HESSE. LANDGRAVE OF HESSE.

(His curious case.)

The world was long ignorant of the fault of Luther, in consenting, that the landgrave of Hesse should have two wives at the same time. Mr Varillas has spoken of this matter at large. “Philip, landgrave of Hesse, was of so vigorous a constitution, that one wife was not sufficient for him; and the surgeons, who opened him after his death, found

a natural cause for it, which the modesty of our tongue will not permit me to explain. Thuam. lib. xli. ad aun. 1567. Addam, quod plerisque risu dignnm mihi silentio minime prætermittendum visum est, ipsum tam inexhausti ad venereos usus succi fuisse, ut cùm uxore sola uteretur, et ilia toties ilium admittere non posset, vir alioqui castus quique vagis libidinibus minime oblectabatur ex ejus permissu, negotio cum pastoribus communicato, concubinam unam superinduxerit, cujus consuetudine adore aliquantum perdomito, parci us ac moderatius cum uxore versaretur. Tandem hoc anno, qui ilii ciimactericus fuit, postridie paschæ mortalitatem exuit. Inspecto à Medicis corpore triorclies repetus est. ⁶⁰ He persuaded himself, that his infirmity dispensed with the gospel rigour, and permitted him to have two wives at the same time. Nothing disturbed him in the notion he had conceived of it, but the novelty of the thing: but he supposed, that the approbation of Luther, and others of the most famous divines of his sect, would justify his action. He assembled them at Wittenberg, in form of a council, in the year 1539. The affair was there examined with all the precautions that were thought necessary to prevent their decisions being turned into ridicule. They foresaw the troublesome consequences of what they were going to do; but, at last, the fear of disobliging the landgrave, carried it in Luther’s opinion, and his chief disciples, against the law of Jesus Christ, conscience, reputation, and all other human and divine considerations. The result of the assembly of Wittemberg, was written with Melancthon’s own hand, and signed by Luther, and by the other most famous divines of their sect. It was expressed in so strong terms, that it could leave no doubt, or ambiguity, and was sent to the landgrave in the following form:” Varillas, Hist, de l'Hérésie, livr. xii. pag. m. 17. ⁶¹ Mr Varillas gives the act entire in Latin and French. We there find an express permission granted to this landgrave to marry a second wife, provided, that only a few persons were made privy to it. We there also find, that in certain cases of necessity, any other man might marry again in his wife’s life-time; and two of these cases of necessity are specified by these doctors; first, if a man being a captive, in a foreign country, cannot otherwise preserve, or recover his health: secondly, if a man be married to a leprous woman. “Certis tamen casibus locus est dispensation i, si quis apud exteras nationes captivus, ad curam corporis et sanitatem inibi alteram uxorem superinduceret, vel si quis haberet leprosam; his casibus alteram ducere cum consilio sui pastoris, non intentione novam legem inducendi, sed suæ necessitate consulendi, hune néscimus, qua ratione damnare liceret.” Mr Varillas sets down in Latin and French the landgrave’s contract of marriage with Margaret de Saal; to which marriage this prince’s first wife gave her consent. This historian makes many reflexions thereupon, tending to shew, that the reasons of these Casuists open a very large door to polygamy, and observes, that the two acts, inserted in his history, have been faithfully transcribed and collated by the imperial notaries with the originals, which are preserved in the archives of Ziegenhain, belonging equally to the branch of Hesse-Cassel, and to that of Hesse-Darmstadt.

But after him came a more artful controversialist, Mr de Meaux, Hist. des Variations, livr. vi. n. 1, et seq. ⁶² who has made many subtle reflexions upon this matter, and on the instruction the landgrave gave to Martin Bucer. In this we find, on one hand, the reasons which induced this prince to a second marriage; and, on the other, those by which he would induce the Divines to consent to it. He shews, that he never loved the princess, his wife; and that she was so disagreeable, and so subject to drunkenness, that he neither could, nor ever would abstain from

other women, whilst he had no other wife than her; and that, nevertheless, he would not incur the penalties, which the scripture denounces to fornicators and adulterers. “Cum videam quod ab hoc agendi modo penes modernam uxorem meam nec possim nec velim abstinere.’ Mr de Maux, Hist, des Variations, page 259. ⁶³ The physicians, add he, know the strength of my constitution; besides, I am often obliged to assist at the diets; they last a long time, and we have rich tables there; how then can I preserve my continence? For I cannot always take my wife along with me, with her great retinue.” He adds to all this I know not how many threats and promises, which must have embarrassed his Casuists; for it is highly probable, that if a private gentleman had consulted them upon the like case, he would have obtained nothing from them. It may therefore reasonably be imagined, that they were men of little faith; they had not a due confidence in the promises of Jesus Christ; they believed, that if the reformation of Germany, were not maintained by the princes who possessed it, it would soon be extinguished. The experience of the time past made them timorous; they saw, that the violence of persecutions, and the violence, employed by Catholic princes against those who had left the Romish communion, had even destroyed those reformations in the birth. It was natural to fear a like fate, unless force were repelled by force. However it be, it cannot be denied, generally speaking, but Luther’s book contained several things favourable to polygamy.

It must here be observed, that Thuanus was ill informed of the circumstances of this affair. The landgrave, according to him, was, on one hand, so vigorous, that his wife could not admit his embraces as often as he desired; and, on the other, so chaste, that he did not love to take his pleasure abroad: and therefore the princess consented to his taking a

concubine. This was not the case; be had never loved her; he married her against his inclination: and beginning three weeks after his marriage to make use of other women, he continued the same course till his second marriage.

Some ministers, have not had all the necessary prudence in answering for Luther. The only answer that should have been given to the Catholic objectors, was to say, as Mr Basnage has prudently done: Basuage, Hist. de la Religion des Eglises Reformées, Tom. I, pag. 443. ⁶⁴ Luther ought not to have granted the landgrave of Hesse the permission to marry a second wife, whilst his first was alive; and that the bishop of Meaux did justly condemn him upon that article, and that the popes have run into much more criminal excesses. Whence it follows, that Luther’s fault, censured by the Papists, has no weight; for if this fault hindered him from being an instrument in the hand of God to declare the truth, and reform the church, the Roman Catholics are to blame in believing that the Popes, who have been guilty of more crying sins than this, were, however, living oracles to the church, and the vicars of Jesus Christ. It is certain, the Catholics can infer nothing from this action of the reformers, nor from any other to invalidate the reformation, without destroying a principle absolutely necessary for their own support; to wit, that the greatest crimes do not hinder the Pope pronouncing ex cathedra, from declaring a truth, the belief of which is obliging on all the faithful.

Art. Luther.