In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 10 LUTHER'S ATTACK ON INDULGENCES ( I 5 I 7 / I 5 I 8 ) LUTHER'S PATH TOWARD THE PUBLIC The dispute over indulgences commencing in the fall of 1S17 may first appear to be a continuation or new phase in die course of odier disputes. Only during 1518 did it become known that not only the dimensions of this new conflict but also its themes spelled a radical turning point. The various early-sixteenth-century debates involving humanists and scholas­ tics as well as humanists and representatives of die official church led Ludier as well to take a position. Efforts on behalf of die University of Wittenberg reform, begun in 1516, brought him in close proximity to some humanists, diough at diat time he was considerably reserved toward Erasmus. First, of particular importance to Ludier was die dispute surrounding Reuch­ lin. In a 1510 opinion, Reuchlin had opposed die burning of rabbinic literature urged by die University of Cologne and die Dominicans. For diis reason action was brought against Reuchlin lasting for years and finally ending in 1520 widi a judg­ ment via a papal brief. Because of his noble as well as scientifically based persistence, Reuchlin was everywhere regarded as die real victor in die conflict. Widi dieir Epistulae obscurorum virorum ("Letters of Obscure Men," 1515/1517) younger humanists attacked die Cologne Dominicans in biting satire. Engaged in composing diese "let­ ters" were, among odiers, Crotus Rubeanus (ca. 1480-1545), a leading humanist at Erfurt in die early sixteendi century, and Ulrich von Hutten (1488-1523).' 1 On Crotus see Helmar Junghans, Derjunge Luther und die Humanisten, (Weimar: Bohlau, 1984), 4S-48. On von Hutten see Johannes Schilling und Ernst Giese, eds., Ulrich von Hutten in seiner Zeit, 96 LUTHER'S ATTACK ON INDULGENCES 97 Luther did not take a public position in the dispute but wrote a letter, led to do so by a request from Georg Spalatin for an expert opinion, made through Johann Lang. The dispute around Reuchlin was explosive not least because the patron of Luther's university, die Saxon elector Frederick the Wise, was drawn into it. Spalatin chose die route through Luther's friend Lang because he did not yet know Ludier personally. In his response of February 1514 Ludier made clear diat he saw nodiing hereti­ cal in Reuchlin's opinion; die conflict did not involve questions of faidi but only sup­ positions.2 Then appear die all but prophetic words: "When such protests and opinions [as diose of Reuchlin] can no longer be freely expressed, dien we must fear diat finally inquisitors . . . will denounce someone as a heretic on a whim."3 Radier dian dealing widi such questions, inquisitors should worry about managing die widespread blasphemies in die church.4 This conflict around Reuchlin "served as a prelude to Ludier's affair."5 A somewhat later statement indicates diat Ludier was not yet skeptical of papal leadership. In it he said diat he was happy diat Reuchlin's case was to be judged by die Apostolic See, no longer by diose from Cologne, since Rome still had die most learned people.6 Of course, Ludier's dieology retained its own profile over against Reuchlin and his defenders. This became clear in his distancing himself more and more from Eras­ mus and his doctrine of sin and grace. In die fall of 1S16 he wrote: What disturbs me about Erasmus, that most learned man . . . is die following: in explaining the Apostle [Paul], he understands the righteousness which originates in "works" or in "the "Law" or "our own righteousness" (the Aposde calls it that) as refer­ ring to diose ceremonial andfigurativeobservances [of the OldTestament]. Moreover he does not clearly state that in Romans, chapter 5, die Aposde is speaking of original sin, although he admits that there is such a thing. Had Erasmus studied die books Augustine wrote against the Pelagians (especially the treatises On the Letter and the Spirit) . . . (then he will recognize) that nothing in Augustine is of his own wisdom but is rather that of the most outstanding fathers, such as Cyprian, [Gregory of] Nazianzus, Rheticus, lrenaeus, Hilary, Olympius, Innocent, and Ambrose.7 From 1516 on, Ludier entered die public arena widi his new dieology. This meant diat he presented insights gained from Paul and Augustine no longer merely Monographia Hessiae 12 (Kassel: Evangelischer Presseverband, 1988), esp. J. Schilling, "Hutten und Luther," 87-IIS. 2 WA Br 1 Nr. 7 (Spalatin's letter and Luther's answer). 3...

Share