In another book, also printed at Wittenberg, in the year 1522, there are found among other articles (which one Sorbona had extracted as heretical from Luther’s books) also these: “That he (namely, Luther) had taught concerning the words of Christ (Matt. 5:39): ‘Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also;’ and again, (Rom. 12:19): Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves,’ that these words are not advices” that is, which one may, or may not do “as many theologians erroneously teach, but that they are commandments” that is, things which must be observed.
Again: “Christians are forbidden to sue for their rights at the law.” Again: “Since a Christian may not place his affections upon temporal things, he may also not swear an oath because of them.”
In short: “We find that Luther for a considerable time was with mouth and hand opposed to resistance, till he was finally seduced to another belief, by the Jesuits even as _Sleydanus, lib. 8, fol. 561_, testifies.” See the oldest edition.
A few pages further on the writer comes to speak of Pomeranus, Brentius, and divers others, who, about the years 1520, 1530, 1540, and subsequently, undertook the work of the Reformation from Popery, and also became effectual instruments in that direction; who nevertheless at that time taught not only against retaliation upon enemies, but also, besides infant baptism, the swearing of oaths, and other articles which are not founded in the holy gospel of Jesus Christ; and, on the other hand, taught and defended such things as are founded therein, and are still at the present day taught by the Anabaptists; though some of the aforementioned reformers themselves, and especially their descendants, for the most part, again departed therefrom.
These and similar matters were, in said reply of the persecuted Anabaptists in Switzerland, given for examination to the lords of Zurich, and to those who had drawn up the aforementioned manifesto in excuse of the persecution raised; as clearly showing that not the Anabaptists, but they themselves, had departed from the principles of the Reformation; that consequently not the Anabaptists, who had adhered to their principles, but the apostate reformed themselves, were to blame in this matter. Hence, that the authors of said manifesto had done wrong in charging the aforesaid Anabaptists with having separated themselves from the obedience which they owed to the true Christian Church, only because they would not go to church with them, who are called Reformed, nor receive their religion contrary to their souls and consciences.
Besides this point of disobedience toward the church, the Swiss brethren were also charged in the aforesaid manifesto, that they were also disobedient to the political authorities, etc. But hereupon they, in said answer, roundly declared: That this was unjustly said of them, yea, that they were willing and entirely ready to obey their authorities in all just matters, to pray for them, to pay them due tribute, honor and fear, and, though they should suffer wrong from them, in no wise to avenge it: but willingly and patiently to bear it for the Lord’s sake.
These were about the principal points that were mentioned in the manifesto, and refuted by the persecuted brethren; the other matters are of small importance, and hence not necessary to be adduced here.
But they nevertheless proceeded with the persecution, and granted no mitigation, as will be seen from the following accounts: