[463] Weim. ed., 20, p. 674. The passage is from the Wolfenbüttel MS., which reproduces Rörer’s Notes (revised, possibly, by Flacius). In another set of Notes Luther speaks here of his doctrine as “evangelium veritatis.”—Cp. vol. iv., p. 408: “not without a revelation of the Holy Ghost.”
[464] Weim. ed., 32, p. 477; Erl. ed., 43, p. 263.
[465] Note in Lauterbach’s “Tagebuch,” p. 81.
[466] Mathesius, “Tischreden,” ed. Kroker, p. 169: “Deus revelavit in hoc schola verbum suum. Quicumque nos fugiunt et sugillant nos clanculum, ii defecerunt a fide,” etc. In 1540.
[467] “Opp. lat. var.,” 1, p. 22 sq.; cp. “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 7, p. 74. Cp. Mathesius, “Tischreden,” p. 211.
[468] “Luthers Werke,” Walch’s ed., 21, p. 363* f. Seckendorf, “Commentaria de Lutheranismo,” gives the passage as follows: “Ionas sæpe eum dixisse memorat, se nemini mortalium aperturum esse, etc., fore autem ut in die novissimo innotescant, sicut et revelationes egregiæ, quæ sub initium doctrinæ habuerit et nemini detexerit” (Lips., 1694, lib. 3, sect. 36, p. 647). Bugenhagen says in his funeral oration (Walch, 21, p. 329*), that God the Father had revealed His Son through Luther, whilst Melanchthon goes so far as to boast that the latter had received his doctrine, not from “human sagacity,” but that God had revealed it to him (see “Corp. ref.,” 6, p. 58 sq., and Köstlin-Kawerau, 2, p. 625). The expression that Luther’s gospel had been “revealed” became quite usual, as we see from the heading of a chapter in the Latin “Colloquia,” entitled: “Occasio et cursus evangelii revelati” (ed. Bindseil, 3, p. 178).—Just as Luther asserted he was reforming the Church, “divina auctoritate” (“Colloq.,” ed. Bindseil, 1, p. 16), so Calvin, too, claimed to derive his ministry of the Word (which differed from that of Luther in so many points) from Christ. Zwingli did the same, and his followers cared but little for Luther’s claim to the contrary.
[469] Weim. ed., 10, 3, p. 8 f.; Erl. ed., 28, p. 212.
[470] Ib., 10, 2, p. 23=28, p. 298.
[471] P. 40=316.
[472] Ib.