evangelical rulers in Austria ; he 
spends the wealthy Church revenues on himself and 
gives the pastor only a small fixed stipend. He has 
long been accustomed to ill-use his pastors and to turn 
them ofi without any reason ; he pays them very 
irregularly, moreover, and often the parish has been 
left more than half a year without any incumbent.' ^ In 
a great number of parishes the parsonages remained 
unoccupied for five, ten, fifteen years ; no divine service 
was held ; ' the people knew nothing whatever of 
Christian teaching.' This is the testimony of many 
different inspectoral reports. For instance : ' At 
Schrattenberg, for the last four years, there has been 
no pastor ; the glebe lands lie fallow ; the parsonage 
house is deserted ; Steinabrunn has been left for eleven 
years without a pastor. Herr von Fiinfkirchen ^' draws 
the income himself. At Stiitzenhofen, Herr von Fiinf- 
kirchen has appropriated the parish. At Drosing there 
has been no pastor for eight years, and the people of the 
place lead profligate, unchristian lives. At Geresdorf, no 
pastor for fifteen years, the parsonage in ruins, the 
church in bad repair. Hans Peltram appropriated the 
glebe, sold the parsonage to a miner, took possession of 
the church ornaments, and used the chasubles to make 
frocks for his children.' ^ While the nobles were them- 

' ' . . . nobilis, uti fere omnis Evangelictis Magistratus Austriacus 
solet, bonis ecclesiasticisutitur,' and so forth, in Raupach, PresiT/i. Austr. 
p. 143, note 3. 

• ' Mylord of Five Churches.' 

3 Wiedemann, iii. 99, 171, 241-242, 265, 338, 403 (note 2), 424, and 
many other instances of parishes despoiled. 


selves chiefly to blame for the orphaned condition 
of their parishes, in 1542 they actually had the face 
to complain, in the name of the ' new Gospel which 
ought to be preached in a right Christian sense,' about 
* the parishes destitute of pastors.' ' Many parishes,' 
they said, ' are without pastors, and the common 
people have, in consequence, become so godless and 
depraved that it is almost impossible to tame them, 
and they die like brute beasts without Christian instruc- 
tion, and without the Sacraments.' ^ The millers by the 
river Kamp, at Modring and on the Falkenthal, com- 
plained in 1536 that under the influence of the new 
doctrines ' all sense of honour, discipline, and con- 
scientiousness among workers were disappearing, and 
the worship of God decaying.' " 

In the year 1556 a committee of the provincial 
diet of the nether-Austrian Estates petitioned the 
King ' to grant protection to the preaching of the 
pure Word of God ' and to turn his attention ' to the 
abolition of the odious superstitions which had crept 
into the old religion.' They prayed the King graciously 
to allow them to adhere to the recognised truth, and 
to decree that henceforth no attacks should be made 
on the evangelical preachers and schoolmasters. The 
pure Word of God, they urged, had at the present day 
been declared with greater clearness and truth than 
ever before, and they could not submit to the old 
religion, which was ' contrary to the Word of God.' 
Ferdinand answered that, as a Catholic King, he did 
not consider himself justified in overthrowing and 
setting at nought the salutary statutes and ordinances 

^ Raupach, Evangel. Oesterreich, ii. 75-82, Beilagen. See Wiede- 
xnann, i. 85-86. 

'^ Wiedemann, iii. 133. 


of the Church on his own judgment and responsibihty. 
It had never been his wish to coerce anybody intO' 
denial of recognised truth, and he should certainly 
never be guilty of such an attempt. It was also his 
desire that the Word of God ' should be preached freely 
and openly in churches according to its true Christian 
meaning ; albeit, in the way in which the apostles 
and martyrs, and the teachers and fathers approved 
by the Church had taught it. If the Gospel were taught 
according to the opinions and ideas of each individual, 
the result would be that in a short time the lands of 
Lower Austria also would be submerged by heresy 
and sectarianism. Each separate preacher would claim 
to be the sole interpreter of the pure Word, and would 
exalt his own judgment and conscience, declaring 
that these were not subject to any human creature,, 
but to God only. Experience showed plainly enough 
what" sort of unity was accomplished in belief and 
in religion when each individual interpreted the Word 
of God according to his own fancy. ^ 

Experience of this sort had indeed been in process 
of acquirement for decades past in Austria. In the 
year 1560 a fresh edict was issued by the King against 
the religious schismatics, namely, ' the Anabaptist, 
Zwinglian, and Schwenckfeldian sects, which swarmed 
everywhere.' " Besides the above sects there were the 
strict Lutherans, the Melanchthoniaus, the Majorites, 
the Osianderites, and the Stankarians, who denied 
the divinity of Christ in the work of redemption. But 
the sect which gradually gained the largest following 

^ Stiilz, ' Ausschusstag von 1556,' in the Archiv fiir Kunde osterreichi- 
sclier Gescliichtsquellen, viii. 160-167 ; Wiedemann, i. 140-148. 
- Wiedemann, i. 149-150. 


of all was that of the Flacians, who were again sub- 
divided into several other sects. From their founder's 
doctrine that original sin formed the substance of 
man, some of the disciples had deduced the conclusion 
that fallen, unregenerate man was a creature of the 
devil, and that women in a state of pregnancy were 
bearing Satan about, and were bound to confess the 
fact openly before all the world. ^ 

In view of this general state of religious and moral 
anarchy Ferdinand was of opinion that, besides the 
imperative necessity for reform of the secular and 
monastic clergy, it was also most desirable to conciliate 
the new religionists ' by reasonable concessions, and 
so gradually bring them back into the bosom of the 
Church. ' Among conciliatory measures he included 
especially the concession of the lay chalice, marriage 
of the clergy, and the abolition of the law of fasting.' 
He entered into negotiations on this subject with the 
Pope in 1560, at the time when the reopening of the 
Trent Council was under discussion ; and he was 
zealously supported in ' his earnest appeal and 
claims ' by his son-in-law, Duke Albert V. of Bavaria. 

^ We shall have more to say concerning these sects later on. 




In Bavaria also the new doctrines had become dis- 
seminated at an early date. In a leaflet of the year 
1524 we read that : ' A certain number of the clergy 
and the laity, and also some artisans and apprentices, 
are going about preaching the gospel of the utter 
corruption of all existing Church organisation, and 
proclaiming the divine revelation that priests and 
laymen are all equal, that there must be no more 
spiritual government, no more confession and fasting, 
and that good works are not necessary for salvation.' 
' In many parts of Bavaria there are a number of these 
people who are preaching lustily in the highways and 
byways, in market-places and in taverns, that all 
temporal rule is unlawful, that it behoves men to have 
pity on the poor and needy, and that for the glory of 
God we should rob the wealthy of their splendour and 
superfluity : for this is the teaching of the holy Gospel 
and the Word of God, so long hidden in darkness, but 
in these beatific times at last brought to light again.' ^ 

In the spring of 1522 the Dukes William IV. and 
Louis had already issued a stern mandate forbidding 
all religious innovations, under pain of death, because 

^ Neiv Weis das heilig Evangelium su predigen und zu lehren 
(1624), Flugblatt, p. 4. 


'' nothing was more certain to result from them than 
the overthrow of all laws human and divine, of all 
order and government : they would create grievous 
and irreparable misunderstanding in the Christian 
religion, and it would come to pass that every- 
body would presume to explain the holy Scriptures 
according to individual understanding and judgment, 
and the unity of the Christian Church would thereby 
be destroyed.' ^ Many of these men had to expiate 
their novel preaching with their lives ; the Anabaptists 
were put to death in great numbers. 

Church discipline went altogether to pieces. The 
higher ecclesiastical offices had long been reserved 
for the nobility, and it was therefore ' a very hard task ' 
for the bishops, as many of themselves complained, 
to remove unworthy prelates from their posts. ' How 
greatly our hands are tied ! ' said Bishop Gabriel von 
Eichstadt ; ' a large number of the clergy are exempt ; 
the canons of the chapter will not submit to the bishop's 
authority in anything ; the superiors of the cloisters 
also appeal to their privileges and immunities, and 
profess utter astonishment when a word of restraint 
is spoken to them; parish priests and their assistants 
learn from secular councillors all sorts of subterfuges 
by which they elude our control. The dearth of good 
priests grows greater and greater." Ever since the 

^ Winter, i. 310-315. See also our statements, vol. ii. 342, German, 
vol. iv. 19, Eng. trans. 

^ ' Plures ecclesiae,' wrote Kilian Leib in 1533, * in nostra Eystettensi 
aliisque dioecesibus non potuerunt habere pastores, sic sancta in dies 
religio deficiebat.' Even in that part of the diocese which appeared 
outwardly to be loyal to the Bishop all restraints of order and discipline 
seemed to have collapsed. The Chapter threatened to dissolve itself; its 
assemblies were either not attended, or else served only as occasions of 
scandal from the excesses carried on at them. See Suttner's article in 


time when Lutheranism came into vogue, introducing 
insubordination of all sorts among the clergy and the 
laity, vice of every description has become rampant 
throughout the land ; and the priests are as bad as the 
rest. The clergy, who ought to be the leaders of the 
people, have become blind, and leaders of the blind.' ^ 
But, however much Gabriel lamented the way in which 
the bishops were handicapped, he nevertheless attri- 
buted to their own ' scandalous neglect ' the chief 
part of the blame of the melancholy state of things. 
' I greatly fear,' he said once to Kilian Leib, ' that 
Lutheranism is a plague sent by God, because we bishops 
are doing nothing. I have spoken repeatedly on the 
subject to this and that bishop, but it is of no use, they 
take nothing to heart.' - 

In Bavaria, as elsewhere, it was the cathedral 
canons who caused the worst scandal in the Church. 
These dignitaries were recruited chiefly from the ranks 
of the grossly degenerated nobility ; they were for the 
most part men devoid of learning or culture, and the 
majority of them were not even ordained priests, but 
' secular men of war,' whose profligate lives were 
chiefly to blame for the contempt in which the ecclesias- 
tical order was held by the people.^ ' What labour it 
will cost to reform the cathedral churches,' the theo- 
logian John Eck wrote on March 13, 1540, to Contarini, 

the EicJistddter Pastoralblatt, Jahrgang 1870, p. 171. As in the diocese 
of Eichstadt, so it was ahiiost everywhere. 

^ Curieuse Nachrichten, p. 87. ^ Suttner, p. 177. 

^ See the letter of Peter Canisius to the Cardinal Commcndone in 
Reiffenberg, Mant. Dijd. 46. It was the habit of these canons to receive 
the revenues of their offices and to delegate their functions to curates not 
belonging to the nobility. Hence arose the sajdng : ' The curates go to 
church for the canons, the canons go to hell for the curates.' Schwarz, 
Briefe mul Aden, 2, xlix. and 66. 


' especially those where the canons are all nobles I 
For out of 24, 30, or 40 of these worthies, there are 
barely five or six who are priests. I know one cathedral 
church where, out of 54 canons, only three are priests.' 
' Within the last few davs I have come to know of 
another one where neither the bishop, nor the provost, 
nor the dean, belong to the order of the priesthood. 
Some of the canons never pray ; others seldom appear 
in the choir ; none of them concern themselves about 
theological studies.' ^ It was represented to Duke 
William IV. of Bavaria, by a provincial synod held 
at Salzburg in 1549, that the principal cause of the 
moral corruption among the higher ecclesiastics was 
the exclusion of the burgher class from the canonicates 
and other higher clerical posts.^ 

The Duke's delegates on this occasion said em- 
phatically that ' the decrees of the synod would be 
utterly fruitless, if, first and foremost, the morals of 
the clergy were not improved ; for irregular living 
was the parent of heresy.' How urgently reform in 
this direction was needed by the lower clergy also 
is best seen from a petition in which a number of 
Bavarian country clergymen appealed to the synod 
for permission to retain their concubines.^ ' John Eck 
complained in 1540 that concubinage had gained 
ground almost everywhere, and that the clergy often 
marry their concubines, as if they could become legiti- 
mate wives ; that a great many of the clergy, who were 
secretly tainted with heresy, no longer observed any 
of the Church rules of fasting and abstinence, no longer 

^ Raynald, ad annum 1540, No. 8. 

- Sugenheim, Baierns Zustdnde, p. 97, note 16. 

■■> Winter, ii. 160, 162-163. 


paid any heed to the breviary prayers, and, owing to 
the lamentable dearth and inefficiency of Church schools, 
were often preposterously ignorant of the simplest 
articles of faith.' It is recorded that in the year 1558 
the abbot of Fiirstenzell could not even ' say how 
many sacraments there were.' ' He has a dancing- 
hall and a tavern in the cloister grounds,' we read in 
an inspectoral protocol, ' but no school.' ^ What the 
Dominican, John Fabri, had said of Colmar in 1540 
was equally applicable to Bavaria : ' The harvest is 
ready but the labourers are few.' ' The monks use 
the outward practice of religion for purposes of avarice, 
and forget to cultivate poverty of spirit and mercy 
towards the poor.' " 

There were, however, some good cloisters here and 
there; for instance, the Benedictine monastery of Metten, 
which was under the charge of several pious and excel- 
lent abbots, and where the monks, since the beginning 
of the 16th century, had shown great zeal in enriching 
their library and cultivating learning. The Protestant 
writer, Caspar Bruschius, calls the abbot Wolfgang 
(1526-1535) a pious man much given to prayer, and 
he gives high praise to his successor Carl (1535-1537) 
for his blameless life and his zealous devotion to learn- 
ing.^ ' But,' writes John Eck, ' well-regulated cloisters 
are growing few^er and fewer, as indeed are also good 
priests and monks, for the number of men who take 
Holy Orders and go into monasteries is rapidly decreas- 
ing. In many cases, too, heresy has found advocates 
inside monastic walls, and if these apostates were not 
restrained by secular authority, many of the monks 

^ Sugenheim, p. 165, note 178. - Rocholl, pp. 54-55. 

3 Mittermiiller, pp. 124-126. 


would marry and divide the abbey property among 
them, and would justify such a proceeding as a fruit of 
the Gospel and call it good evangelical behaviour.' 

Among the common people also, religious life was 
dwindling down. At a provincial assembly at Landshut 
in 1553, the growing impiety of the peasants came 
under discussion, and it was stated that they frequently 
destroyed crosses and images of the saints, and that 
the Holy Mass was treated with contempt by them.^ 
The sacrament of penance and pilgrimages had also 
fallen into contempt with many people, especially 
among the nobles.^ On one occasion a priest, who 
was making a pilgrimage to Altotting with a cross, 
was attacked and fatally injured. It seemed as though 
' a state of deadly lethargy would set in in Bavaria ; 
for piety, church-going, pilgrimages, and all that was 
godly and Christian, was either little cared for or alto- 
gether neglected.' ^ At a Corpus Christi procession 
at Augsburg, one year, there were not more than twenty 
people present ; the Catholic youth were in the habit 
of attending Protestant schools, and thus they grew 
up in the new faith.^ 

Under the rule of the phlegmatic Duke Albert V., who 
succeeded his father William IV. in 1550, the number 
of new religionists in Bavaria went on increasing.^ 

' Freyberg, Landstdnde, ii. 318. 

^ Meichelbeck, Chron. Benedicto-Buranuni, i. 253. 

^ Hemmauer, Histor. Entivurf des Closters Ober-Altaich. p. 329. 

■* Agricola, i. 69. 

" Concerning the religious attitude of Albrecht V. opinions are wide 
asunder. Knopfler's estimate of him {Kelchbewegung &c.) is certainly 
much too favourable (compare Schlecht in the Hist. Jahrb. xiii. 626 f.) ; 
that of Stieve, on the other hand (Allgem. Zeiiung, 1892, Beilage, No. 38),. 
much too disparaging. Gotz {Maximilian II's Wahl, 79-80, 124) 
maintains firmly, in opposition to Knopfler, that Albert V. was for a 
length of time in a wavering frame of mind. Paulus has clearly shown 


If the Duke had hoped to lead the wanderers back 
more easily by instruction and lenity than by force 
and coercion, he must soon have recognised the futility 
of such an endeavour. His forbearance had the opposite 
effect ; the spirit of innovation spread deeper and wider 

in the KatholiJi; 1896, i. 576 f. that the account contributed by Gau- 
dentius, i. 61, is purely fabulous. The much needed work of a more 
accurate investigation into the truth of this corner of history has been 
lately undertaken by Riezler in the Angriff. In his ver^^ valuable article, 
' Zur Wiirdigung Herzog Albrechts V. von Bayern und seiner innern 
Regierung ' {Ahhandlungen der MiincJiener Ahad. xxi. section 1, p. 98 f.), 
he maintains — in opposition to Knopfler, whom, however, he does not 
mention — that in Albert's Church policy we must distinguish between two 
separate sections. ' From the time when he became permeated by the 
influence of the Jesuits, and was roused by the behaviour of the Pro- 
testants among his nobles at the provincial assembly of 1563, and still 
more by the injurious tone and the suspicious contents of their letters, 
found in Mattigkofen (in 1564), his policy was strenuously Catholic, and 
as such clear and consistent. On the other hand, this quality of decision 
is entirely wanting in his Church policy througliout the first decade of his 
sovereignty, and consequently the judgments of modern authors on the 
Duke's attitude at that period are wavering and uncertain.' Riezler goes 
on to reject the opinion of K. Preger {Pancraz von Freijherg, p. 21) that 
Albert was half a patron of the new doctrine, and asserts, in contra- 
diction to Ranke {Pojies, ii. 9), that at no stage of his life did Albert 
show any inclination towards the new religion. At the same time he 
holds firmly to the opinion that ' Albert was a lukewarm and superficial 
Catholic' In a spirit of partial agreement with Riezler, W. Gotz, in his 
Bayerisclw Politikim ersten JaJirzehnt der Regierung Herzog Alhrechts 
V von Bayern, 1550 1560 (Munich, 1896), has lately examined into these 
questions. Gotz presents a very unfavourable view of Albert V. ' He 
was neither a statesman nor a general ; on the whole, not a commanding 
personality, but, all the same, a useful disciple of his councillors. We 
should nevertheless be going too far if we pronounced Duke Albert a mere 
passive instrument of his surroundings ; a long time elapses before he 
finds councillors in perfect agreement with his nature. Phlegmatic con- 
servatism is the groundwork of his being ; of inner evolution there are 
few traces. It is only when the events that happen around him affect 
his personal interest, or the interest of his dynasty, that he bothers him- 
self about them.' Gotz then polemises against the opposite views of the 
Duke, and concludes as follows : ' In spite of these attempts at vindication 
the figure of Albert V. remains a very uninteresting one. It s quite 
different, however, with Bavarian policy in his time ; it has system and 


the more the old measures of sternness and watchful- 
ness were relaxed. 

At Munich several members of the town council 
proclaimed themselves decided adherents of the new 
religion.^ At Straubing the council appointed a school- 
master who had studied at Wittenberg, and who, 
according to a visitation report, ' was inoculated 
through and through with the poisonous doctrines ; ' ^ 
' sectarian tracts, scurrilous pamphlets, and lampoons 
against the Catholic religion and the Pope, who was 
depicted as Antichrist with devil's claws, against the 
bishops as devil's menials, and the Holy Mass as a dragon's 
tail, were circulated broadcast and read in all directions, 
in spite of the ducal prohibition ; and many burghers 
in different towns were infected by these publications, 
and made no secret of the fact that they had gone 
over to the new faith and would have nothing more 

development, and in it all those elements which make that period of 
history so fascinating, recur again and again. . . . This Bavarian policy 
is, in all its essential features, the work of the ducal councillors ; it is 
therefore to their history that we must go first for enlightenment on the 
subject. Hitherto the life of Albert V. has been divided into two sections, 
separated by the year 1563. The following presentation of the case 
attempts to prove that the beginning of the second period, distinguished 
by its strong Catholic policy, must not be placed after the events of 1563, 
but that it was already in a state of incipience in the first decade of Duke 
Albert's reign, and that it is only the inevitable outcome of this first 
period.' Brandi {Hist. Zeitschr. Ixxvii. 297) sets the seal of assent to 
Gotz's conclusions when he says: 'Not a wavering to and fro between 
Catholicism and " fits of evangelicalism " such as Ranke still detected in 
him, still less a sudden change of politics after the experiences of the 
movement of the nobility in 1563, but a slow process of reconcilement to 
Austria, and a natural attachment to the leading representative of 
Catholicism in Europe, Philip of Spain. Although, on tlie whole, these 
changes corresponded to the character and views of Albert V., the responsi- 
bility for each in particular rests with his advisers rather tlian with 

1 Sugenheim, 50 f. - Westenrieder, Calender fur 1801, p. 216. 


to do with the jugglery and seduction of the old religion.^ 
Some even of the Duke's court officials were adherents 
of the new faith ; for instance, the marshal of his house- 
hold, Pancras von Freyberg, and the ducal house- 
stewards (Truchsesses) Achaz von Laymingen and 
Hieronymus von Seiboltsdorf ; also several of the 
principal territorial nobles, with the counts of Orten- 
burg and Haag at their head.^ 

At a provincial assembly which met at the end 
of 1553, the temporal Estates petitioned the Duke 
to allow the Sacrament to be administered in both 
kinds and ' the evangel' to be preached ; and, although 
Albert rejected the petition, several of the nobles pro- 
ceeded to eject the Catholic priests and to appoint 
Lutheran preachers. The owners of the Lordship of 
Brennberg, in the district of Straubing, drove the Bene- 
dictines out of the monastery of Frauenzell, and nomi- 
nated Protestant laymen as administrators of the 
monastery property. ' The noble lords of Bavaria 
were desirous of emulating their brothers in Austria.' 
Oswald von Eck, a son of the chancellor who had 
played so important a part under Duke William IV., 
was a ' mighty drinker, and once, at a carousal, he 
called the ecclesiastical possessions ' a sweet evangelical 
dish ; ' the Duke, he said, should transport the ' chief 
part of them into his kitchen, and the nobles would 
still have plenty of crumbs left over for themselves.' 

At the provincial assembly of 1556, a committee 
of nobles and burghers renewed the petition respecting 

^ Jammer tic. Bl. 3''. 

^ Concerning Pancraz von Freyberg, see the monograph of Preger 
(Halle, 1893), who, however, is mistaken in attributing to him any 
influence over the Duke and his court in religious matters. See Gotz, 
Alhrecht V, p. 96, note. 


the Eucharist, and made a further demand for the 
abolition of the cehbacy of priests and the fasting 
rules ; not till these points had been conceded, they 
said, would they grant the required supplies of money. 
Their language was so defiant that Albert again reproved 
them for their ' presumption and insolence.' 

In order to obtain the subsidies, Albert, in March 
1556, issued an edict in which, regardless of the ecclesias- 
tical law, he promised to concede the lay chalice and 
the eating of meat on fast days to the nobles and to 
their subjects, hut with the reservation that no priest 
was to be constrained either by threats or by violence 
to administer the Sacrament in both kinds. It was 
his wish, he said, that this matter should be left to the 
conscience of each priest, for ' he did not think that 
a clergyman should be coerced or punished in this 
respect.' ^ 

But he found later on, as he wrote to Archduke 
Ferdinand, that ' If one gives these people an inch 
they want an ell.' ^ 

The very next year, the Protestant members of 
the Estates, in direct contradiction to the demand for 
freedom of conscience previously made by them, required 
of the Duke that he would issue a formal injunction 
to the priests to administer the Sacrament in both 
kinds. And this time also the demand was accom- 
panied by a threat of refusal of subsidies. Albert 
promised to send a special deputation, headed by 
the Count of Ortenburg, to discuss the question of 
the Eucharist with the bishops. The latter, however, 

^ Freyberg, Landstdnde, ii. 329 ; Mannert, Gesch. Bayerns, ii. 53. 
See Aretin, Maximilian, pp. 72-82 ; Maurenbrecher, pp. 14-15. See 
Knopfler, KelcJibewegung, pp. 19 f. 

^ Aretin, Maxijyiilian, p. 223. 


declared that this question must await the decision 
of the council, and meanwhile forbade the adminis- 
tration in both kinds. ' One error after another,' 
they said, had arisen from the concession of the lay 
chalice. ' Some of the priests had taken to conse- 
crating the elements without the Mass being said, 
and were also in the habit of administering the Sacra- 
ment without previous confession. Others had taught 
that the body only was present in the bread, the blood 
only in the wine, and that each element was only 
half of the Sacrament ; others even said the bread and 
wine were only symbols.' 

' Among the ministers and other officials of the 
Church,' wrote the Duke, ' there are Lutherans, Zwing- 
lians, Flacians, and Anabaptists ; some of them are 
reviving the doctrines of the Manicheans, others again 
those of the Eunomians : it is scarcely possible to 
root up all the noxious weeds of heresy.' ^ Again, 
in a public document of July 29, 1558, Duke Albert 
said, ' Persons of all classes and conditions, both male 
and female, set themselves up to preach and declaim, 
either secretly in private houses, or openly at public 
meetings, in taverns, in market places, and even in 
churches, against their own preachers and pastors, and 
to speak with derision of our most holy Sacraments 
and of all the principal articles of our Christian faith, 
disputing about them, slandering and reviling them, 
and pouring out blasphemous and venomous attacks 
on them all over the land.' - 

We learn from the reports of a church visitation 

^ Aretin, Maximilian, pp. 82 ff. ; Huschberg, p. 370 ; Wolf, Maximilian, 
i. 19 ff. 

- Huschberg, p. 371, note 1. 


held in the years 1558 and 1559 how terribly morals 
had degenerated. Most of the secular clergy were 
found to be living in open concubinage. Many of 
them refused to recognise more than two sacraments. 
In a large number of districts, owing to the negligence 
of the bishops, the Sacrament of Confirmation had not 
been administered within the memory of the inhabitants. 
The number of those who kept away entirely from the 
Eucharist had augmented from year to year. The 
populace had become ' barbarous and uncivilised.' 

One cleric relates that when he went across country 
he was obliged to carry a musket, for ' he was surrounded 
by wicked people ; ' another, ' while reading Mass, had 
several times been dragged down from the altar and 
his chalice had been irreverently handled by the people.* 
In several parishes it was found that many of the 
inhabitants had not attended church for eight or ten 
years. ^ The author of a pamphlet of the year 1559 
writes : ' I have heard more than one pastor complain 
that very few men attend the Sunday church services ; 
the congregations generally consist of a few women 
and children. At the Easter Communions, to which 
formerly many hundreds flocked, scarcely eight or ten 
are now present.' ' One person told us, with tears 
in his eyes, that a parish priest, who was carrying 
the Eucharist to a sick person, was stripped of his 
vestments, dragged about, and pelted with dirt, and 
that the offenders went unpunished. Another, while 
preaching about the dear Mother of God, had a stone 
flung at his head, which proceeding raised a roar of 
vulgar laughter. At Scharding, some years ago, on 

^ Fuller details in the protocols in Sugenheim, pp. 53-55. See Aretin, 
Maximilian, pp. 86-88. See Knopfler, Kelclibewegung, pp. 42 ff. 

N 9 


holy Easter day, a great barrel of beer had been emptied 
in the church, and the pastor's house set fire to because 
he would not preach the evangelical doctrine of the 
resurrection of the body : that was the point. If he 
preached of confession, they would hack him, saying 
all that sort of thing was done away with, and they 
wouldn't have popish jugglery foisted on them.'- ' In- 
stead of church going, confession, and fasting,' the 
reporter adds, ' there is everywhere nothing but eating 
and drinking, blasphemy, adultery, and murder ; law- 
less, disorderly, dissolute living prevails in all direc- 
tions, and the commands and punishments of the 
ruling authorities are powerless against it all. For 
there is no longer any fear of God or of law among 
men, and this evangelical freedom, of which they prate, 
is a cloak for every kind of vice.' ^ 

A similar state of things prevailed in the arch- 
bishopric of Salzburg, which lay enclosed between 
Austria and Bavaria. Respecting the life of the 
Archbishop Michael of Khiienburg (I1560), ' nothing 
but good was said.' Michael was ' a blameless, ex- 
cellent man, a benefactor of the poor, especially of 
students.' ^ His predecessor, Ernest of Bavaria (tl554), 
on the other hand, had never received Holy Orders, 
and was secretly married to a young lady of the lower 
nobility. There is mention also of an illegitimate 
son of his."^ 

Here too, as in Bavaria and elsewhere, the cathedral 
canons came in for a large share of blame. The testi- 
mony of a morality preacher in 1559 is as follows : 

^ Jainmer <Jtc. Bl. vii. 10. 
^ Wolf Geschichtl. Bilder, pp. 176-177. 

■' Wiedemann, GeschicJtte der Eeformation, ii. 333 ; Paulus in Hist^ 
Jahrh. xv 583, note 3. 


■' The canons are for the most part members of the 
upper nobility, warlike, turbulent men ; they scorn 
to enter into the ecclesiastical state, and look with 
contempt on the whole body of the clergy ; they are 
seldom or never seen in the choir, but are frequent 
attendants at banquets, and a goodly number of them, 
as they themselves have been heard to say, are quite 
ready to take unto themselves wives and to secede 
from the Catholic faith.' ^ These canons had got 
nearly the whole ecclesiastical government into their 
own hands ; the Archbishop of Salzburg, like the 
bishops of Vienna, were nonentities. Among the 
inferior clergy, who were mere puppets of the higher 
nobles, there were ' scandals without end.' Many 
of the clergy ' insisted upon having wives, refused to 
hear confession, and to administer extreme unction 
to the sick.' ' Those of the Church patrons, who were 
members of the nobility, thought to better them- 
selves by confiscating the Church property in their 
possession.' ^' ' The leading burghers of Salzburg,' writes 
a contemporary chronicler, ' despise the Mass and 
do not go to confession, but repair to the nearest 
Lutheran conventicle to perform their so-called wor- 
ship ; they engage sectarian instructors for their chil- 
dren, and send their sons to Lutheran gymnasiums, 
so that only a small number of the burghers of Salz- 
burg are Catholics.' It was ' to be apprehended ' 
that the whole of the archbishopric would become 
Lutheran. ' The population had little to do with their 
priests in religious matters.' ' Out of thousands and 
more inhabitants belonging to the same parish, scarcely 
twenty or thirty were to be seen in church on Sundays, 

1 Janvmer dc. Bl. 8". ^ Ibid. Bl. 9-10. 


and on feast days nobody was present besides the- 
curator, the judge, and the sacristan.^ When the 
Archbishop of Salzburg was invited to the council, 
he excused himself on the plea that ' he dared not 
travel on account of the dangerous state of his diocese ; 
many of the people, especially the mining population, 
harboured a secret spirit of heresy, in addition to 
which, plots had lately been discovered in the Tyrol for 
massacring all the priests and nobles.' ^' 

The Franconian bishoprics of Bamberg and Wiirz- 
burg were ' filled with sectarian preachers,' and the 
nobles ' boldly declared that a daring game must be 
played ; the bishops must be transformed into tem- 
poral princes, and the lords of the nobility must be 
invested with hereditary fiefs out of the Church and 
convent property, and they would then appoint preachers 
of the pure faith.' Already, wherever they could, 
these lords were unscrupulously appropriating ecclesias- 
tical emoluments, and the property of Church institu- 
tions, and robbing the poor either in part or in whole 
of endowments intended for their benefit.^ The letters 
of the Jesuit Canisius are full of complaints of the 
scandalous lives of the Bamberg and Wiirzburg clergy. 
The conditions of public life, he said, were altogether anar- 
chical ; the Bishop of Wiirzburg did not dare leave his 
castle, or enter his cathedral, without a military guard. 
Very few of the Franconian nobles were still Catholics. 

In the diocese of Fulda also ' many preachers of 
different sects were at work among the knights,' and 
' they met with hardly any opposition from the clergy.' 

^ From Steinhaufers Beschreihung der Beformation, in Wolf,. 
Geschichtl. Bilder, pp. 177-179. 

^ Bucholtz, viii. 415. ' Jammer dc. Bl. 12. 


They complained openly that they were very badly 
treated by their patrons, the knights, who had appro- 
priated the Church goods and endowments, and that 
the churches, for want of revenues, were falling into 
decay and often looked like pig-sties ; as for them- 
selves, they said, they received such meagre pittances 
that they and their families were almost paupers ; 
and if they (the pastors) died, their wives and children 
would be reduced to begging. Added to all this, the 
people in many places were thoroughly refractory 
and treated their clergy as though they were the most 
contemptible of men ; they did not care for sermons 
or sacraments ; there were no schools, and the people 
were left to grow up Hke cattle.^ The prince-abbots, 
menaced continually by the Landgrave of Hesse, had 
' been obliged to let things take their course.' Even 
in the town of Fulda ' evil influences had prevailed 
to such an extent that, under the rule of the abbots 
Wolfgang and William (flSTO), the burghers had risen 
in defiance and peremptorily demanded the abolition 
of the Catholic worship and the introduction of the 
Augsburg Confession.' ^ 

The district of the Eichsfeld, in the archbishopric 
of Mayence, especially was ' so entirely in the hands 
of the subversive innovators, that there were very 
few traces of the Catholic faith left.' In many places 
the new Gospel was introduced by means of ' spears and 
muskets.' ' The nobles have the audacity,' we read 
in an archiepiscopal memorandum, ' to take forcible 

^ Quoted in the Cliristenlichen Ermahnungen an die lieben Teutschen 
(1571), Bl. ii. 5. 

- From the GescJiichte des Ftildaer Jesuitencollegs, in Komp 
Ziveite ScJiuIe, p. 7. 


possession of the churches of the Eichsfeld, to assume 
ecclesiastical control, and to appoint strange preachers 
according to their own taste ; they resort to all manner 
of wicked devices, libellous tracts and so forth, and 
even to violence and coercion, to turn their poor sub- 
jects and vassals from the Catholic faith, which they 
and their fathers have professed for ages, and to get 
the Church goods into their own hands.' ^ Here, too, 
the unblushing profligacy of the clergy, the regular 
clergy especially, was chiefly to blame for the general 
falling off from the faith.^' Of the monastic clergy at 
Erfurt, Melchior von Ossa said in his diary in 1554 : 
' They conduct themselves in their pothouses in a way 
that even Turks and heathens would be ashamed of. 
Their behaviour in the choir shows no spirit of devotion ; 
they talk and chatter together and pay no attention 
to the lessons read from Holy Scripture ; they think 
no more of spiritual doctrine than of apples and 
pears ; many clerics have been heard to say that sooner 
than let themselves be reformed they would become 
Lutherans.' ^ 

Christopher of Stadion, Bishop of Augsburg, a 
prelate most eager for reform, told the papal nuncio, 
Morone, in 1542, that it was the licence allowed in the 
Lutheran Church which encouraged and supported 
the clergy in their wicked sensuality."^ And again, 

1 Wolf, Eichsfeld, pp. 172-181. 

^ Compare, for instance, the ' Reformatio Ecclesiae CoUegiatae ad S. 
Martinum Heiligenstadii,' ordered in 1550 by Arclib. Sebastian von 
Heusenstamm (Wolf, Eichsfeld, pp. 80-86). The chai'ge mentions 
' perpotationes, scortationes, concubinatus, rixae, contentiones.' As regards 
the state of the episcopal town, Worms, see Comely, p. 76 ; Riess, p. 207. 

' Von Langenn, Melchior von Ossa, pp. 154-155. 

■* Laemmer, Mon. Vatic, p. 402. See, p. 412, the remarks of the 
Cardinal-Archbishop of Mayence. 


in 1560, Jolin von der Ley en, Archbisliop of Treves, 
wrote to the Cologne Jesuit, John of Reidt, that tlie 
latent Protestantism among those who still kept up 
an outward show of orthodoxy was ' enormously more 
injurious to the Catholic Church and people than was 
open apostasy.' ^ 

In the year 1559, at the Diet of Augsburg, the 
Emperor Ferdinand told the Ecclesiastical Estates that 
' moral and physical evils of all sorts reached a far 
higher pitch in the present day (people being so negli- 
gent of reform) than in the days of our ancestors when 
the Church did not suffer nearly so much from assaults 
and contrarieties. ' In the cloisters,' he said, ' which 
formerly were models of Christian order and discipline, 
we too often find dishonesty, scandal and vice, and such 
disorderly, disgraceful household management, that 
the funds were all squandered in wanton waste and 
luxury, and the needy poor defrauded of what was 
theirs by right.' ' And thus the funds are made to 
serve purposes directly opposed to those intended by 
the pious founders. And the worst of it all is that 
pious, worthy priests and monks often suffer for the 
wicked ones, and have to endure all kinds of grue- 
some, inhuman treatment on their account.' 

' Parishes and livings,' the Emperor goes on, ' are 
so lamentably cut down and impoverished, that good 
effi.cient priests, who would preach the Word of God to 
the people and administer the Sacraments, are extremely 
difficult to obtain. And those we have can no longer 
keep hunger and misery from their doors, and are thus 
reduced to apostatising and going off to any place which 
will make them welcome.' ' The schools also, both 

' Despatch of Dec. 27, 1560. See above, p. 40, note 3. 


public and private, are going to ruin all over Germany ; 
for there is neither help nor counsel at hand for them. 
And much excellent ability and talent is wasted in 
consequence, for some are too poor to carry on their 
education independently, while others, who have both 
the means and the will to study, cannot procure efficient 
instructors. Added to all which there is the great 
and crying evil that those who would be only too glad 
to devote themselves diligently to learning, above all 
to the study of the Holy Scriptures, have little or nothing 
to look forward to at the end of their training : either 
no income at all, or the barest pittance.' ' Thus the 
seed which ought to produce servants of the Church is 
utterly wasted and destroyed.' 

' Owing to the fault of the clergy,' there were many 
places in Catholic districts where the Catholic religion, 
the only true and right one, was not properly cared 
for, and others where it was altogether disregarded ; 
and encouragement was thus given to the populace 
' not only to fall away from their holy religion, but also 
to treat the clergy with contempt and contumely.' 
' We are at our wits' end,' said Ferdinand, ' we and our 
other Catholic Estates, to know how to keep our sub- 
jects in anything like Christian discipline, in these days 
when the nation has become so uncouth and uncivi- 
lised, and the way of salvation is made so broad and 
easy ; in sorrow we are condemned to look on, while our 
people grow more and more unruly and wanton.' ^ 

' The heresy which stalks abroad throughout Ger- 
many,' says a contemporary Catholic writer, ' is a 
judgment of an angry God ; through our own infirmities 
it gains strength daily. So long as there is no improve- 

' Bucholtz, vii. 432-435. 


ment in the morals of the clergy, so long will there be 
no end to sectarianism, and no rest in the dioceses.' ^ 

While the question of imperatively needed reform 
was being discussed at the Diet of Augsburg between 
the Emperor and the Ecclesiastical Estates, a disturb- 
ance of a most serious and extensive nature had occurred 
at Treves. ' Had the agitators succeeded in their 
intentions,' wrote the Archbishop, ' an important 
initial measure, as we learn from exact information, 
would have been to push on further into the Rhenish 
P/qffengasse, and by degrees, as the apostates said, 
bring the whole of that region under the sway of the 
Gospel.' ' A by no means insignificant portion of the 
clergy there are secretly apostates from the Catholic 
faith ; they despise all Church rules and ordinances, 
and in their criminal sinfulness actually threaten that,, 
if they are not allowed to marry, they will openly 
abandon the Church. Among these renegades the 
agitators find many secret adherents, and the agitation 
has made considerable way in adjacent bishoprics.' " 

The author of this disturbance was one Caspar 
Olevian, a native of Treves, and teacher of grammar 
and other branches of secular learning at the school 
' zur Burse ' (bursars' or endowed school) who had long 
been a Calvinist at heart, and who on August 10, during 
the absence of the Archbishop and his councillors at 
the Diet of Augsburg, had begun openly preaching . 
the heretical doctrines which he had long held secretly. 
He declaimed ' with terrible vehemence against the 
saints, the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, pilgrimages 
and other things,' says an eye-witness, the town clerk 
Dronkmann ; his preaching ' could serve no other end 

^ Bucholtz, vii. 435, note. ' Despatch cited at p. 185, note 1. 


than to stir up tumult.' ' On account of the uproar 
he had raised, and because he had behaved in a manner 
at variance with his calling,' the magistrate inhibited 
Olevian from appearing again as a preacher.^ 

But by the management of one of the burgomasters, 
Peter Steuss, and three town councillors, two of whom 
had received letters from Calvin the year before, it 
was settled that the matter should be submitted to 
the decision of the different guilds. As had been the 
case under Zwingli in Switzerland, so again now, the 
question of religion and the right interpretation of the 
Scriptures was to be settled by the votes of a majority 
of shopkeepers and artisans. Olevian, in a circular ad- 
dressed to the heads of the guilds, said that the honour 
of God and the salvation of souls was at stake ; that he 
was anxious to prove openly before them all, from the 
Holy Scriptures themselves, the truth of his doctrine.^ 

The votes of the guilds went against Olevian. Only 
among the weavers, the tailors, and the smiths was there a 
majority in his favour ; the other eleven guilds declared 
themselves opposed to his doctrines. The guild of 
shopkeepers made the following statement of opinion : 
' Whereas up till now, through all Christendom, people 
have lived in peace and sanctity in the old religion, 
and now at the present day all the cities of the Empire 
are thrown into turmoil and unrest on account of the 
ancient faith, it is the will and intention of our honour- 
able guild to petition and implore our honourable 
council that they will put down everything in the way 
of preaching and teaching, and collecting in mobs, which 
militates against public peace and order, so that no 
disturbances may occur in our town.' One of the town 

1 Marx, Olevian, p. 21. ^ Jhid. pp. 120, 121, note. 


councillors, Leonhard Nussbaum, protested that the 
question of religion must not be discussed in the council- 
house, especially as ' in these troublous times, every 
year, indeed every month, fresh creeds were concocted.' ^ 

Although an enormous majority both of magis- 
trates and guilds had pronounced against Olevian's 
being allowed to go on preaching, he was not to be 
restrained. ' The glory of God,' he informed the Arch- 
bishop's councillors, ' was the motive that impelled 
him. He had no right to bury in the earth the gift 
bestowed upon him by God.' 

' If the game succeeds in Treves,' said the new 
religionists, ' a new road will be opened up to us in the 
Empire.' Within Treves and its liberties alone there 
were nearly twenty institutions with founded property 
which, if once the Gospel gained headway there, would 
offer wealthy booty." 

Olevian went forward ruthlessly. As his friends 
said of him, he was ' an evangelical firebrand,' and 
even Theodore Beza felt compelled in later years to 
warn him against excessive zeal and vehemence. For 
the present the chief thing was to make out that his 
proceedings were based on justifiable grounds, and 
for this purpose his adherents sent the magistrate a 
manifesto in which, on the strength of the Augsburg 
Religious Peace, they claimed for the burghers of Treves 
free and unlimited right to regulate their religious 
practices by the Augsburg Confession."^ 

As a matter of fact, however, this right was really 
annulled by the Religious Peace. Even if the whole 
body of magistrates and all the guilds had been in favour 

1 Marx, Olevian, pp. 21-25. ^ jj^^^ p i29, note 2. 

■' Hontheim, ii. 784. 


•of the Augsburg Confession, according to the clear 
wording of the Peace of Augsburg, they would have 
had no right to frame their religious practice accord- 
ing to it. For, by the terms of the Peace, this right 
had only been granted to those of the secular Estates 
who held fiefs immediately from the Empire ; Treves 
was not an imperial city, but had stood for centuries 
under the suzerainty of the electors. As late as Febru- 
ary 28, 1559, the magistrate had said in a memorandum 
to the Imperial Chamber : ' Treves, as everybody knows, 
is not an immediate fief of the Empire.' ^ 

The Elector was by no means willing to allow any 
curtailment of the rights accorded him by the Religious 
Peace. Nevertheless, his stern inhibition of ' evan- 
gelical ' preaching remained without effect. Not only 
did Olevian continue his propagandist work among 
the people, but a second preacher. Gunman Flinsbach, 
was brought from Zweibriicken, and this man declared 
plainly that he should go on with his preaching in spite 
of all prohibition. In opposition to the decision of 
the town council some of its members assigned these 
preachers a church which ' was the property of the town 
and the whole company of burghers.' Olevian and 
Flinsbach were protected by an armed force and 
accompanied to the pulpit by an armed escort.- 

When the Elector returned from the Diet, an insur- 
rection was on the point of breaking out. He had come 
to Treves, so he informed the Landgrave Philip, in the 
hope of being able to bring back to submission the 
turbulent and refractory citizens who had stirred up 
sedition in defiance of the secular and religious peace. 

^ Hontheim, ii. 856. 

" Report of the magistrate, Nov. 18, 1559, in Hontheim, ii. 822-829. 


* These demagogues, however, regardless of his presence, 
had barricaded the gates and streets in a revolutionary- 
manner, and had shown such a spirit of rebellion that 
he and his retinue had been in no slight danger of 
their lives.' One of the Elector's preachers had been 
insulted in the pulpit and with difficulty rescued from 
the maltreatment of the innovators. ' We will pass 
over the odious details,' said the Elector, ' of the manner 
in which this so-called preacher ' (the Calvinist Olevian) 

* has dared openly from the pulpit to assail ourselves 
and our Estates, our clergy, officials, and loyal burghers, 
with scurrilous libels and pasquils, in the most abominable 
manner, in opposition to all the articles, both profane 
and religious, of the Peace of Augsburg.' ' Day and 
night,' wrote the town council, ' the sedition-mongers 
rampage about the streets, armed and accoutred, and 
declaring in threatening tones, " Our creed must be 
established even if no stone should be left standing." ' ^ 

Finally, by command of the Elector, Olevian and 
eleven men of his party, the ringleaders of the move- 
ment, were taken prisoners on October 11, 1559. 

Although it was expressly stated in the terms of the 
Religious Peace that ' No one of the princes must forcibly 
compel any of the others, or their subjects, to embrace 
his own religion, or in any way to protect or defend 
any subjects in revolt against their rulers,' the Palatine 
Elector Frederic III. had promised the preacher 
Flinsbach, on his departure for Treves, to give him 
full support in case of any proceedings being instituted 
against him by the lord of the territory.^ 

' Neudecker, Neue Beitrdge, i. 203-206. Report of the town council 
in Hontheim, ii. 822-829. 

- Fuller details in Mnrx, Olevian, pp. 49-62. 


Immediately on the imprisonment of the Con- 
fessionists, Frederic III. sent a deputation to Treves^ 
and delegates soon followed from the Dukes Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg and Wolfgang of Zweibriicken, from 
the Landgrave Philip and from two other Lutheran 
princes, to whom the Treves Confessionists had appealed 
for help. The delegates demanded that the prisoners 
should be released, that they should be allowed to 
adhere to their Confession, and that a church should 
be assigned to them with the right of appointing 
preachers. ' x411 this,' said the Catholic party, ' was 
very extraordinary from the mouths of princes who 
had nothing so much at heart as to root out all traces 
of Catholicism, wherever their jurisdiction extended, 
and who based their " sacred right " to do this on the 
terms of the Religious Peace. But his Electoral 
Grace of Treves, who has precisely the same right 
as they have to dictate the religion of his subjects, 
gave them a fitting answer.' Fortunately for the 
Elector of Treves, the delegates of the Lutheran princes 
came to the conclusion that ' Calvinism was at the 
bottom of the business, and with that they would 
not be mixed up.' They had discovered, they said, 
that these Confessionists, under the cloak of the 
Augsburg Confession, ' had set many dangerous move- 
ments going, in violation of the Peace of Augsburg : 
in especial they had attempted to exercise suzerain 
and mediate authority, and had appointed Calvinistic 
preachers.' ^ 

Peace was at last restored. The preachers and 
the rest of the prisoners were ordered out of the town 
by the Elector and the magistrate, and all other ' Con- 

^ Marx, Olevian, pp. 63-65. 


fessionists ' also, who refused to return to the old 
religion, were admonished to leave Treves. The 
number of banished persons amounted in all to 35.^ 

But, though the ' storm had quieted down for the 
moment,' the Elector, who could not expect any help 
from the other Catholic Estates, was in constant fear 
of internal commotion and of the interference of neigh- 
bouring Protestant princes. ' The Protestants,' he 
said to the papal nuncio, Commendone, in May 1561, 
' are not satisfied with the Religious Peace of Augsburg, 
although its terms are very disadvantageous to the 
Catholics ; they do not respect its conditions them- 
selves, although they would compel the Catholics to 
do so, and they are always endeavouring to stretch 
the treaty in their own favour.' From fear of dis- 
turbances he did not dare absent himself from his arch- 
bishopric, for he would not leave his church and his 
people exposed to certain danger, and to calamities 
from which it would be impossible to recover." 

Commendone, who travelled over Germany at that 
time on his papal mission, reports from personal observa- 
tion on the hopeless condition of things, which gave 
reason to fear the complete downfall of the Catholic 

' The number of heretics,' he writes, ' increases 
from day to day ; not only have they won over to their 
side the majority of the secular princes, but their 
poison has polluted the lands of all the Catholic princes, 
ecclesiastical as well as secular, so that the lords of 

' In the imperial city of Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) the CathoHc 
measures of defence were as successful as at Treves. Interesting accounts 
of these are contained in unpublished acts at Vienna, Ditsseldorf, and 
Marburg, in Eitter, i. 221 f. 

"^ Reimann, Sendung des Nicntius Commendone, p. 263. 



territories can scarcely obtain any services from their 
subjects, or command their obedience, or get possession 
of the taxes due to them.' ' Amazing alike are the 
watchfulness of the Protestant princes and the lethargy 
of the Catholics. One would think from all appear- 
ances that our party was the one which trusts only 
to faith without works, so little do we bestir ourselves 
to remedy the existing evils and abuses. The Protes- 
tants, on the other hand, although they are outside 
the pale of truth, and cannot therefore attain to any 
real unity, do nevertheless seek to help and support 
each other and to make a show, at least, of agreement.' 
It was not only inertness, however, which hindered 
the Catholics from action, but also fear. ' The Catholic 
princes do not dare show themselves, and are becoming 
quite habituated to endure much contrariety.' ' Unless 
an attempt be made to rally the Catholics together 
and to rouse them from the state of fear and servility 
into which they have fallen, the condition of things 
in the domain of religion must, it seems to me, become 
almost hopeless.' 

This is owing especially to the state of affairs in 
the bishoprics. ' Many of the prelates,' Commendone 
goes on, ' have only one single Catholic councillor 
or servant, and they know not on whom they may 
place reliance ; many of them actually keep very 
extreme Protestants in their service, in order to make 
use of them, as occasion arises, in their negotiations 
with Protestant princes.' 

' The practice of electing, or nominating for election^ 
avowed heretics or merely neutral persons, of whom 
there are so many in Germany, makes it utterly hopeless 
that the Catholic Church will ever be helped up again, 


or even that the bishops and chapters will be kept 
in true submission to the Apostolic See ; the result, 
indeed, is that in many churches the canons have no 
scruples in openly declaring themselves heretics. Some, 
in doing this, are actuated solely by ambition to become 
prelates ; for they see that they cannot be elected without 
the good-will of the princes, and that only heretics 
can secure this good-will. The chapters have already 
made it a rule to hand over the administration of 
ecclesiastical property to the newly elected prelates 
before they have received papal confirmation. The 
result is that less importance is beginning to be attached 
to this confirmation. Many, indeed, could not apply 
for it at all if it were not that their creditors, and those 
who own Church property, make use of this omission 
against the elected persons, and require them to produce 
their warrants of confirmation. But it is to be feared 
that the heretics will find a way even out of this diffi- 
culty.' 1 

Such was the condition of things in the imperial 
dominions which were still under Catholic or semi- 
Catholic rule at the time when Pope Pius IV. was 
negotiating with the Emperor and the other Catholic 
powers concerning the reopening of the General Council. 

^ Reimann, Sendung des Nuntius Commendone, pp. 256 f. 

o -2 



COUNCIL OF TRENT, 1560-1561 

After the close of the pontificate of Paul IV., which 
had been so disastrous for the Church, the cardinals, 
assembled in conclave, represented to the future Pope 
(1559) that it was his first duty to use his utmost en- 
deavours to bring about peace between the different 
Christian powers, to work zealously and diligently, 
by means of a General Council and all other permissible 
agencies, for the uprooting of heresy, and to institute 
a reform of the whole Church and of the Roman Curia.^ 
John Angelo Medici, who ascended the papal chair as 
Pius IV., agreed to all these conditions.^ 

Before his election he had an interview with the 
Cardinal-bishop Otto of Augsburg, who, under Paul IV. 
and in conjunction with the Jesuit Canisius, had long 
been engaged in fruitless endeavours to effect a recon- 
ciliation between the Pope and King Ferdinand, and 
also to bring about the reopening of the Council. Otto, 
on this occasion, had urged on Cardinal Medici that the 
future Pope must look zealously after the affairs of 
Germany, half of which was still Catholic ; but secession 
from the orthodox faith went on daily, and in three or 

^ Conventiones inter cardinales in conclavi initce, in Sickel, pp. 12-13. 
^ Eaynald ad a. 1559, No. 37, 38. See Mliller, Das Conclave Pitis IV 
(Gotha, 1889), pp. 100 f. 


iour years the Empire miglit be entirely won over by 
Protestantism if help and encouragement were not 
given by the Apostolic See. John Angelo had answered : 
' As to what concerns you Germans, it will be necessary 
to convene a council, in order to see whether any con- 
cessions can be made in the matters of the marriage of 
the clergy and the lay chalice ; a good Pope will not 
fail to do what he can in these respects ; some way of 
help, doubt it not, will be found.' ^ Otto, on his part, 
was by no means of opinion that the religious difficulties 
could be got over by any such means as those suggested 
by the Cardinal, but he contented himself with express- 
ing his ' heartiest satisfaction that the new Pope was so 
well disposed towards the Germans, so friendly towards 
the Emperor, and so eager for a council and for reform.' 
' All those whom Pope Paul IV. had somewhat ex- 
asperated by his intemperate zeal,' wrote Otto on Fe- 
bruary 1, 1560, to his friend Duke Albert of Bavaria, 
' the present Pope conciliates by his affability. He is 
kind, friendly, condescending, just, benevolent and 
paternal to all alike, compatriots and foreigners, friends 
and subjects, rich and poor ; and he is most laborious 
and upright.' ^' 

In the spring of 1560 the Pope announced his 
intention of reopening the Council of Trent, and he 
despatched nuncios to negotiate the matter with the 
Emperor and with King Philip II. of Spain.^ The 

^ Augustani cardinalis confessio, in Sickel, pp. 17-18. See Vargas's 
Eeport of Oct. 18, 1559, in Dollinger, Beitriige, i. 278. 

■^ Bader, p. 130 ; see 128. Turba, Venet. Depesclien, iii. 135. 

' See Voss, Die Verhandlungen Pitts IV iiher die Neuberufung des 
Tridentiner Concils (Dissertation, Leipzig, 1887), s. 32 ff., and Dembinsky 
in the Verhandlungen der KraTiauer Akadeinie der Wissenschaften, 
phil.-histor. Classe, 1891, serie ii., 2, 1 ff. 


internal condition of France, where a religious schism 
was apprehended, called urgently for haste. Duke 
Albert of Bavaria, who had pronounced it necessary, 
on account of the Protestant Estates, to hold a Diet 
before the opening of the Council, wrote to Cardinal 
Otto on May 18 : ' His Holiness will not be able to 
put off the meeting of the Council much longer, because 
it is as imperatively needed by other nations as by 
Germany. There is no more sure and certain remedy 
for all impending danger than a Council. But while 
thus urging haste, 1 do not mean that it should not 
be well considered beforehand how we are to begin,, 
proceed with, and conclude the business ; and I am 
firmly convinced, moreover, that unless we start with 
some sort of clear, general understanding and concert,, 
nothing will be accomplished. I see, however, too 
plainly in all directions, that the evil spirit will not rest 
from putting obstacles and hindrances in the road,, 
and that there is more zeal in disputing about ways and 
means than earnestness in grappling with the case ; 
and I fear that we shall go on delaying till we have 
lost all our opportunities, while the adversaries will 
find their opportunity in our tardiness and dilatoriness.' 
A fresh Diet, he said, would not have the effect of 
bringing the Protestant Estates to the Council, ' for 
all they desire is to hinder and postpone the business ; 
and have we not had Diets in plenty which have had 
no influence whatever on these renegades ? ' ^ 

On May 14 the Turkish fleet off Dscherbe had almost, 
entirely destroyed the Christian fleet ; " at Rome the 
worst was apprehended. ' His Holiness,' Otto reported 

' Bader, pp. 166-1G7. 

^ Hammer, GescJi. ties osmanisclien Belches, ii. 301. 


to Munich on May 20, ' has to-day issued orders for 
manning the fortresses on the sea-coast ; for if the 
Turkish armada chose, it could well bear down upon 
Rome. God preserve Christendom ! ' The Cardinal 
became all the more urgent with the Duke to persuade 
the Emperor to hurry on the meeting of the Council. 
' The experience of many years,' he said, ' has shown 
us plainly what grievous injury and disaster have been 
caused, not only in the Empire, but throughout Christen- 
dom, by a perpetual policy of tacking, trimming, 
temporising, and condoning. Religious questions ought 
to be grappled with in a spirit of trust in God and not 
in abject fear of man ; with genuine faith, unwavering 
hope, and dauntless courage. We must be armed with 
the love of God, and heartened by trust in Christ, and 
then no human power, and not even the might of the 
devil, will be able to hinder us from avenging and 
reasserting the glory of God. I fear nothing so much 
as procrastination, which will give the adversaries 
time to reinforce and to harden themselves still further 
in rebellion and obduracy.' ^ 

As the answers of the Emperor and the King of 
Spain were slow in arriving, the Pope, on June 3, 
summoned together the ambassadors already in Rome, 
with the exception of the French King's, and informed 
them of his firm resolve to reassemble the Council of 
Trent : ' We wish for this Council,' he said, ' we wish 
for it most certainly, and we wish it to be free and 
general. If we did not wish for it we might easily 
keep the world waiting another three or four years on 
the plea of the difiiculty of deciding where it is to be 
held.' In order to evade this difficulty, he said it was 

1 Bader, pp. 167-170. 


best tliat the Council should at any rate reopen at Trent ; 
later on it might be removed to some other place which 
might be considered more suitable. To the Venetian 
ambassador the Pope made the following communica- 
tion : ' The Council is to be entirely free in its action, 
and its aim and object will be to improve whatever 
needs improving, even in matters touching our own 
person and interests ; but as to questions of the faith, 
these we intend to maintain intact, as also this our 
Holy See, which must continue to be the head over 
all, as it has been hitherto and must of necessity remain. 
The Council must not meet in a town which is either 
directly or indirectly dependent on the Church, but it 
must be free and unfettered, so that all may come 
and go without let or hindrance.' ^ 

But from fear of the Protestants the Emperor 
raised difficulties ' which gave serious cause to fear 
that now again all hopes of the Council and of reform 
would be disappointed.' 

Several of the imperial councillors — for instance, 
Doctor George Gienger, justiciary at Enns, a fierce op- 
ponent of the false opinions of the Councils of Constance 
and Basle — assumed from the outset an almost hostile 
attitude towards the idea of reopening the Council. 
In a memorandum of June 5 they represented to the 
Emperor that ' In secular matters the Pope shows 
himself conciliatory, but in spiritual things he does 
not appear to recognise his duty ; he makes religion 
secondary to his own private interests ; his view of a 
Council is inadequate ; he will not agree that it should 

^ Report of the imperial ambassador of June 3, 1560, in Sickel, p. 48, 
See Reimami, TJnterliandlungen, pp. 594-595; Ranke, Fcijystc, i. 328; 
Bucholtz, viii. 374 ; Voss, Verliandlungen, pp. 44 f. 


l3e conducted according to the decrees of the Councils 
of Constance and Basle ; possibly he does not really 
wish for it at heart ; perhaps he wishes the Emperor 
to make difficulties ; the King of Spain appears to be 
undecided ; the King of France seeks only his own 
profit. The other kings take no interest in the matter. 
The clergy dislike the idea on account of the proposed 
reform, which they dread. The Confessionists loathe 
it and speak out plainly against it ; it will be difficult 
to enforce its decrees ; what the Pope will very likely 
propose with regard to the Confessionists is dangerous 
and opposed to the terms of the Religious Peace.' ^ 
In what direction the above-mentioned Doctor Gienger, 
who was constantly appealed to for advice and who 
was a trusted friend of the Emperor's Protestant- 
minded son Maximilian, sought to lead the Emperor, 
is most clearly seen in a later memorandum where he 
says : ' The Emperor is only exercising his rights and 
fulfilling his duty when, like the Kings of Judah and 
the Christian Emperors from Constantine and Sigis- 
mund, he takes pity on the poor moribund Church, 
whose servants have abandoned true Christianity, 
have degenerated into abominable heathenism, and 
are all bent only on their own selfish ends.' ' At 
all costs,' he said, Ferdinand must insist on the con- 
cession of the lay chalice and the marriage of the 

Immediately after the accession of Pope Pius IV. 
Ferdinand had begged him to lose no time in coming 
to an understanding with the other Christian sovereigns 

1 Sickel, pp. 49-50, 

2 Ihid. pp. 492-493. See H. Loewe, Die Stellung des Kaisers 
Ferdinand I zum Trienter Concil vom OM. 1561 bis Mai 1563 (In- 
augural Dissertation, Bonn, 1887). 


concerning the summoning of a Council ; ^ but now that 
the Pope was proceeding in earnest to the task and 
was ready forthwith to issue the summons, his Imperial 
Majesty thought fit to admonish Pius IV. that ' it was 
not wise to be in too great a hurry, lest there should 
be a repetition of what had happened eight years before, 
when Duke Maurice had driven the Fathers assembled 
at Trent to seek safety in flight.' On June 20 Ferdi- 
nand handed over to the nuncio, Stanislaus Hosius, 
Bishop of Ermland, a memorandum in which his opinions 
and wishes were stated. He began by lamenting 
(the present Pope of course was absolved from any 
blame in this respect) that a Council had not already 
been held at a much earlier date and long ago brought 
to a conclusion ; for during the past 40 years of religious 
schism, the Catholic religion had gone completely 
to the ground, and all moral probity and discipline 
had by degrees disappeared ; the conduct of both the 
clergy and the laity had become so hopelessly corrupt 
that it would be infinitely harder now than it would 
have been in earlier years to institute a Christian 
reform of conduct and manners. The clergy of the 
land especially had become so demoralised that they 
were little better, indeed they were too often worse, 
than their adversaries the Protestants. It was not 
enough to be Catholics in faith and heretics in practice. 
The proposed Council was intended for the restoration 
of general morality and social order, as well as for the 
reunion of the Church. Moreover, the question of united 
resistance against the Turks would also have to be con- 
sidered at the assembly. It could not well meet till 
twelve months hence. All the Christian powers must 

^ See Eeimann, Unterhandlungen, p. 591. 


be invited to attend, and the Pope himself ought to 
attend personally. Then, again, the place of meeting 
should not be Trent, but either Cologne, Constance, 
or Ratisbon, and this Council should be regarded as 
an entirely new assembly of the Church, not as a con- 
tinuation of former ones, seeing that the Protestants 
would undoubtedly demand a hearing with regard 
to the articles already formulated. He could not 
coerce the Protestant Estates into submission without 
running the risk of a disastrous civil war. They had 
complained that before, at the Council, they had not 
been furnished with a full safe-conduct made out in the 
same form as those granted to the Bohemians by the 
Basle Fathers, and also that they had not been allowed 
an adequate hearing : in both these points, the Emperor 
said, he wished them now to be fully satisfied. He 
also begged the Pope to concede the lay chalice and 
the marriage of the clergy, at any rate until the Council 
should have pronounced its decision.^ The Emperor 
agreed with Albert of Bavaria that a Diet ought first 
to be held ; but he should not dare, he said, to mention 
the Council explicitly in summoning the Diet, because it 
would prevent the princes attending.^' 

' There is no doubt whatever,' Cardinal Otto wrote 
to Albert on July 13, respecting the imperial memo- 
randum, ' that his Majesty's intentions are good and 
sincere, but it is pitiful to see that in these religious 
questions his Majesty trusts more in human clever- 
ness than in Divine Providence, and hopes to attain 
so much by delay and connivance, whereas the exact 
opposite must inevitably be the result of such a course.' 
* God in heaven have mercy on our beloved Fatherland I 

^ Sickel, pp. 55-69. - Eeimann, Unterhandlungen, p. 596. 


Evil has gained such dominion over us that we no longer 
know the time and place of our salvation.' The Con- 
fessionists, he said, were opposed to the Council because 
they knew that it would bring their false doctrines 
to the light of day ; ' but for all that we must not lose 
heart and say, " The Council will never come to pass ; 
the Confessionists will not suffer it ; they will set them- 
selves fiercely against it ; they will go to war ; they 
will impose their will on the Council and take possession 
of our land and people and ' knock the bottom out of 
the barrel.' " It would never do for " the lay and clerical 
rulers, from fear of groundless wanton insurrection, 
to fold their hands before them and let the teachers of 
false doctrine do just as they pleased." ' ' Oh, if only 
we all of us at Rome, at Vienna, and elsewhere, did but 
consider what an account we shall have to render to 
God for all our dilatoriness and inexcusable negligence, 
and cowardly dependence ! If people say : " No Council 
can help us any more, the evil has gone on too long," I 
answer, it is never too late, if we set to work in a spirit 
of godly hopefulness, true faith, and ardent love. In 
all such desperate emergencies as the present one, the 
Catholic Church has always had recourse to the one 
remedy of a General Council, against which the devil, 
the sects, the heretics and schismatics have invariably 
opposed their cleverest wiles, their utmost strength and 
wickedness, but have always been mightily overcome by 
Catholic truth.' ' If we go on listening to the opponents 
they will never to all eternity come to an agreement 
with us Catholics as to the time, locality, and nature of 
the Council. But are we for this reason to stand still, 
and for their sakes endanger the whole of Christendom ? ' 
* Ways and means can most certainly be found for 


encountering the seditious plottings of the opposite 
party. For God's sake, therefore, I implore your 
Grace to talk his Imperial Majesty out of his fears and 
dilatoriness.' ^ 

The Emperor, however, could not be moved from 
his nervous apprehensions, and all the ecclesiastical 
and temporal princes who still clung to the Church 
trembled with him. On October 18, Ferdinand wrote 
to his ambassador at Rome that he could not guarantee 
that the Estates adhering to the Augsburg Confession 
would relax any of the hard conditions they had laid 
down with respect to a Council at the Augsburg Diet 
of 1559, or that they would attend the Council, even 
should the Pope announce it as an entirely new one. 
But if his Holiness persisted in his idea of making the 
Council a continuation of the former one held at Trent, 
the Protestant Estates would most certainly resort to 
arms and stir up insurrection, for they were of opinion 
that they had not been accorded an adequate hearing, or 
been fairly judged at the Trent Council ; and if they 
did have recourse to force they would move heaven 
and earth against the Catholics, and there was little 
doubt that they would enlist the help of several power- 
ful princes.^ 

While the Catholic party were thus wholly a prey 
to terror and pusillanimity, the Protestants were 
spreading reports of ' dangerous popish plots against 
the Evangelical Estates.' Information was sent to Duke 
Albert of Bavaria, according to which the Emperor 
and the other Catholic potentates intended to root out 
and destroy the adherents of the Augsburg Confession.^ 

1 Badev, pp. 184-189. ^ sickel, pp. 109-110. 

' Kluckbohn, Briefe, i. 129, note. 


The Elector Palatine Frederic was able to inform John 
Frederic of Saxony by letter that ' The adversaries will 
not embark on an extensive campaign, but they intend 
at once to make themselves masters of six important 
passes in Germany, and from these points they will 
carry out their treacherous plans — that is if meanwhile 
the Council should take place, and shortly after its 
decrees be enforced.' ^ 

In proof of the ' continually increasing oppression 
of the Papists,' Duke Christopher of Wlirtemberg sent 
the Elector Augustus of Saxony a copy of a letter from 
King Maximilian of Bohemia, in which the latter com- 
plained that his father, the Emperor, would not allow 
him any longer to retain his evangelical Court preacher, 
Sebastian Pfauser." The Protestants were confident 
of their power. Duke Christopher had before this 
calculated that, in the event of a fight taking place with 
the Catholic Estates, they could in a short space of 
time raise an army of 50,000 infantry and 10,000 
cavalry and maintain them indefinitely without any 
special inconvenience ; in fact, he had said, if each 
Protestant prince dealt singly with his own ' pfaffen ' 
so as to prevent their massing together, they would all 
very quickly be sent to the right about.^ Strenuous 
efforts were made in the year 1560 to form a Protestant 
confederacy against ' the popish Estates. The Prince 
Electors Joachim II. of Brandenburg and Augustus 
of Saxony, however, would not consent to join it. 
Augustus declared that, however secretly such a league 
was managed, it could not be kept concealed from the 

1 Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 120. - Calinich, Fiirstentag, p. 63. 

^ Despatch to the Elector Palatine, Otto Heinrich, June 7, 1557. 
Xngler, ii. 180. 


Emperor and the other Estates of the realm, and it 
was much to be feared that Ferdinand, the Catholic 
Estates, and the foreign potentates would be prompted 
by it to form counter leagues and other plots. Experi- 
ence, he said, had taught them the danger of con- 
federacies and their tendency to promote disturbance 
and war, even when they were formed under the 
plausible pretext of defence.' The alarm concerning 
the military preparations of the Emperor and the 
popish party was raised by seditious agitators, who 
would be only too glad to stir up insurrection in the 
Empire for their own purposes.^ 

It was most deplorable. Cardinal Otto wrote to 
Albert of Bavaria on July 20, that the Confessionists 
should be spreading about the report that ' war was 
being plotted against them.' They were ' embittered 
to such a degree ' that neither by means of a Council 
nor by imperial action could they ' be moved to reason- 
ableness.' ' But if, not content with carrying on their 
policy of slander, insult, turbulence, and sedition in 
Germany, they pursue it ceaselessly in other countries 
also, there is no knowing what other powers may be 
roused to take arms in self-defence. Who can place 
any confidence in these people while they persistently 
and unblushingly diffuse so much untruth in all directions 
with a view to embittering the populace ? They will 
not desist till they have succeeded in crushing out all 
the remainder of the Catholics. It grieves me greatly 
to see both spiritual and temporal rulers still look- 
ing on passively, as they have done so long, daily 
procrastinating and throwing away opportunities, to 
the ineffable damage of all Christendom. I can only 

1 Calinich, Filrstentag, pp. 27, 28, 30. 


commend the matter to the mercy of God, who, I trust, 
in His own good time, will graciously bring us all back 
to a state of peace and tranquillity. But it is essential 
that the Catholics should, sooner or later, come to a 
better understanding among themselves, and seriously 
consider some plan of united defence.' ^ 

The Cardinal was thrown into great perplexity and 
agitation by a letter received at Rome from a preacher 
speaking in the following terms of the forthcoming 
Council : ' We tell you plainly that we mean to have 
nothing more to do with the Roman Antichrist and his 
accursed following and diabolical crew. The whole 
accursed lot are for all eternity damned and kicked out, 
even though they go on day and night prating of Church 
and Council. We stand firmly by the words which 
the holy teacher Martinus Lutherus said and wrote : 
" The Pope- ass has crushed us with foul, dirty, stinking 
burdens ; has made the Church his private closet, and 
demanded divine honours for what issues from his body. 
As little as we should dream of worshipping the devil 
as our Lord and God, so little can we tolerate his apostle, 
the Pope, or the Antichrist, in his present position 
of head or lord. For his government consists in nothing 
but lies and murder, in everlasting corruption of souls 
and bodies. At this Council you talk about, we should 
be standing before the devil himself, in the person 
of the Pope, who has no thought of listening to any- 
thing that we have to say, but is bent only on damning 
and murdering us and driving us to idolatry. There- 
fore we dare not, we must not, kiss his feet or say : You 
are my gracious Lord ; but as in Zacharias the angel 

1 Baaer, pp. 190-191. 



said to the devil : May God punish thee, Satan ! " Thus 
wrote Lutherus.' ^ 

As the Protestant Estates had repeatedly declared 
on former occasions, and again at the Diet of Augs- 
burg in 1559, that they would not recognise any sort of 
Church assembly summoned by the Pope, it was a matter 
of indifference to them whether the Council was an- 
nounced as a continuation of the former one, or as an 
entirely new departure. In October 1560 the Pope 
assured the Emperor, through the nuncio Zacharias 
Delfino, Bishop of Lesina, that the safe- conduct for 
the Protestants should be made out with every possible 
provision for security that they themselves could wish ; 
that they should be allowed to bring forward all their 
arguments and their grievances at the Council, and 
should be granted a full and satisfactory hearing ; and 
that he himself, so far as his conscience allowed, would 
show them all possible grace and favour, and prove to 
them that, in very truth, he only wished for their 
salvation. The Council, he said, was to have complete 
power to pronounce decision on the claims of the 
Protestants, on the reform of the clergy, and on the 
Emperor's request for the concession of the lay chalice 
and the marriage of the clergy.^ 

After long consultation with the nuncio, the Emperor 
declared himself willing that the Council should assemble 
at the earliest possible date, and at whatever place the 
Pope should think best. He only stipulated that it 
should not be stated in distinct words that this Council 

■^ Von den neiven Hurenhlasen des vermeinten Concils zu Trient 
(1560), A^-^. The passages from Luther are m his Collected Worhs, 
XXV. 125, 347-348. 

- Instruction filr Delfino in Pogiani, epist. ii. 132-135, note. See 
Le Plat, iv. 633. 



was to be a continuation of the first, and that the 
invitations to the Protestants should be sent by special 
nuncios, who were to be backed up by imperial am- 

These wishes of the Emperor were acceded to by 
Pius IV. 

On November 16, 1560, Cardinal Otto informed 
Duke Albert of Bavaria that the Pope had finally 
decided, the day before, in consistory, to convene the 
Council of Trent, and that he had declared his intention 
of being as Christian, peaceable, and conciliatory in his 
procedure as was possible. ' Above all,' he said, ' he 
would treat the Confessionists in so true-hearted, benevo- 
lent, and paternal a manner, that they would have no 
cause of complaint, either before God or the world, 
respecting the hearing and attention they had received, 
or the judgment pronounced.' All necessary pre- 
liminary matters, he added, should be settled with them 
through a nuncio, in a friendly spirit. ' Would to 
God,' the Cardinal said to Duke Albert, ' your Grace 
could himself see and hear how honourable, sincere, and 
upright, how entirely free from deceit or hypocrisy, 
his Holiness' s intentions are. If the Confessionists 
would attend the Council in person, and could divest 
themselves of the mistrust and bitterness so deeply 
rooted in their hearts, they could, I am certain, be 
pleased and satisfied. They have no need to fear war- 
like measures from us, for we have not the slightest 
intention of anything of the sort.' ' But if, in spite of 
all our advances, and in spite of being promised an 
adequate safe- conduct, the Confessionists still persist in 

' Reimann, Unterhandlungen, pp. 608-610; Voss, Ycrliandlungeny, 
pp. 115 f . ; Turba, Venet. Depeschoi, iii. 161. 


their obdurately hostile behaviour, and resort to force 
in order to prevent the meeting of the Council and the 
execution of its decrees, and attempt to harass the 
Catholics by turbulent and seditious proceedings, they 
will plunge themselves and the whole of Germany into 
the most terrible danger. For foreign nations would 
not look on in silence at an attempt on their part to 
oppress the clergy, and the Muscovites and Turks 
would not be slow to profit by the opportunity which 
civil strife in Germany would afford them for making 
war on Catholics and Confessionists alike.' ' This is 
what I greatly fear, and what, if God does not inter- 
pose, must inevitably happen. We have had, alas I 
more than one example of the invariable consequences 
of such lamentable decay of religion, and so much 
schism in a nation.' ' If the Confessionists, as they 
pretend, really wish for peace, it is for them now to act 
in a friendly and conciliatory manner, to trust in God 
and righteousness, and to put forward their case in a 
spirit of Christian love ; not to carry on their transactions 
with rancour and animosity. They will meet with no 
injustice or foul play from us. But if they insist on 
continuing their storming and raging, let them take 
care that the tables are not turned upon them. The 
Catholics will get more help, both within and without 
the Empire, both from God and man, than some people 
think. Moreover, other nations will not quietly await 
defeat in their own lands, but will far rather flock to 
the help of the Catholics, than sit still and let their own 
countries be invaded. Peace is the best policy for both 
parties, and a far better way of coming to an equitable 
understanding than sedition and violence.' ^ 

' Bader, pp. 222-223. 

p 2 


By a papal bull of November 29, the Council was 
summoned to meet at Trent on Easter day tbe following 
year. It was not explicitly stated that the Council 
would be a continuation of the former one, but the 
decrees suspending the former one were all repealed.^ 

On December 21, Cardinal Otto, in another letter to 
the Duke, again expressed his hope that God would 
bless the Pope's good, upright, sincere and fatherly 
intentions respecting this Council, to a satisfactory and 
decisive issue. ' He added that, in sending his nuncio 
to the Confessionists, Pius IV. had wished to prove to 
them, and to the whole world, that his heart was full 
of love and charity, and to convince them that the 
object of this Council was to do away with all internal 
discord, hatred, and ill-feeling, to give each party an 
opportunity for listening calmly to the pleading and 
statements of their opponents, so that a mutual under- 
standing might be arrived at, and, by the merciful dis- 
pensation of the Almighty, peace at length be concluded, 
all the clouds obscuring Divine truth be dissipated, and 
the litigious questions settled to everybody's satisfac- 
tion.' " 

The Pope had sent the nuncio Delfino to Upper 
Germany, and the nuncio Commendone, Bishop of 
Zante, to Lower Germany, to invite the bishops and 
princes to the Council. By desire of the Emperor they, 
and the imperial ambassadors who accompanied them, 
went first to Naumburg, where a brilliant concourse of 
princes was at the time gathered together to confer 
about matters of religion. 

^ Voss, Verhandlungen, pp. 126, f. 130, 135. 
- Bader, pp. 223-234. 




Lengthy preliminary negotiations had gone on between 
the Protestant Estates concerning the holding of this 
Convention of Princes, which some of them, notably the 
Elector Palatine Frederic III. and Duke Christopher of 
Wiirtemberg, thought urgently necessary in order to 
compose ' the religious differences and controversies 
which had grown to such alarming dimensions,' and also 
for the purpose of forming a great Protestant League. 

The Elector Augustus of Saxony had at the first 
shown exceedingly little desire for a convention. He 
had no intention of joining a political league against 
' the popish Estates,' ^ and any further attempt at 
' reconciliation in matters of religion ' seemed to him 
uncalled for, as he had already issued orders that all 
superintendents, preachers, and teachers were to abide 
by the Frankfort Recess, and to be guided by it to the 
letter in all disputed points of doctrine.^' Elector 
Joachim 11. of Brandenburg was of the same opinion as 
Augustus of Saxony. He said that, ' under existing 
circumstances, an assembly of this sort would produce 
more acrimony and division than unity, not only among 
the theologians, but also among the Estates adhering to 

"• See above, p. 206. - Calinich, Filrstentag, pp. 27 f. 


the Confession of Augsburg.' ^ The Landgrave Philip of 
Hesse, on the other hand, thought that an understanding 
between the theologians might be arrived at if the 
princes were personally present at the Convention, and, 
as Holy Scripture warranted them in doing, ' inter- 
posed their authority.' The theologians, he said, must 
not be allowed ' to dispute at great length ; ' they must 
be made to agree about the Augsburg Confession, which 
would be laid before them, and must be seriously 
admonished by the princes to abstain from libellous 
writing and from overmuch printing. The Landgrave 
urged again and again on the delegates of the Saxon 
Elector that the theologians ' must not be allowed to 
dispute about recondite articles, but asked to give a 
plain exposition of doctrine.' 

It was desirable also ' to take into consideration the 
best means for offering a united opposition to, and pre- 
venting the meeting of, the threatened papal Council.' " 

Thus we see that the Landgrave considered it part 
of the business of the Convention to prevent the meeting 
of the Council. 

At the end of June 1560 the Elector Palatine Frederic, 
Christopher of Wiirtemberg, and Duke John Frederic 
of Saxony met together at Hilsbach, and agreed to do 
all they could to prevail on the Protestant Estates 
to join unanimously in subscribing afresh to the Augs- 
burg Confession, ' with an appropriate introduction and 
conclusion,' and thus bring the disputes to an end.^ 
In order to win over the Landgrave Philip to this plan, 
Duke John Frederic and the Elector Palatine Wolfgang 

' Calinich, Filrstentag, p. 63, ^ Ihid. pp. 33-34, 37. 

^ Kugler, ii. 190-193. See also Heidenhain, Unionsi^olitik PJiilipps 
von Hessen, pp. 187 f. 


of Zweibriicken went in July to Marburg. Whereas, 
however, the Landgrave had proposed to the Electors 
of Saxony to make the Augsburg Confession the basis 
of reconciliation, these two princes now discovered that 
Philip ' did not appear any longer to believe much 
in the Confession himself.' According to Wolfgang's 
account, Philip was now a champion of ' Zwinglian 
heresy, which he defended freely and openly at table 
and on other occasions, in the most shameless manner 
before the whole world, and in such audacious language 
that it made one's hair stand up on end.' Besides 
which he had said, in the presence of John Frederic, 
that ' the Weimar theologians were all of them, save your 
respect, scoundrels and villains, and John Frederic had 
been not a little scandalised.' ^ Nevertheless, Philip 
came forward again in August to sign the Augsburg 
Confession.^ Augustus of Saxony was also in the end 
won over to the Convention by the assurance that ' there 
would be no disputations or condemnations at it, and 
that no prince would bring against another the charge 
that his theologians had falsified the pure doctrine, or 
fallen away from it.' ^ 

The Convention was to meet at Naumburg. ' Pos- 
sibly, at this assembly at Naumburg,' Camerarius wrote 
to Duke Albert of Prussia in January 1561, ' the princes 
may be able to oppose an effectual dam to the inso- 
lent, unbridled proceedings of the theologians. If God 
Almighty does not interpose to stop all this insubordina- 
tion and schism, I fear that terrible disturbance and 
anarchy will shortly ensue.' "^ 

The Convention was opened on January 21, 1561.^ 

1 Kiigler, ii. 196-197. - Ibid. ii. 198. 

^ Calinicli, Fiirstentag, pp. 82- 83. ^ Voight, Briefwechsel, p. 133. 

-'' For the Naumburg Convention, or Diet of Princes, see now the 


The princes present in person were the Electors Frederic 
of the Palatinate, and Augustus of Saxony, the Dukes 
Frederic of Saxony, Christopher of Wlirtemberg, and 
Ulrich of Mecklenburg ; the Landgrave Philip of Hesse 
and the Margrave Charles of Baden. The Elector 
Joachim II. of Brandenburg, the Margrave Hans of 
Ciistrin and Duke Barnim of Pomerania, and other 
princes had sent delegates. Several counts and lords 
also attended the meeting in person. 

Christopher of Wlirtemberg cherished the hope that 
the reconciliation in matters of religion would be 
followed by the conclusion of a political league among 
the Estates, and by a ' Christian agreement ' respecting 
the Council, with Denmark, Sweden, England, and 
Scotland.^ This prince considered it of special import- 
ance that a ' universal code ' (Corpus) of Christian 
doctrine ' should be formulated. ' Such a code,' he 
said, ' could be neither the Bible, as so much misunder- 
standing of all sorts had arisen with regard to the 
meaning of Holy Writ, nor the Augsburg Confession, as 
this creed was " essentially opposed to the Papacy," and 
had also given rise to a great deal of misunderstanding.' 
It would not be enough even if the Confession should be 
unanimously signed by everybody : a code such as he 
advocated was especially necessary, he said, on account 
of the article on the Communion.^' 

But ' unanimous agreement ' was scarcely to be 

detailed account by Heidenliain, UnionspoUtih Philipjos von Hessen, 
pp. 203-274. 

^ Kugler, ii. 217-218, note. The Landgrave Philip of Hesse also 
endeavoured at Naumburg, and again at the beginning of the year 1562, 
to arrange a Protestant League which should connect itself with France 
and England. See Eitter, i. 229, and Heidenliain, Unionsioolitih niiliiy])s 
von Hessen, pp. 273 f., 294 ff. 

- Kugler, ii. 218-219, note. 


hoped for at Naumburg, seeing that dissension and 
quarrelling arose during the very first session. The 
Elector Augustus began with a severe denunciation of 
his cousin Duke John Frederic for having omitted, in 
his writ of summons, the stipulation that ' all condem- 
nation of religious abuses and of sects was to be avoided.' 
Bitterer still grew the wrangling among the princes 
when it came to the principal business of the assembly, 
viz. the signing of the Confession. All the different 
parties at strife, who had been fiercely condemning each 
other from the outset, had all taken their stand on the 
Augsburg Confession, and each had accused the other 
of being unfaithful to its teaching. Reconciliation in 
this matter was all the more impossible from the fact 
that the different versions of the Confession made it 
easy for the holders of different opinions to justify their 
views by different texts. ^ When the question was put, 
' which edition or which copy of the Creed was to be 
signed, it was found that the Estates no longer 
possessed the original text of the Confession of 1530, 
and that they would be reduced to choosing between 
Melanchthon's versions of 1530, 1531, and 1540. How- 
ever, even the oldest of these, those of 1530 and 1531, 
one in quarto and the other in octavo, did not corre- 
spond. It appeared that the Latin text of the quarto 
edition contained popish doctrine concerning the 
Eucharist, viz. a formal acknowledgment of the doctrine 
of transubstantiation ; ^ in the octavo edition, on the 
other hand, the words respecting the transformation of 
the bread had been left out. The Elector Frederic of 

^ See above, pp. 36-38. 

^ In this edition there was not only mention of a corporalis prcesentia, 
but also such expressions as the following : ' mutato pane, pauem vere in 
carnem niutari.' See Calinich, Fiirstentag, p. 166. 


Saxony, who was inclined to Calvinism, would on no 
conditions sign the quarto edition, nor would the other 
princes expose themselves to the reproach of having 
^' ranged themselves on the side of popery " in such an 
important matter. Frederic declared emphatically that 
at Naumburg they had not stuck to the Confession 
which had been presented to the Emperor at Augsburg 
in 1530 ; for in that version, he said, the article respecting 
the Sacrament was worded in such a manner that the 
Electors and princes sitting at Naumburg with him 
could not have subscribed to it with a good conscience, 
and without seeming, in the matter of the Communion, 
to be courting the Pope and his legate.' For in the 
Confession, as it was sent up to the Emperor, the words 
* under the species of bread and wine ' were alone used, 
whereas, in the apology annexed to it, there was the 
phrase ' after the transformation of the bread ' ... * in 
such a way that the then reigning Emperor and all the 
papists had approved of this said article as it stood in 
the apology, and had not opposed it.' ^ 

To the Emperor Ferdinand, on the other hand, the 
princes said in a preface to the copy of the Confession 
signed by them : ' They had been falsely accused of no 
longer being united, and of having apostatised from the 
Confession which they had drawn up in 1530. In 
refutation of these calumnies they had now met to- 
gether to show that they meant to stand loyally by 
this Confession.' " 

The position taken up by the Elector Augustus of 
Saxony was a particularly odd one. 

During the transactions which preceded the Conven- 

^ Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 156-3 57. See Calinich, Fiirstentag, p. 166. 
^ Calinich, p. 167. 


tion of Princes, Augustus, in answer to Duke John 
Frederic's remark that at Naumburg they must sign 
that copy of the Confession which was presented to the 
Emperor by the Chancellor Briick in 1530, had assured 
John Frederic in an autograph letter that he knew of 
no other copy, and that the one of 1530 must certainly 
be the one signed because ' all former truces as well as 
the present Religious Peace were based upon it.' ^ At 
Naumburg, however, in the very first session, the 
Elector proposed that the edition of 1540 should be 
selected for signature, although this one differed in very 
essential points from the original one.^ He should be 
^11 the more glad, he said, for this to be done, because 
this edition of 1540 was the one always referred to by 
the visiting inspectors in the parishes of his electorate.^ 
The Elector Palatine Frederic was also of opinion that 
as they were obliged to withdraw their adhesion to the 
original text of the oldest editions on account of the 
doctrine of transubstantiation, the best course would 
be to subscribe to the edition of 1540, which was now 
used almost universally in all schools and churches. 
It was decided, however, by a majority of votes that the 
Confession of 1531 should be signed, and Augustus then 
moved that it should at least be stated in a preface that 
the later editions of the Confession were approved of. 
The Elector Frederic, in supporting this resolution, 
proposed the further amendment that the Frankfort 
Recess should also be recognised, side by side with the 
altered versions of the Confession, as an authoritative 
rule of faith. This was opposed by the Dukes John 
Frederic of Saxony and Ulrich of Mecklenburg, who 

1 On Sept. 11, 1560. Calinich, pp. 83-84. 

^ See above, pp. 36-38. ^ Calinich, Fiirstentag, p. 139. 


moved on their part, albeit ineffectually, that the Smal- 
caldian articles should be signed anew as constituting a 
good Lutheran confession of faith. 

The Electors Augustus and Frederic were entrusted 
with the preparation of the preface, and on January 30 
they submitted a draft for the approval of the assembly. 
It began with the statement that, ' in order that the 
Emperor, and every one else, should see that they had 
no intention of defending or propagating any new 
doctrine,' they would ' this time ' leave out of account 
' those more adequate and amplified versions, ex- 
plained and enlarged from the text of the Scriptures,' 
which had appeared in 1540 and 1542, and had been 
sent up to the imperial president and the collocutors at 
the Colloquy of Worms. The fact that the various 
editions differed in essential points was not m.entioned 
in this preface, which gave its sanction to the latest 
versions also. The preface went on to state that it was 
not the intention of the princes ' to repudiate the Con- 
fession as handed in and interpreted in the year 1540, 
or to let themselves be persuaded against it,' all the 
less so as this edition was in use in most of the schools 
and churches. 

The Dukes of Saxony and Mecklenburg, however, 
by no means approved of this preface. They would 
not give their assent to the altered Creed, which served 
as a cloak for the Calvinists. ' In opposition to avowed 
truth,' they said, the preface denied the existence of 
religious schism among the Estates. Such ignoring and 
concealment of facts did not improve the position of 
the Augsburg Confessionists, for the papists were fully 
aware of all the divisions that existed among them.^ 

1 Calinich, Fiirstentag, pp. 78-82. 


John Frederic insisted that all the different forms of 
corruption and sectarian error that had crept into the 
Lutheran Church must be specified and condemned ; 
and he drew special attention to the heretical opinions 
of his father-in-law. the Elector Palatine. His speech 
led to ' unedifying scenes ' among the princes. His 
Court preacher, Aurifaber, recounts that ' the princes in 
council, especially the Landgrave of Hesse and the 
Elector of Saxony, treated Duke John Frederic most 
rudely, snorting at him and holding out all manner of 
insulting threats against him.' ^ The Elector Frederic 
said that his son-in-law, not content with schism in 
Church and school, had sought to alienate from him 
(the Elector) the officials of his court and chancellery, 
and even his own wife.^ John Frederic suddenly left 
Naumburg on February 3, without taking leave of his 
brother princes. 

After the Duke's departure another ' quite unex- 
pected incident ' followed. The Elector Palatine had 
succeeded in bringing the rest of the princes to accept 
the Melanchthonian doctrine of the Sacrament, couched 
as it was in the ' preface ' in the words of the Frankfort 
Recess. But John Frederic, after leaving I^aumburg, 
drafted and sent up a ' preface ' of his own, in which the 
sacramental doctrine was stated in the words of the 
Smalcaldian articles, and most of the princes, in order 
to gain over the Duke, then declared themselves willing, 
' in the matter of the Sacrament, to abide by his mean- 
ing and interpretation.' They said that they ' would 
state in a common letter their opinions on this and 
other matters, and they hoped that, as the Naumburg 
preface could not now be altered again, the Duke would 

^ Ibid, p, 185, note. - Kluckholin, Friedrich der Fromme, p. 94. 


be satisfied with such a declaration and would add his 
own name to complete the list of signatures.' 

This declaration, be it noted, was not to be a mere 
explanation of the text, but was to contain matter 
foreign to it. 

But neither the Elector Palatine nor John Frederic, 
the only two princes who really knew what they wanted, 
w^ould consent to such a ' Declaration.' The Elector 
declared that such a proceeding could only result in 
the lowering of princely feelings and needless quarrels of 
restless theologians. John Frederic said he could not 
budge from the exact letter of his own preface. It was 
not he only, he added, who had scruples as to signing 
' the obscure, halting, doubting, and involved preface 
drawn up by the Electors Augustus and Frederic ; ' ^ 
the Duke of Mecklenburg and the leading towns of 
Saxony were of the same mind. The Elector Joachim II. 
of Brandenburg said bluntly that the Elector Palatine 
Frederic must subscribe to the Smalcaldian doctrine of 
the Sacrament, or else they must all break with him and 
leave him to his fate.^ 

In the principal business of the assembly, viz. the 
adjustment of religious dissensions, the princes had 
utterly failed ; the divisions stood out still more sharply 
and distinctly than before. Neither had they realised 
the hope, cherished by many of them at the commence- 
ment of the meeting, and expressed also by Queen 
Elizabeth of England through a special envoy, that the 
Estates should strengthen their position for mutual 
help by the formation of a political league."^ 

1 Calinicb, Fiirstentag, pp. 311-315, 333. * jj^i^i ^^^ 386-387. 

^ Heppe, Gescliichte dcs deutschen Protestantismus, 1. Beil. pp. 132- 
135. . 


It was obviously impossible that the religious schism 
should be either healed or diminished when, in the 
preface which had been adopted, both the earlier and 
the later versions of the Confession were recognised as 
equally authoritative ; nor could it avail anything that 
the Estates decreed in the ' Recess ' of the meeting a 
censorship intended to subject all spiritual activity to> 
the authority of this declaration. Neither privately 
nor publicly — so ran the clause — was any book to be 
printed in the dominions of the princes without having 
first been submitted to the censors of the press (who 
were to be appointed in all directions), and by them 
pronounced to be ' not only in substance, but also in 
form, entirely in harmony with the Augsburg Confession.' 
Least of all were scurrilous pamphlets affecting the 
tranquillity of the Church to be tolerated. 

Nevertheless, ' dissensions in the Church and the 
practice of reviling and fulminating from the pulpits- 
grew worse than ever after 1561.' ' Alas, alas,' wrote 
the Protestant Frederic Seller, ' how grievously are the 
tongues of the Protestants divided against each other ; 
they are like unto the builders of the tower of Babel ; 
how they blare through the trumpet of Seba ! ' ^ 

While the princes at Naumburg were in the thick 
of their fight over their confession of faith, the papal 
nuncios, Delfino and Commendone, and the imperial 
ambassadors arrived on the scene on January 28, 1561, 
to invite them all to the Council at Trent. It appears 
that, previous to the opening of this convention, Chris- 
topher of Wiirtemberg at any rate had no intention of 
refusing an invitation to the Council. During the 

1 Calinich, Fiirstentag, pp. 386-387. 


second stage of the Trent Synod of 1552, lie had sent in 
a formulary of faith drawn up by John Brenz, and had 
announced the advent of theologians to speak on its 
behalf ; shortly afterwards the assembly had been 
broken up by the Elector Maurice of Saxony. When in 
1560 the question of a Council was again mooted, he 
had said to the Elector Palatine Frederic and Duke 
John Erederic, at the assembly at Hilsbach : ' I do not 
see how we Augsburg Confessionists can present a 
united front and act like one man at the Council, when 
we are divided into so many parties. Ever since 1530 
we have indeed clamoured for a free Christian Council, 
at which we might defend our faith and our Confession 
by appeal to the Holy Scriptures ; but the whole thing 
would be an ignominious failure if the magisterial 
bodies among us should refuse to alter their opinions.' ^ 

The Naumburg Convention had been expected to 
unite all these different parties, but, as the meeting had 
not fulfilled its object, it was now considered unlikely 
that the Council would be attended by the Protestant 

' The nuncios,' one of the imperial ambassadors 
wrote to Ferdinand, ' have met with a strange welcome 
liere ; they are treated with scant respect, and are hissed 
at by the populace.' " 

On January 31 the ambassadors delivered the 
imperial message to the assembled princes. It was as 
follows : ' The continuous schisms in religion, with the 
mutual mistrust they engendered, had caused the 
greatest injury to the Empire ; the Turks had grown 
more overbearing and aggressive than ever, and were 
again threatening to overrun Christendom both by 

1 Kugler, ii. 190-193. - Bncholtz, viii. 392, note. 


land and by water ; Livonia was being cruelly harassed 
by the Muscovites, whose savageness spread terror in 
the adjacent lands also ; if the princes did not combine 
together more heartily than they had done hitherto, all 
their foreign neighbours would proceed to wrest from 
the Empire whatever territories they had a fancy for. 
Within the Empire peace, justice, and order had utterly 
collapsed, all godly fear and Christian discipline were 
going to the ground, and the common people had for the 
most part fallen into such a lawless, ungodly, bestial 
mode of life, that even infidels could not be worse. More- 
over, it was a known fact that the number of heretical 
sects was increasing from day to day ; some of these 
denied the divinity, some the humanity, of Christ ; 
others refused to believe in the Trinity, rejected the 
Gospel, and were endeavouring to introduce a sort of 
Turkish or Jewish creed. For the removal of these 
schisms, and for effecting a salutary reform of the 
abuses which had crept in among all the Estates, a 
Council was the most effective and proper means. Hence 
the Emperor had spared no trouble to bring about the 
meeting of such an assembly, and to arrange that it 
should be attended by representatives from all quarters. 
The bishopric and the town of Trent were loyal to the 
Emperor, and also allied to him, and the safety of this 
town and diocese was under imperial control. The 
Estates could count on being provided with perfectly 
adequate safe- conducts ; the proceedings at the Council, 
as the Pope had assured the Emperor, would be of the 
most friendly and temperate nature. The Emperor 
would hold faithfully by the terms of the Religious 
Peace, and he was at a loss to see from what quarter it 
could be threatened if he as head, they as members, 



adhered firmly to it. And whereas he on his part was 
fully minded to extend to them and theirs every fatherly 
care and support, he trusted that they in return would use 
this opportunity for the welfare and good of the Empire.' ^ 
To this message of the Emperor the princes 
answered the ambassadors that the Council, as an- 
nounced by the Pope, did not correspond to the 
conditions formerly laid down by them," and was not 
calculated to diminish the schisms in religious doctrine 
nor to redress existing abuses. 

The nuncios, who had with difficulty obtained 
audience, handed the Pope's breves to each separate 
prince, and also the bulls of Convocation. Delfino 
assured them that the Council would not only grant 
them a hearing on all points, but would also concede 
every reasonable demand. He urged on them the 
importance of doing what they could to restore the unity 
of the faith, seeing that there were now as many different 
opinions in religion as there were individuals to hold 
them, as many gospels as there were teachers ; he 
assured them that their safe- conducts would be of the 
securest nature, and begged them to send their delegates 
to the Council. Commendone pointed out that now 
was the very opportune moment for a Council ; for 
peace had been concluded between France and Spain, 
and the present Pope was ardently bent on the abolition 
of all ecclesiastical abuses, and on the restoration of 
decayed Church discipline. He admonished them to 
remember that religion and salvation were at stake, 
and that, if the foundations of faith were destroyed, 
empires also would crumble to pieces.'^ 

1 Calinich, Fiirstentag, pp. 190-192. - See above, p. 123. 

^ Eaynald ad a. 1561, Nos. 25, 26. See Eeimann, Sendung des 
Nmitios Comniendo7ie, pp. 244-245. 


Scarcely had the nuncios returned to their inns, 
■when the princes sent them back the papal briefs un- 
opened, and this for the simple reason that the Pope, 
in the outside address, had styled them ' beloved sons,' 
while they did not regard him as their spiritual father.^ 
Their answer to the bull of Convocation was as follows : 
* The Pope had no right to proclaim a Council, and to 
set himself up as arbiter of religious disputes, when it 
was he himself who was the author of all the existing 
errors, and who, more than anybody else, cruelly sup- 
pressed the truth. The principal occupation of the 
Popes was to set nation against nation, and, by weaken- 
ing the power of other governments, to augment their 
own authority. They were gruesome oppressors of all 
people who would not humble themselves to the extent 
of worshipping their persons and the idols they set up, 
but who desired to live in true piety.' 

The princes were all at strife together as to which 
was the genuine Augsburg Confession; but as to the 
Emperor, so to the nuncios, they denied the existence 
of schism among them. It was unjust, they declared, 
to accuse them of want of unity of faith, their unity 
being abundantly testified not only by their distinct 
confession of faith sent in to the Emperor at Augsburg 
in 1530, but also by divers other writings which had 
explained and disseminated the truth of divine teaching. 
The Roman Church, on the other hand, was so per- 
meated and laden with errors and abominable abuses, 

^ On March 11, 1561 — so Count Gtinther of Scliwarzburg wrote to 
Prince William of Orange— the princes 'informed the papal envoys that 
they did not miderstand how they could be the Pope's sons, but they 
hoj)ed their mothers had been virtuous and that they had other fathers ' 
(Groen van Prinsterer, i. 51). This answer, however, if at all, was not 
sent officially. See Reimann, Sendting, pp. 279-280. 

Q 2 


while at the same time it so outrageously suppressed the 
teaching of the Gospel, that it was more like a system of 
pagan idolatry than a Christian institution. In obedi- 
ence to the stringent command of God to flee from 
idolatry, the princes and electors had been driven into 
separating themselves from the Roman Church, and 
they were by no means willing to submit to being 
dictated to by the Pope. The Roman Emperor Ferdi- 
nand, their one and only liege lord, had the sole right 
to summon a Council.^ 

Commendone replied in a calm and dignified manner 
that the Pope had announced the Council in the ortho- 
dox form and manner observed in all ages by the Church ; 
and the Emperor, to whom the princes were pleased to 
confine the right of summoning it, was too clearsighted 
not to recognise the difference between spiritual and 
temporal rights. From the moment of his accession 
to the papal throne, the Pope had turned his attention 
to reform, and his Holiness had all the greater pleasure 
in summoning the Council, as he looked upon it as the 
best means of carrying out this end. To assert that 
discord and uncertainty of opinion reigned among the 
new religionists was no unjust accusation ; the fact was 
patent to all the world. The very writings which the 
princes had referred to confirmed this charge, for they 
were full of novel and self-contradicting opinions of 
their different theologians. ' How could the princes 
pretend to unity and fixity of faith when the novelty 
of their doctrines, their deviations from the orthodox 
belief, their separation from the established authority 
of the Church, stamped them, at any rate, with dubious- 

^ Raynald ad a. 1561, No. 27. See Calinich, Filrstentag, pp. 204- 
20G ; Reimaun, Sendung, pp. 245-246. 


ness and indecision ? They must remember that the 
question at stake was no less a one than that of eternal 
salvation or eternal damnation. Although St. Paul, 
the chosen vessel of the Lord, according to his own 
assertion, had received the Gospel not from men, but 
by revelation, he was nevertheless commanded by 
revelation to go to Jerusalem and to compare his Gospel 
with that of the Apostles, in order that he might not 
run, or have run, in vain.' ' Commendone bade the 
princes remember that from the time of the Apostles 
downwards all the ancient fathers had always turned to 
the Roman Church as the one teacher and guide to 
truth.' From Rome, too, the Germans, as their High- 
nesses must know, had first received Christianity. The 
princes should consider those words of the Gospel : 

* How often would I have gathered my children together, 
as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but ye 
would not ! ' ^ 

The princes gave the nuncios no answer to the 
message delivered by them, but they recorded in the 

* Recess ' of the Naumburg Convention their firm inten- 
tion that a meeting of theologians and councillors 
should be convened at Erfurt to hold further delibera- 
tions respecting the Council. Their principal aim was 
to prevent the German bishops from attending the 
Council. Commendone had learnt at Vienna that the 
bishops, whose vassals were for the most part infected 
with heresy, would keep away from Trent out of fear 
that the Protestant Estates might persist in their 
obstinacy. At Naumburg the councillors and secre- 
taries of the princes declared repeatedly to the nuncios 

' Eeimann, Sendung, pp. 247-248 


that not one of the Protestant princes, nor even a single 
bishop, would appear at the Council.^ 

While the nuncio Delfino proceeded on his business 
to South Germany, Commendone repaired to the Elector 
Joachim 11. of Brandenburg, who had not come in 
person to the Naumburg Convention. He met with a 
friendly welcome at Berlin. Joachim received from 
him the papal bull and the brief addressed to himself 
in the presence of his councillors and theologians, 
praised the admirable character and exceeding kindness 
of Pius IV., and promised to induce the other Protestant 
princes to labour for peace. Nevertheless, he said that 
he could only advance the same opinion as theirs with 
respect to the Council ; in any case the theologians 
who subscribed to the Augsburg Confession must be 
allowed the right of voting. On Commendone's asking : 
' What, then, is to be said to the other sects, who will 
also claim this right, if it is conceded to the Confession- 
ists ? ' the Elector answered : ' It must be refused to all 
the others ; for they are not, like the Confessionists, in 
possession of the true Word of God.' When Com- 
mendone objected : ' But all the sects think they possess 
it ; ' adding that God must have placed some infallible 
judge on the earth, Joachim was silent. The following 
day he resumed the discussion with the words, ' No 
sect can legitimately claim the right of voting ; for, apart 
from the fact of their being all of them heretics, they are 
not in direct opposition to the authority of the Koman 
Church, as are the adherents of the Augsburg Confession, 
whose chief aim and endeavour is to remove existing 
abuses and to restore the purity of Gospel teaching.' 
But this was the claim advanced by all the sects equally. 

1 Eeimann, Sendung, pp. 243, 250. 


It would be very easy, said the nuncio, for each one of 
them to make complaints of the Apostolic See, and to set 
itself in opposition to it, in order to obtain a voice at 
the Council, or to escape from the judgment of the 
Pope. At the close of their long conversation Joachim 
said : ' In truth you have given me much to think 
about.' He once more promised the nuncio to do his 
best to persuade the princes to send delegates to the 
Council, and to choose for the purpose honest, con- 
ciliatory men.^ And he did indeed represent to the 
princes that it was not advisable for them to reject the 
Council with such contempt and indignation, and thus 
give the enemy occasion to say that the Evangelicals 
either despise their Council or fear its decision.^' 

Commendone's and Delfino's negotiations had so 
little result that Commendone reported to Rome : ' I 
do not believe that one of the bishops is thinking of 
coming to Trent. The heretical princes are doing all 
in their power to keep them from going, in order, as 
much as possible, to weaken and diminish the authority 
of the Council.' ^ 

The bishops were full of apprehension lest in their 
absence ' sedition should be stirred up in their terri- 
tories, or armed invasions take place.' The Emperor 
himself told the Pope that it would be extremely 
dangerous for the bishops to attend the Council unless 
the Protestants were also prevailed on to come ; he 
begged the Pope to suggest ways and means by which 
possible attacks from the Protestant princes might be 
guarded against.^ 

1 Reimann, Senclung, pp. 251-259. 

^ Droysen, Preussische Politik, 2", 287. 

^ Reimann, Sendung, pp. 260 f. * Bucholtz, viii. 412. 


' It is only by firm trust in God,' wrote the Cardinal- 
bishop Otto von Augsburg, ' that we can hope for any 
good result from the Council, on which, nevertheless, 
the salvation of the Church and the Christian faith 
depend, in this our ill-fated, distracted fatherland. 
But why should we not pluck up heart, and, as it were, 
hope against hope, after the pattern of our fathers, who 
in the darkest, stormiest times, when the ship of Peter 
threatened inevitably to sink, still preserved undaunted 
faith in God, and were thus enabled to triumph over 
the tempest ? ' ' If we put our trust in men, be they 
kings, princes, or bishops, we are only driven to despair ; 
for they sway hither and thither, either from indolence, 
or fear, or anxious apprehension of all sorts of pos- 
sibilities ; even the most solemn human promises can- 
not be relied on. Let us trust in God and await the 
issue. " Put spurs to your efforts, and trust," is the 
Pope's motto.' ^ 

That solemn promises could not be trusted is shown 
by the example of Archbishop Sigmund of Magdeburg. 
He had presented the nuncio Commendone with a 
written statement, in which he said he gratefully 
accepted the benediction of the Pope, and thanked God 
that He had vouchsafed to endow Pius IV. with such 
understanding of, and so much good will towards, the 
German nation, that for their sake he had convened a 
council. He should certainly come to Trent very soon, 
and although he knew that there would be many men at 
the Council much more learned than he was, there would 
be none who would show greater loyalty and reverence 
towards his Holiness : he should appeal to the Pope, 
with the utmost confidence, for help and advice in his 

' Aug. 27, 1561, to the Jesuit, John of Reidt. See above, p. 40, n. 3. 


own ecclesiastical affairs.^ But at the very time he 
was making these solemn protestations, he was at 
heart a Protestant, and before another year had passed 
he openly avowed himself a subscriber to the Augsburg 

The period was a most critical one. 

' All Catholics believe,' said the King of Poland's 
delegates who had arrived at Trent, ' that the salvation 
of the whole Church depends on this Council. 

^ Eeimann, Sendung, pp. 256-257. 
2 Kaynald ad a. 1562, No. 121. 

5 2 




From the moment that Pius IV. had decided on con- 
vening a General Council, he had directed all his energies 
towards the realisation of the plan, although at times 
he had been discouraged by the great difficulties which 
encountered him at every turn. ' Our intentions are 
good,' he said to the Venetian ambassador, to whom he 
gave audience one morning in his bedchamber, where 
he was laid up with gout ; ' our intentions are good, 
but we stand completely alone.' ' It filled me with 
pity,' the ambassador writes, ' to see the Pope lying in 
bed and to hear him saying : " We stand alone with 
this great burden." His Holiness has most certainly 
displayed all the zeal in this matter of the Council that 
was to be expected from so exemplary a supreme 
shepherd ; he has left nothing undone that could con- 
tribute to the success of this most sacred and necessary 
work.' ^ 

On January 18, 1562, the Council, which had been 
twice interrupted, resumed its sessions for the third time. 

All the Christian sovereigns were invited to it, and 
all the non- Catholic ones were provided with safe- 

' Ranke, Pdpste, i. 328 f. 


conducts and were solemnly exhorted by the Council 
' to join in the work of unification and reconciliation, 
that so they might come to apprehend that charity 
which is the bond of perfection, and that the hallowing 
peace of Christ might be revealed to their hearts, to 
which peace they were called in one harmonious body.' ^ 
The Emperor had wished to defer the decisions on 
dogmatic points in order to have the chance of further 
transactions with the Protestants, and the legates, 
consequently, with the Pope's assent, proposed to the 
assembly to begin proceedings with the Index of the 
books that were to be prohibited, because this course 
would furnish opportunity for renewing the invitation 
to the Protestants on the pretext that they should 
speak in defence of the books that were objected to. 
Nevertheless, the Protestants kept themselves aloof. 
The Emperor had no better success than the Council in 
his endeavours to persuade them to come to Trent, 
notwithstanding the facts that complete political toler- 
ance had been most securely guaranteed to the Augsburg 
Confessionists by imperial decrees, and that the Pro- 
testant Estates themselves were at heart convinced 
that the Emperor would neither violate the Keligious 
Peace himself nor assent to its violation by others. 
The Protestants declared the Council to be ' a Synod of 

Throughout the whole duration of the ecclesiastical 
assembly reports went about that ' a great popish 

^ See Bucholtz, viii. 419. The Archbishop of Prague wrote to the 
Emperor on March 10, 1562 : ' Salvus conductus tahs a concilio datur 
protestantibus, qualem ante decenniuni ipsi sibi conscripserunt et in hac 
forma dari vohierunt, imo sunt qui certo affirment banc formulam 
publicse fidei ab ipso Brentio conscriptam esse.' In Sickel, p. 276 ; see 
the Eeport of the imperial ambassadors, p. 275. 


league was plotting the extirpation of the evangelists, 
who were all to be massacred in the bloodiest manner.' 
It behoved the Protestants, therefore, ' to be beforehand 
with their opponents, and to ward off the danger 
threatened by the Catholics.' ' Poison and the dagger 
of the assassin ' were even to be resorted to by ' the 
Pope, and by some of his bishops, against the lives of 
the evangelical princes.' 

The Cardinal -bishop Otto von Augsburg, who heard 
all these reports in Rome, wrote to Duke Albert of 
Bavaria on September 26, 1562 : ' The Confessionists 
are spreading about the report that they have trust- 
worthy information that the Cardinal of Trent has 
commissioned certain Italians to assassinate some of the 
Electors and princes of the Empire, and also that his 
Holiness the Pope has despatched one Ludovico Mar- 
tello with poison.' ' Pfui ! it's nothing but a pack of 
wicked, heretical lies, through which they reveal to us 
the venom and hatred of their hearts. In olden times, 
not even an ignorant peasant — how much less, then, a 
prince — would have believed such palpable falsehoods 
for a moment. To give credence to such lame lies 
shows a shallowness of mind which is more French than 
German.' Before this Otto had written : ' With infi- 
nite pain and sorrow I have learnt of an utterly baseless 
rumour, which is current throughout the whole of 
Germany, among all classes, high and low, viz. that 
the Pope contemplates a bloody enforcement of the 
Council's decrees. For the sake, therefore, of the pure 
and godly truth, and as a true-born loyal German, I 
am constrained, out of Christian love and trust in God, 
to issue this true and simple announcement : The Pope 
is convinced that this Council is the best means for 


doing away with all the different abuses and evils that 
exist ; neither the Pope nor any of the Catholics are 
thinking of war, or equipping for it ; the opposite party 
should not believe the reports of seditious agitators, but 
should send emissaries to inform themselves of the 
truth. The rumours, the writings, and the intrigues 
that are going on make one fear that a knot of sedition- 
mongers may bring on a wholly unnecessary war. From 
such a calamity may Christ our Redeemer and Saviour 
preserve us and our beloved Germany ! ' It was impera- 
tively necessary, however, the Cardinal urged on Duke 
Albert, that the Catholic party should, at any rate, ' be 
prepared for defence in all possible ways ; for otherwise 
it was to be feared that, if one sword did not keep the 
other in its sheath, affairs would not be settled without 
a terrible row.' ' I am distressed and perturbed beyond 
measure,' he goes on, ' at seeing my dearly-loved father- 
land in such danger, trouble, and need, and, apart from 
God, I see no help for her. But in God's great mercy 
and wonderful providence I cannot doubt ; He never 
forsakes those who trust in Him. Your Grace may 
indeed believe me when I say that Pius IV. is animated 
by the most sincere and fatherly intentions, and that 
for full a thousand years there has never been a Pope 
who has been more easily influenced in all reasonable 
directions.' ^ 

The work of preventing the Council, which the Land- 
grave Philip of Hesse had considered a duty incumbent 
on the Protestant princes,- had not proved feasible. It 

^ Jan. 24 and Sept. 26, 1562, in the Reiclisarchiv at Munich, Augsburg. 
Corresjwndenz, ii. 14 ff., 27 ff., 194. Kindly contributed by Dr. J. 
Vochezer. Obto's ' Einfaltig trewhei'zig Bedenken,' in Goldast, pp. 599- 

* See above, pp. 214, 215. 


was all in vain tliat ' several princes ' had insisted that 
the Emperor's office required of him as a duty that 
he should ' oppose with all his might the insufferable 
continuation of the Council of Trent,' for all its earlier 
decisions had been ' annulled and abolished ' by the 
Passau Treaty and the Religious Peace. ' If the Pope 
and his followers persisted in their intention of holding 
this Council, or of carrying out any other scheme in 
opposition to the will of the Emperor, Ferdinand, they 
urged, would be acting in a fatherly and legitimate 
manner if he left it in the hands of the Augsburg Con- 
fessionists to bring about a speedy and thorough ship- 
wreck of the papal plans.' ^ But their remonstrances 
had no result. This much, however, was gained by 
the Protestants, that, in spite of all the Pope's entreaties 
and admonitions, not one of the ecclesiastical princes of 
the Empire dared to show himself at the Council. The 
three spiritual Electors wrote as follows to the Emperor 
on March 3, 1562 : ' If we were to go to Trent in person, 
in spite of the Council's being unacceptable to the 
Estates who subscribe to the Augsburg Confession, mis- 
trust and suspicion might be kindled in the minds of 
the said Estates, as though by means of this Council we 
were plotting somewhat against the general peace of 
the country, which suspicion and mistrust would be 
all the more strengthened by the false reports dis- 
seminated through the Holy Empire by wicked men, to 
the effect that dangerous plots are hatching against the 
said Augsburg Confessionists.' " The Archbishop of 
Mayence said the same as the Archbishops of Treves ^ 

' Ferdinand's despatch to his ambassadors at Eome, dated Oct. 31, 
1560, in Sickel, pp. 124-125. 

2 Sickel, p. 274; ^ gg^ ahovc, p. 187. 


and of Salzburg ; Mf he were to leave his diocese, its 
ruin might easily follow.- The idea of combining to- 
gether in loyal union for defence against and triumph 
over common dangers, and for the sake also of dutifully 
furthering the crying needs of the Church, by no means 
entered into the policy of the German ecclesiastical 
princes of that period. They were princes and lords 
indeed, but, as a rule, no true ecclesiastics. The tem- 
poral power, which had been bestowed on them for the 
protection and support of their spiritual prestige, 
served only to weaken the Church. Before the opening 
of the Council, the Emperor himself had sent word to 
Rome that the bishops would imperil the safety oi 
their lands if they went to the Council ; but after the 
sessions had begun at Trent, he yielded to the Pope's 
request, and sent the bishops repeated exhortations to 
go and take part in the assembly. On March 30, 1562, 
he instructed his ambassador at Trent to inform the 
legates that he considered it most essential that the 
bishops and prelates should take part in the deliberations 
on reform ; no good result could otherwise be hoped for 
for Germany. It was not his fault, he said, that the 
bishops had not come ; he had done all in his power 
to prevail on them to put in an appearance : the Pope 
and the Council must in their turn admonish them of 
the duty of holy obedience. ' Moreover,' he added, 
' whether they attend or not, it is our fixed opinion that 
the business of reform must be proceeded with, and the 
duty which is owed to Germany not be neglected on 
account of their absence.' ^ Once more the bishops 
were summoned to attend, but still they did not come. 

^ See above, pp. 180-182. - Sickel, p. 183, note. 

3 Sickel, p. 287. 


' How is it that the German bishops so lightly esteem 
their mitres ? ' asked the Bishop of Lanciano at a public 
meeting of one of the imperial envoys : ' Did they not 
take the oath of obedience at their consecration ? and 
do they not hold all temporal power by right of being 
bishops ? ' The ambassador answered that the bishops 
kept away from fear of the danger threatened from 
the Protestants.^ 

Because the bishops did not take part in the Council 
the Protestants chose to assert that ' the decisions it 
came to were consequently not binding on the Catholics 
either.' For, said they, ' it is obvious that a concourse 
of Italians at Trent does not constitute a General 
Council to which the papists are bound to yield obedi- 
ence when none of the archbishops, bishops, and pre- 
lates of the Holy Empire have had a share in the so- 
called decrees.' What confusion of ideas existed also 
among the Catholic princes is evidenced by the fact that 
Duke Albert of Bavaria, and even the Emperor, de- 
clared that a Council at which the Protestant imperial 
princes and other Protestant powers, such as England, 
Scotland, Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland, were not 
represented, could not be considered a General (Ecn- 
menical Council.^ 

Among the ' measures of reform ' proposed by the 
Emperor and Duke Albert was the demand for the lay 
chalice. It was considered of the utmost importance 
that this point should be conceded, because hopes were 
cherished that multitudes of wavering Catholics would 
thereby be strengthened anew in the faith, and that 

; 1 Biicholtz, viii. 562. 
^ See the letters of Albrecht and Ferdinand, in Sickel, pp. 130-139. 


numbers of Protestants who had attached themselves 
to the new doctrines for the sake of the Communion 
under both kinds would be brought back to the Church. 
It had been dogmatically decreed by the Council that 
' The reception of both elements is not incumbent on 
all Christians, either in obedience to a divine command 
or as a means to salvation ; the Church had her reasons 
for introducing communion in one kind only among the 
laity and the non-celebrating priests, and in so doing 
she did not err ; the whole Christ is contained in each of 
the elements.' ^ But that the Church had power again, 
unconditionally, to sanction the reception of both 
elements by Christians in general was at once emphati- 
cally acknowledged by the most decided opponents of 
the lay chalice, notably the general of the Jesuits, 
Lainez. On the Abbot Riccardo of Vercelli's expressing 
his opinion that the demand for the chalice ' smacked 
of heresy,' the papal legate, who was presiding, reproved 
him for the offence against the Emperor which was 
implied in this statement, and imposed silence on him. 
The great question, as Lainez most forcibly pointed out, 
was the practical advisability of the measure ; but, he 
said, in the settlement of the matter, neither the 
Council not the Pope must be credited with infallibility. 
' The question of practical advisability ' led to 
lengthy and more or less stormy proceedings. ' No 

1 The Church teaches that in the holy Eucharist the glorified body of 
the Lord, no longer capable of suffering, no longer subject to any sort of 
separation, is present : from this it follows that, both in the form of 
bread and in the form of wine, the whole undivided Christ must be 
equally present. The variety of elements in the holy sacrifice of the 
Mass is only intended to represent mystically the death of the Lord, 
which took place on the cross by separation of His blood from His not 
yet glorified bodj-. 



single point at the Council,' wrote the imperial ambas- 
sadors, ' was discussed with such tremendous excite- 
ment and noise.' The legates and Pius IV. were 
inclined to concede the chalice.^ The Emperor — so said 
the first Cardinal legate — was most hopeful that this 
concession would bring back the heretics and those who 
had wavered in the faith ; if the concession were not 
granted, Ferdinand, as his orators had already informed 
the Council, would withdraw his protection and leave 
the assembly to its unlucky fate.- But a largely pre- 
ponderating majority of the fathers voted against the 
imperial demand. They negatived the question of 
the legates, ' whether the reception of both elements 
under certain conditions should be allowed by the 
Council,' and they could not be induced to give the 
positive assent demanded of them to the reception of 
the chalice. At a session of September 17, 1562, they 
placed ' the whole matter in the hands of his Holiness 
the Pope, in order that he in his wisdom, and according 
to his own judgment, should state expressly what he 
considered best for the welfare of Christendom and for 
the salvation of those who demanded the chalice.' -^ 

In this adverse decision the fathers had been 
chiefly influenced by their knowledge that the conces- 
sion of the lay chalice by the Council of Basle, and again 
by Paul III., had by no means checked, but rather 
encouraged, apostasy. 

' The chalice,' Bishop Stanislaus Hosius had written 
in 1558, ' is the first wedge which begins the cleavage ; 
the next is the Augsburg Confession.' ^ Hosius wrote 

' Grisar, Erste Abliandlung, pp, 676 f. 

* Pallavicini, lib. 18, c. 3, No. 2. 

' Grisar, Zweite Ahhandlung, pp. 89, 105-109. 

* Baynald ad a. 1558, No. 17. 


to Duke Albert of Bavaria that it was not the lay 
chalice which was really the gist of the religious disputes, 
but the principal and fundamental article of the faith 
' in which we acknowledge our belief in a holy and uni- 
versal Church.' Whoever really and truly believed this, 
he said, was bound to submit his judgment to that of 
the Church. ' The use of the chalice has never been 
condemned by the Church ; on the contrary, the Church's 
decision was that, if anybody communicated, whether 
under one species or under both, provided that the act 
was done according to the usage of the Church, and not 
unworthily, it would work for the salvation of the com- 
municant. The Church, however, had condemned the 
■error of those who either denied that the whole un- 
divided Christ was contained as much in one element as 
in the other, or who considered the use of the chalice 
so indispensable to eternal salvation, that they ex- 
cluded communicants in one kind only from all hope of 
salvation, as violators of a divine command.' There 
was danger that the concession of the chalice would 
strengthen and confirm one or other of these errors. 
The demand for the chalice was only the beginning of 
the breach, as might plainly be seen in the Empire, 
where, not content with the Augsburg Confession, 
people were striding on from one innovation to another. 
Calvinism, which denied the actual presence of Christ 
in the Sacrament, was spreading far and wide over 
Germany ; people were also beginning to deny that 
Christ had become incarnate through the Virgin Mary.^ 
"' Only see how far these dissentients have already gone. 
Some of them deny the humanity, some, as attested, 
among others, by Brenz in his book against Peter 

^ Bucholtz, viii. 657. 

R 2 


Martyr, the divinity of Christ. This extremity, how- 
ever, was not reached at one bound, but step by step. 
The separation from the Church had begun with the 
chalice. After the first downward step had been taken, 
it was impossible to arrest the whole precipitous descent." 

Among the German archbishops and bishops, whose 
opinion the Emperor solicited, those of Mayence and 
Cologne decided against the lay chalice, saying that to 
grant it would be to strengthen in their error those who 
thought that one element did not contain as much as 
the two together ; the Church would then be accused 
of error, inconstancy, or impiety, as though she had 
formerly not dispensed this sacrament aright ; and it 
would, moreover, be very easy to fall into the error of 
the Nestorians who taught that the Body of Christ was 
divisible. The benefit to be hoped for from the con- 
cession was decidedly less than the danger to be feared.^ 

The words spoken by Lainez at the Council, that, if 
the chalice was conceded, those who were estranged from 
the Church would make still greater and more importu- 
nate demands, were by degrees justified.^ 

In a brief of April 16, 1564, Pius IV., in consequence 
of long and urgent pressure from the Emperor and Duke 
Albert, authorised all the German bishops to administer 
the Eucharist in both kinds to all those of the laity who 
demanded it, and who were ready to fulfil certain con- 

1 Hosii 0pp. ii. 215-216. 

* Bucholtz, viii. 664. Saftien, Verhandlungen, pp. 12 f., 14 f., where 
there are fuller details respecting the memorandum of advice which 
Ferdinand I. obtained from the Catholic scholars (Canisius and the 
Jesuits of Prague and Vienna were against the lay chalice, Staphylus; 
and Gienger in favour of it), and the transactions with the Electors, with 
Salzburg, and with Bavaria. The dogmatic conclusions of Saftien are in 
many cases quite erroneous. 

' Grisar, p. G8. 


■ditions. These conditions were the acknowledgment 
of the dogma that the whole Christ was contained as 
much in one of the elements as in both ; and the rejection 
of all false notions which had divided them from the 
faith and allegiance of the Church.^ 

This brief was proclaimed with solemnity in Austria, 
and the result seemed at first propitious for the 
maintenance of the ancient Church system. But in 
the very same year, 1564, it became evident that the 
adherents of the new doctrine were only using the 
papal sanction as a decoy to catch other Catholics, and 
a means of establishing the Augsburg Confession.^ 
The same experience was met with in Bavaria. 

If we wish to know what judgment the Protestants 
formed of the papal concession, we may turn, among 
other sources of information, to a letter from the Elector 
Palatine Frederic to Duke John William of Saxony, 
where we read : ' This concession is a work of the devil ; 
were it but for this reason, that the Pope, who is the 
apostle of the devil, retains to himself auricular con- 
fession in order that he may reserve for Satan, his own 
father, a morsel of all the consciences of the poor 
Christians.' The whole business ' is so subtle in its 
venomous iniquity, that many a poor simple-minded 
creature cannot rightly understand it, and will imagine 
he has got a very lucky bargain, when all the time he 

^ Saftien, Verliandlungen, pp. 49 f. 

^ Fuller details on the introduction of the lay chalice in the imperial 
hereditary lands in Saftien, pp. 65 f. Respecting the results in Silesia, 
Jungnitz in his Arcliidiakonus Petrus Gebauer : ein Zeit- und Lebensbild 
aus der schlesiscJien KirchengeschicJite des 17. Jahrhunderts, 1892, p. 61. 
It had been hoped in Silesia that the concession of the lay chalice would 
save the Catholics from apostasy ; but this measure only facilitated and 
encouraged their desertion of the Church, as the transit to Protestantism 
could be made unobserved. 


is being caught in the wiles of the devil and his apostle 
by accepting this concession.' ^ ' Beware,' said a preacher 
to his congregation, ' beware of the crafty, hellish snare 
which the accursed diabolical whoremonger at Rome 
has laid for you with the chalice.' And again : ' How 
has God's anger waxed terrible, that He should allow 
the devil and his apostle, who has been spewed out of 
hell, to do such a thing as this in order to perplex and 
bewilder the evangelical Christians, and draw them 
down into the abyss of hell by means of this papistical 
chalice ! Those who would wish to profit by this con- 
cession verily have devils' mouths.' The preacher, who 
described himself as ' a peace-loving servant of the Holy 
Gospel,' appealed frequently to the Holy Scriptures in 
confirmation of his assertions.- 

The Protestant judgment on the sanction of the 
marriage of the clergy would have been precisely 
similar if the concession had come from the Council or 
from the Pope. Years ago Luther had said : ' If it 
should happen that one, two, a hundred, a thousand, 
or any number of Councils you like, were to settle that 
the clergy are free to marry, or free to do or leave undone 
anything else that God's Word has already given them 
leave to do or not to do, I, for my part, would be more 
inchned to look leniently on, and to commit to the tender 
mercies of God, the man who all his life long had kept 
one, two, or three concubines, than him who should take 
to himself a lawful wife on the strength of the decrees 

^ Letter of July 26, 1564, in Kluekhohn, Briefe, i. 517-518. 

^ Neue Funde and Aushotzicncien des Satans, dc, den getrewen 
Christen zur Warnung gestellt durcli einen friedfertigen Diener des JiL 
Evangelii (1564), A^ G. 


of any number of Councils, but who, without their 
decrees, would not dare to marry ; and in the name of 
God I would advise, and even command, all monks and 
priests, at peril of their souls' salvation, not to enter into 
wedlock on the strength of the decrees of Councils, but 
to continue in their vows of chastity, and, if this should 
be impossible for them, not to despair in their weakness 
and sin, but to call on God for succour.' ^ 

That the introduction of marriage among the clergy 
heightened the esteem in which the clerical state was 
held by the Protestant populace can by no means be 
maintained ; on the contrary, complaints became uni- 
versal of the contempt with which the ministers of 
religion were regarded. In the words of Luther : 
' The people see no good whatever in the servants of 
the Church ; those who live in the married state are 
despised and ejected ; the clergy have become a curse, 
scapegoats, and a butt of ridicule and contempt to 
everybody.' - The people still continued to regard the 
marriages among the clergy as unlawful, and even the 
Protestant jurists at Wittenberg refused for a long time 
to recognise the children of such marriages as legitimate, 
and as entitled to inherit from their parents. ' I 
myself,' Luther complained in 1536, ' have not yet met 
with one jurist who will side with me against the Pope 
in such cases, so that I cannot look to bequeathing my 
good name and my beggarly possessions to my own 
children, nor indeed can any priest.' '^ 

In the territories of Catholic rulers also, the popular 

1 Collected WorTis, pp. 29, 23. See Vol. ii. 283 (German). 
'' See Luther's numerous utterances on this subject in Dollinger, 
i. 298 f. 

3 De Wette, Luther's Letters, v. 26. See v. V16. 


contempt for tlie incontinent clergy — whether legally 
married or living in concubinage was all the same— had 
risen to the highest pitch. Cases of the latter descrip- 
tion had indeed become so numerous as to call forth 
especial condemnation from the Emperor and from 
Duke Albert of Bavaria, who, ' in view of the melan- 
choly conditions of the time,' considered the abolition 
of celibacy ' urgently necessary.' It was their opinion 
that if the Pope or the Council were to sanction marriage 
among the priesthood, so that no blame should any 
longer attach to the clergy who had wives, concu- 
binage would disappear, and the people ' would regain 
their old reverence for the priests who were lawfully 
married with the sanction of the Church.' 

Ferdinand represented to the Pope and the Council 
that ' the desire for marriage ' had spread so enor- 
mously among the Catholic clergy in Germany, that 
out of a hundred pastors there was scarcely one who 
was not either openly or secretly married. If all these 
clergymen were deposed, the churches must either 
remain empty for want of other men to fill their places, 
or else the priests, in order not to lose their livings, 
would go over to the Protestants, and make common 
cause with them against the Catholic Church, and the 
bishops themselves, for want of clergy to work in their 
dioceses, would be driven to forsaking their flocks. 
For all these reasons, he urged, it would be better also 
to promote married men to the priesthood than to leave 
parishes without shepherds and to hand the country 
over to the enemies of the Church.^ 

1 Raynaia ad a. 1562, No. 60 ; ad a. 1563, Nos. 138, 139 ; ad a. 1564, 
No. 29. How far Ferdinand's statements correspond to truth remains 
jet to be discovered. The interesting and important fact, which has 


The Duke of Bavaria's delegate spoke even more 
strongly. He said that nearly all the clergy had either 
wives or concubines. Concubinage was such an offence 
to the people that both priesthood and priests, 
religion and the teachers of religion, were utterly ab- 
horred by them, and they would rather go over to any 
sect than return to the Church. Some few bishops, it 
was true, had endeavoured to remedy the evil, but the 
greater number of the heads of the Church maintained 
an attitude of indifference and inaction. The ancient, 
stringent Church rules could no longer be rigidly adhered 

only lately come to light, that the Catholic clergy of that period were 
undoubtedly better in some districts than the friends of marriage among 
the priesthood assert, warns us to be careful. When, in April 1561, the 
Nuncio Commendone arrived at the court of Duke William of Jiilich, he 
was assured by the Duke that there were not five clerics in the whole of 
his territory who were not living in open concubinage (Lossen, Briefe 
von Andreas Masius und seinen Freunden, Leipzig, 1886, p. 332). 
These words have been repeated since then times without number, but, 
according to the researches of H. H. Koch {Die Eeformation in Herzog- 
thum Jiilich, 2. Heft, Frankfurt, 1888, pp. 83 f.), they are not in harmony 
with truth. ' The sole source,' says Koch, ' from which the Duke could 
get true information respecting the condition of morals among his clergy 
were the protocols of the church visitations made by his officials. These 
had been held in the years 1559 and 1560 ; in Jiilich in 1559.' Koch 
went carefully through the visitation protocols of 1559 in the Dtisseldorf 
archives of state, which give statistics concerning thirty-iive neighbouring 
chm-ches and chapels, which had fifty-four clergymen among them 
(see Koch, loc. cit; Heft 2, p. 84, and Heft 3 [1896], p. 168). 'The 
visiting inspectors took special pains to collect minute information 
respecting the moral conditions of these parishes, and this in the absence 
of the incumbents and without giving the latter the opportunity of justi- 
fying themselves. The information they obtained consisted thus of 
one-sided complaints and accusations, which were possibly all at variance 
with truth, but nevertheless were an accurate expression of public 
opinion, and that was the chief concern.' And what is the result ? Out 
of the 54 clergymen, 32 are given good characters and only 6 bad ones, 
while 13 are neither commended nor blamed, so that there could have 
been nothing against their characters; the remaining three are set down 
as doubtful cases. The above-mentioned words of the Duke are therefore 
in flat contradiction to verified facts and have no claim on our belief. 


to. Many thoughtful men, who had a complete grasp 
of German social and political conditions, saw, in the 
spirit of the age, the working of an occult force of 
nature,^ which was impelling, not ardent youngsters 
only, but even Catholic men of mature age, to renounce 
their benefices for the sake of marrying, rather than 
enter or remain in the Church and not marry, and unite 
themselves with so profligate a class as were the clergy 
of the period. Hence the dearth of learned men among 
the ecclesiastics, hence the frightful ignorance of the 
clerics, hence the growing power of heresy and the im- 
potence of the Church to resist it. The scarcity of 
learned and efficient ministers of religion could only be 
overcome by a moral resuscitation of the clergy, and 
this would be best accomplished by reverting to the 
custom of the primitive Church, and allowing married 
men to proclaim the Word of God and to receive holy 
orders. This concession must also be granted to the 
priests who had wives already. For there was no divine 
command that priests must be celibates. We know 
from history that, formerly, married men were not only 
made priests but also bishops.^ 

The speaker enforced his argument by an appeal to 
the Greek Church, in which, however, ' marriage of the 
priesthood ' did not exist. Ever since the synod of 
Constantinople, in the year 692, the Greek Church had 
conformed to the following rule : ' Men already married 

1 ( 

. esse nunc in Germania siECulum quandam occultam naturte 
vim. ' • 

" Eaynald ad a. 1562, No. 52. See Schleclit, in the Hist. Jalirh. xiii. 
626 {Zur Berichtigung von Enoj^fler, Kelchbejvegung 109). See also 
Histor. Jahrb. xiii. 144 ff. : Schwarz, ' Der erste Antrag Albrechts V. 
von Baiern an den apostol. Stulil auf Bewilligung des LaienTcelclies, 
Zulassung der Priesterehe und Milderung des Fastengebotes,' 1555. 


may become priests and retain their wives on condition 
that they have not married a second time, and that 
they have not married widows or women of bad repute. 
An unmarried man, who has received one of the highest 
orders, must not afterwards marry. Also, no priest 
whose wife has died after his ordination is at liberty to 
marry again. If a married man is consecrated a bishop, 
his wife must go into a convent.' ^ 

Among the German bishops, Frederic Nausea of 
Vienna, Julius Pflug of Naumburg, Michael Helding of 
Merseburg were advocates of the measure for abolishing 
celibacy. In a memorandum presented by them to 
Ferdinand, they expressed their opinion that in view of 
the many and great scandals in the ecclesiastical ranks, 
and also of the deplorable dearth of priests, it was 
desirable that the clergy should be allowed to marry 
under certain conditions." Never, however, the Arch- 
bishop of Cologne declared to the Emperor, had such a 
thing been heard of in the Church as priests taking to 
themselves wives after their ordination. The defenders 
of celibacy urged that the scandals in the Church were 
no more an argument against celibacy than adultery, 
the terrible increase of which was everywhere bewailed, 
was an argument against marriage. Not only the laws 
of man, but also those of God were more and more 
frequently outraged nowadays, owing to the increasing 
demoralisation of the people. It by no means followed, 
however, that these laws should be abolished. Married 
priests do not command the confidence of the people in 

1 Hefele, Conciliengesch. (2 Aufl.) Bd. iii. 331-333. 

2 See Schmidt, Neuere Gesch. iv. 42-47. Nausea had akeady pro- 
posed to Pope Paul III. in 1543 to remove the compulsory character of 
celibacy. See Metzner, Fr. Nausea, pp. 78-80. See also Saftien, Ver- 
handlungen, p. 14. 


the administration of tlie sacrament of penance. If 
those men who, in violation of their vows and in dis- 
obedience to the Church's command, have kept concu- 
bines are permitted to have lawful wives, it will be as 
good as granting them rewards for their immoral con- 
duct. They ought rather to be punished with the full 
rigour of the canon law, so that it may not appear as 
though their sinning had been profitable to them. The 
sin of incontinency, the Archbishop of Mayence urged 
emphatically, was becoming apparent, not only among 
the Catholic clergy, but also among those Protestant 
ministers of religion who were living in so-called wed- 
lock. Once let celibacy go, and a complete change in 
the condition of the clerical state would follow, and the 
Church goods would all be confiscated. 

At a conference held in August 1563, by the Em- 
peror's councillors, the three ecclesiastical electors, the 
Archbishop of Salzburg, and the Duke of Bavaria, it 
was agreed, ' in the question of celibacy, not to appeal 
to the Council, but to propose to the Pope " that those 
who had already joined the priesthood should not be 
allowed to marry, for such a thing had never been 
heard of since the days of the Apostles ; but that in 
this time of scarcity, pious married men should be 
admitted to perform priestly functions, though only in 
the parish churches ; and that, in order to maintain 
celibacy in a position of respect, prelacies, canonries, 
and other benefices should not be bestowed on married 
men." ' i 

At the Council not a single bishop spoke in favour 
of the abolition of celibacy ; only the Hungarian bishop 

1 Bucholtz, viii. 668-680. See the Instructions of the Bishop of 
Miinster, March 1563, in Hiising, p. 165. 


Andreas Dudith of Tina, who later on became a Protes- 
tant and married, had intended making a speech in 
support of marriage among the clergy. ^ The decree of 
the Council was as follows : ' If a sufficient number of 
unmarried clerics cannot be obtained for the functions 
of the four minor orders, married ones may then be 
received, provided they are men of blameless character, 
who have not been married twice, and who are fitted 
for the service of the Church. Clerics who have taken 
the higher orders, or monks who have taken the solemn 
vow of chastity, must not be allowed to marry.' ^ Severe 
penalties were decreed against concubinage,^ and minute 
rules for the official duties and the private conduct of 
the clergy. The Council further enjoined all bishops to 
found seminaries for training a body of clergy whose 
morals should be irreproachable.'* 

The Emperor and all the Catholic powers who sent 
representatives to the Council were most urgent in 
pressing for a thoroughgoing reform of the clergy of all 
ranks and degrees. Ferdinand made repeated demands 
for reform of the Roman Curia and the College of Car- 
dinals, and for redress of the abuses of non-residence, 
simony, dissipation of Church goods, and plurality of 
benefices. He demanded also reform of the cloisters 
and the retractation of their exemptions, the abolition 
of the stole-fees, the compilation of a clear manual of 
Catholic doctrine, a new postille (book of sermons) and 
agenda (ritual and ceremonial guide-books), and, above 

^ Excusatio ad Maximilianum Ccesarem, p. 88. De Thou states 
erroneously that he actually made the speech (Menzel, ii. 393, note). 
* Sessio 23, cap. 17 ; Sessio 24, cap. 9. 
' Sessio 24, cap. 8 ; Sessio 25, cap. 15. ■• Fuller details later on. 


all, the erection of good schools and the foundation of 
stipends for poor scholars.^ The Pope was ready for all 
these reforms. ' Act as you think best,' he wrote to 
one of the legates ; ' we shall not fail to co-operate with 
you and to carry out whatever is agreed upon for the 
glory of God and the general welfare.' ' In so far as it 
can be done with equity and honour,' he said, ' the 
demands of the secular sovereigns must be satisfied.' 
The legates were not to lose time by referring to him 
for his opinion, but to settle everything with the synod, 
and to strive after the best possible issues. With re- 
gard also to the College of Cardinals, they were to 
proceed without any compunction of any sort ; no 
measures of reform would be too stringent for him, for 
in this respect also he wished to give satisfaction to 
the Council and to the princes." 

' His Holiness,' Cardinal Otto of Augsburg wrote 
from Kome on September 17, 1563, ' is indefatigable in 
his ardour for reform of all sorts, in matters that con- 
cern himself personally, as well as in the business of the 
Curia, and in all the affairs of the Church, whose 
members, both high and low, he would gladly bring 
back to the ancient discipline and moral standard. But 
the improvement so urgently needed in the lives of the 
clergy, the restoration of Church ordinances and laws — 
in short, the whole business of Church reform — will not 
be carried through, or at any rate very inadequately, 
without a simultaneous reform of the princes and their 
mode of government, and unless the Church is freed 
from the heavy secular bondage under which she is 

* Rayiiald ad a. 1562, No. 59. ^chelhorn, Anioenitates, i. 501-575. See 
Reimann's Aufsatz in den Forscliungen zur deutschen Gesch. viii. 177- 
186. Bucholtz, viii. 446-454. 

« Bucholtz, viii. 476-477, 601-602. 


more or less crushed and oppressed in every German 
State. Is it exaggeration to assert that in the Catholic 
territories also, it is less the bishops who rule the Church 
than the princes and their officials ? ' ^ 

In the main, this assertion was not an exaggeration. 

It was not to be expected that Catholic princes 
would give in to the Protestant idea that the power of 
the secular rulers was the sole authority that was based 
on divine right, and that all ecclesiastical power was to 
be regarded as derived from territorial sovereignty, and 
princes and municipal authorities as chief bishops 
of the territorial churches. Nevertheless, among the 
Catholic rulers, long before the Protestant movement 
began, many adhered to the teaching of the Roman 
jurists, that the ' externals of the Church ' ought to be 
entirely subject to the territorial sovereign, who had 
the right freely to dispose of the goods of the Church, 
to make all appointments to benefices, and to exercise 
control over all Church ordinances.^ The secular princes 
and nobles, says a pamphlet of 1524, ' want to be lords 
of the Church, to hold the richest benefices and Church 
livings, and to have little or no work to do ; to appoint 
the clergy at their own will, and to demand payment 
for the appointment ; they bring disorder into abbeys 
and cloisters ; they banquet and gormandise out of 
Church funds, and then talk as if they were the saints 
of the earth, and complain of the corruption of the 
clergy. Oh, these Pharisees, through whom God is now 
plaguing the Christian people most bitterly ! ' ' The 
princes,' says another contemporary writer of deep 

^ To the Cologne Jesuit, John of Reidt. See above, p. 40, n. 3. 

^ As early as the 14th and 15th centuries several princes laid claim to 
' papal authority ' within their dominions. See our statements. Vol. ii. 
(Eng.) 284-286. 


insight, ' bring up grievance after grievance against the 
clerics, the greater number of whom they themselves 
have, by fair means or foul, placed in their parishes and 
benefices. They blame the Church, while it is they 
themselves who have given her the Judas kiss.' ^ ' If 
only we can get our sons, our brothers, and our friends 
appointed to episcopal posts and dignities,' wrote the 
Catholic Duke George the Bearded of Saxony, ' we care 
little whether they enter at the door or how they get 
:'n, so long as they get in — whether under the threshold 
or down through the roof, it matters not. This is the 
common practice with us princes, as though we held 
our power for the sake of forcing our way to hell. More- 
over, these lords who get into the Church in this way 
behave as though they had purchased themselves a 
family inheritance and held it by right.' 

' When we laymen,' the Duke goes on, ' have the 
property of cloisters and religious institutions under our 
control, we become so inflamed with covetousness that 
we often think far more of how we can get the property 
into our own possession, in order to maintain our social 
position, than of seeing to it that orderly Christian 
living goes on in the districts under our care. This 
greed of possession has, in these last troublous times, 
served to break up many Christian communities, and to 
increase the revenues of the rulers. Herein we have 
forgotten our duty to God and our neighbour, and have 
cared no whit whether our neighbour came to eternal 
damnation, so long as we could keep up the splendour 
of our state.' ^ 

\ See our statements, Vol. iv. 25-26. 

"^ Hofler, DenhivilrdigTielten der Charitas PirJcheimer, p. 58. See our 
statements, Vol. iv. 28. 


The following words, written by Luther, were en- 
tirely applicable to most of the Catholic princes and 
nobles : ' The irascible young noblemen and the princes 
are the very best of Lutherans ; they take presents and 
money in abundance from the abbeys and cloisters, 
appropriate the Church jewels and precious stones, and 
cast covetous glances on the glebe lands. Besides which, 
they encroach on the papal rights and immunities, and 
tax and oppress the spiritual Estates and persons as 
much as they like. But where do they learn all these 
practices ? In the Pope's books ? Did they though ? 
Don't beheve it ! It was Luther w^ho bestowed this 
freedom on them, and what thanks or glory has he got 
for his pains ? ' ^ 

To meet the necessities of the moment, the services 
of individual princes had from time to time been enlisted 
by the Popes themselves to help in the settling of purely 
ecclesiastical matters. For instance. Pope Adrian VI., 
in consequence of the Bavarian bishops' tardiness in 
attempting to restore Church discipline, had authorised 
the Duke of Bavaria, in 1523, to proceed against all 
culpable clerics by means of an ecclesiastical commis- 
sion (without the concurrence of the ordinaries), which 
should visit all the cloisters of the land and depose un- 
worthy superiors.- A practice that could only be justi- 
fied by the needs of the time soon came to be looked on 
as ' a standing right of the territorial rulers, who, in 
cases where belief itself was not involved, had a right 
to rule at their pleasure over ecclesiastical persons and 
their possessions.' 

In the Catholic territories also there was no respect 

1 Collected WovTis, xxx. 377. 
^ See our statements, vol. iv. 20. 

VOL. Yir. s 


sliown to the fundamental principles of ecclesiastical 
law, according to which Church property belongs to the 
corporate ecclesiastical body, individual members being 
only entitled to the usufructs. Such being the case, 
there could be no legitimate confiscation of Church 
property by the secular power, or any reversion of it to 
the Crown. In Austria and Bavaria it was declared 
that Church property was only Crown property, and 
the prelates only Crown officials. Some of the prelates 
were obsequious and servile enough to speak of the 
goods entrusted to them as ' Crown property,' the 
administration of which was bestowed on them solely 
by the reigning princes.^ 

Complaints were made that it was principally ' the 
bailiffs, magistrates, and other officials of the Catholic 
princes who play fast and loose with Church goods, 
endowments, tithes, bequests to the poor, baptisms 
and Eucharists {? Gottesessen), charitable meals, and so 
forth, and they are often more greedy and grasping than 
the Lutherans ; they oppress the clergy as though they 
were bondsmen, tear up the charters, starve the hos- 
pitals, while they themselves feast in the hospitals and 
almshouses during their visits of inspection.' - The Em- 
peror Ferdinand, who had complained at the Council of 
the manner in which unprincipled prelates squandered 
the Church revenues, had been obliged, in 1548, to 
admonish his bailiffs in Austria as follows : ' I have been 
credibly informed that some of your number help your- 
selves to the ecclesiastical goods and without regard to 

^ See Biedemiann, 'Aus der kameralistischen Praxis des Jahrhun- 
dertes,' in Miillor und Falke's Zeitsclir. filr deiUsche Kulturgesch., 
Jahrg. 1858, pp. 362 f. 

^ In the Cliristliche Klage- und Trostschrift (18-19) referred to at p. 92, 
note 1. 


rights of inheritance, debts, or other considerations, use 
them wholly, or in part, just as it pleases you. Such 
disgraceful and grievous abuse of trust on your part 
has made the clergy not a little timid of accepting 
parishes, benefices, and abbacies ; so that these, nowa- 
days, remain unoccupied, and the common people are 
deprived, in these parlous times, of the Word and wor- 
ship of God, and they suffer injury in soul and body.' ^ 

Ferdinand's son, King Maximilian, ' who made no 
secret of his loathing for the dishonest prelates who 
diverted the Church revenues and endowments from the 
purposes they were intended for, and applied them to 
their own use, when he became emperor, sold the fourth 
part of the Church possessions for his own profit, made 
heavy drags on the cloisters to remunerate his court 
officials, and gave ecclesiastical benefices to laymen.' 
Now it was a court musician and his wife who had to 
be richly provided for out of Church revenues ; now an 
architect ' was appointed to the first vacant benefice ; ' 
now an imperial councillor was to be rewarded ' with 
some ecclesiastical prize — either a parish or a fat bene- 
fice.' " Maximilian was also ' equally disgusted at the 
idea of the clergy meddling with temporal affairs, for 
that sort of thing never led to any good ; ' but he con- 
sidered it quite fitting and legitimate that he himself 
should prescribe to bishops and cloisters, under pain of 
threatened punishment, how many Masses they were to 
say, what collections they were to make, how the 
canonical hours were to be performed, and the Sacra- 
ments administered. ' In Austria the bishops lost the 
respect of the people ; the ordination of priests and the 

1 Wiedemann, i. 96-97. ^ j^^^^ i 206-208. 

B 2 


consecration of churches were the only powers left to 
them.' ^ 

The right claimed by some of the princes, on the 
ground of their princely superiority, to quarter on the 
monasteries, at their pleasure, retinues of ' huntsmen, 
falconers, grooms, and other servants,' worked sad ruin 
in monastic life. ' These people,' it was complained, 
' go on eating and drinking day and night, bring women 
with them, and are never satisfied.' The Bavarian 
provincial deputies complained, in 1543, that ' they 
introduce all sorts of profligacy and evil into the 
monasteries, and they think themselves entitled, they 
and those they bring with them, to be waited on day 
and night, and supplied with the very best food and 
drink.' In the year 1528 the Dukes of Bavaria had 
sternly interdicted ' all the iniquitous proceedings and 
illegal acts that were carried on in the monasteries ; ' 
but the orders had been ' as empty wind.' " 

The clergy were of opinion that ' all this unchristian 
insubordination, as well as the popular contempt for 
the clergy,' had been chiefly brought about by the exer- 
cise of the jus Sfolii (the pretended right to seize on the 
goods of clerics after their death ; also called rifs rafs,. 
from the Latin rapite, cci'pite), through the princes* 
officials and the nobles. ' It is no slight grievance,' 
said a Passau clergyman, ' that the very moment a 
country parish priest dies — indeed, almost before the 
breath has left his body — the parsonage is besieged with 
officers of the secular law, who fall to feasting as at a 
village fair, devouring the poor man's substance, and 

' Klehsl's Denksclirift in von Hamnacr-Purgstall, 1, Urkanden,. 
pp. 308-313. 

- See Sugenheim Baierns Zustiinde, pp. 265-266, antl our statements^ 
vol. iv. 20-25. 


making such a hole in his legacies that very often there 
is not enough left to pay the ordinary his rightful fee, 
or to satisfy the dead priest's creditors. And, besides 
all this, these vultures actually have the insolence to 
tell the priests mockingly beforehand that after their 
death they intend to have fine carousals at their par- 
sonages.' Complaints on this score were made re- 
peatedly at the Bavarian provincial assemblies. For 
instance : ' If it leaks out that a parish pastor or other 
priest has left property behind at his death, the 
civil authorities at once lay hands on it, snap their 
fingers at creditors, heirs, and others, put them off with 
delays, charge them exorbitant costs, and, in short, 
drag the matter on till very often the whole legacy ends 
in smoke.' It was the practice of the nobles to grab to 
themselves either the whole or a part of the property 
left by the clergy who lived in their bailiwicks or held 
livings under their patronage. All the complaints made 
at synods respecting these encroachments of the terri- 
torial princes and nobles were entirely fruitless.^ 

In other Catholic countries, especially in France, in 
the kingdom of Naples, in Sicily, and in Spain, the 
bondage of the Church was even more glaring. 

The Council was therefore completely in its right in 
demanding, as a necessary preliminary to general re- 
form, the ' removal of the obstacles set up by the 
secular authorities.' Pope Pius IV. told the Spanish 
ambassador in the spring of 1563 that he was quite 
ready for a general reform, but he hoped that King 
Philip and the other temporal princes would not be 
excluded from the scope of operations.^ 

^ Sugenheim, Baierns Zustdnde, pp. 207-271. 
" Bucholtz, viii. 607, note. 


The following stipulations were drawn up at Trent.. 
The princes, under pain of excommunication, were com- 
manded not to interfere in purely spiritual matters, 
and to respect the traditional privileges of the Church. 
Free administration of justice, freedom in all matters 
directly or indirectly appertaining to the ecclesiastical 
forum, and, under certain given conditions, freedom 
from unlawfully imposed contributions, taxes, and ser- 
vices, were claimed as rights of the Church. The im- 
position of these on ecclesiastics had been unlawful. 
The princes were not to bestow benefices on prelates 
and canons, or in any way hold out to them the pro- 
spect of ecclesiastical preferment, and they were to leave 
intact all ecclesiastical property and rights, as also 
all property and rights of laymen who were under 
Church patronage. They were no longer to be allowed 
to quarter their servants, soldiers, horses, and dogs on 
the houses of the clergy or monasteries ; and, finally, 
their practice of affixing their ' princely Exequatur or 
Placet ' to ecclesiastical edicts was to be given up.^ 

These articles of reform, which were sent to the 
ambassadors of all the temporal sovereigns in August 
1563, occasioned ' the most violent storm and strife ' — so 
wrote the Cardinal-Bishop Otto of Augsburg on Sep- 
tember 17 — ' and threatened to bring about the complete 
collapse of the Council, or, at any rate, the withdrawal 
of the Catholic potentates' support.' ' The Emperor,' 
Otto adds, ' although by nature discreet and moderate,, 
is in the highest measure displeased, and prognosticates 
risings and disturbances in Germany if these articles are 
not given up or held back till a more opportune season. 

^ Beformartikel, in Le Plat, vi. 227-233 ; Bucholtz, Urhundenhandy 
pp. 703-705. 


The King of Spain declares his intention of recalhng 
his bishops if the royal rights and privileges (as he called 
the violent proceedings against the Church) are in any 
way tampered with at the Council. The King of France, 
or rather the counsellors of this child, are behaving as 
though possessed by devils, and give reason to fear that 
France is completely severing herself from obedience to 
the Apostolic See. Uninterruptedly, vehemently, pas- 
sionately, the princes and their councillors and dele- 
gates have clamoured for reforms ; but the moment 
there is a hint of any change which will affect their 
own proceedings or authority, they cry out as though 
the house were on fire, and pronounce everything that 
they themselves do, or lay claim to, unimpeachable.' ^ 

No sooner had the French King heard of the reform 
articles, than he sent instructions to his ambassadors to 
oppose them wi th all their might, and, ' if their protests 
failed of effect,' to leave the Council forthwith. The 
French bishops, also, in this case, were to come away at 
once. The fathers at the Council, he said, seemed bent 
on ' cutting the claws of all the kings and sharpening 
their own ; ' but he had no intention of allowing his 
rights and ' liberties ' to be infringed in the very slightest 
degree. The power of the Council was limited to the 
reform of the ecclesiastical body, and it had no right to 
intrude on affairs of State and royal prerogatives.^ 

On September 22 the French ambassador de Ferrier 
delivered a speech in full session, which caused general 
excitement. By means of the reform devices, he de- 
clared, among other things, a blow was being struck at 
the liberties of the Galilean Church and the majesty and 

^ See the letter cited at p. 164, note 1. 

- Die Briefc CarVs IX. of August 28, 1563, in Le Plat, vi. 194-198. 


authority of the Most Christian kings. For centuries 
past these sovereigns had framed ecclesiastical laws 
which had never been at variance with dogma or in- 
jurious to the freedom of the bishops. For the bishops 
had never been prevented from residing the whole year 
in their dioceses ; from proclaiming the pure Word of 
God every day ; from living sober, temperate, godly 
lives ; and from distributing the goods of the Church 
among the poor. The poor were the veritable lords of 
the:e goods. But here he must correct himself. These 
Most Christian kings had founded nearly all the churches, 
and as the rulers of France had authority over all the 
possessions and revenues of their subjects in general, so 
also they had the right to exercise free control over the 
clergy, when the necessity and the well-being of the 
State required them to do so. And, moreover, they 
held this right, this power, this authority, not from 
men, but from God, who had given mankind kings to 
be obeyed by them. The fathers must therefore 
attempt nothing against these royal rights and against 
the Galilean liberties, or else, de Ferrier signified, ' we 
have orders to interpose a veto, as indeed we are now 

The next day Charles Grassi, Bishop of Montefias- 
cone, replied as follows : ' It was an unheard-of thing, 
at an (Ecumenical Council, that the ambassador of a 
Christian Idng should talk of a veto, which recalled 
to mind the proceedings of the people's tribunes in 
pagan Rome. So, then, ecclesiastical freedom was to 
be no more than this — that bishops and priests would 
not be prevented by royal laws from proclaiming the 
pure Word of God and distributing alms, while over 
and above this it was a matter of perfect indifference 


that the entire freedom and jurisdiction of the Church 
should be made over to the kings, the Church goods 
squandered, and bishops and priests judged by secular 
tribunals, all which was in direct opposition to apostolic 
traditions, and to the decrees of Popes and Councils, in 
opposition also to the Council of Constance. It was 
impossible to believe, he said, that the ambassador had 
really spoken according to the King's instructions.' 

The Cardinal-Legate Morone said it was an impious 
assertion that the King had the right of control over all 
the possessions of his subjects, and that no bishop was 
at liberty to gainsay him when he appropriated Church 

The imperial ambassadors wrote to Ferdinand that 
de Ferrier had said much that was excellent on the 
question of reform, but that he had seriously offended 
all the fathers by speaking of the King's undoubted 
right of control over his subjects' property, and by 
protesting against the curtailment of the royal preroga- 
tives.- De Ferrier reported to Paris that the imperial 
ambassadors, and also those of the King of Spain and 
of Venice, had expressed their complete satisfaction with 
his speech. He once more asserted emphatically that 
the French kings, n cases of ' urgent necessity,' pos- 
sessed full power over all their subjects and their sub- 
jects' goods and chattels, and also over the clergy and 
Church property.^ Charles IX. was in full agreement 
with his ambassadors. ' The Most Christian kings ' 
could not ' allow their hands to be tied ' in the con- 
stantly occurring cases of ' urgent need ' when it was a 
question of paying royal debts out of Church revenues, 

1 Die Beden, in Le Plac, vi. 233-237, 241-245. 

2 Sickel, p. 606. ^ Le Plat, vi. 249-250. 


or of making provision for royal bastards, favourites, or 

The Government of Lower Austria, consulted by 
Ferdinand with regard to several of the decrees formu- 
lated at Trent, and concerning the articles of reform for 
the princes, advised the Emperor most strongly to con- 
sent to none of the decisions of the Council. The ecclesi- 
astical synods, such as were under consideration, ought 
only to be held under the direction of secular commis- 
sioners, so that the business might be conducted in an 
orderly manner, and nothing decreed that was preju- 
dicial to the country and the people. Church visita- 
tions ought not to be held ' so long as there was every- 
where schism in religion, and nobody knew on what 
basis the visitations should be conducted. The article 
which laid down that '" in penal matters which concern 
punishment in person or in goods, the bishops are not 
to be sentenced by any one except the Pope," was a 
decided grievance, and the Emperor must not allow 

^ The Venetian ambassador, Giovanni Correro, who was at the 
French Court from 1566 to 1569, says of Charles IX. : ' Pare bella cosa a 
quella maesta, col distribuire cento sei vescovadi, quattordici arcivescovadi, 
sei in sette cento abbazie, ed altrettanti priorati, potere, senza metter 
mano alia borsa, pagar debiti, far mercedi, maritar dame, e gratificar 
signori : e I'abuso e camminato tanto innanzi, che si fa cosi bene mer- 
canzia di vescovati e d' abbazie a quella corte, come si fa qui di pevere 
e di cannella' (Alberi, ser. 1, Vol. iv. 192). A bastard of Charles IX., 
Charles de Valois, was made abbot in commendam of Chaise-Dieu, and 
enjoyed the revenues of the monastery even after his marriage. Bussy 
d'Amboise, the most good-for-nothing man of his day, was granted the 
abbey of Bourgueil, as the favourite of Henry III. Henry IV. bestowed 
the revenues of the abbey of Chatillon, where St. Bernard had been 
educated, on a woman of bad character. He bestowed an abbey on 
the Protestant Rosny, in return for his paying 50,000 thalers (crowns) to 
the King's mistress. Mile. d'Entraigues. See Montalembert, MoncJie des 
Abendlandes, translated by C. Brandes (Ratisbon, 1860), Vol. i. 161. 
' Favours ' of this sort were considered ' indisputable rights of royal 


himself to be tied down in this way.' The article to 
the effect that ' at least half of the canonries attached 
to the higher benefices must be held by doctors or 
" licentiates " of theology, or of canon law/ would be 
opposed at the provincial diets by the nobles, for whom 
' the higher benefices were intended.' Equally hard on 
the nobles was the clause stipulating that the canonries 
should be open to strangers and men not belonging to 
the nobility. The holders of benefices would never con- 
sent to the ' needy churches being assisted by incor- 
poration with benefices.' This measure could not be 
passed without their consent. The further stipulation 
' that poor parishes or benefices, which could not main- 
tain priests on account of the meagreness of their in- 
comes, should receive a tenth part of the general 
revenues,' must also be cancelled ; for the tithes ought 
not to be taken away from the laity. Another article 
also contained a stipulation which was very prejudicial 
to the Emperor, and to all overlords and subjects — 
viz. that within the space of twelve months the rights 
of patronage claimed by laymen over benefices must be 
proved before the respective ordinaries ; for in case of 
the charters of such rights having been lost ' each lay- 
man would help himself to his dues and would be by no 
means ready to renounce them.' Nobody could be 
deprived of his having and holding without legal pro- 
cess. But such process would be impossible in that 
' strange court of justice ' before which the case would 
be brought. It was no less impolitic to entrust the 
bishops with the visitation and management of hospitals 
and almshouses. Above all, the Emperor must not con- 
sent to the stipulation that the Council should forbid 
secular rulers ' to appoint prelates or other dignitaries. 


or to enjoy the usufructs and incomes of vacant churclies 
and benefices.' For ' all Church property was Crown 
property, and all the cloisters had been founded and 
endowed by the predecessors of the Emperor and others.' 
The clause forbidding ' the servants of laymen, or lands- 
Jcnechts (soldiers), or horses, or dogs to be housed in 
monasteries ' was superfluous, for ' there were some 
monasteries which could well endure this so-called 
burden ; the Emperor must therefore not let his hands 
be tied in this respect.' ^ The decree that the clergy 
must not be cited before or sentenced by lay tribunals 
was contrary to tradition and inherited rights. Further, 
the Council had not sufficient grounds for decreeing that 
henceforth ' the clergy were not to be molested on 
account of their decisions with regard to excommunica- 
i}ion, and other matters,' for interference on the part of 
the secular power only happened when the ecclesiastical 
authorities did not act ' in accordance with the canons ' 
and abused their rights. It would fall heavily on the 
Emperor, and on the authorities under him, * if their 
hands were so tied as to prevent his examining into 
such cases or taking any action.' The article concerning 
the ' Exequatur and Placet ' was also superfluous. The 
Austrian Government was determined not to allow the 
Church any freedom. At the end of the memorandum 
it was again emphatically urged that ' the Emperor 
must by no means agree to anything proposed by the 
Council without the consent of the Austrian Estates 
and of all the German imperial Estates, including the 
Protestants, otherwise insurrection might easily occur, 

^ The article in question runs as follows : ' Caveant, ne sues officiales, 
familiares, milites eorumve equos, canes in episcoporum clericorunive 
ac beneficiorum quorumcumque domibus, aut religiosorum monasteriis 
distribuant, sive pro eorum transitu aut victu quidquam ab eis exigant.' 


with tlie result of breeding still greater bitterness against 
the clergy.' ^ 

Ferdinand sent this memorandum to his ambassadors 
at Trent, in order that they might make ' the great 
difficulty of the matter clearer to the papal legates.' If 
the Austrian Government raised such objections, he 
said, how much greater obstacles would he not meet 
with in Bohemia, Hungary, and in the German Em- 
pire ! ^ A canon of Mayence, who was travelling 
through Trent to Rome, had assured the imperial 
ambassadors that the article which admitted laymen to 
the cathedral chapters was in itself enough to produce 
great confusion in Germany.^ 

If further deliberations had been held respecting 
single clauses of the reform measures, many modifica- 
tions and additions might have been made as conces- 
sions to the altered circumstances and conditions of a 
different age. But the potentates would none of them 
tolerate any discussion on the boundary line between 
temporal and spiritual power, or any readjustment of 
the relations between Church and State. 

When the imperial ambassadors, in accordance with 
Ferdinand's instructions, urged that the articles should 
either be allowed to drop, or the settlement be post- 
poned to another occasion, the Cardinal-Legate Morone 
said he wondered that the Emperor, who had always 
pressed so strongly for general reform, should now want 
to exclude the princes from its operation. After the 
Pope had gone to the length of giving up his preroga- 
tive, as it were, and investing the Council with authority 

^ The Gutachten of October 13, 1563, in Bucholtz, Urkundenhand,, 
pp. 706-716. 

^ Bucholtz, viii. 618. ' Ibid. p. 606. 


to decide everything without previous appeal to Rome, 
the Emperor actually wanted to decree that this or the 
other article must not be discussed.^ The draft of re- 
form decrees, Morone wrote to Ferdinand, had been 
' sent first to all the ambassadors, in order that it might 
be amended according to their suggestions before going 
up to the fathers. A few articles, against which they 
raised objections, have either been altered by us or 
entirely given up. We have urgently entreated each 
separate ambassador to give us his opinion on the 
matter. If, now, there still remains anj^hing that one 
or other of them objects to, it is not our fault, but the 
fault of those who kept silence. To let the whole busi- 
ness fall through, however, or else postpone it, would be 
impossible without causing the greatest scandal and 
throwing everything into confusion.' Nearly all the 
bishops were convinced that a reform of the whole body 
ecclesiastical could only be effected after removal of the 
hindrances from secular powers by which the bishops 
were completely crippled in their government of the 
Church. ' If these obstacles were not removed, the 
reform measures would not only be defective, but would 
have no result whatever. All the trouble that your 
Majesty and we ourselves have taken will have been 
altogether thrown away.' ' The whole tenor of the 
scheme of reform corresponds not only to the canon law, 
but also to the laws framed by former pious emperors. 
It does not by any means include all the modes of 
oppression of the clergy, or of impugnment of ecclesias- 
tical freedom ; on the contrary, in deference to the con- 
ditions of the age, everything that could possibly dis- 
turb the tranquillity of Germany, or be likely to hinder 

1 Bucholtz, viii. 610. 


resistance against the hereditary enemy of Christendom, 
has been left out. Whereas the opponents of our true 
religion are bent on nothing so resolutely as on the 
ejection and annihilation of the bishops and the rest of 
the clergy, it is only fitting that the Council and the 
Catholic princes should support the ecclesiastical body 
in its services and protect its dignity, more especially 
as the decrees already issued, and those which are to 
follow, give us ground to hope that we may succeed in 
obtaining able, blameless, pious, and honourable men as 
bishops : bishops who possess no authority cannot be 
expected to lead the people back from vice to virtue, 
from erroneous teaching to true religion.' ^ 

No amount of representations to the secular powers 
was of any avail. 

The prospect of the transactions at the Council 
coming to nothing filled multitudes of Catholics with 
' the deepest anxiety.' ' Cardinal Carpi, Dean of the 
Sacred College, a really distinguished man,' the Venetian 
ambassador, Girolamo Soranzo, reported in 1563, ' told 
me that during his last illness he had prayed for death, 
so that he might not live to see the death and burial of 
Rome. Other cardinals of high standing are ceaselessly 
weeping and bewailing the misery of these times. They 
see no means of healing but through the direct inter- 
position of the Almighty.' " 

But, wrote the Cardinal-Bishop Otto of Augsburg, 
' it is just when to human eyes everything seems darkest, 

^ August 28, 1563, in Sickel, pp. 588-590. 

^ Account of June 1563, in Albieri, ser, 2, Vol. iv. 82. See in the 
report of Galeazzo Cusano, May 1, 1563, the passage: '. . . die si pud 
comprar liormai la cera per far 1' essequio al cadavero della chiesa. . . . ' 
Sickel, p. 496. 


that we must trust most in the help of God. Christ 
the Lord still walks with Peter over the stormy waters.' ^ 
While these transactions were going on at Trent, 
the decisions at Naumburg had only increased the 
religious anarchy among the Protestants. 

^ See above, p. 255, note 1. 




The Flacians stood out as the ' most furious antagonists * 
of the Naumburg Resolutions. It had indeed been urged 
on them, so the theologians of Jena said at the assembly 
of princes, that ' it would be better for them to unite 
their forces against the papacy than to bite and devour 
each other,' but the corrupters of doctrine, in their own 
party, constituted in very truth this papacy, which they 
must first root out from among themselves, for the 
Holy Scriptures commanded the extirpation of all 
heresy ; heretics within the fold were more dangerous 
than those without.^ At a convention held at Liine- 
burg by the ecclesiastical and political delegates of the 
Nether Saxon Estates, Morlin drew up the so-called 
' Liineburg Articles ' in opposition to the Naumburg 
Resolutions, and he wrote to a friend : ' Now, then, 
Wittenberg will roar, Heidelberg will rage, and Tiibingen 
will look sour ; but the entrails of Codrus may burst 
for all I care, so long as the purity of Christ's teaching 
is maintained.' - 

The Naumburg ' Samaritan Interim ' — that'' strange 
piece of devil's work ' — was fiercely attacked in sermons 
and controversial pamphlets. Duke Christopher of 

1 Salig, iii. 674-675. 

- Monckeberg, pp. 177-178 ; Hachfeld, p. 20. 



Wiirtemberg wrote that just as the divines of the duchy 
of Saxony ' had formerly called him by name a godless 
man, so now, by the same, he and his Naumburg asso- 
ciates were again " cried down and insulted," as though 
he were Belial himself, with whom no one ought to have 
any dealings, or as if, by subscribing to the Resolutions, 
he had joined himself to the company of Belial.' ^ 

' The princes must not imagine,' the Flacians at the 
university of Jena declared to Duke John Frederic, 
' although they have arrogated to themselves the goods 
of the Church and the right of appointing its officers, 
that they will be able to order the theologians and 
preachers like their own vassals, because they pay them 
their salaries out of the State Treasury. Secular rulers 
may command their secular subjects, but the servants 
of Christ stand under no orders but those of Christ.' 
The consistory established by the Duke was the secular 
papacy foretold by Luther. Appealing to the example 
of Luther, who they said, had written ten times more 
virulently than they had against kings, the Flacians 
told the Duke that he was taking the reins out of Christ's 
hands, and that he could only escape excommunication 
by humbling himself as Theodosius had done.- In 
answer to all this the Chancellor Briick presented him. 
self at Jena on October 10, 1561, summoned the Flacian 
offenders to appear before him, and treated them to a 
violent tirade, calling them ' black, red, and yellow 
good-for-nothing scoundrels, rascals, and popish vil- 
lains.' • 

' Miserable wretches and seditionmongers,' he ex- 

^ Letter of November 21, 1561, to Duke John Frederic, in Pressel, 
Anecdota, pp. 493-498. 

■^ Salig, iii. 852; Wilkens,p. 113. 


claimed, ' may some one haul you over the faggots, 
maim you, and blind you ! ' Utterly unperturbed by 
these maledictions, Simon said in a sermon on Octo- 
ber 13 : ' You great and exalted asses, who have hitherto 
protected and defended us, have the goodness now to 
leave us to ourselves, for you are all of you of the devil 
himself.' ^ Towards the end of the year 1561, Musaus, 
Matthew Judex, and John Wigand received their dis- 
missal. Flacius felt that his life was not secure. The 
students set to work to storm his dwelling-place, and 
it was with difficulty that he saved himself by flight.^ 

His disappearance, however, did not lead to the 
restoration of tranquillity. 

The Flacian preachers attacked the Duke on account 
of his toleration of the avowed heresy of Strigel and 
Hugel, and they drew attention in the pulpit to ' all 
sorts of erroneous doctrines which they wished to see 

' Flacius and his colleagues,' wrote, later on, the 
professors at Jena, ' preached of nothing else than 
Synergists, Adiaphorists, Schwenckfeldians, Majorites, 
Antinomians, Philipists, Calvinists, and other such pecu- 
liar sects whose doctrines they anathematised. Mean- 
while the common people, hearing nothing but this extra- 
ordinary new kind of sermonising, forgot all about their 
catechism ; and, moreover, caring nothing and under- 
standing less about these strange sects, they gradually 

' Despatch of Theophilus Dasypodiiis, November 9, 1561, in Eitter, 
Flacius llhjricus, pp. 130-133. 

* An edict against Flacius was issued at Nuremberg on May 5, 1564, 
to the effect that if lie slipped into the town again, ' he was to be arrested 
and secretly shut up for a time, so that people might not know what had 
become of him. . . . ' The uiaoistrate described him and his ' rabble ' as 
criminals, scoundrels, and so forth (Strobel, Beitrdge, i. 406-412). 

T 2 


left off coming to church, so that God's houses have 
come to be empty and deserted, His Word is set at 
nought and despised, sermons looked on as nothing 
more than fictitious tales or news of the day, and dis- 
cussed as such, with laughter and ridicule, over the 
beer pot and the wine bottle ; and the result of all this, 
has been so much scandal, discontent, and sedition that 
the magistrates have enough to do to keep the peace.' 

All the learned branches of study, which had already 
fallen into considerable disrepute, were brought into 
utter contempt by the Flacians. Musaus, in a public 
and solemn disputation, had called the university of 
Wittenberg a stinking cesspool of the devil. A super- 
intendent had exclaimed from the pulpit : ' Dear 
mother, if you were to stab through the heart the child 
you have carried in your bosom, you would not be 
guilty of so great a crime as if you were to send him to 
Wittenberg or to any other university.' Another man 
had preached that it was better to send one's children 
to a house of ill-fame than to a university.^ 

In the Saxon electorate matters were just as bad a& 
in the Duchy. Quarrelling, discontent, frightful cor- 
ruption, and depravity prevailed everywhere among the 

' Our evangelical Church,' wrote the Wittenberg pro- 
fessor, Paul Eber, in 1560, ' is so marred and disfigured 
throughout with terrible rents and blemishes, that its 
appearance altogether belies its vaunted character. If 
you look at the evangelical teachers you will see that 
some of them, either from ambition, or jealousy, or 
presumption, crush out and destroy the true doctrine 
and propagate and protect false teaching ; others twist 

' Heppe, Gesch. des Protestantismus, i. 75 ; Arnold, i. 950. 


and bend religion to suit their own tastes or the re- 
quirements of their overlords or of the people ; while 
yet others, who have really preached the truth, counter- 
act all their teaching by the frivolity and profligacy of 
their lives. If you turn to the evangelical congrega- 
tions, you will see lamentable abuse of religion and of 
Christian liberty ; you will see contempt and want of 
veneration for Church worship, disgraceful contention, 
shameless squandering of Church goods, ingratitude 
towards the faithful ministers of the Word, decay of all 
morality, unbounded insubordination among the young, 
and a most abundant daily growth of every imaginable 
vice.' A few years later he said, in a public speech : 
' Nothing causes so much anxiety to virtue-loving men 
as the general wantonness of conduct and contempt for 
all discipline, the insolent, blustering rowdyism, and the 
dishonest, pilfering ways which are so common nowadays 
even with young lads.' ^ Insubordination among the 
Wittenberg students had reached such a pitch that a 
general collapse and a reversion to utter barbarism were 
apprehended in the year 1562." 

' Of reverence for the aged,' wrote Paul Eber's col- 
league. Professor George Major, ' there is no trace left 
among the young ; they treat them with the uttermost 
contempt. The world is at its last gasp ; the day of 
judgment cannot be far ofi ; all the energies of the 
Church and of society are dormant. In consequence of 
the interminable dissensions between theologians and 
preachers, the populace no longer knows on which side 

1 DoUinger, ii. 160-162. 

- Arnold, i. 715-716. Respecting the decline of morality at Witten- 
berg and other universities, see J. Janssen, Aus clem TJniversitdtslehen 
des seclizelmten Jalirhunderts, Frankfurt a. M. und Luzern, 1886, und 
Janssen-Pastor, Gesch. des deutschen Volhes, Bd. 7 (1—12 Aufl.), 185 ff. 


the real truth lies. The papists cast in our teeth the 
iniquity of separation from the Church. I know well 
how great this sin is, and that we cannot sufficiently 
grieve over it. But I know also that simple souls are 
so sorely perplexed and bewildered that they are in 
doubt as to where truth is to be found, and whether 
there is still a Church of God in existence which can be 
distinguished from the unbelieving multitudes around 
them.' ^ Another Wittenberg professor, Matthew Bloc- 
hinger, writes the following wail : ' Nowadays we 
hear voices in all directions praising up the enemy ' — 
i.e. the Catholics — ' and justifying these eulogies on 
the ground that, owing to the want of unity among our 
preachers, it is impossible to know what it is right ta 
believe. This tendency is augmented by the cries of 
agitators bent on stirring up insurrection. The papists,, 
at any rate, it is said, agree among themselves, and so 
do even the Turks. We Protestant Christians, on the 
contrary, are at ceaseless war together, fighting one 
another with frenzied, implacable hatred, while every 
breath of new opinion scatters us about like a whirl- 
wind.' ^' 

At Bremen the cathedral preacher, Albert Harden- 
berg, had lain for years under suspicion of Calvinism 
because he had refused to sign the Confession of Augs- 
burg and the Apology. He had declared that he could 
only pledge himself to belief in the Bible, and that the 
Augsburg Confession, to meet the exigencies of the 
time, had been framed in such a manner as to gain over 
the Emperor and the Pope, or, at any rate, to embitter 
them as little as possible. The article on the Holy 
Communion in this Confession contained, he said,. 

' Eber, p. 51-\ ^ DoUinger, ii. 171-172. 


popish doctrine, and in the Apology even worse con- 
cessions had been made to the Catholics. In the edition 
handed him for signature, it was true the text of the 
articles was not the same as the first edition ; they 
had been altered and abridged ; but he doubted whether 
anybody had the right to alter and shorten a document 
that had been drawn up for and handed in to the 
Emperor and the Empire. Hardenberg and those like- 
minded were of opinion that the ' abomination of 
popish idolatry ' would never be rooted out so long as 
the Lutheran doctrine of the presence of the Body and 
Blood of Christ in the Sacrament was taught and 
believed.^ ' Fierce party divisions ' arose in the town 
on this point. ' So fierce was the tumult of controversy 
that the closest bonds of friendship and relationship 
went for nothing among the partisans of different 
opinions.' 'In barbers' shops, in clubs and taverns, 
nothing was talked of but the new doctrine of the Com- 
munion. Such blasphemous utterances were heard as 
" People have been eating the Body of Christ for so 
long ; can there be any of it left ? " Is the bread-God 
of the pastors eaten with boots and breeches ? ' - Harden- 
berg' s opponents actually accused him of having said 
that ' Christ was so overcome with the terror of death, 
at the time when He instituted the Holy Communion, 
that He did not know what He was saying.' ^ Tilmann 
Hesshus, who had been banished from Heidelberg, was 
appointed superintendent by the strong Lutheran 

^ Warhaffte Widerlegung, p. 7. 

'^ See Wilkens, pp. 75-81. Concerning the Hardenberg disturbances at 
Bremen in 1547-1556, see Brem- und Verdische Bibl. iii. 683-812. See 
also Heidenhain, TJnionspolitih Philipp's von Hessen, pp. 162 f., and the 
publication of Rottlander referred to at p. 181, note 1. 

^ Backmeister, Christliche Anleitung, p. 118. 


party in the Council, and lie made it his special business 
' to get rid of the satanic villain, Hardenberg, and his 
gang of associates.' He said, in 1561, 'it was a wonder 
that the magistrate could sit still when the cathedral 
" pfaffen " at Bremen had established a murderer's pit 
in which they daily strangled some of the burghers, or 
committed assaults on burghers' wives and daughters. 
The cathedral of Bremen likewise has become a spiritual 
den of murderers, in which spiritual whoredom is com- 
mitted, and where thousands of souls are murdered, and 
the most dangerous venom of false doctrine thrown 
among our citizens. The Bremen magistrate is bound 
before God to drive out these accursed villains from the 
cathedral' ^ In every sermon he preached, Hesshus 
poured out volleys of most virulent abuse against 
Hardenberg, and relegated all his associates to the 
devil, to whom, he said, their leader belonged. Harden- 
berg complained that he was no longer safe in his own 
house, and he used to take refuge with kind friends, 
because every night he expected violent attacks on his 
person ; so fierce was Hesshus' s persecution of him and 
his endeavours, in conjunction with other preachers, 
to incense the Council against him.- Christian III. of 
Denmark, called by the strict Lutherans 'the most 
holy king,' would have preferred the cathedral of 
Bremen being turned into a heap of stones rather than 
that false doctrine concerning the Sacrament should be 
preached in it : he insisted that the town council must 
turn out the heretic like Baal Peor.^ 

The Estates of the Nether Saxon circle decided, by 

^ Heppe, Gesch. des Protestantismus, i. 471-472, 

2 Corp. Reform, ix. 1080, note 2. See Dollinger, ii. 462. 

3 Wilkens, p. 77. 


■an overwhelming majority, that Hardenberg must be 
banished, or otherwise there would be ' the same sort of 
business at Bremen as there had been at Miinster at the 
time of the Anabaptists.' ^ 

Hardenberg was expelled in the year 1561, and 
he took refuge at Emden. Hesshus also left Bremen ; 
but the disturbances in the town gathered strength after 
his departure, as his successor in the office of super- 
intendent, Simon Musaus, who had been banished from 
Jena, ' carried on still more devilish proceedings against 
his adversaries.' This preacher declared, in a course of 
four sermons on the Sacrament, that ' he would not lay 
his head on a pillow until the poor town of Bremen, 
which the godless crew of Sacramentarians had turned 
into a new Sodom and Gomorrha, had been re-cleansed 
and purified, even were it with fire and salt. It was the 
duty of the town council,' he said, ' to use its sword 
against them.' ^ 

In a new code of Church ordinances which he drew 
up, Musaus claimed for himself and the whole company 
of preachers the right of pronouncing the ban over all 
heretics and wicked persons among the inhabitants. 
When the Council, at the suggestion of the burgomaster, 
Daniel von Blirgen, represented to the preachers that 
even Luther had not used such stern discipline, although 
there was plenty of crime and misdemeanour at Witten- 
berg, the answer given was that Musaus could declare 
from his own personal knowledge that Luther, from the 
pulpit, had excommunicated and delivered over to the 
devil, by name, the governor of the town and a barber, 
for the sin of profligacy, the poet Lemnius for writing 

^ * Die Verhandlungen bei Loscher,' Hist, motuuvi, ii. 245 f. 
^ Walte, Mittheilungen, i. 60. 


scurrilous verses, and even Duke George of Saxony and 
the Archbishop of Mayence. If danger, alarm, and 
tumult resulted from pronouncing the ban, or if quarrels 
arose between friends and relations in consequence, no 
attention must be paid to such trifles, if only souls could 
be rescued from the jaws of the devil. 

The town council, the majority of whose members 
were on the side of the preachers, now enforced anew, 
against the followers of Hardenberg, an edict which had 
been issued formerly against the Anabaptists. There- 
upon Daniel von Biiren, one of the number, collected 
all his fellow-believers in the cathedral on January 19, 
1562, and a tumult ensued. ' Mylord Omnes, armed 
with hatchets and muskets,' threatened the town coun- 
cillors, who had been called together, ' that if they did 
not agree to Biiren' s proposals they should be hewn in 
pieces and thrown out of the window.' The terrified 
councillors yielded to Biiren" s demand that Musaus, 
and one of his most zealous assistants, should be ex- 
pelled from the town, and that the other preachers 
should be bound over not to preach any more against 
Hardenberg's doctrines. In future, they stipulated, 
religious questions should not be settled without the 
assent of the whole community. The banished preachers 
were ' followed into voluntary exile by twelve others ; ' 
numbers of the laity also, among whom were many of 
the town councillors, left the town and sought help 
among the Nether Saxon Estates against ' the heretical 
city of their birth.' 

Hamburg and Liibeck broke off all mercantile rela- 
tions with their confederate city ; Dantzic laid an 
embargo on all Bremen ships, goods, and orders ; 
several Nether Saxon and Westphalian lords, notably 


the Counts of Oldenburg, Hoya, and East Friesland, 
forbade the burghers of Bremen to set foot on their 
territory. Bremen, it was said, had now become a new 
Miinster. Daniel von Biiren was another John of 
Leyden. The battle over the Sacrament came nigh to 
being fought with worldly weapons. It was not till 
1568 that a reconciliation was effected, and even then 
' the acrimony and all the scurrilous wrangling did not 
die out, and trade and industry suffered indescribably.' 
Calvinism gained the upper hand in Bremen.^ 

Tilmann Hesshus had moved from Bremen to 
Magdeburg, where he became superintendent and con- 
ceived the idea of ' converting the town, which, since the 
time of the idolatrous interim, had been widely famed 
as the veritable chancellery of the Almighty, into the 
new Jerusalem of Germany, and determined utterly to 
extirpate all heretics who dared befoul the true Lutheran 
doctrine, together with the last remnants of the accursed 

In his campaign against the Catholics he met with 
powerful support. 

In the Magdeburg Church ordinances it had been de- 
clared that * the stiff-necked papists were not Christians, 
but sheer idolaters, and that they must not be buried 
in the churchyard where the Christians slept, so that 
there might be no mingling of the bones of Christians 
with those of open apostates and inveterate enemies of 
Christ.' This refusal of Christian burial applied especi- 
ally to ' Baalitish priests, monks, and nuns,' and to the 

^ See Loscher, ii. 258 £f. Haberlin, vi. 351 ff. ; the catalogue of the 
different party pubHcations, p. 390, note. Walte, pp. 62 f. See Eottlander, 
Daniel von Biiren und die Sardenhergischen Beligionshdndel in 
Bremen, 1555-1562; Gottmgen, 1893. 


whole ' gang of ecclesiastics.' Parents and guardians 
also, who did not prevent their belongings from receiving 
consecration, or accepting prelacies and benefices from 
the Eoman Antichrist, must be excluded from the 
Sacrament, the privilege of sponsorship, and the rites 
of interment ; for it had been said : ' Be ye not yoked 
together with unbelievers ; God wills not that we should 
worship the devil.' ^ 

In the year 1557, however, a compact had been 
signed between the town and the Catholic clergy at 
Wolmirstedt, according to which the chapter and the 
clergy of the collegiate church were for ever to retain 
possession of their goods and treasures, and ' to be 
allowed to continue, unhindered, in the exercise of their 
ancient Catholic religion, church worship, rites and 
usages.' This agreement had been brought about 
mainly by the efforts of Pfeil, the former syndicus of 
Hamburg, who, although a zealous Protestant, wished 
the Catholics to enjoy a certain amount of tolerance, 
and thought the town's only chance of salvation lay in 
the friendly existence of the different creeds side by 
side. But Hesshus hotly opposed it, and called Pfeil 
an accomplished hypocrite, who had done more harm to 
Magdeburg than a hundred sieges : ' this idolatrous, 
papistical religion of the canons had no right to be 
called " the ancient religion." ' When Pfeil appealed to 
imperial decrees in his own defence, Hesshus answered : 
' If emperors, kings, electors, and notables honour this 
religion with such a designation, in so doing they deny 
God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.' ^ 

Hesshus met with loyal help against ' the Baalitish, 

^ Richter, Evangel, Kirchenordmmgen, ii. 148-149. 
- Wilkens, pp. 102-103. 


popish idolatry and its practices ' from the professors 
Matthew Judex and John Wigand, whom he had 
befriended as the ' exiles of Christ ' in order to gain 
their co-operation in ' kindling the godly fire ' among 
the burghers. Both these men in the last few years had 
issued publications in which they ' had sounded a 
mighty trumpet against the Antichrist,' and in their 
sermons they had consigned to the devil, by divine 
authority, all persons who associated with papists, 
even in mundane matters, such as eating, drinking, 
buying and selling, or greeting in the highways.^ 

But ' the fire of godly wrath ' was not to fall on the 
papists only, but also on those princes who had ' framed 
highly pernicious articles ' at Naumburg. 

The convention held at Liineburg in opposition to 
the Naumburg Resolutions had set up a new obligatory 
confession of faith and fresh anathemas, and Hesshus 
laid the decrees before his clergy for their signatures. 
Schoolmasters also were expected to sign them. Many 
refused to sign and were taken under the protection of 
the town council, whereupon Hesshus announced that 
he would deal out punishment in spite of PericuHsts, 
Neutralists, and weathercocks, even if the godless 
jurists should burst of wickedness. ' Let who will rage 
and bluster. Doctor Hesshusius cares no whit ; if I have 
to do with unmerciful jurists, I still have a merciful 
God.' The bitterness of feeling increased because the 

^ Wie wir Christen dem antichristlichen Baal undromisclien Ahgott 
christlich widerstehen sollen (1562), pp. 5, 6. Wigand's pamphlet bears 
the title : ' Synopsis Antichristi Boniani, spiritii oris Christi revelati,' 
Jena, 1560. That of Judex is called ' Gravissimum et severissimum 
Edictum et Mandatum aeterni et omnipotentis Dei, quoiBodo quisque 
Christianus . . . sese adversus Papatum nimirum Antichristuni . . . gerere 
et exhibere debeat' [1561J. Schliisselburg, xiii. 256 ff., 313. We shall 
come back again to this last pamphlet. 


Council would not allow that ' the exiles of Christ,' 
Wigand and Judex, ' were saints who ought to be 
welcomed as gifts of God,' and also because it forbade 
Wigand' s being appointed pastor of the parish of 
Ulrich. A follower of Hesshus adjured the elders of 
the Church, in a public letter, not to let themselves be 
deterred by any devil's arrows {Teufels-pfeile, a pun on 
Pfeil's name) ; the councillors, he said, were blasphemers 
of the Holy Trinity, and ravishers of all the heavenly 
treasures. Hesshus allowed that this letter was cer- 
tainly strong and pitiless, like a thick rod cut from hard, 
gnarled branches, and shaped with a sledge-hammer on 
hard rock ; but Isaiah, Hosea, and Moses had been ten 
times harder and more relentless in their denunciations ; 
the thicker the rod, the better for the child. From the 
pulpit he exclaimed that for the last forty years so 
great a crime had not been committed in Magdeburg 
as that of the town council's in ordering the arrest of the 
secret canvassers for Wigand.^ The preachers abused 
and damned each other ; a dangerous fermentation 
spread among the people. At a cantonal diet at 
Liineburg of the Estates of the circle, the Nether Saxon 
notables declared that ' disturbance and insurrection 
among the populace, the decay of religion and of schools, 
the collapse of all police rule and discipline, must in- 
evitably ensue if some means were not found of putting 
a stop to the party hatred which the theological dissen- 
sions brought into every department of life. On pain of 
banishment and corporal punishment they inhibited all 
slander and invective from pulpits and chairs ; and as 
no one was safe from scurrilous libels and indecent 
caricatures, they decreed that nothing should be pub- 

' Wilken?, pp. 1O5-106, 114-116. 


lished without permission from the municipal autho- 

The Council of Magdeburg sent Hesshus this man- 
date of the Estates of the circle, and with it a copy of 
the order issued at Halle by the Protestant Archbishop 
Sigmund, that the mandate was to be strictly obeyed. 
This, however, was far from the intention of Hesshus. 
The mandate, he said, had been drawn up ' without 
consulting the mouthpiece of the Lord : the princes 
were drunk when they went to the Council board, and 
the jurists were full of wine when they had vomited out 
this mandate, which they expected people to conform to.' 
He did not scruple to declare from the pulpit that the 
mandate had been composed by godless jurists and 
written out by drunken ones ; the order emanating from 
Halle was, he said, ' a hellish, devilish, impious, and 
blasphemous piece of work.' He and his associates went 
about warning believers against the preachers who were 
on the side of the town council as against murderers of 
souls, perjurors, traitors, tyrants, and enemies of Christ. 
These preachers in return were not chary of ' their 
maledictions on Hesshus and his followers.' 

While the Council was holding debate concerning 
the suspension of the pastors, the Hesshusians had a 
vision : they ' saw in the sky four bright luminous 
pillars, which were awful to behold, and which stood 
still for several hours ; soon after, the heavens burst over 
the town with such terrific fire that those who saw it 
fell into swoons ; a shoemaker was thrown into fearful 
terror which lasted for seven hours, and he moaned out 
that five conflagrations betokened the wrath of God.' 
The mutual vituperations of the preachers caused such 
distressing doubt among the listeners that many of 


them became quite ill, and many were driven to mad- 

On October 1, 1562, the Council issued orders to 
Hesshus that he was not to preach any more ; and on 
the following Sunday his chaplain, Bartholomew Strele, 
mounted the pulpit and pronounced the sentence of 
major excommunication over two pastors, three chap- 
lains, and the whole Council. ' I cut them off,' he said, 
' as stinking, corrupt members, from the community of 
Christ ; I close the door of heaven against them, and 
throw wide open the gates of hell, and I consign them to 
the devil himself, to be plagued and tormented for ever 
and ever.' He told the populace that henceforth they 
must look upon the members of the Council, the ex- 
communicated clergy and all their adherents as ' heathen 
unchristian men.' One of these anathematised clerics. 
Otto Oemes, pastor of St. James's, who was present at 
this sermon, called out loud : ' You lie, you lie, you 
scoundrel and villain,' and then, if he had not been held 
back by some of the congregation, he would have made 
for the pulpit with a knife, collared the chaplain, and 
thrown him down from the pulpit. There was a great 
uproar in the church, and Strele was obliged to stop 
preaching. It was believed that Hesshus had insti- 
gated him to this proceeding. ' If God Almighty,' the 
Council wrote, ' had not turned the tide, the plan of the 
instigator would have been carried out, and the ban 
enforced with hatchets and broad axes ; for these instru- 
ments were all ready to hand.' On being ordered by the 
Council to leave the parish, Hesshus answered : ' I no 
longer recognise your authority ; you and your lying 
preachers are under sentence of excommunication, and 
you belong to the devil, where you stand and where 


you walk.' At last, during the night of October 21, 
the Council called out the burghers to arms ; the par- 
sonage was besieged, and Hesshus led out of the town 
by force. Ah the preachers of his party shared his 

Nevertheless, the riots and dissensions lasted on. 
* In numbers of houses matches were found, laid with 
incendiary intent, and, in some, fire broke out.' The 
preachers who were on the side of the Council ' would 
not allow those persons who defended Hesshus, or who 
expressed disapproval of the proceedings against him, 
to receive the Sacrament ; and these friends of Hesshus, 
on their part, would not confess to those pieachers or 
go to their churches, because in all their sermons they 
inveighed against the late superintendent, and they 
compelled penitents in the confessional to repudiate 
Hesshus ; for which reason many people did not go to 
church or to confession for a long time, and conse- 
quently were not safe in the town.' ^ Hesshus sent 
letters to his followers enjoining them to abstain from 
receiving the Sacrament from the ' false brethren,' and 
telling them that if they should require the services of 
the latter on their death-beds, they must first insist on 
their recording their belief that a wrong had been done 
to Hesshus and his associates ; if then the Sacrament 
was refused them, it would be better for them to die 

1 Wilkens, pp. 116-120. Letters in Dollinger, ii. 463-465 ; Arnold, i. 
744-748 ; Salig, iii. 918-939. To Flacius Hesshus wrote : ' Venit hora 
ruinse ecclesise Magdeburgensis ac profecto cum ingenti fragore, qui 
per universam Europam exaudietur, est collapsa ' (UnscJitcldige Nach- 
ricUen auf 1711, pp. 798-99). 

^ Leuckfeld, Hist. Hesshusiana, p. 35, appeals in confirmation of these 
statements to a number of original letters and autograph Beverses 
(written bonds), which some of the preachers put before their penitents 
at confession. 



without receiving it, because God, in case of necessity, 
could save true believers without the help of the Sacra- 
ment.^ Shoals of libellous and controversial pamphlets 
passed between the different parties and inflamed their 
tempers." Nicholas of Amsdorf, the former Protestant 
Bishop of Naumburg, wrote an ' Admonition ' on behalf 
of the Council, in which he called Hesshus a pig-headed 
creature and a ranter, and denounced the rest of the 
preachers as insurgents, and called Strele's sentence of 
excommunication ' a diabolical piece of wickedness.' 
Hesshus, in his answer, reproached Amsdorf with having 
been bribed by a sum of gold to write this letter. Ams- 
dorf, however, repudiated the charge, saying that he 
had never had the good fortune to receive a present 
from any one.^ 

In 1568 matters were still unsettled, for we find the 
nobleman Andreas von Meyendorf writing to the theo- 
logian Martin Chemnitz, whom the town council wanted 
to call in to appease the disturbances, that for the last 
six years in Magdeburg there had been nothing but 
blasphemous denunciation of the expelled preachers, 
and of all pure doctrine, and that numbers of pious, 
innocent Christians had been pilloried, laid in fetters, 
tortured, and expelled, and driven into utter misery. 
It was a case in which there could be no hope of media- 
tion or reconciliation, such as might be effected if one 
were dealing with less determined people, or with people 
who recognised their sinfulness, but 'here there is nothing 
but audacious persistence in sin, endless persecution, and 
.defamation of the injured parties.' ^ 

' Salig, iii. 941-944. 

"^ A catalogue of their publications is given in Leuckfeld, pp. 34-36. 

^ Salig, iii. 944-947. * Leuckfeld, pp. 37-43. 


The prediction of the Nether Saxon Estates at 
Llineburg in 1561, that ' the ruin of rehgion and of the 
schools, and the decay of all police control and discipline 
must inevitably result from the religious dissensions 
and anarchy,' were fully verified, not only with regard 
to Magdeburg, but to the whole diocese, during a 
general visitation of churches instituted in the years 
1562-1564 by the Protestant Archbishop Sigmund. 

Wherever they went, the visiting inspectors found 
the grossest depravity. Among many other laments 
over the crass ignorance of the preachers, we quote the 
following : ' Andreas Miiller, pastor of Biickaw, was 
ordained at Wittenberg, and came out very badly in 
the examination. He has had no grounding in Christian 
doctrine ; he has no understanding of its leading points, 
or at any rate very little.' ' The pastor of Brumby 
gave the following answer to the questions on the 
Trinity : " God the Holy Ghost was created by the 
Father ; God the Father, and the Mother of God, is the 
first Person in the Godhead; item, the Son is the middle 
Person, as Calbe is the middle town between Halle and 
Wolmirstedt.' ' ' Mauritius Dalchaw, pastor at Kul- 
husen was ordained at Berlin; he produced his testi- 
monials ; was nominated by the parish where he has 
ministered during eleven years ; he is a thoroughly 
unlearned man, who knows of no distinction between 
the Persons of the Trinity, in short a German gentleman, 
who does not know a word of Latin.' ' Bernard Geller, 
pastor of Gudensweg, was ordained at Brunswick ; made 
very poor answers to the questions put to him on 
Christian doctrine ; was first a glazier, and then a 
sacristan, before he became pastor.' ' Antonius 
Meyerin, pastor of Zeppernick, was ordained at 

F 2 


Magdeburg ; has never studied, knows no Latin, was 
formerly a fustian weaver.' ' Ciriacus Moller, pastor 
at Schwarz, was ordained at Wittenberg, as testified 
by a sealed certificate from the theologians at Witten- 
berg ; could answer very little on the articles he was 
examined in, especially about God ; was formerly 
servant at a tavern at Calbe, and married a woman of 
bad character there. His wife is a wicked, mischievous 
person, who causes all sorts of discord and mutiny in 
the place.' ' Ernest Kiitze, pastor of Ebendorf, was 
ordained at Stendal, is well educated, but has been under 
penal sentence for murder and other assaults, and also 
for drunkenness. It is necessary to keep strict watch 
over him.' ^ 

The inspectors found also that the nobility, the 
towns, and the villages exercised arbitrary power in all 
ecclesiastical matters. Magistrates, gentry, and con- 
gregations were in the habit of possessing themselves of 
the church goods, and refusing to pay the pastors and 
sacristans their salaries.^ The pastor of Aken com- 
plained of complete neglect of church attendance in his 
parish, of blasphemy and ridicule of the Eucharist, of 
whoredom with the devil, of sacrilegious cursing, and 
of immorality and laxity in the matter of marriage : it 
had become common for couples to engage themselves, 
to have their banns published in church, and then with- 
out further ceremony to refuse to contract the marriage. 
In the town of Schonebeck, ' where there were about 
200 householders, the parishioners,' so it is said, ' are 
for the most part a rude, uncivilised lot, who concern 
themselves very little about God.' In the town of 

' Danneil, TI. 1, 8, 52, 70 ; III. 3, 24, 34-36, 68. 
» Ibid. I., VI. 2, 38 ; 3, 17, 24. 


Jerichow, * during the last eighteen months, only two 
men had been to the Sacrament.' The inhabitants of 
Frohse were described by the magistrates as ' disrepu- 
table, good-for-nothing scoundrels,' over whom ' they 
had no control.' In Hohendodelene, ' a village of sixty- 
five householders, there are scarcely ten who know how 
to pray, and as for the Sacraments, the whole popula- 
tion knows little or nothing about them.' ' In the 
whole district of Sandau, contrary to all expectations, 
was found a large number of peasants who could not say 
any prayers ; most of them could not repeat the Ten 
Commandments, nor give any account of baptism and 
the Sacrament.' In the villages of Corbelitz and 
Wolterstorf ' there were not more than three people who 
could say the Lord's Prayer ; of the other parts of the 
Catechism they knew nothing ; they are a reckless set of 
people, who move one's pity.' In more than twenty 
other districts the inspectors found everything ' lawless 
and godless.' Respecting Aldenhausen, they report : 
' The peasants' condition with regard to prayer is such 
as to make one think that Christianity has come to an 
end at Aldenhausen.' ^ / 

Among the theologians and preachers in the Mark of 
Brandenburg there were strict Lutherans, Flacians, 
Melanchthonians, Majorites, Osianderites, partisans and 
opponents of the Frankfort Recess and the Naumburg 
Resolutions. Each party sought to gain the favour of 
the Elector Joachim II., and to crush its antagonists by 
secular force. In the Mark also, as elsewhere, the 
theological dissensions were paraded before the people 
from the pulpit, and the congregations of the different 

1 Danneil, I. 26, 28, 29, 35-36 ; II. 17, 21, 80, 47, 54, 77, 78, 83, 84, 94, 
■96, 109, 112, 113, 139 : III. 9, 10, 16, 22, 25, 27 u. s. w. 


sects incensed against the opposite parties. The Court 
preacher Agricola, who, since the time of the interim, 
had gone back again to strict Lutheranism, called his 
former friend Melanchthon ' a child of Satan,' and after 
the latter's death declared from the pulpit that ' If 
Philip did not recant before his death, and end his days 
with very different opinions from those which he had 
written and taught, he is now eternally damned, and 
his body and soul are for ever with the devil.' ^ 

The university of Frankfort on the Oder became a 
hotbed ' of profligacy and of theological dissensions.' 

The preacher and theological professor of this uni- 
versity, Andrew Musculus, combated with all his might 
the Lutheran doctrine of ' stoical necessity ' — that is to 
say, of the bondage of the will — and inveighed especially 
against the dogma of ' new obedience ' laid down in the 
Frankfort Recess in 1558. ' They are all of the devil,' 
he said, ' all those who preached that new obedience or 
good works were necessary to the Christian for salva- 
tion.' ' Those who teach that we must perform good 
works belong to the devil, and all who follow them 
follow the devil himself.' Musculus quarrelled most 
violently with his colleague at the university, Abdias 
Praetorius, a Melanchthonian who advocated the neces- 
sity of ' new obedience.' Musculus denounced him from 
the pulpit as a perverter of youth, and, on being ad- 
monished by a deputation from the academical senate to 
be more moderate, he declared that he would allow no 
one to restrict him in his faith, and that those who 
brought forward other views than his concerning good 
works should be driven out of the town. 

The Elector at first inclined more to the side of 

^ Kaweran, Agricola, pp. 318-321. See above, p. 57. 


Prsetorius, and ' made use of his cleverness at court, in 
Church and civic affairs.' In 1561 he issued a decree 
that Musculus was not to preach any more about good 
works, and that all writers of pasquinades and lam- 
poons, in town and country, were to be seized and 
severely punished. All the same, Musculus went on 
raging against his adversary, and also made fierce 
attacks on the town magistrate in his sermons. He 
denounced the members of the town council as lewd 
fellows, despisers of God, and Sacramentarians. 

In addition to the contention about good works, 
there was now also a schism on the question of the Holy 
Sacrament. Prsetorius, backed up by the Council, 
stuck firmly to the opinion that the presence of the 
Body of Christ was limited to the mere moment of par- 
taking. Musculus, on the other hand, would not agree 
to this limitation, and insisted on the adoration of the 
Body of the Redeemer present on the altar. He 
preached as follows : ' Whenever you hear people assert 
that we must not adore the Sacrament, you must say to 
them : " Begone from my presence, you abominable, 
good-for-nothing devil ! " Such people are no better than 
scoundrels, highway robbers, accursed revilers of Christ, 
fornicators, and drunkards.' The Council informed the 
Elector, in 1562, that there was great agitation in the 
parish and that the worst was to be feared. 

The university also reported that the quarrel had 
spread to the populace, and had made bad blood among 
them, so that uproar and sedition might be expected, 
and a collapse of the whole university might easily 
follow.^ By far the greater number of the students 
hung by Prsetorius, and treated Musculus ' like an 

' Spieker's Musculus, pp. 51 ff. 


avowed criminal.' In the night of February 5, 1562, 
a large number of them drew up outside his house and 
summoned him to come out to be judged by them. 
They went through the farce of condemning to death, 
with terrible imprecations, a straw figure of a man ; 
they cut its head off, bound the limbs on a wheel, and 
threw them to a pack of dogs. On another occasion 
the students pelted their hated professor with stones as 
he was going into college. Twice they stormed his 
house. Joachim Belo, brother-in-law of Musculus, who 
had appointed him preacher, came to public blows with 
a deacon. On the occasion of installing a deacon, 
Musculus was obliged to resort to the protection of an 
escort of bailiffs armed with loaded muskets.^ 

Meanwhile, Musculus had gained the full favour of 
the Elector. 

Joachim warned the Council not to oppose the 
elevation of the host and the chalice," which Musculus 
had ordered, and issued a warrant against Prsetorius,^ 
who already, not sure of his life by reason of the Mus- 
culites,^ had fled to Wittenberg at the beginning of 
1563. From this time forth the Elector looked upon 
him as a ' falsifier of the faith.' When he heard that 
George Buchholzer, Provost at Berlin, approved of 
Prsetorius's doctrine of the ' new obedience,' he made of 
him ' a public warning example,' although only a short 
time before he had taken him under his protection 
against Agricola, by whom he had been publicly ex- 
communicated on account of a quarrel over the doctrine 
of justification. On April 19, 1563, Joachim assembled 

1 Spieker, pp. 70, 86, 89, 98. ^ Ibid. pp. 75 f. 

" Dollinger, Beforniation, ii. 897, note 8. 

■* Prsetorius, Endlicher Bericht von seiner Lehre (1563), viii. 190, 383. 


all the officials and preachers of the capital in order to 
read his will and testament to them. ' I have often 
listened to your preaching,' he said to the clergymen, 
' and now I am going to preach to you for once.' He 
explained every point in his will, and finally declared 
that he held the doctrine of Musculus to be the only true 
one, and herewith gave it his public approbation. 
' He then raised a stick against Buchholzer as if intend- 
ing to strike him,' and reproached him in the sternest 
manner with having allowed himself to be misled by 
Prsetorius. If Luther, he said, were to rise from the 
grave he would strike him and all his followers dead 
with clubs. ' Herr Georg,' he said at the end of his 
speech, ' I intend to stand by the teaching of Musculus ; 
I commend my soul after death to our Lord God, but 
yours and your doctrine,' that of Prsetorius, ' I commend 
to the devil.' Buchholzer fell ill in consequence of 
this treatment, and died shortly after of a stroke of 

^ Geppert, Chronih von Berlin, i. 57 ; Miiller und Kiister, Altes und 
neues Berlin, i. 298 ; Spieker, Musculus, p. 96. Under a statement of the 
Provost's, Joachim wrote : ' Whosoever teaches this proposition : bona 
opera sunt necessaria, simply ntters blasphemy and denies doctrinam de 
Filio Dei, Paulum, Lutherum, et est incarnatus diabolus, Lucifer, 
Beelzebub, and. a perverter of the poor simple people, et mancipium 
diaboli, and must be with Judas in hell for evermore.' Miiller and 
Kiister, Altes und neues Berlin, i. 299 f. Spieker, Beschreibung der 
Marienkirche zu FranTcfurt an der Oder, p. 185. The manner in which 
controversy was carried on at that time is seen from a letter of Buch- 
holzer's to Prsetorius, of January 25, 1562: 'Yesterday, while I was 
sitting in Dr. Schlegel's house, there came in the devil's herald, Vitus 
Bach,' private lecturer at Frankfort on the Oder. ' On seeing him I said, 
-" There comes the councillor of Musculus, the Black King, who asserts 
quod Christus nioi-tuus est secundum utramque naturam, et quod bona 
opera non sunt necessaria" Then he said, " I am a disciple of the holy 
Musculus." I asked whether also '■' oratio esset necessaria." He sat 
silent a long time and then said, " No." Then I said, " But Christ says, 
' Orate, ne intretis in tentationem. Orate est imperativus et liabet in 


The academical senate of Frankfort sent an embassy 
to the Elector and to the provincial Estates assembled 
in Berlin, to inform them that, owing to the theological 
feuds, the university was on the point of ruin, ^hat 
the students were leaving it in swarms, that Musculus 
did nothing but slander and revile all the other profes- 
sors, and that the return of the universally beloved Prse- 
torius was urgently wished for. The provincial Estates 
answered that, although they were unlearned men, 
they were nevertheless convinced that Prsetorius was 
in the right, and they would therefore not concede 
anything to the Elector until he had recalled the 
banished man to Frankfort. 

The Elector, on the other hand, ' gave the ambas- 
sadors such an ungracious hearing that they were 
quite frightened.' ' Sooner than suffer Musculus and 
his doctrine to be put to shame,' he said, ' he would 
rather that the whole university went to the devil, 
or were set on fire and burnt to cinders : he had once 
for all given his public sanction to the teaching of 
Musculus, and he intended to stand by Musculus, 
even if they all, with the university, should go to 
the devil.' ^ 

se necessitatem faciendi.' " Then he said, " Christ spoke those words 
tanqtiam lef/islator ; they do not concern us." Then there was a great 
burst of laughter. Then I said, " You lie like a damned scoundrel with 
Meusel and Eisleben." Afterwards, whenever I raised any question de 
Christi viandato, he said they were verba legislatoris ; there was no 
need for us to attend to them. Then I asked him whether among the 
verba necessitatis were also beati pani^eres, beati mites, &c. Those 
were not ijrcecepta, but exhortationes, he said. Then I proved to him 
the contrari'um ex XfTopositionibus Lutheri, and so forth. Then he was 
beaten down to the ground and went away. Then I said, " There goes 
the child of the devil, the glutton, the child of the mad ape ! Ita discessit 
cum magna ignominia. Ideo esto bono aninio, nos convincemus illos 
nebulones; they are cowardly villains, Miej;^* ad disjnitandmn, indocti " "■ 
(in Spieker's Musculus, p. 67). ^ Spieker, pp. 99-100. 


Musculus went on persistently ' pouring oil on the 
fire.' The members of the Council complained to 
the Elector, in December 1565, that he called them 
' devilish scoundrels and villains ' from the pulpit, 
and that he talked most blasphemously about the 
Sacrament, saying, for instance : ' You will not believe 
till you have got it in your jaws or your throat ; you 
won't be satisfied unless I show you Christ in a blue 
coat as He sat with the disciples at the supper-table.' ^ 

' The Sacrament of Love ' continued to be the worst 
apple of discord in the whole land : it was disputed 
about in beer-houses and at banquets, and bloody 
frays often arose on the questions how long Christ 
remained present, if His Body and Blood were digested 
and excreted, if His Blood could be spilled, run into 
one's beard, and so forth.^ On one occasion when 
John Musculus, who had been appointed by his father 
Andreas to be pastor of the suburb of Lebus, spilt 
the contents of the chalice at the celebration of the 
Lord's Supper, the Elector convened a synod at Berlin 
and said at the opening of it that it was not enough 
to take the offender prisoner and to expel him from 
the country, but that, as he had spilt the Blood of the 
Lord, his own blood must not be spared, and two or 
three of his fingers must be chopped off.^ 

The ' frightful and general demoralisation of the 
people,' which the religious dissensions had caused, 
no less in the Mark Brandenburg than everywhere 
else, was looked upon by Musculus as a confirmation 
of his belief that ' we have degenerated into the image 

1 Spieker, p. 124. 

- See 0. Kramer, Vom Nachtmalil des Herrn, &c. (Frankfort, 1569), 
s. 5, 9. 

* Heppe, Gesch^ des Protestantismus, ii. 386-387. 


of the devil ; those persons especially are of the devil 
who assert that there is still any good left in man.' 
He used at the same time to utter the most outrageous 
invectives against the Pope, and he incited the young 
folk in the streets to scream out abuse of his Holiness. 
But he was forced all the same to recognise that, under 
the Papacy, the people had been more pious, well- 
behaved, and moral than in his time. ' If our grand- 
parents,' he wrote, ' could see the world as it is now, 
especially the youthful portion of it, they would shut 
their eyes in horror or spit on us, because in such a 
highly- favoured age ' (that of the new Gospel) ' we 
ourselves are more wicked than the devil. Sodom 
and Gomorrha, the Venusberg itself, are as child's 
play to the depravity we see all around us in the present 
day.' ' Everywhere resounds the same cry and lamenta- 
tion, that the young have never been so perverted and 
so bad since the beginning of the world as they are now, 
and that they could not well be worse.' The terrible 
sin of the evangelicals, both young and old, was the 
' habit of blasphemy,' never heard of formerly, which, 
not without a special judgment of God, had come into 
vogue with the new Gospel during the last forty years. 
With this crime all other vices are bound up. ' We 
are all of us compelled to acknowledge that, although 
in other countries also, sin and wickedness have every- 
where risen to the highest pitch, the most good-for- 
nothing scoundrels have nevertheless been found among 
the people who made their boast of the holy Gospel 
and the Word of God ; it is among these that we have 
seen greatest contempt for God, for morality, and for 

Musculus pointed out that their Catholic ancestors 


' had given diligent heed to the things of a future life, 
had gone about seeking help and counsel in order to 
avoid future punishment, and had done all in their 
power by cha,stising their bodies, fasting, praying, 
almsgiving, founding religious institutions, and so 
forth ; ' now, however, nobody cared either about 
heaven or hell, nobody gave a thought either to God 
or to the devil. ' The day of judgment is near,' ' we 
must resume the customs of the ancient Church and 
pray to God with incessant supplications that He 
would put an end to, or lessen our tribulation,' both 
now and hereafter. ' But prayer and church-going 
are out of fashion.' ' Our noblemen are altogether 
epicurean and swinish ; our burghers do not care who 
preaches, administers the Sacraments, confesses and 
does penance ; they think only of eating and drinking, 
and of fleecing, flaying, cheating and over-reaching 
their neighbours ; the peasants have completely for- 
gotten their old religion, and the beer-bottle has become 
dearer to them than the church ; if God has patience 
with Germany but a short while longer, we shall soon 
see more pillars in the churches than men and women. 
If there are any pious Christians left, who still do 
something for the Church, they are not visible to 
mortal eyes. Churches, schools, hospitals, are destroyed, 
plundered, ravaged ; the young are lamentably neg- 
lected ; the paths to study are closed to the children 
of the needy, and the claims of poverty are altogether 

Such were the complaints made by Musculus as 
superintendent of the Mark, 

In the Duchy of Prussia the general condition of 
things was equally anarchical, and Duke Albert could 


only look on helplessly at the religious dissensions 
which were scattering ruin broadcast through the 
land. He received but scant consolation from the 
letters of friends telling him how bad things were in 
all directions. ' Germany,' wrote to him Melanchthon's 
son-in-law, Caspar Peucer, on May 6, 1561, ' is so rent 
and distracted by its internal dissensions, which increase 
from day to day, that I fear both ecclesiastical and 
political order will altogether succumb. How by 
mere human means to put a stop to these disputes, 
which breed and multiply in perpetuity, each giving 
rise to some other vexed question, I am at a loss to see.' ^ 

Fresh matter for strife was stirred up in Prussia 
by Albert's court preacher Funk, who, after Osiander's 
death, ' for many years played the leading part in the 
land.' ' He was a shrewd and crafty man, who resorted 
to all sorts of artifices for deluding the Duke, and 
was known to everybody as a great drinker, just as 
his instructor and misleader Osiander had been, who, 
when in a state of intoxication, would use most im- 
proper language concerning the holiest things.' - 

It happened in the year 1561 that an adventurer, 
one Paul Scalichius, ' the pretended Margrave of Verona,' 
came to the court by invitation of the Duke, and struck 
up a close intimacy with Funk. In spite of the opposi- 
tion of the theological faculty he was allowed to give 
lectures on theology at Konigsberg. He put forward 

^ Voigt, Brief wechsel, p. 507. 

- See Fimk's Bekenntnisse vom Trunh (Confessions of Drinking), 
which ' he could not renounce ' (drink) ' without danger to his life ' 
<Hase, p. 175). Osiander fully rivalled Albert's court retinue in strong 
drinking (Hartknoch, p. 354 ; Hase, p. 129). Justus Menius called Funk 
a ' full beer-tap ; ' he accused him of ' daily drunkenness ' (Schmidt, 
Justus Menius, ii. 168). 


^ the strangest doctrines.' In one of his pamphlets 
he maintained, with a view to smoothing down the 
theological controversy on the Eucharist, that ' Christ 
had actually had three natures,' and he endeavoured 
to prove this with a large number of figures, circles, 
triangles, and squares. He made the Duke believe 
that he was in possession of a secret doctrine, and 
that he had received ' wonderful revelations ' on many 
points, among others on the Trinity, on the origin of 
angels and of the devil, and on the power of the devil 
over men. 

The Duke was very soon completely caught in 
the toils of this adventurer. He followed minutely 
all Scalich's directions, made use of magic incantations 
in the shape of prayers, and wore about his person 
a magic medal and ring to ward off the influence of 
evil spirits. Funk and Scalich played into each 
other's hands and enriched themselves at the expense 
of the country. Scalich received from the Duke 200 
hides of land, besides farms and mills, and even the 
town and the district of Kreuzburg. The Estates 
complained that ' an unconscionable quantity of state 
raiment, landed property, pensions, carriages, corn, 
and amber had been wheedled out of the Duke by 
these people. Innumerable promissory notes also, 
which they had given to foreigners on the ducal estates, 
often for lifetime, had made such a drain on Albert's 
revenues that he had scarcely enough money left to 
pay for the bare necessaries of existence. Quite extrava- 
gant sums, at an unusually high rate of interest, had 
disappeared in this manner.' On one occasion when 
Scalich borrowed 10,000 florins from the town of Konigs- 
berg in the Duke's name, he kept 7,000 for himself. 


gave 2,000 to a donkey driver, and only 1,000 found 
their way into the Duke's coffers.^ ' All over Prussia 
people were crying out against the new oppressive 
taxes and the depauperisation of the land.' 

Scalich made off only in the nick of time. Funk 
was put in chains, and in the year 1566 condemned 
to death by a court of justice. The Duke had ' long 
ago repudiated the heretical Osianderite doctrines 
which he had patronised for so many years,' and Funk, 
as court preacher in 1563, had recanted from the 
pulpit all that he had formerly taught as a disciple 
of Osiander's. Nevertheless, in the petition of griev- 
ances sent up by the Estates, it was made a special 
reproach against him that ' for several years he had 
been a follower of the leading heretic Osiander, and 
had defended and propagated his heretical doctrines 
by means of violence, causing numbers of upright, 
pious, unoffending ministers of the Church to be deposed 
from their offices and expelled from the country.' 
Further, it was charged against Funk that he had 
counselled and helped on the introduction, by the 
Duke, without the knowledge of the Estates, of a fresh 
code of Church regulations, in which ' a new and highly 
repugnant service of baptism,' which omitted the 
ceremony of exorcism, had been foisted on the clergy. 
All who refused to accept this new code had been 
subjected to persecution, punished with imprisonment, 
or even banished from the land. 

Albert's endeavours to save the life of his court 
preacher were unavailing. Funk and two members of 

^ Hartknoch, pp. 455-456, Erlautertes Preussen,iii. 284-297. Baczko, 
iv. 272 ff. Hase, pp. 294-309, 329, 350. Vulpius, x. 39-53, who cannot 
give up his ' conviction ' that Scalich ' was a tool of the Jesuits ' ! 


the council implicated in his guilt were beheaded on 
the charge of being malefactors and disturbers of the 
public peace. The crowd gathered round to witness 
their execution, sang ' Nun bitten wir den heiligen 
Geist^ ('Now pray we to the Holy Ghost') and ' Du 
werthes Licht, gib uns deinen Schein'' ('Lead us, kindly 
light. . . :).' 

At the request of the Estates, Morlin, who had 
been banished twelve years before, was recalled as 
' a rock of true doctrine,' and appointed Bishop of 

This man, in conjunction with the Brunswick 
divine, Martin Chemnitz, compiled a new symbol in 
which the Augsburg Confession and the Smalcald 
Articles were incorporated, and in which, among 
other ' erroneous doctrine,' Osianderism was emphati- 
cally condemned.- The new formula was solemnly 
ratified by the Duke and pronounced by him binding 
on Prussia for evermore. From that time all preachers 
and teachers were obliged to swear conformity to it.^ 

In an ecclesiastical statute of the Duke we read 
as follows : ' Because the poor clergy are as a rule so 
miserably paid that they have little more than crusts 
of bread to eat, nobody goes in for deep and accurate 
learning : only poor people without other means of 
existence, after some superficial studies, teach what 
they themselves do not understand, the bhnd thus 
leading the blind. The pure doctrine is lost, our 
temporal sustenance and welfare dwindle away, for 
God everywhere withdraws His blessings, and we, as 

1 Hase, pp. 354 ff. 

- Later on known as the Corpus doctrince Prutenicum. 

^ Hase, pp. 384 ff. 



the prophet Aggeus says, put our money in bags with 
holes.' 1 

Duke Albert died two years after the execution 
of his chaplain, ' deeply distressed at the deplorable 
condition of the clergy and the people.' ' We have, 
alas, very few pastors of souls,' he lamented, ' but 
quite a swarm of hirelings and storks.' The discon- 
tent and disaffection among the people were so general 
that the Duke was frequently heard to say he had 
* no faithful subjects left in the land ; ' he would rather 
' be a tender of sheep than ruler of the country.' - 

In his family life also the former Grandmaster of 
the Teutonic Order ' had had almost incessant tribu- 
lation and crosses.' Out of seven children by his first 
marriage, with a daughter of the Danish King, six had 
died at a tender age, and only one daughter had survived. 
Albert Frederic, the only son of his second marriage, 
with Anna Maria, Princess of Brunswick, who outlived 
him, spent his life in constant terror of being poisoned 
by the people around him. ' They worried and plagued 
my father,' he said, ' down to his grave, and they are 
doing the same by me ; God punishes us to the third 
and fourth generation ! ' He often had such terrible 
fits of violence that he would throw silver tankards 
at the heads of those at table with him, and then 
would fall into so great melancholy that those around 
him feared he might commit suicide.'^ 

The contentions and mutual recriminations on 
account of religion were never-ending. The Konigs- 
berg professor David Voit had said in 1567 that he 
feared ' an invasion of barbarism.' ^ 

^ Richter, Kirchenordnungen, ii, 301-302. 

~ Hase, pp. 235, 343. ■' Hase, pp. 79, 288, 395-396. 

* ' Deum oro, ut in his regionibus ecclesias, politic as, et oeconomias 


Bishop Morlin underwent the most bitter perse- 
cution from the Melanchthonians at the university, and 
from the still numerous sect of Osianderites ; and, like 
Osiander, he too was insulted on his death-bed. One 
•of his opponents writes of him : ' he fell into a state 
of desperation before his end ; he crawled on all fours 
like a bear, and scratched the ground with his nails ; 
knives had to be hidden from him and the door closed 
against him. Verses were stuck up on the cathedral 
announcing that " Morlin had gone down to Lucifer in 
the abyss of hell." ' ^ 

Tilmann Hesshus was appointed Bishop of Samland 
in Morlin' s place. Owing to the Duke's ill-health he 
•enjoyed for several years unlimited power, and he 
made his adversaries at the university, and all over 
the country, fully aware of the fact by excommunica- 
tion and deposition. He procured the bishopric of 
Pomesania for his friend John Wigand. But he soon 
became involved in a fierce quarrel with him, and 
with several preachers, because of his teaching that 
the humanity of Christ is also, in ahstracto, omnipotent 
and omniscient and worthy of adoration, whereas 
this ought only to be asserted of Christ's human nature 
in concreto — that is, in union with the Divine nature. 

The disputed question soon became the theme of 
discussion in all churches and lecture-rooms. ' Some 
professors and rectors,' Wigand wrote, ' have taught 
the children that abstractum is a compound of abs 
and tractum, just as the wolf -skins or seal-skins, which 

clementer servet, nee sinat fieri barbaricam vastitatem, quam cum mnlta 
alia, turn vero praecipue intestini motus portendunt ' (to Camerarius, in 
Dollinger, ii. 666, note). 

1 Erlciutertes Preusscn, iv. 747-748. See Leuckfeld, Hist. Hessh. 
pp. 89-92. 


great lords wear, are the fur coats taken off wolves and 

The flood of controversy poured like a mountain 
cataract among the students and among the people.^ 
It found its way also into taverns and hostels. ' At 
social gatherings, on convivial occasions, at confer- 
ences, in every trumpery shop, conversation turned 
chiefly on the topic of abstractum and concretum^ 
and everywhere there was loud and angry quarrelling 
on the subject. The preachers contributed largely 
to the sum of irritation by incensing their congregations 
against their opponents from the pulpit.' ^ ' Wigand,' 
wrote his former friend, Andreas von Meyendorf,. 
' is being egged on by Satan to ruin Hesshus ; he rages 
and raves just like a madman, and cries out continu- 
ally, " i\.way with this man ! " ' ^ 

At a synod of twenty pastors, presided over by 
Wigand, the following decision was pronounced : ' The 
proposition that the humanity of Christ in abstracto 
{i.e. in itself) is almighty, is blasphemous and is here- 
with rejected with loathing from the Church, and 
abolished for all eternity. The highest exigencies of 
godliness demand that Hesshus should amend, and 
express contrition for, the extremely dangerous and 
offensive language which he has used. And whereas 
bitterness and hatred are rampant throughout Prussia, 
it must be proclaimed with all possible temperance 
from the pulpits that the proposition of abstractum 
has been unanimously condemned, and that the Bishop 
of Samland will correct his offensive speeches, for the 

^ Wilkens, pp. 206-214. 

* Hartknoch, p. 466. 

^ LeuckfelJ, pp. 14.V14G. 


sake of the glory of God, and so tliat they shall no 
longer scandalise anybody.' 

Hesshus, however, refused to submit to the decree 
of the synod. ' Write me down a Dutchman if ever 
I consent to such a decision ! If it is carried, I harness 
my horses in God's name, and bid farewell to Prussia. 
Uhu ! the night-owls and field demons may stay there 
if they like.' As for the synod, he said, he repudiated 
its authority ; for, according to the laws of the land, 
only a general synod could pronounce judgment on 
a bishop ; and as for Wigand, in whose person the 
devil himself had presided, he had laid a snare for all 
future bishops. ' This synod,' Wigand answered, ' was 
as legitimate a tribunal as that which had met in the 
house of Zacharias, when the article on the birth of 
Christ had been ratified by three persons only. The 
child could not teach the father. Had not the ass 
instructed Balaam ? ' Hesshus defended himself from 
the Konigsberg pulpit, and the populace threatened 
to shoot down all the followers of Wigand and hack 
them in pieces, so that their blood should cover the 
ground. Everything was to be turned topsy-turvy. 
Wigand rejected all petitions sent up to the town 
council of Konigsberg as ' fruit not grown in the garden 
of Eden.' 

At the ducal court there was great indecision for 
a long time as to what line to take with regard to this 
controversy, which threatened to lead to a ' terrible 
conflagration.' At length the Duke, still a prey to 
ill-health, determined to take the matter into his own 
hands, and decreed that ' as the Bishop of Samland 
refused to alter the offensive passages, not because 
they were false in themselves, but only because they 


had been falsely expounded to him, he (the Duke) 
had resolved to rid himself of the bishop, and he re- 
quested his episcopal grace to vacate his palace within 
six days.' ^ 

' Wigand has managed,' Hesshus wrote to the 
Duchess of Saxony, ' by cunning and fraud and base 
intrigues, to get me out of my post and himself put 
into it. I could never have believed that such treachery,, 
deceit, and falsehood lurked in the bosom of this theo- 
logian. He is one of those stars that the tail of the 
dragon in the Apocalypse drew from heaven and cast 
upon the earth.' - 

And now, ' in order to prevent the impending 
disturbances, to bring the chaplains to order and the 
country clergy under control, to clear out the evil 
leaven from the university, and to furnish the Church 
with a head,' ^ Wigand, in the presence of the whole 
ducal court, was proclaimed administrator of the diocese 
of Samland. All the followers of Hesshus were com- 
pelled to leave the country. ' Poor, faithful, godly 
preachers,' wrote Andrew of Meyendorf, ' have been 
driven by Wigand, with wives and children into the 
greatest misery, while he remains there, as an execrable 
persecutor, tearing to pieces the Church in Prussia.' ^ 
The superintendent of Liibeck reported that com- 
plaints without end were sent in to the Duke con- 
cerning Wigand' s oppression of preachers and widows 
of clergymen ; it was even asserted that greed of lucre 
had led him into usurious transactions.'^ ' In people 
like Wigand there is nothing but the devil,' wrote 

1 Wilkens, pp. 212-219. 

- Trier, Anmerhnngen zum Concordienhiiche, p. 390. 

» Wi]kens, p. 219. * DoUinger, ii. 477, 479. 

= Stark, Liibecl-ische Kirchenhistorie, Beiliige, s. 478. 


the Tiibinger chancellor, James Andrea, to the Duke ; 
' he ought to be deposed and sent about his business.' ^ 
Wigand, on the other hand, called his adversaries 
' bedevilled wretches, ranters, and knaves,' and painted 
the conditions of the duchy in the most dismal colours. 
' Screamers and agitators,' he wrote, ' go about bewilder- 
ing and leading astray, not only the simple populace, 
but the upper classes also. They go in and out of 
houses, shops, and taverns, like so many madmen, 
forcing their false, abominable opinions on men and 
women of all sorts and conditions. Young children 
also, whom Christ forbade men to offend, are poisoned 
and misled by these rascals, who instil into their 
minds false doctrines and hatred against orthodox 
teachers. Scurrilous pamphlets, scattered about every- 
where, rouse much disaffection and incite people to 
rebel against their rulers in everything — in political 
as well as in religious matters. It is an every-day 
matter-of-course thing now to write insulting calumnies 
outside the doors of houses, to distribute pasquinades 
wholesale among the people, and to assail passers-by 
in the streets with offensive language.' - 

He fell foul especially of the evangelical people, 
complaining of them in various publications, that 
they were sunk in epicurean sensuality, and that they 
set no store by their deliverance from the abomination 
of popish darkness, and the rekindling of evangelical 
light by means of Luther ; that they became more and 
more lawless and covetous, and abandoned them- 
selves more and more to luxury and drunkenness ; 
the Church and the preachers were no longer main- 
tained and cared for as they had been under the papacy ; 

1 Dollinger, ii. 478. ^ Hartknoch, pp. 480-481. 


it was scarcely possible even to keep the roofs over 
the houses of God. ' Now that people are constantly 
preached to that they will not be justified by works, 
they no longer trouble themselves about doing good, 
and they neglect the poor. It is a common occurrence 
for the temporal rulers to lay violent hands on ecclesi- 
astical property which is intended for the mainten- 
ance of churches, schools, hospitals, and poor-houses, 
and without more ado they add it to their own secular 
possessions.' The schools are going to ruin, and we 
hear in all directions most melancholy accounts of 
the apparently hopeless depravity of the young. ^ 

That the ' Abstractum had abstracted his bishopric 
from Hesshus ' caused the loudest jubilation among 
the Calvinists whom he, ' as the defender of Christ, 
had been compelled to consign to the devil.' ^' ' Murder 
and adultery,' Hesshus said in his Treue Warnung an 
seinelieben Preussen (' Sincere Admonition to his beloved 
Prussians'), were child's play in comparison with the 
sin of associating with Calvinists. ^ 

But it was the Calvinists of the Palatinate who 
passed especially as ' accursed blasphemers of the 
Lord God.' ' Terrible reports ' about them were current 
among the Lutheran population : they were said to 
have degraded ' the holy feast into an orgy of gluttony 
and drunkenness, at which the body of the Lord was 
devoured with spoons, the wine drunk convivially, 
the sacred elements trampled under foot and thrown 
to the dogs. Children in the Palatinate were not 
baptised till they reached the age of seven.' ^ 

'' See Dollinger, die Aussprilche, ii. 480-484. 
2 Wilkens, p. 219. ^ Ibid. p. 200. 

" Ibid. p. 127. 




When, at the Naumburg Convention, Frederic III. 
made the discovery that ' popish doctrine ' concerning 
the Holy Communion was taught in the original version 
of the Augsburg Confession, the whole authority of 
that Confession was destroyed in his eyes. In Luther's 
writings, moreover, much appeared to him erroneous 
and contradictory, and he pronounced it to be a duty 
incumbent on his office to extirpate these errors, above 
a,ll ' that doctrine of the corporeal presence of Christ 
" which had stuck to Luther," and which w^as the 
chief bulwark of the whole papacy.' 

He regarded also with special aversion the new 
dogma of the omnipresence of Christ's human nature, 
which the Lutheran theologians of Wiirtemberg had 
set up, and by which, so it seemed to him, ' the humanity 
of Christ w^as as good as annihilated, or attenuated 
into an element so subtle that it pervaded all inanimate 
nature — stones, wood, foUage, grass, apples, pears, 
&c. &c. ; and was found in animal nature also, even 
in stinking swine, and, as some one had said to the old 
Landgrave, it was actually present in the great barrel 
of wine at Stuttgart.' ^ 

Moreover, the manner of life of his associates in 
the faith by no means satisfied him. He observed, he 

' Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 587. 


said, that the preaching of ' the Gospel ' had, so far,, 
not produced any good fruit in Germany. ' We have 
now had the pure teaching of the Gospel and the Word 
of God,' he wrote to his son-in-law, John Frederic of 
Saxony, ' proclaimed to us for more than f oity years, we 
have made and still make loud and constant profession 
of it, but we do not get the right hold of it. For, although 
this doctrine is pure and clear, it produces little im- 
provement in our lives ; on the contrary, to judge 
from outward appearances, many papists may well 
be preferred before us, while we undoubtedly exceed 
them in over- eating and drinking, gambling, dice, 
immorality, hatred, and envy.' ' I fear me,' he wrote 
on another occasion, ' that the righteous God, who 
does not let sin go unpunished, will one day chasten 
us with a heavy scourge ; for does He not see that 
while we boast with high-sounding words of our most 
Christian Confession of Augsburg, we nevertheless 
indulge without fear in the gross vices of gluttony,, 
drunkenness, fornication, blasphemy, gambling, usury, 
greed, as though we were free to do just as we like ? ' 
And again : ' Such execrable vices as gluttony, drunken- 
ness, blasphemy, usury and covetousness, which are 
abominations even to the heathen who know not God, 
are not considered sinful by us.' ' We make a great 
to do about the Augsburg Confession and boast inordi- 
nately of it, but we live all the while in libertinism 
and easy-going security, as though this Confession 
were only a cloak to cover us with, and there could be 
no doubt that the Lord God would be gracious unto 
us because we acknowledge the Confession of Augsburg.' ^ 
The Elector entered into active relations with the 

1 Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 478-486, 537. 


leading Zwinglian and Calvinistic theologians. In the 
work of reconstructing the Church organisation of the 
Palatinate, he relied chiefly on the services of the twO' 
Calvinistic professors at Heidelberg, Caspar Olevian and 
Zacharias Ursinus. Radical iconoclastic measures were 
at once instituted. By the Elector's orders the churches 
in Heidelberg underwent a complete transformation. 
The still existing altars and images were everywhere 
removed and replaced by plain tables ; the wall-pictures- 
were whitewashed ; ordinary bread was substituted 
for the wafers, common wooden beakers for the chalices^ 
tin basins for the stone fonts ; and the organs were 
all locked up. On being reprimanded for these pro- 
ceedings by Duke John Frederic of Saxony, the Elector 
answered that Christ and the apostles had not used 
chalices, and that these things had grown out of a 
special form of idolatry ; stone fonts also were frequently 
' abused for all sorts of idolatry and witchcraft.' ^ 
The wafers, which were still used by the Lutherans, 
he called ' idolatrous bits of bread,' and he said he 
had had them taken away because he found that ' they 
led to such superstitious practices among his subjects, 
who worshipped them as though they were truly God.' - 
Frederic also pronounced the crucifixes to be ' works 
of idolatry,' and again he issued a stern decree that 
every corner of the land was to be inspected, and every 
bit of ' that sort of rubbish, either inside or outside 
the churches, to be cleared away.' ^ He notified to- 
the Lutherans at Amberg that he could not tolerate 
idolatry in his principality : within eight days every 
idolatrous work ' must be taken away and destroyed, 

1 Struve, pp. 106-108. - Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 372, note. 

3 Sudhoff, pp. 140-141. 


whether pictures or sculpture, and that not only 
from the churches but from every place where such 
things were to be found.' At Hirschau the preacher 
himself carried out the Elector's orders and ' destroyed 
all the altars and other furniture in his church.' ^ 

In 1562, by order of Frederic III., Thomas Erast, 
professor of medicine at Heidelberg, drew up a ' well- 
grounded report ' on the Eucharist, in which Luther's 
dogma is diametrically opposed. The following year 
there appeared the ' Heidelberg Catechism,' compiled 
by Ursinus and Olevian, and calculated to remove 
any remaining doubts as to whether ' the Elector 
Frederic was wholly Calvinistic in faith.' Published 
in the name of the Elector, this Catechism obtained 
recognition as the authorised Creed of the Church 
of the Palatinate, and gained entry into all those 
German countries which in the course of years had 
gone over to the novel opinions. Later on the synod 
of Dortrecht invested it with the authority of a symbol 
of faith. After the Catechism had been thus recog- 
nised and sanctioned by a synod of the Palatinate 
and published with a preface dated January 19, 1563, 
another edition was brought out, in which Frederic 
inserted the notorious 80th clause on the Catholic 
Mass, which ended with the following words : ' And 
thus the Mass is at bottom nothing else than a denial 
of the one sacrifice and passion of Jesus Christ.' But 
the Elector was not satisfied even with this. In a 
third edition he added these words : ' and an accursed 
piece of idolatry.' - 

' Muck, ii. 93-94. 

'^ Kluckhohn, in the Munich Histor. JaJirbuch, 1866, v. 500-502, and 
Friedrich der Fromnie, p, 134. See A. Wolters, Der Heidelherger Cate- 
ckismiis in seiner urspriinglichen Gestalt nebst der OeschicJite seines 


Thus it became an important part of the rehgious 
training of the young that they should be taught to 
despise Catholics as idolaters. 

A letter of Frederic to his son-in-law, John Frederic, 
on May 10, 1562, gives a good insight into his state 
of mind. He writes : ' It is to be regretted that the 
Huguenots at Lyons contented themselves with only 
driving out the monks and priests, and did not massacre 
them wholesale.' ^ 

Seeing that this Elector regarded ' all popish belief 
and forms of worship as mere devil-worship,' it is not 
to be wondered at that he should have embarked on 
a campaign of complete annihilation against all Catholic 
institutions, churches, cloisters, and religious houses. 
He showed no regard whatever for the stipulations 
of the Augsburg Confession. In the Rhenish Palati- 
nate alone he confiscated the property of forty reli- 
gious houses and other Catholic foundations ; at a 
later date the Bishop of Worms reckoned the number 
of ecclesiastical institutions that had been seized in 
the Palatinate, inclusive of parish churches, at 300. ^' 
Frederic proceeded, with even greater violence than 
Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg, against the poor 
defenceless nuns instance the nuns of Himmelskrone 
and Liebenau, who entreated in vain that ' whereas 

Tcxtes im Jalire loGS', Bonn, 1864. Niepmann, Dcr Heidelberger 
Catechismus von 1563; Elberfeld, 1866. Gooszen, De Heidelberg sche 
catechismen. Textus receptus met toelichtende tehsien. Bijdrage tot 
de kermis van zij7ie word ingsgescJiiedenis en van liet gereformeerd iiro- 
testantisme ; Leiden, 1890, und Gooszen, De Heidelberg sche catechismen 
en het boehje van de hreJnng des broods ; Leiden, 1893. See Zarncke's 
Literar. Ceniralblatf, 1890, No. 23, and 1893, No. 41. 

1 Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 297 ; see i. 126^127. 

"^ See Hitter's August von Sachsen und Friedrich III., s. 310; 
Hausser, ii. 27 ; see also Bitter, i. 201. 


the Jews had been left in the enjoyment of their reUgion, 
the nuns ought to be allowed the same freedom.' ^ 
At Liebenau the prioress iVnna von Seckendorf, and 
all the twenty-two sisters under her care, told the electoral 
commissioners that they had no intention of letting 
themselves be turned away from their faith, which 
for many centuries had stood its ground as a true and 
good Christian belief ; they meant to persist firmly 
in it. Likewise, they said, it was impossible that 
anybody could be annoyed by the sight of their tradi- 
tional dress, as they never went outside the convent. 
They therefore humbly prayed his electoral grace 
not to force them to renounce it. They could not 
submit to a preacher, they declared ; and if one was 
foisted on them, they should not listen to him; 'they 
could not do with all the different creeds that were 
preached nowadays.' ^ 

^ Further details on the treatment of convents in Falk, pp. 50-73. 

' Report of the electoral commissioners of March 25, 1563, in 
Biittinghausen, ii. 378-379. For the proceedings of the Elector against 
the nuns of Marienkrone at Oppenheim, see F. Falk's article in the 
Histor. Jalirhuch of the Gorresgesellschaft, Bd. 10 (1889), 47-66. Much 
light is thrown on the history of the period by the accounts of a nun from 
Pforzlieim (printed by Holzwarth in the Katlwlische TrosteinsamJceit 
12; Mayence, 1858) on the veritably scandalous treatment which her 
convent had to suffer from 1556, for eight years, at the hands of the 
preachers and officials of Charles II. of Baden. During the first six years 
no less tlaan eighteen preachers were at work in the convent trying to 
make the nuns abjure their faith. Not one of them, however, could be 
persuaded to break the vows of her Order. ' l^ut we could do nothing of 
ourselves,' says the Sister, ' we give the glory to God. One of the 
preachers scolded us in the most abominable manner, and called us all 
such bad names, and abused our Father Confessors worse still, calling 
them stud stallions, stud bulls, mass sows, murderers of souls, and other 
vile names, which would take too long to write down ; and he often raised 
such an uproar over us that it was a wonder the whole town did not 
flock to the convent.' ' Another of them spoke so disgracefully and 
sacrilegiously of the Sacrament, I never heard the like of it before . . . He 
preached of and against the Papal Holiness . . . whatever monks and 


Frederic knew no mercy. In liis frenzy of destruc- 
tion against all monuments of former Christian worship, 

nuns dreamed, he said, must be conformed to in the churches, as though 
it had been revealed by the Holy Ghost. All our work too, he said, aimed 
at making people gape in wonderment at skinning and fleecing the poor, 
for which we got great profit ... he said we were hardened and 
bewitched, and recklessly making for eternal damnation. He packed us 
all off to hell as if God had made him our judge. A third preacher read 
us such a sermon against our vows and our statutes that I onlj? wonder 
what a man can be thinking of to talk to others in such a way,' and so 
forth. ' Whenever the Margrave's chancellor came into the convent he 
used to rush straight into the dormitory without giving us notice, and we 
knew nothing of it till we heard him screaming out, and then we used to 
be frightened and to run away ; then he would tear from one cell to 
another like a maniac, and he would behave in such a manner . . . that 
our honour would not have been safe if we had not protected one another,' 
&c. It was all in vain that the nmis represented to the officials that in 
former days no poor person had been ' sent away imrelieved from the 
convent, but that now the poor were driven from the convent like dogs 
without even having a morsel of bread given them ; and yet the convent 
had been founded for the sake of bestowing alms, and naost of its property 
belonged to the poor. The convent revenues were dissipated, and altars 
and images of saints destroyed.' Not for eight long years did ' the day of 
deliverance ' come for the nuns, and deliverance meant only permission 
to leave the convent. ' When at last we went out of the convent, such a 
crowd of people came flocking round, young and old, that in all my life I 
have never seen more people collected together. They were all weeping ; 
but the cries and laments of the poor sounded above all the others, and 
they followed us a long way. And when we came away from the 
convent the daughters of the steward fell a weeping. Then their father 
was very angry with them, and one of them he nearly beat to death, and 
he kicked the other, and said that he should not cry over us even if the 
devil himself had carried us off.' The nuns went to Kilchberg (Konigs- 
berg) in the county of Hochberg, where the sisters of their own order 
gave them a home. No less brutal was the treatment of the convents in 
Saxony. See, for instance, in Weber's Aus vier Jahrliunderten, Neue 
Folge, i. 19-21, the proceedings instituted by the Elector Augustus of 
Saxony against the nuns of the convent of the Holy Cross at Meissen. 
Wlien all efforts to make the nuns there apostatise had proved fruitless, 
Augustus, on September 2, 1557, issued orders ' to stop the food of all 
those sisters who had not abjured their idolatry by St. Martin's Day.' 
Concerning the treatment of the defenceless nuns at Wiirtemberg, see 
above, pp. 79 ff. Concerning the persecution of the Mecklenburg nuns, 
see Schurmacher's Johann Albert i., 337 f. See also Paulus's Glaubens- 


he did not confine himself to the departments under 
his own sole jurisdiction, but ' launched out also against 
churches and cloisters, the patronage of which he 
shared with other princes, and in many cases against 
some over which he had no authority at all.' For 
instance, in October 1564, he instituted iconoclastic 
proceedings in the village of Dirnstein, which was 
the joint property of himself and the Bishop of Worms, 
and ordered all altars, images, and church furniture 
there to be broken up or carted away. At Simten 
in the Palatinate, the Elector took the sacred Host 
with his own hand out of the Ciborium, and began 
a disputation with it, saying : ' See what a splendid 
God you are ! You think you're stronger than I am ? 
No indeed ; ' whereupon Frederic III. broke the sacred 
Host in pieces, uttering the most profane blasphemies. 
A portion of it, which remained in his hand, he threw 
into the fire in which he had burnt the decorations 
of the altars, the images, and other articles belonging 
to the service of the church.^ 

' The new Josiah,' ' the pious Frederic,' as the 
court theologians called the Elector, repeatedly chose 
for his iconoclastic sport the 'seasons most sacred to 
the Catholics. On Thursday in Holy Week, in the 
year 1565, accompanied by several divines, he appeared 
in the abbey of St. Michael at Sinsheim, which had 
been founded by a bishop of Spires, and which ' had 
no connection with the Electoral Palatinate.' Some 

trcite (lev Lilnebvrger Klosterfranen im sechzehnten JahrJiunderf, in 
Histor.-polit. BUitter, pp. 112, 625-649. 

^ Wonderful to relate, these particles were afterwards found under 
the ashes unconsumed. The Bishop of Spires saw them in the possession 
of the Dean of Simten. So says the Baron de Bolwiller, on June 28, 
1565, Papiers cVEtat du Card, de Granvelle, ix. 372. 


workmen ' who had been brought there for the pur- 
pose were then let loose to break open the choir and 
to tear down the altars and wainscotings, and to carry- 
out of the church the carved images, the church vest- 
ments, the ornaments of the sacristy, the Blessed 
Sacrament (in the monstrance), several consecrated 
wafers, and also the crucifixes with the psalters, the 
graduals, the antiphonaries, and other things that were 
in the choir. Frederic ordered all these treasures to 
be broken in pieces and publicly burnt in his presence.' 
The next day he behaved in precisely the same manner 
in the parish church of the village of Steinfurt, belonging 
to the abbey of Sinsheim. He committed similar out- 
rages on Good Friday in the parish church of Ladenburg, 
which was incorporated with the chapter of Worms^ 
as well as in the hospital of this place, and in the parish 
churches of two other places ; he also burnt down the 
libraries. On May 9 of the same year the Elector, 
so we read in a report, ' went in person to attack the 
abbey of Neuhausen (an immediate fief of the Empire)^ 
took it, ravaged and destroyed all the property belong- 
ing to it, and burnt the images and ornaments in the 
church, and all the psalters and other books.' The 
inmates were thrown into prison, and all their property, 
both movable and immovable, was taken possession 
of. In the other places already mentioned the Elector 
also appropriated all church property.^ The Margrave 

' Fuller details in Struve, pp. 170-187. Concerning Sinsheim, see K. 
Wilhelmi in the Schriften des Alterthumsvereins filr das Grossli. Baden, 
I. 258 ff. At Ladenburg the pictures had already before been partly- 
destroyed. A preacher of the place ' indulged in the utmost abuse and 
insolence against the Bishop of Worms, with scandalous imprecations 
and calumnies from the pulpit ; on several different occasions sent his 
fists through the pictures, or belaboured them with clubs and other 



Philibert of Baden, who was a Lutheran, complained 
that in the former county of Sponheim, which he 
owned in common with the Elector, Frederic, ' despite 
the Augsburg Confession, had made alterations in 
the manner of administering the Communion, and in 
other things had been guilty of iconoclasm, and had 
established the Calvinistic sect in the land.' ^ The 
knights, the town council, and the burghers of Oppen- 
heim all made similar complaints. On May 15, 1565, 
they said, the Elector with his preachers had made 
a personal visitation of their parishes, and had unlaw- 
fully deposed the Lutheran pastors whom they had 
appointed, had set up preachers in their places, had 

weapons, burnt many of them, and made a public boast of his proceedings 
from the pulpit.' On Christmas Eve, 1564, while the Bishop, with his 
pastor and chaplain, was chanting vespers, this preacher, with the school- 
master and his pupils, made a disturbance in the church and insulted the 
Bishop. The latter sent a letter of complaint to the Elector, but Frederic 
returned it unopened. From the ' Acten in Schuch,' Polit. und Kirchen- 
gescJi. von Ladenhurg (Heidelberg, 1843), s. 156-157. 

^ The Hessian comicillors to the Landgrave Philip, on April 19, 1566, 
in Kluckhohn, Briefs, i. 655. See the Actenstiiche, published by Falk in 
the Histor. JaJirbuch, xii. 38 ff. from the Munich imperial archives. For 
Frederic's ' Reformation ' in the town of Oppenheim, which had accrued 
to the Palatinate by mortgage, and in the imperial villages of the so- 
called Ingelheim Grund, see the article of F. Falk in the Histor.-jwlit. 
Blatter, pp. 100, 255-267, the materials for which are gathered from 
hitherto unpublished Acts. In these Acts is the following, among other 
statements : ' Firstly, their electoral graces abolished everything that still 
remained of popish idolatry, daily prayer in the choir . . . item, the 
pictures, images, altars, and everything in the shape of vestments or 
other objects of ritual which served for oiitward idolatry.' With regard 
to Oppenheim a special decree was issued that not only all altars, but also 
' crucifixes and other idolatrous objects in front of the door were to be 
destroyed, and also the idol which was between the two gates was to be 
removed from thence . . . also that the three crucifixes on the tombs 
of the Lords of Dienheim, the two upper ones, and the one carved 
beneath, were to be removed. The field-churches are also to be cleared 
of idolatrous symbols, and the inhabitants are to be allowed to take away 
the wood, slates, and walls.' 


cleared out the churches, tearing down and breaking 
much that was in them, and had appointed a fresh 
■collector of ecclesiastical revenues.^ 

But the heaviest charges of all against Frederic 
were raised by his Lutheran cousin, the Count Pala- 
tine Wolfgang of Zweibriicken. In February 1565 
Wolfgang sent in to one of the electoral councillors a< 
written statement to the effect that ' The Elector 
was coercing servants of the Church and subjects of 
the Palatinate to join his new Calvinistic sect, and com- 
pelling all who refused to obey to leave the land. In 
many places there were no more clergymen left ; the 
•churches were not attended and no sermons preached ; 
where formerly there had been 50 or even 100 communi- 
cants at the Eucharist, not more than five were now 
seen ; whereas there was no instruction or education 
for the young, it was to be feared that terrible epi- 
cureanism would set in. Furthermore, the Elector 
was confiscating all the cloisters and using their revenues 
for profane purposes, taking away all the ornaments 
a,nd treasures from the churches, handing over the 
cloisters to people from Brabant, from England, and 
to men and women attached to the Calvinistic sect. 
He was also oppressing the inhabitants of the Palati- 
nate with unheard-of taxes, so that many of them 
were obliged to leave their homes with their wives 
and children and take to begging.' ^ 

The Count Palatine Wolfgang, Duke Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg, and the Margrave Charles of Baden 

^ Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 658, note 1. 

- Ihid. i. 563-569. Wolfgang made many other complaints besides 
the above ; many of them are unjust, many exaggerated. See the editor's 

T -2 


had before this pointed out repeatedly to the Elector 
the danger of Zwinglian and Calvinist doctrine, which 
they said contained damnable error respecting the 
Blessed Sacrament and baptism, and which taught 
that God had not destined all men for salvation, and 
that no sin could be committed except through the 
vwill of God, Frederic, however, in his answers had 
always appealed to the Holy Scriptures, and he was 
as firmly convinced that his interpretation of them 
was the only right one as each of the different Protes- 
tant theologians and princes was certain that his was 
the only true interpretation. ' As for the writings 
of Zwingli, Calvin, and Luther,' said the Elector, ' we 
only let ourselves be guided by them in so far as they 
coincide with the Word of God ; all else we pay no 
heed to.' His doctrine of the Sacrament and his 
Heidelberg Catechism, he said, ' were not based on 
the teaching of any human being, but only on God's 
Word ; ' he did not intend to be drawn ' into a disputa- 
tion about them with any one ; ' he would not have 
his people perplexed and bewildered by every fresh 
' demagogue preacher,' nor would he allow ' erroneous 
doctrine to be introduced in his dominions under the 
semblance of the Augsburg Confession ; ' he wished 
his subjects to enjoy ' the honest, sound teaching of 
the Word of God,' no matter what the world said.^ He 
told the Landgrave of Hesse that the other Protestant 
princes also had not held by the Augsburg Confession ; 
there were ' many things in this Confession which were 
not fully explained (as for instance the article on the 

^ Heppe, Gesch. des Protestantismus,2; Beil. 5-11, 12-26; Kugler, 
ii. 439 ff. 


Mass), and which had afterwards been altered by 
the princes in their respective principahties and 
towns.' ^ 

In order to win over Duke Christopher to his reli- 
gious opinions, Frederic persuaded him to convene a 
religious conference, which took place in April 1564, 
at the monastery of Maulbronn in Wiirtemberg. It 
consisted of Palatine and Wiirtemberg theologians, and 
was held in the presence of the respective ruling princes, 
lasting from April 10 to April 15. This conference, 
however, only increased the mutual bitterness of feeling. 
The Heidelberg theologians spread abroad the report 
that ' the Wiirtembergers, as was patent to all present, 
had suffered so crushing a defeat at Maulbronn that 
Duke Christopher had now actually become reconciled 
to the teaching of the Heidelberg Catechism.^ With 
regard to the Sacrament, Luther, they said, shortly 
before his death, had acknowledged, in a talk with 
Melanchthon, that the Zwinglian doctrine on this 
point was more in harmony with the Scriptures than 
his own ; he had begged Melanchthon after his death 
to look into the matter afresh.^ Christopher, on his 
part, caused another report of the conference, adverse 
to theHeidelbergers,to be drawn up. In this document 
it was stated that the Heidelbergers had indulged in 
continual sophistry throughout the conference, now 
denying some point, now reasserting it ; they had 
themselves not known what they were driving at. The 
Duke and his councillors had thus been greatly 

1 Vilmar, p. 294. Beil. 2. 

^ Heppe, Oesch. des Protestantismus, ii. 73-94. Kugler, ii. 458 f. 
^ Protocol of the Maulbronn Colloquy, in the Gegenbericht, f. 217. 
'See, on the other hand, Anton, i. 34-36. 


strengthened in their own creed, and they now enter- 
tained greater loathing than ever for the fearful errors 
and blasphemies of the Heidelberg faction. One ' spe- 
cially terrible and abominably blasphemous statement 
of theirs ' was ' that they called Christ's presence 
in the bread nothing but an idolatrous invention of 
the human brain.' As for the dogma of the Majesty 
of Christ, the Wiirtembergers placed 'the Turkish 
Alkoran and the Zwinglian tenet ' on one and the 
same level. ^ 

The theologians of Wiirtemberg and of the Pala- 
tinate quarrelled with each other, and the Witten- 
bergers quarrelled with both these parties. They 
rejected the Heidelberg Catechism, but they also repu- 
diated the Wiirtemberg dogma of the omnipresence 
of Christ's human nature as one of the rankest of 
heresies. In this matter both Wittenbergers and Wiir- 
tembergers appealed to Luther, the first of them as- 
serting that Luther had in after years emphatically 
retracted his earlier doctrine of omnipresence, the 
others declaring that this was by no means the case- 
John Brenz and James Andrea, Christopher's leading 
theologiaps, assured the Duke that they had always 
been ' at pains to follow Luther's footsteps undeviat- 
ingly ; ' if it could be proved to them that ' even in 
the matter of a few words only, they had digressed 
from Luther's doctrine,' they would gladly retract.^ 

Christopher, taking part with his theologians, would 
not have it said that his dogma of omnipresence was 
novel, ' unheard-of teaching ; ' Frederic, with equal 

^ ChristUche ErMarung, &c., pp. 35, 195. 

^ Heppe, GescJi. des Protestantismus, ii. 101 ff. 


firmness, repudiated the charge of introducing ' unheard- 
of innovations.' While Frederic indulged in anathe- 
matising language against ubiquity,^ Christopher de- 
nounced the Heidelberg doctrine of the Sacrament as 
' venomous poison and stiff-necked wickedness.' 

It had been expressly stated in the terms of the 
Religious Peace of Augsburg that this treaty only in- 
cluded the Catholic Estates and those who were adherents 
of the Augsburg Confession. ' All the other Estates 
which belonged neither to the old religion nor were 
adherents of the Augsburg Confession were not included 
in this Pacification, but were wholly excluded from it.' 
The princes who were meant by the phrase ' The 
Estates adhering to the Augsburg Confession with its 
tenets. Church customs, ordinances, and ceremonies ' 
could only, according to the clear wording of the treaty, 
be such as accepted the doctrines of the Confession as 
originally sent to Charles V. ; not such, however, as 
accepted the Confession as a matter of form, while they 
disputed and rejected its doctrinal contents. 

This was manifestly the case with Frederic III. 

In order to remain a participator m the benefits 
of the Religious Peace, the Elector was in the habit of 
appealing to the Augsburg Confession, and he endea- 
voured to harmonise the Heidelberg Catechism with 
the terms of the Pacification by the following syl- 
logistic method : ' The Augsburg Confession is in accord 
with the Word of God ; the Catechism also is in accord 
with the Word of God ; it follows therefore that what- 
ever in the terms of the Peace applies to the one, applies 
to the other also.' The Empire, however, was not 
concerned with the question whether this or that 

' See above, p. 313. 


doctrine was in harmony with the Word of God, but 
whether it corresponded to the tenets of the Augsburg 

It remained to be seen whether Emperor and Empire 
would recognise the Elector's argument as valid, and, 
on the strength of it, would be ready to grant Calvinism 
also the protection of the Religious Pacification. 




The Emperor Ferdinand was utterly helpless against 
the progress of Protestantism and the religious dissen- 
sion and fighting within the Empire. He had ' quite 
as much to do as he could manage,' as he said once to 
a Franciscan monk, ' with the Turks and with the 
sectarian innovations in his own hereditary dominions.' ^ 
Against the Augsburg Religious Peace, which he him- 
self had brought about, and which was responsible for 
the loss of unity in the Church and for sanctioning the 
maxim : ' Wessen das Land, dessen die Religion,' " a 
stern protest had been raised by the papal see; 
but of Ferdinand individually Paul IV. had written, on 
December 4, 1556, to the Emperor's eldest son Maximi- 
lian, King of Bohemia, that he could point him to 
no better example, among sovereigns of the present time, 
than his own father, whose piety and fear of God he 
would do well to imitate.^ An admonition of this sort 
was very opportune, for Maximilian had early begun 
to stray from the footsteps of his father. Before his 
marriage, in 1548, With his cousin Maria, daughter of 

^ Wider die sectirischen RumoJirinacher, pp. 5-6. 
- ' Whose the land, his the religion.' 
•' Raynald ad a. 1556, Nos. 16, 17. 


Charles V., he had been by no means blameless in 
moral respects ; ^ and later on he caused his father 
much and bitter grief by the religious attitude which 
he took up.^ In spite of all the trouble that Ferdinand 

1 Bucholtz, iv. 468 f. and Huber, p. 220. 

- The religious attitude of Maximilian II. was dealt with in the last 
century in dissertations (see Krones, iii. 267), and the question has again 
lately been subjected to minute investigation by Reimann {Religiose 
Entwichelung Maximilian'' s II. pp. 1-28), by Maurenbrecher (in v. Sybel's 
Histor. Zeitschrift, vii. 351-380 ; xxxii. 221-297 ; 1. 17-31), by Brieger 
{Freuss. Jalirh. 33), by Reitzer {Z^lr Gesch. ties religiosen Wandhing 
Maximilian's II. ; Leipzig, 1870), by Gotz und "Walter (in the Mono- 
grajjhien ilber die Wahl Maximilian' s). See also Mdrhische Forschungen, 
xiii. 330; Theol. Studien und Kritiken, 1873, pp. 721-727; Gothein, 
pp. 725. 730 ; Moritz, pp. 18 and 438 f. To these works may be added 
that of Hopfen, published in 1895 and based on fresh authentic material, 
a work which certainly leaves much to be desired, and in which there are 
some very important omissions (see Paulus, in the Histor. Jahrbuch, xvi. 
599 ff.). In agreement with Stieve, Hopfen attributes to the Emperor the 
so-called Catholicism of compromise. Loserth {Allgem. Zeitimg, 1896, 
Beil. No. 105 : Aus den Lehrjahren Kaiser Maximilian' s II.) agrees 
with Hopfen, except that he thinks the date of Maximilian's adopting 
independent religious opinions is fixed at too late a period. Paulus 
{I.e.) and Hirn {Literahirblatt der Leo-Gesellschaft, 1896, pp. 361 f.) have, 
in my opinion, proved convincingly', in opposition to Hopfen, that the 
Emperor cannot be absolved from the reproach of doublefacedness. 
Wolf also (Deutsche Literaturzeitung, 1895, p. 781) is of opinion that 
Maximilian was not free from hypocrisy. See also Forst in v. Sybel's 
Histor. Zeitschrift, Ixxiii. 496, and Michael in the Zeitschrift filr 
hathol. Theologie, xvi. 519 ff. The name ' Catholicism of compromise ' 
was not very happily chosen to designate a religion which cared nothing 
for the Pope and very little for the bishops, rejected auricular confession, 
confirmation, extreme unction, and so forth. There may be a ' Protes- 
tantism of compromise,' but there is no ' Catholicism of compromise.' 
Whosoever rejects but one single doctrine of the Church is no longer a 
Catholic. What Hopfen calls ' Catholicism of compromise ' is latent 
Protestantism. While Hopfen's work was in the press, Gotz's interesting 
article, 'Compromise-Catholicism and the Emperor Maximilian II.' 
appeared in the Histor. Zeitschrift, Ixxvii. 193-206. In these pages 
Hopfen is sharply criticised, and objections to the designation 'Compro- 
mise-Catholicism ' are raised from other points of view. Gotz declares 
the system pursued by Hopfen to be wrong : ' first, because he has by no 
means adequately arranged all his varied materials, and, secondly, because 


had taken in this special direction, and all his efforts 
to keep doubtful influences away from his ' restless, 
ambitious ' son, it was his unhappy fate to see him at 
an early age ' infected with the novel sectarian opinions. ' 
The results of Maximihan's contact with the eloquent 
court preacher John Sebastian Pfauser, who was any- 
thing but a true Catholic, were particularly disastrous. 
Although Ferdinand had deposed Pfauser from his 
office of court preacher in 1554, Maximilian sheltered 
him in his own house. All Ferdinand's attempts to 
remove this dangerous man from his son ended in 
failure. The Emperor was weak enough to give in 
and allow the intercourse between the two to continue.^ 
At the end of the year 1557 Maximilian, unbeknown 
to his father, took into his service the Protestant zealot 
Verger, an apostate from the Church.^ Pfauser exer- 
cised a fatal influence over Maximilian. This man 
called himself a Catholic, while he combated the 
primacy of the Pope, and in his sermons plainly de- 
nounced all Catholics as fools, sticks, vain babblers, 
and destroyers of souls. On Christmas Day 1558 he 
preached ' so insultingly against the Apostolic See 
and the Catholic Church, that the like of it,' so the 
Archbishop of Salzburg wrote to the Emperor, ' was 
not tolerated even in Zwinglian towns and districts.' ^ 
Maximilian held opinions similar to Pfauser's. In 

in his one-sided treatment of the religious position of the Emperor, there 
lies an error of method.' Hopfen's new thesis on Maximihan's attitude to 
religion and the Church does not coincide with facts (pp. 199 f.). Gotz's 
condemnation of the Emperor, if not stronger than Janssen's, is at any 
rate quite as strong ; he says (p. 202, note) that Maximihan ' was first and 
foremost an adept at hypocrisy.' 

^ Hopfen, xvii. 22 f. '^ Le Bret, p. 109 ; Hopfen, p. 32. 

' Wiedemann, ii. 105-114 ; Bucholtz, viii. 208. Concerning Pfauser^ 
see also Braunsberger, EpisMce Canisii, i. 524-527, 530. 


private letters to Protestant princes, especially to Duke 
Christopher of Wiirtemberg, he said frankly that he 
recognised the Augsburg Confession as ' the expression 
of the true faith,' spoke of Catholic ' servants of the 
devil,' of a ' diabolical proceeding ' of the Pope, and 
expressed his wish that a reconciliation of the many 
religious differences in the Protestant camp would soon 
be effected, by which the Pope's throat would be cut.' ^ 
He held out distinct hopes to Duke Christopher of the 
abolition of the Ecclesiastical Eeservation." When, 
in 1559, the Emperor required of him that he should 
dismiss Pfauser on account of his having married, he 
refused to do so, saying that he could not obey his 
father in religious matters. They might persecute him 
to the very utmost, he wrote on April 9, 1559, to the 
Brandenburg Margrave, Hans von Ciistrin, ' and if they 
make it too hot for me, as they threaten, I hope I shall 
not be forsaken by your grace and other true Christians.' 
In February 1560 he complained to the Margrave that 
' it had, alas, come to this, that the Emperor had 
removed his preacher from him by force ; Ferdinand, 
in a great rage, had threatened that if his son did not 
get rid of the preacher he would have the man arrested 
and proceeded against in the way that such an heretical 
rogue deserved.' So great was Maximilian's alarm that 
he actually believed there were designs on his own life, 
' for they think that, if I were out of the way, everything 
would go as they wish.' ' I pray your grace not to 
be displeased at the contents of my letter ; for I have 
no one to open my heart to but God Almighty, your 
grace, and other good Christians.' 

'The King of Spain is very influential with my 

^ See above, p. 50. '^ See above, p. 104. 


father ; it is his ambassadors who are chiefly instru- 
mental in making the wheels go round at the imperial 
court.' ^ Finally, in the spring of 1560, Maximilian sent 
Pfauser to Styria as a temporary retreat, holding 
out to him hopes of a speedy recall, and giving him a 
yearly pension of 200 florins. 

Maximilian, who was extremely hazy about all 
matters of dogma, was at that time an enthusiastic 
advocate for tolerance, and for casting aside dogmatic 
religion ; he wished for a mixed religion without a Pope ; 
he rejected auricular confession, confirmation, extreme 
unction, indulgences, purgatory, veneration of saints, 
and celibacy, and was most keenly in favour of the 
lay chalice." 

In April 1560 he sent a confidential agent to the 
electors of Saxony, Brandenburg, and the Palatinate, 
to Christopher of Wiirtemberg, Philip of Hesse, and 
Hans von Ciistrin, for the double purpose of obtaining 
advice as to how he ought to behave if his father should 
refuse him permission to have another Protestant 
preacher, and should compel him to attend the service 
of the Mass ' which he abhorred ; ' and also to find out 
on what support he might reckon in case of further 
persecution from the Emperor and the Pope. He was 
determined, he said, not to pollute his conscience ' with 
popish abominations.' 

The Protestant princes, however, did not wish to 
push things on to an open breach between the Emperor 

^ Meyer, pp. 566-567. Die vollstdndige Correspondenz zivisclien 
Maximilian und dem Marhgrafen Hans von Ciistrin, edited by Meyer, 
in the Zeitschr. fiir preussische Gesch. und LandesTcunde, xv. (Berlin, 
1878) 114-150. 

- Hopfen, pp. 35 ff. Concerning Pfauser's dismissal, see Turba, Venet, 
Depeschen, iii. 119 f., 132. 


and Maximilian, and they made no definite promises. 
They advised Maximilian to continue steadfast in his 
own opinions and, so long as the public exercise of his 
religion was forbidden him, to content himself with 
divine service under his own roof/ 

The princes evidently looked forward to a favourable 
turn of affairs when once Maximilian should be Emperor. 
The Catholics, however, were unrelenting in their efforts 
to win him back to the orthodox Church. Since August 
1560 Maximilian had had frequent interviews with the 
papal nuncio, Hosius, Bishop of Ermland, who en- 
deavoured to bring back the wanderer by pointing out 
to him the many contradictions among the Protestants, 
and their never-ending internal dissensions. 

Maximilian, on these occasions, talked in such a 
manner as to give Hosius good grounds for expecting a 
successful result to his efforts.- And when the nuncio 
Commendone, on his way to the Naumburg convention 
of princes, stopped at Vienna, and in the name of the 
Pope invited Maximilian also to the Council of Trent, 
he too, to his great satisfaction, was impressed with the 
idea that the King was a devoted adherent of the Roman 
see. With eager delight he wrote back to Rome that 
' Maximilian, in a conversation on January 12, 1561, 
had praised the kindness and condescension of the Pope 
in sending his nuncios to the Protestant princes to 
invite them to Trent, and in addressing them as " beloved 
sons " in his briefs.' ' Pius IV.,' the King had said, 

' Weber, Arcliiv fiir sachsische Gescli. iii. 317-318. Meyer, pp. 568- 
570; Kugler, ii. 636-638; Eommel, ii. 577-578. Krabbe, Chytrdus, 
p. 194. Kluckhohn, Briefe, ii. 1032-1034. Hopfen, pp. 51 tf. 

•^ Eichhorn, Hosius, i. 354-382, goes too far in asserting that Hosius 
Tjroiight Maximilian back again to the Catholic faith. See Reimann, 
Beligiose Entwickelung, pp. 27 ff. 


* had done, if possible, almost more than he was autho- 
rised to do ; he had abundantly revealed the goodness 
of his heart.' ' The King then discussed the character 
■of these German princes, and talked about their interests 
and their dissensions, saying that he considered it almost 
impossible that they should ever agree together con- 
cerning a confession of faith ; with regard to the Council, 
he had little hope of them on account of their obduracy ; 
he on his part, however, would certainly support this 
most laudable attempt of the Pope ; he did not know 
how he could make sufl&cient return for the unparalleled 
goodness shown him by his Holiness ; he had done 
nothing to deserve it ; he hoped, however, by future 
action to show forth all that was in his heart.' ^ Maxi- 
milian at the same time assured the ambassador of King 
Philip II. of Spain that he had asked a few of the 
Protestant princes, with whom he was on friendly terms, 
to attend the Council ; he also told him that he intended 
sending his eldest son Rudolph, a boy of eight years old, 
to Spain to be educated, because under the present 
condition of things in Germany there was considerable 
danger of the child's religious instruction being tainted." 
But the very day after his conversation with Com- 
mendone, who then left Vienna for Naumburg with the 
Bishop Delfino, Maximilian ' showed forth by action 
what was in his heart ' in a manner which revealed his 
character in a very bad light. On January 13, the day 
of the nuncio's departure, he warned Duke Christopher 

■^ ' . . . In fine mi disse che non sapeva come corrispondere a 
Tinfinita benignita di nostro signore verso di lui, e che conosceva di non 
I'haver mai meritata, ma che sperava per I'avvenire mostrar con I'opere 
I'ammo suo ' (Commendone's letter of January 13, 1561, to Charles 
Borromaens, in Pogiani, Epist. ii. 219, note m). 

~ Reimann, Religiose Entwickelung, pp. 41-42. 


of Wiirtemberg to be well on his guard at Naumburg 
' against these fellows.' 

Two days later he spoke disparagingly to the Duke 
about " this conciliabulum or concilium,' and added 
with regard to the papal nuncios : ' I have no doubt 
but what your grace will take the measure of these men 
and will know well how to deal with them, for verily 
they are not to be trusted.' Including himself among 
the Protestant princes, he then expressed the hope that 
the princes at Naumburg would unite together ' in one 
religion and one mind,' ' a consummation,' he added, 
' which would cause no slight annoyance to our adver- 
saries, as your grace may easily imagine ; for their 
strength lies chiefly in the fact that we are so divided 
against each other in religion.' ^ 

So double-tongued a man as this was not to be 
trusted either by Catholics or Protestants." 

When, in the same year, 1561, the Emperor brought 
forward the question of the election of a Roman king, 
the ecclesiastical electors insisted on being informed 
with certainty whether Maximilian, who was likely to 
be raised to the throne, was a good CathoHc. Ferdinand 
communicated their wish to his son and requested him 
to say conscientiously what answer was to be given to 
the spiritual electors. Maximilian replied that it was 
' his firm resolve to maintain the Catholic religion, 
and to live and die in its faith.' ' What you say gives 
me great pleasure,' Ferdinand went on, ' and I verily 

1 In Le Bret, ix. 188, 190. The English ambassadors, Knolles and 
Mundt, wrote to Queen Elizabeth in 1562: 'Maximilian bears himself 
so that the Protestants stand in good hope, the Papists do not despair, 
and he is liked by both ' {Calendar of State Pa'pers, For. Ser. p. 552). 

2 This view of Janssen is supported by Paulus in the Histor. Jahr- 
buch, xvi. 600, against Hopfen. 


believe that you will not wander away from the path 
of your ancestors ; I am also convinced that, if you 
were otherwise minded, you would not hide the fact 
from me for any consideration. The demand made 
by the ecclesiastical electors I hold to be perfectly 
legitimate, and I confess that without the assurance 
which you have given, neither for your sake, nor for all 
the kingdoms of the world, would I propose or support 
you as a candidate. Of that you may be certain. And 
I beseech you, before the negotiations begin, to open 
your heart to me freely and unreservedly, so that you 
may not afterwards bring yourself and your father 
to shame ; for unless you can give me full and positive 
asseveration in this respect, I shall not give you any 
support : on the contrary, I shall be the first to oppose 
you.' Once more Maximilian declared that the Em- 
peror might rest assured that he would live and die 
a faithful son of the Roman Church, as his forefathers 
had done. He solemnly renewed this assurance in the 
presence of his brothers, and before the imperial privy 
councillors. He resumed attendance at Mass, and 
took part in processions and other Catholic Church 
services. He told Ferdinand that he had come to re- 
cognise how greatly the new religionists were going 
astray, and that he was sure the bulk of the people 
would return to the true fold, if the clergy ceased scan- 
dalising them by their evil examples. The only point 
on which he held out was the lay chalice.^ And thus 
the court preacher Cittardus was able to give the eccle- 
siastical electors the most tranquillising assurances 
concerning Maximilian's future attitude. The Pro- 

^ Reimann, Beligicise EnhvlcTielung, pp. 58-61. Ritter, i. 254. Gotz, 
Maximilian's Wahl, pp. 118 f. See Hopfen, pp. 74 f. 



testant friends of tlie King of Boliemia had no suspicion 
of his hypocrisy ; they cherished the hope that in 
Ferdinand's successor they would have a champion/ 

From the outset there had been no reason to fear 
any opposition to Maximilian's election from the 
Lutheran electors : Joachim II. of Brandenburg had 
himself suggested the King as a candidate ; Augustus 
of Saxony, when first the Emperor proposed his son's 
name, had declared that he should ' be on the imperial 
side.' -' The Calvinist elector, Frederic III., on the other 
hand, spoke decidedly against proceeding with an 
election. He was only waiting for the throne to be 
vacant to ' ravish the Empire from the House of Austria.' 
It was said in Heidelberg that to prevent the Empire 
from losing ' its freedom,' it was desirable that the 
* dignity should pass for once to another line.' -^ Under 
the existing conditions of schism and embitterment 
between the Protestant and Catholic Estates, the election 
of an Emperor during an interregnum would in all 
probability have led to a rival election, which in its turn 
might have caused a civil war, in which there would 
have been danger of the interference of foreign powers. 

^ Schmidt, Neicere Gesch. ii. 151. Gotz, Maximilian's Wahl, p. 119. 

- Hjiberlin, iv. 483 ff. ; Bitter, i. 252. Both these electors, be it said, 
demanded, later on, very real counter ser^vices in return for their votes, 
and their requests were for the most part granted. See Gotz's Maxi- 
milian's Wahl, pp. 145 f., 191 f., a work based on the study of archives, and 
Walter's Die Wa]d Maximilian's II., a dissertation ; Heidelberg, 1892. 
See also Schlecht, in the Histor. Jahrbuch, xiii. 903, and xiv. 185. In a 
hitherto unknown memorandum, preserved in the Berlin secret State 
archives (possibly the work of a Protestant in Maximilian's retinue) and 
intended as a propaganda for the election of Maximilian, the latter is 
recommended directly in opposition to papistical candidates. Altmann, 
in the Mittheilungen des Oesterr. Instituts, 1892, xiii. 619 ff. 

' Kluckhohn's Brlefe, i. 243, 247 ff., 274, 286, 355. See Kluckhohn's 
Priedrich der Fromme, pp. 190-192, and Gotz's Maximilian's Wahl, 
pp. 107 ff. 


Cliristopher of Wiirtemberg put tliis probability before 
the Elector Palatine and reminded him of the respon- 
sibility he was incurring in opposing an election at the 
present time.^ Finding no support among the other 
princes, Frederic withdrew his opposition, and on No- 
vember 24, 1562, Maximilian was unanimously elected 
King of Rome at Frankfort on the Main, and crowned 
in St. Bartholomew's Church on November 30. After 
the manner of all his predecessors, he swore a solemn 
oath that he would maintain the Catholic religion, 
protect the Church and its ministers, and continue 
in dutiful submission and loyalty to the Pope and the 
Roman Church.^ 

How far Maximilian in his heart remained attached 
to the Augsburg Confession must be left undecided. 
Certain it is, however, that this many-faced and equi- 
vocating prince, guided not so much by conviction as by 
caprice and calculation, never planted his foot firmly 
•on the soil of Roman Catholicism. His religious opinions 
were as misty and confused as possible, and this in 
itself was a sufficient reason for the failure of his attempt 
to reunite the schismatic parties ; his utterances were 
-always such that they could be interpreted in a two- 
fold manner. Against Calvinism alone did he oppose a 
decided and straightforward front.^ 

^ HTlberlin, iv. 539-540. Gotz's Maximilian's WaJiI, pp. 109 and 139. 

- Gotz, Maximilian's Walil, pp. 170 f., and the already cited work of 
"Walter. That Pius IV. did not, as has so often been alleged against him, 
.take up a position absolutely antagonistic to Maximilian's election, but 
that, on the contrary, he met the wishes of the Emperor and the King as 
far as he possibly could, is shown by Schlecht, in his most interesting 
and valuable article, ' Das geheime Dispensbreve Pius IV. ftir die 
romische Konigskronung Maximilian's II.' in the Histor. Jahrbuch, xiv. 

^ See Hopfen, pp. 90 ft", and Hirn, I.e. That Maximilian (as Paulus 

z 2 


Already, on the day of the election at Frankfort,. 
Christopher of Wiirtemberg had endeavoured to per- 
suade his Protestant associates, especially the Electors 
of Saxony and Brandenburg, to unite in taking action 
with regard to Frederic III. He had urged on them 
that there was no doubt whatever that the Zwinglian 
or Calvinistic doctrine had gained the upper hand in the 
Palatinate, that it was a most pernicious heresy, that 
it stood in direct opposition to the Confession of Augs- 
burg, and that ' this sect, like all the others, was ex- 
cluded from the Eeligious Peace.' Over and above 
all this, he said, ' Calvinism, as is proved by many ex- 
amples, is seditious in spirit, and wherever it enters it is 
determined to usurp dominion, even over magistrates : 
the Elector Palatine is therefore exposed to danger not 
only from outside, but also from his own subjects.' 
Christopher urged that the Estates ought all to join in 
representing this to the Elector and in endeavouring 
to make him see ' what a mocker he would appear in 
everybody's eyes ' if, after subscribing, only a short time 
ago, to the Augsburg Confession, both in the Frankfort 
Recess and at Naumburg, hs so soon digressed from it. 
' It is also easy to foresee what misery, tribulation,, 
and ruin your Grace will by this means bring on yourself, 
on your land, and on your people, seeing that the Reli- 
gious Peace is based on the Confession of Augsburg.' ^ 

The Electors of Brandenburg and Saxony, however, 
would not accede to Christopher's proposal, although 
in doing so they would have been supported by Maxi- 
milian. ' The Roman King solemnly warned the Augs- 

maintains in the Histor. Jalirh. xvi. 509) after his election was no longer 
Protestant at heart I am inclined to donbt. 
^ Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 371- o77. 


burg Confessionists to beware of letting tlie Zwinglian 
or Calvinistic poison creep in among them; for otherwise 
the KeUgious Peace, which the Emperor had arranged 
in all sincerity after the recusation of the Council by 
the Evangelicals, would be frustrated, and this might 
lead to the complete ruin of the beloved Fatherland.' ^ 
Soon afterwards Maximilian told Duke Christopher at 
Goppingen, that if the Protestant princes had not suc- 
ceeded in settling their differences and becoming united 
by St John's day next year, it was quite likely that 
forcible proceedings of some sort would be taken against 
them.- Maximilian and Ferdinand implored the Elector 
Palatine most urgently, both in April and July 1563> 
to renounce Calvinism, which was excluded from the 
benefits of the Keligious Peace.^ But neither Emperor 
nor King received a word of answer to their entreaties. 
When, in the following year, Christopher of Wiirtem- 
berg and the Count Palatine Wolfgang of Zweibrilcken 
begged the King to address ' another similar letter ' to 
Frederic, Maximilian refused to try again, saying, with 
bitterest reproaches of the Elector for his apostasy, 
that he had not yet answered either his or his father's 
first remonstrances. He added, however, that he would 
consider by what means this grievous trouble might be 
remedied, and the matter suitably dealt with in accord- 
ance with the terms of the Religious Peace. 

Maximilian commended both the princes for the 
Tules and regulations which they had drawn up to 
protect their lands against ' the poison of the Palatinate,' 

^ Eine Mainzer Aufzeichnung vom 27 November 1562, from Habel's 

- Heppe, GescJi. des Pyotestantismus, ii. 24. Kugler, ii. 436, 
^ Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 398-399, 419-422. 


and promised to use his influence to persuade Ferdinand 
* to bestow like watchful care in preventing his lands 
and dominions from being corrupted by this same 
poison, so that by the joint efforts and careful scrutiny 
of the Emperor, himself, and the Estates of the realm, 
the evil leaven might at last be cleared out.' ^ 

Frederic of the Palatinate had no fears of such a 
scrutiny being instituted. 

After the death of the Emperor Ferdinand, on July 
25, 1564, and the accession of Maximilian, Frederic, in 
spite of his Calvinistic Heidelberg Catechism, presented 
himself to the new ruler as an adherent of the Augsburg 
Confession, and began instructing him in the duties 
of his office. His first and highest duty, he told him, 
was to acknowledge and propagate the one true Christian 
religion, which alone could procure salvation, and which 
was embodied in the Augsburg Confession, and to labour 
for the extirpation of the Catholic Church, or, as he put 
it, ' the abolition of all idolatry and false worship.' 
Maximilian must not let himself be hindered in this work 
by the wicked enemy, and by the Pope and all his 
followers. Frederic expressed his regrets that former 
emperors had not used their power and preroga- 
tive ' against the abominable idolatry of the Roman 
antichristian Empire.' There would doubtless be 
plenty of people who would counsel him, the Emperor, 
to ' moderation in religious affairs ; ' but he must not 
follow such advice ; Clod Almighty wished that everything 
that was contrary to His com.mand should be ' hated, 
shunned, and abolished.' In order to put an end to the 
quarrels and dissensions among the theologians, the 
Emperor, Frederic said, should summon a council and 

^ Kugler, ii. 455. 


preside over it liimself, and abolish ' all in the con- 
stitution of the Empire which hindered the advent of 
the kingdom of God.' ^ 

In the Elector's eyes the abolition of the ecclesiastical 
reservation would be the best means for ' ridding the 
Empire of the horrors and idolatry of the papacy ; ' 
and to this end (he wrote on August 22, 1564, to the 
Elector of Saxony) the three temporal electors must 
deliberate with other princes as to how the new Emperor 
was to be prevailed on to do away with this obstacle 
to the ' emancipation of the true Christian religion.' ^ 

Reckless of Emperor and Empire, Frederic went 
forward with his violent measures, not only against the 
Catholics and all their institutions, schools, and Church 
property, but also against the Lutherans. Even his 
own younger brother, the Count Palatine George, 
deemed it advisable that judgment should be pronounced 
on Frederic's religious position by a declaration from 
all the other Protestant princes. The Count Palatine 
Wolfgang of Zweibriicken was in favour of this sugges- 
tion, ' for by this means,' he wrote to Duke Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg, ' the Elector's sect, and all belonging 
to it, will be condemned, and we and the others be cleared 
before God and the world.' The civil authorities would 
also by this means come to a knowledge of what power 
and authority their offices conferred on them. Every 
prince of the Empire who made himself a partisan of 
this sect must ' without mercy be excluded from the 
Religious Peace.' "^ 

On August 24, 1565, Christopher once more sum- 
moned all the Lutheran princes to unite with him for 

1 Struve, pp. 145-149. - Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 520. See i. 529-530. 

•' Kugler, ii. 461. 


the protection of the true faith against Zwinglianism, 
which in some parts of Germany was making violent 
inroads, in others creeping in secretly and insidiously. 
' People were more and more finding out what deadly 
poison and execrable blasphemy lurked in this doctrine, 
and it was to be feared that many more abortions would 
be generated by this monster, seeing that the Heidel- 
bergers had not scrupled to write that Christ in the 
Sacrament was a wheaten idol, and in our hearts a 
mere fiction of man's invention.' ^ 

Thus there was every reason to expect that at the 
Diet summoned by Maximilian to meet at Augsburg, 
' a heavy storm would burst on the head of the Elector 
of the Palatinate.' 

^ Neudecker, Neiie Beitrdge, ii. 89-96. 




Among the subjects announced by the Emperor for 
discussion at the Diet of January 14, 1566, two principal 
ones were : how a right understanding was to be arrived 
at with regard to the Christian rehgion, and how the 
inroads of the heretical sects were to be stemmed. 

Frederic III., to whom it could not be a matter of 
doubt whether Calvinism would be reckoned among 
the number of these ' seductive sects,' spared no pains 
before the meeting of the Diet in endeavouring to bring 
his Protestant compeers to a state of unanimity, and to 
prevail on them to oppose a united front to the Catholic 
Church. ' It was not Protestantism,' he explained to 
them, ' which had produced all these erroneous sects ; 
they had originated from the blasphemies and idolatry 
of the papacy, which was the true source of all heresy : 
the j&rst step, therefore, must be to abolish the papacy.' 
So long as the papacy, with all its sacrilege and worship 
of idols, continued to exist in Germany, so long would 
sects of all sorts have the right to claim for themselves 
the same tolerance and recognition that Roman Catho- 
licism enjoyed. The Protestant princes, who, in spite 
of all ' secondary disputes ' among theologians, were 
really and truly united on all fundamental doctrine. 


must stand loyally together, must encourage and 
strengthen the Emperor in his bias towards the true 
religion, and above all must lose no time in endeavouring 
to secure the abolition of the Ecclesiastical Reservation.^ 
But the Protestant princes had very little hope of 
being able to combine unanimously against the papacy. 
The Landgrave Philip drew the Elector's attention 
to the controversy on the Person of Christ, and to the 
Palatine doctrine of the Sacrament which ' would cause 
a great deal of studying.' ' If we attempted to combat 
the papacy, we should be told that we were not agreed 
among ourselves.' ' Therefore, we do not really know 
what course will have to be taken in these matters. 
For it would look somewhat strange to be trying to 
reform others when we were divided among ourselves.' 
Philip promised, however, to exert influence at the Diet, 
through his coimcillors, for reducing the Estates to 
unanimity, and for procuring the abolition of the 
Reservation.^' The Elector Augustus of Saxony feared 
that if stronger pressure than before was brought to 
bear in this matter, the result would be to upset the 
whole Religious Peace. He apprehended ' less harm 
and disaster ' from the papacy than ' from the want of 
unity, the schisms, and the odious quarrelling of those 
w^ho boasted of their adherence to the Augsburg Con- 
fession.' It was obvious from the situation of affairs, 
he wrote, with evident reference to Frederic's new con- 
fession of faith, ' that in these later times there had been 
no decrease of schism, errors, and perverting doctrine, 
but that, on the contrary, these evils had gone on in- 

* Heppe, GescJi. des Profestanfismns, ii. 113. Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 

- Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 609-610. 


creasing ; for so great was the mutual bitterness of heart 
and spirit that strife and division were preferred to peace 
and unity, and more deUght was taken in setting up 
novel, independent creeds and dogmas than in the 
maintenance of the true Christian doctrine.' ^ Augustus 
of Saxony, moreover, did not wish Frederic to 'be 
driven at the Diet to separation from the other Estates,' 
which would occasion a still greater breach in the 
Empire.- The Elector Joachim II. of Brandenburg, to 
whom Augustus caused this to be intimated, declared the 
Palatine doctrine of the Sacrament to be a far greater 
blasphemy than even the Zwinglian error : the Estates 
must on no account give their sanction to this heresy, 
as adherents of the Augsburg Confession, but must 
declare openly that on this point they were not in agree- 
ment with Frederic ; at the same time he would not 
advise that ' any severe measures should be taken against 
him, although all contraria docentes w^ere excluded from 
the Religious Peace.' ^ Duke Wolfgang of Zweibriicken 
replied to the Elector Palatine's declaration that ' in 
the controversy between the Protestant Estates it was 
not a question of secondary or minor disputations, 
but of matters which concerned the honour of the Son 
of God and the groundwork of salvation ; there could 
be no fellowship between the Christians and the holders 
of false opinions, and no real happiness or good would 
follow, if, in violation of their consciences, they joined 
together to oppose the papacy, boasting of unanimous 
belief fn one and the same creed, while an opposite state 
of things was plainly apparent, and had been made 

1 Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 611-613. 

- Instruction to the Elector of Brandenburg, in Kluckliolm, ii. 1038- 
1039, note. 

2 Kluckhohn, Briefe, ii. 1039. 


known to the world by printed pamphlets. All those 
who should thus show themselves in the light of sharers 
in opinions that were most highly condemned would be 
self- excluded from the Religious Peace.' Wolfgang 
sent this letter to Frederic's sons-in-law, the Dukes 
John Frederic and John William of Saxony, and received 
the following answer from John William : He abhorred 
'that devilish Zwinglianism,' felt true Christian pity 
for his father-in-law, of whose conversion he had small 
hopes, and would not suffer him to cover this heresy 
with the mantle of the Augsburg Confession ; on the 
contrary, he would do everything in his power to suppress 
and extinguish it.^ John Frederic's answer to Wolf- 
gang's letter is not known, but he had already intimated 
to his father-in-law that if he did not renounce his errors 
he would go to the devil.^ 

Duke Christopher of Wiirtemberg entertained fears 
Hhat schism would break out among the adherents of 
the Augsburg Confession ' at the Diet. The Emperor 
had, at any rate, made up his mind to ask the evangelical 
Estates whether they still considered the Elector at 
Heidelberg a member of their own religious profession, 
whether he was qualified to be included in the Religious 
Peace, and whether the Palatine Catechism and Frederic's 
Church regulations were in harmony with the Augsburg 
Confession ? To these questions not one of the evan- 
gelical princes, if put on his oath, would be able to answer 
anything but ' No.' Duke Christopher's theologians 
advised that he should endeavour to move the other 
Protestant princes to fulfil their duty with regard to 
Frederic, but that he should be careful withal not to 
load himself with the chief odium in the matter, and 

1 Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 605-607. - Ibid. i. 150. 


not to give any loophole for its being said afterwards 
that he alone, or he first, occasioned a breach between 
the Estates. It would be better for him to let the Count 
Palatine Wolfgang, Duke John William, and the dele- 
gates from Pomerania, Mecklenburg, and a few of the 
towns, take the initiative.^ 

The Diet was to begin on January 14, 1566; but the 
Emperor, who had arrived with a brilliant retinue, had 
to wait more than two months for the notables and the 
delegates. The opening of the assembly did not take 
place till March 23. In the imperial address, which 
was read by Duke Albert of Bavaria, the first and prin- 
cipal matter of business mentioned by the Emperor 
was the question of the Christian religion. All the 
turbulence and disaffection which had distracted 
Germany, he said, had been caused by the long and 
wearisome schism in religion, and the misery and tribu- 
lation in the Empire would have been far worse even 
but for the Eeligious Peace, which King Ferdinand 
and the Estates had brought about in the year 1555, 
between the princes of the old religion and those pro- 
fessing the Augsburg Confession. All the ways and 
means however, by which, after the conclusion of this 
peace, Ferdinand and the Estates had sought to reconcile 
the religious differences, had been doomed ' by the spe- 
cial judgment of God and by the force of circumstances ' 
to remain fruitless. Nevertheless, at the last Diets 
held at Rat'sbon and Augsburg, it had been resolved, 
and recorded in the Recesses, that the Religious Peace 
should continue valid even if religious unification were 
not effected. The present Emperor also had sworn 

^ Heppe, Gesch. des Protestaniismus, ii. 114. Kugler, ii. 478 480. 


at his coronation to stand faithfully by this treaty, and 
he would be as good as his word. 

There was no allusion in the address to the announce- 
ment previously made by the Emperor in his letters 
of summons, respecting transactions for effecting uni- 
fication in religion between the adherents of the ancient 
religion and the Augsburg Confessionists. But Maxi- 
milian had all the more strongly emphasised the fact 
that ' It was well-known to everybody that, since the 
conclusion of the Religious Peace, divisions of all sorts 
had occurred among those parties, whether Catholic 
or Protestant, to whom alone the treaty had reference,' 
that ' abominable sects, erroneous, pernicious, mis- 
leading doctrines ' were springing up day by day, and 
gaining dominion more and more, to the terrible scandal 
and perplexity of many Christian hearts and minds. 
It was therefore indispensably necessary to devise 
pious, fitting, and adequate measures for getting rid of 
these sects, which were excluded from the Religious 
Peace. With fatherly solicitude and most earnest 
insistence, the Emperor begged the Estates to point out 
to him what these measures should be.^ 

The Emperor had given up his earlier idea of negotia- 
tions between the Catholic princes and those of the 
Augsburg Confession on account of the daily widening 
breaches among the Protestants, and the sluggishness 
and unwillingness of the princes concerned," and also 
in deference to Pope Pius V., who, through his legate. 
Cardinal Commendone, had most sternly forbidden 
him, even on pain of excommunication and dethrone- 
ment, to meddle in any way with religious matters.^ 

^ Beichstagsacten , 70 fol. 74-106. See Hiiberlin, vi. 145 ff. 

- Hopfen, p. 131 f. 

^ See Schwarz, Bricfe und Aden, i. 3 f., 6 f., 16 f. Ritter i. 266, 


The Emperor did not wish to break openly with the 
Church ; on the contrary, he made a parade of Catholic 
conformity. In the observance of the Mass and other 
' popish ceremonies,' the Hessian ambassadors reported, 
Maximilian was as strict as his father. Moreover, he 
never heard any other sermons than those of his court 
preacher Cittardus, who was out and out ' popish.' ^ 
On the other hand, in private conversations with 
Protestants, the Emperor made no secret of his constant 
predilection for the Augsburg Confession ; he spoke 
against the invocation of saints, called the Mass and 
Purgatory monkish dreams, and said it was a most heinous 
sin to bind consciences down to such things. To the 
Elector Augustus of Saxony he owned that he would 
prefer, now at once, to put an end to the whole idolatrous 
business.^ While, however, he was thus inclining more 
and more to the Confession of Augsburg, Calvinism 
was as odious to him as ever. His court preacher 
delivered violent harangues against the Calvinistic 
doctrine of the Sacrame»t, which, according to the testi- 
mony of an ambassador from the Palatinate, he was 
wont to describe as a ' damnable, heretical, blasphemous, 
seditious doctrine, cunningly devised according to 
human understanding and reason by self-instructed 
charlatans and quack theologians.' ^ 

On March 29 it was resolved at the Diet that, for 
the avoidance of acrimony of any sort, ' nothing should 
be decided with regard to religion in general assembly ; ' 

277. Hopfen, p. 131, shows that Maximihan II. endeavoured to nullify 
Comniendone's mission as long as it was possible. 

^ Kluckhohn, Brief e, i. 567, note. 

* Archiv fiir siichsische GescJiichte, iii. 335. Kluckhohn, Friedrich 
der Fromme, p. 222, and 464-465. See Hopfen, pp. 116 f., 132 f. 

3 Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. G34, 


but that the Catholic Estates should stand together 
' as one man,' and the Estates of the Augsburg Confession 
likewise, and that each party should send up its griev- 
ances to the Emperor in writing.^ 

Thereupon the Protestant princes and ambassadors 
(with the exception of the Palatine councillors) met 
together in the hostel of Elector Augustus of Saxony, 
and agreed that they could not be associated with 
Frederic III. of the Palatinate in religious matters 
unless he made an entirely satisfactory ' Christian 
declaration, especially respecting the article of the Holy 
Sacrament.' - Frederic, however, who two days later, 
April 2, put in a personal appearance at the Diet, ignored 
this decision, and joined in the business of the assembly 
without making any declaration of his opinions. On 
April 12 he invited the Estates to his hostel, and on 
this day, and on April 13, at the hostel of the Elector 
Augustus, an agreement was arrived at concerning 
a petition to be sent to the Emperor. ' Unanimously 
as one man,' they said in this document, ' they would 
oppose the idolatrous papists.' What sort of unanimity, 
however, existed among them was made known by 
Duke Christopher and the Count Palatine Wolfgang 
on April 17, at a gathering of Protestant princes and 
delegates of princes, when he told them that the Elector 
Palatine's chaplain had dared ' here, while the Diet was 
sittinfi^, to attack the doctrine of the Real Presence in the 
Holy Eucharist with most offensive and scandalous lan- 
guage, and had openly called all believers in this dogma 
Capernaites, cannibals, and other abominable names.' ^ 

^ Ponawer, p. 37. - Kugler, ii. 483-484. 

■' Report of the Hessian Ambassador of April 19, 1566, in Kluckhohn, 
Brief e, i. 655. See Ritter, i. 279. 


In a publication also circulated against Frederic by 
the Lutheran party, it was stated that ' His preachers 
rant and declaim against us openly, call us eaters of the 
Lord God, Capernaites, cannibals.' Frederic answered 
that abuse and invective of this sort was not carried on 
with his sanction, and that it was unreasonable to ' call 
him to account for it, and make it a cause of separation.' 
' On the other hand, it was well known how the preachers 
and scribes of that party dealt wholesale in abusive 
nicknames such as heretics, ranters, revilers of the 
Sacrament, devil's teachers, and so forth, and that 
'those among them who excelled most in this practice 
were the most highly esteemed.'^ Nevertheless, 'how- 
ever discordant they might be among themselves ' 
in their joint petition now, as before at Naumburg, 
the princes assumed the semblance of perfect unity in 
the faith. They heaped the heaviest accusations against 
the Catholic Church and against their Catholic brother 

It was not the Protestants, they declared, who had 
caused schism and sectarianism in religion ; the evil 
had all arisen by divine decree, ' out of the heathen 
atrocities and idolatry of the papacy.' 'Whereas for 
many years past they had observed, in many different 
transactions and in imperial edicts and declarations, 
evident signs of the Emperor's sincere zeal for the true 
religion,' they now proposed, in their anxiety both 
for his temporal and eternal welfare, and for the satis- 
faction of their consciences, to bring to his notice all 
that the extremity of the case required. 

All God-fearing people, they said, not only in Ger- 
many but also in the neighbouring kingdoms, were 

1 Kluckholm, Brief e, i. 728. 


confident that at this present Diet the Emperor, in 
the present state of religious division, would find a way 
for the propagation of the Divine Word, by which the 
' idolatry and abominations ' of the Pope would be 
extirpated. The Emperor must be well informed, 
from trustworthy, historical sources, what was the 
origin of this papacy, which had come into existence, 
to the disturbance of the whole of Christendom ; he 
must be aware of the manner in which it had gradually 
weakened the imperial power, incensed the princes one 
against the other, fettered the emperors ' by impious 
oaths,' and introduced all sorts of idolatry into religion, 
above all the in quitous Mass. All this had been 
demonstrated more than, once by the writings of their 
theologians. It was only within the last forty years that 
the all-merciful God had had pity on His poor Church, and 
in a marvellous manner had rekindled in the German 
Empire the light of His unchangeable Word, which alone 
could give salvation, and had caused it to shine through- 
out Christendom. But the Popes and their followers 
had ' set themselves stubbornly against this light,' 
and in opposition to God and to their consciences had 
striven to suppress and extinguish it.' The true 
doctrine was set forth clearly in the Augsburg Con- 
fession and the Apology. As for all the different 
sects, whose extirpation the Emperor demanded in his 
address, they knew of none such in their territories ; 
these must have originated with the wicked enemy 
and the papists, ' who persecuted the manifest truth 
in violation of their consciences, and would not allow 
it place or foothold.' To the Pope and his champions 
they could say, with equal truth, what Elias had said : 
* I have not troubled Israel, but thou and thy father's 


house, in that ye have forsaken the Commandments of 
the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim.' 

All these charges against the Catholic Estates and 
the Catholics generally, as followers of idolatry, the 
Protestants were pleased to say had been made ' for the 
furtherance of God's glory, for the welfare of the Empire, 
and with a view to peace ; ' and what they had thus done 
in a ' Christian and loyal spirit ' they expected the 
Emperor ' to respond to in a fatherly and gracious 
manner.' It was their hope and belief, they repeated, 
that in the loftiness of his understanding he would 
already have thought out ways and means by which the 
abominable idolatry and superstitions of the papacy 
might once for all be stopped. In their opinion the 
means best adapted to this end would be to convene a 
national council under the presidency of the Emperor.^ 

' A council of this sort,' said the Catholic party, 
' would be a veritable tower of Babel ; for if even now» 
when there were only a few theologians and princes at 
work discussing religious matters, the Protestants were 
constantly at strife and divided by worse hatred than 
ever, what was likely to happen if crowds were assembled 
from all parts of Germany in order, as they said, to 
decide matters according to the Divine Word ? Who 
at such a council would be judge and arbiter as to 
what was the true interpretation of the Divine Word and 
Holy Scripture, to which they all in turn appealed 
for justification of their endless different dogmas ? 
There would be Lutherans of the unaltered Confession, 
and Lutherans of the altered Confession, Flacians, 
Hesshusians, Strigelians, Wigandists, Adiaphorists, Syn- 
ergists, Majorites, Musculists, Osianderites, Schwenck- 

^ Donawer, pp. 47-82 ; Lehmann, pp. 90-103. 

A A 2 


feldians, and by whatever other names these teachers 
of the different doctrines called themselves; not to 
speak of Zwinglians and Calvinists and the new sect of 
Ubiquists, who all and sundry condemned each other 
as heretics, and, as everybody knows, in their writings 
sent each other to the devil.' And if the Emperor were 
to lay down the law, who would obey him ? And which 
of the princes would have power ' to legislate beyond 
the limits of his own territory ? There is scarcely one 
of these who has any control over his own theologians, 
as the princes themselves confess. Who would be able 
to exercise authority over the imperial cities ? And let 
no one imagine that these towns would go along with 
the princes in their confession of faith. In these ques- 
tions of religion there are innumerable splits and differ- 
ences of opinion, and whichever way one turns there is 
nothing but discontent, mistrust, quarrelUng and hatred, 
a very Babel indeed, which at a national council would 
be evident to the blindest ; indeed, the Confessionists^ 
when among themselves, do not deny that all this is 
true. But in the eyes of the world they pose as if they 
were eager for a council.' ^ 

The petition of the Protestant Estates went on to 
supplicate that, ' meanwhile, until a national council 
should be summoned, the Emperor would, in the first 
place, grant free exercise of their religion to all subjects 
of Catholic princes who either were, or should become, 
adherents of the Augsburg Confession, and, secondly, 
that he would remove the Ecclesiastical Reservation.' 

The Elector Frederic had for a long time pointed out 

^ Tractat ilher die recJite und einig christliche Sclilichtung der 
Streitluindcl in SacJien christliches Glauhens ujid Confession (1566), 
pp. 4-5. 


to the Protestant Estates that the abolition of the 
Reservation was the best means towards the extirpation 
of the Catholic religion.^ The suppliants, in their 
petition, called this article ' the mainspring of all the 
pernicious mistrust' existing between the Estates of the 
German nation. ' We cannot,' they protested, ' allow 
this eternal blemish and disgrace to rest on our true 
religion ; we are furthermore of opinion that the said 
article is a heavy burden on the consciences even of 
many loyal Estates of the ancient religion, and that your 
Majesty is bound in the sight of God to allow free course 
to the truth of God, which alone can give salvation ; 
and that you ought not to bar the way of salvation to 
any of your Estates or subjects.' 

The Protestant towns, however, did not believe 
that the princes, ' in their continual agitation ' for the 
abolition of the Ecclesiastical Reservation, ' were guided 
by considerations of eternal salvation.' If, at the Diet 
of 1559, some at least of the towns had joined the 
princes, these also now changed their opinions. When 
the princes pressed the town delegates to vote for the 
removal of the Reservation, the latter were unanimous in 
their refusal, and, as the Frankfort delegates reported on 
April 23, ' placed themselves thus under the high dis- 
favour of electors and princes.'^ 'All the imperial cities, 
without exception,' wrote Christopher of Wiirtemberg, 
' have now deserted us on the matter of emancipation. 
Had they stood loyally by the princes, I believe the 
measure would have been forced on the Emperor : he no 
longer felt much pleasure, therefore, in joining in trans- 
actions respecting religion with an imperial city.' ^ 

^ See above, pp. 342 f. 

■^ Frankfurter Beichstagsacten, 70, fol. 22. ' Kugler, ii. 493. 


In spite of the contrariety of the towns, the petition 
and gravamina were sent up to the Emperor, through 
the Elector of Saxony, on April 25, in the name of all 
the Estates belonging to the Augsburg Confession. 

Maximilian, according to the agreement made by 
both parties, handed it to the Catholic Estates to be 
answered. Their reply was couched in calm and 
temperate language, differing very agreeably from the 
bitter polemical style of the adversaries : ' They had 
no desire on their part,' they said, to enter afresh on a 
dispute of so many years' standing, which had been 
worn threadbare, and the story of which had filled such 
innumerable books ; nor did they intend to indulge 
in a cross-fire of ratiocination and in reciprocation of 
the slanderous libels and insults, so odious to a Christian 
spirit, which were hurled at them in the petition. They 
had come to Augsburg with the intention of seeking 
out ways and means by which, in these parlous times 
of extreme peril to the German nation, peace, tran- 
quillity, and security might be restored. All the more 
strange, therefore, did it seem to them that, contrary 
to all the usages of the holy Empire, in violation of the 
Religious Peace, and in opposition to all Christian rule 
and courtesy, they should be met with so virulent and 
slanderous a document : a document which dared in 
the grossest manner to attack the ancient Catholic 
religion handed down from the days of the Apostles, the 
Majesty of the Emperor himself, the Catholic Estates 
of the realm, and even the pious forefathers of the peti- 
tioners themselves (the Augsburg Confessionists) who 
had died in the Catholic religion. They could not 
believe that the petition really emanated from these 
Estates ; they preferred to think it was the work of 


restless agitators who delighted in stirring up sedition 
with their pens, and whose last wish or thought was to 
establish and maintain between Emperor and Estates 
the peace that was of such vital import to the nation. 
No greater insult or injury could be inflicted on them 
than to be told publicly that their religion was blind- 
ness ; that their religion was a scandalous abomination, 
a heathen invention, an idolatrous system, altogether 
at variance with the Word of God ; that the regular 
authority of the Church and the Councils was tyranny ; 
that they and other Catholics were in opposition to the 
Word of God, were the cause of all the irregularities 
and sectarianism in the Church, and that they were 
unmindful of the welfare of the German nation.' They 
then proceeded to refute the reproaches and complaints 
raised against the Church. ' If the old religion was no 
longer of any account, and if it was indeed true that it 
was only in these later times that the Omnipotent God 
had taken pity on His poor Church, and that not till 
some short forty years ago had He vouchsafed to kindle 
in the holy German Empire the marvellous light of the 
one only Gospel by which salvation is wrought, and allow 
it to shine throughout Christendom ; how incredibly 
great must have been the wrath of Almighty God, even 
after the human race had been redeemed at such tre- 
mendous costs and had received the outpouring of the 
Holy Ghost, if He could keep back such a light from the 
Christian Church and from our pious forefathers, and 
leave them groping in the darkness and the shadow 
of death, and allow so many hundred thousands of souls, 
^ baptised in His own name, to perish in corruption and 
eternal damnation.' As to fresh religious conferences, 
or a national council, they could not recommend either 


of these ways to the Emperor. Conferences had always 
proved fruitless, and a national council would not heal 
the schism in religion ; on the contrary, it would only 
lead to fresh anarchy and apostasy among Christian 
nations. If, however, the Emperor should be able to 
suggest any practicable and salutary measures for the 
solution of the difficulty, be it Christian reform of Church 
discipline, or removal of many palpable scandals, 
grievances, and irregularities, or any other means which 
accorded, at any rate, with the substance of Catholic 
doctrine and the decrees of the Council lately held at 
Trent, they, on their part, would not be found wanting 
in zeal for the re-establishment of unity and the main- 
tenance of peace. 

With regard to the complaints raised by the Protes- 
tant Estates of injury and oppression practised against 
their fellow-believers, they themselves had far greater 
and more numerous grievances to bring forward : it 
would seem indeed as if the one concern of the Protestants 
was to get possession of the last remnants and fragments 
of the churches, abbeys, and cloisters, with all the goods 
appertaining to them, in spite of the terms of the Pacifi- 
cation of Augsburg, by which all these had been so 
dearly secured to the Catholics. As to their demand 
for the abolition of the Ecclesiastical Reservation, and 
the guarantee of religious freedom to their subjects, 
they must at all points conform rigidly to the letter of 
the Pacification of Augsburg. Unconditional freedom of 
religion was by no means, in their opinion, conducive 
to general peace, because it gave wide scope to seditious, 
msubordinate, disloyal subjects — Anabaptists, Sacra- 
mentarians, and other similar sects — to set themselves 
up insolently over the civil rulers, to foment insurrection 


and turbulence, and then, by appeal to the Augsburg 
Confession, to evade their merited punishment. With 
regard to the heretical sects alluded to by the Augs- 
burg Confessionists, they could only reiterate that the 
benefits of the Religious Peace extended to no other 
religion save that of the Catholic Church and the Con- 
fession of Augsburg ; all other sects were entirely ex- 
cluded. If, now, in the ancient, universal Church, 
nobody was tolerated who did not conform to its faith 
and sacraments, it followed that there could be no sects 
in this Church, and they could only exist there where, 
from all pulpits and in all new publications, the ancient 
Catholic religion was anathematised. They therefore 
begged the Emperor to demand from the Estates of 
the Augsburg Confession a clear declaration of their 

Meanwhile Maximilian had been besieged with vehe- 
ment complaints against Frederic III., not only from 
the Bishop of Worms, but also from the Protestant 
Estates. The Bishop of Worms and the abbeys of 
Neuhausen and Sinsheim complained that the Elector 
had invaded their rights and liberties, in violation of 
the Religious Peace, and had mutilated, torn down, and 
taken away altars, images, books, jewels, and other 
things. On the Lutheran side, the Margrave Philibert 
of Baden, and the knights, councillors, and burghers 
of Oppenheim came forward to complain of Frederic's 
unlawful, violent suppression of the Augsburg Con- 
fession, of his iconoclasm, and of his introduction of the 
Calvinist religion.^ 

Maximilian handed over the petitions of grievances 

^ Donawer, pp. 128-151 ; Lehmann, pp. 103-112. 
2 See above, p. 321-322. 


to a committee of the Estates for their opinion on them, 
and after judgment had been pronounced on May 10 
the Emperor, in accordance with the decision of the 
committee, issued a severe edict against Frederic on 
May 14. With regard to his offences against the Bishop 
of Worms and the abbeys of Neuhausen and Sinsheim, 
the sentence was the same that had already been 
passed on him by Maximilian (though without any 
result), viz. full restitution and indemnity for damages. 
He was also required to make amends and reparation 
to the Margrave of Baden. And, furthermore, he was 
to recant all that he had pledged himself to in Calvinism, 
both as regards doctrine and the administration of the 
Sacraments ; to dismiss all preachers and schoolmasters 
who clung obstinately to Calvinistic tenets, and to 
suppress the Heidelberg Catechism and other Calvinistic 
books. If he did not obey all these orders, but con- 
tinued himself, and allowed his subjects to continue, 
in adherence to Calvinist error, the Emperor, it was 
stated, ' would not be able to have patience with him- 
any longer, but would be compelled, in fulfilment of the 
terms of the Religious Peace, to take serious steps in 
the matter.^ 

Frederic did not allow himself to be disconcerted. 
' The Emperor,' he said, on hearing the edict read, ' may 
carry on his " execution " against the Turks, but I 
dare any one to come near me with an execution ! ' ^ 
No whit daunted, he went on, as before, openly de- 
nouncing the Catholic religion as ' idolatry.' His pro- 
ceedings in the abbeys of Neuhausen and Sinsheim, 
he declared, were quite in order. It was incumbent on 

1 Struve, pp. 184 f. 

^ Mainzische Aufzeichnung, see above, p. 123, note 3. 


him as a Christian magistrate to proclaim and propagate 
the pure teaching of the Gospel, and to root out all 
that remained in the land of popish superstition and 
idolatry, and to organise Christian reforms and institu- 
tions.^ He considered it specially insulting to him that 
the contents of the edict should have been communi- 
cated to him not only in the presence of the princes of 
the Augsburg Confession, but also ' of the clergy, 
especially of such of the species who wore red birettas,. 
such as the Cardinal of Augsburg and other popish 
rabble.' He declared before a group of electors and 
princes gathered round the Emperor on May 14, that 
in matters of conscience he recognised no other lord 
than God Almighty. He knew nothing of Calvinism, 
he said ; he took his stand on the Frankfort Eecess and 
the Confession signed at Naumburg ; his Catechism 
was so well fortified with fundamental teaching of 
Scripture that hitherto nothing had overthrown it; 
but if anybody, from the meanest kitchen or stable 
boy to the Emperor himself, could teach him a better 
one out of the Holy Scriptures, he would yield willing 
obedience ; a Bible could easily be produced for the 
purpose.- When the Cardinal-bishop Otto of Augs- 
burg reproached him with having said in his Catechism 
that the Holy Mass was detestable idolatry, Frederic 
acknowledged that he had done so. 

^ Meichsen's Bericlit, in Senckenberg, Collection of rare and itnprinted 
MSS., i. 313-315. 

2 Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 312-315. Struve, pp. 187 £f. The usual tale that 
Frederic, after hearing the imperial edict, retired from the presence of 
the assembly, and then, after his son Casimir had brought him a Bible, 
came back again, is unhistorical and a later dressmg-up of the incident. 
See Kluckhohn, i. 662, where it is also stated that the Elector Augustus 
of Saxony did not speak the words so often quoted : ' Fritz, you are more 
pious than all of us.' 


The Elector was certain of the issue of his cause, 
for he was aware both of the Emperor's weakness and 
the powerlessness of the Catholic Estates, and he knew 
also how extremely bitter the Protestant Estates were 
against the Catholics. ' They will not condemn me,' 
he said, ' for fear of giving pleasure to the Catholics 
by so doing, and thus cutting off their own noses.' ^ 

A publication which appeared under the title, 
* Christliches Bedenken, wie im romischen Reich und in 
der ganzen Kirche mit Gottes Hiilfe Irrthum in der 
Religion abgeschafft und Ainigkeit erhalten werden 
mochte,' " was not only sold publicly, ' but also dedicated 
to the laudable Estates, and presentation copies were 
given in some hostels.' The sum and substance of 
this treatise was that ' there would be no rest or unity 
for the Church until the papacy was rooted out.' ^ 

The duplicity of the Elector Augustus of Saxony 
was the chief factor in extricating Frederic from his 
precarious situation. 

Augustus had signified his full approval of the 
imperial edict of May 14, and had also agreed that 
it involved Frederic's ' condemnation and execution.' 
But he had immediately afterwards taken his departure 
from Augsburg, leaving no definite instructions for the 
further action of his councillors who remained behind.^ 

^ Mainzische Aufzeiclinting. See above, p. 123, note 3. 

" ' Christian Advice how, with God's Help, to aboUsh Eeligious Heresy 
throughout the Roman Empire and the whole Church, and to maintain 
Unity of Faith ' [Translator]. 

^ Erstenberger, p. 118. 

'^ In a despatch of May 22, 1566, he justified himself to the Emperor 
for his departure by saying that after the forenoon of the 14th, after he 
had expressed his opinion to the Emperor by word of mouth, and his 
Majesty 'had been satisfied with it, he had not expected any further 
deliberation on this point,' and had therefore not left his delegates any 


These councillors, among whom were the secret 
Calvinists Craco and Lindemann, took an early oppor- 
tunity of declaring for Frederic. On May 17 the Em- 
peror summoned them into his presence, in company 
with the delegates who represented the Elector of 
Brandenburg, the Count Palatine of Zweibriicken, the 
Dukes of Wiirtemberg and Mecklenburg, and the Mar- 
grave of Baden, and had explained to them how matters 
stood with regard to the Elector of the Palatinate, 
reminding them of the growth of sectarianism in his 
territory. The Elector, he said, would not allow that 
these sects were in error, but had appealed in self- 
defence to the Augsburg Confession, albeit with the 
proviso ' as far as it conformed to the Holy Scriptures.' 
In order, therefore, to put down these sects and to check 
the evil in time, the Emperor, for guidance in his pro- 
ceedings, desired to be informed whether they (the 
councillors and delegates) recognised the Elector as an 
adherent of the Augsburg Confession, and considered 
his religion in agreement with this confession as it stood 
in its original form. The councillors of the Elector of 
Saxony answered that, as they had no instructions on 
the matter, they must refer to their lord for his opinion. 
In view of the importance of the matter they would 
like also to consult with the absent Estates belonging 
to the Augsburg Confession. The princes agreed with 

further instructions. In other words, says Ritter (i. 284, where thia 
despatch is quoted from the Dresden State archives) : ' He had voted for 
the decree against Calvinism because the Emperor wished it ; but now the 
Emperor himself must see to the execution of his orders ; he had not 
given his delegates any special instructions, but now that these latter 
were facing an imperial order so full of consequences they acted on the 
knowledge they had long possessed of this lord's real wishes, that the 
Elector Palatine should not be formally excluded from the Augsburg 
Confession and the Religious Peace.' 


the councillors and begged the Emperor to grant them 
■a, short respite, promising to bring him their joint 
answer the next day. Maximilian assented to this request, 
remarking, however, that the affair was urgent, because 
the Elector Frederic was on the point of departure, 
and the business must be finally settled at this Diet, 
' in order that the poison might not spread further, for 
there were many other Estates in secret adherence 
to this sect, who were only waiting to see what would 
be decided at the Diet.' ^ 

' We have no doubt whatever,' wrote the delegates 
of the Saxon Elector to their lord, ' that these troubles 
originate with the papists.' They are ' great and 
important matters.' If they answered the Emperor's 
question in the affirmative, they said, they should bring 
on themselves the suspicion of Zwinglianism. If they 
answered in the negative it would be condemning 
themselves and excluding themselves from the Reli- 
gious Peace ; it would lead to division among the 
Estates professing the Augsburg Confession, and would 
aggravate the persecution of foreign Protestants. They 
decided that their best course would be to propose to 
the Emperor that the case of the Elector Frederic 
should be subjected to ' thorough discussion ' at a fresh 
convention ; if then Augustus should not wish for the 
convention he could easily put difficulties in the way 
and prevent its coming off, if he thought fit.^ Frederic 
himself was anxious for a convention as proposed, for 
* an impartial council or colloquy ; ' he threatened that 
if his doctrine ' was condemned without a hearing, or if 

' Report of the Saxon councillors in Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 668 669. 
See ii. 1041-1042. Donawer, pp. 93-94. 
- Klnckhohn, i. 669 tf. '■ 


any force was used against him, lie would resort to all 
possible means of resistance at his disposal, and proceed 
as he thought fit.' ^ ' The Elector Palatine,' so the 
Frankfort delegates reported, ' is not to be daunted 
in this matter ; he has Calvinist sermons preached 
publicly in his hostel every week, and there is always 
a very large attendance.' " 

In the transactions which now followed, the Princes 
of Wiirtemberg, Zweibriicken, and Mecklenburg appeared 
as opponents of Frederic ; they declared that> on the 
ground of the article respecting the Sacrament, they 
could not recognise the Elector Palatine as a brother 
in the faith.^ 

The councillors of the Elector of Saxony remained 
on Frederic's side, and they were supported by the 
Hessian delegates and a few others. They argued 
that it might happen in future to many other of 
the Estates to be excluded from the benefits of the 
Religious Peace on account of disagreement respecting 
single articles, and that they ought to beware of playing 
into the hands of the papists, A Confession, in the 
form of articles and counter-articles, and furnished 
with arguments against Calvin, was drawn up by the 
Princes of Wiirtemberg, Zweibriicken, and Mecklen 
burg ; but because ' ubiquity and transubstantiation and 
other things had been introduced in it,' the councillors 
of the Elector of Saxony would not assent to it, and again 
many ' voted with them.' ' After much fierce dis- 
cussion,' the following declaration was addressed to 
the Emperor : ' The Estates considered that Frede ic 

^ Donawer, pp. 94-96. - Beichstagsacten, 70, fol. 59. 

^ See Eitter, i. 285, who made use of a report of the electorate ol 
Brandenburg in the State archives at BerHn, 


was orthodox on the principal article of all-saving 
justification, and also on many other articles, but 
with regard to the article on the Sacrament they could 
not come to a unanimous decision. At the same time 
it was not their intention to allow either the Elector 
or others, whether Germans or foreigners, who should 
differ from them in some particular points, to be exposed 
to any danger, still less to be excluded from the Religious 
Peace. Frederic had expressed himself ready to defend 
his case, at a properly constituted assembly, by refer- 
ence to the Word of God, and they would make arrange- 
ments with him for such a meeting during the present 

The Emperor laid the chief blame of this turn of 
affairs on the Elector of Saxony's councillor, Linde 
mann. This man, he wrote to Duke Albert at Munich, 
had spoilt everything in this matter with the Elector 
Palatine : ' he has gone straight against everything 
that all the Estates had promised me before ; ' if this 
could have been foreseen, it would have been a thousand 
times better, he said, to have left the matter alone. 
' In short, there is no constancy among them. Doctor 
Lindemann is out and out " Palatine " and Zwinglian. 
I believe it is the devil who has brought him to this 
state of mind, and I am quite convinced that it will 
not be pleasing to the pious Elector of Saxony.' ^ But 
the Elector Augustus left his councillors a tolerably free 
hand, although their policy was opposed to that exhi- 
bited by himself at the Diet.- Under his ' tacit concur- 
rence all the assaults on Frederic resulted in nothing.' ^ 

^ Briefwechsel Maximilians, p. 149. Kluckhohn, Friedrich der 
Fromme, p. 247. 

"^ See Kluckhohn, Briefe, ii. 1041-1042. ^ Ritter, i. 286. 


The imperial councillor Zasiiis, on May 17, begged 
the Bavarian Duke, at whose court Augustus was on 
a visit, to try to influence the Elector of Saxony not 
to let his councillors depart from the sentiments which 
he himself ' had so wisely and piously, so justly, gene- 
rously, and commendably expressed.' Much depended 
on their votes. Everything now turned on the ' straight- 
forward, prompt settlement of this business.' The 
Emperor would then pluck up heart and courage to 
persevere in his good intentions ; ' otherwise it would 
have been far better (as the Emperor had said) to have 
left the matter alone, and stood by, dissembling, until 
in a few years Calvinism had conquered the whole 
German nation, as it had conquered some of the best 
minds already.' In order to increase the difficulty 
they now alleged that ' if it was decided to exclude the 
Elector Frederic from the Pacification of Augsburg, 
or if a declaration should follow, ' the persecuted 
Christians in France or in the Netherlands might 
suffer worse treatment than before. This, however, 
was mere sophistry. Moreover, all the Protestants 
in those countries were Huguenots, and coarse, abomi- 
nable Sacramentarians.' ^ On May 18 Zasius wrote 
further that on May 15, the day after the issue of the 
imperial edict, Frederic's preacher delivered a most 
' insolent ' sermon, anathematising both the papacy 
and the Confession of Augsburg. And yet the princes 
who professed belief in this creed could not bring 
themselves to exclude Frederic from their number. 

^ ' Ergo reducantur in viam vol sint nobis ethnici et tanquam pub- 
licani.' In Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 665-667. Zasius was tlie writer of 
this letter ; see v. Bezold, Briefe Casimir's, i. 9, note 1. For the passage 
on the Huguenots, see Sybel's Histor. Zeitsclirift, xix. 78, note. 



' For, as far as I can make out, they are determined 
not to snare the fox, in spite of all the insults and 
invectives which the Palatine preacher incessantly 
hurls at them and at the Confession. I greatly fear 
that this Diet will do more to strengthen and spread 
Zwinglianism than anybody thinks at present. And 
this will no doubt put the finishing stroke to the ruin 
of Germany. For the spirit of Calvinism is such that, 
in all its schemes and exertions, it aims at nothing but 
murder and bloodshed. France is an illustration of 
this. I greatly fear that they will gain the upper hand 
everywhere, and that the Augsburg Confessionists 
themselves in their own churches will not be safe from 
their attacks ; for examples are not wanting of heresies 
which led to murder and bloodshed during sermons and 
divine worship. May God preserve us from evil and 
from the dominion of the bloodthirsty bread-breakers.' ^ 
Later on the Lutheran theologians expressed the same 
fears as Zasius. ' The Hunnish or Calvinistic, and 
also thoroughly Jewish and Calvinistic spirit,' wrote 
Samuel Huber for instance, ' is never at rest or satisfied 
unless it is gloating over our own and our children's 
blood, and devastating the face of the whole earth.' " 

In answer to the declaration addressed to him by 
the Protestant princes on May 22, the Emperor said 
that the Religious Peace had only been concluded 
between the Estates of the old religion and those who 
had subscribed to the Augsburg Confession ; by the 
exclusion of all other sects and opinions, both parties 
had hoped to secure the Empire against further religious 
disturbances. It was the bounden duty of the Emperor 

' Kluckhohn, Fricdrich der Fromme, 466-467. 

2 Bettung &c., Vorrede, A^"". See Celestinus, Priifung, F-~''. 


to conform to the terms of this treaty of peace. With 
regard to the Elector Frederic, he said, he was as much 
at a loss how to reconcile this present declaration of the 
Estates with the edict of May 14, which had been drawn 
up according to the advice and with the unanimous 
consent of all the princes assembled at the Diet, as 
with the private communications, both written and 
verbal, of the said princes. Neither before God nor 
before the world would it be justifiable to include in 
the benefits of the Peace all, without distinction, 
whether or no they agreed about all the articles of the 
■Confession ; to extend this mantle of protection even 
over those who denied some of the most vital points in 
the creed, as for instance the doctrine of the Sacrament ; 
and to include foreign nations also, and thereby afford 
them scope for the propagation of all their different 
sects and opinions. He could not see what sense there 
was in the Augsburg Confession if no persons, what- 
ever the sect they belonged to, should be required 
to give account of their opinions. There had never been 
any sect, ever since the days of the Apostles, that had 
not been in agreement with the universal Church on 
some, or indeed on most, points of the faith. Even 
at the present time, all the leading sects — even the 
Anabaptists — agreed with the Catholic Church and 
the Augsburg Confession in some articles, and each and 
all of them appealed equally to the Word of God. But 
if all sects were to be tolerated on account of their 
soundness on some points, he was at a loss to see how the 
holy Empire and the German nation could any longer 
maintain their existence. With regard to Frederic, 
the edict which had been drawn up in the presence 
and with the assent of the electors and princes must be 

B B 2 


carried out. If Frederic would submit to being ' directed 
and guided by them in religion ' they should at once 
begin to instruct him in such a manner that ' he would 
acknowledge, not with his lips only, but with facts, the 
Augsburg Confession, and the whole of its doctrine, cere- 
monies, and Church usages,' and in proof of his sincerity 
would renounce and abolish in his land all Calvinistic 
doctrines and institutions opposed to the Confession. In 
case, however, of the Elector's refusing their instruction 
and guidance, and persisting in his erroneous views, 
the Emperor would then require of them a statement 
of opinion as to what steps were to be taken. ^ 

During the debates which then followed among the 
Protestant Estates, Duke Christopher and the Count 
Palatine Wolfgang once more insisted that a form of 
confession should be presented to Frederic, and that he 
and his theologians should be required to submit to 
the judgment which should be pronounced at the con- 
vention about to be summoned. The councillors of 
the electorate of Brandenburg and a few other dele- 
gates supported this opinion. But the majority voted 
on the side of the Elector of Saxony's councillors, who 
maintained that to present a form of confession to 
Frederic would only cause fresh disputes and divisions ; 
as for the convention, its constitution ought to be well 
planned, and submission to its decision was improbable ; 
the Estates should ' depute their political councillors 
to meet together at a fixed place, in order to consult 
as to whether and how such a convention should be 
assembled, and what should be the form of procedure,, 
since in such a matter as the one in question the outward 
form was quite as important as the substance itself.' 

' Donawer, pp. 103-109. 


The Elector should simply be seriously admonished 
that his doctrine of the Sacrament was erroneous, and 
be required to recant it, ' or else submit to having 
the truth demonstrated to him from the Word of God 
at an approved meeting.' By the desire and in the 
presence of the Estates the Elector of Saxony's coun- 
cillors then represented to the Elector Palatine that his 
views on the Sacrament were erroneous, and that by 
persisting in them he would cause much division among 
the Estates, much scandal in the Churches, much 
danger and misery to his country and among his people, 
especially as his preachers and theologians spoke much 
more recklessly and offensively about the Real Pre- 
sence, in churches and schools, and even at this very 
Diet, than Calvin and (Ecolampadius. The Elector 
was further reminded that on the matter of baptism 
also he was at variance with the Estates adhering to 
the Augsburg Confession. He had expelled from the 
country all preachers who did not agree with his doctrine, 
and he had forbidden his subjects to receive the Sacra- 
ment, or to have their children baptised, in the neigh- 
bouring principalities where the Augsburg Confession 
was conformed to. He was now required to make 
recantation, or at any rate, pending the approaching 
convention, to inhibit his theologians from further 
writing and preaching, and to cancel the religious 
prohibitions to his subjects.^ 

Frederic, however, only reiterated that he was 
not conscious of believing any false doctrine ; on the 
contrary, his opinions coincided with the Confession 
of Augsburg ; if a convention were really held, his 
theologians would know how to defend themselves ; in 

' Kluckhohn, Briefe, i. 676-681. 


his own principality he allowed no one to dictate to 

' From this heated discussion,' it is said in a report, 
' distress and confusion arose. The final decision arrived 
at was that they must consult further with the coun- 
cillors and electors respecting the idea of a conven- 
tion.' ' 

These further deliberations took place on May 24. 
On the same day Frederic left the Diet. He could 
travel, he knew, in perfect security, for the Estates 
had made known to him the contents of a document 
which they had drawn up for the Emperor in answer 
to the latter's resolution of May 22. 

This important document ran as follows : ' They 
would not agree to a general condemnation of those 
persons, whether in German or in foreign lands, who 
were at variance with them respecting some few articles, 
even though they should be forced to allow that the 
said persons were themselves Calvinists, or had Calvinist 
teachers in their employment. For by so doing they 
would only be encouraging persecution, or even incur- 
ring the danger of being, sooner or later, forced to accept 
the doctrine of transubstantiation. To help in the 
extension of the papacy was by no means their wish 
or intention. As for the edict of May 14, in the publica- 
tion of which only a few of them had taken part, they 
could not recognise it as applying to all the Estates, 
nor could they regard it as authorising the exclusion 
of Frederic from the Religious Peace ; but only as a 
warning and admonition to him to renounce Calvinism. 
Finally, as Frederic had agreed to appear before a 
convention, the issue of which they must now await, 

^ Eeport in Donawer, pp. 110-112. 


they could not settle beforehand what ought to be done 
in case of his not submitting to the decision ; the 
Emperor was advised to set this matter at rest, to 
postpone and to drop it.' ^ 

The Emperor spoke with great bitterness of the 
Protestant Estates, and was very angry at the fickle- 
ness shown by them in the Palatine case. He wrote 
to Duke Albert on May 24 that there was no reliance 
to be placed on these wavering, inconstant people. 
It was well, however, he added, that this had happened, 
' for I have now learnt what sort of constancy I may 
expect from them. May God grant them a better 
spirit ! I would not give a brass farthing for their 
Confession ; for, as things are going on, we shall soon have 
universal Zwinglianism and confusion. I pray God 
that He vouchsafe to inspire them with a better mind ; 
but they are utterly blinded.' ' All the same,' he added, 
' I cannot refrain from saying that Mecklenburg has 
come out very well in the business, and has stood his 
ground firmly. But that fellow Lindemann is a scoun- 
drel to the backbone.' - 

But Maximilian could not thwart and oppose these 
' wavering, inconstant people ' with firmness and de- 
cision, because he needed their subsidies for resist- 
ance to the ever increasing inroads of the Turks. He 
answered the document of the Estates as follows : ' In 
asking them for a statement of opinion, he had not 
meant them to proceed to business as if " the Elector 
Palatine alone was involved," or as if " there were any 
special animus against him ; " what had been much 

1 Donawev, pp. 112-117. 

^ Briefivechsel, p. 150. Kluckhohn, Friedrich der Fromme, p. 255. 
See Hopfen, p. 133. 


more in his mind was that measures should be taken 
to purge the German Empire from the corruption of 
all those terrible foreign and native sects, which were 
becoming more and more numerous every day, and 
gaining greater and greater ascendency, at risk of 
completely ruining the country. Religious matters 
must be regulated in accordance with the Religious 
Peace of Augsburg, and the exclusion of the sects from 
the protection of this treaty must be insisted on.' In 
short, the edict issued against Frederic on May 14 must 
be carried out.^ 

But ' the Palatine affair grew and multiplied at the 
Diet in decrees, promises, debates, and words, and 
nothing practical was effected.' Even the sequestra- 
tion of the abbeys of Sinsheim and Neuhausen, confis- 
cated by Frederic — an act which all the joint Estates 
had approved of — was not carried out. The proposed 
religious convention also, at which Frederic was ' to 
allow himself to be set right by the Word of God,' 
did not come to pass. The Elector was left free to 
carry on the extension of Calvinism, unhindered by the 
Emperor or the Empire. 

As the imperial councillor Zasius had predicted, 
the result of the Diet was a general reinforcement of 
Calvinism throughout Germany- — not, however, till 
after one last protest had been made in the shape of 
* a Lutheran revolt w^hich was defeated in Saxony by 
the Lutherans themselves.' 

^ Donawer, pp. 117-121. 

- Hesshus gave expression to the same apprehension on May 8, in a 
letter to Chemnitz : ' After this Diet Calvinism will advance rapidly.' 
Leiickfeld, Hist. Hesshus. pp. 70-71. 




Towards the close of the Augsburg Diet of 1566, the 
Frankfort delegates wrote as follows respecting the 
transactions with the Elector Frederic on religious 
matters : ' Would God we might establish genuine 
peace in Germany ! AVe fear that a great storm is. 
gathering in the heavens : may God Almighty graciously 
deign to disperse it ! ' ^ 

A ' great storm ' had indeed long been brewing in 
the heavens. 

Between the courts at Weimar and at Dresden 
serious enmity had broken out. Duke John Frederic 
the Second {der Mittlere) was not only ambitious to 
restore the vanished lustre of the Ernestine house by 
the reconquest of his electoral dignity and lands, but 
he also aimed, with the help of the nobility, at overthrow- 
ing the constitution of the Empire, placing himself on 
the imperial throne, and then, ' in the character of a 
second Theodosius,' establishing pure Lutheranism as 
the one religion in the Empire. 

In this comprehensive undertaking he and his 
accomplice, the chancellor Christian Briick, were directed 
I)y the Knight William of Grumbach. 

A worthy associate of the murderer and incendiary 

^ Reichstag sacten, 70, fol. 65. 


Albert Alcibiades of Anspach-Culmbach, Grumbach 
also had known how to turn the fortune of war to hi& 
own profit in spoil of lands and money, at the expense 
of his feudal lord, the Bishop of Wiirzburg ; but after 
the defeat of Albert in the year 1554, he had lost all 
his booty, and also his hereditary lands in the territory 
of the Bishop. He had succeeded in obtaining from 
the Imperial Chamber a mandate of restitution, which,, 
however, Melchior Zobel, Bishop of Wiirzburg, had 
opposed. He denounced Grumbach as ' a notorious 
malefactor,' who did not even deserve a legal hearing, 
still less to be reinstated in his possessions ; he called 
him 'a perjurer and a violator of oaths, who had no longer 
any claim on justice.' ^ A fierce cross-fire of invective 
was carried on, and in February 1558 Grumbach de- 
clared that if his property was kept back from him 
any longer he should find himself compelled ' to think 
of other means ' by which he might regain possession 
of it.- ' The priests do nothing except under com- 
pulsion,' the chancellor of the Margrave Albert had 
once written ; ' but if you put the thumbscrew on, then 
you get more out of them than you at first demanded.' ^ 
It was on this advice that Grumbach intended acting. 
His hatred of the Bishop of Wiirzburg was ' so bitter,' 
he said, ' that if he could tear his heart out of his body, 
he would not fail to do it.' "* In 1557 Duke John Frederic 
had made him a member of his privy council and 
granted him a letter of protection,'^ and on the strength 
of these marks of favour Grumbach pushed vigorously 
on, and, as he put it, had determined to entertain 

1 Voigt, Grumbach, Ahhandl. i. 136. Beck, i. 422. 
- Voigt, p. 175. '' Beck, i. 416. 

'» Gropp, i. 678. ^ Beck, i. 432. 


Germany with ' a dance of the priesthood ' such as 
the latest books of history would chronicle ; and if, 
he said, ' the most excellent nobility throughout the 
Empire thereby came to their rights, so much the better 
would it be ; and the downfall of the noble Francis of 
Sickengen, that highest example of all knightly deeds 
and virtues, would then be avenged in salt and blood.' 
It was utterly in vain that the Emperor Ferdinand 
required Duke John Frederic to deliver up ' this per- 
turber of the public peace.' ^ 

Grumbach's first intention was to seize the person 
of the Bishop of Wiirzburg. After a consultation at 
Coburg he despatched several of his staunchest partisans 
into Franconia for this purpose. These men stole into 
Wiirzburg with their followers, surprised the Bishop 
on April 15, 1558, as he was on his way from the town 
to his castle of Frauenberg with a meagre escort, and put 
him to death. Some of his escort also died of the wounds 
they received.- Grumbach, although he persisted in 
declaring that he had only intended to take the Bishop 

1 Feb. 14, 1558. Beck, i. 438. Grumbach had other special ' affairs ' 
and ' alhances.' After the death of the ]\Iargrave Albert Alcibiades in 
Jan. 1557, the new ruler of the Franconian land, George Frederic, had 
refused to pay Albert's debts (influenced, as is supposed, by the Mar- 
grave, Hans von Custrin, who wished to marry his daughter to the young 
Prince of Anspach, and thereby open up to himself the prospect of 
annexing the territory of the deceased marquis to his family possessions). 
Grumbach thereupon determined to collect military forces, attack the 
Bishops of Bamberg and Wiirzburg and the town of Nuremberg, and 
compel them to take over the debts of the Margrave Albert. The Elector 
of Brandenburg and the electoral prince, John George, were not unfriendly 
to this plan, and thought that the young Prince of Anspach ought to con- 
tribute 100,000 thalers towards its execution. The Margrave Hans, 
however, made objections,' saymg that if the scheme did not turn out 
well George Frederic might be plunged into fresh debts. MdrMscJiG 
ForscJmngen, xiii. 332, 333. 

^ This murder was an act of private revenge of Christopher Kretzer. 
Beck, i. 443 ; Wegele, p. 431. 


prisoner, not to assassinate him,^ nevertheless retained 
the murderers near him, and appeared openly as their 
protector and defender. 

' The Wiirzburg crime ' caused tremendous excite- 
ment through the whole Empire, and it was lamented 
that ' no powerful force was at hand for retribution.' 
' It was a cruel, barbarous age, and everywhere flour- 
ished religious brawls, robbery, and highway murders.' 
In a letter from Nuremberg of May 1558 we read : 
' The most frightful cases of murder, robbery, brigandage 
and highway attacks occur daily, and, indeed, increase 
daily in number.' ^' 

After the murder of the Bishop, Grumbach took 
refuge in France, where he remained till the business 
of recruiting troops for King Henry II. led him back 
to the court of John Frederic. In March 1559 he repre- 
sented to the latter that ' now was the very oppor- 
tunity for him and his brother, Duke John William, to 
recover their ancient electoral lands ; the French King 
and the Duke Adolphus of Holstein would help them 
in the enterprise.' If the Emperor ' should be displeased, 
should raise the cry of the " Landfriede," and call the 
imperial circles to arms, he would not be able to raise 
an army, and the terror-stricken population would not 
know whither to turn ; he also knew ways of giving 
trouble to the Emperor through the chief feudatories 
of Bohemia. '^ 

But ' affairs in Saxony were not ripe,' and ' for the 

' Gruner, Grumbach, Ahhandl jDp. 271, 282. On April 5, 1562, 
Grumbach wrote that he had only contemplated seizing the Bishop by the 
throat, and that he had not meant to shoot him, although he had full 
right to do so with his own hand. Kohler, iii. 304. 

- Voight, Grumbach, Ahhandl. i. 185. See above, pp. 95, 96. 

^ Ortloff, i. 178-179, 528-533. 


timely undertaking of still greater things a divine 
revelation was needed. Grumbach put himself in 
communication with a ' seer of ghosts,' Hans Tausend- 
schon from Sundhausen, ' who was frequently visited 
by angels, the size of three-year-old children, clad in 
ashen-grey frocks and black hats with white staffs in 
their hands, and who showed him wonderful things/ 
John Frederic installed this ' divinely-favoured man ' 
at Weimar, and came gradually ' to place great con- 
fidence in the utterances of the angels ; ' they showed 
him in a crystal not only his lost electoral hat, but even 
the imperial crown. In December 1562 Grumbach 
informed the Duke that ' the angels had revealed that 
the Emperor, who was not of the true faith, and who 
was leading his people away from the Word of God,' 
was to be shot by one of Grumbach' s boys ; by com- 
mand of God, Grumbach said, he had provided this 
boy with a musket, and the lad was now waiting for a 
sign from the angels ' to carry out the divine behest ' 
and shoot the Emperor. The deed would possibly be 
committed in the forest of Hagenau, when his Majesty 
was hunting there. The Duke was told that hereby 
he might see ' how wonderful God was, and how He 
chose out insignificant people to punish the persecutors 
of His Gospel, so that His divine omnipotence might 
be recognised.' Grumbach further believed, he said, 
that the Catholic Dukes Henry of Brunswick and 
Albert of Bavaria would, like the Emperor, receive their 
chastisement at the hands of quite mean persons, 
' because they also were not the least of the perse- 
cutors of God's Word, on whom the priests and their 
godless crew placed their affections and their trust.' 
He also believed that God contemplated ' a change of 


this sort ' in the Elector Augustus of Saxony ; in six 
months' time the Duke, according to the statement of 
the angels, would find himself once more in possession 
of the electorate which had been wrested from him. But 
the first ' change ' that was to be accomplished was with 
the Bishop Frederic of Wiirzburg ; within three weeks, 
so the angel announced, this dignitary was to be 
shot and the bishopric was to pass into the hands of a 
secular lord. The angels had bidden him set forth on a 
' virtuous and knightly expedition ' to Wiirzburg : ' God 
would grant him His blessing, and good luck in over- 
throwing the priests.' ^ 

With the approval of the Duke, Grumbach began 
recruiting troops, and on September 16, 1563, in con- 
junction with his former military associates, Wilhelm 
von Stein and Ernst von Mandelsloe, he issued a writ 
against Bishop Frederic of Wiirzburg ; all negotiations 
for obtaining justice having proved fruitless, they 
intended taking the matter into their own hands, and 
bearing down on the enemy. Towards the end of 
September they invaded the territory of Wiirzburg 
with about 300 cavalry and 500 infantry. ' Hun- 
dreds of the nobility took part in this most laudable 
priest-hunt ; ' the ' seer of angels ' was also of the 
company, and ' undertook to make himself invisible 
and to bring a troop of black horsemen into the field.' 
In the absence of the Bishop, who had sought in vain 
for help, Wiirzburg was seized on October 4, and all 
that savoured of ' priesthood ' was treated as spoils of 
war. The burgomaster and the members of the town 
council were compelled to swear an oath of allegiance. 
The cathedral chapter and the episcopal councillors 

' Ortloff, i. 313-324, 373. 


were required to sign a compact agreeing to all Griim- 
bach's stipulations, and also to seal a similar compact 
in the name of the Bishop. ' To bring the priests to 
submission they fleeced them to the bone, not omitting 
also to look about for booty among the wealthy burghers.' 
' On this day,' says a contemporary report, ' there were 
gruesome and unheard-of doings in Wiirzburg, and so 
tremendous was the amount of booty taken in the 
town, that sufficient horses could not be procured to 
cart away the cases. The town was damaged to the 
extent of many hundreds of thousands of florins, and 
not a creature was able to save as much as a spoon.' 
' And as it happened to be the time of the annual 
market, there were Nuremberg and Augsburg mer- 
chants among those who were plundered, not to speak 
of other outrages. Some of the soldiers dressed them- 
selves up in chasubles, hung cow-bells about them, and 
carried on all sorts of buffoonery.' ' Many of the 
unmannerly rascals ' attempted to assault the women, 
' and, when the latter would not yield to them, drove 
them out of their houses and brought in thither common 
prostitutes ' who completed the pillage. Grumbach 
informed Duke John Frederic on October 9 that the 
town had suffered damage to the extent of 200,000 
florins, and that it was a judgment of God ; everything 
had happened just as the ' angel-seer ' had predicted.^ 

According to the agreement extorted from the 
cathedral chapter and the episcopal councillors, not only 

^ Kurzer BericJit vom Wilrzhurger Handel (1563), pp. 4-7. Gropp, 
i. 248 ff. ; Ortloff, i. 402-428. Voigt, Zweite Ahliandlung , pp. 112-120. 
Count Louis of Nassau wrote to his brother, Prince WiUiam of Orange, 
on Nov. 1, 1563, that Grumbach and his associates carried away more 
than 1,100,000 florins' worth of goods from Wiirzburg. In Groen van 
Prinsterer, suppl. 14*. 


was Grumbach to receive his goods back, together with 
an indemnity, but Ernst von Mandelsloe and Wilhelm 
von Stein also were to be compensated for all the losses 
they had suffered in the Margravian war. The Bishop, 
yielding to necessity, ratified the compact ; but the 
Emperor Ferdinand forbade him to fulfil it because he 
' had been coerced by tyrannical threats,' pronounced 
the ban of the Empire over the ogina tor of, and the 
sharers in, this breach of the Public Peace, and addressed 
repeated orders to Duke John Frederic, to whom 
CTrumbach had returned after leaving Wiirzburg, not 
to harbour the outlawed criminals in his territory. 
The Duke, however, did not deign to answer the Emperor, 
but ' hoped that things would fall out as the angel-seer 
had predicted, and as the stars also foretold.' By a 
fresh prognostication it was announced to him that 
the House of Austria and the Elector Augustus of 
Saxony would be brought under his power. ^ At the 
time of the seizure of Wiirzburg the Elector Augustus 
wrote : ' If this conflagration is not extinguished for 
good and all, much further trouble may result from 
it.' 2 

A general ' war of the nobility,' after the fashion 
of Sickingen, came to be dreaded.^ ' There had been 
a peasant-war,' it was said, ' and also a war of the 
princes, and now there must be a war of the nobles.' 

^ Among other things in this prophecy it said : 

When death strikes Perdinandus down, 

And to another falls his crown, 
Then Augustus loses his electoral right, 
The Saxon dukes appear in greater might, 
Many bishops lose land and people, &c. 

^ Droysen, Aus den diinischen BiicJiern, 16. 

3 Bucholtz, vii. 473, note ; Beck, i. 456 ; Sattler, iv. 204 ; Haberhn, 
V. 602. 


On January 27, 1564, at the instigation of Duke Christo- 
pher of Wiirtemberg, an agreement was entered into 
at Maulbroun by several princes, through their coun- 
cillors, to the effect ' that they would lend each other 
mutual aid and support, in case of their being attacked 
by the knights.^ Duke Albert wrote to Christopher 
of Wiirtemberg that he had received tidings that 
Grumbach and his associates intended to recruit fol- 
lowers among the Bavarian landlords, and with their 
help first to invade Bavaria, and then the Bishopric 
of Salzburg (where the peasants of the Pinzgau were 
even then in revolt), and to carry on their audacious 
violations of the Public Peace to their hearts' content. 
The root-principle of all Grumbach' s tactics was to gain 
the adherence of the nobles in all the principalities he 

Grumbach brought up a consignment o' troops, 
and issued public proclamations to the electors and 
princes on January 28, and to the whole body ol German 
knights on February 18, announcing that ' a great 
enterprise ' was in prospect. To the princes he explained 
' how honourably, peacefully, properly, and harm- 
lessly ' he had hitherto behaved, and how, after the 
failure of all amicable negotiations, ' in consequence 
of the Public Peace and the imperial rights,' he had 
been authorised to act as he had done. If the Wiirzburg 
compact was not faithfully fulfilled he was resolved, 
rather than continue any longer in misery and poverty, 
to set life and property at stake, and in the defence of 
his righteous cause, to trust to the mercy of God. He 
summoned the knights to his assistance, telling them 
that the liberties of the nobility of the whole Empire 

1 Haberliii, v. 642-644. ^ v. Aretin, Maximilian, p. 136. 



and the redress of all existing grievances were the 
matters at stake. What had happened to him and his 
associates might befall any nobleman at any moment ; 
for if the stronger were always to have the right to 
oppress the weaker, all the nobles would very soon be 
deprived of their dignity and their liberties, and be 
brought down to a level with the peasants. He there- 
fore exhorted the whole of the nobility to lend him a 
hand in defence and offence.^ 

Meanwhile ' the angels ' announced at Weimar 
that the war would begin at Erfurt. Duke John 
Frederic was ' confident in the extreme.' He wrote 
to Grumbach on May 5, 1564, that ' from the Word 
of God and the writings of Luther he was certain of 
success ; ' what the ' angel-seer ' said would, he was 
sure, come to pass : the mighty deeds of God, which 
God intended to perform through their agency, would 
undoubtedly be fulfilled. Grumbach replied that he, 
too, believed that ' the angelic proceedings ' were 
' righteous and godly ; ' in Luther's commentary on 
good and bad angels there was clear and emphatic 
confirmation of the righteousness of this course of 

The fact that ' the new Emperor Maximilian was 
taking up the matter more keenly than his father 
Ferdinand, and proceeding more fiercely against the 
outlaws, " served as proof to the conspirators " that he 
would lose his throne all the sooner.' It was all in 
vain that John Frederic's brothers urged him to submit 
to the Emperor and to have nothing more to do with 
the outlawed Grumbach. The Elector only answered 
by recounting to them (May 2, 1564) how hitherto, in 

1 Haberlin, vi. 2-25. - Ortloff, ii. 41-42 ; Graner, p. 245. 


fulfilment of his mission to protect and propagate the 
pure doctrine of Luther, he had overcome all the assaults 
•of Satan. He told them of the rare and artful devices 
which Satan had resorted to at the colloquy of Worms, 
when he, the Duke, had been excluded from the debates, 
because he had refused to tolerate the Adiaphorists 
and other sectarians. At that time the cry of ' Crucifige '' 
liad gone out against him. ' The devil had further 
•attempted to bring about an amnesty at Frankfort, 
and to get a " Recess " passed by which the corruptions 
and falsifications which had crept in should be restored 
and smoothed over ; by the grace of the Almighty, 
however, we were preserved against this, and the wiles 
of Satan were confounded.' Nothing daunted, the 
devil had then brought together the princes at Naum- 
burg, under the plausible pretext of signing the Augsburg 
Confession anew, and ' when our true Christian Con- 
fession came under discussion again there was nothing 
but trouble and distress, and the adversaries would not 
suffer the truth to be spoken. Again, however, the 
Lord God had mercy upon us, although all manner of 
evil reports were spread against us, and we were once 
more compelled to suffer on the cross with Christ.' 
Later on, from fear lest the subjugated House of Saxony 
should lift up its head again, Satan had kindled a fire 
•of contention among the Saxon theologians, and by 
means of the Flacians had destroyed all the churches 
and schools, and created such disturbance everywhere 
that all public officials were at daggers drawn with each 
other, and every town and village divided against 
itself. But even this hellish onslaught had been over- 
come. Now Satan was again at his old game, endea- 
vouring to suppress the pure doctrine in Saxony. 

c c 2 


' And,' said the Elector in conclusion, ' although it is 
loudly asserted that the Emperor ought to be obeyed 
in all things, so long as his commands are not in opposi- 
tion to God, I nevertheless ask your graces whether you 
are not acting against the Ten Commandments, and 
whether your consciences can be at rest if you herein 
follow the commands of the Emperor ? ' He begged 
his brothers not ' to break thus wantonly with the 
Word of God and the pure doctrine.' 

' But,' he went on, ' if you are fully minded to pay 
court to the devil, to subscribe to the Emperor's letter, 
to follow the advice of wicked people, and perish in 
soul and body, well then you may go your ways ; but 
you will not, I hope, bear me a grudge because I think 
right to follow my own conscience and to work for the 
glory of God, out of a free, pure, and good conscience, 
in the best way I can.' ^ 

On September 27, 1564, the ' angels ' announced 
positively that John Frederic would become Emperor. 
' It was the purpose of God to set up an Emperor who 
should better serve the cause of the Gospel and of the 
poor than did the present one ; there would be a com- 
plete subversion of the whole country, so that the 
chosen of the Lord might win everything by the sword.' " 

At the earnest persuasion of Grumbach the Duke 
had removed his court from Weimar to the town of 
Gotha, which was strongly fortified and protected by 
the fortress of Grimmenstein. The conspirators, with 
the Duke's knowledge, had already formed various plans 
for procuring money for the war ; Nuremberg mer- 
chants, for instance, were to be attacked and robbed 
on their way to the Leipzig fair ; the Bishop of Metz 

Beck, ii. 263-269. • Ortloff, ii. 204. 


was to be seized in order to obtain a large ransom for 
him.^ At the bidding of the ' angels ' the Duke prac- 
tised all manner of alchemic arts with ' gold makers.' 
Two preachers also set up in this line, and, at the Duke's 
behest, turned their minds to the discovery of the 
philosopher's stone." 

A manifesto of war had been drawn up as a pro- 
clamation from ' the counts, the lords, and the nobility,' 
who, it was therein stated, were driven to defend 
themselves against the aggressions of ecclesiastical 
and secular princes, above all against the Elector 
Augustus of Saxony, who was draining the country 
dry, turning the nobles into bond- servants, ousting the 
Dukes of Saxony, the sons of the former electors, from 
their possessions, and attempting to bring the whole 
of Germany under his tyranny. Against such pro- 
ceedings they were compelled to have recourse to arms. 
They had chosen Duke John Frederic as their head 
and ruler, and they were actuated by no other motive 
in this enterprise than the glory of God and the exten- 
sion of the pure teaching of the Gospel. Bishops, 
monks, and priests must be reformed all over the Empire, 
and the abuse of ecclesiastical property be put a stop 
to. They hoped that all princes, counts, and knights 
would join in such a laudable undertaking.^ 

They actually thought to befool even the Emperor. 
David Baumgartner, a patrician of Augsburg, who had 
been obliged to leave his native town on account of 
his debts, was sent by Grumbach to Vienna to represent 
to the Emperor that the German nobles, especially 

1 Ortloff, ii. 162 ff. 169. - Ihid. iii. 271 ff. 

^ Ibid. ii. 230-240. After the conquest of Gotha the draft of this 
iuanifesto fell into the hands of the conquerors (p. 230, note). 


Grumbach, Stein, and Mandelsloe, were ready to render 
him service for the sake of the House of Austria. 
Augustus of Saxony, the Emperor was to be told, was 
meditating day and night how he could get possession 
of the imperial crown. He had already seized the 
Bishoprics of Meissen, Merseburg, and Naumburg- 
Zeitz, he had his eyes on the Bishoprics of Magdeburg 
and Halberstadt, and he wanted also to rob his cousin,, 
Duke John Frederic, of the little that he still possessed. 
In the event of the Emperor's death, Augustus would 
certainly keep his heirs from the throne. Maximilian 
was therefore entreated either to consent to, or at any 
rate wink at, a plan for falling unexpectedly on the 
Elector, and depriving him of his lands and people, in 
order to place them in the hands of the pious, laudable 
Duke, John Frederic. The Duke's servants, Grumbach, 
Stein, and Mandelsloe, would procure money and soldiers 
for the Emperor ; through their instrumentality he 
would become truly master of the Roman Empire, he 
would be in a position to deal out justice to every- 
body, and his revenues would be increased.^ If 
Maximilian had agreed to these proposals, Grumbach 
said, all the nobility of the Empire would have been 

In order to get rid of his principal enemy, Grumbach,, 
in 1564 and 1565, made repeated attempts to get the 
Elector Augustus either assassinated during the chase 
or else poisoned. Count GUnther of Schwarzburg 
reported to the Elector in 1565 that Grumbach had 
said to him at Gehren in the Thuringian Forest, that 
he should not desist from his attempts on the life of 
the Elector Augustus, by whom his life and those of 

1 Beck, i. 508-509, ^ jrj^^_ i 474 ^^ 


his associates were threatened, and the attempt would 
succeed before next Christmas.^ 

While the conspirators were waiting for the oppor- 
tunity to perform more extensive operations, they 
occupied themselves with perpetrating highway robberies. 
Not less than forty-six members of the nobility took 
part in this dignified pursuit, which was carried on 
chiefly in the lands of the Saxon Elector.- 

On May 13, 1566, the ban was judicially pronounced 
against Grumbach and his associates at the Diet of 
Augsburg. Maximilian was determined to hear nothing 
more about lenity and condoning, and this chiefly on 
account of the Turkish danger.^ A special deputation 
of electors and princes was sent to John Frederic to 
exhort him to yield obedience to the laws of the Empire, 
but the Duke defied all their threats and entreaties. 

But it was not enough that the ' most excellent 
nobility should conspire the overthrow of the con- 
stitution and ' a general insurrection on behalf of the 
evangel of Luther ; ' the populace also were to be 
en listed in the cause. On June 10, 1566, Hans Beyer, 
a confidential agent of the Duke, drew up a ' memorial ' 
for Grumbach, with a view to organising a Bundschuh 
(armed peasantry) : ' Matters must be settled by war, 
and the sooner the better ; ' and there was no better way 
of bringing on war than by an insurrection of the people. 
' The godless popish priests must be massacred wholesale, 
and then, after the election of a " Christian head," the 
Augsburg Confession be established everywhere. The 
goods of the priests would furnish ample means for 

^ V. Weber, Anna, pp. 10-12. 

- Ortloff, ii. 322 ff., 366-385, and 3, 7, 40-41. 

' See Wegele (from the Wilrzburger Reichstag sacten), p. 436. 


carrying on the war. Not for nothing had Luther 
prophesied in many places that the Pope must go to 
the ground. This consummation must be brought 
about by massacring every single cardinal, bishop, 
abbot, monk, and priest, and not sparing the life of 
one of them.' If once they got Erfurt into their hands 
all the rest would be easily managed. A banner of the 
league was to be set up with a device announcing the 
object of the undertaking to the people.^ 

' In all directions they looked round for aid and 
support.' The Dithmarsers, actuated by the hope of 
recovering the territorial privileges wrested from them 
by the Dukes of Holstein, declared themselves ready 
to join the league and to send money contributions. 
The King of Sweden also proffered his services, through 
his Chancellor Giildenstern, and to him John Frederic 
proposed that, after the example of the French King, 
' he should always maintain in Germany a certain 
number of duly appointed captains and cavalry officers, 
through whose agency soldiers could easily be got 
together at any time. ' " 

^ Ortloff, iii. 153-157. On both sides of the banner, which was 
designed by Hans Beyer, was a representation of a Bundschuh. On one 
side, on the band over the shoe was the motto, ' Facere justitiam,' and so 
forth, and under the shoe, was inscribed : ' For the maintenance of the 
pure "Word of God, and the spread of the Augsburg Confession. To pre- 
serve the ancient, laudable freedom of the Germans. To promote God- 
fearing, Christian conduct, discipline, and morality. 1566,' On the 
reverse side of the banner, above the shoe, was the inscription, ' Wo, wo 
to thee. Pope, wo to you cardinals, bishops, abbots, and all you monks 
and priests.' And under the shoe : ' 1 Eeg. cap. 17 : And when all the 
people saw it, they fell on their faces ; and they said. The Lord, He is 
the God ; the Lord, He is the God. And Elijah said unto them, Take the 
prophets of Baal ; let not one of them escape. And they took them. 
Dr. Martin Luther, the other Elias, Vivus eram pestis, moriens ero mors 
tua, papa ' (' Living, I was thy plague ; dead, I shall be thy death, 
O Pope ! '). In Ortloff, iii. 164, note 1. 

'■^ Ortloff, iii. 263 ; Beck, i. 570. ' The worst danger that we have 


Alliances were also contracted with the nobles of 
the Netherlands who were in rebellion against King 
Philip 11. , and ' the French nobles, weary of the King's 
yoke,' also ' signified their willingness to help.' The 
conspirators were all the more hopeful of the result 
because in the summer of 1566 the Emperor had become 
involved in one of the most serious of Turkish cam- 
paigns. ' The angels ' actually held out to Duke John 
Frederic the prospect of obtaining two empires and a 
kingdom in this very year. According to the plan of 
Grumbach regiments were to be raised in Westphalia 
and on the Rhine, the Rhenish bishoprics to be plundered 
as the first step, and then an invasion to be effected in 
Franconia, with plunder and robbery of the Bishop 
of Wiirzburg, after which the Elector of Saxony was 
to be driven into a corner, and contributions levied on 
the towns of Miihlhausen, Nordhausen, and Erfurt. 
Several regiments were to be placed simultaneously 
in the Mark and in Pomerania in order to surprise the 
Elector Joachim II. and drive him out of his territory ; 
and finally, after the junction of both armies, Duke 
John Frederic was to be proclaimed Elector at Witten- 
berg, and even Emperor of Germany.^ Banners with 
the imperial crown were already prepared.^ 

been exposed to,' wrote the Elector Augustus to King Frederic of Den- 
mark, on Feb. 21, 1567, ' came from the Swedish intrigues. ... It is 
especially evident from the captured letters that Sweden, in joining the 
league, had designs not only against your Koyal Majesty, but also against 
the Emperor.' The Margrave, Hans von Ctistrin, and Duke John Albert 
of Mecklenburg had also a hand in the game. Droysen, from the 
Danish Books, pp. 74-75. See pp. 63-72. 

^ Beck, i. 493-494 ; Ortlotf, ii. 296. Droysen, Aus den ddniscJien 
Bilchern, pp. 37 If. Sixteen years before, in 1550, Duke John Frederic had 
already drawn up a great plan of warfare for the extirpation of the ' popish 
priests.' See fuller remarks by us in Vol. vi. 424. 

^ These were afterwards found at Gotha. See v. Bezold, Briefe 
Johann Casimir's, ii. 150, No. 196. 


But ' the angels ' had been mistaken in their dates. 
On December 12, 1566, the Emperor pronounced the 
ban on John Frederic and ordered the Elector Augustus 
to enforce the sentence at once ; he also enjoined Duke 
John William, brother of the victim, to help in the 
execution of the penalty. John Frederic received the 
imperial herald, who brought him the mandate of 
outlawry and the imperial order of renunciation, and 
also the herald of the Elector Augustus, with the greatest 
composure. He caused the artillery on the castle 
ramparts to be shown to their august messengers so 
as to let them know how he was protected, and he 
said : ' Augustus was welcome to come ; he had been 
baking and brewing for him for a long time past.' By 
the advice of the ' angel-seer ' he assumed the title of 
' Elector of Saxony by birth,' called his- chancellery 
' the electoral chancellery of Saxony,' and had the 
electoral swords introduced into his armorial bearings 
and engraved on the coins which he caused to be 
struck. He ordered gold swords to be made for rewards 
to his captains. Little did he reckon on a speedy execu- 
tion of the ban. Nevertheless, on December 24, Gotha 
was invested by an army from the Saxon electorate, 
and a few weeks later the Elector Augustus and Duke 
John William appeared in full battle array before the 

John Frederic delivered a harangue to his troops 
and to the citizens of Gotha, telling them that the 
sole object of the Elector Augustus was to suppress the 
true religion of the Gospel, and that he was egged on 
by the priests ; he exhorted them to have courage, and 
tried to reassure them with the hope of foreign help. 
When John William summoned the Saxon provincial. 


Estates of Saxony to meet at Saalfeld in order to consult 
over the perilous position of the land, John Frederic 
demanded of them instant help ; his brother, he said, 
* had been bought by the papists and had turned traitor 
to the true cause ; the whole business was nothing 
more or less than an infamous plot of the abominable 
priests of Baal.' The besieged city waited in daily 
expectation of strong succour from Ernst von Mandelsloe. 
who was to have come up with large forces of soldiers. 
Grumbach sent him urgent appeals to hasten to their 
relief, and to attack the enemy in their fat farms, 
where the booty would be dealt out not with spoons 
but with bushel measures, and velvet and gold-em- 
broidered cloth be measured out to them by spear- 
lengths. *As for the Emperor's command and pro- 
hibition, his own act of perjury, committed in order to 
obtain the imperial throne and majesty, would in due 
time richly find him out, and bring condign punishment 
on him.' ^ 

When all hope of relief was at an end the Duke and 
Grumbach, on April 3, 1567, formed the desperate 
resolve to remove all the provisions and goods and 
chattels that were in the town, as well as the best of 
the troops, to the castle, to send away the rest of the 
inhabitants, and then set fire to the town at the four 
corners. But a mutiny which broke out among the 
soldiers hindered the execution of this plan. The 
mutineers imprisoned Colonel von Brandenstein, com- 
mandant of the fortress, assaulted the castle, and, 
regardless of all the Duke's prayers and supplications, 
possessed themselves of the persons of the Chancellor 

^ Voigt, Grumbach, Zioeite Ahhandlung, pp. 200-210. Ortloflf, iii. 
457 478, 5;j7 ; Beck, i. 531, 536-538, 544. 


Briick, of Wilhelm von Stein, and of other adherents 
of Grumbach. Grumbach himself they dragged out 
of his bed and carried on a hearse to join the other 
prisoners in the council-house, where his hands and 
feet were laid in chains by a smith. As they bore him 
along they cried out : ' We have got the bride ! ' A 
committee was formed from among the nobles, the 
captains, and the burghers, and on April 13 the town 
was handed over by this body to the Elector Augustus. 
The garrison withdrew, the burghers asked for pardon 
on their knees, and swore allegiance to Duke John 
William as their new lord.^ John Frederic was delivered 
up to the conqueror, to be dealt with at the Emperor's 
pleasure, and taken to Dresden. Even after his capture 
and removal he ' continued in the hope that all would 
still go well with him.' In the Abrechtsburg near 
Meissen, where he was lodged during the night, he wrote 
on the wall with a pencil : ' Es gelilckt noch wohl ' (' There 
is still a chance'). His companion, the preacher Roth, 
reported a rumour to the effect that the Duke was 
informed by a special revelation and prophecy that 
' it was necessary that he should first of all be thus 
deprived of his land and subjects, and that afterwards 
he would attain to that height of eminence which he 
had so long striven after.' " From Dresden John 
Frederic was taken to Vienna and lodged in the castle 
at Wienerisch-Neustadt, whence, in course of time, he 
was removed to Steyer, in Upper Austria, there to 
endure perpetual imprisonment. 

At Gotha, meanwhile, on April 14, the trial and 

^ In the town and on the Grimmenstein, enormous stores of provisions 
were found. See Glasey, pp. 233-234. 
' Ortloff, iv. 275-276. 


examination of the prisoners began ' with gruesome 
torture.' The Elector Augustus and Duke John Wil- 
liam, from behind a silken curtain, ' indulged in the 
inhuman gratification of looking on at the terrible 
tortures inflicted.' ' It was plainly manifest from the 
whole procedure how inhuman the times had become, 
and how little the gospel of love worked in the hearts 
of those princes, albeit it was always on their lips.' The 
Chancellor Briick implored Count Giinther of Schwarz- 
burg to intercede for him with the princes, and, if his 
life was not granted, to beg that at any rate he might 
be condemned to death by the sword and spared the 
torture of the rack. But the Count, who considered 
himself to have been defrauded by the chancellor some 
years before in the purchase of a lordship of Briick, 
took the opportunity of revenging himself : ' You 
rascal,' he said, ' you tried once to cheat me out of my 
due ; you shall now be requited with the full mercy 
you deserve.' Not one whit more merciful was the 
Elector of Saxony's councillor. Doctor Craco, to whom 
Briick had also appealed, reminding him of all that his 
father, the old Chancellor Briick, had done for the house 
of Saxony and for the evangelical cause, and trying 
further to work on Craco' s feelings by recalling the fact 
that he (Craco) had formerly been his father's pupil at 
Wittenberg. Craco, however, was unmoved. He called 
him insulting names and told him that ' if he had 
received instruction from his father he had paid him for 
it ; and if his father had been such an exemplary man, 
he ought to have taken pattern by him.' ^ At the time 
when he was in power Briick had ordered a secretary 
of the Duke to be put in chains on a mere trifling 

' Gruner, p. 286 ; Beck i. 572. 


charge, and to be laid twice on the rack. He had him- 
self looked on while the torment was being inflicted, 
urging on the executioner to greater and greater cruelty, 
till at last the man had declared that if he stretched the 
victim any tighter his body would snap in two like a 
fiddle string, the blood already gushing out at the navel. ^ 
This same secretary was now a witness of Briick's tor- 
tures. Briick and Grumbach were tried and inter- 
rogated during four successive days, and put on the 
rack each day. ' Their screams were so terrific,' says 
a report, ' that they could be heard all over the castle.' 
Doctor Craco must have remembered these days when 
he himself, later on, was condemned by the Elector 
Augustus to similar suffering. 

The sentence passed on Grumbach was, that from 
the enormity of his crimes he deserved the most extreme 
penalty, but that the Elector, in the greatness of his 
mercy, would modify the sentence to ' quartering 
alive.' Briick was condemned to the same punishment 
without mention of the Elector's ' mercy.' Wilhelm 
von Stein was to be beheaded first and afterwards 
quartered ; Hans Beyer and the ' angel-seer ' were 
both to be hanged. 

The brutal exhibition took place on April 18, on the 
market place of Gotha in the presence of the Elector 
and ' a barbarous and grand assemblage of princes, 
counts, nobles, and soldiers, besides a multitude of 
burghers and peasants.' At ten o'clock in the morning 
Grumbach, an infirm, palsied man of sixty-four, was 
carried to the scaffold on an old chair by eight gaol 
officials. When he reached the place of execution 
eight trumpets were sounded. ' The executioners,' 

^ Kohler, xii. 405-406 ; Beck, i. 489. 


says an eye-witness, ' first cut his heart out of his body, 
then struck him on the mouth with it, and finally 
chopped him in four quarters.' Briick's entreaty that 
they would cut off his head before quartering him was 
in vain : if they were to do that, the executioners said, 
they would not be carrying out the orders of his Elec- 
toral Grace. When his body was being ripped open 
he prayed with a loud voice : ' Merciful God, have pity 
on me.' The other condemned criminals then under- 
went their respective punishments. Of Hans Beyer, 
who was hanged, it says : ' He met death with resig- 
nation, and had a beautiful end.' A peasant bought the 
bloody scaffold and built himself a dwelling-room out 
of its boards. 

The Elector Augustus boasted in Gotha of the 
things that had been done, and commemorated them 
on a memorial coin in the following inscription : — 'At 
last the good cause has triumphed.' At last, says the 
poet of the ' Nightingale,' 

At last Augustus home repaired, 
When all his business well he'd squared ; 
The devils then were wild with glee, 
They danced and sang loud jubilee ; 
Such deeds our children's children will 
Revenge, when these in death are still. 
We've kindled in the German nation 
A mighty, blazing conflagration ; 
For many a day 'twill burn and rage. 
If no one can its fire assuage.^ 

^ See Voigt, Ziveite Ahhandlung, pp. 246 ff. ; Beck, i. 569-584; 
Menzel, ii. 434-435. For the names of many of the songs and poems 
relating to the Grumbach affair see the catalogue in Ortloff, iv. 546-560. 
For the A'ac/i^aZZ especially, see pp. 324-334; Koch, ii. 7 f. 165-166; 
and Calinich's Aus dem 16. JahrJiundert, pp. 262-278. The author of 
the poem, which was first brought back to light by Lessmg, was Wilhelm 
Klebitz. the Heidelberg deacon, who is mentioned at pp. 69, 70 of this vol. 
For Maximilian's threatening attitude towards the Elector Palatine 
Frederic III. on account of the Nachtigall, see Kluckhohn, Friedrich 


The fire burnt steadily on. 

The full extent of danger to the Empire that might 
have arisen from this rebellious enterprise of the Duchy 
of Saxony and of Grumbach only became known to 
the Emperor through the documents sent to Vienna 
from the ducal chancellery. When, in May 1567, the 
most influential of the Estates, headed by the three 
spiritual electors, interceded with the Emperor on 
behalf of the captive John Frederic, and begged for his 
speedy release, Maximilian answered that he had assured 
himself, by looking through secret papers, that even 
worse guilt had been perpetrated than had previously 
come to light. The Duke was not ' on the level of an 
ordinary participator in the insurrection and conspiracy, 
but he had been convicted of being chief leader, and 
self-elected commander-in-chief, of an enterprise which 
aimed at nothing less than overturning the whole 
Empire, and kindling such a gigantic conflagration that 
the Fatherland and the peace-loving Estates belonging 
to it would have been plunged into unutterable anguish, 
suffering, tribulation, and da'nger, and even the Emperor's 
majesty and throne would not have been spared.' ^ On 

der Fromme, pp. 291-293. Concerning Caspar Weidling, of whom Koch 
(ii. 21) makes very slight mention, for want of fuller information, there 
is a parcel of papers in the Frankfort archives {BeichssacJien, 1566- 
1568). He was a bankrupt merchant and bad been put in prison at 
Frankfort for committing a highway robbery and for taking part in the 
Grumbach proceedings. In a despatch from Vienna, Aug. 11, 1567, 
the Emperor ordered the council at Frankfort to put in prison the 
author of the Nachtigall, Wilhelm Cleovitius, whose wife and children 
lived at Frankfort. 

1 Gruner, Urkunden, No. 21. In the year 1571 the three spiritual 
electors addressed a written petition to the Elector Augustus beseeching 
him in most supplicating terms to have pity on John Frederic, although, 
according to Grumbach's statement, their lands were destined as the 
first booty of the conspirators ; ' very significant this of the then attitude 


August 11, 1567, the Emperor informed the delegates 
at a Diet at Erfurt that it had come to his knowledge 
that the escaped Ernst von Mandelsloe, the chief of the 
proscribed criminals, and his followers were exerting 
themselves incessantly to raise fresh tumult, sedition, 
and rebellion in the holy Empire, and were above all 
plotting to stir up a general rising of subjects against 
their legitimate rulers, and of feudal vassals against their 
liege lords. He had also, he said, received trustworthy 
information to the effect that various people of dis- 
tinction in the Empire, who had ' previously had a hand 
in the insurrectionary scheme, were still implicated 
in treacherous intrigues.' ^ 

After the signal disgrace of Duke John Frederic 
such ' persons of distinction ' were no longer found 
among the Lutheran party. The centre of all the 
revolutionary endeavours to overthrow the constitu- 
tion of the Empire and exterminate the Catholic Church 
now became removed to the Calvinistic court of Heidel- 
berg, which was in league with foreign nations. 

of the Catholics,' remarks Menzel, ii. 436. 'Popish love of persecution' 
does not appear in this transaction. 
^ Koch, Quellen, ii. 51. 



Adelberg (abbey), 79 

Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen), 193 {n. 1) 

Aken (Acken, village), 292 

Albrechtsburg, near Meissen, 396 

Alsatia (Alsace), 94 

Altenhausen (Aldenhausen), 293 

Allotting, 173 

Amberg (town), 61, 315 

Anhalt (principality), 34, 51, 135 

Astrachan, 112 

Augsburg (bishopric), 30, 108, 127, 
184, 196 f., 203, 207 f.. 236, 254, 
262, 271 

Augsburg (town), 119, 127, 173, 
383, 389 

Augsburg (Confession), 2 f., 31 f., 
34-38, 41, 47, 60, 68 f., 76, 86, 97, 
100, 109, 116, 113-121, 125, 129, 
134, 137, 139, 141, 145 f., 150, 
183, 189 f., 201, 204, 207, 210, 
213-224, 227, 230, 233, 235, 245, 
305, 313 f., 322, 324, 327, 332, 
339 f., 347-352, 355-366, 369- 
376, 387, 391 

Augsburg (Apology), 32, 36, 47, 68, 
218, 278, 354 

Augsburg (Ecclesiastical Eeserva- 
tion), 97-104, 106, 124, 129, 132, 
332, 343, 346, 356 

Augsburg (Interim, 1548), 82, 283, 

Augsburg (Diets, 1555), 1, 37, 85, 
100; (1559) 106, 114, 116, 120^ 
132, 134, 137, 185, 187, 190, 205, 
209, 349, 357 ; (1566) 344, 345- 
376, 377, 391 

Augsburg (Religious Peace), 1, 10, 
29, 78, 83, 85, 93, 95, 97, 100, 103, 
104, 119, 122, 125, 129 ff, 135, 
189, 201, 219, 225, 235, 327. 329, 
340, 343, 346 ff., 360, 369 f., 

Austria, Imperial Hereditary Lands, 
116, 150, 151-167, 173 (w. 5), 176, 
180, 245, 258, 329 

Baden (margraviate), 47, 118, 318 
322 ff., 361 f. 

Baltic (sea), 112 

Bamberg (bishopric), 119, 182, 379 

Basle (town), 67 

Basle (council), 200, 242 

Bavaria (duchy), 41, 100, 118 f., 
167, 168-180, 198, 203, 207, 210, 
236, 240, 243, 248, 257, 349, 369, 
375, 381, 385 

Belgium, 67 

Berlin (town), 57, 230, 291, 296, 299 

Berlin (state archives), 333 {n. 1), 
338 {n. 2) 

Blaubeuren (abbey), 79 

Bohemia, 49. 61, 96 (n. 3), 104,203, 
206, 269, 329, 380 

Bohemia (Bohemian Brothers), 38 

Bourges, 67 

Bourgogne. See Burgundy 

Bourgueil (abbey), 266 {n. 1) 

Brabant, 323 

Brandenburg (bishopric), 134 

Brandenburg (Mark, electorate), 37, 
47, 115, 119, 127, 135, 206, 213, 
216, 222, 230, 293-299, 333, 338, 
340, 347, 365, 372 

Brandenburg- Ciistrin (margravi- 
ate), 13, 34, 216, 332 f., 379 {n. 1), 
392 (n. 2) 

Brandenburg, Franconian part 
(margraviates of Anspach, Bay- 
reuth, and Culmbach), 39 {ti. 4), 
68, 378, 384 

Bremen (archbishopric), 134 

Bremen (town), 55, 58, 278-283 

D r 2 



Bremen (cathedral), 280 
Brennbevg (in the district of Strau- 

bing), 176 
Breslau (town), 138 
Brixen (bishopric), 153 
Brumby, 291 

Brunswick-Liineburg, 135 
Brmiswicli - Wolfenblittel (duchy) , 

36, 38, 41 f., 135, 305, 381 
Brunswick (town), 20 f., 55, 291 
Brussels (town), 50 (n. 1) 
Buckau (Biickaw), 291 
Burgundy, 136 

Cabardey, 112 

Calbe, 291 

Commin, 134 

Caspian Sea. 112 

Caucasus, 112 

Cbaise-Dicu (abbey), 266 (n. 1) 

Chateau-Cambresis (Peace of 1559), 

107, 120 
Chatillon (abbey), 266 (n. 1) 
Cleves (duchy). See Jlilich-Cleves 
Corbehtz. 293 
Cologne (archbishopric), 238, 244, 

251, 336, 400 
Cologne (towai), 185, 203, 255 («. 1) 
Colmar, 172 
Constance (town), 203 
Constance (council), 200, 265 
Curland, 116 

Dantzic, 282 

Denmark, 39, 44, 47, 113. 216, 240, 

280, 306, 392 {n. 2) 
Dillingen, 9 {n. 1) 
Dirmstein, 320 
Dithmarsen, 392 
Dorpat, 113 

Dresden (State archives), 365 
Drosing, 164 
Dscherbe, 198 , 
Diisseldorf (State archives), 249 

Ebendorf, 292 

Ebingen in Wiirtemberg, 88 (?i. 1) 
Egenbui'g (monastery), 158 
Eichsfeld, the (district), 183, 184 

(n. 1) 
Eichstiidt (bishopric), 169 
Eisenach, 127 

Eisleben, 297 (n. 1) 

Elbe, the, 140 

Emden (county), 281 

England, 58, "107, 112, 216, 224, 

240, 323, 336 
Enns (river) {das Erzherzogthum 

center und oh der Enns : the 

archduchy of Upper and Lower 

Austria), 156 
Enns (town), 200 
Erfurt (town), 184, 229, 386, 392 
Erfurt (Diet), 401 
Ermland (bishopric), 202, 242, 334 
Esthonia, 115 

Europe, 94, 173 (n. 5), 185 (?;.. 1) 
Exaeten (library), 40 

Falkenthal, 165 

Florian, St. (monastery), 157 

France, 67, 94 f., 106-111, 120, 136, 

199, 201, 369 f., 380. 392 f. 
Franconia, 182, 379, 393 
Frankfort-on-the-Main (town), 47 f., 

67, 96 {nn. 1, 2), 99, 104, 110, 

121, 126, 130 f., 357, 367, 377 
Frankfort-on-the-Main (archives), 

399 {v. 1). 
Frankfort-on-the-Main (Protestant 

Diet, 1557), 31 
Frankfort-on-the-Main (Recess, 

1558). 46-52, 55, 58, 74. 144, 213, 

219, 293 f., 340, 363, 387 
Frankfort-on-the-Main (Election 

Diet, 1558), 47 f., 104, 120, 339 
Frankfort-on-the-Oder (town), 294; 

(suburb of Lebus), 299 
Frankfort-on-the-Oder (university), 

297 («. 1) 
Frauenberg. See Wiirzburg 
Frauenzell (monastery), 176 
Frohse, 293 

Furstenzell (monaster}'), 172 
Fulda (bishopric), 182 
Fulda (town), 58, 183 

Garsten (monastery), 157 
Gehren (in the Thuringian forest), 

George, St. (abbey), 79 
Geras (monastery), 157 
Gercsdorf, 164 
Gleink (monastery), 157 
Gnadenberg (monastery), 61 



Gnadenzell, at Offenhausen (ntin- 

nery), 86 
Gobelsburg, 164 
Goppingen, 341 
Goslar, 22 
Gotha (town), 19, 389 («. 3), 393 

{n. 2), 394-399 
Graz, 158 

Greece (Church of), 250 
Grimmenstein (fortress), 146 
Gutenswegen (Gudensweg), 291 

Hagenau (forest), 381 
Halberstadt (bishopric), 134 
Halle, 287, 291 

Hamburg, 26, 51, 55, 58, 114, 282 f. 
Hartz (mountains), 148 
Havelberg (bishopric), 134 
Heidelberg (town and court), 60, 

67, 279, 315, 338, 348, 399 (w. 1) 
Heidelberg (imiversity), 67, 77,273, 

315, 324 
Heidelberg (Catechism), 316, 324 f., 

342, 348, 362 
Heidelberg (Disputation of 1560), 

Henneberg (county), 51 
Herrenberg, in Wlirtemberg, 88 

(». 1) 
Herzogenburg (monastery), 157 
Hesse, 4, 15 {n. 1), 31, 47, 57, 100, 

108, 119, 135 ff., 139, 144, 183, 

190, 214 ff., 221, 237, 322 {n. 1), 

324, 333, 346, 367 
Hildesheim (town), 28 
Hilsbach (congress of princes), 214, 

Himmelskrone (nunnery), 317 
Hirschau (Hirsau, abbey), 79 
Hochberg (county), 318 (n. 2) 
Hohendodenleben (Hohendoden- 

lene), 293 
Holstein (duchy), 380, 392 
Holy Cross near Meissen (nunnery), 

318 (n. 2) 
Huguenots, 317, 369 (n. 1) 
Hungary, 96 {n. 3), 98, 117, 252, 


Illyria, 11 

Ingelheim Grund, 322 {n. 1) 
Ingolstadt (town), 92 {n. 1) 
Italy, 111 

Jena (town), 143, 275, 281, 285 

(n. 1) 
Jena (university, or theologian), 

20, 33, 143 
Jena (Book of Confutation, 1559), 

52 ft'., 145 ff. 
Jerichow, 293 
Jerusalem, 229 
Judah, Jews, 72, 117, 201 
Jlilich-Cleves (duchy), 248 {n. 1) 

Kamp (river), 165 

Kasan, 112 

Kilchberg (Konigsberg), 318 («. 2) 

Kirchheim in Wurtemberg, 88 {n. 1) 

Klosternenburg, 157 

Konigsberg (town), 12-17, 302, 309 

Konigsberg (university), 12-17, 302, 

I^jreuzburg (district), 303 
Kuhlhausen (Kulhusen), 291 
Kurbrandenburg, Kurpfulz, Kur- 

sachsen, &c. See Brandenburg, 

Palatinate, Saxony, &c. 

Ladenburg, 321 

Lanciano (archbishopric), 240 

Landsberg (League), 119 

Landshut (Provincial Assembly, 
1553), 173 

Laufen in Wurtemberg, 88 {n. 1) 

Lebus (bishopric), 134 

Lebus (suburb of). See Frankfort- 

Leipsic (university), 75 

Leipsic (Interim, 1548), 48 

Lesina (bishopric), 209 

Leuchtenburg, the, 146 

Lichtenstern in Wurtemberg, 88 
(n. 1) 

Liebenau (nmmery), 317 

Lithuania, 112 

Livonia, 112-116, 225 

Lorraine, 106, 110 

Lower Austria, 156, 165 f., 266 

Lower Germany, 212 

Lower Netherlands, 95 

Lower Saxony, 52, 274, 280, 291 

Liibeck (bishopric), 134 

Ltibeck (town), 51, 114, 138, 282, 

Luneburg(princii)ality). See Bruns- 



Liineburg (town), 51, 138 
Liiueburg (Conventiou, 1561), 273, 

285 f., 291 
Liitzetstein (district), 64 
Lyons, 317 

Magdeburg (archbishopric), 134, 

232, 286, 291, 390 
Magdeburg (town), 51, 283, 291 
Magdeburg (Church Ordinances), 

Mansfeld (county), 18 
Marbach, 88 
Marburg (town), 215 
Maria Reuthin, near Wildberg 

(Dominican nvumery), 80 
Markgroningen, in Wiirtemberg, 

88 {n. 1) 
Mattigkofen (castle), 173 (n. 5) 
Maulbronn (monastery, ReUgious 

Conference, 1564), 325 
Maulbronn (Treaty, 1564), 385 
Mayence (archbishopric), 183, 238, 

244, 252, 269, 282, 336, 400 
Mayence (town), 341 
Mecklenburg (duchy), 7,23, 50 {n. 1), 

113, 216, 220, 313 {n. 2), 349, 

365, 375, 392 {n. 2) 
Meissen (bishopric), 132 f., 390 
Meissen (margraviate). Sec Saxe- 

Meissen (town), 19 
Merseburg (bishopric), 133, 251, 390 
Metten (monastery), 172 
Metz (bishopric), i07, 388 
Metz (town), 107 
Minden (bishopric), 134 
Modrinsr, 107 
Molk (abbey), 157 
MongoUa, 112 

Montefiascone (bishopric), 264 
Moscow, 112, 114 
Miinchenreidt, 162 
Miuister (bishopric), 252 (n. 1) 
Mimster (town), 281 
Munich (town), 175, 199, 368 
Munich (imperial archives), 237 

(«. 1) 
Murrkard (monastery), 79 

Naples (kingdom), 261 
Narva, 113 

Naumburg ( = Zeitz, bishopric), 19, 
38. 134, 251, 290, 390 

Naumburg (congress of princes), 
212, 213 229, 272, 285, 293, 313, 
334, 340, 353, 363, 387 

Netherland. See the Baltic Sea 

Netherlands, the, 369, 393 

Neuffen (fortress), 79 

Neuhausen (abbey), 321, 362, 376 

Nordhausen, 393 

North Germany, 115, 163, 273-312 

Novgorod (archbishoiDric), 113 

Nuremberg, 51, 119, 127 

Oppenheim (Marienkrone), 318 

{n. 2) 
Oppenheim (town), 322 {n. 1) 
Osnabrtick (bishopric), 134 

Palatinate, the (Pfalz), 29, 31, 33, 
37,* 47, 59, 60-72, 79, 94, 98 f., 
108, 115, 117 f., 122, 124, 126 f., 
131, 144, 150, 191, 206, 213, 219 
222, 224, 245, 312, 313-326, 333, 
339, 341 ff., 346-356, 361-376, 
377, 399 

Paris, 95, 109 

Passau (bishopric), 260 

Passau (Treaty, 1552), 79, 85, 100 

Pfalz- Simmern, 68 

Pfalz-Zweibriicken, 33, 47, 72 {n. 4), 
110, 192, 214, 323, 341, 343, 
347 ff., 352, 365, 367, 372 

Pforzheim. 318 (n. 2) 

Pfullmgen, 82, 84 

Pinzgau, 385 

Poland, 50, 94, 111, 116, 233 

Pomerania, 51, 135, 216, 349 

Pomesania (bishopric), 196 

Prague (archbishopric), 235 {n. 1) 

Prague (town), 244 (u. 2) 

Prussia, 12-17, 39 {n. 4), 45, 112, 
116, 138, 143, 215, 302-312 

Ratisbon (Diet, 1556-1557), 29, 38, 
42, 95-69, 117, 123, 130, 349 

Ratisbon (town), 31, 50 («. 1), 56, 
127, 203 

Rhenish Palatinate, 63, 66, 317 

Rhine, Rhinelands, 94, 135, 187, 

Riga (archbishopric), 112 f. 

Rittenau, 85 



Rome (Ancient), 261 
Rome (Christian), 4, 6, 7, 19, 104, 
155 {n. 2), 199, 204, 208, 228, 230, 
236, 239, 246, 253, 269. 334 
Rostock (town), 22-27, 67 
Rostock (university), 22, 25 
Russia, 106, 111 f., 211, 225 

Saalfeld (Provincial Diet), 395 

Salzburg (archbisliopric), 119, 181, 
182, 239, 244 {n.2), 252, 331, 385 

Salzburg (town), 181 

Salzburg (Provincial Synod, 1549), 

Samland (bisliopric), 305, 310 

Sandau (district), 293 

Saxe-Gotha, 13, 15 (?i. 1), 31 {n. 1), 
39, 41, 52, 58, 68, 71, 108, 117, 
121, 135, 144-150, 206, 215 f., 
218 ff., 224, 273 f ., 310, 314, 316 f., 

347, 380, 382, 384, 387-401 
Saxe-Meissen, 255, 280 f. 
Saxe-Weimar, 215, 245, 346, 380, 

387, 393 
Saxon lands (Ernestine Lim), 377 
Saxony (electorate), 31 {n. 1), 47, 
55, 58, 77, 94, 99, 119 f., 126 f., 
132, 135, 140 {n. 2), 202, 206, 213, 
218 f., 224, 276, 318 {n. 2), 320. 
323, 333, 338, 340, 343, 346 f., 

348, 351, 358, 364-369, 371, 376, 
380, 382, 384, 387, 389, 393-400 

Scandinavia, 111 

Scharding, 179 

Schonebeck, 292 

Schrattenberg, 164 

Schwarz, 292 

Schweinfurt, 28 {n. 3) 

Schwerin (bishopric), 134 

Scotland, 216, 240 

Seligenporten (nimnery), 62 

SemgaU, 116 

SicUy, 261 

Silesia, 245 {n. 2) 

Simmem. See Pfalz-Simmern 

Simter, 320 

Sinsheim, 320, 362, 376 

Smalcald (articles), 32, 69, 220 f., 

Smalcald (war), 135 
South Germany (Upper), 31, 95, 

115, 212, 230 
Spires (bishopric), 320 {n. 1) 

Sponheini (county), 322 

Stargard, 27 

Steinabrumi, 164 

Steinfiu-t, 321 

Steinheim-on the-Mm'r, 85 

Stendal, 292 

Stettin (Provincial Diet, 1558), 28 

Strasburg (town), 2, 71, 94, 127 

Straubing, 175 f. 

Stiitzenhofen, 164 

Stuttgardt (town), 77, 313 

Suabia, 135 

Sundhausen, 381 

Sweden, 112, 216, 240 

Switzerland, 77, 94, 137, 188, 240 

Tina (bishopric), 252, 258 

Toul (town), 107 

Transylvania, 99 

Trent (CouncU), 34, 122, 167, 178, 
195, 196-205, 208 f., 214-216, 
225-232, 234-253, 258, 261-272, 
334, 341, 360 

Trent (town), 225 

Treves (archbishopric), 37, 42 {n. 2), 
185, 187, 189, 238, 252, 336, 400 

Treves (town), 187-192, 193 (n. 1) 

TruUus (Synod, 692), 250 

Tubingen (university, or theo- 
logians), 40, 273, 311 

Turkey, 29, 96, 98, 115, 117, 136, 
153 f., 198, 202, 211, 224, 271, 
278, 326, 329, 362, 375, 391 

Tyrol, the, 153, 182 

Upper Austria, 156 
Upper Palatinate, 63 f. 
Upper Rhine, 94 

Venice, 11, 95, 118, 200, 234, 265, 

VerceUi, 241 
Verden (bishopric), 134 
Verdun (bishopric), 107 
Verdun (town), 107 
Vienna (town and court), 151, 155,. 

204, 229, 244 {n. 2), 334, 389, 396, 

399 (n. 1) 
Vienna (university), 154 
Vienna (Conference, 1563), 251 
Viennese Neustadt (town) (Wien- 

erisch-), 396 



Waldsassen (monastery), 61 

"Weiler, near Blaubeuren (nunnery) , 

Weiler, near Esslingen (Dominican 
nunnery), 85 

Weimar (religious conference, 
1560), 147 ff. 

Weimar (town), 43, 146, 148, 377. 
381, 386 

Wesel-on-the-Lower Rhine, 21 

Wesenberg, 112 

Western Europe, 111 

Westphalia, or Westphalian Circle, 
282, 393 

Wismar, 51 

Wittenberg (town), 14, 17, 21, 45, 
139, 142, 247, 291, 393, 397 

Wittenberg (university or theo- 
logians), 17, 21, 33, 55, 75, 77, 
139, 143, 184, 276, 281, 292, 295, 

Wittenberg (Concord), 40 

Wolmirstedt, 284, 291 

Woltersdorf (Wolterstorf), 293 
Worms (bishopric), 317, 320 f., 361 
Worms (town), 42, 184 (n. 2) 
Worms (religious conference, 
1557), 28, 29-43 (». 1), 46, 49, 55, 
122 f., 134, 220, 387 
Wiirtemberg, 5, 31, 38, 43, 46 f., 
59, 73, 74-89, 98 f., 104, 108 f., 
117 ff., 136, 144, 150, 192, 206, 
213 f., 223, 274, 313, 317, 318 
{n. 2), 323, 332, 336, 340 f., 343, 
348, 352, 357, 365, 372, 385 
Wiirzburg (^bishopric), 119, 378- 

384, 393 
Wiirzburg (castle of Frauenberg), 

Wiirzburg (town), 379-385 

Zante (bishopric), 212 

Zeitz. See Naumburg 

Zeppernick, 291 

Zweibriicken (county See Pfalz 

Zweibriicken (town), 190 


Adeler (preacher), 25 

x\dolphus IX. (Diike of Holstein- 

Gottorp), 380, 392 
Adrian VI. (Pope), 267 
JSpinus, John (superintendent), 13, 

Agricola, John (court preacher), 57, 

294, 296 
Alber, Matthaus, 40 
Albrecht von Brandenburg (Arch- 
bishop of Mayence), 184 (n. 4), 

Albrecht V. (Duke of Bavaria), 

109, 118 ff., 167, 173-177, 198 f., 

203 f., 208, 210 f., 236 f., 240 £., 

243 f., 248 f., 252, 349, 368, 375, 

381, 385 
Albrecht I. (Diike of Prussia), 13 f., 

39 {11. 4), 45, 116, 138, 143 f., 

215, 301 f. 
Albrecht Alcibiades (Margrave of 

Anspach-Culmbach), 378 f. 
Albrecht Frederic (Duke of 

Prussia), 306-311 
Amsdorf, Nicholas of, 19 f., 45, 

Anabaptists, 166, 169, 178, 281 f., 

360, 371 
Andrea, James (chancellor), 40, 41, 

43, 89 f., 311, 326 
Anjou. See Henry III. 
Anna Maria of Brunswick (Duchess 

of Prussia), 306 
Augustus, Elector of Saxony, 37, 

46, 55, 58, 75, 99, 119, 126 f., 132, 

206, 213, 218 f., 319 f., 333, 338, 

343, 346 f., 352, 358, 364 f., 382, 

383, 389 f., 394-399 
Aiurifaber, John (court preacher), 

41 (n. 4), 43, 221 
Austria (House of). See Habsburg 

Bach, Vitus (private lecturer), 297 
Badvero, Federigo (ambassador), 94 
Barnim XI. (Duke of Pomerania), 

51, 138, 216 
Barthold, Frederic William (his- 
torian), 111 {n. 2) 
BasiHus, Dr. (ambassador), 39 
Baumgiirtner, David (patrician), 

Baumgartner, Jerome (jurist), 71 

Beaucaire, Francis of (Bishop of 

Metz), 388 
Belo, Joachim (preacher), 296 
Benedictines, 176 
Berghem, Eupert II. von (Bishop 

of Lllttich), 106 f. 
Bernhard, St., of Clairvaulx (Doctor 

of the Church), 266 {n. 1) 
Bettendorf, Theodovich von (Bishop 

of Worms), 317, 321 {n. 1), 362 
Beyer, Hans (confidential agent of 

John Frederic II.), 391, 398 
Beza, Theodore, 189 
Blochinger, Matthew (professor), 

Bol wilier, Baron de, 320 (n. 1) 
Boquin, Pierre (theologian), 67 
Brandenstein, Colonel von, 395 
Brandi (historian), 112 {n. 5) 
Braunsberger, Otto, S.J., 40 (». 2) 
Brenz, John (theologian), 39 f., 43, 

51, 77, 137, 224, 235 (n. 1), 243, 326 
Brieger, Theodore (writer on church 

matters), 330 {iu 2) 
Briick, Christian (ducal chancellor, 

son of the following), 148, 274, 

377, 397 
Briick, Greg. (Pontanus, actually 

Heintze, chancellor of the Saxon 

electorate), 37, 219, 397 f. 



Briimmer, Pet. (burgomaster), 22 f., 

25 f. 
Brlimier, Seb. (author), 155 (n. 1) 
Brus, Ant. (Archbishop of Prague), 

235 {n. 1) 
Bruschius, Casp. (poly-historian), 

Buchliolzer, George (provost), 57, 

296 f. 
Biiren, Dan von (burgomaster), 282 
Bugenhagen, (Pomeranus) John 

(preacher), 44 
BuUinger, Henry, 11 (?2. 1), 31 (n. 1) 
Bussy clAmboise, Jacques de Cler- 
mont de, 266 (n. 1) 

Calvin, Calvinism, Calvinists, 11 
(n. 1), 31 (»,. 1), 40, 67 f., 71, 75 f., 
105 {n. 1), 141 in. 1), 187, 191 i, 
141, 143, 243, 275, 278, 283, 312, 
315-328, 338 f., 345-352, 356, 
363, 364 {11. 4)-376, 401 

Camerarius, Joachim (magister), 
10, 143, 215, 306 («. 4) 

Canisius, Peter, S.J., 30, 35, 88, 40, 
43, 155, 170 {n. 3), 182 

Capito, Wolfgang Fabr. (preacher), 

Carmelites, 67 

Carpi, Eud. Pio (cardinal-dean), 271 

Casimir (Margrave of Brandenburg- 
Culmbach), 68 

Charles V. (Emperor), 29, 36, 85, 
94, 104, 112, 218, 227, 279, 328 

Charles V. (Carolina), 161 {n. 3) 

Charles IX. (Iving of France), 263 f., 
392 f. 

Charles II. (Margrave of Baden- 
Durlach), 47, 118, 216, 318 {n. 2), 
323 f. 

Charles (Abbot of Metten), 172 

Charles Borromseus, St., 335 {n. 1) 

Chemnitz, Martin (theologian), 290, 
305, 376 {n. 2) 

Christian III. (King of Denmark), 
39, 44, 47, 113, 280 

Christopher (Duke of Wiirtemberg), 
5, 39 {11. 4), 46 ff., 59, 73, 74-90, 
98, 99, 103 f., 108 f., 117 ff., 124, 
136 f., 150, 192, 206, 214, 225, 
273, 817, 323, 325, 332 f., 389 f.. 
348, 848, 852, 857, 365, 372, 385 

Christopher (Dvike of Mecklen- 
burg), 113 

Christopher (Bishop of Augsburg). 
See Stadion 

Christopher (Bishop of Brixen). 
See Fuchs 

Chytraeus, David (theologian), 51 

Cittardus (Citardus, or Zithard)^ 
Matthew (court preacher), 387, 

Clarisses, the, 82 f. 

Clement VII. (Pope), 218, 278 

Cleovitius. See Klebitz 

Commendone, Giov. Franc. (Car- 
dinal-legate), 170 {n. 3), 193 f., 
212, 223-232, 248 {n. 1), 834, 350 

Conrad (magister), 69 

Constantine the Great (Emperor), 

Contarini, Casp. (papal legate, for- 
merly Venetian ambassador), 170 

Craco, George (privy councillor), 
365, 897 

Cragius, Tilm. (superintendent), 28 

Cusano, Galeazzo (ambassador), 
271 {n. 2) 

Dalchaw, Maurice (pastor), 291 
Daniel Brendel von Hamburg 

(Archbishop of Mayence), 238 f., 

244, 252, 400 
Das3'podius, Theophilus, 275 {n. 1) 
Delfino, Zacharias (papal Nuncio, 

Bishop of Lesina), 209 f., 223 f., 

230 f., 385 
Dienheim (the Lords of), 205 {n. 1) 
Diller (com-t preacher), 67 
Dominicans, the, 172 
Dominicanesses, the, 80, 85 
Dorothea of Denmark (Duchess of 

Prussia), 806 
Draconites, Jolm (superintendent), 

Dronkmann (town clerk), 187 
Dudith, Andr. (Bishop of Briigge), 

Dilrfeld, Christopher (jurist), 146 

East Fkiesland, Edzard II. (Coimt 
of), 283 

Eber, Paul (professor and super- 
intendent-general), 148 {n. 1) 

Eck, Dr. John, 170, 172 

Eck, Leonard v. (chancellor), 176 



Eck, Oswald v. (son of the chan- 
cellor), 176 

Ediger (Mongolian Chan), 112 

Egenolf (Franciscan), 151 

Eggerdes, Peter (preacher), 23 

Eichhorn, Ant., 334 (h. 2) 

Elizabeth (Queen of England), 72 f., 
224, 336 {n. 1) 

Elizabeth of the Palatinate 
(Duchess of Sachsen), 310 

Emden (Count of). See East 

Entraigues, Catherine Henrietta de 
Balzac d' (Mademoiselle, later 
Duchess of Verneuil), 266 (h. 1) 

Erasmus of Venningen (not Ben- 
ningen) (court judge), 67, 71 

Erast, Thomas (professor of medi- 
cine), 67, 316 

Erbach, Valentin (Count of, coun- 
cillor of the Elector Palatine), 126 

Eric XIV. (King of Sweden), 392 

Ernest of Bavaria (Archbishop of 
Salzburg), 181 

Eyb, Gabriel (Bishop of Eichstadt), 

Francis II. (King of France), 110, 

Frederic IV., Comit von Wied 

(Ai-chbishop of Cologne), 252,400 
Frederic II. (Elector Palatine), 

60, 94, 98 
Frederic III. (the Pious), 57 f., 68, 

108, 115, 122, 125 f., 131, 150, 

191, 206, 214, 218-244, 245, 313- 

328, 333, 338-344, 345-356, 362- 

376, 377-400 
Frederic (Count Palatine of Zwei- 

briicken), 47 
Frederic 11. (Duke of Holstein- 

Glilckstadt, King of Denmark), 

392 (w. 2) 
Frederic (Bishop of Wiirzbm-g). 

See Wirsberg 
Freyberg, Pancr. v. (court marshal), 

Fuchs, Christopher von (Bishop of 

Brixen), 153 
Fuchs von Eiigheim, George (Bishop 

of Bamberg), 119, 379 {n. 1) 
Ftinfkkchen, Herr von, 164 
Funk, John (court preacher), 302 f. 

Fabee, John (Bishop of Vienna), 

Fabri, John (Dominican), 172 
Fabricius, Andr. (preacher), 8 
Falk, Francis (historian), 322 (n. 1) 
Ferdinand I. (King, then Emperor), 
1, 29, 42, 47, 49, 82 f., 95, 98-102, 
104 f., 107, 114-130, 134 f., 150 f., 
155 f., 162, 165, 167, 177, 185 £f., 
187, 195, 196-206, 210, 212, 218, 
224, 231, 235-244, 248, 251, 253, 
259, 262, 265-272, 329-343, 349, 
379-384, 386 
Ferdinand II. (Archduke of Tyrol), 

Ferrier, Arn. de (French ambas- 
sador), 263 
Flacius, Matthew (styled Illyricus, 
controversial theologian), Fla- 
cians, 11, 13, 19, 32, 39, 44, 48, 
52, 57, 75, 139, 144, 147, 167, 178, 
273 ff., 289 {n. 1), 293, 355, 387 
Flimmer, John (preacher), 72 {n. 3) 
Flinsbach, Cunman (preacher), 190 
Franciscans, or Minorites, 107, 151, 
158, 329 

Gabriel (Bishop of Eichstadt). 

See Eyb 
GaUus, Nic. (superintendent), 31 f., 

50 {n. 1), 56 
Gaudentius (Guggenbiichler, Fran- 
ciscan), 173 {n. 5) 
GeUer, Bernard (pastor), 291 
George of Austria (or Bishop of 

Brixen, Valencia, and Liittich), 

George (the Bearded, Duke of 

Saxony), 256 f., 282 
George (Count Palatine of Pfalz- 

Simmern), 343 
George Frederic (Margrave of 

Brandenburg- Anspach), 39 {n. 4), 

379 («. 1) 
Gienger, George (justiciary), 200 f., 

244 {n. 2) 
Gillet, J. F. A. (historian), 140 

{n. 2) 
Gotz, Walter (historian), 173 {n. 5) 
Gonzaga, Hercules (Cardinal of 

Mantua, first cardinal legate), 242 
Grassi, Charles (Bishop of Monte- 

fiascone), 264 



Gressenicus, John (court preacher), 

Griimbach, William of (knight), 

Glildensteni (chancellor), 392 
Glittlingen, Balth. von, 80 
Gustavns I. (King of Sweden), 113 

Haag, Count von, 176 

Habel, 341 {n. 1) 

Habsburg (House of), 117, 388, 380, 

Haenel, A. (jurist), 141 {n. 1) 
Hans (Margrave of Erandenburg- 

Ciistrin), 13, 34, 216, 832 f., 879 

{n. 1), 892 {n. 2) 
Hardenberg (Rizaeus), Alb. 

(preacher), 140, 278 
Hattstein, Marquard von (Bishop 

of Spires), 320 (n. 1) 
Haugaritz, John IX. v. (Bishop of 

Meissen), 132 
Helding, Mich. (Bishop of Merse- 

burg), 38 (n. 8), 134, 251 
Helmstadt, Jorg v. (commissioner), 

Henneberg, William VI. von 

(Count), 51 
Henry II. (King of France), 95, 

107, 380 
Henry III. (Duke of Anjou, King 

of Poland and of France), 266 
{n. 1) 

Henry the Younger (Duke of Bruns- 
wick- Wolf enblittel), 881 

Heppe, Henry Louis Jul. (church 
historian), 41 {n. 2) 

Hesshus, Tilmann (theological con- 
troversialist), 21-28, 67-72, 280 f., 
288-290, 307-812, 355, 376 (». 2) 

Heusenstamixi (Archbishop of May- 
ence). See Sebastian 

Hirn, Jos. (historian), 154 (n. 3), 
330 (n. 2) 

Hofsess, Otto Leonard (abbot), 79 

Hohenlohe (Counts of), 85 

Hopfen (historian), 830 (??. 1), 331 
{nn. 1, 2), 336 (;;. 2), 889 {n. 3), 
350 (n. 2) 

Hornolt, Bart, (cominissioner), 87 

Hosius, Stanislaus (Bishop of Erm- 
land. Cardinal), 202, 242, 334 

Hoya, Albert (Graf zu), 283 

Huber, Sam., 870 

Hugel (superintendent), 146, 275 

Ivan IV. ('the Terrible,' Czar), 

James III. von Eltz (Archbishop 

of Treves), 400 (n. 1) 
Janssen, Johannes, 330 (n. 2), 336 

(n. 2) 
Jesuits, 30, 35, 38, 40, 43, 155, 159, 

173 [n. 5), 182, 185, 282 (n. 1), 

241, 244 (n. 2), 255 {n. 1), 804 

in. 1) 
Joachim 11. (Margrave of Branden- 
burg, Elector), 37, 47, 115, 119, 

127, 188, 206, 213, 216, 224, 230 f., 

298-300, 333, 338, 340, 347, 365, 

379 («. 1), 393 
Joachim III. (Prince of Anhalt- 

Dessau), 34, 135 
John V. of Isenburg (Archbishop of 

Treves), 87 
John VI. V. d. Leyen (x\rchbishop 

of Treves), 185, 187, 189, 288, 

252, 336 
John the Elder (Duke of Holstein- 

Hudersleben), 892 
John of Leyden (Anabaptist), 288 
John a Via (cathedral preacher), 41, 

42 {n. 2) 
John Casimir (Count Palatine of 

Neustadt and Lantern), 263 ('». 2) 
John Frederic (the Magnanimoias, 

Elector of Saxony), 37, 137, 388 
John Frederic II. (' der Mittlere,'' 

Duke of Saxe-Gotha), 15 [n. 1), 

31 {n. 1), 43, 52, 58, 68, 108, 117, 

121, 144, 150, 206, 214, 224, 274, 

814 f., 348, 877, 879, 884, 386-396, 

400 f. 
John Frederic III. (Duke of 

Saxe-Gotha), 54 ff., 388 
John Gcbhard, Count of Mansfeld 

(Archbishop of Cologne), 238, 244, 

251, 336 
John George (Electoral Prince, later 

Elector of Brandenburg), 379 

(«. 1) 
John WiUiam (Duke of Saxe- 

Weimar), 54, 245, 348, 394-396 
John, St., Knights of, 117 



Jonas, Justus the younger (pro- 
fessor of law), 45, 145 

Judex, Matthew (theologian), 7 
(n. 1), 275, 285 f. 

Julias (Duke of Brunswick- Wolf en- 
biittel), 36 

Jungen, Anton zum (delegate), 96 

{H. 2) 

Jungen, Daniel zum, 110, 121, 130 

Jungnitz, Jos. (director of archives), 

245 (n. 2) 

Karge, George (superintendent), 
39 (». 4) 

Kasimir. See Casiniir. 

Kern, John V. (Abbot of St. George), 

Ketteler, Gotthard v. (Duke of Cur- 
land and Semgall, grandmaster), 
113, 116 

Khlienburg, Michael, Count of 
(Archbishop of Salzburg), 80, 119, 
181, 331 

liliuen-Belasy, John James (Arch- 
bishop of Salzburg), 239, 244 
(«. 2) 

Kirchmair, George, 154 

Klebitz (Cleovitius), William (dea- 
con), 68 f., 400 

Kleindienst, Barthol. (doctor and 
convert), 8 

Ivnopfler, Alvis (chixrch historian), 
173 (n. 5) 

Knolles, Henry (ambassador), 336 
{n. 1) 

Koch, Henry (historian), 248 (n. 1) 

Koch, Matthew (historian), 400 

Kretzer, Christopher, 379 (n. 2) 

Klitze, Ernest (pastor), 292 

Lainez, Jajies (General of the 

Jesuits), 40, 43, 155 (n. 3), 241, 244 
Latomus (Latimer), Barthol., 42 

{n. 2) 
Laymingen, Achaz v. (Truchsess), 

Leib, Kilian, 169 (n. 2) 
Lemniv;s, Sim. Emporicus (poet), 

Lessing, Gotthold Ephr., 400 
Lindemann (privy councillor), 865, 

368, 375 

Lisch, Eg. Christian Fred, (histo- 
rian), 161 (». 3) 

Loserth (historian), 330 {n. 2) 

Louis (Duke of Bavaria), 168, 257. 

Luna (Count, Spanish ambassador), 

Luther, Lutheran, Lutheranism. 
7, 10, 12 f., 19, 21, 31, 35, 40, 
43 f., 48, 53, 56, 61, 63, 66 f„ 
68 f., 76 f., 79, 81, 90, 113, 139, 
146, 148, 151, 157, 166, 170, 178, 
181, 184, 192, 208, 220, 246 f., 
257, 274, 280, 293, 297, 311, 313, 
322, 324 f., 338, 343, 353, 361, 
370, 376, 386, 391, 401 

Madruzzi, Christopher (Cardinal, 
Prince -bishop of Trent and 
Brixen, nephew of the following), 
153, 236 

Madruzzi, Louis (Prince-bishop of 
Trent), 110 

Major, George (professor), Majorites, 
17-22, 33 f., 38, 44, 53, 166, 275, 
277, 293, 355 

Mandelsloe, Ernest v., 382, 384, 
390, 395, 401 

Marbach, John (theologian), 41, 71 

Maria of Spain (Queen of Bohemia, 
afterwards Empress), 155 

Maria of Brandenburg-Culmbach 
(Electress of the Palatinate), 68, 

Marini, Leonard, 0. Pr. (Bishop of 
Lanciano), 240 

Martello, Lud., 236 

Martyr. See Peter 

Maurenbrecher, Carl Pet. Will, 
(historian), 330 {n. 2) 

Maurice (Elector of Saxony), 94, 
202, 224 

Maximilian I. (Emperor), 94 

Maximilian II. (King, later Em- 
peror), 34 f., 104, 201, 206, 259, 
329-344, 386-395, 400 

Medici, John Angelo. See Pius IV. 

Melanchthon, Slelanchthonianers 
(Philipists), 10, 13 f., 29, 33, 36 f., 
39 f., 43-45, 46-48, 67, 75 f., 98, 
135, 137, 140-143, 163, 166, 217, 
221, 275, 293, 294, 302, 325 

Melander, AVilliam, 95 



Menius, Justus (superintendent), 

19 f., 302 ('». 2) 
Menzel, Charles (historian), 62 
Menzel, Charles Adolphus (his- 
torian), 401 
Meyendorf, Andreas v. (nobleman), 

290, 308, 310 
Meyerin, Anton, (pastor), 291 
Minckwitz (chancellor), 67 
Moller, Cyriacus (pastor), 292 
Morlin, Joachim (Bishop of Sam- 
land), 13, 15 {n. 1), 33, 273, 305, 
Morone, Johannes (Nuncio, Car- 
dinal-legate), 184, 265, 270 
Miiller, Andreas (pastor), 291 
Mundt, Christopher (ambassador), 

336 (». 1) 
Musiius, Simon (professor), 146, 

275, 284 
Musculus (Meusel), Andreas (theo- 
logian), 294-301, 355 

Nassau, Louis (Count of), 383 

(«. 1) 
Nassau, William (Count of). See 

Nausea, Frederick (Bishop of 

Vienna), 155 {n. 1), 251 
Navarre. See Henry IV. 
Nussbaum, Leonard (councillor), 



Oemes, Otto (pastor), 288 

Oldenburg (Counts of), 283 

Olevian, Caspar (preacher and pro- 
fessor), 188-192 («. 1), 316 f. 

Orange, William I. (Count of 
Nassau-Dollenburg, Prince of), 
227 (w. 1), 383 (n. 1) 

Ortenburg (Counts of), 176 

Osiander, Andreas, Osianderites, 
12-17, 21, 33, 38 f., 43, 53, 55, 
140, 166, 293, 302-307, 355 

Ossa, Melchior v., 184 

Otto, Henry (Elector Palatine), 33, 
47, 59, 60, 66, 99, 125, 181, 206 
{n. 3) 

Paul III. (Pope), 133, 242, 251 (n. 2) 
Paul IV. (Pope), 49, 105, 121, 196, 

Paul, St. (Apostle), 19, 44, 229, 297 

(n. 1) 
Paul, Nic. (historian), 9 (n. 1), 173 

(«. 5), 330 (n. 2), 336 {n. 2), 339 • 

{n. 3) 
Pettram, Hans, 164 
Peter Martyr, 105 («. 1), 243 f. 
Peucer, Caspar, 71 {n. 3), 143, 302 
Pfaff, K. (historian), 88 (n. 1) 
Pfefferkorn v. Ottobach Sal., 163 
Pfeil (Syndicus), 284 
Pflug, Julius (Bishop of Naumburg), 

38, 251 
Phihbert (Margrave of Baden), 321 f., 

361, 365 
Philip 'II. (King of Spain), 94, 173 

{n. 5), 197, 201, 261, 265, 332, 

335, 393 
Philip I. (Landgrave of Hesse), 5, 

14, 31, 47, 57, 100, 108, 119, 135, 

139, 144, 190, 214, 221, 237, 322 

(n. 1), 333, 346 
Pius IV. (Pope), 1.50, 167, 195, 196- 

204, 209 f., 223, 226-245, 254, 

261, 269, 334, 339 (n. 2), 342 
Pius V. (Pope), 350 
Planck, G. J., 42 («. 2) 
Polanco, Johannes, S.J., 155 (n. 2) 
Prsetorius, Abdias (professor), 294- 

Prsetorius, Alexius (superinten- 
dent), 19 
Preger, K. (historian), 173 (n. 5) 
Puchheim, Adam v., 162 

Raesfeld, Bernard (Bishop of 

Mllnster), 252 {n. 1) 
Ranke, Leop. v. (historian), 173 

(n. 5) 
Eeidt, John v., S.J., 185, 232 (n. 1), 

255 (». 1) 
Reimann (historian), 330 {n. 2) 
Reitzes (historian), 330 {n. 2) 
Resch, Hippol. (commissioner), 87 
Riccardo (Abbot of Vercelli), 241 
Riezler, Sigmund (chief librarian), 

173 {n. 5) 
Ritter, Maurice (historian), 367 (n. 3) 
Rosny, Maximilian de Bethune, 

Baron de (Duke of Sully), 266 

(". 1) 
Roth (preacher), 396 
Rothenhjiusler, K. (historian), 88 

in. 1) 



Eudolph II. (Archduke, later Em- 
peror), 335 

Russow (chronicler), 112 

Rupert of Pfalz-Zweibriicken (Count 
Palatine), 2 

Rupert II. See Bergheini 

Salentin, Count of Isenburg (Arch- 
bishop of Cologne), 401 

Sarcerius, Erasmus, 39 

Saxony (House of), 387, 397 

Scalichius, Paul, 302 f. 

Scherer, George, S.J., 160 

Schlecht, Jos. (historian), 338 (?i. 2) 

Schlegel (doctor), 297 (n. 1) 

Schlliter, Joachim (preacher), 25 

Schinidlin. See Andrea, James 

Schnepf, Dietr., 89 

Schnepf, Erhard (preacher), 33, 39 
(n. 2) 

Schroter (physician), 148 

Schwarzburg, Glinther (Count of, 
military general), 227 {n. 1), 390, 

Schwenckfeld, Schwenckfeldians, 
53, 74, 141, 166, 275, 355 

Schwendi, Lazarus von, 93 

Sebastian v. Heusenstamm (Arch- 
bishop of Mayence), 184 {n. 2) 

Seekendorf, Anna von (prioress), 

Seiboltsdorf, Jerome v., 176 

Seller, Fred., 223 

Seld (vice-chancellor), 105 

Servet, Mich., 53, 140 

Sickingen, Francis of, 162, 379, 384 

Sigismund (Emperor), 201 

Sigismund v. Brandenburg (Arch- 
bishop of Magdeburg), 232, 286 f. 

Sigismund II., Augustus (King of 
Poland), 113, 233 

Slatkonia, George (Bishop of 
Vienna), 151 

Solyman II. (Sultan), 98, 112 

Soranzo, Girol. (ambassador), 271 

Soriano, Mich, (ambassador), 95, 

Speratus, Paul (preacher), 151 

Stadion, Christopher von (Bishop 
of Augsburg), 184 

Stanear(us), 53, 166 

Staphylus, Fred, (convert), 42 {n. 2), 
156, 244 {n. 2) 

Stein, William von, 382, 390, 396 
Steuss, Peter (burgomaster), 188 
Stieve, Felix (historian), 173 {n. 5), 

330 {n. 2) 
Stolberg (und Konigstein), Louis 

(Count of), 110 
Strele, Barthol. (chaplain), 288 
Strigel, Victorin (theologian), 145, 

275, 355 
Sturio (deacon), 44 
Sudhoff, K., 37 {n. 1) 

Tausendschon, Hans (seer of 
angels), 381 f., 386 f., 394, 398 

Teutonic Order, 112 f., 117, 306 

Thammer, Theob., 141 

Thann, Eberhard v. d. (ambas- 
sador), 121 

Theodosius (emperor), 274 

Thou, James Aug. d. (Thuanus), 
253 («. 1) 

Truchsess, Otto v. (Cardinal-Bishop 
of Augsburg), 30, 109, 196, 207, 
210, 212, 232, 236 f., 254, 262, 
271, 363 

Ulrich (Duke of Mecklenburg), 23, 

216, 218 
Ulrich (Duke of Wtirtemberg), 46, 

77, 82, 86, 136 
Ursinus (actually Beer), Zacharias 

(professor), 315 

Valois, Charles of, 266 («. 1) 
Velderer, Louis (Abbot of Hirschau), 

Venningen, Erasmus of (court 

judge), 67, 71 
Verger, 331 
Verona (the pretended Margrave). 

See Scalichius 
Voehezer, Jos. (keeper of archives), 

237 {n. 1) 
Voit, David (professor), 306 
Vulpius, Christian Aug. (author), 

304 {n. 1) 

Walter, Fred, (historian), 330 

(«. 2) 
Weidling, Caspar (highway robber), 

399 {n. 1) 



Wesenbeck, Matthew (professor), 

Westplial (lis), Joachim (theologian), 

13, 58 
Wiechmann, C. M., 7 {n. 1) 
Wiedemann, Theodore (historian), 

161 {11. 3) 
Wigand, John (Bishop of Pome- 

sania), 19, 146, 275, 285, 807 ff., 355 
WilUam IV. (Duke of Bavaria), 

168, 171, 173, 257, 260 
"William (Duke of Jiilich-Cleves), 

248 {n. 1) 
William of J3randenburg (Arch- 
bishop of Riga), 113 
William of Orange. See Orange 
William (Abbot of Fulda), 182 f. 
Winter (superintendent), 146 

Wirsberg, Fred, of (Prince-Bishop 

of Wiirzburg), 382, 393 
Wolf (historian). 210 (??. 4) 
Wolfgang (Abbot of Fulda), 183 
Wolfgang (Abbot of Metten), 172 
Wolfgang (Count Palatine of Zwei- 

briicken), 33, 47, 110, 192, 215, 

323, 343, 347 ff., 352, 365, 372 
Wolfgang (Prince of Anhalt- 

Gothen), 51 

Zasius, Ulrich (Imperial coun- 
cillor), 118, 369, 376 

Zobel, Melchior (Bishop of Wiirz- 
burg), 119, 378 

Zwingli, Zwinglians, 33, 53, 61, 67, 
72, 75, 137, 166, 178, 188, 215, 315, 

324, 331, 341, 344, 347, 366, 375