These men were just as honest as Luther, but they occupied the standpoint of the mediaeval
Church, and could not appreciate his departure from the beaten track. The archbishop was very
kind and gracious to Luther, as the latter himself admitted. He simply required that in Christian
humility he should withdraw his objections to the Council of Constance, leave the matter for the
present with the Emperor and the Diet, and promise to accept the final verdict of a future council
unfettered by a previous decision of the Pope. Such a council might re-assert its superiority over
the Pope, as the reformatory Councils of the fifteenth century had done.
But Luther had reason to fear the result of such submission, and remained as hard as a rock.
He insisted on the supremacy of the word of God over all Councils, and the right of judging for
himself according to his conscience.^381 He declared at last, that unless convinced by the Scriptures
or "clear and evident reasons," he could not yield, no matter what might happen to him; and that
he was willing to abide by the test of Gamaliel, "If this work be of men, it will be overthrown; but
if it is of God, ye will not be able to overthrow it" (Acts 5:38, 39).^382
He asked the Archbishop, on April 25, to obtain for him the Emperor’s permission to go
home. In returning to his lodgings, he made a pastoral visit to a German Knight, and told him in
leaving: "To-morrow I go away."
Three hours after the last conference, the Emperor sent him a safe-conduct for twenty-one
days, but prohibited him from writing or preaching on the way. Luther returned thanks, and declared
that his only aim was to bring about a reformation of the Church through the Scriptures, and that
he was ready to suffer all for the Emperor and the empire, provided only he was permitted to confess
and teach the word of God. This was his last word to the imperial commissioners. With a shake of
hands they took leave of each other, never to meet again in this world.
It is to the credit of Charles, that in spite of contrary counsel, even that of his former teacher
and confessor, Cardinal Hadrian, who wished him to deliver Luther to the Pope for just punishment,
he respected the eternal principle of truth and honor more than the infamous maxim that no faith
should be kept with heretics. He refused to follow the example of his predecessor, Sigismund, who
violated the promise of safe-conduct given to Hus, and ordered his execution at the stake after his
condemnation by the Council of Constance.^383 The protection of Luther is the only service which
and usually calls him "Doctor Rotzlöffel," also "Kochlöffel." See Works, Erl. ed., XXXI. 270 sq., 276 sq., 302 sq.; LXII. 74, 78. Otto,
Johann Cochlaeus, der Humanist, Breslau, 1874; Felician Gess, Johannes Cochlaeus, der Gegner Luthers, Oppeln, 1886, IV. 62 pages.(^381) "Gnädiger Herr," he said to the Archbishop of Trier, "ich kann alles leiden, aber die heilige Schrift kann ich nicht übergeben." And
again: "Lieber will ich Kopf und Leben verlieren, als das klare Wort Gottes verlassen."
(^382) See the reports on these useless conferences, in Walch, XV. 2237-2347, 2292-2319; Cochlaeus, Com. de Actis Lutheri, and his
Colloquium cum Luthero Wormatiae habitum; the report of Hieronymus Vehus, published by Seidemann, in the "Zeitschrift für histor.
Theol.," 1851, p. 80 sqq.; and the report of Aleander in Brieger, I. 157-160. Ranke says (I. 332), one might almost be tempted to wish
that Luther had withdrawn his opposition to the councils, and contented himself for the present with the attack upon the abuses of the
papacy, in which he had the nation with him; but he significantly adds, that the power of his spirit would have been broken if it had bound
itself to any but purely religious considerations. "Der ewig freie Geist bewegt sich in seinen eigenen Bahnen."
(^383) It is asserted by Gieseler and Ranke (I. 341) that the Council gave official sanction to this maxim by declaring with regard to Hus:
"Nec aliqua sibi [ei] fides aut promissio de jure naturali, divino vel humano fuerit in praejudicium catholicae fidei observanda." Von der
Hardt, Conc. Const. IV. 521; Mansi, Concil. XXVII. 791. Hefele (Conciliengeschichte, VII. 227 sq.) charges Gieseler with sinning against
the Council and against truth itself, and maintains that this decree, which is only found in the Codex Dorrianus at Vienna, was merely
proposed by a member, and not passed by the Council. But the undoubted decree of the 19th Sess., Sept. 23, 1415, declares that a
safe-conduct, though it should be observed by him who gave it as far as he was able, affords no protection against the punishment of a
heretic if he refuses to recant; and the fact remains that Hus was not permitted to return, and was burned in consequence of his condemnation
by the Council and during its session, July 6, 1415. Aeneas Sylvius (afterwards Pope Pius II.) bears to him and Jerome of Prague the
testimony: "Nemo philosophorum tam forti animo mortem pertulisse traditur quam isti incendium." The traditional prophecy of Hus: