The Reformation all this time was rapidly gaining ground. In 1542 and 1543 two other diets were held at Xuremberg, but they were of less importance, both in a political and in a religious point of view. In 154"2 the emperor was in a very critical position, being at war with the Turks and with France, while at home the war of Brunswick was on the eve of breaking out, on account of the encroachments of duke Henry of Wolfenbiittel against Brunswick, which had called to its assistance John Frederick of Saxony and the land- grave of Hesse. It was feared at one time that all the princes belonging to the league of Smalcald would unite and make war on the Roman Catholic states, but they proved that their only object was to defend Brunswick, without reference to religious questions. All these ditficulties, together with the dissatisfaction arising from promised reforms not having been carried out, led to another diet being summoned for Nov. 14, 1542 ; it was afterwards postponed to December 14, and final- ly assembled on January 31, 1543 (according to Sleidan, lib. XV, 483 ; Ranke, iv, 285 ; but according to Secken- dorf [p. 41G] in the earh' part of February). King Fer- dinand came, on January 17, to take part in it. Charles V was represented by Frederick of the Palatinate, John of Naves, and Christopher, bishop of Augsburg, all persons at least distasteful to the evangelical party. Bishop Christopher died suddenly during the conference, and was replaced by Otto of Truchses. King Ferdinand had repeatedly invited the elector of Saxony, through Dr. Andreas Coneritz, to be personally present at the diet; but he declined. Circumstances now compelled the emperor and his brother to act as leniently as pos- sible towards the evangelical states. Still the Roman Catholics clearly evinced their old opposition to all re- form, and thus the other party was obliged to act with vigor. At the opening of the diet king Ferdinand pointed out the necessity of carrying on the war against the Turks with increased energj', and of pro- tecting Hungary and the neighboring regions; after that, assistance ■(vas askeil against the French, who had invaded the Netherlands. On February 5 Granvelle addressed the diet, representing the exigencies of the war against the Turks, praised the emperor for all he had done for the country, and promised in his name that he would devote his life, if need be, to overcome the enemies of Christianity, if the states would help him in the war against France. The evangelical princes and states in the mean time presented to the king and to the imperial commissioners a list of their grievances. They complained of the peace of Nuremberg having been broken by the imperial chamber of justice, and of the promised reforms not having been carried out. They declared that they had protested against the op- pression of that court, and that they rejected its arbi- trary decisions, for instance, in the case of tlie aifairs of Brunswick, etc. They also required religious libertj', which was incompatible with that tribunal. All the questions started liy both parties gave rise to numerous debates. Duke Ulric of Wurtembcrg sought to uphold
the views of the imperial commissioners against the evangelical party by means of political considerations. He attached himself especially to the affair of Bruns- wick, and sought to organize a league of Saxony, Ba- varia, and Hesse. Leonard Eck drew up the articles of the bond, into which other states were to be after- wards admitted. These articles did not suit either the landgrave of Hesse or the elector of Saxony, and they both demanded first of all that Bavaria should be pledged to render no assistance to duke Henry, and this put an end to the plan. The mistrust of the evan- gelical party was greatly increased by letters of duke Henry liaving been discovered, in which he spoke of the emperor intending soon to restore him in his gov- ernment, while (iranvelle had declared that the emper- or would not take Henry's part. To this was added that Ferdinand and the imperial commissioners com- menced agitating the question of the forthcoming coun- cil which was to be held at Trent; that they insisted that duke Henry, who was claiming his estates back, should not be denied his rights, etc. The evangelical party answered that they did not accept this council, nor would they attend it, and declined, since they were given no sure guarantees of peace, to take any further share in the proceedings of the diet. The resolutions of the diet were therefore drawn up, April 28, without the participation of the evangelical states. They re- peated the demand for a reform, postponed the settle- ment of the Brunswick affair until the return of the emperor, and renewed the assurance given by the Diet of Spires, in 1542, of a peace of five years. The evan- gelical states declined recognising these decisions, as they had been drawn up without their participation, and also because they did not receive sufficient guar- antees of the promised peace being kept. Thej' at the same time declared themselves unwilling to take any part in the Turkish war, and announced their intention of sending a deputation to the emperor, to present him their propositions. The resolutions were never acted upon, but gave rise to numerous conferences between the two parties, in which all the questions at issue were repeatedly discussed. See Seckendorf, Bist. Luther, p. 41G; Sleidan, De statu Rdig. lib. xv, 483-486; Neu- decker, Urkunden, p. 661 sq. ; id. Merhw. Alctenslilcke, p. 323 sq. — Herzog, Real-Eiict/llojjddie, x, 485 ; Fisher, Hist. Ref. p. 1 15 sq. (J. N. P.)