there be found some difference, that should be borne with, since it is not necessary that the rites of the church should be every where the same."* Even the Calvinist minister of Charenton, M. Daillé, much as he hated the Catholic church, makes a similar avowal. After having enumerated those articles of his belief, which he is pleased to call fundamental, he says: "Rome does not call in question the articles which we believe; it even professes to believe them. Who can deny, even in our day, that Rome admits the necessary articles ?" Why then separate from her?

Hitherto we have treated of the origin and extent of the evils which afforded the reformers a pretext for the reformation; and we have also endeavored to point out the proper means of effecting reformation-the true method of solving the great problem of the sixteenth century. We will now proceed to examine the means adopted by the reformers for that alleged purpose, and will endeavor through them to account for the rapidity with which the reformation was diffused.

* Art. xxi. Anno Dom. 1530. Confessio Augustana. "Institut. Chrétiennes," l. iv, ch. ii, and "La Loi fondée," part. iii.

CHAPTER IV.

THE TRUE CAUSES AND MANNER OF THE REFORMATION, AND THE MEANS BY WHICH IT WAS EFFECTED.

Saying of Frederick the great-What we mean to prove-Testimony of Hallam-Doctrines of Luther-Justification without works-Its dreadful consequences avowed-The "slave-will"-Man, a beast with two riders-Dissuasive from celibacy-An easy way to heaven -D'Aubigné's discreet silence-Testimony of the Diet of Worms on Luther's doctrines-An old lady emancipated-Protection of princes -Schlegel's testimony-The reformers flatter princes and pander to their vices-A reformed dispensation-Character of reformed princes -Their cupidity-Fed by Luther-Protestant restitution-Open violence and spoliation-The modus operandi of the reformationSchlegel again-Abuse of the press-Vituperation and calumny— Policy of Luther's marriage-Apostate monks-Recapitulation-A distinction-The reformation "a reappearance of Christianity."

We believe it was Frederick the Great, of Prussia, who first made the well known remark, " that pride and avarice had caused the reformation in Germany, lawless love in England, and the love of novelty in France." Perhaps the greatest severity of this remark, is its strict historic truth. It, of course, was intended merely to designate the first and most prominent among a variety of other causes. Wm. Cobbett has proved-and no one has yet answered his arguments-that in England, the first cause alluded to above, was powerfully aided by cupidity, which fattened on the rich spoils of the church, and by the reckless pride of ascendancy, which revelled in, and was cemented by, the blood of vast numbers of innocent victims, whose only crime was their conscientious adherence to the religion of their fathers.

We will present a mass of evidence to prove that in Germany, the reformation, which was commenced in the

pride of revolt, was fed and kept alive by avarice and licentiousness, was propagated by calumny, by violence, and by pandering to the worst passions, and was consum-. mated and rendered permanent by the fostering care of secular princes, without whose protection it would have died away and come to naught. This is strong language; but it is more than justified by the facts of history: not indeed as those facts have been travestied, miscolored and perverted by such partial writers as M. D'Aubigné; but, as they are clearly set forth by cotemporary historians, and as they appear in the original documents. We shall allege only such as are undoubted and clearly established from these sources.

But before we adduce this evidence, let us see what a very learned and enlightened living Protestant historian. thinks on this subject, to the investigation of which he has devoted much labor. Mr. Hallam gives us the result of his researches in the following passages, which we quote from his latest work. 66 Whatever may be the bias of our minds as to the truth of Luther's doctrines, we should be careful, in considering the reformation as a part of the history of mankind, not to be misled by the superficial and ungrounded representations which we sometimes find in modern writers. (M. D'Aubigné for example). Such is this, that Luther, struck by the absurdity of the prevailing superstitions, was desirous of introducing a more rational system of religion; or, that he contended for freedom of inquiry, and the boundless privileges of individual judgment; or, what others have been pleased to suggest, that his zeal for learning and ancient philosophy led him to attack the ignorance of the monks and the crafty policy of the church, which withstood all liberal studies. These notions are merely fallacious refinements, as every man of plain understanding (except M. D'Aubigné) who is acquainted with the writings of the early reformers, or has considered their history, must acknowledge."*

"History of Literature." Sup. Cit. vol. i, p. 165, sec. 60-61.

In another place, he has this remarkable passage: "the adherents to the church of Rome have never failed to cast two reproaches on those who left them: one, that the reform was brought about by intemperate and calumnious abuse, by outrages of an excited populace, or by the tyranny of princes; the other, that, after stimulating the most ignorant to reject the authority of their church, it instantly withdrew this liberty of judgment, and devoted all who presumed to swerve from the line drawn by law, to virulent obloquy, and sometimes to bonds and death. These reproaches, it may be a shame to us to own, can be uttered and cannot be refuted."* After making this painful avowal, he enters upon a labored argument to prove that the reformation could have succeeded by no other means !t

The reformers, as we have seen, were not content with clamoring for the reform of abuses: they laid violent hands on the sacred deposit of the faith. Like Oza of old, they put forth their hands to the ark of God, mindless of Oza's fate! Under the plea that the Catholic church had fallen into numerous and fatal doctrinal errors, and that the reformation could not be thorough, without the removal of these, they rejected many doctrines which the whole world had hitherto revered as the revelation of God; and substituted in their place new tenets, which they professed to find more conformable to the word of God. This is not the place to examine whether these new doctrines are true; all that our plan calls for at present, is to inquire what those doctrines were, and what was their practical bearing on the work of the reformation? Were they really calculated to exercise an influence beneficial to morals and to society? Were they adequate means to reform the church? As it would be tedious to exhibit even a brief summary of all the contradictory tenets held by the early reformers, or even by the early Lutherans themselves, we

* Ibid. p. 200, sec. 34. † Ibid.

2 Kings (or Samuel) vi, 6.

must confine ourselves to those broached and defended by Luther, the "father of the reformation." And we shall state nothing for which we will not exhibit chapter and verse from his own writings.*

The leading tenet of Luther's doctrine was, a belief in justification by faith alone without works. This is the key to his entire system. Let us hear the modest way in which he asserts this doctrine, one that he always styled "a fundamental article." "Well, then, I, Doctor Martin Luther, an unworthy evangelist of our Lord Jesus Christ, do confess this article, that faith alone without works justifies in the sight of God;' and I declare that, in spite of the emperor of the Romans, the emperor of the Turks, the emperor of the Tartars, the emperor of the Persians, the pope, all the cardinals, bishops, priests, monks, nuns, kings, princes, nobles, all the world, and all the devils, it shall stand unshaken for ever! That, if they will persist in opposing this truth, they will draw upon their heads the flames of hell. This is the true and holy gospel, and the declaration of me, Doctor Luther, according to the light given to me by the Holy Ghost."

.

This declaration was made in 1531; and, according to M. D'Aubigné, who quotes Seckendorf, Luther's most ardent admirer, he received "this new light of the Holy Ghost" while visiting "Pilate's stair-case"‡ in Rome, a few years before he turned reformer. This we apprehend was an after-thought. Certain it is that, to get rid of the conclusive argument against this cardinal doctrine drawn

* Some of the modern editions of Luther's works have been greatly expurgated by his admirers. We shall quote from the oldest and most authentic editions, those of Wittemberg, of Jena, of Frankfort, of Altenberg, of Leipsic, and Geneva. That of Wittemberg was put forth by the immediate disciples of Luther.

† Glossa in Edict. Imperiale. Opera Lat. tom. xx. Apud D'Aubigné i, 172.

Properly called the "scala santa," or "holy stairway;" from having been once consecrated by the Saviour's footsteps, while he was entering into the pretorium to be judged by Pilate.