THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
suited for that office. He even declared in 1542 that the Evangelical princes themselves " must be necessity-bishops," and even went so far as to meditate (letter of Mar. 29, 1527) a " congregation of Christians " with full ecclesiastical powers, but determined to be guided by the course of events and to wait until parishes and schools were provided with the proper persons. Since, however, the result of the Saxon visitation gave no encouragement to this project, it was deemed far more important first to win non-Christians to the faith through the Gospel, preserving the external form of the Church as it was at the beginning of the Reformation. The visitation accordingly took place in 1527-29, Luther writing the preface to Melanchthon's Unterricht der Visitatoren an die P/arrherrn, and himself acting as a visitor in one of the districts after Oct., 1528, while, as a result of his ol> servations, he wrote both his catechisms in 1529. At the same time 'he took the keenest interest in education, conferring with Georg Spalatin (q.v.) in 1524 on plans for a school system, and declared that it was the duty of the civil authorities to provide schools and to see that parents sent their children to theim He also advocated the establishment of elementary schools for the instruction of girls. In the mean time the nature of the Eucharist had become a theme on which Luther found himself obliged to state his doctrines both fully and polemically. Rejecting transubstantiation, he nevertheless maintained the actual presence of the
body of Christ, while Zwingli, Leo
15. Eucha- Jud, and CEcolampadius, on the other
ristic Views hand, rejected this doctrine, interpre-
and Con- ting the " is " of the words of institu-
troversies. tion as " signifies." Luther was sorely
disturbed by this doctrine, which he regarded as closely akin to the teachings of Carlstadt and the " fanatics " in general. In the controversy which ensued, Luther replied to CEcolampadius in the preface to the Syngramma Suevicum, and also set forth his views in his Sermon von den Sakramenten Wider die Schwdrmgeister and
Dass diese Worte noch feststehen (spring, 1527),
while he sought to give a final and most thorough statement in his Vom Abendmahl Christi Bekenntnis (1528). In view of the perils to Protestantism in the measures of the Diet of Speyer (q.v.) in 1529 and the coalition of the emperor with France and the pope, the Landgrave Philip desired a union of all the adherents of the Reformation, but Luther declared himself opposed to any alliance which might aid heresy. He accepted, however, the landgrave's invitation to a conference at Marburg (Oct. 1-3, 1529; see Marburg, Conference of) to Settle the matters in controversy, and there opposed CEcolampadius, while Melanchthon was the antagonist of Zwingli. Although he found an unexpected harmony in other respects, no agreement could be reached regarding the Eucharist; and he therefore refused to call them brethren, even while he wished them peace and love. f[It was Luther's conviction that God had blinded Zwingli's eyes so that he could not see the true doctrine of the Lord's Supper. He denounced Zwingli and his followers at this time as " fanatics/j " patricides," " matri-
cides," " fratricides," " devils," " knaves," " heretics,". " rioters," " hypocrites," and the like. a. h. n.] The princes themselves then made subscription to the Schwabach Articles, upheld by Luther, a condition of alliance with them. Luther's reason for his Eucharistic doctrine was not a mere literal interpretation of the words of institution, but rather thankfulness for such an individual sealing and giving of the forgiveness won by the death of this body in the administering of the very same body, doubts as to the possibility of such a presence being silenced by remembering the absolute unity of the divine with the human in Christy While Christ's presence is " repletive " (filling all places at once), his omnipresence in the Eucharist is especially " definitive " (unbound by space). T)n the other hand, Luther taught with equal clearness that participation in itself is of no avail without faith^ [He insisted that the impious and even beasts in partaking of the consecrated elements partake of the body and blood of Christ, but the unworthy partake unto damnation, a. h. n.] While, moreover, fne combated the view that the Eucharist is a mere memorial, he fully recognized the commemorative element in itj As regards the effect of the Sacrament on the faithful, (he laid special stress on the words " given for you," and hence on the atonement and forgiveness through the death of Christ)
Under the same perilous conditions which had made desirable an alliance of all adherents of the Reformation, the estates convened with the emperor at Augsburg in 1530, when the relation of the empire to Protestantism was def- 16. The initely to be determined. Luther, de- Diet of spised by emperor and empire, re- Augsburg mained at Coburg, but the confession and the there presented by Melanchthon was Question essentially based upon his labors. The of Civil latter, while refraining from an au- Resistance. thoritative attitude, was little pleased by the smooth and cautious procedure of Melanchthon, and saw no chance of harmony of doctrine except in abolishment of the papacy, although he hoped for official toleration of both religions in the empire. While the recess of the diet gave the Protestants only a short time to make their submission, the emperor, urged on by threatened war with the Turks and by the Schmalkald League of the Protestant princes and cities, made further attempts to secure harmony, which led to the Religious Peace of Nuremberg in 1532 (q.v.), to last until a general council should be called to make a final decision. Since the Diet of Speyer (1529) the question had become vital whether, in case the emperor refused peace, the princes were justified in, or even bound to, armed resistance. Until now Luther had held that even wrongful acts of the emperor in no way released his subjects from obedience, and had been unfavorable to offensive and defensive alliances between Evangelical princes, preserving this attitude even in regard to the Schmalkald League. His position was somewhat modified, however, by the opinions of the jurists that in cases of public and notorious injustice the existing imperial laws (" the emperor himself in his laws ") warranted such resistance. Accepting this,