Chapter VI: The Change of 1515 in the Light of

THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS (1515-16) _pages_ 184-261

1. THE NEW PUBLICATIONS.

Denifle the first to utilise the Commentary
on Romans. Ficker’s recent edition of the
original. General remarks on the Commentary.
Aim of St. Paul according to Luther _pages_ 184-187

2. GLOOMY VIEWS REGARDING GOD AND
PREDESTINATION.

Luther’s “more profound theology” and
unconditional predestination to hell; God’s
will that the wicked be damned. God to be
approached in fear and despair, not with
works and in the hope of reward. The mystic
on resignation to hell. Man’s will and his
salvation entirely in God’s hands. Objections:
Is it not God’s will that all be saved? Why
impose commandments which the will is not free
to perform? Unperceived inconsistencies _pages_ 187-197

3. THE FIGHT AGAINST “HOLINESS-BY-WORKS” AND
THE OBSERVANTINES IN THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

Luther’s aversion to works and observances.
His rude description of the “Observants” and
“Justiciaries.” The very word “righteousness” a
cause of vexation _pages_ 197-202

4. ATTACK ON PREDISPOSITION TO GOOD AND ON FREE
WILL.

Human nature entirely spoiled by original
sin. Being unable to fulfil the command “_Non
concupisces_,” we are ever sinning mortally.
Uncertainty of salvation; the will not free for
good. Interpretation of Rom. viii. 2 f. Against
Scholasticism. In penance and confession no
removal (_ablatio_) of sin _pages_ 202-209

5. LUTHER RUDELY SETS ASIDE THE OLDER DOCTRINE
OF VIRTUE AND SIN.

The habit of sanctifying grace; “cursed
be the word ‘_formatum charitate_’”; sin
coexistent with grace in the good man;
Augustine on concupiscence. “Nothing is of
its own nature good or bad”; the Occamist
acceptation-theory against the “Aristotelian”
definition of virtue and the scholastic
doctrine that virtues and vices are qualities
of the soul _pages_ 209-213

6. PREPARATION FOR JUSTIFICATION.

Christ’s grace does all, and yet man disposes
himself for justification. Man’s self-culture.
Inconsistencies explained by reminiscences of
his early Catholic training _pages_ 213-214

7. APPROPRIATION OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST BY
HUMILITY—NEITHER “FAITH ONLY” NOR ASSURANCE OF
SALVATION.

Imputation applied to justification. Another’s
righteousness is imputed to us and becomes
ours; sin remains, but is no longer accounted;
our inability to know whether Christ’s
righteousness has been imputed to us. Advantage
of fear. “He who renounces his own self and
willingly faces death and damnation” is truly
humble, and in such humility is safety. Faith
not yet substituted for humility. Passivity
again emphasized _pages_ 214-222

8. SUBJECTIVISM AND CHURCH AUTHORITY. STORM AND
STRESS.

The back place already taken in Luther’s
mind by the Church and her teaching-office;
his preference for a theology of his own
invention. Our duty of not judging Luther by
the later Tridentine decrees. His Catholic
sentiments on the hierarchy; denounces abuses
whilst respecting the rights of the Roman
Church; desiderates a reduction of festivals;
reproves Bishops for insisting on their rights
instead of rejoicing to see them infringed. On
listening to the inner voice _pages_ 223-230

9. THE MYSTIC IN THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

Luther’s misapprehension of Tauler and other
mystics clearly proved in the Commentary.
Quietism. The “Spark in the Soul.” The
“Theology of the Cross.” The “Night of the
Soul.” Readiness for hell the joy of the
truly wise; Christ and Paul the Apostle, two
instances of such readiness _pages_ 230-240

10. THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS AS A WORK OF
RELIGION AND LEARNING.

Its witness to the unsettled state of the
writer’s mind. Texts and commentaries utilised;
neglect of Aquinas’s Commentary; the author’s
style; obscenity and paradox; a tilt at the
philosophers; the character of the work rather
spoilt by unnecessary polemics. Appeal to
Augustine. Misuse of theological terms. “The
word of God is every word which proceeds from
the mouth of a good man.” Contradiction a
criterion of truth. All the prophets against
observances. Unconscious self-contradiction on
the subject of freedom. Whether any progress
is apparent in the course of the Commentary.
Comparison of Luther’s public utterances with
those in the Commentary. Some excerpts from the
Commentary on Hebrews _pages_ 241-261