Red Brick Parsonage

Praying on the Privy

March 26, 2024 Leave a comment

Beginning in June 1531, Konrad Cordatus, having been recently expelled from his pastoral position in Zwickau due to disagreements with the city council, took up residence in the home of Martin Luther, his former professor, in Wittenberg. There he began taking down Luther’s table talk, and others soon followed his example. Cordatus not only preserved Luther’s theological observations, but also his casual remarks and jokes. Shortly before Christmas of that year, Cordatus recorded the following story told by his host, a piece of humorous lore that had probably been shared with Luther back when he was an Augustinian monk:

This monk was sitting on the latrine one time and was reading the canonical hours. The devil approached him and said, “A monk should not be reading prime¹ on the latrine!” The monk replied:

“I cleanse my gut of excrement
and worship God Omnipotent—
to you the filth that falls below,
to God the prayers that upward go.”²

Endnotes

¹ Prime was the third prayer service in the divine office, intended for the first hour of daylight. “To read prime [or any other service in the divine office]” meant to say or speak through (or even chant) the service in question, whether one was reading it or not.

² The original Latin rhyme that Luther cited goes as follows:

Purgo meum ventrem
et colo Deum omnipotentem.
Tibi, quod [cadit] infra;
Deo omnipotenti, quod supra.

Some versions do not include cadit.

Source

Kroker, Ernst, Oskar Brenner, and Karl Drescher, eds., D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Tischreden, vol. 2 (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1913), 413, no. 2307b.

See also Brecht, Martin, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation (1521–1532), trans. James L. Schaaf (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 432–33.

Filed under Luther's Works, Quotes Tagged with 1531, canonical hours, Conrad Cordatus, daily office, devil, divine office, humor, Konrad Cordatus, latrine, Luther quotes, Martin Luther, monk, potty humor, prayer, prime, privy, Purgo meum ventrem, rhyme, Satan, story, Table Talk, Tischreden, toilet humor

Erlangen Edition of Luther’s Works

March 7, 2024 Leave a comment

This post picks up where Later Editions of Luther’s Works left off. The last major edition of Luther’s works prior to the revised Walch Edition (usually called the St. Louis Edition; 1880–1910) and the definitive Weimar Edition (1883–2009) was the Erlangen Edition (1826–1932; commonly abbreviated EA). Volumes 1–20 were edited by Johann Georg Plochmann (1794–1861), a doctor of philosophy and assistant pastor in the so-called new city of Erlangen, who exhausted his entire fortune on the venture. The project was then continued by Johann Konrad Irmischer (1797–1857), a lecturer on history and literature; secretary of, then librarian for, the university library; and eventual assistant pastor in the new city of Erlangen.

Ernst Ludwig Enders (1833–1906), pastor in Oberrad near Frankfurt am Main, then edited and reissued just the Plochmann volumes (1–20). Enders also edited volumes 1–11 of Luther’s Briefwechsel before passing away. The Briefwechsel was then continued and nearly completed by Gustav Kawerau (1847–1918), provost, chief consistorial councilor, and honorary university professor in Berlin. (Kawerau also contributed to the Weimar Edition.)

The editing of the volumes of Luther’s Latin exegetical works was begun by Christoph S. T. Elsperger (a professor at the royal preparatory school in Erlangen, then in Ansbach). It was continued by Heinrich Schmid (1811–1885), the above-mentioned Johann Konrad Irmischer (who also edited Luther’s lectures on Galatians), and Heinrich Schmidt, and was completed by Johannes Linke. Volumes 1–11 constitute Luther’s lectures on Genesis; volume 12 contains a 1518 sermon series on the Ten Commandments; volume 13 his annotations on Deuteronomy; volumes 14–20 his works on the Psalms; volumes 22–23 on Isaiah; and volumes 24–28 on the Minor Prophets.

The renowned theologian C. F. W. Walther (1811–1887) extolled the Erlangen Edition as a series “prepared with great diligence that cannot be sufficiently praised,” even if he thought the design and format “very poor.”

First Edition (German Volumes)

Division 1: Homiletical and Catechetical Writings

Title Page of Volume 1 of the Erlangen Edition

Division 2: Reformation-Historical and Polemical Writings

Division 3: German Exegetical Writings

Division 4: Miscellaneous German Writings

Indices

Second Edition (German Volumes)

Latin Exegetical Works

Old Testament

Title Page of Volume 1 of the Latin Exegetical Works of the Erlangen Edition

New Testament

Briefwechsel (Correspondence)

Filed under Luther's Works, Tips Tagged with Briefwechsel, Christoph Elsperger, Correspondence, editions of Luther's works, Erlangen edition, Erlanger Ausgabe, Ernst Ludwig Enders, Exegetica Opera Latina, Gustav Kawerau, Heinrich Schmid, Heinrich Schmidt, Johann Georg Plochmann, Johann Konrad Irmischer, Johannes Linke, later editions, Luther's Works, Martin Luther, publication dates

Report of Hendrik van Zutphen’s Martyrdom

January 25, 2024 Leave a comment

Jacob Probst
Letter to Martin Luther
Circa Middle of December, 1524

Translator’s Preface

See the preface to this previous post for more on the early life of Jacob Probst. After being imprisoned in Brussels for his preaching in December 1521 and interrogated in December and January 1522, Probst caved and issued a public recantation from the pulpit in St. Gudula’s Church in Brussels on Sunday, February 9. After returning to Ypres, his hometown, and cautiously beginning to preach the gospel again, he was arrested and imprisoned a second time, first being detained in Bruges, then in Brussels. But after some of his friends told him that he “would not help the gospel’s cause as much by [his] death in this second imprisonment as [he] would have if [he] had steadfastly persevered in the first,” he escaped “by divine providence and with the help of a certain brother,” probably in June. He fled to Wittenberg, where he assisted the reformers with various tasks, until he was called to serve the Church of Our Lady in Bremen in May 1524. There he became the colleague of Hendrik van Zutphen, who had been preaching the gospel in Bremen since November 1522 and who, like Jacob, had also been an Observant Augustinian.

Van Zutphen had already lived an eventful life, too. Likely hailing from the Dutch town of Zutphen, Hendrik had enrolled at the University of Wittenberg in 1508, probably from the monastery either in Enkhuizen or Dordrecht. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1509 and his Master of Arts in 1511. He stayed in Wittenberg until 1515, when he was sent to be sub-prior in the Cologne monastery. After a short stay there, he was sent to Dordrecht where he participated in the Observant reform of that cloister before becoming its prior in 1516. He relinquished his position in 1520 and returned to Wittenberg to continue his education, receiving his Bachelor of the Bible degree in January of 1521 and Bachelor of Sentences degree in October.

After attending a special chapter meeting in Grimma in early June 1522, he returned to Wittenberg, where he may have been advised by Martin Luther and Wenceslaus Linck, the Wittenberg prior, to go to his Augustinian brothers in the Low Countries, in order to comfort and encourage them in the wake of increasing persecution. In July 1522, the Augustinians in Antwerp, suspected of Lutheranism, were questioned by officials, and a number of the monks were put on wagons and transported to the ducal castle in Vilvoorde, just northeast of Brussels, which was being used as an imperial prison. There they were interrogated, and all but two of them soon recanted and returned to Antwerp. (The two monks who persisted, Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen, ended up becoming the first Lutheran martyrs when they were burned at the stake in Brussels on July 1, 1523.) How the timing of van Zutphen’s trip to Antwerp lines up with this July 1522 deportation is unclear, but we know that he eventually joined the Antwerp monastery and soon became its prior—the position that Jacob Probst had formerly held.

Hendrik initially kept a low profile, but when indulgence salesmen arrived in the city, he began to preach against them publicly, first from the pulpit, then in the streets. On September 29, 1522, he was lured from the monastery under the pretext of being called to visit an ailing parishioner. He was arrested and held overnight in St. Michael’s Abbey for transport to Brussels the next day, where he would appear before the inquisitors. But what happened next almost defies imagination: After sunset a mob consisting mostly of women—several thousand women according to van Zutphen, more than 300 according to another source, and 500 with swords according to another—battered down the doors and broke into the abbey, found van Zutphen, and led him back to his brother Augustinians. He spent three days in hiding with them before fleeing the city.

Hendrik intended to return to Wittenberg, probably stopping at his hometown on the way, and also stopping in Bremen. (He probably took this less direct route for the sake of his own safety.) But while in Bremen, he was asked to give a sermon in one of the chapels of St. Ansgar’s Church. As a result, he was called as a preacher there and helped to introduce the Reformation in the city, in spite of strong and persistent opposing forces. It was, then, due to his influence and that of his supporters that Jacob Probst was called there to strengthen the evangelical cause in May 1524.

In November of that same year, Hendrik received an invitation from Pastor Nicolas Boye of Meldorf in Dithmarschen, together with other pious Christians in Pastor Boye’s parish, to come and preach the gospel there, so as to help weaken the strong Roman Catholic sway in the area. (Boye came from one of the leading families of Dithmarschen. He had enrolled at the University of Wittenberg in May 1518 and was stationed in Meldorf in 1523.) Hendrik held a secret meeting with six of his leading parishioners on November 24. He persuaded them to let him accept this invitation and to explain the reasons for his secret departure to the rest of his parishioners, with the understanding that he would return to Bremen after a few months, once a gospel foundation had been laid in Dithmarschen.

This is where Jacob Probst’s letter to Luther picks up. See also the Postscript below.

December 10 of this year will mark the 500th anniversary of Hendrik van Zutphen’s martyrdom. It is usually claimed that he was burned at the stake, but as you will see, it is unclear whether he died as a result of fire or as a result of trauma from the wounds he sustained. May the triune God use this fresh translation, together with all such accounts, to prepare, fortify, and equip us to boldly witness to his grace and his saving name in our own day and age.

Jacob Probst’s Report of Hendrik van Zutphen’s Martyrdom

Jacob of Ypres, to the true disciple of Christ, Martin Luther:

Grace and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who is our only mediator and a priest into eternity [1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 5:6]. What should I say, dearest brothers? Where should I begin? The soul is in distress, and my spirit cries out to the Lord [Baruch 3:1], and I have no respite. I say: “Behold! How the righteous man passes away, and there is no one who reflects on it in his heart! Men of mercy are gathered up, because there is no one who understands! For the righteous man is gathered up to be taken away from malice!” [Isa. 57:1].

Our brother Hendrik, the intrepid preacher of the word of God, is slain. And he perished in a manner suggesting that he was not beloved by God. Nevertheless, his blood is precious in the sight of the Lord [Ps. 72:14], even if it was made cheap in front of the people of Dithmarschen. O Lord, how long shall we cry out, and you will not answer? Why do you show regard for the despisers and keep silent while the impious tramples underfoot the one more righteous than he? Yes, Father, it is because this was your good pleasure [Matt. 11:26]. For no disciple is above the teacher, nor is a servant above the master. It is sufficient for a student to be like his teacher, and for a servant to be like his master. If they have called the head of the household Beelzebub, how much more the members of his household! Therefore we shall not be afraid of them [Matt. 10:24–26]. For this is their hour and the power of darkness [Luke 22:53]. Therefore we, the lovers of the truth, grieve and advance in dejection. The adversaries rejoice and advance with heads held high. We nevertheless grieve like this over the death of Hendrik, in order that we may rejoice just as much in the presence of the Lord, certain of a new martyr of Christ. They, on the other hand, rejoice in the presence of the world, and their joy, I do not doubt, will only be like a moment. But be satisfied with a brief account of what happened, for my soul is too sad for me to write at length.

Hendrik was invited to Dithmarschen by a certain pastor in Meldorf, a Christian and apostolic man, with the consent of several leading men of that place, in Meldorf. Since Hendrik was an eager and true witness of Christ, he set out to go there, confident in the Lord. His friends were against it, but he would not listen, because he was saying that he was being called there by God.

When he arrived, he received a very warm welcome from Christian people. But the monks, hostile to true piety and Christian truth, go running, pursuing, and exerting themselves in a frenzy, and they finally obtain from certain elders of their country a prohibition forbidding Hendrik from preaching. But he, knowing that we must be more obedient to God than to men, preached two sermons on the Second Sunday in Advent [Dec. 4], and all who were present rejoiced and praised God for his gift. He similarly preached two sermons on St. Nicholas’s Day [Dec. 6], with the people flocking to hear them from nearly every corner. He similarly preached two sermons on the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin [Dec. 8], and everyone was astonished at his teaching.

Meanwhile the monks were exerting themselves with the utmost diligence, complaining and inciting commotion, and they achieved what they wanted. For on Friday night, after midnight, before the Third Sunday of Advent, forty or fifty armed men arrived in Meldorf, using the monks’ lamps for their light, and, full of Hamburg beer, they forcibly entered the pastor’s house in a hostile manner and cruelly dragged Christ’s martyr out of bed. After tying him to the tail of a horse, they dragged him with great exaltation to Heide, which is a good mile distant from Meldorf.¹ When they arrived there, they threw him into the cellar of a certain priest. Everyone was drinking, singing, and making sport.

When morning came, they dragged him to the fire with the utmost disgrace. This fire died out twice in the sight of everyone, which they attributed to magical arts, as is fitting for such people. Now a certain Christian woman, positioning herself between Hendrik and the fire, offered a thousand gulden to leave him unharmed until he could be convicted legally and burned then. But there was no listening on that point, and the woman, having received a blow to her head, was forced to withdraw. And the verdict was given by someone who was not the judge that year. But he still accepted ten gulden from the man whose duty it was to render verdicts, and he rendered the verdict with these words: “Let this malefactor, who has blasphemed God and his mother, be burned!” Hendrik said, “I have not done these things.” But the shouting prevailed: “Burn him! Burn him!” And when he prayed for them to the heavenly Father, they mocked him and spit on him.

Finally, after he had received a number of wounds, he was thrown into the third fire. And at least twenty wounds were counted on his body. Then his spirit returned to the Father, and his body remained unburned that entire day. But on the next day, which was the Third Sunday in Advent, they cut the head, hands, and feet off the dead man’s corpse and burned them in a new fire they had built. But they are said to have buried the trunk after performing a dance around the corpse.

Thus, thus pass away the servants of Christ; thus the words of the teacher are fulfilled! I am unable to write more. Pray to the Divine Majesty that he would condescend to bestow such steadfastness upon us, too! Oh, if I had had but a tiny drop of this kind of faith and steadfastness, I would now be resting securely in Christ, I who roll along in various miseries, afflictions, anxieties, and sins! Farewell! The Spirit of Christ be with you all.

Martin, dearest father in Christ, I would have written this letter to the people of Antwerp, but the mail carrier had departed and left this letter behind, which I am now sending to Your Paternity, and I entreat your kindness and beseech you through Jesus Christ to comfort us with a single letter addressed to the entire church in Bremen. I beg you, do not deny me, since I am not the only one asking for this, but many people are, and celebrate the martyr of Christ and rebuke the villainy of the monks! Pardon the blathering, I beg you! My soul is sorrowful to the point of death [Matt. 26:38]. For I am weary of living any longer as I witness so much evil all around, and my old Adam is not dead either. Pray for us!

Yours,
Jacob

[Written around the middle of December 1524]

Postscript

Martin Luther did fulfill Jacob Probst’s request early the following year (1525). You can read Luther’s work, The Burning of Brother Henry, in volume 32 of Luther’s Works, pages 261–86. It includes an introductory exhortation, a brief commentary on Psalm 9, and a detailed “history of Brother Henry.”

It is interesting to note that, after this inauspicious beginning for Lutheranism in Dithmarschen, the Council of the Forty-Eight, the elected governing body of the republic, turned the Ditmarsian Catholic Church into a Lutheran state church in 1533, less than ten years later.

In 1830, a monument to Hendrik van Zutphen was erected in Heide at the site of his martyrdom. Restored in 1858, it can still be visited today, though the death date engraved on it is incorrect.

Sources

Bebermeyer, Gustav, Otto Clemen, et al., eds. D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Briefwechsel. Vol. 3. Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1933. Pages 400–403.

I also consulted one anonymous, contemporary German translation of Probst’s letter: Ein erschreckliche geschicht wie etliche Ditmarschen den Christlichen prediger Heinrich von Zutfeld [sic] newlich so jemerlich vmbgebracht haben. Bamberg: Georg Erlinger, 1525.

Endnotes

¹ The German mile was the equivalent of about 4.5 American miles, but “a good mile [milliarium magnum or starke, große, or gute Meile]” could also be an inexact, approximate designation for a distance longer than that. The actual distance between the two cities was about 8.5 American miles.

² Latin: fraudem, which could also be translated “deceit” or “delusion.” A contemporary German translation rendered it Arglistigkeit, “cunning.”

Filed under History Tagged with 1524, 500th anniversary, Augustinian, Bremen, burning, December 10, Dithmarschen, Dominicans, drunkenness, Franciscans, Heide, Heinrich von Zütphen, Hendrik van Zutphen, Jacob Probst, Jacob Propst, Latin, letter, Lutheran persecution, Lutheran women, Martin Luther, martyrdom, Matthew 10:24-26, Meldorf, mob, Nicolas Boye, persecution, perseverance, Psalm 72:14, Reformed Augustinians, Zütphen Denkmal

Luther’s Sermon on the Authority of St. Peter

August 5, 2023 Leave a comment

Translator’s Preface

Martin Luther preached the following sermon on June 29, 1522, which was both the Second Sunday after Trinity and the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul. Since there was usually a morning and an afternoon sermon on a typical Sunday, and since the morning sermon was usually reserved for the regularly appointed Gospel, Martin Luther probably preached this sermon on the special Gospel for the feast day in the afternoon. We do not know who transcribed it; Georg Rörer, the eventual tireless transcriber of Luther’s sermons, didn’t arrive in Wittenberg until the fall of 1522. But the transcription was quickly converted into two printed German pamphlets, one published in Augsburg and the other in Nuremberg. When translated, both pamphlets were titled (with slightly different German spellings): “A Christian Sermon on the Authority of Saint Peter, Delivered by Martin Luther in Wittenberg in the Twenty-Second Year. Very Useful for All Believers in Christ to Know.” These pamphlets are the primary basis of the sermon’s reproduction in the Weimar Edition of Luther’s works (see Sources below).

This sermon was also included in three later collections—Johann Schott’s collection of twelve Luther sermons on several Marian festivals and other saints’ festivals (XII. Predig D. Martin Luthers, Strasbourg, 1523), Johann Herwagen’s similar collection of “short sermons” translated into Latin (Conciunculae quaedam, Strasbourg, 1526), and Stephan Roth’s collection of Luther’s festival sermons now commonly called Roth’s Festival Postil (Auslegung der Euangelien an den furnemisten Festen ym gantzen iare, Wittenberg, 1527). Roth’s is the most edited version, but he also corrected some of the typographical errors in the earlier printings.

In the broader context, Luther had just returned from the Wartburg less than four months earlier, and he was busy. He began a May 15 letter to Spalatin by complaining about how overwhelmed he was with all the letters he had to read and reply to. He was also in the throes of overseeing the publication of his New Testament translation. The printing of Matthew had been completed by the beginning of June, and Luther had included this marginal note on 16:18 (“And I also say to you: You are Peter”): “Cephas in Syriac and Petros in Greek mean eyn fels [“a rock”] in German, and all Christians are Peters on account of the confession of faith that Peter makes here, which is the rock on which Peter and all Peters are built. If we share his confession, then we also share his name.” Luther was still in the process of reconciling the basic tenets of the Reformation, which he had gleaned from Scripture, with Scripture passages that had been used for many years to promote and uphold important Roman Catholic teachings.

In the new Christian Worship three-year lectionary, the text Luther based this sermon on is the appointed Gospel for Sundays falling on August 21–27 in Year A (Proper 16). I pray that this fresh translation proves professionally beneficial for my fellow confessional Lutheran pastors, and spiritually edifying and historically instructive for all. It is indeed a “very useful [sermon] for all believers in Christ to know.” To God alone be the glory.

Sermon on the Authority of Saint Peter

Matthew 16:13–19.
Then Jesus came into the region of the city of Caesarea Philippi and asked his disciples, “Who do the people say that the Son of Man is?” They said, “Some say you are John the Baptist, others that you are Elijah, still others that you are Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “And who do you say that I am?” Then Simon Peter answered, “You are Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus replied to him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I also say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my congregation, and the gates of hell shall not overcome it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. All that you will bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven, and all that you will loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven.”

You know this Gospel well, for it has now been preached and hyped for so long that by now it should be very well known. And it is also basically the best section and the chief passage in the Gospel that Matthew records. And they¹ have been using this passage to ornament themselves from the beginning, and so there is also no passage that has caused greater damage than this one, which is what happens when those who are reckless meddle with the Scriptures. They twist them this way and that, which is exactly what has happened, and the holier the passage is, the sooner a person can go wrong and the more shameful the damage he can do. Therefore observe this as a general rule: Whenever anyone goes along and floats and hovers around in the Scriptures like this, and has no firm understanding on which he can establish his heart, he should just leave it alone entirely, for when the devil has caught you with his pitchfork, so that you are not established on a settled conscience like you should be, he tosses you back and forth, so that you don’t know which way is out. Therefore you must be certain on the basis of a clear and pure understanding.

This Gospel is all about making us recognize what Christ is. Now Christ is recognized in a twofold way. The first way is by his life, as is said here: “Some say you are Elijah, others John the Baptist, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Thus when a person judges by reason alone, and by flesh and blood, he cannot grasp Christ any further than merely as a holy, pious man who provides others with a fine example that they should follow. Reason cannot understand him any further, even if he were to show up here today. Now whoever accepts him this way, merely as an example of a good life, is still locked out of heaven. He has not yet grasped or recognized Christ. He thinks of him only as a holy man as Elijah once was. Therefore note the rule: Where reason alone is involved, there you will only find the understanding that people think of him as a teacher and holy man. That perception will last as long as the heavenly Father does not instruct that person’s heart.

The second understanding of Christ is the one that St. Peter expresses: “You are a special man, not Elijah, not John, not Jeremiah, not someone who shows and leads the way for other people. There needs to be something much higher with you. You are Christ, the holy Son of God.” This identification cannot be attributed to any saint, whether John or Elijah or Jeremiah or any one of the prophets. Therefore when someone thinks of Christ only as a pious man, his reason always continues to float and hover around, going from one identification to the next, from Elijah to Jeremiah. But here he is singled out and held to be something more special than all the saints, and something definite and certain. For if I am uncertain about Christ, my conscience is never at peace and my heart does not have any rest. Therefore a distinction is being made here between faith and works. Here Christ himself is making it clear to us how we should grab hold of him—not with works. We do not come to him with works; works come after the fact. I must first come into the possession of his goods and blessings, so that he becomes mine and I become his.

Christ makes it clear that this is what he wants when Peter says, “You are Christ, the Son of the living God.” Christ himself acknowledges this answer when he says, “Blessed are you, Simon Peter. Your flesh and blood has not revealed this to you. And you are Peter, and a rock, and on this rock I will build my church, which the gates of hell shall not overcome.” Now here is where the power lies to know what the church is, what the rock is, and what it means to build the church. Here we must find an enduring rock on which the church is supposed to stand, just as he says: It is a rock on which my church shall stand, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. This rock is Christ, or the Word, for Christ is not known except through his word. Without his word, Christ’s flesh does not help me at all, even if it were to show up here today. And it is these words, when it is said that Christ is the Son of the living God, that make him known to me and describe him for me. This is what I build on. These words are so certain, so true, so established, that no other rock can be so surely and strongly grounded and fortified.

Now “rock” means nothing else but the evangelical Christian truth that proclaims Christ to me, by which I establish my conscience on Christ. No authority or power, not even the gates of hell, shall be able to do anything against this rock, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3[:11], “No one is able to lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.” The same thing is said by Isaiah in Chapter 28, which is really what Christ is commenting on here: “I will lay a stone in Zion, an approved stone, a precious stone, one that is well anchored, so that whoever believes in him will not be put to shame” [28:16]. The apostles make very powerful use of this passage and it is also cited in 1 Peter 2[:6] and in Romans [9:33 and] 10[:11]. There you have it in clear words that God plans to lay one foundation stone, one keystone,² an approved stone, a cornerstone, and none other besides, which is Christ and his gospel. Whoever is established on this stone will not be put to shame and will stand so firmly that all the gates of hell shall not overcome him.

Therefore Christ alone is the rock, and wherever someone lays down a different rock, make the sign of the cross and guard yourself, for that is certainly the devil. For this passage may not be understood about anyone else except Christ alone, as St. Paul says. That is the pure understanding of this passage, and no one can deny it. The universities do not deny it either; they admit that Christ is the rock. But they want St. Peter to be another rock next to him and try to lay an additional stone there. They want to create a dead-end path³ alongside the proper highway. We should not and will not tolerate that, for the more precious the passage is, the more firmly we should stand on it, for it is clear from Isaiah and Paul that Christ alone is the stone.

Now this is the understanding they have given to the passage: Christ says, “You are Peter. On this rock I will build my church.” They want to take that to mean that Peter is the rock, and all the popes who have succeeded him. So then they have to have two rocks. But that cannot be, since Peter singles Christ out here and will not let either John the Baptist or Elijah or Jeremiah be his equal. He does not want any of them to be the rock here. Plus, the pope is sometimes an evil scoundrel [böser bub] and nowhere near as good as St. John the Baptist or Elijah or Jeremiah. And if I cannot build on John, Jeremiah, Elijah, or any of the saints, how then am I supposed to build on a sinner whom the devil has possessed?

For this reason Christ tears all saints away from our eyes here, even his own mother. He wants there to be one rock, while they want to have two. Now either they must be lying or Scripture is. But if Scripture cannot lie, we must therefore conclude that the entire papal government is built on nothing but puddlework, lies, and blasphemy of God, and the pope is the arch-blasphemer of God by applying this passage to himself, even though it is only talking about Christ. The pope wants to be the stone, and the church is supposed to stand upon him, just as Christ foretold of him in Matthew 24[:5]: “Many will come in my name saying, ‘I am Christ.’” In so doing the pope makes himself out to be Christ. Sure, he does not want to have the name Christ, for he does not say, “I am Christ.” But he wants to attribute to himself the nature and the office that belong only to Christ.

Now this is the simple understanding of this passage: Christ is the foundation stone upon which the church shall stand, so that no authority or power will be able to do anything against her. It’s just like when a house is built here on earth, it relies entirely on its good footing, or like a castle that has its foundation on a rock. We could imagine the castle saying, “I have a good foundation, and I completely depend on it.” The heart that stands upon Christ does the same thing. It says, “I have Christ, God’s Son. I stand here upon him and I completely depend on him as on a well-anchored rock. Nothing can harm me.”

Therefore to build on the rock here means nothing else but to believe in Christ and to confidently rely on him, trusting that he is mine along with all his goods and blessings. For I stand upon all that he has and is capable of. His suffering, his dying, his righteousness, and all that is his is also mine. That is what I stand on, just like a house upon a rock, which stands on all that the rock is capable of. Now when I stand on him the same way and know that he is God’s Son, that his life is greater than all death, his honor greater than all shame, his blessedness greater than all sorrow, his righteousness greater than all sin, and so on, then nothing can do anything against me, even if all the gates of hell were to come at once.

Now on the other hand, when I stand on anything else besides this foundation stone, such as on some good work, and even if I had the works of all the saints, yes, even of St. Peter, and do not have faith, then I am opposed to Christ. For compared to his light, everything else is darkness; compared to his wisdom, everything else is foolish; compared to his righteousness, everything else is sin. Now when I stand on my own work and run up against him through his judgment, I would be knocked down into eternal damnation. But when I grab hold of him and build on him, then I am taking hold of his righteousness and all that is his, which preserves me before him so that I am not put to shame. Why can I not be put to shame? Because I am built on God’s righteousness, which is God himself. He cannot reject that, otherwise he would be rejecting himself.

This is the correct, simple understanding of this passage. Therefore do not let yourselves be led away from this understanding, otherwise you will be knocked down and condemned by the rock.

Now they may say, “But Christ says here, ‘You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.’” You have to understand that this way: Here Peter is called a rock, and Christ is called a rock elsewhere, because Christ is the whole rock, while Peter is a part of the rock. It’s like how he is called Christ, while we are called Christians after him, by reason of fellowship and faith, since we also have a Christ-like nature in us. For through faith we become one spirit with Christ and receive from him his nature. He is pious and holy, he is righteous, and we are righteous through him, and all that he has and is capable of, we may boast of too. But this is the difference: Christ has all his goods by obligation and by right, while we have them by grace and mercy. In the same way he calls Peter a rock here, because he stands on the rock and through him becomes a rock himself. Thus we too are rightly called Peters, that is, rocks, because we acknowledge the rock, Christ.

Now they may wish to press the matter further and say, “Whatever the case may be with your interpretation, I am going to follow the text, which says, ‘You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.’ There the text indicates that Peter is the rock.” If so, then confront them with what follows, namely that all the gates of hell shall not be able to do anything against this rock. St. Peter did not stand firm, for immediately in the text that follows the Lord called him a devil. The Lord was saying how he would go to Jerusalem, would suffer so much at the hands of the Jews, and would ultimately also be put to death and then rise again. When he said that, Peter spoke up and rebuked the Lord, “God forbid such a thing! This shall never happen to you.” Then the Lord said, “Get behind me, you devil or tempter!” [Matt. 16:21–23]. So the rock would have fallen and the gates of hell would have overcome it, if the church were built on Peter. For the Lord continues by saying, “Peter, you do not have the will that God has” [16:23]. See, my friend? Do you see? Here the Lord calls Peter a devil, when he previously pronounced him holy and blessed. Why? All of this happened so that he would stuff the yappers of the useless babblers who want to have the church built on Peter and not on Christ himself. He also had it happen in order to make us certain in our understanding, so that we would know that the church was not founded on a puddle or a manure pile, but on Christ, who was established as a cornerstone, as a foundation stone that is well anchored, as Isaiah says.

Likewise when the servant girl called out to Peter and he denied Christ [Mark 14:66–72], when he then falls and I am standing on him, where will I end up? If the devil were to take the pope captive and I were standing on him, I would definitely be on bad footing. That is why Christ also let Peter fall, so that we would not regard him as the rock and would not build on him. For we must be established on the One who stands firm against all devils, which is Christ. Therefore hold firm on this understanding, for he says that all the gates of hell shall be able to do nothing against it.

Faith is an almighty thing, like God himself is. That is why God also wants to authenticate and test it. That is also why everything that the devil has the power and ability to do must set itself against it, for Christ is not speaking empty words when he says here that all the gates of hell will not overcome it. “Gates” in Scripture mean a society and its government, since they would conduct their legal affairs by the gates, as God had commanded in the law in Deuteronomy 16: “You shall appoint judges and officials in all your gates” [16:18]. So here “gates” means every authority in the devil’s control, along with their attendants and followers,⁴ such as kings and princes, along with the wise men of this world, who cannot help but set themselves against this rock and this faith.⁵ The rock stands in the middle of the sea, where the waves roll along and storm, flash, bluster, and rage against it, as if they were trying to knock the rock over, but it has no problem standing firm, because it is well anchored. In the same way we must be alert and on our guard, because the devil and every authority in his control will charge at us and try taking on the rock. But he will not be able to do anything, just like the waves on the sea do not succeed in knocking the rock over, but fall away and break themselves up on it. It’s just like you see currently: Our ungracious princes are angry, and the highly learned are also angry, along with all those this world considers holy. But you should not pay any attention to it or waste any concern on it, for they are the gates of hell and the waves on the water that storm against this rock.

Christ continues: “And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. All that you will bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven, and all that you will loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven.” As you stuck with the simple understanding before, stick with it now, too. The keys are given to the one who stands on this rock through faith, to whomever the Father has given the ability to do so. Now you cannot single out any one person who remains standing on the rock, for one person falls today, the next one tomorrow, just as St. Peter fell. Therefore there is no specific individual to whom the keys belong. Instead they belong to the church, that is, to those who stand on this rock. The Christian church alone has the keys and no one else, although the pope and bishops could use them as those to whom their use has been entrusted by the congregation. A parson who carries out the ministry of the keys, that is, who baptizes, preaches, and administers the Sacrament, does so not on his own behalf but on behalf of the congregation. For he is a servant or minister of the entire congregation, to whom the keys have been given, even if he happens to be a scoundrel. For if he does it in place of the congregation, then the church is doing it, and if the church is doing it, then God is doing it. For you have to have a servant or minister. If the entire congregation all came forward and all baptized, they might very well drown the child, since there would probably be a thousand hands reaching for it. It won’t work. Therefore you have to have a minister who carries it out in place of the congregation.⁶

Now the keys to bind or to loose are the authority to teach and not just to absolve. For the keys are applied to everything by which I can help out my neighbor—to the comfort that one person gives another, to public and private confession, to absolution, but most commonly to preaching. For when a person preaches, “Whoever believes will be saved,” that is what it means to unlock, and when he preaches, “Whoever does not believe is condemned” [Mark 16:16], that is what it means to lock and bind.

The binding is put before the loosing. When I preach to someone, “You belong to the devil indoors and out [wie du geest und steest],” then heaven is closed to him. When he then falls down and acknowledges his sin, then I say, “Believe in Christ and your sins will be forgiven for you.” That is what it means for heaven to be unlocked, just like Peter does in Acts 2[:37–41]. Thus we all have the Christian authority to bind and lock and to loose and unlock.

Now the way they have applied it is to strengthen and establish the pope’s laws. They claim that binding means to make laws. But that is the way that blind guides go. But you should stick with the simple understanding that you have now heard and not let yourselves be turned away from it, if you want to stand firm against the attacks of sin, death, and the devil.

That is where we will let the matter rest for now and call upon God for his grace.

Sources

Pietsch, Paul, Georg Buchwald, Alfred Götze, et al., eds. Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Vol. 10. Part 3. Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1905. Pages xvi, xxi, xliv, cxxvii–cxxix, 208–216.

I also consulted Stephan Roth’s version in his Festival Postil, as reproduced by Karl Drescher, Ernst Thiele, Georg Buchwald, et al., eds., Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe, vol. 17, part 2 (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1927), 446–53. Roth was especially useful in correcting some typographical errors in previous editions, providing alternate and better spellings of certain words, and filling out the end of Luther’s sermon, which is quite abrupt in the original pamphlets.

Endnotes

¹ A few times in this sermon Luther uses a general “they” to refer to the papists.

² German: hauptsteyn. In English, keystone denotes the central stone at the summit of an arch, but Luther is using it here as a synonym for cornerstone, but with emphasis on its vital importance.

³ German: holtzweg. A Holzweg, lit. “wood or timber path,” is a road or path in the woods that does not connect two inhabited locations, but leads only to a place where trees are being felled or some other commercial venture is being undertaken. The German expressions “to be or get on the Holzweg” mean “to be on the wrong track or to fall into error.”

⁴ Alternate translation: all the authority of the devil and those who follow it.

⁵ In his 1522 editions of the New Testament, Luther included this marginal note on “gates of hell” in Matthew 16:18: “The gates of hell are every authority opposed to Christians, such as sin, death, hell, worldly wisdom and power, etc.”

⁶ The Erlangen Lutheran theologian Johann Wilhelm Friedrich Hoefling (1802–1853) is caricatured as having a purely functional or practical view of the holy ministry, of which the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod has also been accused in the past. This position is defined thus: The holy ministry does not arise from divine institution, but from an inner, practical necessity of the church. It is easy to see how someone could find support for this position from Luther here, but Luther’s other writings on the holy ministry must also be taken into account. However, Luther certainly is underscoring here that order in the church is a reason for the existence of the public ministry, even if it is not the only or primary reason. Recall that the apostle Paul’s appeal to order among the Corinthians (1 Cor. 14:33, 40) was not simply phrased in human or practical terms. He rather appealed to the fact that God, who is a God of peace and order, wants peace and order to reign in his church.

Filed under Exegesis, Luther's Works Tagged with 1 Corinthians 3:11, 1522, 2 Thessalonians 2:4, authority of the keys, binding and loosing, certainty, church, faith and works, Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, gates of hell, Hoefling, holy ministry, Isaiah 28:16, June 29, keys of the kingdom of heaven, Martin Luther, Matthew 16:13–19, Matthew 16:18, papal authority, person of Christ, Peter, Peter's authority, power of the keys, Proper 16, public ministry, public ministry of the gospel, rock, sermon, sermon illustrations, universal priesthood, use of the keys, work of Christ, Year A

Martin Luther’s Letter to Christians in the Low Countries

July 3, 2023 Leave a comment

Translator’s Preface

Read the preface here for more information on Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen and the circumstances leading up to and surrounding their execution. Martin Luther had clearly read both that German pamphlet and the Latin one containing two eyewitness accounts (here and here) and the sixty-two articles for which they were condemned before penning the letter below.

Luther penned this letter toward the end of July or beginning of August 1523. The letter is closely connected with his first hymn, a ballad recounting the martyrdom entitled, “A New Song Now Shall Be Begun [Eyn newes lyed wyr heben an].”¹ Either preparing this letter planted the seeds of that hymn in his mind, or the letter shows that he had already begun working on the hymn or perhaps had already finished it.

As for “the articles for which the two Christian Augustinian monks were burned to death in Brussels” that Luther appended to the letter, they appear to be a digest and summary of the accounts and articles already available in print. However, the monks’ response to the inquisitor Jacob van Hoogstraten that Luther records—“Those are the words of Pilate, and you would have no authority over me, if it were not given to you from above”—does not appear in either of the martyrdom pamphlets and shows that Luther did possess other reports separate from those pamphlets. (It is therefore also possible that the articles Luther appended to his letter were the reproduction of a digest and summary prepared by one of his sources.)

This concludes the series of translations I specifically prepared in connection with the five hundredth anniversary of the first Lutheran martyrdom. To borrow phraseology from Luther, may these translations lead all pious Christians to give praise and thanks to God the almighty for having bestowed such great grace on these martyrs and all his other holy martyrs and, if divine honor and Christian necessity call for it, to endure the same way they did. Amen.

Open Letter to Christians in the Low Countries

Martin Luther, churchman in Wittenberg,
To all dear brothers in Christ in Holland,² Brabant,³ and Flanders,⁴ together with all believers in Christ,
Grace and peace from God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Praise and thanks be to the Father of all mercy, who once again in these days lets us see his marvelous light, which up till now was hidden on account of our sin. In the past he let us be subject to the horrible authority of the darkness and let us serve such disgraceful errors and the Antichrist. But now the time has come again for us to hear the voice of the turtledove, and the flowers are springing up in our land [Song of Sol. 2:12]. What joy, my dearest friends, you have not only taken part in, but have become its foremost partakers—a joy from which we ourselves have derived great joy and delight! For before all the world, you have been given the honor not only to hear the gospel and to acknowledge Christ, but also to be the first who now suffer shame and injury, apprehension and distress, imprisonment and danger for Christ’s sake, and have now matured into such ripe fruit and become so strong that you have also watered and confirmed it with your own blood, since the two noble jewels of Christ among you, Hinricus and Johannes,⁵ thought nothing of their life in Brussels, so that Christ would be praised with his word. Oh, how despicably those two souls were executed! Yet how gloriously and in eternal joy they will return with Christ and justly judge those by whom they have now been unjustly judged! Ah, how very inconsequential a thing it is to be disgraced and killed by the world for those who know that their blood and their death are precious in God’s sight, as the psalms sing [Psalm 9:12; 116:15]. What is the world in comparison with God? What great pleasure and joy all the angels have taken in the sight of these two souls! How gladly the fire must have helped them to their eternal life from this sinful life, to eternal glory from this shame! God be praised and blessed into eternity, that we have lived to see and to hear true saints and genuine martyrs, we who have previously extolled and adored so many false saints. We up here have not yet been worthy to become such a precious and worthy offering to Christ, although many of our ranks have not escaped persecution and are still being persecuted. Therefore, my very dearest friends, take heart and be joyful in Christ, and let us give thanks for his great signs and wonders, which he has begun to do among us. Here he has set before us brand-new examples of his life. Now it is time for the kingdom of God not to consist in words but in power [1 Cor. 4:10; cf. 1 Thess. 1:5]. Here we are being taught what the saying means: “Be joyful in distress” [cf. Rom. 12:12]. Isaiah says, “For a little while I forsake you, but with eternal mercy I will take you in” [Isa. 54:7]. And God says in Psalm 91, “I am with him in distress, I will deliver him and will honor him, for he has acknowledged my name” [Ps. 91:15, 14]. So then, since we see the present distress, and have such powerful and comforting promises, let us revive our heart, be of good cheer, and joyfully let ourselves be slaughtered for the Lord. It is he who has said it; he will not lie. “Even the hairs on your head are all numbered” [Matt. 10:30]. And although the adversaries will decry these saints as Hussites, Wycliffites, and Lutherans, and will take pride in their murder, this should not amaze us but strengthen us all the more. For the cross of Christ must have blasphemers. But our judge is not far off. He will render a different verdict. We know this, and are certain of it. Pray for us, dear brothers, and pray for and with each other, so that we extend one another a helping hand and all of us cling in one spirit to our head, Jesus Christ. May he strengthen and fully equip you with grace to bring glory to his holy name. To him be honor, praise, and thanks among you and all creatures into eternity. Amen.

The Articles for Which the Two Christian Augustinian Monks Were Burned to Death in Brussels

The above-mentioned Christian men were interrogated by [Jacob van] Hoogstraten and several other heretic-masters (who mainly because of [von groß wegen] their unchristian malice are rightly called masters over other heretics), and they answered their questions as follows:

Question: What do you believe?

Answer: The twelve articles of the Christian faith, the books of the Bible and evangelical writings, also one holy Christian Church, but not the church you inquisitors believe in.

The second question: Do you believe in the laws of the councils and ancient fathers?

Answer: We believe them so far as their precepts are in line with divine Scripture and not contrary to it.

The third question: Do you believe that those who transgress the laws of the pope and the church fathers are committing mortal or damnable sin?

Answer: We believe that divine commands and prohibitions, and not human laws, are what save and condemn.

Verdict: On this basis the above-mentioned interrogators, being men who cannot tolerate divine doctrine because of the practice of their malice, pronounced the two above-mentioned pious Christian men to be heretics and handed them over to the secular authorities for execution (just as the Jews handed Christ over to the heathens). From there they were unjustly condemned to the fire.

Now although it is just and fair for everyone’s crime to be publicly read at their execution, and this is the practice especially in Brussels, this was not done in this case out of shame at the great injustice. But those who were in Brussels at the time learned exactly what these articles were from certain individuals.

Likewise, when Hoogstraten assured the condemned men that if they would recant the above-cited Christian truth, he had the authority or power to set them free, one of them answered him, “Those are the words of Pilate, and you would have no authority over me, if it were not given to you from above,” and both men publicly said that they thanked God for the privilege to die for the sake of his word. And they not only suffered this innocent martyrdom and death willingly, eagerly, joyfully, and resolutely, but besides that they gave, admonished, and taught many good Christian answers during their execution. They also praised God by singing some of the holy psalms and other songs, and they devoutly called upon Christ our Lord, as a Son of David, for grace and mercy as long as they were able to speak, before the fire began to do them serious harm. For such Christian perseverance, it is right for all pious Christians to give praise and thanks to God the almighty (who has bestowed such great grace on these martyrs and all his other holy martyrs) and, if divine honor and Christian necessity call for it, to desire to endure the same way they have. Amen.

Source

Kawerau, Gustav, Paul Pietsch, and Georg Buchwald, eds. D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesammtausgabe. Vol. 12. Weimar: Hermann Böhlau, 1891. Pages 77–80.

Endnotes

¹ Weimarer Ausgabe 35:91–97, 411–15. English translations of this hymn can be found in Luther’s Works 53:211–16 and in Peter C. Reske, ed., The Hymns of Martin Luther (St. Louis: Concordia, 2016), 10–12. Additional insightful commentary on the hymn can be found in Robert J. Christman, The Dynamics of the Early Reformation in their Reformed Augustinian Context (Amsterdam University Press, 2020), 137–44, 207–8.

² The Countship of Holland included Rotterdam, Delft, The Hague, Haarlem, Enkhuizen, and Amsterdam. Today the territory belongs to the Netherlands.

³ The Duchy of Brabant included Louvain, Brussels, Antwerp, and ’s-Hertogenbosch. Today the territory belongs to Belgium and the Netherlands.

⁴ The Countship of Flanders included Ghent, Bruges, and Ypres. Today this territory belongs to Belgium, France, and the Netherlands.

⁵ That is, Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen.

Filed under History, Luther's Works Tagged with 500th anniversary, Antwerp, Brabant, Brussels, burning, Egmondanus, execution, first Lutheran martyrdom, Flanders, Francis van der Hulst, Grand Plaza, Hendrik Voes, Hendrik Vos, Holland, immolation, imprisonment, inquisition, interrogation, Jacob van Hoogstraten, Jan van den Esschen, Johannes van den Esschen, July 1 1523, letter, Low Countries, Lutheran persecution, Martin Luther, martyr, martyrdom, Netherlands, Nicolaas Baechem, Nicolaas Egmond, perseverance, University of Louvain

First Lutheran Martyrdom (Third Account)

July 2, 2023 Leave a comment

Translator’s Preface

Read the preface to the First Account for more information on Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen and the circumstances leading up to and surrounding their execution.

In addition to the German pamphlet translated there, another account of the martyrdom was published in Latin, Historia de Duobus Augustinensibus, ob Evangelii doctrinam exustis Bruxellae, die trigesima Iunij. [sic]Anno domini M. D. XXIII. (History of the Two Augustinians Burned at the Stake in Brussels for the Doctrine of the Gospel on the Thirtieth Day of June [sic], in the Year of the Lord 1523). This Latin pamphlet included four parts:

An eyewitness account of the martyrdom penned on July 10, 1523
An eyewitness account penned on July 14, 1523
A list of sixty-two “articles asserted by Brother Hendrik and the others” compiled by a member of the Inquisition.
“A Pious and Christian Expostulation with [or Strong Rebuke of] a Man Who Was Finally Compelled by the Tyranny of the Impious and the Terror of Death to Deny the Truth Which He had Professed.” (The man in question was Lambert de Thoren, who had asked for time to reconsider after being degraded and before being led to the stake.)

What follows is a translation of the second part of this Latin pamphlet, which provides more of a summary report of what happened and names the inquisitors. We do not know the identity of the author. The final sentence suggests his home was in Basel but he had taken a trip to Brussels and was in the city for the burning of the two Augustinian monks.

To the glory of the triune God and in commemoration of the courage and steadfastness he bestowed upon Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen:

Summary Report of the Two Augustinians Burned at the Stake in Brussels

Concerning the two Augustinians who were burned to death here in Brussels, I believe that others have written about it at length. With unbelievable steadfastness or perseverance¹ they endured a most painful death. The chancellor affirmed that he had never seen anything like it among so many condemned and executed in his time.² From within the fire, they were reciting the Creed and calling upon Jesus again and again. The judges were [Jacob van] Hoogstraten, Egmondanus [Nicolaas Baechem of Egmond], Hodscalcus [Godschalk Roesmont van Eyndhoven], [Jacob] Latomus, and Ruard [Tapper]. Also present was [Johannes] Pascha [or Jan van Paesschen], a Carmelite of Mechelen. Francis [van der] Hulst was commissioned by an official papal letter to appoint an inquisitor himself; he just had to be a prelate or a theologian. He immediately named Egmondanus. All these are said to be going to Holland, to [Cornelis Henricxz] Hoen and the schoolmaster in Delft,³ who was thrown into prison a long time ago. Apart from that, they are very concerned that a disturbance will arise there,⁴ as are the people, although the example will frighten most, as they hope. They do not yet agree whether they all want to go; some are formulating other cases. Pass along my greetings to Johannes,⁵ Zwingli, and Hutten [in Basel]. Once matters here have been sufficiently investigated, I will return to you, and we will reflect on everything there in the baths. From Brussels, July 14, etc.

Source

Anonymous. Historia de Duobus Augustinensibus, ob Evangelii doctrinam exustis Bruxellae, die trigesima Iunij. [sic] Anno domini M. D. XXIII. Basel: Andreas Cratander, 1523. Fol. a 4 recto.

Endnotes

¹ Latin: constantia aut pertinacia. Since the author uses aut instead of et, perhaps it should be translated, “perseverance or stubbornness.”

² Hieronymus van der Noot was chancellor of the Duchy of Brabant from 1514–1531. He was fifty-nine at the time.

³ Friedrich Hondebeke (see Otto Clemen, Beträge zur Reformationsgeschichte aus Büchern und Handschriften der Zwickauer Ratsschulbibliothek, vol. 1 [Berlin: C. A. Schwetschke und Sohn, 1900] 41, n. 2).

⁴ The “there” seems to be referring back to Brussels, not Holland.

⁵ Probably Johannes Oecolampadius, who had been in Basel since November of 1522.

Filed under History Tagged with 500th anniversary, Brabant, Brussels, burning, Chancellor of Brabant, Cornelis Henricxz Hoen, Diocese of Cambrai, Egmondanus, execution, eyewitness, first Lutheran martyrdom, Francis van der Hulst, Friedrich Hondebeke, Godschalk Roesmont van Eyndhoven, Hendrik Voes, Hendrik Vos, Hieronymus van der Noot, immolation, inquisition, interrogation, Jacob Latomus, Jacob van Hoogstraten, Jan van den Esschen, Jan van Paesschen, Johannes Pascha, Johannes van den Esschen, July 1 1523, Lutheran persecution, martyr, martyrdom, Nicolaas Baechem, Nicolaas Egmond, persecution, Reformed Augustinians, Ruard Tapper, University of Louvain

The First Lutheran Martyrs’ Sixty-Two Articles

July 1, 2023 Leave a comment

Translator’s Preface

Read the preface to the First Account for more information on Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen and the circumstances leading up to and surrounding their execution. Read the preface to the Second Account for more information on the source of the sixty-two articles below.

The content of these articles clearly shows that they were compiled by a member of the Inquisition, and doubtless before the two monks were degraded and burned, though how it was obtained or copied so that it could be printed and disseminated is unknown.

I am deliberately presenting these articles today, the five hundredth anniversary of the degradation and burning of Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen. These are the articles of truth for which these first Lutheran Christian martyrs willingly gave up their lives. To my knowledge, they have never before appeared in English in their entirety. May the triune God give Christians today the same conviction of the truth and the same perseverance and steadfastness, even to the point of death, that he gave to these two young men.

Articles Asserted by Brother Hendrik and the Others

No one is obligated to abstain from reading the books of Luther by the mandate of the pope or the emperor.
Those commanding us to abstain from reading the books of Luther are commanding more than the Spirit of God requires.
Those commanding us to abstain from reading the books of Luther are acting contrary to the Scripture passages, “Test everything” [1 Thess. 5:21], and, “Test the spirits and see whether they are from God” [1 John 4:1].
In a manner insulting to the commissary, he tells him that he [the commissary] was trying to deceive him with flattering words.
The books of Luther showed him the light of Sacred Scripture more than other teachers whom he had read.
Luther brought him closer to the gospel of Christ than Augustine or Jerome.
It cannot be proven from Sacred Scripture that the pope or any bishop possesses anything beyond simply the ministry of the word of Christ.
Neither the pope nor any other bishop is able to command or forbid something else that Sacred Scripture does not contain or that God does not command or forbid, if the conscience would be injured by it.
Secular authority can command and prohibit such things with respect to bodies, but not with respect to the conscience.
The church has not yet forbidden the books of Luther. And after the passages, “Test everything,” and, “Test the spirits and see whether they are from God,” were explained to him, he found a way into the same point, saying, “The church has not rejected the books of Luther.”
Some articles [taught by Luther] are found condemned in Pope Leo the Tenth’s bull even though they are true, and are thereby wrongly condemned until he [Hendrik] was better instructed.¹ And he gave examples of this:
All people² are priests before God.
All people are able to remit the sins of any Christian whatsoever, if they know how to fraternally admonish their neighbor.
Women are able to absolve people of their sins. He deduces this from the evangelical absolution contained in the passage: “If your brother sins against you, etc.” [Matt. 18:15].
The evangelical authority contained in the passage, “Those whose sins you remit, etc.” [John 20:23], is an authority common to all people.
In the mass, the body of Christ is not sacrificed by man, since what is given to him as a medicine and remembrance is not sacrificed.
When interrogated whether the words of the canon of the mass are false, he says, “Whatever the case may be with the words of the canon, the body of Christ is not sacrificed in the mass, but is only taken in memory of him.”
He does not know whether the bread remains in the sacrament of the Eucharist after the consecration of Christ, and when the text of Chapter Damnamus of “De summa Trinitate & fide catholica” from canon law was cited,³ he responded, “If it can be found in the Sacred Scriptures, then I believe that, otherwise I do not.”
Nothing should be believed, at risk to the conscience, except what is recorded in the words of God, or what can be drawn out from the words of God.
If a council should define something⁴ that is not contained in Sacred Scripture, it should be treated with suspicion.
He refused to respond any further whether he should believe [what canon law said] or not.⁵ But after being repeatedly interrogated, he said that whatever the case may be with Martin Luther, he knows and says that he has come to know the gospel through his writings. When he was interrogated whether Martin Luther himself had the Spirit of God, he refused to respond.
When interrogated if he thinks there is a difference between the priests and the laypeople in the consecration of the Eucharist, and whether consecrating belongs to the priesthood of Christ and to the priesthood of the New Testament, he said he did not understand [intelligere].⁶
He insultingly said, “Christ will mark well your threats,” etc.
If everyone had considered the matter well up till now, all laypeople would have been regarded as priests just as much as those consecrated as priests by themselves [namely, by bishops].
He did not understand [intellexit] whether a bishop who consecrates someone for the priesthood imparts any new power to consecrate [the elements of the Eucharist].
It is greater to take the body of Christ, which is fitting for all the faithful, than to consecrate it, which only belongs to the administration of the Sacrament itself. He did not understand, however, whether a layman, if a bishop were to tell him to consecrate the body of Christ, could do so without any other ordination.
It is not part of God’s law nor is it commanded by God that all mortal sins should be confessed to a man, since no human is able to know his sins [Ps. 19:12], much less confess them.
Baptism, the Eucharist, and repentance rest on the promises of Christ, which kindle faith. He therefore believes that they confer faith and grace.⁷
The other four sacraments—confirmation, ordination, marriage, and last rites—do not have a word of promise, but are rather anciently observed rites. Therefore they do not confer grace and can be relinquished as non-sacraments.
The just-mentioned sacraments do not confer any more grace than other rites of the church that the church does not regard as sacraments, since grace is conferred by the word of God alone.
The priesthood is not a sacrament. It is nevertheless a necessary ministry.
Last rites does not have a promise.
Neither the pope nor a bishop nor any other prelate in the church whatsoever is able to obligate a person to things that are not included in God’s law, so that the person would commit a mortal sin by transgressing them. They cannot, for example, obligate anyone to fast during Lent, to confess their sins once a year, to celebrate feast days, etc., excluding offense to brothers.⁸ This was his position until he was better instructed.
Christ works every good work in humans and through humans, so that humans do nothing good actively. They rather merely allow Christ to work in them as his instruments.
The Roman pontiff, the successor of Peter, was not instituted by Christ himself in the person of blessed Peter as Christ’s vicar over all the churches in the whole world. For Christ did not institute a vicar, but a minister as the highest pontiff.⁹
All perpetual vows made outside of Christ’s command, such as the vows of the monastics, have been imprudently made out of ignorance of Christian liberty, and thus are not binding.
Now that he has become familiar with Christian liberty, he does not think that his conscience is restrained by vows.
The true, Christian, and catholic¹⁰ faith is not able to be separated from love, since love is a fruit of faith, and Christian faith without love is dead.
The sacrament in the mass only benefits the recipient.
When God releases the sinner from his sins, then for the sake of Christ’s death he also releases him from every penalty his sins deserve. And he devoutly believes this.
He does not know whether or not there is a purgatory.
He said, “My lords, you have dealt with us unfairly, and not according to the gospel.”
The sacrament of the Eucharist does not contain a sacrifice on the altar; the sacrifice was only made once on the cross.
After the sinner has confessed and been absolved, he is not obligated by divine law to any penance, provided that he does not offend a brother Christian by causing him to stumble, or offend the church by some public or private crime. Repentance therefore only consists of two parts.
He does not know whether the prayers of the living benefit the dead.¹¹
It is better to observe the manner of celebrating mass that the church observed in its earliest days than to be entangled in these regulations that have been issued apart from God’s command.
These regulations made by the church regarding the mass have been instituted contrary to the command of God and of Christ.
If the just-mentioned regulations or ceremonies have been put in place by humans and do not originate with a divine command, then they are contrary to divine law.
We are not obligated to read the canonical hours on pain of committing mortal sin.
He himself always acted contrary to God’s law when reading the canonical hours, since he never prayed to the Father in spirit and truth [John 4:23–24].
He would prefer to be beheaded, even if he had ten heads,¹² than to respond to the questions put before him.
If a sinner believes that he is truly absolved, then he is released from his sins.
It is better not to deny the laypeople what Christ left behind to be distributed to everyone, that is, Communion in both kinds.
Those who prohibit the laypeople from being communed in both kinds are acting contrary to God’s intention.
The words of consecration should be spoken loudly.
When interrogated whether the saints may be adored, he said that he did not wish to respond any further.
When interrogated whether he had been led astray by Luther (and such interrogations are being put before him because it is feared that he has been led astray by Luther), he said, “I have been led astray just as much as Christ led his apostles astray.”
It is contrary to divine law that the clergy are exempt from the jurisdiction of the emperor.
The pope does not have any other authority than to preach God’s word and to feed his sheep with the preaching of God’s word.
He sees well that the word of God is not in the esteemed commissaries.
He cares little for life. He commends his soul to God.
He did not understand how he could solemnly renounce each and every error he had confessed. And when he was demanded and ordered to renounce them, he refused.

Source

Anonymous. Historia de Duobus Augustinensibus, ob Evangelii doctrinam exustis Bruxellae, die trigesima Iunij. [sic] Anno domini M. D. XXIII. Articuli LXII. per eosdem asserti. Basel: Andreas Cratander, 1523. Fols. a 4 verso—a 7 verso.

I also consulted two German translations:

Reckenhofer [printed Heckenhofer], Martin., tr. and ed. Dye histori / so zwen Augustiner Ordens gemartert seyn tzu Bruxel in Probant / von wegen des Evangelj. Erfurt: Wolfgang Stürmer, 1523. Fols. A iii recto—H iv recto.

Rabus, Ludwig. Historien der Heyligen Außerwölten Gottes Zeügen / Bekennern vnd Martyrern. Vol. 2. Strasbourg: Samuel Emmel, 1554. Fols. 117 verso—121 verso.

Endnotes

¹ This phrase, which appears again later, does not imply that Hendrik thought he was poorly educated. It rather has the sense: “until he was proven wrong from clear and thorough demonstration from the Scriptures.”

² That is, all Christians, not just ordained priests. This sense of “all people” also applies to Articles 13 and 15.

³ Either the interrogator or the recorder cited the incorrect chapter from canon law. The Corpus Juris Canonici (Body of Canon Law) was generally published in six collections at this time. The first was Gratian’s collection of church laws and decretals, the Decretum Gratiani. The second was a five-book collection of decretals promulgated by Pope Gregory IX, the Decretales Gregorii Noni. The third was a collection of decretals compiled by Pope Boniface VIII, the so-called Liber Sextus. The fourth was the Constitutiones Clementinae or Clementine Constitutions of 1314. The fifth was a collection of supplementary decretals of Pope John XXII, the Extravagantes Joannis XXII, and the sixth another collection of supplementary decretals, the Extravagantes Communes. The chapters cited from canon law were commonly named after the first word of the chapter. The chapter cited here is Chapter 2, Damnamus, of Title 1, “De summa Trinitate & fide catholica,” of the Decretales Gregorii Noni. However, the topic under discussion—the presence (or lack thereof) of Christ’s body and blood and of the earthly elements in the Eucharist—is discussed in Chapter 1, Firmiter, of Title 1. See, e.g., Decretales D. Gregorii Papae IX (Rome, 1582), col. 10.

⁴ In Catholicism, to define something is to make an irrevocable decision and decree about something pertaining to faith or morals, which is binding for the whole Catholic Church.

⁵ This seems to refer back to Article 18. Articles 16–21 are closely related in thought.

⁶ This could also be translated: “he said he did not see any difference.” However, the repeated use of “he did not understand” in subsequent articles makes clear that “not understanding” is a pregnant, disparaging version of “not knowing.” Whoever recorded these articles wanted to imply that the monks not only did not know the answer (the fault of which could potentially be the unclarity of the interrogators or the convoluted content of their questions), but did not know the answer because they were simpletons lacking in education and intelligence.

⁷ Latin: ideo credit eorum fidem & gratiam conferre. Reckenhofer translates: hyerumb glaubtt ehr das der glaub bey den selben auch gnad bring—“he therefore believes that the faith accompanying the same [namely, these sacraments] also brings grace.

⁸ In other words, one should not rashly forgo such customs at the expense of a brother or sister Christian’s conscience.

⁹ Rabus’s translation switches the objects and predicate: “For Christ has not instituted supreme bishops to be vicars [or substitutes], but rather servants and ministers.”

¹⁰ Latin: catholica. Reckenhofer translated this word gemeyn.

¹¹ Rabus incorrectly translates: “He does not know whether the intercession of the dead is of any benefit to the living.”

¹² Lit.: “He would prefer that his neck be cut off, even if he had ten necks.”

Filed under Dogmatics, History Tagged with 1 John 4:1, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, 500th anniversary, Antwerp, baptism, both kinds, Brabant, Brussels, burning, canon law, canon of the mass, commissary, confession and absolution, Confirmation, degradation, Diocese of Cambrai, faith, fasting, feast days, first Lutheran martyrdom, Hendrik Voes, Hendrik Vos, immolation, inquisition, interrogation, Jan van den Esschen, Johannes van den Esschen, John 20:23, John 4:23–24, July 1 1523, last rites, Lord's Supper, love, Lutheran persecution, marriage, Martin Luther, martyr, martyrdom, Matthew 18:15, ministry of the word, offense, ordination, papal authority, papal bull, persecution, priesthood of all believers, Psalm 19:12, Reformed Augustinians, repentance, sacraments, sacrifice of the mass, seven sacraments, sola Scripture, universal priesthood, University of Louvain, Vilvoorde, vows

First Lutheran Martyrdom (Second Account)

June 30, 2023 2 Comments

Translator’s Preface

The Burning of Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen, woodcut printed in Rabus, Historien der Heyligen Außerwölten Gottes Zeugen, vol. 2 (1554). While it incorrectly portrays the monks tied to the same stake, it does capture Hendrik’s smoother appearance and Jan’s rougher appearance.

Read the preface to the First Account for more information on Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen and the circumstances leading up to and surrounding their execution.

In addition to the German pamphlet translated there, another account of the martyrdom was published in Latin, Historia de Duobus Augustinensibus, ob Evangelii doctrinam exustis Bruxellae, die trigesima Iunij. [sic] Anno domini M. D. XXIII. (History of the Two Augustinians Burned at the Stake in Brussels for the Doctrine of the Gospel on the Thirtieth Day of June [sic], in the Year of the Lord 1523). This Latin pamphlet included four parts:

An eyewitness account of the martyrdom penned on July 10, 1523
An eyewitness account penned on July 14, 1523
A list of sixty-two “articles asserted by Brother Hendrik and the others” compiled by a member of the Inquisition.
“A Pious and Christian Expostulation with [or Strong Rebuke of] a Man Who Was Finally Compelled by the Tyranny of the Impious and the Terror of Death to Deny the Truth Which He had Professed.” (The man in question was Lambert de Thoren, who had asked for time to reconsider after being degraded and before being led to the stake.)

What follows is a translation of the first part of this pamphlet, the most detailed eyewitness account of the burning that we possess. I strongly suspect that the anonymous author of this account was a woman, due especially to the author’s description of the appearance of the three men and the author’s comment that he/she had “always been naturally adverse to such spectacles and gladly stayed away from them.” This hypothesis is supported by the fact that Lutheranism seems to have found a particularly devoted following among women in the Low Countries, as evidenced by the rescue of Hendrik van Zutphen from confinement, detailed in the preface to the First Account, and the demonstration organized by Margaretha Boonams from Mechelen on October 6, 1522, when the remaining Reformed Augustinian friars at the monastery in Antwerp were arrested.

To the glory of the triune God and in commemoration of the courage and steadfastness he bestowed upon Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen:

History of the Two Augustinians Burned at the Stake in Brussels for the Doctrine of the Gospel

Quite a spectacle has been shown to us in these recent days. I would call it a miserable one, if those whom the spectators felt sorry for had seemed miserable to themselves rather than most blessed. If you have the time and inclination to listen, here is a brief summary of what happened.

Map of Brussels from Braun, ed., Civitates Orbis Terrarum (1572), modified. The Grand Plaza and city hall are circled by a red oval, and St. Gudula’s Church, where Jacob Probst had been forced to recant in 1522, is circled in yellow.

From that group of Augustinians who had been arrested and conducted from the city of Antwerp to Vilvoorde, three of them persisted in their heresy, with the rest singing a palinode [i.e. recanting]. No effort was spared in the attempt to get them to sing the same song their brothers had sung. When those to whom that part of the business had been entrusted saw that, though they were doing everything, they were accomplishing nothing, they decided to deliver the exceedingly obstinate men to the ultimate punishment. They are transported to Brussels and carefully guarded in prison. Our teachers [magistri nostri] from Louvain¹ meet together there. Because hardly any news preceded the day of the punishment, what little news there was did not draw many outsiders here.

Melchisedech van Hoorn, Dit stadhuys triumphant staet te Bruessel in brabant (Brussels City Hall), 1565, engraving.

On the day before the Visitation of the God-Bearing Virgin,² there is a stampede to the marketplace.³ Three mendicant orders are meeting, and of course there are not any more than that, as you know.⁴ Here they come, with the banner of the cross leading the way, as is their custom when they march in solemn procession. Now the professors of sacred theology, the abbots with their miters and jeweled croziers, who were present in place of the bishops, and some other men are seated in order on a platform. For a very large platform had been erected in front of the basilica, which is what people commonly call the city hall.⁵

At eleven o’clock, the youngest of the three men⁶ is led through the marketplace. Although he was surpassed by the other two in years, he was their superior in learning and eloquence. After being led inside and staying there a little while, he comes out onto the platform, clothed in priestly array. A table had been set up in the middle, decorated and covered like an altar. In front of it he goes down to his knees. There everyone fixed their eyes on him, as though struck senseless. No sign of consternation or of a troubled heart could be detected. The guardian of the Minorites,⁷ standing behind the table, starts preaching a sermon, and the bishop,⁸ opposite him in front of the table, begins the ceremonies with an open book.⁹ For a whole hour, as the latter performs the ceremonies and the former continues preaching, the young man was remaining in the same posture with the same facial expression. Since I could not understand the preacher due to the commotion, which was also the case for others, I was focusing entirely on the accused. Why would we try to hide what is well established to be true? His face was composed and calm. He was displaying not only scorn for death, but also the utmost modesty and gentleness. He looked like a man intent on prayers and sacred contemplations. Afterwards, when he was ordered to do this and that, it was amazing how promptly and how ungrudgingly he complied. Incidentally, he is reported to have said that he would be obedient even to the point of death. After those ceremonies had been performed, in which he had been removed from the priesthood and turned into what the common people call a layman or man of the world, he goes inside, dressed in different attire.

After that the other two men¹⁰ come out—rougher in appearance, truly bearded. (The young man I already mentioned did not have bristly chin, but an appearance that was wonderfully well formed and quite attractive.¹¹) Anyway, they come out, with facial expressions attesting the same steadfastness and cheerfulness. Why go on at length? From these, too, the priesthood and the sacrament of monasticism are taken away. Having been removed from the sacred and rendered profane, they leave the platform.

After a little while two men are brought out—the first one I mentioned and one of the other two. They proceed to the fire, which was being prepared in the same marketplace where these things were done. In the meantime, as they are being led there, as they are undressing themselves, many things could be heard from them which would have been very clear evidence to all of their sound and pious minds, minds belonging precisely to people eagerly desiring to be released from their body and united with Christ. It would only have been unclear to someone already convinced that they were convicted of heresy. They repeatedly testified that they were dying as Christians, that they believed in the holy catholic Church. They were saying that this was the day they had been awaiting for a long time.

Now stripped of their clothes, leaving only their underwear, they stood for a long time, more embracing the stakes themselves rather than being bound to them. The fire was being kindled rather slowly; whether this was done by design or by chance, I would certainly not dare to affirm. What then, you ask? Were they not growing faint, distressed by such a long delay? Were they not letting their spirits sink already as the smoke was flying up in their faces, soon to be followed by the flame? Actually, if it is appropriate to judge from gestures, eyebrows, eyes, and finally from the entire face—which all do a sort of talking, and not infrequently disclose what is in the heart more surely and with better reliability than the tongue—confidence, steadfastness, and cheerfulness, which had always been very high, appeared to receive a boost! And then there was the joyfulness, of a kind I do not know, that was especially springing up within them, to such an extent that they seemed to many people to be laughing! Among other things, they were reciting the Apostles’ Creed and the ecclesiastical song, “We Praise You, O God [Te Deum laudamus],” and this they were saying in turns. The second man, as he was looking at the fire burning under his feet, was saying that roses seemed to be strewn beneath him.

At last the rising flame cut off the voices of both.

I myself have always been naturally averse to such spectacles and gladly stayed away from them, and I would not have been able to be a spectator here, if the very men whose lives were on the line had not, by their noble spirits and joyful faces, driven all uneasiness away from me, who was idly watching them in safety.

The third man was not brought out; I do not know for sure why that was. Some say that he came to his senses, but since he was not brought back out to the people to recant publicly, not everyone is able to be persuaded of this. Some suspect that he was killed secretly. Whatever the case may be, it cannot stay a secret for long.¹²

Since the next day was dedicated to the divine Virgin,^13, the Minorite¹⁴ admonished the people in a sermon here that, if someone should happen to ask them how the men they had seen being burned had met their end, they should say that they had died in the erroneous faith of Luther. At the same time he was repeatedly asserting that he had learned from certain men that they had abandoned their errors at the last moment, which he said had in fact happened by the prayers of certain people and by the help of the divine Virgin, who had performed a miracle. The same thing was basically affirmed in Louvain, for our teacher [magister noster] Nicolaus Egmondanus had returned there, telling in an afternoon sermon that at eleven o’clock he had received a letter from the honest and excellent man Francis van der Hulst, to whom the emperor had entrusted the responsibility of investigating and persecuting the heretics. He said it was indicated in the letter that those Augustinians condemned of heresy and burned at the stake had rejected their errors and returned to a healthier mind, after the fire was already going beneath them. But since all those who stood closest to the fire consistently deny this, it probably would have been better to say nothing, unless anyone thinks it was done out of the abundance of the charity that hopes for all things.¹⁵

Farewell.

Brussels, July 10, 1523.

Source

Anonymous. Historia de Duobus Augustinensibus, ob Evangelii doctrinam exustis Bruxellae, die trigesima Iunij. [sic] Anno domini M. D. XXIII. Basel: Andreas Cratander, 1523. Fols. a 2 recto—a 3 verso.

I also consulted a German translation published three decades later: Rabus, Ludwig. Historien der Heyligen Außerwölten Gottes Zeügen / Bekennern vnd Martyrern. Vol. 2. Strasbourg: Samuel Emmel, 1554. Fols. 114 verso—117 recto.

Endnotes

¹ “Our teachers [magistri nostri, abbreviated M. N.]” appears to have originated as a term of respect for the professors of theology at the University of Louvain, who were considered theological experts and rendered judgments on theological debates.

² The Visitation was on Thursday, July 2, 1523, so the day before was Wednesday, July 1.

³ That is, the Grand Plaza in Brussels (Grote Markt in Dutch), today an UNESCO World Heritage Site.

⁴ The you is singular. It is unclear whether this letter was originally intended for a broader audience, and the author is simply addressing the readers individually, or if it was addressed to one person and then shared more broadly by the recipient. The author must be implying that there are not any more than three orders of mendicants in the city of Brussels (Franciscans, Carmelites, and Dominicans), since the Augustinians were also a mendicant order.

⁵ The city hall, an example of Flamboyant architecture, was completed in 1455 and is still standing.

⁶ Probably Hendrik Voes (or Vos)

⁷ Minorites (sing., Minorite; Latin: minorita, sing., minoritae, pl.) was a nickname for members of both the conventual and observant branches of the Franciscan Order (Order of Friars Minor).

⁸ Adrien (or Adriaan) Aernoult of Bruges, auxiliary bishop of Cambrai, the diocese to which Antwerp and Brussels belonged

⁹ Robert J. Christman, quoting the sixteenth century historian Johannes Sleidanus, describes these ceremonies (The Dynamics of the Early Reformation in their Reformed Augustinian Context [Amsterdam University Press, 2020], 203–4, with slight emendations based on my translation of the original source cited):

Once a person who is a priest is condemned as a heretic by a spiritual judge, he is clothed in his priestly robe. A chalice filled with water and wine and a paten on which sits unleavened bread are placed in his hands. With these things, he kneels before the bishop’s vicar, who takes one after the other away and forbids him henceforth from saying mass for the living and the dead. After that, the vicar takes a glass shard and slices his fingers and forbids him from giving the blessing any longer. Then the robe is removed and each [heretic] is given a special curse. And when one is defrocked from the priesthood, all the other grades and ordinations through which one becomes a priest are also taken away. So having been undressed and re-clothed in secular clothes, he is handed over to the temporal authorities. And the bishop’s vicar requests that nothing further be done for his life and body.

¹⁰ Lambert de Thoren and probably Jan van den Esschen

¹¹ This sentence is one of the factors leading me to surmise that the author of this report was a woman. A man could have described their appearance in this kind of detail without it necessarily being considered inappropriate (and I do not know if the Latin phrase “quite attractive [satis venusta]” had the same overtones it does in English), but it is more likely that a woman would do so.

¹² See the preface to the First Account for more on the fate of Lambert de Thoren.

¹³ Thursday, July 2, 1523, was the Feast of the Visitation of Mary.

¹⁴ Or a Minorite. Ludwig Rabus translated it, “the aforementioned monk.”

¹⁵ See Christman, op. cit., 130. Francis van der Hulst’s claim is disproved not only by this account, but also by:

Georg Hauer, a theologian from the University of Ingolstadt and preacher at the Church of Our Lady in that city, who preached a sermon on August 15, 1523, the Feast of the Assumption of Mary, in which he ignored the rumors of the monks’ last-second recantation and simply maintained that their punishment was well deserved and that God did not miraculously intervene with them to relieve their suffering, as he had in the cases of the martyrs of old (Hauer, Drey christlich predig vom Salve regina [1523], fol. A iii recto), and
the famous Erasmus who, in a July 1, 1529 letter to Charles Utenhove, criticized the church’s habit of spreading the rumor that a condemned heretic had recanted at the last moment whenever that heretic remained steadfast in the fire. In support of his criticism, he cited the “ridiculous lie [ridiculam fabulam]” that the Augustinian friars burned in Brussels had recanted at the last moment, which even the executioner denied (quoted in Christman, op. cit., 163, 205).

Filed under Arts, History Tagged with 500th anniversary, Adriaan Aernoult, Adrien Aernoult, Antwerp, Brabant, Brussels, Brussels City Hall, burning, degradation, Diocese of Cambrai, execution, eyewitness, first Lutheran martyrdom, Grand Plaza, Hendrik Voes, Hendrik Vos, immolation, imprisonment, inquisition, interrogation, Jan van den Esschen, Johannes van den Esschen, July 1 1523, Lambert de Thoren, Lambert Thorn, Low Countries, Lutheran persecution, martyr, martyrdom, monastery, Netherlands, persecution, Reformed Augustinians, University of Louvain, Vilvoorde

First Lutheran Martyrdom (First Account)

June 29, 2023 Leave a comment

Translator’s Preface

The biographical information we have on Hendrik Voes (or Vos) and Jan (or Johannes) van den Esschen is scant. From the little and sometimes conflicting information we have, it seems best to assume that Jan van den Esschen was in fact, as his name suggests, from Essen in modern-day Belgium, located in a geographical region called the Campine.¹ He seems to have been born around 1494, and was thus about twenty when he participated in a legal agreement in 1514 between the Antwerp Augustinians (of which Jan was one of eight representatives) and the chapter of the Church of Our Lady (Onze Lieve Vrouwekerk), effectively making him one of the Antwerp monastery’s charter members, and about twenty-nine when he was executed in 1523.² Hendrik Voes appears to have been born around 1499 in ’s-Hertogenbosch,³ making him twenty-four when he was executed.⁴

In his history of Mansfeld, the Lutheran theologian and historian Cyriacus Spangenberg (1528–1604) claimed that the “two young brothers” spent time in the recently founded (1515) Reformed Augustinian monastery of St. Anne’s in Eisleben, apparently in or around 1521. But he does not specify whether they stayed there as guests while traveling on monastery business or were actually members there for a time.⁵ This does, however, suggest that the two young men were already close before being arrested, interrogated, and executed together.

Virgilius Bononiensis, Urbs Antverpia, 1565, modified. The map is oriented to the west-northwest. The Church of Our Lady is circled in purple. St. Andrew’s Church, the site of the former Reformed Augustinian monastery, is circled in red. St. Michael’s Abbey, where Hendrik van Zutphen was held prisoner until hundreds of women broke in and rescued him, is circled in yellow.

In 1522, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V’s inquisitors were ramping up their efforts to suppress “heretical” ideas in the wake of the May 1521 Edict of Worms. In July 1522 Antoine I de Lalaing (1480–1540), Count of Hoogstraten, Hieronymus van der Noot, Chancellor of Brabant, and a notary public named van Springens arrived at the Augustinian monastery in Antwerp (which stood where St. Andrew’s Church now stands) at six in the morning. There, in the presence of members of the city council, whom they had apparently scheduled to meet there, they said that the emperor wanted all those infected with the stain of heresy to be forced to leave, and that the “den of thieves” should no longer be permitted to distribute the Lord’s Supper. The monks were then apparently questioned, and a number of them were put on wagons and transported to the ducal castle in Vilvoorde, just northeast of Brussels, which was being used as an imperial prison.⁶ There they were interrogated, and all but two them, Hendrik and Jan, were soon dismissed and permitted to return to the monastery, under the condition that they publicly renounce and recant certain articles of Lutheran doctrine from the apse of the Church of Our Lady in Antwerp, which they did. The monastery was then permitted once again to conduct mass their chapel.⁷

Hendrik and Jan were taken to nearby Brussels and imprisoned there for further questioning and judgment. The inquisitors in their case included some of the same men involved in their former prior Jacob Probst’s case: Francis van der Hulst, about fifty-three years old; Jacob van Hoogstraten, about sixty-three; Nicolaas Baechem of Egmond, about fifty-three; Jacob Latomus, about forty-eight; Jan van Paesschen (or Johannes Pascha, a Carmelite of Mechelen), perhaps in his sixties; and Godschalk Roesmont van Eyndhoven, about forty.⁸

In the meantime Hendrik van Zutphen arrived in Antwerp. He had attended a special chapter meeting in Grimma in early June of 1522. He had then returned to Wittenberg, where he had been studying since 1520. There he was probably advised by Martin Luther and Wenceslaus Link, the Wittenberg prior, to go to the “sad and abandoned Christians” in the Low Countries, namely his Augustinian brothers, in order to comfort and encourage them.⁹ How the timing of his return trip lines up with the first deportation of monks from Antwerp to Vilvoorde is unclear, but we know that he eventually joined the Antwerp monastery and soon became its prior. He initially kept a low profile, but when indulgence salesmen arrived in the city, he began to preach against them publicly, first from the pulpit, then in the streets. On September 29, he was lured from the monastery under the pretext of being called to visit an ailing parishioner. He was arrested and held overnight in St. Michael’s Abbey for transport to Brussels the next day, where he would appear before the inquisitors. But what happened next almost defies imagination: After sunset a mob consisting mostly of women—several thousand according to Zutphen, more than 300 according to another source, and 500 with swords according to another—battered down the doors and broke into the abbey, found van Zutphen, and led him back to his brother Augustinians. He spent three days in hiding with them before fleeing the city. Initially intending to return to Wittenberg, he ended up in Bremen.¹⁰

On the evening of October 6, one week after van Zutphen’s flight, Margaret of Austria, governor of the Low Countries, had the remaining friars arrested—there appear to have been more than twenty. Monks who were sons of Antwerp’s citizens were placed with the Beghards.¹¹ Of the others, sixteen were put on wagons and transported to the castle in Vilvoorde, and the rest were taken to Hoogstraten (perhaps to the castle belonging to the Count of Hoogstraten).¹² “A few months later, Margaret would destroy the cloister and transform its church into the parish church of St. Andreas, which it remains to this day.”¹³

Ducal Castle of Vilvoorde, engraving in Jacques Le Roy, Castella et praetoria nobelium Brabantiae (1696).

The details of the outcome for this second deportation of monks are murky. By the end of October Francis van der Hulst had interrogated those at Vilvoorde and “the prior…and seven others” were released.¹⁴ Others, perhaps the rest except one, were released (or perhaps transferred elsewhere) on May 29, 1523.¹⁵ That one exception was Lambert de Thoren (also simply called Lambert Thorn). His identity is not entirely clear. Spalatin called him the successor of Jacob Probst.¹⁶ Luther called him “the successor in the Word of our Jacob Probst.”¹⁷ Since someone identified as the prior is said to have been released (he must have been a sort of prior pro tem after van Zutphen’s flight), it seems best to assume that Lambert, like Probst, was the monastery’s regular preacher. Lambert persisted in his “heresy” and was thus sent to Brussels to join Voes and van den Esschen.¹⁸

The exact process of their interrogation is not recorded, but it was doubtless similar to Jacob Probst’s—one-on-one conversations, two- or three-on-one conversations, appearances before the entire Inquisition, cajoling, flattering, pleading, bullying, ridiculing, and plenty of time alone with their own thoughts, doubts, and fears. The account of their execution below says that after their degradation ceremony, the clergymen “handed them over to the tribunal in Brussels [and t]hey in turn handed them over to Lady Margaret’s councilors, who took them and gave them to the executioner in ropes.” This suggests that the monks may have also appeared before representatives of the city and of Governor Margaret, so that their persistence would be tantamount to defiance against both ecclesiastical and secular authority.

Pope Leo X had passed away on December 1, 1521, and on January 9, 1522, Adriaan Floriszoon, himself a native of the Low Countries and former professor of theology at the University of Louvain, was elected his successor. (He had been involved in the aforementioned 1514 agreement between the Reformed Augustinians and the chapter of the Church of Our Lady in Antwerp.) Adriaan was crowned Pope Adrian VI on August 31. On June 1, 1523, exactly one month before the burning of Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen, Pope Adrian officially named Francis van der Hulst a papal inquisitor, after he had already been publicly confirmed in his position as a secular inquisitor by Emperor Charles in April of the preceding year. As a layman, he was still required to enlist the services of clergymen, but he was now “vested with the same inquisitorial powers as an episcopal or papal inquisitor.”¹⁹ It was probably no coincidence that van der Hulst proceeded with the monks’ degradation and burning not long thereafter.

What follows is one account of the monks’ degradation and burning on July 1, 1523. While it initially gives the impression of an eyewitness account, some of the details and especially the final paragraph, which describes events that did not actually happen, suggest that the author is reporting what he heard from others, who were probably eyewitnesses in some cases and sharing gossip and rumors in others. The account I will publish here tomorrow, God willing, was definitely authored by an eyewitness, probably a woman, and she says that hardly any notification of the burning preceded the event, so the attendees and eyewitnesses were mostly locals. The author of this account does not appear to have been a local, but someone with local connections.

Nevertheless, the account does not contain any overt editorializing and seems to be reliable on the whole, and it certainly played an important role in the Reformation movement. It was published sixteen times during the second half of 1523, in Nuremberg, Augsburg, Speyer, Bamberg, Leipzig, Erfurt, and Wittenberg, among others, and its sale got some booksellers arrested.²⁰

As for the final paragraph, which claims that Lambert de Thoren was also burned to death on July 4, the reality is that, after yielding and asking for time to reconsider, his sentence was commuted to life in prison on a diet of bread and water, though sympathizers and supporters would bring him additional food and drink. Martin Luther himself wrote him a letter of comfort and encouragement on January 19, 1524.²¹ He would die in his cell on September 15, 1528.²²

To the glory of the triune God and in commemoration of the courage and steadfastness he bestowed upon Hendrik Voes and Jan van den Esschen:

The Performance und Proceedings of the Degradation and Burning of the Three Christian Knights and Martyrs of the Augustinian Order, Which Took Place in Brussels on the First of July in the Year 1523

How the three Christian knights and martyrs of the Augustinian order gave up their spirit to God, etc., in a tragic manner, with great expressions of thanksgiving, for the sake of the evangelical truth:

Of the monks of the Augustinian order who were expelled in Antwerp, three of them were imprisoned in many places for the sake of Christian truth. Several articles [of doctrine] were put forward for them to retract. But none of them consented to do this. Now other monks and clergymen made a number of deals with the regents involving money, and also gave money to the pope, so that a mandate was issued from Rome in which the pope condemned all those who were of this persuasion to be burned to death. On this basis, those at the ducal court in Brussels had the monks brought to trial and charged them with several articles that they should retract. Two of these were cited the most—that the pope did not have the power to forgive, bind, or loose a person’s sin, but only God did, and that the pope was just as sinful a person as other people and had no more power than any other priest. And they were also supposed to retract all the other evangelical articles. Then they stood and said no, they would not deny God’s word, but would much rather die for the sake of Christian belief. Then they were told they would have to be burned to death. They were fully ready for that and said they were glad that God had given them the grace to die for the sake of Christian belief. Then one of the three asked for a four-day reprieve to deliberate whether to retract or not. He was led back to the prison.

The Two Augustinians Martyred in Brussels, woodcut printed on the title page of Dye histori / so zwen Augustiner Ordens gemartert seyn tzu Bruzel in Probant / von wegen des Evangelj (Erfurt, 1523), Martin Reckenhofer’s German translation of a Latin pamphlet printed in Basel. Though the woodcut leaves something to be desired in accuracy (one of the martyrs had a beard and both were burned in their underwear), it was the first artistic depiction of the burning and it accurately captures the monks’ pious resignation and endurance, and the acts of worship with which they met their end.

They took the other two and dressed them up as if there were about to conduct mass, and then set up an altar, at which bishops and other church prelates were stationed. They then divested the two monks of their consecration as priests and put a different garment on them—a pale yellow robe on the youngest one and a black robe on the other. After that, they handed them over to the tribunal in Brussels. They in turn handed them over to Lady Margaret’s councilors, who took them and gave them to the executioner in ropes. Then four father confessors accompanied them—the head inquisitor from Cologne, a Dominican;²³ a Carmelite monk from Brussels;²⁴ and two other monks. These four went along with them in order to advise them strongly to retract. They responded and praised God for giving them the grace to die for the sake of his word. When they now arrived at the fire, the four father confessors began to cry. Then those two said they did not need to cry for them, but for their own sin. They also said, “Cry about the great injustice that you are committing by proceeding against divine righteousness this way.” And with that they went into the fire quite joyfully, with beaming faces. When they were stripped of their robes, they gave each other excellent comfort and went into the fire together. Then the father confessors asked them one more time if they still intended to persist in their preferred²⁵ faith or not. They said, “We believe in God and in one Christian church. But your church we do not believe.” And they stood in the middle of the wood like this a good half hour before it was kindled. During that time they continually said that they were willing to die in the name of Christ. Then the four father confessors called out to them that they should convert or they would go to the devil and they would die in the devil’s name. Then the two men said they were willing to die for the sake of the evangelical truth, as pious Christians. After that the fire was kindled. They cried out nothing other than this: “Lord, Lord, O Son of David,²⁶ have mercy on us!” And the ropes around their body burned up before they suffocated. Then the one finally fell to his knees in the fire, put his hands together, and cried out, “Lord Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on us!” After that they both passed away and were completely burned to ashes. This event lasted nearly four hours.

The third day after that, the third monk who had taken time to deliberate was also burned to death, and he was treated as the others were. He was a very learned man. At the pile of wood he gave a long sermon, and after that went to his torture. And after they kindled the fire, he kept on preaching until the fire and flames leapt up and covered him, and in this way he, too, passed away blessedly in God.

Source

Anonymous. Der Actus vnnd hendlung der Degradation vnd verprennung der Christlichen dreyen Ritter vnd Merterer Augustiner ordens. Augsburg: Melchior Ramminger, 1523.

Endnotes

¹ In the 1514 agreement mentioned in the next sentence, Jan is recorded as Joannes de Essendia (H. Q. Janssen, Jacobus Praepositus, Luthers Leerling en Vriend, 9th ed. [Amsterdam: G. L. Funke, 1866], 12). One of the inquisitors in the case of him and Hendrik, Jan van Paesschen, recorded him as Joannes van den Esschen (Jean Charles Diercxsens, Antverpia Christo Nascens et Crescens, tome 4 [Antwerp: Joannes Henricus van Soest], 2). The assumption that his hometown was therefore Essen seems to be confirmed by the fact that an ancient Antwerp chronology says that one of the martyrs was from the Campine (Kaspar Verstockt, Antwerpsch Chronykje [Leiden: Pieter vander Eyk, 1743], 23), which includes Essen. (The etymology of Campine denotes uncultivated flat land.)

² Georg Spalatin, Elector Frederick the Wise’s secretary and Luther’s friend, reported that Jan (“Johannes Nesse”) was the younger of the two martyrs, and he says that he got his information about the men from Lambert Mulmann, an imperial courtier present at the burning (“Chronicon sive Annales Georgii Spalatini a M[ense] Augusto Anni MDXIII. usque ad Finem Fere Anni MCXXVI,” in Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum, Praecipue Saxonicarum, tome 2, edited by Johann Burchard Menke [Leipzig: Johann Christian Martin, 1728], col. 628). Luther wrote in a letter to Spalatin that one of the two monks was “Iohannes Nesse, not yet thirty years old” (Weimarer Ausgabe, Briefwechsel 3:115), and he called both of them “young boys [iunge knaben]” in the hymn he penned about their martyrdom (Weimarer Ausgabe 35:411). Another account written by an eyewitness says that the youngest of the three men—Jan, Hendrik, and Lambert de Thoren, who eventually yielded and was not burned—was degraded in a separate ceremony from the other two, apparently as the leader and chief speaker of the three. We might therefore assume that Jan was the chief speaker and was in his late twenties, and that the others were older. But we also possess a list of sixty-two “Articles Asserted by Brother Hendrik and the Others,” which gives the impression that Hendrik was the leader and chief speaker and therefore the younger of the two martyrs. And the French martyrologist Jean Crespin wrote in 1556 that Hendrik Voes was twenty-four years old—a specific number as opposed to Luther’s approximate one—and he says nothing about Jan’s age (Acta Martyrum [Geneva, 1556], 178). If, hypothetically, Crespin got Hendrik and Jan switched around, that would mean that Jan participated in the 1514 agreement at the age of fifteen—not impossible, but unlikely. It therefore seems safe to assume that Spalatin was incorrect about Jan being the younger of the two.

³ The inquisitor Jan van Paesschen recorded him as “F[rater] Henricus Vos ex Busco-ducis,” that is, from ’s-Hertogenbosch (Diercxsens, op. cit., 4:2). However, in the Antwerp chronology mentioned in endnote 1, when talking about Jan and Hendrik’s arrest, the author says that both men were from ’s-Hertogenbosch, and later, when describing their execution, he says that “the one was from the Campine and the other was from Zeeland” (Verstockt, op. cit., 19, 23). Zeeland was a countship at the time that basically corresponds to the modern day Dutch province of the same name, but it does not have any connection to either Essen or ’s-Hertogenbosch. Some uncertainty therefore remains about the martyrs’ places of origin.

⁴ See endnote 2.

⁵ Rudolf Leers, ed., Mansfelder Blätter 31/32 (1918) 341. Spangenberg wrote his history in 1572. He gives the monks’ names as Joannes Nesse and Heinrich Voes, and says that Joannes (Jan) was “scarcely thirty years old [kaum 30 Jahr alt].” But since Spangenberg’s spelling of his name is identical to Luther’s and since Spangenberg also refers the reader to a collection of Luther’s letters for more information on the two monks, he appears to have lifted the remark about van den Esschen’s age straight from the letter of Luther cited in endnote 2.

⁶ The castle was demolished in 1775, having become dilapidated.

⁷ Diercxsens, Antverpia Christo Nascens et Crescens, tome 3 (Antwerp: Joannes Henricus van Soest, 1773), 363–64.

⁸ Diercxsens, op. cit., 4:2. Another source also mentions Ruard Tapper, thirty-six, and says that “Francis [van der] Hulst was commissioned by an official papal letter to appoint an inquisitor himself; he just had to be a prelate or a theologian. He immediately named Egmondanus [Nicolaas Baechem of Egmond].”

⁹ Robert J. Christman, The Dynamics of the Early Reformation in their Reformed Augustinian Context (Amsterdam University Press, 2020), 66, 103–5.

¹⁰ Ibid., 66, 119–20.

¹¹ The Beghards were a lay order of men that lives in semi-monastic religious communities but did not take formal vows. The communities were not bound by a uniform rule; each community was only subject to their particular superior.

¹² Diercxsens, op. cit., 3:375.

¹³ Christman, op. cit., 67–68.

¹⁴ Paul Fredericq, ed., Corpus Documentorum Inquisitionis Haereticae Pravitatis Neerlandicae, vol. 4 (Ghent: J. Vuylsteke, 1900), 174, doc. 119; Christman, op. cit., 59.

¹⁵ Fredericq, ed., op. cit., 4:173, doc. 118; Christman, op. cit.

¹⁶ Spalatin, op. cit.

¹⁷ Weimarer Ausgabe, Briefwechsel 3:115.

¹⁸ Diercxsens, op. cit., 3:375; 4:1–2.

¹⁹ Christman, op. cit., 80, 82.

²⁰ Ibid., 173, 184.

²¹ Weimarer Ausgabe, Briefwechsel 3:237–39, no. 707; St. Louis Edition 10:1924–27.

²² Christman, op. cit., 165–66.

²³ Jacob van Hoogstraten. It is interesting that he is called the head inquisitor, since elsewhere Francis van der Hulst and Nicolaas Baechem of Egmond are called head inquisitors.

²⁴ Probably either Nicolaas Baechem of Egmond, who had formerly been prior in Brussels, or Jan van Paesschen, who was not from Brussels but Mechelen.

²⁵ This could also be translated superior, in which case the father confessors would be speaking sarcastically.

²⁶ German: Domine/domine. O ain Sun Dauid erbarme dich unser. Addressing Jesus as “a Son of David” seems to have been a local or cultural peculiarity. It could also be translated “one or only Son of David,” but that address would also be peculiar.

Filed under Arts, History Tagged with 500th anniversary, Adriaan Aernoult, Adriaan Floriszoon, Adrien Aernoult, Antoine I de Lalaing, Antwerp, ’s-Hertogenbosch, Beghards, Brabant, Brussels, Brussels City Hall, burning, Charles V, degradation, Diocese of Cambrai, Egmondanus, Emperor Charles V, Essen, execution, first Lutheran martyrdom, Francis van der Hulst, Georg Spalatin, Grand Plaza, Hendrik Voes, Hendrik Vos, Hieronymus van der Noot, immolation, imprisonment, inquisition, interrogation, Jacob Latomus, Jacob van Hoogstraten, Jan van den Esschen, Johannes van den Esschen, July 1 1523, Lambert de Thoren, Lambert Thorn, Low Countries, Lutheran persecution, Margaret of Austria, Martin Luther, martyr, martyrdom, monastery, Netherlands, Nicolaas Baechem, Nicolaas Egmond, papal authority, persecution, Pope Adrian VI, Reformed Augustinians, Ruard Tapper, University of Louvain, Vilvoorde

Jacob Probst’s Exhortatory Epistle (1522)

June 28, 2023 Leave a comment

Translator’s Preface

This is the second in a series of translations I am posting in preparation for the 500th anniversary of the first Lutheran martyrdom on July 1, 2023. See the preface of the first translation in this series for more on Jacob Probst, the author of this epistle, the unhappy circumstances in which he wrote it, and its connection to the first Lutheran martyrs. I will repeat here that if this epistle made it into the hands of Probst’s fellow Augustinian monks in Antwerp, which is not at all unlikely, then it would be impossible to overstate its impact on the men who would become the first Lutheran martyrs. It would have prepared, fortified, and equipped them for what they were about to undergo.

Jacob Probst’s Exhortatory Epistle

Exhortatory Epistle to his Hearers, and Especially to the People of Antwerp

Brother Jacob Probst, a useless servant of Christ,
To all the faithful of Antwerp in Christ,
Grace and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Although I am so humiliated in my iniquities, dearest friends in Christ, that I dare not lift up my face in your sight or lift my eyes up to heaven, since I denied my Lord Jesus Christ and his word out of the fear of death and of the destruction of your city, and did so in the presence of impious and sacrilegious tyrants, nevertheless my conscience does not permit me to be silent. It forces me to disregard my shame and to be concerned for your salvation. I am concerned that many of you will be scandalized by my example, perhaps very many, and as a result of my case will depart from the pure and holy word of Christ, which he began to sow among you through my ministry. It is admittedly unbecoming for a man who has fallen himself to exhort others to steadfastness, when as a leader and pastor he should have been the first to take a stand and to lay down his life for his brothers. But if the leading roles must be denied to me, I will function¹ in the secondary and common ones, so that I at least may warn strangers of the danger I myself fell into. However, it is clearly not new or rare for leaders and those who should especially stand firm to sin and fall. For we read that the majority of kings, princes, priests, and prophets made mistakes and acted impiously, yes, that nearly all of the best and holiest men fell at some point. Moses and his brother Aaron sinned. David sinned, and he was a man chosen after God’s own heart. Job sinned, even though he was extremely blameless in all his temptations. The apostle Peter sinned, not just before but also after the Holy Spirit was given. How much more are we able to sin and fall, when we are the bottommost dregs in comparison with those men? Not that I want my sacrilege to be excused or mitigated by these examples. No indeed, it is extremely deplorable that I can only be numbered with the impious or with the falling saints. Rather, I am saying this because these have been recorded for all of us as universal examples of fear and hope, fear regarding God’s judgment and hope regarding his mercy, in order that those who have fallen may not despair, whether they are pastors or sheep, and on the other hand that they may fear the judgment of God, and that those who are standing firm may take heed that they do not fall, whether they are pastors or sheep.

Then, too, the unsearchable depths of divine goodness and wisdom allow those who are superior to sin with a more noticeable fall, so that we realize that everyone must stand on his own, and as Paul says in teaching the Galatians, “Let each person test his own work, and then he will have a boast in himself, and not in another” [Gal. 6:4]. For if the wisdom of God did not do this, some would think that they were excused if they perished by following the example of their superiors. Others, on the other hand, would be arrogant and trust that they were standing firm by the good example of their superior. For right away in the early church, the Corinthians began to boast in men this way, saying, “I belong to Paul”; “I belong to Apollos”; “I belong to Cephas”; “I belong to Christ” [1 Cor. 1:12]. And the people of Israel sinned by asking for a king, not because it was evil to have a king, since God had promised kings from the seed of Abraham, but because they trusted in a human king more than in the only God, as he says to Samuel, “They have not rejected you, but me from being king over them” [1 Sam. 8:7]. Therefore the zeal of the Lord of hosts does this, so as to chastise his bride and train her in such a way that she will not cling in faith to either a good overseer [praeposito] or an evil one, rely on his good example, or fall by his bad example, but will boast only in the Lord and look for nothing from her ministers except the word of her Lord. For she lives in safety and security by his word alone, not by the work of any human. So too, she dies by the lack of his word alone, not by the sin of any human. Although each person will pay for his own bad example, no one else can somehow be excused by it before the just Judge, who will repay each person not according to what belongs to someone else, but according to what belongs to that person.

I wish and pray with all my strength that this is the fruit my offense will bear for all of you, dearest friends, that you may turn your eyes away from me whether I am standing or falling, and cling faithfully and steadfastly only to the message you heard through my mouth, and that you do so all the more, the more fiercely Satan now rages among you through the sophists and the devourers of the world, the mendicant brothers. That miserable fall and sacrilegious and impious recantation is indeed my own, but the message that you heard through me is not my own, and however guilty I have been by falling, those who have fallen by my falling will not be excused for that reason, just as those who have stood firm by my standing firm will not be crowned for that reason. For indeed neither have planted their feet on that rock, Jesus Christ, but on me, that is, on the sand. But those people will be saved who both then and now have planted themselves on the rock. And who knows? Maybe it was necessary for me to fall, so that those who have planted themselves on me would also fall. Awesome is God in his decisions over the sons of men [Psalm 66:5].

Therefore, dearest and tremendously longed-for friends in the Lord, let us humble and pardon each other, pray for one another and bear each other’s burdens. Instructed by this experience of mine, let us learn to leave behind all respect of persons and to trust in, rely on, and cling to the pure word of God alone. And with the apostle let us rejoice that Christ is preached in every way, whether sincerely or insincerely [Phil. 1:18]. For it is the Lord who judges the peoples, and he judges the whole world with justice [Psalm 9:8; 96:13; 98:9]. All others are only ministers and messengers of his word, so that those who boast may boast in the Lord and not in men.

So then, I implore you by the mercy of Christ, dearest friends in the Lord, to grow and persevere in that which you have received by the Lord’s blessing. You especially received what I also received from the Lord and passed on to you, namely that Jesus Christ came into this world to save sinners, in order that everyone might know this trustworthy message worthy of all acceptance, that we are unable to be justified and saved by our own strength or works, and that all the things a person does and can do on his own are truly sins. They are so untrustworthy that they are all the more deplorable, the greater the show they put on trying to sell themselves as good works and hiding wolves under every kind of mask. For if what Paul writes in Romans 14 stands firm—“Everything that is not from faith is sin” [Rom. 14:23]—how much more is that sin that is against faith? That is exactly what those presumptuous works are by which the impious desire to become good and to merit grace. They don’t just do works without faith; they rave against faith with downright impudence. But this is righteousness, salvation, and redemption, and our wisdom—to know Christ, that we are redeemed and cleansed by his blood alone, that his works, his death, and all that is his are ours. These are the things in which we should boast, take pride, and presume upon.² But we should be confused, anxious, and hopeless in ourselves. This is the glory of Christian knowledge; these are the riches of our faith. Then we should also show the same kind of love to our neighbors, whether they are friends or enemies, that he showed to all, in order that they too may be helped by our prayers, our speech, and our work, and that they may not believe anything about us and what is ours except that we believe in Christ and the things that are Christ’s. This is the highest doctrine and knowledge, and the only one that is necessary for and useful to humans.

But as for those extremely recent fictions, which are the traditions of disreputable men, about food and drink, about clothing and shaving, about cinctures, about cells, about regular fasts, about specified short prayers, about rosaries, and whatever the lying mendicant brothers have thought up, see that you guard against them. For these are deceits, these are tricks of Satan, by which he leads consciences away from faith and love. For the inventions, statutes, and commandments of men nullify faith, and those who think that they are justified by them have fallen away from grace [Gal. 5:4]. For you are not a Christian because you tie a small rope around you, when even a pig can be asked to do that and has that done to it every day. Nor are you a Christian if you eat fish on a certain day, which a Muslim Turk can also do. Indeed, as Christ says, nothing that enters the mouth defiles a person [Matt. 15:11], so nothing that clothes a person’s body can defile a person either.

Listen therefore to this Leader and Master, and steadfastly follow him, most beloved friends. But do not be afraid of or put up with those bulls [Bullas], whether the pope’s or any others opposed to this Master, for they are only bubbles [Bullae]. And may the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, our Leader and Light and Salvation, educate and preserve your minds in all spiritual wisdom and knowledge, keeping them pure and blameless up until that great day, and may he crush Satan under your feet very quickly [Rom. 16:20]. Amen. Pray for me, dearest friends, and for all who labor in the Word. The grace of Christ be with you. Amen.

Source

Probst, Jacob. Fratris Iacobi Praepositi Augustiniani quondam Prioris Antvverpiensis historia utriusque captivitatis propter verbum Dei. Eiusdem etiam Epistola ad Auditores suos Antvverpienses. Wittenberg: Johann Rhau-Grunenberg, 1522.

I also consulted the anonymous German translation published the following year: Ein schone und clegliche history bruder Jacobs probst Augustiner ordens vor zeiten Prior zu Antdorff / an gemeine fromme Christenheit / von beiden gefencknissen / so er von wegen des worts gottes / und umb des heyligen Euangeliumß willen erlitten hatt. Colmar: Amandus Farckall, 1523.

Endnotes

¹ Or let me function

² Latin: in his praesumendum. Probst may seem to be going a step too far here in making his point, but praesumere was also used in the sense to believe, trust, be confident. In other words, it could denote taking for granted in both a godly and ungodly sense.

Filed under History Tagged with Antwerp, confession, conscience, David, distinction of foods, divine wisdom, downfall, encouragement, faith, fasting, first Lutheran martyrdom, God's Word, Hendrik Voes, Hendrik Vos, Jacob Probst, Jacob Propst, Jan van den Esschen, Job, Johannes van den Esschen, judgment, letter, love, Lutheran doctrine, mendicants, mercy, merits, Moses, Peter, recantation, Rosary, salvation, trust

← Older posts

Observance Countdown

500th Anniversary of the First Lutheran HymnalJanuary 19, 2024

In a letter to Willibald Pirkheimer dated January 19, 1524, Georg Spalatin implied that the first Lutheran hymnal had already left the press. That hymnal was "Etlich Cristlich lider, Lobgesang, und Psalm, dem rainen wort Gotten gemeß, auß der heyligen schrifft, durch mancherley hochgelerter gemacht, in der Kirchen zu singen [Several Christian Hymns, Songs of Praise, and Psalms, Composed by Various Highly Learned Men in Accordance With the Pure Word of God on the Basis of Holy Scripture for Singing in Church]," published by Jobst Gutknecht in Nuremberg. Now called the "Achtliederbuch [Book of Eight Hymns]," it included "Dear Christians, One and All, Rejoice" (Luther), "Salvation Unto Us Has Come" (Speratus), "In God I Trust, For So I Must" (Speratus), "O God, Man’s Ruin Is So Broad and Grim" (Speratus), "O Lord, Take Pity Once You've Seen" (Luther), "The Mouth of Fools May Well Confess" (Luther), "From Depths of Woe, Lord God, I Cry" (Luther), and "In Jesus' Name We Upward Lift" (anonymous).

First Edition (German Volumes)

Division 1: Homiletical and Catechetical Writings

Division 2: Reformation-Historical and Polemical Writings

Division 3: German Exegetical Writings

Division 4: Miscellaneous German Writings

Indices

Second Edition (German Volumes)

Latin Exegetical Works

Old Testament

New Testament

Briefwechsel (Correspondence)

Translator’s Preface

Jacob Probst’s Report of Hendrik van Zutphen’s Martyrdom

Postscript

Sources

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

Sermon on the Authority of Saint Peter

Sources

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

Open Letter to Christians in the Low Countries

Source

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

Summary Report of the Two Augustinians Burned at the Stake in Brussels

Source

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

Articles Asserted by Brother Hendrik and the Others

Source

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

History of the Two Augustinians Burned at the Stake in Brussels for the Doctrine of the Gospel

Source

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

The Performance und Proceedings of the Degradation and Burning of the Three Christian Knights and Martyrs of the Augustinian Order, Which Took Place in Brussels on the First of July in the Year 1523

Source

Endnotes

Translator’s Preface

Jacob Probst’s Exhortatory Epistle

Source

Endnotes

Editions of Luther

Sources

Translation

Observance Countdown