temberg. The same passion led him to add the study of the mathematics, and even of medicine, to his theological labours. For several years in the latter part of his life, he held the station of rector in the university, and filled the office with eminent prudence, diligence, and success; but his incessant application and exertions probably hastened his end, since he died in 1548, when only in the forty-fifth year of his age.

15

MATTHEW AUROGALLUS, a native of Bohemia, was a divine of Wittemberg, eminent for his knowledge of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues. He died in 1543. He was the author of a work on the Hebrew names of countries, cities, rivers, mountains, &c. mentioned in the Old Testament, printed at Wittemberg, 1526, 8vo. and again with improvements, at Basil, 1539, 8vo.; and of a Compendium of the Hebrew and Chaldee Grammar, Wittemberg, 1525, 8vo.; Basil, 1539, 8vo.".

16

GEORGE RORAR, or RORARIUS, the learned corrector, of the press at Wittemberg, born October 1st, 1492, was a clergyman of the Lutheran church, ordained in 1525. He not only carefully guarded against typographical errors, in the editions which he superintended, but after the decease of Luther, added several Marginal Notes to his translation; and with the knowledge and consent of the Wittemberg doctors of divinity, made some alterations in the translation itself. He also enlarged Caspar Cruciger's edition, of Luther's Exposition of St. Peter's Epistle, from discourses which he had heard deli vered by Luther; and assisted in editing other works of the Great Reformer. On the removal of the public library from Wittemberg to Jena, he was appointed librarian. He died on the 24th of April, 1557, in the 65th

(15) M. Adami Vit. Germ. Theolog. pp. 192-199.

Bower's Life of Luther, App. pp. 443, 444. Lond. 1813, 8vo. (16) Le Long, Biblioth. Sacra, II. p. 620. Paris, 1723, fol. Chalmers, III. p. 196.

year of his age. He had been amanuensis to Luther."7 Luther was likewise occasionally assisted in his translation by JOHN FORSTER, the intimate friend of Reuchlin, and author of a valuable Hebrew Lexicon, printed at Basil, 1557, fol. Forster was born at Augsburg in 1495. He taught Hebrew at Wittemberg, where he died in 1556.18

BERNARD ZIEGLER also contributed his aid to the same great work. He was a native of Misnia, professor of theology at Leipsic, and an able supporter of the doctrines of the Reformation. He died in 1556, aged 60. He was the author of some theological works, now almost forgotten."

The publication of Luther's German version of the Scriptures roused the Catholics to the most virulent opposition, and every measure was adopted that was likely to disparage the translation, and prevent its circulation amongst the people. JEROM EMSER, one of the counsellors of George, duke of Saxony, and professor of the canon laws at Leipsic; and JOHN COCHLEUS, chaplain to the duke, and afterwards dean of the collegiate church of Frankfort, attacked it in terms of calumnious severity. Emser, affirmed, that the heresies and falsehoods of the translation amounted to fourteen hundred; Cochlæus estimated them only at a thousand! But critical notes were not deemed adequate to the exigency of the case; Emser therefore, under the patronage and sanction of George of Saxony, and two bishops, produced what was called, A CORRECT TRANSLATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT INTO GERMAN, with annotations, printed at Dresden, 1527, fol. In this work Emser asserts, "That he had

(17) Le Long, Biblioth. Sacra, I. pp. 384. 385. Paris, 1723. Freheri Theatrum, pt. i. p. 173.

Walchii Biblioth. Theologica, IV. p. 741.

(18) M. Adami Vit. Germ. Theolog, pp. 302–305.

(19) Le Long, Biblioth. Sacra. I. p. 384.

Lempriere's Universal Biography, art. Ziegler.

confuted Luther's interpretations of the Scriptures, and opposed to them his own, constantly following that sense of any passage which the church approved. That, however, he was by no means convinced of the expediency of trusting the Scriptures with the ignorant multitude; for that the Sacred Writings were an abyss, in whose depths even the most learned men had often been lost." "If the laity," said he, "would but take my advice, I would recommend it to them rather to aim at a holy life, than to study the Scriptures. The Scriptures are committed to the learned, and to them only." Emser's translation was, nevertheless, little more than a republication of the version of Luther, altered in some places to meet the views of the Catholics; so that whilst he condemned the work of the reformer, he actually passed the highest encomium upon it, by republishing the principal part of it as his own. Luther was sensible of this, and thus expresses himself respecting it: "He has left out my preface, inserted his own, and then sold my translation almost word for word. The best revenge which I can wish for is, that though Luther's name is suppressed, and that of his adversary put in its place, yet Luther's book is read, and thus the design of his labours is promoted by his very enemies."20

Several editions of Emser's New Testament were speedily printed; and in 1530, the monks of Rostock published a version of it in the dialect of LOWER SAXONY, in 8vo. Alterations were also made in many of the later editions, so that they varied exceedingly from those of earlier date. 21 A German version of the whole Bible was undertaken and published at the request of Albert II. by JOHN DIETENBERG, a Dominican monk, and professor of theology,* with the same design as that of Emser's New Testament. It was printed at (20) Milner's Hist. of the Church of Christ, V. ch. viii. pp. 84-87. (21) Walchii Biblioth, Theolog. IV. p. 161.

* He died A. D. 1534.

Mentz, 1534, fol. Dr. Geddes calls it "a bad transcript, or rather miserable interpolation of Luther's;" and Caspar Ulenberg, who undertook a German translation, by order of Ferdinand, elector and archbishop of Cologne, in 1614, declared, "that it was impossible to render it conformable to the Vulgate; and that it would be easier to make a new translation of the whole Bible." JOHN ECKIUS, or ECKEN, another of Luther's opponents, published a German translation of the Old Testament, in 1537, fol.; to which he subjoined a corrected edition of Emser's translation of the New Testament.23

Whilst the more learned adversaries of Luther were thus zealously engaged in their literary endeavours to check the progress, and discountenance the perusal, of Luther's translation, the powerful aid of civil authority was called in to assist the design. The duke George of Saxony persecuted, with unrelenting severity, the clergy of his district who were inclined to Lutheranism; recalled the students from the schools and universities where the doctrines of Luther were supposed to prevail; and, with a view to destroy Luther's version of the New Testament, purchased as many copies of it as he could collect, and severely punished such of his subjects as refused to deliver them up. As soon as Emser's revision of the New Testament was ready for publication, he issued a proclamation, in which he treated Luther and his disciples with the most virulent language; accused him of being the author of the fanatical and seditious commotions which had lately occurred; and laid particular stress on the mischief, which he affirmed, Luther had done to Christianity, by his version of the New Testament; vindicating his prohibition of the use of it, by saying that "he acted in obedi

(22) Walchii Biblioth. Theolog. IV, p. 109.

Geddes's Prospectus, pp. 107.

Le Long, Biblioth. Sacra, I. pp. 379, 380. Paris, 1723.

(23) Le Long p. 379,

ence to the late edict of Nuremberg, agreeably to what was the acknowledged duty of every German prince." This edict of Nuremberg was the one issued at the diet held in that city, by the pope's legate, in 1523, by which, among other things, it was decreed, "That printers should print no new things for the future; and that some holy and learned men, appointed for the purpose by the magistrates, within their several jurisdictions, should peruse and examine what came from the press, and that what they disapproved should not be sold." The edict being variously interpreted, Luther wrote to the princes who had sanctioned the diet, acquainting them that he had reverently and with pleasure read it, and also proposed it to the church of Wittemberg; but that since some persons of the highest quality refused to obey it, and put various constructions upon it, he thought it prudent to declare his judgment respecting its meaning, which he hoped would be consonant to their own. After this introduction, he stated the articles of the edict, and proposed his opinions as to the sense of them, and, in particular, respecting the decree before mentioned, observed, "That whereas they had decreed, That no more books should be published, unless they were first approved and licensed by learned men chosen for that purpose, he was not, indeed, against it; but, however, that he understood it so as not at all to be extended to the books of the Holy Scripture; for that the publishing of those could not be prohibited.""

This opposition of the civil authority to the dissemination of Luther's translation of the Bible, was promoted by Henry VIII. king of England. For, exasperated by the Reply of the reformer to his Answer to Luther's treatise On the Babylonish Captivity, Henry complained to the elector Frederic, and to the dukes John his brother, (24) Sleidan's Hist. of Reformation, translated by Bohun, B. iv, p. 64, Milner's Hist, of the Church of Christ, V. pp. 83. 85,