[1420]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348, with account of the acceptance of the Concord.[1421]Kawerau, in Möller, “KG.,” 3³, p. 125.[1422]Luther to Jacob Meyer, Burgomaster of Basle, February 17, 1537, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 172 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 201). To this letter Luther frequently refers as best expressive of his standpoint.[1423]Ibid.[1424]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348.[1425]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 46.[1426]On May 6, 1538, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 200 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 357).[1427]On June 13, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 567 f.[1428]June 20, 1543,ibid., p. 571.[1429]To the printer, Christoph Froschauer, at Zürich, August 31, 1543,ibid., p. 587.[1430]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396seq.[1431]See “Concilii Tridentini Actorum Pars 1,” ed. S. Ehses, 1904. Introduction by Ehses, chap. 10. Cp. Pastor, “Gesch. der Päpste,” 4, 2, 1907, pp. 471 ff., 582 ff.; 5, 1909, p. 31 ff.[1432]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 31, p. 395seq.In the writing “Etliche Sprüche wider das Concilium Obstantiense” (Constantiense).[1433]Ibid., p. 393. Cp.ibid., p. 411; cp. his mocking “Ausschreibung eines heiligen freien, christlichen Conciliums.”[1434]Vergerio to Ricalcati, November 13, 1535 (“Nuntiaturber.” 1, ed. W. Friedensburg, p. 539 ff.). “Corp. Ref.,” 2, p. 987 (Spalatin’s note). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 58 (Table-Talk), Pallavicini, “Storia del Conc. di Trento,” 3, 18. Sarpi,idem, 1, n. 74. Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 371 ff. Pastor,op. cit., 5, p. 49 f.[1435]On November 10, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 267: “Egi Lutherum ipsum tota mensa.”[1436]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 375.[1437]“Senza nervo, sensa iudicio et una bestia.” “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 543. “Bestia” in such a connection even now does not signify a “beast,” but rather a foolish man of whom no use can be made.[1438]“Ha li occhi sguerzi, li quali quanto più io mirava, tanto più mi pareva di vederli appunto simili a quelli, che qualche volta io ho veduto, di qualche uno iudicato inspiritato, così affogati, inconstanti et con certo come furor et rabie, che vi si vede dentro” (p. 541).[1439]“Che egli habbia qualche demonio adosso.”[1440]In Friedensburg, “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 554.[1441]On Vergerio, particularly on his trial, see G. Buschbell, “Reformation und Inquisition in Italien um die Mitte des 16. Jahrh.,” Paderborn, 1910, p. 103 ff.[1442]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 181 ff.[1443]Ibid., p. 184.[1444]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 168; also “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 51 ff. “Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 202. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 385.[1445]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 126seq.“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 137.[1446]Seckendorf (“Comment de Lutheranismo,” 3, p. 145) says of the words “with the fist”: “id est calamo.” This is confirmed by a statement of Luther’s, according to which he was determined to write against the “Romish beast” with an even stronger fist (below, p. 437).[1447]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 384.[1448]See below, p. 439.[1449]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 413 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 169.[1450]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 436.[1451]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 389.[1452]Ibid., p. 390 f.[1453]Ibid.[1454]Mathesius, “Historien,” p. 130´.[1455]N. Ericeus in the Sylvula MS., p. 202´; “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 186, n.[1456]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 4, p. 58.[1457]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 185.[1458]Ibid., 5, p. 59.[1459]“Aufzeichnungen,” p. 200.[1460]Cp. above, p. 208 f.[1461]“Tagebuch,” p. 111.[1462]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 61; cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 294.[1463]Ibid., 25², p. 254, 128.[1464]To Caspar Müller, January 10, 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 120 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 291).[1465]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 470; Erl. ed., 25², p. 128.[1466]Ibid., 23, p. 57.[1467]See vol. vi., xxxvi.[1468]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 328 ff. “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 272seq.[1469]See above, p. 434.[1470]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 336; in n. 39 and 40, the thesis that the Pope is Antichrist is proved syllogistically from 2 Thessalonians ii. 3 f.: “Plane notæ antichristi competunt in regnum papæ et sua membra.”[1471]Page 337 f.[1472]“Abolent veros cultus, videlicet exercitia fidei luctantis cum desperatione.” See above, p. 345, how Melanchthon frequently emphasises the terrors which precede the working of the evangelical faith.[1473]Page 340 ff.[1474]Kolde, in the Introduction to the 10th edition of the “Symbolische Bücher,” p. 1. “This was the only official Confession agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention.” When Luther caused his bitter “Artickel”—which had not been accepted at Schmalkalden at all (above, p. 431)—to be printed in 1538 (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 163 ff.), he nevertheless spoke of them as an official deed agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention, declaring: “They have also been agreed upon unanimously by our followers and accepted, so that—were the Pope and his adherents ever so bold as to hold a Council, without lying and deceit but in all sincerity and truth, as he ought to do—these Articles ought to be publicly put forward as the confession of our faith.” Was he really ignorant of the actual facts of the case? It was surely to his interest, after the Conference of Schmalkalden, to inform himself exactly of the fate of his Articles. Kolde,ibid., p. 61, is of opinion that he evidently made the above assertion “in ignorance of the negotiations which had taken place at Schmalkalden during his illness.” Kolde, moreover, shows that Luther’s publication did not even agree with the original as “presented at Schmalkalden”; but contained various additions, some of them of considerable length, though “without any alteration of meaning.”[1475]“Symbolische Bücher,”ibid., p. xlix. f.[1476]Ellinger,ibid., p. 346.[1477]“De ecclesiæ autoritate et de veterum scriptis.” Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 50.[1478]One of the terms there used by Luther; “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 282; Erl. ed., 25², p. 12.[1479]Ellinger,ibid., p. 527, on the preface of 1546, reprinted in “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 190seq.[1480]Ellinger,ibid., p. 528.[1481]Ibid., p. 416, in 1541.[1482]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, pp. 201, 203, Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 454 f. Cp. above, p. 321.[1483]“Die Reformation,” p. 280.[1484]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 251 ff.: “Ratschlag von der Kirche.... Mit einer Vorrede und Glosse M. Luthers,” 1538. The writing begins: “The Pope with his wretched Council is like a cat with her kittens,” and concludes (p. 277): Unchastity “is no sin at Rome.” Yet unchastity was one of the abuses assailed in the very writing which he here reprints, which urges that “Rome ought to be the model and example of all other cities.” Of the ambition prevalent at Rome he writes in his usual way (p. 253): “If all such filth were to be stirred up in a free Council, what a stench there would be.” On the title-page he depicts three cardinals: “Desperate knaves, bent on cleansing the Churches with foxes’ brushes” (p. 254).[1485]Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 38.[1486]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 272.[1487]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 507, to Camerarius, March 31, 1538: “ridicula deliberatio,” in which Erasmus’s work was prohibited.Ibid., p. 525, to Spalatin, May 16, 1538, where the whole of the proposals for reform are called “illæ cardinalium ineptiæ.”[1488]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” 1906, p. 605 f.; he quotes at length some indecent passages.[1489]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 346.[1490]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 212.[1491]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 96.[1492]Ellinger,ibid., p. 371.[1493]Ibid., p. 372.[1494]Cp. the passage in the reprint of the “Variata,” “Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 357, with the same in the original Confession (“Symbol. Bücher,”10p. 41). Our quotations are from Loofs, “Dogmengesch.,”4p. 864 f.: “In view of the new idea of the Eucharist which he gradually adopted, we cannot doubt that Melanchthon was anxious to leave an open door for future agreement with the Swiss.” Thus Kolde, “Symbol. Bücher”10, Introd., p. xxvi.[1495]Selnecker, “Hist. narratio de Luthero, postremæ ætatis Elia,” Lipsiæ, 1575, Fol. H2: “Landgravium concepisse optimam spem de voluntate ipsorum et accessione ad unanimem Augustanam Confessionem amplectendam, si modo improbatio et damnatio sententiæ ipsorum, quam hactenus habuissent, eximeretur, atque hoc ipsum clementer perscripsisse ad D. Philippum et petiisse, exemplaria alia, omissis illis particulis, imprimi.” Cp. Kolde,ibid., p. xxv. n. 3. Selnecker took Melanchthon’s part in the theological controversies of his day.[1496]“Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 367seq.[1497]Kolde (“Symbol. Bücher”10, Einleitung, p. xxv.) characterises the enlarging of Articles v. and xx., the stress laid on the necessity of Penance and good works, and also Article xviii. (De libero arbitrio) as “real alterations, or at any rate a watering down of their dogmatic character.” “The chief stumbling-block proved, not indeed then, but later, to be the wording of Article x. on the Supper.... That it was here a question of a real change (in the doctrine of the Eucharist) should never have been denied.”[1498]Loofs,ibid., p. 865seq.[1499]Ibid., p. 905.[1500]See Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Eng. Trans., 6, p. 147).[1501]Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” p. 424 f.[1502]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 582.[1503]The writing is entitled “Kurtz Bekentnis,” etc. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396 ff.[1504]Kawerau, “Stellung” (above, p. 319, n. 1), p. 30.[1505]“Ultima admonitio ad Westphalum.” Cp. “RE. für prot. Theol. und Kirche”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 526.[1506]“Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 578seq.Cp. “Luthers Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 370. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 599.[1507]Köstlin-Kawerau,ibid.[1508]Ellinger,ibid., p. 440.[1509]On the book “Das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft,” see vol. v., xxxiii. 2.
[1420]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348, with account of the acceptance of the Concord.[1421]Kawerau, in Möller, “KG.,” 3³, p. 125.[1422]Luther to Jacob Meyer, Burgomaster of Basle, February 17, 1537, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 172 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 201). To this letter Luther frequently refers as best expressive of his standpoint.[1423]Ibid.[1424]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348.[1425]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 46.[1426]On May 6, 1538, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 200 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 357).[1427]On June 13, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 567 f.[1428]June 20, 1543,ibid., p. 571.[1429]To the printer, Christoph Froschauer, at Zürich, August 31, 1543,ibid., p. 587.[1430]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396seq.[1431]See “Concilii Tridentini Actorum Pars 1,” ed. S. Ehses, 1904. Introduction by Ehses, chap. 10. Cp. Pastor, “Gesch. der Päpste,” 4, 2, 1907, pp. 471 ff., 582 ff.; 5, 1909, p. 31 ff.[1432]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 31, p. 395seq.In the writing “Etliche Sprüche wider das Concilium Obstantiense” (Constantiense).[1433]Ibid., p. 393. Cp.ibid., p. 411; cp. his mocking “Ausschreibung eines heiligen freien, christlichen Conciliums.”[1434]Vergerio to Ricalcati, November 13, 1535 (“Nuntiaturber.” 1, ed. W. Friedensburg, p. 539 ff.). “Corp. Ref.,” 2, p. 987 (Spalatin’s note). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 58 (Table-Talk), Pallavicini, “Storia del Conc. di Trento,” 3, 18. Sarpi,idem, 1, n. 74. Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 371 ff. Pastor,op. cit., 5, p. 49 f.[1435]On November 10, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 267: “Egi Lutherum ipsum tota mensa.”[1436]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 375.[1437]“Senza nervo, sensa iudicio et una bestia.” “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 543. “Bestia” in such a connection even now does not signify a “beast,” but rather a foolish man of whom no use can be made.[1438]“Ha li occhi sguerzi, li quali quanto più io mirava, tanto più mi pareva di vederli appunto simili a quelli, che qualche volta io ho veduto, di qualche uno iudicato inspiritato, così affogati, inconstanti et con certo come furor et rabie, che vi si vede dentro” (p. 541).[1439]“Che egli habbia qualche demonio adosso.”[1440]In Friedensburg, “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 554.[1441]On Vergerio, particularly on his trial, see G. Buschbell, “Reformation und Inquisition in Italien um die Mitte des 16. Jahrh.,” Paderborn, 1910, p. 103 ff.[1442]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 181 ff.[1443]Ibid., p. 184.[1444]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 168; also “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 51 ff. “Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 202. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 385.[1445]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 126seq.“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 137.[1446]Seckendorf (“Comment de Lutheranismo,” 3, p. 145) says of the words “with the fist”: “id est calamo.” This is confirmed by a statement of Luther’s, according to which he was determined to write against the “Romish beast” with an even stronger fist (below, p. 437).[1447]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 384.[1448]See below, p. 439.[1449]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 413 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 169.[1450]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 436.[1451]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 389.[1452]Ibid., p. 390 f.[1453]Ibid.[1454]Mathesius, “Historien,” p. 130´.[1455]N. Ericeus in the Sylvula MS., p. 202´; “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 186, n.[1456]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 4, p. 58.[1457]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 185.[1458]Ibid., 5, p. 59.[1459]“Aufzeichnungen,” p. 200.[1460]Cp. above, p. 208 f.[1461]“Tagebuch,” p. 111.[1462]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 61; cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 294.[1463]Ibid., 25², p. 254, 128.[1464]To Caspar Müller, January 10, 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 120 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 291).[1465]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 470; Erl. ed., 25², p. 128.[1466]Ibid., 23, p. 57.[1467]See vol. vi., xxxvi.[1468]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 328 ff. “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 272seq.[1469]See above, p. 434.[1470]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 336; in n. 39 and 40, the thesis that the Pope is Antichrist is proved syllogistically from 2 Thessalonians ii. 3 f.: “Plane notæ antichristi competunt in regnum papæ et sua membra.”[1471]Page 337 f.[1472]“Abolent veros cultus, videlicet exercitia fidei luctantis cum desperatione.” See above, p. 345, how Melanchthon frequently emphasises the terrors which precede the working of the evangelical faith.[1473]Page 340 ff.[1474]Kolde, in the Introduction to the 10th edition of the “Symbolische Bücher,” p. 1. “This was the only official Confession agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention.” When Luther caused his bitter “Artickel”—which had not been accepted at Schmalkalden at all (above, p. 431)—to be printed in 1538 (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 163 ff.), he nevertheless spoke of them as an official deed agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention, declaring: “They have also been agreed upon unanimously by our followers and accepted, so that—were the Pope and his adherents ever so bold as to hold a Council, without lying and deceit but in all sincerity and truth, as he ought to do—these Articles ought to be publicly put forward as the confession of our faith.” Was he really ignorant of the actual facts of the case? It was surely to his interest, after the Conference of Schmalkalden, to inform himself exactly of the fate of his Articles. Kolde,ibid., p. 61, is of opinion that he evidently made the above assertion “in ignorance of the negotiations which had taken place at Schmalkalden during his illness.” Kolde, moreover, shows that Luther’s publication did not even agree with the original as “presented at Schmalkalden”; but contained various additions, some of them of considerable length, though “without any alteration of meaning.”[1475]“Symbolische Bücher,”ibid., p. xlix. f.[1476]Ellinger,ibid., p. 346.[1477]“De ecclesiæ autoritate et de veterum scriptis.” Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 50.[1478]One of the terms there used by Luther; “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 282; Erl. ed., 25², p. 12.[1479]Ellinger,ibid., p. 527, on the preface of 1546, reprinted in “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 190seq.[1480]Ellinger,ibid., p. 528.[1481]Ibid., p. 416, in 1541.[1482]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, pp. 201, 203, Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 454 f. Cp. above, p. 321.[1483]“Die Reformation,” p. 280.[1484]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 251 ff.: “Ratschlag von der Kirche.... Mit einer Vorrede und Glosse M. Luthers,” 1538. The writing begins: “The Pope with his wretched Council is like a cat with her kittens,” and concludes (p. 277): Unchastity “is no sin at Rome.” Yet unchastity was one of the abuses assailed in the very writing which he here reprints, which urges that “Rome ought to be the model and example of all other cities.” Of the ambition prevalent at Rome he writes in his usual way (p. 253): “If all such filth were to be stirred up in a free Council, what a stench there would be.” On the title-page he depicts three cardinals: “Desperate knaves, bent on cleansing the Churches with foxes’ brushes” (p. 254).[1485]Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 38.[1486]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 272.[1487]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 507, to Camerarius, March 31, 1538: “ridicula deliberatio,” in which Erasmus’s work was prohibited.Ibid., p. 525, to Spalatin, May 16, 1538, where the whole of the proposals for reform are called “illæ cardinalium ineptiæ.”[1488]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” 1906, p. 605 f.; he quotes at length some indecent passages.[1489]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 346.[1490]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 212.[1491]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 96.[1492]Ellinger,ibid., p. 371.[1493]Ibid., p. 372.[1494]Cp. the passage in the reprint of the “Variata,” “Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 357, with the same in the original Confession (“Symbol. Bücher,”10p. 41). Our quotations are from Loofs, “Dogmengesch.,”4p. 864 f.: “In view of the new idea of the Eucharist which he gradually adopted, we cannot doubt that Melanchthon was anxious to leave an open door for future agreement with the Swiss.” Thus Kolde, “Symbol. Bücher”10, Introd., p. xxvi.[1495]Selnecker, “Hist. narratio de Luthero, postremæ ætatis Elia,” Lipsiæ, 1575, Fol. H2: “Landgravium concepisse optimam spem de voluntate ipsorum et accessione ad unanimem Augustanam Confessionem amplectendam, si modo improbatio et damnatio sententiæ ipsorum, quam hactenus habuissent, eximeretur, atque hoc ipsum clementer perscripsisse ad D. Philippum et petiisse, exemplaria alia, omissis illis particulis, imprimi.” Cp. Kolde,ibid., p. xxv. n. 3. Selnecker took Melanchthon’s part in the theological controversies of his day.[1496]“Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 367seq.[1497]Kolde (“Symbol. Bücher”10, Einleitung, p. xxv.) characterises the enlarging of Articles v. and xx., the stress laid on the necessity of Penance and good works, and also Article xviii. (De libero arbitrio) as “real alterations, or at any rate a watering down of their dogmatic character.” “The chief stumbling-block proved, not indeed then, but later, to be the wording of Article x. on the Supper.... That it was here a question of a real change (in the doctrine of the Eucharist) should never have been denied.”[1498]Loofs,ibid., p. 865seq.[1499]Ibid., p. 905.[1500]See Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Eng. Trans., 6, p. 147).[1501]Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” p. 424 f.[1502]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 582.[1503]The writing is entitled “Kurtz Bekentnis,” etc. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396 ff.[1504]Kawerau, “Stellung” (above, p. 319, n. 1), p. 30.[1505]“Ultima admonitio ad Westphalum.” Cp. “RE. für prot. Theol. und Kirche”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 526.[1506]“Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 578seq.Cp. “Luthers Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 370. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 599.[1507]Köstlin-Kawerau,ibid.[1508]Ellinger,ibid., p. 440.[1509]On the book “Das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft,” see vol. v., xxxiii. 2.
[1420]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348, with account of the acceptance of the Concord.[1421]Kawerau, in Möller, “KG.,” 3³, p. 125.[1422]Luther to Jacob Meyer, Burgomaster of Basle, February 17, 1537, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 172 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 201). To this letter Luther frequently refers as best expressive of his standpoint.[1423]Ibid.[1424]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348.[1425]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 46.[1426]On May 6, 1538, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 200 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 357).[1427]On June 13, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 567 f.[1428]June 20, 1543,ibid., p. 571.[1429]To the printer, Christoph Froschauer, at Zürich, August 31, 1543,ibid., p. 587.[1430]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396seq.[1431]See “Concilii Tridentini Actorum Pars 1,” ed. S. Ehses, 1904. Introduction by Ehses, chap. 10. Cp. Pastor, “Gesch. der Päpste,” 4, 2, 1907, pp. 471 ff., 582 ff.; 5, 1909, p. 31 ff.[1432]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 31, p. 395seq.In the writing “Etliche Sprüche wider das Concilium Obstantiense” (Constantiense).[1433]Ibid., p. 393. Cp.ibid., p. 411; cp. his mocking “Ausschreibung eines heiligen freien, christlichen Conciliums.”[1434]Vergerio to Ricalcati, November 13, 1535 (“Nuntiaturber.” 1, ed. W. Friedensburg, p. 539 ff.). “Corp. Ref.,” 2, p. 987 (Spalatin’s note). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 58 (Table-Talk), Pallavicini, “Storia del Conc. di Trento,” 3, 18. Sarpi,idem, 1, n. 74. Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 371 ff. Pastor,op. cit., 5, p. 49 f.[1435]On November 10, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 267: “Egi Lutherum ipsum tota mensa.”[1436]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 375.[1437]“Senza nervo, sensa iudicio et una bestia.” “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 543. “Bestia” in such a connection even now does not signify a “beast,” but rather a foolish man of whom no use can be made.[1438]“Ha li occhi sguerzi, li quali quanto più io mirava, tanto più mi pareva di vederli appunto simili a quelli, che qualche volta io ho veduto, di qualche uno iudicato inspiritato, così affogati, inconstanti et con certo come furor et rabie, che vi si vede dentro” (p. 541).[1439]“Che egli habbia qualche demonio adosso.”[1440]In Friedensburg, “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 554.[1441]On Vergerio, particularly on his trial, see G. Buschbell, “Reformation und Inquisition in Italien um die Mitte des 16. Jahrh.,” Paderborn, 1910, p. 103 ff.[1442]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 181 ff.[1443]Ibid., p. 184.[1444]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 168; also “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 51 ff. “Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 202. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 385.[1445]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 126seq.“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 137.[1446]Seckendorf (“Comment de Lutheranismo,” 3, p. 145) says of the words “with the fist”: “id est calamo.” This is confirmed by a statement of Luther’s, according to which he was determined to write against the “Romish beast” with an even stronger fist (below, p. 437).[1447]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 384.[1448]See below, p. 439.[1449]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 413 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 169.[1450]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 436.[1451]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 389.[1452]Ibid., p. 390 f.[1453]Ibid.[1454]Mathesius, “Historien,” p. 130´.[1455]N. Ericeus in the Sylvula MS., p. 202´; “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 186, n.[1456]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 4, p. 58.[1457]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 185.[1458]Ibid., 5, p. 59.[1459]“Aufzeichnungen,” p. 200.[1460]Cp. above, p. 208 f.[1461]“Tagebuch,” p. 111.[1462]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 61; cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 294.[1463]Ibid., 25², p. 254, 128.[1464]To Caspar Müller, January 10, 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 120 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 291).[1465]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 470; Erl. ed., 25², p. 128.[1466]Ibid., 23, p. 57.[1467]See vol. vi., xxxvi.[1468]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 328 ff. “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 272seq.[1469]See above, p. 434.[1470]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 336; in n. 39 and 40, the thesis that the Pope is Antichrist is proved syllogistically from 2 Thessalonians ii. 3 f.: “Plane notæ antichristi competunt in regnum papæ et sua membra.”[1471]Page 337 f.[1472]“Abolent veros cultus, videlicet exercitia fidei luctantis cum desperatione.” See above, p. 345, how Melanchthon frequently emphasises the terrors which precede the working of the evangelical faith.[1473]Page 340 ff.[1474]Kolde, in the Introduction to the 10th edition of the “Symbolische Bücher,” p. 1. “This was the only official Confession agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention.” When Luther caused his bitter “Artickel”—which had not been accepted at Schmalkalden at all (above, p. 431)—to be printed in 1538 (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 163 ff.), he nevertheless spoke of them as an official deed agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention, declaring: “They have also been agreed upon unanimously by our followers and accepted, so that—were the Pope and his adherents ever so bold as to hold a Council, without lying and deceit but in all sincerity and truth, as he ought to do—these Articles ought to be publicly put forward as the confession of our faith.” Was he really ignorant of the actual facts of the case? It was surely to his interest, after the Conference of Schmalkalden, to inform himself exactly of the fate of his Articles. Kolde,ibid., p. 61, is of opinion that he evidently made the above assertion “in ignorance of the negotiations which had taken place at Schmalkalden during his illness.” Kolde, moreover, shows that Luther’s publication did not even agree with the original as “presented at Schmalkalden”; but contained various additions, some of them of considerable length, though “without any alteration of meaning.”[1475]“Symbolische Bücher,”ibid., p. xlix. f.[1476]Ellinger,ibid., p. 346.[1477]“De ecclesiæ autoritate et de veterum scriptis.” Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 50.[1478]One of the terms there used by Luther; “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 282; Erl. ed., 25², p. 12.[1479]Ellinger,ibid., p. 527, on the preface of 1546, reprinted in “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 190seq.[1480]Ellinger,ibid., p. 528.[1481]Ibid., p. 416, in 1541.[1482]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, pp. 201, 203, Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 454 f. Cp. above, p. 321.[1483]“Die Reformation,” p. 280.[1484]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 251 ff.: “Ratschlag von der Kirche.... Mit einer Vorrede und Glosse M. Luthers,” 1538. The writing begins: “The Pope with his wretched Council is like a cat with her kittens,” and concludes (p. 277): Unchastity “is no sin at Rome.” Yet unchastity was one of the abuses assailed in the very writing which he here reprints, which urges that “Rome ought to be the model and example of all other cities.” Of the ambition prevalent at Rome he writes in his usual way (p. 253): “If all such filth were to be stirred up in a free Council, what a stench there would be.” On the title-page he depicts three cardinals: “Desperate knaves, bent on cleansing the Churches with foxes’ brushes” (p. 254).[1485]Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 38.[1486]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 272.[1487]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 507, to Camerarius, March 31, 1538: “ridicula deliberatio,” in which Erasmus’s work was prohibited.Ibid., p. 525, to Spalatin, May 16, 1538, where the whole of the proposals for reform are called “illæ cardinalium ineptiæ.”[1488]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” 1906, p. 605 f.; he quotes at length some indecent passages.[1489]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 346.[1490]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 212.[1491]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 96.[1492]Ellinger,ibid., p. 371.[1493]Ibid., p. 372.[1494]Cp. the passage in the reprint of the “Variata,” “Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 357, with the same in the original Confession (“Symbol. Bücher,”10p. 41). Our quotations are from Loofs, “Dogmengesch.,”4p. 864 f.: “In view of the new idea of the Eucharist which he gradually adopted, we cannot doubt that Melanchthon was anxious to leave an open door for future agreement with the Swiss.” Thus Kolde, “Symbol. Bücher”10, Introd., p. xxvi.[1495]Selnecker, “Hist. narratio de Luthero, postremæ ætatis Elia,” Lipsiæ, 1575, Fol. H2: “Landgravium concepisse optimam spem de voluntate ipsorum et accessione ad unanimem Augustanam Confessionem amplectendam, si modo improbatio et damnatio sententiæ ipsorum, quam hactenus habuissent, eximeretur, atque hoc ipsum clementer perscripsisse ad D. Philippum et petiisse, exemplaria alia, omissis illis particulis, imprimi.” Cp. Kolde,ibid., p. xxv. n. 3. Selnecker took Melanchthon’s part in the theological controversies of his day.[1496]“Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 367seq.[1497]Kolde (“Symbol. Bücher”10, Einleitung, p. xxv.) characterises the enlarging of Articles v. and xx., the stress laid on the necessity of Penance and good works, and also Article xviii. (De libero arbitrio) as “real alterations, or at any rate a watering down of their dogmatic character.” “The chief stumbling-block proved, not indeed then, but later, to be the wording of Article x. on the Supper.... That it was here a question of a real change (in the doctrine of the Eucharist) should never have been denied.”[1498]Loofs,ibid., p. 865seq.[1499]Ibid., p. 905.[1500]See Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Eng. Trans., 6, p. 147).[1501]Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” p. 424 f.[1502]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 582.[1503]The writing is entitled “Kurtz Bekentnis,” etc. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396 ff.[1504]Kawerau, “Stellung” (above, p. 319, n. 1), p. 30.[1505]“Ultima admonitio ad Westphalum.” Cp. “RE. für prot. Theol. und Kirche”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 526.[1506]“Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 578seq.Cp. “Luthers Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 370. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 599.[1507]Köstlin-Kawerau,ibid.[1508]Ellinger,ibid., p. 440.[1509]On the book “Das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft,” see vol. v., xxxiii. 2.
[1420]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348, with account of the acceptance of the Concord.
[1421]Kawerau, in Möller, “KG.,” 3³, p. 125.
[1422]Luther to Jacob Meyer, Burgomaster of Basle, February 17, 1537, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 172 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 201). To this letter Luther frequently refers as best expressive of his standpoint.
[1423]Ibid.
[1424]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 348.
[1425]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 46.
[1426]On May 6, 1538, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 200 (“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 357).
[1427]On June 13, 1543, “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 567 f.
[1428]June 20, 1543,ibid., p. 571.
[1429]To the printer, Christoph Froschauer, at Zürich, August 31, 1543,ibid., p. 587.
[1430]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396seq.
[1431]See “Concilii Tridentini Actorum Pars 1,” ed. S. Ehses, 1904. Introduction by Ehses, chap. 10. Cp. Pastor, “Gesch. der Päpste,” 4, 2, 1907, pp. 471 ff., 582 ff.; 5, 1909, p. 31 ff.
[1432]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 31, p. 395seq.In the writing “Etliche Sprüche wider das Concilium Obstantiense” (Constantiense).
[1433]Ibid., p. 393. Cp.ibid., p. 411; cp. his mocking “Ausschreibung eines heiligen freien, christlichen Conciliums.”
[1434]Vergerio to Ricalcati, November 13, 1535 (“Nuntiaturber.” 1, ed. W. Friedensburg, p. 539 ff.). “Corp. Ref.,” 2, p. 987 (Spalatin’s note). “Werke,” Erl. ed., 62, p. 58 (Table-Talk), Pallavicini, “Storia del Conc. di Trento,” 3, 18. Sarpi,idem, 1, n. 74. Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 371 ff. Pastor,op. cit., 5, p. 49 f.
[1435]On November 10, 1535, “Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 267: “Egi Lutherum ipsum tota mensa.”
[1436]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 375.
[1437]“Senza nervo, sensa iudicio et una bestia.” “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 543. “Bestia” in such a connection even now does not signify a “beast,” but rather a foolish man of whom no use can be made.
[1438]“Ha li occhi sguerzi, li quali quanto più io mirava, tanto più mi pareva di vederli appunto simili a quelli, che qualche volta io ho veduto, di qualche uno iudicato inspiritato, così affogati, inconstanti et con certo come furor et rabie, che vi si vede dentro” (p. 541).
[1439]“Che egli habbia qualche demonio adosso.”
[1440]In Friedensburg, “Nuntiaturberichte,” p. 554.
[1441]On Vergerio, particularly on his trial, see G. Buschbell, “Reformation und Inquisition in Italien um die Mitte des 16. Jahrh.,” Paderborn, 1910, p. 103 ff.
[1442]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 181 ff.
[1443]Ibid., p. 184.
[1444]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 168; also “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 5, p. 51 ff. “Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 202. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 385.
[1445]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 126seq.“Briefwechsel,” 11, p. 137.
[1446]Seckendorf (“Comment de Lutheranismo,” 3, p. 145) says of the words “with the fist”: “id est calamo.” This is confirmed by a statement of Luther’s, according to which he was determined to write against the “Romish beast” with an even stronger fist (below, p. 437).
[1447]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 384.
[1448]See below, p. 439.
[1449]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 413 (“Tischreden”). Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 169.
[1450]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 61, p. 436.
[1451]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 389.
[1452]Ibid., p. 390 f.
[1453]Ibid.
[1454]Mathesius, “Historien,” p. 130´.
[1455]N. Ericeus in the Sylvula MS., p. 202´; “Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 186, n.
[1456]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 4, p. 58.
[1457]“Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 185.
[1458]Ibid., 5, p. 59.
[1459]“Aufzeichnungen,” p. 200.
[1460]Cp. above, p. 208 f.
[1461]“Tagebuch,” p. 111.
[1462]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 60, p. 61; cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 294.
[1463]Ibid., 25², p. 254, 128.
[1464]To Caspar Müller, January 10, 1536, “Werke,” Erl. ed., 55, p. 120 (“Briefwechsel,” 10, p. 291).
[1465]“Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 470; Erl. ed., 25², p. 128.
[1466]Ibid., 23, p. 57.
[1467]See vol. vi., xxxvi.
[1468]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 328 ff. “Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 272seq.
[1469]See above, p. 434.
[1470]“Symbolische Bücher,” p. 336; in n. 39 and 40, the thesis that the Pope is Antichrist is proved syllogistically from 2 Thessalonians ii. 3 f.: “Plane notæ antichristi competunt in regnum papæ et sua membra.”
[1471]Page 337 f.
[1472]“Abolent veros cultus, videlicet exercitia fidei luctantis cum desperatione.” See above, p. 345, how Melanchthon frequently emphasises the terrors which precede the working of the evangelical faith.
[1473]Page 340 ff.
[1474]Kolde, in the Introduction to the 10th edition of the “Symbolische Bücher,” p. 1. “This was the only official Confession agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention.” When Luther caused his bitter “Artickel”—which had not been accepted at Schmalkalden at all (above, p. 431)—to be printed in 1538 (“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 163 ff.), he nevertheless spoke of them as an official deed agreed to at the Schmalkalden Convention, declaring: “They have also been agreed upon unanimously by our followers and accepted, so that—were the Pope and his adherents ever so bold as to hold a Council, without lying and deceit but in all sincerity and truth, as he ought to do—these Articles ought to be publicly put forward as the confession of our faith.” Was he really ignorant of the actual facts of the case? It was surely to his interest, after the Conference of Schmalkalden, to inform himself exactly of the fate of his Articles. Kolde,ibid., p. 61, is of opinion that he evidently made the above assertion “in ignorance of the negotiations which had taken place at Schmalkalden during his illness.” Kolde, moreover, shows that Luther’s publication did not even agree with the original as “presented at Schmalkalden”; but contained various additions, some of them of considerable length, though “without any alteration of meaning.”
[1475]“Symbolische Bücher,”ibid., p. xlix. f.
[1476]Ellinger,ibid., p. 346.
[1477]“De ecclesiæ autoritate et de veterum scriptis.” Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 50.
[1478]One of the terms there used by Luther; “Werke,” Weim. ed., 30, 3, p. 282; Erl. ed., 25², p. 12.
[1479]Ellinger,ibid., p. 527, on the preface of 1546, reprinted in “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 190seq.
[1480]Ellinger,ibid., p. 528.
[1481]Ibid., p. 416, in 1541.
[1482]“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, pp. 201, 203, Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 454 f. Cp. above, p. 321.
[1483]“Die Reformation,” p. 280.
[1484]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 251 ff.: “Ratschlag von der Kirche.... Mit einer Vorrede und Glosse M. Luthers,” 1538. The writing begins: “The Pope with his wretched Council is like a cat with her kittens,” and concludes (p. 277): Unchastity “is no sin at Rome.” Yet unchastity was one of the abuses assailed in the very writing which he here reprints, which urges that “Rome ought to be the model and example of all other cities.” Of the ambition prevalent at Rome he writes in his usual way (p. 253): “If all such filth were to be stirred up in a free Council, what a stench there would be.” On the title-page he depicts three cardinals: “Desperate knaves, bent on cleansing the Churches with foxes’ brushes” (p. 254).
[1485]Kawerau, “Versuche,” p. 38.
[1486]“Werke,” Erl. ed., 25², p. 272.
[1487]“Corp. ref.,” 3, p. 507, to Camerarius, March 31, 1538: “ridicula deliberatio,” in which Erasmus’s work was prohibited.Ibid., p. 525, to Spalatin, May 16, 1538, where the whole of the proposals for reform are called “illæ cardinalium ineptiæ.”
[1488]W. Walther, “Für Luther,” 1906, p. 605 f.; he quotes at length some indecent passages.
[1489]Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 346.
[1490]Mathesius, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 212.
[1491]Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 96.
[1492]Ellinger,ibid., p. 371.
[1493]Ibid., p. 372.
[1494]Cp. the passage in the reprint of the “Variata,” “Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 357, with the same in the original Confession (“Symbol. Bücher,”10p. 41). Our quotations are from Loofs, “Dogmengesch.,”4p. 864 f.: “In view of the new idea of the Eucharist which he gradually adopted, we cannot doubt that Melanchthon was anxious to leave an open door for future agreement with the Swiss.” Thus Kolde, “Symbol. Bücher”10, Introd., p. xxvi.
[1495]Selnecker, “Hist. narratio de Luthero, postremæ ætatis Elia,” Lipsiæ, 1575, Fol. H2: “Landgravium concepisse optimam spem de voluntate ipsorum et accessione ad unanimem Augustanam Confessionem amplectendam, si modo improbatio et damnatio sententiæ ipsorum, quam hactenus habuissent, eximeretur, atque hoc ipsum clementer perscripsisse ad D. Philippum et petiisse, exemplaria alia, omissis illis particulis, imprimi.” Cp. Kolde,ibid., p. xxv. n. 3. Selnecker took Melanchthon’s part in the theological controversies of his day.
[1496]“Corp. ref.,” 26, p. 367seq.
[1497]Kolde (“Symbol. Bücher”10, Einleitung, p. xxv.) characterises the enlarging of Articles v. and xx., the stress laid on the necessity of Penance and good works, and also Article xviii. (De libero arbitrio) as “real alterations, or at any rate a watering down of their dogmatic character.” “The chief stumbling-block proved, not indeed then, but later, to be the wording of Article x. on the Supper.... That it was here a question of a real change (in the doctrine of the Eucharist) should never have been denied.”
[1498]Loofs,ibid., p. 865seq.
[1499]Ibid., p. 905.
[1500]See Janssen, “Hist. of the German People” (Eng. Trans., 6, p. 147).
[1501]Ellinger, “Melanchthon,” p. 424 f.
[1502]Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 582.
[1503]The writing is entitled “Kurtz Bekentnis,” etc. “Werke,” Erl. ed., 32, p. 396 ff.
[1504]Kawerau, “Stellung” (above, p. 319, n. 1), p. 30.
[1505]“Ultima admonitio ad Westphalum.” Cp. “RE. für prot. Theol. und Kirche”³, Art. “Melanchthon,” p. 526.
[1506]“Corp. ref.,” 5, p. 578seq.Cp. “Luthers Briefe,” ed. De Wette, 6, p. 370. Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 599.
[1507]Köstlin-Kawerau,ibid.
[1508]Ellinger,ibid., p. 440.
[1509]On the book “Das Bapstum vom Teuffel gestifft,” see vol. v., xxxiii. 2.