Karlstadt, Luther, and Zwingel.
Andrew Bodenstein, better known as Dr. Karlstadt, once a professor at Wittenberg,
commenced the attack.
This man has the reputation of having been both able and learned, and really devoted
to the cause of the Reformation, from his extreme views on that subject and
the impetuosity of his spirit, his measures were sweeping revolutionary.
He would have all the images destroyed, and all the rites of potpourri abolished
at once.
We have met with him before.
He was one of the earliest and warmest friends of Luther, but he had rejected
Luther's notion of the real presence in the Eucharist, and that was the
unpardonable sin in the eyes of the Reformer.
He had also given too much countenance and encouragement to the excesses of the
Anabaptists, or, the Celestial Prophets, as they were called, and this gave Luther
a show of reason for visiting with the same condemnation the and the Anabaptists.
But this was most unjust, as Zwingle and his followers were as opposed to the
fanaticism of the so-called Prophets, as were Luther and his colleagues.
In refutation of Dr. Karlstadt, Luther wrote a pamphlet against these
Prophets in 1525, in which he says, Dr. Karlstadt has fallen away from us,
and become our bitterest foe.
Although I deeply regret this scandal, I still rejoice that Satan has shown the
cloven foot, and will be put to shame by these as Heavenly Prophets, who have long
been peeping and muttering in concealment, but never would come fairly out until I
enticed them with a gilder, that, by the grace of God, has been too well
laid for me to rue it.
But still the whole infamy of the plot is not yet brought forward, for still more
lies concealed which I have long suspected.
I know also, that Dr. Karlstadt has long been brewing this heresy in his mind,
though till now he has not found courage to spread it abroad.
Zwingle was now persuaded that the time for silence was past.
Although he sympathized with Karlstadt's views of the Eucharist, he greatly
objected to his offensive style and levity.
He published in the year 1525, an important treatise, concerning true and
false religion.
His own views of the Eucharist are fully and clearly stated in this book,
besides his utter condemnation of the seditious spirit of the Anabaptists,
and the errors of the Papists on the subject in dispute.
An opponent soon appeared in a pamphlet, against the new error of the
sacramentaries.
To this Zwingle replied in the same year, 1525, and took occasion to remind his
opponents, the Lutherans, that they should be less personal in their abuse,
and more rational and scriptural in their arguments.
There was a mildness and respect in the writings of the Swiss, which the Saxons
were utter strangers to, even Melanchthon, at times, became the reflection of his
violent master.
Ecolampadius, the intimate friend of Zwingle, was preaching the simple doctrine
of the New Testament, as to the Lord's Supper, at Baal, just about this time.
But finding that his enemies were associating him with Karlstadt,
he published and defended his own views.
The effect of this book was great, written in such a Christian spirit,
so full of the closest reasoning, and the fairest arguments, both from the
Scriptures and the most eminent among the Fathers, that many were drawn to consider
the new opinions.
Erasmus himself was well nigh converted by the book.
A new dogma has arisen, he writes to a friend, that there is nothing in the
Eucharist but bread and wine.
To confute this is now a very difficult matter, for John Oecolampadius has
fortified it by so many evidences and arguments, that the very elect might
almost be seduced by it.
An abusive reply to this book very soon appeared, signed by 14 German theologians,
with a preface written by Luther.
Zwingle was deeply offended, and complained of the insults offered to a
brother reformer by his German brethren.
I have seen nothing in this age, he says, less praiseworthy than this
reply, on account both of the violence offered in it to Holy Writ, and of its
immoderate insolence.
Oecolampadius, of all men the most harmless, a very model of every sort of
piety in learning, he, from whom most of them have learned what they know of
literature, is so infamously treated by them, with such filial ingratitude,
that we are called upon, not for reproaches, but for execrations.
Thus the controversy went on.
Luther was deeply grieved and astonished to find so many learned and pious men
holding the same views as Zwingle, and many of whom he had entertained the
highest opinion now expressed themselves favourable to the new views.
This was gall and wormwood to the spirit of Luther, and filled him with
inexpressible grief and anger.
In his letters and writings at this time he expressed himself in the most
unmeasured and unguarded terms.
He calls them, his absolums, sacrament conjurers, in comparison with whose
madness the papists are mild opponents the satanic instruments of my temptation.
Luther's followers took up the tone of their master, and he transferred to this
controversy all the vehemence and obstinacy of his own nature.
From about the close of the year 1524 till the year 1529, Luther had written so
violently against the Swiss, and so little against the papists, that it was
sarcastically said by Erasmus, the Lutherans are eagerly returning to the
bosom of the church.
Luther's followers took up the tone of their master, and he transferred to this
controversy all the vehemence and obstinacy of his own nature.
From about the close of the year 1529 till the year 1529, Luther had written so
violently against the Swiss, and so little against the papists, that it was
sarcastically said by Erasmus, the Lutherans are eagerly returning to the
bosom of the church.