453
LXJTBBB
•arlier, aimed at a religious compromise. The two
"Propositions" or "Instructions (Waldi, op. oit.,
XVI, 31^-323) submitted, were expected to accom-
plish this. Tbe decree allowed the Lutheran Estates
the practice and reform of the new religion within
their territorial boundaries, but claimed the same
rights for those who should continue to adhere to the
Catholic Church. Melanchthon expressed his satisfac-
tion with this and declared that tney would work no
hardship for them, but even "protect us more than the
decrees of the earUer Diet" (opeyer, 1526; Corp. Ref.,
I, 1059). But an acceptance, much less an effective
submission to the decrees, was not to be entertained
at this juncture, and five princes most affected, on 19
April, handed in a protestation which Melanchthon in
alarm called "a terrible affair" (Corp. Ref., 1, 1060).
This protest has become historic, since it gave the
specific nomenclature Protestant to the whole opposi-
tional movement to the Catholic Church. " The Diet
of Speyer inaugurates the actual division of the Ger-
man Nation" (^Janssen, op. cit., Ill, 51).
In spite of the successful Hungarian invasion of the Turks, political affairs, by the reconciliation of pope and emperor (Barcelona, 29 June, 1529) , the peace with Francis I (Cambrai, 5 Aug., 1529), shaped tnemselves so happily, that Charles V was crowned emperor by his wnilom enem^^, Clement VII (Bologna, 24 Feb., 1 530) . However, in Germany, affairs were still irritant and menacing. To the hostility of Catholics and Prot- estants was now added the acrimonious quarrel be- tween the latter and the Zwin^ians; the late Diet of Speyer was inoperative^ practically a dead letter, the Protestant princes pnvily and publicly showed a spirit that was not far removed from open rebellion. Charles again sought to bring about religious peace and harmony by taking tl^ tangled skein into his own hands. He accordingly summoned the Diet of Augs- burg, which assembled in 1530 (8 April-19 November), presided over it in person, arranged to have the disaf- fected religious parties meet, calmly discuss and sub- mit their differences, and by a compromise or arbitra- tion, re-establish peace. Luther being under the ban of the Empire, for "certain reasons" (De Wette, op. cit., Ill, 368) did not make his appearance, but was harboured in the fortress of Coburg, about four days journey distant. Here he was in constant touch and confidential relations with Melanchthon and other Protestant leaders. It was Melanchthon who. under the dominant influence of Luther and availing himself of the previously accepted Articles of Marburg (5 Oct., 1529), Schwabach (16 Oct., 1529), Torgau (20 March, 1530), and the Lar^ Catechism, drew up the first authoritative profession of the Lutneran Church. This religious charter was the Au^burg Confession (Cotj/ss- 810 Avgustana^y the symbolical book of Lutheranism.
In its original form it met with Luther's full endorsement (De Wette, op. cit., IV, 17). It consists of an introduction, or preamble, and is in two parts. The first', consisting of twenty-one Articles, gives an exposition of the principal doctrines of the Protestant creed, and aims at an amicable adjustment; the sec- ond, consisting of seven Articles, deals with " abuses", and concerning these there is a "difference". The Confession as a whole is irenic ((>orp. Ref., II, 122) and is more of an invitation to union than a provoca- tion to disunion. Its tone is dignified, moderate, uid pacific. But it allows its insinuating coooessions to carry it so far into the boundaries of the vague and indefinite as to leave a lurking suspicion of artifice. Doctrinal differences, fundamental and irreconcilable, are pared down or slurred over to an almost irreducible degree (Hamack, " Dogmengesch.", Ill, 584-585; Hausrath, op. cit., II, 273-274; Ranke, op. dt., Ill, 244-245; ♦Ddllinger, "Die Reform.", Ill, 277-296). No one was better qualified by temper or training to clothe the blunt, apodictic phraseology of Luther in the engaging vesture of truth than MelanohthoQ. The
Articles on original fin, justification b}[ faith alooe.
and free will — ^though perplexinglv sinoilar in sound
and terminology, lack the ring of the true Catholic
metal. Again, many of the conceded points, some of
them of a surprising and startling cnaracter, even
abstracting from their suspected ambiguity, were in
such diametric conflict with the past teaching and
preaching of the petitioners, even m contradiction to
their written and oral communications passing at the
veiy moment of deliberation, as to cast suspicion on
the whole work. That these suspicions were not un-
founded was ampler proved by the aftermath of the
Diet. The correction of the so-called abuses dealt
with in Part II under the headings: Communion
under both kinds, the marriage' of priests, the Mass, *
compulsory confession, distinction ot meats and tradi-
tion^ monastic vows, and the authority of bishops, for
obvious reasons, was not entertain^, much less agreed
to. Melanchth(Hi's advances for still further conces-
sions were promptly and peremptorily rejected by Lu-
ther (De Wette, op. cit., IV, 52, 54) . The ^* Confession "
was read at a public session of the Diet (25 June) in
German and liitin, was handed to the emperor, who
in turn submitted it to twenty Catholic theologians,
including Luther^s old antagonists £ck, Cochlsus,
Usingen, and Wimpina, for examination and ref uta-
tion. The first reply, on account of its prolixity, and
bitter and irritating tone, was guickly rejected, nor
did the emperor allow the " Confutation of the Augs-
burg Confession " to be read before the Diet (3 Aug.)
imtfi it had been pruned and softened down by no kos
than five revisions. Melanchthon's " Apology for the
Augsburg Confession", which was in the nature of a
reply to the "Confutation", and which passes as of
equal official authority as the "Confession" itself
("Realencyclqp. Protest. Theol. u. Kirche", Leipzig,
1897, II, 249; Winckehnann, "Der Schmalkald. Bund ",
Strasburg, 1892, 197-204), was not accepted by the
emperor. All further attempts at a favourable out-
come proving unavailing, the imperial edict condemn-
ing the Protestant contention was published (22 Sept.).
It allowed the leaders until 15 April, 1532, for recon-
sideration (Kolde. "Die Augsburg. Konfession",
Gotha, 1896; Plitt, "Einleitung ... die Augus-
tana ", Erlangen, 1867; ROckert, " Luthers Verhiiltniss
8. Augsb. Bekentniss", Jena, 1854; Hcppe, " Die Kon-
fess. Entwickol. der altprot. Kirch. Deutschlands ",
Marburg, 1854; Kalinich, "Luther u. die Augsb.
Konfession", Leipzig, 1861; Knaake, "Luthers An-
theil . . . der Au^. Konfession", Berlin, 1863;
- Pastor, " Die kirchuche Reunionsbestreb. ", Freiburg,
1879, 17-90; Hausrath, op. cit., II, 257-332; Thudi- chum, op. cit., II, 315-333; ^Janssen, op. cit., Ill, 173- 220; Schaff, "Creeds of Christendom", I-III, New York, 1887; "Cambridge Hist.", II, 211-224; Arm- strong, op. cit., I, 232-259).
The recess was read (13 Oct.) to the Catholic Estates, who at the same time formed the Catholic League. To the Protestants it was read 11 Nov., who rejected it and formed the Smalkaldic League (29 March, 1531), an offensive and defensive alliance of all Lutherans. The Zwinglians were not admitted. Luther, who returned to Wittenberg in a state of great irritation at the outcome of the Diet, was now invoked to prepare the public mind for the position assumed by the princes, wnich at first blush looked suspiciously like downright rebellion. He did this in one of his paroxysmal rages, one of those ruthless outpourings when calm deliberation, religious charitv, politick prudence^ social amenities are openly and flagrantly set at denance. The three popular publications were: "Warning to his dear German People" (Walch, op. cit.. XVI, 1950-2016), "Glosses on the putative Im- perial Edict" (Idem, op. cit., 2017-2062), and, far outstripping these, "Letter against the Assassin at Dresden" (Idem, op. cit., 2062-2086), which his chief biographer characterises as " onft ^ ^»Vfc ^aa>5Ji^ ^mm-^^^
