[343] The Explanation of the Our Father in 1518, “Werke,” Weim. ed.,

2, p. 74 ff; 9, p. 122 ff; Erl. ed., 21, p. 156 ff; 45, p. 203 ff.

Noteworthy additions to it were made by Luther in 1519, _ib._, 6, pp. 8

ff., 20 ff.=45, p. 208 ff. Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, pp. 116 f., 291 f.

[344] Above, vol. iii., pp. 169 f., 211 f.

[345] Vol. iii., p. 200 ff.

[346] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 36, pp. 416-477; Erl. ed., 18², pp. 304-361.

[347] _Ib._, pp. 420=308 f.

[348] P. 448 f.=335 f.

[349] P. 444=331.

[350] P. 452=339.

[351] P. 449 ff.=336 ff.

[352] P. 447=334.

[353] To Melanchthon from the Coburg, July 31, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 8,

p. 157: “_ex arce dæmonibus plena_.”

[354] To the same, April 23, 1530, _ib._, 7, p. 308: “_Hæc satis pro

ioco, sed serio et necessario ioco, qui mihi irruentes cogitationes

repelleret, si tamen repellet_.”

[355] To the same, May 12, 1530, _ib._, 7, p. 333: “_Eo die, quo literæ

tuæ e Norimberga venerunt, habuit satan legationem suam apud me_,” etc.

See vol. ii., p. 390. Cp. to the same, June, 1530 (“Briefwechsel,” 8,

p. 43), where he calls the devil his torturer, and to the same, June

30, 1530, _ib._, p. 51, where he speaks of his “private struggles with

the devil.”

[356] To the same, July 31, 1530, _ib._, 8, p. 157.

[357] Cp. to the same, April 23, 1530, _ib._, 7, p. 303.

[358] To the same, May 12, 1530, _ib._, p. 333.

[359] To the same, May 15, 1530, _ib._, p. 335.

[360] To the same, Aug. 15, 1530, _ib._, 8, p. 190: “_Christus vivit et

regnat. Fiant sane dæmones, si ita volunt, monachi vel nonnæ quoque.

Nec forma melior eos decet, quam qua sese mundo hactenus vendiderunt

adorandos._” The “monks or nuns” is an allusion to the appearance of

the “spectre-monks” at Spires just before the Diet of Augsburg; see

vol. ii., p. 389 f.

[361] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 36, p. 424; Erl. ed., 18², p. 313 f.

[362] _Ib._, p. 423=312.—The so-called “Sermon on Love” (above, p.

96 f.) seeks to demonstrate in the above words the value of love of

our neighbour, and, that this necessarily resulted from true faith.

It abounds in beautiful sayings concerning the advantage of this

virtue. Cruciger had his reasons for publishing it, one being, as he

says in the dedication, to stop the mouths of those who never cease to

cry out against our people as though we neither taught nor practised

anything concerning love and good works. (Erl. ed., 18², p. 305.)

Köstlin-Kawerau remarks (2, p. 273): “The fundamental evil was that the

new Church included amongst its members so many who were indifferent to

such preaching; they had joined it not merely without any real interior

conversion, but without any spiritual awakening or sympathy, purely by

reason of outward circumstances.” It must be added that the Sermon,

though intended as a remedy, suffers from the defect of being permeated

through and through with a spirit of bitter hate against the Church

Catholic; in the very first pages we find the speaker complaining, that

the devil, “who cannot bear the Word,” “attacks us ... in order to

murder us by means of his tyrants”; “we are, however, forced to have

the devil for our guest,” who molests us “with his crew.” Weim. ed.,

36, p. 417 f.; Erl. ed., 18², p. 306 f.

[363] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24², p. 356 ff.

[364] To Melanchthon, May 12, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 332.

[365] To the same, April 29, 1530, _ib._, p. 313: “_Oratio mea ad

clerum procedit; crescit inter manus et materia et impetus, ut plurimos

Landsknechtos prorsus vi repellere cogar, qui insalutati non cessant

obstrepere_.” Cp. Kolde, “Luther,” 2, p. 330.

[366] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 199.

[367] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24², p. 391 ff.

[368] _Ib._, p. 395 f.

[369] _Ib._, p. 406.

[370] _Ib._, p. 396 f.

[371] Cp. our vol. iii., p. 435.

[372] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 107; Erl. ed., 28, p. 144.

[373] To Eobanus Hessus, April 23, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 301. Cp.

n. 2 in Enders, who suggests the above translation of “_tu habes malam

vocem_.” We read in Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 199: “We must admit, that,

judging by the tone of this tract [the ‘Vermanũg’] Luther’s ‘voice’

would have been out of place at Augsburg, as he admits in his letter to

Eobanus Hessus.”

[374] On June 5, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 367.

[375] See vol. iv., p. 338 f.

[376] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24², p. 364.

[377] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 363 f.

[378] “Werke,” _ib._, p. 361; cp. p. 396.

[379] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 313; Erl. ed., 33, p. 331. Sermons on

Genesis, 1527.

[380] _Ib._, p. 312 f.=330 f.

[381] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 108. From the year 1540.

[382] To Jacob Probst, June 1, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 353 f.

[383] To Bucer, July 12, 1532, in “Anal. Lutherana,” ed. Kolde, p. 203.

[384] “Anal.,” _loc. cit._

[385] Leo Judae, 1. c., 203.

[386] _Ib._, p. 204.

[387] See our vol. iv., p. 87.

[388] H. Barge, “Carlstadt,” see our vol. ii., p. 154.

[389] F. Hülsse, “Card. Albrecht und Hans Schenitz,” “Magdeburger

Geschichtsblätter,” 1889, p. 82; cp. Enders, “Briefwechsel Luthers,”

10, p. 182, who remarks of F. W. E. Roth’s review in the “Hist.-pol.

Bl.,” 118, 1896, p. 160 f.: “The author does not seem to be acquainted

with Hülsse’s work and therefore condemns Albert.”

[390] Enders, _ib._, p. 181.

[391] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 419.

[392] Enders, _ib._

[393] On July 31, 1535, and Jan.-Feb., 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, pp.

98 and 125 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, pp. 180 and 296).

[394] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 420.

[395] Enders, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 297; Hülsse, p. 61.

[396] On March 10, 1542, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 442.

[397] To Johann Göritz, judge at Leipzig, Jan. 29, 1544, _ib._, p. 625.

Cp. for the account of Rosina, vol. iii., pp. 217 f., 280 f.

[398] Vol. i., p. 59. “_Stupidæ litteræ_” here perhaps means

“indignant” rather than “amazed” letters.

[399] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 483.

[400] Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.” (Loesche), p. 200. Cp. above vol. iii.,

p. 437 f.

[401] To Catherine, end of July, 1545, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p.

753.

[402] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 127. Cp. above vol. iv., p. 276.

[403] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 470; Erl. ed., 25², p. 127. “Widder

den Meuchler zu Dresen,” 1531.

[404] _Ib._, 26², p. 242, “Das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft,” 1545.

[405] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 33, p. 605; Erl. ed., 48, p. 342. Expos. of

John vi.-viii., 1530-1532.

[406] _Ib._, p. 341.

[407] Feb. 7, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 83 f.

[408] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, pp. 427, 428 f.; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 305 and

307. “An den christl. Adel,” 1520. Cp. above p. 88 f.

[409] “_Utinam haberent plures reges Angliæ, qui illos occiderent._”

Cp. Paulus, “Protestantismus und Toleranz in 16. Jahrh.,” 1911, p. 17

ff.

[410] Dec., 1535, “Briefwechsel” 10, p. 275.

[411] Feb. 3, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 410; cp. to Spalatin, Feb. 7,

1519, _ib._, p. 412.

[412] 4-9 Dec., 1521, _ib._, 3´, p. 253: “_Exacerbabitur mihi spiritus,

ut multo vehementiora deinceps in eam rem nihilominus moliar_.”

[413] Vol. iv., p. 329 ff.

[414] Oswald Myconius to Simon Grynæus, Nov. 8, 1534, in

Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 665, from a MS. source: “_Doctiorem se esse,

quam qui ab eiusmodi hominibus doceri velit_”; this showed his

“_tyrannica superbia_.”

[415] To Amsdorf, April 14, 1545, “Briefe” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 728.

[416] To Caspar Güttel, March 30, 1522, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 326.

[417] Vol. iv., p. 13 ff.

[418] _Ib._, p. 3 ff.

[419] Cp. our vol. ii., p. 386: “For when once we have evaded the peril

and are at peace, then we can easily atone for our tricks and lapses

(‘_dolos ac lapsus nostros_’), because His [God’s] mercy is over us,”

etc., for the word _mendacia_ after _dolos_ see vol. iv., p. 96.

[420] See vol. iv., p. 95: “_In cuius [Antichristi] deceptionem et

nequitiam ob salutem animarum nobis omnia licere arbitramur_.”

[421] _Ib._, p. 81 f.

[422] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24², p. 388 f. Cp. our vol. iv., p. 166 ff.

[423] _Ib._, p. 391. “Even should the Pope, the bishops, the canons and

the people wish to remain in the state of celibacy, or the state of

whores and knaves—and even the heathen poet admits that fornicators

and whoremongers are loath to take wives—still I hope you will take

pity on the poor pastors and those who have the cure of souls and allow

them to marry.”

[424] Cordatus, “Tageb.,” p. 364.

[425] Cp. vol. iv., p. 102 f.

[426] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 27, p. 286.

[427] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 287.

[428] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24², p. 364.

[429] _Ib._, p. 365.

[430] _Ib._, p. 364.

[431] _Ib._, p. 361.

[432] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 291; Erl. ed., 25², p. 23.

[433] _Ib._, p. 285-14 f.

[434] “Wahrhaffte Bekanntnuss,” Bl. 9´.

[435] _Ib._

[436] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 290; Erl. ed., 25², p. 22.

[437] “Opp.” 10, col. 1558. “Adv. ep. Lutheri.”

[438] _Ib._, 1555.

[439] _Ib._, 1334. “Hyperaspistes.”

[440] Vol. iv., p. 228 ff.

[441] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 442.

[442] Dec. 8, 1534, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 71 (“Briefwechsel,” 10,

p. 88 f.); “Briefe,” 4, p. 567 ff.: “To set ourselves up as judges and

ourselves to judge is assuredly wrong, and the wrath of God will not

leave it unpunished.” “If you desire my advice, as you write, I counsel

you to accept peace, however you reach it, and rather to suffer in

your goods and your honour than to involve yourself further in such an

undertaking where you will have to take upon yourself all the crimes

and wickedness that are committed.... You must consider for how much

your conscience will have to answer if you knowingly bring about the

destruction of so many people.”

[443] Cp. Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 159. “Briefwechsel,” 12, pp.

84-102; 13, p. 13.

[444] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 444.

[445] Cp. C. A. Burkhardt, “Der historische Hans Kohlhase,” 1864.

[446] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 140 ff.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 178 ff.

In “Wyder den falsch genantten geystlichen Standt,” 1522.

[447] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 44, p. 84. In the sermons on Mt. xviii.-xxiii.

[448] See xxix., 8.

[449] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 651 f.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 2, p. 511. In

the “Defensio contra Eccii iudicium.”

[450] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 15, p. 183; Erl. ed., 24², p. 251. “Widder den

newen Abgott und allten Teuffel der zu Meyssen sol erhaben werden.”

[451] _Ib._, p. 194 f.=264.

[452] _Ib._, p. 175=249.

[453] Cp. vol. iii., p. 191 f.; 211 f. and Joh. Wieser in “Luther und

Ignatius von Loyola” [“Zeitschr. f. kath. Theol.,” 7 (1883) and 8

(1884), particularly 8, p. 365 ff.].

[454] Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vi., p. 54.

[455] “Briefwechsel,” 12, p. 231.

[456] Cp. Janssen, _ib._

[457] July, 1539, “Briefwechsel,” 12, p. 188.

[458] Cp. my “Hist. of Rome and the Popes in the Middle Ages” (Engl.

Trans., i., pp. 9-26).

[459] In what follows we have drawn largely on J. Wieser (see above, p.

124, n. 1).

[460] Wieser rightly points out that Luther claimed above all to be

a “National Prophet”; he was fond of saying that he had brought the

Gospel “to the Saxons,” or “to the Germans.” _Ib._, 8, pp. 143 f., 356.

[461] _Ib._, 8, p. 352.

[462] Above, pp. 3 ff. and 66 ff.

[463] Cp. Wieser, _ib._, 8, p. 353.

[464] Wieser, _ib._, 8, p. 387.

[465] “Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts,” 1², 1896, p. 174.

[466] See above, vol. iii., p. 25 ff.

[467] Vol. ii., p. 111. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 169 ff.; “Opp. lat.

var.,” 6, p. 494 _sqq._

[468] “Werke,” _ib._, p. 192=p. 528.

[469] _Ib._, p. 194=532.

[470] “Entsprach das Staatskirchentum dem Ideale Luthers?” (“Zeitschr.

f. Theol. und Kirche,” 1908, Suppl., p. 38.) The striking new works of

Hermelink, K. Müller, etc., have already been referred to elsewhere.

In addition we must mention K. Holl, “Luther und das landesherrliche

Kirchenregiment” (“Zeitschr. f. Theol. und Kirche,” 1911, Suppl.),

where the writer takes a view of the much-discussed question different

from that of K. Müller.

[471] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 484 f.; Erl. ed., 11², p. 205 f. Cp.

_ib._, p. 481=201 f., and Erl. ed., 11², p. 82 f.

[472] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 12, p. 215 f.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, 13. On the

“_Formula missæ_,” see below, xxix., 9.

[473] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 11, p. 210. The Latin version reads: “_Si

Dominus dederit in cor vestrum, ut simul probetis_,” etc.

[474] _Ib._, 12, p. 693; cp. 697. On the Wittenberg Poor Box see below,

vol. vi. xxxv., 4.

[475] P. Drews, p. 55.

[476] Vol. ii., p. 113; cp. vol. iii., p. 27.

[477] “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 70.

[478] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 11 ff.; Erl. ed., 22, p. 106 ff.

[479] _Ib._, p. 35 ff=153 ff.

[480] _Ib._, 11, p. 408 ff.=22, p. 141 ff. “Ordenũg eyns gemeynen

Kastens,” 1523. On the date cp. Drews, p. 43.

[481] See below, vol. vi., xxxv., 4.

[482] Above, p. 78 ff.

[483] “Schwenckfelds Epistolar,” 2, 2, 1570, p. 39 ff. Cp. K. Ecke,

“Schwenckfeld, Luther und der Gedanke einer apostolischen Reformation,”

1911, p. 101, where the words of the Epistolar, pp. 24 and 39, are

given, showing that Schwenckfeld “noted down the whole affair from

beginning to end at the inn while it was still fresh in his memory.”

[484] Of these steps and the sermon nothing is known.

[485] “Epistolar,” _ib._, pp. 39, 43.

[486] “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 13, p. 552 ff.

[487] See below, xxix., 9. The writing is reprinted in “Werke,” Weim.

ed., 19, p. 70 ff.; Erl. ed., 22, p. 227 ff.

[488] Sermon of Dec. 6, 1523, _ib._, Weim. ed., 11, p. 210.

[489] In the “Deudsche Messe,” Weim. ed., 19, p. 75; Erl. ed., 22, p.

231: “In order that no faction may arise as though I had done it of my

own initiative.”

[490] “Entsprach des Staatskirchentum dem Ideale Luthers?” p. 65. Drews

adds: “He was afraid of doing something contrary to God’s will.” That

Luther had not thought out the matter plainly is also stated by K.

Müller (“Luther und Karlstadt,” p. 121).

[491] “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 10.

[492] As late as June 26, 1533 (“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 317), he wrote:

“_In hoc sæculo tam turbido et nondum satis pro recipienda disciplina

idoneo non ausim consulere tam subitam innovationem_.” Cp. p. 142,

below.

[493] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53 (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 32), p. 399.

[494] P. 67.

[495] The plan as Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 47 f., rightly points out had

been formed “mainly on elements previously brought forward by Luther.”

[496] Reprinted in A. L. Richter, “Die evang. Kirchenordnungen des 16.

Jahrh.,” 1, 1846, p. 56.

[497] Jan. 7, 1527. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 56, p. 170 (“Briefwechsel,” 6,

p. 9).

[498] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 48.

[499] F. Feuchtwanger: “Gesch. der sozialen Politik ... im Zeitalter

der Reformation” (“Schmollers Jahrb. f. Gesetzgebung N.F.,” 33, 1909),

p. 193.

[500] Cp. Enders, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 73 n.

[501] June 26, 1533, to Schnabel, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 316.

[502] _Ib._, p. 68.

[503] Below, xxxv., 2.

[504] To what extent the Elector was following the example of his

Catholic ancestors in Church matters is shown by K. Pallas, “Entstehung

des landesherrlichen Kirchenregiments in Kursachsen” (“N. Mitteilungen

aus dem Gebiet historisch-antiquarischer Forschung”), 24, 2.

[505] To Luther, Nov. 26, 1526, “Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 408.

[506] Proofs of this will be given below when we deal with Luther’s

attitude towards State government of the Church. So ineffectual was

Luther’s reserve and even his formal protest, that Carl Holl (above,

p. 134, n. 4) remarks (p. 59): “These exertions on Luther’s part were

of small avail. Facts proved stronger than his theories. Once the

Visitation had been made in the Elector’s name, then, in spite of all

that might be said, he could not fail to appear as the one to whom

the oversight of spiritual matters belonged. It must have been fairly

difficult for the Electoral Chancery to make the distinction between

the Elector speaking as a brother to other Christians and as a ruler to

his subjects. It was certainly much easier to treat everything on the

same lines.” Cp. W. Friedensburg, above, vol. ii., p. 333, n. 2.

[507] Cp. vol. ii., p. 319 ff.

[508] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 205; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 2 _sqq._

[509] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 19, p. 70 ff.; Erl. ed., 22, p. 227 ff.

[510] To V. Warnbeck, Sep. 30, 1525, see Schlegel, “Vita Spalatini,” p.

222. Cp. Jonas to Spalatin, Sep. 23, 1525, vol. iv., p. 511.

[511] “Since so many from all lands request me to do so, and the

secular power also urges me to it.” “Werke,” Weim. ed., 19, p. 50 f.;

Erl. ed., 14², p. 278, from the Church-postils. Cp. G. Rietschel,

“Lehrb. der Liturgik,” Berlin, 1900, p. 278.

[512] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 19, p. 95; Erl. ed., 22, p. 239.

[513] For Luther’s writing: “Von dem Grewel der Stillmesse so man den

Canon nennet,” see above, vol. iv., p. 511 f.

[514] For the fate of this see our vol. iii., p. 392 f., vol. iv., p.

195, n. 4, p. 239, and Kawerau, in Möller, “KG,” 3³, p. 401.

[515] See below, xxxiv., 4.

[516] Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 532. He also repeatedly complains that the

hymns and prayers of antiquity failed to make sufficient mention of the

Redemption and the Grace of Christ. Even in the “Te Deum” he misses the

doctrine of Redemption, needless to say in the sense in which he taught

it. “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 425.

[517] W. Germann, “Johann Forster” (“N. Beitr. zur Gesch. deutschen

Altertums,” Hft. 12), 1894.

[518] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 19, p. 72; Erl. ed., 22, p. 227.

[519] _Ib._, 12, p. 37=22, p. 156.

[520] _Ib._, 19, p. 73=22, p. 228.

[521] _Ib._

[522] _Ib._, p. 75=230 f.

[523] _Ib._, 74 ff.=229 ff.

[524] _Ib._, p. 72=228.

[525] Cp. for instance above, p. 44 f.

[526] Cp. above, p. 45, and “Werke,” Erl. ed., 14², p. 87.

[527] On Luther’s attitude towards such punishment cp. his letter to

Margrave George of Brandenburg (Sep. 14, 1531), “Briefe,” ed. De Wette,

4, p. 308 (“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 103).

[528] Kawerau in the “Göttinger Gelehrte Anzeigen,” 1888, 1, p. 113 f.,

in his review of Joh. Gottschick, “Luthers Anschauungen vom christl.

Gottesdienst,” Freiburg, 1887: “In practice Luther helped to further a

worship which, though easily to be explained, constituted nevertheless

a questionable concession to the needs of the moment; for he vindicates

the purely pedagogic character of worship and ascribes it to the need

of educating backward Christians or of making real Christians of them.”

Kawerau speaks of this as “an object which, on every side, spells

serious injury to worship itself.” Gottschick had proved convincingly

(p. 19 f.) that “such a conception of worship was on every point at

variance with Luther’s own principles concerning the priestly character

of the congregation and the relation of prayer to faith.” In this view

Gottschick would find himself “in complete harmony with all eminent

liturgical writers at the present day.”

[529] J. Gottschick (see above, n. 1), in concluding, charges Luther’s

reform of divine worship with being merely an adaptation of the Roman

Mass, absolutely worthless for Lutherans, adopted out of too great

consideration for the weak; this form of worship, utterly at variance

with his own liturgical principles, was not to be regarded as a real

Lutheran liturgy.

[530] Cp. Kawerau’s quotations in his article in the “Göttinger Gel.

Anzeigen,” 1888, 1, p. 115.

[531] June 17, 1525, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, p. 412 ff.; Erl. ed., 53,

p. 315 ff. (“Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 198). For Bugenhagen’s letter see

“Briefwechsel,” p. 207, for Hofmann’s, _ib._, p. 213.

[532] Kawerau, in Möller, “KG.,” 3³, p. 400; “The influence of the

Catholic past is still evident in the fact, that, in spite of the

predominant position assigned to preaching, the view still prevailed

that Divine worship, in order to be complete, must include the Supper,

and that it culminated in this ‘office.’ This, even in the 16th

century, gave rise to difficulties.”

[533] To Margrave George of Brandenburg in the letter quoted above, p.

145, n. 2.

[534] Kawerau, _ib._, p. 401.

[535] _Ib._, p. 400. Luther says: “_Diligens verbi Dei prædicatio est

proprius cultus novi testamenti_.” “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 19, p. 161.

[536] Gottschick.

[537] This is Kawerau’s opinion, _ib._, p. 401.

[538] See above, p. 146, n. 3.

[539] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 35; Erl. ed., 22, p. 153. “Von

Ordenung Gottes Dienst ynn der Gemeyne,” 1523.

[540] Of the most recent studies we need only mention here H. Greving,

“Ecks Pfarrbuch für U.L. Frau in Ingolstadt” (“RGI. Studien”), Hft. 4

and 5, 1908, p. 87 ff. Cp. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl.

Trans.), vol. i., _passim_.

[541] This introduction, together with the whole text of the common

Preface, enters into Luther’s Latin Mass. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p.

212; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 8. In his German Mass it is suppressed.

[542] “Epistolar,” 2, 2, 1570. Ecke (see below, p. 156, n. 1), p. 159.

[543] “Der erste Teil der christl. orthodox. Bücher und Schriften....

Schwenckfelds ... durch Mitbekenner zusammengetragen,” 1564, p. 4.

Ecke, p. 160; cp. p. 10 f.

[544] “Epistolar,” _ib._, p. 228; cp. p. 246.

[545] _Ib._, p. 645.

[546] _Ib._, p. 519.

[547] “Schwenckfeld, Luther und der Gedanke einer apostolischen Ref.,”

Berlin, 1911, p. 161.

[548] Ecke, p. 176. The Protestant author adds in a note: “It must,

however, be pointed out that this criticism does not affect the

apostolic nature of the profound phenomena of Evangelical piety seen

among Lutherans.”

[549] “Christl. Bücher,” etc. (above, p. 155, n. 2), p. 384. Ecke, p.

177.

[550] “Epistolar,” _ib._, p. 602. In 1550. Ecke, p. 196.

[551] See our vol. iv., p. 210 ff., for instance, and below, vol. vi.,

xxxix., 1.

[552] “Die andere Verantwortung,” 1556, Aiii. Ecke, p. 190 f.

[553] “Christl. Bücher,” p. 326 f. Ecke, p. 163.

[554] _Ib._

[555] “Epistolar,” 1, 1566, p. 680. Ecke, p. 164.

[556] “Christl. Bücher,” p. 362. In 1547. Ecke, _ib._

[557] Ecke, p. 164, from a MS.

[558] “Christl. Bücher,” p. 477. Ecke, p. 164.

[559] Thus G. Arnold, “Kirchenhistorie,” Frankfurt a/M., 1729, 1, p.

413.

[560] _Ib._, p. 395. Ecke, p. 170 f., where he quotes in support of

this and what follows, “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 14², pp. 164 f., 174.

[561] _Ib._

[562] _Ib._, p. 325. Ecke, p. 172.

[563] _Ib._, p. 377. Ecke, p. 168.

[564] _Ib._, p. 420. Schwenckfeld’s excuse is, however, worthy of note,

p. 401: “Such doctrine is not the outcome of an evil mind but is due to

misapprehension.” Ecke, p. 168.

[565] _Ib._, p. 421. Ecke, p. 169.

[566] _Ib._

[567] _Ib._, p. 401. Ecke, _ib._

[568] _Ib._ Ecke, p. 170.

[569] _Ib._, p. 361. Ecke quotes “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 11², p. 217.

[570] _Ib._, p. 365. Ecke, p. 166, quotes Erl. ed., 13², p. 218; 14²,

pp. 281 f., 287 ff.

[571] _Ib._

[572] _Ib._

[573] _Ib._

[574] _Ib._, p. 343 f. Cp. “Epistolar,” 2, 2, p. 912. Ecke, p. 176. Cp.

Döllinger, on Schwenckfeld, in “Die Reformation,” 1, p. 254 ff.

[575] “Epistolar,” 2, 2, p. 913. Ecke, p. 55.

[576] _Ib._, p. 427. Cp. “Epistolar,” 1., p. 410.

[577] Ecke’s words, p. 161.

[578] “Epistolar,” 2, 2, p. 513, cp. p. 403 ff.; 1, p. 424. Ecke, _ib._

[579] Ecke, p. 162.

[580] Cp. Ecke, p. 160, n. 3.

[581] _Ib._, p. 222.

[582] Ecke, p. 180 f.; from MS. sources.

[583] “Epistolar,” 2, 2, p. 639. Ecke, p. 179.

[584] “Epistolar,” 1, p. 99. Ecke, p. 181.

[585] _Ib._ Ecke, p. 182.

[586] _Ib._, 1, p. 92. Ecke, p. 181.

[587] _Ib._, p. 736. Ecke, p. 182.

[588] “Christl. Bücher,” p. 363. Ecke, p. 173.

[589] _Ib._

[590] “Epistolar,” 2, 2, p. 1014. Ecke, p. 160.

[591] Ecke, p. 227, MS.

[592] “Christl. Bücher,” pp. 962, 965. Ecke, p. 191.

[593] “Epistolar,” 1, p. 173. “Christl. Bücher,” p. 74 f., 549. Ecke,

_ib._

[594] “Epistolar,” 1, p. iii. B. Ecke, p. 86.

[595] See above, vol. iv., p. 367.

[596] Ch. v. Rommel, “Philipp der Grossmüthige, Landgraf von Hessen,”

1, 1820, p. 517.

[597] Aug. 5, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 580.

[598] May 7, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 557.

[599] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 562.

[600] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 75 ff. Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 91 ff.

[601] Letter to the Emperor Charles V, Aug. 24, 1544, in Raynaldus,

“Annales,” a. 1544; in German in “Luthers Werke,” Walch’s ed., 17,

p. 1253 ff. For the former attitude of the Papacy to the idea of the

Council, cp. our vol. iii., p. 424 ff.

[602] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 172 f.

[603] _Ib._, p. 62.

[604] _Ib._, p. 70.

[605] _Ib._, p. 114.

[606] _Ib._, p. 80.

[607] _Ib._, p. 91 f. Cp. “Colloq.” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 90 _sq._;

“Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 42 f.

[608] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 101.

[609] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 138.

[610] _Ib._, p. 287.

[611] _Ib._, p. 231.

[612] _Ib._, p. 169.

[613] _Ib._, p. 417.

[614] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 32, p. 474; Erl. ed., 43, p. 263.

[615] _Ib._, p. 475 = 264 f.

[616] In the “Antwort auf das Schmähbüchlein,” etc., “Luthers Werke,”

Erl. ed., 25², p. 146.

[617] April, 1525, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, p. 547; Erl. ed., 53, p. 342

“Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 151.

[618] To the Preacher Balthasar Raida of Hersfeld, Jan. 17, 1536,

“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 288.

[619] April 4, 1541, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 291.

[620] To Wenceslaus Link, Sep. 8, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 398.

[621] To the Elector Johann Frederick, Jan. 18, 1545, _ib._, p. 716:

“I will have them [the lawyers] eternally damned and cursed _in my_

Churches.”

[622] To Justus Jonas, Dec. 16, 1543, _ib._, p. 612.

[623] To Jacob Probst, Dec. 5, 1544, _ib._, p. 703.

[624] To Amsdorf, Jan. 8, 1546, _ib._, p. 773 f.

[625] _Ib._, p. 774.

[626] Cp. (E. v. Jarcke) “Studien und Skizzen z. Gesch. d. Ref.,” 1846,

p. 68.

[627] _Ib._

[628] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 158.

[629] _Ib._, p. 198.

[630] _Ib._, p. 200.

[631] “Theander Lutherus,” Ursel s.a., Bl. 59´.

[632] After June 16, 1533, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 20.

(“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 312.) The passage in question in the original

at Weimar is in Melanchthon’s handwriting. Cp. Enders, p. 313, on the

historical connection of the memorandum.

[633] “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 139 _sqq._ Rommel, “Philipp von Hessen,” 1,

p. 417. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol.

v., p. 527 ff. Pastor, “Die kirchl. Reunionsbestrebungen während der

Regierung Karls V,” p. 95.

[634] To Brenz, April 14, 1537, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 340: “_Ulyssea

philosophia ... multa dissimulantes_.”

[635] Letter of March 10, 1540, in Bindseil, “Melanchthonis epistolæ,

iudicia, etc.,” 1874, p. 146.

[636] Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 421 ff.

[637] Letter of Dec. 28, 1543, in Lenz, “Briefwechsel des Landgrafen

Philipp von Hessen,” 2, p. 227. “_Nihil est quod minus multum_ [_read_

inultum] _relinquerem._”

[638] Lenz, _ib._, p. 241.

[639] Letter of Feb. 25, 1545, Lenz, p. 304.

[640] Letter of Dec. 1, 1545, Lenz, p. 379.

[641] Letter of April 5, 1546, Lenz, p. 426 f.

[642] Letter of May 12, 1545, Lenz, p. 433.

[643] See below, vol. vi., xl., 3.

[644] Seckendorf, “Comm. hist. de Lutheranismo,” 3, Lips., 1694,

p. 468. The disputant, Johannes Marbach, received from Luther this

testimony: “_Amplectitur puram evangelii doctrinam, quam ecclesia

nostra uno spiritu et una voce profitetur_.” “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5,

p. 543. Cp. Disputationen, ed. Drews, p. 700 ff. Some of Luther’s other

statements concerning unity ring very differently.

[645] Cp. vol. iii., pp. 324, 363, 371 f.

[646] “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 230; “_Incipiunt de tota religione dubitare_.”

[647] “Pezelii Object. et resp. Melanchtonis,” P. V., p. 289.

Döllinger, “Die Reformation,” 1, p. 373.

[648] Nov., 1536, to Myconius, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 187.

[649] _Ib._, pp. 460, 488 (1537 and 1538).

[650] To Prince George of Anhalt, June 10, 1545, “Briefe,” ed. De

Wette, 6, p. 379.

[651] _Ib._

[652] “Corp, ref.,” 1, p. 907.

[653] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, pp. 441, 574.

[654] To Spalatin, Jan. 12, 1541. “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 246. “Spalatin

foresaw what was to come better than did Luther.” K. Holl, “Luther und

das landesherrliche Kirchenregiment,” 1911, p. 57.

[655] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 223, Table-Talk.

[656] To Count Albert of Mansfeld, Oct. 5, 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55,

p. 147 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 90). Cp. above, vol. iii., 38 f., 263 f.

[657] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121.

[658] _Ib._, p. 152.

[659] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 82.

[660] To the Visitors in Thuringia, March 25, 1539, “Briefe,” 5, p. 173

“Briefwechsel,” 12, p. 118.

[661] To Daniel Cresser, Oct. 22, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p.

596, concerning certain occurrences at Dresden.

[662] See above p. 55, ff., and vol. ii., p. 298.

[663] “Kirchenrecht,” 1, 1892, p. 613.

[664] R. Sohm, _ib._, p. 615.

[665] _Ib._, p. 623.

[666] _Ib._, p. 618.

[667] _Ib._, p. 632. Sohm’s standpoint is, that a Church with powers of

self-government or with a “canon law,” as he calls it, is practically

unthinkable. Cp. Carl Müller, “Die Anfänge der Konsistorialverfassung

in Deutschland” (Hist. Zeitschr. Bd. 102, 3. Folge Bd. 6, p. 1 ff.). He

too arrives at the conclusion, contrary to many previously held views,

viz. that it was only gradually in the course of the 16th century that

the consistories changed, from organs of ecclesiastical jurisdiction,

into organs of State government of the Church. Cp. also O. Mejer, “Zum

KR. des Reformationsjahrh.,” 1891, p. 1 ff.

[668] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 66.

[669] “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 720 _sq._ Memorandum as to whether the

Schmalkalden League should continue, etc., March, 1545, signed by him

first. Cp. “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 374.

[670] To Wenceslaus Link, Sep. 8, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 399.

[671] Pars 3, art. 9: “_Maiorem excommunicationem, quam papa ita

nominat, non nisi civilem poenam esse ducimus non pertinentem ad nos

ministros ecclesiæ._” “Symbol. Bücher,” ed. Müller-Kolde^[10], p. 323.

[672] To Tileman Schnabel and the other Hessian clergy, June 26,

1533, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 317: “_Hoc sæculo excommunicatio maior ne

potest quidem in nostram potestatem redigi, et ridiculi fieremus, ante

vires, hanc tentantes. Nam quod vos sperare videmini, ut executio vel

per ipsum principem fiat, valde incertum est, nec vellem politicum

magistratum in id officii misceri_,” etc.

[673] N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess,” 1911, p. 32, with

reference to “Luthers Werke,” Weim. ed., 29, p. 539, where the note of

the Wittenberg Deacon, George Rörer to Luther’s sermon of Aug. 22 of

that year says: “_Hæc prima fuit excommunicatio ab ipso pronuntiata._”

[674] Luther to Leonhard Beier, 1533, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 365.

[675] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 275.

[676] Cp. the passages quoted, _ib._, p. 675, and Lauterbach,

“Tagebuch,” p. 167.

[677] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 291 _sqq._ Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2,

p. 440.

[678] On April 2, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 550. Cp. “Werke,” Erl. ed.,

59, pp. 162 ff., 159 f.; “We must set up excommunication again.” In

the latter passage he speaks of his action against the Wittenberg

Commandant, Hans v. Metzsch.

[679] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 42. His words remind us of Luther’s

own; above, p. 139.

[680] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 160.

[681] _Ib._, p. 179 f. Cp. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 185 (in 1540).

[682] _Ib._, p. 169 f.

[683] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 278 (in 1542-1543).

[684] “Kosmographie,” Bl. 44´, 163. Janssen, “Hist. of the German

People” (Engl. Trans.), v., p. 535.

[685] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 122.

[686] _Ib._, 1, p. 322.

[687] _Ib._, 3, p. 306.

[688] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 367, Table-Talk.

[689] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 306. In the statement the year

given is uncertain. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 368: “_Anno_ 34,” etc.;

elsewhere 1543.

[690] Rebenstock, in Bindseil, 1. c.

[691] P. Drews, “Die Ordination, Prüfung und Lehrverpflichtung der

Ordinanden in Wittenberg” (“Deutsche Zeitschr. für KR.”), 15, 1905, pp.

66 ff., 274 ff., particularly p. 281 ff.

[692] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 22 f. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 80:

“_Doctor dixit: Nos qui prædicamus Evangelium, habemus potestatem

ordinandi; papa et episcopi neminem possunt ordinare_” (a. 1540). P.

226: “_Doctor ad Cellarium; Vos estis episcopus, quemadmodum ego sum

papa_” (a. 1540). Johannes Cellarius was Superintendent at Dresden.

[693] Janssen, _ib._ (Engl. Trans.), vi., 181 ff.

[694] Letter of Jan. 24, 1541, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 253 f.

[695] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 553 ff.

[696] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 126, in the “Exempel” (see below, p.

195).

[697] “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 3, p. 302, according to MS. Dresdense B 193,

4.

[698] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 554 f.

[699] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 125, in the “Exempel.”

[700] On March 26, 1542, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 451:

“_Venerabili in Domino viro Iacobo Probst ecclesiæ Bremensis episcopo

vero_,” etc.

[701] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 93 ff.

[702] _Ib._, p. 121.

[703] _Ib._, pp. 99, 100, 118, 113.

[704] P. 124.

[705] P. 125.

[706] P. 115.

[707] P. 126 f.

[708] Feb. 6, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 432.

[709] Letter of Jan. 13, 1543, _ib._, p. 532.

[710] Letter of July 23, 1542, _ib._, p. 485.

[711] To Amsdorf after Jan. 20, 1542, _ib._, p. 430.

[712] To Amsdorf, Feb. 12, 1542, _ib._, p. 433.

[713] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 123.

[714] Jan. 8, 1546, “Briefe,” 5, p. 773.

[715] Feb. 7, 1546, “Briefe,” 5, p. 787.

[716] Feb. 10, 1546, _ib._, p. 790.

[717] April 13, 1542, _ib._, p. 464.

[718] To the Elector and the Duke, April 7, 1542, “Werke,” Erl. ed.,

56, p. 15 ff. “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 304 ff.

[719] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 567.

[720] April 9, 1542, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 56, p. liii. “Briefe,” _ib._,

p. 311.

[721] Leipzig, 1874, p. 28 f.

[722] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 568.

[723] According to Luther’s report to Brück, April 12, 1542, “Werke,”

Erl. ed., 56, p. liv., “Briefe,” p. 314.

[724] _Ib._

[725] Burkhardt, “Gesch. der sächs. Kirchen- u. Schulvisitationen,

1524-1545,” 1879, p. 209 f. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People”

(Engl. Trans.), vi., p. 192.

[726] G. A. Arndt, “Archiv der sächs. Gesch.,” 2, Leipzig, 1784-1786,

p. 333 ff. C. G. Gersdorf, “Urkundenbuch von Meissen,” 3, Leipzig,

1867, p. 375 f. Janssen, _ib._, p. 193.

[727] April 29, 1544, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 56, p. 91; “Briefe,” 5, p. 646.

[728] In Luther’s household memoranda, “Briefe,” 6, p. 326.

[729] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 213 (“Briefwechsel,” 12, p. 34).

[730] July 7, 1544, “Werke,” _ib._, p. 104 f.

[731] Cp. Luther’s attitude at the time when the question of armed

resistance to the Emperor was mooted, vol. iii., 56 ff., and his views

on the relations of Church and State.

[732] To Amsdorf, Nov. 25, 1538, “Briefe,” 5, p. 136 (“Briefwechsel,”

11, p. 38): “_Vides, quantis premor oneribus.... Miserrimis miserior,

ut qui amplius nihil possum præ defectu virium._”

[733] To the Christians at Strasburg, Dec. 15, 1524, “Werke,” Weim.

ed., 15, p. 395; Erl. ed., 53, p. 275 (“Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 83).

[734] See above, vol. ii., p. 370.

[735] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, p. 67 f.; Erl. ed., 29, p. 141 f.

“Against the heavenly Prophets.”

[736] _Ib._, p. 68=143.

[737] _Ib._, p. 73=148.

[738] _Ib._, p. 74=149.

[739] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 15², p. 334.

[740] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 3, p. 26; Erl. ed., 28, p. 225 f.

[741] _Ib._, p. 29=228.

[742] _Ib._, 16, p. 440=36, p. 49.

[743] _Ib._, p. 440 f.=50.

[744] _Ib._, p. 444=54. Sermon of 1525.

[745] Cp. Weim. ed., 1, p. 425; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 51 _sq._

(1518, against the strictures of the Bohemians) and Weim. ed., 10, 2,

p. 34; Erl. ed., 28, p. 310.

[746] See above, vol. ii., p. 97 f.; vol. iii., p. 385.

[747] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 3, p. 31 f.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 229 f.

[748] _Ib._, 16, p. 440=36, p. 49. Sermons on the Ten Commandments.

[749] _Ib._, 28, p. 677 f.=36, p. 329 f. Exposition of Deuteronomy.

[750] _Ib._, p. 716=368.

[751] P. 553=206.

[752] P. 715=367.

[753] April 25, 1522, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 133 (“Briefwechsel,” 3,

p. 347).

[754] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 74 f., 82 f.; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 149

f., 159.

[755] _Ib._, 26, p. 509=30, p. 372.

[756] _Ib._, 10, 3, p. 114=15², p. 334.

[757] _Ib._, 18, p. 83=29, p. 159.

[758] _Ib._, 63, p. 391 f.

[759] Cp. above, p. 203.

[760] See vol. ii., p. 351 f.

[761] Th. Eitner, “Erfurt u. die Bauernaufstände im 16. Jahrh.,” Halle,

1903, pp. 59, 95.

[762] _Ib._, p. 72.

[763] _Ib._, pp. 74, 84.

[764] _Ib._, p. 75.

[765] _Ib._, pp. 78, 76.

[766] See below, p. 230.

[767] Chr. Falk, “Elbingisch-Preuss. Chronik,” ed. M. Töppen (“Publik.

des Vereins f. die Gesch. der Provinzen Ost- und West-Preussen,”

Leipzig, 1879), p. 157 f. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl.

Trans.), v., p. 112 ff.

[768] v. Baczko, “Gesch. Preussens,” 4, p. 173 ff. Janssen, _ib._

[769] Janssen, _ib._

[770] L. Redner’s “Skizzen aus der KG. Danzigs,” Danzig, 1875

(“Marienkirchen”).

[771] Janssen, _ib._, p. 120.

[772] Janssen, _ib._, vol. xi., p. 34 ff.

[773] _Ib._, vol. vi., p. 205.

[774] Whitsuntide Sermon, in Janssen, _ib._, vol. xi., p. 38. Cp.

“Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 7², pp. 121, 131, 222 f., 330. Cp. Janssen,

_ib._, p. 37, the passages from the sermons of the superintendent

George Nigrinus.

[775] Janssen, _ib._, v., p. 121.

[776] Beckmann, “Historie des Fürstentums Anhalt,” 6, p. 43.

[777] “Repertorium f. Kunstwissenschaft,” 20, p. 46. Janssen, _ib._,

vol. xi., p. 36.

[778] Oldecop, in 1548. Janssen, _ib._, vol. xi., p. 36.

[779] “Hist.-pol. Bl.,” 9, p. 316 ff.; 10, p. 15 ff. Janssen, “Hist. of

the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vi., p. 209.

[780] “Hist.-pol. Bl.,” 10, p. 17.

[781] Ladurner, “Der Einfall der Schmalkaldener im Tirol, 1546,”

(“Archiv f. Gesch. u. Altertumskunde Tirols,” 1), p. 415 ff. Janssen,

_ib._, vi., 315 ff.

[782] Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 349.

[783] J. Voigt, “Briefwechsel der Gelehrten des Zeitalters der

Reformation mit Herzog Albrecht von Preussen,” 1841, p. 30.

[784] Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 434.

[785] Aug. 19, 1548, C. W. Hase, “Mittelalterliche Baudenkmale

Niedersachsens,” Hannover, 1858, Hft., 3, p. 100.

[786] Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 438 f.

[787] _Ib._, vi., p. 454.

[788] See A. v. Druffel, “Briefe und Akten zur Gesch. des 16. Jahrh.,”

2, 1873 ff., p. 668.

[789] Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 458.

[790] F. A. Sinnacher, “Beitr. z. Gesch. d. Kirche Säben und Brixen,”

7, 1830, p. 441. D. Schönherr, “Der Einfall des Kurfürsten Moritz in

Tyrol,” 1868, p. 101 ff. Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 478.

[791] See Schönherr, _ib._, p. 137 ff.

[792] Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 496.

[793] _Ib._, vi., p. 459.

[794] Melchior von Ossa in his diary, Jan. 1, 1553. F. A. Langenn, “D.

Melchior von Ossa,” 1858, p. 161. Janssen, _ib._, p. 505.

[795] Döllinger, “Reformation,” 2, p. 318.

[796] “Mitteil. der Gesellschaft f. Erhaltung der geschtl. Denkmäler im

Elsass,” 15, 1892, p. 248. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl.

Trans.), xi., p. 46.

[797] E. Weller, “Der Volksdichter Hans Sachs u. seine Dichtungen,”

1868, p. 118 ff.

[798] _Ib._

[799] He frequently laments that the churches were too ill-provided

for. Cp. Walch’s Index, s.v. “Kirche,” & “Gotteshäuser.”

[800] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, p. 82 f.; Erl. ed., 29, p. 158.

[801] See P. Lehfeldt, “Luthers Verhältnis zu Kunst und Künstlern,”

Berlin, 1892, p. 84. Janssen, _ib._, xi., 39.—On the whole subject see

Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol. xi., ch. ii.

[802] March 26, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 451.

[803] Oct. 9, 1542, _ib._, p. 501.

[804] Oct. 29, 1542, _ib._, p. 502.

[805] Nov. 7, 1543, _ib._, p. 600.

[806] Dec. 3, 1544, _ib._, p. 702.

[807] March 13, 1542, _ib._, p. 444.

[808] Oct. 5, 1542, _ib._, p. 501.

[809] Dec. 16, 1543, _ib._, p. 611 f.

[810] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 144.

[811] _Ib._, p. 105.

[812] _Ib._, p. 140.

[813] _Ib._, p. 122.

[814] _Ib._, p. 113.

[815] _Ib._, p. 132.

[816] Below, xxxii., 6.

[817] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 114, in 1538.

[818] _Ib._, p. 105.

[819] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 303.

[820] According to Mathesius (“Historien,” p. 146) he once said even in

the pulpit: “A full belly and ripe dung are easily parted.”

[821] To Anton Lauterbach, Nov. 3, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 598.

[822] _Ib._

[823] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 156; “Aufzeichn.,” p. 117.

[824] To Lauterbach, _ib._

[825] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 303.

[826] “Hist.,” p. 145´ f. Ecebolius, under the Emperor Constantine, a

type of the hypocrite.

[827] To Hans Luther, Feb. 15, 1530, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24, p. 130

(“Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 230).

[828] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 127.

[829] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 288.

[830] _Ib._, p. 179.

[831] _Ib._, p. 155.

[832] Dec. 7, 1540, “Briefe,” 5, p. 322.

[833] _Ib._

[834] To Justus Jonas, Jan. 26, 1543, _ib._, p. 534.

[835] To Spalatin, Aug. 21, 1544, _ib._, p. 679 f.

[836] To Amsdorf, April 14, 1545, _ib._, p. 728.

[837] June 18, 1543, _ib._, p. 570.

[838] To Justus Jonas, Feb. 25, 1542, ib., p. 439: “_Carlstadii ista

sunt monstra_.”

[839] _Ib._: “_Furiis furiosis aguntur, quia ira Dei pervenit super

eos usque in finem. Quare ergo propter istos perditos nos conficere

volumus? Mitte, vadere sicut vadit._”

[840] To Dr. Ratzeberger, the Elector’s physician, Aug. 6, 1545,

“Briefe,” 5, p. 754.

[841] April 14, 1545, _ib._, a letter not in the least intended as a

joke.

[842] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 185. Rebenstock in Bindseil, l.c.

[843] To Amsdorf, Aug. 18, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 584. Cp. p. 789: “_ne

tandem fiat quod ante diluvium factum esse scribit Moises_,” etc.

[844] _Ib._, p. 585.

[845] Sep. 3, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 396.

[846] On the psychology of his humour, see below, xxxi., 5.

[847] To Justus Jonas, April 17, 1544, “Briefe,” 5, p. 642. Cp. p. 629:

“_testes fidelissimi_” report an alliance between the Pope, the Turks,

French and Venetians against the Emperor. “Now give a cheer for the

Pope.”

[848] To Amsdorf, Jan. 9, 1545, “Briefe,” 5, p. 713.

[849] To Amsdorf, July 17, 1545, _ib._, p. 750 f.

[850] Cp. Pastor, “Hist. of the Popes” (Engl. Trans.), vol. x.

[851] June-July, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 379.

[852] June, 22, 1541, _ib._, p. 372.

[853] Vol. iii., pp. 217, 280 f.

[854] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 155.

[855] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 423. In 1537.

[856] Above, vol. iii., p. 116.

[857] “Colloq.,” l.c., p. 156. Cp. Rebenstock, in Bindseil, l.c.

[858] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 125.

[859] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 156.

[860] To Melanchthon, April 20, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 346;

“Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 308.

[861] To Melanchthon, March 24, 1541, _ib._, p. 336=279.

[862] To Jakob Probst, Pastor at Bremen, Oct. 9, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p.

501.

[863] On Feb. 23, 1545, see Döllinger, “Reformation,” 3, p. 269, n.

208, from MS.

[864] Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 582. On Melanchthon, cp. above, vol.

iii., p. 370.

[865] To Chancellor Brück, 1544, “Briefe,” 5, p. 708.

[866] To Amsdorf, May 2, 1545, _ib._, p. 734.

[867] To Amsdorf, Aug. 18, 1543, _ib._, p. 585: “_an colaphus Satanæ?_”

[868] To Anton Lauterbach, Nov. 3, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 599.

[869] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 20², 2, p. 561 f., in his last sermon, Feb.

14, 1546, on Mt. xi 25 ff.

[870] _Ib._, p. 562 ff.

[871] _Ib._, p. 565.

[872] _Ib._, p. 564.

[873] _Ib._, p. 566 f.

[874] _Ib._, p. 571.

[875] To Ratzeberger, the Elector’s medical adviser, Aug. 6, 1545,

“Briefe,” 5, p. 754: “_Credo nos esse tubam illam novissimam_,” etc.

[876] To Jonas at Halle, Jan. 23, 1542, _ib._, p. 429.

[877] To Lauterbach, July 25, 1542, _ib._, p. 487.

[878] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 385 f. (Dec., 1536).

[879] To Wenceslaus Link, Jan. 14, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 72:

“_videns, rem tumultuosissimo tumultu tumultuantem; forte hæc est

inundatio illa prædicta anno 24 futura_.”

[880] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 423, concluding: “_Videte, tanta

est potentia Sathanæ in deludendis sensibus externis; quid faciet in

animabus?_”

[881] Cp. N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess vornehmlich im 16.

Jahrh.,” 1910, particularly pp. 20 f., 48 ff.

[882] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 227.

[883] _Ib._, p. 129.

[884] _Ib._, p. 422, from Lauterbach and Weller’s Notes in the summer,

1537.

[885] To Amsdorf, June 3, 1545, “Briefe,” 5, p. 741. Amsdorf had sent

an inquiry “_de monstro illo vulpium_.”

[886] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 10², p. 69 f. Kirchenpostille.

[887] _Ib._

[888] To Jonas, Dec. 16, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 612: “_congruunt omnia

signa_.”

[889] In the “Chronology of the World,” “Werke,” Walch’s ed., 14, p.

1278, from the Latin MS. See above, vol. iii., p. 147 f.

[890] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 22.

[891] _Ib._, p. 33.

[892] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 86.

[893] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 208; “Historien,” p. 143. “Luthers

Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, pp. 18, 25, “Tischreden.”

[894] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1., p. 85.

[895] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 206.

[896] _Ib._, 62, p. 23.

[897] _Ib._, p. 24 f.

[898] See above, vol. iii., p. 141 ff., on the rise of his idea of the

Pope as Antichrist.

[899] Cp. the index to Walch’s edition, vol. xxiii., _s.v._

“Antichrist” and “Widerchrist.”

[900] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p. 719; Erl. ed., 24², p. 203, “Bulla Cœnæ

Domini” (1522), appendix.

[901] Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 646. On the Monk-Calf, see vol. iii.,

p. 149 f.

[902] On this Reply see vol. iii., p. 142.

[903] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 72.

[904] To Jonas, Dec. 16, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 612.

[905] To Link, Sep. 8, 1541, _ib._, p. 398.

[906] To Jonas, March 13, 1542, _ib._, p. 445.

[907] To Jonas, Feb. 25, 1542, _ib._, p. 439.

[908] To Jonas, May 3, 1541, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 328: “_Ego et

ægrotus et pæne morosus sum, tædio rerum et morborum. Utinam me Deus

evocet misericorditer ad sese. Satis malorum feci, vidi, passus sum._”

[909] To Lauterbach, April 2, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 551: “_ubique

grassatur licentia et petulantia vulgi_.” Cp. p. 552.

[910] To the Evangelical Brethren at Venice, June 13, 1543, _ib._, p.

569.

[911] To Amsdorf, Aug. 18, 1543, _ib._, p. 584.

[912] To Jonas, June 18, 1543, _ib._, p. 570.

[913] To Lauterbach, Nov. 3, 1543, _ib._, p. 599.

[914] To Jonas, Dec. 16, 1543, _ib._, p. 610.

[915] To Duke George of Anhalt, July 10, 1545, _ib._, 6, p. 370.

[916] _Ib._

[917] Vol. ii., p. 522.

[918] To Lauterbach, Feb. 9, 1544, “Briefe,” 5, p. 629.

[919] To Amsdorf, June 23, 1544, _ib._, p. 670.

[920] To Probst, Dec. 5, 1544, _ib._, p. 703.

[921] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch” (1538), p. 34.

[922] P. 172 f.

[923] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” (1531 and 1532), p. 17.

[924] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, pp. 85, 86.

[925] _Ib._, p. 86.

[926] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 41, p. 233.

[927] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 282. Cp. Mathesius,

“Aufzeichn.,” ed. Lœsche, p. 393.

[928] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 287.

[929] Above, p. 229.

[930] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 131.

[931] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 289.

[932] _Ib._, p. 288.

[933] _Ib._, p. 179.

[934] _Ib._, p. 108.

[935] _Ib._, p. 209.

[936] _Ib._, p. 111.

[937] To Amsdorf, Nov. 7, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 600.

[938] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 87.

[939] _Ib._, p. 89.

[940] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 172 f.

[941] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 41, p. 233.

[942] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 130.

[943] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 86.

[944] _Ib._, p. 87.

[945] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 95 f.

[946] Schlaginhaufen, _ib._, p. 30.

[947] See above, p. 226.

[948] Above, vol. iii., p. 362 ff.

[949] April 28, 1548, “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 879 _sqq._

[950] G. Kawerau, “Luthers Stellung zu den Zeitgenossen Erasmus,

Zwingli und Melanchthon” (Reprint from “Deutsch-evang. Bl.,” 1906,

1-3), p. 30.

[951] F. Loofs, “DG.,” 4, 1906, p. 866, n. 3.

[952] G. Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” 1902, p. 535 f.

[953] Nov. 12, 1538, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 606.

[954] To Gelous, May 20, 1559, _ib._, 9, p. 822: “_Pendeo velut ad

Caucasum adfixus, etsi verius sum ἐπινηθεύς quam προμηθεύς et laceror,

non ut ille vulturibus tantum, sed etiam a cuculis_.”

[955] C. Sell, “Philipp Melanchthon und die deutsche Reformation bis

1531” (“Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” 14, 3, 1897), p. 117.

[956] Nov. 13, 1536, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 187.

[957] Dec. 7, 1537, _ib._, p. 460.

[958] Feb. 13, 1538, _ib._, p. 488.

[959] June 24, 1545, _ib._, 5, p. 776: “_tam atrocia certamina inter

collegas_.”

[960] Dec. 25, 1544, to Camerarius, “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 554.

[961] “Die Reformation,” 1, p. 376.

[962] Oct. 11, 1538, to Caspar Borner, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 596.

[963] April 30, 1550, _ib._, 7, p. 580.

[964] Cp. Döllinger, _ib._, 1, p. 379 f.

[965] From a New-Year’s letter (Jan. 1, 1540) to Veit Dietrich, “Corp.

ref.,” 3, p. 895.

[966] Sept. 9, 1541, to Veit Dietrich, _ib._, 4, p. 654, where he

continues: “_Tegere hæc soleo, sed, mihi crede, manent cicatrices_.”

[967] About July 16, 1537, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 390 _sq._ Before this he

had said in humanistic style: “_Video novum quoddam genus sophistarum

nasci; velut ex gigantum sanguine alii gigantes nati sunt.... Metuo

maiores ecclesiæ motus. Hie cum hydra decerto. Uno represso alii multi

exoriuntur._”

[968] “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 503 _sqq._ Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 451.

[969] Cp. “RE. f. prot. Th.,”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 523.

[970] Cp. Döllinger, “Reformation,” 1, p. 394.

[971] On March 9, 1559, to the Elector August of Saxony, “Corp. ref.,”

9, p. 766 _sq._ Cp. “RE.,” _ib._, p. 525.

[972] As early as Aug. 28, 1535, “Corp. ref.,” 2, p. 917.

[973] Sep. 8, 1544, to Peter Medmann, _ib._, 5, p. 478.

[974] Oct. 6, 1538, _ib._, 3, p. 594.

[975] See Döllinger, “Reformation,” 1, p. 354, and 3, p. 270.

[976] See above, vol. iii., p. 421 f.

[977] Kolde in the Preface to the “Symbol. Bücher,”^[10], p. xxvi.,

No. 3. The Articles of Agreement were published in full by G. Mentz

in 1905, “Die Wittenberger Artikel von 1536” (“Quellenschriften zur

Gesch. des Prot.,” Hft. 2). Letter to the Elector, “Werke,” Erl. ed.,

55, p. 128; “Briefe,” 4, p. 683 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 315, where

Enders, as late as 1903, had to admit: “The doctrinal articles herewith

transmitted are not known”). On the negotiations with the English, see

vol. iv., p. 10 f.

[978] Thus Mentz, the editor, p. 11. Some theses from these Articles of

Agreement proposed by the Wittenbergers but not accepted by the English

deserve to be quoted from the new sources; their divergence from

Luther’s ordinary teaching is self-evident. Of good works: “_Bona opera

non sunt precium pro vita æterna, tamen sunt necessaria ad salutem,

quia sunt debitum, quod necessario reconciliationem sequi debet_.” In

support of this Mt. xix. 17 is quoted: “_Si vis ad vitam ingredi serva

mandata_.” Again: “_Docemus requiri opera a Deo mandata et quidem non

tantum externa civilia opera, sed etiam spirituales motus, timorem Dei,

fiduciam_,” etc. (p. 34).—“_Hæc obedientia in reconciliatis fide iam

reputatur esse iustitia et quædam legis impletio_” (p. 40).—“_Docendæ

sunt ecclesiæ de necessitate et de dignitate huius obedientiæ,

videlicet quod ... hæc obedientia seu iusticia bonæ conscientiæ sit

necessaria quia debitum est, quod necessario sequi reconciliationem

debet_” (p. 42).—Merit, at least in a certain restricted sense, is

also admitted: “_Ad hæc bona opera sunt meritoria iuxta illud_ (1 Cor.

iii. 8): _Unusquisque accipiet mercedem iuxta proprium laborem_.”

(Cp. the Apologia of the Confession of Augsburg, “Symb. Bücher,” pp.

120, 148.) “_Etsi enim conscientia non potest statuere, quod propter

dignitatem operum detur vita æterna, sed nascimur filii Dei et hæredes

per misericordiam_ (which is also the Catholic teaching) _tamen hæc

opera in filiis merentur præmia corporalia et spiritualia et gradus

præmiorum_,” etc. (p. 46). The ambiguity concerning Christ’s Presence

in the Eucharist (p. 62) is due to Melanchthon, not to Luther.

[979] Kolde, _ib._

[980] “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 497.

[981] To Melanchthon, June 18, 1540, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 293;

“Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 91; “Ratzebergers Gesch.,” p. 102 ff.; “Corp.

ref.,” 3, pp. 1060 _sq._, 1077, 1081. To Johann Lang, July 2, 1540,

“Briefe,” _ib._, p. 297; “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 109: “_mortuum enim

invenimus; miraculo Dei manifesto vivit_.” See vol. iii., p. 162.

[982] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 689; “Anal. Luth.,” ed. Kolde, p. 402;

“Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 522.

[983] “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 524.

[984] Cp., for instance, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 12, pp. 106, 116, 123,

etc.; 13, pp. 282, 318.

[985] Discourse of Feb. 22, 1546, “Corp. ref.,” 11, p. 726 _sqq._

[986] “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 59.

[987] For further details, see below, vol. vi., xl., 3.

[988] On what follows, see Loofs, “DG.,”^[4], p. 867 f.

[989] Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” p. 554.

[990] _Ib._, p. 569.

[991] Cp. the report of Peter Canisius to Lainez, General of the

Jesuits, Braunsberger, “Epistulæ b. Petri Canisii,” 2, p. 176 _sq._

[992] Ellinger, _ib._, p. 570.

[993] _Ib._, p. 571.

[994] Thus the Protestant theologian Nitzsch, see “RE. f. prot. Th.,”³,

Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 525. Loofs,^[4], p. 904. “The religious conference

suffered shipwreck from want of unity amongst the Evangelicals.” The

Gnesio-Lutherans demanded (Sep. 27) that all errors on “the Supper”

should be condemned, “ whether emanating from Carlstadt, Zwingli,

Œcolampadius, Calvin or others.” Calvin’s doctrine was, however,

substantially identical with Melanchthon’s at that time.

[995] “RE.,” _ib._

[996] To Camerarius, Feb. 16, 1559, “Corp. ref.,” 9, p. 744.

[997] _Ib._, p. 822. As a Humanist he was fond of conjuring up heaven

under the image of the Academy. In his address to the students on

Luther’s death he says, the former had been snatched away “_in æternam

scholam et in æterna gaudia_.”

[998] To Buchholzer, Aug. 10, 1559, _ib._, p. 898.

[999] _Ib._, p. 1098.

[1000] Thus in his “Testament” of April 18, 1560, _ib._, p. 1099.

[1001] Reprinted in “Opera Ph. Melanchtonis,” t. 1, Vitebergæ, 1562, p.

364 _sqq._

[1002] Jan. 28, 1538, “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 20, p. 247 ff. G. Kawerau,

“Die Versuche Melanchthon zur kathol. Kirche zurückzuführen,” 1902

(“Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” No. 73), p. 43.

[1003] To Vergerio, June 1, 1534, “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 19, p. 222.

Kawerau, _ib._, p. 79.

[1004] To Bishop Cricius, June 2, 1534, in his “Velitatio in Apologiam

Ph. Melanchthonis,” 1534, Bl. A. 6 ff. Kawerau, _ib._, p. 23 f.

[1005] “Velitatio,” Bl A. 4. Kawerau, p. 25.

[1006] “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 18, p. 424. Kawerau, p. 64 f.

[1007] Vol. ii., p. 438 ff., and above, p. 266. Cp. vol. iii., p. 447

(Cologne Book of Reform).

[1008] Cp. above, p. 265, n. 6.

[1009] The authors of the Article on Melanchthon in the “RE. f. prot.

Th.,”³, say, p. 535: “A Humanist mode of thought forms the background

of his theology”; Melanchthon strove for a kind of compromise between

Christian truth and ancient philosophy.

[1010] “Versuche,” p. 83, with the above example taken from “Corp.

ref.,” 12, p. 269.

[1011] Cp., for instance, the letter of May 12, 1536, to Erasmus,

“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 68 _sq._ Kawerau, _ib._, p. 32.

[1012] Cp. the Article quoted, p. 268, n. 2.

[1013] _Ib._, and pp. 532, 537 of the “Realenzyklopädie.”

[1014] F. X. Funk in the “KL.,”², Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 1212 f.

[1015] For a supposed remark of Luther’s to Catherine Bora which would

seem even more clearly to admit the uncertainty of the new faith, see

below, p. 372 f.

[1016] “L’Histoire de la naissance, progrez et decadence de l’hérésie

de ce siècle,” l. 2, ch. 9 (Rouen, 1648), p. 166: “On éscrit, qu’éstant

sur le poinct de rendre l’âme, l’an 1560, sa mère,” etc. The author is

quite uncritical (see below, p. 271).

[1017] “Corp. ref.,” 1, p. 1083, Melanchthon to Camerarius. C. G.

Strobel, “Melanchthoniana,” 1771, p. 9.

[1018] Cp. N. Müller, “Jakob Schwarzerd,” 1908 (“Schriften des Vereins

f. RG.,” Nos. 96-97), p. 42, on “Corp. ref.,” 2, p. 563. Müller assumes

(p. 41) that the visit took place in 1524.

[1019] “Theol. Stud. und Krit.,” 1, 1830, p. 119 ff., “Die Schwarzerd.”

[1020] P. 122.

[1021] In the collection of essays published by the Wittenberg

“Academy,” “Memoria Ph. Melanchthonis, finito post eius exitum sæculo

II.”

[1022] 3rd ed., Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 531.

[1023] G. Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” 1902, p. 191. F. X. Funk remarks in

the “KL.,”², Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 1212: Melanchthon, “after having

made her [his mother] repeat her prayers, is said to have assured her,

that if she continued thus to believe and to pray, she might well live

in hopes of being saved.”

[1024] “Des Teutschen ... Rekreation,” Munich, 1612, 4, p. 143. The

author, who died in 1620, is no authority on historical matters beyond

his own times and surroundings.

[1025] “Vitæ theologorum,” p. 333.

[1026] “RE. f. prot. Th.,”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 531, with reference

to Melanchthon’s “Postille,” 2, p. 477.

[1027] Above, p. 270, n. 5, p. 41.

[1028] “Historia comitiorum a. 1530 Augustæ celebratorum,” 3, p. 20.

[1029] Gotha, 1876, p. 191.

[1030] J. B. Hablitzel, “Liter. Beil. zur Augsburger Postztng.,” 1905,

No. 40 f.

[1031] Printed in the Jena edition of Luther’s German works, 5, 1557,

p. 41.

[1032] “Apologia,” Ingolstadii, 1542, p. clii.

[1033] Willibald Pirkheimer, who was then on Luther’s side, is usually

regarded as the author of this screed published under the pseudonym

of J. F. Cottalambergius. Like some others, K. Bauer (“Schriften des

Vereins f. RG.,” No. 100, 1910, p. 272) rejects his authorship. The

passage in question appears in Böcking’s edition, “Hutteni opp.,” 4,

1860, p. 533.

[1034] “Johannes Eck,” 1865, p. 275 f.

[1035] 1906, p. 885.

[1036] To Melanchthon, Dec. 7, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 227.

[1037] To Melanchthon, Nov. 21, 1540, _ib._, p. 215.

[1038] To Link, Sep. 8, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 399.

[1039] To Jonas, Jan. 23, 1542, _ib._, p. 429.

[1040] To Lauterbach, April 2, 1543, _ib._, pp. 551, 552.

[1041] To the Evangelical Brethren at Venice, June 13, 1543, _ib._, p.

569.

[1042] To Lauterbach, July 25, 1542, _ib._, p. 487 f.

[1043] To Cordatus, Dec. 3, 1544, _ib._, p. 702.

[1044] To Probst, Jan. 17 (the year of his death), 1546, _ib._, p. 778.

[1045] To Jonas, Sep. 30, 1543, _ib._, p. 591: “_quorum glorias pro

stercore diaboli habeo_.”

[1046] To Justus Menius, Jan. 10, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 426, on “Master

Grickel,” i.e. Agricola.

[1047] To Caspar Schwenckfeld’s messenger (1543), “Briefe,” 5, p. 614:

“_Increpet Dominus in te, Satan_,” etc.

[1048] Cp. for what follows N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess

vornehmlich im 16. Jahrh.,” 1910, where not only Luther’s (pp. 20 ff.,

48 ff.) but also the Zwinglians’ and Calvinists’ attitude to the matter

is dealt with.

[1049] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 305.

[1050] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 1, p. 123 ff.; Erl. ed., 21, p. 26 ff.;

cp. p. 127=28 ff.

[1051] _Ib._, p. 211=127.

[1052] _Ib._, p. 205=121.

[1053] _Ib._, p. 134=36.

[1054] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 3², p. 477 f., in the first Sermon on the

Angels.

[1055] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 590 f.; Erl. ed., 10², p. 359. In

the editions from 1522 to 1540 the word “conjugal” is inserted before

“members.”

[1056] _Ib._

[1057] _Ib._, 32, p. 112 ff.=18², p. 64 ff.

[1058] _Ib._, p. 120=76.

[1059] _Ib._, 34, 2, p. 263 f.=19², p. 75.

[1060] _Ib._, 32, p. 114=18², p. 68.

[1061] “Drey Sermon, Von den Heiligen Engeln, Vom Teufel, Von der

Menschen Seele,” Wittenberg, 1563. In the sermon “Vom Teufel.” See N.

Paulus, “Augsburger Postztng.,” 1903, May 8.

[1062] July 26, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 147.

[1063] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 331.

[1064] On July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 299. Cp. Mathesius,

_ib._, p. 179: “Nothing is more certain than that the insane are not

without their devils; these make them madder; the devil knows those who

are of a melancholy turn, and of this tool he makes use.” Thus Luther

in 1540.

[1065] “_Sic informat [diabolus] animam et corpus, ut obsessi nihil

audiant, videant, sentiant; sed ipse est iis pro anima._” Mathesius,

_ib._, p. 198 (in 1540). Cp. also “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 13, with

reference to 1 Cor. v. 5. The passage occurs in the Table-Talk, ch.

24, No. 68. Cp. Erl. ed., vol. 59, p. 289 to vol. 60, p. 75. This

chapter is followed by others on similar subjects. Demonology occupies

altogether a very large place. Ch. 59, “On the Angels,” comprises

hardly four pages.

[1066] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 326 (in 1543).

[1067] Dec. 1, 1544, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 699 f.

[1068] July 25, 1542: “_quum ipse occiderit eos et imaginatione animis

impressa coegerit eos putare, quod se ipsos suspenderent_.”

[1069] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 59. Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” p.

198.

[1070] Mathesius, _ib._ Cp. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 127.

[1071] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 24; cp. pp. 25, 27.

[1072] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 269; “Aufzeichn.,” p. 300.

[1073] Mathesius, in both the passages quoted. Cp. Lauterbach,

“Tagebuch,” p. 105 (1538): “_habuit fœdus cum Sathana ipse et pater

eius, et fœdissima scortatione occubuit securissime_.”

[1074] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 207, under the heading

“_Spectra_.” In the same volume pp. 218-242 treat of the devil under

the heading “_Diabolus, illius natura, conatus, insidiæ, figura,

expulsio_.” In the second volume the ch. on “_tentationes_,” pp.

287-320, and, in the third, that on “_fascinationes et incantationes_,”

pp. 9-14, are important.

[1075] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 224 f. (1540).

[1076] _Ib._, p. 402: “_dixit de machinis bellicis et bombardis_,” etc.

(1537).

[1077] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 23.

[1078] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 262 (1542-43).

[1079] _Ib._, p. 380 (1536).

[1080] _Ib._, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 291: “We see how the milk

thieves and other witches often do great mischief” (1543). Cp.

Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121.

[1081] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 117 (1532).

[1082] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 304.

[1083] _Ib._, 60, p. 73.

[1084] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 322 (1543).

[1085] _Ib._, p. 412 f.

[1086] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 130; Erl. ed., 18², p. 70 (1530).

[1087] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 395 f. (1537).

[1088] _Ib._, p. 198 (1540).

[1089] _Ib._, p. 240.

[1090] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 70.

[1091] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 585; Erl. ed. 10², p. 354.

[1092] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 70. Cp. p. 31 and Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1,

p. 585; Erl. ed., 10², p. 354.

[1093] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 63.

[1094] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 585; Erl. ed., 10², p. 354.

[1095] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 63.

[1096] _Ib._, 59, p. 348.

[1097] _Ib._

[1098] _Ib._, 60, p. 70.

[1099] _Ib._, 59, p. 348.

[1100] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 316; Irmischer, 1, p. 279, in the

fuller Commentary on Galatians (1535). Cp. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p.

357: “_In Antinomis furit Sathan_”(1539). _Ib._, p. 206: “_Anabaptistæ

non intelligunt iram Dei, sic excæcantur a diabolo; quare non anguntur,

ut sancti, qui hæc omnia sentiunt; diabolus enim ipsorum aures et

animos tenet occupatos_,” etc. (1540).

[1101] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 316; Irmischer, 1, p. 279.

[1102] _Ib._

[1103] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 2, p. 505 f.; Irmischer, 3, p. 251, in the

first Commentary on Galatians.

[1104] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 97 (1540). Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed.,

1, p. 409; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 23, in the Exposition of the Ten

Commandments, 1518.

[1105] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 321.

[1106] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 40, 1, pp. 315, 317, 319; Irmischer, 1, pp.

278, 280, 283; Erl. ed., 49, p. 19, in the Exposition of St. John

xiv.-xvi. Erl. ed., 59, p. 335.

[1107] Cp., for instance, Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” pp. 55, 111.

Mathesius, “Tischreden,” pp. 97, 130, 174, 198, 279, 380, 436. “Werke,”

Erl. ed., 59, pp. 317, 320-323; 60, pp. 24, 27, 57, 63, 71, etc.

[1108] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 560.

[1109] _Ib._, 29, p. 401. Sermon of 1529. Similarly in the sermon of

July 2, 1536, _ib._, 41, p. 633. Cp. N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn” (see above,

p. 278, n. 1), p. 31.

[1110] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 11², p. 136. Sermon on Oculi Sunday.

[1111] Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 248.

[1112] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 22. Cp. p. 38 f.

[1113] _Ib._, 11², p. 136.

[1114] _Ib._, 59, p. 287.

[1115] _Ib._, p. 324.

[1116] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 110. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p.

108.

[1117] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 179; “Aufzeichn.,” pp. 87, 127.

[1118] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 13.

[1119] _Ib._, 59, p. 287. There ever was a widespread tendency to

connect the Evil One with the water.

[1120] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 380 (1536).

[1121] _Ib._, p. 118 (1540).

[1122] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 340.

[1123] _Ib._, 60, pp. 64, 66

[1124] _Ib._, 59, p. 138.

[1125] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540).

[1126] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 129. The account assures us that he

claimed to have seen the apparition himself.

[1127] _Ib._, 31, p. 363.

[1128] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 25, p. 140, in the shorter Exposition of

Isaias iii. 21.

[1129] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 71.

[1130] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 300 (1542-44).

[1131] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 73.

[1132] _Ib._, 59, p. 294; cp. 60, p. 123. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1,

pp. 235, 318. For an explanation of the word here used see Förstemann,

“Tischreden,” 3, p. 132, n. 3.

[1133] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 19², p. 281 f.

[1134] _Ib._, 32, p. 291 in “Vom Schem Hamphoras,” 1543.

[1135] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 258 (1542-43).

[1136] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 208.

[1137] _Ib._, p. 218.

[1138] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 46, p. 211 f., in the Exposition of John i.

and ii. (1537-38).

[1139] _Ib._, 60, p. 70.

[1140] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 315; Irmischer, 1, p. 277 _sq._

[1141] “Hexenwahn” (see above, p. 278, n. 1), pp. 45, 67.

[1142] “Theol. Literaturztng.,” 1909, p. 147. Paulus, _ib._, p. 46.

[1143] Leipzig, 1904, p. 518. Cp. Paulus, _ib._, pp. 1-10.

[1144] Cp. Paulus, _ib._, pp. 1-19.

[1145] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 398 ff.; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 3

_sqq._

[1146] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540): “_hoc malum (sagarum)

invalescit iterum_.” In 1519 he had lamented that “this evil is

noticeably on the increase.” “Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 590; Irmischer,

3, p. 426, first Commentary on Galatians.

[1147] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 401; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 7.

[1148] _Ib._, p. 406 f.=16.

[1149] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 57 (heading).

[1150] _Ib._, p. 79.

[1151] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540).

[1152] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 406 f.; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 20.

[1153] _Ib._, 12, p. 345. Sermon of 1523.

[1154] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 1, p. 190.

[1155] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 590; Irmischer, 3, p. 426.

[1156] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 156; Nov. 4, 1538.

[1157] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 314 ff.; Irmischer, 1, p. 277

_sqq._, detailed Commentary on Galatians which is fuller on the

question of sorcery than the Commentary of 1519 (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 2,

p. 590; Irmischer, 3, p. 426).

[1158] _Ib._, 40, 1, p. 314; Irmischer, 1, p. 277.

[1159] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 380.

“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 12.

[1160] See Lauterbach’s “Tagebuch,” p. 117, for both.

[1161] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 162; Erl. ed., 33, p. 161. Cp. Erl.

ed., 60, pp. 37, 39.

[1162] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 198 (1540). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60,

p. 39 f.

[1163] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 198. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 40.

[1164] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540).

[1165] _Ib._, p. 380 (1536).

[1166] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p.

12.

[1167] Lauterbach, _ib._

[1168] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129.

[1169] _Ib._: there is no “_motus de loco_,” etc., all this

“_phantasmata sunt_.” Similarly in “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 409; “Opp.

lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 17 _sq._: the metamorphosis of old women into

tom-cats and the nocturnal excursions of the witches to banquets are

“delusions of the devil, not actual occurrences”; he, however, admits

the possibility.

[1170] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 111.

[1171] See Paulus, _ib._, pp. 25 ff., 49.

[1172] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 111.

[1173] _Ib._, p. 117, Aug. 20, 1538.

[1174] _Ib._, p. 121, Aug. 25, 1538. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 12.

[1175] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 79.

[1176] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 16, p. 551 (“_occidantur_,” etc.).

[1177] See Paulus, _ib._, p. 43 f., where he quotes Luther’s “Von

den Conciliis und Kirchen” (1539), in support of the duty of burning

witches on account of their compact with the devil, quite apart from

the harm they may cause—“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 441 f.: The witches

or “devil’s whores, who are burnt at the stake whenever they are

caught, as is right, not for stealing milk but because of the blasphemy

by which they strengthen the cause of the devil, his sacraments and

Churches.”

[1178] Cp. the Eisleben edition (1569), pp. 280, 280´: “They should

be hurried to the stake. The lawyers require too many witnesses and

proofs, they despise these open, etc.” The same occurs in the Frankfurt

edition (1568), p. 218´.

[1179] “Pythonissa,” Frankfurt, 1660, pp. 471, 472, from Luther’s

Works, Erl. ed., 58, p. 129 (above, p. 287).

[1180] “Hexenwahn,” p. 75 ff.

[1181] _Ib._, p. 54 ff.

[1182] See Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol.

xvi., pp. 269 to 526, a very full account of the Witch trials, etc.

[1183] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129. From May 21 to June 11, 1540.

See above, p. 290, n. 3.

[1184] Cp. N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn,” pp. 52, 66.

[1185] Karl Adolf Menzel, “Neuere Gesch. der Deutschen,” 3², 1854, p.

65, is of opinion that the reformers of the 16th century lent the whole

weight of their position and convictions to strengthening the belief in

witches. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People,” _loc. cit._: “Through

Luther and his followers belief in the power and influence of the

devil, who was active in all men and who exercised his arts especially

through witches and sorcerers, received an impetus and spread in a

manner never known before.” J. Hansen, “Zauberwahn und Hexenprozess im

MA.,” 1900, p. 536 f., also admits that Protestantism had increased

the readiness to accept such belief. Cp. the admissions of Riezler, v.

Bezold and Steinhausen quoted by Paulus, “Hexenwahn,” p. 48 f.

[1186] Cp. J. Diefenbach, “Der Zauberglaube des 16. Jahrh. nach den

Katechismen Luthers und Canisius,” 1900.

[1187] To Catherine Bora, Feb. 7, 1546, “Briefe,” 5, p. 787.

[1188] See below, vol. vi., xxxvi., 3.

[1189] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 295 (1542). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 61,

p. 117.

[1190] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 317.

[1191] _Ib._, p. 267, speaking of a case of long-continued adulterous

incest between brother and sister (1542): “This was the work of the

devil himself,” etc.

[1192] “_Satanicum tempus et sæculum._” To Jakob Probst, Dec. 5, 1544,

“Briefe,” 5, p. 703.

[1193] To Amsdorf, Jan. 8, 1546, _ib._, p. 774.

[1194] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 174 (1540).

[1195] On the great tragedy between God and Satan in which he

(particularly in 1541) is so prominently entangled, see the letter to

Melanchthon, April 4, 1541, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 291.

[1196] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 307 (1542-43).

[1197] To Johann Silvius Egranus, March 24, 1518, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p.

173.

[1198] See above, p. 226 ff.

[1199] Thus as early as June 27, 1522, to Staupitz at Salzburg,

“Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 407, with the emphatic assurance: “_sed Christus,

qui cœpit, conteret eum, frustra renitentibus omnibus portis inferi_.”

[1200] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 117.

[1201] _Ib._, 59, p. 342.

[1202] _Ib._, 57, p. 65.

[1203] _Ib._, 58, p. 301.

[1204] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 222.

[1205] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, pp. 73, 55. Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” ed.

Lœsche, p. 113.

[1206] P. 200. Cp. above, p. 174.

[1207] P. 193´.

[1208] “Cochlæi Acta, etc.” (1549), p. 2: “_quod etiam corporaliter

visus quibusdam fuerit cum eo conversari_.”

[1209] “I feel him well enough.” “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 301.

[1210] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 198.

[1211] _Ib._, p. 331.

[1212] To Wenceslaus Link, July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 301.

[1213] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 51; Erl. ed., 33, p. 55.

[1214] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 51, p. 90 f. (1534).

[1215] _Ib._, cp. above, p. 5.

[1216] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 279.

[1217] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 235.

[1218] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 586; Erl. ed., 10², p. 355,

Church-postils.

[1219] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 70.

[1220] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 55 f.

[1221] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 340. Lauterbach, _ib._, p. 56.

[1222] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 228. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p.

60, under the heading “Satan flees from music”: “It was thus that David

with his harp abated Saul’s temptations when the devil plagued him” (3

Kg. xvi. 23).

[1223] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 313.

[1224] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 343 f.

[1225] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 56.

[1226] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 165.

[1227] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 27.

[1228] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 3.

[1229] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 82.

[1230] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 222.

[1231] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, pp. 55, 73.

[1232] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 30.

[1233] _Ib._, p. 163.

[1234] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 88 f. Cp. “Luthers Werke,” Erl.

ed., 60, p. 101 f., n. 59.

[1235] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121. Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3,

p. 12, and Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 380, from Notes of Lauterbach

and Weller. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 78.

[1236] Lauterbach, _ib._ In the Latin “Colloquia” as well as in

the German Table-Talk (_ib._), in connection with “the clergy and

schoolmasters” of the past, it is related, that, in their day, the

head of an ox was taken from the fence and thrown into the St. John’s

bonfire, whereby a great number of witches were attracted to the place.

Then follows at once in both passages, in order to emphasise the

advance which had been made: “But Dr. Pommer’s plan is the best,” etc.,

etc. See vol. iii., p. 230, n. 2.

[1237] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 218.

[1238] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 59.

[1239] _Ib._, 31, p. 311.

[1240] _Ib._, p. 316 f.

[1241] _Ib._, 60, p. 61.

[1242] _Ib._, and 59, p. 294.

[1243] See below, xxxiii., 4.

[1244] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 129.

[1245] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 312. Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p.

160 _sq._, and below, p. 314, n. 3.

[1246] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 179 (1540), where Kroker remarks: “A

favourite saying with Luther,” and quotes Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” pp. 130

and 295. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 215, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p.

124.

[1247] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 277 ff.; Erl. ed., 27, p. 86 ff.

[1248] _Ib._, 7, p. 262 ff.=27, p. 200 ff.

[1249] In the writing against Alveld, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 286;

Erl. ed., 27, p. 87.

[1250] “Briefe,” 6, p. 321, of 1542. See above, vol. iv., p. 292.

[1251] Nov. 6, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 505; cp. 6, p. 320.

[1252] Feb. 10, 1546, _ib._, 5, p. 789.

[1253] Feb. 7, 1546, _ib._, p. 787.

[1254] Feb. 1, 1546, _ib._, p. 784.

[1255] Above, vol. ii., p. 140 f.; also vol. iii., pp. 233 ff., 264

ff., 301; vol. iv., pp. 161 ff., 318 ff.

[1256] Feb. 6, 1546, “Briefe,” 5, p. 786.

[1257] Above, vol. iii., p. 305.

[1258] _Ib._, p. 268.

[1259] On certain frivolous expressions which Luther was fond of using

of holy things his opponents seized as proofs that he was little better

than an atheist or blasphemer. There is indeed no doubt that religious

reverence suffered by his jests. Do you suppose Christ was drunk, he

repeatedly asks, when He commanded this or that? The Son of Man came to

save what was lost, but He set about it foolishly enough. Unless Our

Lord God understands a joke, then I shouldn’t like to go to heaven.

He even has a jest about the feathers of the Holy Ghost, pokes fun at

the Saints, etc., etc.—On the occasion of his journey to Heidelberg,

in 1518, undertaken at a grave juncture when the penalties of the

Church were hanging over his head, he said jestingly, that he had no

need of contrition, confession or satisfaction, the hardships of the

journey being equal to “_contritio perfecta_,” etc. (“Briefwechsel,” 1,

p. 184). The Pietists were not so far wrong when they asked in their

day: “Who would wish to approve all the jests of that holy man, our

dearly-beloved Luther?” (Cp. Frank, “Luther im Spiegel seiner Kirche”

(“Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol.,” 1905, p. 473.)) “Some readers may, for

instance, be scandalised at the passages where Luther makes fun of

Scripture texts or articles of faith, e.g. the Trinity.” Thus in the

“Beil. z. M. Allg. Ztng.,” 1904, No. 26.

[1260] See vol. iii., p. 149 ff.

[1261] See vol. ii., p. 137.

[1262] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 323; Erl. ed., 27, p. 138.

[1263] _Ib._, p. 391 f.=23.

[1264] March 5, 1522, _ib._, Erl. ed., 53, p. 106 f. (“Briefwechsel,”

3, p. 296).

[1265] _Ib._

[1266] June 27, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 35.

[1267] To the Elector Johann Frederick, July 9, 1535, “Werke,” Erl. ed.

55, p. 95 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 169).

[1268] To Johann Rühel, etc., June 15, 1525, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p.

314 (“Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 195).

[1269] See vol. ii., p. 184.

[1270] Dec. 4, 1539, “Briefwechsel,” 12, p. 317.

[1271] Amsdorf to Spalatin, April 4, 1523, see Kolde, “Anal.

Lutherana,” p. 443.

[1272] May 23, 1534, “Werke,” Erl. ed. 55, p. 54 f. “Briefwechsel,” 10,

p. 48.

[1273] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 249.

[1274] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 450. For other remedies against sadness

mentioned here or elsewhere see above, p. 92 f., and below, p. 323, and

vol. iii., pp. 175 ff., 305 ff.; vol. iv., p. 311 f.

[1275] Bugenhagen’s account of Luther’s illness and temptations of

1527, from the Latin. Walch’s ed. of Luther’s Works, 21, p. 158*; Vogt,

“Bugenhagens Briefwechsel,” 1888, p. 64 ff.

[1276] April 23, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 308.

[1277] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 310.

[1278] To Melanchthon, June 29, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 43.

[1279] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 86 ff. (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 127).

The preface is addressed to Amsdorf.

[1280] See Dietz, “Wörterbuch, etc.”

[1281] _Ib._, p. 89.

[1282] _Ib._, 26², p. 251.

[1283] _Ib._, p. 275.

[1284] _Ib._

[1285] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 390.

[1286] _Ib._

[1287] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 406: “_Mentionem fecit morbi sui

spiritualis. Nam in 14 diebus nihil edit neque bibit neque dormivit._

‘_Quo tempore sæpius disputavi cum Deo_,’” etc.

[1288] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 144.

[1289] _Ib._, p. 113. Cp. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 16.

[1290] To Justus Menius, May 1, 1542, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 467.

[1291] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 159, June 18, 1540: “_tentari de

blasphemia, de iudicio Dei, ibi nec peccatum intelligimus nec remedia

novimus_.” According to other passages he is here speaking from his own

experience.

[1292] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 222.

[1293] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 65.

[1294] _Ib._, p. 66.

[1295] _Ib._, 60, p. 82 f.

[1296] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 34, 2, p. 266; Erl. ed., 19², p. 76. Sermon

at Michaelmas. In place of the devil’s “raging” (“Rasen”), as in Erl.

ed., the Weim. ed. reads “nosing” (“Nasen”) [?“Nahsein”]. Rorer’s MS.

reads: “_Et in me sentio satanæ nisum_.”

[1297] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 36, p. 476; Erl. ed., 18², p. 359, Sermon on

1 John iv. (16-21).

[1298] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 3, pp. 61 f., 63 f.; Erl. ed., 28, pp.

283, 285, at the end of the eight sermons against Carlstadt.

[1299] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 221 _sq._

[1300] _Ib._, 3, p. 154 _sq._ “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 70. Cordatus,

“Tagebuch,” p. 107. Taken from Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 26,

1532.

[1301] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 243.

[1302] Schlaginhaufen, p. 11 (Dec. 14, 1531). Cp. “Werke,” Erl. ed.,

60, p. 46.

[1303] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 128.

[1304] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 18, p. 223.

[1305] See vol. iii., pp. 175 f., 178 f.

[1306] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 11. Cp. _ib._, Veit Dietrich’s

statement, and vol. iii., p. 177 f.

[1307] Schlaginhaufen, p. 41, Jan.-March, 1532. Cp. Cordatus, p. 131;

“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 298; “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 402.

[1308] Above, p. 7 ff.

[1309] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 301.

[1310] _Ib._, p. 301 f.

[1311] _Ib._, 20², 1, p. 161, Sermon on Gal. i. 4 f. (1538).

[1312] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 48, with the addition: “But the

Law must be preached to those who are well.”

[1313] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 222.

[1314] Schlaginhaufen, _ib._, p. 122.

[1315] Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” ed. Lœsche, p. 411. Cp. Khummer, in

Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 74.

[1316] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 363.

[1317] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, 301.

[1318] _Ib._

[1319] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 21.

[1320] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 159.

[1321] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 47.

[1322] “Vitæ reformatorum,” ed. Neander, “Vita Lutheri,” c. 4, p. 5.

The text was Rom. xi. 32.

[1323] Cp. above, p. 323.

[1324] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 19 ff.

[1325] _Ib._, p. 9. Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 177 f.

[1326] See vol. ii., p. 180 f. Cp. Melanchthon’s statement, p. 177.

[1327] Schlaginhaufen, _ib._, p. 10.

[1328] Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 147 f., June 11-19, 1540. See vol.

iii., p. 203 f.

[1329] Schlaginhaufen, _ib._, p. 39.

[1330] July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 300.

[1331] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 40: “_Tristitiæ spiritus est

ipsa conscientia_.” Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, pp. 296, 298, and

“Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, 108.

[1332] Cp. above, p. 66 ff.

[1333] Schlaginhaufen, _ib._, p. 26, Jan.-March, 1532.

[1334] To Link, July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 301 f.

[1335] March 8, 1544, “Briefe,” 5, p. 635: “_solari contra

conscientiam, quæ est mortis sævissimum ministerium_.” Cp. above, p. 67.

[1336] To the Wittenberg Augustinians, Nov. 1, 1521, in the dedication

of his writing “De abroganda missa privata,” “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p.

411 f.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 6, p. 116 (“Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 243). Cp.

above, vol. ii., p. 79 ff.

[1337] “_Furebam ita sæva et perturbata conscientia_,” etc. “Opp. lat.

var.,” 1, p. 22. Vol. i., p. 388 ff.

[1338] From the letter to the Augustinians, p. 411 f.=116.

[1339] To Melanchthon, May 26, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 163.

[1340] Khummer (1539), in Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 36: “_per totum

triennium laboravi omnibus desperationibus_.” The reading “_omnibus

desperantibus_” is excluded by what follows: “_scripserunt quidam ad me

fratres ad constantiam me adhortantes_.”

[1341] To Link, Sep. 8, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 399.

[1342] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 9.

[1343] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 205. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 80.

“Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 160 f.

[1344] “_Acetissimum mihi acetum_,” speaking of the rapacity of the

despoilers of the churches and of the use of church property for purely

private purposes. To Spalatin, Jan. 1, 1527, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 3.

On this illness, see below, vol. vi., xxvi., 1.

[1345] “Luthers Werke,” Walch ed., 21, appendix, p. 158*, from

the Latin. Best rendered in the original Latin text in O. Vogt,

“Briefwechsel Bugenhagens,” 1888, p. 64 ff.

[1346] Cp. the account of Jonas, “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 160

_sqq._, and better still, Kawerau, “Briefwechsel des Jonas,” 1,

1884-85, p. 104 ff. The account begins: “_Cum mane, ut ipse fatebatur

nobis, habuisset grandem tentationem spiritualem et tamen utcunque ad

se rediisset_.” Kawerau, _ib._, p. 109: “_Dixit (Lutherus) hesternam

tentationem spiritualem duplo fuisse maiorem, quam hanc ægritudinem ad

vesperam subsecutam_.”

[1347] Aug. 2, 1527, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 71: “_Agebar fluctibus et

procellis desperationis et blasphemiae.... Deus eruit animam meam de

inferno inferiori_” (Ps. lxxxv. 13).

[1348] Aug. 12, 1527, _ib._, p. 73, “_Agon iste meus_,” etc.

[1349] _Ib._, p. 78.

[1350] _Ib._, p. 84 f.

[1351] To Michael Stiefel, _ib._, p. 104.

[1352] To Justus Jonas, _ib._, p. 106.

[1353] To Melanchthon, _ib._, p. 110: “_cum aliud non quæram aut sitiam

quam propitium Deum_.”

[1354] _Ib._, p. 111. 2 Cor. vii. 5: “_Foris pugnæ, intus timores_”;

Luther: “_pavores_.”

[1355] To Jonas, _ib._, p. 113. He, however, has a joke even here at

the expense of Bugenhagen, who was then staying in his house: “_Salutat

te Pomeranus, hodie cacator purgandus factus_.”

[1356] Cp. Ps. cviii. 17: “_compunctum corde mortificare_.” Luther,

quoting from memory, says: “_contritum corde ad mortificandum_.”

[1357] “_Novissimus omnium hominum._” Cp. Ps. liii. 3: “_novissimus

virorum_,” of the Messias; 1 Cor. iv. 9: “_novissimos ostendit_,” of

the Apostles.—“_Quem Deus percussit, persequuntur_”; cp. Ps. lxviii.

27.

[1358] For the letters quoted, see “Briefwechsel,” under the dates

given.

[1359] To the Elector Johann of Saxony, Jan. 16, 1528, “Werke,” Erl.

ed., 53, p. 215 (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 195).

[1360] Jan. or Feb., 1527, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 23, p. 15; Erl. ed., 53,

p. 412 (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 15).

[1361] July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 300.

[1362] Cp. the letter to Link of March 7, 1529, _ib._, 7, p. 63.

[1363] Cp. vol. iii., p. 218 ff.

[1364] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 19², p. 350 f., Sermon on Rom. viii. 31

(1537).

[1365] To Link, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 214.

[1366] “Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 52: “_ut Dominus non me deserat in manu

Satanæ_.”

[1367] _Ib._, p. 87.

[1368] To Johann Brismann at Riga, _ib._, p. 139. On the extraordinary

states and temptations of certain Saints which some have likened to

Luther’s “temptations,” see below, vol. vi., xxxv., 5, at the end.

[1369] To Link, Oct. 28, 1529, _ib._, p. 179 f. On the Marburg

Conference, see vol. iii., p. 381 f.

[1370] _Ib._, p. 180. Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 180.

[1371] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 23, p. 13; Erl. ed., 53, p. 411

(“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 15). Cp. the article on Kling by N. Paulus,

“Katholik,” 1892, 1, p. 146 ff.

[1372] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 23, p. 322; Erl. ed., 63, p. 259, in the

Preface to the work of Justus Menius against Conrad Kling: “Etlicher

gottloser Lere ... Verlegung,” etc., 1527.

[1373] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 530 ff.; Erl. ed., 63, p. 271.

[1374] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 56, p. 343 f. Cp. below, xxxiv., 4. [We give it

above in Carlyle’s rendering, “Miscellanies,” “Luther’s Psalm.”]

[1375] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, pp. 177, 646.

[1376] Cp. vol. iii., pp. 48 f., 325 f.

[1377] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 41; Erl. ed., 31, p. 20. “Von

heimlichẽ und gestolen Brieffen,” 1529.

[1378] P. Tschackert, “Die Entstehung des Lutherliedes ‘Ein’ feste,’”

etc. (“Theol. Literaturblatt,” 1905, No. 2, and before, in the “N.

kirchl. Zeitschr.,” 1903, Hft. 10).

[1379] Exposition of John xvii., “Werke,” Weim. ed., 28, p. 91; Erl.

ed., 50, p. 174.

[1380] _Ib._, p. 137=213.

[1381] _Ib._, p. 85 f.=169.

[1382] _Ib._, p. 159 f.=233 f.

[1383] _Ib._, p. 199=264.

[1384] _Ib._, p. 182 ff.=252 f.

[1385] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 28, p. 295 ff.; Erl. ed., 50, p. 328 f.

[1386] To Spalatin, April 23, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 308. See

above, p. 315.

[1387] To Melanchthon, May 12, 1530, _ib._, p. 332 f.

[1388] To Jonas, May 19, 1530, _ib._, p. 338.

[1389] To Melanchthon, May 15, 1530, _ib._, p. 335.

[1390] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 203.

[1391] “_Spiritus ille, qui me colaphizavit hactenus._” Cp. 2 Cor. xii.

7: “_angelus satanæ, qui me colaphizet_.”

[1392] “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 43.

[1393] Oct. 31, 1530, _ib._, p. 301.

[1394] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 87.

[1395] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 374, Oct. 28-Dec. 12, 1536.

[1396] Schlaginhaufen, _ib._

[1397] See above, vol. ii., pp. 391 ff.; vol. iv., pp. 191 ff.

[1398] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 115, March 21 to June 11, 1540.

[1399] To Jakob Probst, Dec. 31, 1527, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 169.