The Facts About Johann Tetzel

I came across a Roman Catholic stating Johann Tetzel "is one of history's most unjustly persecuted figures by Protestantism," and also, "Tetzel didn't sell nor could he have sold indulgences." It was asserted that to "portray Dr. Tetzel an ignorant goof-ball by Luther is shear arrogance and fabrication." Over the years I've come across a number of Rome's cyber-defenders similarly trying to defend the reputation of Johann Tetzel.  If you come across someone from the other side of the Tiber defending Tetzel, here are some basic facts to keep in mind.

Did Tetzel Really Say "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs"?
It is usually taken at absolute fact that Tetzel often used this jingle while preaching his indulgence sermons. It may be surprising to find out that attributing this exact jingle to Tetzel isn't as easy as one may think. Roman Catholics have a valid gripe if they question if Tetzel was the originator of the jingle. It does not appear in his extant written sermons. There is though evidence from contemporaries of Tetzel that he did use it. This phrase may actually be traced back to a much earlier date (Martin Brecht notes the University of Paris complained about this popular jingle as early as 1482). For a full discussion of Tetzel and this jingle, see my blog entry here, and the related discussion here.

Where can I find one of Tetzel's indulgence sermons? Were they that bad?

Yes, they were horrific. Extracts from Tetzel's indulgence sermons can be found here. In this link you will find Tetzel preaching, "Don’t you hear the voices of your wailing dead parents and others who say, ‘Have mercy upon me, have mercy upon me, because we are in severe punishment and pain. From this you could redeem us with a small alms and yet you do not want to do so.’ Open your ears as the father says to the son and the mother to the daughter, ‘We have created you, fed you, cared for you, and left you our temporal goods. Why then are you so cruel and harsh that you do not want to save us, though it only takes a little?"

Where can I find the instructions Tetzel was given to preach indulgences?

The instructions can be found here, towards the bottom of the entry. You'll see the instructions included "the complete remission of all sins."

Did Tetzel say that for every mortal sin committed, there will be seven years of  penitence or suffering purgatory? Would an indulgence letter take the suffering away?

According to an extant sermon, he did.  He preached, "Consider, that for each and every mortal sin it is necessary to undergo seven years of penitence after confession and contrition, either in this life or in Purgatory," and also, "But with these confessional letters you will be able at any time in life to obtain full indulgence for all penalties imposed upon you, in all cases except the four reserved to the Apostolic See. Thence throughout your whole life, whenever you wish to make confession, you may receive the same remission, except in cases reserved to the Pope, and afterwards, at the hour of death, a full indulgence as to all penalties and sins." For a full discussion, see my blog entry here. 

Was the indulgence controversy the fault of Tetzel, or did Rome have a role also?

Tetzel typically gets thrown under the bus for his significant role in the indulgence controversy. But what about Rome? Were they at fault as well? Yes they were involved, and it was a scandalous financial involvement. Find the facts here.

How do Roman Catholic encyclopedias portray Tetzel?

It's interesting to see if  Roman Catholic sources will criticize Tetzel in any way. The Old Catholic Encyclopedia blames his errors on following the wrong opinions. The New Catholic Encyclopedia does similarly.  See their treatment here. 

What types of indulgences were preached by Tetzel?

He preached the complete remission of all sins, he offered a confessional letter that enabled a person to receive absolution from all sins, and a release from purgatory of dead people. See the addendum at the bottom of this entry for the specifics. 

What is the definitive biography on Tetzel?

I haven't come across anything modern yet, but the most popular biography of Tetzel was done in the nineteenth century by the Roman Catholic scholar, Nikolaus Paulus. Paulus is credited for a scholarly positive defense of Tetzel, proving that often Reformation polemics against him went too far. For a discussion of Paulus' defense of Tetzel, see this entry. 

Where can I find Tetzel's rebuttal to Luther?

You can find Tetzel going after Luther here.  

How would you respond to a Roman Catholic defending Tetzel?

Here's how I did it in response to some comments defending Tetzel found in a Catholic Answers discussion. 

Did Tetzel sell an indulgence to a man who then robbed him? 

I found this one Wikipedia. As far as I can tell, the story functions more as hearsay than an actual historical happening. See my blog entry here for the full details. 

Did Luther lie about Tetzel?

It's true that Luther was harsh against Tetzel, and he would attribute the worst things to him without checking the facts (I will do some posts on this in the future). However, Luther did get some things right about Tetzel, as this blog entry shows. 

Luther: Tetzel Sold an Indulgence to a Man who Then Robbed Him?

I came across this tidbit over on the Catholic Answers Forum:

Wikipedia tells a story about a man who asked Tetzel if he could buy an indulgence for a future sin. He did so, and then “used” that indulgence to rob Tetzel dumb, deaf and blind. 

This little story presents a good opportunity to delve into Wikipedia: your source for everything one needs to know, even if it's wrong or perhaps just hearsay. Wiki attributes this story to... none other than... Martin Luther. They say it's "Luther's Impression" of  Johann Tetzel.  Here's what's currently posted on Wikipedia:

According to Luther, after Tetzel had received a substantial amount of money at Leipzig, a nobleman asked him if it were possible to receive a letter of indulgence for a future sin. Tetzel quickly answered in the affirmative, insisting that the payment had to be made at once. The nobleman did so and received thereupon letter and seal from Tetzel. When Tetzel left Leipzig the nobleman attacked him along the way, gave him a thorough beating, and sent him back empty-handed to Leipzig with the comment that it was the future sin which he had in mind. Duke George at first was quite furious about the incident, but when he heard the whole story, he let it go without punishing the nobleman.

This story serves as an example why Wikipedia should not be used as a primary reference. This is not a report "according to Luther" nor is it "Luther's impression" of Tetzel.  While Luther did make a number of comments about his adversary, this account is not Luther's. Further, the story is just that: a purported story of something that may have happened to Tetzel.

Documentation From Wikipedia and Plagiarism
At least at the time of the composing of this blog entry, Wikipedia gives no documentation. Wikipedia articles are composed by "volunteers" that "do not need to have any formal training." It's no wonder therefore that Wiki content appears and disappears as per the whims of these volunteers. Kudos to Wikipedia though for providing transparency as to how these covert Wiki articles are edited. In this instance, the paragraph under scrutiny was added November 26, 2015 to an already existing entry on Tetzel.  For this added story, the Wiki volunteer cited "Johann Tetzel" Encyclopædia Britannica, 1911 Edition" (without a volume or page number) as proof of the story's validity. This reference though is bogus (here is the page from the Encyclopedia). Three minutes later on the same day, Wiki then provided this reference:

Description of Incident Involving Tetzel, by Luther http://randy_horton.myteachersite.org/teacher/files/documents/ref%20primary%20sources%20-%20tetzel%20&%20indulgences.pdf Description of Incident Involving Tetzel, by Luther

This hyper-link was eventually edited down to, "Description of Incident Involving Tetzel, by Luther." On March 18, 2017, someone then added a PDF link page 745 of this this book to verify the story. This was fallacious as well: there is no page 745 in the book being cited. Even though a similar story is recounted on page 445,  on May 21, 2017 this PDF book link was removed, along with the original documentation-link "Description of Incident Involving Tetzel, by Luther." That's how the entry stands now: no documentation.

Wiki's original documentation, "Description of Incident Involving Tetzel, by Luther" was to a PDF link entitled, The Reformation, Primary Sources apparently put together by someone named "Randy Horton." The website hosting this PDF is My Teacher Site. Randy Horton  appears to be a teacher at UME Preparatory Academy (a K-12 school), using the "My Teacher" site to put up documents for young students. His Tetzel link has been up since at least Sept. 2015.  Horton provides the documentation, "Luthers Schriften, herausg. von Walch. XV, 446" (we'll look at  that reference later on). I suspect that Mr. Horton did not read Walch XV and then produce this English paragraph. The way a few of his quotes are laid out are very similar to this older web-page which says the English version of this Tetzel story is from Hans. J. Hillerbrand (ed.), The Reformation in its own Words (London, 1964). The story / quote can be found on pages 44-45, worded (with the same documentation) exactly as Mr. Horton's "My Teacher" web-page. The translation used by Wiki / Horton is Hillerbrand's. Horton can be excused; he's not looking to sell his material, he's a grade school teacher, probably using the material in a lecture. On the other hand, what irks me is that there are authors that have taken Hillerbrand's translation without crediting him for it while trying to sell their materials:

Michael Grzonka, Luther and His Times. This author obviously utilized Hillerbrand's translation, but tried to rewrite it to make it appear to be his own words. Certain phrases are exactly the same as Hillerbrand's, for instance, "...nobleman attacked him along the way...," "...gave him a thorough beating, and sent him back...".

Andreas Malessa, The Unreformed Martin Luther: A Serious (and Not So Serious) Look at the Man Behind the Myths, p. 27-28.

Eric Metaxas, Martin Luther: The Man Who Rediscovered God and Changed the World, p. 106. Not only does this author provide no documentation, he erroneously attributes this story to "a contemporary of Luther's named Myconius."

We'll see below that this story is not something Luther stated. Rather, it was a story recounted in an early version of Luther's works, and whoever at Wikipedia cut-and-pasted it simply assumed Luther said it. Their history of editing demonstrates something I've seen often in their articles: they make assertions, and then try to document those assertions. This is a backwards methodology demonstrating poor research skills.

Other English Sources
Leaving the land of Wikipedia for a moment, this Tetzel story has circulated for a long time. Various published versions of it are available. In Luther and His Times, the story is presented with some extra details sifted from Walch 15 mixed in with some sentences plagiarized from Hillerbrand:

Another version (a much older English version) can be found in Jean Henri Merle d'Aubigné's History of the Great Reformation, vol. 1:

A Saxon gentleman had heard Tetzel at Leipsic, and was much shocked by his impostures. He went to the monk, and inquired if he was authorised to pardon sins in intention, or such as the applicant intended to commit? "Assuredly," answered Tetzel; "I have full power from the Pope to do so." Well," returned the gentleman, "I want to take some slight revenge on one of my enemies, without attempting his life. I will pay you ten crowns, if you will give me a letter of indulgence that shall bear me harmless." Tetzel made some scruples; they struck their bargain for thirty crowns. Shortly after, the monk set out from Leipsic. The gentleman, attended by his servants, laid wait for him in a wood between Juterboch and Treblin, — fell upon him, gave him a beating, and carried off the rich chest of indulgence money the inquisitor had with him. Tetzel clamoured against this act of violence, and brought an action before the judges. But the gentleman showed the letter signed by Tetzel himself, which exempted him beforehand from all responsibility. Duke George, who had at first been much irritated at this action, upon seeing this writing, ordered that the accused should be acquitted. [Albinus Meissn. Chronik. L.W. (W.) xv. 446, (and) c. Hechitus in Vita Tezelli].

And finally, John Dowling's History of Romanism appears to have utilized d'Aubigné:

On another occasion a gentleman of Saxony had heard Tetzel at Leipsic, and was much shocked by his impostures. He went to the monk, and inquired if he was authorized to pardon sins in intention, or such as the applicant intended to commit ?" Assuredly," answered Tetzel; "I have full power from the Pope to do so."— "Well," returned the gentleman, "I want to take some slight revenge on one of my enemies, without attempting his life. I will pay you ten crowns, if you will give me a letter of indulgence that shall bear me harmless." Tetzel made some scruples; they struck their bargain for thirty crowns. Shortly after, the monk set out from Leipsic. The gentleman, attended by his servants, laid wait for him in a wood between Jaterboch and Treblin,—fell upon him, gave him a beating, and carried off the rich chest of indulgence money the inquisitor had with him. Tetzel clamored against this act of violence, and brought an action before the judges. But the gentlemen showed the letter signed by Tetzel himself, which exempted him beforehand from all responsibility. Duke George who had at first been much irritated at this action, upon seeing this writing, ordered that the accused should be acquitted.

Documentation
Mentioned above a number of times as the source has been the Walch edition of Luther's Works, 15:446. This volume contains more than just Luther's writings. It also includes early historical documents from the early Reformation period. The story in question is not a writing or saying of Luther's. It an historical account about Tetzel from these other historical sources. Here's the text from Walch, 15:446-

The Walch text here says that there are different versions of this story available, and included above are two of those versions. Walch also provides references to a number of historians mentioning this incident. The first  account (#96) is the version mentioned above by Jean Henri Merle d'Aubigné (Albinus Meissn. Chronik.). This refers to Petrus Albinus, Chronicles of Meissen [information on Albinus can be found here]. Meissnische Land-Chronika can be found here, and here is page 342 cited by Walch].  "Löscher's Ref-Acta, Vol. I, p.405" refers to Valentin Ernst Löscher's Vollständige Reformations-Acta und Documenta, oder umständliche Vorstellung des Evangelischen Reformations-Wercks, p.405. "Tentzels Hit. Bericht, Bd. I, S. 111" refers to Wilhelm Ernst Tentzel's Historischer Bericht vom Anfang und ersten Fortgang der Reformation Lutheri, p. 111.

The second account (#97) is the work of  Georgius Arnoldus (Georg Arnoldus), from his Vita Mauritii Electoris Saxoniae (Life of Maurice, Elector of Saxony) [Information on Arnoldus can be found here. Information on Maurice can be found here]. The Life of Maurice was also include in Mencken, Scripores Rerum Germanicarum tom II, p. 1151 (mentioned by Walch above). Also being cited by Walsh is Commentarius historicus et apologeticus de Lutheranismo, Volume 1 By Veit Ludwig von Seckendorf, p. 26.


Conclusion
All of this Wiki-produced-tedium should lead the honest inquirer to one simple conclusion: Wikipedia is not to be trusted as any sort of primary source. Simply take a look at the way the stories are presented above. The German versions are fairly straight forward. Some of the English versions above appear to be fleshing out the story for dramatic effect. As far as I can tell, the story functions more as hearsay than an actual historical happening. Sure, the account is within the realm of probability, but Albinus wrote his version in 1580, Arnoldus did his in 1569. Neither one was present to hear Tetzel preach on indulgences.

One thing is certain: Luther did not write this story. Wikipedia (or anyone else crediting it to him) never bothered to actually look it up in Walch 15. Those folks selling books using Hillerbrand's translation without crediting him, be they Roman Catholic, Protestant, or Atheists, etc... well, shame on them. For years I've caught Rome's defenders doing the same sort of thing: giving an English quote they've taken from a secondary source, and then attempting to pass themselves off as honest and meaningful by citing a German text. It doesn't prove anything except that actual research was not done.

Someone may well ask, why should I be trusted for the content just presented? To this I say "kudos to you." Go and do your own research.

Tetzel: "For every mortal sin a man commits he must, after making a good confession, suffer seven years in purgatory, unless he has done seven years penance"

Here's one from the mailbox:

Hi James. I hope this email reaches you. I am a PhD student in History.  I am frantically searching for the source of this letter, written by John Tetzel:

Tell your people,” he wrote, “that for every mortal sin a man commits he must, after making a good confession, suffer seven years in purgatory, unless he has done seven years penance. Bid them think how many mortal sins a day are committed, how many each week, each month, each year. All but infinite, then, are the pains they must undergo in the flames of purgatory. This indulgence will mean for them full remission of all the punishment due to them up to the time they gain the indulgence. And for the rest of their lives, whenever they go to confession the priest will have the power to grant them a similar indulgence; and they will receive an indulgence again in the very moment when they pass from this life to the next.”

Can you help? Thanks in advance.

Yes, I can help.  The quote appears to be a condensed version of this extract from a Tetzel sermon.  Note the similarities below (placed in bold type). See also my blog entry here.

You may obtain letters of safe conduct from the vicar of our Lord Jesus Christ, by means of which you are able to liberate your soul from the hands of the enemy, and convey it by means of contrition and confession, safe and secure from all pains of Purgatory, into the happy kingdom. For know, that in these letters are stamped and engraven all the merits of Christ's passion there laid bare. Consider, that for each and every mortal sin it is necessary to undergo seven years of penitence after confession and contrition, either in this life or in Purgatory. How many mortal sins are committed in a day, how many in a week, how many in a month, how many in a year, how many in the whole extent of life! They are well-nigh numberless, and those that commit them must needs suffer endless punishment in the burning pains of Purgatory. But with these confessional letters you will be able at any time in life to obtain full indulgence for all penalties imposed upon you, in all cases except the four reserved to the Apostolic See. Thence throughout your whole life, whenever you wish to make confession, you may receive the same remission, except in cases reserved to the Pope, and afterwards, at the hour of death, a full indulgence as to all penalties and sins, and your share of all spiritual blessings that exist in the church militant and all its members. Do you not know that when it is necessary for anyone to go to Rome, or undertake any other dangerous journey, he takes his money to a broker and gives a certain per cent—five or six or ten—in order that at Rome or elsewhere he may receive again his funds intact, by means of the letters of this same broker? Are you not willing, then, for the fourth part of a florin, to obtain these letters, by virtue ofwhich you may bring, not your money, but your divine and immortal soul, safe and sound into the land of Paradise?

I'm fairly confident that the quote you sent me is from the very context of this sermon selection. I've worked through many of these sorts of things before. The language of the quote is very similar to that sermon. Keep in mind that there is not a lot of Tetzel available in English, so I would be greatly surprised if the quote you sent me is from something different than the sermon snippet posted above.  

The source of the sermon is cited as, "From the Latin. Gieseler: Ecclesiastical History, Vol. V., pp. 225-26." This source can be found here. There you will find the Latin version of part of Tetzel's sermon. The author also notes, "Tetzel also issued an Instructio summaria for the parochial clergy, in what they were to go to work in behalf of the indulgence..." This is probably the "letter" you're referring to.  The source goes back at least one more step to Herr D. Löscher, Reformationsacten, whom I think, published in the 18th century. I do not have access to that. It may be online somewhere, I don't know.

Martin Brecht: Tetzel did not say, " As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs"?

Here's one from the Catholic Answers forums that demonstrates why it's important to read out of the meaning of a text rather than reading something in to the text.

Scholars have debated for quite a while as to whether or not Tetzel preached something like, "As soon as a coin in the coffer rings,  the soul from purgatory springs." The better scholarship says there's no proof from Tetzel's extant writings that he either coined this phrase or used this phrase (see here for more information). On the other hand, it does appear that he did teach something like the sentiment of this during his indulgence preaching.  In the following excerpt, note how the historical discussion as to whether Tetzel said "As soon as a coin in the coffer rings / the soul from purgatory springs" is read into a section from Martin Brecht's first volume on Luther, whereas Brecht is talking about something entirely different:

First of all, how, specifically and exactly (of course), did Tetzel actually ‘provoke’ Luther? A few pages earlier Brecht reviews, in general, the 95 Theses. He mentions Thesis # 27, which is as follows: “27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.” Luther, “95 Theses” “The phrase ‘as soon as the coin in the coffer rings the soul from purgatory springs’ is also extremely questionable.” Brecht, pg. 194 Here Brecht admits what virtually every reputable Scholar (Protestant and otherwise) now understands, that Tetzel never said ‘as soon as the coin…….”. This means that Luther was mistaken about how Tetzel was preaching the Indulgence. Had he not gone off half-cocked but had bothered to actually make sure of the facts of the matter, he would not have made this mistake, and maybe, just maybe, without the misperception [sic] of a ‘provocation’ by Tetzel, possibly Luther might not have started the ‘Reformation’.


This is a mis-reading of page 194. Brecht isn't saying this at all. He isn't discussing whether or not Tetzel said, "As soon as a coin in the coffer rings,  the soul from purgatory springs." Rather, Brecht is describing what Luther is saying in Theses 27-29 of the 95 Theses.  Luther states:

27.There is no divine authority for preaching that the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest.

28. It is certainly possible that when the money clinks in the bottom of the chest avarice and greed increase; but when the church offers intercession, all depends in the will of God.

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed in view of what is said of St. Severinus and St. Pascal? (Note: Paschal I, pope 817-24. The legend is that he and Severinus were willing to endure the pains of purgatory for the benefit of the faithful).

Brecht is describing Luther's points section by section in the 95 Theses. It's Luther saying that the phrase " the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest" is questionable.

 On page 182 Brecht explains that the phrase, "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs" had been around as early as 1482. I don't recall a discussion from Brecht in this section exactly as to whether Tetzel said it or not. Regardless, while Tetzel may not have coined the phrase, he taught it's sentiment.

Did Rome Have a Role in the Indulgence Controversy?

The way it usually plays out: Tetzel gets thrown under the bus for his significant role in the indulgence controversy. But what about Rome? Were they at fault as well? Below are some sobering words from Roman historian Jospeh Lortz on the culpability of the pope and Rome:

The full disintegrating power of the abuse of indulgences was revealed in that affair which became the occasion of Luther's first public appearance. 

In 1513 the twenty-three-year-old Albrecht of Brandenburg, youngest brother of the prince elector Joachim, was elected archbishop of the important diocese of Magdeburg by the cathedral chapter. (Albrecht's predecessor had been a Saxon, who also occupied the see of Mainz.) It was an old tradition that the same young man be installed as administrator of the collegiate church in Halberstadt. Finally, in 1514, Albrecht was elected by the cathedral chapter of Mainz to be archbishop of this diocese also, and prince elector. He had undertaken to support the collegiate prebend at his own expense. We have already learned how Mainz was in need of cutting down its expenditure. Within the space of  ten years the archepiscopal see had thrice fallen vacant, and each time the confirmation dues to Rome for the see and the pallium had amounted to 14,000 ducats. 

Now Albrecht had to apply to the pope not only for confirmation of his election to Mainz but also for permission to occupy this see while retaining that of Magdeburg and the administration of Halberstadt. Such an accumulation of benefices was unheard of, in Germany at least, and was in fact forbidden by canon law. But Leo X was not going to be hindered too much by canon law when political and financial advantage was at stake. With his decisive connivance the ambassadors from Brandenburg were granted confirmation on payment of an additional 10,000 ducats. Moreover it was the curia who made this proposal acceptable to the ambassadors, for they suggested a method by which Albrecht might raise all or part of the sum to be paid. They would make over to the archbishop of Mainz the sale of the St Peter's indulgence in the archdiocese of Mainz and in the Brandenburg territories, allowing him a half share in the proceeds. The contract was perfect; a deal was made with the Fuggers who, in return for a share in the income from the indulgence, advanced the archbishop 29,000 Rhenish guilders - and the whole shameful business was complete. 

That this let loose the Reformation storm is highly symbolic and an expression of historical retribution, for all the corruption in the Church of that time had its chief cause in the fiscalism of the curia, which was rotten with simony. In the case just mentioned, the curia, contrary to canon law, in return for cash, and in the hope of gaining political advantage, were allowing a young, worldly man to hold an irresponsible accumulation of benefices. In so doing they turned indulgences into a means of exchange in big business. The executive organ of this business carried on between the custodian of the merits won by Christ's blood and a worldly prince of the Church was a bank. Corruption could scarcely have been more blatantly expressed. We are struck with amazement to discover that Catholic theologians are still so hide-bound by formalism that they can discuss whether or not this affair was simony according to the strict letter of canon law. Even to raise such a question is to create religious confusion. Anyone can see that the whole affair is utterly at war with the Spirit of Christ. 

 As a result of various delays, it turned out that the preaching of the indulgence, taken over by the prince elector of Mainz, did not start until the beginning of 1517. For the most part the monetary yield was little enough. The indulgence preachers of the elector of Mainz based their sermons upon his instructio summaria. This short guide provides an exact illustration of what has just been said about the abuses of the indulgence system. Its theory can be justified; but the tendency has to be sharply rejected, for, by the use of pious formulae, it was rapidly turning the indulgence sermon into sheer commercial advertising. Money, which was of secondary importance, became the central thing; the atmosphere of the sale-room prevailed everywhere; there were pompous and solemn openings, and then bargain clearances at the end. 

The Dominican, Tetzel, subcommissar general of the archbishop of Mainz, faithfully followed out the spirit of this instruction. There is no doubt that he taught: As soon as your money clinks in the bowl Out of purgatory jumps the soul. Admittedly it is also certain that he never claimed that an indulgence could expiate future sins. This calumny was first set going by Luther in his pamphlet Against Hans Worst in 1541. Tetzel was very weil paid; but he cannot be charged with any serious misdemeanours. He was not one of those indulgence preachers of whom Eck compliained that they paid their mistresses with certificates of indulgence and confession. But he was one of those, piloried by Emser, for whom repentance and contrition had become eclipsed by money. In fact, for the sake of financial gain he stressed in a dangerous way the mitigation of the demands of the gospel of redemption. 

Joseph Lortz, The Reformation in Germany vol. 1(New York: Herder and Herder, 1949) pp. 225-227.

Tetzel: The Old vs. the New Catholic Encyclopedia

How widespread was that taught by Tetzel in regard to indulgences for the dead?


The old Catholic Encyclopedia says:

As much cannot be said about his teaching regarding indulgences for the dead. The couplet attributed to him — As soon as the gold in the casket rings The rescued soul to heaven springs, like that attributed to Luther, Who loves not wine and wife and song Remains a fool his life long; though verbally spurious, can in both instances be in substance unfailingly traced to the writings of their respective authors. By Tetzel they are substantially acknowledged in his Frankfort theses. Here he accepted the mere school opinion of a few obscure writers, which overstepped the contents of papal indulgence Bulls. This opinion found no recognition but actual condemnation at the hands of authoritative writers, and was rejected in explicit terms by Cardinal Cajetan as late as 1517-19.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says:

Tetzel was orthodox in regard to indulgences for the living. In regard to those for the dead, however, he followed the teaching contained in the Mainz Instruction issued to preachers of indulgences. That is, he taught the then widespread, erroneous theological opinion that indulgences for the dead were gained independently of dispositions of contrition in the person seeking the indulgence, who also had the right to apply them absolutely to a specific soul in purgatory. Cajetan condemned this teaching at Rome.

Now that's historical clarity!

Reevaluating Tetzel

It appears that one of the most important books written about Johann Tetzel is quite old, and never translated into English: Johann Tetzel der Ablakprediger (1899) by the Roman Catholic writer Nikolaus Paulus. I've been searching for a full-length contemporary and scholarly treatment of Tetzel in English, but I've yet to come across such a book.  Most of the secondary literature I've found simply refers back to Paulus.

Having a translation of Paulus would be helpful, because I'm left further away from Tetzel by relying on what other writers say what Paulus said about Tetzel. That being said, I did come across a Roman source that seeks to gives an overview of what Paulus compiled about Tetzel: Tetzel the Indulgence Preacher (1902) by John Corbett. The article is worth a read.  You'll come across Reformation polemics in which some went too far against Tetzel, similar to the way some go to far against Luther. Yes the article has an underlying slant that the entire concept of the indulgence is Christian and that the St. Peter's building project was a worthwhile endeavor, but try to look past this to get a better understanding of how Rome's apologists defend Tetzel.

The basic gist of the article is that Tetzel consistently taught that a plenary indulgences was an entire remission of the temporal punishment for specific sins. The guilt of these sins had already been remitted by contrition and confession. In other words, Tetzel was teaching that someone seeking an indulgence had to be truly sorry for their sins, or else the indulgence would be of no benefit. The idea that future sins could be remitted by an indulgence was never taught by Tetzel, but was rather a false accusation brought on by Luther.  If someone received an indulgence for sins and then immediately went out and committed the same sorts of sin again, well, it would then be time to go back and purchase another indulgence.

Tetzel comes under more scrutiny in regard to indulgences for the dead. He is charged with teaching speculative Roman doctrines as certain. He's said to be in error for holding the following as "Christian dogma": "In order to gain a plenary indulgence for a soul in purgatory, it is not necessary to be in the state of grace. It is enough to give the alms." This means that if one wanted to buy an indulgence for a deceased person, the holiness (or lack thereof) of the purchaser made no impact on the efficacy of the indulgence for the departed soul.  Second, Tetzel held that "such indulgences are applied infallibly to the particular soul for whom they have been obtained." In other words, when Tetzel urged his hearers to have pity on their parents "suffering the most dreadful pains and tortures" in purgatory by buying them an indulgence, it wasn't certain that those parents were going to get the purchased relief.

One other sale of indulgences from Tetzel is worth mentioning: confession-letters or indulgence letters. These could be "procured without contrition." One need simply make the purchase.  It appears that for these to actually work, the purchaser had "to choose a suitable confessor, from whom absolution could be obtained even for sins usually reserved to the Holy See." This particular purchase could be used two times: "once during life and again at the hour of death."

The speculative and curious part of the article says that perhaps the indulgence preachers were not careful as to how they presented this theology and it led to misunderstanding by the people- Tetzel though shouldn't be blamed for this. I can agree with this to an extent- that if Tetzel was preaching the indulgence doctrines as has been defined above and the people heard complete remission for all my sins (past, present, and future) without contrition or confession, and there isn't historical proof that Tetzel taught what was heard, then we should consider holding Tetzel responsible for what we know he did say. On the other hand, the article does point out via testimony that Tetzel "devised new ways of getting money... and finally there resulted scandal and contempt among the common people and censure of such spiritual treasure on account of the abuse." The writer summarizing Paulus reluctantly concludes that "...it would indicate on Tetzel's part some excess in urging the faithful to contribute."  The article doesn't really explore this "part."  Perhaps Paulus did. It would be interesting to read how Rome's defenders describe "some excess."

Overall, what the article demonstrated to me was that one can quibble about the historical facts of the Reformation, whereas the point of contention should actually be the theology of the indulgence. That's what appears to have happened to Luther as well- he began arguing over the indulgence issues of his day and then arrived at seeking to refute the ultimate theology behind the indulgence. Imagine living in the 16th Century and purchasing some incredible indulgence. The responsibility then to not waste your money by seeking holy living demonstrates a crucial difference between the Gospel of Christ's perfect work and those who seek to save themselves by their works and what they can afford.

Addendum #1
Here's a negative contemporary review of Paulus from The Methodist Review. "Paulus himself confesses that, at least in substance, Tetzel taught that as soon as the indulgence fee rattled on the bottom of the money box the soul for which the indulgence was purchased sprang out of purgatory."

Addendum #2
Here's an interesting tidbit about Paulus and the historicity of indulgences:

Johann Tetzel: Sermons on Indulgences

I spent a little time recently on the Catholic Answers forums on the subject of Tetzel's role in the Reformation. I was surprised to find the defenders of Rome suporting Tetzel. Below are some pertinent excerpts from the literature that provoked the Reformation. The first section is an excerpt from a sermon of Tetzel's. The second extract is a pattern sermon produced by Tetzel for indulgence preachers to use. The third extract contains a portion Archbishop Albert's instructions to the sub-commissioners on indulgences (these were the instructions given to Tetzel).  See for yourself if Tetzel had a role in the Reformation, and a role that shouldn't be defended.

Extract of a sermon from Tetzel

So what is there to think about? Why do you hesitate to convert yourself? Why don’t you have fears about your sins? Why don’t you confess now to the vicars of our Most Holy Pope? Don’t you have the example of Lawrence, who, compelled by the love of God, gave away his inheritance and suffered his body to be burned? Why do you not take the example of Bartholomew, Stephen, and of other saints who gladly suffered the most gruesome deaths for the sake and salvation of their souls? You, however, do not give up great treasures; indeed you give not even a moderate alms. They gave their bodies to be martyred, but you delight in living well joyfully. You priest, nobleman, merchant, wife, virgin, you married people, young person, old man, enter into your church which is for you, as I have said, St Peter’s, and visit the most holy Cross. It has been placed there for you, and it always cries and calls for you. Are you perhaps ashamed to visit the Cross with a candle and yet not ashamed to visit a tavern? Are you ashamed to go to the apostolic confessors, but not ashamed to go to a dance? Behold, you are on the raging sea of this world in storm and danger, not knowing if you will safely reach the harbor of salvation. Do you not know that everything which man has hangs on a thin thread and that all of life is but a struggle on earth? Let us then fight, as did Lawrence and the other saints, for the salvation of the soul, not the body which is today but not tomorrow. Today it is well, but ill tomorrow. Today alive and tomorrow dead.

You should know that all who confess and in penance put alms into the coffer according to the counsel of the confessor, will obtain complete remission of all their sins. If they visit, after confession and after the Jubilee, the Cross and the altar every day they will receive that indulgence which would be theirs upon visiting in St Peter’s the seven altars, where complete indulgence is offered. Why are you then standing there? Run for the salvation of your souls! Be as careful and concerned for the salvation of your souls as you are for your temporal goods, which you seek both day and night. Seek the Lord while he may be found and while he is near. Work, as St John says, while it is yet day, for the night comes when no man can work.

Don’t you hear the voices of your wailing dead parents and others who say, ‘Have mercy upon me, have mercy upon me, because we are in severe punishment and pain. From this you could redeem us with a small alms and yet you do not want to do so.’ Open your ears as the father says to the son and the mother to the daughter, ‘We have created you, fed you, cared for you, and left you our temporal goods. Why then are you so cruel and harsh that you do not want to save us, though it only takes a little? You let us lie in flames so that we only slowly come to the promised glory.’ You may have letters which let you have, once in life and in the hour of death full remission of the punishment which belongs to sin. Oh, those of you with vows, you usurers, robbers, murderers, and criminals—Now is the time to hear the voice of God. He does not want the death of the sinner, but that he be converted and live. Convert yourself then, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, to the Lord, thy God. Oh, you blasphemers, gossippers, who hinder this work openly or secretly, what about your affairs? You are outside the fellowship of the Church. No masses, no sermons, prayers, sacraments, or intercession help you. No field, vineyard, trees, or cattle bring fruit or wine for you. Even spiritual things vanish, as many an illustration could point out. Convert yourself with all your heart and use the medicine of which the Book of Wisdom says, ‘The Most High has made medicine out of the earth and a wise man will not reject it.’

Source: Hans J. Hillerbrand, ed., The Reformation: A Narrative History Related by Contemporary Observers and Participants. New York, 1964, pp. 41-43.

EXTRACT FROM SERMON ON INDULGENCES GIVEN BY TETZEL TO PAROCHIAL CLERGY (source)

Venerable Sir, I pray you that in your utterances you may be pleased to make use of such words as shall serve to open the eyes of the mind and cause your hearers to consider how great a grace and gift they have had and now have at their very doors. Blessed eyes indeed, which see what they see, because already they possess letters of safe conduct by which they are able to lead their souls through that valley of tears, through that sea of the mad world, where storms and tempests and dangers lie in wait, to the blessed land of Paradise. Know that the life of man upon earth is a constant struggle. We have to fight against the flesh, the world and the devil, who are always seeking to destroy the soul. In sin we are conceived, alas! what bonds of sin encompass us, and how difficult and almost impossible it is to attain to the gate of salvation without divine aid; since He causes us to be saved, not by virtue of the good works which we accomplish, but through His divine mercy ; it is necessary then to put on the armor of God.

You may obtain letters of safe conduct from the vicar of our Lord Jesus Christ, by means of which you are able to liberate your soul from the hands of the enemy, and convey it by means of contrition and confession, safe and secure from all pains of Purgatory, into the happy kingdom. For know that in these letters are stamped and engraven all the merits of Christ's passion there laid bare. Consider, that for each and every mortal sin it is necessary to undergo seven years of penitence after confession and contrition, either in this life or in Purgatory.

How many mortal sins are committed in a day, how many in a week, how many in a month, how many in a year, how many in tfie whole course of life ! They are well-nigh numberless, and those that commit them must needs suffer endless punishment in the burning pains of Purgatory,

But with these confessional letters you will be able at any time in life to obtain full indulgence for all penalties imposed upon you, in all cases except the four reserved to the Apostolic See. Therefore throughout your whole life, whenever you wish to make confession, you may receive the same remission, except in cases reserved to the Pope, and afterwards, at the hour of death, a full indulgence as to all penalties and sins, and your share of all spiritual blessings that exist in the church militant and all its members.

Do you not know that when it is necessary for anyone to go to Rome, or undertake any other dangerous journey, he takes his money to a broker and gives a certain per cent five or six or ten in order that at Rome or elsewhere he may receive again his funds intact, by means of the letter of this same broker? Are you not willing, then, for the fourth part of a florin, to obtain these letters, by virtue of which you may bring, not your money, but your divine and immortal soul safe and sound into the land of Paradise?

Wherefore I counsel, order, and by virtue of my authority as shepherd, I command that they shall receive together with me and other priests, this precious treasure, especially those who were not confessed at the time of the holy Jubilee, that they may be able to obtain the same forever. For the time may come when you may desire, but yet be unable to obtain the least portion of the grace.

Also on the part of SS. D. N. the Pope and of the most holy apostolic See and of the most reverend sir, my legate, to each and every one who shall have profited by the sacred Jubilee and made confession, and to all who may profit by this present brief opportunity, and who shall have lent a helping hand to the construction of the aforesaid house of the Prince of the Apostles, they shall all be participants and sharers in all prayers, suffrages, alms, fasts, supplications, masses, canonical hours, disciplines, pilgrimages, papal stations, benedictions, and all other spiritual goods which now exist or may exist forever in the church militant, and in all of these, not only they themselves, but their relatives, kindred, and benefactors who have passed away; and as they were moved by charity, so God, and SS. Peter and Paul, and all the saints whose bodies rest in Rome, shall guard them in peace in this vale, and conduct them through it to the heavenly kingdom. Give everlasting thanks in the aforesaid names and in mine to the reverend secular priests and prelates, etc.

Copy of an inexpensive indulgence
sold by Tetzel

Translation: "In the authority of all the saints,
and in compassion towards thee,
I absolve thee from all sins and misdeeds,
and remit all punishment for ten days." (source)

ARCHBISHOP ALBERT'S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE SUB-COMMISSIONERS.
(source)

"The Archbishop of Mainz arranged with the Pope in 1515 to conduct the sale of indulgences in his own vast archiepiscopal provinces, Mainz and Magdeburg, for one-half the proceeds. The plan was not carried out until 1517 when, we may infer, the undated Instructions to Subcommissioners were drawn up, a portion of which is given below. These instructions, Cardinal Hergenrother observes, "corresponding with the teaching of the church, cannot be a source of reproach to the Elector" (Contiliengeschichte, IX, ii). The sub-commissioners appealed in turn to the parochial priests, and there are extant portions of another set of instructions issued by John Tetzel to the priests of his territory, exhorting them to prepare the minds of their parishioners for indulgences; and with these instructions he sent pattern sermons..."
xx

Here follow the four principal graces and privileges, which are granted by the apostolic bull, of which each may be obtained without the other. In the matter of these four privileges preachers shall take pains to commend each to believers with the greatest care, and, in-so-far as in their power lies, to explain the same.

The first grace is the complete remission of all sins; and nothing greater than this can be named, since man who lives in sin and forfeits the favor of God, obtains complete remission by these means and once more enjoys God's favor: moreover, through this remission of sins the punishment which one is obliged to undergo in Purgatory on account of the affront to the divine Majesty, is all remitted, and the pains of Purgatory completely blotted out. And although nothing is precious enough to be given in exchange for such a grace, since it is the free gift of God and a grace beyond price, yet in order that Christian believers may be the more easily induced to procure the same, we establish the following rules, to wit :

In the first place every one who is contrite in heart, and has made oral confession, or at all events has the intention of confessing at a suitable time, shall visit at least the seven churches indicated for this purpose, that is to say, those in which the papal arms are displayed, and in each church shall say devoutly five Paternosters and five Ave Marias in honor of the five wounds of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby our salvation is won, or one Miserere, which Psalm is particularly well adapted for obtaining forgiveness of sins.

Sick or otherwise incapacitated persons shall visit with the same devotion and prayers the seven altars, which the commissioners and subcommissioners shall have erected in the church where the cross shall be raised, and on which they shall have affixed the papal arms.

Where, however, persons are found so weak that they cannot conveniently come to such a church, then shall their confessor or penitentiary cause an altar to be brought to a convenient place approved by him. And where such persons visit this place and offer up their prayers near the altar or before it, they shall deserve the indulgence as though they had visited the seven churches.

To those, however, who are upon beds of sickness the image of a saint may be sent, before or beside which they may offer up a certain number of prayers, according to the judgment of the confessor, in which case they shall be considered to have done as much as if they had visited the seven churches.

But where a certain one, particularly a woman, requests, on account of some especial cause, that the visitation of the churches and altars be remitted, the penitentiaries may grant the request on proper grounds; but the said visitation shall be replaced with an increased contribution.

Respecting, now, the contribution to the chest, for the building of the said church of the chief of the apostles, the penitentiaries and confessors, after they have explained to those making confession the full remission and privileges, shall ask of them, for how much money or other temporal goods they would conscientiously go without the said most complete remission and privileges; and this shall be done in order that hereafter they may be brought the more easily to contribute. And because the conditions and occupations of men are so manifold and diverse that we cannot consider them individually, and impose specific rates accordingly, we have therefore concluded that the rates should be determined according to the recognized classes of persons.

Kings and Queens and their offspring, archbishops and bishops, and other great rulers as well, provided they seek the places where the cross is raised, or otherwise present themselves, shall pay at least five and twenty Rhenish guilders in gold. Abbots and the great prelates of Cathedral churches, counts, barons, and others of the higher nobility, together with their consorts, shall pay for each letter of indulgence ten such guilders. Other lesser prelates and nobles, as also the rectors of celebrated places, and all others, who, either from permanent incomes or merchandise, or otherwise, enjoy a total yearly revenue of five hundred gold guilders, shall pay six guilders. Other citizens and tradespeople and artisans, who have individual incomes and families of their own, shall pay one such guilder; others of less means only a half. And where it is impossible to adhere rigidly to the schedule above indicated, then we declare that the said kings, bishops, dukes, abbots, prelates, counts, barons, members of the higher nobility and rectors, together with all others above mentioned, shall place or cause to be placed in the chest a sum in accordance with the dictates of sound reason, proportionate to their magnificence or generosity, after they have listened to the advice and council of the subcommissioners and penitentiaries and of their confessors, in order that they may fully obtain the grace and privileges. All other persons are confided to the discretion of the confessors and penitentiaries, who should have ever in view the advancement of this building, and should urge their penitents to a freer contribution, but should let no one go away without some portion of grace, because the happiness of Christian believers is here concerned not less than the interests of the building. And those that have no money, they shall supply their contribution with prayer and fasting; for the Kingdom of Heaven should be open to the poor not less than to the rich.

And although a married woman may not dispose of the husband's goods against his will, yet she shall be able to contribute in this instance against the will of her husband of her dowry or of her own private property, which has come to her in a regular manner. Where she has no such possessions, or is prevented by her husband, she shall then supply such contribution with prayer; and the same we wish to have understood concerning sons who still remain under parental control.

Where, however, the said poor wives and sons who still remain under parental control may obtain by entreaty or otherwise from other rich and pious persons the means needed for such payments and contributions, they shall place the sums so acquired in the chest. Where, however, they have absolutely no way of procuring such contributions, then they may obtain through prayer and supplication the said treasures of grace as well for themselves as for the dead.

In all the cases above indicated, however, some room shall be left for the exercise of discretion on the part of the subcommissioners and confessors, who shall have regard to God and their consciences, so that peace of conscience and the welfare of all the above said persons shall be happily secured.

The second signal grace is a confessional letter containing the most extraordinarily comforting and hitherto unheard of privileges, and which also retains its virtue even after our bull expires at the end of eight years, since the bull says: "they shall be participators now and for ever." The meaning of the same, preachers and confessors shall explain and bring unto all possible prominence ; for there will be granted in the confessional letter, to those who buy : first, the power to choose a qualified confessor, even a monk from the mendicant orders, who shall absolve them first and foremost, with the consent of the persons involved, from all censures by whomsoever imposed; in the second place, from each and every crime, even the greatest, and as well from those reserved to the apostolic see, once in a lifetime and in the hour of death; third, in those cases which are not reserved, as often as necessary; fourth, the chosen confessor may grant him complete forgiveness of all sins once in life, and at the hour of death, as often as it may seem at hand, although death ensue not; and, fifth, transform all kinds of vows, excepting alone those solemnly taken, into other works of piety (as when one has vowed to perform the journey to the Holy Land, or to visit the holy Apostles at Rome, to make a pilgrimage to St. James at Compostella, to become a monk, or to take a vow of chastity) ; sixth, the confessor may administer to him the sacrament of the altar at all seasons, except on Easter day, and in the hour of death.

We furthermore ordain that one of these confessional letters shall be given and imparted for the quarter of a Rhenish gold guilder, in order that the poor shall not thereby be shut out from the manifold graces therein contained; it may however happen that nobles and other wealthy persons may, out of devotion and liberality, be disposed to give more. Whatever is given over and above the ordinary fee shall be placed in the chest. In cases where such letters are demanded by colleges or cloisters, whether of men or women, the fee which they shall be obliged to pay must be computed by the subcommissioners according to their number and their property. The same subcommissioners must seal the confessional letters which shall be issued, and sign them with their own hand, setting forth the fee which has been paid for the letter.

It is also our desire that the name of only one person should be written in the confessional letter, except in case of man and wife, who are one in the flesh. To these may also be added the sons and daughters who are still under parental control, and have as yet nothing of their own. And in order that each and every one of the said persons, as well as the poor and those of moderate means, may be able to obtain such confessional letters, we hereby clothe our general subcommissioner with power to fix a certain sum to be paid collectively by the persons whose names are written in a confessional letter, as it may best subserve the interests of the aforesaid church building.

We desire also, that the names of each and every one who buys a letter, or obtains one for any cause without remuneration shall be written by him who issues the same in a special book. And he that issues shall endorse his name upon each letter, in order that an account of the sales may be given later, and that no mistakes may creep in.

We desire, moreover, that the said confessional letters be issued in all places covered by our commission for the sale of indulgences, even where the cross has not been raised, during the period of eight years, by those who hold authentic written commissions either from us or from our general subcommissioners.

The third most important grace is the participation in all the possessions of the church universal, which consists herein, that contributors toward the said building, together with their deceased relations, who have departed this world in a state of grace, shall from now and for eternity, be partakers in all petitions, intercessions, alms, fastings, prayers, in each and every pilgrimage, even those to the Holy Land; furthermore, in the stations at Rome, in the masses, canonical hours, flagellations, and all other spiritual goods which have been brought forth or which shall be brought forth by the universal, most holy church militant or by any of its members. Believers will become participants in all these things who purchase confessional letters. Preachers and confessors must insist with great perseverance upon these advantages, and persuade believers that they should not neglect to acquire these along with their confessional letter...

We also declare that in order to acquire these two most important graces, it is not necessary to make confession, or to visit the churches and altars, but merely to purchase the confessional letter.

The fourth distinctive grace is for those souls which are in purgatory, and is the complete remission of all sins, which remission the pope brings to pass through his intercession to the advantage of said souls, in this wise; that the same contribution shall be placed in the chest by a living person as one would make for himself. It is our wish, however, that our subcommissioners should modify the regulations regarding contributions of this kind which are given for the dead, and that they should use their judgment in all other cases, where in their opinion modifications are desirable. It is furthermore not necessary that the persons who place their contributions in the chest for the dead should be contrite in heart and have orally con- fessed, since this grace is based simply on the state of grace in which the dead departed, and on the contribution of the living, as is evident from the text of the bull. Moreover, preachers shall exert themselves to give this grace the widest publicity, since through the same, help will surely come to departed souls, and the construction of the Church of St. Peter will be abundantly promoted at the same time.

Tetzel's Rebuttal Against Luther's Sermon on Indulgences and Grace

I was happy to find a pdf of Johann Tetzel's Rebuttal Against Luther's Sermon on Indulgences and Grace available online. This is an English translation of Vorlegung wider einen vermessenen Sermon.

From the introduction:

"With this translation of his Rebuttal, Tetzel is granted a new hearing, indeed probably a first hearing for most persons. What one has heard of his own words is the infamous jingle (unfortunately, actually part of the indulgence preachers’ promotional techniques): “As soon as the penny in the money chest clinks, the soul out of purgatory springs.” ” In the Rebuttal, however, instead of the caricatured money-grubber, one hears a genuine concern for the salvation of souls, praise of God’s inestimable mercy, and a concern for the whole of Christendom. In his impassioned outcry of rebuttal 20, Tetzel foresees what tragic consequences can follow upon Luther’s ideas—the dissolution of Christianity, its shattering into fragments, the very opposite of Christ’s desire that all people might be one in him. For centuries Tetzel has also been consistently caricatured as stupid, ignorant of Latin, and unable to write his own theses. The Rebuttal provides a different witness. His presentation here is well-structured; exhibits a credible understanding of Scripture, Catholic doctrines, and the major theologians of the Christian tradition; and shows him fully as proficient as his debate opponent in Latin and in the citation of Scripture to support his arguments."


Addendum
It's interesting to note that this translation of Tetzel's Vorlegung includes what appears to me to be a complete English translation of Luther's Eyn Sermon vom Ablass und Gnade (A Sermon on Indulgence and Grace) found in WA 1:243-246. This particular writing of Luther's is scheduled to be included in an upcoming English edition of Luther's Works. A partial English translation can also be found here.  Tetzel appears to include the entirety of this short writing, and responds to it point by point.

"History presents few characters that have suffered more senseless misrepresentation, even bald caricature, than Tetzel"

From the Catholic Answers forums comes the following:

History presents few characters that have suffered more senseless misrepresentation, even bald caricature, than Tetzel. "Even while he lived stories which contained an element of legend gathered around his name, until at last, in the minds of the uncritical Protestant historians, he became the typical indulgence-monger, upon whom any well-worn anecdote might be fathered" (Beard, "Martin Luther", London, 1889, 210). For a critical scholarly study which shows him in a proper perspective, he had to wait the researches of our own time, mainly at the hands of Dr. Nicholas Paulus, who is closely followed in this article. In the first place, his teaching regarding the indulgences for the living was correct.

-snip-

An indulgence, he writes, can be applied only "to the pains of sin which are confessed and for which there is contrition". "No one", he furthermore adds, "secures an indulgence unless he have true contrition". The confessional letters (confessionalia) could of course be obtained for a mere pecuniary consideration without demanding contrition. But such document did not secure an indulgence. It was simply a permit to select a proper confessor, who only after a contrite confession would absolve from sin and reserved cases, and who possessed at the same time facilities to impart the plenary indulgence (Paulus, "Johann Tetzel", 103).

These two snips are from directly taken from the old Catholic Encyclopedia article on Tetzel.The historical record, even from some Roman sources, proves that Tetzel was a main factor that sparked the Reformation. For instance, Roman historian Hartmann Grisar states,

"...in his sermons he advocated a certain opinion held by some Schoolmen (though in no sense a doctrine of the Church), viz. that an indulgence gained for the departed was at once and infallibly applied to this or that soul for whom it was destined."(Luther 1, p. 343).

Grisar cites Cardinal Cajetan as a "great theologian" against Tetzel's teaching on this (also claiming Tetzel "was no great theologian"). Grisar though admits "the more highly placed Indulgence Commissaries did not scruple, in their official proclamations, to set forth as certain this doubtful scholastic opinion" (p. 344). This sort of apologetic answer downplays the fact that during this time period there was no official doctrine or dogma as to the effect of the indulgence upon those in Purgatory.

Roman historian Joseph Lortz states:

There is little doubt that Tetzel's preaching was well summed up in the phrase, "a coin in the box opens heaven to your soul," and there is no doubt either that the deal between Albrecht and the Curia as well as the lively trade in indulgences would have been condemned as the worst type of simony in the early Church [Joseph Lortz, The Reformation, a Problem for Today (Maryland: The Newman Press, 1964), p. 79].

For excerpts from Tetzel's sermons, see this link, and for more information on Tetzel's financial interests in the selling of indulgences, see this link.

Note above, the Catholic Encyclopedia mentions "Dr. Nicholas Paulus." I'm familiar with Paulus, but as far as I know, the book has not been translated into English. I would be very interested in reading the study put together by Paulus (The New Catholic Encyclopedia states of Paulus,

With a genuine love for truth he sought to do justice to Luther's reputation, but he also helped to undo the legends about him: Luthers Lebensende (Frankfurt 1898); Johann Tetzel, der Ablassprediger (Mainz 1899); Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess im 16. Jh. (Frankfurt 1910); Protestantismus und Toleranz im 16. Jh. (Frankfurt 1911). His chief work, however, is Geschichte des Ablasses im Mittelalter (3 v. Paderborn 1922–23). Because of his search for the whole truth and his faithfulness to the facts, he prepared the way toward a new Catholic outlook on the Reformation.

Keep in mind as well, Tetzel did attempt to defend himself and his practices in writing, so I would be curious to see if Tetzel was developing a defense for his earlier abuses, and how Paulus interpreted Tetzel's actions. I would also be curious to see how Tetzel preached and then compare it to the "fine print" of the confessionalia. In a book that gave an overview of many of the Luther studies done around the time of Paulus, note the following comment from Reu's Thirty Five Years of Luther Research:

Although Tetzel, who was commissioned for his special trade, and of whom Paulus treats in a monogravure (1889), later after his acquittal, taught that the indulgences "served solely in the case of punishment of sins that had been repented of and confessed," yet his instructions read, outside of indulgence for punishment of sin, of the plenaria omnium peccatorum remissio, and without repenting one could buy an indulgence upon the presentation of which any promiscuously chosen priest was forced once during lifetime and in the hour of death to grant to the professor a general absolution.

In the same way an indulgence for the dead could be had, for "as soon as the money clinked in the bottom of the chest, the souls of the deceased friends forthwith went into Heaven," was, according to Prierias, actually preached as "mera et catholica Veritas." Therefore, it was no trivial issue on which Luther's battle began; it was an institution, representative of the entire system which brought it forth, and because of whose abuses the entire world suffered.

What's also interesting to do when an entry from the old Catholic Encyclopedia is cited is to compare that entry to the New Catholic Encyclopedia. In the old version, a most spirited defense of Tetzel is put forth, whereas in the New version, there's only a mention that certain charges against Tetzel were spurious.  The main point of contention though remains the same. The old encyclopedia states:

As much cannot be said about his teaching regarding indulgences for the dead. The couplet attributed to him — As soon as the gold in the casket rings The rescued soul to heaven springs, like that attributed to Luther, Who loves not wine and wife and song Remains a fool his life long; though verbally spurious, can in both instances be in substance unfailingly traced to the writings of their respective authors. By Tetzel they are substantially acknowledged in his Frankfort theses. Here he accepted the mere school opinion of a few obscure writers, which overstepped the contents of papal indulgence Bulls. This opinion found no recognition but actual condemnation at the hands of authoritative writers, and was rejected in explicit terms by Cardinal Cajetan as late as 1517-19. By the teaching he laid himself open to just censure and reproach. To condition a plenary indulgence for the dead on the mere gift of money, without contrition on the part of the giver, was as repugnant to the teaching of the Church, as it violated every principle of elementary justice. "Preachers act in the name of the Church", writes Cardinal Cajetan, "so long as they teach the doctrines of Christ and the Church; but if they teach, guided by their own minds and arbitrariness of will, things of which they are ignorant, they cannot pass as representatives of the Church; it need not be wondered at that they go astray" (Paulus, "Johann Tetzel", 165). It was this deviation from the correct teaching of the Church and the obtrusive and disgraceful injection of the treasury chest, that led to abuses and scandals reprobated by such contemporaries as Cochlæus, Emser, and Duke George (Paulus, op. cit., 117-18). "Grave abuses arose; the attitude of the preachers, the manner of offering and publishing the indulgences aroused many scandals; above all, Tetzel is in no way to be exonerated" (Janssen-Pastor, "Geschichte des deutsch. Volkes", 18th ed., Freiburg, II, 84)

 In the New version, the Tetzel entry states:

Tetzel was orthodox in regard to indulgences for the living. In regard to those for the dead, however, he followed the teaching contained in the Mainz Instruction issued to preachers of indulgences. That is, he taught the then widespread, erroneous theological opinion that indulgences for the dead were gained independently of dispositions of contrition in the person seeking the indulgence, who also had the right to apply them absolutely to a specific soul in purgatory.

Addendum on "types" of Indulgences

For a good overview of Tetzel, see Brecht's first volume on Luther, around page 175 or so and following.

Tetzel's indulgence preaching focused on four chief graces:

1. The complete remission of all sins (including remission of the punishment in purgatory). Earning the right amount of grace for this was possible under certain conditions: contrition of heart, confession (or at least the intention of doing so), visits to 7 churches with particular prayers offered, monetary payment

2. The possibility of obtaining a confessional letter: this enabled a person to receive absolution from all sins (including those committed up to the time of one's death). This could be obtained without confession.

3. Buy a confessional letter that promised the person who bought it and his dead relatives "participation in all the church's goods, i.e, its prayers, fasts, alms, and other pious works." This could be obtained without confession.

4. "Remission of the punishment of sins for souls in purgatory by means of the Pope's intercession when one paid for these souls"

Luther lied when he said of Tetzel: "He sold grace for money at the highest price"?

In my recent look at Tetzel's alleged "as the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs", I came across some other interesting related tidbits. I found a blogger asserting, "Luther lied when he said of Tetzel in a 1541 pamphlet: 'He sold grace for money at the highest price.' " The blogger cites "Luther, Hartmann Grisar, S.J., translated by E.M. Lamond, edited by Luigi Cappadelta, London: 1914-1915, 6 volumes; taken from vol. 1: 342-344" as the background source for this assertion. This assertion appears to be based on Grisar's statement on page 342:

In his pamphlet of 1541 Luther says : "He sold grace for money at the highest price he could." He then instances six "horrible, dreadful articles " which the avaricious monk had preached.

As I looked through pages 342-344, I didn't find Grisar saying Luther lied about Tetzel selling "grace for money at the highest price." Rather, Grisar goes on to expound on six articles Luther brought up in that 1541 writing, and goes through some of the legends surrounding Tetzel. Grisar is more concerned with noting that Tetzel  held that those purchasing indulgences must also be contrite. That is, the indulgence had at least one string attached (more on this below, see addendum)*. That indulgences were sold by Tetzel is not disputed by Grisar, nor does Grisar tackle any sort of "lie" about grace being sold for money.

What exactly did Luther state in 1541? He didn't exactly say Tetzel "sold grace for money at the highest price he could." Rather, Luther stated Tetzel was "selling grace for money as dearly or as cheaply as he could, to the best of his ability":

It happened, in the year 1517, that a preaching monk called John Tetzel, a great ranter, made his appearance... This same Tetzel now went around with indulgences, selling grace for money as dearly or as cheaply as he could, to the best of his ability. At that time I was a preacher here in the monastery, and a fledgling doctor fervent and enthusiastic for Holy Scripture. [LW 41:231]

Grisar doesn't dispute this statement. He simply mentions what Luther stated in 1541. shortly after this, Grisar approvingly quotes a Dominican contemporary of Tetzel, Johann Lindner, criticizing the methods Tetzel used:

His teaching found favour with many; but he devised unheard-of ways of raising money, was far too liberal in conferring offices, put up far too many public crosses [as a sign of the Indulgence-preaching] in towns and villages, which caused scandal and bred complaints among the people and brought the spiritual treasury into disrepute" (Grisar, 343).

Tetzel did in fact have a financial interest in selling indulgences. Heinrich Boehmer explains :

In other respects also, Tetzel must have possessed all the characteristics which help to influence the masses. "Physically, he was a large, strong man, eloquent and very bold of speech, sufficiently educated, and his mode of life so-so," that is, neither too strict nor too lax. When he had finished his sermon, he would himself usually go to the indulgence chest and buy a certificate for his father or some other dead person, and when the money tinkled in the chest, he would cry out, "Now I am sure of his salvation; now I need pray for him no longer." In this way he stirred up the people, "especially the sentimental matrons," so that they too came to the chest and bought certificates. In fact, such power did he wield over the masses that on one occasion in Annaberg, Saxony, he prevailed upon the miners who had treated with disrespect the relics of the wandering monks of St. Anthony to follow the Anthonins in a crowd a distance of three miles to do penance for their offense. This he accomplished by threatening that all the mines would cease operations. He was always quick to utter threats. Whoever challenged his authority was immediately discomfited and reminded that he was also an inquisitor. Thus he always knew how to silence all critics, including the clerics who had been injured by the indulgence.


Apparently the unusual talent of this member of the Dominican Monastery of St. Paul in Leipzig for the business of selling indulgences was not discovered until quite late by his superiors. It was not until 1504 that he entered upon this career. After this time he was almost constantly active as an indulgence preacher. In the course of years on his journeys throughout Germany he also acquired a wide commercial experience, which later proved exceedingly useful to his employers. For example, when he could not get rid of his wares at the price demanded, he would immediately have the indulgence cross taken down again. Then after a time he would return and sell the indulgences at a substantially lower price. But he was also quite conscious of his own worth. "I am well known in Italy, in many other kingdoms, and in all Germany," he wrote on January 24, 1517, to a critic who had presumed to remark that he was not a doctor but only an ordinary begging monk. "I have showered my knowledge of theology and canon law upon mans German universities and no one has ever treated me with contempt. On the contrary, every one of them, as long as ten years ago, begged me most urgently to take my degree of doctor of theology with them. If I had wanted to, I could have been a doctor before you had ever seen even the outside of a Corpus Juris Civilis and Canonici."


Just because Tetzel thought so highly of himself, he was by no means inclined to sell himself too cheaply. For instance, for his co-operation in the Mainz indulgence enterprise he demanded eighty guldens monthly in cash, besides free transportation and free maintenance for himself and his companions and ten guldens extra for his servant, Veit. Thus this servant received in cash twenty guldens more a yew than the highest official of the wealthy town of Leipzig! Any for handling the external details of the holy trade he also demanded large sums of the Fuggers, who had financed the venture and allowed the retail sale of the holy wares to he taken care of by their agents. It is very doubtful whether he was always wholly conscientious in handling the large sums of money that passed through his hands [Heinrich Boehmer, Road to Reformation (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1946). pp. 181-182].

Martin Brecht notes:

Certainly many more historical testimonies could be added. Suffice it to say that Luther did not lie in 1541 about Tetzel's "selling grace for money as dearly or as cheaply as he could, to the best of his ability." Luther may have erred in other regards to Tetzel, but he certainly did not in regard to Tetzel's ability to sell indulgences and make a living off of it. One may try to quibble that an indulgence is not the selling of grace. However, if, as the Catholic Encyclopedia asserts, "An indulgence is the extra-sacramental remission of the temporal punishment due, in God's justice, to sin that has been forgiven which remission is granted by the Church in the exercise of the power of the keys, through the application of the superabundant merits of Christ and of the saints, and for some just and reasonable motive", I don't know how one can think of an indulgence as anything other than obtaining grace.

*Addendum

The Church as a matter of fact did distinguish theoretically between the purchase of an indulgence and the absolution as declared by the priest in Confession. The latter could be an absolution from culpability, or of the punishments exacted by the Church, or of the divine punishments for sin in time and eternity. But because this absolution was often granted by priests who accompanied the indulgence-vendors, and thus occurred at the same time when a purchase of indulgence was made; and because from the end of the 14th century the indulgences were also called indulgences for punishment and culpability (poena et culpa) and praised as an atonement of man with God, it can be readily understood that the common people generally were of the opinion that on these occasions they had the opportunity, not only to receive indulgence for punishments, but also for culpability. For the common man did not know that theoretically the Church had bound together freeing from culpability with Confession and Absolution; he could only form his judgment according to what he saw. What he really saw was something that savored strongly of the open marketplace, a business where Confession played a very much subordinated role, especially since attritio was considered enough. Although Tetzel, who was commissioned for his special trade, and of whom Paulus treats in a monogravure (1889), later after his acquittal, taught that the indulgences "served solely in the case of punishment of sins that had been repented of and confessed," yet his instructions read, outside of indulgence for punishment of sin, of the plenaria omnium peccatorum remissio, and without repenting one could buy an indulgence upon the presentation of which any promiscuously chosen priest was forced once during lifetime and in the hour of death to grant to the professor a general absolution. [source]