§ 109. LAST ATTACK ON THE SACRAMENTARIANS. 661
versy, had not the courage to deliver this letter—the only one of Calvin to Luther— “because,” he says, ‘ Doctor Martin is suspicious, and dislikes to answer such questions . as were proposed to him.” !
‘ Calvin regretted “the vehemence of Luther’s natural temperament, which was so apt to boil over in every direction,” and to “ flash his lightning sometimes also upon the servants of the Lord;” but he always put him above Zwingli, and exhorted the Zurichers to moderation. When he heard of the last attack of Luther, he wrote a noble letter to Bullinger, Nov. 25, 1544, in which he says :? —
“Ὶ hear that Luther has at length broken forth in fierce invective, not so much against you as against the whole of us. On the present occasion, I dare scarce venture to ask you to keep silence, because it is neither just that innocent persons should thus be harassed, nor that they should be denied the opportunity of clearing themselves; neither, on the other hand, is it easy to determine whether it would be prudent for them to do so. But of this I do earnestly desire to put you in mind, in the first place, that you would consider how eminent a man Luther is, and his excellent endowments, with what strength of mind and resolute constancy, with how great skill, with what efficiency and power of doctrinal statement, he hath hitherto devoted his whole energy to overthrow the reign of Antichrist, and at the same time to diffuse far and near the doctrine of salvation. Often have I been wont to declare, that even although he were to call me a devil, I should still not the less esteem and acknowledge him as an illustrious servant of God.* . . . This, therefore, I would beseech you to consider first of all, along with your colleagues, that you have to do with a most distinguished servant of Christ, to whom we are all of us largely indebted. That, besides, you will do yourselves no good by quarreling, except that you may afford some sport to the wicked, so that they may triumph not so much over us as over the gospel. If they see us rending each other asunder, they then give full credit to what we say, but when with one consent and with one voice we preach Christ, they avail themselves unwarrantably of our inherent weakness to cast reproach upon our faith. I wish, therefore, that you would consider and reflect on these things, rather than on what Luther has deserved by his violence; lest that
1 Opera, ed. Reuss, XII. 6 sq., 61sq. Letters, ed. Constable, I. 416 sq.
2 Letters, 1. 409 sq., Opera, XI. 774.
8 “ Sepe dicere solitus sum: etiam si me diabolum vocaret, me tamen hoe illi honoris habiturum, ut insignem Dei servum agnoscam: qui tamen ut pollet eximiis virtutibus, ita magnis vitiis laboret.”’
662 THE GERMAN REFORMATION. A.D. 1517 To 1530.
may happen to you which Paul threatens, that by biting and devouring one another, ye be consumed one of another. Even should he have provoked us, we ought rather to decline the contest than to increase the wound by the general shipwreck of the church.”
This is the wisest Christian answer from Geneva to the thunderbolts of Wittenberg.
§ 110. Reflections on the Ethics of the Eucharistic Controversy.
Dogmatics and ethics, faith and conduct, should agree like the teaching and example of Christ from which they are to be drawn. But, in practice, they often conflict. History shows us many examples of ungodly champions of orthodoxy and godly champions of heterodoxy, of unholy churchmen and holy dissenters. The angel of Ephesus is commended for zeal against false apostles, and censured for leaving the first love; while the angel of Thyatira is praised for his good works, and reproved for tolerating error. Some are worse than their belief, and others are better than their misbelief or unbelief.
Luther and Zwingli are by no means opposed to each other as orthodox and heretic; they were essentially agreed in all fundamental articles of the evangelical faith, as the Marburg Conference proved. The difference between them is only a little more Catholic orthodoxy and intolerance in Luther, and a little more Christian charity and liberality in Awingl. ‘This difference is characteristic of the Reformers and of the denominations which they represent.
Luther had a sense of superiority, and claimed the credit of haying begun the work of the Reformation. He supposed that the Swiss were indebted to him for what little knowledge they had of the gospel; while, in fact, they were as independent of him as the Swiss Republic was.of the German Empire, and knew the gospel as well as he.?
1 In his book, *‘ Dass die Worte Christi,’’ etc. (1527, Er). ed. XXX. 11),
he calls the Sacramentarians ‘‘ his tender children, his dear brethren, his golden friends’’ (‘meine zarte Kinder, meine Briderlein, meine gilden