"An Open Letter to The Christian Nobility (1520)."  
                      By Martin Luther, 1483-1546  
             Introduction and Translation by C. M. Jacobs  
         WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER: WITH INTRODUCTIONS AND NOTES  
                               Volume II  
              (Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915)  
  
  
                II. ABUSES TO BE DISCUSSED IN COUNCILS  
 
 
    We shall now look at the matters which should be discussed in 
    the councils, and with which popes, cardinals, bishops and all 
    the scholars ought properly to be occupied day and night if 
    they loved Christ and His Church. But if they neglect this 
    duty, then let the laity[1] and the temporal authorities see 
    to it, regardless of bans and thunders; for an unjust ban is 
    better than ten just releases, and an unjust release worse 
    than ten just bans. Let us, therefore, awake, dear Germans, 
    and fear God rather than men, that we may not share the fate 
    of all the poor souls who are so lamentably lost through the 
    shameful and devilish rule of the Romans, in which the devil 
    daily takes a larger and larger place,--if, indeed, it were 
    possible that such a hellish rule could grow worse, a thing I 
    can neither conceive nor believe.  
     
    1. It is a horrible and frightful thing that the ruler of 
    Christendom, who boasts himself vicar of Christ and successor 
    of St. Peter, lives in such worldly splendor that in this 
    regard no king nor emperor can equal or approach him, and that 
    he who claims the title of "most holy" and "most spiritual" is 
    more worldly than the world itself. He wears a triple crown, 
    when the greatest kings wear but a single crown;[2] if that is 
    like the poverty of Christ and of St. Peter, then it is a new 
    kind of likeness. When a word is said against it, they cry out 
    "Heresy!" but that is because they do not wish to hear how 
    unchristian and ungodly such a practice is. I think, however, 
    that if the pope were with tears to pray to God, he would have 
    to lay aside these crowns, for our God can suffer no pride; 
    and his office is nothing else than this,--daily to weep and 
    pray for Christendom, and to set an example of all humility.  
     
    However that may be, this splendor of his is an offense, and 
    the pope is bound on his soul's salvation to lay it aside, 
    because St. Paul says, I Thess. 5:21: "Abstain from all 
    outward shows, which give offense," and in Romans 12:17, "We 
    should provide good, not only in the sight of God, but also in 
    the sight of all men." An ordinary bishop's crown would be 
    enough for the pope; he should be greater than others in 
    wisdom and holiness, and leave the crown of pride to 
    Antichrist, as did his predecessors several centuries ago. 
    They say he is a lord of the world; that is a lie; for 
    Christ, Whose vicar and officer he boasts himself to be, said 
    before Pilate, John 17:36, My kingdom is not of this world," 
    and no vicar's rule can go beyond his lord's. Moreover he is 
    not the vicar of the glorified, but of the crucified Christ, 
    as Paul says, I Cor 2:2, "I was willing to know nothing among 
    you save Christ, and Him only as the Crucified"; and in 
    Philippians 2:5, "So think of yourselves as ye see in Christ, 
    Who emptied Himself and took upon Him the appearance of a 
    servant"; and again in I Corinthians 1:23, "We preach Christ, 
    the Crucified." Now they make the pope a vicar of the 
    glorified Christ in heaven, and some of them have allowed the 
    devil to rule them so completely that they have maintained 
    that the pope is above the angels in heaven and has authority 
    over them.[3] These are indeed the very works of the very 
    Antichrist.  
     
    What is the use in Christendom of those people who are called 
    the cardinals? I shall tell you. Italy and Germany have many 
    rich monasteries, foundations, benefices, and livings. No 
    better way has been discovered to bring all these to Rome than 
    by creating cardinals and giving them the bishoprics, 
    monasteries and prelacies, and so overthrowing the worship of 
    God. For this reason we now see Italy a very 
    wilderness--monasteries in ruins, bishoprics devoured, the 
    prelacies and the revenues of all the churches drawn to Rome, 
    cities decayed, land and people laid waste, because there is 
    no more worship or preaching. Why? The cardinals must have the 
    income.[4] No Turk could have so devastated Italy and 
    suppressed the worship of God.  
     
    Now that Italy is sucked dry, they come into Germany,[5] and 
    begin oh, so gently. But let us beware, or Germany will soon 
    become like Italy. Already we have some cardinals; what the 
    Romans seek by that the "drunken Germans" are not to 
    understand until we have not a bishopric, a monastery, a 
    living, a benefice, a heller or a pfennign left. Antichrist 
    must take the treasures of the earth, as it was prophesied. So 
    it goes on. They skim the cream off the bishoprics, 
    monasteries and benefices, and because they do not yet 
    venture to turn them all to shameful use, as they have done in 
    Italy, they only practice for the present the sacred trickery 
    of coupling together ten or twenty prelacies and taking a 
    yearly portion from each of them, so as to make a tidy sum 
    after all. The priory of Wurzburg yields a thousand gulden; 
    that of Bamberg something; Mainz, Trier and the others, 
    something more; and so from one to ten thousand gulden might 
    be got together, in order that a cardinal might live at Rome 
    like a rich king.  
     
    "After they are used to this, we will create thirty or forty 
    cardinals in a day,[6] and give to one Mount St. Michael at 
    Bamberg[7] and the bishopric of Wurzburg to boot, hang on to 
    these a few rich livings, until churches and cities are waste, 
    and after that we will say, 'We are Christ's vicars and 
    shepherds of Christ's sheep; the mad, drunken Germans must put 
    up with it.'"  
     
    I advise, however, that the number of the cardinals be 
    reduced, or that the pope be made to keep them at his own 
    expense. Twelve of them would be more than enough, and each of 
    them might have an income of a thousand gulden a year.[8] How 
    comes it that we Germans must put up with such robbery and 
    such extortion of our property, at the hands of the pope? If 
    the Kingdom of France has prevented it,[9] why do we Germans 
    let them make such fools and apes of us? It would all be more 
    bearable if in this way they only stole our property; but they 
    lay waste the churches and rob Christ's sheep of their pious 
    shepherds, and destroy the worship and the Word of God. Even 
    if there were not a single cardinal, the Church would not go 
    under. As it is they do nothing for the good of Christendom; 
    they only wrangle about the incomes of bishoprics and 
    prelacies, and that any robber could do.  
     
    If ninety-nine parts of the papal court[10] were done away and 
    only the hundredth part allowed to remain, it would still be 
    large enough to give decisions in matters of faith. Now, 
    however, there is such a swarm of vermin yonder in Rome, all 
    boasting that they are "papal," that there was nothing like it 
    in Babylon. There are more than three thousand papal 
    secretaries alone; who will count the other offices, when they 
    are so many that they scarcely can be counted? And they all 
    lie in wait for the prebends and benefices of Germany as 
    wolves lie in wait for the sheep. I believe that Germany now 
    gives much more to the sheep. I believe that Germany now gives 
    much more to the pope at Rome than it gave in former times to 
    the emperors. Indeed, some estimate that every year more than 
    three hundred thousand gulden find their way from Germany to 
    Rome, quite uselessly and fruitlessly; we get nothing for it 
    but scorn and contempt. And yet we wonder that princes, 
    nobles, cities, endowments, land and people are impoverished! 
    We should rather wonder that we still have anything to eat!  
     
    Since we here come to the heart of the matter, we will pause a 
    little, and let it be seen that the Germans are not quite such 
    gross fools as not to note or understand the sharp practices 
    of the Romans. I do not now complain that at Rome God's 
    command and Christian law are despised; for such is the state 
    of Christendom, and particularly of Rome, that we may not now 
    complain of such high matters. Nor do I complain that natural 
    or temporal law and reason count for nothing. The case is 
    worse even than that. I complain that they do not keep their 
    own self-devised canon law, though it is, to be sure, mere 
    tyranny, avarice and temporal splendor, rather than law. Let 
    us see!  
     
    In former times German emperors and princes permitted the pope 
    to receive the annates from all the benefices of the German 
    nation, i.e., the half of the first year's revenues from each 
    benefice.[11] This permission was given, however, in order 
    that by means of these large sums of money, the pope might 
    accumulate a treasure for fighting against the Turks and 
    infidels in defense of Christendom, so that the burden of the 
    war might not rest too heavily upon the nobility, but that the 
    clergy also should contribute something toward it. This 
    single-hearted devotion of the German nation the popes have so 
    used, that they have received this money for more than a 
    hundred years, have now made of it a binding tax and tribute, 
    and have not only accumulated no treasure, but have used the 
    money to endow many orders and offices at Rome, and to provide 
    these offices with salaries, as though the annates were a 
    fixed rent. When they pretend that they are about to fight 
    against the Turks, they send out emissaries to gather money. 
    Oft-times they issue an indulgence on this same pretext of 
    fighting the Turks,[12] for they think the mad Germans are 
    forever to remain utter and arrant fools, give them money 
    without end, and satisfy their unspeakable greed; though we 
    clearly see that not a heller of the annates or of the 
    indulgence-money or of all the rest, is used against the 
    Turks, but all of it goes into the bottomless bag. They lie 
    and deceive, make laws and make agreements with us, and they 
    do not intend to keep any of them. All this must be counted 
    the work of Christ and St. Peter! Now, in this matter the 
    German nation, bishops and princes, should consider that they 
    too are Christians, and should protect the people, whom they 
    are set to rule and guard in things temporal and spiritual, 
    against these ravening wolves who, in sheep's clothing, 
    pretend to be shepherds and rulers; and, since the annates are 
    so shamefully abused and the stipulated conditions are not 
    fulfilled, they should not permit their land and people to be 
    so sadly robbed and ruined, against all justice; but by a law 
    of the emperor or of the whole nation, they should either keep 
    the annates at home or else abolish them again.[13] For since 
    the Romans do not keep the terms of the agreement, they have 
    no right to the annates. Therefore the bishops and princes are 
    bound to punish or prevent; such thievery and robbery, as the 
    law requires.  
     
    In this they should aid the pope and support him, for he is 
    perchance too weak to prevent such an abuse all by himself; or 
    if he were to undertake to defend and maintain this practice, 
    they ought resist him and fight against him as against a wolf 
    and a tyrant, for he has no authority to do or to defend evil. 
    Moreover, if it were ever desired to accumulate such a 
    treasure against the Turks, we ought in the future to have 
    sense enough to see that the German nation would be a better 
    custodian for it than the pope; for the German nation has 
    people enough for the fighting, if only the money is 
    forthcoming. It is with the annates as it has been with many 
    another Roman pretence. Again, the year has been so divided 
    between the pope and the ruling bishops and canons,[14] that 
    the pope has six months in the year--every other month--in 
    which to bestow the benefices which fall vacant in his 
    months.[15] In this way almost all the benefices are absorbed 
    by Rome, especially the very best livings and dignities,[16] 
    and when once they fall into the hands of Rome, they never 
    come out of them again, though a vacancy may never again occur 
    in the pope's month. Thus the canons are cheated. This is a 
    genuine robbery, which intends to let nothing escape. 
    Therefore it is high time that the "papal months" be 
    altogether abolished, and that everything which they have 
    brought to Rome be taken back again. For the princes and 
    nobles should take measures that the stolen goods be returned, 
    the thieves punished, and those who have abused privilege be 
    deprived of privilege. If it is binding and valid when the 
    pope on the day after his election makes, in his chancery, 
    rules and laws whereby our foundations and livings are 
    robbed,--a thing which he has no right to do; then it should 
    be still more valid if the Emperor Charles on the day after 
    his coronation[17] were to make rules and laws that not 
    another benefice or living in all Germany shall be allowed to 
    come into the hands of Rome by means of the "papal months," 
    and that the livings which have already fallen into its hands 
    shall be released, and redeemed from the Roman robbers; for 
    he has this right by virtue of his office and his sword.  
     
    But now the Roman See of Avarice and Robbery has not been able 
    to await the time when all the benefices, one after another, 
    would, by the "papal months," come into its power, but 
    hastens, with insatiable appetite, to get possession of them 
    all as speedily as possible; and so besides the annates and 
    the "months" it has hit upon a device by which benefices and 
    livings fall to Rome in three ways:  
     
        First, If any one who holds a free [18] living
        dies at Rome or on the way to Rome, his living
        must forever belong to the Roman-I should rather
        say the robbing-See;[19] and yet they will not
        be called robbers; though they are guilty of
        such robbery as no one has ever heard or read
        about.
        
        Second, In case any one who belongs to the
        household of the pope or of the cardinals[20]
        holds or takes over a benefice, or in case one
        who already holds a benefice afterwards enters
        the "household" of the pope or of a cardinal;
        but who can count the "household" of the pope
        and of the cardinals, when the pope, if he only
        goes on a pleasure-ride, takes with him three or
        four thousand mule-riders, eclipsing all
        emperors and kings? Christ and St. Peter went on
        foot in order that their vicars might have the
        more pomp and splendor. Now avarice has
        cleverly thought out another scheme, and brings
        it to pass that even here many; have the name of
        "papal servant," just as though they were in
        Rome; all in order that in every place the mere
        rascally little word "papal servant" may bring
        all benefices to Rome and tie them fast there
        forever. Are not these vexatious and devilish
        inventions? Let us beware! Soon Mainz; Madgeburg
        and Halberstadt will gently pass into the hands
        of Rome, and the cardinalate will be paid for
        dearly enough.[21] "Afterwards we will make all
        the German bishops cardinal so that there will
        be nothing left outside."
        
        Third, When a contest has started at Rome over a
        benefice.[22] This I hold to be almost the
        commonest and widest road for bringing livings
        to Rome. For when there is no contest at home,
        unnumbered knaves will be found at Rome to dig
        up contests out of the earth and assail livings
        at their will. Thus many a good priest has to
        lose his living, or settle the contest for a
        time by the payment of a sum of money.[23] Such
        a living rightly or wrongly contested must also
        belong forever to the Roman See. It would be no
        wonder if God were to rain from heaven fire and
        brimstone and to sink Rome in the abyss, as He
        did Sodom and Gomorrah of old. Why should there
        be a pope in Christendom, if his power is used
        for nothing else than such archknavery, and if
        he protects and practices it? O noble princes
        and lords, how long will ye leave your lands and
        people naked to these ravening wolves! 
        
    Since even these practices were not enough, and Avarice grew 
    impatient at the long time it took to get hold of all the 
    bishoprics, therefore my Lord Avarice devised the fiction that 
    the bishoprics should be nominally abroad, but that their land 
    and soil should be at Rome, and no bishop can be confirmed 
    unless with a great sum of money he buy the pallium,[24] and 
    bind himself with terrible oaths to the pope's servant.[25] 
    This is the reason that no bishop ventures to act against the 
    pope. That, too, is what the Romans were seeking when they 
    imposed the oath, and thus the very richest bishoprics have 
    fallen into debt and ruin. Mainz pays, as I hear, 20,000 
    gulden. These be your Romans! To be sure they decreed of old 
    in the canon law that the pallium should be bestowed gratis, 
    the number of papal servants diminished, the contest lessened, 
    the chapters[26] and bishops allowed their liberty. But this 
    did not bring in money, and so they turned over a new leaf, 
    and all authority was taken from the bishops and chapters; 
    they are made ciphers, and have no office nor authority nor 
    work, but everything is ruled by the archknaves at Rome; soon 
    they will have in hand even the office of sexton and 
    bell-ringer in all the churches. All contests are brought to 
    Rome, and by authority of the pope everyone does as he likes. 
     
    What happened this very year? The Bishop of Strassburg[27] 
    wished to govern his chapter properly and to institute reforms 
    in worship, and with this end in view made certain godly and 
    Christian regulations. But my dear Lord Pope and the Holy 
    Roman See, at the instigation of the priests, overthrew and 
    altogether condemned this holy and spiritual ordinance. This 
    is called "feeding the sheep of Christ!" Thus priests are to 
    be encouraged against their own bishop, and their disobedience 
    to divine law is to be protected! Antichrist himself, I hope, 
    will not dare to put God to such open shame! There you have 
    your pope after your own heart! Why did he do this? Ah! if one 
    church were reformed, it would be a dangerous departure; 
    Rome's turn too might come! Therefore it were better that no 
    priest should be left at peace with another, that kings and 
    princes should be set at odds, as has been the custom 
    heretofore, and the world filled with the blood of 
    Christians, only so the concord of Christians should not 
    trouble the Holy Roman See with a reformation. So far we have 
    been getting an idea of how they deal with livings which 
    become vacant. But for tender-hearted Avarice the vacancies 
    are too few, and so he brings his foresight to bear upon the 
    benefices which are still occupied by their incumbents, so 
    that they must be unfilled., even they are not unfilled.[28] 
    And this he does in many ways, as follows: First, He lies in 
    wait for fat prebends or bishoprics which are held by an old 
    or a sick man, or by one with an alleged disability. To such 
    an incumbent, without his desire or consent, the Holy See 
    gives a coadjutor's i.e., an "assistant," for the coadjutor's 
    benefit, because he is "papal servant," or has paid for the 
    position, or has earned it by some other ignoble service to 
    Rome. In this case the rights of the chapter or the rights of 
    him who has the bestowal of the living[29] must be 
    surrendered, and the whole thing fall into the hands of Rome. 
    Second, There is a little word commend,[30] by which the pope 
    entrusts the keeping of a rich, fat monastery or church to a 
    cardinal or to another oh his people, just as though I were to 
    give you a hundred gulden to keep. This is not called the 
    giving or bestowing of the monastery nor even its destruction, 
    or the abolition of the worship of God, but only "giving it 
    into keeping"; not that he to whom it is entrusted is to care 
    for it, or build it up, but he is to drive out the incumbent, 
    to receive the goods and revenues, and to install some 
    apostate, renegade monk,[31] who accepts five or six gulden a 
    year and sits in the church all day selling pictures and 
    images to the pilgrims, so that henceforth neither prayers nor 
    masses are said there. If this were to be called destroying 
    monasteries and abolishing the worship of God, then the pope 
    would have to be called a destroyer of Christendom and an 
    abolisher of God's worship, because this is his constant 
    practice. That would be a hard saying at Rome, and so we must 
    call it a commend or a "command to take charge" of the 
    monastery. The pope can every year make commends out of four 
    or more of these monasteries, a single one of which may have 
    an income of more than six thousand gulden. This is the way 
    the Romans increase the worship of God and preserve the 
    monasteries. The Germans also are beginning to find it out. 
    Third, There are some benefices which they call 
    _incompatibilia_,[32] and which, according to the ordinances 
    of the canon law, cannot be held by one man at the same time, 
    as for instance, two parishes, two bishoprics and the like. In 
    these cases the Holy Roman See of Avarice evades the canon law 
    by making "glosses,"[33] called unio and incorporatio, i.e., 
    by "incorporating" many _incompatibilia_, so that each becomes 
    a part of every other and all of them together are looked upon 
    as though they were one living. They are then no longer 
    "incompatible," and the holy canon law is satisfied, in that 
    it is no longer binding, except upon those who do not buy 
    these "glosses"[34] from the pope or his datarius.[35] The 
    _unio_, i.e., "uniting," is of the same nature. The pope binds 
    many such benefices together like a bundle of sticks, and by 
    virtue of this bond they are all regarded as one benefice. So 
    there is at Rome one courtesan[36] who holds, for himself 
    alone, 22 parishes, 7 priories and 44 canonries besides,--all 
    by the help of that masterly "gloss," which holds that this is 
    not illegal. What cardinals and other prelates have, everyone 
    may imagine for himself. In this way the Germans are to have 
    their purses eased and their itch cured. Another of the 
    "glosses" is the _administratio_, i.e., a man may have beside 
    his bishopric, an abbacy or a dignity,[37] and possess all the 
    property which goes with it, only he has no other title than 
    that of "administrator."[38] For at Rome it is sufficient that 
    words are changed and not the things they stand for; as though 
    I were to teach that a bawdy-house keeper should have the name 
    of "burgomaster's wife," and yet continue to ply her trade. 
    This kind of Roman rule St. Peter foretold when he said, in II 
    Peter 2:3: "There shall come false teachers, who in 
    covetousness, with feigned words, shall make merchandise of 
    you, to get their gains." Again, dear Roman Avarice has 
    invented the custom of selling and bestowing livings to such 
    advantage that the seller or disposer retains reversionary 
    rights,[39] upon them; to wit, if the incumbent dies, the 
    benefice freely reverts to him who previously sold, bestowed 
    or surrendered it. In this way they have made livings 
    hereditary property, so that henceforth no one can come into 
    possession of them, except the man to whom the seller is 
    willing to dispose of them, or to whom he bequeaths his rights 
    at death. Besides, there are many who transfer to others the 
    mere title to a benefice from which those who get the title 
    derive not a heller of income. It is now an old custom, too, 
    to give another man a benefice and to reserve a certain part 
    out of the annual revenue.[40] In olden times this was 
    simony.[41] Of these things there are so many more that they 
    cannot all be counted. They treat livings more shamefully than 
    the heathen beneath the cross treated the garments of Christ. 
    Yet all that has hitherto been said is ancient history and an 
    every-day occurrence at Rome. Avarice has devised one thing 
    more, which may, I hope, be his last morsel, and choke him. 
    The pope has a noble little device called _pectoralis 
    reservatio_, i.e., his "mental reservation," and _proprius 
    motus_, i.e., the "arbitrary will of his authority."[42] It 
    goes like this. When one man has gotten a benefice at Rome, 
    and the appointment has been regularly signed and sealed, 
    according to custom, and there comes another, who brings 
    money, or has laid the pope under obligation in some other 
    way, of which we will not speak, and desires of the pope the 
    same benefice, then the pope takes it from the first man and 
    gives it to the second.[43] If it is said that this is unjust, 
    then the Most Holy Father must make some excuse, that he may 
    not be reproved for doing such open violence to the law, and 
    says that in his mind and heart he had reserved that benefice 
    to himself and his own plenary disposal, although he had never 
    before in his whole life either thought or heard of it. Thus 
    he has now found a little "gloss" by which he can, in his own 
    person, lie and deceive, and make a fool and an ape of 
    anybody--all this he does brazenly and openly, and yet he 
    wishes to be the head of Christendom, though with his open 
    lies he lets the Evil Spirit rule him. This arbitrary will and 
    lying "reservation" of the pope creates in Rome a state of 
    affairs which is unspeakable. There is buying, selling, 
    bartering, trading, trafficking, lying, deceiving, robbing, 
    stealing, luxury, harlotry, knavery, and every sort of 
    contempt of God, and even the rule of Antichrist could not be 
    more scandalous. Venice, Antwerp, Cairo[44] are nothing 
    compared to this fair which is held at Rome and the business 
    which is done there, except that in those other places they 
    still observe and reason. At Rome everything goes as the devil 
    wills, and out of this ocean like virtue flows into all the 
    world. Is it a wonder that such people fear a reformation and 
    a free council, and prefer to set all kings and princes at 
    enmity rather than have them unite and bring about a council? 
    Who could bear to have such knavery exposed if it were his 
    own? Finally, for all this noble commerce the pope has built a 
    warehouse, namely, the house of the datarius,[45] in Rome. 
    Thither all must come who deal after this fashion in benefices 
    and livings. From him they must buy their "glosses"[46] and 
    get the power to practice such archknavery. In former times 
    Rome was generous, and then justice had either to be bought or 
    else suppressed with money, but now she has become exorbitant, 
    and no one dare be a knave unless with a great sum he has 
    first bought the right. If that is not a brothel above all the 
    brothels one can imagine, then I do not know what brothel 
    means. If you have money in this house, then you can come by 
    all the things I have said; and not only these, but all sort 
    of usury[47] are here made honest, for a consideration, and 
    the possession of all property acquired by theft or robbery is 
    legalized. Here vows are dissolved; here monks at granted 
    liberty to leave their orders; here marriage is on sale to the 
    clergy; here bastards can become legitimate; here all dishonor 
    and shame can come to honor; all ill repute and stigma of evil 
    are here knighted and ennobled here is permitted the marriage 
    which is within the forbidden degrees or has some other 
    defect.[48] Oh! what a taxing and a robbing rules there! It 
    looks as though all the laws of the Church were made for one 
    purpose only--to be nothing but so many money-snares, from 
    which a man must extricate himself,[49] if he would be a 
    Christian. Yea, here the devil becomes a saint, and a god to 
    boot. What heaven and earth cannot, that this house can do! 
    They call them compositions[50]! "Compositions" indeed! rather 
    "confusions"! Oh, what a modest tax is the Rhine-toll,[51] 
    compared with the tribute taken by this holy house! Let no one 
    accuse me of exaggeration! It is all so open that even at Rome 
    they must confess the evil to be greater and more terrible 
    than any one can say. I have not yet stirred up the hell-broth 
    of personal vices, nor do I intend to do so. I speak of things 
    which are common talk, and yet I have not words to tell them 
    all. The bishops, the priests and, above all, the doctors in 
    the universities, who draw their salaries for this purpose, 
    should have done their duty and with common consent have 
    written and cried out against these things; but they have done 
    the very opposite.[52] There remains one last word, and I must 
    say that too. Since boundless Avarice has not been satisfied 
    with all these treasures, which three great kings might well 
    think sufficient, he now begins to transfer this trade and 
    sell it to Fugger of Augsburg,[53] so that the lending and 
    trading and buying of bishoprics and benefices, and the 
    driving of bargains in spiritual goods has now come to the 
    right place, and spiritual and temporal goods have become one 
    business. And now I would fain hear of a mind so lofty that it 
    could imagine what this Roman Avarice might yet be able to do 
    and has not already done; unless Fugger were to transfer or 
    sell this combination of two lines of business to somebody 
    else. I believe we have reached the limit. As for what they 
    have stolen in all lands and still steal and extort, by means 
    of indulgences, bulls, letters of confession,[54] 
    "butter-letters" [55] and other _confessionalia_,[56]--all 
    this I consider mere patch-work, and like casting a single 
    devil more into hell.[57] Not that they bring in little, for a 
    mighty king could well support himself on their returns, but 
    they are not to be compared with the streams of treasure above 
    mentioned. I shall also say nothing at present of how this 
    indulgence money has been applied. Another time I shall 
    inquire about that, for Campoflore,[58] and Belvidere[59] and 
    certain other places probably know something about it. Since, 
    then, such devilish rule is not only open robbery and deceit, 
    and the tyranny of the gates of hell, but also ruins 
    Christendom in body and soul, it is our duty to use all 
    diligence in protecting Christendom against such misery and 
    destruction. If we would fight the Turks, let us make a 
    beginning here, where they are at their worst. If we justly 
    hang thieves and behead robbers, why should we let Roman 
    Avarice go free? For he is the greatest thief and robber that 
    has come or can come into the world, and all in the holy Name 
    of Christ and of St. Peter! Who can longer endure it or keep 
    silence? Almost everything he owns has been gotten by theft 
    and robbery; that is the truth, and all history shows it. The 
    pope never got by purchase such great properties that from his 
    office[60] alone he can raise about a million ducats, not to 
    mention the mines of treasure named above and the income of 
    his lands. Nor did it come to him by inheritance from Christ 
    or from St. Peter; no one ever loaned it or gave it to him; it 
    has not become his by virtue of immemorial use and enjoyment. 
    Tell me, then, whence he can have it? Learn from this what 
    they have in mind when they send out legates to collect money 
    for use against the Turks. 
     
    _____________________________________________________________ 
    NOTES: 
     
    [1] _Der Haufe_, i.e. Christians considered _en masse_, 
    without regard to official position in the Church. 
     
    [2] The papal crown dates from the XI Century: the triple 
    crown, or tiara, from the beginning of the XIV. It was 
    intended to signify that very superiority of the pope to be 
    rulers of this world, of which Luther here complains. See 
    _Realencyk._, X, 532, and literature there cited. 
     
    [3] A statement made by Augustinus Triumphus. See above, p.73, 
    note 5; and below, p. 246. Vol. II.-6. 
     
    [4] The Cardinal della Rovere, afterwards Pope Julius II, held 
    at one time the archbishopric of Avignon, the bishoprics of 
    Bologna, Lausanne, Coutances, Viviers, Mende, Ostia and 
    Velletri, and the abbacies of Nonantola, and Grottaferrata. 
    This is but one illustration of the scandalous pluralism 
    practiced by the cardinals. Cf. LEA, in Cambridge Mod. Hist., 
    I, pp. 659 f. 
     
    [5] The complaint that the cardinals were provided with 
    incomes by appointment to German benefices goes back to the 
    Council of Constance (1415). Cf. _BENRATH_, p. 87, note 17. 
     
    [6] The creation of new cardinals was a lucrative proceeding 
    for the popes. On July 31, 1517, Leo X created thirty-one 
    cardinals, and is said to have received from the new 
    appointees about 300,000 ducats. Needless to say, the 
    cardinals expected to make up the fees out of the income of 
    their livings. See Weimar Ed., VI, 417, note I, and _PASTOR, 
    Gesch. der Papste IV_, I, 137. Cf. Hutten's _Vadiscus_ 
    (Bocking IV, 188). 
     
    [7] The famous Benedictine monastery just outside the city f 
    Bamberg. 
     
    [8] The proposal made at Constance (see above, p. 82, note 2) 
    was more generous. It suggested a salary of three to four 
    thousand gulden. 
     
    [9] As early as the XIV Century both England and France had 
    enacted laws prohibiting the very practices of which Luther 
    here complains. It should be noted, however, that these laws 
    were enforced only occasionally, and never very strictly. 
     
    [10] The papal court or curia consisted of all the officials 
    of various sorts who were employed in the transaction of papal 
    business, including those who were in immediate attendance 
    upon the person of the pope, the so-called "papal family." On 
    the number of such officials in the XVI Century, see 
    _BENRATH_, p. 88, note 18, where reference is made to 949 
    offices, exclusive of those which had to do with the 
    administration of the city of Rome and of the States of the 
    Church, and not including the members of the pope's "family." 
    The Gravamina of 1521 complain that the increase of these 
    office in recent years has added greatly to the financial 
    burdens of the German Church (WREDE, _Deutsche 
    Reichstagaskten unter Kaiser Karl V_, II, 675). 
     
    [11] On the annates, see Vol. I, p. 383, note I. Early in 
    their history, which dates from the beginning of the XIV, 
    Century, the annates (_fructus medii temporis_) had become a 
    fixed tax on all the Church offices which fell vacant, and the 
    complaint of extortion in their appraisement and collection 
    was frequently raised. The Council of Constance restricted the 
    obligation to bishoprics and abbacies, and such other 
    benefices as had a yearly income of more than 24 gulden. The 
    Council of Basel (1439) resolved to abolish them entirely, but 
    the resolution of the Council was inoperative, and in the 
    Concordat of Vienna (1448) the German nation agreed to abide 
    by the decision of Constance. On the use of the term "annates" 
    to include other payments to the curia, especially the 
    _servitia_, see _Catholic Encyclopedia_, I, pp. 537 f. Luther 
    here alleges that the annates are not applied to their 
    ostensible purpose, viz. , the Crusade. This charge is 
    repeated in the _Gravamina of the German Nation presented to 
    the Diet of Worms_ (1521), with the additional allegation that 
    the amount demanded in the way of annates has materially 
    increase (A. WREDE, _Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter Kaiser 
    Karl V._, II, pp. 675 f.). Similar complaints had been made at 
    the Diet of Augsburg (1518), and were repeated at the Diet of 
    Nurnberg (WREDE, op. Cit., III, 660). Hutten calls the annates 
    "a good fat robbery" (ed. Bocking, IV, 207). In England the 
    annates were abolished by Act of Parliament (April 10, 1532) 
     
    [12] On the crusading--indulgences, see Vol. I, p. 18. 
     
    [13] i.e., As was done by the Council of Basel. See above, p. 
    84, note 1. 
     
    [14] The canons are the clergy attached to a cathedral church 
    who constituted the "chapter" of that cathedral, and to whom 
    the right to elect the bishop normally belonged. 
     
    [15] This whole section deals with the abuse of the "right of 
    reservation," i.e., the alleged right of the pope to appoint 
    directly to vacant church positions. According to papal theory 
    the right of appointment belonged absolutely to the pope, who 
    graciously yielded the right to others under certain 
    circumstances, reserving it to himself in other cases. The 
    practice of reserving the appointments seems to date from the 
    XII Century, and was originally an arbitrary exercise of papal 
    authority. The rules which came to govern the reservation of 
    appointments were regarded as limitations upon the authority 
    of the pope. The rule of the "papal months," as it obtained in 
    Germany in Luther's time, is found in the Concordat of Vienna 
    of 1448 (MIRBT, Quellen, 2d ed., NO. 261, pp. 167 f.). It 
    provides that livings, with the exception of the higher 
    dignities in the cathedrals and the chief posts in the 
    monasteries, which fall vacant in the months of February, 
    April, June, August, October and December, shall be filled by 
    the ordinary methods-elections, presentation, appointment by 
    the bishop, etc. - but that vacancies occurring in the other 
    months shall be filled by appointment of the pope. 
     
    [16] i.e., Church offices which carried with them certain 
    rights of jurisdiction and gave their possessors a certain 
    honorary precedence over other officials of the Church. See 
    MEYER in Realencyk., IV, 658. 
     
    [17] Charles V, though elected emperor, was not crowned until 
    October 22d. 
     
    [18] i.e., A living which has not hitherto been filled by 
    papal appointment. 
     
    [19] This rule, like that of the "papal months," is found in 
    the Concordat of Vienna. Luther's complaint is reiterated in 
    the Gravamina of 1521. (WREDE, Deutsche Reichstagsakten, etc., 
    II, 673.) 
     
    [20] Des Papstes und der Cardinale Gesinde, i.e., all those 
    who were counted members of the "family" or "household" 
    (called Dienstverwandte in the Gravamina of 1521) of the pope 
    or of any of the cardinals. The term included those who were 
    in immediate attendance upon the pope or the cardinals, and 
    all those to whom, by virtue of any special connection with 
    the curia, the name "papal servant" could be made to apply. 
    These are the "courtesans" to whom Luther afterwards refers. 
     
    [21] In 1513 Albrecht of Brandenburg was made Archbishop of 
    Madgeburg and later in the same year Administrator of 
    Halberstadt; in 1514 he became Archbishop of Mainz as well. In 
    1518 he was made cardinal. 
     
    [22] This rule, like the others mentioned above, is contained 
    in the Concordat of Vienna. 
     
    [23] Cf. The Gravamina of 1521, NO. 20, _Von anfechtung der 
    cordissanen_ (see above, p.88, note 3), where the name 
    _cordissei_ is applied to the practice of attacking titles to 
    benefices. (WREDE, op. Cit., II, pp. 677 f.) 
     
    [24] The _pallium_ is a woolen shoulder-cape which is the 
    emblem of the archbishop's office, and which must be secured 
    from Rome. The bestowal of the pallium by the pope is a very 
    ancient custom. Gregory I (590-604) mentions it as _prisca 
    consuetude_ (Dist., C.c. 3). The cannon law prescribes (Dist. 
    C.c. 1) that the archbishop-elect must secure the pallium from 
    Rome within three months of his election; otherwise he is 
    forbidden to discharge any of the duties of his office. It is 
    regarded as the necessary complement of his election and 
    consecration, conferring the "plenitude of the pontifical 
    office," and the name of archbishop. Luther's charge that it 
    had to be purchased "with a great sum of money" is 
    substantiated by similar complaints from the XII Century on, 
    though the language of the canon law makes it evident that 
    Luther's other contention is also correct, viz., that the 
    pallium was originally bestowed _gratis_. The sum required 
    from the different archbishops varied with the wealth of their 
    see, and was a fixed sum in each case. The Gravamina of 1521 
    complain that the price has been raised" "Although according 
    to ancient ordinance the bishoprics of Mainz, Cologne, 
    Salzburg, etc., were bound to pay for the pallium about 10,000 
    gulden and no more, they can now scarcely get a pallium from 
    Rome for 20 or 24 thousand gulden." (WREDE, op. Cit., II, 
    675.) 
     
    [25] The oath of allegiance to the pope was required before 
    the pallium could be bestowed (Dist. C.c. 1). The canon law 
    describes this oath as one "of allegiance, obedience and 
    unity" (X, I, 6, c. 4). 
     
    [26] See above, p.86. note 2. 
     
    [27] cf. Luther to Spalatin, June 25, 152. (ENDERS, II, 424; 
    SMITH, NO. 271). 
     
    [28] i.e., The benefices are treated as though they were 
    vacant. 
     
    [29] In the case of certain endowed benefices the right of 
    nominate the incumbent was vested in individuals, usually of 
    the nobility, and was hereditary in their family. This is the 
    so-called _jus patronum_, or "right of patronage. The 
    complaint that this right is disregarded is frequent in the 
    Gravamina of 1521. 
     
    [30] Commendation was one of the practices by which the pope 
    evaded the provision of the canon law which prescribed that 
    the same man should not hold two livings with the cure of 
    souls. The man who received an office in _icommendam_ was not 
    required to fulfill the duties attached to the position and 
    when a living or an abbacy was granted in this way during the 
    incumbency of another, the recipient received its entire 
    income during a subsequent vacancy. The practice was most 
    common in the case of abbacies. At the Diet of Worms (1521), 
    Duke George of Saxony, an outspoken opponent of Luther, was as 
    emphatic in his protest against this practice as Luther 
    himself (WREDE, op. cit., II, 665); his protest was 
    incorporated in the _Gravamina_ (ibid., 672), and reappears in 
    the Appendix (ibid., 708). 
     
    [31] A monk who deserted his monastery was known as an 
    "apostate." 
     
    [32] i.e., Offices which cannot be united in the hands of one 
    man. See e.g., note 3, p. 91. 
     
    [33] A gloss is a note explanatory of a word or passage of 
    doubtful meaning. The glosses are the earliest form of 
    commentary on the Bible. The glosses of the canon law are the 
    more or less authoritative comments of the teachers, and date 
    from the time when the study of the canon law became a part of 
    the theological curriculum. Their aim is chiefly to show how 
    the law applies to practical case which may arise. The 
    so-called glossa _ordinaria_ had in Luther's time an authority 
    almost equal to that of the _corpus juris_ itself. Cf. _Cath. 
    Encyc._, Vi, pp. 588f. 
     
    [34] The thing which was bought was, of course, the 
    dispensation, or permission to avail oneself of the gloss. 
     
    [35] Dataria is the name for that department of the curia 
    which had to deal with the granting of dispensations and the 
    disposal of benefices. Datarius is the title of the official 
    who presided over this department. 
     
    [36] See above, p.88, note 2. For a catalogue of papal 
    appointments bestowed upon two "courtesans,". _Johannes Zink 
    und Johannes Ingenwinkel_, see SCHULTE, _Die Fugger in Rom_, 
    I, pp. 282 ff. Between 1513 and 1521, Zink received 56 
    appointments, and Ingenwinkel received, between 1496 and 1521, 
    no fewer than 106. 
     
    [37] See above, p. 87, note 1. 
     
    [38] So Albrecht of Mainz bore the title of "administrator" of 
    Halberstadt. 
     
    [39] The name of this practice was "regression" (_regressus_). 
     
    [40] The complaint was made at Worms (1521) that it was 
    impossible for a German to secure a clear title to a benefice 
    at Rome unless he applied for it in the name of an Italian, to 
    whom he was obliged to pay a percentage of the income, a 
    yearly pension, or a fixed sum of money for the use of his 
    name (WREDE, op. Cit., II, 712). 
     
    [41] Simony--the sin of Simon Magus (Acts 8:18-20)--the sin 
    committed by the sale or the purchase of an office or position 
    which is formally conferred by a ritual act of the Church. In 
    the ancient and earlier medieval Church the use of money to 
    secure preferment was held to invalidate the title of the 
    guilty party to the position thus secured, and the acceptance 
    of money for such a purpose was an offense punishable by 
    deposition and degradation. The "heresy of Simon" was 
    conceived to be the greatest of all heresies. The traffic in 
    Church offices, which became a flagrant abuse from the time of 
    John XXII (1316-1334), would have been regarded in earlier 
    days as the most atrocious simony. 
     
    [42] The _reservatio mentalis_ or _in pectore_ is the natural 
    consequence of the papal theory that the right of appointment 
    to all Church offices of every grade belongs to the pope (see 
    above, p. 86, note 3.) According to the theory of the 
    canonists (LANCELOTTI, _Institutiones juris canonici_, Lib. I, 
    Tit. XXVII) this right is exercised either per 
    _petitionemalterius_, i.e., by confirmation of the election, 
    appointment, etc., of others, or _propriomotu_, i.e., "on his 
    own motion." In ordinary cases the exercise of the appointing 
    power was limited by rules, which though bitterly complained 
    of (see above, pp. 86 ff. and notes), were generally 
    understood, but the theory allowed any given case to be made 
    an exception to the rules. Of such a case it was said that it 
    was "reserved in the heart of the Pope," and the appointment 
    was then made "on his own motion." Hutten says of this 
    reservation in _pectore_ that "it is an easy, agile and 
    slippery thing, and bears no comparison to any other form of 
    cheating" (ed. Bocking, IV, 215). 
     
    [43] For a similar instances quoted at Worms (1521), see 
    WREDE, op. Cit., II, 710. 
     
    [44] The three chief centers of foreign commerce in the XV and 
    the early XVI Century. The annual fairs (_Jahrmarkt_), held at 
    stated times in various cities, brought great numbers of 
    merchants together from widely distant points, and were the 
    times when the greater part of the wholesale business for the 
    year was done. 
     
    [45] Built by Innocent VIII (1484-1490). 
     
    [46] See above, p. 93, note 2. 
     
    [47] The Church law forbade the taking of interest on loans of 
    money. 
     
    [48] During the Middle Ages all question touching marriage and 
    divorce, including, therefore, the question of the legitimacy 
    of children, were governed by the laws of the Church, on the 
    theory that marriage was a sacrament. 
     
    [49] i.e., By buying dispensations. 
     
    [50] The sums paid for special dispensations were so called. 
     
    [51] The toll which the "robber-barons" of the Rhine levied 
    upon merchants passing through their domains. 
     
    [52] _Ja wend das blat umb szo findistu es_--The translators 
    have adopted the interpretation of O. CLEMEN, L's. Werke, I, 
    383. 
     
    [53] The Fuggers of Augsburg were the greatest of the German 
    capitalists in the XVI Century. They were international 
    bankers, "the Rothschilds of the XVI Century" Their control of 
    large capital enabled them to advance large sums of money to 
    the territorial rulers, who were in a chronic state of need. 
    In return for these favors they received monopolistic 
    concessions by which their capital was further increased. The 
    spiritual, as well as the temporal lords, availed themselves 
    regularly of the services of this accommodating firm. They 
    were the pope's financial representatives in Germany. On their 
    connection with the indulgence against which Luther protested, 
    see Vol. I, p. 21; on their relations with the papacy, see 
    SCHULTE, _Die Fugger in Rom_, 2 Vols., Leipzig, 1904. Vol. 
    II.-7 
     
    [54] Certificates entitling the holder to choose his own 
    confessor and authorizing the confessor to absolve him from 
    certain classes of "reserved" sins; referred to in the _XCV 
    Theses as confessionalia_. Cf. Vol. I, p.22. 
     
    [55] Certificates granting their possessor permission to eat 
    milk, eggs, butter and cheese on fast days. 
     
    [56] The word is used here in the broad sense, and means 
    dispensations of all sorts, including those just mentioned, 
    relating to penance. 
     
    [57] Equivalent to "carrying coals to Newcastle." 
     
    [58] The Campo di Fiore, a Roman market-place, restored and 
    adorned at great expense by Eugenius IV (1431-1447), and his 
    successors. 
     
    [59] A part of the Vatican palace notorious as the 
    banqueting-hall of Alexander VI (1492-1503), turned by Julius 
    II (1503-1513) into a museum for the housing of his wonderful 
    and expensive collection of ancient works of art. Luther is 
    hinting that the indulgence money has been spent on these 
    objects rather than on the maintenance of the Church. Cf. 
    CLEMEN, I, 384, note 15. 
     
    [60] i.e., The offices and positions in Rome which were for 
    sale. See BENRATH, p. 88, note 18; p. 95, note 36.  
 
 
 
 
    _______________________________.______________________________  
   
    This text was converted to ascii format for Project Wittenberg 
    by Marsha Mundinger is in the public domain. You may freely  
    distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any  
    comments or suggestions to:     
        
                         Rev. Robert E. Smith      
                            Walther Library     
                   at Concordia Theological Seminary     
         
                      E-mail: smithre@mail.ctsfw.edu    
   Surface Mail:  6600 N. Clinton St.,  Ft. Wayne,  IN 46825 USA   
  
   Phone: (260) 452-2123                     Fax: (260) 452-2126 
 
   Address information is subject to change. Refer to the file, 
   "00-address.txt" from the main directory at Project Wittenberg 
   for the current information.     
   _______________________________.______________________________  
   
      
      
      
      
      
   --------------------------------------------------------- 
   file: /pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther: nblty-04.txt 
   rev : 1997/07