Of the serious preparations made by both parties for the disputation.
Of Duke George's and the University of Leipzig's partly doubtful, partly even dismissive answer to D. Eck's and Luther's request to be allowed to debate in public.
367 Letter to Luther reprimanding the University of Leipzig. Feb. 19, 1519.
This letter is found in Latin in the Jena edition (1579), toiD. I, col. 364; in Löscher's Ref.-Acta, vol. Ill, p. 282; in the Erlanger, oxx. var. arg., tova. IV,
We Rector, 3) Magistri and Doctoren of the high University of Leipzig, offer our greetings to D. Martin Luther.
In the days that have recently passed, Doctor, as we celebrate the birthday of our most Holy Redeemer, Christianity, the
(Erl. Briefw.). He is from Lemberg, and, as Löscher (Vol. Ill, p. 579) notes, gave the final speech at the end of the Leipzig disputation.
The excellent Doctor of Holy Scripture, Johann Eck, has written to the most noble Prince, Duke George, this university and the doctors of theology, 1) and has chosen the theological faculty as a lesbian guide to judge his dispute, asking most diligently that we allow him to dispute with D. Carlstadt in our highly famous university. Since through this examination, by means of disputation, the truth can be defended against the slanderers and, as it were, brought out of the deep pit of democritus 2) into the light of day, we have granted him his request as far as possible and granted him a place to disputate. 3) On this good will of ours, D. Eck has relied on this good will of ours; and after he wants to engage in a school fight here with D. Carlstadt, so that he may leave the camp of Pallas with a flying ensign and deliver a public battle to your champion (as he says), he has issued a note of his disputation, like a banner, by which, as you think, he has announced the fight to your sentences. Since you do not intend to give way to him, you have again challenged him to the dispute of the disputation by means of a printed document. In this, we are highly astonished at you that you write against our decision, which was made in truth, 4) that we had refused or refused him the disputation; but we are much more astonished that you have pretended that such a disputation would be held in our university in Leipzig, since nothing of this is known to us, nor have you obtained such from us, nor even from the most illustrious prince, the gracious Mäcenas of our university. Therefore, since this is similar to a presumption of which you are believed to be disgusted, we most earnestly request that you do not burden us, who know nothing about it, either, if it is not repugnant to you, revoke it, or
1) Thus, Eck's letters, dated Dec. 4, 1518, did not reach their addressees until Christmas. On Dec. 26, the theological faculty forwarded Eck's letter to He^og Georg (cf. Seidemann, Leipz. Disp., pp. 25 and 113, supplement 7). The letters are reprinted in Seidemann, p. Ill f., supplement 6 (Erl. Briefw.).
2) Democritus says: In truth we are nothing, because the truth is in the depth ('UrcH "üöcr- cv
H ä^i)cra).
3) "After the theological faculty had at first refused the disputation in response to Eck's letter of Dec. 4 (Seidemann, Leipz. Disp., p. 25), it subsequently approved the same on Feb. 1 by express order of Duke Georg (Seidem. idick., pp. 30,124)." (Erl. Briefw.)
4) In Luther's open letter to Carlstadt, No. 361.
at least of your struggle, in a letter of reply, which we earnestly desire from you, to withdraw until you have obtained permission from us to dispute. With this little, you are commanded by God. Given at Leipzig, under our Rectorate's seal, February 19, in the year of the salvation of mankind, 1519. 5)
Luther's report to Lang on how the Leipzig theologians, along with the bishop of Merseburg, tried to prevent the disputation.
See Annex, No. 44, U 5.6, Nö. 34, § 2, No. 45, § 2. See also No. 31, § 5.
Luther's report to Spalatin and Lang of Duke George's doubtful and conclusive answer.
See Appendix, No. 33, § 2 and No. 34, § 2.
B. Of the permission granted by Duke Georg himself and subsequently also by the University of Leipzig to
Disputation to happen.
370 Excerpt from a very emphatic letter from Duke George to the Bishop of Merseburg, Prince Adolph of Anhalt, who was the Chancellor of the University of Leipzig and who was strongly opposed to the Leipzig disputation, asking him not to hinder the disputation any further.
This letter is found in Latin from the Zacharias Schneider titironie. lüps., lid. IV, p. 168 reprinted in Seckendorf's nist. I^ntsi., lid. I, p. 80, § 57; in Fabricius, OriA. 8uxon., lid. VII, p. 861 in other words, but in the same sense. German in Frick's translation of Seckendorf, p. 187 and in Hofmann's Ref.-Hist. der Stadt Leipzig, p. 68. - Seckendorf reports (I. e. p. 81) that in spite of this serious letter, the Bishop of Merseburg, during the entry of the Wittenbergers on June 24 (Seckendorf wrong: 17. ^unü), had a ban posted on the church doors in Leipzig not to hold the disputation. But the council, by order of the duke, not only had the notice torn down, but also had the one who had posted it thrown into prison. Cf. Document No. 393, § 4.
Translated from Latin.
5) The letter was signed by: D. Matthias Henning, M. Nicolaus Apel of Königshöfen im Grabfelde sBayern], Düngersheim, Matthias Frauendienst of Schweidnitz, D. Paul Schwoffheim of Görlitz, Martin Meenborn of Hirschberg and Lungenschneider. (Seidemann, 1. 6. p. 32.)
J.F.D. is not a little surprised that the bishop would be disgusted with the old custom used by the noble ancestors and holy church fathers to investigate the truth in disputed religious matters, and brought upon them, their descendants. It would be useful and necessary for the recently raised question to be considered carefully, for both sides to hear the reasons for the evidence, and for the truth to be investigated: whether, when the money deposited for the indulgence rings in the basin, the souls of the deceased, delivered from purgatory, will lead to heaven, and whether the silly, simple-minded rabble would not be cheated out of money in this way. It seemed as if the bishop wanted to speak the word of some unworthy, but pompous people (who were like the fearful soldiers, who boasted of great manliness apart from the fight, but, as soon as noise was blown, sought to flee). It would be an old custom to hold disputations in such disputes, to hear the parties against each other, and to let each defend his opinion to the best of his ability and answer the other's objections. If the theologians should not be able to maintain their opinions, which would be wrong, it would neither be detrimental to the pope nor to the church if they were to be instructed better; on the other hand, even if they were to be driven in a just and good cause by the opposite, it would neither be detrimental to them nor to the cause, because they, surpassed by the sophists in a good cause through speed of dispute, could easily appeal to the pope. Nor would this public discussion be annoying to those who were properly instructed and walked in the light, nor would it be disagreeable and repugnant to the pope at Rome and his cardinals, because the common man would thereby be properly instructed in the things that belong to all men's blessedness. It would be in the interest of all Christendom that, if something in doctrine had been falsified through error and ignorance on the part of the teachers, it should be made known to everyone. The theologians who refuse to debate would be acting against their profession and against the high privilege they enjoy above all other teachers, both in other assemblies and in the public courts of the university; But if they should not be able to defend and uphold their office and title of honor, old women or young children could be fed at little expense and with more benefit, who in time would be more useful to the common people and much more obedient to the authorities than such theologians.
The bishop hoped that the bishop's enlightened mind would consider what use a dog could be to the sheep, a dog that could neither bark nor attack wolves. He wished that the bishop would consider, according to his enlightened mind, what use a dog that could neither bark nor attack wolves would be to the sheep. He asked the bishop not to defend the lazy clergy, but rather to impose on these night birds, who shun the light, that they take up this fight, which their profession and office demanded, because it was not forbidden by the pope to fight bravely and fearlessly against heresies for the Christian truth. If they would bravely defend the truth, neither the church nor the university would be endangered; thus the outcome of this disputation could not be detrimental to him, as a Christian prince. In the contrary case, if neither the bishop's reputation nor his, the sovereign's, well-meant and faithful admonition should catch on with these theologians, this obstinacy would be an indication from which he and all reasonable people could conclude that they were not theologians, but such people who dealt only with how they would like to deceive the common man, but in doing so neither reveal their opinions nor know how to refute and overturn the errors of the heretics and newcomers. If, however, they were to seek evasion, he wanted to testify in a public patent before God and all the world that he had no other intention, nor would he have had, than that by such means the dispute that had been raised might be rightly recognized and the truth brought to light; but the theologians, because of their clumsiness and ignorance, would not only have rejected such disputation, but would also have worked tooth and nail against it, so that it could not gain its continuance. The bishop should well consider for himself how fine this would be for the church, how praiseworthy it would be for the clergy, and what reputation and praise it would win among the descendants. Finally, he asks and admonishes him: that he would prove himself manly in such a high and important matter, and as a bishop in work and in deed.
371 Letter from Bishop Adolph of Merseburg to the theologians of Leipzig, in which he informs them that the disputation is now not to take place.
and promises to see to it that the university is not harmed in any way. Jan. 31, 1519.
From Hofmann's Ref.-Gesch. der Stadt Leipzig, p. 72.
By the Grace of God Adolph, Bishop of Merseburg, Prince of Anhalt.
Our greetings and favorable will beforehand, worthy and highly learned, dear devotees! We have received your letter, with avoidance, as that the illustrious Highborn Prince, Lord George of Saxony, our dear lord and uncle, Doctor Andreas and Eck 1) in his dear University of Leipzig to disputiren attributed, and you, to him such to favor, ordered, which you were not able to resist, therefore asking, not to heed to ungraciousness, also, according to our promise, to be helpful to get the lost Canonicat, and further content, read; and what we wrote to you before, on account of the disputation that Eck intends to do at the university in question, not to permit it, we did 2) out of special concern, and also because we were moved to do so; but that our lord and uncle should procure otherwise with you, we leave to his discretion. Furthermore, when you wrote to us on account of the canonry that you had been at our will with it, the university of our oversight has not progressed to any harm or disadvantage, and we have spoken with Ern Sebastian, Noble of Plote, our cathedral provost at Merseburg, if he has recently been here, and if he intends to come to us again in a short time, we want to take further action with him on account of the prebend, and talk to him; We will let you know in the best possible way what we achieve and obtain from him. We are inclined to show you favorable will. Given at Merseburg, Monday after Conversionis St. Pauli [Jan. 31] Anno 1519.
To the worthy and highly learned, Rector, Magistris and Doctors of the Leipzig High School, our dear devotees.
372 D. Eck's letter to Luther, in which he informs him of the permission he has received from Duke George and the university for the disputation and invites him again to Leipzig. Ingolstadt, 19 Feb. 1519.
1) So set by us instead of: "Andrea Eckio" in our template.
2) Here we have deleted "not" in our template, because it seems to us Wider den Zusammenhang zu sein.
This letter is found in Latin in the Jena edition (1579), tona. I, toi. 365 d; in Löscher, Ref.-Acta, vol. Ill, p. 283; in Seidemann, Leipziger Disputation, p. 127, supplement 19, after the original; in the Erlanger, opp. vur. urZ., tom. IV, p. 77 and in the Erlanger Briefwechsel, vol. I, p. 428. Latin and German in Hofmanns Ref.-Gesch. der Stadt Leipzig. p. 74.
Translated from Latin.
To the eminent theologian and philosopher Martin Luther, the famous man, full professor at Wittenberg, the Lord and Superior Ecks, Augustinian 3) at Wittenberg.
Hail in the Lord, and in Jesus' right mind! That the highly learned men of the University of Leipzig had refused the complaint to hear us, such was vehemently repugnant to me, and I did not know at all how I should advise the matter. But then Mr. Georg, Duke of Saxony 2c, my most gracious prince, at my request, acted with his university and brought it about that they finally consented; as I have received letters today, both from the most noble prince as well as from the university and faculty. I have therefore fixed the 27th day of June, 4) on which we will begin with the disputation, but on the preceding 26th day we want to compare notes in the theological faculty as to who is to be the opponent in the first battle. Since Carlstadt is your champion, but you are the most prominent, who, according to my small and poor understanding, has spread this false and erroneous doctrine throughout all of Germany, therefore it is fitting that you come there yourselves, and either defend your opinion, or overturn mine. But how I would like you to change your mind and obey the apostolic see in all things, to listen to Leo the Tenth as Christ's governor, and not to seek singularity, but to submit to the general opinion of the teachers, and to be sure that Christ would not have left his church in such error for 400 years (as you suppose). For you see from the disputation note that I have not set my propositions against Bodenstein as well as against your teachings. God be with you, dear Martin, and let us both pray that God may enlighten us. Given at Ingolstadt, February 19, in the 1519th year after the birth of the Virgin. Your most devoted corner. 5)
3) Instead of ".4.", we have indicated A. {}angeAugustinianus].
taken. - Only Seidemann has this address.
4) in the letter to the faculty of February 19, which is found in Seidemann, I. 6. p. 127.
5) Luther sent this letter to Spalatin on March 13.
373 Luther's thoughts about this disputation, which was now to take place, opened to Joh.
See Appendix, No. 44, § 3.4.
Luther's report to Lang about what Tetzel is supposed to have said when he heard that the Leipzig disputation was to take place.
See Annex, No. 44, § 6.
The letter of Mosellanus to Erasmus of Rotterdam, in which he informs him of the upcoming disputation. January 6, 1519.
From lidr. VI 6p!8t. LrMrni, p. 140, translated from the Basel edition in Frick's German Seckendorf, p. 201.
Translated by E. F.
Johann Eck, the most distinguished among the pen fencers and grand speakers, who, like that Socrates in Aristophanes, despises the gods themselves,
will engage in a disputation with Andreas Carlstadt, Archidiaconus in Wittenberg, for his life, that is, his Corollaria. The place of battle will be the theological auditorium; our mataeologi 1) have been appointed as arbiters; the day, however, has not yet been named. Both sides are making great preparations for this battle. One will bring the Augustinians; the other the Dominicans, who are always present when their interest is in need. People will flock from all places to witness this rare quarrel. It is a fine pair of Scotists who will fight. Shall I tell you beforehand how it will go? The affair will end with great clamor in a quarrel that is likely to be bloodier than the one so artfully described by the gentleman in his Esesino and Pacidiano. This will be the outcome. For I know well the heat of both. Ten democriti will get enough to laugh. I will report the course of events when it is otherwise deserved. In the meantime, I want to blow the whistle on these duelists with these words: Be wise, and remember the weapons of your knighthood. Jan. 6, 1519.
1) "Matäologi", useless chatterers, mockingly put instead of: Theologi.