[2277] Reference to the title of his writing, “Deuttung ... des Munchkalbs zu Freyberg,” 1523. See above, vol. iii., p. 149 f.
[2278] The latter saying occurs in the “Unterricht,” Weim. ed., 26, p. 212; Erl. ed., 23, p. 28.
[2279] There is no call to lay so much stress on the Preface as to be obliged to say with Holl, ib., 54: It “necessarily assumes the significance of a silent protest.... Luther is defending the Church’s independence of the State by painting the Visitation in its true light.” Holl also says, p. 59, that Luther, here, entered upon “a struggle for the integrity of his whole work.” “To him it was of vital importance whether the ruler of the land was obeyed as the highest member of the congregation, or as a Christian Prince.” P. 60: “All the efforts directed to-day towards greater independence of the Church and larger liberty within the Church have a good right to appeal to Luther on this question.”
[2280] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 53, p. 386 (“Briefwechsel,” 5, p. 406). See above, p. 581. The other passages mentioned here are quoted by P. Drews, ib., pp. 95 ff., 98.
[2281] See above, vol. iv., pp. 413 and 418 f., for the corroborative statements of Scheel and Seeberg.
[2282] Vol. iii., pp. 48 ff. and 58 ff.
[2283] See Holl, ib., p. 9, with a reference to “Werke,” Erl. ed., 21, p. 289 (Weim. ed., 6, p. 413), on the Christian who, according to Mt. xviii., summons the culprit before the congregation: “If I am to accuse him before the congregation, I must first assemble the congregation.”
[2284] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 413; Erl. ed., 21, p. 290.
[2285] Ib., p. 440 = 322. Holl, ib., p. 16. It is to Holl’s credit that he so strongly emphasises this tendency of Luther’s in favour of the independent rights of the congregation.
[2286] Cp. his letter to Spalatin, May 29, 1522, “Briefwechsel,” 3, p. 378 f.: “Faciat princeps et aula hac in re quod voluerint, ego Spiritui sancto non resistam ipsi viderint.” See also “Briefwechsel,” 3, pp. 381 and 561.