[1361] H. Kawerau, “RE. für prot. Theol.,” Art. “Bugenhagen.”
[1362] See also Köstlin-Kawerau, 1, p. 528, where the “contravention of the rights of the Chapter” is admitted.
[1363] To Bugenhagen, November 24, 1531, “Briefwechsel,” 9, p. 127.
[1364] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 147 f. See above, p. 204.
[1365] Mathesius, ibid., p. 274.
[1366] In the work called “Contra novum errorem de sacramento corporis et sanguinis Iesu Christi” (end of August, 1525). See “Luthers Werke,” Weim. ed., 19, p. 447. Zwingli replied to Bugenhagen in a writing of October, 1525. In the “Klare Underrichtung vom Nachtmal Christi,” which Zwingli published in February, 1526, in vindication of his denial of the Real Presence, he, as in his previous writings, avoided naming Luther. Since at Basle in September, 1525, [Œcolampadius also advocated the figurative sense of the words of institution in his writing, “De genuina verborum Domini expositione,” and Caspar Schwenckfeld and Valentine Krautwald sought to propagate the same in Silesia, while Carlstadt was winning adherents by his attacks upon the Sacrament, Bugenhagen’s work was all the more timely. Johann Brenz espoused his cause, in opposition to the figurative interpretation, in his “Syngramma” of October, 1525, and so did Jacob Strauss. The “Sacramentarian” movement had grown before Luther followed up his vigorous refutation of Carlstadt’s denial of the Sacrament (in his book “Widder die hymelischen Propheten,” and in his sermon of 1526 on the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ against the fanatics) by his polemical Tractate against Zwingli and [Œcolampadius on the words of Christ, “This is My Body” (1527). See above, p. 379 f.]
[1367] Spengler to Veit Dietrich, in Mayer’s “Spengleriana,” p. 153. Döllinger, “Die Reformation,” 2, p. 141.
[1368] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 25.
[1369] Ibid., p. 89.
[1370] E. Hörigk, “Joh. Bugenhagen und die Protestantisierung Pommerns,” Mainz, 1895, p. 19 f.