RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Wittenberg
was required also assent to the Augsburg Confession and to the Apology. Butzer handed the confession of the Swiss (ut sup.) to Luther who promised to read it. Asa seal of the compact Butzer was one of the preachers on the following Sunday, and he and Capito participated in the communion. On Monday the subscription took place, and the delegates departed in the most hopeful frame of mind.
In most of the cities people were indeed astonished at the new articles. In Ulm they openly spoke of a new doctrine; they quickly perceived that
Luther had made not the least conces-
5. Result sion. At Constance, where the agreeof the ments on baptism and auricular con- Conference. fession were offensive, a new formula on the Lord’s Supper, baptism, and
church discipline was planned in rebuttal, but left in abeyance. Strasburg, always the van of the movement, where all subscribed but the former abbot, P. Volzius, had a strained position. Yet by July 22, Frankfort, Worms, Landau, Weissenburg, Esslingen, Augsburg, Memmingen, and Kempten had assented, and Reutlingen followed, Sept. 13, 1536. As to the Swiss, Luther had expressed, before Butzer’s departure, his pleasure concerning the confession handed to him; and sent along an amiable missive to the burgomaster of Basel, who in turn was much gratified. Basel and Miithlhausen seemed to be in accord, but after various movements a council at Basel (Nov. 14, 1536), unable to decide between the Roman and the Lutheran doctrines, declined the presence in substance. At the Diet of Schmalkald (Feb., 1537) Butzer was to confer with Luther in regard to the declaration (Jan. 12, 1537) by seven Swiss cities, including Zurich, Bern, and Basel; but this was prevented by Luther’s illness, and only the fact that the official approval of Luther’s articles at the diet was not called for averted a most probable breach with the South Germans. Meanwhile, a letter of Butzer to Luther (Jan. 19, 1537) in disparagement of the Swiss declaration, enabled the former’s enemies to make his efforts also unpopular. Johann Zwick of Constance, who seems to have received intimation of Luther’s teaching in the Schmalkald Articles of the eating of the ungodly, now made an appeal for opposition to the union and was joined by Bullinger against Butzer’s movement. At a synod at Bern, during the middle of 1537, in the presence of Calvin and P. Viret, Butzer achieved a brilliant vindication, but met with the impatient inquiry concerning the delayed answer of Luther. Finally, Luther, in answer to Butzer who had urged an official reply (Dec. 3, 1539), showed that the Swiss formula was not at all satisfactory; but in his reply to the Swiss (Dec. 1), without touching the dogmatic discussion except to dispose of a misunderstanding on some point on the Lord’s Supper, he again professed his adherence to the idea of concord, expressed his joy over their honest efforts and the progress made, presumed that the steps toward concord had not been completed but only opened, and recommended forbearance and good will until further progress. This answer produced great satisfaction in Switzerland. Bullinger was of the mind to suspend further procedure except that of promoting peace by writing, speech, and preach-
Wittenberg Woellner
THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
I
ing. But hopes were disappointed. At a synod at Zurich (May 4, 1538), in which the note was loudly voiced that the agreement should only be assumed as valid after Luther had formally recalled his written attacks against Zwingli, a reply to Luther was resolved upon, in which the Swiss asserted the partaking of the body through a believing spirit; presumed that no difference longer existed; and begged the privilege, under present circumstances, of presenting such instruction to the people as would be most intelligible to them. But before its receipt, Luther, in an answer to Bullinger, assumed the harmony to be an assured thing, and the missive of the Swiss he acknowledged briefly by referring them, regarding his scruples, to Butzer as mediator. Thus, the movement resolved itself for years into polite correspondence; of an ultimate concord, by the action of a general convention, there was no more mention; and Butzer, who had made another attempt at Wittenberg (1538), seemed to have lost his former interest. The only fruit was a temporary truce of friendliness with the cities of upper Germany. Luther’s comparison of Zwingli with Nestorius (Concilien und Kirchen, 1539) caused deep resentment in Switzerland. His restrictions upon the Swiss and their orthodoxy became ever severer until by a letter (Aug. 31, 1543) he broke off all relations with them, offering to pray and teach against them until his end. (T. Koxpe.)
Brsiiocrapuy: The sources are the official reports in Butzer’s Scripta Anglicana, pp. 648 sqq., Basel, 1577, and in Walch’s ed. of Luther’s Werke, xvii. 2543; the matter in Tentzel, Supplementum hist. Gothane, pp. 114 saq., Jena, 1716; Wolfgang Musculus’ reports in his Itinerarium, given in T. Kolde, Analecta Lutherana, pp. 216 sqq., Gotha, 1883. Consult: J. C. G. Neudecker, Urkunden aus der Reformationszeit, Cassel, 1836; idem, Merkwiirdige Aktenstiicke aus der Zeit der Reformation, 2 parts, Nuremberg, 1838; idem, Neue Beitrige zur Geschichte der Reformation, Leipsic, 1841; T. Keim, Die Reformation der Reichstadt Ulm, Stuttgart, 1851; idem, Schwiibische Reformationsgeschichte, Tiibingen, 1855; C. Pestalozzi, Heinrich Bullinger, Elberfeld, 1858; J. W. Baum, Capito und Butzer, ib. 1860; G. Uhlhorn, Urbanus Rhegius, ib., 1861; F. W. Hassencamp, Hessische Reformationsgeschichte, vol. i., Frankfort, 1864; M. Lenz, Briefwechsel Landgraf Philipps mit Bucer, 3 vols., Leipsic, 1880-91; G. Kawerau, Der Briefwechsel des Justus Jonas, Halle, 1884 sqq.; H. E. Jacobs, The Book of Concord, ii. 253-259, Philadelphia» 1893; idem, Martin Luther, pp. 316 sqq., New York, 1898; W. Germann, Johann Forster, Meiningen, 1894; J. W. Richard, Philip Melanchthon, pp. 254-255, New York, 1898; E. Egli, Analecta reformatoria, Zurich, 1899 sqq.; K. Wolfart, Die Augsburger Reformation in... 1633- 16534, Leipsic, 1901; F. Roth, Augsburgs Reformationsgeschichte, 3 vols., Munich, 1901-07; Cambridge Modern History, li. 234, 339, New York, 1904; K. Schornbaum, Zur Politik des Markgrafen Georg von Brandenburg, Munich, 1906; T. Kolde, Die dlteste Redaktion der Augsburger Konfession, Giitersloh, 1906; idem, Historische Einlettung im die symbolischen Biicher der evang.-lutheraschen Kirche, ib. 1907; the letters and lives of Luther (see under article on him), and the literature on the later stages of the German Reformation.
WITZEL, vit’sel, GEORG: German Roman Catholic theologian; b. at Vacha-on-the-Werra (30 m. s.w. of Gotha) 1501; d. at Mainz Feb. 16, 1573. He studied at the University of Erfurt 1516-18, then interrupted his studies and became parish schoolmaster in Vacha; after that he continued work at the University of Wittenberg for twenty-eight weeks under Luther, Carlstadt, and Melanchthon. In the same year he was consecrated priest and served as
vicar and also a.part of the time as town-clerk in his native city until his twenty-fourth year. In 1523 he petitioned the abbot of Fulda for permission to marry, and in the silence of the abbot married without dispensation the daughter of a citizen in Hisenach. In 1524 he lost his clerical position. In EHisenach he became acquainted with Jakob Strauss (q.v.), in conjunction with whom he preached sermons against princes and bishops, against Roman abuses, picturing also the‘heavy burdens of the peasantry. Strauss made him preacher of Wenigen-Lupnitz, where he zealously began his work when the excitement among the peasants had already reached an alarming height. However much he may have been influenced by the social ideas of Strauss, his later assurance is to be received that he tried to subdue the rebellious spirit. In consequence of the Peasants’ War he lost his position and was in great need until at the recommendation of Luther he became preacher at the small town of Niemegk. His leisure at that place he employed in comprehensive studies, especially of the Church Fathers, while the works of Erasmus influenced his views of the Church. What had led him to the Evangelical cause had not been assent to Luther’s doctrine of justification or personal longing for certainty of faith, but a desire for the purification of the Church from abuses in worship and discipline, partly also in doctrine, but principally in life. Seeing in Lutheranism disagreement between doctrine and life, he at a later time returned to the Roman Catholic Church. Lutherans mistakenly accused Witzel of the Antitrinitarianism of Campanus, so that in Mar., 1530, he was arrested and imprisoned in the castle of Belzig. His innocence was soon proved and he returned, sick, to Niemegk, greatly disappointed and dissatisfied with Luther and his associates. In 1531 he left Niemegk, and began his open contest with the ‘‘Lutheran sect.” Two years he spent in Vacha, trying in vain to find a new position, his marriage naturally proving an obstacle. But he was at this time diligently engaged in literary work. In 1533 Count Hoyer of Mansfeld called him as minister to St. Andrew’s in Hisleben, where he as preacher and pastor of a small number of Roman Catholics experienced five years of bitter struggle with Johann Agricola, Giittel, Cordatus, Coelius, Kymaeus, Balthasar Raidt, and especially with Jonas. He also tried to put into practise his program of a renewal of the Roman Catholic Church in accordance with the principles of the primitive Church. On Aug. 30, 1538, he was still in Hisleben, when he accepted a call from Duke George to Dresden or Leipsic, where he attempted to reconcile the two religious parties by leading them back to the doctrine and custom of the apostolic and early Church. Duke George laid no obstacles in his way, but under Duke Henry, his successor, Witzel was compelled to flee into the mountains of Bohemia. Thence he went to Berlin to Joachim II., who at first seemed to be inclined to adopt the Catholicism of Witzel, whom soon the sentiment of the country compelled to introduce the Reformation. Berlin was therefore no longer open to Witzel, who began to lead a migratory life, trying to find a receptive soil for his ideas in Lusatia, Silesia, Bamberg, and in 1540 in Wiirzburg. In 1541 he found
a place of refuge with Abbot John of Fulda, who by concessions attempted to stem the tide of Evangelical ideas, and with his successor Philip Schenck of Schweinsberg. Bishop Nausea of Vienna recommended him to Ferdinand, with whom he thenceforth remained in connection. He was present at the religious discussions in Regensburg. In the Schmalkald War he fled from Fulda to Wurzburg, but returned again. In 1553 he removed to Mainz, where he passed the remainder of his life. His most prominent works are Methodus concordie ecclesiastice (written 1532, printed 1537), and Via regia (1564). In the former work he demanded the convocation of a council, at which both parties should be heard; the basis of agreement was to be the doctrine of the apostles as found in Holy Scripture and the earlier Church Fathers; in all questions of the salvation of the soul Holy Scripture is sufficient, but the right of the Church to make valid and binding ordinances in other questions is to be acknowledged; the institution of the mass was to be reformed, especially its performance for money; communion in both kinds should be restored and compulsory clerical celibacy abolished; the number of monasteries was to be reduced; those that were allowed to remain were to be reformed. In Via regia, the program essentially agrees with that of 1532; only criticism deals more relentlessly with Roman Catholic conditions. Reconciliation is not possible without a thorough reform of that church. In the system which came to rule in the Counter- Reformation he saw the burial of his own plans of church reform after the Erasmian pattern. (G. KAWERAU.)
BrsiioGRApHy: C. L. Callidius, Germanie scriptorum catalogus, Mainz, 1582; G. T. Strobel, Bettrage zur Literatur ... des 16. Jahrhunderts, ii. 2, Nuremberg, 1787; F. W. P. von Ammon, Gallerie der denkwiirdigsten Personen, pp. 1 saqq., Erlangen, 1833; J. Neander, Commentatio de Georgio Vicelio, Berlin, 1839; J. J. I. von Déllinger, Die Reformation, i. 21 sqq., Regensburg, 1848; W. Kampschulte, De Georgio Vicelio eiusque studits et scriptis, Bonn, 1856; G. Schmidt, Georg Witzel, ein Altkatholik des 16. Jahrhunderts, Vienna, 1876; A. Rass, Die Konvertiten, i. 122 sqq., Freiburg, 1866; C. Schlottmann, Hrasmus redivivus, pp. 342 sqq., Halle, 1883; Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte, vi (1909), 234 sqq.; ADB, xliii. 657 sqq.; KL, xii. 1726 sqq.