Art. VIII. Roscoe's Life and Pontificate of Leo, X. continued from p. 228. THE importance of this elaborate work, together with the

vast variety of matter which it comprehends, will be deemed a sufficient apology for our devoting to its consideration a more than usual number of pages. Had we been able indeed to bestow upon it unqualified praise, our review would have been contained within much narrower limits: but when Mr. R. treats of subjects or characters connected with Religion, we frequently feel ourselves compelled to appeal from his decisions, and, in many cases, it seems expedient to state the grounds of our dissent. After all, however, we find it impossible to enter so fully into this work, as we could wish, and many points in which we greatly differ from the author must be suffered to remain untouched. Our principal object has been to counteract the unfavourable impressions, which his account of the Refor mation and its illustrious author seems calculated to produce in the mind of the reader. We are convinced that a person, totally unacquainted with the History of the reformation, and the character of Martin Luther, except, as collected from Mr. R.'s work, would rise from the perusal of it, with feelings which a just representation of the case would not authoriseand as we are sincere advocates for the cause of Protestantism, we shall be excused, if we endeavour to repel whatever would bring it into discredit.-Let it not, however, be supposed that we mean to enter into a justification of every part of Luther's conduct, during his controversy with the church of Rome, Extraordinary would it indeed have been, if, in a contest so long continued, upon subjects so directly calculated to rouse the feelings, extending to such a variety of objects, and conducted against the most powerful potentates of the world, Luther had never betrayed an improper spirit, nor given any just occasion to his enemies for triumph. On the contrary, his life furnishes us with many affecting proofs that the greatest and best of men are still but men; for bright as was this luminary, it was, nevertheless, disfigured by spots. Luther was not insensible of this, and lamented his failings with the greatest sincerity. No man more severely condemned what was wrong in his temper and conduct than he did himself; but yet these failures did not affect his general character, nor the grand principles and motives by which he was actuated. He possessed a sincere desire to glorify God: he had an unbounded thirst for truth; and he fearlessly followed wherever she seemed to lead. He reverenced his conscience more than man; but he also venerated, even to superstition, the constituted authorities; and it was among the very last of his discoveries, that it was his duty to separate from the Papal See corrupt and abo

minable

1

minable as he knew it to be. Even to the close of all, when the whole mystery of the Papal iniquity was exposed to his view, he felt and paid the greatest deference to the high character for propriety of conduct, which Leo X. had then obtained throughout the whole of Europe; and in laying before the Pope the unbounded licentiousness immorality and profligacy of the Roman court, he excepts from his censure the Pope himself and two or three of his Cardinals. The letter which Luther wrote to the Pontiff, stating these views of his holiness and his court, is represented by Mr. R. as the most extraordinary and insolent production that ever proceeded from the pen of man. He considers it as a specimen, to which it would be difficult to find a parallel, of insincerity contempt and abuse, and leaves the author of it under strong suspicions of a defect in moral principle. But it will be proper to lay before the reader Mr. R's own account of this letter.

"He addressed," says he, another letter to Leo X. which in its purport may be considered as one of the most singular, and in its consequences, as one of the most important, that ever the pen of an individual produced. Under the pretext of obedience, respect, and even affection for the Pontiff, he has conveyed the most determined opposition, the most bitter satire, and the most marked contempt, insomuch that it is scarcely possible to conceive a composion more replete with insult and offence, than that which Luther affected to allow himself to be prevailed on to write, by the representations of his own fraternity."

Mr. R. then translates the greater part of this letter, and furnishes us with the whole of it in the appendix. If this letter of Luther were really intended as a sarcasm on the Pope himself, and he meant directly the reverse of what he said, it would be difficult indeed to exonerate the Reformer from direct and deliberate falshood, and that too on a most solemn occasion. But what are Mr. R.'s proofs that Luther really intended to caricature the Pontiff? He adduces none, but leaves us to collect them from the letter itself. We have not however been so successful in our discoveries as Mr. R. though we have read both his translation and the original; in the former indeed we thought we perceived something more of sarcasm than in the latter, but in neither did we see any thing which in our opinion can justify Mr. Roscoe's strictures. The fact is, Luther, throughout the whole, draws a broad line of distinction between' the See of Rome and the Roman Pontiff. The former he represents as advanced to the last degree of profligacy and iniquity;the latter as seeing indeed this wickedness, but unable to oppose any barrier against it. He speaks of the Pope as having obtained the highest character, throughout Christendom, for integrity and propriety of conduct, and laments that he had not lived as the ornament of better times. He considers his natural disposition as mild and conciliating, and that he was impelled to

act

act as he did by the influence of wicked counsellors. He does not state a single fact respecting the Pontiff, which, whether true or false, was not then generally believed, and which indeed our Author, upon drawing up the character of Leo X. has not laboured to prove; nor does he exhibit the state of the Roman See, in a shade at all darker, than it was generally allowed to deserve. Where then is the sarcasm? Where the insincerity? Where the expressions of the most contemptuous kindness for the Pontiff? This letter, it is acknowledged, could not fail to bring matters to an extremity, and Luther could have no expectation of mercy after having so fully and so cuttingly exposed the abominable state of the Roman Church: we go further, and acknowledge that it betrays a considerable want of temper in Luther, and that seeing he could not hope in this way to reform the abuses which he so severely lashes, it might have been better to be silent on this head, or to have written with less asperity: but we can by no means concede that any thing which it contains, at all justifies the terms in which Mr. R. represents it. He appears to us equally sincere in his censure of the vices of the Roman Court, and in his honourable mention of the character of the Pontiff. That he afterwards thought, and expressed himself differently respecting Leo X,, is no proof that he did not mean what he said, when he wrote this letter. He had but little knowledge of the Pope at this time, but what he collected from general reports; and Mr. R. has abundantly shewn that no character could stand higher in the public estimation; and he has laboured, though with unequal success, to prove that he really deserved this reputation.

We cannot dismiss this censure which Mr. R. passes on the principles of Luther, without noticing an insinuation which this author has in another place thrown out, of the cruel and altogether barbarous exultation of Luther over a fallen enemy. Tetzel, the infamous vender of indulgences, who first called forth the opposition of Luther, fell into disgrace with the Roman Pontiff, and is said to have died of a broken heart. When Luther heard that this unhappy man was deserted by his friends, and pining away with mortification and disappointment, Luther wrote him a consolatory letter, and begged him not to distress himself with the recollection of what had passed between them; thereby manifesting the true spirit of Christianity, which watches for the first opportunity of shewing kindness and compassion to the most inveterate enemy. Mr. R. in a note on this subject thus expresses himself. When Luther was informed of his sickness, he addressed a letter to him, entreating him to keep up his spirits, and to fear nothing from his resentment,' &c.

*

Printed Fetzal, by mistake, in our last Number.

whether

whether this was really intended as a consolation the reader will judge;' (Vol iv. page 7), and the reader also will judge whether Mr. R. does not betray a want of candour in this ungenerous insinuation.

On another occasion the veracity of Luther is called in question by our author: though if there be one trait in Luther's character more prominent than another, it is an inviolable regard to truth. This story,' says Mr. R. rests only on the authority of Luther, who on such an occasion, will scarcely be admitted as a sufficient evidence.' (p. 328.)

The violent and truly exceptionable language of Luther on some occasions, is frequently the subject of Mr. R.'s remarks, and is sometimes introduced with an air of triumph, as evidencing no great superiority in point of principle over his enemies. Far be it from us to justify any thing which savours of rancour and asperity-yet it should be recollected, as some apology for the reformer on these occasions, that the 16th century was a stranger to the refinements of modern times, and that such lan. guage was then current among controversialists. It would, at all events, have been but fair in Mr. R. to have been equally pointed in his remarks, on the manner in which Luther was treated by his adversaries, that his reader might have a just view of his provocations, and see which party was guilty of the greatest excess.

Though a regard to the memory of the great reformer has called on us to notice these instances of unfair treatment, we must also acknowledge that on some occasions Mr. R. does ample justice to Luther, and vindicates him from the charges and aspersions of his enemies. In the memorable diet at Worms, when Luther intrepidly put himself once more into the hands of his enemies, the whole of his conduct is exhibited in a favourable light; and in answer to the invidious remarks that were made on Luther's first appearance before this diet, Mr. R. observes that,

"To observations of this kind the friends of Luther might have replied, that the prohibition imposed upon him before the assembly, prevented him from entering into a general vindication either of his opinions or his conduct. That with respect to his having exhibited no symptoms of divine inspiration, he had never asserted any pretensions to such endowments, but on the contrary, had represented himself as a fallible mortal, anxious only to discharge his duty, and to consult the safety of his own soul. And that, as to the remark of the Emperor, if in fact such an assertion escaped him, it proved no inore than that he had been already prejudiced against Luther: and that by a youthful impatience which he ought to have restrained, he had already anticipated his condemnation.' (p. 32.)

The conduct of Luther before this diet was so dignified, his answer so pertinent, his temper so truly christian, his fortitude

so unshaken, and the occasion so interesting, that had not our critique already extended to an unusual length, we could not deny ourselves the pleasure of transcribing Mr. R.'s account of it, for the reader's gratification. We shall content ourselves, however, with quoting Mr. R.'s remarks upon it.

"Such was the result of this memorable interview, which each of the adverse parties seem to have considered as a cause of triumph and exultation. The Romish historians assert, that the conduct of Luther on this occasion, diminished his credit, and greatly disappointed the expectations which had been formed of him while his apologists represent it as highly to be commended and in every respect worthy of his character. Nor can it be denied, that when the acuteness of his interrogator compelled him either to assert or retract the doctrines which he had maintained, he rose to the height of his great task, with that inflexible intrepidity which was the characteristic feature of his mind. Of the theological tenets so earnestly inculcated by Luther, different opinions will be entertained; and whilst some approve, and some condemn them, there are, perhaps, others who consider many of them as unimportant and founded merely on scholastic and artificial distinction: as equivocal from the uncertainty of their effects on the life and conduct of those who embrace them; or as unintelligible, being totally beyond the limits and comprehension of human reason: but all parties must unite in admiring and venerating the man, who undaunted and alone, could stand before such an assembly, and vindicate, with unshaken courage, what he conceived to be the cause of religion, of liberty and of truth; fearless of any reproaches, but those of his own conscience, of of any disapprobation, but that of his God. This transaction may, indeed, be considered as the most honourable incident in the life of that great reformer, by which his integrity and his sincerity, were put to the test, no less than his talents and his resolution. That he considered it as a proof of uncommon fortitude, appears from the language in which he adverted to it a short time before his death. Thus' said he, God gives us fortitude for the occasion, but I doubt whether I should now find myself equal to such a task." pp. 35, 36.

We shall conclude our review of Mr. R.'s remarks on what relates to the Reformation, by quoting his account of its effects on the political and moral state of Europe.

"The effects produced by the reformation on the political and moral state of Europe, are of a much more important nature. The destruction of the authority of the Romish see, throughout many flourishing, and many rising nations, whilst it freed the monarch from the imperious interposition of an arrogant pontiff, released the people from that oppressed and undefined obedience to a foreign power, which exhausted their wealth, impeded their enjoyments, and interfered in all their domestic concerns, The abolition of the odious and absurd institutions of monastic life, by which great numbers of persons were restored to the common purposes of society, infused fresh vigour into those states which embraced the opinions of the reformers; and the restoration of the ancient and apostolic sage of the Christian church, in allowing the priesthood to marry, was

a