Luther and the Reformation

J H Merle d’Aubigné

11. The 95 Theses

Luther’s condemnation of the sale of indulgences produced little effect. Tetzel continued his traffic and his unscriptural discourses. As pastor, Luther had earnestly exhorted those who attended his services; as preacher, he had uttered a warning voice from the pulpit. It still remained for him to speak as a theologian; he had yet to address not merely the assembly of worshippers at Wittenberg, but those who were, like himself, teachers of the Word of God. He did not think of attacking the Church or the Pope; on the contrary, it was his respect for the Pope that would not allow him to be silent any longer on the monstrous claims by which the Pontiff was being discredited. He felt he had to take the Pope’s part against those impudent men who dared to invoke his name in their scandalous traffic. Far from thinking of a revolution which should overthrow the primacy of Rome, Luther believed he had the Pope and Romanism as his allies against these barefaced monks.

The festival of All Saints was a very important day for Wittenberg and especially for the church the Elector had built there and had filled with relics. On that day the priests used to bring out these relics, ornamented with gold, silver and precious stones, and display them before the people, who were dazzled by such magnificence. Those who visited the church at that festival and made confession obtained a rich indulgence. Accordingly pilgrims then came to Wittenberg in crowds.

At noon on 31 October 1517, the day before the festival, Luther walked boldly towards the church, as a superstitious crowd of pilgrims were making their way there, and posted up on the door 95 theses, or propositions, against the doctrine of indulgences. Neither the Elector, nor Staupitz, nor Spalatin, nor any even of his most intimate friends, knew of his intentions. Luther declared, in a kind of preface, that he wrote these theses desiring to set the

¹This is a further abridged extract from d’Aubigné’s The History of the Reformation in the Sixteenth Century, vol 1. Last month’s article focused on Tetzel’s sale, especially near Wittenberg, of indulgences to fund the building of St Peter’s in Rome – and also on Luther’s reaction to the sale.

truth in the full light of day. He declared himself ready the next day to defend them in the university against all opponents. They excited great attention and, before long, the pilgrims, the university, and the whole city were in commotion. We give some of these propositions:

1. “This word [repent] cannot be understood of the sacrament of penance (that is, confession and satisfaction) as administered by the priest.”

2. “Still the Lord does not mean to speak in this place solely of internal repentance; internal repentance is null if it does not produce externally every kind of mortification of the flesh.”

3. “Repentance and sorrow – that is, true penance – endure as long as a man is displeased with himself: that is, until he passes from this life into eternity.”

4. “The Pope is unable, and does not desire, to remit any other penalty than that which he has imposed of his own good pleasure, or conformably to the canons – that is, the papal ordinances.”

5. “The Pope cannot remit any condemnation, but only declare and confirm the remission of God, except in the cases that refer to himself. If he does otherwise, the condemnation remains entirely the same.”

6. “They preach mere human follies who maintain that, as soon as the money rattles in the strong box, the soul flies out of purgatory.”

7. “This is certain: that as soon as the money tinkles, avarice and love of gain arrive, increase and multiply. But the support and prayers of the Church depend solely on God’s will and good pleasure.”

8. “Those who fancy themselves sure of salvation by indulgences will go to perdition along with those who teach them so.”

9. “They are teachers of antichristian doctrines who pretend that to deliver a soul from purgatory, or to buy an indulgence, there is no need of either sorrow or repentance.”

10. “Every Christian who truly repents of his sins, enjoys entire remission both of the penalty and of the guilt, without any need of indulgences.”

11. “Every true Christian, whether dead or alive, participates in all the blessings of Christ or of the Church, by God’s gift, and without a letter of indulgence.”

12. “We should teach Christians that he who gives to the poor, or lends to the needy, does better than he who purchases an indulgence.”

13. “For the work of charity increases charity, and renders a man more pious; whereas the indulgence does not make him better, but only renders him more self-confident, and more secure from punishment.”

14. “We should teach Christians that, if the Pope knew of the extortions of the preachers of indulgences, he would rather the mother-church of St Peter were burnt and reduced to ashes, than see it built up with the skin, the flesh and the bones of his flock.”

15. “They are the enemies of the Pope and of Jesus Christ who, by reason of the preaching of indulgences, forbid the preaching of the Word of God.

16. “The true and precious treasure of the Church is the holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.”

17. “The treasures of the gospel are nets in which in former times the rich and those in easy circumstances were caught.”

18. “But the treasures of the indulgence are nets with which they now catch the riches of the people.”

19. “The indulgence of the Pope cannot take away the smallest daily sin, as far as regards the guilt or the offence.”

20. “It is blasphemy to say that the cross adorned with the arms of the Pope is as effectual as the cross of Christ.”

21. “The bishops, pastors, and theologians who permit such things to be told to the people, will have to render an account of them.”

22. “We should exhort Christians to diligence in following Christ, their head, through crosses, death and hell.”

23. “For it is far better to enter into the kingdom of heaven through much tribulation than to acquire a carnal security by the consolations of a false peace.”

Such was the commencement of the work. The germs of the Reformation were contained in these propositions of Luther. The abuses of indulgences were attacked, and this is their most striking feature; but the evangelical doctrine of a free remission of sins was there for the first time publicly professed. The work must now increase in strength. It was evident that whoever had this faith in the remission of sins, this conversion and this sanctification – the necessity of which Luther so earnestly taught – would escape from the toils of Rome and would acquire the liberty of the children of God. All errors would fall down before this truth, by which light had begun to enter Luther’s mind.

A clear knowledge of this truth is what preceding reformers had lacked; hence the unfruitfulness of their exertions. Luther himself acknowledged afterwards that, in proclaiming justification by faith, he had laid the axe to the root of the tree. “It is doctrine we attack in the adherents of the Papacy,” said he; “Hus and Wycliffe only attacked their lives, but in attacking their doctrine we take the goose by the neck.” Everything depends on the Word, which the pope has taken from us and falsified. I have vanquished the Pope, because my doctrine is from God, and his is from the devil.”

But if Luther’s theses were strong by the strength of the truth they proclaimed, they were not the less so by the faith of their champion. He had boldly drawn the sword of the Word; he had done so in reliance on the power of truth. He had felt that, by leaning on God’s promises, he could afford to risk something, to use the language of the world. “Let him who desires to begin a good work,” said he when speaking of this daring attack, “undertake it with confidence in the goodness of his cause, and not – which God forbid – expecting the support and consolation of the world. Moreover, let him have no fear of man, or of the whole world; for these words will never lie: It is good to trust in the Lord, and assuredly he that trusts in the Lord shall not be confounded.”

Whatever boldness prevails in these propositions, they still point to the monk who refuses to admit a single doubt about the authority of the see of Rome. But, while attacking the doctrine of indulgences, Luther had unwittingly touched on certain errors, whose discovery could not please the Pope; sooner or later they would call his supremacy in question. Luther was not so far-sighted, but he realised the extreme boldness of the step he had just taken, and consequently thought it his duty to soften down their audacity, as far as he could in conformity with the truth. He therefore set forth these theses as doubtful propositions on which he solicited the views of the learned; and appended to them, conformably with the established usage, a solemn declaration that he did not mean to affirm or say any thing contrary to the Holy Scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, and the rights and decrees of the Roman See.

Often in later years, as he contemplated the immense, unexpected consequences of this courageous attack, Luther was astonished at himself, and could not understand how he had ventured to make it. An invisible and mightier hand than his led the herald of truth along a path that was still hidden from him, and he would perhaps have shrunk from its difficulties if he had foreseen them, and if he had advanced of his own accord. “I entered into this controversy,” said he, “without any definite plan; I was taken quite unawares.”

Luther had become acquainted with the source of these abuses. Someone brought him a little book, adorned with the arms of the Archbishop of Mainz and Magdeburg, which contained the regulations to be followed in the sale of indulgences. So this young prelate had at least sanctioned all this quackery. In him Luther saw only a superior whom he should respect. Not wishing to beat the air at random, but rather to address those who are charged with the government of the Church, Luther sent him a letter, abounding at once in frankness and humility. On the very day he posted up the theses he wrote to Albert:

“Pardon me, most reverend father in Christ and most illustrious prince, if I, who am but the dregs of men, have the presumption to write to your sublime Highness. The Lord Jesus Christ is my witness that, feeling how small and despicable I am, I have long put off doing it. . . . Certain individuals are hawking the papal indulgences up and down the country, in your Grace’s name. . . .

“The souls intrusted to your care, most excellent Father, are taught, not unto life, but unto death. The severe and just account that will be required of you increases from day to day. . . . I could no longer be silent. No, man is not saved by the work or the office of his bishop. Even the righteous are saved with difficulty, and narrow is the way which leads unto life. Wherefore then do these preachers of indulgences by their empty fables inspire the people with a carnal security?

“Indulgences alone, to hear them, ought to be proclaimed and extolled. . . . What! Is it not the principal . . . duty of the bishops to instruct the people in the gospel, and in the love of Christ Jesus? Christ Himself has nowhere ordained the preaching of indulgences, but He has forcibly commanded the preaching of the gospel. How dreadful then, and how dangerous, for a bishop to allow the gospel to be silent, and that the noise of indulgences alone should re-echo incessantly in the ears of his flock! . . .

“Most worthy Father in God, in the instructions to the commissioners, which have been published in your Grace’s name (no doubt without your knowledge), it is said that the indulgences are the most precious treasure – that by them man is reconciled to God and that repentance is not necessary to those who purchase them. . . . I beg your Highness, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to cast a look of fatherly vigilance on this affair, to suppress the book entirely, and to order the preachers to deliver other sermons before the people. If you do not so, fear lest you should one day hear some voice uplifted in refutation of these preachers, to the great dishonour of your most serene Highness.”

At the same time, Luther forwarded his theses to the Archbishop, inviting him to read them in order to convince himself how slight was the foundation of the doctrine of indulgences. Luther’s whole desire was for the sentinels of the Church to awaken and put an end to the evils that were laying it waste. Nothing could be more respectful than this letter from a monk to one of the greatest princes of the Church and of the Empire. It is the cry of a Christian conscience – of a priest who gives honour to all but fears God above everything. All his entreaties, were unavailing. The youthful Albert, engrossed by pleasures and ambitious designs, made no reply to so solemn an appeal.

The Bishop of Brandenburg, Luther’s superior, to whom he also sent his theses, replied that he was attacking the power of the Church, that he would bring upon himself much trouble and vexation, that the thing was above his strength; and he earnestly advised Luther to keep quiet. The princes of the Church stopped their ears against the voice of God; they were struck with that blindness which has caused the ruin of so many powers and dignities. “They both thought”, said Luther afterwards, “that the Pope would be too strong for a poor mendicant friar like me.” But Luther could judge better than the bishops the disastrous effects of indulgences on the lives of the people, for he was in direct communication with them. Although the bishops failed him, God did not. The Head of the Church, who sits in the heavens, and to whom all power is given upon earth, had prepared the soil and deposited the seed in the hands of His minister, and He scattered it in an instant throughout the length and breadth of Christendom.

No one appeared next day at the university to attack Luther’s propositions. The Tetzel traffic was too much decried and too shameful for anyone but himself or his followers to dare take up the challenge. But in less than a month these theses reached Rome. “In a fortnight,” says a contemporary historian, “they were in every part of Germany, and in four weeks they had traversed nearly the whole of Christendom. No one can believe the noise they made.” Somewhat later they were translated into Dutch and Spanish, and a traveller sold them in Jerusalem. “Everyone”, said Luther, “complained of the indulgences: and as all the bishops and teachers had kept silence, poor Luther became a famous doctor, because (as they said) there came one at last who ventured to do it. But I did not like this glory, and the tune was nearly too high for my voice.”

Many of the pilgrims, who had thronged to Wittenberg from every quarter for the feast of All Saints, carried back with them the famous theses, instead of indulgences. They thus contributed to their circulation. Everyone read them and commented on them. Men conversed about them in all the monasteries and universities. Monks who had entered the cloisters to save their souls were delighted at this simple and striking confession of the truth and heartily desired that Luther would continue his work. At length one man had found courage to undertake the perilous struggle. Thus the public conscience was satisfied. Piety saw in these theses a blow aimed at every superstition; the new theology hailed in it the defeat of the scholastic dogmas; princes and magistrates considered the theses a barrier raised against the invasions of the ecclesiastical power; and the nation rejoiced at seeing so positive a veto on the avarice of the Roman chancery. “When Luther attacked this fable,” a trustworthy man remarked to Duke George of Saxony, one of the principal rivals of Erasmus, “the whole world applauded, and there was a general assent.”