PART I.

THE REV. S. BARING-GOULD

ON

"LUTHER AND JUSTIFICATION."

THE REPLY.

"Soft you; a word or two before you go."--Othello.

CHARACTERISTIC feature of the Ritualistic school is that its members are singularly unanimous in their hatred of the Reformers and the Reformation. This antipathy is exhibited on every available occasion. Protestantism is repudiated by them as a heresy, while they revel in the title "Catholic." If you are uncertain of your company, casually mention "Foxe's Book of Martyrs," and you will find it operate as the proverbial red rag. We have had lately a notable example in Dr. Littledale. In his Lecture, delivered at Liverpool, "On Ritualistic Innovations, he declared that "even the best of the lay and clerical Scotch and English Reformers were a set of miscreants, and others generally licentious infidels"; Bishop Burnet and Foxe the martyrologist were "mendacious and infamous partisans "; Cranmer was "a thief and a liar"; and Latimer a "miscreant." He tells us that "the Jacobins sinned deeply in cruelty and licentious foulness, but in all these peculiarities they were left far behind by the leaders of the Reformation." Robespierre, Danton, Marat, St. Just, Couthon, and

the like, the celebrities of the French Revolution, merit quite as much respect as Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, Hooper, and others." This is bold and outspoken language.

Men that make

Envy and crooked malice nourishment

Dare bite the best.-SHAKESPEARE, Henry VIII.

The Rev. Sabine Baring-Gould, the late Vicar of East Mersea, is a fair type of this school, and now takes his turn in equally plain language against the great German Reformer, Luther. These gentlemen sigh for pre-Reformation days when the priest ruled and the sacramental system flourished, to the glorification of the priest, and ignorance, superstition, thraldom, and degradation of the people.

A noted political writer said: "I have uniformly observed, in my perusal of history, that the increase of ignorance and of oppression always kept pace with clerical power." 1

To regain the ascendency of the priesthood, the work of the Reformers must be undone. The Reformers themselves must, therefore, be degraded in the estimation of the people at any cost. With this end in view, at least, I cannot see what other object was to be attained, the Rev. S. Baring-Gould has published two Lectures, entitled "Luther and Justification." By stringing together a series of disjointed scraps, forcibly torn from their context, and artistically arranged with an affectation of accuracy by a formidable array of foot references, a very plausible primâ facie case is made out. I would venture to hope, however, that the rev. gentleman has not read the originals of the numerous works purported to be quoted by him (the extracts are, in fact, for the most part, the usual round of Popish quotations; there is a remarkable resemblance in all these reproductions),

1 "Political Register," Cobbett, vol. xxvi. 349, 350.

4

3

otherwise, my observations would take a positive and personal form.1 In any event, the Lectures are as gross a libel on that great Reformer, the godly and God-fearing man, Martin Luther, as could possibly be produced. We are told of the atheist who said that we learn from the Bible "that there is no God," of the Socinian, that Christ came to spread strife and discord in this world instead of peace, to set families by the ears, and that He Himself literally became a curse, and so on. These are trite illustrations, but when we find a professed Christian Minister of the Reformed Church adopt the very same exceptional course with the writings of Luther, and thus hold him up to us as a self-convicted, depraved monster, it becomes the duty of all who love the truth to raise the voice of protest and warning, and expose the art and malignity displayed by these traducers of the dead.

5

The Rev. S. Baring-Gould reproduces the slander of others who have gone before him. He has shown himself to be an industrious compiler. He passes current with some as a learned man, a man of antiquarian research. It is deeply to be regretted to find a man thus gifted prostitute his energies by repro

1 In reply to my application to the Rev. S. Baring-Gould whether he had personally examined the originals from which he professes to quote, thus making himself responsible for their accuracy, he wrote with characteristic evasion:- "All such quotations as I have not myself verified in my lectures on Luther are taken from Dr. Döllinger's great work 'Die Reformation,' &c. I was in correspondence with him about translating this work at the time the lectures were delivered, but other literary work has prevented my undertaking it." Thus avoiding a direct reply to my question, though certainly not bound to answer it. It is a significant fact, however, that we have here a Minister of the Reformed Church,which Reformation was begun by the great Luther,—seeking the material for his lectures against Luther from the work of a leading divine of the unreformed Church, the greatest opponent to which was Luther himself. This is certainly a new interpretation of the saying, "Fas est et ab hoste doceri."

2 Psl. xiv. 1. 3 Mat. x. 34. 4 Luke xii. 51, 53. 5 Gal. iii. 13.

ducing the calumnies of others, for (to borrow a phrase from Archdeacon Hare on the same subject, as applied to Dr. Mill) he has committed the same sin of citing the same mutilated passages, with the purpose of holding up Luther to condemnation. Yes; sin it is, and sin it ought to be called, so long as the Ninth Commandment keeps its place in the Decalogue, to take up slander hastily, without examination, and to repeat it, and circulate it through the world, and that, too, against a man whose memory has been an object of deep reverence to millions for twelve generations. In fact, the higher the repute of him who does so, the more such conduct ought to be reprobated.

I wish it in the outset to be distinctly understood that I charge the Rev. S. Baring-Gould :—

1. With misrepresenting the teaching of the Church on the doctrine of Justification by Faith at the time when Luther wrote, and which he assailed.

2. With misrepresenting Luther's teaching on the same doctrine.

3. With mistranslating Luther's writings.

4. With misquoting Luther's words; and, 5. With misinterpreting Luther's text.

According to this rev. gentleman, Luther preached and wrote, under the doctrine of "Justification by Faith," the most soul-destroying, diabolical system that could be devised by Satan himself. He deliberately asserts that Luther taught that "good works were prejudicial"; that "conscience was the voice of Satan" ; and "morality an impediment to justification"; "if in faith adultery be committed, it is not a sin"; and that marriage vows may be disregarded. "No acts a man can do, however heinous, are sinful to him who is justified"; that" Christ died in order to allow us to give way at our pleasure to our bestial inclinations"; that "a man being justified solely by imputation of Christ's righteousness, then, as

1

5

1 "Lecture," p. 7. 2 p. 17. 3 p. 14. 4 p. 6.

5 p. 32.

(9)

a consequence, he is entirely emancipated from the necessity of attempting to keep the moral law;"1 that, whereas, "under the Catholic system, morality is binding, and sacraments are necessary, under the Lutheran system neither are of any value whatever." "

2

Indeed, Satan could not have devised so clumsy a system; for its very extravagant grossness and contradictions would carry its own refutation. And so it would here, if it were not seriously put forward in this enlightened age by a Minister of the Gospel, a man of good report before the world, with a high literary reputation, and apparently supported by an arsenal of references. To sum up his most elaborate indictment, let me at once state that the Rev. S. Baring-Gould charges Luther with teaching that, if we only rely on Christ, and profess to receive our sole justification through Him, we may with impunity commit the grossest crimes to which our mortal natures are prone or exposed; nay, the greater reliance we place in Christ, the greater are our privileges in indulging every deadly sin which otherwise we are taught would everlastingly destroy the soul. Only " admit the Gospel of Christ, and no sin can damn a man.'

The rev. gentleman calls in aid a phalanx of accusers to support his case; Papists,-whom he will persist in calling "Catholics,"--Anabaptists, and even Lutherans, are alleged to bear testimony against Luther and his writings. This, indeed, is nothing new, for abuse of Luther personally, and misrepresentation of his writings, were rife even during his lifetime. Luther bitterly complained of this. First, that they brought against him his early writings, when he was, as he designated himself, "a most furious papist," and when he was "merely striving to emerge and force his way out of this thick darkness." Secondly, that they purposely and maliciously per