[580] “Grundriss einer Gesch. der deutschen Irrenpflege,” 1890, p. 76.
[581] “Antwort auf das Sendschreiben,”³ Sulzbach, 1817, p. 70 ff.
[582] See the 2nd ed. of this writing, bearing the same title as the 1st, “Seitenstück zur Weisheit Luthers.” The 1st ed. is weaker in its animadversions than the 2nd.
[583] P. 188.
[584] See above, vol. i., p. 16.
[585] “Zeitschr. des Harzvereins,” 39, 1906, p. 191 ff. It cannot be proved from the records that the second Hans Luther had been guilty of actual manslaughter. Hence in vol. i., it was not necessary to point out that the manslaughter of which Wicel accuses Martin Luther’s father, repeating his accusation most emphatically in public writings without its being called into question by Luther, cannot be placed to the account of the second Hans with any semblance of likelihood (though it has been done, cp. “Luther-Kalender,” 1910, p. 76 f). Wicel came to Eisleben in 1533, thus only a few years after the father’s death, and was able to assure himself of the facts, concerning which there was not likely to be any mistake owing to Martin Luther’s celebrity at that time.
[586] Aug. Cramer, “Die Nervosität,” Jena, 1906.
[587] “Grundriss der Psychiatrie,” Leipzig, 1906, p. 104.
[588] Ib., p. 141 f.
[589] “Monatsschr. für Psychiatrie,” Berlin, 1907, p. 230.
[590] Ib., p. 236.
[591] A. Hausrath, “Luthers Leben,” 2, p. 432.
[592] Ib., p. 432 f.
[593] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 169.
[594] Ib., (from Rebenstock).
[595] Ib., p. 175.
[596] Ib., p. 170.
[597] Ib.
[598] Erl. ed., 31, p. 257.
[599] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 195.
[600] Ib., p. 188: “… et D. Staupitius me incitabat contra papam.”
[601] Ib., p. 176.
[602] See above, vol. i., pp. 104 ff., 184 ff., 303 ff., where his theological attitude previous to the indulgence theses is discussed. It is taken for granted that the account of his development given in vol. i. is already known to the reader. The fictions have already been discounted in vol. i., p. 20 f. and p. 110 f.
[603] “Dokumente zu Luthers Entwicklung” (“Sammlung ausgewählter kirchen- und dogmengesch. Quellenschriften,” 2, Reihe 9. Hft.), 1911, p. 11 ff.
[604] Luther’s untrustworthiness here, where it is a question of his polemics, does not render untrue certain other data of a non-polemical character and otherwise supported. This is the case, e.g. with the date given above when the meaning of Rom. i. 17 first dawned upon him; this happens to agree with the facts. Cp. above, vol. i., p. 388 ff.
[605] Erl. ed., 63, p. 405, in the preface of 1539 to his German writings.
[606] See vol. iii., p. 153 ff. Cp. “Werke,” ib., p. 370, in a preface of 1531, where, referring to the “many and great miracles,” he makes no distinction between Evangel and Gospel.
[607] Ib., p. 373 (1542).
[608] Ib., p. 400 in the preface of 1539 to his German writings.
[609] Ib., p. 328.
[610] Ib., p. 295 (1530).
[611] Hausrath, “Luthers Leben,” 2, p. 432.
[612] “Studien und Skizzen zur Gesch. des Reformationszeitalters,” p. 219.
[613] “Schriften des Vereins f. RG.,” Hft. 100, 1910, p. 14.—Cp. K. A. Meissinger, quoted above, vol. ii., p. 362, n. 2.
[614] “Theol. Stud. und Krit.,” 1908, p. 580.
[615] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 182.
[616] Weim. ed., 33, p. 431 f.; Erl. ed., 48, p. 201.
[617] Ib., 49, p. 118.
[618] Ib., 20², 2, p. 420.
[619] “Comment. in Galat.,” Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 138; Irmischer, 1, p. 109 sq.
[620] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 19, p. 100.
[621] Ib., 7, p. 74.
[622] Weim. ed., 33, p. 560; Erl. ed., 48, p. 306.
[623] Erl. ed., 49, p. 27. Cp. 20, 2, p. 420.
[624] Weim. ed., 33, p. 575; Erl. ed., 48, p. 317.
[625] Erl. ed., 46, p. 73.
[626] At the time the present writer’s series of articles on Luther’s intellectual development was appearing in the “Köln. Volkszeitung” (1903, 1904), Denifle’s work which also insists on the unreliable nature of the legend (“Luther und Luthertum,” 1¹ 1904, pp. 389 ff., 725 f., 739 f.) was already in print.
[627] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 183.
[628] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 11, p. 123 (1545).
[629] Erl. ed., 49, p. 300. Comm. on John xiv.-xvi., of 1537.
[630] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 7, p. 72. “Enarr. in Genesim,” c.a. 1541.
[631] Ib., 5, p. 267, a. 1539.
[632] Erl. ed., 49, p. 27 (1537).
[633] Weim. ed., 33, p. 561; Erl. ed., 48, p. 306. Comm. on John vi.-viii., 1531.
[634] Erl. ed., 31, p. 273. “Kleine Anwort auff H. Georgen nehestes Buch,” 1533.
[635] Comment. in Galat., Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 135; Irmischer, 1, p. 107. Cp. p. 138=p. 109. The passage was only introduced by Luther in the 1538 ed., a fact remarkable for the history of the legend.
[636] Erl. ed., 20², 2, p. 420.
[637] Comment. in Galat. ed. Irmischer, 3, p. 20, 1535.
[638] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 18, p. 226. Enar. in ps. 45, a. 1532.
[639] See above, p. 126.
[640] See above, p. 150.
[641] Erl. ed. 58, p. 377.
[642] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 23, p. 401. Enarr. in Is. (1543).
[643] Comm. in Gal., Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 137; Irmischer, 1, p. 109, of 1535.
[644] Erl. ed. 45, p. 156. Sermon of Dec. 7, 1539.
[645] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 36. From Khummer, no date, but a late utterance.
[646] “Opp. lat. var.,” 1, p. 23, preface to the Latin works (1545).
[647] N. Ericeus, “Sylvula sententiarum,” 1566, p. 174 ff.
[648] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 19, p. 100 (1532).
[649] To Bugenhagen (1532), preface to the latter’s edition of Athanasius, “De trinitate,” “Opp. lat. var.,” 7, p. 523 (“Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 252).
[650] Weim. ed., 34, 2, p. 410 (1531). In the text, for “deinde quando,” read “deinde quanto.” A second hasty report, ib., gives the passage in this form: “Multos scio, et ego unus fui, quando confessus and clean et dixi orationes meas, I came to the altar it was all not worth a straw; vocabam presbyterum, et quando absolutio had been pronounced et missa perfecta [erat], tum certus ut antea [eram] and as much at peace with God ut antea, …” Of the Last Day: “Ego non libenter audiebam istum diem.”
[651] Above, vol. i., p. 290 f.
[652] Ericeus, “Sylvula,” l. c.
[653] G. Buchwald, “Ungedruckte Predigten Luthers 1537-1540,” 1905, p. 61 f. Scheel, “Dokumente,” p. x., n.
[654] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichn.,” p. 122 (1532).
[655] Erl. ed., 45, p. 156. Sermon of Dec. 7, 1539.
[656] Ib., p. 154, from the same sermon.
[657] Ib., 31, p. 279. “Anwort auff H. Georgen nehestes Buch.”
[658] Dr. Kirchhoff, “Zeitschr. f. Psychiatrie,” vol. 44, 1888, p. 376.
[659] Cp. previous volumes, passim, particularly vol. iv., pp. 120-31.
[660] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 182. See above, p. 192.
[661] Erl. ed., 14², p. 342.
[662] Comment. in ep. ad Galat., Weim. ed., 40, 1, p. 137. Irmischer, 1, p. 109.
[663] Erl. ed., 47, p. 37.
[664] Ib., 49, p. 27.
[665] Ib., 45, p. 156 f.
[666] Ib.
[667] Ib., 14², p. 185.
[668] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 10, p. 232.
[669] Ib., 19, p. 100.
[670] See above, vol. i., p. 278.
[671] Cp. apart from the “Dicta Melanchthoniana” (ed. Waltz, “Zeitschr. f. KG.,” 4, 1880, p. 324 ff.), p. 330:—“diebus Sabbati, cum esset vacuus a concionibus,” etc., “initio evangelii—” “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, where the same thing is related no less than three times: 1, p. 67; 1, p. 198; 3, p. 279, the German Table-Talk, Erl. ed., 59, pp. 10 and 21, and Ericeus, “Sylvula Sententiarum,” 1566, p. 174 sq.
[672] Erl. ed., 47, p. 37.
[673] Ib., 49, p. 315.
[674] Aquinas, “Summa theol.,” 3, q. 40, a. 2 ad 1. In ep. ad Tim. c. 4, lect. 2. “Summa theol.,” 2, 2, q. 88, a, 2 ad 3. Denifle, ib., 1², p. 365 f., where other quotations are given from Thomas and the mediæval theologians.—Cp. the wholesome teaching of the “Imitation”—already widely read in Luther’s day—on the value of outward works compared with interior virtue and charity (Bk. II., cap. 1): “Regnum Dei intra vos est, dicit Dominus,” are the words with which it begins. Bk. I., c. 19: “Multo plus debet esse intus quam quod cernitur foris,” and, again: “Iustorum propositum in gratia Dei potius quam in propria sapientia pendet,” etc. On the need of discretion see ib., 3, c. 7.
[675] “De non esu carnium ap. Carthus.,” “Opp.,” 2, pp. 723, 729. Denifle, ib., p. 370.
[676] Cp. Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 49.
[677] See above, vol. i., p. 80 ff.
[678] Weim. ed., 4, p. 626. Denifle, 1², p. 376 f.
[679] Ib., 6, p. 246; Erl. ed., 16², p. 180. Denifle, 1², p. 377 f.
[680] Weim. ed., 37, p. 661. Sermon of Feb. 1, 1534.
[681] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 18, p. 226. Enarr. in ps. 45. Jan., 1532.
[682] Weim. ed., 33, p. 561; Erl. ed., 48, p. 306. In the Comment. on John vi.-viii., 27 Oct., 1531.
[683] Erl. ed., 49, p. 300 (1537): “I myself must testify from my own experience: After having been a pious monk for over twenty years.” This reading of the sermons reported and edited by Cruciger is embodied in the text, whereas, in the notes, it is corrected to “fifteen.”
[684] Erl. ed., 46, p. 78, Sermon of 1537.
[685] On March 28, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 490: “Fraterculus in Christo … in angulo sepultus,” etc.
[686] To Joh. Braun, April 22, 1507, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 1 f; “sola et liberalissima sua misericordia … tanta divinæ bonitatis magnificentia.”
[687] March 17, 1509, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 6.
[688] From a MS. sermon of Luther’s of 1544 at Gotha. Scheel, “Dokumente,” p. 20.
[689] To N. Paulus is due the credit of having drawn attention in 1893 to the description given by Luther to Usingen. Hausrath in his article “Luthers Bekehrung” in 1896 (“N. Heidelb. Jahrb.,”) also noted how happy Luther had at first been in the convent. Cp. his “Leben Luthers,” 1, p. 22.
[690] Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 197 (Khummer): The good old man had taught him to commit perplexing matters of conscience “divinæ bonitati.”—Preface to Bugenhagen’s edition of St. Athanasius “De Trinitate”: “Vir sane optimus et absque dubio sub damnato cucullo verus christianus.”—Cp. “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 19, p. 100, on the preceptor’s words (above, vol. i., p. 10): “Fili quid facis, an nescis, quod ipse Dominus iussit nos sperare?”—Cp. Lauterbach, “Tagebuch,” p. 84 (Khummer): Luther’s reminiscence of the wise exhortation of his preceptor on conversations with women (“pauca et brevia loquatur”).—Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 1.
[691] See above, vol. i., p. 11.
[692] To George Leiffer, Augustinian at Erfurt, April 15, 1516, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 31.
[693] Flacius Illyr., “Clarissimæ quædam notæ veræ ac falsæ religionis,” Magdeburgi (1549), pages not numbered, end of cap. xv.: “Affirmabat is Martinum Lutherum apud ipsos sancte vixisse, exactissime regulam servasse et diligenter studuisse.” Copy of this rare work in the Vienna Hofbibliothek.
[694] On the passages in the Comm. on Rom. of 1515-16 in which he speaks well of the religious life, see above, vol. i., p. 270.
[695] Weim. ed., 2, p. 736; Erl. ed., 21, p. 242. Denifle, 1², p. 39.
[696] Ib., 2, p. 644; “Opp. lat. var.,” 2, p. 500, and in his “Letter to the Minorites of Jüterbogk,” May 15, 1519, “Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 40: “Media quibus facilius implentur præcepta.” Cp. Denifle, 1², p. 36.
[697] Sep. 9, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 226.
[698] Above, vol. ii., p. 181 ff.
[699] “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 183: “in gloriam Dei et confusionem sathanæ.”
[700] Cordatus, “Tagebuch,” p. 450: “etiam in complexus veni coniugis,” etc. Cp. “Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 2, p. 299. See above, vol. v., p. 354; vol. iii., p. 175.
[701] To Nich. Gerbel of Strasburg, Nov. 1, 1521, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 241: “ut nihil iam auribus meis sonet odiosius monialis, monachi, sacerdotis nomine et paradisum arbitrer coniugium vel summa inopia laborans.” Thus the monk and priest, four years before his marriage.
[702] To George Mascov, Provost of the Premonstratensian house at Leitzkau, end of 1516, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 76. At the close of the letter, of which only fragments have been preserved, we read: “Quam maxime rogo ut pro me Dominum ores; confiteor enim tibi, quod vita mea in dies appropinquet inferno, quia quotidie peior fio et miserior,” which must, of course, be understood of his moral, not his physical, condition. The “drawing nigh to hell” is an echo of Ps. lxxxvii., which was such a favourite of his, where we read: “repleta est malis anima mea et vita mea inferno appropinquavit” (v. 3), and: “In me transierunt iræ tuæ, et terrores tui conturbaverunt me” (v. 17).
[703] Above, vol. i., p. 88.
[704] To Spalatin, Dec. 14, 1516, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 73 f., where he begins by humbly confessing his unworthiness to receive any attention from the Elector (“talis tantusque princeps”), at whose Court Spalatin held a post.
[705] To Joh. Lang, Feb. 8, 1517, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 86. “Quid enim non credant, qui Aristoteli crediderunt, vera esse, quæ ipse calumniosissimus calumniator aliis affiingit et imponit tam absurda, ut asinus et lapis non possint tacere ad illa?” (ib., p. 85).
[706] Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 44, from Dietrich’s MSS.
[707] To Hier. Weller, July (?), 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 160.
[708] “Videbis,” Staupitz had said, according to him, “quod ad res magnas gerendas te ministro (Deus) utetur. Atque ita accidit,” Luther goes on. “Nam ego magnus (licet enim hoc mihi de me iure prædicare) factus sum doctor.” Such utterances, he continues, have in them something of the “oraculum et divinatio.” Then follows the statement quoted above concerning the other prophecy of his future greatness: “huius dicti sæpissime memini,” and again he declares such words contain “aliquid divinationis et oraculi.”
[709] Above, p. 102.
[710] Reprinted in Luther’s “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 79: “De tua præstantia, bonitate, eruditione creber sermo incidit.” After having spoken of Luther’s “celebris fama,” Scheurl expresses the wish “to become his friend.” The words are simply those in common use among the humanists.
[711] Jan. 27, 1517, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 82 ff.
[712] Weim. ed., 1, p. 30; “Opp. lat. var.,” 1, p. 57: “Nolunt audire, quod iustitiæ eorum peccata sint.… Gratiam maxime impugnant, qui eam iactant.”
[713] “Incurrunt inobedientiam et rebellionem.” See vol. i., p. 69.
[714] “Hæc est lux angeli Sathanæ” (ib.).
[715] Ib., p. 53.
[716] Weim. ed., 1, p, 12; “Opp. lat. var.,” I, p. 33.
[717] To Spalatin, June 8, 1516, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 41: “præsulari id est pergræcari sodomitari, romanari.”
[718] To Spalatin, in the spring, 1517, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 91: “eruditio sæculi nostri ferrea, immo terrea, sive sit Græcitatis sive Latinitatis sive Hebræitatis.”
[719] To Lang, March 1, 1517, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 88.
[720] See above, vol. i., p. 228.
[721] Ib., p. 70.
[722] To Nich. Hausmann at Zwickau, “Briefwechsel,” p. 144: “Corpore satis bene valeo, sed tot distrahor externis actibus, ut spiritus prope extinguatur raroque sui curam habeat. Ora pro me, ne carne consummer.” Cp. Gal. iii. 3: “Sic stulti estis, ut quum spiritu cœperitis, nunc carne consummemini.”
[723] To Lang, Oct. 26, 1516, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 67: “raro mihi integrum tempus est,” etc.; above, vol. i., p. 275.
[724] To Lang, Sep. 4, 1517, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 106. Cp. vol. i., p. 313.
[725] To Chr. Scheurl, May 6, 1517, “Briefwechsel,” 1, p. 97: “Sunt paradoxa modestis et qui non ea cognoverint, sed eudoxa et calodoxa scientibus, mihi vero aristodoxa. Benedictus Deus, qui rursum iubet de tenebris splendescere lumen.”