Above all, an accurate, coherent presentation of the history of Luther's church postilion is needed. Strict chronological order should help most easily to gain insight and overview. We can distinguish four periods in the history of the editing of the Church Postil: the first from the year 1520 to the year 1527, in which Luther himself wrote down the sermons and mostly also promoted them for printing; the second from the year 1527 to the year 1535, in which the work of Rodt comes to the fore; the third from the year 1540 to the year 1544, in which the name of Creuziger stands out; the fourth, in which we summarize all the editing work that took place after Luther's death.
Luther's church postilion, which Luther himself called his "very best book," was caused by the state of emergency and the need of the church. The majority of preachers at that time were not capable of preparing a sermon themselves, but were content to read the Epistle and Gospel pericopes and perhaps another sermon in church. The most common pre
The most important collections were those of Tauler (†136I) and Geiler von Kaisersberg (†1510). But because the latter were not evangelical in all respects, Luther decided to write his own explanation of the usual pericopes and to give them to the preachers for their use. He wrote about this in the "Deutsche Messe und Ordnung des Gottesdienstes" 1526 (Walch, Hall. A. X, 280. Erl. A. 22, 238. f.): "And methinks, if one had the German Postil throughout the year, it would be best that one ordered the Postil of the day to be read aloud to the people in whole or in part from the book: not only for the sake of the preachers, who could not do better, but also to prevent the enthusiasts and sectarians; as is seen and felt in the homilies at matins, that such a manner has also been used. Otherwise, if spiritual understanding and the Spirit itself do not speak through the preachers (whom I do not want to aim at here, the Spirit teaches to speak much more than all the postilions and homilies), then it finally comes to pass that each one will preach what he wants, and instead of the Gospel and its interpretation, blue ducks are preached again. For one of the causes is that we keep the epistles and gospels as they are arranged in the postils, so that there are few witty preachers who can act a whole gospel or other book powerfully and usefully. That Luther by no means wanted to support the laziness of the preachers and release them from their own work is proven by the preface he wrote to Spangenberg's Postilla of 1542. There it says towards the end (Walch, Hall. A. XIV, 379. Erl. A. 63, 371 f.): "But nevertheless, some lazy pastors and preachers are also not good, who rely on such and other good books, so that they can take a sermon from them, do not pray, do not study, do not read, do not strive for anything in the Scriptures, just as if one would not have to read the Biblia for that reason. They need such books, like the forms and calendars, to earn their yearly nourishment, and are nothing but pests and jackdaws, who learn to talk without understanding, although our opinion and that of such theologians is to point them to the Scriptures and to admonish them that they should not read the Bible.
they should think to defend even our Christian faith after our death, against the devil, the world and the flesh. For we shall not stand forever at the pinnacle as we stand now."
The external cause for this work, however, was the Elector Frederick the Wise. In 1520, he asked Luther to write a postilla about all Sundays, especially during Lent. At the same time, he wanted to draw Luther away from his many feuds. In the dedication to the Elector printed below, Luther writes: "For the good of us, E. K. Gn. advised me to turn away from the quarrelsome, acrimonious and confusing writings, so that I now entered my third year of devotion to the holy and friendly doctrine and, in addition to the work of the Psalter explanation, endeavored in the epistles and gospels (so called postilion) interpretation for the benefit of the pastors and their subjects: so that I, so burdened with such valiantly undertaken work, might the sooner attain peace even against the attack of my adversaries." For the time being, other business kept Luther from complying with his Elector's request. But at Spalatin's repeated urging, he finally undertook this work and began the explanation of the Epistles and Gospels of Advent in Latin. In a letter to Spalatin of July 1520 (de Wette, Luthers Briefe I, 463), he noted that he was already in negotiation with the printer Lotther in Wittenberg about the printing of these sermons; he only hoped to obtain an imperial privilege from the Elector for a few years, which would protect him from reprinting elsewhere. The printing was delayed until 1521. On January 16, 1521, Luther wrote to Spalatin that his explanation of the Epistles and Gospels was ready for printing. (de Wette I, 544.) On March 3, he wrote the aforementioned dedication to the Elector, and on March 6, he sent the printed version to Spalatin as a "foretaste of the postilla" (Postillae praegustum), The title of this Latin Advent postilla is: Enarrationes Epistolarum et Evangeliorum, quas postillas vocant, in IV.
äomillioas ackveutus, D. Nartim I^utüoriMttoud6rZ6Q8!8. ^Vittsnberss" 1521. A letter to Wenceslaus Link, March 7, 1521, states, "My postil for Advent is completed."
This first work of Luther was immediately translated into German, but not by Luther himself, perhaps, as Francke assumes, by Leo Judä, and appeared in 1522 under the title: "Postil oder Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien durch den Advent, Doctor Martin Luthers." This translation was included in the Basel collection of the Epistles and Gospels from Advent to the Sunday after Epiphany of 1522, in the Colmar edition of the same sermons of 1523, and in the Strasbourg edition of all sermons of the church year of 1527.
That first Latin edition is also found in the second part of the Jenische Sammlung der lateinischen Schriften Luthers, p. 321; that first German translation in the Hallischen Band, p. 175, and in the twelfth part of the Leipzigische Sammlung, p. 258.
Luther was prevented from further work on the pericopes by his trip to the Diet of Worms. During his stay at Wartburg Castle, he now took up the work and began a German, more detailed explanation of the postilion. First appeared again the Advent PostMe, entitled: "Interpretation of the Epistles and Gospels of Advent. Martinus Luther. Wittenberg 1522." Meanwhile, Luther had immediately tackled the pericopes of the Christmas season. From a letter to Spalatin of June 10, 1521 (de Wette II, 16), we see that at that time he was waiting in vain for the Postil, i.e., the printed sheets of the Advent Postil, from the printer and had just finished the interpretation of the Epistle of Christmas Day. In July of the same year, he decided to publish the first ten Gospels of the church year as a special book, and sent Spalatin the continuation of the Postil (rsli^uLpostillao), i.e. the manuscript of the interpretation of some of the Gospels of Christmas Day. This can be seen in a letter to Melanchthon from July 13 and in a letter from Spalatin from July 31 (de Wette H, 22. 33). This
However, the idea was not carried out. In a letter to Spalatin of August 15, 1521 (de Wette H, 42-14), Luther complains that Johannes Lufft had printed his book of confession so dirty, carelessly and confusingly; he therefore wants to withdraw the printing of his postilla from him; however, at the end of this letter he changes his intention and sends a new continuation of his work and orders that it be printed in quarto and with Lotther's types. Due to the Carlstadt unrest and the dispute with the Löwen theologians, the completion of the second part was postponed. In the meantime, he had the gospel of the 14th Sunday after Trinity, of the ten lepers, printed as a rehearsal, still in 1521, and remarked on it: "I also want to credence my dear Germans with the postils in the middle of the barrel, although I have not brought them any further than from Advent to Epiphany, and must break order in the middle of the work for the sake of the blasphemers: but there is nothing wrong with it, it will probably be all right again. On September 17, 1521, the Postille was completed up to Epiphaniä. This second part appeared soon after the first, the Advent Postil, in February 1522, under the title: "Interpretation of the Epistles and Gospels, which are read according to the custom of the church, from Christmas Day to the Sunday after Epiphany. Martinus Luther. 1522." At the head of this second volume are Luther's two prefaces, printed below: his letter to his sovereign, Count Albrecht of Mansfeld, "given in the desert (Wartburg) on the day of St. Elisabeth (November 19) 1521," and: "A little instruction on what to look for and wait for in the Gospels." At the end of both parts there is the remark: "Printed at Wittemberg by Johann Grünenberg, after Christ's birth in the thousand, five hundred, twenty-second year."
These two first parts were printed together in one volume in Basel in 1522 and in Colmar in 1523, under the title "Interpretation of the Epistles and Gospels, which are read according to the custom of the churches, through Advent, and then from Christmas Day to the Sunday after Epiphany. Therein is abundantly indicated and illustrated, what-
It is necessary for a Christian man to know for his salvation. D. Martinus Luther. That the Advent Postil in these two printings contains the translation of Luther's very first Latin work has already been noted above.
Also in Wittenberg the whole appeared as a special book in 1525. The same is titled: "Interpretation of the Epistles and Gospels read according to the custom of the churches, from Advent to the Sunday after Epiphany. Mart. Luther."
Even before 1525, Luther had begun to work on the third part of the Winter Postil, containing the pericopes from Epiphany to Easter. On March 14, 1524, he wrote to Nik. Hausmann that he had just put into print an argument about infant baptism that is found in the interpretation of the third Sunday after Epiphany (de Wette II, 490). On February 2, 1525, he was still busy with this part of the Postil; for he notes under this date to his friend Hausmann that he had enough work with the Postil and with Deuteronomy (de Wette II, 621). Half of the finished manuscript, however, was stolen by a typesetter from the Wittenberg printing office and published a postilion on the six Sundays after Epiphany in Nuremberg without Luther's knowledge and will. Luther complained about this in a letter to the mayor and council of the city of Nuremberg on September 26, 1525: "I add E. W. complaining to know that some sixths of the Postillia, which are still in print, have been secretly taken from our printers and stolen, well over half of the book, and brought to your laudable city, and hastily reprinted, sold, before ours is finished, and thus with the assembled book led ours into noticeable damage.... They have done well, must not dare to work on it, have obtained it through thieves, it is no different than if it were stolen from one in the streets or in the house, we poor have to suffer it, are banished. Well, I would be well satisfied that I am urged by such cause to keep quiet, but for the other half I speak, and that the holy scripture is hindered by such perfidy of the devil. Moreover, that my little books are generally
improved and corrupted in other printings. It is therefore my very friendly request that E. W. would do a Christian service here and have an eye on your printers so that they do not graze on such important books to our detriment and that they do not wait any longer, that they wait seven or eight weeks so that ours also have bread next to them and are not so shamefully deprived of theirs by them. (Erl. Ausg. Bd. 56, p. X. XI.) In another letter to the city syndic Lazarus Spengler of November 7, 1525, Luther suggested that the Nuremberg printer Koburg er, who had begun to reprint his writings, should contact the Wittenberg printers (de Wette III, 47. 48). That Nuremberg printing of the six sermons is erroneously dated from Wittenberg. However, in the same year, 1525, the complete third part of the Winter Postille was published in Wittenberg, under the title "Interpretation of the Epistles and Gospels from the Feast of the Epiphany to Easter, improved by Mar. Luther" and with a "Preface and Admonition to the Printers. Presumably, Luther had replaced the stolen part of the manuscript in such a way that he took the Nuremberg print and improved it. This first edition of the third part was immediately followed by three more editions, two printed in Wittenberg, one in Strasbourg.
- Also in 1525, the entire Winterpo stille was published in one folio volume in Wittenberg. This volume bore the inscription: "Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien vom Advent an bis auf Ostern, anderweit corrigirt durch Martin Luther. Two new editions appeared in Wittenberg in 1526.
Martin Bucer translated the Winter Postille into Latin, primarily to make it accessible to friends of the Gospel in Italy. This Latin translation appeared in Strasbourg in the years 1525-1527 in five volumes. In the fourth volume, however, Bucer falsified the text and added his false doctrine of the Lord's Supper, which was related to the Swiss, to Luther. Luther testified about this in his book "Daß die Worte Christi: das ist mein Leib,
He has also condemned my very best book, the Postillen, which the papists also like, with prefaces, interjections and objections, so that under my name this blasphemous, disgraceful doctrine is brought and carried further than perhaps through all your books. In a letter to the printers Joh. Sarcerius in Basel and Herwegen in Strasbourg of September 13, 1527 (de Wette III, 201), Luther also complained that Bucer had interspersed his poison in the fourth part of the Latin Postille, and demanded that in a new edition of this fourth part, his letter be included as an antidote to the sacramentarian poison. However, a new edition of Bucer's work did not come about. Rather, in 1528, a new Latin translation of the Winter Postille appeared in Strasbourg, which literally corresponded to the original, and to which the Latin Summer and Festival Postille was added. The entire Latin Postille was republished in Strasbourg in 1530 and 1535, and in Frankfurt in 1517.
Even in this first period, however, Luther's sermons were collected by editors whose names remain unknown to us, namely those sermons that he had mostly preached in Wittenberg and that had been copied by others. Many sermons appeared in single prints. The sermon collections that are available from that first period are the following:
Fourteen beautiful Christian sermons by Doctor Martin Luther, recently preached in Wittenberg in the year 1522. Item der Passion oder das Leiden JEsu Christi, und wie wir uns des gebrauchen sollen." 1523. Basel.
2. XXVII (27) Sermons of D. Martin Luther, recently published. 1523. Strasbourg.
XIII (13) Sermons of D. Martin Luther. Recently issued Anno 1523, pending the preprinted twenty-seven sermons."
4. xii (12) sermons of D. Martin Luther. On Several Feasts of Our Lady and the Saints." 1524.
Most of these sermons deal with pericopes of the summer half-year and the saints' feasts and are then later also included in the church postilla. In our edition of the Postille, for each of the sermons in question, reference is made to previously published single printings or to one of the collections just mentioned. Therefore, it is unnecessary to print here the detailed titles of the 14, 27, 13, 12 sermons (cf. Erl. Ausg. Bd. 7, XVII to XXIV).
The editing of the Kirchenpostille entered a new stage when M. Stephan Rodt took over the editing of the various sections.
Before this, it should be noted that in 1527 in Strasbourg, the entire Postilla was published for the first time in two parts: "Postilla oder Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien durchs ganzen Jahr, getheilt in zwei Theile. D. Martin Luther's." The Advent Postilla is the translation of the first Latin edition. Otherwise, nothing more is known about the manner of compilation, especially of the summer part, which had never been published before.
Since Luther was hindered by other work, the aforementioned M. Rodt, last syndicus in Zwickau, took his place as redactor. He first completed the Sommerpostille and Festpostille from Luther's sermons, which were transcribed and mostly published individually. In the preface to the Sommertheil, he himself remarks that he had taken special care that the sayings, which were taken from the Scriptures in these sermons, were added according to Luther's interpretation, which went through almost all of Germany, so that one would not have to search through many books now and then while reading, and that he had translated Johann Bugenhagen's sums, which he had published in Latin, and placed them before the individual Gospels. Both, the summer part "Interpretation of the Gospels from Easter to Advent, preached by Martin Luther", as well as the festival part "Interpretation of the Gospels at the most distinguished feasts of the whole year, preached by Mart. Luther", appeared, with prefaces by Rodt and Luther, still in the
Year 1527 in Wittenberg. The epistles are omitted here. In 1528, Rodt prepared a new edition of the Winter Postil: "Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien vom Advent an bis auf Ostern. Otherwise corrected by Martin Luther." He also preceded this part with his own preface and a preface by Luther. These three parts, which Rodt was in charge of, were published again in Wittenberg in the years 1527, 1528, 1529, 1530, 1531, 1532, 1533, 1535, namely the winter part nine times, the summer part eight times, and the festival part four times.
In his editorial work, Rodt omitted some things, added others, occasionally combined two sermons or divided one sermon into two. In any case, Francke judges him too harshly and harshly, accusing him of arbitrariness and suggesting that he had made some of Luther's sermons himself. Later, Luther was not quite satisfied with Rodt's work, and even wanted to see his postilion completely erased, as he expressed in a letter to Nik. Gerballius in Strasbourg of 1535 (de Wette IV, 654). But we also know that Luther often looked askance at his own earlier works and continued to improve the sermons that he himself had edited in new editions. The fact is that the Lutheran sermons contained in the Wintertheil edited by Rodt correspond quite exactly with the text of the editions edited by Luther himself until 1525, while the sermons of the editions from 1522 to 1535 deviate considerably from the parallel sermons in the editions of 1540 and 1543. Thus, one may assume that Rodt did not arbitrarily change the manuscripts available to him in the summer and festival editions, but only occasionally made corrections that seemed desirable to him, similar to the way Luther used to revise his own manuscript. It almost seems as if Rodt, according to Luther's judgment, had corrected too little, since Creuziger, after he was commissioned by Luther with a new edition of the Postille, allowed himself much more extensive changes.
Finally, it should be noted that Walch published an edition of the whole postilla from 1535.
and 1536, of which the Erlangen edition, also Francke mentions nothing, thus also seems to know nothing.
In 1540, the Winter Postil was published anew in Wittenberg: "Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien vom Advent bis auf Ostern. By Doctor Martin Luther. Aufs neu corrigirt mit einem nützlichen Register." The same was reprinted in 1543. In 1543, Creuziger had also put into print his newly edited Summer Postil, which came out in two editions in 1544, under the title: "Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien von Ostern bis auf den Advent. D. Mar. Lut. Aufs neue zugericht." The entire church postilla was then published, thus corrected and reworked, first in Leipzig, then in Wittenberg still in 1544: "Auslegung der Episteln und Evangelien durchs ganze Jahr. D. Mart. Luther's. Ons neu corrigirt, mit einem nützlichen Register." The Creuziger postilla is preceded by a preface by Luther and a preface by Creuziger.
The Winter Postille of 1540 or 1543 was edited by Luther himself. He corrected the text of the earlier editions in many ways, shortened some sermons, omitted others entirely, and replaced them with new ones.
And in such a free way Creuziger, of course according to Luther's will and order, revised, i.e. reshaped, the Sommertheil. Luther himself had intended to have the entire Postille "forged into a new and better form" by Caspar Creuziger, as can be seen from the above-mentioned letter to Nik. Gerballius mentioned above. And in his preface to Creuziger's Postille, he remarks that Creuziger had "increased and improved" the sermons. Creuziger's procedure was something like this. He often used Rodt's sermons as a basis and changed them so thoroughly that they appeared like new productions. Many of the sermons, as he himself states in his preface, he made from
The first part of the book is a record of oral sermons and interpretations by Luther, which he himself or someone else made during the lecture. These sermons, which he inserted into the church postilla in place of those collected by Rodt, are, as can be easily seen from their content, style, and expression, to a large extent his own creations. He softened Luther's strong language, often watered it down, spun out Luther's short, pithy thoughts as he saw fit, and made corrections in puffy and inappropriate places. These sermons of Creuziger's Sommertheil are easy and smooth to read, but they consistently bear a different stamp than those sermons of Luther in which Luther speaks everything himself word for word. What and how much in the church sermons of 1543 and 1544 originates from Luther, where the attributions of Creuziger begin and end, can hardly ever be determined exactly and definitively.
After Luther's death, in the 16th and 17th centuries, the Church Postil was often reprinted in Wittenberg and other places, mostly according to the text of 1543. It was only changed even more, more often also falsified and mutilated in the dogmatic interest. The first complete editions of Luther's works did not include the Kirchenpostille.
In order to give this excellent book of Luther's into the hands of the church again in its original purity, Spener decided to organize a new edition and to put the Postille "before the eyes of the diligent reader in the most perfect way, so that he not only sees how it appeared only at this or that time, but also at once sees its different forms, with the difference that he sees at the same time what has been added or taken away at other times. He based his work on the editions of 1528, 1532 and 1543. This first critical edition of the Kirchenpostille appeared in Berlin in 1700. In 1710, it was republished in Leipzig in three parts with Gottfried Arnold's preface, in which a fourth part was added, which consisted of the remaining parts.
The first part of the Leipzig collection of Luther's writings contained Luther's sermons collected in the Leipzig collection of Luther's writings and other books. When the Leipzig collection of Luther's writings reprinted the church postilla and included it in the 13th and 14th parts, it was considered appropriate to publish a certain number of copies of this postilla. D. Lange added a preface and Johann Jakob Greiff a historical note to this special edition. The Spener Postille formed the basis for Walch's edition, as it did for the two Leipzig editions just mentioned. In 1737, Walch first published the Kirchenpostille as a special book. The printing was done according to Spener's text. The standard was, as with Spener, mainly the edition of 1532, but Walch not only compared or had compared the editions of 1528 and 1543, but also those of 1522, 1525, 1527, 1535, 1540, and either noted the variants in special notes or added them in brackets to the text of the interpretation. Admittedly, the redactor made a human error here. In the Sommertheil, he has often cited the variants of 1522, 1525, and 1527, while the sermons in question do not exist in these first editions. In this form, the church postilion was also included in Walch's complete edition of Luther's writings. The first part, containing the Gospel sermons of the entire year (the eleventh part of the entire work), appeared in Halle in 1742.
In the Erlangen edition of Luther's works, the Kirchenpostille comprises volumes 7 to 15. The editor of the second edition (1866), Ernst Ludwig Enders, has based the winter part (not the winter and summer part, as Francke erroneously states) on the edition of 1540, the summer part of the Evangelienpostille on that of 1531, the epistle part on that of 1543, and the festival part on that of 1527, and has noted the variants from the same editions as Walch, as well as from various individual printings.
In his edition of the Evangelientheil der Kirchenpostille (1871), Dr. Friedrich Francke consistently followed the principle of restoring the oldest text.
More details about the critical procedure of the last three editors of the Kirchenpostille, Walch, Enders, Francke, are given under B and we now set out to present the principles which were decisive for us in this present publication of the Kirchenpostille.
In our editing of the Evangelientheil, we had in mind the old Walch edition, the second edition of the Erlangen edition edited by Enders, the Evangelientheil of the Winter- und Sommerpostille published by Francke, and thus also the textual forms of the editions of 1522, 1525, 1527, 1528, 1531, 1532, 1535, 1540, 1543, and 1544, respectively, as well as a copy of the Creuziger edition of 1544. From these originals we have produced the text of the present edition.
We could not agree with Walch throughout. Walch, respectively Spener, whose work Walch has essentially adopted, has often proceeded too mechanically and also arbitrarily. In the winter part of Walch's edition, the text of the old editions from 1522 to 1535 alternates with the revision of 1540 and 1543, without any reason for the change being discernible. In the summer part, the text of the 1532 edition has been retained all too exclusively. In the Festtheil, another edition of 1527 has been compared with the edition of 1532, which is inferior in value to the text of another printing of 1527 produced by the Erlangen edition.
But it did not seem advisable to us to correct Walch according to the Erlangen edition. In the winter part, Enders used the edition of 1540 as a basis, which we cannot give preference over the earlier editions. In the summer section, he used the text of the 1531 printing, which we prefer over the 1532 printing.
Nor could we agree with Francke's principle of reproducing the oldest text everywhere. For one thing, it is impossible, and it was also impossible for Francke, to use in all sermons the oldest version of Luther, namely Luther's own words.
to find it. In the winter part, he could easily have the text reprinted from the editions of 1522 and 1525. In the summer part, he had to use the earliest individual printings of various sermons. However, he only assumed and did not prove that in these individually published sermons, most of which Luther did not print himself, only Luther's words were reproduced uncorrected. And many sermons lacked such individual printings. In this case, Francke also had to resort to Rodt, whom he judged so unfavorably. On the other hand, even the earliest readings are by no means the best in all cases. In the edition of 1525, Luther himself made significant improvements, which Francke basically ignores. And what Luther said better and more clearly in 1525 is more valuable to us than the more imperfect expression of 1522. What is the reason that the latter is three years older? The archaeological interest finds enough satisfaction when the oldest monument is casually remembered in notes.
First of all, as far as the Winter Postilla is concerned, we have included the text of the older editions from 1522 to 1535 in our present edition. The editions just mentioned essentially agree with each other. And we find Luther's own words throughout. Rodt, who was responsible for the editions of 1528, 1532, and 1535, was a very careful editor and usually only improved where it was really necessary and beneficial for understanding. Of course, the text of the edition of 1540, which Creuziger then included in his Postille of 1543 and 1544, is also Luther's own work. However, we must give priority to the older Luther over the later Luther. The older text is stronger, more pithy, more original, than the reworking of 1540. It is sufficient to record the deviations of the latter as variants. Where, however, the older editions differ from each other, we have decided and chosen according to internal, factual reasons. We have, as far as possible, retained Luther's own corrections and for this very reason have used the edition of 1525 in many cases. Only there,
where the oldest, more original expression is more understandable, we have produced the 1523 reading. Where, on the other hand, Rodt, in the editions of 1528, 1532, 1535, has corrected errors, deficiencies and linguistic hardships overlooked by Luther, we have adopted these corrections. It only serves to facilitate understanding and does neither the sense nor the language of Luther any harm if, for example, instead of "Gezengniß, halsstark, Schreiber, das rechte Blut" (1522 and 1525), one reads with Rodt "Zeugniß, halsstarrig, Schristgelehrte, das gerechte Blut".
For the summer postilion, the only choice was between Rodt and Creuziger, since Luther did not provide his own manuscripts for these sermons. Together with Walch and Enders, we gave absolute preference to the more faithful adaptation of Rodt over the free, complex paraphrasing of Creuziger. Among Rodt's editions, however, the text of 1528 and 1532 used by Walch and Spener, respectively, seemed to us to be superior in value to the text of 1531 used by Enders as a basis. However, we have not so exclusively, as Walch, kept the text form of 1532, but where the edition of 1531 really offers a better reading, we have added the latter to our text. Whether Luther himself spoke this way or that way during his oral presentation is impossible for us to decide now.
In the Festpostille, we used throughout the earlier edition of 1527 reproduced in the Erlangen edition, without completely setting aside the later editions of 1527, 1528, 1532.
The sermons, which Creuziger exclusively edited and published and which are therefore missing in all other editions, we have included as "second" or "third sermon" after the process of Spener-Walch and Enders from the edition of 1543 and 1544. But we note again that these sermons, taken only from Creuziger's Postille (d), reflect only the basic ideas of Luther, and have gained a new form under Creuziger's pen. Thus, one cannot consistently say of these parts of the church postilion, "Luther said that."
In the Erlangen edition, Enders also
the different readings of such single prints, which he could get hold of. From the latter, we have only added larger additions in brackets to our text. We also considered it superfluous to print the exact titles of the various individual printings that the Erlangen edition lists. The editor of the Erlangen edition only copied the titles from older lists and had very few of the prints he cited in mind. Where, for example, for the sermon on the Gospel of the Second Sunday of Advent, the Erlangen edition places at the top the detailed titles of eight individual printings published in 1522, or for the sermon on the Feast of the Epiphany, the titles of two individual printings of the year 1524, it is sufficient for us to simply note that eight individual printings of that Advent sermon were published in 1522, and two individual printings of this Epiphany sermon in 1524. The reader can only be interested in knowing in which year the sermon in question was first published. Where it is known, we have also noted in which year Luther preached this or that sermon and in which place and on which occasion he preached it.
All somehow important or only noteworthy variants we have, where it was thunlich, especially if another edition offered longer additions, inserted in brackets to the text, or placed as notes under the text. However, we have not been as meticulous as the Erlangen edition in printing the most minor and meaningless differences, which do not even offer an archaeological interest, e.g. whether it says "but" here, "yet" there, "however" in a third edition. Too much useless, scholarly ballast, as is also packed into some of the notes of Walch's edition, only hinders the proper use of the church postilla, a book of sermons and edification.
We denote the variants of the different editions with the following letters:
1. in the winter section: a = 1522, b = 1525, c = 1528, d = 1532, e = 1535, f = 1540, g = 1543, resp. 1544.
2. in the summer part: a = 1528, b = 1531, c = 1532, d = 1543, resp. 1544.
3. in the fixed part: a = 1527a , b = 1527b , c = 1528, d = 1532.
Only where Luther's interpretation was not available for Protestant texts, we have buried Bugenhagen's sums.
The Bible texts are prefixed to the sermons from our present German Bible. In the interpretation itself, the Bible passages are quoted partly according to the Bible translation in use at Rodt's time, and partly according to Luther's original German translation. The interpretation itself gave this or that form of the citation.
As far as orthography and interpunction are concerned, we have followed the language of our
In the Erlangen edition, even Enders was not able to strictly implement his principle of letting Luther speak letter by letter. Even Enders, in the Erlangen edition, has not been able or dared to strictly implement his principle of letting Luther speak letter for letter. We are all interested in Luther's teaching and that it be presented to Lutheran Christians in Luther's language, of course, but in a way that is understandable to our people. May God also allow this present edition of Luther's Church Postil to flourish so that God's Word and Luther's teachings will become more and more known, clearer, dearer and more precious to many Lutherans!
St. Louis, on Easter Day, 1882.