# Thirty-five Years of Luther Research/Researches on Particular Phases of the Life and Theology of Luther

IV. RESEARCHES ON PARTICULAR PHASES OF THE LIFE AND THEOLOGY OF LUTHER
In as much as we are about to make mention of those valuable individual investigations which have been made during the last thirty-five years in the life and theology of Luther, we shall name them in their chronological sequence, and the career of the Reformer will furnish us with the links that will connect the one with the other,
1. Luther's Youth
Luther at all times held his father in high regard. The life of Luther's father, in spite of many investigations, has always been unclear in many respects. Catholic writers sometimes even portrayed it as possessing flagrantly immoral propensities. W. Moellenberg29 therefore in 1906, after carefully examining the papers of the Mansfeld mine at Eisleben and the council minutes of the city of Mansfeld, which are now in Magdeburg, shed new light on the life and doings of Hans Luther, especially on his possessions and his trade, so that we now are much better acquainted with his gradually increasing wealth and prominence. That the maiden name of Luther's Mother was not Lindemann as we still sometimes read owing to a statement of Rector Schneidewin of Wittenberg to that effect, but rather Ziegler, Knaake proved in a lengthy article in "Theologische Studien und Kritiken" (1881). When Hans Luther's son Martin was born, whether in 1482 (according to a ​bronze tablet on Luther's grave, which, allowing Luther sixty-three years, two months and ten days, points to the seventh of December, 1482) or 1484 (as Melanchthon would have it), or 1483, is something that can not be ascertained beyond doubt, as is generally conceded. G. Oergel (1889) put in a plea again for 1482, and was inclined to accept the seventh of December as the birthday of the Reformer.80 However, Drews points out that Luther himself, in a letter of the sixth of December, 1532, mentions that he celebrates his birthday on St. Martin's day, and Kawerau, through an article in the "Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift," seems almost to prove beyond doubt that Luther was born in 1483, notwithstanding Luther said himself as late as spring, 1543, "nullus est certiis de nativitatis tempore, for Philippiis et ego are one year apart in our vieivs." (Kroker, Luther's Tischreden, 1903, no. 625.)
Since 1497 Luther attended school in Magdeburg and Eisleben. If one desires to know something of the knowledge purveyed to him at this time, he must acquaint himself with the writings of Kaemmel, Mueller, Knepper, Schmid and Bauch.31 Concerning the "Brethren of the common life" (also called "Nullbrueder"), to which order his teachers in Magdeburg belonged, one may be excellently informed by L. Schulze's article in Hauck's "Real Enzyclopaedie," III, pp. 474-507, together with its lengthy supplements in Volume XXIII, pp. 260-269. Schoengen in his book, "Die Schule von Zwolle" (Freiburg, 1898), deals especially with the schools of this order. We also direct attention, as far as Luther's school years at Mansfeld, Magdeburg and Eisenach are concerned, to the first volume of O. Scheel's work, "Martin Luther. Vom Katholicismus zur Reformation" (Tue​bingen, 1916), in which, by means of the school statutes of the late Middle Ages, the teaching and the learning in the preparatory schools of the universities is minutely described, although here the error is also made that the author in unwarranted and arbitrary fashion pictures the conditions better than they in reality were. E. Schneidewind, 1883, in his booklet, "Das Lutherhaus in Eisenach," offers much concerning the Cotta family, that so generously welcomed Luther into its midst. Buchwald also gives a happy account of Luther's stay here.32
2. Luther at the University
In the summer of 1501 Luther matriculated at the University of Erfurt. Today we have a much truer and detailed conception of the conditions prevailing at Erfurt at that time, and of its teachers than the one obtained through F. W. Kampschulte's "Die Universitaet Erfurt in ihrem Verhaeltnis zu deni Humanismus und der Reformation" (1858 and 1860), which, however, is still worthy of notice today. This change was primarily brought about by Oergel, Kolde, Bauch, Hermelink and Scheel.33 Hermelink has taught us better to understand the teaching of the Humanists, which naturalized itself also in Erfurt. He pointed out, above all things, that it was by no means an offshoot of the Italian Renaissance movement, but, on the contrary a relatively independent reform endeavor on German soil, which, although desiring to be unhampered by the guardianship of the clergy, still remained entirely within the pale of the Mediaeval Age, and was in nowise modernly pagan and materialistically inclined. With these Humanists Luther could be related and yet remain a Catholic.
Luther in the year 1533.
Painting by Cranach.
​the theological and philosophical teachers of Luther, Jodocus Trutvetter and Bartholomaeus Arnoldi of Usingen,34 and through them with the theology that was taught Luther. He locates them as Occamists, whose leader at this time was Gabriel Biel in Tuebingen,35 and whose philosophy they represented. It was known as the via moderna. Thanks to Hermelink, we are also in a position better to understand these German Occamists, and through this Luther's own development, in as much as he proves that their teaching was in nowise identical with Nominalism. "It did not deny that the genera and the intelligible cosmos were realities or entities. It was much rather by nature methodical and 'erkenntnistheoretisch.' It attempted in critical spirit to distinguish between the province of faith and the province of science by means of a grammatical-terministic logic, derived from stoic influences, in order to make place for a theology that was both positivistic and Christian, respectively ecclesiastical. Thus, instead of being the opposite of realistic ontology, it was merely a theory about the way of theological thinking, which linked itself everywhere with the Platonic-realistic metaphysic." Of the textbooks that formed the basis for study in the university especial mention must be made of those named by Ficker in his edition of Luther's commentary on Romans (pp. civ), to wit, those by Trutvetter: Breviarium dialecticum, Erphordiae 1500; Summulae totius logicae, Erphordiae 1501 (Summa in totam physicen, Erph. 1514); those by Usingen: Compendium totius logicae, Lipsiae 1500; Parvulus philosophiae naturalis, figuralis interpretatio in epitomam philosophiae naturalis, editio secunda, Basiliae 1511. Scheel has even found manuscripts in the libraries of Stuttgart and Munich that contain a great share of ​the lectures Luther attended as a student and baccalaureus artium at Erfurt, so that at last a much more trustworthy and plastic conception of his university work can be arrived at than before.
Kolde has shed light upon all the different phases of the religious life in Erfurt. Especially did he throw the searchlight on the preaching at Erfurt when he made us better acquainted with the sermons on indulgences and other subjects by the Augustinian Genser (or Jenser) of Paltz, and when he published from a manuscript a sermon Genser preached at the beginning of a semester at the university in October, 1482. We are now able to appreciate what Luther said later on, although sermons were regularly and often heard in Erfurt, that during his stay he had never heard a Christian sermon.
3. Luther Enters the Monastery
Oergel has shed more light on the circumstances connected with Luther's entrance into the monastery, when he tells how during the year of 1505 the university was visited by quite a number of dire happenings. He tells how suddenly a classmate of Luther died of pleurisy; how just at this time the plague and spotted fever made many victims at Erfurt, so that during the summer a panic occurred among the students. All this helps to explain why just at this time the serious thoughts of death and judgment tormented the soul of Luther, even though the principal motive of his entrance into the monastery always remained the inner restlessness and desire for salvation, of which Hermelink excellently says that the western church always kept this restlessness and desire present, nurturing the same for pedagogical reasons and at the same time satisfying it.
�� � ​The monastery which Luther entered belonged to that division of the Augustinian order called "Observantes." Kolde's already mentioned writing concerning the German Augustinians and Johann von Staupitz enables us to understand the peculiarity of these "Observantes." We find that the Augustinians in Germany were divided into four provinces since 1299, to wit, the Rhenisch-Suebian, the Bavarian, the Thuringian-Saxonian and the one of Cologne-Flanders. When, in the fifteenth century, a reformation among the German Augustinian monasteries became more and more imperative, Henry Zolter, enthusiastic for the abandoned strictness in monasteries, succeeded in combining together, for the purpose of observing strictly the old Augustinian rules, as an independent union, five monasteries, the one at Himmelspforte, near Wernigerode; the one at Magdeburg, at Dresden, at Waldheim, and at Koenigsberg, in Franconia. These five were called "Observantes," in contradistinction to the bulk of other Augustinians called "Conventuales." Andreas Proles energetically carried on Zolter's plan, so that his union, now called the congregation of Proles, or the Saxonian, or the German, was fully recognized in 1496, in spite of the fact, that he and the monasteries that held with him by the General-Vicar of the order were once temporarily placed under the ban. More than that, its claim for an independent vicar was granted, and it was considered completely on par with the four German provinces mentioned before. Proles was furthermore successful in winning twenty-five other monasteries in addition to the five already named, for the purpose of observing the old rules of the order more strictly, because not a few of these twenty-five belonged to the most important ones in all Germany, and even of ​the Netherlands; for example, the ones in Muenchen, Nuernberg, Erfurt, Gotha, Magdeburg, Dresden, Wittenberg, Nordhausen, Muehlhausen in Alsace, Bonn, Coeln, Haarlem, Dordrecht. This "German Congregation" at the time of Proles' death, in 1503, constituted a real power. Proles' successor as General-Vicar was the well-known Staupitz, who was elected at the meeting in Eschwege on the seventeenth of May, 1503, according to the wish of Proles. Thus through his entrance into the monastery at Erfurt Luther became one of the "Observantes," a member of the "German Congregation," and the noble-minded Staupitz came to be his first superior in Germany.
Since Denifle had cast so many aspersions on Luther's monastery life, it became necessary to study this period of the life of the Reformer more thoroughly. Outside of the brief answers made to Denifle by Kolde, Seeberg, Haussleiter, Brieger, Koehler, Harnack and Walther,36 we have here especially to consider Benrath, and even more so Braun.37 Because Denifle contends that since 1515, certainly since 1519, "the vow of chastity had proven itself irksome to Luther," and that the real motive for his defection from Rome is to be found in his
Luther in the year 1535. Painting by Cranach.
​velopment, a development, that had to pass through all stages of alleged certainty of gaining salvation and the bitter knowledge that external guarantees do not allay doubt until it found its way to the truly blessed certainty of God's paternity through Jesus Christ.
Braun visualizes the internal development of Luther up to 1521, wherefore we must return to his work later on. We must, however, in this connection, consider that Braun very definitely brings out that it was not weakness for carnal sins that contaminated Luther all these years, and brought about the end of his relation with Rome. On the contrary, it was his eminently tender conscience, the very opposite of the "Kautschukconscience" trained by the Church, his conscience which would not allow itself to be soothed either through the at that time customary reference to the "Monk's Baptism" (i. e., to the power of order to make up for sins) or through sacramental magic, but which would trouble itself before and after dispensation of grace because of the consciousness of inherent lusts, until the New Testament conception of grace, with its mercy of God, that reckons no sins to the faithful, came into its own, and through faith in it peace entered the heart. Braun says "the Luther personality that becomes apparent to us through his theological endeavors is none other than the one we already know from his mode of life. His unbending veracity that is never guilty of distortion of justice, that by the scholastic distinctions of sins of omission, of weaknesses, of excusable ignorance, the scholastic assertion of the validity of good intentions, and whatever the rest of softening phrases, may be called, does not allow its moral convictions to be confused, but abides by the dictum of the conscience and calls sin sin, — his excellent psychological understand​ing of the methods of divine pedagogy, finally the unconditional dependence on the grace of God, because of which, following in the steps of Paul and Augustine, he finds nothing of good in himself, but attributes all of holiness, all of virtue, all of good to the freely given mercy of God, — all of these constitute the spiritual seal which Luther's theology bears. They are the proof that God was with him."
4. Luther's Journey to Rome
In the year 1508 Luther was called to the University of Wittenberg. Haussleiter gives us an idea of the university at this time, whereas Bauch sheds light on its relation to Scholasticism and Haupt illustrates how much the universities of today owe to the founding of Wittenberg.38 As is known, after one year at Wittenberg, Luther was called back to Erfurt (probably by his order), where in the fall of 1509 he entered as Sententiarius.
It appears that during this time at Erfurt he made his journey to Rome. As to time, motive for going and route of travel nobody seems to know very much. Hausrath, Tuerk, Elze, Kawerau, Todt and especially Boehmer in our period treat of his journey.39 Hausrath, in using the guide of the pilgrims to Rome at that time, the Mirabilia urbis Romæ, made the interesting attempt to interpret Luther's sojourn at the different places of grace in Rome and his scattered notes concerning these by means of this old guide. It was interesting, but not trustworthy. Much less does the work of Hausrath bring us to a decision as to the time, whether in the winter of 1510-11 or in the winter of 1511-12, or as to the motive for going, whether as a representative of the seven convents rebelling against Staupitz or as a mediator upon ​the wish of Staupitz. Tuerk and Kawerau devoted themselves to gathering every possible expression of Luther that might have a bearing upon his journey to Rome. Elze, Todt and Clemen have performed a service for us in connection with discoveries as to the route of travel. However, Boehmer has given us the main production.
In his work not only are all the sources that come into consideration carefully and critically examined, but additional sources bearing upon important issues are used. For Boehmer does not only give us those passages of the very rare Alphabetum of the Augustinian hermit, Felix Milensius, that have reference to the matter reviewed, but he also enriches our knowledge of the trouble between Staupitz and the seven revolutionary convents and furnishes us with a reproduction of entries for 1508 and 1509 in the diary of the General of the Order, Egidio, and two important communications of the Council at Nuernberg addressed to the General and the Chapter of the Augustinians at Koeln.
On the basis of this we have pretty conclusive evidence that Luther started his journey in fall, say in November, 1510, and that Luther was in Rome during January, 1511. We are now also better informed as to the motive of the journey. Luther actually did go to Rome in the interest of the seven revolutionary convents. Staupitz, in harmony with the General of the Order, Egidio, also wished to reform the "Conventuales" (cf. above) and with this end in view to unite for the first the Augustinian Province Saxonia with the "German Congregation." The majority of the twenty-nine "Observantes," namely, twenty-two, agreed to this and recognized the union; but seven convents under the leadership of the Frankish District Vicar of Kulmbach, Simon ​Kayser, raised their voices in protest. These were the convents of Nuernberg, Kulmbach, Koenigsberg in Franconia, Sangerhausen, Nordhausen, Sternberg in Mecklenburg and Erfurt. They were afraid that, instead of the ideal of the "Observantes" being assimilated by the "Conventuales" through this union, the levity of these would find access into their own ranks. When all other means had failed they did not hesitate to send a delegation to the General of the Order at Rome, in order to nullify the union and make their ideal secure. As a member of this delegation the monastery at Erfurt elected the monk, Martin Luther. He could hardly have been the litis procurator, but only the socius itinerarius. For the former position an experienced man was required, one who understood the procedure at the Roman See — perhaps the distinguished monk of Nuernberg, Anton Kress, was entrusted with this position. At their arrival in Rome the commissioners brought their matter to the Procurator in January, 1511, but a deaf ear was turned to them. So after a stay of four weeks in Rome they started their journey homeward, their mission unfulfilled. Even to-day we can read an entry into the General's diary for January, 1511, which says: "Appellare ex Legibus Germani prohibentur." But the journey to Rome brought no new light or peace to Luther's soul, not even the ascent of the Scala Santa of Pilate.40
At the same time Boehmer gives a minute description of Rome at that time, where every statement made is carefully proven by the literature of the age, and where, for the description of the immeasurably sunken state of morals, the not altogether unknown yet not very thoroughly used book, "The Lozana Andaluza," of Francisco Delirado, Venice, 1528, is made use of. Boehmer also ​for the first time offers an attractive suggestion as to what course Luther's career took immediately after his return from Rome. A second delegation sent by the Nuernberg Convent — likely in the name of the others — which brought a communication of the Nuernberg Council to the General of the Order succeeded in so far, that an actual union between the "Observantes" and the other Augustinians in Germany was no longer expected, and that from now on the only requirement was that all parties recognize in Staupitz their Vicar General, otherwise having nothing in common. This new proposition was discussed at Jena in the middle of July, 1511. Here again the seven "Observantes" protested. But, the main object had been achieved and the danger that because of the union the levity of the "Conventuales" might find entrance among them, avoided; so Luther and Johann Lang, it seems, went over to the side of Staupitz. Because he now knew that he must be in opposition to the majority of his brother-monks at Erfurt, Luther would have been glad to be called back again to Wittenberg by Staupitz. In the spring of 1512 he had already moved there and it was probably in May, 1512, that he represented the Convent of Wittenberg in Koeln at the occasion of the assembly of Congregations.41
5. Luther Made Doctor of Divinity, 1512
At the assembly in Koeln some resolutions were formed that were important for Luther's future. He was not only named as sub-prior of the Wittenberg Monastery, in which capacity it devolved upon him to take the leadership in the course of study there, but he was also called upon to become a postulant for the title of Divine Doctor. One can readily see in this, that at this time already ​Staupitz intended that his tried disciple should take the place in Wittenberg, which he himself as yet occupied, the "Lectura in Biblia auf das Augustinerkloster gestiftet."
Concerning the solemn ceremony when Luther was made a Divine Doctor,42 on the 18th and 19th of October, Steinlein published a valuable investigation, in which he describes the procedure of the promotion, the meaning of being a Doctor, in itself as well as in reference to Luther — whom it gave a strong impulse and secure footing, whereas it did not influence his relation to Holy Scriptures, as this had been a most intimate one before — and also the prominence which Luther in different periods of his activity accorded to his being a Divine Doctor.
6. Luther's Development from 1512-1517
Of what nature was Luther's theological development between 1512 and 1517, i. e., how did Luther's mind gradually become free from Rome and how did he become an evangelical Christian and an evangelical theologian? The Roman Catholic Denifle, above all others, as has already been briefly stated, placed this question in the foreground, and Grisar held fast to similar assertions that strongly incriminated Luther, and scattered them broadcast in the widest circles. One cannot answer this question without at the same time answering the other question, namely, in how far the later statements made by Luther himself about his theological development, and about his monastery life and the vulgarly Catholic beliefs, which obtained in Luther's time, are trustworthy. Denifle, Grisar and Paulus prefer simply to ignore these as being entirely devoid of historical interest, sometimes they even attempt to hold them up as proofs of ​a strong streak of dishonesty in Luther, whereas the Protestant theologians contend, while admitting that Luther's memory failed him in some single instances, that they in the main, as far as his theological development is concerned, are entirely trustworthy. Among the later Scheel is probably the most ready to admit that Luther's memory played him false in some material respects. But he at the same time is a strong opponent against the Catholic assertions and holds that all decisive features related by Luther are correct.43
So it must be considered a historical fact what Luther tells of his "Klostererlehnis." It was really "auf diesem Turm," i. e., in the tower room of the cloister at Wittenberg, where Luther for the first time gained the evangelical understanding of Rom. 1, 17, and as a result peace for his soul. It is characteristic for Grisar's mind and method when starting from a very doubtful text, that he attempts to prove that Luther found this important and saving explanation in the privy; but even if he were right, what would it matter? Kawerau and Scheel on this point strike Grisar home in a way deserved by him.44 We are not able to say with certainty at what time this new understanding of the term "jnstitia Dei" was given to Luther, but Scheel, it seems, dates it correctly in the year 1512-13.
Furthermore, it is a fact that Luther soon after his Doctor-promotion began to work on the Psalms and that in these lectures, extending from 1513-1516, we have an important milestone of his inner development. Without placing himself, after a critical examination, in opposition to the system of doctrine of the Church, still there are moments when rays of true evangelical faith break through these lectures, especially can we more and more ​gain glimpses into a soul that has found its peace in that righteousness of God that makes all sinners just. Outside of Hering it was Dieckhoff especially who busied himself more intimately with these lectures.45
Already, before completion of the lectures on the Psalms, Luther in 1515 began with the Epistle to the Romans. This commentary has been well treated by its
Luther in the year 1542. Painting by Cranach.
​cerning his consideration for the Hebrew and Greek text — Luther took up the study of Hebrew before Greek; the Greek New Testament (Edition of Erasmus) he used for the first time in 1516 in connection with Romans IX. Meissinger further attempts a list of Luther's first library.
The whole question of Luther's theological development is taken up by Dieckhoff, J. Picker, W. Braun, A. W. Hunzinger, H. Hermelink, Scheel, Kawerau, J. v. Walter, A. V. Mueller; besides these investigations certain passages in Loofs's History of Dogma, Boehmer's "Luther in the light of recent research," and O. Ritschl's History of Protestant Dogma must be compared.47 Unhappily we cannot enter into details at this time. It is apparent, however, that there were four main factors that played the influential part in Luther's theological development during these years: Occam's school of theology of which Luther was an adherent, his reading of Augustine, his study of Paul, and the German mysticism. Hermelink in 1912 includes everything that has been accomplished during the last years, when he writes in his History of Reformation (Krueger, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, second volume, p. 63), as follows: "We must begin in all likelihood with the Occam school of theology, with which Luther first became acquainted. He will always have this school to thank for the strong accentuation of the will in the idea of God, for the beginning of his understanding of faith as building upon positive facts of revelation and mistrusting reason. The moral undertone in the way of salvation, as the School of Occam taught it, aided in multiplying his inner restlessness. The tension between reason and faith, self and the will of God is intensified, and, for the time being ​solved, through the reading of Augustine, whose earlier writings, tinged with New-platonic ideas, Luther at that time preferred. The mysticism that he gained from these, together with that complete metaphysical ethical dualism that has its origin in ancient philosophy, he brought into full play in his exegesis on the Psalter. A further means of consolation is the fides incarnationis that is found in Augustine, i. e., the stress laid on the importance for salvation of Christ's life and passion. This is emphasized even more through the study of Anselm and Bernhard (the 'happy trade' of sin and grace between Christ and the soul). Finally, his opposition against the moralism of his time that tended toward Pelagianism was another chain that bound Luther to Augustine."
"What Augustine wrought in the mind of Luther was immeasurably intensified through the study of Pauline ideas and Paul's opposition against nomism and ergism in every form. In the Pauline idea of ΣΑΡΞ Luther finds his experience with concupiscence confirmed. Now, 1, justificatio=absolutio=non imputatio peccatorum; 2, gratia is identified as justificatio=misericordia dei= nova nativitas, quæ dat novum esse. Semper adhuc justificamur et in justificatione sumus. Simul sum peccator et Justus; 3, fides==fides evangelii=relativa promissioni, per quam solam deus justificat. Synergistic statements are still to be found in the lectures on the Psalms, and more rarely in the commentary on Romans. German mysticism, Tauler and Theologia Deutsch especially (new edition by Mandel), helped strongly to overcome this. The pantheistic conclusions of mysticism were completely crowded into the background through Occam's idea of God, intensified through the Gospel. The last link in the chain, not the first — as was formerly supposed from state​ments of Melanchthon — was the certainty of salvation, whose clear expression Luther had wrought out during
his study of Romans."
Herewith the main factors in Luther's development are correctly mentioned, even though Walter is right when he advises, not as yet to conclude this investigation. Braun's work has been the most instructive among those alluded to. Mueller's book one time aroused a great deal of excitement. He directs a very sharp attack against Denifle, and on the strength of a very wide knowledge concerning mediæval theology, attempts the proof that Luther's doctrine of concupiscentia, etc., did not have its origin in Luther's "soiled" mind, but that much rather it is an expression that dates back to a once celebrated old school that had the sanction of the Church, and which even at Luther's time had many adherents on the Catholic side, so that in reality Luther brought no "innovation," but only a "renovation," and that the papacy of that time is much rather to be called the "apostate" instead of Luther. However, Mueller did not prove very satisfactorily that Luther was acquainted with this theology. Nevertheless, it was pretty confounding evidence and challenged to closer investigation in this direction.
7. Luther and the Indulgence
Luther could hardly have begun with his lectures on Romans, in which he fought his way to the absolute certainty of salvation when Pope Leo gave his sanction to the Mainz Indulgence on the 31st of March, 1515. It had always been accepted heretofore that the Pope gave his sanction to this Mainz Indulgence, in order that half of the funds might place Albrecht in a position to defray the huge sums paid to the Roman See for his confirmation ​as archbishop of Mainz, which method of procedure would have been scandalous enough, and which would have furnished plenty of proof that the indulgences were a means unscrupulously employed to fill the treasuries of the Vatican. But the investigation of the dealings of the House of Fugger, the Pope's banker, that transacted all of the papal business at that time in Germany, Hungary, Poland and Scandinavia, by the Catholic Alois Schulte48 disclosed very clearly that the papal business was even much more sordid. Not only did Albrecht have to pay the Pope the sum of 12,000 Dukaten (= ca $60,- 000) as regular fee for confirmation as archbishop of Mainz; but it was hinted to him that he could never unite the archbishopric of Mainz with the bishopric of Halberstadt and the archbishopric of Magdeburg without paying a further sum of 10,000 Dukaten (about $50,000); only then could the rules forbidding such unification of offices be set aside. And Albrecht conceded. So in the end the much-mooted simony was committed by the Pope himself! In order to gain the sums for this unholy business it was Rome itself who intimated to the young Albrecht that the best way would be to sell indulgences in Mainz and Brandenburg, send half of the money thus acquired directly to Rome, the other half indirectly as a payment for the sanction of three bishoprics existing under one head! It is fairly astonishing what conditions Alois Schulte discloses in his book.
What was the nature of indulgences? On this subject also many disclosures have been made in the last thirty- five years. We name especially the works of Bratke, Dieckhoff, Brieger, Ditterle and the one by the Roman Catholic Paulus.49 Although Protestants were at first a
Luther in his later years. Painting by Cranach.
​to which these indulgences were much less harmful than they were once thought to be, and that they only excused the purchaser from punishments demanded by the canons of the Church, yet in the end it was acknowledged that the old definitions were in the main correct.
The Church as a matter of fact did distinguish theoretically between the purchase of an indulgence and the absolution as declared by the priest in Confession. The latter could be an absolution from culpability, or of the punishments exacted by the Church, or of the divine punishments for sin in time and eternity. But because this absolution was often granted by priests who accompanied the indulgence-vendors, and thus occurred at the same time when a purchase of indulgence was made; and because from the end of the 14th century the indulgences were also called indulgences for punishment and culpability (pœna et culpa) and praised as an atonement of man with God, it can be readily understood that the common people generally were of the opinion that on these occasions they had the opportunity, not only to receive indulgence for punishments, but also for culpability. For the common man did not know that theoretically the Church had bound together freeing from culpability with Confession and Absolution; he could only form his judgment according to what he saw. What he really saw was something that savored strongly of the open market-place, a business where Confession played a very much subordinated role, especially since attritio was considered enough. Although Tetzel, who was commissioned for his special trade, and of whom Paulus treats in a monogravure (1889),50 later after his acquittal, taught that the indulgences "served solely in the case of punishment of sins that had been repented of and confessed," yet his ​instructions read, outside of indulgence for punishment of sin, of the plenaria omnium peccatorum remissio, and without repenting one could buy an indulgence upon the presentation of which any promiscuously chosen priest was forced once during lifetime and in the hour of death to grant to the professor a general absolution.
In the same way an indulgence for the dead could be had, for "as soon as the money clinked in the bottom of the chest, the souls of the deceased friends forthwith went into Heaven," was, according to Prierias, actually preached as "mera et catholica Veritas." Therefore, it was no trivial issue on which Luther's battle began; it was an institution, representative of the entire system which brought it forth, and because of whose abuses the entire world suffered.
Concerning particularly that indulgence connected with the Castle Church at Wittenberg, P. Kalkoff treats in his "Ablass und Reliquienverehrung an der Schlosskirche zu Wittenberg" (1907).
8. Luther's Ninety-five Theses
To the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Luther nailed his Ninety-five Theses. As far as these are concerned, in addition to the already mentioned writing of Bratke, the publications of Koehler and Brieger come into consideration.51 Koehler presents all the documents from the 11th century to the Indulgence Decretal of Leo X on the 9th of November, 1518, that are necessary for the understanding of the indulgence controversy, so that every one can form an estimate for himself. And then he arranges the Ninety-five Theses so that, alongside of the individual theses, he can give Luther's own explanation in the "Resolutiones" and the ​contradictions of the Roman theologians. Brieger, on the other hand, has given close study to the systematical arrangement of the Ninety-five Theses.
Because the systematic arrangement is by no means so clear at the first glance, we shall here reproduce it, as Brieger thinks it to be (according to Hermelink, Geschichte der Reformation, 1912): The first seven sentences constitute the introduction and offer the fundamental definition of repentance (the life-long pœnitentia vera interior that is demanded by Christ is distinguished from the sacramental act of Penitence: it finds its expression in mortificationes carnis, Theses 1-4), that of punishment (5), and that of culpability (6-7). The first main passage, Theses 8-29, treats of purgatory in a double respect. First, the relation between the idea of pœna canonica and pœna purgatorii (8-19): negatively 8-13 (morituri legibus canonum mortui iam sunt), and affirmatively 14-19 (spiritual interpretation of purgatory, which serves to increase love and decrease fear). Then the relation of the pope to purgatory is investigated in 20-29: negatively in 20-24 (the pope can only excuse from the punishment he himself has exacted, therefore not from the punishment of purgatory, and affirmatively in 25-29 (the papal suflfragium is dependent upon the will of God). The second main passage (30-80) deals of the indulgences for the living. Theses 30-55 contain contents and subject-matter of the indulgence sermons (30-35 criticism of indulgence sermons, 36-40 positive declarations beginning with the premises of the Catholic doctrine of penitence; 41-52 the right form of indulgence sermons and the one solely wanted by the pope; 53-55 its non-value compared with the other parts of divine service). Proceeding from the practical into the dogmatical, we are ​brought to the discussion in Theses 56-66 on the thesaurus. The criticism in 56-59 and the positive declaration concerning the Gospel, and the merit of Christ as the real claves and thesaurus ecclesiæ (60-62) are taken together in ringing anti-theses (63-66). In conclusion the authorities of the Church are reminded of their duty in further pairs of anti-theses (67-80). The Ninety-five Theses are concluded in twofold manner: in 81-91 Luther gathers all the old protests from the laity against the hawking of indulgences and in 91-95 in ringing words about the evil motive for purchasing indulgences escaping from the salubrious suffering in repentance — he leads back to Theses 1-4.
9. Rome's Procedure Against Luther, 1517-1520
The action of the Roman Church against Luther that followed and that ended with his excommunication, has taken an entirely new aspect as a result of the newer investigations. That Luther's opponents, like Tetzel, Wimpina, Eck et al, already from the very beginning entered the lists against Luther without reserve, and were prepared, because of his doubts about the popularly accepted indulgence doctrine, to call him an heretic, to cause him to be excommunicated and to send him to the stake, all of this was known. But the opinion seemed to hold sway that Rome itself, as the highest ecclesiastic
The old Luther.
Woodcut by Joerg after Cranach.
​to smash the new progressive with the severest Church punishment, and, that through diverse, and sometimes even poltically influential measures, it worked to the end to get him into its power.
The results of these important discoveries are briefly summarized by Kawerau in the third edition of his "Geschichte der Reformation und Gegenreformation" (Moeller, Kirchengeschichte, Vol. III, 1907). Kalkoff himself treats of this minutely and very excellently, besides his special studies in the Zeitschrift fuer Kirchengeschichte (Vol. 32), later published in book form, in his introduction of 186 pages for the second volume of the Muenchen-Edition of Luther, when he presents this entire period under the following headings: 1. The history leading up to the Indulgence Controversy (pp. 9-21), the controversy itself and Rome's first steps against Luther (pp. 22-44), the first Roman suit in the actual process (pp. 45-54), the summary procedure (pp. 55-69), the hearing at Augsburg (pp. 70-84), awaiting the bull carrying the ban (pp. 75-95), election and ecclesiastical armistice (pp. 96-114), the coming reformer (pp. 115-127), the second Roman process against Luther and the Elector (pp. 128-158), the opposition of the Elector and the great reformatory writings of Luther (pp. 159-186).
We shall briefly sketch the course of events. On the same day, when Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg, he also sent a letter to the archbishop of Mainz protesting against the manner in which the indulgence traffic was carried on. The archbishop, however, fearing that Luther's opposition would seriously hinder the sale of indulgence and that thus his revenues would be severely diminished, reported the matter to Rome. His report was a letter of informa​tion rather than of complaint against Luther. Pope Leo X. put the whole matter into the hands of Cajetan, his advisor in questions concerning faith and doctrine. That keen-sighted cardinal readily recognized that the point at issue in Luther's theses and other writings was not merely his rejection of indulgences, but also two other propositions of very great importance, (1) that natural man has no power to do what is really good and acceptable to God; (2) that the sinner is justified before God and saved alone through faith in Christ. Soon after, it was on December 8, Cajetan submitted his opinion on the whole controversy in his "tractatus de indulgentiis." The pope, however, thought it wise to wait for further information on Luther before he called him to account.
The desired information soon arrived. Tetzel succeeded in mobilizing his order, that is the order of Dominican monks, against Luther. The Dominican brethren lent their assistance all the more willingly because they were filled with envy, when they saw how Luther drew large numbers of students to Wittenberg, and how through him the Augustinian order forged ahead to honor and respect. Under the leadership of Doctor Rab, prior of the Monastery of St. Paul in Leipzig, to which Tetzel himself belonged, the Dominicans held a meeting of demonstration in Frankfurt a. O., and here decided vigorously to press the charge of heresy against Luther in Rome. And because they possessed a shrewd representative in Nikolaus von Schoenberg, the Dominicans at first gained their purpose. A papal letter was promptly addressed to Staupitz, Luther's superior, commanding him to force Luther to recant. Staupitz passed the demand of the pope on to Luther without any comment of his own. Luther answered May 31, 1518, "I teach men to trust in ​Jesus Christ and not in their own merit, consisting of prayer and other good works. Because we can be saved, not of our own strength, but alone through the mercy of God. I can not refrain from this." It now seemed as if Tetzel's prediction would come true, that in a few months Luther would be burned at the stake, especially since it was at this time, that Luther published a German tract for the common people in which he attacked indulgences and declared that the vicarious death of Christ and repentant faith were the true way of salvation. Yes, with a letter and other expressions of his grace and good will, the pope even tried to turn the Elector of Saxony into a willing instrument of Rome, who would, either deliver Luther, or at least divest him of his professorship. And the Dominicans were even preparing to take him prisoner on his journey to Heidelberg, where he was required to appear toward the end of April before his superiors. But the Elector turned a deaf ear to all the allurements of the pope and more and more looked with favor on Luther and his teachings, and therefore provided most carefully for Luther's safety on his journey to and from Heidelberg. And in Heidelberg itself, where Luther was to be called to account before his order, and where he was to be delivered into the hands of the hangmen of Rome, in case he did not recant, by God's grace he was privileged to present the principles of his own theology in extended outline before his brethren of the Augustinian order and before the Dominicans who had come to hear him. Luther emphasized that true theology was not to be taken from the books of men, but out of the Book of God, Holy Scripture, and that the central thought in Holy Scripture was, (1) man can do nothing that is really good and so appear righteous before God; (2) there is no other way ​by which we can be freed from guilt and the dominion of sin, than through faith in God's grace, faith in Christ, and Him crucified. And this "theology of the cross" Luther defended with such power that the Dominicans did not succeed in forcing him to deviate even a hair's breadth from his convictions. The brethren of his own order did not even think of insisting on a revocation, but in part even took sides with him.
Upon his return from Heidelberg to Wittenberg, Luther, in the beginning of June, published a defence and a careful exposition of his theses in Latin and sent a copy to the pope in order that he might be able to judge correctly if Luther really were a heretic. In an accompanying letter to the pope Luther contended that the fact that he was a Doctor of Divinity, an honor bestowed upon him through papal power, gave him the privilege to take part in public disputations on all great questions. He also made mention of the flagrancies of the indulgence preachers who, in the way they carried on their traffic, only seriously harmed the Church. Out of all this the Roman authorities heard but the one word, "I cannot recant." Meanwhile Luther appealed to the whole nation in a tract written in German, in which he insisted that he ought not be denounced as an heretic before his case had been carefully investigated and closed in these words, "I am not so presumptuous that I place my opinion above that of all others, nor am I so unmindful of my duty that I would sacrifice God's Word for the sake of the fables of men. Jesus Christ lives and reigns yesterday, today and forever." This confirmed the Roman authorities in their unwillingness to make even the smallest concession. The Dominicans again pressed their charges against Luther before the Papal See and insisted upon prompt ​action against him. Commissioned by the pope, Sylvester Prierias, a Dominican, submitted an opinion on Luther's teachings on the basis of which it was decided that inside of 60 days Luther must appear in Rome personally to defend himself.
Luther and his Elector had hardly begun to take a stand over against the summons, when because of a third report by the Dominicans, a veritable network of lies, and also because of various political events, the authorities in Rome decided to employ even still harsher measures against Luther. Hardly 16 of the 60 days had passed, when without further notice Luther was declared a heretic and put under the papal ban in case he did not recant and immediately respond to the summons. Cajetan, who during these weeks represented the pope at the Diet of Augsburg in 1518, was to get the dangerous Wittenberg monk into his power. Yes the authorities even considered the idea of proceeding against the Elector if he continued to shield Luther. It seemed as if Luther were lost. But God so changed the political situation that the pope suddenly was obliged to depend on the good will of the Elector of Saxony if he hoped to carry out his plans. And the Elector improved the situation to protect Luther. This was the reason why the sentence which had been passed was not carried out, and why Luther, instead of being obliged to go to Rome, was permitted to defend himself before Cajetan at Augsburg.
Thus we can see how promptly and energetically Rome proceeded against Luther, that the Dominicans took a leading part in the affair, and that Cajetan had already formed his opinion of Luther and his teachings before he met him at Augsburg. He is also the author of the Decretal on Indulgence of 1518, and he also provided for ​its German translation and its wide circulation among the German people.
We see now especially what an important role Elector Frederick the Wise53 played in the first period of the Reformation, and that Kolde did not estimate him highly enough. It is true that from the very first, when Luther was called to Heidelberg in order to be seized and sent to Rome, he accorded Luther protection, and it seems that he was finally and completely won over through Luther's great writings of 1520. Brieger says: "The stand of the Wettinian was of importance for the whole further development of the history of the world." Next to God, it is due to the religious conscientiousness and diplomatic firmness of this really wise "Fabius Cunctator" that the Reformation was not nipped in the bud. It is clear now, too, that up until now the activity of Miltitz which took place in this period has been entirely misunderstood. He, as far as his intrusion into Luther's trial is concerned, acted solely upon his own initiative, in order to hinge about a trial under the jurisdiction of the archbishop of Trent, Because this had become pretty well known, it is easy to understand why Luther cared so little for the promise to keep silence that he gave Miltitz.54
That the Disputation at Leipzig had bearing on the procedure against Luther is a fact long ago established; Seitz, however, published (1903) this debate for the first time in its authentic form, and Brieger later (1909) dwelt on it in a special article.55
In June, 1520, the pope signed the bull "Exsurge Domine," in which Luther was threatened with excommunication. It was this bull that Luther burned on the 10th of December, 1520. We now have six sources relating the burning of the bull. They are: 1, the exhortation ​to the students of Wittenberg of the l0th of December, 1520; 2, Luther's letter to Spalatin, written on the same day; 3, the paper, "Acta exustionis antichristianorum decretahum," written by a pupil and adherent of Luther, who was present at the burning, and who also heard Luther's speech during lectures the following day; 4, the report of the bishop of Brandenburg; 5, a sketch of Agricola of the l0th of December, who had been present at the burning — made accessible by Perlbach in 1907; 6, the sketch of John Kessler in his "Sabbata," who had also been present. On the strength of these sources it seems probable to Clemen that Melanchthon was the "magister quispiam baud incelebris" who kindled the fire, and that the words with which Luther committed the bull to the flames, which had not been clearly understood heretofore, were not: "Quia tu conturbasti sanctum domini, Ideoque te conturbet ignis æternus" — thus in the "Acta" — nor: "quoniam tu conturbasti veritatem dei, conturbat et te hodie ignem istum, amen" — thus with Agricola — but: "Because thou hast damned the truth of God, therefore He condemns thee to the fire. Amen." For that reason it is condemnat and condemnasti instead of conturbat and conturbasti56
10. A Few Points of Luther's Theology, 1517-1520
It is known that during these affairs with Rome the thought that the pope was the Antichrist gained more and more prominence with Luther. In how far he was influenced in this particular through mediæval thoughts at this time Preuss explains in a measure. Preuss also recently offered a contribution toward answering the question how many actual mediæval beliefs still retained their influence on Luther during this period.57 ​The investigations concerning Luther's idea of repentance that are connected with his Sermo de pœnitentia (1518) can not be sketched at this time, but we at least refer to them,58 and state that there is no contradiction when Luther, in 1518, puts the "amor justitiæ" first and the "pœnitentia" second, and when he later on maintains faith and love can only arise after the "terrores conscientiæ" have been produced, because the viewpoint is an entirely different one.
By means of Luther's first debate on ethical matters Stange aimed at emphasizing the truth, that in all of Luther's debates with Rome on matters of faith there were always at the same time ethical views of the deepest importance involved. 58
In connection with the circumstance that on the occasion of the Leipzig Disputation a new idea or definition of the Church presented itself to Luther, Rietschel devoted himself to the question of Luther's definition of Church.58
Through the three great Reformation writings of 1520 58a and through the burning of the bull, Luther severed all relations with Rome, before the real bull of excommunication (Decet Romanum Pontificem) was announced in Rome the 2d of January, 1521.
11. The Diet at Worms
We now understand much better the Diet of Worms and everything connected with it. After Kolde wrote his excellent monogravure in 1883, A. Wrede presented us with the complete minutes of the Diet whereas Brieger and Kalkoff devoted themselves especially to the study of Aleander's dispatches.60 Already Kolde and later on
Letter of indulgence for the benefit of building St. Peter's Church at Rome made out for the widow Katharina von Trebra at Gehofen and her sons, Hans and Konrad in the name of the archbishop of Mainz on the third day of March, 1517, signed by the notary public Heinricus Kappe. With seal attached.
​nuncio Aleander as the main authority in Luther research work as far as this diet was concerned. Brieger presented these letters by using the manuscript of Trent and by comparing it with the original jottings of Aleander — in the archives of the Vatican at Rome — and thus answered the question as to their chronological sequence. But it was Kalkoff who in 1886 gave them to the world in a trustworthy translation, which because of their original text — half Italian, half Latin — made them accessible for the first time to wider circles. Written by an excellent judge of men who was directly influenced by the great events and who stood in the midst of the excitement and tension occasioned by the fight, entirely unreserved in his estimate of men and conditions, these dispatches of Aleander to the vice-chancellor, Julius de Medici, later on Clement VII, allowed their writer to give full play to his wagging tongue, and revealed unabashedly the inspirations of his unscrupulous wit, the arousing of his fanatical hate and the little expression of his egotism, of his wounded vanity, cowardice and meanness. Thus these dispatches bring home to us fully how severe a test these days were for Luther and the business of God's Kingdom. Aleander tried everything to prevent Luther from being invited to the Diet, and when this failed, he again used every means to make Luther's appearance as harmless as possible.
Kolde has closely investigated the Emperor's Herald, Kasper Sturm, who escorted Luther to Worms,60 and so has made us acquainted with him for the first time. At the same time he has also made it appear probable that it was no other than this herald who wrote the first anonymous circular, which within a brief space of time reported Luther's trial. ​Groessler, and later Spitta, have again broken a lance in behalf of the belief that Luther composed his hymn "Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott" on his way to Worms — cf. what follows.
The reports concerning the treating with Luther here can be found in the "Reichstagsakten" by Wrede, with which the work of Kalkoff is to be compared.
As is known, Luther defined his decisive answer as one "without horns and without teeth" a responsum neque cornutum neque dentatum. Meissinger directs close attention to this answer in a special article. He is entirely convinced that Luther formulated his answer in Latin. Whether he repeated it in German we, according to Meissinger, do not know; at all events we have no German text. Luther thought in Latin when he used th expression, "neque cornutum neque dentatum." The official of the Emperor's court had required of Luther a "responsum non cornutum," having in mind with this an old word used in Logic, an expression of a "syllogismus cornutus"; therefore he wanted an answer that was devoid of ambiguity and sophistry.59 Luther accepts this word and says: "Yes, I shall give you a responsum nocornutum, as you demand it." But because this expression cornutus reminds Luther of the student who, according to their initiation ceremony, had horns placed upon his head and then again taken off, when he lost his position, and because that student was also represented as a monster with huge teeth, Luther enlarges upon the words of the official of the court, saying: "I shall not only give you an answer devoid of ambiguity and sophistry, but one that is also lacking in the horns and teeth, known from the students' ceremonial." It seems, as if suddenly a mood of spirited recklessness possessed Luther. This explana​tion may appear strange at first sight, but it fits in well with the Spanish report on these events—"Reichstagsakten" II. 636, 20 — in which we are told that Luther left the place in a joyous, even petulant mood.
The other and much more important expression used by Luther in his speech: "Convictus testimoniis scripturarum aut ratione evidente," has given use to all sorts of speculations. In consequence of this the conclusion has been drawn that Luther at this time during the climax of his activity, recognized two entirely independent authorities or sources for the certainty of salvation, Holy Scriptures and natural reason. On the one hand it was inferred herefrom that Luther is the father of liberal Protestantism, whose source of knowledge is not only the Bible but also reason; on the other hand, that in this point lies the necessary progress made at the Wartburg since the days of Worms; that in the quiet of the Wartburg it dawned upon Luther, that the Bible could be the only source of the certainty of salvation. Only those can speak in this manner, who are but casually acquainted with the Luther of Worms, for the sola scriptura had been an established fact for him much earlier. At all events, it was a valuable service that Preuss rendered us through his investigation concerning this expression, published in 1909.60 He gives the uses of autoritas (scriptura) et ratio, before Luther, then carefully analyses them by giving Luther's use of them up to 1521, according to which ratio not only represented to Luther, in general, the power to think, nor is it to him only a name for the method of thinking inherent to the natural man in contradiction to spiritus, gratia, evangelium, etc., but in reality also a name for logical conclusions, for logical deductions from acknowledged premises. In this last ​sense he used this word at Worms: — he demands to be convinced through the words of Holy Scriptures or through such conclusions as necessarily must be deducted from what has been stated in Scriptures, before he will retract.
It is by no means certain what Luther's concluding remarks were. The well known word, "Here I stand, I cannot otherwise; God help me! Amen," are only to be found in a few, not especially trustworthy, sources. Lately K. Mueller,60 especially, investigated what the original might have been, after it had already been the object of researches — for instance, by Koestlin, Kolde, Burckhardt, et al. According to Mueller these concluding words consisted very likely in only, "God help me! Amen." These hardly sound as defiant as those formerly accepted, but the main thought in Luther's speech is not these words, but that which precedes them, and of that we are absolutely certain. Thus we see Luther now as the herald of a freedom of conscience conditioned alone by the Word of God, a man who has ushered in a new era.
How Frederick the Wise through masterful silence and delays in decisions protected Luther and how Aleander worked toward the proclamation of the Edict of Worms, can be understood best through the study of Kalkoff,60
Title page of the book 'Von der babylonischen Gefangenschaft der Kirche', 1520.
​ance of having been accepted by the complete representation of the Empire,60 Luther had long since been made a captive on his way home and carried to safety in the Wartburg in accordance with a plan of which he was informed already in Worms — cf. the letter which he wrote at Frankfurt to Cranach.
12. Luther on the Wartburg
Concerning the importance of Luther's sojourn at the Wartburg we have a good dissertation from the pen of the able historian Max Lenz.61
At the Wartburg Luther began to translate the Bible into German. It was W. Walther, who for the first time made us acquainted with what the declining Middle Ages possessed in the way of German Bibles in a methodically correct and very thorough manner. It was a truly monumental work that Walther gave us in his "Die deutsche Bibeluebersetzung des Mittelalters," 1889-1902. Together with 202 manuscripts Walther brings to light, from the 55 years, 1466-1521, 18 complete, printed German Bibles, 22 Psalteries and 12 printed productions of other biblical books. With this enough material was placed at our disposal to answer the question, whether Luther's translation was original work or only a revision of older German Bibles. A resumption of this not exactly modern question was again necessitated through the activity of the church historian Krafft in Bonn, 1883,62 who contended that the latter answer was the correct one, and whose contention was at once spread all over by the Catholic Church as the absolute result of investigation — cf., especially the article on Dietenberger, that Wedewer wrote in 1884 for the Catholic "Kirchenlexicon von Wetzer u. Welte," and his monogravure of 1888 on ​Dietenberger. The Catholic Church wished at the same time to hide from view the unwelcome yet absolute truth that the Catholic Bibles of the i6th century by Emser and Dietenberger are only thinly-veiled copies of Luther's translation made to conform to the Vulgata; it could even contend that this "deadly parallel" between the Catholic Bibles and Luther's translation was not a sign of their dependency upon Luther, but rather the proof that they had used the same source as Luther, namely, the German Bible of the Middle Ages.
This beautiful theory was then so thoroughly exploded by W. Walther62 that we can hardly understand how an American church historian, who demands to be taken at face value and who contends that he can give an entirely different meaning to the Reformation by reason of his completely exhaustive study of all possible sources, dares to revive once more this old question in almost childish fashion.63 Either he never made the acquaintance of Walther's production or he did not let its truth sink in deeply enough. For Walther shows how just in all those places, where the use of the mediaeval Bible through Luther must have shown itself, granted that Luther used it at all, — for example, in difficult passages, — that just there entirely different translations are to be found, different not only as to the words used, but also as to the method of translation in respect to style as well as to syntax. Parallels only show themselves there where the renderings — especially in the historical books — might, because of their nature, be alike, without being copied. If Luther really was acquainted with the Bible of the Middle Ages, he did not use it. During the first phase of his translation work, and the one that gave the work its characteristics, he was not acquainted with it, as we can ​state with a reasonable degree of definiteness. Only later he became acquainted with it, and then, as we can see now, in his revisions and corrections he occasionally supplanted his own word with one from it.
Keyssner62 had already before Walther compared the three versions of the Psalters from 1524, 1528 and 1531 with each other, and in this way made interesting discoveries as to Luther's translatory activities. Kawerau says concerning this: "Keyssner shows how Luther, in his sympathy for rhythm in language, fairly searches for an expression at the beginning and end of a Psalm, that recommends itself because of its depth of meaning and euphony. He shows how Luther, with his intuitive sense for the right term, chooses from the synonyms that are at his fingertips, how he translates the alien illustrations of the Oriental so that they are understood by the German mind or how he entirely discards them, in order to create the Bible for the Germans."
Before Luther began with the translation of the New Testament he completed the first parts of his Epistle and Gospel Postil. G. Bossert and Koehler64 have treated of the origin of this Wartburg Postil in thoroughgoing investigations; later on Koehler edited it as a part of the Weimar Edition in exemplary fashion (Vol. X, i). In Vol. X, 2, he will give us a valuable introduction.
To the time of Luther's sojourn at the Wartburg also belongs his writing on the vows of the monks. Scheel 64 not only edited this work in German, as has been stated before, but he also furnished for it a very careful commentary, which played great havoc with the contentions of Denifle against Luther, based on this work of Luther.
So much of that which we know from Luther's Wartburg sojourn explains that Luther was by no means ​entirely free from the vulgar superstitions of his time, although we also know that this circumstance does by no means entirely explain many of the things that come into consideration here. Just this influence that the vulgar superstitions exercised upon Luther, Klingner64 made the object of special study. He shows how these ideas, by no means, caused him to appear contemptible, but how in reality his firm belief in the reality of the Devil, through whom God inflicts his salutary punishments upon man, and how his idea of the mightiness of Satan were for Luther a stimulant for a continual fight against evil, as he found it within and without himself, and an incentive for the good, for the perfection of others and himself. Therefore they are integral parts of the religious side of his personality and closely interwoven with the work of his career. How insufficient this view of Klingner may be, for according to Scripture the idea of the Devil is neither only a vulgar superstition nor only a term used in pedagogical interests, we nevertheless welcome his writing.
13. Luther and the Scriptures
One can not well differentiate between Luther's residence on the Wartburg and his attitude towards the Scriptures. Not, indeed, because Luther here learned to look upon the Scriptures in a new relation, so that not until now they became for him the only source of religious knowledge. This proposition already crumbles into dust in view of the sources that were generally available prior to 1883, and to maintain it now is to become guilty of an historical falsification for the sake of one's construction. Undritz already wrote a splendid article on the development of the Scripture principle with Luther during the earlier years of the Reforma​tion. But it is Preuss who in a perfectly trustworthy way suffers us to follow this development to the minutest detail. He begins with the rule which Staupitz, 1504, laid down in his statutes for cloisters: "The novice shall gladly read the Scriptures, devoutly hear them, and diligently learn them," and closes with a searching investigation of the statements made by Luther at the Leipzig Disputation, 1519. To follow Luther farther than to this point is unnecessary, for with the Leipzig Disputation the Reformer had actually reached the position from which he did not deviate the rest of his life. viz.: The Scriptures are the only source of religious knowledge. Already in 1518 he wrote: "Even if all the holy teachers had held this or that, they are as nothing over against one single passage from the Scriptures" (Weimar Ed. 1, page 384). The last day of the Leipzig Disputation his final statement was his confession of the authority of the Scriptures, for he concludes: Doleo, quod d.d. ita profunde penetrat scripturas sicut tippula aquas: immo videtur fugere a facie carum sicut diabolus crucem, quare salvis reverentiis patrum praefero ego auctoritatem scripturae, quod commendo judicibus futuris (Weim. Ed. 2, p. 382). In his "Contra malignum L Eccii judicium M. Lutheri Defensio" of the same year he proves this his position over against the Scriptures with the declaration of their inerrancy, for he reaffirms the words of St. Augustine: Ego solis eis libris, qui canonici appellantur, hunc honorem deferre didici, ut nullum scriptorem eorum errasse firmissime credam (Weim. Ed. 2, p. 626 ff.). In his "Operationes in psalmos" of 1519 he already made the famous declaration: "Quid est papa? quid mundus? quid princeps mundi? ut propter eum veritatem evangelii, pro qua Christus mortuus est, negem. Valeat, qui valet; ​pereat, qui perit; ego sic sentiam deo propitio semper (Weim. Ed. 5, p. 452).64a The question "Scripture or reason," as well as the combination "Scripture and reason," were a priori impossible for him a disciple of Occam, for with Occam he looked upon the human "ratio" as the most uncertain factor. Kropatscheck and especially Seeberg have emphatically asserted this, and their assertion has been ably seconded by O. Ritschl.64a
It is quite another question at what time and in which measure the Scriptures became of importance for Luther's personal religious life. His lectures on the Psalms and especially on the Epistle to the Romans now put us in a position to gain more reliable data. Scheel, Thimme, O. Ritschl, and Tschackert inform us on this score. "Tota justitia hominis ad salutem pendet ex verbo per fidem;" "Vera justitia fit credendo ex toto corde verbis Dei;" "Quando verbo eius credimus. Per tale credere nos justificat i.e. justos reputat;" "Sola reputatione miserentis Dei per fidem verbi eius justi sumus" we already read in his lectures of the Romans. The gospel for him is no longer the "nova lex" as during the whole of the Middle Ages, but the means of grace, "nuntius bonus."64a
We now can readily trace how he gradually progressed from the allegorical interpretation of Scripture to the historical, which emphasizes the "sensus literalis," even though he never fully abandoned the former. Zoeckler, Grundt, and Eger have discussed this as well as his position to the Old Testament. Not later than 1520 we already read the sentence: "Scriptura sacra ipsa per se sui ipsius interpres" (Erl. Ed. v. n. 5, p. 160). Especially in his book against Emser, 1521, he energetically defends the "grammatical" or "historical" sense of the ​Scriptures as the only correct sense. "The Holy Ghost is the simplest writer and speaker in heaven or earth; hence His words can not have more than one simplest meaning, which we call the written or literal sense (Zungensinn)." "The Scriptures must not have a twofold meaning, but must retain only the one expressed by the words" (Erl. Ed. 27, p. 259-262).64a
How the attempt has been made to get much capital for a freer position of Luther towards the Scriptures out of his expressions concerning James, Hebrews, the Apocalypse, etc., is well known. But it is scientific levity to do so. Careful research will ever find, that the books recognized by him as canonical, under all conditions were regarded by him as the authoritative Word of God, but that he differentiated between these and such which he did not without more ado accept as God's Word, simply because he did not regard them as canonical. It is a matter, therefore, of two entirely different spheres. For this reason it is not correct to ascribe to the former what is said of the latter. That Luther in his doubts over the canonicity of this or that book during the transition period from the Middle Ages to the Reformation did not stand alone, that the conception of canonical writings was not a firmly fixed conception as it largely is today, is clearly shown by Walther and Leipold, whilst Walther and Kawerau have also investigated the question of Luther's (and other's) final opinion of James.64a
What position did Luther take towards the writings recognized by him as canonical, did he merely assert their inerrancy in religious matters or also extend this to historical, physical, etc., matters? Walther in Rostock has shown that Luther's position here, too, was much more conservative than nearly all presentations care to admit.64a ​If time and strength permit, the writer will express himself more in detail on Luther and the Scriptures in the near future, in order on his part to preclude the attempt even of theologians of the American Lutheran Church to defend their own lax positions over against the Scriptures by appealing to Luther.
Even though Luther's residence on the Wartburg did not in any way involve a new position of the reformer towards the Scriptures, yet the undisturbed and careful study of the same, which he here could undertake, could only fortify the position which he had already gained.
14. Luther and the German Language
Since the question concerning Luther's influence on the German language is closely related with the question concerning Luther's Bible, and Luther's work on the German Bible began with so much promise on the Wartburg, the most important results of the work done during the past thirty-five years to get a better understanding of this phase of Luther's life work, may be noted at this place.
In 1868 the Catholic V. Hasak published his book: "Der christliche Glaube des deutschen Volkes beim Schlusz des Mittelalters dargestellt in deutschen Sprachdenkmalen." By means of this collection of sources he attempts to show that the claim, Luther is the creator of modern High German, is entirely without foundation in fact. Others, both before and since, for inst. the well known Scherer, and Hasak himself in his later work: "Dr. M. Luther und die religioese Literatur seiner Zeit bis zum Jahre 1520" (Regensburg, 1881) assumed the same position. And, of course, all those writers who think that Luther's Bible translation rests on the pre- Lutheran German versions (compare IV, 12 and foot​notes 62 and 63) are of the same opinion. For the Roman Catholic literary historian Anselm Salzer (Illustrierte Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, Muenchen, 1906, ff.) this matter is settled. And Gutjahr also strongly operates with a modern High German unity in language ("Einheitssprache") prior to Luther. The one-sided manner in which in certain sections the "fact is emphasized that the 'language-unifying process began long before Luther and was ended long after him' already threatens to lead to an undervaluation of Luther's merits on this score before these are even fully understood," R. Neubauer wrote in 1903. In opposition to the well known saying of Jacob Grimm: "Luther's language because of its almost wonderful purity and powerful influence must be regarded as the very pith and marrow of the new High German language deposit, in which to the present day there has been very little variation, and then only at the expense of its power and expressiveness. The new High German can indeed be termed the Protestant dialect, whose freedom breathing nature has long since, unknown to themselves, conquered poets and authors of Catholic faith," — this lofty evaluation of the services of Luther in behalf of the German language has been characterized as a "Protestant' legend" (compare P. Pietsch, Luther's Werke, Weimar Ed. 12, p. VII).
Among the men who have carefully investigated this question Burdach and Pietsch, the Germanistic co-laborer in the Weimar Luther edition, deserve especial mention. The most and the best which Protestant theologians in their scientific works on Luther's Bible adduce from the philological point of view can directly or indirectly be traced, according to Risch, to the work by Pietsch, "Luther und die neuhoch deutsche Schriftsprache" ​(Breslau, 1883). This amply characterizes the importance of this publication. Next to Burdach and Pietsch the brief but carefully weighed and splendidly instructive dissertation of Neubauer demands special consideration. It contains so splendid a characterization of the language of the Reformer that we have appended it almost unabridged64a in the foot notes. And Risch enlarges on all of the pertinent questions, putting into bold relief the problems in questions and also detailing the work still to be undertaken.64b
That Luther did not newly create the language which he used as far as its externals, its grammatical cloak, is concerned, is evident. He himself also says so. In this sense a single individual can not create a language. He meant to be understood by the German people and this conditioned the existing language as his starting point. And he studied it, if ever it was studied. The spoken, written, and printed language of his people was ever during his lifetime the object of his closest observation and study. As late as 1536 he instructs Linck to purchase everything of "German pictures, rimes, songs, books, master-songs" to be had in Nuernberg, and send it to him for the purpose of study. He compiled a collection of German adages for himself, which was first edited for us by E. Thiele. He listened and learned from the German people what was to be learned.64b
Modern research has ever more shown how much of German literature was in existence prior to Luther. Of course the lifted treasures have not yet been carefully sifted and studied. Yet Kluge, Pietsch, Daumer, Schuett, Boehme, and others have begun to study this field. The limits of this research work, however, must ever be more extended. The question, just in how far the various Ger​man chief dialects prior to Luther have found a unification ("Einigungssprache") has been made the subject of careful research by Burdach. Virgil Moser, 1909, has collected everything what research work has thus far evolved. Yet he is not quite just to the linguistic importance of Luther. And that Gutjahr succeeded in an even lesser degree has already been mentioned. Alfred Goetze essayed the attempt to create an "Early High German Glossary" on the basis of independent reading and detailed study of the early High German literature and the various dictionaries of Swiss, Bavarian, Alsatian, Suebian, etc., dialects, a work which notwithstanding its brevity we always used with profit.64b
And now in what relation does Luther's language stand to the language prior to him? Did he simply receive it and pass it on? Or did it become a new language under his hands, which became the standard for the future? Did he take some particular dialect and develop it, leaving aside whatever of good and beautiful is contained in the others, thereby consigning them to lingering death? Or did he take the good and beautiful and assimilate it, thereby giving it residence in the German language? Burdach answers: "Luther's genius was the 'awakening sun' that shone over the development of the modern High German." Pietsch in the preface to volume XII of the Weimar edition, 1891, says: "One of the most important phases of the national importance of Luther is doubtless to be found in the fact that with his care and his influence he strengthened the young shoot of the common language to such an extent that it gradually grew to a tree overshadowing the whole of Germany.64b
Neubauer arrives at the same conclusion. He writes: "Ever since the 13th century the need became apparent, ​and various circumstances during the 14th and 15th centuries tended to a unification of language: the ground was prepared. And this all the more so, since that very German, which through Luther's pioneer work was destined to be the mediator, the Middle German, had since the 14th century, where the literary center of gravity had shifted from the South to Middle Germany, received a greater literary importance than in the past and more and more had assimilated upper German elements. The ground was prepared. It only needed the awakening sun. And we owe it to the masterful personality of Luther, his stupendous genius for language, the skillful selection in the use of his language and its masterful manipulation in his Germanizing of the Bible, the profound influence and the astounding dissemination of the latter, which soon became a popular book — originally diligently read and re-read by thousands for the sake of its contents, but like a secret master of language doing in quiet a slow but successful work in house and hut — that the incipient movement making for a unification of language increased in momentum, and that "Luther's German" finally became the unifying language for literature and cultured intercourse. In so far Luther is the founder of the modern High German language. On the one hand he gave to his language a certain type, which embodying, as it did, certain elements of different dialects, afforded a possibility for further and more comprehensive linguistic unification, and on the other hand his genius quickened this language, enriched it, gave it flesh and spirit and life, and thus enabled it to discharge the lofty duty that fell to its lot" (1. c. p. 8).
At another place Neubauer says: "In truth there was no book prior to Luther in which 'the kind of German ​language was contained.' During three centuries the language was neglected, crude, inflexible; degenerate in forms and syntax, irregular and without deeper spirit, it lacked the ability for expressing the finer and more delicate sentiments, it lacked soul and nobility. For this reason the more refined, the humanists looked upon it as 'barbarous' and felt scandalized to use it.*
Even those who spoke and wrote the most elegant and artistic Latin, men like Erasmus, Melanchthon, and even Hutten, wrote a crude and defective German. And the language was blamed for what was due only to personal incapacity, a scholarship that weaned away from nationality, or a lack of heart for one's own people and language. With Luther things took a turn. In him the master had arisen, who recognized that the German language possesses all those elements which were regarded as lacking, and that it only remained for some one to bring them to the light of day. He recognized the princess in the scorned Cinderella, rescued her from her despised humbleness, rinsed her beautiful eyes and noble countenance of the ashes and the dirt of common servitude, took from her her vile rags, clothed and decorated her in the habiliments of wealth and royalty, so that her inherent walk and attitude of quality, her beauty, virility, and elasticity of youth, and her entire nobility became radiantly apparent. And the despised and nearly degenerated as a
language' (Haupt-und Heldensprache). It is literally true what Justus Jonas in his funeral sermon declares of Luther: 'He has rehabilitated the German language, so that now we can again distinctly speak and write' " 1. c. p. I2f.).
Risch remarks: "Luther was bound to find the proper word for the new and great that filled his heart, that filled the heart of the people, though they were unable to clothe it in words. His wonderfully developed genius of language almost always enabled him to find what he sought. And the moment he had found the word he also gave to the concept included therein an explosive power of penetrating effect. One must clearly visualize this mental revolution with its psychological results for the linguistic expression of the masses, who stood in the midst of the stream, in order fully to appreciate Luther's importance for the history of language." "The stronger projection of the dialect during the 15th century plainly reveals how the politically disjointed Germany also cultivated but little of mental touch and intercourse. And the international character of humanism was even less in a position to afford the people the mental unity. Only the imperial chancery felt the need of a uniform German written language understood by all. But the chancery on the other hand was too little in touch with the people, and possessed too little influence among them, to bring about a healthy and vigorous linguistic movement. The great and unifying thought, that joined the north and the south was lacking, the mastering and ponderous gravity of a great personality, who knew how to press the German language into the service of a great cause, over which every German could enthuse. In order to realize this great aim ​among the German people, Luther was forced to bring the many beginnings for a popular and unified language to their full development. And he was the right man" (1. c. p. 137x191).
In order to understand somewhat the tremendous influence which Luther exerted upon the German language, the whole flood of German writings poured by Luther on the German people must be considered. But in the forefront there stand his translation of the Bible, and, as Risch has again justly pointed out, his Small Catechism. Pietsch's bibliography appended to the "German Bible" in the Weimar edition of Luther's Works, enables the student to gain a reliable conception of the distribution of the Luther Bible up to Luther's death. In the beginning only parts of the Bible, principally the New Testament, were brought to the masses through the printeries. In 1522 three original prints were issued and 22 reprints. In 1524 eight editions in Wittenberg were followed by 39 reprints. That was the culmination point. In the years following the ratio of original editions to reprints is the following: 1525, 3 to 22; 1526, 7 to 25; 1527, 3 to 21; 1528, 4 to 15; 1529, 1 to 13. During the years 1530 to 1540, 34 Wittenberg editions were followed by 72 reprints; 1541 to 1546 Pietsch enumerates 18 Wittenberg editions and 26 reprints outside of Wittenberg. During the period of 1534 to 1584 Lotter's press alone is said to have sent out no less than 100,000 complete Bibles among the people. All told Pietsch treats of 84 original editions and 253 reprints, among which many double editions are counted as one. And if an edition is put at not less than 1,000 copies and not more than 5,000, and if the number of reprints is multiplied accordingly, it affords a glimpse of the stupendous distribution of the German Bible at ​that time, and also indicates the singular and unique influence of Luther's Bible German on the German language. And only then is this fully understood when we consider (1) that the Bible was read in every Church service (matins, common service, vespers, weekday service), and thus also became part and parcel for those of the people who could not read, or were too poor to purchase a copy of their own; (2) that the Low German editions as to their language; and (3) that the Catholic Bibles (the Swiss Bibles also) as to their language were largely dependent on Luther's Bible, so that all circles of society stood directly under its influence. Compare herewith the investigations by Byland, Bachmann, Lindmeyr, Schroeder, Schaub, Jellinghaus, Neubauer, Risch, Breest.64b
Risch in his comprehensive essay (compare also Kuehn) calls attention to the fact that the student in following the "German Bible" in the Weimar edition can not only trace how Luther in the course of time much better commands the text, but also ever better and with increasing skill handles the German language. Here the development of the modern High German can be discerned as nowhere else, and one also sees his genius for language and his fidelity in the work for the language of his people in all its wonderful uniqueness. Overwhelming and humiliating alike it stands forth in bold relief.
Next to the translation of the Bible the Small Catechism claims attention, to show Luther's influence on the German language. This was recited daily in the homes, and read in nearly every service. It was the first and only German reader for many. It was committed
Title page of the book 'Von der Freiheit eines Christenmenschen', 1520.
​his Bible translation. Gillhoff has written a splendid booklet on this subject, of which we quote several passages in the footnotes.64c
Alfred Goetze calls attention to the influence of Luther's hymns in forming the German language. In our period Luther's language has been treated in its entirety by Franke, briefer but good by Neubauer. The lexicon for Luther's German writings by Dietz has unfortunately been left incomplete. Luther's influence on the German sequence of words, syntax, and above all things vocabulary, and the development of the meaning of words, in spite of the wealth of material in Grimm's German dictionary and Paul's German dictionary, has not
15. Luther's Return to Wittenberg
The upheaval in Wittenberg during March, 1522, caused Luther to return. The question whether Luther returned upon his own initiative or whether he thought at the same time that the Elector, while desiring his return, did not dare to voice his wish publicly because of political considerations, has been much discussed during the last decade. This was especially the case since Barge, in his lamentably one-sided, over-estimation of Carlstadt65 and the things he started at Wittenberg, called Luther an "administrator of the Justice Department," who, in agreement with his prince made null and void the promising beginning of the "fruehreformatorischen Gemeindechristentums." Already before Barge Kawerau65 had expressed the thought that Luther returned in accordance with the wish of the Elector, but von Bezold and, especially, K. Mueller65 refused to let it stand, not even as far as it alone was concerned, and much less as Barge had represented it. Nikolaus Mueller65 then pictured the entire Wittenberg movement in a work that distinguishes itself because of its detail and minuteness.
Several months after his return to Wittenberg Luther wrote his well-known and blunt answer to the charges made against him by Henry VIII of England — cf., Walther's monogravure on this subject.66
16. Luther's Endeavors to Build up Evangelical Congregations, 1523-1529
After his return the time had arrived to arrange an evangelical order of Divine Service, and to take into consideration the organization of congregations and entire regions that had severed connections with Rome. So ​his "Deutsche Messæ," in 1523 and again in 1526 his "Taufbuechlein," 1529 the "Traubuechlein," 1529 the two catechisms, 1523 resp. 1524 the evangelical hymnbook, admonished in 1524 to erect evangelical schools, took an active part in the visitation of churches and schools in the Electorate of Saxony in 1528-29, and advised Bugenhagen, when he went to Braunschweig and other cities, to introduce there a new and evangelical order of the entire church affairs.
Gottschick, Gruenberg, Hans, Achelis, Rietschel and others attempted to state what views Luther held concerning an evangelical Divine Service.67
In order that the German Service might also possess a German hymnary, Luther not only called on others to compose German hymns, but also applied himself to this task. And, although about forty years of age, he still became the author of quite a number of the most precious church hymns. This view had obtained pretty generally at least67 until a short while ago, even though Groessler contended more and more steadfastly that at least "Ein' feste Burg" was traceable to April, 1521, to his journey to Worms. It was due to Spitta,67 however, that many who held this view, became otherwise convinced and accepted the one Spitta offered, to wit, that we possess hymns from Luther that already date back to his student years, to the time of his spiritual unrest as a monk, and to the days of his early reformatory activity. The more careful historians of the Reformation, however, have up until now abstained with due cause from giving this theory their support.
Thanks are due to F. Zelle67 for a thoroughgoing work on the first hymn-books that contained Luther's hymns. ​Phil. Wolf rum and Zelle67 have also made us better acquainted with them in respect to their melodies and musical setting.
Kawerau, Althaus and Rietschel devoted themselves to the study of Luther's Order of Baptism. Kawerau's study especially is of lasting value, because he brought to light quite a number of the "Ordines Baptismatis" of the end of the Mediæval Period and compared them carefully with Luther's Order of 1523.67
Luther's conception of married life and his views about betrothing and the solemnization of marriage were often treated before 1883; in our period H. von Schubert, in his book "Die-evangelische Trauung, ihre geschichtliche Ent- wicklung und gegenwaertige Bedeutung, 1890," has again taken up this question.
In 1524 Luther called upon the council members of the
Bull against the errors of Martin Luther and his Followers.
In the center the coat of arms of the Medici, to which house Pope Leo X belonged. Five balls and three lilies of Florence. Also the triple crown of the pope and the keys of St. Peter. From a print of 1520.
​is the Latin School that Luther desired to be erected and safeguarded first of all — and the present writer knows of three hundred German cities that between 1524 and 1600 erected new schools or rearranged them on new principles — but that Luther also referred to the common school, at least in the cities, is indicated by his demand for a minimum instruction of two hours per day for boys and one hour for girls. The "Kuesterschule" of the Reformation period is the kernel out of which is grown of whatever we have to-day of Christian common schools.
It was in his "German Mass" that Luther declared catechetical instruction of the young a necessary part of an evangelical Divine Service. "One of the principal parts of a right German order of worship is a plain and good instruction of the youth," he said. Here he also illustrated in a remarkable manner, in which way children could be brought to a correct understanding of the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer. It is the merit of Ferdinand Cohrs"69 and the Society for the History of Education in Germany that more than thirty catechisms published between 1522 and 1528 were again made accessible, the majority of which was brought forth by this appeal of Luther.
Buchwald has shed new light on Luther's own catechetical work.69 We now can follow his endeavors on this line from 1516 up to 1529, and must be astonished over the amount of time and work Luther devoted to the instruction of the young and the uneducated. He explained to them the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, later on also the Sacraments in sermons and in writings of all kind; he even gathered them in his house in the evening and expounded to them the meaning of these texts in such a plain and simple way ​that even the weakest ones could grasp the evangelical truth. Buchwald, Knoke and Albrecht,69 by means of new discoveries and most thorough and extensive investigations in a conclusive way, made us acquainted with the origin of the two catechisms, with the form in which the Small Catechism was at first published, with the different editions up to Luther's death, with its translations into Latin, Greek, Hebrew, French, English, etc. Compare the author's article on the "Religious Instruction During the 16th Century" in the Lutheran Church Review of 1915 and 1916.
That through the publication of his "Passionale" in 1529, Luther became the father of Bible story instruction, is covered by my article in "Kirchliche Zeitschrift" (1906), and the little book has been made known again through the second part of my "Quellen zur Geschichte des kirchlichen Unterrichts."69 This last-named work also carefully traces the great influence which Luther's catechism had into the most distant portions of Germany and beyond. Hardeland presents the rich thoughts that are hidden in all of Luther's catechetical writings, and Meyer shows plainly how the Large Catechism grew out from the three series of Luther's sermons on the catechism-texts of 1528.69
Luther was the advocate of an entirely new relation of the evangelical congregations that now arose all over Germany towards the State. Sohm, Kolde, Brandenburg, Koehler, Drews, K. Mueller, Holl, Hermelink and Waring aim at making us acquainted with this view of Luther of the State and its relation to the Church, as well as with the dream of founding ideal congregations that was once dreamed by him.70 Space does not permit to dwell longer upon this matter. May it suffice to say ​that the principle of the freedom of the Church as well as the freedom of the State, so dear to us Americans and so fundamental for the sound development of the future of our nation, was laid down by no one else than by Luther.
17. The Years of Separation, 1524-1530
The year 1524-1525 was replete with many different kinds of weighty decisions for Luther. In the first place there was the Christian-socialistic revolution, as it manifested itself in the Peasants' War; the immoderate spiritualism of the Anabaptists, the Catholic humanists such as Erasmus; and even now the dispute with Zwingli and others on the Eucharist had begun.
Stolze, Boehmer, Strœle, Sommerlad, Vogt, Solle and V. Bezold71 present all the material necessary for a full understanding of the situation that led to the Peasants' War and made it so difficult for Luther to take the correct position. By means of their writings it also becomes apparent why Luther necessarily had to separate himself from the peasants. Riggenbach, v. Nathusius, Lezius, and Seeberg have very excellently portrayed the deep sympathy which Luther at all times had for the social question of his days.71
The great difference that separated Luther from the fanatic Anabaptists is duly emphasized by the works of Gruetzmacher and Walther.72 Walther makes clear how far here again most important principles were involved, principles which even to-day are the dividing wall between sound historical Lutheranism and all branches of the Reformed Church. Gottschick, Hegler, Scheel, Otto, and Sachsse,72 however, ought to be compared. Scheel has published anew the important writing of Luther, ​"Wider die himmlischen Propheten," this vigorous treatise of the Reformer against every phase of nomism that does not understand the great difference between Old and New Testament, and against all enthusiasm that loosens the soul from the firm foundation given by the word. Wappler72 raises the question in which sense we can speak of liberty of creed and conscience during the Reformation period, and makes plain the tenacity with which the Anabaptists, even in Thuringia, held their own for a long time.
Burckhardt, Lezius, Richter, J. von Walter, Zickendrath and others73 cover the relations between Luther and Erasmus, and whoever studies these publications should be convinced of the necessity of Luther's separation from Erasmus. They belong to two entirely different periods, and their religious and moral convictions stood in direct opposition to each other. We understand readily that Wernle (Die Renaissance des Christentums im i6. Jahrhundert, 1904, p. 11ff.) and Troeltsch (Die Kultur der Gegenwart, 2 ed. Leipzig, 1909, IV, 1 p. 473ff.) judge Erasmus entirely differently and pronounce him "Den groeszten Bahnbrecher der Renaissance des Christentums im 16. Jahrhundert"; but this only shows, as Hauck correctly says, how so many representatives of modern theology have forgotten the objectiveness that to Ranke was the necessary requisite for historical judgment. All the greater is the debt we owe to J. von Walter, who opposed these views in a very able manner. Walter has again also edited the "Diatribe" of Erasmus, and Scheel has offered us Luther's "De servo arbitrio" in a new translation, together with a good introduction and many explanatory notes. The essays of C. Stange are also to be noted in this connection.78 ​On the dispute between Luther and Zwingli, W. Walther74 has shed new light. He discloses the dishonest methods to which the opponents of Luther constantly resorted during the Eucharistic controversy, and thus he explains the feeling of distrust Luther had for Zwingli and his brothers in arms. Jæger and Thimme emphasize the religious interest Luther had in the Real-Presence, whereas Græbke shows the construction of the Lutheran doctrine of The Eucharist in its development, but hardly with sufficient accuracy.74
In 1529 the Religious Discussion at Marburg took place. Kolde, in Hauck's "Realencyklopædie," has furnished us the best treatise on this remarkable occurrence. In his "Augsburger Konfession"75 he has also made easily accessible the text of the Articles of Marburg. H. von Schubert75 showed that the Articles of Marburg were not prior to the Articles of Schwabach, as was formerly thought; that rather the Articles of Schwabach were fundamental to the Articles of Marburg. The Articles of Schwabach very likely were already written by Luther in June, to serve as the basis for a common confession of Brandenburg-Ansbach, Nuernberg and Saxony (cf. also Schornbaum's writings75). Luther took them to Marburg, where they were divested of some of their darts against Zwingli.
The separation from Zwingli and his friends was kept up at Augsburg. Through Kolde's investigations76 we have gained a concrete idea of how much of the Augustana was placed before Luther, and of what great dimensions Melanchthon's lamentable yielding to Rome really was. We now realize all the more why Melanchthon so seldom sent a report to Luther at Coburg, and we can assume that Luther had fulfilled his promise, or rather ​threat, to go himself to Augsburg if he had known how much Melanchthon at one time was ready to give up. Burkhardt76 informed us about the route of travel the Elector and Luther took to Coburg, while Buchwald76 discovered and published some of the sermons Luther delivered during his second exile, i. e., at Coburg. The most important one is the sermon of the 2d of October, in which he touches the Diet of Augsburg and expresses his unshakable confidence about the future: "Fuerchte sich denn der Teufel," he said, "wir wollen uns nicht fuerchten! Die Stunde und Zeit wird kommen, dass die Weisheit und Gewalt, darauf sie jetzt pochen, wird dahingehen, dass wir sagen werden: wo sind sie nun?"
18. Luther's Marriage, Home and Health
In 1525, i. e., in a year full of important crises for the further development of his life-work, Luther entered the "holy estate of matrimony." He was fully aware of the daring of his step, but he was also convinced of its correctness, and it was to him really a part of his work of Reformation. A. Thoma and E. Kroker77 portray the life of his wife, Katharina von Bora, thus affording us a glimpse into Luther's domestic life. By his marriage Luther became the founder of the evangelical parsonage, this rich source of intellectual and religious life, this home of good music, of genuine art and of all what is pure, lovely and good. Luther's close relation to art and artists is sketched by P. Lehfeldt in "Luther's Verhaeltnis zu Kunst und Kuenstlern," 1892. Compare also W. Baur, "Das deutsche evangelische Pfarrhaus," 2 1878. W. Kawerau deals in general, and very learnedly concerning the "Reformation and matrimony."77
It is known that Luther was often ill during the ​thirties. It was Ebstei77 who, in 1908, published an investigation into the different ailments of Luther and their subsequent influence on his physical and mental condition. He asserts that Luther suffered from calculi, constipation, piles, catarrh of the middle ear — almost deafness —, periostitis, stomach-affections, weakness of the heart, dysentery, cataract on one eye, and rheumatism! Ebstein finds that it was a particularly virulent kind of rheumatism which was in the main cause for his many pains, and acknowledges that "das ganze Ach und Weh" was the consequence of this sickness, even his corpulency. His mental work, however, was not influenced for the worse through this sickness, even though nervous affliction, fits of mental depression, etc., did temporarily hinder it. He was not an epileptic, or, as some have even said, a maniac. Through the strength of his will and his unflagging energy he invariably rose above his sickness, and until his death he remained the victor in a fight, whose successful termination demanded the greatest possible mental resistance. Thus does the greatness of his genius only show itself all the more resplendent when we think of his numerous illnesses.
19. Luther Introduces the Act of Ordination, 1535
The more independent and organized evangelical churches appear, especially since 1530, the more does Luther disappear from the foreground. Our review for that same reason can from now on be also much briefer and of a more elective character.
In 1531 the evangelical princes and cities organized the Alliance of Schmalkalden. Now it was up to Luther to take anew a stand to the question whether the sword ​could be drawn from the sheath even against the Kaiser, to protect the Gospel or not78 Cardauns defines the position Luther took.
In 1535, with the help of Luther, an order of ordination, as we understand this term to-day, was introduced at Wittenberg. Originally it had not been Luther's intention to create a holy act that in any respect could be considered as a substitute for the Roman consecration to the priesthood. If the person who wished to become an evangelical pastor had been found worthy and capable (by the superintendents and visitators) and had been called by the magistrates (secular government), the representative of the congregation, the office was established in the single congregation; especially the latter, the call, was the main requisite. Often a divine service was held in this connection, in which the call of the pastor was confirmed, in which he was introduced to the congregation, and where under laying-on of hands, prayers were offered for him. All of this, and sometimes with the exception of the divine service, Luther formerly called ordination, but according to present terminology it was more of an introduction to the congregation rather than an ordination.
Psalm 1.
Illustration from the second German Bible produced by the printing press. Printed about 1470 by H. Eggesteyn in Strassburg. It is a reprint of the first German Bible which was published 1466 by Johann Mentel at Strassburg.
​Wittenberg, 1535 — Bugenhagen plainly speaks of an ordination that is not only an installation79 However, in Wittenberg the old custom was clung to until 1535.
Thanks to the investigations of G. Rietschel we know that Luther conducted such an ordination October 20, 1535. Buchwald quotes the address that Luther held on this occasion. Afterwards Drews calls attention to the fact that candidates were already ordained in Wittenberg before the 14th of August; he even calls our attention to a writing of the Elector of the 12th of May, in which attention is called to an edict of the Elector that those about to be ordained should be sent to Wittenberg, for the "learned men of Holy Scriptures" should ordain them. Drews also proves that in connection with this the candidates were no longer to be examined by the superintendents as heretofore, but by the theologians in Wittenberg. The faculty turned over the ordination to Bugenhagen. The doubts of Bugenhagen concerning the edict of the Elector79a did not concern the ordination itself, but had their cause in his conviction, already expressed in his church constitution for Pommerania that the candidates for the ministerium should be examined by their home superintendents, solemnly bound to do their whole ministerial work in accordance with the Word of God by their home bishops (or superintendents) and then be installed by laying on of hands and prayer in the midst of the congregation by which they had been called.79a Although it was Bugenhagen who was to officiate at the ordinations, yet Luther often took his place. When, in July, 1537, Bugenhagen went to Denmark for a period of two years, Luther officiated regularly and began "the catalogus ordinatorum," which Buchwald has published.
The ordination generally took place on Sunday, after ​a sermon which exhorted to prayer for those about to be ordained.
With the exception of a report of an ordination which we know through the Table-talk and a Latin formula for those unversed in German, we now possess five forms for the order of ordination that date back to the time until 1539. One of these, obligatory for use in Wittenberg since 1539, was recast by Bugenhagen after his return from Denmark by using an existing sketch. Did the other four have their origin in Luther? Drews believed that he certainly had traced one to Luther, which he published as "the oldest formula for ordination in the Lutheran Church," in the 38th volume of the Weimar Luther Edition (p. 401 ff.). But later Vetter contended that this formula could by no means be considered the oldest, and that it does not date back to Luther. On the contrary, it may be that the formula C — taken back by the preachers of Kulmbach, Schnabel and Eberhard, from Wittenberg to their home in 1538 — and that the formula F — in the minutes of the visitators of Freiberg from the year 1538 — are the oldest that we possess and are directly traceable to Luther,80
20. Luther and the Wittenberg-Concord, 1536
It was a momentous event when, in 1536, the Wittenberg-Concord was established between Luther and the upper Germans, and when Luther said: "We have now heard the answer and confession that all of you believe and teach that in the Eucharist the true body and the true blood of the Lord is given and received and not only bread and wine; also that this giving and receiving takes place in reality and not in imagination; you only take offense, because the real presence is there also for the ​impious. Believe what Saint Paul says that those who are unworthy also receive the body of our Lord, as long as the institution and the word of the Lord are not changed; about this point we shall not quarrel. Because you stand thus, we are one, and we acknowledge and receive you as our dear brethren in the Lord." Later on, when the formula for the Concord had been signed, he said, in farewell: "Let us bury that which has happened on both sides and weigh it down with a stone." Th. Kolde has given us, in the 21st volume of Haucks' Realenzyklopædie a detailed account of the respective events occurring between the religious discussion at Marburg and the Wittenberg-Concord, as well as an account of these two happenings themselves. Here we also learn why, in spite of all this, a real union was not achieved later on, why even before Luther's death the dispute with the Swiss broke out anew.
21. Luther and England
In the year 1536, not only the representatives of upper Germany appeared with Luther in Wittenberg, but a deputation from England came in order to treat with the Wittenberg theologians. The object of their coming was no less important than that of ascertaining how closely the German evangelicals could approach the representatives of Henry VIII in doctrine, so that a nation like England might enter into the Smalkald Union. G. Mentz has edited for the first time the "Articles of Wittenberg" of 1536, and has therewith documentarily proven how dependent the 48 articles of Edward VI, and therefore, also the 39 articles of Elizabeth, are upon the Augsburg Confession. For the "Wittenberg Articles" have their origin in the Augustana. Many times they only quote ​literally from it. On the other hand they stand in the closest relation to these English confessions. All this is only another example of the penetrative power of Luther's influence, it reaches directly into the confessions of those who, to-day, boast of being a completely separate branch of the Christian Church.81
When, about 12 years previously, Tyndale completed his translation of the New Testament into the English language (1524-1525), he made copious use of Luther's translation. He did this work in Germany, where his New Testament was also printed. The first complete English Bible (1535) on its title-page frankly stated, that it was faithfully translated out of "Douche and Latyn" (Douche, or Dutch = Luther's German). Tyndale's version, though revised, is virtually our English Bible of today. Through Tyndale and his friends translations of the Bible and many Lutheran writings were smuggled into England and were distributed. So as not to depend on the Latin writings of Luther and his coworkers, however, several of their works were translated into English. For instance, the first English catechism, Marshall's Primer, 1534 (2d edition 1535), is a translation of Luther's "Betbuechlein," and thus also of his "Short Form of the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer" (1520), the important precursor of his later catechism (confer: M. Reu, Katechetik, 1915, p. 49, and "Three Primers Put Forth in the Reign of Henry VIII, Oxford, 1848). In 1548 Cranmer published "A Short Instruction into the Christian religion for the syngular commoditie and profit of children and young people in England," an English version of the "Kinderpredigten," written by Osiander (Cranmer married Osiander's niece)
Page of the Septemberbible of 1522.
​ordnung" of 1533. These sermons for children were an explanation of Luther's small catechism. Kawerau and Jacobs have again called attention to this.82 But that this catechism (or rather these sermons on Luther's Catechism) was one of the best explanations of Luther's catechism, and that it had been both translated into different foreign languages (into Latin by Justus Jonas) and used more widely in Germany than any other, has been first brought to light by the present writer in his "Quellen z. Geschichte des Kirchl. Unterrichts zwischen 1530 and 1600."
The English Book of Common Prayer, in addition to other influences, manifests a copious use of Lutheran forms of worship, especially of the "Koelner Reformation," 1543, edited by Melanchthon and Butzer.
In 1548 there appeared in England, "M. Luther's Sermon on the Keys and of Absolution on John 20:21, 22," translated by R. Argentine. In the same year Walter Lynne, a London printer, published and dedicated to the Princess Elizabeth, another of Luther's works, namely, "A frutefull and godly exposition and declaration of the kyngdome of Christ and of chrysten lybertye made upon the words of the prophete Jeremye of the same matter by the famous clerke Doctor Martyn Luther" . . . London, 1548. In the following year Lynne published another of Luther's writings under the title, "A briefe collection of all such testes of the scripture as do declare the most blessed and happie estate of them that be with syckness . . . whereunto are added two frutefull and comfortable sermons made by the famous clerke Doctor Martyn Luther." 1549. (cfr. P. Smith in 'The Nation," Dec. 17, 1914.)
Thus a Bible, catechism, confessions, and order of wor​ship, borrowed from the work done by the Lutheran leaders or influenced by it, the first evangelical hymnal of England also drew from Lutheran sources. In 1539 or earlier Miles Coverdale published his "Ghostly Psalms and Spiritual Songs, drawn out of the Holy Scripture." This includes not only a number of the psalms which were versified by Luther, but also some of Luther's hymns in a liberal version, such as "Nun freut euch, lieben Christen gmein," "Komm heilger Geist," "Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott," etc. The latter reads,
Our God is a defense and towre
A good armoure and good weapon,
He had been ever oure helpe and sucoure
In all the troubles that we have ben in
Therefore wyl we never drede
For any wondrous dede
By water or by lande
In hilles or the see side:
Our God hath them al in his hande.
Indeed, during 1548 and the years following England had almost become a Lutheran country.82
22. Luther and the Articles of Smalkald, 1537
The Council was announced in 1536. In view of this Luther, at the behest of the Elector, wrote his so-called Smalkald Articles, in a way his last will and testament. Zangemeister has made the original manuscript accessible, whereas Kolde especially shows how it came to pass that Luther's articles were in the end not accepted by the assembled representatives of evangelical lands and cities in Smalkald, and that it was decided to refer once more to the Augustana, Apology and Wittenberg-Concord, and ​that only Melanchthon's tract on the power and primacy of the pope was officially added to the others. Luther must not have known of Melanchthon's "small conduct" on this occasion and of the fact that his articles were not officially recognized, for otherwise he could not have written in his preface "These have been accepted by our side and unanimously subscribed to, etc." It was due to Kolde and Virck that we know of this, whereas Thieme has treated of the contents of these articles in an appreciative way.83
Because Luther in the introduction acknowledges once more the symbols of the old Church, we here refer to Kattenbusch's writing concerning Luther's position in respect to the œcumenical confessions.83
23. Luther and Agricola's Antinomism, 1537
It is known that the antinomistic tendencies of Agricola once more threatened to disturb the peace in 1537, and it is also known how Luther stood in regard to this. Kawerau shows that Luther was not only compelled to deal with Agricola in 1527 in the same matter, but that already in 1524 he, Bugenhagen and Melanchthon gave their opinion in a very similar case — concerning the method of preaching of the pastor in Chemnitz, Dominicus Beyer. Kawerau also shows just what the final stand of Luther in 1537 against Agricola had been. He sheds new light on Agricola's character who, as soon as he had escaped to Brandenburg, retracted every concession made by him to the Wittenberg theologians and immediately taught his heresy in the new edition of his catechism, 1541. His catechism is again made accessible through the
24. Luther and Philip's Bigamy, 1539
In 1539 (l0th of December) Luther gave his unfortunate "confessional advice" to Philip the Landgrave of Hesse concerning the latter's bigamy. It will be readily understood that Luther has been much attacked within the last decades because of this, and that the event has been thoroughly aired in order to drag Luther himself into the mire. Lenz, Koldewey, Walther, Kolde, Rockwell, Brieger, N. Mueller, and Koehler have contributed much toward clearing up this episode and toward the correct understanding of Luther's action.84 The last-named especially has directed his attention against the never-dying Roman slander in this connection that Luther, having demanded at the Eisenach Conference (July, 1540) that Philip should silence this happening with a "good, healthy lie," a necessary lie (Nutzluege), was at all events an entirely untrustworthy and prevaricating person. It is exceedingly strange that men have dared to consider just this man guilty of lying who has said, among other things, "No virtue has made us Germans more famous, and, as I believe, has elevated us higher heretofore and has kept us in that position, than the fact that we have been esteemed faithful, trustworthy and steadfast folk, to whom 'no' meant 'no' and 'yes' meant 'yes.' And although foreign and Grecian vices are already becoming native among us, yet thus it has always remained that there can be no graver and uglier word spoken or heard than to call some one else a liar or to be called that oneself."
However, Koehler errs when he traces back this mistake of Luther in the matter with Philip to his theology, i. e., "his extreme supernaturalism." It probably originated in this, that Luther in this case resorted to the ​casuistic "morale" and held that in the end a smaller sin might be substituted for a greater one, instead of discarding this opinion from the very outset. Or it may be explained according to Hermelink, first, through the distinct difference between spiritual and secular justice as it existed in Luther's conception of religion, i.e., the first marriage would be binding according to secular law, whereas the second only before God and the conscience of the contracting parties; second, through practice according to which a dispensation could be granted secretly for an action that the public law prohibited.
25. Luther and the Revision of His Bible, 1531-1541
The year 1541 saw the completion of the revision of his Bible translation which he had begun in 1531, which gave us the German Bible as we know it today, with the exception of a few individual passages, the revision of which took place later on. What great care and work Luther devoted to the work of his translation of the Bible is now made evident by the third volume of Luther's "Deutsche Bibel" (Weimar Edition). Here we find the newly-discovered minutes of the sessions arranged by Luther with Melanchthon, Bugenhagen, Jonas, Cruciger, Aurogallus, etc., for the special purpose of revision of Luther's translation. Three such revisions have taken place in 1531, 1534 and 1539-1541. In 1531 only the Psalter was revised, in 1539-1541 the entire Bible. The minutes of the revision in 1534 are lost, so nothing can be stated positively. Reichart and Koffmane, who have treated the pertaining questions before, furnished the text of the minutes and commented successfully on them.85 How interesting it is to watch now the gradual growth of Luther's Bible! Risch sums up the problems ​arising from the new material as well as connected with Luther's Bible in general.85 Compare chapter 14.
26. The Last Years of Luther's Life-Work
For the years 1541 and 1542 Brandenburg published an investigation in which he shows how Luther was by no means afraid to step into the path of the Elector. When the Elector, in his political dealings with the Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz, patron of Halle, in regard to Halle impetuously pursued his own advantage, Luther called his attention to the sacredness of his given word.86
It had been popularly supposed that Luther's well-known hymn, Erhalt uns Herr bei deinem Wort, had been composed in 1541; but Albrecht proved that it must have been existent already at least in 1537, because he found it in the index for hymns in the church constitution of Naumburg of 1537. Kolde has especially followed the history of this hymn in "Beitraege z. bayrischen Kirchen-geschichte."87
Because Luther in 1542 once more took up his issue with the infidel and heart-hardened Jews, we here refer to Buchwald's and Lewin's work concerning Luther's position toward the Jews.88 Lewin distinguishes four periods in Luther's stand toward the Jews. Before the diet at Worms Luther did not come in personal contact with the Jews; what he now and then said about them is based entirely on the literature of his time concerning this people and on his reading of the Bible. At Worms he became acquainted with two Jews who argued with him about Is. 7, 14. Other Jews enter in connection with him, and he believes in the possibility of their conversion. In 1523 he published his writing, "Dass Jesus Christus ein geborner Jude sei," and favors the endeavor to con​vince them by means of biblical disputations. But the Jews did not show up. The years 1524-36 form the transitory period. Luther had disagreeable experiences with Jews. These and their attacks against his Bible translation cooled him off. In 1536 the Elector expelled the Jews from his territory and Luther refused to intercede; in 1538 he wrote his "Brief wider die Sabbather," which is followed by other writings of increasing severity: "Von den Juden und ihren Luegen," "Vom Schem Hamphoras," "Von den letzten Worten Davids," "Die Vermahnung wider die Juden."
It has already been mentioned that in the last years of Luther's life new fuel was heaped on the sacramental controversy. The year 1545 brought another sharp attack against Rome. By means of a series of circulars containing pictures and satirical verses Luther waged an immoderate and coarse attack against the papacy. C. Wendeler has proved that the nauseating representation of the "papist-child's" birth in the most offensive picture was not Luther's fault, but solely that of the painter for Luther was only responsible for the verses and not the pictures.89
His "Pabsttreu Hadriani IV u. Alexanders III gegen Kaiser Friederich Barbarossa geuebt" reminds us of his knowledge in church history, and of what Schaefer and Luther has devoted a good deal of his time to historical studies. Especially in his writing "Von den Conciliis und Kirchen" he shows an historical knowledge surprising by its wide range and real thoroughness.
In 1556 Hardenberg, of Bremen, stated that Luther had changed his views on the Eucharist in his last discussion with Melanchthon, and had said: "There has ​been too much ado made about the Lord's supper, etc." Amsdorf also accused Roerer, the editor of Luther's Works, of having falsified Luther's writing, "Dass diese Worte noch feststehen," because some of the parts did not agree with the original of 1524. It was rendering a valuable service when Haussleiter proved that Hardenberg's assertions were not entirely lacking in historical foundations, but that the fact had been much distorted here. The conference at Regensburg, namely, at which Butzer represented the Protestants, occurred at the same time when the second volume of Luther's German works was to be printed. Therefore it was the wish of the Landgrave Philip and the court of Electoral Saxony that in publishing this writing, "Dass diese Worte noch feststehen," the sharp utterances directed against Butzer's tactics in the Eucharistic Controversy should be erased. Luther acted according to their wish, for, in the first place, this omission did not involve any real change in the doctrine, and then, Butzer's position in this matter itself was altered in important points (Wittenberg Concord). Luther's action therefore meant by no means an actual retraction; it only accommodated itself to the new situation and was only just and proper.91
It has already been mentioned that the Catholic Paul Majunke, 1890, once more played the patron to the old falsehood of 1568, that Luther died a suicide, and that this assertion brought forth a whole series of writings against it; the most important literature in connection
Facsimile of a page of the New Testament printed at Augsburg by Hans Schoensperger, 1523.
The original is beautifully colored. No modern edition of the Bible can equal this print in splendid and careful work. The illustration shows that at Luther's time the Bible was divided into chapters, but not into verses.
​Spaeth published an hitherto unknown report on Luther's last hours in the Lutheran Church Review (1910), and J. Strieder made the authentic reports concerning his dying accessible to all in a cheap pamphlet.92
27. A List of Auxiliary Literature
Finally it remains to point out what auxiliary literature must necessarily be used if one wishes to make a true and faithful reproduction of the time in which Luther lived and of the people with whom he was intimately associated.
Especially to be considered here are the complete accounts of the history of the Reformation century. We name Ranke, Egelhaaf, Hæuser, von Bezold, Lamprecht, Brandi, Brieger, and Mentz; Kawerau, Lindsay, and Hermelink.93
To him who wishes to work with manuscripts in the libraries and archives, the study of the "Handschriftenproben" of Ficker & Winckelmann, or of Mentz is to be recommended; and the "Addressbuch der deutschen Bibliotheken" by Schwenke is indispensable.94 The "Quellenkunde der deutschen Geschichte" of Dahlmann- Waitz, the "List of References on the History of the Reformation in Germany," by Kieffer, and especially the "Quellenkunde zur deutschen Reformationsgeschichte" of Wolf, which is just making its appearance, will render valuable service.95
If we wish to specialize, we must have at our disposal Buchwald's publications on Wittenberg,96 a complete series of biographies97 and correspondences,98 a collection of circulars from the first years of the Reformation, the collection of church constitutions by Sehling, and the detailed publications on sources by Cohrs and Reu.99 ​Gothein, Vogt, Kaser, Caro, Stoltze, Sommerlad, Keuckhohn, Harvey et al., discuss the social and economic conditions.100
It will readily be seen that the "Zeitschrift fuer Kirchengeschichte," "Theolologische Studien und Kritiken," especially "Das Archiv fuer Reformationsgeschichte," also "Theol. Jahresbericht," now, sorry to relate, defunct, must also be used in this connection. And Hauck's "Realenzyklopædie" will prove to be a veritable treasure chest for every student of the history of the Reformation.