[1593] K. Hase, “Hdbch. der prot. Polemik,”^[4] p. 264.
[1594] “Kirche und Kirchen,” p. 428 f.
[1595] Ibid., p. 269.
[1596] “Gesch. des Pietismus,” 1, Bonn, 1880, p. 38.
[1597] “Die Lehre von der Wiedergeburt, die christl. Centrallehre, in dogmengeschichtl. und religionsgeschichtl. Beleuchtung,” Leipzig, 1907, p. 229.
[1598] P. 120 f.
[1599] On the Confession of Augsburg and Melanchthon’s alterations in Luther’s teaching, and on Melanchthon’s own change of views, cp. O. Ritschl, “Der doppelte Rechtfertigungsbegriff in der Apologie der Augsburgischen Konfession” (“Zeitschr. f. Theol. u. Kirche,” 1910, pp. 292-338).
[1600] On de Lagarde see “Theol. Revue,” 1908, col. 345. G. Esser, in his review there of Genrich’s work, remarks of the alleged “religious experiences”: “We hear the familiar rhapsodies concerning personal experience, religion that has to be lived and cannot be reduced to any formulas, and then again, experiences are discussed which have to be differentiated from others, vital experiences which must be accurately formulated, in short, a constant revolving in a circle, and a language that is always vague.” Before this Esser had said: “What can the word Justification mean to those who have lost all idea of the supernatural and of grace, and have so changed the idea of ‘faith’ that nothing remains but a vague religious sentiment, a venture of the will to affirm the value of a higher world in the face of worldly wisdom.”
[1601] “Die Rechtfertigungslehre im Lichte der Gesch. des Protestantismus,” 1906 (“Sammlung ... Vorträge und Schriften aus dem Gebiet der Theol.,” No. 45), pp. 2, 3, 42, 10, 16.
[1602] “Die Rechtfertigungslehre in Luthers Vorlesungen über den Römerbrief mit bes. Rücksicht auf die Frage der Heilsgewissheit” (“Zeitschr. f. Theol. und Kirche,” 1910, p. 245 ff.), pp. 287, 289.