CHAPTER XXII. LUTHER AND LYING _pages_ 80-178

1. A BATTERY OF ASSERTIONS.

Luther’s conduct in the matter of the Bigamy an excuse for the present chapter. His dishonest assurances in his letters to Leo X, to Bishop Scultetus his Ordinary, and to the Emperor Charles V (1518-1520); his real feelings at that time as shown in a letter to Spalatin; Luther’s later parody of Tetzel’s teaching; his insinuation that it was the Emperor’s intention to violate the safe-conduct granted; he calls into question the authenticity of the Papal Bull against him, whilst all the time knowing it to be genuine; he advises _ordinandi_ to promise celibacy with a mental reservation; his distortion of St. Bernard’s “_perdite vixi_”; his allusion to the case of Conradin, “slain by Pope Clement IV,” and to the spurious letter of St. Ulrich on the babies’ heads found in a convent pond at Rome. His allegation that his “Artickel” had been subscribed to at Schmalkalden; his unfairness to Erasmus and Duke George; his statement, that, for a monk to leave his cell without his scapular, was accounted a mortal sin, and that, in Catholicism, people expected to be saved simply by works; his advocacy of the “Gospel-proviso”; his advice to the Bishop of Samland to make a show of hesitation in forsaking Catholicism _pages_ 80-99

2. OPINIONS OF CONTEMPORARIES IN EITHER CAMP.

Bucer, Münzer, J. Agricola, Erasmus, Duke George, etc., on Luther’s disregard for truth _pages_ 99-102

3. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEM. SELF-SUGGESTION AND SCRIPTURAL GROUNDS OF EXCUSE.

The palpable untruth of certain statements which Luther never tires of repeating. How to explain his putting forward as true what was so manifestly false: The large place occupied by the jocular element; his tendency to extravagance of language; he comes, by dint of repetition, to persuade himself of the truth of his charges. The new theology of mendacity: Luther’s earlier views consistent with the Church’s; study of the Old Testament leads him to the theory that only such untruths as injure our neighbour are real lies; influence of his teaching on the theologians of his circle: Melanchthon, Bucer, Bugenhagen, Capito, etc. _pages_ 102-116

4. SOME LEADING SLANDERS ON THE MEDIÆVAL CHURCH HISTORICALLY CONSIDERED.

Luther’s distortions of the actual state of things before his coming; admissions of modern scholars. The olden Catholics’ supposed “holiness-by-works”; on the relations between creature and Creator; the Lamb of God; the Eucharistic sacrifice; “personal religion”; Luther’s plea that he revived respect for the secular calling; the olden teaching concerning perfection _pages_ 116-131

5. WAS LUTHER THE LIBERATOR OF WOMANKIND FROM “MEDIÆVAL DEGRADATION”?

Luther’s claim to be the saviour of woman and matrimony; what he says of the Pope’s treatment of marriage; marriage “a state of sin”; witnesses to the contrary: Devotional and Liturgical books; Luther’s own attachment in his younger days to St. Anne. Various statements of Luther’s to the advantage or otherwise of woman and the married life; his alteration of outlook during the controversy on the vow of Chastity; the natural impulse, and the honour of marriage; expressions ill-befitting one who aspired to deliver womankind; practical consequences of the new view of woman: Matrimonial impediments and divorce; Duke George on the saying “If the wife refuse then let the maid come.” Respect for the female sex in Luther’s conversations. The new matrimonial conditions and the slandered opponents; the actual state of things in Late Mediæval times as vouched for in the records. Two concluding pictures towards the history of woman: A preacher’s matrimonial trials; the letters of Hasenberg and von der Heyden and the “New-Zeittung” and “Newe Fabel” which they called forth _pages_ 131-178