INDULGENCES NOT FOR SALE

A bit of writing by a 34 year old German priest and professor of theology set the world alight and was hugely influential in the creation of the Protestant Reformation. Performance writing on a world scale at a time when the middle east was in turmoil (The Ottomans were expanding empire) The Portuguese were visiting China and doing deals, England was suffering from the “sweating sickness” and the Fifth Council of the Lateran, an Ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, which had begun five years earlier, was coming to an end.

Albert of Mainz

Luther

 

                                   Wittenberg

On 31 October 1517, Martin Luther wrote to Albert of Mainz, protesting against the sale of indulgences. He enclosed in his letter a copy of his "Disputation of Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences," which came to be known as The Ninety-Five Theses. Hans Hillerbrand writes that Luther had then no intention of confronting the church, but saw his disputation as a scholarly objection to church practices, and the tone of the writing is accordingly "searching, rather than doctrinaire."Hillerbrand writes that there is nevertheless an undercurrent of challenge in several of the theses, particularly in Thesis 86, which asks: "Why does the pope, whose wealth today is greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build the basilica of Saint Peter with the money of poor believers rather than with his own money?"

Luther objected to a saying attributed to Johann Tetzel that "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory [also attested as 'into heaven'] springs." He insisted that, since forgiveness was God's alone to grant, those who claimed that indulgences absolved buyers from all punishments and granted them salvation were in error. Christians, he said, must not slacken in following Christ on account of such false assurances.

On the eve of All Saint's Day, 31st October, 1517, Luther posted the ninety-five theses, which he had composed in Latin, on the door of the Castle Church of Wittenberg, according to university custom.

On the same day, Luther sent a hand-written copy, accompanied with honourable comments to the archbishop Albert of Mainz and Magdeburg, responsible for the practice of the indulgence sales, and to the bishop of Brandenburg, the superior of Luther. 

Christoph von Scheurl

Within two weeks, copies of the Theses had spread throughout Germany; within two months throughout Europe. It was not until January 1518 that Christoph von Scheurl and other friends of Luther translated the Ninety-Five Theses from Latin into German, printed, and widely copied them, making the controversy one of the first in history to be aided by the printing press.

FAILED PERFORMATIVES

Sergius Witte

Nicholas II

The October Manifesto was issued on 30 October 1905, during the '1905 Revolution'. Count Sergei Yulyevich Witte, also known as Sergius Witte, a highly influential policy-maker, was the author of the October Manifesto of 1905. He was Chairman of the Council of Ministers (Prime Minister) of the Russian Empire and served under the last two emperors of Russia.

The October Manifesto divided opposition to Tsar Nicholas II. The Kadets (The Constitutional Democratic Party, informally Kadets - Конституционная Демократическая партия) were appeased by the idea of having freedom of speech and a truly representative government, and the Union of October 17 or more informally Octobrist Party took their name from this manifesto; however; the Marxists maintained that Nicholas had really only made a small concession. The Duma was only a shell of democracy as it could not pass laws without the approval of the Tsar and freedom of speech was heavily regulated.

The first Duma had a majority of Kadets. The Kadets were mainly supported by professionals, - university professors and lawyers were particularly prominent within the party - members of the zemstvo (a form of local government), and some industrialists.

As it turned out at the time, the Marxists proved to be correct. The manifesto may have been a precursor of the first ever Russian Constitution of 1906; but, the manifesto and the constitution resulted in insignificant democratization as the Tsar continued to exercise veto power over the Duma. Nicholas II demonstrated his hold on power by dismissing the first and second Duma; indeed, he dissolved and reformed the Duma several times.

30^th October Manifesto (Gregorian calendar – the 17^th in the Russian calendar)

ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF ORDER IN THE STATE

The disturbances and unrest in St Petersburg, Moscow and in many other parts of our Empire have filled Our heart with great and profound sorrow. The welfare of the Russian Sovereign and His people is inseparable and national sorrow is His too. The present disturbances could give rise to national instability and present a threat to the unity of Our State. The oath which We took as Tsar compels Us to use all Our strength, intelligence and power to put a speedy end to this unrest which is so dangerous for the State. The relevant authorities have been ordered to take measures to deal with direct outbreaks of disorder and violence and to protect people who only want to go about their daily business in peace. However, in view of the need to speedily implement earlier measures to pacify the country, we have decided that the work of the government must be unified. We have therefore ordered the government to take the following measures in fulfilment of our unbending will:

1. Fundamental civil freedoms will be granted to the population, including real personal inviolability, freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and association.

2. Participation in the Duma will be granted to those classes of the population which are at present deprived of voting powers, insofar as is possible in the short period before the convocation of the Duma, and this will lead to the development of a universal franchise. There will be no delay to the Duma elect already been organized.

3. It is established as an unshakeable rule that no law can come into force without its approval by the State Duma and representatives of the people will be given the opportunity to take real part in the supervision of the legality of government bodies.

We call on all true sons of Russia to remember the homeland, to help put a stop to this unprecedented unrest and, together with this, to devote all their strength to the restoration of peace to their native land.

Nicholas II, clearly never had any intention of fulfilling any of the promises contained in the manifesto. If one takes a performance writing approach to the text, it contains a number of performative utterances, all of which turned out to be false; hence, all unhappy performatives. If one accepts that the uttering of words is the leading incident in the performance of an act, the performance of which is also the object of the utterance, than poor Sergius Witte’s writing is an abject failure. Although the contents of the manifesto were certainly appropriate to the situation, they missed their timing, and their intention was delayed by 12 years until the 17^th October 1917. Perhaps that was their intention after all. Sing along if you can.

JUST ANOTHER PERFORMANCE WRITER

Sir Walter Raleigh, English aristocrat, writer, poet, soldier, courtier, spy, and explorer, was executed for allegedly conspiring against James I of England on the 29^th October 1618. A more than somewhat interesting character.

Queen Elizabeth died in 1603, and Raleigh was arrested at Exeter Inn, Ashburton, Devon and imprisoned in the Tower of London on 19 July. On 17 November, Raleigh was tried in the converted Great Hall of Winchester Castle for treason, due to alleged involvement in the Main Plot against King James.

Raleigh conducted his defence with great skill. The chief evidence against Raleigh was the signed and sworn confession of one Cobham. Raleigh frequently requested that Cobham be called in to testify so that he might recant, "[Let] my accuser come face to face, and be deposed. Were the case but for a small copyhold, you would have witnesses or good proof to lead the jury to a verdict; and I am here for my life!" Raleigh essentially was objecting that the evidence against him was "hearsay"; but the tribunal refused to allow Cobham to testify and be cross examined  Although hearsay was frowned upon under the common law, Raleigh was tried under civil-law, which allowed hearsay. King James spared his life, despite a guilty verdict.

Raleigh's cell in the Bloody Tower

He remained in the tower until 1616. While imprisoned, he wrote many treatises and the first volume of The Historie of the World (London, 1628) about the ancient history of Greece and Rome. His son Carew was conceived and born (1604) while Raleigh was imprisoned in the tower.

In 1616, Raleigh was released to conduct a second expedition to Venezuela in search of El Dorado. During the expedition, Raleigh's men, under the command of Lawrence Kemys, attacked the Spanish outpost of Santo Tomé de Guayana (San Tomé) on the Orinoco River. In the initial attack on the settlement, Raleigh's son Walter was killed by a bullet. On Raleigh's return to England, the outraged Count Gondomar, the Spanish ambassador, successfully demanded that King James reinstate Raleigh's death sentence.

Raleigh's house at Blackwall, London.
Photo 1890

Raleigh was beheaded in the Old Palace Yard at the Palace of Westminster on 29 October 1618. "Let us dispatch", he said to his executioner. "At this hour my ague comes upon me. I would not have my enemies think I quaked from fear." After he was allowed to see the axe that would behead him, he mused: "This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries." According to many biographers – R. Trevelyan in his book Sir Walter Raleigh (2003) for instance – Sir Walter's final words (as he lay ready for the axe to fall) were: "Strike, man, strike!"

He wrote the following poem, possibly whilst in the tower:

         The Lie

Go, Soul, the body's guest,


Upon a thankless errand;


Fear not to touch the best;


The truth shall be thy warrant:


Go, since I needs must die,


And give the world the lie.



Say to the court, it glows


And shines like rotten wood;


Say to the church, it shows


What's good, and doth no good:


If church and court reply,


Then give them both the lie.



Tell potentates, they live


Acting by others' action;


Not loved unless they give,


Not strong but by a faction.


If potentates reply,


Give potentates the lie.



Tell men of high condition,


That manage the estate,


Their purpose is ambition,


Their practice only hate:


And if they once reply,


Then give them all the lie.



Tell them that brave it most,


They beg for more by spending,


Who, in their greatest cost,


Seek nothing but commending.


And if they make reply,


Then give them all the lie.



Tell zeal it wants devotion;


Tell love it is but lust;

Tell time it metes but motion;


Tell flesh it is but dust:


And wish them not reply,


For thou must give the lie.



Tell age it daily wasteth;


Tell honour how it alters;


Tell beauty how she blasteth;


Tell favour how it falters:


And as they shall reply,


Give every one the lie.



Tell wit how much it wrangles


In tickle points of niceness;


Tell wisdom she entangles


Herself in overwiseness:


And when they do reply,


Straight give them both the lie.



Tell physic of her boldness;


Tell skill it is pretension;


Tell charity of coldness;


Tell law it is contention:


And as they do reply,


So give them still the lie.



Tell fortune of her blindness;


Tell nature of decay;


Tell friendship of unkindness;


Tell justice of delay:


And if they will reply,


Then give them all the lie.

Tell arts they have no soundness,


But vary by esteeming;


Tell schools they want profoundness,


And stand too much on seeming:


If arts and schools reply,


Give arts and schools the lie.



Tell faith it's fled the city;


Tell how the country erreth;


Tell manhood shakes off pity


And virtue least preferreth:


And if they do reply,


Spare not to give the lie.



So when thou hast, as I


Commanded thee, done blabbing--


Although to give the lie


Deserves no less than stabbing--


Stab at thee he that will,


No stab the soul can kill.