Chapter XXXV: Luther’s Attitude Towards Society and Education (4)

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

[539] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 35; Erl. ed., 22, p. 153. “Von Ordenung Gottes Dienst ynn der Gemeyne,” 1523.

[540] Of the most recent studies we need only mention here H. Greving, “Ecks Pfarrbuch für U.L. Frau in Ingolstadt” (“RGI. Studien”), Hft. 4 and 5, 1908, p. 87 ff. Cp. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol. i., _passim_.

[541] This introduction, together with the whole text of the common Preface, enters into Luther’s Latin Mass. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 212; “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 8. In his German Mass it is suppressed.

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

[543] “Der erste Teil der christl. orthodox. Bücher und Schriften.... Schwenckfelds ... durch Mitbekenner zusammengetragen,” 1564, p. 4. Ecke, p. 160; cp. p. 10 f.

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

[545] _Ib._, p. 645.

[546] _Ib._, p. 519.

[547] “Schwenckfeld, Luther und der Gedanke einer apostolischen Ref.,” Berlin, 1911, p. 161.

[548] Ecke, p. 176. The Protestant author adds in a note: “It must, however, be pointed out that this criticism does not affect the apostolic nature of the profound phenomena of Evangelical piety seen among Lutherans.”

[549] “Christl. Bücher,” etc. (above, p. 155, n. 2), p. 384. Ecke, p. 177.

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

[551] See our vol. iv., p. 210 ff., for instance, and below, vol. vi., xxxix., 1.

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

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

[554] _Ib._

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

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

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

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

[559] Thus G. Arnold, “Kirchenhistorie,” Frankfurt a/M., 1729, 1, p. 413.

[560] _Ib._, p. 395. Ecke, p. 170 f., where he quotes in support of this and what follows, “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 14², pp. 164 f., 174.

[561] _Ib._

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

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

[564] _Ib._, p. 420. Schwenckfeld’s excuse is, however, worthy of note, p. 401: “Such doctrine is not the outcome of an evil mind but is due to misapprehension.” Ecke, p. 168.

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

[566] _Ib._

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

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

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

[570] _Ib._, p. 365. Ecke, p. 166, quotes Erl. ed., 13², p. 218; 14², pp. 281 f., 287 ff.

[571] _Ib._

[572] _Ib._

[573] _Ib._

[574] _Ib._, p. 343 f. Cp. “Epistolar,” 2, 2, p. 912. Ecke, p. 176. Cp. Döllinger, on Schwenckfeld, in “Die Reformation,” 1, p. 254 ff.

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

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

[577] Ecke’s words, p. 161.

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

[579] Ecke, p. 162.

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

[581] _Ib._, p. 222.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[589] _Ib._

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

[591] Ecke, p. 227, MS.

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

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

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

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

[596] Ch. v. Rommel, “Philipp der Grossmüthige, Landgraf von Hessen,” 1, 1820, p. 517.

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

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

[599] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 562.

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

[601] Letter to the Emperor Charles V, Aug. 24, 1544, in Raynaldus, “Annales,” a. 1544; in German in “Luthers Werke,” Walch’s ed., 17, p. 1253 ff. For the former attitude of the Papacy to the idea of the Council, cp. our vol. iii., p. 424 ff.

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

[603] _Ib._, p. 62.

[604] _Ib._, p. 70.

[605] _Ib._, p. 114.

[606] _Ib._, p. 80.

[607] _Ib._, p. 91 f. Cp. “Colloq.” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 90 _sq._; “Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 42 f.

[608] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 101.

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

[610] _Ib._, p. 287.

[611] _Ib._, p. 231.

[612] _Ib._, p. 169.

[613] _Ib._, p. 417.

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

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

[616] In the “Antwort auf das Schmähbüchlein,” etc., “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 146.

[617] April, 1525, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, p. 547; Erl. ed., 53, p. 342 “Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 151.

[618] To the Preacher Balthasar Raida of Hersfeld, Jan. 17, 1536, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 288.

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

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

[621] To the Elector Johann Frederick, Jan. 18, 1545, _ib._, p. 716: “I will have them [the lawyers] eternally damned and cursed _in my_ Churches.”

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

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

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

[625] _Ib._, p. 774.

[626] Cp. (E. v. Jarcke) “Studien und Skizzen z. Gesch. d. Ref.,” 1846, p. 68.

[627] _Ib._

[628] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 158.

[629] _Ib._, p. 198.

[630] _Ib._, p. 200.

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

[632] After June 16, 1533, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 20. (“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 312.) The passage in question in the original at Weimar is in Melanchthon’s handwriting. Cp. Enders, p. 313, on the historical connection of the memorandum.

[633] “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 139 _sqq._ Rommel, “Philipp von Hessen,” 1, p. 417. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol. v., p. 527 ff. Pastor, “Die kirchl. Reunionsbestrebungen während der Regierung Karls V,” p. 95.

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

[635] Letter of March 10, 1540, in Bindseil, “Melanchthonis epistolæ, iudicia, etc.,” 1874, p. 146.

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

[637] Letter of Dec. 28, 1543, in Lenz, “Briefwechsel des Landgrafen Philipp von Hessen,” 2, p. 227. “_Nihil est quod minus multum_ [_read_ inultum] _relinquerem._”

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

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

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

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

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

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

[644] Seckendorf, “Comm. hist. de Lutheranismo,” 3, Lips., 1694, p. 468. The disputant, Johannes Marbach, received from Luther this testimony: “_Amplectitur puram evangelii doctrinam, quam ecclesia nostra uno spiritu et una voce profitetur_.” “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 543. Cp. Disputationen, ed. Drews, p. 700 ff. Some of Luther’s other statements concerning unity ring very differently.

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

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

[647] “Pezelii Object. et resp. Melanchtonis,” P. V., p. 289. Döllinger, “Die Reformation,” 1, p. 373.

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

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

[650] To Prince George of Anhalt, June 10, 1545, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 379.

[651] _Ib._

[652] “Corp, ref.,” 1, p. 907.

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

[654] To Spalatin, Jan. 12, 1541. “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 246. “Spalatin foresaw what was to come better than did Luther.” K. Holl, “Luther und das landesherrliche Kirchenregiment,” 1911, p. 57.

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

[656] To Count Albert of Mansfeld, Oct. 5, 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 147 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 90). Cp. above, vol. iii., 38 f., 263 f.

[657] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121.

[658] _Ib._, p. 152.

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

[660] To the Visitors in Thuringia, March 25, 1539, “Briefe,” 5, p. 173 “Briefwechsel,” 12, p. 118.

[661] To Daniel Cresser, Oct. 22, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 596, concerning certain occurrences at Dresden.

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

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

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

[665] _Ib._, p. 623.

[666] _Ib._, p. 618.

[667] _Ib._, p. 632. Sohm’s standpoint is, that a Church with powers of self-government or with a “canon law,” as he calls it, is practically unthinkable. Cp. Carl Müller, “Die Anfänge der Konsistorialverfassung in Deutschland” (Hist. Zeitschr. Bd. 102, 3. Folge Bd. 6, p. 1 ff.). He too arrives at the conclusion, contrary to many previously held views, viz. that it was only gradually in the course of the 16th century that the consistories changed, from organs of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, into organs of State government of the Church. Cp. also O. Mejer, “Zum KR. des Reformationsjahrh.,” 1891, p. 1 ff.

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

[669] “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 720 _sq._ Memorandum as to whether the Schmalkalden League should continue, etc., March, 1545, signed by him first. Cp. “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 374.

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

[671] Pars 3, art. 9: “_Maiorem excommunicationem, quam papa ita nominat, non nisi civilem poenam esse ducimus non pertinentem ad nos ministros ecclesiæ._” “Symbol. Bücher,” ed. Müller-Kolde^[10], p. 323.

[672] To Tileman Schnabel and the other Hessian clergy, June 26, 1533, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 317: “_Hoc sæculo excommunicatio maior ne potest quidem in nostram potestatem redigi, et ridiculi fieremus, ante vires, hanc tentantes. Nam quod vos sperare videmini, ut executio vel per ipsum principem fiat, valde incertum est, nec vellem politicum magistratum in id officii misceri_,” etc.

[673] N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess,” 1911, p. 32, with reference to “Luthers Werke,” Weim. ed., 29, p. 539, where the note of the Wittenberg Deacon, George Rörer to Luther’s sermon of Aug. 22 of that year says: “_Hæc prima fuit excommunicatio ab ipso pronuntiata._”

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

[675] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 275.

[676] Cp. the passages quoted, _ib._, p. 675, and Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 167.

[677] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 291 _sqq._ Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 440.

[678] On April 2, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 550. Cp. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, pp. 162 ff., 159 f.; “We must set up excommunication again.” In the latter passage he speaks of his action against the Wittenberg Commandant, Hans v. Metzsch.

[679] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 42. His words remind us of Luther’s own; above, p. 139.

[680] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 160.

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

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

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

[684] “Kosmographie,” Bl. 44´, 163. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), v., p. 535.

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

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

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

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

[689] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 306. In the statement the year given is uncertain. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 368: “_Anno_ 34,” etc.; elsewhere 1543.

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

[691] P. Drews, “Die Ordination, Prüfung und Lehrverpflichtung der Ordinanden in Wittenberg” (“Deutsche Zeitschr. für KR.”), 15, 1905, pp. 66 ff., 274 ff., particularly p. 281 ff.

[692] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 22 f. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 80: “_Doctor dixit: Nos qui prædicamus Evangelium, habemus potestatem ordinandi; papa et episcopi neminem possunt ordinare_” (a. 1540). P. 226: “_Doctor ad Cellarium; Vos estis episcopus, quemadmodum ego sum papa_” (a. 1540). Johannes Cellarius was Superintendent at Dresden.

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

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

[695] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 553 ff.

[696] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 126, in the “Exempel” (see below, p. 195).

[697] “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 3, p. 302, according to MS. Dresdense B 193, 4.

[698] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 554 f.

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

[700] On March 26, 1542, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 451: “_Venerabili in Domino viro Iacobo Probst ecclesiæ Bremensis episcopo vero_,” etc.

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

[702] _Ib._, p. 121.

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

[704] P. 124.

[705] P. 125.

[706] P. 115.

[707] P. 126 f.

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

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

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

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

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

[713] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 123.

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

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

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

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

[718] To the Elector and the Duke, April 7, 1542, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 56, p. 15 ff. “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 304 ff.

[719] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 567.

[720] April 9, 1542, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 56, p. liii. “Briefe,” _ib._, p. 311.

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

[722] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 568.

[723] According to Luther’s report to Brück, April 12, 1542, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 56, p. liv., “Briefe,” p. 314.

[724] _Ib._

[725] Burkhardt, “Gesch. der sächs. Kirchen- u. Schulvisitationen, 1524-1545,” 1879, p. 209 f. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vi., p. 192.

[726] G. A. Arndt, “Archiv der sächs. Gesch.,” 2, Leipzig, 1784-1786, p. 333 ff. C. G. Gersdorf, “Urkundenbuch von Meissen,” 3, Leipzig, 1867, p. 375 f. Janssen, _ib._, p. 193.

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

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

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

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

[731] Cp. Luther’s attitude at the time when the question of armed resistance to the Emperor was mooted, vol. iii., 56 ff., and his views on the relations of Church and State.

[732] To Amsdorf, Nov. 25, 1538, “Briefe,” 5, p. 136 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 38): “_Vides, quantis premor oneribus.... Miserrimis miserior, ut qui amplius nihil possum præ defectu virium._”

[733] To the Christians at Strasburg, Dec. 15, 1524, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 395; Erl. ed., 53, p. 275 (“Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 83).

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

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

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

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

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

[739] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 15², p. 334.

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

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

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

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

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

[745] Cp. Weim. ed., 1, p. 425; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 51 _sq._ (1518, against the strictures of the Bohemians) and Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 34; Erl. ed., 28, p. 310.

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

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

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

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

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

[751] P. 553=206.

[752] P. 715=367.

[753] April 25, 1522, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 133 (“Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 347).

[754] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 18, pp. 74 f., 82 f.; Erl. ed., 29, pp. 149 f., 159.

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

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

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

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

[759] Cp. above, p. 203.

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

[761] Th. Eitner, “Erfurt u. die Bauernaufstände im 16. Jahrh.,” Halle, 1903, pp. 59, 95.

[762] _Ib._, p. 72.

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

[764] _Ib._, p. 75.

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

[766] See below, p. 230.

[767] Chr. Falk, “Elbingisch-Preuss. Chronik,” ed. M. Töppen (“Publik. des Vereins f. die Gesch. der Provinzen Ost- und West-Preussen,” Leipzig, 1879), p. 157 f. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), v., p. 112 ff.

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

[769] Janssen, _ib._

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

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

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

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

[774] Whitsuntide Sermon, in Janssen, _ib._, vol. xi., p. 38. Cp. “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 7², pp. 121, 131, 222 f., 330. Cp. Janssen, _ib._, p. 37, the passages from the sermons of the superintendent George Nigrinus.

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

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

[777] “Repertorium f. Kunstwissenschaft,” 20, p. 46. Janssen, _ib._, vol. xi., p. 36.

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

[779] “Hist.-pol. Bl.,” 9, p. 316 ff.; 10, p. 15 ff. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vi., p. 209.

[780] “Hist.-pol. Bl.,” 10, p. 17.

[781] Ladurner, “Der Einfall der Schmalkaldener im Tirol, 1546,” (“Archiv f. Gesch. u. Altertumskunde Tirols,” 1), p. 415 ff. Janssen, _ib._, vi., 315 ff.

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

[783] J. Voigt, “Briefwechsel der Gelehrten des Zeitalters der Reformation mit Herzog Albrecht von Preussen,” 1841, p. 30.

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

[785] Aug. 19, 1548, C. W. Hase, “Mittelalterliche Baudenkmale Niedersachsens,” Hannover, 1858, Hft., 3, p. 100.

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

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

[788] See A. v. Druffel, “Briefe und Akten zur Gesch. des 16. Jahrh.,” 2, 1873 ff., p. 668.

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

[790] F. A. Sinnacher, “Beitr. z. Gesch. d. Kirche Säben und Brixen,” 7, 1830, p. 441. D. Schönherr, “Der Einfall des Kurfürsten Moritz in Tyrol,” 1868, p. 101 ff. Janssen, _ib._, vi., p. 478.

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

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

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

[794] Melchior von Ossa in his diary, Jan. 1, 1553. F. A. Langenn, “D. Melchior von Ossa,” 1858, p. 161. Janssen, _ib._, p. 505.

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

[796] “Mitteil. der Gesellschaft f. Erhaltung der geschtl. Denkmäler im Elsass,” 15, 1892, p. 248. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), xi., p. 46.

[797] E. Weller, “Der Volksdichter Hans Sachs u. seine Dichtungen,” 1868, p. 118 ff.

[798] _Ib._

[799] He frequently laments that the churches were too ill-provided for. Cp. Walch’s Index, s.v. “Kirche,” & “Gotteshäuser.”

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

[801] See P. Lehfeldt, “Luthers Verhältnis zu Kunst und Künstlern,” Berlin, 1892, p. 84. Janssen, _ib._, xi., 39.—On the whole subject see Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol. xi., ch. ii.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[810] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 144.

[811] _Ib._, p. 105.

[812] _Ib._, p. 140.

[813] _Ib._, p. 122.

[814] _Ib._, p. 113.

[815] _Ib._, p. 132.

[816] Below, xxxii., 6.

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

[818] _Ib._, p. 105.

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

[820] According to Mathesius (“Historien,” p. 146) he once said even in the pulpit: “A full belly and ripe dung are easily parted.”

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

[822] _Ib._

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

[824] To Lauterbach, _ib._

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

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

[827] To Hans Luther, Feb. 15, 1530, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24, p. 130 (“Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 230).

[828] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 127.

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

[830] _Ib._, p. 179.

[831] _Ib._, p. 155.

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

[833] _Ib._

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

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

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

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

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

[839] _Ib._: “_Furiis furiosis aguntur, quia ira Dei pervenit super eos usque in finem. Quare ergo propter istos perditos nos conficere volumus? Mitte, vadere sicut vadit._”

[840] To Dr. Ratzeberger, the Elector’s physician, Aug. 6, 1545, “Briefe,” 5, p. 754.

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

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

[843] To Amsdorf, Aug. 18, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 584. Cp. p. 789: “_ne tandem fiat quod ante diluvium factum esse scribit Moises_,” etc.

[844] _Ib._, p. 585.

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

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

[847] To Justus Jonas, April 17, 1544, “Briefe,” 5, p. 642. Cp. p. 629: “_testes fidelissimi_” report an alliance between the Pope, the Turks, French and Venetians against the Emperor. “Now give a cheer for the Pope.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[859] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 156.

[860] To Melanchthon, April 20, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 346; “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 308.

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

[862] To Jakob Probst, Pastor at Bremen, Oct. 9, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 501.

[863] On Feb. 23, 1545, see Döllinger, “Reformation,” 3, p. 269, n. 208, from MS.

[864] Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 582. On Melanchthon, cp. above, vol. iii., p. 370.

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

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

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

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

[869] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 20², 2, p. 561 f., in his last sermon, Feb. 14, 1546, on Mt. xi 25 ff.

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

[871] _Ib._, p. 565.

[872] _Ib._, p. 564.

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

[874] _Ib._, p. 571.

[875] To Ratzeberger, the Elector’s medical adviser, Aug. 6, 1545, “Briefe,” 5, p. 754: “_Credo nos esse tubam illam novissimam_,” etc.

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

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

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

[879] To Wenceslaus Link, Jan. 14, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 72: “_videns, rem tumultuosissimo tumultu tumultuantem; forte hæc est inundatio illa prædicta anno 24 futura_.”

[880] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 423, concluding: “_Videte, tanta est potentia Sathanæ in deludendis sensibus externis; quid faciet in animabus?_”

[881] Cp. N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess vornehmlich im 16. Jahrh.,” 1910, particularly pp. 20 f., 48 ff.

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

[883] _Ib._, p. 129.

[884] _Ib._, p. 422, from Lauterbach and Weller’s Notes in the summer, 1537.

[885] To Amsdorf, June 3, 1545, “Briefe,” 5, p. 741. Amsdorf had sent an inquiry “_de monstro illo vulpium_.”

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

[887] _Ib._

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

[889] In the “Chronology of the World,” “Werke,” Walch’s ed., 14, p. 1278, from the Latin MS. See above, vol. iii., p. 147 f.

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

[891] _Ib._, p. 33.

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

[893] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 208; “Historien,” p. 143. “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, pp. 18, 25, “Tischreden.”

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

[895] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 206.

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

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

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

[899] Cp. the index to Walch’s edition, vol. xxiii., _s.v._ “Antichrist” and “Widerchrist.”

[900] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p. 719; Erl. ed., 24², p. 203, “Bulla Cœnæ Domini” (1522), appendix.

[901] Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 646. On the Monk-Calf, see vol. iii., p. 149 f.

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

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

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

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

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

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

[908] To Jonas, May 3, 1541, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 328: “_Ego et ægrotus et pæne morosus sum, tædio rerum et morborum. Utinam me Deus evocet misericorditer ad sese. Satis malorum feci, vidi, passus sum._”

[909] To Lauterbach, April 2, 1543, “Briefe,” 5, p. 551: “_ubique grassatur licentia et petulantia vulgi_.” Cp. p. 552.

[910] To the Evangelical Brethren at Venice, June 13, 1543, _ib._, p. 569.

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

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

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

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

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

[916] _Ib._

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

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

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

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

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

[922] P. 172 f.

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

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

[925] _Ib._, p. 86.

[926] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 41, p. 233.

[927] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 282. Cp. Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” ed. Lœsche, p. 393.

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

[929] Above, p. 229.

[930] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 131.

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

[932] _Ib._, p. 288.

[933] _Ib._, p. 179.

[934] _Ib._, p. 108.

[935] _Ib._, p. 209.

[936] _Ib._, p. 111.

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

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

[939] _Ib._, p. 89.

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

[941] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 41, p. 233.

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

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

[944] _Ib._, p. 87.

[945] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 95 f.

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

[947] See above, p. 226.

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

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

[950] G. Kawerau, “Luthers Stellung zu den Zeitgenossen Erasmus, Zwingli und Melanchthon” (Reprint from “Deutsch-evang. Bl.,” 1906, 1-3), p. 30.

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

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

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

[954] To Gelous, May 20, 1559, _ib._, 9, p. 822: “_Pendeo velut ad Caucasum adfixus, etsi verius sum ἐπινηθεύς quam προμηθεύς et laceror, non ut ille vulturibus tantum, sed etiam a cuculis_.”

[955] C. Sell, “Philipp Melanchthon und die deutsche Reformation bis 1531” (“Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” 14, 3, 1897), p. 117.

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

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

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

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

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

[961] “Die Reformation,” 1, p. 376.

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

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

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

[965] From a New-Year’s letter (Jan. 1, 1540) to Veit Dietrich, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 895.

[966] Sept. 9, 1541, to Veit Dietrich, _ib._, 4, p. 654, where he continues: “_Tegere hæc soleo, sed, mihi crede, manent cicatrices_.”

[967] About July 16, 1537, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 390 _sq._ Before this he had said in humanistic style: “_Video novum quoddam genus sophistarum nasci; velut ex gigantum sanguine alii gigantes nati sunt.... Metuo maiores ecclesiæ motus. Hie cum hydra decerto. Uno represso alii multi exoriuntur._”

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

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

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

[971] On March 9, 1559, to the Elector August of Saxony, “Corp. ref.,” 9, p. 766 _sq._ Cp. “RE.,” _ib._, p. 525.

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

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

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

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

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

[977] Kolde in the Preface to the “Symbol. Bücher,”^[10], p. xxvi., No. 3. The Articles of Agreement were published in full by G. Mentz in 1905, “Die Wittenberger Artikel von 1536” (“Quellenschriften zur Gesch. des Prot.,” Hft. 2). Letter to the Elector, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 128; “Briefe,” 4, p. 683 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 315, where Enders, as late as 1903, had to admit: “The doctrinal articles herewith transmitted are not known”). On the negotiations with the English, see vol. iv., p. 10 f.

[978] Thus Mentz, the editor, p. 11. Some theses from these Articles of Agreement proposed by the Wittenbergers but not accepted by the English deserve to be quoted from the new sources; their divergence from Luther’s ordinary teaching is self-evident. Of good works: “_Bona opera non sunt precium pro vita æterna, tamen sunt necessaria ad salutem, quia sunt debitum, quod necessario reconciliationem sequi debet_.” In support of this Mt. xix. 17 is quoted: “_Si vis ad vitam ingredi serva mandata_.” Again: “_Docemus requiri opera a Deo mandata et quidem non tantum externa civilia opera, sed etiam spirituales motus, timorem Dei, fiduciam_,” etc. (p. 34).—“_Hæc obedientia in reconciliatis fide iam reputatur esse iustitia et quædam legis impletio_” (p. 40).—“_Docendæ sunt ecclesiæ de necessitate et de dignitate huius obedientiæ, videlicet quod ... hæc obedientia seu iusticia bonæ conscientiæ sit necessaria quia debitum est, quod necessario sequi reconciliationem debet_” (p. 42).—Merit, at least in a certain restricted sense, is also admitted: “_Ad hæc bona opera sunt meritoria iuxta illud_ (1 Cor. iii. 8): _Unusquisque accipiet mercedem iuxta proprium laborem_.” (Cp. the Apologia of the Confession of Augsburg, “Symb. Bücher,” pp. 120, 148.) “_Etsi enim conscientia non potest statuere, quod propter dignitatem operum detur vita æterna, sed nascimur filii Dei et hæredes per misericordiam_ (which is also the Catholic teaching) _tamen hæc opera in filiis merentur præmia corporalia et spiritualia et gradus præmiorum_,” etc. (p. 46). The ambiguity concerning Christ’s Presence in the Eucharist (p. 62) is due to Melanchthon, not to Luther.

[979] Kolde, _ib._

[980] “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 497.

[981] To Melanchthon, June 18, 1540, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 293; “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 91; “Ratzebergers Gesch.,” p. 102 ff.; “Corp. ref.,” 3, pp. 1060 _sq._, 1077, 1081. To Johann Lang, July 2, 1540, “Briefe,” _ib._, p. 297; “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 109: “_mortuum enim invenimus; miraculo Dei manifesto vivit_.” See vol. iii., p. 162.

[982] Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 689; “Anal. Luth.,” ed. Kolde, p. 402; “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 522.

[983] “Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 524.

[984] Cp., for instance, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 12, pp. 106, 116, 123, etc.; 13, pp. 282, 318.

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

[986] “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 59.

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

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

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

[990] _Ib._, p. 569.

[991] Cp. the report of Peter Canisius to Lainez, General of the Jesuits, Braunsberger, “Epistulæ b. Petri Canisii,” 2, p. 176 _sq._

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

[993] _Ib._, p. 571.

[994] Thus the Protestant theologian Nitzsch, see “RE. f. prot. Th.,”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 525. Loofs,^[4], p. 904. “The religious conference suffered shipwreck from want of unity amongst the Evangelicals.” The Gnesio-Lutherans demanded (Sep. 27) that all errors on “the Supper” should be condemned, “ whether emanating from Carlstadt, Zwingli, Œcolampadius, Calvin or others.” Calvin’s doctrine was, however, substantially identical with Melanchthon’s at that time.

[995] “RE.,” _ib._

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

[997] _Ib._, p. 822. As a Humanist he was fond of conjuring up heaven under the image of the Academy. In his address to the students on Luther’s death he says, the former had been snatched away “_in æternam scholam et in æterna gaudia_.”

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

[999] _Ib._, p. 1098.

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

[1001] Reprinted in “Opera Ph. Melanchtonis,” t. 1, Vitebergæ, 1562, p. 364 _sqq._

[1002] Jan. 28, 1538, “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 20, p. 247 ff. G. Kawerau, “Die Versuche Melanchthon zur kathol. Kirche zurückzuführen,” 1902 (“Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” No. 73), p. 43.

[1003] To Vergerio, June 1, 1534, “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 19, p. 222. Kawerau, _ib._, p. 79.

[1004] To Bishop Cricius, June 2, 1534, in his “Velitatio in Apologiam Ph. Melanchthonis,” 1534, Bl. A. 6 ff. Kawerau, _ib._, p. 23 f.

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

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

[1007] Vol. ii., p. 438 ff., and above, p. 266. Cp. vol. iii., p. 447 (Cologne Book of Reform).

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

[1009] The authors of the Article on Melanchthon in the “RE. f. prot. Th.,”³, say, p. 535: “A Humanist mode of thought forms the background of his theology”; Melanchthon strove for a kind of compromise between Christian truth and ancient philosophy.

[1010] “Versuche,” p. 83, with the above example taken from “Corp. ref.,” 12, p. 269.

[1011] Cp., for instance, the letter of May 12, 1536, to Erasmus, “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 68 _sq._ Kawerau, _ib._, p. 32.

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

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

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

[1015] For a supposed remark of Luther’s to Catherine Bora which would seem even more clearly to admit the uncertainty of the new faith, see below, p. 372 f.

[1016] “L’Histoire de la naissance, progrez et decadence de l’hérésie de ce siècle,” l. 2, ch. 9 (Rouen, 1648), p. 166: “On éscrit, qu’éstant sur le poinct de rendre l’âme, l’an 1560, sa mère,” etc. The author is quite uncritical (see below, p. 271).

[1017] “Corp. ref.,” 1, p. 1083, Melanchthon to Camerarius. C. G. Strobel, “Melanchthoniana,” 1771, p. 9.

[1018] Cp. N. Müller, “Jakob Schwarzerd,” 1908 (“Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” Nos. 96-97), p. 42, on “Corp. ref.,” 2, p. 563. Müller assumes (p. 41) that the visit took place in 1524.

[1019] “Theol. Stud. und Krit.,” 1, 1830, p. 119 ff., “Die Schwarzerd.”

[1020] P. 122.

[1021] In the collection of essays published by the Wittenberg “Academy,” “Memoria Ph. Melanchthonis, finito post eius exitum sæculo II.”

[1022] 3rd ed., Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 531.

[1023] G. Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” 1902, p. 191. F. X. Funk remarks in the “KL.,”², Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 1212: Melanchthon, “after having made her [his mother] repeat her prayers, is said to have assured her, that if she continued thus to believe and to pray, she might well live in hopes of being saved.”

[1024] “Des Teutschen ... Rekreation,” Munich, 1612, 4, p. 143. The author, who died in 1620, is no authority on historical matters beyond his own times and surroundings.

[1025] “Vitæ theologorum,” p. 333.

[1026] “RE. f. prot. Th.,”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 531, with reference to Melanchthon’s “Postille,” 2, p. 477.

[1027] Above, p. 270, n. 5, p. 41.

[1028] “Historia comitiorum a. 1530 Augustæ celebratorum,” 3, p. 20.

[1029] Gotha, 1876, p. 191.

[1030] J. B. Hablitzel, “Liter. Beil. zur Augsburger Postztng.,” 1905, No. 40 f.

[1031] Printed in the Jena edition of Luther’s German works, 5, 1557, p. 41.

[1032] “Apologia,” Ingolstadii, 1542, p. clii.

[1033] Willibald Pirkheimer, who was then on Luther’s side, is usually regarded as the author of this screed published under the pseudonym of J. F. Cottalambergius. Like some others, K. Bauer (“Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” No. 100, 1910, p. 272) rejects his authorship. The passage in question appears in Böcking’s edition, “Hutteni opp.,” 4, 1860, p. 533.

[1034] “Johannes Eck,” 1865, p. 275 f.

[1035] 1906, p. 885.

[1036] To Melanchthon, Dec. 7, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 227.

[1037] To Melanchthon, Nov. 21, 1540, _ib._, p. 215.

[1038] To Link, Sep. 8, 1541, “Briefe,” 5, p. 399.

[1039] To Jonas, Jan. 23, 1542, _ib._, p. 429.

[1040] To Lauterbach, April 2, 1543, _ib._, pp. 551, 552.

[1041] To the Evangelical Brethren at Venice, June 13, 1543, _ib._, p. 569.

[1042] To Lauterbach, July 25, 1542, _ib._, p. 487 f.

[1043] To Cordatus, Dec. 3, 1544, _ib._, p. 702.

[1044] To Probst, Jan. 17 (the year of his death), 1546, _ib._, p. 778.

[1045] To Jonas, Sep. 30, 1543, _ib._, p. 591: “_quorum glorias pro stercore diaboli habeo_.”

[1046] To Justus Menius, Jan. 10, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 426, on “Master Grickel,” i.e. Agricola.

[1047] To Caspar Schwenckfeld’s messenger (1543), “Briefe,” 5, p. 614: “_Increpet Dominus in te, Satan_,” etc.

[1048] Cp. for what follows N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess vornehmlich im 16. Jahrh.,” 1910, where not only Luther’s (pp. 20 ff., 48 ff.) but also the Zwinglians’ and Calvinists’ attitude to the matter is dealt with.

[1049] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 305.

[1050] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 1, p. 123 ff.; Erl. ed., 21, p. 26 ff.; cp. p. 127=28 ff.

[1051] _Ib._, p. 211=127.

[1052] _Ib._, p. 205=121.

[1053] _Ib._, p. 134=36.

[1054] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 3², p. 477 f., in the first Sermon on the Angels.

[1055] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 590 f.; Erl. ed., 10², p. 359. In the editions from 1522 to 1540 the word “conjugal” is inserted before “members.”

[1056] _Ib._

[1057] _Ib._, 32, p. 112 ff.=18², p. 64 ff.

[1058] _Ib._, p. 120=76.

[1059] _Ib._, 34, 2, p. 263 f.=19², p. 75.

[1060] _Ib._, 32, p. 114=18², p. 68.

[1061] “Drey Sermon, Von den Heiligen Engeln, Vom Teufel, Von der Menschen Seele,” Wittenberg, 1563. In the sermon “Vom Teufel.” See N. Paulus, “Augsburger Postztng.,” 1903, May 8.

[1062] July 26, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 147.

[1063] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 331.

[1064] On July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 299. Cp. Mathesius, _ib._, p. 179: “Nothing is more certain than that the insane are not without their devils; these make them madder; the devil knows those who are of a melancholy turn, and of this tool he makes use.” Thus Luther in 1540.

[1065] “_Sic informat [diabolus] animam et corpus, ut obsessi nihil audiant, videant, sentiant; sed ipse est iis pro anima._” Mathesius, _ib._, p. 198 (in 1540). Cp. also “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 13, with reference to 1 Cor. v. 5. The passage occurs in the Table-Talk, ch. 24, No. 68. Cp. Erl. ed., vol. 59, p. 289 to vol. 60, p. 75. This chapter is followed by others on similar subjects. Demonology occupies altogether a very large place. Ch. 59, “On the Angels,” comprises hardly four pages.

[1066] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 326 (in 1543).

[1067] Dec. 1, 1544, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 699 f.

[1068] July 25, 1542: “_quum ipse occiderit eos et imaginatione animis impressa coegerit eos putare, quod se ipsos suspenderent_.”

[1069] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 59. Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 198.

[1070] Mathesius, _ib._ Cp. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 127.

[1071] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 24; cp. pp. 25, 27.

[1072] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 269; “Aufzeichn.,” p. 300.

[1073] Mathesius, in both the passages quoted. Cp. Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 105 (1538): “_habuit fœdus cum Sathana ipse et pater eius, et fœdissima scortatione occubuit securissime_.”

[1074] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 207, under the heading “_Spectra_.” In the same volume pp. 218-242 treat of the devil under the heading “_Diabolus, illius natura, conatus, insidiæ, figura, expulsio_.” In the second volume the ch. on “_tentationes_,” pp. 287-320, and, in the third, that on “_fascinationes et incantationes_,” pp. 9-14, are important.

[1075] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 224 f. (1540).

[1076] _Ib._, p. 402: “_dixit de machinis bellicis et bombardis_,” etc. (1537).

[1077] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 23.

[1078] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 262 (1542-43).

[1079] _Ib._, p. 380 (1536).

[1080] _Ib._, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 291: “We see how the milk thieves and other witches often do great mischief” (1543). Cp. Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121.

[1081] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 117 (1532).

[1082] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 304.

[1083] _Ib._, 60, p. 73.

[1084] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 322 (1543).

[1085] _Ib._, p. 412 f.

[1086] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 130; Erl. ed., 18², p. 70 (1530).

[1087] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 395 f. (1537).

[1088] _Ib._, p. 198 (1540).

[1089] _Ib._, p. 240.

[1090] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 70.

[1091] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 585; Erl. ed. 10², p. 354.

[1092] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 70. Cp. p. 31 and Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 585; Erl. ed., 10², p. 354.

[1093] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 63.

[1094] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 585; Erl. ed., 10², p. 354.

[1095] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 63.

[1096] _Ib._, 59, p. 348.

[1097] _Ib._

[1098] _Ib._, 60, p. 70.

[1099] _Ib._, 59, p. 348.

[1100] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 316; Irmischer, 1, p. 279, in the fuller Commentary on Galatians (1535). Cp. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 357: “_In Antinomis furit Sathan_”(1539). _Ib._, p. 206: “_Anabaptistæ non intelligunt iram Dei, sic excæcantur a diabolo; quare non anguntur, ut sancti, qui hæc omnia sentiunt; diabolus enim ipsorum aures et animos tenet occupatos_,” etc. (1540).

[1101] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 316; Irmischer, 1, p. 279.

[1102] _Ib._

[1103] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 2, p. 505 f.; Irmischer, 3, p. 251, in the first Commentary on Galatians.

[1104] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 97 (1540). Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 409; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 23, in the Exposition of the Ten Commandments, 1518.

[1105] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 321.

[1106] _Ib._, Weim. ed., 40, 1, pp. 315, 317, 319; Irmischer, 1, pp. 278, 280, 283; Erl. ed., 49, p. 19, in the Exposition of St. John xiv.-xvi. Erl. ed., 59, p. 335.

[1107] Cp., for instance, Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” pp. 55, 111. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” pp. 97, 130, 174, 198, 279, 380, 436. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, pp. 317, 320-323; 60, pp. 24, 27, 57, 63, 71, etc.

[1108] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 560.

[1109] _Ib._, 29, p. 401. Sermon of 1529. Similarly in the sermon of July 2, 1536, _ib._, 41, p. 633. Cp. N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn” (see above, p. 278, n. 1), p. 31.

[1110] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 11², p. 136. Sermon on Oculi Sunday.

[1111] Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 248.

[1112] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 22. Cp. p. 38 f.

[1113] _Ib._, 11², p. 136.

[1114] _Ib._, 59, p. 287.

[1115] _Ib._, p. 324.

[1116] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 110. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 108.

[1117] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 179; “Aufzeichn.,” pp. 87, 127.

[1118] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 13.

[1119] _Ib._, 59, p. 287. There ever was a widespread tendency to connect the Evil One with the water.

[1120] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 380 (1536).

[1121] _Ib._, p. 118 (1540).

[1122] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 340.

[1123] _Ib._, 60, pp. 64, 66

[1124] _Ib._, 59, p. 138.

[1125] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540).

[1126] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 129. The account assures us that he claimed to have seen the apparition himself.

[1127] _Ib._, 31, p. 363.

[1128] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 25, p. 140, in the shorter Exposition of Isaias iii. 21.

[1129] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 71.

[1130] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 300 (1542-44).

[1131] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 73.

[1132] _Ib._, 59, p. 294; cp. 60, p. 123. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, pp. 235, 318. For an explanation of the word here used see Förstemann, “Tischreden,” 3, p. 132, n. 3.

[1133] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 19², p. 281 f.

[1134] _Ib._, 32, p. 291 in “Vom Schem Hamphoras,” 1543.

[1135] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 258 (1542-43).

[1136] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 208.

[1137] _Ib._, p. 218.

[1138] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 46, p. 211 f., in the Exposition of John i. and ii. (1537-38).

[1139] _Ib._, 60, p. 70.

[1140] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 315; Irmischer, 1, p. 277 _sq._

[1141] “Hexenwahn” (see above, p. 278, n. 1), pp. 45, 67.

[1142] “Theol. Literaturztng.,” 1909, p. 147. Paulus, _ib._, p. 46.

[1143] Leipzig, 1904, p. 518. Cp. Paulus, _ib._, pp. 1-10.

[1144] Cp. Paulus, _ib._, pp. 1-19.

[1145] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 398 ff.; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 3 _sqq._

[1146] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540): “_hoc malum (sagarum) invalescit iterum_.” In 1519 he had lamented that “this evil is noticeably on the increase.” “Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 590; Irmischer, 3, p. 426, first Commentary on Galatians.

[1147] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 401; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 7.

[1148] _Ib._, p. 406 f.=16.

[1149] _Ib._, Erl. ed., 60, p. 57 (heading).

[1150] _Ib._, p. 79.

[1151] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540).

[1152] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 406 f.; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 20.

[1153] _Ib._, 12, p. 345. Sermon of 1523.

[1154] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 1, p. 190.

[1155] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 590; Irmischer, 3, p. 426.

[1156] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 156; Nov. 4, 1538.

[1157] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 314 ff.; Irmischer, 1, p. 277 _sqq._, detailed Commentary on Galatians which is fuller on the question of sorcery than the Commentary of 1519 (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 590; Irmischer, 3, p. 426).

[1158] _Ib._, 40, 1, p. 314; Irmischer, 1, p. 277.

[1159] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 380. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 12.

[1160] See Lauterbach’s “Tagebuch,” p. 117, for both.

[1161] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 162; Erl. ed., 33, p. 161. Cp. Erl. ed., 60, pp. 37, 39.

[1162] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 198 (1540). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 39 f.

[1163] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 198. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 40.

[1164] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129 (1540).

[1165] _Ib._, p. 380 (1536).

[1166] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 12.

[1167] Lauterbach, _ib._

[1168] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129.

[1169] _Ib._: there is no “_motus de loco_,” etc., all this “_phantasmata sunt_.” Similarly in “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 409; “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 12, p. 17 _sq._: the metamorphosis of old women into tom-cats and the nocturnal excursions of the witches to banquets are “delusions of the devil, not actual occurrences”; he, however, admits the possibility.

[1170] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 111.

[1171] See Paulus, _ib._, pp. 25 ff., 49.

[1172] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 111.

[1173] _Ib._, p. 117, Aug. 20, 1538.

[1174] _Ib._, p. 121, Aug. 25, 1538. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 12.

[1175] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 79.

[1176] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 16, p. 551 (“_occidantur_,” etc.).

[1177] See Paulus, _ib._, p. 43 f., where he quotes Luther’s “Von den Conciliis und Kirchen” (1539), in support of the duty of burning witches on account of their compact with the devil, quite apart from the harm they may cause—“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 441 f.: The witches or “devil’s whores, who are burnt at the stake whenever they are caught, as is right, not for stealing milk but because of the blasphemy by which they strengthen the cause of the devil, his sacraments and Churches.”

[1178] Cp. the Eisleben edition (1569), pp. 280, 280´: “They should be hurried to the stake. The lawyers require too many witnesses and proofs, they despise these open, etc.” The same occurs in the Frankfurt edition (1568), p. 218´.

[1179] “Pythonissa,” Frankfurt, 1660, pp. 471, 472, from Luther’s Works, Erl. ed., 58, p. 129 (above, p. 287).

[1180] “Hexenwahn,” p. 75 ff.

[1181] _Ib._, p. 54 ff.

[1182] See Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Engl. Trans.), vol. xvi., pp. 269 to 526, a very full account of the Witch trials, etc.

[1183] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 129. From May 21 to June 11, 1540. See above, p. 290, n. 3.

[1184] Cp. N. Paulus, “Hexenwahn,” pp. 52, 66.

[1185] Karl Adolf Menzel, “Neuere Gesch. der Deutschen,” 3², 1854, p. 65, is of opinion that the reformers of the 16th century lent the whole weight of their position and convictions to strengthening the belief in witches. Janssen, “Hist. of the German People,” _loc. cit._: “Through Luther and his followers belief in the power and influence of the devil, who was active in all men and who exercised his arts especially through witches and sorcerers, received an impetus and spread in a manner never known before.” J. Hansen, “Zauberwahn und Hexenprozess im MA.,” 1900, p. 536 f., also admits that Protestantism had increased the readiness to accept such belief. Cp. the admissions of Riezler, v. Bezold and Steinhausen quoted by Paulus, “Hexenwahn,” p. 48 f.

[1186] Cp. J. Diefenbach, “Der Zauberglaube des 16. Jahrh. nach den Katechismen Luthers und Canisius,” 1900.

[1187] To Catherine Bora, Feb. 7, 1546, “Briefe,” 5, p. 787.

[1188] See below, vol. vi., xxxvi., 3.

[1189] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 295 (1542). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 117.

[1190] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 317.

[1191] _Ib._, p. 267, speaking of a case of long-continued adulterous incest between brother and sister (1542): “This was the work of the devil himself,” etc.

[1192] “_Satanicum tempus et sæculum._” To Jakob Probst, Dec. 5, 1544, “Briefe,” 5, p. 703.

[1193] To Amsdorf, Jan. 8, 1546, _ib._, p. 774.

[1194] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 174 (1540).

[1195] On the great tragedy between God and Satan in which he (particularly in 1541) is so prominently entangled, see the letter to Melanchthon, April 4, 1541, “Briefwechsel,” 13, p. 291.

[1196] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 307 (1542-43).

[1197] To Johann Silvius Egranus, March 24, 1518, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 173.

[1198] See above, p. 226 ff.

[1199] Thus as early as June 27, 1522, to Staupitz at Salzburg, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 407, with the emphatic assurance: “_sed Christus, qui cœpit, conteret eum, frustra renitentibus omnibus portis inferi_.”

[1200] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 117.

[1201] _Ib._, 59, p. 342.

[1202] _Ib._, 57, p. 65.

[1203] _Ib._, 58, p. 301.

[1204] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 222.

[1205] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, pp. 73, 55. Mathesius, “Aufzeichn.,” ed. Lœsche, p. 113.

[1206] P. 200. Cp. above, p. 174.

[1207] P. 193´.

[1208] “Cochlæi Acta, etc.” (1549), p. 2: “_quod etiam corporaliter visus quibusdam fuerit cum eo conversari_.”

[1209] “I feel him well enough.” “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 301.

[1210] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 198.

[1211] _Ib._, p. 331.

[1212] To Wenceslaus Link, July 14, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 301.

[1213] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 24, p. 51; Erl. ed., 33, p. 55.

[1214] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 51, p. 90 f. (1534).

[1215] _Ib._, cp. above, p. 5.

[1216] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 279.

[1217] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 235.

[1218] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 586; Erl. ed., 10², p. 355, Church-postils.

[1219] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 70.

[1220] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 55 f.

[1221] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 340. Lauterbach, _ib._, p. 56.

[1222] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 228. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 60, under the heading “Satan flees from music”: “It was thus that David with his harp abated Saul’s temptations when the devil plagued him” (3 Kg. xvi. 23).

[1223] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 313.

[1224] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 59, p. 343 f.

[1225] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 56.

[1226] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 165.

[1227] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 27.

[1228] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 3.

[1229] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 82.

[1230] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 222.

[1231] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, pp. 55, 73.

[1232] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 30.

[1233] _Ib._, p. 163.

[1234] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 88 f. Cp. “Luthers Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 101 f., n. 59.

[1235] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 121. Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 12, and Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 380, from Notes of Lauterbach and Weller. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 78.

[1236] Lauterbach, _ib._ In the Latin “Colloquia” as well as in the German Table-Talk (_ib._), in connection with “the clergy and schoolmasters” of the past, it is related, that, in their day, the head of an ox was taken from the fence and thrown into the St. John’s bonfire, whereby a great number of witches were attracted to the place. Then follows at once in both passages, in order to emphasise the advance which had been made: “But Dr. Pommer’s plan is the best,” etc., etc. See vol. iii., p. 230, n. 2.

[1237] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 218.

[1238] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 59.