Associate professor of church history princeton theological seminary baker book house

Download 4,25 Mb.
Date conversion27.04.2018
Size4,25 Mb.
1   ...   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   ...   38


suited for that office. He even declared in 1542

that the Evangelical princes themselves " must be

necessity‑bishops," and even went so far as to

meditate (letter of Mar. 29, 1527) a " congregation

of Christians " with full ecclesiastical powers, but

determined to be guided by the course of events

and to wait until parishes and schools were pro­

vided with the proper persons. Since, however,

the result of the Saxon visitation gave no encourage­

ment to this project, it was deemed far more im­

portant first to win non‑Christians to the faith

through the Gospel, preserving the external form

of the Church as it was at the beginning of the

Reformation. The visitation accordingly took place

in 1527‑29, Luther writing the preface to Melanch­

thon's Unterricht der Visitataren an die Pfarrherrn,

and himself acting as a visitor in one of the dis­

tricts after Oct., 1528, while, as a result of his ob­

servations, he wrote both his catechisms in 1529.

At the same time he took the keenest interest in

education, conferring with Georg Spalatin (q.v.)

in 1524 on plans for a school system, and declared

that it was the duty of the civil authorities to pro­

vide schools and to see that parents sent their chil­

dren to them. He also advocated the establishment

of elementary schools for the instruction of girls.

In the mean time the nature of the Eucharist

had become a theme on which Luther found him­

self obliged to state his doctrines both fully and

polemically. Rejecting transubstantiation, he

nevertheless maintained the actual presence of the

body of Christ, while Zwingli, Leo

15. Eucha‑ Jud, and GJcolampadius, on the other

ristic Views hand, rejected this doctrine, interpre­

and Con‑ ting the " is " of the words of institu­

troversies. tion as " signifies." Luther was sorely

disturbed by this doctrine, which he

regarded as closely akin to the teachings of Carl­

stadt and the " fanatics " in general. In the contro­

versy which ensued, Luther replied to Q;colampa­

dius in the preface to the Syngramma Sueancum,

and also set forth his views in his Sermon von den

Sakramenten . . . Wider die Schwitrmgeister and

Dass dress Worte . . . noch festatehen (spring, 1527),

while he sought to give a final and most thorough

statement in his Vom Abendmahl Christi Bekennt­

nis (1528). In view of the perils to Protestantism

in the measures of the Diet of Speyer (q.v.) in

1529 and the coalition of the emperor with France

and the pope, the Landgrave Philip desired a union

of all the adherents of the Reformation, but Lu­

ther declared himself opposed to any alliance which

might aid heresy. He accepted, however, the land­

grave's invitation to a conference at Marburg (Oct.

1‑3, 1529; see MARBURG, CONFERENCE OF) t0 Settle

the matters in controversy, and there opposed

aJcolampadius, while Melanchthon was the antag­

onist of Zwingli. Although he found an unex­

pected harmony in other respects, no agreement

could be reached regarding the Eucharist; and he

therefore refused to call them brethren, even while

he wished them peace and love. [It was Luther's

conviction that God had blinded Zwingli's eyes so

that he could not see the true doctrine of the Lord's

Supper. He denounced Zwingli and his followers

at this time as " fanatics," " patricides," " matri‑

cides," " fratricides," " devils," " knaves," " here­tics," " rioters," " hypocrites," and the like. A. a. N.] The princes themselves then made sub­scription to the Schwabach Articles, upheld by Luther, a condition of alliance with them. Luther's reason for his Eucharistic doctrine was not a mere literal interpretation of the words of institution, but rather thankfulness for such an individual seal­ing and giving of the forgiveness won by the death of this body in the administering of the very same body, doubts as to the possibility of such a presence being silenced by remembering the absolute unity of the divine with the human in Christ. While Christ's presence is " repletive " (filling all places at once), his omnipresence in the Eucharist is espe­cially " definitive " (unbound by space). On the other hand, Luther taught with equal clearness that participation in itself is of no avail without faith. [He insisted that the impious and even beasts in partaking of the consecrated elements partake of the body and blood of Christ, but the unworthy partake unto damnation. A. a. N.] While, more­over, he combated the view that the Eucharist is a mere memorial, he fully recognized the commem­orative element in it. As regards the effect of the Sacrament on the faithful, he laid special stress on the words " given for you," and hence on the atone­ment and forgiveness through the death of Christ.

Under the same perilous conditions which had made desirable an alliance of all adherents of the Reformation, the estates convened with the em­peror at Augsburg in 1530, when the relation of the empire to Protestantism was def­i6. The finitely to be determined. Luther, de­Diet of spised by emperor and empire, re‑

Augsburg mained at Coburg, but the confession and the there presented by Meht,nchthon was Question essentially based upon his labors. The of Civil latter, while refraining from an au‑

Resistance. thoritative attitude, was little pleased by the smooth and cautious procedure of Melanchthon, and saw no chance of harmony of doctrine except in abolishment of the papacy, al­though he hoped for official toleration of both re­ligions in the empire. While the recess of the diet gave the Protestants only a short time to make their submission, the emperor, urged on by threat­ened war with the Turks and by the Schmalkald League of the Protestant princes and cities, made further attempts to secure harmony, which led to the Religious Peace of Nuremberg in 1532 (q.v.), to last until a general council should be called to make a final decision. Since the Diet of Speyer (1529) the question had become vital whether, in case the emperor refused peace, the princes were justified in, or even bound to, armed resistance. Until now Luther had held that even wrongful acts of the emperor in no way released his subjects from obedience, and had been unfavorable to offensive and defensive alliances between Evangelical princes, preserving this attitude even in regard to the Schmalkald League. His position was somewhat modified, however, by the opinions of the jurists that in cases of public and notorious injustice the existing imperial laws (" the emperor himself in his laws ") warranted such resistance. Accepting this,


he nevertheless referred judgment on the present conditions to the jurists, and not to the theologians. In his Warnung an die lieben Deutsehen (1531), nevertheless, he openly advocated resistance in a righteous cause, while in letters written in 1539 he went back still further to the general requirements of natural law.

The pope declaring himself ready to call a coun­cil, peaceable negotiations were renewed with the Roman Catholic Church, and in Nov., 1535, the

papal nuncio Vergerius conferred with

r7. The Luther in Wittenberg. While Luther Authority had no faith in the pope's sincerity, he of Church agreed to attend the council, wherever Councils it might be held, although it was con­Denied. vened expressly for the extirpation of Lutheran heresy. At the instance of the elector, he prepared articles for the council in which he bitterly attacked Roman Catholic dog­mas and the Roman Catholic Church, and termed the pope antichrist. The diet at Schmalkald (Feb., 1537) declined to take part in the council, and in 1539 Luther developed his views on councils in general in his Von den Concilien and Kirchen. Here he declared that not only could no reformation be hoped for from the pope and a papal council, but even the early councils and Fathers could not be regarded as the source for a reform. The entire system of Christian belief was to be derived, not from the Fathers and the councils, but from the Bible, the one task even of the four chief councils being simply and solely the defense of clear funda­mental doctrines of the Scriptures. He therefore denied the right of any council which, he declared, should include laymen, to posit new articles of be­lief, to command new good works, or to require ceremonies; and he restricted their functions to juristic pronouncement of judgment according to the Bible in cases of peril to the faith. In this same treatise he reiterated his view that the Church consists solely of the congregation of the faithful, and is recognizable by the use of the means of grace and the power of the keys, as well as by prayer, the bearing of the cross, and uprightness of life, in that her members are sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

In the mean time, efforts had been made to unite the Protestants upon the doctrine of the Eucha­rist, and Butzer (q.v.) had conferred with Luther

on the matter at Coburg as early as 18. Attacks 1530. Luther himself could yield on Zwingli, nothing, for he could not see why, if and Recog‑ his opponents really acknowledged nition of the the true presence of the body of Christ,

Bohemian they would not grant external partici­

Brethren. pation in the case of the unworthy.

He accordingly expressed the utmost

disapproval of Zwingli and warned against any ac­

ceptance of his teaching. Since, however, he found

the other Southern Germans unexpectedly yielding,

he reached a formal agreement with them at Wit­

tenberg in 1536, wherein they renounced Zwingli's

teachings and recognized the true presence. On

the other hand, since he did not, evidently through

some uncertainty regarding the question, demand

recognition of the reception of the elements by the

actually " impious," he left a loophole for Butzer's opinion that only Christians who, even though un­worthy, believed the words of institution, received, but not those who " mocked at all and believed naught." In 1537 he wrote a friendly letter to the burgomaster of Basel and to the Swiss cities, who could not, however, be won over, and in the fol­lowing year he informed Bullinger that since the Marburg conference he had considered Zwingli per­sonally an " excellent man." Luther's desire for all possible union with those of kindred views was shown still more clearly by his recognition of the Bohemian Brethren (q.v., IL). In 1533 and again five years later he had written the prefaces to the apology and confession which they had presented to the Margrave George of Brandenburg and King Ferdinand, even though in their new apology their theory of justification and of the Eucharist was not in agreement with his own.

However much Luther took part in visitations and the like, his chief activity within his Church

consisted not so much in external or­ig. Luther ganization as in preaching, exegesis, as a spiritual counsel, and the preparation Preacher of treatises on the truths of salvation.

and As a preacher he now labored at the

Exegete. city church together with his friend

Bugenhagen, and also visited the sick and performed other duties of private pastoral care. During the years following his return from the Wartburg, he delivered exegetical sermons on I and II Peter and Jude (1522‑24), as well as on Genesis and Exodus (1523‑27), besides preaching on the pericopes. In 1524‑25 he had lectured on Deuter­onomy, and in 1524‑26 he delivered lectures on the minor prophets, Ecclesiastes, and Isaiah. In 1526 he published his exegeses of Jonah and Habakkuk, and that of Zechariah in the following year. Among his other lectures the most important were those on Galatians (1531‑35; the chief presentation of his doctrine of salvation) and on Genesis (1536‑45); of his sermons the most noteworthy, besides those on the pericopes, were delivered on Matthew and John. His postilla, the second half not edited by himself, was completed in 1527; while the ser­mons which Luther, prevented by ill health from delivering publicly, preached to his children and household in 1532 formed the basis of his Haua­poslille. The translation of the Bible was com­pleted in 1534, although he made emendations until 1545.

Within his own church questions repeatedly arose which led Luther to more explicit statements on weighty points of doctrine. While he had re‑

jected Roman Catholic auricular con­io. Theory fession, he laid great stress on Evan­of Confes‑ gelical private confession, not because

sion and of any power of the confessor, but be‑

the Law. cause of the words of promise with

which forgiveness is declared, pro­vided that the penitent is filled with faith. Al­though the words of forgiveness should be pro­claimed in every sermon„he held private confession conducive to the ascertainment of the penitent's spiritual state but declaration of forgiveness could be withheld only in case of manifest un‑

Luther, martin THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 76

belief and impenitence. In 1533, and again in 1536, Luther approved the retention of public gen­eral absolution together with private confession at Nuremberg, and even drew up a formula for such absolution. Nevertheless, holding that absolution was not conditioned by priestly judgment (though it was an objective and effectual conferring of for­giveness), he later declared that it might be con­ferred by one layman on another in virtue of the " power of the keys." On the other hand, in 1538 he stated that those capable of instructing them­selves need not make a formal confession before receiving the Eucharist. In 1537 a controversy broke out with Johann Agricola on the nature of the law (see AGRICOLA, JoxANrr; and Arrmtrtomi­Arnsns). Sharply opposed by Luther in theses of 1537‑38 and the Wider die Antinorreer (1539), Ag­ricola held that the Mosaic law had been abrogated, and that repentance should be preached only on the basis of the Gospel (the word of grace in Christ), not because of the law. Luther, on the contrary, maintained that the word of salvation could not awaken faith in the sinful heart unless it had first been broken by the law and its resultant terrors of conscience. This is, indeed, not true repentance, but is a preparation for it; and stress was also laid by Luther on the fact that wherever in the New Testament sin, wrath, and judgment are revealed, the law, and not the Gospel, prevails.

The most important part in Church organization yet in store for Luther was the establishment of coneistories. These were especially needed for the regulation of marriage. Luther, pro‑

z:. Estab‑ ceding on his theory of the relation lishment of of the secular to the Mosaic law, and Consistories regarding marriage as a secular, though and the holy estate, relegated it to the State;

Marriage and held that the clergy were con­

of Philip cerned with it in so far as, from its

of Hesse. very nature, it led to questions of con­

science more than any other secular

state (see MARRIAGE, L, 16, II. 2, § 5). The first

consistory was established at Wittenberg in 1539

with Luther's approval. The chief importance of

the consiatory for the organization and life of the

Church, however, came from the fact that the duty

entrusted to it was discipline. This, it was thought,

would lead to the introduction of the public ban,

with its civic consequences, but when opposition

was raised in Wittenberg in 1539 on the matter,

Luther set forth very clearly the ban he would be

willing to establish‑one based on Matt. aviii. 15

sqq. There is no record, however, that such a

plan, so eminently in accord with the Evangelical

concept of the Church, was anywhere carried out;

nor had Luther himself much hope of the consis­

tories' actual disciplinary powers. The end of Lu­

ther's life was now approaching, and he had already

received warning in a sharp attack of calculus at

Schmalkald in 1537. Beneath his external bra­

very, he felt himself aging, and while full of grati­

tude for the grace of the Gospel, he felt the world

an alien to it in precept and practise, and looked

forward to a time of distress and judgment for the

Church. He was pained most of all by the attitude

of the masses and of the nobility toward the Gospel,

illustrated by the marital relations of Philip of Hesse. The latter, though married, was enamored of a girl of the nobility, and asserted that he was compelled by most urgent reasons of conscience to search for another wife. He conceived the idea of a double marriage, and as early as 1526 asked Luther's opinion on it, renewing his inquiries moat urgently through Butzer after 1539. Though Luther held that monogamy was the original insti­tution of God, he nevertheless granted the possi­bility of cases in which a dispensation was admis­sible, even among Christians, especially as such a double marriage was preferable to an illegal di­vorce. This dispensation, however, could be given only as confessional advice, and could not alter the law, which recognized only a single wife; and it must, therefore, remain absolutely secret to avoid scandal. While sharply admonishing Philip of his sins and his duty, Luther and Melanchthon granted that his was a case for a dispensation, and~the wed­ding took place on Mar. 3, 1540. Luther insisted that the affair be kept secret, and that the new wife be represented to the emperor as a mistress, knowing that he could not justify his attitude to the world, though he thought he might to God.

The impossibility of peaceable relations with the Roman Catholic Church was felt still more keenly by Luther in these last years when new attempts at reconciliation were made. He was obliged to deliberate with his colleagues in Jan., 1540, with only the passing hope that the em‑

zz. Re‑ peror might convene a national coun­newed cil, for there was no remedy unless Eucharistic doctrines contrary to Scripture should

Contro‑ first be openly renounced. He so‑

versies. cordingly felt little sympathy with the

Regensburg Conference in 1541 (q.v.),

headed by Melanehthon and Cruciger, condemning

their attitude toward both the Eucharist and the

doctrine of justification. When, however, the em­

peror sought to reopen negotiations in 1545, Luther

subscribed to Melanchthon's proposal to reunite

with the episcopate, but his diatribes against the

Roman Catholic Church were even more bitter than

ever, as is amply illustrated by his Wider das PapsG­

tum zu Rom, which appeared in the year before his

death. He gave a very real ground of offense,

moreover, to his opponents, when in 1542, despite

the protests of the chapter, he made Nikolaus von

Amsdorf bishop of Nuremberg, an act which he

defended in his Exempel einen rechten christlichen

Bischof zu weihen, wherein he sought to establish

from the Evangelical point of view the validity of

the consecration which he had performed. With

the growth of dissension between the two Saxon

houses after 1542 came a break in the unity of the

Evangelicals. Luther had never ceased warning

against the doctrines of Zwingli, and he now found

his suspicions increased by the fact that Zurich

refused to give up these tenets. He formally re­

nounced fellowship with the preachers of Zurich,

but deemed that the heresy had entered Germany

through the Cologne scheme of reformation drawn

up' by Butzer and Melanchthon, who made recep­

tion of the Eucharist simply a heavenly work and

a matter of faith. Aroused to fresh elucidations,


finally, by Schwenekfeld (q.v.), he published, toward the end of 1544, his Kurze Bekenntnis des Sacra­ments, containing no new doctrinal development, but savage criticisms of those who disagreed with him, renewed in the following year in his attacks on the theologians of Louvain, where he declared "the Zwinglians and all blasphemers of the Sacrament" to be heretics and cut off from the Christian Church. He had likewise protested against the Eucharistic doctrine of the Bohemian Brethren in 1541, being auspicious of their views, but in the following year he received Augusta in friendly fashion in Witten­berg and gave him the hand of fellowship for his coreligionista. A still more striking proof of his recognition of unity of spirit despite difference of opinion is seen in his attitude toward Melanchthon, against whose synergistic passages in the later edi­tions of his Loci Luther could never be persuaded to polemize. As early as 1537 Melanchthon was charged with Zwinglian views on the Eucharist, but Luther, though finding much suspicious in his wri­tings, nevertheless desired " to share his heart with him." He also gave high tribute to the Loci and the entire theological activity of his colleague in the preface to the first volume of his Latin works (1545); but Melanchthon is said to have foretold in his illness (1537) that after his death there would be no peace among the theologians associated with himself.

More and more pronounced became Luther's con­viction that bitter trials were to come on Germany,

whether from the Turks or from in­z3. The ternecine strife. While the whole

Death of world seemed to him to be in the state

Luther. it had been in before the flood or the

Babylonian exile or the destruction of Jerusalem, he was especially shocked by the im­morality in Wittenberg, so that he threatened in 1545 that he would never revisit it. But he felt his death approaching. In 1544 he declined to prepare a church discipline on the plea of old age and exhaustion, and when, in 1545, he completed his lectures on Genesis, he expressed his longing to die. On Jan. 23, 1546, he went from Wittenberg to Eisleben to settle a mining dispute between the counts of Mansfeld, and was successful. But amid his preoccupations his health had been neglected; a fontanel which he had long had in his thigh had cicatrized; and he had caught a severe cold on his journey. On the evening of Feb. 17 he felt a heavy pressure on his chest, and on the following morning he died, still declaring his adherence to the faith he had preached. His corpse was solemnly buried in the castle church at Wittenberg, where it was rediscovered on the morning of Sunday, Feb. 14, 1892, by two men who had taken part in the restoration of the church ordered by William L, thus disposing of the story that during the Schmal­kald War the corpse had been exhumed and buried in a neighboring field.

Surveying the entire course of Luther's life and activity, and especially the development of his the­ories and teachings, their important and positive content is seen clearly formulated when he entered upon his struggle in 151?; while their logical re­sults, particularly as opposed to the Roman Catho‑


lie Church and the papal claims, were fully evolved at the time of his return from the Wartburg. The Peasants' War, often termed the great s¢. Sum‑ incentive to his subsequent career, was mare of really important only as accentuating Luther's his boldness in the practical task of Doctrinal reformation. After that, modifications Develop‑ in his doctrine entered only in so far meat. as he emphasized one or another fac­tor, as circumstances required. His basal principle was ever " justification by faith in Christ," as set forth especially by Paul and expe­rienced by himself. Curious as it may seem, how­ever, he never understood the Pauline doctrine of justification as a declaration or assumption of right­eousness in man; but he took it rather as an in­ward process, in the believer, of becoming justi­fied. The first step is the forgiveness of sins by grace alone, after which justification and the im­putation of righteousness proceed from the Spirit which is given to those thus forgiven. It is clear, moreover, from his controversy with Agricola, that from the first Luther held that the rousing of con­science by the mandatory and punitive word of God was a necessary preliminary to belief. A further characteristic of his views on the divine influence on faith and the divine part in those who were jus­tified through faith was the realism with which he asserted the actual and full presence of God in the Holy Ghost. In regard to God, he held that be could never be known from human speculation or from a merely natural revelation, but that man may rise to him from his perfect self‑manifesta­tion in Christ, even while refraining, in trusting faith, from penetrating into what is here concealed. In his concept of the historic Christ, it is noteworthy that he insisted on the moat intimate identification of the divine and human, instead of contenting him­self with a mere coexistence of the two natures.

Luther's doctrine of the Church, or congrega­tion, of Christ and the means of grace conferred by it, was of the highest importance in his activity as a reformer. This was, in his opinion,

sg. Theory the congregation of the faithful, who of the become sanctified by the means of Church grace and must exercise them con­and the tinually in the name of God. As re­World. garda the moral statue of the Christian in this world, proceeding from faith and the Holy Ghost, Luther held that he already shared in heavenly blessings and was exalted above the world, serving God and himself in the temporal ordinances and estates ordered of God, and par­taking thankfully of the earthly blessings vouch­safed him. While he took a warm interest in the problems of secular, civil, and social life, he was a reformer here only in so far as he urged that they be considered according to the importance God had given them and with the proper attitude of mind. If, finally, the inquiry be made whence Luther gained the entire basis of his belief and doctrine, the answer moat be that he ever defended the supreme authority of the Bible against the claims of the Roman Catholic Church. This faith is also based on the inner witness which the spirit of God bears to the believer in the right use of the

Lather, Martin


Scriptures, not merely as regards its authority, but also its content, so that he considered himself per­mitted to distinguish the higher character and value of individual books included in the Bible, and to make a further distinction between state­ments referring to divine revelation and those al­luding to secular affairs.

The style of Luther was naturally strong, simple, and clear; and, despite its depth and keenness, it

wan as free from excess of feeling of 26. The fantasy as from dialectic subtlety.

Style of But, as he himself said, he must always

Luther. storm and fight. His basal concept

of salvation ever occupied the fore­ground and center of his writings, even in the exe­gesis of taste where, strictly speaking, it scarcely applied. On the other hand, historical and lin­guistic accuracy were frequently imperfectly con­sidered. The force of allegorical interpretation he denied, yet employed it as suggestive and enlighten­ing. In his sermons, neat to the requirement that Christ should be their theme, he sought intelli­gibility for the masses. They lack technical form, but combine exegesis and application, strictly fol­lowing the thought and exhortation to be developed, though lacking an explicit theme.

In conformity with his recognition of the free a,o­tivity of man in secular affairs, Luther possessed a lively interest in such matters. He highly valued

all noble arts and sciences, and he had aq. The a keen appreciation of proverbs, fables,

Personal and the like. His married life was

Life of marked by nothing noteworthy, yet it

Luther. wan true, happy, and patient, as is

clearly shown by his letters and table­

talk. He was generous with his modest wealth,

and among his friends his conversation was brisk

and natural, though frequently far too coarse for

a refined ear. In food he was extremely temper­

ate, despite his corpulency, and he often fasted for

several days in succession. His inner life was one

of humble struggle, amid the strongest temptations

(due, in great part, to the bodily infirmities from

which he frequently suffered), for his own salva­

tion, a phenomenon the more remarkable in view

of his unswerving conviction of the truth of his be­

lief and his resolute attitude in the face of external

dangers. He never formed far‑reaching plane for

the future, feeling that speedy death awaited him.

Throughout his life he seemed to feel the impulse

of a higher power constraining him to toil and fight;

and in his obedience to the call he knew neither

fear nor anxiety, but calmly awaited the results

from on high. (Jortus KtSaTLIN t.)

For his contributions to hymnody Martin Luther deserves and receives the thanks of the Christian world. His activity in this direction included not only the writing of hymns but the compilation of hymnals, of which nine are on record, issued be‑

tween 1524 and 1545, five of these be­2& His ing revisions of his GeiBtliehe Lieder.

Hymns. These hymnals always contained a

large proportion of his own composi­tions; thus the Etlich chriatlich Lider Lobgeaang uf6 Psalm (Wittenberg, 1524) contained eight hymns of which four were his own, the Geiatliche Lieder of



Wittenberg, 1543, contained sixty‑one hymns, of which lie composed thirty‑five. His own hymns were not all new, some of them being translations from the Latin, some revisions of pre‑Reformation German hymns, while others were versions of Psalms or paraphrases of other portions of Scripture. In all Luther left thirty‑eight hymns, the most cele­brated of which is his "battle hymn," Ein' feats Burg ist unaer Gott, known best to those who worship in English in the version of Rev. F. H. Hedge, " A mighty fortress is our God," though the translation by Thomas Carlyle, "A safe stronghold our God is still," is justly celebrated on account of its strength and fidelity to the original. Other hymns which have passed into common use in English are Nun freut each dieben Christengerrtein, many times trans­lated, but known beat in the version of Mrs. Charles, " Dear Christian people, all rejoice "; and Gelobet aeist du JeBU Christ, anonymously translated into " All praise to thee, eternal Lord." More than all other work of Luther, excepting only his translation of the Bible, his hymns have become the household possession of the German people, while his great battle hymn was sung by Gustavus Adolphus be­fore the battles of Leipaic and Liitzen, and by others in times almost as critical.
Ba3Lroaasrsr: The Works of Luther have appeared in seven major editions: (1) the Wittenberg edition, 19 vole., 1b39‑b8; (2) the Jens edition 13 vole., lbbb‑58, with two supplementary vola., Eisleben, 1b84‑8b; (3) the Altenburg edition, 10 vole., 1881‑84, with additional volume, Halls, 1702; (4) the Leipeio edition, 23 vole., 1729 10; (b) the Walah edition, 24 vole.. Halls, 1740­17b3; (6) the Erlangen‑Frankfort edition, 103 vole., 1828­1898; and the Weimar edition, begun in 1883. of which 35 vole. are issued (1908). Notes upon these editions will be found in Hsuok‑Heraog, RE, u. 720‑721. A standard edition of the Works in English is in course of publication by the Lutherans is All Lands Co., Minneapolis, 1904 eqq. The principal collection of the " Letters is still that of W. M. L. de Wette sad J. K. 8eidemsnn, 8 vole., Berlin, 1826‑b0, though other collections are by C. A. H. Burkhardt, Leipsic, 1888; and D. C. A. Raw, Leipeic, 1878 (cf. G. Veesenmeyer, Litterargeechichte der Brief­sammlunpsn . . . von Dr. Martin Lathe''. Berlin, 1821). Note should be made also of The Letters qt Martin Lather. Seceded and tranaiatsd by Margaret .1. Currie, London and New York, 1908. The beet edition of the Tieehreden, " Table Talk," is by C. E. FSrstemann and H. E. Bmdseil, 4 vole., Berlin, 1844 F8. Of the Table Talk there are many English tranelatione, e.g., by Capt. Henrie Bell, London, 1862, republished, Lewes, 1818; by W. Hsalitt, London, 1848; and the Centenary edition, ib. 1883. The Latin form, Colloquia. ed. H. E. Bindaeil, 3 vole., Detmar.1883‑88. Luther's Dichtungen were collected by K. GSdeke, Leip­ei0, 1883; and by G. 8chleuener, Wittenberg, 1892. Among selections from his works mention may be made of E. Leasing's Martin Luther ale deutacher %laaaiker, Hamburg. 1908 (from Luther's poetical and popular prose writings); and R. Neubauer's Martin Luther: sine AuewahZ aua aeinen SchriJten in alter 3chriJt)'orm. Here. 1908.

Lives written by contemporaries were: by Melsnch­thon, in his preface to vol. ii. of the Latin Works in the Wittenberg edition; by M. Rataeberger, first published by C. G. Neudeoker, Jens, 1860; and by J. Matheeius, ed. G. Ltleehe in the Works of Matheeius, vol. iii., Prague, 1898. The beat life, made from the sources, is J. K6etlin, Martin Luther, rein Leban and seine &rhriften, 8th ed, by G. Kawerau, 2 vole., Berlin, 1903: and the moot accessible for English readers is H. E. Jacobs, Martin Luther, the Hero of the Reformation, New York, 1898. Among the immense literature upon Luther the following lives may be mentioned: M. Mic6elet, 2 vole., Paris, 1835, Eng. travel., London, 1848; M. Meurer, 3 vole., Dresden, 1843­1846: K. JOrgene, 3 vole.. Leipeic. 1846‑47: H. Lang. Berlin, 1870; G. A. Hoff, Paris. 1873; K. J. Ledderhoee.


1   ...   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   ...   38

The database is protected by copyright © 2016
send message

    Main page