[279] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 7, p. 74. Cp. our vol. i., p. 400 f.
[280] Schlaginhaufen, “Aufzeichnungen,” p. 41.
[281] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 391 (“Tischreden”).
[282] Cp. e.g. the summarised teaching of an eminent theologian, Denis the Carthusian, in Krogh-Tonning, “Der letzte Scholastiker,” 1904.
[283] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 58, p. 391.
[284] From Kleindienst, “Ein recht catholisch Ermanung an seine lieben Teutschen,” Dillingen, 1560, Paulus, “Die deutschen Dominikaner,” etc., 1903, p. 276.
[285] To Johann Lang, Aug. 18, 1520, “Briefwechsel,” 2, p. 461: “Nos hic persuasi sumus, papatum esse veri et germani illius Antichristi sedem, in cuius deceptionem et nequitiam ob salutem animarum nobis omnia licere arbitramur.” This must not be translated “to their deceiving and destruction,” but, “against their trickery and malice.” The passage strictly refers to his passionate work “An den christlichen Adel,” but seems also to be intended generally.
[286] To Melanchthon, Aug. 28, 1530, “Briefwechsel,” 8, p. 235. Cp. vol. ii., p. 386. Luther says: “dolos et lapsus nostros facile emendabimus”; thus assuming his part of the responsibility. The explanation that he is speaking merely of the mistakes which Melanchthon might make, and simply wished “to console and sympathise with him,” is too far-fetched to be true. In his edition of the “Briefwechsel” Enders has struck out the word “mendacia” after “dolos,” though wrongly, as we shall see in vol. vi., xxxvi., 4. According to Enders the handwriting is too faint for it to be accepted as genuine. As there is no original of the letter the question remains how it came into the old copies which were in Lutheran hands. In any case, such an interpolation would be more difficult to understand than its removal. Cp. also Luther’s own justification of such mendacia in 1524 and 1528, given below on p. 109 ff.
[287] To the apostate Franciscan Johann Briesmann, July 4, 1524, “Briefwechsel,” 4, p. 360. These instructions to the preacher who was to work for the apostasy of the Teutonic Order in Prussia are characteristic of Luther’s diplomacy. Cp. the directions to Martin Weier (above, vol. ii., p. 323).
[288] “Briefe,” 6, p. 386 ff.