Cardinal Albert of Brandenburg instructs his chamberlain, Count Bodo of Stolberg, and his other counsels to take action against the spread of Luther’s teachings, which he describes as a “giftigen irrthumb” (“toxic fallacy”). Aschaffenburg, December 13, 1517

In November 1517, Cardinal Albert of Brandenburg received a letter from a vermessen monichs zcu Wittenberg (“impudent monk from Wittenberg”), who criticized indulgences and the practice of indulgences in general. This monk was none other than Martin Luther. Luther also added - and this is crucial - his 95 theses to this letter. Albert considered these a particular thorn in his side as, in his view, they caused turmoil among the populace. But how did this conflict ever come about?
It all began in 1513 with the inauguration of Albert as archbishop of Magdeburg and administrator of the diocese of Halberstadt and his subsequent appointment as archbishop of Mainz just one year later. With the latter appointment, Albert became both elector and archchancellor of the Holy Roman Empire, making him one of the most powerful men in the empire. This policy of awarding multiple offices was a canonical problem. Not only had Albert not attained the required age for episcopal consecration but it was actually not permissible to hold two offices at once. This was only possible with a papal dispensation, i.e. an exemption from canon law. These cost about 30,000 guilders, however. In order to be able to pay such a large sum to the Pope, Albert concluded a debt contract with the financial institution of Jakob Fugger in 1514. To repay the loan, Albert took over the sale of the St. Peter’s indulgence, proclaimed by Pope Leo X., in his ecclesiastical provinces and other parts of the empire as commissioner. One half of the fees collected was sent directly to the Pope in Rome, while the other could be used by Albert to repay his debt to the Fuggers. He appointed the Leipzig Dominican Johann Tetzel (around 1465-1519) as subcommissioner and thus the actual organizer of the sale of indulgences. Tetzel began promulgating the indulgence in early 1517, but quickly attracted a great deal of attention by virtue of his blatant advertising – please note the famous saying “Sobald das Geld im Kasten klingt, die Seele in den Himmel springt!” (“Soon as the coin in the chest doth ring, the soul will into heaven spring.”) The distinguishing characteristic of the St. Peter’s indulgence was its scope. Compared to the late medieval practice of selling indulgences, which only absolved certain sins when the appropriate amount was paid and required additional penance (prayer, pilgrimage, etc.), the new plenary indulgence went much further. Now, complete absolution was promised and the payment of money came to be the only obligation required of believers. In addition, the new indulgence could also be applied to those already deceased. These new options and the obvious orientation of the indulgence trade towards the church’s financial requirements and tax payments to Rome resulted in increasing criticism in Germany.
It was at this point that Martin Luther came on the scene. In Wittenberg, the distribution of the St. Peter’s indulgence was prohibited by Elector Frederick the Wise, but the citizens flocked to the neighboring territories of Jüterbog and Zerbst so as to circumvent the prohibition and obtain the indulgence with its promise of redemption, after all. Luther perceived this as a serious problem and opposed the pious practice in his sermons. When his efforts proved unsuccessful, he addressed a letter dated October 31, 1517 to Albert of Brandenburg, since, as indulgence commissioner and spiritual leader, he was responsible with regard to this matter in Luther’s eyes. In his letter, Luther asked for his grievances to be addressed and referred to the widespread criticism of indulgences.
Albert was slow to respond. It wasn’t until December 13, 1517 that he announced his response to his counselors in Halle. Luther himself never received an answer. While Albert did not perceive them as an attack on himself, he wanted to have these impudent theses examined and assessed by his theologians at the University of Mainz. Albert also informed the Pope about the events in Wittenberg, hoping the Pope himself would initiate proceedings against Luther, as was later the case. Albert wanted to avoid direct conflict with the Augustinian Hermits. Nevertheless, the document proves that Albert considered initiating his own prohibition proceedings against Luther in order to rebuke him and to prevent what he regarded as giftigen irthumb (“toxic fallacy”) from running rampant among the people.
What is also interesting about Albert’s letter is that he even criticized Tetzel’s practice of selling indulgences. However, his anger was directed at Tetzel’s wasteful methods. At 80 guilders a month, Tetzel received a very generous fee, which was comparable with the annual salary of a well-paid pastor. The invoice requested of Tetzel detailing food and board and pay for servants and subcommissioners amounted to over 300 guilders. In order to avoid reducing the final return on the sale of the indulgence, Tetzel was not to continue to indulge in such pomp. The grievances leveled at the subcommissioners, which found expression in negligence and in their clumsy behavior during sermons or even in their own personal gain through the indulgence trade, were also to be addressed.
In general, the present letter and the notification of the Pope of Luther’s theses set in motion a momentous chain of events. The initially purely theological discussion about the indulgence spread like wildfire across all levels of society, seizing and changing them radically.