[802]Ibid., 10, 3, p. 222=23, p. 116 f., in the work “On marriage matters,” to the pastors and preachers, 1530. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 119.[803]As regards the authorities, Luther’s wish was that they should interfere in the matter from the outset, and that strongly, although he can scarcely have hoped to see this carried out in practice. “The authorities must either coerce the woman or put her to death. Should they not do this, the husband must imagine that his wife has been carried off by brigands and look about him for another” (ibid.).[804]How the expression was at once taken up among Luther’s opponents is plain from a letter of Duke George of Saxony to his representative at the Diet, Dietrich von Werthern, in F. Gess, “Akten und Briefe Georgs,” etc., 1, p. 415. Cp. Weim ed., 10, 2, p. 290 n., and vol. iv., xxii. 5.[805]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 323 f.[806]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 289; Erl. ed., 16², p. 525 f. Sermon on conjugal life.[807]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 123; Erl. ed., 51, p. 44 n., in the work “Das siebẽdt Capitel S. Pauli zu den Corinthern aussgelegt,” 1523.[808]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 278; Erl. ed., 16², p. 515. She was to say: “Permit me to enter into a secret marriage with your brother, or your best friend,” etc. Luther is speaking of the case “where a healthy woman had an impotent husband,” etc. He here refers to the similar answer he had already given in his work: “On the Babylonish Captivity” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 558; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 98seq.)[809]To Joachim von Weissbach, August 23, 1527, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 406 f. (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 80). In 1540 he says: “Ego concessi privatim aliquot coniugibus, qui leprosum vel leprosam haberent, ut alium ducerent.” Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. In a sermon of 1524 he says coarsely of an impotent wife: “I would not have such a one beside me” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 560). The marriage bond was also dissolved where husband or wife had become impotent “owing to an evil spell”; his convictions forced him to teach this (ibid., p. 562).[810]Letter of February 16, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 436; cp.ibid., p. 584. The question was thoroughly gone into by Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” 1904, p. 202 ff., who says: “About 1536 a change took place in the attitude of the Wittenbergers towards marriage with relatives-in-law” (p. 216). “Thus it is evident that Luther’s views underwent a change” (p. 217). For the answer to the question how far this change was due to the hope of winning over Henry VIII. to the New Evangel, see vol. iv., xxi. 1.[811]To Chancellor Brück, January 27, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283.[812]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 380seq.[813]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 131; Erl. ed., 51, p. 55. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”[814]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 124 f.; Erl. ed., 51, p. 45 f. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”[815]Ibid., p. 124=44 f.[816]Ibid., p. 124=45.[817]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 16², p. 519.[818]Op. cit., above, p. 249, n. 6.[819]Ibid., p. 51.[820]“Die Frau und der Sozialismus,”19Stuttgart, 1893, p. 61.[821]Ibid., p. 64.[822]Ibid., p. 61. On Philip of Hesse, see vol. iv., xxi. 2.[823]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 559; “Op. lat. var.,” 6, p. 100, “De captivitate babylonica,” 1520, “an liceat, non audeo definire.”[824]Ibid., 24, p. 304; Erl. ed., 33, p. 323. Sermons on Genesis.[825]Ibid., p. 305=324; on the date see Weim. ed., 14, p. 250 ff.[826]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283: “Viro qui secundam uxorem consilio Carlstadii petit.”[827]The Elector forwarded it together with a letter to Philip of Hesse on July 3, 1540. See Enders, “Briefwechsel,”ibid., No. 5.[828]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 523; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, p. 368, in the “Propositiones de digamia episcoporum.”[829]“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 92 ff.[830]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 206 ff.[831]Thus Landgrave Philip, on May 16, 1542, to his theologian Bucer (Lenz, “Philipps Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 82).[832]“De bono coniugali,” c. 15; “P.L.,” 40, col. 385: “nunc certe non licet.” “Contra Faustum,” 1. 22, c. 47; “P.L.,” 42, col. 428: “nunc crimen est.”[833]“In IV. Sent.,” Dist. 33, q. 1, a. 1.[834]“Commentarii in Pentateuchum,” Romae, 1531, f. 38´; “Commentarii in Evangelia,” Venet., 1530, f. 77; “Epistolae s. Pauli enarr.,” etc., Venet. 1531, f. 142.[835]Ambr. Catharinus, “Annotationes in Comment. Cajetani,” Lugd., 1542, p. 469, “In hoc prorsus omnes theologi, neminem excipio, consenserunt.” Cp. Paulus, “Luther und die Polygamie” (“Lit. Beilage der Köln. Volksztng.,” 1903, No. 18), and in “Cajetan und Luther über Polygamie” (Hist.-pol. Blätter, 135, 1905, p. 81 ff.). On the opinions in vogue regarding the Old Testament exceptions, see Hurter, “Theol. spec.,”11P. ii., 1903, p. 567, n. 605. Cp. Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” p. 236 ff.[836]Letter to the Elector of Saxony, 1540, reprinted by Seidemann in Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 198.[837]Ibid.[838]Letter of December, 1523, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 237 f.; Erl. ed., 29, p. 16 (“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 266). For the letters, to the Teutonic Order and concerning the Abbots, cp. our vol. ii., p. 120.[839]To the Elector Johann of Saxony, May 25, 1529, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 75 (“Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 102).[840]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, 283; Erl. ed., 16², p. 559.[841]Ibid., Erl. ed., 61, p. 219.[842]Ibid.[843]To Spalatin, December 18, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 278 f.[844]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 96 f.[845]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 550 ff.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 88seq.[846]Cp. Köstlin, “Luthers Theologie,” 2², pp. 307 f., 311.[847]See vol. iv., xxii. 5.[848]In the first Erl. ed., vol. 20 (in the 2nd edition, vol. 16, p. 508 ff.); The Exposition in vol. 51, p. 1 ff.[849]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 118 ff.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 158 ff.[850]Ibid., p. 127=165.[851]The passage was given above, p. 251, n. 3. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448.[852]Appeal to the Old Testament: “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448, with the addition: “We are ashamed where there is no need for shame.”Ibid., 10, 2, p. 118=28, p. 158; St. Peter’s words (2 Peter ii. 1 ff.) obliged him to paint as it deserved the virtue of our clerical squires.[853]“Tractatus de modo dicendi et docendi ad populum,” printed at Landshut, 1514, pars 2, cap. 1.[854]His Catholic pupil Oldecop says in his “Chronicle” (p. 191), that he would not repeat Luther’s “shameful words” on the Sixth Commandment.[855]R. Seeberg, “Luther und Lutherthum in der neuesten kath. Beleuchtung,”² 1904, p. 19.[856]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” p. 616.[857]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 90.[858]Ibid., p. 49.[859]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 177 f.[860]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 426.[861]Ibid., p. 430.[862]Ibid., p. 431.[863]Ibid., p. 432.[864]Ibid.[865]Ibid., 436.[866]Ibid., 432seq.[867]Ibid., p. 432.[868]Ibid., 430. In Rebenstock’s Latin version: “Cocus jocundus ... cum carnem ... non poterat, etc., anu illam conspurcaviscat.”[869]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 8: “Ridens sapientiam, qua esse volebat sua Catharina: Creator formavit masculum lato pectore et non latis femoribus, ut capax sedes sapientiae esset in viro; latrinam vero, qua stercora eiciuntur, ei parvam fecit. Porro haec in femina sunt inversa. Ideo multum habent stercorum mulieres, sapientiae autem parum.” Such passages do not tend to the higher appreciation of the female sex with which Luther has been credited.[870]“Ego quaero quare mulieres non optant fieri virgines? Et tacuerunt omnes et omnes siluerunt ridentes.”Ibid., p. 177 f.[871]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 166.[872]Ibid., p. 184.[873]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 74.[874]Lauterbach,ibid., p. 185. Cp. Cordatus, p. 286; “Eunuchi plus omnibus ardent nam appetitus castratione non perit, sed potentia.” Ich wolt mir lieber zwey paar ° [thus the Halle MS.=testiculos] ansetzen lassen, denn eins ausschneiden.[875]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen” (Kroker), p. 82. Said in 1540.[876]Ibid., p. 373. In 1536. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 361: “Wer nicht Wunder, so ervenereuswer, das er sein Freulein todtgearbeitet hette.”[877]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 69.[878]The reference to the Hessian is founded on a popular tale of Marcolfus and King Solomon. See Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 526.[879]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 117 f. Cp. in the Table-Talk of the Mathesius Collection, ed. Kroker, p. 156 f., a similar account of this conversation dating from 1540, 11-19 June. It begins: “Ego occallui sum rusticus et durus Saxo[a pun on the Latin word]ad eiusmodiX” (Luther probably made use of a word against which the pen of the writer revolted. Kroker’s note). Later: “Ipsi (papistae) occidunt homines, nos laboramus pro vita et ducimus plures uxores.” The end of this discourse, as Loesche and Kroker have shown, contains verbal reminiscences of Terence, with whom Luther must have been well acquainted from the days of his youth.[880]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” Kroker, p. 373.[881]“Saluta tuam conjugem suavissime, verum ut id tum facias cum in thoro suavissimis amplexibus et osculis Catharinam tenueris, ac sic cogitaveris: en hunc hominem, optimam creaturulam Dei mei, donavit mihi Christus meus, sit illi laus et gloria. Ego quoque cum divinavero diem qua has acceperis, ea nocte simili opere meam amabo in tui memoriam et tibi par pari referam. Salutat et te et costam tuam mea costa in Christo. Gratia vobiscum. Amen.” Letter of December 6, 1525. An esteemed Protestant historian of Luther declared recently in the “Theol. Studien und Kritiken” that he was charmed with Luther’s “wholesome and natural spirit, combined with such hearty piety.” The explanation is that this historian disagrees with the “shy reticence” now observed in these matters as at variance with the “higher moral sense,” and looks on what “Thomas says of theactus matrimonialis” as an “entire perversion of the sound ethics of matrimony.” Another historian “thanks Luther warmly for this letter,” whilst a third scholar extols “the depth of feeling with which Luther, as a married man, comprehends the mystery of neighbourly love within marriage.”[882]More on this, vol. v., xxxii. 4 f.[883]Letter of May 23, 1534, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 48; “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 55.[884]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 340 f., 342 ff., 346 f.[885]Ibid., 26, p. 6.[886]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26, pp. 23-26.[887]Ibid., 63, p. 394 (“Tischreden”).[888]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 82.[889]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 87 (Khummer).[890]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 73.[891]Ibid., p. 1.[892]Ibid., p. 2.[893]Ibid., p. 74.[894]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.[895]See above, p. 228, n. 6. It is strange to note that Mathesius commences the paragraph in question thus: “As occasion arose all sorts of wise sayings fell from his lips. The man was full of grace and the Holy Ghost, for which reason all who sought counsel from him as from God’s own prophet found what they needed. One of them once asked whether it would be a real marriage were a young fellow,” etc.[896]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 99.[897]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 204.[898]Ibid., p. 172.[899]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.[900]“Cinquante raisons,” etc., Munick, 1736, consid. 25, p. 32 s. I have access only to the French edition of this work, published originally in German and Latin.[901]“S.B. Böhm. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,” 1892, p. 123. In this volume Constantine Höfler has reprinted the lost “Apology” with a preface, p. 79 ff. Cp. E. Michael, “Luther und Lemnius, Wittenbergische Inquisition, 1538,” in “Zeitschr. für kath. Theol.,” 19, 1895, p. 450 ff., where the passage in question is given in Latin.[902]Ibid., p. 136. Michael,ibid., p. 465.[903]Vol. ii., pp. 129 f., 364, 368 f., 376.[904]Ickelsamer, “Clag etlicher Brüder,” ed. Enders, p. 48. See our vol. ii., p. 368 n.[905]Enders, p. 52.[906]Münzer, “Hochverursachte Schutzrede und Antwort,” ed. Enders, p. 18 ff.[907]See vol. ii., p. 130 f.[908]Art. 17, p. 81.[909]In answer to the screed, “Widder den Meuchler zu Dresen”, 1531, reprinted in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 145.[910]Ibid., pp. 139, 141.[911]Ibid., p. 148 f.[912]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 140.[913]Venetiis, 1547. In 1548 Johann Cochlæus collected Catharinus’s strictures on Luther out of three of the former’s writings, and entitled his work “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri judicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548. The above quotation appears in this collection, fol. C. 2a. For an account of the great services rendered by Catharinus, who for all his piety was yet too prejudiced and combative, see Joseph Schweizer, “Ambrosius Catharinus Politus,” 1910 (“Reformationsgeschichtl. Studien und Texte,” ed. J. Greving, Hft. 11 and 12). Cp. the remarks of others living at a distance given below, p. 294 ff., and the Roman reports mentioned by Jacob Ziegler (vol. ii., p. 133).[914]Luther to Spalatin on January 14, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 278. See our vol. ii., p. 133.[915]See vol. ii., p. 132 f.[916]Letter of June 16, 1525; “Maligna fama effecit,” etc. See vol. ii., p. 175.[917]See vol. ii., p. 176, n. 3.[918]Letter to Camerarius, April 11, 1526. “Corp. ref.,” 1, p. 794.[919]Page 205; “aus dem Thesaurus Baum in Strassburg.”[920]Kolde,ibid., p. 229.[921]Quoted by R. Stähelin, “Huldreich Zwingli,” 2, Basle, 1897, p. 311, and “Briefe aus der Reformationszeit,” Basle, 1887, p. 21: “si non stultitia Fabrum superat, impuritate Eccium, audacia Cocleum, et quid multa, omnia omnium vitia,” etc.[922]Fol. 3, 9. Quoted by N. Paulus in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 852.[923]“Theol. Studien und Kritiken,” 1907, p. 246 ff. (Excerpts given by the Protestant scholar E. Thiele, from a Bible at Wernigerode.)[924]We have only to recall the exaggerations concerning the power of faith alone, even in the case of the filthiest sins, e.g. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p. 527 f.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 92. Cp. above, pp. 177, 180 ff., 185 ff., 196, etc.[925]“The reading of heretical books was made difficult even for the Jesuits.” B. Duhr, “Gesch. der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge,” 1, 1907, p. 657. The learned polemical writers of the Society did, however, make use of the writings of heretics, Luther’s inclusive, as is clear from their works.[926]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, pp. 395, 506, 625, 753.[927]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 141, n., and p. v. Andreas matriculated at the University of Wittenberg in 1538.[928]Cp. also Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 112; Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 430.[929]On February 1, 1546, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 783.[930]Sim. Lemnius, “Monachopornomachia,” a satire against Luther. Cp. Strobel, “Neue Beiträge zur Literatur,” 3, 1, p. 137 ff.[931]In Enders, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 334.[932]“Colloq.,” ed. Rebenstock, Francof., 1571, 2, fol. 95.[933]They were received on September 29, 1525. “Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 248.[934]“Opp. Lat. var.,” 4, 486.[935]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 170. It has been asserted by controversialists that another version of the German translation of these Theses had already been made in 1545 from which some of the most “swinish expressions” were omitted through motives of modesty. Of any such revision during Luther’s lifetime nothing is, however, known. Probably the reference is to Caspar Cruciger’s translation which is placed next to the older translation in Walch’s edition of Luther’s works (19, p. 2258). But examination proves that Cruciger by no means weakened the wording, indeed, his rendering is in some instances even stronger, for instance, that of Theses 35, 42, 61, and 64. The “Swine-theologians of Louvain,” alluded to in his title, do not appear here in the original German edition.[936]The latter statement was in great part withdrawn by one controversial writer of standing, but not before it had been made their own by the lesser fry.[937]“Ein christenliche Predig von dem heyligen Ehestandt durch Wolfgangum Agricolam Spalatinum,” Ingolstadt, 1580 (Münchener Staatsbibliothek, Hom. 53, 8º). Cp. the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,” 1880, No. 27 ff., where accounts taken from a Spalt Chronicle of Wolfgang Agricola’s, according to an Eichstätt MS. (n. 248), are given, and where is printed the passage referring to Luther in the sermon to be discussed later. In the Suttner index of Eichstätt books the sermon is numbered 258, which explains certain mistaken references to the “ancient deed.”[938]In the sermon, quoted, p. 95.[939]See the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,”ibid.“Spalatins Muttergottesbild.”[940]To Spalatin, August 21, 1544, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 679 ff. See above, p. 197, n. 1. In the last years of his life Spalatin fell into incurable melancholy which finally brought him to the grave (January 16, 1546). Cp. J. Wagner, “Georg Spalatin,” Altenburg, 1830, p. 105 f. Luther was unacquainted with the actual cause of his fears, but says that some persons thought they were due to remorse for having given his sanction to an illegal marriage.[941]Agricola’s Sermon, p. 90.[942]Cp. N. Paulus, “Hist. Jahrb.,” 1903, p. 73, where Dungersheim is quoted: “As I have heard more than once from the lips of the said Lord Adolphus.”[943]“Acta et scripta Lutheri,” p. 1.[944]“Tischreden Luthers 1531-1532” (1888). Cp. the Introduction by the editor, p. vi. Preger does not appear to have heard of Wolfgang Agricola’s “Hans Schlahinhauffen.” Cp. the Erfurt register, in Weissenborn, “Akten der Erfurter Universität,” 1-2; also the Index published in 1899. The particulars concerning Johannes Schlaginhaufen are contained in the second vol., pp. 301-316. Spalatin is there entered (p. 207) in 1498 as: “Georgius Burchardi de Sula superiori.”[945]Mutian to Johann Lang, December 6, 1516, Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 5 f.[946]For all the proofs bearing on the matter see E. Schneidewind, “Das Lutherhaus in Eisenach,” 1883.[947]First ed., fol. 3.[948]Vol. iv., xxii. 5.[949]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 261.[950]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 260.[951]“Briefwechsel,” ed. Enders, 6, p. 186.[952]January 3, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 180.[953]Cp. W. Walther, “Deutsche Bibelübersetzungen,” 1889 ff., p. 403 f.[954]“Diarium italicum,” 1708, p. 278.[955]Tom. 24, La Haye, 1702, p. 134.[956]“Vita Lutheri, nummis illustrata,” Francof. et Lipsiae, 1699, pp. 225, 227. Joh. Fabricius, “Amoenitates theologicae,” Helmestadii, 1699, p. 676, in the Notes to his “Oratio de utilitate itineris Italiae.” Fabricius says the verses, though usually attributed to Luther, were not in his handwriting, nor could Luther well have composed anything so clumsy. Further, the sub-librarian at Rome had assured him that in the Vatican there was only one quarto book written by Luther.[957]Cp. Paul Haake, “Johann Fr. v. Wolfframsdorf” (“N. Archiv für sächsische Gesch.,” 22, 1901, pp. 69 f., 76-the text not quoted).[958]Vol. 1², p. 252.[959]Noribergae, 1731, p. 124.[960]Cp. “Anzeiger für Kunde der deutschen Vorzeit,” 1878, p. 16 (“Ein schon Frawe on Kinder”).[961]Ibid., 1879, p. 296 (“Ein schon Weib, viel Rinder wentzig Kinder”). Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 682. Walther, “Bibelübersetzungen,” points out concerning the origin of the story, that, owing to people being unaware of the mediæval translations of the Bible, “a German Bible immediately suggested the name of Luther.”[962]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 15.[963]Ibid., p. 120.[964]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, 1903, p. 681, n. 498. “Possibly he merely translated the old Italian rhyming proverb:‘Chi non ama il vino, la donna e il cantoUn pazzo egli sara e mai un santo,’and, being himself an outspoken Voltairean, suppressed the ‘santo.’” H. Böhmer, “Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung,” p. 84; 2nd ed., p. 117 f.[965]“Luther Tischreden Mathesische Sammlung,” p. 376, with other passages under the heading: Lauterbach and Weller.[966]Under the heading “Der ‘gute Trunk’ in den Lutheranklagen” the present writer published an article in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 479 ff., which under a revised form is given anew in the following pages. In view of the strong verdicts frequently pronounced upon Luther’s love of drink, we may point out that P. Albert Weiss, O. P., in his “Lutherpsychologie” (Mainz, 1906, p. 185 f.; 2nd ed., p. 274), goes so far as to declare he was inclined to “tone down this or that opinion expressed by Grisar,” but that he was thankful that he had “treated the subject with such moderation.”[967]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 348, “Tischreden.”[968]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 500; Erl. ed., 30, p. 363, in the “Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis.” Cp. also “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 189.[969]Letter to Wenceslaus Link, March 19, 1522, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 317. The reference is, of course, to the words of Peter, Acts ii. 13-15.[970]See n. 1.[971]Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 71, in the “Relatio Gregorii Caselii” of November 29, 1525. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 234; Erl. ed., 29, p. 20, where he says that God was not drunk when He spoke the words; alsoibid., 8, p. 507=28, p. 63: Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul were not drunk when they wrote certain things.[972]Letter of July 29, 1534, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 61 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 66).[973]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 437 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Ratzebergers Handschriftl. Gesch.,” ed. Neudecker, p. 131, and Jonas’s obituary sermon on Luther in Walch’s ed. of Luther’s works, 21, Anhang, p. 373*.[974]To Caspar Müller, March 18, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 137.[975]“Briefwechsel Bugenhagens,” ed. O. Vogt, 1888, p. 64 ff.[976]To Spalatin, August 15, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 218.[977]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. Cp. vol. ii., p. 133 f.[978]“Etwas vom kranken Luther” (“Deutsch-evangel. Blätter,” 29, 1904), p. 303 ff., p. 306.[979]Ibid., p. 311 f.[980]Ibid., p. 306.[981]The “Itinerarium,” in Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 229. From the Bern Archives.[982]The dots are Kolde’s.[983]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 96.[984]Letter of February 27, 1532, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 155.[985]A passage from a letter of Melanchthon’s to Veit Dietrich, dated March 15, 1537 (“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 327), deserves consideration: “Secuta est hos agones(his mental struggles or temptations),ut fit, magna debilitas; accessit etiam cruditas, quam vigiliae, vomitus et caetera incommoda multa auxerunt.”[986]The context is unfortunately not given by Kolde, no more here than in the case of Musculus. A copy of the letter is, he says, found in the Baum Thesaurus of the Strasburg University Library.[987]“Clag etlicher Brüder,” etc., ed. Enders (“Neudrucke deutscher Literaturwerke,” No. 118, 1893), p. 48.[988]“Hochverursachte Schutzrede,” etc., ed. Enders,ibid., p. 18 ff.[989]“De consideratione praesentium temporum,” Venetiis, 1547. Cochlæus’s “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri iudicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548, gives the words on fol. C. 2a.[990]Brieger, “Aleander und Luther,” p. 170; “alla quale (ebrietà) è deditissimo.”[991]“Helluone in crapula et ebrietate cervisiaria, ut audio, foedior.”[992]Cp. “Archiv für Reformationsgesch.,” “Texte und Untersuchungen,” 3 Jahrg., Hft. 1, p. 79, article by P. Kalkoff, “Römische Urteilo über Luther und Erasmus im Jahre 1521.” See our vol. ii., p. 133.[993]“Briefwechsel der Brüder Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer,” 1, 1908, p. 43; “Tui Wittenbergenses velut quotidie communicant et mox cerevisia inebriantur, ut sese aliquando non cognoscant, ita enim fertur.”[994]Ibid., pp. 58-68.[995]Barge, “Karlstadt,” 2, p. 558.[996]Henr. Sedulius,O.S.F., “Praescriptiones adv. haereses,” Antwerp, 1606, p. 210. It was he who published the false document concerning Luther’s alleged suicide (see vol. vi., xxxix. 3).[997]Paulus, “Luthers Lebensende,” 1898, p. 70.[998]“De mensuris,” Basileae, 1550, pp. 4, 338.[999]Luther to Katey, February 7, 1546, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 788.[1000]Grimm, “Deutsches Wörterbuch,” 8, p. 700.[1001]Cp. the letter addressed to Katey on February 1, 1546, p. 786: “I drink Neunburgish beer.”[1002]On July 2, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” ed. Burkhardt, p. 357.[1003]On July 16, 1540, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 298. De Wette’s edition of this letter is not altogether trustworthy. Cp. Burkhardt, “Briefe Luthers,” p. 358.[1004]On February 6, 1546,ibid., p. 786.[1005]From the written notes of Veit Dietrich (the “most reliable authority on the Table-Talk”), see Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 498. Cp. a parallel passage in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 135.[1006]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 151.[1007]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 152.[1008]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 451 (“Tischreden”).[1009]Letter of 1530 (July?), “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 159seq.[1010]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 516, from Veit Dietrich’s MS.[1011]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 185.[1012]Ibid., p. 95. Cp. Mathesius’s notes in Loesche, “Analecta Lutherana et Melanthoniana,” p. 100: “Then I would permit you a good drink;nam ebrietudo est ferenda, non ebriositas.” Forcellini’s definition: “ebriositas=propensio in ebrictatem.” According to Loesche, Luther himself invented the word “ebrietudo.” Luther says of the Elector Johann Frederick in his work, “Wider Hans Worst”: “Sometimes he takes a drink too much, which we are sorry to see,” but it was untrue that he was “a drunkard and led a disorderly life” (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 74).[1013]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141.[1014]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 8², p. 294.
[802]Ibid., 10, 3, p. 222=23, p. 116 f., in the work “On marriage matters,” to the pastors and preachers, 1530. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 119.[803]As regards the authorities, Luther’s wish was that they should interfere in the matter from the outset, and that strongly, although he can scarcely have hoped to see this carried out in practice. “The authorities must either coerce the woman or put her to death. Should they not do this, the husband must imagine that his wife has been carried off by brigands and look about him for another” (ibid.).[804]How the expression was at once taken up among Luther’s opponents is plain from a letter of Duke George of Saxony to his representative at the Diet, Dietrich von Werthern, in F. Gess, “Akten und Briefe Georgs,” etc., 1, p. 415. Cp. Weim ed., 10, 2, p. 290 n., and vol. iv., xxii. 5.[805]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 323 f.[806]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 289; Erl. ed., 16², p. 525 f. Sermon on conjugal life.[807]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 123; Erl. ed., 51, p. 44 n., in the work “Das siebẽdt Capitel S. Pauli zu den Corinthern aussgelegt,” 1523.[808]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 278; Erl. ed., 16², p. 515. She was to say: “Permit me to enter into a secret marriage with your brother, or your best friend,” etc. Luther is speaking of the case “where a healthy woman had an impotent husband,” etc. He here refers to the similar answer he had already given in his work: “On the Babylonish Captivity” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 558; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 98seq.)[809]To Joachim von Weissbach, August 23, 1527, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 406 f. (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 80). In 1540 he says: “Ego concessi privatim aliquot coniugibus, qui leprosum vel leprosam haberent, ut alium ducerent.” Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. In a sermon of 1524 he says coarsely of an impotent wife: “I would not have such a one beside me” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 560). The marriage bond was also dissolved where husband or wife had become impotent “owing to an evil spell”; his convictions forced him to teach this (ibid., p. 562).[810]Letter of February 16, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 436; cp.ibid., p. 584. The question was thoroughly gone into by Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” 1904, p. 202 ff., who says: “About 1536 a change took place in the attitude of the Wittenbergers towards marriage with relatives-in-law” (p. 216). “Thus it is evident that Luther’s views underwent a change” (p. 217). For the answer to the question how far this change was due to the hope of winning over Henry VIII. to the New Evangel, see vol. iv., xxi. 1.[811]To Chancellor Brück, January 27, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283.[812]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 380seq.[813]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 131; Erl. ed., 51, p. 55. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”[814]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 124 f.; Erl. ed., 51, p. 45 f. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”[815]Ibid., p. 124=44 f.[816]Ibid., p. 124=45.[817]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 16², p. 519.[818]Op. cit., above, p. 249, n. 6.[819]Ibid., p. 51.[820]“Die Frau und der Sozialismus,”19Stuttgart, 1893, p. 61.[821]Ibid., p. 64.[822]Ibid., p. 61. On Philip of Hesse, see vol. iv., xxi. 2.[823]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 559; “Op. lat. var.,” 6, p. 100, “De captivitate babylonica,” 1520, “an liceat, non audeo definire.”[824]Ibid., 24, p. 304; Erl. ed., 33, p. 323. Sermons on Genesis.[825]Ibid., p. 305=324; on the date see Weim. ed., 14, p. 250 ff.[826]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283: “Viro qui secundam uxorem consilio Carlstadii petit.”[827]The Elector forwarded it together with a letter to Philip of Hesse on July 3, 1540. See Enders, “Briefwechsel,”ibid., No. 5.[828]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 523; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, p. 368, in the “Propositiones de digamia episcoporum.”[829]“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 92 ff.[830]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 206 ff.[831]Thus Landgrave Philip, on May 16, 1542, to his theologian Bucer (Lenz, “Philipps Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 82).[832]“De bono coniugali,” c. 15; “P.L.,” 40, col. 385: “nunc certe non licet.” “Contra Faustum,” 1. 22, c. 47; “P.L.,” 42, col. 428: “nunc crimen est.”[833]“In IV. Sent.,” Dist. 33, q. 1, a. 1.[834]“Commentarii in Pentateuchum,” Romae, 1531, f. 38´; “Commentarii in Evangelia,” Venet., 1530, f. 77; “Epistolae s. Pauli enarr.,” etc., Venet. 1531, f. 142.[835]Ambr. Catharinus, “Annotationes in Comment. Cajetani,” Lugd., 1542, p. 469, “In hoc prorsus omnes theologi, neminem excipio, consenserunt.” Cp. Paulus, “Luther und die Polygamie” (“Lit. Beilage der Köln. Volksztng.,” 1903, No. 18), and in “Cajetan und Luther über Polygamie” (Hist.-pol. Blätter, 135, 1905, p. 81 ff.). On the opinions in vogue regarding the Old Testament exceptions, see Hurter, “Theol. spec.,”11P. ii., 1903, p. 567, n. 605. Cp. Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” p. 236 ff.[836]Letter to the Elector of Saxony, 1540, reprinted by Seidemann in Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 198.[837]Ibid.[838]Letter of December, 1523, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 237 f.; Erl. ed., 29, p. 16 (“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 266). For the letters, to the Teutonic Order and concerning the Abbots, cp. our vol. ii., p. 120.[839]To the Elector Johann of Saxony, May 25, 1529, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 75 (“Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 102).[840]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, 283; Erl. ed., 16², p. 559.[841]Ibid., Erl. ed., 61, p. 219.[842]Ibid.[843]To Spalatin, December 18, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 278 f.[844]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 96 f.[845]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 550 ff.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 88seq.[846]Cp. Köstlin, “Luthers Theologie,” 2², pp. 307 f., 311.[847]See vol. iv., xxii. 5.[848]In the first Erl. ed., vol. 20 (in the 2nd edition, vol. 16, p. 508 ff.); The Exposition in vol. 51, p. 1 ff.[849]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 118 ff.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 158 ff.[850]Ibid., p. 127=165.[851]The passage was given above, p. 251, n. 3. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448.[852]Appeal to the Old Testament: “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448, with the addition: “We are ashamed where there is no need for shame.”Ibid., 10, 2, p. 118=28, p. 158; St. Peter’s words (2 Peter ii. 1 ff.) obliged him to paint as it deserved the virtue of our clerical squires.[853]“Tractatus de modo dicendi et docendi ad populum,” printed at Landshut, 1514, pars 2, cap. 1.[854]His Catholic pupil Oldecop says in his “Chronicle” (p. 191), that he would not repeat Luther’s “shameful words” on the Sixth Commandment.[855]R. Seeberg, “Luther und Lutherthum in der neuesten kath. Beleuchtung,”² 1904, p. 19.[856]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” p. 616.[857]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 90.[858]Ibid., p. 49.[859]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 177 f.[860]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 426.[861]Ibid., p. 430.[862]Ibid., p. 431.[863]Ibid., p. 432.[864]Ibid.[865]Ibid., 436.[866]Ibid., 432seq.[867]Ibid., p. 432.[868]Ibid., 430. In Rebenstock’s Latin version: “Cocus jocundus ... cum carnem ... non poterat, etc., anu illam conspurcaviscat.”[869]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 8: “Ridens sapientiam, qua esse volebat sua Catharina: Creator formavit masculum lato pectore et non latis femoribus, ut capax sedes sapientiae esset in viro; latrinam vero, qua stercora eiciuntur, ei parvam fecit. Porro haec in femina sunt inversa. Ideo multum habent stercorum mulieres, sapientiae autem parum.” Such passages do not tend to the higher appreciation of the female sex with which Luther has been credited.[870]“Ego quaero quare mulieres non optant fieri virgines? Et tacuerunt omnes et omnes siluerunt ridentes.”Ibid., p. 177 f.[871]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 166.[872]Ibid., p. 184.[873]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 74.[874]Lauterbach,ibid., p. 185. Cp. Cordatus, p. 286; “Eunuchi plus omnibus ardent nam appetitus castratione non perit, sed potentia.” Ich wolt mir lieber zwey paar ° [thus the Halle MS.=testiculos] ansetzen lassen, denn eins ausschneiden.[875]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen” (Kroker), p. 82. Said in 1540.[876]Ibid., p. 373. In 1536. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 361: “Wer nicht Wunder, so ervenereuswer, das er sein Freulein todtgearbeitet hette.”[877]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 69.[878]The reference to the Hessian is founded on a popular tale of Marcolfus and King Solomon. See Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 526.[879]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 117 f. Cp. in the Table-Talk of the Mathesius Collection, ed. Kroker, p. 156 f., a similar account of this conversation dating from 1540, 11-19 June. It begins: “Ego occallui sum rusticus et durus Saxo[a pun on the Latin word]ad eiusmodiX” (Luther probably made use of a word against which the pen of the writer revolted. Kroker’s note). Later: “Ipsi (papistae) occidunt homines, nos laboramus pro vita et ducimus plures uxores.” The end of this discourse, as Loesche and Kroker have shown, contains verbal reminiscences of Terence, with whom Luther must have been well acquainted from the days of his youth.[880]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” Kroker, p. 373.[881]“Saluta tuam conjugem suavissime, verum ut id tum facias cum in thoro suavissimis amplexibus et osculis Catharinam tenueris, ac sic cogitaveris: en hunc hominem, optimam creaturulam Dei mei, donavit mihi Christus meus, sit illi laus et gloria. Ego quoque cum divinavero diem qua has acceperis, ea nocte simili opere meam amabo in tui memoriam et tibi par pari referam. Salutat et te et costam tuam mea costa in Christo. Gratia vobiscum. Amen.” Letter of December 6, 1525. An esteemed Protestant historian of Luther declared recently in the “Theol. Studien und Kritiken” that he was charmed with Luther’s “wholesome and natural spirit, combined with such hearty piety.” The explanation is that this historian disagrees with the “shy reticence” now observed in these matters as at variance with the “higher moral sense,” and looks on what “Thomas says of theactus matrimonialis” as an “entire perversion of the sound ethics of matrimony.” Another historian “thanks Luther warmly for this letter,” whilst a third scholar extols “the depth of feeling with which Luther, as a married man, comprehends the mystery of neighbourly love within marriage.”[882]More on this, vol. v., xxxii. 4 f.[883]Letter of May 23, 1534, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 48; “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 55.[884]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 340 f., 342 ff., 346 f.[885]Ibid., 26, p. 6.[886]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26, pp. 23-26.[887]Ibid., 63, p. 394 (“Tischreden”).[888]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 82.[889]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 87 (Khummer).[890]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 73.[891]Ibid., p. 1.[892]Ibid., p. 2.[893]Ibid., p. 74.[894]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.[895]See above, p. 228, n. 6. It is strange to note that Mathesius commences the paragraph in question thus: “As occasion arose all sorts of wise sayings fell from his lips. The man was full of grace and the Holy Ghost, for which reason all who sought counsel from him as from God’s own prophet found what they needed. One of them once asked whether it would be a real marriage were a young fellow,” etc.[896]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 99.[897]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 204.[898]Ibid., p. 172.[899]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.[900]“Cinquante raisons,” etc., Munick, 1736, consid. 25, p. 32 s. I have access only to the French edition of this work, published originally in German and Latin.[901]“S.B. Böhm. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,” 1892, p. 123. In this volume Constantine Höfler has reprinted the lost “Apology” with a preface, p. 79 ff. Cp. E. Michael, “Luther und Lemnius, Wittenbergische Inquisition, 1538,” in “Zeitschr. für kath. Theol.,” 19, 1895, p. 450 ff., where the passage in question is given in Latin.[902]Ibid., p. 136. Michael,ibid., p. 465.[903]Vol. ii., pp. 129 f., 364, 368 f., 376.[904]Ickelsamer, “Clag etlicher Brüder,” ed. Enders, p. 48. See our vol. ii., p. 368 n.[905]Enders, p. 52.[906]Münzer, “Hochverursachte Schutzrede und Antwort,” ed. Enders, p. 18 ff.[907]See vol. ii., p. 130 f.[908]Art. 17, p. 81.[909]In answer to the screed, “Widder den Meuchler zu Dresen”, 1531, reprinted in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 145.[910]Ibid., pp. 139, 141.[911]Ibid., p. 148 f.[912]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 140.[913]Venetiis, 1547. In 1548 Johann Cochlæus collected Catharinus’s strictures on Luther out of three of the former’s writings, and entitled his work “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri judicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548. The above quotation appears in this collection, fol. C. 2a. For an account of the great services rendered by Catharinus, who for all his piety was yet too prejudiced and combative, see Joseph Schweizer, “Ambrosius Catharinus Politus,” 1910 (“Reformationsgeschichtl. Studien und Texte,” ed. J. Greving, Hft. 11 and 12). Cp. the remarks of others living at a distance given below, p. 294 ff., and the Roman reports mentioned by Jacob Ziegler (vol. ii., p. 133).[914]Luther to Spalatin on January 14, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 278. See our vol. ii., p. 133.[915]See vol. ii., p. 132 f.[916]Letter of June 16, 1525; “Maligna fama effecit,” etc. See vol. ii., p. 175.[917]See vol. ii., p. 176, n. 3.[918]Letter to Camerarius, April 11, 1526. “Corp. ref.,” 1, p. 794.[919]Page 205; “aus dem Thesaurus Baum in Strassburg.”[920]Kolde,ibid., p. 229.[921]Quoted by R. Stähelin, “Huldreich Zwingli,” 2, Basle, 1897, p. 311, and “Briefe aus der Reformationszeit,” Basle, 1887, p. 21: “si non stultitia Fabrum superat, impuritate Eccium, audacia Cocleum, et quid multa, omnia omnium vitia,” etc.[922]Fol. 3, 9. Quoted by N. Paulus in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 852.[923]“Theol. Studien und Kritiken,” 1907, p. 246 ff. (Excerpts given by the Protestant scholar E. Thiele, from a Bible at Wernigerode.)[924]We have only to recall the exaggerations concerning the power of faith alone, even in the case of the filthiest sins, e.g. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p. 527 f.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 92. Cp. above, pp. 177, 180 ff., 185 ff., 196, etc.[925]“The reading of heretical books was made difficult even for the Jesuits.” B. Duhr, “Gesch. der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge,” 1, 1907, p. 657. The learned polemical writers of the Society did, however, make use of the writings of heretics, Luther’s inclusive, as is clear from their works.[926]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, pp. 395, 506, 625, 753.[927]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 141, n., and p. v. Andreas matriculated at the University of Wittenberg in 1538.[928]Cp. also Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 112; Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 430.[929]On February 1, 1546, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 783.[930]Sim. Lemnius, “Monachopornomachia,” a satire against Luther. Cp. Strobel, “Neue Beiträge zur Literatur,” 3, 1, p. 137 ff.[931]In Enders, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 334.[932]“Colloq.,” ed. Rebenstock, Francof., 1571, 2, fol. 95.[933]They were received on September 29, 1525. “Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 248.[934]“Opp. Lat. var.,” 4, 486.[935]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 170. It has been asserted by controversialists that another version of the German translation of these Theses had already been made in 1545 from which some of the most “swinish expressions” were omitted through motives of modesty. Of any such revision during Luther’s lifetime nothing is, however, known. Probably the reference is to Caspar Cruciger’s translation which is placed next to the older translation in Walch’s edition of Luther’s works (19, p. 2258). But examination proves that Cruciger by no means weakened the wording, indeed, his rendering is in some instances even stronger, for instance, that of Theses 35, 42, 61, and 64. The “Swine-theologians of Louvain,” alluded to in his title, do not appear here in the original German edition.[936]The latter statement was in great part withdrawn by one controversial writer of standing, but not before it had been made their own by the lesser fry.[937]“Ein christenliche Predig von dem heyligen Ehestandt durch Wolfgangum Agricolam Spalatinum,” Ingolstadt, 1580 (Münchener Staatsbibliothek, Hom. 53, 8º). Cp. the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,” 1880, No. 27 ff., where accounts taken from a Spalt Chronicle of Wolfgang Agricola’s, according to an Eichstätt MS. (n. 248), are given, and where is printed the passage referring to Luther in the sermon to be discussed later. In the Suttner index of Eichstätt books the sermon is numbered 258, which explains certain mistaken references to the “ancient deed.”[938]In the sermon, quoted, p. 95.[939]See the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,”ibid.“Spalatins Muttergottesbild.”[940]To Spalatin, August 21, 1544, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 679 ff. See above, p. 197, n. 1. In the last years of his life Spalatin fell into incurable melancholy which finally brought him to the grave (January 16, 1546). Cp. J. Wagner, “Georg Spalatin,” Altenburg, 1830, p. 105 f. Luther was unacquainted with the actual cause of his fears, but says that some persons thought they were due to remorse for having given his sanction to an illegal marriage.[941]Agricola’s Sermon, p. 90.[942]Cp. N. Paulus, “Hist. Jahrb.,” 1903, p. 73, where Dungersheim is quoted: “As I have heard more than once from the lips of the said Lord Adolphus.”[943]“Acta et scripta Lutheri,” p. 1.[944]“Tischreden Luthers 1531-1532” (1888). Cp. the Introduction by the editor, p. vi. Preger does not appear to have heard of Wolfgang Agricola’s “Hans Schlahinhauffen.” Cp. the Erfurt register, in Weissenborn, “Akten der Erfurter Universität,” 1-2; also the Index published in 1899. The particulars concerning Johannes Schlaginhaufen are contained in the second vol., pp. 301-316. Spalatin is there entered (p. 207) in 1498 as: “Georgius Burchardi de Sula superiori.”[945]Mutian to Johann Lang, December 6, 1516, Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 5 f.[946]For all the proofs bearing on the matter see E. Schneidewind, “Das Lutherhaus in Eisenach,” 1883.[947]First ed., fol. 3.[948]Vol. iv., xxii. 5.[949]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 261.[950]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 260.[951]“Briefwechsel,” ed. Enders, 6, p. 186.[952]January 3, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 180.[953]Cp. W. Walther, “Deutsche Bibelübersetzungen,” 1889 ff., p. 403 f.[954]“Diarium italicum,” 1708, p. 278.[955]Tom. 24, La Haye, 1702, p. 134.[956]“Vita Lutheri, nummis illustrata,” Francof. et Lipsiae, 1699, pp. 225, 227. Joh. Fabricius, “Amoenitates theologicae,” Helmestadii, 1699, p. 676, in the Notes to his “Oratio de utilitate itineris Italiae.” Fabricius says the verses, though usually attributed to Luther, were not in his handwriting, nor could Luther well have composed anything so clumsy. Further, the sub-librarian at Rome had assured him that in the Vatican there was only one quarto book written by Luther.[957]Cp. Paul Haake, “Johann Fr. v. Wolfframsdorf” (“N. Archiv für sächsische Gesch.,” 22, 1901, pp. 69 f., 76-the text not quoted).[958]Vol. 1², p. 252.[959]Noribergae, 1731, p. 124.[960]Cp. “Anzeiger für Kunde der deutschen Vorzeit,” 1878, p. 16 (“Ein schon Frawe on Kinder”).[961]Ibid., 1879, p. 296 (“Ein schon Weib, viel Rinder wentzig Kinder”). Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 682. Walther, “Bibelübersetzungen,” points out concerning the origin of the story, that, owing to people being unaware of the mediæval translations of the Bible, “a German Bible immediately suggested the name of Luther.”[962]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 15.[963]Ibid., p. 120.[964]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, 1903, p. 681, n. 498. “Possibly he merely translated the old Italian rhyming proverb:‘Chi non ama il vino, la donna e il cantoUn pazzo egli sara e mai un santo,’and, being himself an outspoken Voltairean, suppressed the ‘santo.’” H. Böhmer, “Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung,” p. 84; 2nd ed., p. 117 f.[965]“Luther Tischreden Mathesische Sammlung,” p. 376, with other passages under the heading: Lauterbach and Weller.[966]Under the heading “Der ‘gute Trunk’ in den Lutheranklagen” the present writer published an article in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 479 ff., which under a revised form is given anew in the following pages. In view of the strong verdicts frequently pronounced upon Luther’s love of drink, we may point out that P. Albert Weiss, O. P., in his “Lutherpsychologie” (Mainz, 1906, p. 185 f.; 2nd ed., p. 274), goes so far as to declare he was inclined to “tone down this or that opinion expressed by Grisar,” but that he was thankful that he had “treated the subject with such moderation.”[967]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 348, “Tischreden.”[968]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 500; Erl. ed., 30, p. 363, in the “Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis.” Cp. also “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 189.[969]Letter to Wenceslaus Link, March 19, 1522, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 317. The reference is, of course, to the words of Peter, Acts ii. 13-15.[970]See n. 1.[971]Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 71, in the “Relatio Gregorii Caselii” of November 29, 1525. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 234; Erl. ed., 29, p. 20, where he says that God was not drunk when He spoke the words; alsoibid., 8, p. 507=28, p. 63: Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul were not drunk when they wrote certain things.[972]Letter of July 29, 1534, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 61 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 66).[973]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 437 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Ratzebergers Handschriftl. Gesch.,” ed. Neudecker, p. 131, and Jonas’s obituary sermon on Luther in Walch’s ed. of Luther’s works, 21, Anhang, p. 373*.[974]To Caspar Müller, March 18, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 137.[975]“Briefwechsel Bugenhagens,” ed. O. Vogt, 1888, p. 64 ff.[976]To Spalatin, August 15, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 218.[977]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. Cp. vol. ii., p. 133 f.[978]“Etwas vom kranken Luther” (“Deutsch-evangel. Blätter,” 29, 1904), p. 303 ff., p. 306.[979]Ibid., p. 311 f.[980]Ibid., p. 306.[981]The “Itinerarium,” in Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 229. From the Bern Archives.[982]The dots are Kolde’s.[983]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 96.[984]Letter of February 27, 1532, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 155.[985]A passage from a letter of Melanchthon’s to Veit Dietrich, dated March 15, 1537 (“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 327), deserves consideration: “Secuta est hos agones(his mental struggles or temptations),ut fit, magna debilitas; accessit etiam cruditas, quam vigiliae, vomitus et caetera incommoda multa auxerunt.”[986]The context is unfortunately not given by Kolde, no more here than in the case of Musculus. A copy of the letter is, he says, found in the Baum Thesaurus of the Strasburg University Library.[987]“Clag etlicher Brüder,” etc., ed. Enders (“Neudrucke deutscher Literaturwerke,” No. 118, 1893), p. 48.[988]“Hochverursachte Schutzrede,” etc., ed. Enders,ibid., p. 18 ff.[989]“De consideratione praesentium temporum,” Venetiis, 1547. Cochlæus’s “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri iudicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548, gives the words on fol. C. 2a.[990]Brieger, “Aleander und Luther,” p. 170; “alla quale (ebrietà) è deditissimo.”[991]“Helluone in crapula et ebrietate cervisiaria, ut audio, foedior.”[992]Cp. “Archiv für Reformationsgesch.,” “Texte und Untersuchungen,” 3 Jahrg., Hft. 1, p. 79, article by P. Kalkoff, “Römische Urteilo über Luther und Erasmus im Jahre 1521.” See our vol. ii., p. 133.[993]“Briefwechsel der Brüder Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer,” 1, 1908, p. 43; “Tui Wittenbergenses velut quotidie communicant et mox cerevisia inebriantur, ut sese aliquando non cognoscant, ita enim fertur.”[994]Ibid., pp. 58-68.[995]Barge, “Karlstadt,” 2, p. 558.[996]Henr. Sedulius,O.S.F., “Praescriptiones adv. haereses,” Antwerp, 1606, p. 210. It was he who published the false document concerning Luther’s alleged suicide (see vol. vi., xxxix. 3).[997]Paulus, “Luthers Lebensende,” 1898, p. 70.[998]“De mensuris,” Basileae, 1550, pp. 4, 338.[999]Luther to Katey, February 7, 1546, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 788.[1000]Grimm, “Deutsches Wörterbuch,” 8, p. 700.[1001]Cp. the letter addressed to Katey on February 1, 1546, p. 786: “I drink Neunburgish beer.”[1002]On July 2, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” ed. Burkhardt, p. 357.[1003]On July 16, 1540, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 298. De Wette’s edition of this letter is not altogether trustworthy. Cp. Burkhardt, “Briefe Luthers,” p. 358.[1004]On February 6, 1546,ibid., p. 786.[1005]From the written notes of Veit Dietrich (the “most reliable authority on the Table-Talk”), see Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 498. Cp. a parallel passage in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 135.[1006]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 151.[1007]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 152.[1008]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 451 (“Tischreden”).[1009]Letter of 1530 (July?), “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 159seq.[1010]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 516, from Veit Dietrich’s MS.[1011]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 185.[1012]Ibid., p. 95. Cp. Mathesius’s notes in Loesche, “Analecta Lutherana et Melanthoniana,” p. 100: “Then I would permit you a good drink;nam ebrietudo est ferenda, non ebriositas.” Forcellini’s definition: “ebriositas=propensio in ebrictatem.” According to Loesche, Luther himself invented the word “ebrietudo.” Luther says of the Elector Johann Frederick in his work, “Wider Hans Worst”: “Sometimes he takes a drink too much, which we are sorry to see,” but it was untrue that he was “a drunkard and led a disorderly life” (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 74).[1013]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141.[1014]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 8², p. 294.
[802]Ibid., 10, 3, p. 222=23, p. 116 f., in the work “On marriage matters,” to the pastors and preachers, 1530. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 119.[803]As regards the authorities, Luther’s wish was that they should interfere in the matter from the outset, and that strongly, although he can scarcely have hoped to see this carried out in practice. “The authorities must either coerce the woman or put her to death. Should they not do this, the husband must imagine that his wife has been carried off by brigands and look about him for another” (ibid.).[804]How the expression was at once taken up among Luther’s opponents is plain from a letter of Duke George of Saxony to his representative at the Diet, Dietrich von Werthern, in F. Gess, “Akten und Briefe Georgs,” etc., 1, p. 415. Cp. Weim ed., 10, 2, p. 290 n., and vol. iv., xxii. 5.[805]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 323 f.[806]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 289; Erl. ed., 16², p. 525 f. Sermon on conjugal life.[807]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 123; Erl. ed., 51, p. 44 n., in the work “Das siebẽdt Capitel S. Pauli zu den Corinthern aussgelegt,” 1523.[808]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 278; Erl. ed., 16², p. 515. She was to say: “Permit me to enter into a secret marriage with your brother, or your best friend,” etc. Luther is speaking of the case “where a healthy woman had an impotent husband,” etc. He here refers to the similar answer he had already given in his work: “On the Babylonish Captivity” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 558; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 98seq.)[809]To Joachim von Weissbach, August 23, 1527, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 406 f. (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 80). In 1540 he says: “Ego concessi privatim aliquot coniugibus, qui leprosum vel leprosam haberent, ut alium ducerent.” Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. In a sermon of 1524 he says coarsely of an impotent wife: “I would not have such a one beside me” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 560). The marriage bond was also dissolved where husband or wife had become impotent “owing to an evil spell”; his convictions forced him to teach this (ibid., p. 562).[810]Letter of February 16, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 436; cp.ibid., p. 584. The question was thoroughly gone into by Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” 1904, p. 202 ff., who says: “About 1536 a change took place in the attitude of the Wittenbergers towards marriage with relatives-in-law” (p. 216). “Thus it is evident that Luther’s views underwent a change” (p. 217). For the answer to the question how far this change was due to the hope of winning over Henry VIII. to the New Evangel, see vol. iv., xxi. 1.[811]To Chancellor Brück, January 27, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283.[812]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 380seq.[813]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 131; Erl. ed., 51, p. 55. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”[814]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 124 f.; Erl. ed., 51, p. 45 f. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”[815]Ibid., p. 124=44 f.[816]Ibid., p. 124=45.[817]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 16², p. 519.[818]Op. cit., above, p. 249, n. 6.[819]Ibid., p. 51.[820]“Die Frau und der Sozialismus,”19Stuttgart, 1893, p. 61.[821]Ibid., p. 64.[822]Ibid., p. 61. On Philip of Hesse, see vol. iv., xxi. 2.[823]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 559; “Op. lat. var.,” 6, p. 100, “De captivitate babylonica,” 1520, “an liceat, non audeo definire.”[824]Ibid., 24, p. 304; Erl. ed., 33, p. 323. Sermons on Genesis.[825]Ibid., p. 305=324; on the date see Weim. ed., 14, p. 250 ff.[826]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283: “Viro qui secundam uxorem consilio Carlstadii petit.”[827]The Elector forwarded it together with a letter to Philip of Hesse on July 3, 1540. See Enders, “Briefwechsel,”ibid., No. 5.[828]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 523; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, p. 368, in the “Propositiones de digamia episcoporum.”[829]“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 92 ff.[830]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 206 ff.[831]Thus Landgrave Philip, on May 16, 1542, to his theologian Bucer (Lenz, “Philipps Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 82).[832]“De bono coniugali,” c. 15; “P.L.,” 40, col. 385: “nunc certe non licet.” “Contra Faustum,” 1. 22, c. 47; “P.L.,” 42, col. 428: “nunc crimen est.”[833]“In IV. Sent.,” Dist. 33, q. 1, a. 1.[834]“Commentarii in Pentateuchum,” Romae, 1531, f. 38´; “Commentarii in Evangelia,” Venet., 1530, f. 77; “Epistolae s. Pauli enarr.,” etc., Venet. 1531, f. 142.[835]Ambr. Catharinus, “Annotationes in Comment. Cajetani,” Lugd., 1542, p. 469, “In hoc prorsus omnes theologi, neminem excipio, consenserunt.” Cp. Paulus, “Luther und die Polygamie” (“Lit. Beilage der Köln. Volksztng.,” 1903, No. 18), and in “Cajetan und Luther über Polygamie” (Hist.-pol. Blätter, 135, 1905, p. 81 ff.). On the opinions in vogue regarding the Old Testament exceptions, see Hurter, “Theol. spec.,”11P. ii., 1903, p. 567, n. 605. Cp. Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” p. 236 ff.[836]Letter to the Elector of Saxony, 1540, reprinted by Seidemann in Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 198.[837]Ibid.[838]Letter of December, 1523, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 237 f.; Erl. ed., 29, p. 16 (“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 266). For the letters, to the Teutonic Order and concerning the Abbots, cp. our vol. ii., p. 120.[839]To the Elector Johann of Saxony, May 25, 1529, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 75 (“Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 102).[840]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, 283; Erl. ed., 16², p. 559.[841]Ibid., Erl. ed., 61, p. 219.[842]Ibid.[843]To Spalatin, December 18, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 278 f.[844]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 96 f.[845]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 550 ff.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 88seq.[846]Cp. Köstlin, “Luthers Theologie,” 2², pp. 307 f., 311.[847]See vol. iv., xxii. 5.[848]In the first Erl. ed., vol. 20 (in the 2nd edition, vol. 16, p. 508 ff.); The Exposition in vol. 51, p. 1 ff.[849]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 118 ff.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 158 ff.[850]Ibid., p. 127=165.[851]The passage was given above, p. 251, n. 3. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448.[852]Appeal to the Old Testament: “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448, with the addition: “We are ashamed where there is no need for shame.”Ibid., 10, 2, p. 118=28, p. 158; St. Peter’s words (2 Peter ii. 1 ff.) obliged him to paint as it deserved the virtue of our clerical squires.[853]“Tractatus de modo dicendi et docendi ad populum,” printed at Landshut, 1514, pars 2, cap. 1.[854]His Catholic pupil Oldecop says in his “Chronicle” (p. 191), that he would not repeat Luther’s “shameful words” on the Sixth Commandment.[855]R. Seeberg, “Luther und Lutherthum in der neuesten kath. Beleuchtung,”² 1904, p. 19.[856]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” p. 616.[857]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 90.[858]Ibid., p. 49.[859]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 177 f.[860]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 426.[861]Ibid., p. 430.[862]Ibid., p. 431.[863]Ibid., p. 432.[864]Ibid.[865]Ibid., 436.[866]Ibid., 432seq.[867]Ibid., p. 432.[868]Ibid., 430. In Rebenstock’s Latin version: “Cocus jocundus ... cum carnem ... non poterat, etc., anu illam conspurcaviscat.”[869]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 8: “Ridens sapientiam, qua esse volebat sua Catharina: Creator formavit masculum lato pectore et non latis femoribus, ut capax sedes sapientiae esset in viro; latrinam vero, qua stercora eiciuntur, ei parvam fecit. Porro haec in femina sunt inversa. Ideo multum habent stercorum mulieres, sapientiae autem parum.” Such passages do not tend to the higher appreciation of the female sex with which Luther has been credited.[870]“Ego quaero quare mulieres non optant fieri virgines? Et tacuerunt omnes et omnes siluerunt ridentes.”Ibid., p. 177 f.[871]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 166.[872]Ibid., p. 184.[873]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 74.[874]Lauterbach,ibid., p. 185. Cp. Cordatus, p. 286; “Eunuchi plus omnibus ardent nam appetitus castratione non perit, sed potentia.” Ich wolt mir lieber zwey paar ° [thus the Halle MS.=testiculos] ansetzen lassen, denn eins ausschneiden.[875]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen” (Kroker), p. 82. Said in 1540.[876]Ibid., p. 373. In 1536. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 361: “Wer nicht Wunder, so ervenereuswer, das er sein Freulein todtgearbeitet hette.”[877]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 69.[878]The reference to the Hessian is founded on a popular tale of Marcolfus and King Solomon. See Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 526.[879]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 117 f. Cp. in the Table-Talk of the Mathesius Collection, ed. Kroker, p. 156 f., a similar account of this conversation dating from 1540, 11-19 June. It begins: “Ego occallui sum rusticus et durus Saxo[a pun on the Latin word]ad eiusmodiX” (Luther probably made use of a word against which the pen of the writer revolted. Kroker’s note). Later: “Ipsi (papistae) occidunt homines, nos laboramus pro vita et ducimus plures uxores.” The end of this discourse, as Loesche and Kroker have shown, contains verbal reminiscences of Terence, with whom Luther must have been well acquainted from the days of his youth.[880]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” Kroker, p. 373.[881]“Saluta tuam conjugem suavissime, verum ut id tum facias cum in thoro suavissimis amplexibus et osculis Catharinam tenueris, ac sic cogitaveris: en hunc hominem, optimam creaturulam Dei mei, donavit mihi Christus meus, sit illi laus et gloria. Ego quoque cum divinavero diem qua has acceperis, ea nocte simili opere meam amabo in tui memoriam et tibi par pari referam. Salutat et te et costam tuam mea costa in Christo. Gratia vobiscum. Amen.” Letter of December 6, 1525. An esteemed Protestant historian of Luther declared recently in the “Theol. Studien und Kritiken” that he was charmed with Luther’s “wholesome and natural spirit, combined with such hearty piety.” The explanation is that this historian disagrees with the “shy reticence” now observed in these matters as at variance with the “higher moral sense,” and looks on what “Thomas says of theactus matrimonialis” as an “entire perversion of the sound ethics of matrimony.” Another historian “thanks Luther warmly for this letter,” whilst a third scholar extols “the depth of feeling with which Luther, as a married man, comprehends the mystery of neighbourly love within marriage.”[882]More on this, vol. v., xxxii. 4 f.[883]Letter of May 23, 1534, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 48; “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 55.[884]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 340 f., 342 ff., 346 f.[885]Ibid., 26, p. 6.[886]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26, pp. 23-26.[887]Ibid., 63, p. 394 (“Tischreden”).[888]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 82.[889]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 87 (Khummer).[890]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 73.[891]Ibid., p. 1.[892]Ibid., p. 2.[893]Ibid., p. 74.[894]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.[895]See above, p. 228, n. 6. It is strange to note that Mathesius commences the paragraph in question thus: “As occasion arose all sorts of wise sayings fell from his lips. The man was full of grace and the Holy Ghost, for which reason all who sought counsel from him as from God’s own prophet found what they needed. One of them once asked whether it would be a real marriage were a young fellow,” etc.[896]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 99.[897]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 204.[898]Ibid., p. 172.[899]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.[900]“Cinquante raisons,” etc., Munick, 1736, consid. 25, p. 32 s. I have access only to the French edition of this work, published originally in German and Latin.[901]“S.B. Böhm. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,” 1892, p. 123. In this volume Constantine Höfler has reprinted the lost “Apology” with a preface, p. 79 ff. Cp. E. Michael, “Luther und Lemnius, Wittenbergische Inquisition, 1538,” in “Zeitschr. für kath. Theol.,” 19, 1895, p. 450 ff., where the passage in question is given in Latin.[902]Ibid., p. 136. Michael,ibid., p. 465.[903]Vol. ii., pp. 129 f., 364, 368 f., 376.[904]Ickelsamer, “Clag etlicher Brüder,” ed. Enders, p. 48. See our vol. ii., p. 368 n.[905]Enders, p. 52.[906]Münzer, “Hochverursachte Schutzrede und Antwort,” ed. Enders, p. 18 ff.[907]See vol. ii., p. 130 f.[908]Art. 17, p. 81.[909]In answer to the screed, “Widder den Meuchler zu Dresen”, 1531, reprinted in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 145.[910]Ibid., pp. 139, 141.[911]Ibid., p. 148 f.[912]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 140.[913]Venetiis, 1547. In 1548 Johann Cochlæus collected Catharinus’s strictures on Luther out of three of the former’s writings, and entitled his work “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri judicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548. The above quotation appears in this collection, fol. C. 2a. For an account of the great services rendered by Catharinus, who for all his piety was yet too prejudiced and combative, see Joseph Schweizer, “Ambrosius Catharinus Politus,” 1910 (“Reformationsgeschichtl. Studien und Texte,” ed. J. Greving, Hft. 11 and 12). Cp. the remarks of others living at a distance given below, p. 294 ff., and the Roman reports mentioned by Jacob Ziegler (vol. ii., p. 133).[914]Luther to Spalatin on January 14, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 278. See our vol. ii., p. 133.[915]See vol. ii., p. 132 f.[916]Letter of June 16, 1525; “Maligna fama effecit,” etc. See vol. ii., p. 175.[917]See vol. ii., p. 176, n. 3.[918]Letter to Camerarius, April 11, 1526. “Corp. ref.,” 1, p. 794.[919]Page 205; “aus dem Thesaurus Baum in Strassburg.”[920]Kolde,ibid., p. 229.[921]Quoted by R. Stähelin, “Huldreich Zwingli,” 2, Basle, 1897, p. 311, and “Briefe aus der Reformationszeit,” Basle, 1887, p. 21: “si non stultitia Fabrum superat, impuritate Eccium, audacia Cocleum, et quid multa, omnia omnium vitia,” etc.[922]Fol. 3, 9. Quoted by N. Paulus in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 852.[923]“Theol. Studien und Kritiken,” 1907, p. 246 ff. (Excerpts given by the Protestant scholar E. Thiele, from a Bible at Wernigerode.)[924]We have only to recall the exaggerations concerning the power of faith alone, even in the case of the filthiest sins, e.g. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p. 527 f.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 92. Cp. above, pp. 177, 180 ff., 185 ff., 196, etc.[925]“The reading of heretical books was made difficult even for the Jesuits.” B. Duhr, “Gesch. der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge,” 1, 1907, p. 657. The learned polemical writers of the Society did, however, make use of the writings of heretics, Luther’s inclusive, as is clear from their works.[926]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, pp. 395, 506, 625, 753.[927]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 141, n., and p. v. Andreas matriculated at the University of Wittenberg in 1538.[928]Cp. also Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 112; Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 430.[929]On February 1, 1546, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 783.[930]Sim. Lemnius, “Monachopornomachia,” a satire against Luther. Cp. Strobel, “Neue Beiträge zur Literatur,” 3, 1, p. 137 ff.[931]In Enders, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 334.[932]“Colloq.,” ed. Rebenstock, Francof., 1571, 2, fol. 95.[933]They were received on September 29, 1525. “Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 248.[934]“Opp. Lat. var.,” 4, 486.[935]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 170. It has been asserted by controversialists that another version of the German translation of these Theses had already been made in 1545 from which some of the most “swinish expressions” were omitted through motives of modesty. Of any such revision during Luther’s lifetime nothing is, however, known. Probably the reference is to Caspar Cruciger’s translation which is placed next to the older translation in Walch’s edition of Luther’s works (19, p. 2258). But examination proves that Cruciger by no means weakened the wording, indeed, his rendering is in some instances even stronger, for instance, that of Theses 35, 42, 61, and 64. The “Swine-theologians of Louvain,” alluded to in his title, do not appear here in the original German edition.[936]The latter statement was in great part withdrawn by one controversial writer of standing, but not before it had been made their own by the lesser fry.[937]“Ein christenliche Predig von dem heyligen Ehestandt durch Wolfgangum Agricolam Spalatinum,” Ingolstadt, 1580 (Münchener Staatsbibliothek, Hom. 53, 8º). Cp. the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,” 1880, No. 27 ff., where accounts taken from a Spalt Chronicle of Wolfgang Agricola’s, according to an Eichstätt MS. (n. 248), are given, and where is printed the passage referring to Luther in the sermon to be discussed later. In the Suttner index of Eichstätt books the sermon is numbered 258, which explains certain mistaken references to the “ancient deed.”[938]In the sermon, quoted, p. 95.[939]See the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,”ibid.“Spalatins Muttergottesbild.”[940]To Spalatin, August 21, 1544, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 679 ff. See above, p. 197, n. 1. In the last years of his life Spalatin fell into incurable melancholy which finally brought him to the grave (January 16, 1546). Cp. J. Wagner, “Georg Spalatin,” Altenburg, 1830, p. 105 f. Luther was unacquainted with the actual cause of his fears, but says that some persons thought they were due to remorse for having given his sanction to an illegal marriage.[941]Agricola’s Sermon, p. 90.[942]Cp. N. Paulus, “Hist. Jahrb.,” 1903, p. 73, where Dungersheim is quoted: “As I have heard more than once from the lips of the said Lord Adolphus.”[943]“Acta et scripta Lutheri,” p. 1.[944]“Tischreden Luthers 1531-1532” (1888). Cp. the Introduction by the editor, p. vi. Preger does not appear to have heard of Wolfgang Agricola’s “Hans Schlahinhauffen.” Cp. the Erfurt register, in Weissenborn, “Akten der Erfurter Universität,” 1-2; also the Index published in 1899. The particulars concerning Johannes Schlaginhaufen are contained in the second vol., pp. 301-316. Spalatin is there entered (p. 207) in 1498 as: “Georgius Burchardi de Sula superiori.”[945]Mutian to Johann Lang, December 6, 1516, Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 5 f.[946]For all the proofs bearing on the matter see E. Schneidewind, “Das Lutherhaus in Eisenach,” 1883.[947]First ed., fol. 3.[948]Vol. iv., xxii. 5.[949]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 261.[950]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 260.[951]“Briefwechsel,” ed. Enders, 6, p. 186.[952]January 3, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 180.[953]Cp. W. Walther, “Deutsche Bibelübersetzungen,” 1889 ff., p. 403 f.[954]“Diarium italicum,” 1708, p. 278.[955]Tom. 24, La Haye, 1702, p. 134.[956]“Vita Lutheri, nummis illustrata,” Francof. et Lipsiae, 1699, pp. 225, 227. Joh. Fabricius, “Amoenitates theologicae,” Helmestadii, 1699, p. 676, in the Notes to his “Oratio de utilitate itineris Italiae.” Fabricius says the verses, though usually attributed to Luther, were not in his handwriting, nor could Luther well have composed anything so clumsy. Further, the sub-librarian at Rome had assured him that in the Vatican there was only one quarto book written by Luther.[957]Cp. Paul Haake, “Johann Fr. v. Wolfframsdorf” (“N. Archiv für sächsische Gesch.,” 22, 1901, pp. 69 f., 76-the text not quoted).[958]Vol. 1², p. 252.[959]Noribergae, 1731, p. 124.[960]Cp. “Anzeiger für Kunde der deutschen Vorzeit,” 1878, p. 16 (“Ein schon Frawe on Kinder”).[961]Ibid., 1879, p. 296 (“Ein schon Weib, viel Rinder wentzig Kinder”). Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 682. Walther, “Bibelübersetzungen,” points out concerning the origin of the story, that, owing to people being unaware of the mediæval translations of the Bible, “a German Bible immediately suggested the name of Luther.”[962]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 15.[963]Ibid., p. 120.[964]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, 1903, p. 681, n. 498. “Possibly he merely translated the old Italian rhyming proverb:‘Chi non ama il vino, la donna e il cantoUn pazzo egli sara e mai un santo,’and, being himself an outspoken Voltairean, suppressed the ‘santo.’” H. Böhmer, “Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung,” p. 84; 2nd ed., p. 117 f.[965]“Luther Tischreden Mathesische Sammlung,” p. 376, with other passages under the heading: Lauterbach and Weller.[966]Under the heading “Der ‘gute Trunk’ in den Lutheranklagen” the present writer published an article in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 479 ff., which under a revised form is given anew in the following pages. In view of the strong verdicts frequently pronounced upon Luther’s love of drink, we may point out that P. Albert Weiss, O. P., in his “Lutherpsychologie” (Mainz, 1906, p. 185 f.; 2nd ed., p. 274), goes so far as to declare he was inclined to “tone down this or that opinion expressed by Grisar,” but that he was thankful that he had “treated the subject with such moderation.”[967]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 348, “Tischreden.”[968]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 500; Erl. ed., 30, p. 363, in the “Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis.” Cp. also “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 189.[969]Letter to Wenceslaus Link, March 19, 1522, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 317. The reference is, of course, to the words of Peter, Acts ii. 13-15.[970]See n. 1.[971]Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 71, in the “Relatio Gregorii Caselii” of November 29, 1525. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 234; Erl. ed., 29, p. 20, where he says that God was not drunk when He spoke the words; alsoibid., 8, p. 507=28, p. 63: Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul were not drunk when they wrote certain things.[972]Letter of July 29, 1534, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 61 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 66).[973]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 437 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Ratzebergers Handschriftl. Gesch.,” ed. Neudecker, p. 131, and Jonas’s obituary sermon on Luther in Walch’s ed. of Luther’s works, 21, Anhang, p. 373*.[974]To Caspar Müller, March 18, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 137.[975]“Briefwechsel Bugenhagens,” ed. O. Vogt, 1888, p. 64 ff.[976]To Spalatin, August 15, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 218.[977]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. Cp. vol. ii., p. 133 f.[978]“Etwas vom kranken Luther” (“Deutsch-evangel. Blätter,” 29, 1904), p. 303 ff., p. 306.[979]Ibid., p. 311 f.[980]Ibid., p. 306.[981]The “Itinerarium,” in Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 229. From the Bern Archives.[982]The dots are Kolde’s.[983]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 96.[984]Letter of February 27, 1532, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 155.[985]A passage from a letter of Melanchthon’s to Veit Dietrich, dated March 15, 1537 (“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 327), deserves consideration: “Secuta est hos agones(his mental struggles or temptations),ut fit, magna debilitas; accessit etiam cruditas, quam vigiliae, vomitus et caetera incommoda multa auxerunt.”[986]The context is unfortunately not given by Kolde, no more here than in the case of Musculus. A copy of the letter is, he says, found in the Baum Thesaurus of the Strasburg University Library.[987]“Clag etlicher Brüder,” etc., ed. Enders (“Neudrucke deutscher Literaturwerke,” No. 118, 1893), p. 48.[988]“Hochverursachte Schutzrede,” etc., ed. Enders,ibid., p. 18 ff.[989]“De consideratione praesentium temporum,” Venetiis, 1547. Cochlæus’s “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri iudicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548, gives the words on fol. C. 2a.[990]Brieger, “Aleander und Luther,” p. 170; “alla quale (ebrietà) è deditissimo.”[991]“Helluone in crapula et ebrietate cervisiaria, ut audio, foedior.”[992]Cp. “Archiv für Reformationsgesch.,” “Texte und Untersuchungen,” 3 Jahrg., Hft. 1, p. 79, article by P. Kalkoff, “Römische Urteilo über Luther und Erasmus im Jahre 1521.” See our vol. ii., p. 133.[993]“Briefwechsel der Brüder Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer,” 1, 1908, p. 43; “Tui Wittenbergenses velut quotidie communicant et mox cerevisia inebriantur, ut sese aliquando non cognoscant, ita enim fertur.”[994]Ibid., pp. 58-68.[995]Barge, “Karlstadt,” 2, p. 558.[996]Henr. Sedulius,O.S.F., “Praescriptiones adv. haereses,” Antwerp, 1606, p. 210. It was he who published the false document concerning Luther’s alleged suicide (see vol. vi., xxxix. 3).[997]Paulus, “Luthers Lebensende,” 1898, p. 70.[998]“De mensuris,” Basileae, 1550, pp. 4, 338.[999]Luther to Katey, February 7, 1546, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 788.[1000]Grimm, “Deutsches Wörterbuch,” 8, p. 700.[1001]Cp. the letter addressed to Katey on February 1, 1546, p. 786: “I drink Neunburgish beer.”[1002]On July 2, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” ed. Burkhardt, p. 357.[1003]On July 16, 1540, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 298. De Wette’s edition of this letter is not altogether trustworthy. Cp. Burkhardt, “Briefe Luthers,” p. 358.[1004]On February 6, 1546,ibid., p. 786.[1005]From the written notes of Veit Dietrich (the “most reliable authority on the Table-Talk”), see Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 498. Cp. a parallel passage in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 135.[1006]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 151.[1007]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 152.[1008]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 451 (“Tischreden”).[1009]Letter of 1530 (July?), “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 159seq.[1010]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 516, from Veit Dietrich’s MS.[1011]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 185.[1012]Ibid., p. 95. Cp. Mathesius’s notes in Loesche, “Analecta Lutherana et Melanthoniana,” p. 100: “Then I would permit you a good drink;nam ebrietudo est ferenda, non ebriositas.” Forcellini’s definition: “ebriositas=propensio in ebrictatem.” According to Loesche, Luther himself invented the word “ebrietudo.” Luther says of the Elector Johann Frederick in his work, “Wider Hans Worst”: “Sometimes he takes a drink too much, which we are sorry to see,” but it was untrue that he was “a drunkard and led a disorderly life” (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 74).[1013]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141.[1014]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 8², p. 294.
[802]Ibid., 10, 3, p. 222=23, p. 116 f., in the work “On marriage matters,” to the pastors and preachers, 1530. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 119.
[803]As regards the authorities, Luther’s wish was that they should interfere in the matter from the outset, and that strongly, although he can scarcely have hoped to see this carried out in practice. “The authorities must either coerce the woman or put her to death. Should they not do this, the husband must imagine that his wife has been carried off by brigands and look about him for another” (ibid.).
[804]How the expression was at once taken up among Luther’s opponents is plain from a letter of Duke George of Saxony to his representative at the Diet, Dietrich von Werthern, in F. Gess, “Akten und Briefe Georgs,” etc., 1, p. 415. Cp. Weim ed., 10, 2, p. 290 n., and vol. iv., xxii. 5.
[805]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 323 f.
[806]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 289; Erl. ed., 16², p. 525 f. Sermon on conjugal life.
[807]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 123; Erl. ed., 51, p. 44 n., in the work “Das siebẽdt Capitel S. Pauli zu den Corinthern aussgelegt,” 1523.
[808]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 278; Erl. ed., 16², p. 515. She was to say: “Permit me to enter into a secret marriage with your brother, or your best friend,” etc. Luther is speaking of the case “where a healthy woman had an impotent husband,” etc. He here refers to the similar answer he had already given in his work: “On the Babylonish Captivity” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 558; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 98seq.)
[809]To Joachim von Weissbach, August 23, 1527, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 406 f. (“Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 80). In 1540 he says: “Ego concessi privatim aliquot coniugibus, qui leprosum vel leprosam haberent, ut alium ducerent.” Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. In a sermon of 1524 he says coarsely of an impotent wife: “I would not have such a one beside me” (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 15, p. 560). The marriage bond was also dissolved where husband or wife had become impotent “owing to an evil spell”; his convictions forced him to teach this (ibid., p. 562).
[810]Letter of February 16, 1542, “Briefe,” 5, p. 436; cp.ibid., p. 584. The question was thoroughly gone into by Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” 1904, p. 202 ff., who says: “About 1536 a change took place in the attitude of the Wittenbergers towards marriage with relatives-in-law” (p. 216). “Thus it is evident that Luther’s views underwent a change” (p. 217). For the answer to the question how far this change was due to the hope of winning over Henry VIII. to the New Evangel, see vol. iv., xxi. 1.
[811]To Chancellor Brück, January 27, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283.
[812]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 380seq.
[813]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 131; Erl. ed., 51, p. 55. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”
[814]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 124 f.; Erl. ed., 51, p. 45 f. “Das siebẽdt Capitel.”
[815]Ibid., p. 124=44 f.
[816]Ibid., p. 124=45.
[817]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 16², p. 519.
[818]Op. cit., above, p. 249, n. 6.
[819]Ibid., p. 51.
[820]“Die Frau und der Sozialismus,”19Stuttgart, 1893, p. 61.
[821]Ibid., p. 64.
[822]Ibid., p. 61. On Philip of Hesse, see vol. iv., xxi. 2.
[823]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 559; “Op. lat. var.,” 6, p. 100, “De captivitate babylonica,” 1520, “an liceat, non audeo definire.”
[824]Ibid., 24, p. 304; Erl. ed., 33, p. 323. Sermons on Genesis.
[825]Ibid., p. 305=324; on the date see Weim. ed., 14, p. 250 ff.
[826]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 283: “Viro qui secundam uxorem consilio Carlstadii petit.”
[827]The Elector forwarded it together with a letter to Philip of Hesse on July 3, 1540. See Enders, “Briefwechsel,”ibid., No. 5.
[828]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 523; “Opp. lat. var.,” 4, p. 368, in the “Propositiones de digamia episcoporum.”
[829]“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 92 ff.
[830]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 206 ff.
[831]Thus Landgrave Philip, on May 16, 1542, to his theologian Bucer (Lenz, “Philipps Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 82).
[832]“De bono coniugali,” c. 15; “P.L.,” 40, col. 385: “nunc certe non licet.” “Contra Faustum,” 1. 22, c. 47; “P.L.,” 42, col. 428: “nunc crimen est.”
[833]“In IV. Sent.,” Dist. 33, q. 1, a. 1.
[834]“Commentarii in Pentateuchum,” Romae, 1531, f. 38´; “Commentarii in Evangelia,” Venet., 1530, f. 77; “Epistolae s. Pauli enarr.,” etc., Venet. 1531, f. 142.
[835]Ambr. Catharinus, “Annotationes in Comment. Cajetani,” Lugd., 1542, p. 469, “In hoc prorsus omnes theologi, neminem excipio, consenserunt.” Cp. Paulus, “Luther und die Polygamie” (“Lit. Beilage der Köln. Volksztng.,” 1903, No. 18), and in “Cajetan und Luther über Polygamie” (Hist.-pol. Blätter, 135, 1905, p. 81 ff.). On the opinions in vogue regarding the Old Testament exceptions, see Hurter, “Theol. spec.,”11P. ii., 1903, p. 567, n. 605. Cp. Rockwell, “Die Doppelehe Philipps von Hessen,” p. 236 ff.
[836]Letter to the Elector of Saxony, 1540, reprinted by Seidemann in Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 198.
[837]Ibid.
[838]Letter of December, 1523, “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 237 f.; Erl. ed., 29, p. 16 (“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 266). For the letters, to the Teutonic Order and concerning the Abbots, cp. our vol. ii., p. 120.
[839]To the Elector Johann of Saxony, May 25, 1529, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 75 (“Briefwechsel,” 7, p. 102).
[840]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, 283; Erl. ed., 16², p. 559.
[841]Ibid., Erl. ed., 61, p. 219.
[842]Ibid.
[843]To Spalatin, December 18, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 278 f.
[844]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 96 f.
[845]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 550 ff.; “Opp. lat. var.,” 5, p. 88seq.
[846]Cp. Köstlin, “Luthers Theologie,” 2², pp. 307 f., 311.
[847]See vol. iv., xxii. 5.
[848]In the first Erl. ed., vol. 20 (in the 2nd edition, vol. 16, p. 508 ff.); The Exposition in vol. 51, p. 1 ff.
[849]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 2, p. 118 ff.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 158 ff.
[850]Ibid., p. 127=165.
[851]The passage was given above, p. 251, n. 3. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448.
[852]Appeal to the Old Testament: “Werke,” Weim. ed., 10, 1, 1, p. 694; Erl. ed., 10², p. 448, with the addition: “We are ashamed where there is no need for shame.”Ibid., 10, 2, p. 118=28, p. 158; St. Peter’s words (2 Peter ii. 1 ff.) obliged him to paint as it deserved the virtue of our clerical squires.
[853]“Tractatus de modo dicendi et docendi ad populum,” printed at Landshut, 1514, pars 2, cap. 1.
[854]His Catholic pupil Oldecop says in his “Chronicle” (p. 191), that he would not repeat Luther’s “shameful words” on the Sixth Commandment.
[855]R. Seeberg, “Luther und Lutherthum in der neuesten kath. Beleuchtung,”² 1904, p. 19.
[856]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” p. 616.
[857]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 90.
[858]Ibid., p. 49.
[859]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 177 f.
[860]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 426.
[861]Ibid., p. 430.
[862]Ibid., p. 431.
[863]Ibid., p. 432.
[864]Ibid.
[865]Ibid., 436.
[866]Ibid., 432seq.
[867]Ibid., p. 432.
[868]Ibid., 430. In Rebenstock’s Latin version: “Cocus jocundus ... cum carnem ... non poterat, etc., anu illam conspurcaviscat.”
[869]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 8: “Ridens sapientiam, qua esse volebat sua Catharina: Creator formavit masculum lato pectore et non latis femoribus, ut capax sedes sapientiae esset in viro; latrinam vero, qua stercora eiciuntur, ei parvam fecit. Porro haec in femina sunt inversa. Ideo multum habent stercorum mulieres, sapientiae autem parum.” Such passages do not tend to the higher appreciation of the female sex with which Luther has been credited.
[870]“Ego quaero quare mulieres non optant fieri virgines? Et tacuerunt omnes et omnes siluerunt ridentes.”Ibid., p. 177 f.
[871]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 166.
[872]Ibid., p. 184.
[873]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 74.
[874]Lauterbach,ibid., p. 185. Cp. Cordatus, p. 286; “Eunuchi plus omnibus ardent nam appetitus castratione non perit, sed potentia.” Ich wolt mir lieber zwey paar ° [thus the Halle MS.=testiculos] ansetzen lassen, denn eins ausschneiden.
[875]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen” (Kroker), p. 82. Said in 1540.
[876]Ibid., p. 373. In 1536. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 361: “Wer nicht Wunder, so ervenereuswer, das er sein Freulein todtgearbeitet hette.”
[877]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 69.
[878]The reference to the Hessian is founded on a popular tale of Marcolfus and King Solomon. See Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 526.
[879]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 117 f. Cp. in the Table-Talk of the Mathesius Collection, ed. Kroker, p. 156 f., a similar account of this conversation dating from 1540, 11-19 June. It begins: “Ego occallui sum rusticus et durus Saxo[a pun on the Latin word]ad eiusmodiX” (Luther probably made use of a word against which the pen of the writer revolted. Kroker’s note). Later: “Ipsi (papistae) occidunt homines, nos laboramus pro vita et ducimus plures uxores.” The end of this discourse, as Loesche and Kroker have shown, contains verbal reminiscences of Terence, with whom Luther must have been well acquainted from the days of his youth.
[880]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” Kroker, p. 373.
[881]“Saluta tuam conjugem suavissime, verum ut id tum facias cum in thoro suavissimis amplexibus et osculis Catharinam tenueris, ac sic cogitaveris: en hunc hominem, optimam creaturulam Dei mei, donavit mihi Christus meus, sit illi laus et gloria. Ego quoque cum divinavero diem qua has acceperis, ea nocte simili opere meam amabo in tui memoriam et tibi par pari referam. Salutat et te et costam tuam mea costa in Christo. Gratia vobiscum. Amen.” Letter of December 6, 1525. An esteemed Protestant historian of Luther declared recently in the “Theol. Studien und Kritiken” that he was charmed with Luther’s “wholesome and natural spirit, combined with such hearty piety.” The explanation is that this historian disagrees with the “shy reticence” now observed in these matters as at variance with the “higher moral sense,” and looks on what “Thomas says of theactus matrimonialis” as an “entire perversion of the sound ethics of matrimony.” Another historian “thanks Luther warmly for this letter,” whilst a third scholar extols “the depth of feeling with which Luther, as a married man, comprehends the mystery of neighbourly love within marriage.”
[882]More on this, vol. v., xxxii. 4 f.
[883]Letter of May 23, 1534, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 48; “Werke,” Erl. ed., 54, p. 55.
[884]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, pp. 340 f., 342 ff., 346 f.
[885]Ibid., 26, p. 6.
[886]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26, pp. 23-26.
[887]Ibid., 63, p. 394 (“Tischreden”).
[888]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 82.
[889]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 87 (Khummer).
[890]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 73.
[891]Ibid., p. 1.
[892]Ibid., p. 2.
[893]Ibid., p. 74.
[894]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.
[895]See above, p. 228, n. 6. It is strange to note that Mathesius commences the paragraph in question thus: “As occasion arose all sorts of wise sayings fell from his lips. The man was full of grace and the Holy Ghost, for which reason all who sought counsel from him as from God’s own prophet found what they needed. One of them once asked whether it would be a real marriage were a young fellow,” etc.
[896]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 99.
[897]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 204.
[898]Ibid., p. 172.
[899]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 426.
[900]“Cinquante raisons,” etc., Munick, 1736, consid. 25, p. 32 s. I have access only to the French edition of this work, published originally in German and Latin.
[901]“S.B. Böhm. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,” 1892, p. 123. In this volume Constantine Höfler has reprinted the lost “Apology” with a preface, p. 79 ff. Cp. E. Michael, “Luther und Lemnius, Wittenbergische Inquisition, 1538,” in “Zeitschr. für kath. Theol.,” 19, 1895, p. 450 ff., where the passage in question is given in Latin.
[902]Ibid., p. 136. Michael,ibid., p. 465.
[903]Vol. ii., pp. 129 f., 364, 368 f., 376.
[904]Ickelsamer, “Clag etlicher Brüder,” ed. Enders, p. 48. See our vol. ii., p. 368 n.
[905]Enders, p. 52.
[906]Münzer, “Hochverursachte Schutzrede und Antwort,” ed. Enders, p. 18 ff.
[907]See vol. ii., p. 130 f.
[908]Art. 17, p. 81.
[909]In answer to the screed, “Widder den Meuchler zu Dresen”, 1531, reprinted in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 145.
[910]Ibid., pp. 139, 141.
[911]Ibid., p. 148 f.
[912]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 140.
[913]Venetiis, 1547. In 1548 Johann Cochlæus collected Catharinus’s strictures on Luther out of three of the former’s writings, and entitled his work “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri judicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548. The above quotation appears in this collection, fol. C. 2a. For an account of the great services rendered by Catharinus, who for all his piety was yet too prejudiced and combative, see Joseph Schweizer, “Ambrosius Catharinus Politus,” 1910 (“Reformationsgeschichtl. Studien und Texte,” ed. J. Greving, Hft. 11 and 12). Cp. the remarks of others living at a distance given below, p. 294 ff., and the Roman reports mentioned by Jacob Ziegler (vol. ii., p. 133).
[914]Luther to Spalatin on January 14, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 278. See our vol. ii., p. 133.
[915]See vol. ii., p. 132 f.
[916]Letter of June 16, 1525; “Maligna fama effecit,” etc. See vol. ii., p. 175.
[917]See vol. ii., p. 176, n. 3.
[918]Letter to Camerarius, April 11, 1526. “Corp. ref.,” 1, p. 794.
[919]Page 205; “aus dem Thesaurus Baum in Strassburg.”
[920]Kolde,ibid., p. 229.
[921]Quoted by R. Stähelin, “Huldreich Zwingli,” 2, Basle, 1897, p. 311, and “Briefe aus der Reformationszeit,” Basle, 1887, p. 21: “si non stultitia Fabrum superat, impuritate Eccium, audacia Cocleum, et quid multa, omnia omnium vitia,” etc.
[922]Fol. 3, 9. Quoted by N. Paulus in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 852.
[923]“Theol. Studien und Kritiken,” 1907, p. 246 ff. (Excerpts given by the Protestant scholar E. Thiele, from a Bible at Wernigerode.)
[924]We have only to recall the exaggerations concerning the power of faith alone, even in the case of the filthiest sins, e.g. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 8, p. 527 f.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 92. Cp. above, pp. 177, 180 ff., 185 ff., 196, etc.
[925]“The reading of heretical books was made difficult even for the Jesuits.” B. Duhr, “Gesch. der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge,” 1, 1907, p. 657. The learned polemical writers of the Society did, however, make use of the writings of heretics, Luther’s inclusive, as is clear from their works.
[926]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, pp. 395, 506, 625, 753.
[927]Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 141, n., and p. v. Andreas matriculated at the University of Wittenberg in 1538.
[928]Cp. also Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 112; Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 430.
[929]On February 1, 1546, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 783.
[930]Sim. Lemnius, “Monachopornomachia,” a satire against Luther. Cp. Strobel, “Neue Beiträge zur Literatur,” 3, 1, p. 137 ff.
[931]In Enders, “Luthers Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 334.
[932]“Colloq.,” ed. Rebenstock, Francof., 1571, 2, fol. 95.
[933]They were received on September 29, 1525. “Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 248.
[934]“Opp. Lat. var.,” 4, 486.
[935]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 65, p. 170. It has been asserted by controversialists that another version of the German translation of these Theses had already been made in 1545 from which some of the most “swinish expressions” were omitted through motives of modesty. Of any such revision during Luther’s lifetime nothing is, however, known. Probably the reference is to Caspar Cruciger’s translation which is placed next to the older translation in Walch’s edition of Luther’s works (19, p. 2258). But examination proves that Cruciger by no means weakened the wording, indeed, his rendering is in some instances even stronger, for instance, that of Theses 35, 42, 61, and 64. The “Swine-theologians of Louvain,” alluded to in his title, do not appear here in the original German edition.
[936]The latter statement was in great part withdrawn by one controversial writer of standing, but not before it had been made their own by the lesser fry.
[937]“Ein christenliche Predig von dem heyligen Ehestandt durch Wolfgangum Agricolam Spalatinum,” Ingolstadt, 1580 (Münchener Staatsbibliothek, Hom. 53, 8º). Cp. the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,” 1880, No. 27 ff., where accounts taken from a Spalt Chronicle of Wolfgang Agricola’s, according to an Eichstätt MS. (n. 248), are given, and where is printed the passage referring to Luther in the sermon to be discussed later. In the Suttner index of Eichstätt books the sermon is numbered 258, which explains certain mistaken references to the “ancient deed.”
[938]In the sermon, quoted, p. 95.
[939]See the “Eichstätter Pastoralblatt,”ibid.“Spalatins Muttergottesbild.”
[940]To Spalatin, August 21, 1544, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 679 ff. See above, p. 197, n. 1. In the last years of his life Spalatin fell into incurable melancholy which finally brought him to the grave (January 16, 1546). Cp. J. Wagner, “Georg Spalatin,” Altenburg, 1830, p. 105 f. Luther was unacquainted with the actual cause of his fears, but says that some persons thought they were due to remorse for having given his sanction to an illegal marriage.
[941]Agricola’s Sermon, p. 90.
[942]Cp. N. Paulus, “Hist. Jahrb.,” 1903, p. 73, where Dungersheim is quoted: “As I have heard more than once from the lips of the said Lord Adolphus.”
[943]“Acta et scripta Lutheri,” p. 1.
[944]“Tischreden Luthers 1531-1532” (1888). Cp. the Introduction by the editor, p. vi. Preger does not appear to have heard of Wolfgang Agricola’s “Hans Schlahinhauffen.” Cp. the Erfurt register, in Weissenborn, “Akten der Erfurter Universität,” 1-2; also the Index published in 1899. The particulars concerning Johannes Schlaginhaufen are contained in the second vol., pp. 301-316. Spalatin is there entered (p. 207) in 1498 as: “Georgius Burchardi de Sula superiori.”
[945]Mutian to Johann Lang, December 6, 1516, Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 5 f.
[946]For all the proofs bearing on the matter see E. Schneidewind, “Das Lutherhaus in Eisenach,” 1883.
[947]First ed., fol. 3.
[948]Vol. iv., xxii. 5.
[949]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 261.
[950]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 260.
[951]“Briefwechsel,” ed. Enders, 6, p. 186.
[952]January 3, 1528, “Briefwechsel,” 6, p. 180.
[953]Cp. W. Walther, “Deutsche Bibelübersetzungen,” 1889 ff., p. 403 f.
[954]“Diarium italicum,” 1708, p. 278.
[955]Tom. 24, La Haye, 1702, p. 134.
[956]“Vita Lutheri, nummis illustrata,” Francof. et Lipsiae, 1699, pp. 225, 227. Joh. Fabricius, “Amoenitates theologicae,” Helmestadii, 1699, p. 676, in the Notes to his “Oratio de utilitate itineris Italiae.” Fabricius says the verses, though usually attributed to Luther, were not in his handwriting, nor could Luther well have composed anything so clumsy. Further, the sub-librarian at Rome had assured him that in the Vatican there was only one quarto book written by Luther.
[957]Cp. Paul Haake, “Johann Fr. v. Wolfframsdorf” (“N. Archiv für sächsische Gesch.,” 22, 1901, pp. 69 f., 76-the text not quoted).
[958]Vol. 1², p. 252.
[959]Noribergae, 1731, p. 124.
[960]Cp. “Anzeiger für Kunde der deutschen Vorzeit,” 1878, p. 16 (“Ein schon Frawe on Kinder”).
[961]Ibid., 1879, p. 296 (“Ein schon Weib, viel Rinder wentzig Kinder”). Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 682. Walther, “Bibelübersetzungen,” points out concerning the origin of the story, that, owing to people being unaware of the mediæval translations of the Bible, “a German Bible immediately suggested the name of Luther.”
[962]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 15.
[963]Ibid., p. 120.
[964]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, 1903, p. 681, n. 498. “Possibly he merely translated the old Italian rhyming proverb:
‘Chi non ama il vino, la donna e il cantoUn pazzo egli sara e mai un santo,’
and, being himself an outspoken Voltairean, suppressed the ‘santo.’” H. Böhmer, “Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung,” p. 84; 2nd ed., p. 117 f.
[965]“Luther Tischreden Mathesische Sammlung,” p. 376, with other passages under the heading: Lauterbach and Weller.
[966]Under the heading “Der ‘gute Trunk’ in den Lutheranklagen” the present writer published an article in the “Hist. Jahrb.,” 26, 1905, p. 479 ff., which under a revised form is given anew in the following pages. In view of the strong verdicts frequently pronounced upon Luther’s love of drink, we may point out that P. Albert Weiss, O. P., in his “Lutherpsychologie” (Mainz, 1906, p. 185 f.; 2nd ed., p. 274), goes so far as to declare he was inclined to “tone down this or that opinion expressed by Grisar,” but that he was thankful that he had “treated the subject with such moderation.”
[967]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 348, “Tischreden.”
[968]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 500; Erl. ed., 30, p. 363, in the “Vom Abendmal Christi Bekentnis.” Cp. also “Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 189.
[969]Letter to Wenceslaus Link, March 19, 1522, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 317. The reference is, of course, to the words of Peter, Acts ii. 13-15.
[970]See n. 1.
[971]Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 71, in the “Relatio Gregorii Caselii” of November 29, 1525. Cp. “Werke,” Weim. ed., 12, p. 234; Erl. ed., 29, p. 20, where he says that God was not drunk when He spoke the words; alsoibid., 8, p. 507=28, p. 63: Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul were not drunk when they wrote certain things.
[972]Letter of July 29, 1534, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 61 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 66).
[973]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 437 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Ratzebergers Handschriftl. Gesch.,” ed. Neudecker, p. 131, and Jonas’s obituary sermon on Luther in Walch’s ed. of Luther’s works, 21, Anhang, p. 373*.
[974]To Caspar Müller, March 18, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 137.
[975]“Briefwechsel Bugenhagens,” ed. O. Vogt, 1888, p. 64 ff.
[976]To Spalatin, August 15, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 218.
[977]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141. Cp. vol. ii., p. 133 f.
[978]“Etwas vom kranken Luther” (“Deutsch-evangel. Blätter,” 29, 1904), p. 303 ff., p. 306.
[979]Ibid., p. 311 f.
[980]Ibid., p. 306.
[981]The “Itinerarium,” in Kolde, “Analecta Lutherana,” p. 229. From the Bern Archives.
[982]The dots are Kolde’s.
[983]“Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 96.
[984]Letter of February 27, 1532, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 155.
[985]A passage from a letter of Melanchthon’s to Veit Dietrich, dated March 15, 1537 (“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 327), deserves consideration: “Secuta est hos agones(his mental struggles or temptations),ut fit, magna debilitas; accessit etiam cruditas, quam vigiliae, vomitus et caetera incommoda multa auxerunt.”
[986]The context is unfortunately not given by Kolde, no more here than in the case of Musculus. A copy of the letter is, he says, found in the Baum Thesaurus of the Strasburg University Library.
[987]“Clag etlicher Brüder,” etc., ed. Enders (“Neudrucke deutscher Literaturwerke,” No. 118, 1893), p. 48.
[988]“Hochverursachte Schutzrede,” etc., ed. Enders,ibid., p. 18 ff.
[989]“De consideratione praesentium temporum,” Venetiis, 1547. Cochlæus’s “De persona et doctrina M. Lutheri iudicium fratris A. Catharini,” etc., Moguntiae, 1548, gives the words on fol. C. 2a.
[990]Brieger, “Aleander und Luther,” p. 170; “alla quale (ebrietà) è deditissimo.”
[991]“Helluone in crapula et ebrietate cervisiaria, ut audio, foedior.”
[992]Cp. “Archiv für Reformationsgesch.,” “Texte und Untersuchungen,” 3 Jahrg., Hft. 1, p. 79, article by P. Kalkoff, “Römische Urteilo über Luther und Erasmus im Jahre 1521.” See our vol. ii., p. 133.
[993]“Briefwechsel der Brüder Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer,” 1, 1908, p. 43; “Tui Wittenbergenses velut quotidie communicant et mox cerevisia inebriantur, ut sese aliquando non cognoscant, ita enim fertur.”
[994]Ibid., pp. 58-68.
[995]Barge, “Karlstadt,” 2, p. 558.
[996]Henr. Sedulius,O.S.F., “Praescriptiones adv. haereses,” Antwerp, 1606, p. 210. It was he who published the false document concerning Luther’s alleged suicide (see vol. vi., xxxix. 3).
[997]Paulus, “Luthers Lebensende,” 1898, p. 70.
[998]“De mensuris,” Basileae, 1550, pp. 4, 338.
[999]Luther to Katey, February 7, 1546, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 788.
[1000]Grimm, “Deutsches Wörterbuch,” 8, p. 700.
[1001]Cp. the letter addressed to Katey on February 1, 1546, p. 786: “I drink Neunburgish beer.”
[1002]On July 2, 1540, “Briefwechsel,” ed. Burkhardt, p. 357.
[1003]On July 16, 1540, Letters, ed. De Wette, 5, p. 298. De Wette’s edition of this letter is not altogether trustworthy. Cp. Burkhardt, “Briefe Luthers,” p. 358.
[1004]On February 6, 1546,ibid., p. 786.
[1005]From the written notes of Veit Dietrich (the “most reliable authority on the Table-Talk”), see Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 498. Cp. a parallel passage in “Werke,” Erl. ed., 57, p. 135.
[1006]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 151.
[1007]Mathesius, “Historien,” 1566, p. 152.
[1008]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 451 (“Tischreden”).
[1009]Letter of 1530 (July?), “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 159seq.
[1010]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 516, from Veit Dietrich’s MS.
[1011]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 185.
[1012]Ibid., p. 95. Cp. Mathesius’s notes in Loesche, “Analecta Lutherana et Melanthoniana,” p. 100: “Then I would permit you a good drink;nam ebrietudo est ferenda, non ebriositas.” Forcellini’s definition: “ebriositas=propensio in ebrictatem.” According to Loesche, Luther himself invented the word “ebrietudo.” Luther says of the Elector Johann Frederick in his work, “Wider Hans Worst”: “Sometimes he takes a drink too much, which we are sorry to see,” but it was untrue that he was “a drunkard and led a disorderly life” (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 26², p. 74).
[1013]Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 141.
[1014]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 8², p. 294.