The Protestation at Speyer

The Edict of Worms of 1521 had outlawed Martin Luther, forbidden his books and ordered his supporters to be seized (Edict of Worms §§ 26–29). In 1526 a diet at Speyer resolved unanimously that, until a council met, each estate would “so live, govern, and carry himself” in the matters touched by the edict “as he hopes and trusts to answer it to God and His Imperial Majesty” (Recess of Speyer (1526) § 4 (Kidd no. 90, p. 185)).

The diet met at Speyer again in March 1529. The proposition put to it in the name of the emperor Charles V complained that pernicious doctrines were increasing daily, forbade anyone to go over to a new sect before the council, and said that several estates had expounded the article of 1526 at their pleasure, to the great trouble of the faith. The emperor therefore annulled it by his own power (Diet of Speyer (1529) proposition, §§ 1, 4 and 7 (Kidd no. 104, pp. 240–241)). On 7 April the majority resolved that those who had kept the Edict of Worms should keep to it until the council; that the other estates should prevent all further innovation as far as was humanly possible; that doctrines denying the sacrament of Christ’s body and blood should not be tolerated; and that no one should be forbidden or hindered from celebrating or hearing mass (Diet of Speyer (1529) majority resolution, §§ 5–7 (Kidd no. 105, p. 242)).

A minority refused. In their protest the elector John of Saxony and his allies told the majority that they held its resolution “null and not binding” on themselves and their people. They would go on, by the recess of 1526, so to live and govern as they trusted to answer before God and the emperor (Protestation of Speyer protest (Kidd no. 107a, pp. 243–244)). The appeal drawn up on 25 April gives two grounds. A recess adopted unanimously can only be altered unanimously. And “in matters which concern God’s honour and the salvation and eternal life of our souls, every one must stand and give account before God for himself” (Protestation of Speyer instrument of appeal (Kidd no. 107b, pp. 244–245)).

The appeal names John of Saxony, Margrave George of Brandenburg, Dukes Ernest and Francis of Brunswick-Lüneburg, Landgrave Philip of Hesse and Prince Wolfgang of Anhalt (Protestation of Speyer instrument of appeal, opening (Ney, pp. 29–30)). The envoys of fourteen cities adhered to it: Strasbourg, Nuremberg, Ulm, Constance, Lindau, Memmingen, Kempten, Nördlingen, Heilbronn, Reutlingen, Isny, St Gallen, Weissenburg and Windsheim (Protestation of Speyer instrument of appeal, close (Ney, p. 94)).

The protest was made by rulers for themselves and their people (Protestation of Speyer protest (Kidd no. 107a, pp. 243–244)). The same princes, with the cities of Nuremberg and Reutlingen, put their names the next year to the confession presented to the emperor at Augsburg (Augsburg Confession conclusion, signatures); see the Augsburg Confession and, for the months between, Luther and Zwingli Meet at Marburg.