and gives clear refutations of the veracity of the latter-day words and writings of Luther. I alone in Erfurt monastery read the Bible,' he wrote. Now, this was false, for the Augustinian rule lays special emphasis on the reading of the Scriptures. The novice must read the Scriptures assiduously, must hear it devoutly, and learn it fervently.' He praised his novice-master, who must have had little judgment and little prescience. To deal with such a soul as Luther's was-a soul with such a strong will, such an imperious manner, such a violent temper, so morbid, so scrupulous, so proud, and a mind trained as Luther's had been on the streets and in the taverns-needed a master of the spiritual life, a searcher of hearts, a watcher of and a guide in his every act. The postulant was assiduous in his duties, conformed well to rule, and was, after two years' stay in the monastery, ordained priest in 1507. He entered on his priestly life full of reverence, of awe, and of fervour. But that event, which should have filled his shrewd old father with joy, brought the old man nothing but fear and dread. I sit here, eating and drinking,' he said on the morning of his son's ordination, but I would much prefer to be away from the spot.' Did he not speak with that prophetic instinct which so often lives in parents? Perhaps his own life's story, with its ghastly crime, its frenzy, its cruelty, came before the old man's mind, as a foreboding of grave hereditary taint. Perhaps his watching of, and his hearing of, the goings-on of young Martin at the University pointed to what he considered defects incompatible with priestly life. Father Martin Luther never forgot his father's words, and probably in the years that followed the old man's words came back to the renegade priests who, as holy priests of St. Augustine, heard the old man's speech.

Luther was now a priest, and for ten years he lived as a regular, offered up the Great Sacrifice, shrived and preached, and taught and studied. His soul, badly cultivated, ran riot. He was perfervid, tepid, cold, moody, boisterous, sad, scrupulous, and above all stubborn and proud.

His superiors introduced him to the study of theology, and put into his hands the works of William of Ockham (1280-1849), a rebel English friar, as a text-book. Ockham's works are pugnacious. He was an Ishmael; his hand against every man's hand and every man's hand against his. His

works bristle with venemous opposition to the Papacy and are everywhere tinged with scepticism and rash novelties. They led to his resignation of his chair in the University of Paris, where his strong support of the imperial against the ecclesiastical power led to his being summoned to Rome. He refused to go, and sought refuge with hostile Powers. Ockham advocated absolutism, denied the papal right to exercise temporal power, to interfere in the affairs of empire. Human reason, he said, is unable to reach certitude in the most important problems of philosophy. In ethics he maintained that all distinction between right and wrong depends on the will of God. His writings betray a lack of Scripture knowledge and traditional teaching, but they display great originality, vigour, and bitter opposition to the scholastics. Surely the writings of such a man were very peculiar fare for the ardent and contentious mind of Luther. Hence, nearly every error of the English Franciscan is found, with corollaries and deductions, in Luther's works and words. Father Grisar tells us that the training of the Augustinian novices at that time was of the poorest and most meagre kind. We can well believe it. The permission and approval of Ockham as a text-book speaks eloquently for the prudence and guidance of his superior. For the influence on the student-mind of a text-book's words and principles is immense. Priests ordained in the last century know from experience the fixedness and linkedness of the opinions printed in their college text-book. The pages of this periodical gave long and frequent evidence of the long and strong toil needed by priests to tear out of their minds the eucharistic arithmetic, to unlearn proprius parochus, domicilium, to learn and put in practice the rules for the Communion of children, and other canonico-moral items. Luther was human: he learned from a rebel and became an arch-rebel.

In addition to his private study of theology, the raw young priest with little training was appointed University lecturer in ethics. He became popular as a preacher, as a teacher, and as a confessor. His vigorous and novel treatment of questions, to which he gave the Ockham tinge, led his young hearers to believe that his novelties were the result of profound and original thought. They enjoyed his humour and his buffoonery, and his non

1 Life of Luther, chap. iv.

exacting standards of student knowledge made him their idol. Their corncrake repetitions of their bold and learned professor reached the Court, which rejoiced to hear of an anti-papal priest, who favoured the Empire. His sermons, delivered in his sweet clarion voice, drew great congregations to the Augustinian church. They are poor stuff. But his fame and courage won for him the recognition of his Order, and he was sent to Rome as their spokesman on an important mission. The eulogy, court favour, and promotion did not help the self-confident and over-weeningly proud soul of young Father Luther. In 1512 he took his doctorate in theology; and if we may judge its scholastic value by the time at Luther's disposal for preparation and by the grasp of elementary principles of theology in his works, the Erfurt degree was not a title of great honour or renown. But his lectures and sermons made him popular, a hero with many worshippers. In his everyday life 'he had always been a quarrelsome man,' wrote Dungersheim, his friend. He never learned,' wrote Oldcop, his pupil, 'to live at peace, and being disputatious he was always desirous of coming out victorious in differences of opinion and liked to stir up strife.'

As early as 1515-two years before his theses appeared —he was suspect in his conduct and opinions. Denifle says that year was the turning point in Luther's headlong career. His wild spirit was torn with doubts, with scruples. He had no training; no spiritual therapeutics was practised by him; his soul's maladies cried for help, for judicious treatment from a skilled spiritual master. But no such priest was sought. His pride, his frenzied rage, his gluttony, his lust, and the carelessness in matters spiritual were combining in the war against the doomed priest. He was too busy and too blind to study his own case to call in a soul physician to minister to his moral maladies, to his mind diseased.

The critical point was reached in 1517, when his students and his penitents went out to the small town of Juterbock, a few miles distant from Wittenberg, to hear Tetzel, the Dominican, who was preaching the Papal Indulgence Crusade. His jealousy and pride were stirred up at the sight of so many pilgrims going to hear anyone save Dr. Luther, but, above all, to hear his rival, a Dominican. He flew to arms against the doctrine of indulgences and against Tetzel, a friar of a rival Order. Wild and ignorant discourses have

VOL. X-27

been spoken and penned before 1517, and since, but few, if any, can rival Professor Luther's effort for ignorance and intemperate language. Tetzel's reply was dignified, modest, and correct in doctrine. Dr. Luther was enraged at his rival's calmness and he replied: 'I laugh at your words, as I do at the braying of an ass; instead of water I recommend to you the juice of the grape; and instead of fire, inhale, my friend, the smell of a roast goose. I am at Wittenberg. I, Dr. Martin Luther, make it known to all inquisitors of the faith, bullies and rock-splitters, that I enjoy abundant hospitality, an open house, a well supplied table and marked attention, thanks to the liberality of our Duke and Prince, the Elector of Saxony.' His students laughed and applauded their professor; the anti-papal and pro-Emperor party was loud in his praise. Superiors frowned, advised, threatened, but it was useless. promised to his Bishop to be silent. But he broke all promises and published his famous theses on All Saints' Day, 1517. And this year, 1917, is the quarto-centenary of Luther's revolt.

He

I have tried to outline the man, his manner and methods up to the theses-making time. I have tried to show his training, his tastes, his talent; and now a word on his teaching as displayed in the famous theses. When he published them he expected that some knight should at once enter the lists to defend Holy Church. But his theses were received with silence. They hung unnoticed; fluttering idly in the November blast. He thirsted for praise and notoriety, those dangerous stimulants. He was frenzied. His friends were silent. Critics were silent, too. 'The ninety-five sledge-hammer strokes,' as Lindsay, the Protestant historian, called these theses, were not noticed at all: even as a tinkling cymbal they did not reach the ears of the multitude, much less as 'sledge-hammer strokes.' No one noticed, no one was terrified; for, many of the stolid Germans who had previously heard his anti-papal views knew the truth, which Voltaire crystallized later: He who eats Pope dies of it.' When this world-famous document was examined it was found full of contradictory theses: theses obscure in their wording; sentiments which were neither theses in form nor in meaning. Well did Lindsay write, 'The theses are not a reasoned treatise.' No, the theses are not a reasoned treatise and show signs of haste. The tone of several theses is abusive and satirical, and the

dictatorial spirit-I-am-Sir-Oracle-let-no-dog-bark style of Luther, which was to develop to such strength in old age, is seen here in vigorous shoots. In later years he was to write, 'in a word, before me no one knew anything.' In the theses the child is father of the man. He, at this time, wrote to the Bishop of Brandenburg declaring his absolute submission and readiness to obey the Catholic Church in every thing. But Dr. Luther added: 'In my opinion, nothing can be advanced against my theses either from Scripture, Catholic doctrine, or Canon Law, with the exception of the utterances of some few canonists, who spoke without proofs, and of some of the scholastic Doctors, who cherished similar views, but who were unable to demonstrate anything.'

Many of these theses [writes Father Grisar, S.J.1], from the theological point of view, go far beyond a mere opposition to the abuse of indulgences. Luther, stimulated by contradiction, had to some extent altered his previous views on the nature of indulgences and brought them now into touch with the fundamental principles of his erroneous theology.

A practical renunciation of indulgences as it had been held up to that time is to be found in the theses, where Luther states that indulgences have no value in God's sight, but are merely to be regarded as the remission by the Church of the canonical punishment (Theses 5, 20, 21, etc.). . . . In some of the theses (58-60) Luther likewise attacks the generally accepted teaching with regard to the Church's treasury of grace, on which indulgences are based. Erroneous views concerning the state of purgation of the departed occur in some of the propositions (18, 19, 20). Others appear to contain what is theologically incorrect and connected with his opinion regarding grace and justification; this opinion is not, however, clearly set forth in the list of theses.

Many of the statements are irritating, insulting, and cynical observations on indulgences in general, no distinction being made between what was good and what was perverted. Thus, for example, thesis 66 declares 'the treasuries of Indulgences are simply nets in which the wealth of mankind is caught.' Thesis 86 enquires, Why does not the Pope, who is as rich as Croesus, build St. Peter's with his own money, rather than with that of poor Christians?' Another thesis declared: Christians should be taught that he who gives to the poor or assists the needy does better than he who purchases indulgences.'

The theses had to be dealt with, as their contents made steady and slow progress through Germany. Tetzel, whose memory has been amply vindicated from the libels of

1 Vol. i. pp. 331, 332.