With such antecedents, Eck was prepared to take up arms against Luther (as, indeed, he was ready to take up arms against any man). Tliey had been good friends, and Luther sent him his Theses. See Luther. Against these, in 1518, Eck wrote animadversions un- der the title Obdisci (given in Loscher, Vollst. Ref. A ct. ii, 333 sq.), which were freely circulated, though the writer declared the}-- were not meant to be published. Eck was at that time inquisitor for Bavaria, and what he said and wrote had great weight in fixing upon a man the reputation of heresy. Carlstadt (q. v.), at Luther's reciuest, replied in 400 thel^es, in. which he assailed both the learning and the orthodoxy of Eck, and very satirically. The controversy ended in a jiublic Disputaiion, to which Carlstadt challenged Eck. According to a letter of Luther, written to Eck Nov. 15, 1518, Lutlier seems to have cherished the hope of a friendly settlement of the difficulty ; but Eck was onlv puffed up by this tenderness of Luther, and in Febru- ary, 1519, he printed an outline for the expected dispu- tation, in which lie endeavored again to imjicach the University of Wittenberg, but more esi>cciany Carl- stadt and Lutlier, particularly the latter, as iiolding heretical doctrines on jicnitence and on the papal pow- er. Malice onlj' could have insjiired Eck here, as Lu- ther had at that very time promised to Miltitz to dis- continue the dispute. Luther was, of course, relieved
from his promise, and he so declared to the elector Frederick on the 13th of March. He wrote at once a reply to Eck, so unanswerable in all its points, and so full of severity, that Eck could no longer remain in doubt as to the fate which awaited him at Leipzig. Eck's aim was undoubtedly not so much to gain the mastery over Carlstadt as over Luther. He published (Februaiy, 1519) 13 theses, which he professed himself willing to defend against Luther. They referred chief- ly to the doctrine of penitence and absolution, and the thirteenth especially sought to provoke an answer from Luther which should make him liable to the Inquisi- tion for heresy. It read: '■^ Romanam Ecclesiam nnji fuisse superiorem aids Ecclesiis ante temjwra Sylmestn, negamus. Sed eum, qui sedem heaiissimi Petri hahnit etjidein, successorem Petri et Vicariiun Christi ffeneralem semper affiiovimus." Eck here really gained his ol)ject. Luther accepted the challenge, and answered it by the following: '■'■ Romanam Ecclesiam esse omnibus aliissupe- riorem, probatnr ex frifjidissimis Rom. Pontijicum decre- tis, intra qundrinrjentos annos 7iatis. Contra quce sunt kistori'c approbat(e milla et centum annorum, texius scrip- turce divines et decretum Niceni Concilii omnium sacra- iissimi." Eck, eager to bring Luther into a still more inextricable position as heretic, advanced, March 14, 1519, the following: '■'■ Excusatio adversus criminaiio- nes Fr. M. Luther!, ordinis Eremitariim,^' with the ac- cusation that Luther was a coward, and that he only endeavoi-ed to advance Carlstadt in order that he might himself safely retreat. To this Luther replied in an- other ^''Excusatio Fr. Martini Ljttheri adversus crimi- nationes Dr. Jo. Eckii,'" and with the assertion "ycA fiirchte mich weder vor dem Pabste und des Pctbstes Xa- men noch ror Pdbstchen und Puppen" (I am neither afraid of the pope or the pope's name, nor of popelings or puppets"). But Eck succeeded at least in fright- ening some true friends of Luther, and it was no easy task to cuiiet Spalatinus, who liad grown very doubt- ful as to the final result of the dispute. But Luther was already decided not to spare the Roman see. Tlie Roman Ciuirch he calls (De Wette, Luther s Briefe, i, 2G0) "Babylon;" the power of the Roman pontifl'ho i counts among tvorldly powers {ib. i, 2G^). Meanwhile many causes delayed disputation. At last the person- al interference of duke George, who asked of the bish- op "not to defend the lazy priests, but to oblige them to meet the battle manfully, unless the pope should interfere," removed all obstacles.
The session opened at Leipsic June 27, 1519, and from that date to July 3 Eck and Carlstadt were the disputants. Eck admitted that the Scriptures were the ultimate rule of doctrine, and maintained a syner- gistic doctrine as to grace and free-will. Carlstadt supported the doctrine of the impotency of the will, and that good works are from grace alone. The con- troversy' led to no result. " On Monday, the 4th of July, at seven in the morning, Luther arose ; tlie an- tagonist whom Eck most ardentl}' desired to meet, and whose rising fame he hoped to crush by a l)rilliant vic- tory. He stood in the prime of manhood, and in the fulness of his strength : he was in his tiiirty-sixth year; his voice was melodious and clear; he was per- fectly versed in the Bible, and its aptest sentences pre- sented themselves unbidden to his mind; above all, he inspired an irresistible conviction that he sought the truth. The battle immediately commenced on the question of tlio authority of the papaej', which, at once intelligible and important, riveted universal attention. It was immediately obvious that Luther could not maintain his assertion that the pope's primacy dated only from the last four centuries: he soon found him- self forced from- tliis position by ancient documents ; and the rather, that no criticism had as yet shaken the authenticity of the false decretals. But his attack on the doctrine that tlie primacy of the pope (whom he still persi.stod in regarding as the oecumenical bishop) was founded on Scripture and by divine right, was far