all purses were open; then nothing was spared to put children in the cloister or to send them to school. But now when we must establish good schools (rechte Schulen) – establish, did I say, no, but only preserve the buildings in good condition – the purses are closed with iron chains. The children are neglected, no one teaches them to serve God, while they are joyfully immolated to Mammon." But herein Luther was inconsistent. Had he not taught people again and again that good works were useless? Why should they make any sacrifice of money for a pious work like that of education? And was it a good and pious work at all? This might have been asked by those who remembered Luther's reckless invectives against higher schools.
Luther was absolutely powerless to remedy the evil which grew worse daily. Therefore he appealed earnestly to the Protestant princes and magistrates to found and support schools. He told them that it was their right, nay, their duty to oblige their subjects to send their children to school. As is evident, Luther had been forced to this step because his voice, always "omnipotent when it preached destruction and spoliation, now fell powerless when it was at length raised to enforce the necessity of liberal contribution for the rearing of institutions to replace those which had been wantonly destroyed."[1] Compulsory education, accordingly, is a child of the Reformation; so is also the state-monopoly which gradually developed in European countries.[2]
