[804] Ibid., p. 633 = 154.
[805] Ibid., p. 673 = 204.
[806] Ibid., p. 633 = 154.
[807] “Hic est fidei summus gradus, credere illum esse clementem, qui tam paucos salvat, tam multos damnat.... Si possem ulla ratione comprehendere, quomodo is sit Deus misericors et iustus, qui tantam iram et iniquitatem ostendit, non esset opus fide. Nunc cum id comprehendi non potest, fit locus exercendæ fidei.”
[808] “De servo arbitrio,” p. 602 = 119.
[809] Ibid., p. 636 = 158.
[810] Ibid., p. 638 = 160.
[811] P. 605 = 123.
[812] Ibid., p. 601 = 117.
[813] P. 664 = 192. The Weimar editor remarks of a similar assertion of Luther’s on p. 664: “There is no doubt that Luther in this passage draws conclusions from the definition of Erasmus (viz. of free-will) which do not directly follow from it.” In confirmation of this Kattenbusch (p. 28) is quoted where he speaks of “Luther’s tactics in his controversy with Erasmus, the object of which was ... to convict Erasmus in one way or another, usually by distorting his words, of rendering grace, the Holy Ghost, or Christ, superfluous for the attainment of salvation.” Kattenbusch instances in support of this pp. 191 seq., 193, 208, 213, 224, 231, 238, 287, 303, 324, 330, 354, etc., in the Erlangen ed.