Fug and Wenzel Link follows John Lang and precedes John Staupitz the head of your order? It is signal carelessness and remarkable ignorance to put him who had the first place in chapter xlii. down among the following numbers. I will not call it malice, for Luder and Luther might be different persons.[1] . . .
Zasius does not think ill of Martin. He knows that he is quite learned in our theology both modern and ancient, he knows that he is a luminary of the Augustinian order, he knows that he sustains the attacks of many, in short, he knows that the innocent man is wrongly bound by the curses of the Pope. He is not ignorant how much hatred is brought by the Hussite name, and how much odium by blessed Bohemia. Perhaps he thinks that it would be more for the peace and concord of the people if Luther would keep within the fold of his gentle and taciturn monasticism, and leave to secular priests the interpretation of the divine law. There are some men neither bad nor unlearned, whose names I refrain from giving, who think that it is wicked and impious for a doubly consecrated priest thus to tear to pieces Leo, the head of the apostolic see. I agree with no authors of dissension, contuḿely and strife. Let us have fair play. If they stir up sleeping dogs, and revive the dormant folly of the Bohemians, or for the sake of vengeance violate the majesty of the Roman see, rubbing the scar from the old wound, their audacity is nothing to me. I am peaceful, not for fear of outward foes, but for myself; my moderation is due to gentleness rather than to prudence. Finally you ask my opinion of the papal decrees. I esteem the decrees of philosophers more than those of priests. . . .
273. ERASMUS TO SPALATIN.
. . . I wrote recently to Melanchthon in such a way that the letter[2] was as much for Luther as for him. I pray that Christ Almighty may temper the pen and mind of Luther so
