Sigel ist aussgangen”; “Ad Schedulam inhibitionis.” Weim. ed., 6, pp.
135(136)-141, 142(144)-153; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 78-84; “Opp. lat. var.,”
4, pp. 138-151.
64. “Sermon von den guten Wercken.” Weim. ed., 6, pp. 196(202)-276; 9,
pp. 226(229)-301; Erl. ed., 20, pp. 193-290; 16², pp. 121-220.
65. “Responsio ad condemnationem doctrinalen per Lovanienses et
Colonienses.” Weim. ed., 6, pp. 170(174)-195; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp.
176-205.
66. “Confitendi ratio.” Weim. ed., 6, 154(157)-169; “Opp. lat. var.,”
4, pp. 154-171 (cp. No. 34).
67. “Eyn kurcz Form der czehen Gepott. Eyn kurcz Form dess Glaubens.
Eyn kurcz Form dess Vatter Unssers.” Weim. ed., 7, pp. 194(204)-229;
Erl. ed., 22, pp. 3-32.
68. “Von dem Bapstum tzu Rome wider dem hochberumpten Romanisten tzu
Leiptzk” (i.e. Alveld). Weim. ed., 6, pp. 277(285)-324; Erl. ed., 27,
pp. 86-139.
69. “Epitoma responsionis Silv. Prieratis” with preface and postface.
Weim. ed., 6, pp. 325(328)-348; “Opp. lat. var.,” 2, pp. 79-108.
70. “An den christlichen Adel deutscher Nation.” Weim. ed., 6, pp.
381(404)-469; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 277-360.
71. “Eyn Sermon von dem newen Testament das ist von der heyligen
Messe.” Weim. ed., 6, pp. 349(353)-378; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 141-173.
72. “De captivitate babylonica ecclesiæ præludium.” Weim. ed., 6, pp.
484(497)-573; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 16-118.
73. “Erbieten” (“Oblatio sive Protestatio”). Weim. ed., 6, pp.
478(480)-481, 482-483; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 9-11; 24², pp. 12-14; “Opp.
lat. var.,” 5, pp. 4-6; early draft of same, Weim. ed., 6, pp.
476-478; 9, pp. 302-304; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 12-14; 24², pp. 14-16.
74. Preface to “Adv. constitutionem de cleri cœlibatu.” Cp. Weim. ed.,
7, p. 677.
75. “Von den newen Eckischenn Bullen und Lugen.” Weim. ed., 6, pp.
576(579)-594; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 15-28; 24², pp. 18-31.
76. “Von der Freyheyt eynes Christen Menschen.” Weim. ed., 7, pp.
12(20)-38; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 175-199.
77. “Eyn Sendbrieff an den Bapst Leo. den czehenden.” Weim. ed., 7,
pp. 1(3)-11; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 41-52.
78. “Epistola Lutheriana ad Leonem decimum.” “Tractatus de libertate
christiana.” Weim. ed., 7, pp. 39(42)-73; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp.
219-255.
79. “Adv. execrabilem Antichristi bullam.” Weim. ed., 6, pp.
595(597)-612; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 134-153.
80. “Widder die Bullen des Endchrists.” Weim. ed., 6, pp.
613(614)-629; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 36-52; 24², pp. 39-55.
81. “Appellatio ad Concilium repetita.” Weim. ed., 7, pp. 74(75)-82;
“Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 121-131.
82. “Appellation odder Beruffung … repetirt.” Weim. ed., 7, pp.
83(85)-90; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 30-35; 24², pp. 32-37.
83. “Das Magnificat verteuschet und ausgelegt” (publ. 1521). Weim.
ed., 7, pp. 538-604; Erl. ed., 45, pp. 212-290.
84. “Warumb des Bapsts und seyner Jungern Bucher … vorbrant seyn.”
Weim. ed., 7, pp. 152-186; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 152-164; 24², pp.
154-166; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 257-270.
85. “Assertio omnium articulorum per bullam damnatorum.” (publ. 1521).
Weim. ed., 7, pp. 91-151; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 156-237.
Tessaradecas (cp. No. 49). Sermons (cp. No. 58). Letters, Enders 2, p.
290-3, p. 37; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 34-53.
=1521.= First war between Charles V and François I (lasting till 1526).
Henry VIII publishes his “Assertio.” Death of Leo X (Dec. 1). Fall of
Belgrad. Bugenhagen comes to Wittenberg and Eberlin of Günzburg goes to
Ulm. The Bull “Decet Rom. Pontif.” is issued (Jan. 3). The Diet of Worms;
the “Gravanima”; Aleander’s discourse (Feb. 13). Luther is summoned to
the Diet (March 6), his sermon at Erfurt (April 7), his condemnation by
the Sorbonne (April 15), his arrival at Worms (April 16); he refuses
to recant (April 18); his stay at the Wartburg (May 4, 1521-March 1,
1522); the sentence of outlawry, May 8 (May 26). Carlstadt assails
clerical celibacy; the turmoil at Erfurt (July); the Mass is abolished
among the Wittenberg Augustinians (Oct.). Luther busies himself with the
translation of the Bible (Dec. 1521-1534); Melanchthon’s Commonplace-Book
(Dec.). Luther’s secret visit to Wittenberg (Dec. 3-11). Carlstadt
introduces a new rite for the Supper (Dec. 25). The Zwickau “prophets”
come to Wittenberg.
86. “Grund vnd Vrsach aller Artickel … so … verdampt seindt.” Weim.
ed., 7, pp. 299(308)-457; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 53-150; 24², pp. 56-150.
87. “An den Bock zu Leyptzck.” Weim. ed., 7, pp. 259(262)-265; Erl.
ed., 27, pp. 201-205.
88. “Auff des Bocks zu Leypczick Antwort.” Weim. ed., 7, pp.
266(271)-283; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 205-220.
89. “Unterricht der Beychtkinder ubir die vorpotten Bucher.” Weim.
ed., 7, pp. 284(290)-298; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 203-209; 24², pp. 206-213.
90. “Auff das ubirchristlich, ubirgeystlich und ubirkunstlich Buch
Bocks Emssers.” Weim. ed. 7, pp. 614(621)-688; Erl. ed., 27, pp.
221-308.
91. “Ad librum Ambrosii Catharini responsio,” Weim. ed. 7, pp.
698(704)-778; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 289-394.
92. “Responsio extemporaria ad articulos ex Babylonica et
Assertionibus excerptos.” Weim. ed., 7, pp. 605(608)-613; “Opp. lat.
var.,” 6, pp. 24-30.
93. “Eyn Sermon … am Gründornstag.” Weim. ed., 7, pp. 689(692)-697;
Erl. ed., 17, pp. 65-72; 16², pp. 242-249.
94. “Deutsch Auszlegũg des sieben uñ seditzigstẽ Psalmẽ.” Weim. ed.,
8, pp. 1(14)-35; Erl. ed., 39, pp. 179-220.
95. “Von der Beicht ob der Bapst Macht habe zu gepieten.” Weim. ed.,
8, pp. 129(138)-204; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 319-379.
96. Church-postils, Advent to Epiphany (publ. 1522). Weim. ed., 10, 1,
1, pp. 1-728; Erl. ed., 7, 10; 7², 10².
97. “Eyn Kleyn Unterricht was man ynn den Euangeliis suchen und
gewartten soll.” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, pp. 8-18; Erl. ed., 7, pp. 5-12;
7², pp. 6-13.
98. “Rationis Latomianæ confutatio.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 36(43)-128;
“Opp. lat. var.,” 5, pp. 395-521.
99. “Der sechs uñ dreyssigist Psalm.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 205 (210)-240;
Erl. ed., 38, pp. 373-396; 39, pp. 124-136.
100. “Eyn Urteyl der Theologen tzu Paris uber die Lere Dr. Luthers.
Eyn gegen Urteyl Dr. Luthers.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 255(267)-312; 9, pp.
716(717)-761; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 380-410.
101. “Evangelium von den tzehen Aussetzigen.” Weim. ed., 8, pp.
336(340)-397; Erl. ed., 17, pp. 146-176; 14², pp. 42-87; 16², pp.
259-291.
102. “Themata de votis.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 313(323)-335; “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 344-360; 6, p. 235.
103. “Eyn Widderspruch seynis yrthũss erczwungen durch den … Herrn H.
Emser.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 241(247)-254; Erl. ed., 27, pp. 308-318.
104. “De votis monasticis” (publ. 1522). Weim. ed., 8, pp.
564(573)-669; “Opp. lat. var.,” 6, pp. 238-376.
105. “De abroganda missa privata” (publ. 1522). Weim. ed., 8, pp.
398(411)-476; “Opp. lat. var.,” 6, pp. 115-212.
106. “Vom Missbrauch der Messen” (publ. 1522). Weim. ed., 8, pp.
477(482)-563; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 28-141.
107. “Eyn trew Vormanung … sich zu vorhuten fur Auffruhr und
Emporung.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 670(676)-688; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 43-59;
22², pp. 43-58.
108. Translation of the New Testament (publ. 1522).
The Magnificat, cp. No. 83. Latin Postils, cp. No. 59. “Assertio
omnium articulorum,” cp. No. 85. Sermons, cp. Nos. 58, 96 and Weim.
ed., 7, pp. 792(795)-802; 9, pp. 501-516; Erl. ed., 16², pp. 221-301.
Letters, Enders, 3, pp. 38-268; 53, pp. 55-103.
=1522.= Hadrian VI (Pope from Jan. 9, 1522, to Sept. 14, 1523). Charles V
goes to Spain, remaining there till 1529; the Diet of Nuremberg (Dec.);
the Turkish question, the “Centum gravamina,” the fall of Rhodes (Dec.
25). Iconoclastic riot at Wittenberg (Jan.); the Wittenberg Augustinians
abolish their rule about begging (Jan. 6); relics no longer to be exposed
at the Collegiate Church (April 16). Jonas (Feb. 22) and Bugenhagen
(Oct. 13) take wives. Luther returns from the Wartburg (March 1); his
sermons against Carlstadt (March 9-16). Hartmuth von Cronberg’s missive;
Luther returns to Erfurt (Oct.). The innovations forcibly introduced into
Altenburg, Schwarzburg, Eilenburg, etc.
109. “Bulla Cœnæ Domini.” Weim. ed., 8, pp. 688(691)-720; Erl. ed.,
24, pp. 165-202; 24², pp. 168-204.
110. “Acht Sermon” (Against Carlstadt). Weim. ed., 10, 3, pp. 1-64;
Erl. ed., 28, pp. 203-285.
111. “Von beider Gestallt des Sacramentes zu nehmen.” Weim. ed., 10,
2, pp. 1(11)-41; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 286-318.
112. “Eyn Missive an den ereñvestenn Harttmutt vonn Cronberg.” Weim.
ed., 10, 2, pp. 42(53)-60; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 120-128.
113. “Von Menschen leren tzu meyden.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 61(72)-92;
Erl. ed., 28, pp. 330-343.
114. “Die erst Epistel Sanct Petri gepredigt und ausgelegt” (publ.
1523). Weim. ed., 12, pp. 249(259)-399; Erl. ed., 51, pp. 325-494.
115. “Wyder den falsch genantten geystlichen Standt des Bapst und der
Bischoffen.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 93(105)-158; Erl. ed., 28, pp.
142-202.
116. “Bulle des Ecclesiasten tzu Wittenbergk.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp.
140-144; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 380-387; 24², pp. 214-220.
117. “Epistel odder Unterricht von den Heyligen an die Kirch tzu
Erffurdt.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 159(164)-168; Erl. ed., 53, pp.
139-144.
118. “Contra Henricum regem Angliæ.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp.
175(180)-222; “Opp. lat. var.,” 6, pp. 385-448.
119. “Antwort deutsch … auff König Henrichs von Engelland Buch. Lügen
thun myr nicht, Warheyt schew ich nicht.” Weim, ed., 10, 2, pp.
223(227)-262; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 344-387.
120. Latin letter to the Bohemian Estates. Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp.
169(172)-174; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 144-148.
121. 1522-1523. Translation of the Old Testament (Pentateuch, publ.
1523).
122. Preface to “Wesselii epistolæ.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp.
310(316)-317; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 495-497.
123. Preface to “Gochii fragmenta.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 327(329)-330.
124. “Vom Eelichen Leben.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 267(275)-304; Erl.
ed., 20, pp. 57-87; 16², pp. 510-541.
125. “Ain Betbüchlin.” Weim. ed., 10, 2, pp. 331(375)-482.
The German New Testament, cp. No. 108. Church-Postils, cp. No. 96. “De
votis monasticis,” cp. No. 104. “De abroganda missa privata,” cp. No.
105. Sermons, Weim. ed., 10, 3, pp. 1-435; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 263-265;
16², pp. 304-543. Letters, Enders, 3, p. 269—4, p. 52; Erl. ed., 53,
pp. 103-157.
=1523.= Clement VII (Pope from Nov. 19, 1523, to Sept. 25, 1534). In
Sweden, Gustavus Vasa (†1560). In Denmark, Frederick I (†1533). Edict
of the Diet of Nuremberg (Feb. 8). The Lutherans begin to form parishes
apart. The innovations introduced into Prussia. Luther has the Mass done
away with at Wittenberg. Two Augustinians of Lutheran sympathies are
burnt at Antwerp. Flight of Bora and the other Nimbschen nuns; Lang’s
marriage. End of the German Augustinians. Luther’s illness. His interview
with Carlstadt at Jena (Aug. 22). Link goes to Altenburg. The attempt to
establish a new order of things at Leisnig. Luther drafts a constitution
for the Churches of Bohemia.
126. “Die ander Epistel S. Petri und eyne S. Judas gepredigt und
ausgelegt” (1523-1524). Weim. ed., 14, pp. 1(13)-91; Erl. ed., 52, pp.
213-287.
127. “Von Anbeten des Sacramẽts des heyligen Leychnams Christi.” Weim.
ed., 11, pp. 417(431)-456; Erl. ed., 28, pp. 389-421.
128. “Deuttung der czwo grewlichen Figuren, Bapstesels czu Rom und
Munchkalbs zu Freyberg ynn Meysszen funden Philippus Melanchthon D.
Martinus Luther.” Weim. ed., 11, pp. 357(368)-385; Erl. ed., 29, pp.
2-16.
129. “Adversus armatum virum Cokleum.” Weim. ed., 11, pp.
292(295)-306; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 44-60.
130. Various Sermons, etc. Weim. ed., 11, pp. 36-62.
131. “Von welltlicher Uberkeytt wie weytt man yhr Gehorsam schuldig
sey.” Weim. ed., 11, pp. 229(245)-281; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 60-105.
132. “Eyn Bepstlich Breve widder den Luther.” Weim. ed., 11, pp.
337(342)-356; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 411-420; “Opp. lat. var.,” 6, pp.
466-477.
133. “In Genesim Declamationes” (publ. 1527). Weim. ed., 24; 14, pp.
94(97)-488; Erl. ed., 33, 34.
134. “Von Ordenung Gottes Dienst ynn der Gemeyne.” Weim. ed., 12, pp.
31(35)-37; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 153-156.
135. “Ursach und Anttwortt das Jungkfrawen Kloster gottlich verlassen
mugen.” Weim. ed., 11, pp. 387(394)-400; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 34-42.
136. “Das eyn Christliche Versamlung odder Gemeyne … Macht habe alle
Lere zu urteylen.” Weim. ed., 11, pp. 401(408)-416; Erl. ed., 22, pp.
141-151.
137. “Das Jhesus Christus eyn geborner Jude sey.” Weim. ed., 11, pp.
307(314)-336; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 46-74.
138. “Das Tauff Buchlin Verdeutscht.” Weim. ed., 12, pp. 38(42)-48;
Erl. ed., 22, pp. 158-166.
139. “Ordenũg eyns gemeynen Kastens.” Weim. ed., 12, pp. 1(11)-30;
Erl. ed., 22, pp. 106-130.
140. “Widder die Verkerer und Felscher Keyserlichs Mandats.” Weim.
ed., 12, pp. 58(62)-67; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 182-190.
141. “Das siebẽdt Capitel S. Pauli zu den Corinthern aussgelegt.”
Weim. ed., 12, pp. 88(92)-142; Erl. ed., 51, pp. 3-69.
142. 1523-1529. Latin translation of the Bible (publ. 1529).
143. Epistolary Recommendation of Johann Apel’s “Defensio pro suo
coniugio.” Weim. ed., 12, pp. 68(71)-72; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 500
ff.
144. Preface to the German translation of Lamprecht’s (Lambert of
Avignon) “In regulam Minoritarum … Commentarii.” Weim. ed., 11, pp.
457(461); “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 498 _sq._
145. Introduction to Savonarola’s “Meditatio pia.” Weim. ed., 12, pp.
245(248); “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 497 _sq._
146. “Eyn Brieff an die Christen ym Nidder Land.” Weim. ed., 12, pp.
73(77)-80; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 180-182.
147. “Allen Christen zu Righe, Revell und Tarbthe [Dorpat].” Weim.
ed., 12, pp. 143(147)-150; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 190-194.
148 Hymns: “Nu freut euch liebe Christen gmein,” “Ein newes Lied wir
heben an.” Erl. ed., 56, pp. 309 f., 340 ff.
149. “De instituendis ministris ecclesiæ.” Weim. ed., 12, pp.
160(169)-196; “Opp. lat. var.,” 6, pp. 494-535.
150. “Eyn Sendtbrieff … an ein Christl. Gemain der Stat Essling.”
Weim. ed., 12, pp. 151(154)-159; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 213-217.
151. “Eyn trost Brieff an die Christen zu Augspurg.” Weim. ed., 12,
pp. 221(224)-227; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 223-227.
152. “An die Herrn Deutschs Ordens das sie falsche Keuscheyt meyden
und zur rechten ehlichen Keuscheyt greyffen.” Weim. ed., 12, pp.
228(232)-244; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 17-33.
153. “Formula missæ et communionis.” Weim. ed., 12, pp. 197(205)-220;
“Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 1-20.
German Old Testament (1st part), cp. No. 121. Sermons on the 1st
Epistle of Peter, cp. No. 114. Other sermons, Weim. ed., 11, 12; Erl.
ed., 17², pp. 1-72. Letters, Enders, 4, pp. 53-272; 5, p. 8; Erl. ed.,
53, pp. 158-230; 56, pp. 166 f., vii. f.
=1524.= Diet of Nuremberg for the execution of the Edict of Worms.
Amsdorf introduces the Reformation into Magdeburg. Münzer sacks the
chapel at Malderbach near Eisleben. The Peasant War (beginning in June
and lasting till the following year). League of the South-German Catholic
Estates entered into at Ratisbon (July 6). Joh. Walther’s “Spiritual
Song-book.” Münzer’s “Well-grounded plea” in his own defence (Sept.).
Erasmus’s “Diatribe” (Sept.). Catholic worship is forbidden at Altenburg.
Luther throws off the Augustinian habit (Dec.).
154. “An die Radherrn aller Stedte deutsches Lands das sie christl.
Schulen auffrichten und halten sollen.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 9(27)-53;
Erl. ed., 22, pp. 170-199.
155. Translation of the Old Testament (2nd part, from Josue to Esther).
156. “Duæ episcopales bullæ super doctrina Lutherana et Romana.” Weim.
ed., 15, pp. 141(146)-154; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 63-73.
157. “Eyn Christlicher Trostbrieff an die Miltenberger.” Weim. ed.,
15, pp. 54(69)-78; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 117-128.
158. Preface to Bugenhagen’s “In librum psalmorum Interpretatio.”
Weim. ed., 15, p. 1(8); “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 502 _sq._
159. “Eyn Geschicht wie Got eyner Erbarn Kloster Jungfrawẽ ausgelffen
hat.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 79(86)-94; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 103-113.
160. 1524-1526. “Prælectiones in Prophetas minores” (publ. 1526-1545).
Weim. ed., 13, pp. 1-703; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 24-28.
161. “Deuteronomium Mosi cum annotationibus” (publ. 1525). Weim. ed.,
14, pp. 489(497)-744; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 13, pp. 5-351.
162. “Widder das blind und toll Verdamnis.” Weim. ed., 15, pp.
95(110)-140; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 76-92.
163. “Dass Elltern die Kinder zur Ehe nicht zwingen noch hyndern.”
Weim. ed., 15, pp. 155(163)-169; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 236-244.
164. “Zwey keyserliche uneynige und wydderwertige Gepott.” Weim. ed.,
15, pp. 241(254)-278; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 210-237; 24², pp. 221-247.
165. “Der Psalter deutsch.” Erl. ed., 37, pp. 107-249.
166. “Von Kauffshandlung und Wucher.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 279(293)-322;
Erl. ed., 22, pp. 200-226.
167. “Eyn Sermon von dem Wucher” (2nd edition, cp. No. 61).
168. “Widder den newen Abgott und allten Teuffel der zu Meyssen sol
erhaben werden.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 170(183)-198; Erl. ed., 24, pp.
239-257; 24², pp. 250-268.
169. “Zwue Sermon auff das xv. und xvi. Capitel ynn der Apostel
Geschichte” (publ. 1526). Weim. ed., 15, p. 571-622; Erl. ed., 17, pp.
223-253.
170. “Eyn Brieff an die Fürsten zu Sachsen von dem auffrurischen
Geyst.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 199(210)-221; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 256-268.
171. “Sendbrieff an die … Burgermeyster, Rhatt und gantze Gemeyn der
Stadt Mülhausen.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 230(238)-240; Erl. ed., 53, pp.
253-255.
172. “Ain Senndbrief an den Wolgeb. Herren, Herren Barth von
Staremberg.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 1(5)-7; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 202-204.
173. “Geistliches Gesangbüchlein” (with 24 hymns by Luther) Cp. Erl.
ed., 56, p. 306 ff.
174. Sermons on Exodus (publ. in 1526, 1528, 1564, and, in full, in
1899). Weim. ed., 16, pp. 1-646; Erl. ed., 33, pp. 3-21 (“Opp. lat.
var.,” 7, pp. 75-112); 35, pp. 1-392; 36, pp. 1-144.
175. German Old Testament (3rd and final part, without the
“Apocrypha”).
176. “Von dem Grewel der Stillmesse so man den Canon nennet.” Weim.
ed., 18, pp. 8(22)-36; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 114-133.
177. “Der 127. Psalm ausgelegt an die Christen zu Rigen ynn Liffland.”
Weim. ed., 15, pp. 348(360)-379; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 130-150; 53, p. 281.
178. “Eyn Brieff an die Christen zu Straspurg widder den Schwermer
Geyst.” Weim. ed., 15, pp. 380(391)-397; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 270-277.
Sermons on the 2nd Epistle of Peter and on the Epistle of Jude, cp.
No. 126. Other Sermons, Weim. ed., 15, pp. 398(409)-803; Erl. ed.,
17², pp. 73-115. Letters, Enders, 4, p. 273 to 5, p. 99; Erl. ed., 53,
pp. 230-281.
=1525.= Charles V is victorious near Pavia (Feb. 24). Prussia becomes a
secular principality (April 10). Luther opposes the so-called fanatics,
Carlstadt and the rest. The massacre at Weinsberg (April 16). Death
of the Elector Frederick (May 5). Johann succeeds him on the Saxon
throne and reigns till 1532. Münzer is vanquished near Frankenhausen
(May 15). The Erfurt Articles. League of the North German Catholic
princes, meeting at Dessau (July 19). Link becomes preacher at Nuremberg
(Aug.). The Mayence assembly (Nov.). Eck’s “Enchiridion.” Carlstadt’s
humiliation. Luther’s marriage (June 13). He calls for the entire
suppression of “idolatry” at Altenburg (July 20). The Reformation is
violently carried through in the Saxon Electorate (Oct. 1). Interview
with Schwenckfeld (Dec. 1). Nuremberg openly comes over to Luther’s side.
179. “Widder die hymelischen Propheten.” Weim. ed., 18, pp.
37(62)-214; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 136-297.
180. “Von Bruder Henrico ynn Diedmar verbrand sampt dem zehenden
Psalmen ausgelegt.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 215(224)-250; Erl. ed., 53, pp.
347-354; 27², pp. 400-426.
181. “Vorrede an den Leser von der Jubil Jars Bullen.” Weim. ed., 18,
pp. 251(255)-269; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 298-318.
182. Sermons on 1 Timothy. Weim. ed., 17, 1, pp. 102-167; Erl. ed.,
51, pp. 276-324.
183. “Eyn christl. Schrift an Herrn Wolfgang Reissenbusch sich ynn den
Ehelichen Stand zubegeben.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 270(275)-278; Erl. ed.,
33, pp. 286-290.
184. “Ermanunge zum Fride auff die zwelff Artikel der Bawrschafft ynn
Schwaben.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 279(291)-334; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 259-286;
24², pp. 271-299.
185. “Vertrag zwischen dem löblichen Bund zu Schwaben und den
zweyen Hauffen der Bawrn am Bodensee und Algew.” Weim. ed., 18, pp.
335(336)-343; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 2-12.
186. “Wider die mordischen und reubischen Rotten der Bawren.” Weim.
ed., 18, pp. 344(357)-361; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 288-294; 24², pp. 303-309.
187. “Eyn schrecklich Geschicht unnd Gericht Gottes uber Thomas
Müntzer.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 362(367)-374; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 13-22.
188. “Eyn Sendebrieff von dem harten Buchlin widder die Bauren.” Weim.
ed., 18, pp. 375(384)-401; Erl. ed., 24, pp. 295-319; 24², pp. 310-334.
189. “Eyne Christliche Vormanung von eusserlichem Gottis Dienste unde
Eyntracht an die yn Lieffland.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 412(417)-421; Erl.
ed., 53, pp. 315-321.
190. Preface to Bodenstein’s “Entschuldigung D. Andres Carlstats des
falschen Namens der Auffrůr.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 431(436)-438; Erl.
ed., 64, pp. 404-408.
191. Preface to Carlstadt’s “Erklerung.” Weim. ed., 18, pp.
446(453)-466; Erl. ed., 64, pp. 408-410.
192. “Die sieben Buss Psalmen” (revised). Weim. ed., 18, pp.
467(479)-550; Erl. ed., 37, pp. 344-442.
193. Notes to the 28 Articles of the Erfurt Council. Weim. ed., 18,
pp. 531(534)-540; Erl. ed., 56, pp. xii.-xviii.; 65, pp. 239-247.
194. “Radtschlag wie in der Christlichen Gemaine ain … bestendigen
Ordnung solle fürgenommen und auffgericht werden” (publ. 1526). Weim.
ed., 19, pp. 436(440)-446; Erl. ed., 26², pp. 2-8.
195. “De servo arbitrio.” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 551(600)-787; “Opp. lat.
var.,” 7, pp. 113(116)-368.
196. Church-Postils (2nd part), Epiphany to Easter. Erl. ed., 8-11;
8²-11².
197. “Deudsche Messe und Ordnung Gottis Diensts” (publ. 1526). Weim.
ed., 19, pp. 44(70)-113; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 227-244.
198. Hymn, “Jesaia dem Propheten das geschach.” Erl. ed., 56, p. 343.
199. “Epistel des Propheten Jesaia so man ynn der Christmesse lieset”
(publ. 1526). Weim. ed., 19, pp. 126(131)-168; Erl. ed., 15, pp.
65-110; 15², pp. 70-116.
“Annotationes in Deuteronomiam,” cp. No. 161. Other sermons, Weim.
ed., 17, 1, pp. 1-507; Erl. ed., 17², pp. 116-253. Letters, Enders, 5,
pp. 100-297; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 281-357; 56, pp. 168-170, viii.-xviii.
=1526.= The Diet of Augsburg demands (Jan. 9) an Œcumenical Council.
Luther lays it down (Feb. 9) that, in each locality there must be but
one doctrine. The new worship in the Saxon Electorate. The Electorate
and Hesse enter into a league (at Gotha, and, later, at Torgau, May 2).
Lambert of Avignon helps Philip of Hesse to introduce the innovations.
The Kaiser threatened by the League of Cognac (May 22). The Diet of
Spires (Aug. 27) tempers the Edict of Worms. The Battle of Mohacs (Aug.
29). Charles V politically estranged from the Pope. The “Hyperaspistes”
of Erasmus.
200. “Das Bapstum mit seinen Gliedern gemalet und beschrieben.” Weim.
ed., 19, pp. 1(6)-43; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 360-378.
201. Sermons (publ. in full in 1898). Weim. ed., 20, pp. 204(212)-591;
Erl. ed., 17², pp. 254-267.
202. “Widder den … Radschlag der gantzen Meintzischen Pfafferey.”
Weim. ed., 19, pp. 252(260)-282; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 23-46.
203. “Der Prophet Jona aussgelegt.” Weim. ed., 19, pp. 169(185)-251;
Erl. ed., 41, pp. 325-414.
204. “Sermon von dem Sacrament des Leibs und Bluts Christi widder die
Schwarmgeister.” Weim. ed., 19, pp. 474(482)-523; Erl. ed., 29, pp.
329-359.
205. Two Prefaces to the Swabian “Syngramma.” Weim. ed., 19, pp.
447(457)-461, 524(529)-530; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 108-185.
206. “Antwort auff ettliche Fragen Closter Gelübd belangend.” Weim.
ed., 19, pp. 283(287)-293; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 318-327.
207. “Der Prophet Habacuc ausgelegt.” Weim. ed., 19, pp. 336(345)-435;
Erl. ed., 42, pp. 3-108.
208. “Das Tauffbuchlin verdeudscht auffs new zugericht.” Weim. ed.,
19, pp. 531(537)-541; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 291-294.
209. “Annotationes in Ecclesiasten” (publ. 1532). Weim. ed., 20, pp.
1(7)-203; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 21, pp. 1-266.
210. “Der 112. Psalm Davids … gepredigt.” Weim. ed., 19, pp.
294(297)-336; Erl. ed., 40, pp. 241-280.
211. “Vier trostliche Psalmen.… An die Königyn zu Hungern ausgelegt.”
Weim. ed., 19, pp. 542(552)-615; Erl. ed., 38, pp. 370-453.
212. “Der Prophet Sacharja ausgelegt” (publ. 1528). Weim. ed., 23, pp.
477(485)-664; Erl. ed., 42, pp. 109-362.
213. “Epistel aus dem Propheten Jeremia von Christus Reich” (publ.
1527). Weim. ed., 20, pp. 549-561; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 187-219.
214. “Ob Kriegsleutte auch ynn seligen Stande seyn künden.” Weim. ed.,
19, pp. 618(623)-662; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 264-290.
“Deudsche Messe,” cp. No. 197. Two sermons on Acts xv., xvi., cp.
No. 171. Sermon on Is. ix., cp. No. 199. Lecture on Osee, cp. No.
160. Instruction on Moses, Weim. ed., 16, pp. 363-394; Erl. ed.,
33, pp. 3-21. Various memoranda, cp. No. 194. Summer part of the
Church-Postils (Erl. ed., 8, 9, 11-14; 9², 11²-14²). Sermons, cp. Nos.
201, 204, 210, 213. Letters, Enders, 5, p. 298 ff.; Erl. ed., 53, pp.
357-394.
=1527.= Second war between Charles V and François I (lasting till 1529).
Henry the Eighth’s plans for a divorce. Ferdinand I is crowned at Prague
as King of Bohemia (Feb. 24). Sack of Rome (May 6-14). Peace between
Charles V and Clement VII (Nov.). Gustavus Vasa takes Luther’s side. The
Visitation of the Saxon Electorate (lasting till 1529) and introduction
of the office of Superintendent. Emser’s translation of the New Testament
(Dec.). Melanchthon in his “Commonplace Book” modifies his teaching on
Predestination. Luther falls ill; beginning of his worst “struggles of
conscience.” Commencement of the controversy with Zwingli, etc., on the
Supper. Wittenberg is invaded by the Plague.
215. “Das diese Wort Christi (Das ist mein Leib etce.) noch fest
stehen widder die Schwermgeister.” Weim. ed., 23, pp. 38(64)-320; Erl.
ed., 30, pp. 16-150.
216. Translation of Isaias.
217. “Auff des Königs zu Engelland Lesterschrift.” Weim. ed., 23, pp.
17(26)-37; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 2-14.
218. Sermons on Leviticus and Numbers (publ. 1902). Weim. ed., 25, pp.
403(411)-522.
219. Preface to “Commentarius in Apocalypsim ante centum annos
editus.” Weim. ed., 26, pp. 121(123)-124; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp.
506-508.
220. Preface to “Die Weissagungẽ Johannis Lichtenberger.” Weim. ed.,
23, pp. 1(7)-12; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 250-258.
221. “In Esaiam scholia ex D.M.L. prælectionibus collecta” (publ.
1532-1534). Weim. ed., 25, pp. 79(87)-401; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 22, pp.
1-296.
222. “Ob man fur dem Sterben fliehen muge.” Weim. ed., 23, pp.
323(338)-386; Erl. ed., 22, pp. 318-341.
223. Lecture on the 1st Epistle of John (publ. 1708 and 1799). Weim.
ed., 20, pp. 592(599)-801.
224. “Trostunge un die Christen zu Halle uber Er Georgen yhres
Predigers Tod.” Weim. ed., 23, pp. 390(401)-434; Erl. ed., 22, pp.
295-316.
225. “Octonarius David” (Ps. xix.). Weim. ed., 23, pp. 435(437)-442;
Erl. ed., 41, pp. 93-115.
226. “Von Er Lenhard Keiser ynn Beyern umb des Evangelii Willen
verbrandt.” Weim. ed., 23, pp. 443(445)-476.
227. “Ain feste Burg” (1528?). Erl. ed., 56, p. 343 f., see above,
vol. v., p. 549.
228. Lecture on Titus and Philemon (publ. 1902). Weim. ed., 25, pp.
1(6)-78.
Church-Postils, Summer part and conclusion, ed. Roth, cp. Erl. ed.,
15, 16; 15². Sermon on Jer. xxiii. 5-8, cp. No. 213. Sermons on
Genesis, cp. No. 133. Other Sermons, Weim. ed., 23, pp. 665(682)-757;
Erl. ed., 17², pp. 268-322. Letters, Enders, 1, pp. 1-172; Erl. ed.,
53, pp. 395-416; 56, pp. 170-176.
=1528.= The Pack negotiations. Anabaptists are threatened with the
death-penalty. Death of Albert Dürer (April 6) and Emser (Nov. 8).
Cochlæus, Court-chaplain to Duke George. Cruciger and other friends come
to Wittenberg. Letters of Hasenberg and von der Heyden. Bugenhagen’s work
in Brunswick. Progress of the Visitation of the Saxon Electorate. The
“catechetical sermons” at Wittenberg. Philip of Hesse’s breach of the
peace and hostilities against Bamberg, Würzburg and Mayence. The Turks
threaten new inroads.
229. “Unterricht der Visitatorn an die Pharhern ym Kurfurstenthum zu
Sachssen,” etc. Weim. ed., 26, pp. 175(195)-240; Erl. ed., 23, pp.
3-70.
230. “Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis.” Weim. ed., 26, pp.
241(261)-509; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 152-373.
231. “Ein Gesichte Bruder Clausen ynn Schweytz und seine Deutunge.”
Weim. ed., 26, pp. 125(130)-136; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 260-268.
232. Lecture on 1 Timothy (partly publ. 1797). Weim. ed., 26, pp.
1(4)-120.
233. “Von der Widdertauffe an zween Pfarherrn.” Weim. ed., 26, pp.
137(144)-174; Erl. ed., 26, pp. 255-294; 26², pp. 282-321.
234. “De digamia episcoporum propositiones.” Weim. ed., 26, pp.
510(517)-527; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 360-373.
235. New edition of the German Psalter; cp. No. 165, 289.
236. Three series of sermons on the Catechism (publ. 1899). Weim. ed.,
30, 1, pp. 2-122.
237. “Vom Kriege widder die Türcken” (publ. 1529). Weim. ed. 30, 2,
pp. 81(107)-148; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 32-80.
238. “New-Zeittung von Leyptzig.” “Ein newe Fabel Esopi newlich
verdeudscht gefunden.” Weim. ed., 26, pp. 534(539)-554; Erl. ed., 64,
pp. 326-337.
239. “Von beider Gestalt des Sacraments.” Weim. ed., 26, pp.
555(560)-618; Erl. ed., 30, pp. 374-426.
240. Week-day sermons on John xvi.-xx. (in part publ. 1530, 1557).
Weim. ed., 28, pp. 31(42)-502; Erl. ed., 50, pp. 1-441.
241. Week-day sermons on Mt. xi.-xv. Weim. ed., 28, pp. 1(4)-30.
242. “Nachwort zu der Durchleuchtigen hochgebornen F. Ursulen
Hertzogin zu Mönsterberg. Christliche Ursach des verlassen Klosters zu
Freyberg.” Weim. ed., 26, pp. 623(628)-633; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 132-169.
Exposition of the Ten Commandments, Weim. ed., 16, pp. 394-528; Erl.
ed., 36, pp. 1-144. Commentary on Zacharias, cp. No. 212. Other
Sermons, Weim. ed., 27, 28, pp. 503-763. Letters, Enders, 6, p. 173-7,
p. 38; Erl. ed., 53, pp. 416-452; 54, pp. 1-60; 56, pp. 176-180, xix.
=1529.= Peace of Barcelona (June 29). Peace of the Ladies (Cambrai,
Aug. 5). Retreat of the Turks from Vienna (Oct. 14). Diet of Spires.
“Protest” of the Lutheran Estates (April 19). They promise each other
mutual support (April 22). Philip of Hesse and Melanchthon seek a union
with the Zwinglians; the Marburg Conference (Oct. 1-4). Luther submits
to the Upper German townships his so-called Schwabach Articles which are
rejected by Strasburg and Ulm at the Schwabach Conference (Oct. 16). The
same thing happens again at the Schmalkalden Conference (Nov. 29) and
spoils all prospect of an arrangement with the South-Germans. Nuremberg
alone stands true to the union.
243. “Von heimlichẽ und gestolen Brieffen.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp.
1(25)-48; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 2-30.
244. “Deudsch Catechismus.” Weim. ed., 30, 1, pp. 123-238; Erl. ed.,
21, pp. 26-155.
245. “Der Kleine Catechismus für die gemeine Pfarher und Prediger.”
Weim. ed., 30, 1, pp. 239-425; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 5-25.
246. “Ein Trawbüchlin für die einfeltigen Pfarherr.” Weim. ed., 30, 3,
pp. 43(74)-80; Erl. ed., 23, pp. 208-213.
247. “Teütsche Letaney” and “Latina Litania correcta.” Weim. ed., 30,
3, pp. 1(29)-42; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 360-366.
248. Preface to the “Œconomia christiana” of Justus Menius. Weim. ed.,
30, 2, pp. 49(60)-63; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 117-121; 63, pp. 277-282.
249. Translation of the Book of Wisdom.
250. Sermons on Deuteronomy (publ. 1564). Weim. ed., 28, pp.
501(509)-763; Erl. ed., 36, pp. 164-411.
251. Preface to Melanchthon’s Exposition of Colossians. Weim. ed., 30,
2, pp. 64(68)-69; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 492 _sq._
252. Preface to Brentz’s Commentary on Ecclesiastes. Weim. ed., 26,
pp. 619(621)-622; Erl. ed., 54, p. 59 f.
253. Preface to Venatorius’ “Ein kurtz Underricht den sterbenden
Menschen.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 70(79)-80; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 285-287.
254. The “Wittenberg Song-book” with new hymns and a preface.
255. “Von Ehesachen” (publ. 1530). Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 198(205)-248;
Erl. ed., 23, pp. 93-154.
256. Marburg Conference and Articles. Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
92(110)-171; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 88-91.
257. Articles of the Schwabach Convention. Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
81(86)-91.
258. “Eine Heer-Predigt widder den Türcken.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp.
149(160)-197; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 81-121.
259. Scholia to Ps. cxviii. (to Eobanus Hessus).
Latin translation of the Bible, cp. No. 142. “Vom Kriege widder
die Türcken,” cp. No. 237. Sermons, cp. No. 240 and Weim. ed., 29.
Letters, Enders, 7, pp. 39-212; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 60-121; 56, pp. 181,
xix.-xxvii.
=1530.= Charles V is crowned Emperor at Bologna (Feb. 24). Death of
Willibald Pirkheimer and of Luther’s father, Hans (Feb.). The “Confessio
tetrapolitana” of Strasburg, Constance, Lindau and Memmingen (drawn up
by Bucer and Capito). The Torgau Articles (March). Diet of Augsburg
(June 20-Nov. 19). Luther at the Coburg (April 23-Oct. 4). At Torgau
he begins to favour the use of armed resistance to the Emperor (Oct.).
The “Confessio Augustana” (June 25), the “Confutatio” and Melanchthon’s
“Apologia” (Sept.). Bucer at the Coburg (Sept. 25). The warlike league
planned by the Protesting Estates at the Schmalkalden Assembly (Dec. 22).
Spread of the innovations in Hungary.
260. Preface to Spengler’s “Kurczer Auszuge aus den Bebstlichen
Rechten.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 215(219); Erl. ed., 63, pp. 288-290.
261. Preface to “Libellus de ritu et moribus Turcarum.” Weim. ed., 30,
2, pp. 198(205)-208; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 514-519; Erl. ed., 65,
pp. 248-254.
262. New ed. of the New Testament.
263. Translation of Daniel.
264. Preface to “Der Widdertauffer Lere” of Justus Menius. Weim. ed.,
30, 2, pp. 209(211)-214; Erl. ed., 63, pp. 290-296.
265. Lecture on the Song of Songs (publ. 1538). “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 21,
pp. 273-368.
266. “Vermanũg an die geistlichen versamlet auff dem Reichstag zu
Augsburg.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 237(268)-356; Erl. ed., 24, pp.
330-379; 24², pp. 358-407.
267. (1530-1532). Translation of Jeremias, Ezechiel and the Lesser
Prophets.
268. “Das xxxviii. und xxxix. Capitel Hesechiel vom Gog.” Weim. ed.,
30, 2, pp. 220(223)-236; Erl. ed., 41, pp. 220-231.
269. Twenty-one Sermons (publ. 1702). Weim. ed., 32, pp. 1-298; Erl.
ed., 17², pp. 323-472.
270. “Auff das Schreien etlicher Papisten uber die siebentzehen
Artickel.” Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 183(186)-197; Erl. ed., 24, pp.
321-329; 24², pp. 337-344.
271. “Das schöne Confitemini” (Ps. cxviii.). Erl. ed., 41, pp. 2-19.
272. Short exposition of the first 25 Psalms (publ. 1548, and, in
full, 1559). Erl. ed., 38, pp. 1-275; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 17.
273. (1530?). German version of Æsop’s Fables. Erl. ed., 64, pp.
350-361.
274. “Etliche tröstliche Vermanungen … Mit diesen Sprüchen hat sich
der heilige Man … getröstet.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 697(700)-710; Erl.
ed., 23, pp. 155-162.
275. Reflections of the Holy Fathers, on how a Christian must bear his
cross with patience. Erl. ed., 64, pp. 298-300.
276. Glosses on the Decalogue. Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 357(358).
277. “Widderruff vom Fegefeur.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 360(367)-390;
Erl. ed., 31, pp. 185-215.
278. “Ettlich Artickelstück so M.L. erhalten wil, wider die gantze
Satans Schüle uñ alle Pforten der Hellen.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp.
413(420)-427; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 373-377; Erl. ed., 31, pp.
122-125.
279. “Predigt das man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle.” Weim. ed., 30,
2, pp. 508(517)-588; Erl. ed., 20, pp. 1-45; 17², pp. 376-422.
280. “Brieff an den Cardinal Ertzbisschoff zu Mentz.” Weim. ed., 30,
2, pp. 391(397)-412; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 159-168.
281. “Der lxxxii. Psalm ausgelegt.” Erl. ed., 39, pp. 225-264.
282. “Von den Schlüsseln.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp. 428(435)-507; 30, 3,
pp. 584-588; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 126-184.
283. “Der hundert und siebenzehende Psalm ausgelegt.” Erl. ed., 40,
pp. 281-328.
284. “Vermanung zum Sacrament des Leibs und Bluts unsers Herrn.” Weim.
ed., 30, 2, pp. 589(595)-626; Erl. ed., 23, pp. 163-207.
285. “Sendbrieff D.M.L. von Dolmetzscheñ.” Weim. ed., 30, 2, pp.
627(632)-646; Erl. ed., 65, pp. 103-123.
286. “Der hundert und eilffte Psalm ausgelegt.” Erl. ed., 40, pp.
193-240.
287. Week-day sermons on Mt. v.-vii. (publ. 1532). Weim. ed., 32, pp.
299-555; Erl. ed., 43, pp. 2-368.
288. Sermons on John vi. 26-viii. 38 (publ. 1564). Weim. ed., 33; Erl.
ed., 47, pp. 227-394; 48, pp. 1-410.
“Von Ehesachen,” cp. No, 255. “Heer-Predigt widder den Türcken,” cp.
No. 258. Sermons on John xvii., cp. No. 240. Letters, Enders, 7, p.
213—8, p. 334; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 122-209; 56, pp. 181-183, xxvii.-xxix.
=1531.= Ferdinand becomes the German King (Jan. 5). League of
Schmalkalden (Feb. 27). Bavaria takes the field against Ferdinand (24
Oct.). Archbishop Albert stays at Halle (till 1540). Melanchthon prepares
for the press his “Confessio Aug.” and its “Apologia.” Luther suggests to
Henry VIII that bigamy would be preferable to divorce (Sept. 3). England
(1531-1545) is carried into schism by Henry VIII. Zwinglian iconoclastic
riots in Swabia. Zwingli slain in Battle (Oct. 11) is succeeded by
Bullinger. Luther’s revision of his translation of the Psalms; his
memoranda on the means of stamping out the Anabaptist movement (end of
Oct.).
289. New edition of the Psalms, cp. Nos. 165, 235.
290. “Auff das vermeint Keiserlich Edict ausgangen jm 1531 Jare.”
Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp. 321(331)-388, 583; Erl. ed., 25, pp. 51-88; 25²,
pp. 50-88.
291. “Warnunge an seine lieben Deudschen.” Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
252(276)-320, 392-399; Erl. ed., 25, pp. 2-50; 25², pp. 3-49; 65, p.
259 f.
292. “Widder den Meuchler zu Dresen gedrückt.” Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
413(446)-471; Erl. ed., 25, pp. 89-109; 25², pp. 109-128.
293. “Commentarius (maior) in Epistolam ad Galatas” (publ. 1535).
Weim. ed., 40, 1 (cap. i.-iv.); Irmischer, 1; 2; 3, pp. 1-120.
294. “Exemplum theologiæ et doctrinæ papisticæ.” Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
494(496)-509; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 21-43.
295. Psalm cxlvii. (publ. 1532). Erl. ed., pp. 152-181.
296. “Enarratio psalmi xlii.” “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 17, pp. 234-238.
Sermons, Weim. ed., 34, 1, 2; Erl. ed., 18², pp. 1-135. Letters,
Enders, 8, pp. 335-9, p. 135; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 209-265; 56, p. 183.
=1532.= The Turkish invasion of Hungary and Austria (June); Suleiman II
does not venture to attack Vienna. Elector Johann dies and is succeeded
by Johann Frederick (till 1547). Calvin stays for a while in Geneva. The
Nuremberg proposals for a religious truce (June 23) are rejected by the
Catholic Estates at Ratisbon (July 2). Melanchthon thinks of leaving
Wittenberg.
297. “Brieff von den Schleichern und Winckelpredigern.” Weim. ed., 30,
3, pp. 510(518)-527; Erl. ed., 31, pp. 214-226.
298. “An den Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürsten und Herrn Herrn
Albrechten Marggraffen zu Brandenburg.” Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
541(547)-553; Erl. ed., 54, pp. 281-289.
299. “Enarratio psalmorum ii. et xlv.” (publ. 1533 and 1546). “Opp.
lat. exeg.” 18, pp. 1-127, 129-264.
300. “Enarratio psalmi li.” (publ. 1538). “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 19, pp.
1-154.
301. Preface to Bugenhagen’s ed. of “Athanasii libri contra
idolatriam.” Weim ed., 30, 3, pp. 528(530)-532; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7,
pp. 523-525.
302.“Summarien uber die Psalmen und Ursachen des Dolmetschens” (publ.
1533). Erl. ed., 37, pp. 254-339.
303. Sermon on Charity (1 Jo. iv. 16-21; publ. 1533). Weim. ed., 36,
pp. 416-477; Erl. ed., 19, pp. 358-412; 18², pp. 304-311.
304. Translation of the Old-Testament “Apocrypha” (publ. 1533 f.).
305. Sermon on the sum total of the Christian life (1 Tim. 1, 5 ff.
publ. 1533). Weim. ed., 36, pp. 352-375; Erl. ed., 19, pp. 296-328;
18², pp. 370-304.
306. (1532-1533). “Enarratio in psalmos graduales” (publ. 1540). “Opp.
lat. exeg.,” 19, pp. 157-289; 20, pp. 1-306.
307. “Brieff an die zu Franckfort am Meyn.” Weim. ed., 30, 3, pp.
554(558)-571; Erl. ed., 26, pp. 295-313; 26², pp. 372-389.
308. (1532-1534). Home-sermons (Home-postils, ed. Veit Dietrich, 1544;
ed. Rörer, 1559). Weim. ed., 36, 37; Erl. ed., 1-6; 1²-3² (after
Dietrich); 4²-6² (after Rörer).
Exposition of Ps. cxlvii., cp. No. 295. Translation of the Prophets,
cp. No. 267. Sermons on Mt. v.-vii., cp. No. 287. “In Esaiam prophetam
scholia,” cp. No. 221. “Annotationes in Ecclesiasten,” cp. No. 209.
Sermon on Numbers, vi. 22-27, cp. No. 218. Other Sermons, Weim. ed.,
36; Erl. ed., 18², pp. 136-384. Letters, Enders, 9, pp. 136-258; Erl.
ed., 54, pp. 266-348; 56, pp. 184 f.-187.
=1533.= Clement VII takes steps for the assembling of an Œcumenical
Council (Jan.). The Schmalkaldeners refuse to hear of a Council (June).
Henry VIII weds Anne Boleyn (Jan). Progress of Protestantism in the Duchy
of Jülich-Cleves, in Anhalt-Köthen and Mecklenburg.
309. Sermons on 1 Cor. xv. (publ. 1534). Weim. ed., 36, pp. 649-697;
Erl. ed., 51, pp. 71-275.
310. “Verantwortung der auffgelegten Auffrur.” Erl. ed., 31, pp.
228-269.
311. “Die kleine Anwort auff H. Georgen nehestes Buch.” Weim. ed., 31,
pp. 270-307.
312. “Von der Winckelmesse und Pfaffen Weihe.” Erl. ed., 31, pp.
308-377.
313. Preface to the “Rechẽschafft des Glaubens” (of the Bohemian
Brethren). Erl. ed., 63, pp. 320-323.
314. Preface to Balth. Rhaida’s reply to Wicel. Erl. ed., 63, pp.
317-319.
“Summarien,” cp. No. 302. “Brieff,” etc., cp. No. 307. Exposition of
Ps. xlv., cp. 299. Sermon on 1 John iv. 16-21, cp. No. 303. Sermon
on 1 Tim. i. 5 ff., cp. No. 305. Translation of Sirach, cp. No. 304.
Other Sermons, Weim. ed., 37, pp. 1-248; Erl. ed., 19², pp. 1-102.
Letters, Enders, 9, pp. 259-370; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 1-35; 56, pp.
185-191, xxix.-xxxv.
=1534.= Death of Clement VII (Sept. 25). Paul III (from Oct. 13,
1534-Nov. 10, 1549). Bull against Henry VIII (March 23). Act of Supremacy
is passed by the English Parliament (Nov. 3). Ulrich of Würtemberg is
reinstated by Philip of Hesse; his treaty with King Ferdinand signed at
Baden (June 29). Reformation of Anhalt (March) of Würtemberg (May) of
Augsburg (July) of Pomerania (Dec.). Carlstadt at Basle. Luther again
attacks Erasmus, the latter’s “Purgatio adv. epistolam non sobriam
Lutheri.” Death of Cardinal Cajetan (Aug. 9). Strasburg the centre of the
Anabaptist movement. The Anabaptists’ orgies at Münster (Feb., 1534, to
June 25, 1535). First edition of Calvin’s “Institutio.”
315. “Ein Brieff D. Mart. Luth. von seinem Buch der Winckelmessen.”
Erl. ed., 31, pp. 378-391.
316. “Der lxv. Psalm durch D.M.L. zu Dessaw … gepredigt.” Weim. ed.,
37, pp. 425-451; Erl. ed., 39, pp. 137-177.
317. “Biblia das ist die gantze Heilige Schrift.”
318. “Convocatio concilii liberi christiani” (of doubtful
authenticity). Erl. ed., 31, pp. 411-416; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp.
370-372.
319. “Præfatio in Antonii Corvini librum de Erasmi concordia.” “Opp.
lat. var.,” 7, pp. 526-531.
320. Preface to Urban Rhegius, “Widderlegung der Münsterischen newen …
Bekentnus.” Erl. ed., 63, pp. 332-336.
321. Preface to the “Newe Zeittung von Münster.” Erl. ed., 63, pp.
336-341.
322. “Enarratio psalmi xc.” “Opp. lat exeg.,” 18, pp. 264-334.
323. Exposition of Psalm ci. Erl. ed., 39, pp. 266-364.
324. “Einfeltige Weise zu beten.” Erl. ed., 23, pp. 215-238.
325. “Klagschrift der Vögel an D.M. Luther über seinem Diener Wolfgang
Sieberger.” Erl. ed., 64, p. 347 f.
“Scholia in Esaiam,” cp. No. 221. Sermons on 1 Cor. xv., cp. No. 309.
Further Sermons, Weim. ed., 37, pp. 249-672. Letters, Enders, 9, pp.
371—10, p. 117; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 36-81; 56, pp. 191-196.
=1535.= Growth of the Schmalkalden League after the accession of
Würtemberg. Death of Joachim I of Brandenburg (July 11). Joachim II
his successor (†1571) a friend of Luther’s. Execution of Sir Thomas
More. Vergerio’s interview with Luther (Nov. 7). Amended edition of
Melanchthon’s Commonplace-Book. The ordination-oath introduced at
Wittenberg. The Schmalkalden League is prolonged for ten years (Dec.).
King Ferdinand to the Emperor on Germany’s downfall (Dec.).
326. Sermon on Infant-Baptism. Weim. ed., 37, pp. 258-293; Erl. ed.,
16, pp. 43-105; 19², pp. 103-167.
327. “Etliche Spruche Doc. Martini Luther wider das Concilium
Obstantiense (wolt sagen Constantiense).” Erl. ed., 31, pp. 391-411.
328. (1535-1545). “Enarrationes in Genesim” (publ. 1544). “Opp. lat.
exeg.,” 1-11.
329. Prefaces to Anton Corvinus’s “Kurtze Ausslegung der Euangelien …
der Episteln.” Erl. ed., 63, pp. 348-353.
330. Letter to the preachers of Soest. Erl. ed., 65, pp. 95-102.
331. (1535-1536). Sermons. Weim. ed., 41; Erl. ed., 19², pp. 103-242.
332. Disputations, “de concilio Constantiensi” and for the promotion
of Hier. Weller, and Nic. Medler. “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 402-410,
377-389; Drews, pp. 1-3, 9-32.
333. Hymns: “Von Himel hoch”; “Sie ist mir lieb”; “All Ehr und Lob
soll Gottes seyn.” Erl. ed., 56, pp. 348 f., 350 f.
“Comment, in epist. ad Galatas,” cp. No. 293. Sermons, cp. No. 331.
Letters, Enders, 10, pp. 118-282; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 81-117; 56, pp.
196-198, xxxv. f.
=1536.= Third war between Charles V and François I (lasting till 1538).
The Turkish peril. Denmark converted to Protestantism (Aug.). The
“Consilium de emendanda ecclesia” drafted by Cardinals Pole, Contarini,
Sadoleto and Caraffa. A General Council is summoned (June 2) to meet at
Mantua in 1537. Death of Erasmus (July 12). Luther makes advances to
Henry VIII and admits the lawfulness of his divorce. Articles are drafted
to the object of inducing the King of England to make common cause
with the German Reformers. The Articles are thrown over by Henry. The
Wittenberg Concord (May). Luther endeavours to win over Augsburg, Ulm and
the Swiss. Bucer labours for a union. Synods held by the Swiss at Basle
and Bern (Sept., Nov.). Memoranda of the Wittenberg theologians regarding
the Council (Aug.). Bull for the bettering of the City of Rome and the
Papal Court (Sept. 23). Calvin begins his work at Geneva.
334. Disputations: “De iustificatione,” “De muliere peccatrice” and
“Contra missam privatam” (Jan. 14, 21, 29). “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp.
389-394, 398-402, 413; Drews, pp. 55-66, 66, 69-89.
335. Preface to Robert Barnes (Chaplain to Henry VIII), “De vitis
pontificum.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 533-536.
336. “Præfatio in tres epistolas Hussii.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 536
_sq._
337. “Der xxiii. Psalm Auff ein Abend uber Tisch nach dem Gratias
ausgelegt.” Erl. ed., 39, pp. 62-122.
338. Preface and Postscript to “Joan. Nannii Viterbensis, De monarchia
Papæ.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 2, pp. 110-121.
339. Disputations for the promotion of Jakob Schenk and Philip Moth.
“Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 417-419; Drews, pp. 100-109.
340. “Artickel so da hetten sollen auffs Concilion zu Mantua,” etc.
(publ. 1538). Erl. ed., 25, pp. 110-146; 25², pp. 169-205.
341. Disputation “De homine.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 413-416; Drews,
pp. 90-96.
“Enarratio” on Joel, Amos, Obedias, cp. No. 160. Sermons. Weim. ed.,
41, pp. 493-763; Erl. ed., 19², pp. 243-259. Letters, Enders, 10, p.
283—11, p. 151; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 117-167; 56, pp. 199-206, xxxvii. f.
=1537.= Ferdinand’s defeat in Slavonia. Paul the Third’s Bull on the
Turkish question (July 14). Bugenhagen helps in the conversion of Denmark
to Protestantism. Luther’s so-called Schmalkalden Articles sent by him to
the Elector (Jan. 3). The Schmalkalden Meeting (Feb.). Luther is taken
ill and returns home. The Princes decide to have nothing to do with
the Council. They accept the Augsburg Confession and the “Apologia.”
The Schmalkaldeners call on the King of France for help (March 5).
Melanchthon’s “De potestate papæ.” Luther returns sound to Wittenberg
(March 14). Cordatus opposes Melanchthon. The cleavage between Luther and
Melanchthon is carefully veiled. On Oct. 8 the Council is summoned to
meet at Vicenza on May 1, 1538. Efforts of Bucer and others to promote a
Protestant Council. Luther’s spiritual indisposition.
342. Sermon on Mt. iv. 1 ff. Erl. ed., 17, pp. 7-34; 19², pp. 260-292.
343. “Die drey Symbola oder Bekentniss des Glaubens Christi jnn der
Kirchen einträchtiglich gebraucht.” Erl. ed., 23, pp. 252-281.
344. (1537-1538). Exposition of John xiv.-xvi. (publ. 1538). Weim.
ed., 46, pp. 1-112; Erl. ed., 49, pp. 2-391; 50, pp. 1-154.
345. Disputations of Peter Palladius and Tilemann Schnabel. “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 394-397; Drews, pp. 115-160.
346. Discourse at the promotion of Peter Palladius. “Opp. lat. var.,”
4, pp. 315-322.
347. “Disputatio de cœna magna (i.e. de veste nuptiali).” “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, p. 419; Drews, pp. 163-245.
348. (1537-1539). Exposition of John i.-iv. (publ. 1565 and 1847).
Weim. ed., 46, p. 538 ff.; Erl. ed., 45, pp. 291-422; 46, pp. 1-378;
47, pp. 1-226.
349. (1537-1539). Sermons on Mt. xviii. 24-xxiii. 23. Erl. ed., 44;
45, pp. 1-203.
350. “Eines aus den hohen Artikeln des Bepstlichen Glaubens genant
Donatio Constantini.” Erl. ed., 25, pp. 176-201; 25², pp. 207-232.
351. “Bulla papæ Pauli” (publ. in “Zeitschr. für luth. Theol.,” 1876,
p. 362 ff.).
352 Exposition of Ps. viii. (publ. 1572). Erl. ed., 39, pp. 2-60.
353. Preface to “Ein alt Christlich Concilium … zu Gangra.” Erl. ed.,
64, p. 57 f.
354. “Die Lügend von S. Johanne Chrysostomo an die Heiligen Veter inn
dem vermeinten Concilio zu Mantua.” Erl. ed., 25, pp. 202-218; 25²,
pp. 232-249.
355. Postscript to “Tres epistolæ I. Hussii.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p.
536 _sq._
356. “Præfatio in epistolas quasdam Hussii.” Erl. ed., 65, pp. 59-83;
“Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 538-540.
357. First disputation against the Antinomians (Dec. 18). “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 420-427; Drews, pp. 249-333.
358. Hymns “Erhalt uns Herr bey deinem Wort,” “Vater unser im
Himelreich.” Erl. ed., 56, pp. 354, 351 f.
359. “Conciunculæ cuidam amico præscriptæ.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp.
374-433.
Further Sermons, Erl. ed., 19², pp. 260-466. Letters, Enders, 11, pp.
152-320; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 167-195; 56, pp. 206-208, xxxix. f.
=1538.= The Truce of Nice between the Kaiser and François I (June 15).
Luther in conflict with the Antinomianism of Agricola (1537-1540). His
quarrels with Lemnius, Schenk and Joh. von Metzsch. His antagonism to
Albert of Mayence. The assembly of the Protestants at Brunswick (April
8). The Schmalkaldeners enter into a league with Christian III of Denmark
(April 9). They send missions to the Kings of France and England (Aug.,
Oct.). The strength of the League in Germany increases the danger of a
religious war. The Kaiser (aided by his vice-chancellor Held) succeeds
in inducing the Catholic princes to form the so-called Holy Alliance at
Nuremberg (June 10). Calvin is banished from Geneva.
360. Revised edition of the “Unterricht,” cp. No. 229.
361. “Ratschlag eins ausschus etlicher Cardinel,” etc. Erl. ed., 25,
pp. 146-174; 25², pp. 251-278.
362. “Præfatio in librum S. Hieronymi ad Evagrium de potestate papæ.”
“Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 541-544.
363. “Brieff … wider die Sabbather.” Erl. ed., 31, pp. 417-449.
364. “Der cx. Psalm Dixit Dominus gepredigt und ausgelegt.” Erl. ed.,
40, pp. 39-192.
365. First answer to the “Epigrammata” of Simon Lemnius. Erl. ed., 64,
p. 323 f.
366. Second disputation against the Antinomians (Jan. 12). “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 427-430; Drews, pp. 336-418.
367. Third disputation against the Antinomians (Sept. 13). “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 436-441; Drews, pp. 423-484.
368. “Præfatio in Confessionem Bohemorum.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp.
548-551.
369. “Wider den Bischoff zu Magdeburg Albrecht Cardinal.” Erl. ed.,
32, pp. 15-59.
370. Preface to Rhau’s “Symphoniæ.” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, pp. 551-554.
371. “Frau Musica,” to Joh. Walther’s “Lob und Preis der Himlischen
Kunst Musica.” Erl. ed., 56, p. 295 f.
372. Sermons. Weim. ed., 46, pp. 113-537; Erl. ed., 20², 1, pp. 1-171.
The Schmalkalden Articles, cp. No. 340. Æsop’s Fables, cp. No. 273.
The Three Creeds, cp. No. 343. Exposition of Ps. li., cp. No. 300.
Lecture on the Song of Songs, cp. No. 265. Sermons on John xiv.-xvi.,
cp. No. 344. Further Sermons, cp. Nos. 344, 348 f., 372. Letters,
Enders, 11, pp. 321—12, p. 61; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 195-216; 56, pp.
208-220, xl.-xlv.
=1539.= Death of Duke George (April 17). Apostasy of Joachim II. The
Duchy of Saxony, the Electorate of Brandenburg, and Livonia become
Protestant. Memorandum of Luther and Melanchthon to Elector Johann
Frederick, in favour of armed resistance. The Frankfurt meeting of the
Protestants (April 19); their decision not to appeal as yet to force
and to promote a simple conference rather than a Council; a new mission
dispatched to England (April 29). The Protestant Visitation of the Duchy
of Saxony. Luther and his friends again at work (1539-1541) revising the
German Bible. The Consistories established in the Saxon Electorate. The
Hessian “Order of Church-Discipline.” In England, dissolution of the
Monasteries. Luther’s disputation on the “Papal Werewolf” (May 9). He
sanctions the Bigamy of Philip II (Nov. 10).
373. “Wider die Antinomer.” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 2-14.
374. “Von den Conciliis und Kirchen.” Erl. ed., 25, pp. 219-388; 25²,
pp. 281-448.
375. Sermon at Leipzig on Jo. xiv. 23 ff. (publ. 1618). Erl. ed., 20²,
1, pp. 242-253.
376. Disputation on Mt. xix. 21 (Vade, vende, etc.). “Opp. lat. var.,”
4, pp. 442-449; Drews, pp. 536-584.
377. Preface to Myconius’s “Wie man die einfeltigen … im Christenthumb
unterrichten sol.” Erl. ed., 63, p. 364 f.
378. Preface to a work of Moibanus, on Ps. xxix. Erl. ed., 63, pp.
342-344.
379. Preface to German version of Galeatius Capella’s “De bello
Mediolanensi seu rebus in Italia gestis.” Erl. ed., 63, pp. 354-357.
380. Disputation on “Verbum caro factum est” (Jo. i. 14). “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 458-461; Drews, pp. 487-531.
381. Revision of the German Bible.
382. “An die Pfarherrn wider den Wucher zu predigen.” Erl. ed., 23,
pp. 282-338.
383. Preface to the 1st part of his Collected German Works. Erl. ed.,
63, pp. 401-406.
384. Sermons. Erl. ed., 20², 1, pp. 172-264.
“Wider den Bischoff,” cp. No. 369. Further Sermons, cp. Nos. 348 f.,
384. Letters, Enders, 12, pp. 62-334; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 217-269; 56,
pp. 221 ff., xlvi.-l.
=1540.= Death of Duke William IV of Bavaria. The Jesuits approved by the
Pope (Sept. 27); Pierre Favre in Germany. Philip II of Hesse weds his
second wife in Melanchthon’s presence (March 4). Luther at the Conference
of Eisenach (July 10). Melanchthon’s “miraculous” cure at Weimar; the
“Confessio variata.” Meeting at Schmalkalden (March); Catholic worship
not to be tolerated. Persecution of Schwenckfeld by the Lutherans.
Religious conferences at Hagenau (June) and Worms (Nov. 25-Jan.).
Agricola goes to Berlin to the Elector of Brandenburg (Sept.). Morone
the Papal Legate complains of the apathy of the German Bishops.
385. Disputation “De divinitate et humanitate Christi” (Feb. 28).
“Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 461-466; Drews, pp. 586-610.
386. Preface to Robert Barnes’s “Bekantnus des Glaubens …
verdeudscht.” Erl. ed., 63, pp. 396-400.
387. New edition of the Winter part of the Church-Postils.
388. Disputation for the promotion of Joach. Mörlin. “Opp. lat. var.,”
4, p. 411 _sq._; Drews, pp. 613-636.
“An die Pfarherrn,” cp. No. 382. On the “psalmi graduales,” cp. No.
306. Sermons, Erl. ed., 20², 1, pp. 265-512. Letters, Enders-Kawerau,
12, pp. 335-400; 13, pp. 1-240; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 269-293; 56, pp.
223-227.
=1541.= The Turks secure their footing in Hungary. Naumburg given over
to the Protestants; the Bishop-Elect, Julius von Pflug shut out from
his See by the Saxon Elector (Jan.). The Archbishop of Cologne, Hermann
von Wied is won over to Protestantism. Accession of Maurice of Saxony
(†1553). Philip of Hesse comes to an understanding with Charles V.
Jonas goes to Halle to convert it to Protestantism; Schenk at Leipzig.
Death of Carlstadt (Dec. 24). Religious conferences of Worms (Jan.) and
Ratisbon (April 27-May 22); Diet of Ratisbon and Ratisbon Interim. The
Catholic spokesmen: Eck, Julius von Pflug and J. Gropper; the Protestant:
Melanchthon, Bucer and Frederick Pistorius. Calvin in supreme power at
Geneva (till 1564).
389. “Wider Hans Worst.” Erl. ed., 26, pp. 2-75; 26², pp. 21-93.
390. Preface to Ezechiel, explanation of the figure of the Temple.
Erl. ed., 63, pp. 64-74.
391. Exposition of Dan. xii. Erl. ed., 41, pp. 294-324.
392. “Vermanunge zum Gebet wider den Türcken.” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 75-99.
393. Preface to Urban Rhegius’s “Wider die gottlosen blutdurstigen
Sauliten und Doegeten,” etc. Erl. ed., 63, pp. 366-368.
394. Hymns: “Christ unser Herr zum Jordan kam,” “Was furchstu, Feind
Herodes, seer.” Erl. ed., 56, p. 353 ff.
Revised edition of the German Bible, cp. No. 385. “Enarratio in Ps.
xc.,” cp. No. 322. Letters (Enders), Kawerau, 13, pp. 241-395; De
Wette, 5, pp. 326-420; 6, pp. 279-294; Erl. ed., 55, pp. 294-343; 56,
pp. 227-232.
=1542.= Fourth War of Charles V with François I (lasting till 1544); Diet
of Spires meets on Feb. 9 to vote supplies for the war against the Turks.
The Elector and Duke of Saxony fall out over Wurzen (March); Luther’s
mediation; his last will (Jan. 6). Amsdorf is “consecrated” Bishop of
Naumburg (Jan. 20). A Bull dated May 22 summons the Council to assemble
on Nov. 1 at Trent. The Schmalkaldeners are successful in their attack
on the Duchy of Brunswick (July). Bucer goes to Bonn to the Elector
Hermann von Wied (Dec.).
395. Tract against Bigamy (publ. 1749). Erl. ed., 65, pp. 206-213.
396. Disputation for the promotion of Joh. Macchabæus Scotus (Theses
by Melanchthon). Drews, pp. 639-683.
397. “Exempel einen rechten Christlichen Bischoff zu weihen.” Erl.
ed., 26, pp. 77-107; 26², pp. 94-128.
398. Disputation for the promotion of H. Schmedenstede. “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 452-455; Drews, pp. 686-698.
399. “Von den Jüden und jren Lügen.” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 100-274.
400. Preface to “Verlegung des Alcoran Bruder Richardi Prediger Ordens
anno 1300.” Erl. ed., 65, pp. 190-205.
401. Preface to “Barfuser Münche Eulenspiegel und Alcoran.” Erl. ed.,
63, pp. 373-376.
402. “Trost fur die Weibern welchen es ungerat gegangen ist mit Kinder
geberen.” Erl. ed., 23, pp. 339-343.
403. Preface to the Hymn Book. Erl. ed., 56, pp. 299-306.
Comment. on Micheas, cp. No. 160. No sermons. Letters, De Wette, 5,
pp. 421-525; 6, pp. 294-343; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 1-43, 232-238, li.-lvii.
=1543.= Diet of Nuremberg (Feb.). The Protestants refuse to vote supplies
for the Turkish War. The Emperor is victorious in his campaign against
the Duke of Cleves though the latter is supported by the Elector of
Saxony and by France (Aug., Sept.). The Bishop of Münster and Osnabrück
connives at the introduction of Lutheranism into his diocese. Canisius
the first German Jesuit (May 8). Death of Eck (Feb. 10). Schenk in
Brandenburg; The Cologne Book of Reform drafted by Melanchthon and Bucer
is severely handled by Luther.
404. “Vom Schem Hamphoras.” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 275-358.
405. “Von den Letzten Worten Dauids.” Erl. ed., 37, pp. 2-103.
406. Disputation for the promotion of Joh. Marbach (Feb. 16). Drews,
pp. 701-707.
407. Disputation for the promotion of Fr. Bachofen and Hier. Noppus.
“Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 466-470; Drews, pp. 730-748.
408. Disputation for the promotion of Erasmus Alber. “Opp. lat. var.,”
4, pp. 473-476; Drews, pp. 750-752.
409. Lecture on Is. ix. (publ. 1546). “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 23, pp.
303-438.
410. Hymns: “Von Himel kam der Engel Schar,” “Der du bist drey in
Einigkeit.” Erl. ed., 56, pp. 357-558.
New edition of the German Bible, cp. No. 381. Church-Postils, Summer
part. Sermon, Erl. ed., 20², 1, pp. 513-523. Letters, De Wette, 5, pp.
526-614, 6, pp. 343-559; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 43-72, 238-242, lvii.-lxi.
=1544.= Peace of Crespy between the Kaiser and France (Sept. 18). Diet at
Spires (beginning in Feb.). Concessions to the Protestants. The Abschied
of June 10 postpones the religious controversy to a later Diet and “A
free Christian Council within the German Nation.” The Pope’s protest to
the Kaiser (Aug. 24). Luther again at daggers drawn with the lawyers (on
the question of secret espousals). The people of Cologne denounce their
Archbishop to the Pope (Oct. 9). The theses of the Louvain theologians
against Luther (Nov. 6). The Council is yet again summoned (Nov. 19, to
meet on March 15, 1545) to avert the schism and the inroads of the Turks.
411. Lecture on Is. liii. (publ. 1550). “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 23, pp.
443-536.
412. Disputation for the promotion of Theod. Fabricius and Stanislaus
Rapagelanus (Melanchthon’s Theses). Drews, pp. 756-781.
413. “Kurtz Bekentnis vom heiligen Sacrament.” Erl. ed., 32, pp.
397-425.
414. Sermon at the Dedication of the Castle-church at Torgau. Erl.
ed., 17, pp. 239-262; 20², 2, pp. 215-243.
415. Disputation for the promotion of George Major and Joh. Faber.
“Opp. lat. var.,” 4, pp. 470-473; Drews, pp. 784-830.
Home-Postils, cp. No. 308. “Enarratio in I. librum Mosis,” cp. No.
328. Sermons, Erl. ed., 20², 2, pp. 1-266. Letters, De Wette, 5, pp.
615-709; 6, pp. 359-367; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 72-122, 242-244.
=1545.= Diet of Worms. The Abschied hints at a religious conference
and the imminent danger of a War of Religion. George, the Protestant
Prince of Anhalt, is “consecrated as Evangelical Bishop” of Merseburg
(Aug. 2). The “Wittenberg Reformation” (Jan.). The final edition of the
German Bible. “Popery Pictured.” Luther goes in disgust to Leipzig (July,
Aug.). Goes as arbiter to Mansfeld (Oct.). Duke Henry of Brunswick is
taken prisoner by the Schmalkaldeners (Oct. 20). A final Bull of Dec.
4 convokes the Council to Trent for Dec. 13, where it is opened in the
presence of 34 Fathers qualified to vote. The Schmalkaldeners’ meeting
(Dec. 15) at Frankfurt to devise a counterblast. Death of Spalatin (Jan.
16) and of Albert of Mayence (Sept. 24).
416. “Wider das Bapstum zu Rom vom Teuffel gestifft.” Erl. ed., 26,
pp. 110-228; 26², pp. 131, 251.
417. Verses to Cranach’s cuts in the “Abbildung des Bapstum.”
418. “Wellische Lügenschrifft von Doctoris Martini Luthers Todt zu Rom
ausgangen.” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 426-430.
419. “Bapst Trew Hadriani iiii und Alexanders iii gegen Keyser
Friderichen Barbarossa geübt.” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 359-396.
420. Disputation for the promotion of Peter Hegemon (July 3). “Opp.
lat. var.,” 4, pp. 476-480; Drews, pp. 833-903.
421. “Wider die xxxii Artikel der Teologisten von Löven.” Erl. ed.,
65, pp. 170-178.
422. “Articuli a magistris nostris Lovaniensibus editi.” “Opp. lat.
var.,” 4, pp. 480-492.
423. “An Kurfursten zu Sachsen und Landgraven zu Hesse von dem
gefangenen H. von Brunswig.” Erl. ed., 26, pp. 229-253; 26², pp.
254-281.
424. Preface to the new edition of the “Unterricht” (No. 360).
425. Preface to the first vol. of his “Opera Latina.” “Opp. lat.
var.,” 1, pp. 15-24.
German Bible, new ed., cp. No. 381. “Enarratio in Hoseam prophetam,”
cp. No. 160. Sermons, Erl. ed., 20², 2, pp. 267-454. Letters, De
Wette, 5, pp. 710-772; 6, pp. 368-413; Erl. ed., 56, pp. 122-147, 244,
xli.-lxv.
=1546.= The Diet opens at Ratisbon (March 29) without the Schmalkalden
Leaguers. Luther’s last journey to Mansfeld (Jan. 23). His death at
Eisleben (Feb. 18) and burial at Wittenberg (Feb. 22).—Treaty between
the Kaiser and King Ferdinand, and Duke William of Bavaria in view of
the eventual war (June 7). The Kaiser also makes an alliance with the
Pope (June 7) and comes to an agreement with Maurice of Saxony (June 19).
Schärtlin as commander of the South German townships begins hostilities
at Füssen (July 9). Outlawry of Elector Johann Frederick of Saxony and of
Landgrave Philip of Hesse (July 20). The Schmalkalden War (ending in the
Kaiser’s victory at Mühlberg, April 24, 1547).
426. Sermons. Erl. ed., 20², 2, pp. 455-574.
Letters, De Wette, 5, pp. 773-801; 6, p. 413 f.; Erl. ed., 56, pp.
147-165.
XLII—APPENDIX II
ADDITIONS AND EMENDATIONS
[In the following Appendix we have ruthlessly excised all that seemed to
us merely personal and to have no direct bearing on Luther. Many of the
smaller emendations have already been incorporated in their proper place
in the body of this translation. _Note of the English Editor._]
1-2. Luther’s Visit to Rome
_The Scala Santa_: According to Paul Luther, when his father “was about
to say the usual _preces graduales in scala Lateranensi_, there suddenly
came into his mind the text of Habacuc ‘the just shall live by his
faith,’ whereupon he refrained from his prayer.” As we pointed out in
vol. i., p. 33, it is most unlikely that Luther should, at this time,
have seen this text in such a light. Moreover, as it now turns out,
Luther actually did perform the usual devotions at the Scala Santa. It is
to G. Buchwald (“Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch.,” 1911, p. 606 ff.) that we
are indebted for a quotation from a yet unpublished sermon of Luther’s
own, which shows that he conformed to the common usage and ascended the
famous steps on his knees: “I climbed the stairs of Pilate, _orabam
quolibet gradu pater noster_. _Erat enim persuasio, qui sic oraret
redimeret animam. Sed in fastigium veniens cogitabam: quis scit an sit
verum? Non valet ista oratio, etc._”
As for the doubt expressed in the latter portion of the text, it seems
at variance with Luther’s general credulity in those early days. On
the other hand, it is by no means unlikely that the scepticism of the
Renaissance suggested a doubt to Luther’s mind regarding this supposed
trophy of Christ’s Passion.
_The projected General Confession_: In “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil (3, p.
169, n. 33), Luther says: “_Causa profectionis meæ erat confessio, quam
volebam a pueritia usque texere, et pietatem exercere. Erphordiæ talem
confessionem bis habui. Sed homines indoctissimos Romæ inveni, qui me
plus offendebant quam ædificabant_” (cp. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed.
Kroker, p. 414). In this text it is to be noted that Luther falsely makes
out the main object of his journey to Rome to have been his proposed
general confession, and his progress in piety. The truth is that he went
there first and foremost for the business of his Order. That the general
confession was probably never made may be inferred from Luther’s use of
the word “_sed_” in the above text (cp. vol. i., pp. 30-31).
_Oldecop’s account of Luther’s petition to be secularised_: (Against
Kawerau, “Schriften d. Vereins f. Reformationsgesch.,” 1912). Though but
little notice has hitherto been taken of Oldecop’s narrative, yet there
is no solid ground for distrusting it. As we were careful to point out
(vol. i., p. 36, n. 1), he was indeed wrong in saying that Luther had
gone to Rome without his superiors’ authorisation, for the journey was
at least authorised by the seven priories whose representative Luther
was. Luther had, however, no authorisation to seek secularisation, nor
was his mission countenanced by the minister-general of the Augustinians.
This may have led Oldecop to suppose that his whole undertaking was
unauthorised. Regarding Jacob, the Jew mentioned in Oldecop’s account,
Kawerau (_ib._, p. 36) makes out a likely case for distinguishing him
from his German homonym with whom (vol. i., p. 37, n. 1) we tentatively
identified him.
_The outcome for the Order of Luther’s visit to Rome_: Under the
title “Aus den Actis generalatus Ægidii Viterbiensis,” G. Kawerau has
published in the “Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch.” (1911, p. 603 ff.) a few
short extracts from a MS. in the Royal Berlin Library. One of these
seems to bear on Luther’s mission from the seven priories opposed to
Staupitz: “_MDXI. Jan. Appellare ex legibus Germani prohibentur. Ut
res germanæ ad amorem et integram obedientiam redigerentur, Fr. Joh.
Germanus ad vicarium missus est._” Hence Luther’s appeal was prohibited,
nor had his mission the slightest support from Ægidius of Viterbo the
minister-general. That, on the contrary, he was opposed to the movement
then afoot against Staupitz, is also clear from the expression he uses on
March 18, 1511, viz. that “obedience to the Order and its head” must be
reintroduced into the German Congregation. At any earlier date (May 1,
1510) we are told that Staupitz himself had come to Rome “_[Germanicæ]
congregationis colla religionis iugo subiecturus._” His visit, however,
had nothing to do with the matter of the seven priories, but concerned
the general discipline of the Congregation.
3. Luther’s conception of “Observance” and his conflict with his brother
friars
What we said of Luther’s early antagonism to the Observantines in his
Order has been very diversely appreciated by Protestant experts. Kawerau
and Scheel, for instance, are of opinion that no proof is forthcoming of
the continuance of the conflict between Observantines and Conventuals.
On the other hand, A. Harnack, K. A. Meissinger and W. Braun hold
that the persistence of the conflict has been made out and that it
really formed one of the starting-points of Luther’s new conception of
faith. Modesty, however, dictates a protest on our part against being
considered the inventor of this explanation, for it had, even previously,
been suggested by Protestant scholars (cp. vol. i., p. 200, n. 3), though
they may not have used it to such purpose. Again, a word of warning
must be uttered against the supposition that, for instance as late as
1515-1516, there was still in Luther’s Congregation a clear-cut division
between those devoted to the “observance” and the others who inclined
to “Conventualism.” Of such a schism we hear no more after the Cologne
Chapter of 1512. Nevertheless, that the partisan spirit that had once
led to the appeal of the seven priories still smouldered, so much at
least seems obvious from those addresses and writings of Luther in which
he trounces the Pharisaism of certain members of his Congregation and
their attachment to their statutes, privileges and exemptions. It must
not be lost to sight that the Congregation to which Luther belonged was
in name and fact an “observantine” one, having been founded to promote
the stricter observance of the Augustinian Rule; for this reason it was
exempted from the jurisdiction of the German Provincial of the Order and
placed directly under the Roman minister-general, whose representative in
Germany was the Vicar.
Regarding the mediæval cleavage of several of the Orders into
Observantines and Conventuals we must be on our guard against flying
to the conclusion that all mere Conventuals were necessarily slack in
the performance of their duties. This was by no means the case; in
many localities the Franciscan Observantines, e.g. were scarcely more
zealous than the Franciscan Conventuals, though the latter had at an
early date mitigated their rule of poverty; much the same held good
among the Dominicans, Servites and Carmelites. In the event, so far as
the Augustinians are concerned, the Saxon Observantines, for all their
“observance,” were among the first to fall before the storm let loose
from Wittenberg, whereas the German Conventuals, under such worthy
provincials as Träger and Hoffmeister, showed themselves better able to
cope with the innovations. The Dominican Conventuals under a Vicar like
Johann Faber also furnished several protagonists of the faith.
* * * * *
In view of the doubts raised in certain quarters we shall now submit to a
closer scrutiny Luther’s utterances on the question of the “observance.”
On one occasion Luther complains of those who made so small account of
obedience, though this virtue was the very soul of good works:
“Tales hodie esse timendum est omnes observantes et exemptos sive
privilegiatos; qui quid noceant ecclesiæ nondum apparuit, licet factum
sit; apparebit autem tempore suo. Quærimus autem, cur sic eximi sibi
et dispensari in obedientia velint. Dicunt propter vitam regularem.
Sed hæc est lux angeli Satanæ.”
Obedience is something which cannot be dispensed (_non eximibilis_,
“Werke,” Weim. ed., 3, p. 155; O. Scheel, “Dokumente zu Luthers
Entwicklung,” 1911, p. 74 f.; above, vol. i., p. 68 f.). Truth, so Luther
argues, hides its face from the unwise and the particularist:
“Sic etiam omnibus superbis contingit et pertinacibus, superstitiosis,
rebellibus et inobedientibus, atque ut timeo et observantibus
nostris, qui sub specie regularis vitæ incurrunt inobedientiarn et
rebellionem.” (Weim. ed., 4, p. 83; above, vol. i., p. 69.)
In the former text he was speaking of “all Observantines,” here he
speaks of “ours,” presumably, of the more zealous Augustinians. These
“_observantes_” are the same opponents whom he goes on to describe as
“_superbi in sanctitate et observantia, qui destruunt humilitatem et
obedientiam_.” The real meaning here of the words “_observantia_” and
“_observare_” can scarcely escape the reader, particularly when Luther
couples this “observance” with disobedience to superiors. Thus he says:
“Nostris temporibus est pugna cum hypocritis et falsis fratribus, qui
de bonitate fidei pugnant, quam sibi arrogant, per observantias suas
iactantes suam sanctitatem.” (_Ib._, 4, p. 312.)
“_Observantia_” means of course outward practices, but there can be
little doubt that the word is here used in the more exclusive sense
defined in the text first quoted. Thus he denounces those who defend
their own “_traditiones et leges_,” which “_usque hodie statuere
conantur_”; those who busy themselves about ceremonies and the “_vanitas
observantiæ exterioris_”; he several times repeats the “_usque hodie_,”
as though to show that the practices he had in view were present ones.
(Cp. Weim. ed., 3, p. 61.)
It must be borne in mind that Luther delivered his Lectures on the
Psalms (in which most of the texts in question are found) to an audience
composed in the main of young Augustinians sent by the various priories
to prosecute their studies at Wittenberg. Some of these may well
have brought with them some of those stricter ideas which the seven
“Observantine” priories had once championed against Staupitz. To one,
who, as Luther now was, was against such ideas, it was an easy matter,
even though in itself wrong, to make the question one of obedience,
by urging either that their exemption from the jurisdiction of the
Provincial was irregular, or that Staupitz had now abandoned his one-time
projects.
Luther charges the other faction, not only with disobedience, but also
with pigheadedness, e.g. in refusing to conform to the usages of the
other priories, and in laying such stress on their own customs and
institutions.
“Nunc quam multi sunt, qui sibi spiritualissimi videntur et tamen sunt
sanguinicissimi, ut sic dixerim, verissimique Idumæi. Hi scilicet
qui suas professiones, suum ordinem, suos sanctos, sua instituta ita
venerantur et efferunt, ut omnium aliorum vel obfuscent vel nihil
ipsi curent, satis carnaliter suos patres observantes et iactantes;
(such was the New Judaism of those), qui suos conventus, suum ordinem
ideo laudant et ideo aliis præstare volunt ac nullo modo doceri, quia
magnos et sanctos viros habuerunt, quorum titulum, nomen et habitum
gestant, … O furor late regnans hodie! Ita nunc pene fit, ut quilibet
conventus contemnat alterius mores acceptare adeo superbe, ut sibi
dedecus putet, si ab alio, quam a se ipso doceatur aut recipiat.
Hæc vera superbia est Iudæorum et hæreticorum, in quo et nos heu
infelices comprehendimur. Quia cum in nullo similes patribus nostris
simus, solum de nomine et gloria eorum contra invicem contendimus et
superbimus.” (_Ib._, 3, p. 332.)
Though what Luther here says might be applied to other religious Orders,
yet it seems more natural to take it as referring chiefly to what was
going on in his own.
_Luther’s then Conception of Cloistral Life and Religious Mendicancy_:
Luther spoke very plainly about that part of the Rule which enjoined
mendicancy; as Conventuals no less than Observantines were bound to
observe this enactment it follows that Luther’s attack was directed,
not so much against the Observantines as such, as against any attempt
seriously to put in practice the Evangelical Counsels. Thus, in the
passage quoted above (vol. i., p. 71) he says: “_O mendicantes,
mendicantes, mendicantes! At excusat forte quod elemosynas propter Deum
recipitis et verbum Dei ac omnia gratis rependitis. Esto sane. Vos
videritis._” (Weim. ed., 3, p. 425.) Here, it is true, he is speaking of
the abuses to which the system led, yet he is also annoyed that their vow
of poverty should be the motive of their preaching: “_Horribilis furor et
cæca miseria, quod nunc nonnisi ex necessitate evangelizamus._”
Now, though these hasty words were open to a perfectly sound
interpretation, yet their effect must have been to arouse a certain
contempt for their calling in the minds of the young men to whom they
were spoken. At any rate Luther had then not yet lost his esteem for the
religious life, particularly as an incentive to humility and general
Godliness. (See vol. i., p. 218 f.)
It is scarcely necessary to say that the fact that, in 1518 (at
Augsburg), Staupitz released Luther “from the observance” has nothing
whatever to do with the question in hand. Luther says: “_me absolvit ab
observantia et regula ordinis_.” (Weim. ed., of the Table-Talk, 1, p.
96.) All that his superior did was to dispense him from his obligation
of carrying out outwardly the rule of the Order, e.g. from dressing as a
monk, etc. Even had Luther been a Conventual he could still have spoken
thus of his having been absolved from the “observance.” It may be that
Staupitz, for his own freedom of action, also absolved Luther from his
duty of obedience to him as Vicar. Even so, however, Luther remained an
Augustinian, returned to his monastery, wrote on behalf of the vows, and,
long after, still continued to wear the Augustinian habit.
* * * * *
One notice brought to light from the Weimar archives and published by
Kawerau (_loc. cit._, p. 68) is of interest. It deals with the practices
of the severer Observantine priories (about the year 1489) with which the
laxer members were later to find fault. Among their practices was that
of “not speaking at meal-time but of listening to a reader, of fasting
from All Hallows till Christmas (in addition to the other fasts), of
singing Matins every night, of abstaining from food and drink outside of
meal-time, and of holding a Chapter every Friday with public admission of
shortcomings and imposition of penance.”
4. Attack upon the “Self-righteous”
In 1516 Luther presided at Bernhardi’s Disputation, “_De viribus et
voluntate hominis sine gratia_.” (Above, vol. i., p. 310 f.) In the
letter to Lang about it he says that Bernhardi had held the debate
“_motus oblatratorum lectionum mearum garritu_.” Some opinions therein
put forward had much scandalised the adherents of Gabriel Biel (“_cum
et mei [Gabrielistæ] vehementer hucusque mirentur_”), but, at any rate,
the Disputation had served its purpose (“_ad obstruendum ora garrientium
vel ad audiendum iudicium aliorum_”). He goes on to speak of the
offence his denial of the authenticity of the tract “_De vera et falsa
pænitentia_”—hitherto ascribed to St. Augustine—had given at Wittenberg
(“_sane gravius offendi omnes_”). Mathesius (above, vol. i., p. 304)
also alludes to the opposition he encountered about this time among his
brethren. At any rate a few months later Luther could triumphantly tell
Lang:
“Theologia nostra et S. Augustinus prospere procedunt et regnant
in nostra universitate, Deo operante.… Mire fastidiuntur lectiones
sententiariæ, nec est ut quis sibi auditores sperare possit, nisi
theologiam hanc … velit profiteri.”
Before this, the young Professor (at Christmas, 1515) had told his
hearers, that, just as the Prophets, wise men and scribes had been
persecuted, so _he_ was being persecuted now:
“Sed state firmiter, neque moveatur ullus contradictionibus; sic enim
oportet fieri. Prophetæ, Sapientes, Scribæ, dum mittuntur ad iustos,
sanctos, pios, non recipiuntur ab ipsis sed occiduntur.”
The supposed “saints” he goes on to describe in their true character.
What they were bent on persecuting was really Grace, viz. what he
preaches under the figure of “Christ our mother-hen”:
“Superbi semper contra iustitiam Dei pugnant et stultitiam æstimant,
quæ sapientia [sic] eis mittitur; similiter veritas eis mendacium
videtur. Imo persequuntur et occidunt eos, qui veritatem dicunt. Sic
enim et ego semper prædico de _Christo, gallina nostra_. Efficitur
mihi errans et falsum dictum: ‘Vult Dominus esse gallina nostra ad
salutem, sed nos nolumus’.… Nolunt audire, quod iustitiæ eorum peccata
sint, quæ gallina egeant, imo quod peius est, versi in vultures etiam
ipsi alios a gallina rapere nituntur et persequuntur reliquos pullos.…
Sicut Iudæi … iustitiam statuentes quod sibi placuit, ita isti hoc
gratiam vocant quod ipsi somniant.” (Weim. ed., 1, p. 31.)
A few pages further on, the new Lutheran teaching on Grace is clearly
seen in its process of growth:
“Ecce impossibilis est lex propter carnem; verumtamen Christus
impletionem suam nobis impertit, dum se ipsum gallinam nobis exhibet,
ut sub alas eius confugiamus et per eius impletionem nos quoque legem
impleamus. O dulcis gallina, o beatos pullos huius gallinæ!” (P. 35.)
To the “vultures,” i.e. his opponents, he returns again in the same
lectures. They build only on their “_sapientia carnis_” when they set out
to gain what they consider to be virtue and the gifts of grace. (Weim.
ed., 1, pp. 61, 62, 70.)
“In his maxime pereunt [peccant?] hæretici et superbi, dum ea
pertinaciter diligunt, quasi ideo Deum diligant, quia hæc diligunt.
Inde enim zelant et furiunt, ubi reprehenduntur in istis, et defendunt
se ac zelum Dei sine scientia exercent.… Quantumlibet sapiant et bene
vivant, recte adhuc de sapientia carnis vivere dicendi sunt.… Servi
[superbi?] sine timore et occultissime superbi.… Talis est stultitia
hypocritarum de virtutibus et gratiis Dei, præsumentium se esse
integros et iustos.”
A trace of the antagonism within the Order is also found in the notes of
the sermons preached in the summer of 1516. On July 6, Luther speaks of
the greatest plague now rampant in the Church:
“Prosequimur, quæ incepimus, nam singularem illi tractatum quærunt,
cum non sit hodie pestis maior per ecclesiam ista peste hominum, qui
dicunt, ‘bonum oportet facere,’ nescire volentes, quid sit bonum vel
malum. Sunt enim inimici crucis Christi i.e. bonorum Dei.”
As we know, his theology was professedly the “theology of the cross.” As
for his foes, lay, clerical or monastic, their outward works were but the
lamb-skins concealing the wolves beneath:
“Ad alia vocati, quam quæ ipsi elegerunt, difficiles imo rebelles
sunt et contrarii, impatientes, [inclinati] detrahere ac iudicare,
alios negligere, contentiosi, opiniosæ cervicis, indomiti sensus,
ideo non pacifici, brevianimes, immansueti, duri, crudi. Hæc vitia et
opera interioris hominis _ovina veste_ contegunt, i.e. actionibus,
oblationibus, gestu, ceremoniis corporalibus, ita ut et sibi et aliis
simplicibus boni et iusti videantur.”
On July 27 he speaks of the “darts” which the foes let fly from their
ambush at those who are right of heart.
“Hæc ideo iam commemoro, quia iam accedo ad subtiliores homines et
invisibiles transgressores præcepti Dei et in abscondito peccantes et
sagittantes eos qui recte sint corde.”
In another sermon preached on the same day, speaking of the Pharisee and
the Publican, he says:
“Credo quod pauci timeant se pharisæo similes esse quem odiunt; sed
ego scio, quod plures ei similes sint.… Non præsumamus securi, quod
publicano similes simus.”
In this sentence, and elsewhere, stress should not be laid on the use of
the first person plural, as it is merely a rhetorical embellishment. The
Pharisee is the self-righteous man; he bears “_idolum iustitiæ suæ in
corde statutum_”; he refuses to be accounted a sinner, hence:
“incurrit in Christum, qui omnes peccatores suscepit in se. Et ideo
Christus iudicatur, accusatur, mordetur, quandocunque peccator
quicunque accusatur, etc. Qui autem Christum iudicat, suum iudicem
iudicat, Deum violenter negat. Vide quo perveniat furens et insipiens
superbia.”
This indeed, in itself, is all capable of a perfectly orthodox
interpretation, not, however, if we take it in conjunction with all
the circumstances. On Aug. 3, the preacher again inveighs against the
“_sensuales iustitiarii_,” who hang on their works and observances: This
is to remain
“… pueri abecedarii in isto statu; sed heu quam plurimi hodie in
illis indurantur, quia hæc putant esse seria, et magna ea æstimant.
[Tamen] qui Spiritu Dei aguntur, ubi didicerint exterioris hominis
disciplinas, non eas multum curant nisi ut præludium.”
True piety on the other hand consisted in allowing oneself to be ridden
by God. The man of God
“vadit quocumque eum Dominus suus equitat; nunquam scit quo vadat,
plus agitur quam agit, semper it et quomodocunque per aquam, per
lutum, per imbrem, per nivem, ventum, etc. Tales sunt homines Dei, qui
Spiritu Dei aguntur.”
The “holy-by-works” soil themselves with the seven deadly sins of the
spirit. Hence, let us not befoul ourselves by making a rock of the
“_opera iustitiæ_.” Let us leave that sort of thing to beginners to whom
indeed we may teach
“multis bonis operibus exercere et a malis abstinere secundum
sensibilem hominem, ut sunt [sic] ieiunare, vigilare, orare, laborare,
misereri, servire, obsequi, etc.”
These words must have been addressed to men with some theological
training, for, in this discourse, Luther dilates at some length on a text
of Alexander of Hales; doubtless those present were members of his Order;
but what then must we think of the teacher who thus proclaims a freedom
from all the observances and traditional rules by which his fellow-monks
were bound? Luther’s point of view was one, which, if adopted, spelt the
end not only of the Observantines but even of Conventualism. Hence it is
no wonder that it caused murmuring.
5. The collapse of the Augustinian Congregation
The fifth Council of the Lateran took measures against many abuses
which had crept in among the mendicant Orders, particularly among the
Hermits of St. Augustine. As we know, the German Congregation under
Staupitz and with Luther as Rural Vicar was no better off than the other
branches. It is from June 30, 1516, i.e. during the period of Luther’s
“vicariate” that we find a curious note in the “Acta Generalatus Ægidii
Viterbiensis.” (Above, p. 497.)
“Universo ordini significamus bellum nobis indictum ab episcopis in
concilio Lateranensi, ob idque nos reformationem indicimus omnibus
monasteriis.” [Cp. 2 Jan., 1517]. “Religioni universæ quæcunque
in concilio acta sunt contra mendicantes per litteras longissimas
significamus et reformationem exactissimam indicimus.”
In thus doing the Minister-General’s intention, to judge by the few
scraps his Acts contain, was to bring back his people “_ad communem
vitam_.” No doubt too many dispensations had been given for the sake
of making study easier, or for other reasons. The reader may remember
the incident (above, vol. i., p. 297, n. 1) of Gabriel Zwilling’s being
sent to Erfurt and the words used by Luther in his letter to Lang.
Zwilling, who, after leaving the Augustinians, became one of the Zwickau
“Prophets” but afterwards accepted an appointment as Lutheran minister
at Torgau, had joined the Augustinians in 1502 and matriculated at
Wittenberg University in 1512; hence he had already been sixteen years an
Augustinian at the time when Luther wrote that he had “not yet seen or
learnt the rites and usages of the Order.” Does not this seem to prove
that the Rule must have been greatly relaxed and that too many exceptions
were allowed in the common way of life? Luther himself, as we know, had
been dispensed in his student-days from attending Matins and had been
assigned a serving-brother; this is proved by the manuscript notes of
the Table-Talk made by Rörer. “_(Staupitzius) absolvit eum a matutinis
et addidit fratrem famulum._” (Kroker, “Archiv für Reformationsgesch.,”
1908, p. 370.) It has indeed been urged that Zwilling’s ignorance of
the “rites” was due to the smallness of the Wittenberg monastery.
But, as Luther wrote to Lang on Oct. 26, 1516, the house contained
“twenty-two priests, twelve students, and, in all, forty-one persons.”
(“Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 67). This was surely enough to allow of the
carrying out of the “rites and usages of the Order.” Zwilling, moreover,
was sent to Erfurt, not only to get a better insight into the ways of the
Order, but, mainly, to learn Greek: “_Ut et ipse et alii quam optime,
~i.e.~ christianiter, græcisent._”
6. _The Tower Incident_ (vol. I, pp. 388-400)
To avoid giving unnecessary offence we did not unduly insist on the
locality in which Luther professed to have received his chief revelation.
To have suppressed all mention of the locality would, however, have been
wrong seeing that the circumstance of place is here so closely bound up
with the historicity of the event. We, however, confined ourselves to
a bald statement and explanation of what is found in the sources, and
chose the most discreet heading possible for the section in question. In
spite of this, Adolf Harnack (“Theol. Literaturztng.,” 1911, p. 302),
dealing with our first volume, informed his readers that, on this point,
we had made our own “the olden fashion of vulgar Catholic polemics” and
had made of the “locality a capital question,” no doubt in the hope that
Catholic readers would take the matter very much as the olden Christians
took Arius’s death in the closet. Needless to say, what Harnack wrote was
repeated and aggravated by the lesser lights of German Protestantism. The
truest remark, however, made by Harnack in this connection, is that, the
actual “locality in which Luther first glimpsed this thought is of small
importance,” and that, even had I made out my case, “what would it really
matter?”
As to our authorities the chief one is Johann Schlaginhaufen’s notes of
Luther’s Table-Talk in which the words are related as having been spoken
some time between July and Sept., 1532.
_The forms in which Luther’s utterance has been handed down_: The
friends who, in 1532, either habitually or occasionally, attended at
Luther’s parties and noted down his sayings were three in number, viz.
Schlaginhaufen, Cordatus and Veit Dietrich. The (yet unpublished) notes
of the last as given in the Nuremberg MS. contain nothing about this
utterance. From Cordatus we have the version given below as No. III. But,
according to Preger, the editor of Schlaginhaufen, Cordatus “at this
time was no longer at Wittenberg”; if this be true, then what he says on
the subject must have come to him at second hand, though, otherwise, his
notes contain much valuable first-hand information. Nevertheless both
Preger and Kroker, two experts on the Table-Talk, are at one in arguing
that an attentive comparison of Cordatus’s notes with those of the other
guests, proves that Cordatus not seldom fails to keep closely enough
to Luther’s actual words and sometimes misses his real meaning, which
is less so the case with Schlaginhaufen. As for Lauterbach, as Kawerau
points out, he was not at that time a regular visitor at Luther’s house,
though we several times hear of his being present at the Table-Talk. It
is more than doubtful whether his version of the utterance in question
(given below as IV) was taken down from Luther’s lips. Moreover his
notes, as printed by Bindseil, often show traces of subsequent correction.
In Schlaginhaufen, on the other hand, we find throughout first-hand
matter, the freshness, disorder, and even faulty grammar, showing how
little it has been touched up by the collector’s hand. He was a personal
friend of Luther’s, and, whilst awaiting a call to the ministry, stayed
at the latter’s house from November, 1531, where he was always present
at the evening repast. Luther was aware that he was taking notes of
the conversations, and, on one occasion (Preger, p. 82) particularly
requested him to put down something. He was comforted in his anxieties by
Luther (above, vol. v., p. 327), nor, when he left Wittenberg at the end
of 1532 to become minister at Zahna, did he break his friendly relations
with Luther. He quitted Zahna in Dec., 1533, and took over the charge of
Köthen.
The notes of Schlaginhaufen made public by Preger in 1888 are not in his
own handwriting. The Munich codex (Clm. 943) used by Preger is rather the
copy made by some unknown person about 1551, written with a hasty hand,
and (as we were able to convince ourselves by personal inspection) by
one, who, in places, could not quite decipher the original (now lost).
There are, however, three other versions of Schlaginhaufen’s notes of
the utterance under consideration: That of Khummer (mentioned above,
vol. i., p. 396), that made in 1550 by George Steinhart, minister in the
Chemnitz superintendency, and that of Rörer, which, thanks to E. Kroker
the Leipzig city-librarian, we are now able to give. That of Steinhart
is found bound up in a Munich codex entitled “Dicta et facta Lutheri
et aliorum.” (Clm. 939, f., 10.) Steinhart evidently made diligent use
of the papers left by Schlaginhaufen, Lauterbach and others. Generally
speaking, his work is well done. Steinhart’s rendering of the utterance
in question agrees word for word with that of Khummer, though they both
differ from the Munich copy published by Preger and show it to be lacking
in some respects. Rörer’s text V, in many ways, stands by itself.
Khummer had fled from Austria on account of his Lutheran leanings and
gone to Wittenberg, where he matriculated on May 11, 1529. He was then
a fellow-student of Lauterbach. He is supposed to have been given by
Luther (between 1541 and 1545) charge of the parish of Ortrand, where
he still was in 1555 when the Visitors gave a good account of him. His
collection, now in the Royal Dresden Library, contains a copy (not all in
his own handwriting) made in 1554 from Lauterbach’s Diary (1538), and,
further, in the second part, this time all in his own handwriting, copies
of many things said by Luther at table. “We shall not be far wrong,” says
Seidemann (p. x.), “if we surmise that Khummer obtained his version from
Pirna [where Lauterbach had been superintendent since 1539].” Below we
give his version as printed in Seidemann (p. 81, n.):
_Luther’s words as they were heard by Schlaginhaufen_:
I. Copies of Steinhart (1550) and Khummer (1554):
“Hæc vocabula iustus et iustitia dei erant mihi fulmen in conscientia.
Mox reddebar pavidus auditor. Iustus, ergo punit. Sed cum semel in hac
turri speculabar de istis vocabulis Iustus ex fide vivit, iustitia
dei, mox cogitaveram, [Steinhart: cogitabam] si vivere debemus iusti
ex fide et iustitia dei debet esse ad salutem omni credenti, mox
erigebatur mihi animus. Ergo iustitia dei est, quæ nos iustificat et
salvat. Et facta sunt mihi hæc verba iucundiora, Dise khunst hat mir
der heilig geist aüff diser cloaca aüff dem Thorm (ein)gegeben.”[1662]
II. Anonymous Copy of (Preger) 1551:
“Hæc vocabula: iustus et iustitia erant mihi fulmen in conscientia.
Mox reddebar pavidus auditis: Iustus—ergo puniet, Iustus ex fide
vivit, Iustitia dei revelatur sine lege. Mox cogitabam, si vivere
debemus ex fide et si iustitia dei debet esse ad salutem omni
credenti, mox erigebatur mihi animus: ergo iustitia dei est, quo nos
iustificat et salvat, et facta sunt mihi hæc verba iucundiora. Dise
kunst hatt mir d[er] S[piritus] S[anctus] auf diss Cl. eingeben.”
Here the identical text of Khummer and Steinhart (I) supplies certain
missing parts in text II, and, as it is the more understandable of the
two, is more likely to represent the earlier form of Schlaginhaufen’s
rendering. Thus in text II, line 1-2, the word “_Dei_” after “_iustitia_”
is wrongly omitted; so also, the words “_Sed cum semel in hac turri
speculabar de istis vocabulis_,” or others to that effect, are required
to introduce the “_mox cogitabam_” a few lines below. Read alone the
“_Iustus ex fide_,” as in II, is not intelligible. In both I and II
there is, on the other hand, an omission, viz. after the words “_omni
credenti_” which III, IV and V seek to supply each in their own way.
Here we shall not be far wrong in assuming the omission to have been the
fault of the lost original of Schlaginhaufen of which they made use. The
fact that No. I here refrains from completing the passage is in itself
a testimony to its copyist’s integrity. Again, in the Steinhart-Khummer
version, the final allusion in the German words at the end to the “Thorm”
(tower) brings us back to the “_turris_” mentioned earlier. Now, what is
noteworthy, is that, at the conclusion of this version which seems the
better of the pair, the word “cloaca” is spelt out in full (as it also is
below, in Rörer’s copy).
In II, however, we find only the abbreviation “Cl.” Now, in the MS.
followed by the editor of text II, though we find a large number of
abbreviations, they are merely the ones in use in those times. “Cl.,”
however, is a most singular one, and, were it not explained by other
texts, would be very difficult to understand. Why then is it used? It can
hardly be merely from the desire to avoid using any word in the least
offensive to innocent ears, for, elsewhere, in the same pages (e.g. in
Preger’s edition, Nos. 364, 366, 375) the coarsest words are written
out in full without the slightest scruple. Hence in this connection
the copyist must have had a special reason to avoid spelling out so
comparatively harmless a word.
* * * * *
The remaining texts are those of Cordatus, Lauterbach and Rörer.
Cordatus was assigned too high a place by his modern editor, Wrampelmeyer
(1885). He had, indeed, his merits, but, as Preger points out, an
inspection of the many items he took from Schlaginhaufen shows him to
have been careless and often mistaken. Moreover, he has wantonly altered
the order of the utterances instead of retaining Schlaginhaufen’s
chronological one. Those utterances which he had not heard himself (such
as the one in question) have naturally suffered most at his hands. As
for Lauterbach’s so-called “Colloquia” preserved at Gotha (ed. H. E.
Bindseil), it also betrays signs of being a revision and rearrangement of
matter collected together or heard personally by this most industrious of
all the compilers of Luther’s sayings. Whether Lauterbach was actually
present on the occasion in question cannot be told, but it seems scarcely
likely that he was if we compare his account carefully with that of
Schlaginhaufen. On Rörer’s connection with Schlaginhaufen, see Kroker,
“Archiv für Reformationsgesch.,” 7, 1910, p. 56 ff.
_Luther’s words in the revised form_:
III. Cordatus 1537 (Wrampelmeyer, p. 423, No. 1571):
“Hæc vocabula iustus et iusticia in papatu fulmen mihi erant
conscientia, et ad solum auditum terrebant me. Sed cum semel in hac
turri (in qua secretus locus erat monachorum) specularer de istis
vocabulis Iustus ex fide vivit et Iusticia dei, etc. obiter veniebat
in mentem: Si vivere debemus iusti fide propter iusticiam et illa
iusticia Dei est ad salutem omni credenti, ergo ex fide est iusticia
et ex iusticia vita. Et erigebatur mihi conscientia mea et animus
meus, et certus reddebar, iusticiam dei esse quæ nos iustificaret et
salvaret. Ac statim fiebant mihi hæc verba dulcia et iucunda verba.
Diesze kunst hatt mir der heilige geist auff diesem thurm geben.”
IV. Lauterbach c. 1559 (Bindseil, 1, p. 52):
“Nam hæc verba iustus et iustitia Dei erant mihi fulmen in
consciencia, quibus auditis expavescebam. Si Deus est iustus, ergo
puniet. Sed Dei gratia cum semel in hac turri et hypocausto specularer
de istis vocabulis Iustus ex fide vivit et Iustitia Dei, mox
cogitabam: Si vivere debemus iusti ex fide et iustitia Dei debet esse
ad salutem omni credenti, non erit meritum nostrum, sed misericordia
Dei. Ita erigebatur animus meus. Nam iustitia Dei est qua nos
iustificamur et salvamur per Christum, et illa verba facta sunt mihi
iucundiora. Die Schriefft hat mir der heilige geist in diesem thuen
[thurm] offenbaret.”
V. Rörer (Jena, Bos. q. 24 s, Bl. 117´, 118):
“Vocabula hæc iustus, misericordia erant mihi in conscientia
tristitia. Nam his auditis mox incutiebatur terror: Si Deus est
iustus, ergo puniet, etc. Cum autem diligentius cogitarem de
significatione et iam incideret locus Hab. 2: Iustus ex fide vivet,
item Iustitia Dei revelatur sine lege, cœpi mutare sententiam: Si
vivere debemus ex fide, et si iustitia Dei est ad salutem omni
credenti, non terrent, sed maxime consolantur peccatores hi loci.
Ita confirmatus cogitavi certo iustitiam Dei esse, non qua punit
peccatores, sed qua iustificat et salvos (salvat) peccatores
pœnitentiam agentes. Diese Kunst hat mir der Geist Gottes auf dieser
cloaca [in horto] eingeben.”
It will be noticed that III and IV resemble each other and both conclude
with a mention of the tower (as in Schlaginhaufen I). At the beginning,
however, each adds a few words of his own not found in Schlaginhaufen.
Cordatus adds a parenthesis about the “_locus secretus_,” i.e. privy
(whether the marks of parenthesis are merely the work of the editor we
cannot say, nor whether the parenthetic sentence is supposed to represent
Luther’s actual words or is an explanation given by Cordatus himself). At
any rate the words really add nothing new to Schlaginhaufen’s account,
if we bear in mind the latter’s allusion at the end to the “cloaca” and
the fact that Cordatus omits to refer to this place at the end of his
account. Hence we seem to have a simple transposition. As to why Cordatus
should have transposed the words, we may not unreasonably conjecture
that, in his estimation, they stood in the earlier form in too unpleasant
proximity with the reception of the revelation.
Lauterbach’s text, even if we overlook the words it adds after
“_credenti_,” betrays an effort after literary polish; it can scarcely
be an independent account and most likely rests on Schlaginhaufen. One
allusion is, however, of importance, viz. the words “_in hac turri et
~[in Rebenstock’s version: _vel_]~ hypocausto_” which here replace the
mention of the cloaca or privy. Here the “_hypocaustum_” signifies either
a heating apparatus or a heated room.
In Rörer the whole text has been still further polished up. He agrees
with II in leaving out the “_in hac turri_,” but, with I, in introducing
the “cloaca” at the end. The words “_in horto_” which are inserted in
his handwriting just above would seem to be his own addition due to his
knowledge of the spot (the tower really stood partly in the garden).
_Other interpretations of the texts in question_: Kawerau (p. 62 f.)
takes Lauterbach’s “_hypocaustum_” to refer to Luther’s workroom in
the tower, which Luther had retained since his monkish years and from
which “he stormed the Papacy.” Unfortunately, in the references given by
Kawerau, we find no allusion to any such prolonged residence in a room in
the tower.
Luther himself once casually alludes to two different “_hypocausta_”
(or warmed rooms) in the monastery. According to a letter dated in
Nov., 1527 (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 117), whilst the Plague was raging,
he put up his ailing son Hans in “_meo hypocausto_,” whilst the wife of
Augustine Schurf, the professor of medicine, when she was supposed to
have contracted the malady, was also accommodated in a “_hypocaustum_”
of her own. For another sick lady, Margareta von Mochau, he found room
“_in hybernaculo nostro usitato_,” and, with his family, took up his
own lodgings “_in anteriore magna aula_.” Hans’s “_hypocaustum_” was
probably the traditional room furnished with a stove still shown to-day
as Luther’s (Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 491). Unfortunately this room is
not near the town-wall, or the tower, but on the opposite side of the
building. There is another allusion elsewhere (Feb. 14, 1546, “Briefe,”
5, p. 791) to a “_hypocaustum_,” but, there again, no reference is made
to its being situated in the tower.
An undated saying in Aurifaber’s German Table-Talk, in which Luther
expresses a fear for the future of his “poor little room” “from which I
stormed the Pope” (Erl. ed., 62, p. 209; Förstemann, 4, p. 474) might
refer to any room. As a monk Luther is not likely to have had a warmed
cell of his own but merely the use of the common-room of the community.
He himself speaks of what he suffered from the cold (above, p. 194);
elsewhere he tells us of the noise once made by the devil “in the
chimney” of the refectory (above, p. 125) to which Luther had betaken
himself to prepare his lecture, presumably for the sake of more warmth.
In vol. i. (p. 397) we perhaps too hastily assumed the “necessary
building” to have been a privy which Luther, in 1519, asked permission to
erect. It may even have been the “pleasant room overlooking the water” in
which Luther “drank and made merry”—to the great disgust of the fanatic
Ickelsamer. (See above, vol. iii., p. 302.) Being new it would no doubt
have been “pleasant” and no doubt, too, it also had a fire-place. It
may be conjectured that, possibly Lauterbach, with his allusion to the
“tower” and the “_hypocaustum_” was intending to suggest this room as the
scene of the revelation rather than the more ignoble locality of which
Cordatus speaks.
* * * * *
Others have sought to escape the disagreeable meaning of the text in
other ways. Wrampelmeyer interpreted it figuratively: The tower was
Popery and the “_hypocaustum_” Luther’s spiritual “sweat bath.” Preger
did much the same and even more. He says: “I hold that ‘Cl.,’ from which
abbreviation the other readings seem to have sprung[!], stands for
‘Capitel’ [i.e. chapter].” Even Harnack inclines to this latter view.
The meaning would then be: “This art the Holy Ghost revealed unto me
on this chapter” (of the Epistle to the Romans). But, apart from the
clumsiness of such a construction, as it was pointed out by Kawerau, such
an abbreviation as “Cl.” for “capitel” or “capitulum” is unheard of. With
even less reason Scheel tentatively makes the suggestion to read “Cl.” as
“claustrum,” or “cella.”
Kawerau admits that “Cl.” stands for “cloaca,” but he urges that it
arose through a misunderstanding on Schlaginhaufen’s part of Cordatus’s
“_secretus locus_”—as though Schlaginhaufen was likely to depend on
second-hand information regarding an utterance he had heard himself.
Kawerau further points out, that the locality in which the revelation
was received is, after all, of no great moment, that “the stable at
Bethlehem was not unworthy of witnessing God’s revelation in Christ”;
Scheel, likewise, asks whether all Christians, even those of the Roman
persuasion, do not believe that God is present everywhere? They certainly
do, and nothing could have been further from our intentions than any wish
to prejudice the case by making the locality of the incident a “capital
question.” Had Luther received his supposed revelation on Mount Thabor,
or on Sinai, or before the altar of the Schlosskirche we can assure our
critics that we should have faithfully recorded the testimonies with the
same regard for historical truth.
7. The Indulgence-Theses
In vol. i. (p. 332) and vol. ii. (p. 16) we insinuated that Luther
wilfully concealed the true character of his 95 Theses. Whereas, in
reality, his system had no room for Indulgences at all, in the Theses he
chose to veil his opinions under an hypothetical form. It has, however,
been objected that Luther’s letters to Spalatin and to Scheurl, of Feb.
15 and March 5, 1518, prove that his views were not yet fixed.
But this is scarcely a true presentment of the case. In his private
letter to Spalatin he openly brands Indulgences as an “illusion.”
“Dicam primum tibi soli et amicis nostris, donec res publicetur, mihi
in indulgentiis hodie videri non esse nisi animarum illusionem et
nihil prorsus utiles esse nisi stertentibus et pigris in via Christi.…
Huius illusionis sustollendæ gratia ego veritatis amore in eum
disputationis periculosum labyrinthum dedi me ipsum.”
He tells Spalatin not to bother about gaining Indulgences but rather
to give his money to the poor, otherwise he will deserve the wrath of
God. All would be demonstrated in the forthcoming “Resolutiones”; only
the “_ipsa rudiores ruditate_” still assail him as a heretic, etc.
(“Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 155.) From these words his true opinion emerges
clearly enough, in spite of the previous ones: “_Hæc res in dubio adhuc
pendet et mea disputatio inter calumnias fluctuat_,” and in spite, too,
of his assurance to the Court-preacher, that he had not the slightest
wish to bring the Prince under any suspicion of being unfriendly to the
Church.
As to the letter sent a fortnight later to Scheurl at Nuremberg, the
historian must bear in mind the effect it was calculated by Luther to
produce at Nuremberg, where some were evidently inclined to find fault
with the Theses. In this letter, just as he does in his letter to Bishop
Scultetus (above, vol. ii., p. 16) Luther makes out the Theses to be
quite innocent, almost impartial, and, moreover, in no wise intended for
the outside public. They were to be the subject-matter of a Disputation,
“_ut multorum iudicio vel damnatæ abolerentur vel probatæ ederentur_.”
He is sorry now that they were made so public. “_Sunt enim nonnulla mihi
dubia, longeque aliter et certius quædam asseruissem vel omisissem, si
id ~[their publication]~ futurum sperassem._” He also adds: “_Mihi sane
non est dubium, decipi populum, non per indulgentias, sed usum earum_”
(“Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 166.) Here he seeks to depict his downright
antagonism to Indulgences as such, as merely directed against their abuse.
8. The Temptations at the Wartburg
Luther writes to Melanchthon (July 13, 1521): “_Carnis meæ indomitæ
uror magnis ignibus; summa, qui fervere spiritu debeo, ferveo carne,
libidine, pigritia, otio_.” He adds that for a whole week he had been
“_tentationibus carnis vexatus_,” and concludes: “_Ora pro me, peccatis
enim immergor in hac solitudine_.” In his letter of Nov. 1, 1521, to Nic.
Gerbel, the temptations are also alluded to, but less clearly qualified.
“Mille credas me satanibus obiectum in hac otiosa solitudine. Tanto
est facilius adversus incarnatum diabolum, id est adversus homines,
quam adversus spiritualia nequitiæ in cœlestibus pugnare. Sæpius ego
cado, sed sustentat me rursus dextra excelsi.”
Though, in the former text, there is undoubtedly an element of
exaggeration (as we pointed out, vol. ii., p. 88), yet there can be no
question that his main complaint relates to temptations of the flesh and
that it is in their regard that he asks for prayers of his friends.
9. Prayer at the Wartburg
Against us it has been said that we were too disposed to make of Luther a
“prayerless” man. One critic, in proof of Luther’s prayerfulness, points
out that, in his Wartburg letters, Luther uses the word “Amen” no less
than thirteen times in the text, apart from its use at the end of the
letters. Now, in all the Epistles of St. Paul—which cover far more paper
than these Wartburg letters—the word “Amen” occurs in the text only
eleven times. But, notoriously, Luther was accustomed to use this word in
rather unusual connections, as he does for instance when speaking of the
wife of the “_theologus coniugatus_” Johann Agricola (“_Dominus det, ut
uteri onus feliciter exponat. Amen._” “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 151).
Moreover, Luther’s prayers were very peculiar. We hear nothing of his
having used his enforced stay at the Wartburg to ask of God whether the
path he had chosen was the right one, and for the grace to carry out, not
his own will, but that of God. In the interests of his new doctrine, he
is, however, “_paratus ire quo Dominus volet, sive ad vos sive alio_.”
(“Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 193.) He asks a friend to pray “_ut non deficiat
fides mea in Domino_,” i.e. that his views may not change (_ib._, p.
214); “_commenda, quæso, tuis orationibus Deo causam nostram_.” (_Ib._,
p. 324.) Elsewhere he writes:
“Benedictus Deus, qui nobis eam non solum dedit colluctationem
adversus spiritualia nequitiæ, insuper revelavit nobis, non esse
carnem aut sanguinem, a quibus oppugnamur in ista causa.… Satan furit
in sapientibus et iustis suis.…”
above all, in Emser, whom he calls a “_vas diaboli proprie obsessum_.”
(_Ib._, 3, p. 197.)
10. Luther’s state during his stay at the Coburg
In addition to the troubles mentioned in vol. ii., p. 390, which tended
to depress Luther at the Coburg there were yet others. He felt keenly
the separation from his family and from those with whom he had been
accustomed to work. His father’s death was also a cause of sadness to
him. Finally the difficulties of corresponding with his friends at
Augsburg were responsible for his being often in a state of uncertainty
as to what was going on at the Diet.
11. Luther’s moral character
Exception has been taken to our interpretation (vol. ii., p. 161, n. 1)
of a certain utterance of Luther’s. In the “Comment. on Galat.,” 1, p.
107 _sq._, he says:
“zelavi pro papisticis legibus … conatus sum eas præstare plus
inedia, vigiliis, etc., … Bono zelo et ad gloriam Dei feci … [Yet]
in monachatu Christum quotidie crucifixi et falsa mea fiducia, quæ
tum perpetuo adhærebat mihi, blasphemavi. Externe non eram sicut
ceteri homines, raptores, iniusti, adulteri, sed servabam castitatem,
obedientiam et paupertatem, denique totus eram deditus ieiuniis,
vigiliis, etc. Interim tamen sub ista sanctitate et fiducia iustitiæ
propriæ alebam … odium et blasphemiam Dei.”
But, in these words written in his old age, he is not witnessing to his
virtuous life in former days, but, on the contrary, he is striving to
show that, for all its outward propriety, it was the merest blasphemy.
Moreover, the words “_servabam … obedientiam_,” etc., cannot be taken too
literally, as Luther himself elsewhere admits that he was careless about
the Office, though this was a matter on which the Rule was very severe.
A more appropriate self-justification would be the utterance recorded in
Veit Dietrich’s MS. of the Table-Talk (Bl. 83) which begins: “_Monachus
ego non sensi multam libidinem_.”
A man’s speech is in some sense an index to his character. Our volumes
teem with samples of the filthy expressions to which Luther was addicted.
No theologian or preacher had hitherto dared to speak as he did; the
Franciscans Johann Pauli and Thomas Murner—albeit by no means too
particular—certainly cannot compare with Luther on this score. Moreover,
it should not be forgotten that Luther uses such language chiefly as a
weapon against his Catholic foes without, and the Protestant “sectarians”
within. In his polemics, insults and foul speaking go hand in hand, and
the greater his wrath the fouler his speech.
In connection with one instance of his use of unseemly comparisons when
(above, vol. ii., p. 144) we spoke of his allusion to the “Bride of
Orlamünde” we were not aware that—as Kawerau now points out—Staupitz,
his old superior, had described in very free language the nature of the
union between the soul and her divine Bridegroom. (“Von der endlichen
Vollziehung ewiger Fürsehung,” 1516.) Such mystical effusions were very
apt to be misinterpreted by the unlearned fanatics, whom Luther ridicules.
12. Luther’s views on lies
That Luther believed in the permissibility of “lies of convenience”
is fairly evident. (Cp. above, vol. iv., p. 108 ff.) The “_mendacium
officiosum_” is an “_honestum et pium mendacium_”; it is useful and
wholesome; “_si hoc peccatum esset, ut non puto_, etc.” In “Opp. lat.
exeg.,” 6, p. 289, speaking of Isaac’s statement that Rebecca was his
sister, he says: “_non est peccatum, sed est officiosum mendacium_.” But,
if it be no sin, then, presumably, it is allowed.
It is true that Luther speaks of Isaac’s untruth as an “_infirmitas_,”
but, by this, he does not mean a “venial sin,” rather he is alluding to
the “_infirmitas fidei_,” which, in Isaac’s case was the cause of his
untruth. Hence Isaac’s untruth, according to Luther, comes under the
category of the
“mendacium officiosum, quo saluti, famæ corporis [corpori?] vel animæ
consulitur; e contra perniciosum (mendacium) petit ista omnia, sicut
officiosum defendit [quod est] pulcherrima defensio contra periculum
animæ, corporis, rerum.”
Hence the “_mendacium officiosum_,” far from being a sin, is an
“_officium caritatis_,” i.e. to tell one is “_servare, non transgredi,
præcepta Dei_.” (_Ib._, p. 288 _sq._)
Even another text which has been quoted to the opposite effect must mean
much the same. Luther says:
“quod non offendatur Deus, sive constanter confitearis, id quod
heroicum est, sive infirmus sis; dissimulat enim et connivet. Atque
ex eo perspicimus nos habere propitium Deum, qui potest ignoscere
et connivere ad infirmitates nostras, remittere peccata, tantum non
perniciose mentiamur … nec proprie sed æquivoce et abusive mendacium
dicitur quia est pulcherrima defensio contra periculum animæ corporis
et rerum.” (_Ib._, p. 288.)
Here the word “_peccata_” cannot well include such untruths since he
distinctly affirms that such “infirmities” “do not offend God.”
Moreover, since, as we know, Luther admits no distinction between mortal
and venial sins, holds that all sins “_ex natura et substantia peccati_”
are equal, and makes no allowance for “_parvitas materiæ_,” it follows
that, even if such untruths as those of Isaac, the Egyptian midwife,
etc., are “infirmities,” yet, since they are not mortal, they are not
sins at all.
In “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 3, pp. 140-143, Luther distinguishes the “_iocosum
mendacium_”—which is merely a “_grammaticum peccatum_”—and the
“_officiosum mendacium_”—such as was Christ’s on the road to Emaus—from
the true lie: “_Revera unum tantum mendacii genus est, quod nocet
proximo_.”
That Luther himself quite realised the novelty of his teaching, comes
out clearly enough in the fragmentary notes of a sermon preached on Jan.
5, 1528, i.e. on the eve of the feast of the Three Kings. The reporter’s
notes are as usual partly in Latin partly in the vernacular.
“Hujusmodi officiosa mendacia, charitable lies, in which I lie for
someone else’s sake, non incommodat, but rather does him a service.
Sic filia Saul.… Illi [magi] mentiuntur, quia sciunt eius object to
be murderous, et tamen non est mendacium, quia quando aliquid loquor
ex bono corde, non est.… Ergo mendacium [est] quando my heart is bad
and false erga proximum.… Si etiam seduxissem [misled others], how I
should rejoice over my trickery, si ita ad salutem seducerem homines.…
Monachi in totum volunt dici veritatem. Sed audistis, etc.” (Weim.
ed., 27, p. 12.)
Hence, as the concluding words show, Luther was of opinion that the
“monks” went too far in insisting on the truth everywhere.
* * * * *
Elsewhere Luther is disposed to follow the teaching of his Nominalist
masters and to see in certain apparent lies (e.g. in that told by Abraham
about his “sister” Sara) the result of divine inspiration. (Cp. “Opp.
lat. exeg.,” 3, p. 142 _sq._) “_Hoc ipsum consilium ex fide firmissima
et ex Spiritu Sancto fuisse profectum iudicem._” Abraham was moved by
the Holy Ghost to take steps to save his person and thus ensure the
fulfilment of the Divine promises made to his posterity. “_Quæ fiunt ad
gloriam Dei et verbum eius ornandum et commendandum, hæc recte fiunt et
merito laudantur._”
Gabriel Biel, a representative Nominalist, admits that a sort of
inspiration may sometimes make lawful what God has forbidden: He says,
e.g.:
“Nam lex [non mentiendi] quantum ad id, ubi concurrit familiare
consilium Spiritus Sancti, per ipsum Spiritus Sancti consilium
revocatur, et ita non erit contra conclusionem et, ubicunque cum
mendacio, secundo modo accepto, concurrit consilium Spiritus Sancti,
ibi excusatur a peccato; et per hoc multa mendacia excusari possent.”
(In III Sent. dist. 38, q. unica.)
Biel appeals to St. Augustine’s excuse of Jacob’s lie to his father
Isaac, and then proceeds to justify it on Nominalist grounds; the
“_potentia Dei absoluta_” can make lies lawful; by virtue of this
“_potentia_” the Holy Ghost, in such inspired cases, can suspend for the
while the prohibition. Biel himself had only the Old Testament instances
in view, but the theory was a dangerous one.
13. Luther’s lack of the missionary spirit
Walter Köhler in his article “Reformation und Mission” (in the Swiss
“Theologische Zeitschrift,” 1911, pp. 49-60) seeks to find the reason for
the Reformers’ lack of interest in the Missions. (See above, vol. iii.,
p. 213 ff.) It cannot be simply because they were too busy with Rome,
for this might indeed explain their not sending out missionaries but not
the fact that even the thought of so doing never occurred to them. Yet a
movement which professed to be Evangelical and to take as its standard
the Apostolic Church should surely have concerned itself more about the
heathen.
Against those who argue that the absence of missionary effort was due to
Luther’s eschatological expectations and his belief in the nearness of
the Last Day, Köhler points out that the teaching of history rather shows
that such expectations, far from hindering, tend to promote missionary
work. He alludes, for instance, to the rapid spread of Christianity at
a time when the Second Coming was thought so near. He might also have
referred to the case of St. Gregory the Great, who, though he believed
the end of the world to be imminent, did not scruple to send his
missionaries to England.
Others have said that the Reformers had no knowledge of the number of the
heathen. But, as Köhler urges, though their knowledge was small compared
with ours, yet they were not wholly ignorant of the state of things. They
had at least heard of the discovery of America, as we see, for instance,
from a sermon of Luther (Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 21), where he says:
“Quite recently many islands and lands have been found, to which, so far,
in fifteen hundred years, nothing of this grace (of the Gospel) has been
proclaimed.”
The real reason is found by Köhler in the exegesis and theology of the
Reformers: Luther, for instance, opined that the Apostles alone had been
commanded to carry the Gospel throughout the world. He also followed the
olden view that the Apostles had actually preached the Gospel to the very
ends of the earth. Hence, since Apostolic times, no one is any longer
under any obligation to preach Christ everywhere; we are now no longer
apostles, but merely parish-priests.
His theology also comes into play in this. For God alone calls men to
faith and salvation; He it is Who assembles His elect from among the
heathen. But if it is God alone who arouses the faith in helpless man,
then organised activity is useless. True to his principles the Reformer
left the conversion of the heathen in the hands of God. To him an
organised mission would have seemed to partake of the evil nature of
work-service.
14. Notes
In vol. iv., p. 90 the author rather too hastily expresses wonder that
Luther should have spoken of Pope Alexander VI as an “unbelieving
Marane.” Luther, however, in so doing was merely re-echoing what had been
said in Rome. Cp. Pastor, “History of the Popes” (Engl. Trans., vol. vi.,
p. 137): “When Julius II, who was an implacable enemy of the Borgia,
occupied the Papal Chair, it became usual to speak of Alexander as a
‘Maraña.’” Cp. also, _ib._, p. 217 f. “His [Julius’s] dislike for this
family was so strong that on the 26th of November, 1507, he announced
that he would no longer inhabit the Appartamento Borgia, as he could not
bear to be constantly reminded by the fresco portraits of Alexander of
‘those Marañas of cursed memory.’” (Note of the English Editor.)
* * * * *
In connection with the bishopric of Meissen (above, vol. v., p. 200 ff.,
etc.) we may quote a few words from the correspondence of its occupant.
They will show how the Bishops, while taking no steps themselves, were
vexed with the Pope and Kaiser for doing so little to obviate the
danger to religion. Johann von Maltitz, Bishop of Meissen, wrote on
Oct. 16, 1540, as follows to Johann Fabri, Bishop of Vienna (Cardauns,
“Nuntiaturberichte,” 6, p. 233):
“Nihil imprimitur contra hanc sectam [Lutheranam] nec quisquam tale
quid vendere audet, nam cum magna potentia regunt, quibus contra ne
mutire quisquam aliquid audet, et quidquid visitatores et Lutherus in
rebus spiritualibus ordinant, id exequi et servari per omnes debet et
episcopi mandata nihil efficiunt.”
On Dec. 10, 1540, he wrote to the same correspondent:
“Martini Lutheri secta egregie suum processum habet quotidieque
augetur; timeo iram Dei super papam, Cæs. ac Regiam Mᵗᵉᵐ, quod
eorum temporibus ac regimine religionem ita decrescere supprimique
patiuntur, et Sᵗⁱ S. Maiestatibusque illorum iocose objicietur, esse
adhuc pios aliquot homines, qui obedientes essent, si modo haberent,
qui eos ita defenderet. Videmus autem, quod quicquid Lutherani
præsumunt, id patitur et locum habet et quod plures religionis sectæ
efflagitantur ac dantur quam obedientiæ (sic). Misniæ adhuc nulla
divina exequi audemus. Intrusus est nobis vi in nostram ecclesiam
quidam Lutheranus concionator.… Sane ferme in omnibus locis male
agitur quantum ad religionem.” (_Ib._, p. 237 f.)
FOOTNOTES
[1] “An die Radherrn aller Stedte deutsches Lands das sie Christl.
Schulen auffrichten und halten sollen.” “Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 9 ff.;
Erl. ed., 22, p. 170 ff.
[2] Weim. ed., 15, pp. 30, 34, 35 f.; Erl. ed., pp. 22, 173, 178, 180 f.
[3] In such passages “beast” more often merely implies stupidity; cp.
“bête” in French. Hence it would be a mistake to think that Luther is
here crediting the Germans with any actual “bestiality.” Cp. below, p. 15
and above, vol. v., p. 534, n. 2.
[4] Weim. ed., 15, p. 44; Erl. ed., 22, p. 189.
[5] “De constituendis scholis,” etc.
[6] Weim. ed., 15, p. 53; Erl. ed., 22, p. 198.
[7] A schoolmaster of Zwickau remarked on the writing to the Councillors:
“With this pamphlet Luther will win back the favour of many of his
opponents.” Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 548.
[8] Erl. ed., 14², pp. 390, 389.
[9] Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 519 f.; Erl. ed., 17², p. 381, in “Das man
Kinder,” etc. The object of furthering the Evangel which is set forth in
both this and the former writing is indicated by the very title of the
first writing with its reference to “Christian” schools.
[10] _Ib._, p. 518=379, in the writing mentioned below. See, however,
below, p. 36.
[11] _Ib._, p. 519=380.
[12] “Predigt, das man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle.” Weim. ed.,
30, 2, p. 508 ff.; Erl. ed., 17², p. 378 ff. As early as July 5, 1530,
Luther wrote from the Coburg to Melanchthon that he was “meditating”
this writing and adds: “_Mirum, si etiam antea fui tam verbosus, ut nunc
fieri mihi videor, nisi senectutis ista garrulitas sit_.” It is curious
to hear him already speaking of his old age. When sending the finished
work to Melanchthon on Aug. 24, 1530, he wrote: “_Mitto hic sermonem de
scholis, plane Lutheranum et Lutheri verbositate nihil auctorem suum
negans, sed plane referens. Sic sum. Idem erit libellus de clavibus_”
(“Briefwechsel,” 8, pp. 80, 204). The latter remark certainly applies to
his long writing, “Von den Schlüsseln,” 1530 (Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 428
ff.; Erl. ed., 31, p. 126 ff.).
[13] Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 519; Erl. ed., 17², p. 381.
[14] P. 554=401, 402.
[15] Pp. 556, 559=403, 404.
[16] P. 586=420 f.
[17] P. 587=421.
[18] _Ib._, 15, p. 34=22, p. 178.
[19] “Reformation und Gegenreformation” (W. Möller, “Lehrb. der KG.”),
3³, p. 437, No. 2.
[20] Cp. Kawerau, _ib._
[21] “Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts,” etc., 1², 1896, p. 197.
[22] See below, p. 20, n. 3.
[23] See above, vol. iii., p. 361.
[24] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 15: “_Scholæ crescentes verbi Dei
sunt fructus_,” says Luther, “_et ecclesiarum seminaria_”; if these
are furthered, then, so God will, things will be in a better case (in
Rebenstock: “_Hæc si promoveantur, tunc Deo volente, nostrum inceptum
meliorem habebit progressum_”). _Ib._, p. 14: Although the work of
the schools was performed quietly, “_attamen magnum fructum exhibent,
ex quibus ecclesiæ conservatio consistit.… Inde collaboratores et
ludimagistri vocantur ad ministerium ecclesiæ_.”—Cp. Mathesius,
“Tischreden” (Kroker), p. 208: “Wretched parsonages are not the place
for schoolmasters”; they deserve to be superintendents and to rule over
others. _Ib._, p. 213 on the importance of the schools.
[25] Weim. ed., 15, p. 29 f.; Erl. ed., 22, p. 173.
[26] _Ib._, p. 35 f.=175.
[27] See also above, n. 1.
[28] Proofs in G. Rietschel, “Luther und die Ordination,” ², 1889. Cp.
Paulsen, p. 203.
[29] Weim. ed., 15, p. 47 f.; Erl. ed., 22, p. 193.
[30] _Ib._, p. 40=185.
[31] _Ib._, p. 53=198.
[32] _Ib._, 30, 2, p. 588=17², p. 421 f.
[33] See above, p. 6, n. 3.
[34] Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 582; Erl. ed., 17², p. 418.
[35] _Ib._, p. 584=419.
[36] P. 530=387.
[37] Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 456; Erl. ed., 17², p. 396.
[38] P. 586=421.
[39] _Ib._, 15, p. 36 f.=22, p. 181 f.
[40] Cp. F. M. Schiele, in H. Delbrück, “Preuss. Jahrbücher,” 132, 1908,
Art. “Luther und das Luthertum in ihrer Bedeutung für die Gesch. der
Schüle und der Erziehung,” p. 381 ff. P. 386: “The principal motive with
Melanchthon … is the love of learning, Luther’s motive [in the above
writings] is to educate leaders for Christendom who shall deliver her
from the unholy abominations of the olden days.… With this is connected
the fact that for him ‘government,’ whether exercised by the sovereign,
the bishop, or the father of the family, is a work of charity.” P.
384: According to Luther “the erection of schools must always remain a
matter which concerns the Christian authorities.” To those historians of
education, who, according to Schiele, are wont to ask: “Was not Luther
the father of the national schools?” he replies: “The matter wears
a different aspect when viewed in the light of history.” He roundly
describes as fabulous the supposed foundation of the national schools
by Luther. “Nor do we find in Luther’s schemes for the organisation of
education the slightest trace of any tendency to the secularisation of
the schools” (pp. 384, 381 f.). The last words are aimed at the friends
of the secularised or undenominational schools of the present day.
[41] In the Introduction to the Weimar edition of the writing “An die
Radherrn” (15, 1899, p. 9 ff.) we read: “It is very characteristic of the
reformer’s attitude to the question of education in his day that he does
not, as we might expect, give the preference to these German elementary
schools in which we can see the beginnings of the national schools, but,
whilst admitting their claims, insists emphatically on the need of a
classic training.” “To characterise the writing in question as ‘of the
utmost importance for the development of our elementary-school system’
(“Mon. Germ. Pædag.” III, iii.) is to be unfair to it.”
[42] Erl. ed., 62, p. 307.
[43] _Ib._, p. 306.
[44] _Ib._, p. 297; cp. p. 289.
[45] Weim. ed., 19, p. 445; Erl. ed., 26², p. 7: “Proposal how permanent
order may be established in the Christian community.”
[46] Compare with this Luther’s letter to Johann, Elector of Saxony (Nov.
22, 1526), advocating the Visitation; Erl. ed., 53, p. 386 (“Briefe,”
5, p. 406). Of the final article of the Instructions for the Visitors
(1538), which refers to the schools, Köstlin-Kawerau says, 2, p. 37: “The
chief point kept in view here, as in Luther’s exhortations referred to
above [in his writing to the Councillors], was the need of bringing up
people sufficiently skilled to teach in the churches and to be capable
also of ruling. Hence the regulations prescribed the erection of schools
in which Latin should be taught.”
[47] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 311, a conversation dating from 1542-3
noted down by Heydenreich.
[48] _Ib._, p. 332. It may be mentioned here that amongst the German
universities, Erfurt, where he had received his own education, always
held a high place in his memory. “The University of Erfurt,” he once
said in later years, “enjoyed so high a reputation that all others in
comparison were looked upon as apologies for universities—but now,” so
he adds sadly, “its glory and majesty are a thing of the past, and the
university seems quite dead.” He extols the pomp and festivities that
accompanied the conferring of the mastership and doctorate, and wishes
that such solemnities were the rule everywhere. Erl. ed., 62, p. 287.
[49] “Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts,” 1², p. 198.
[50] Weim. ed., 15, p. 46 f.; Erl. ed., 22, p. 192.
[51] Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 37.
[52] Schiele (above, p. 13, n. 2), p. 389, where he adds: “What the
children needed to fit them for household work they could as a matter of
fact have learnt better from their parents or at the dame-school than
in the Councillors’ schools which Luther so extols.” Cp. above, p. 7,
Luther’s statement: “German books are principally intended for the common
people to read at home,” etc.
[53] Weim. ed., 26, pp. 236-240.
[54] _Ib._, 6, p. 462; Erl. ed., 21, p. 349 f., “An den Adel.”
[55] Erl. ed., 62, p. 458 f., “Tischreden.”
[56] _Ib._, p. 344.
[57] Paulsen, _ib._, p. 204. O. Schmidt, “Luther’s Bekanntschaft mit den
Klassikern,” Leipzig, 1883.
[58] “An die Radherrn,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 46; Erl. ed., 22, p. 191 f.
[59] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 431. Uttered in 1537 and noted by
Lauterbach and Weller.
[60] Cp. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), 13, p.
166.—K. v. Raumer, “Gesch. der Pädagogik,” 1, Stuttgart, 1843, p. 272,
says: “It seems to us incredible that the learning by heart and acting
of plays so unchaste as those of Terence could fail to exert a bad
influence on the morals of the young.… If even the reading of Terence was
questionable, how much more questionable was it when the pupils acting
such plays identified themselves wholly with the events and personages
of the drama.”—Cp. above, vol. iii., p. 443 f., Melanchthon on the Roman
condemnation of the school edition of Erasmus’s “Colloquia.” Luther
condemned this book of his opponent in very strong language.
[61] “An die Radherrn,” etc., Weim. ed., 15, p. 46; Erl. ed., 22, p. 192.
[62] _Ib._, p. 47=192.
[63] “Martin Luthers Werke,” Stuttgart und Leipzig, 1907, p. 231.
[64] Before this Boehmer had said: “The importance of the lower schools,
girl schools and national schools, was fully recognised. Luther’s
concern was, however, with higher education.… It was not indeed his
intention to promote classical studies as such, but he wished to see them
harnessed to the service of the Gospel and to the furthering of its right
understanding. Hence, though Luther had in view other classes besides
the theologians, and though he advanced other motives in support of his
plans, still it was the religious standpoint which was the determining
one.”
[65] Weim. ed., 6, p. 461; Erl. ed., 21, p. 350, “An den Adel.”
[66] Paulsen, “Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts,” 1², p. 185.
[67] Weim. ed., 6, p. 462; Erl. ed., 21, pp. 347, 348, “An den Adel.”
[68] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 62, p. 304 f., “Tischreden.”
[69] _Ib._, 63, p. 281 f. (“Briefe,” 7, p. 73). Written in the middle of
March, 1529, this served at the same time as a preface to the work by
Justus Menius, “Œconomia christiana.”
[70] _Ib._, p. 280.
[71] Thus in the Introduction to Luther’s “An die Radherrn,” Weim. ed.,
15, p. 9 f.
[72] See above, p. 6.
[73] Erl. ed., 63, p. 280 f.
[74] Luther expressed this in his way as follows: Of all “the wiles of
Satan” this, aimed at the holy Gospel, was perhaps the worst, for it
suggested to men such dangerous ideas as these: Now that there is “no
longer any hope for the monks, nuns or priestlings there is no need of
learned men or of much study, but we must rather strive after food and
wealth,” “truly a masterpiece of diabolical art,” for creating “in the
German lands a wild, hideous mob of ‘Tatters’ or Turks.” Weim. ed., 30,
2, p. 522 f.; Erl. ed., 17², p. 383, Preface to the work on the schools
(1530).
[75] “Werke,” _ib._, 6, p. 462=21, p. 349 f., “An den Adel.”
[76] The violence of the tone in which Luther speaks of the Universities
in the writings which followed his “An den Adel,” as the real strongholds
of the devil on earth, has perhaps never been equalled in any attack
on these institutions either before or after his day. See passages in
Janssen, _ib._, Engl. Trans., iii., _passim_. Some of the preachers
of the pure Gospel, who soon sprang up in great numbers, went a step
further: “The Word of God alone was sufficient and in order to understand
it what was required was, not learning, but the spirit.” Paulsen, “Gesch.
des gelehrten Unterrichts,” 1², p. 185.
[77] “Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts,” 1², p. 177.
[78] Erl. ed., 62, p. 319. The Note is by Lauterbach. Copernicus is not
named, but is merely alluded to as “the new astrologer”=astronomer. His
work “De orbium cœlestium revolutionibus,” with its detailed proofs in
support of the new theory of the heavens, appeared only in 1543, at
Nuremberg.
[79] Cp. for proofs H. Stephan, “Luther in den Wandlungen seiner Kirche,”
p. 35 f.
[80] Weim. ed., 15, p. 36; Erl. ed., 22, p. 180 f., “An die Radherrn.”
[81] “Didymi Faventini pro M. Luthero adversus Thomam Placentinum
oratio,” “Corp. ref.,” 1, pp. 286-358, particularly p. 343. Cp. Paulsen,
_ib._, p. 186 f.
[82] “Preuss. Jahrbücher,” 132, 1908 (see above, p. 13, n. 2), p. 381
f. The author safeguards himself by remarking that the above account
contains “nothing new.” In Janssen, “Hist. of the German People,” vol.
xiii., this subject is dealt with in full.
[83] P. 382. In the “Archiv für Kulturgesch.,” 7, 1909, p. 120, Schiele’s
art is described as “an excellent piece of criticism.”
[84] To Eobanus Hessus, March 29, 1523, “Briefe,” 4, p. 118.
[85] Hessus had told Luther of this complaint, as is evident from the
latter’s reply.
[86] For a detailed account see above, vol. ii., p. 336 ff.
[87] Janssen, Engl. Trans., xiii., p. 258.
[88] _Ib._
[89] Luschin v. Ebengreuth, “Gött. Gel. Anz.,” 1892, p. 826 f., in a
review of Hofmeister, “Die Matrikel der Universität Rostock,” Part II.,
1891. Cp. Janssen, _ib._, p. 266.
[90] F. Eulenburg, “Über die Frequenz der deutschen Universitäten in
früherer Zeit,” “Jahrbücher f. Nationalökonomie u. Statistik,” 3. Vol.
13, 1897, pp. 461-554, 494, 525. Janssen, _ib._
[91] Weim. ed., 30, 2, p. 550; Erl. ed., 17², p. 399, “Das man Kinder zur
Schulen halten solle.”
[92] N. Paulus, “Wolfgang Mayer, Ein bayerischer Zisterzienserabt des 16.
Jahrh.” (“Hist. Jahrb.,” 1894, p. 575 ff.), p. 587 f. from MS. notes.
[93] Weim. ed., 15, p. 28; Erl. ed., 22, p. 171 f., “An die Radherrn.”
[94] Cp. on Wittenberg, Janssen, Engl. Trans., xiii., 286 and below,
xxxix, 1.
[95] Erl. ed., 53, p. 387. See above, vol. v., pp. 582, 590.
[96] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 483.
[97] Cp. Chr. Scheurl, “Briefbuch, ein Beitrag zur Gesch. der Ref.,”
ed. Soden and Knaake, 2, 1872, pp. 127, 132, 138, 177. See also
Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 790 (p. 653, N. 2).
[98] Cp. for the change in Humanism, above, vol. ii., p. 38 ff., etc.
[99] “Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts,” 1², p. 177.
[100] “Opp.,” 3, col. 777: “_Lutherana factio … perdit omnia studia
nostra_.”
[101] _Ib._, col. 915: “_… intolerabili degravavit invidia_.”
[102] _Ib._, col. 1089: “_Tantam ignaviam invexit hoc novum evangelium_.”
[103] _Ib._, col. 1069: “_Amant viaticum et uxorem, cetera pili non
faciunt_.”
[104] To Œcolampadius, June 20, 1523, “Briefe,” 4, p. 164.
[105] Weim. ed., 15, p. 29; Erl. ed., 22, p. 172, “An die Radherrn.”
[106] Work cited above, p. 29, n. 2 (p. 525).
[107] _Ib._, p. 260.
[108] Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), 1, p. 68 ff.
[109] Raynald., “Annal. eccles.,” a. 1514, n. 29.
[110] Cp. Janssen (Engl. Trans.), xiii., 9 ff.
[111] _Ib._, i., p. 25 ff.
[112] Weim. ed., 15, p. 33; Erl. ed., 22, p. 177, “An die Radherrn”:
“When I was young there was a saying in the schools: ‘_Non minus est
negligere scholarem quam corrumpere virginem_.’ This was said in order to
frighten the schoolmasters.”
[113] “_Ubicunque regnat Lutheranismus, ibi litterarum est interitus.
Et tamen hoc genus hominum maxime litteris alitur. Duo tantum quærunt,
censum et uxorem. Cætera præstat illis evangelium, ~i.e.~ potestatem
vivendi ut volunt._” To Pirkheimer, 1528, from Basle. “Opp.,” 3, col.
1139.
[114] Schiele, _ib._, p. 391.
[115] C. Hagen, “Deutschlands literarische und religiöse Verhältnisse im
Reformationszeitalter,” 3², 1868, p. 197. Janssen, _ib._, xiii., p. 100.
[116] “Opp.,” 3, col. 1363 _sq._
[117] M. Töppen, “Die Gründung der Universität Königsberg,” etc., 1844,
p. 78. Janssen, _ib._, p. 101.
[118] Janssen, _ib._, p. 102.
[119] Cp. Döllinger, “Die Ref.,” 1, p. 483 ff.; 2, p. 584 ff.
[120] For proofs see Janssen (Engl. Trans.), xiii., p. 71 ff.
[121] “Preuss. Jahrb.,” _loc. cit._, p. 392.
[122] _Ib._, p. 393.
[123] Janssen, _ib._, p. 43. Schiele, _ib._, p. 593.
[124] Schiele, _ib._, p. 390.
[125] He even says: “_Academiæ nunc quidem Dei beneficio omni genere
doctrinarum florent_.” “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 1068. Bishop Julius Pflug
informed Pope Paul III, in a letter in which he gives him a vivid
picture of the needs of the country in order to determine him to active
assistance: “_Scholæ Lutheranorum cum privatæ tum publicæ florent, nostræ
frigent plane ac iacent_.” “Epistolæ Mosellani,” etc., p. 150 _sq._
Kawerau, “Reformation und Gegenreformation”³, (Möller, “Lehrb. der KG.,”
3, p. 437.)
[126] G. Steinhausen, “Gesch. der deutschen Kultur,” Leipzig and Vienna,
1904, p. 515. There we read (p. 514) in the description of the education
given by the Protestant Universities that it was “rendered sterile” by
the new theology. “The intellectual leaders of the time became more and
more Court theologians. It is noteworthy that many of the edicts and
regulations begin with an improving theological preface.… What had become
of the intellectual revival of the first decades of the 16th century?”
Eobanus Hessus had prophesied in 1523 that the new theology would bring
in its train a worse barbarism than that which had been overthrown, and
already in 1524 he had been obliged to speak of the “New Obscurantists.”
[127] Döllinger, “Die Ref.,” 1², p. 509.
[128] M. Ritter, “Matthiä Flacii Illyrici Leben”², 1725, p. 105 Janssen,
_ib._, p. 265.
[129] For proofs see Janssen, _ib._, p. 286 ff.
[130] _Ib._, p. 295.
[131] On the contrast between mediæval and Lutheran charity, see above,
vol. iv., p. 477 ff., and Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl.
Trans.), vol. xv., pp. 425-526.
[132] Adolf Bruder, art. “Armenpflege,” “Staatslexikon der
Görresgesellschaft.”
[133] F. Ehrle, “Beiträge z. Gesch. u. Reform der Armenpflege,” 1881; do.
“Die Armenordnungen von Nürnberg (1522) und von Ypern (1525),” “Hist.
Jahrb.,” 9, 1888, p. 450 ff. Ratzinger, “Gesch. d. kirchl. Armenpflege”²,
1884, p. 442 ff. Janssen, p. 431.
[134] L. Feuchtwanger, “Gesch. der sozialen Politik und des Armenwesens
im Zeitalter der Reformation” (“Jahrb. für Gesetzgebung,” etc., ed. G.
Schmoller, N.F. 32, 1908, p. 168 ff. (I), and 33, 1909, p. 191 ff. (II),
I, p. 169.)
[135] “De origine, situ, moribus et institutis Norimbergæ,” cap. 12.
[136] Reprint of the Regulations of 1522 according to the oldest
revision, in Ehrle, “Die Armenordnungen,” p. 459 ff. For the passage “Our
salvation,” etc., see p. 467.
[137] Ehrle, _ib._, p. 477 f. Feuchtwanger, _ib._, I., p. 184.
[138] Janssen, _ib._, xv., p. 439 ff.
[139] Feuchtwanger, _ib._, p. 182. For all the towns mentioned above see
Janssen, _loc. cit._
[140] Weim. ed., 26, p. 639; Erl. ed., 63, p. 270.
[141] _Ib._, 6, p. 450 f.=21, p. 335 f.
[142] Cp., for instance, the passage in the Church-Postils, Erl. ed.,
14², p. 391: “The whole world is full of idle, faithless, wicked knaves,
among the day labourers, lazy handicraftsmen, servants, maids, to say
nothing of the greedy, work-shy beggars,” etc.
[143] Weim. ed., 6, p. 42; Erl. ed., 16², p. 87. (Longer) Sermon on
Usury, 1520.
[144] _Ib._, 19, p. 654 f.=22, p. 281 in “Ob Kriegsleutte auch ynn
seligen Stande seyn künden.”
[145] Barge, “Andreas Karlstadt,” 2, p. 559 f.
[146] E. Sehling, “Die evang. Kirchenordnungen des 16. Jahrh.,” 1, 1, p.
696 ff.
[147] _Ib._, p. 596 ff.; also “Luthers Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 11 ff.;
Erl. ed., 22, p. 112 ff. On Leisnig cp. above, vol. v., p. 136 ff.
[148] _Ib._, pp. 11 ff., 14=106 ff., 110.
[149] Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 551.
[150] It was the first to be established with so much pomp and
circumstance.