Newly translated from the Latin.
Philip Melanchthon gives his greeting to the godly reader.
The venerable Lord Martin Luther had given us the hope that he would tell us his life story and the reason for his struggles in the preface to this part of his works. He would have done so, if the author had not been called away from this mortal life to eternal life with God and to the fellowship of the heavenly church before the printers had finished this volume. However, it would also be useful to have a detailed written consideration of his private life, for it was full of exemplary
peln, which would serve to fortify godliness in pious hearts. Also a narration of the occasions would be useful, since it could instruct the descendants about many things. It would also refute the blasphemies of those who say that he was incited by princes or other people to undermine the dignity of the bishops, or that, inflamed by evil desire, he broke the bonds of monastic servitude.
If he himself had explained and recalled this completely and abundantly, it would have been of use. For although Uebel-
*) This writing can be found in the Hallische Theil, p. 151 and subsequently in the Leipzig edition, vol. XXII, appendix, p. 162, by Walch and in the Erlanger, vol. 65, p. 221.
**The second volume of Luther's collected works, written in Latin, was published in Wittenberg by Johann Lasst in 1546. Because Luther, during whose lifetime this volume was still in progress, had died in the meantime, Melanchthon wrote our preface to it. We have included it because it is, in a sense, a "history of Luther's life," as it is called in a registry in Walch's old edition, Vol. XXI, 394*, No. XXXIV. It is found in Latin in the Wittenberg edition (1551), toin. II, col. r ij. German under the title: "Die Historia vom leben vnd geschichten des Ehrnwirdigen Herrn D. Martin Luthers der vnuerfelschten vnd waren Theologi Lerer, trewlich vnd warhafftiglich beschrieben. By Herr Philippum Melanthon." in the Wittenberg (1559), vol. XII, p. 4731"; subsequently in the Altenburg, vol. VIII, p. 874 and in the Leipzig, vol. XXI, p. 726; in Walch in a new translation by LI. A. Tittel. We have newly translated according to the Wittenberg.
would have held up the usual adage to him: Every man speaks the best of himself, yet we know that he had such an honest mind that he would have told the story in the most faithful way. And there are still many good and wise men alive of whom he knew that the course of affairs was known to them, and it would have been ridiculous to invent another history, as it sometimes happens in poetry. But because the anniversary of his death occurred before the publication of this volume, we want to tell the truth about these very things, what we have partly heard from him, partly seen ourselves.
It is an old and widely spread family of middle class people, who have the name Luther, in the area of the famous Grasen of Mansfeld. However, Martin Luther's parents had their residence first in the town of Eisleben, where Martin Luther was born. Then they moved to the city of Mansfeld, where his father, Johann Luther, also held official positions and was extremely dear to all good people because of his righteousness.
His mother Margaretha, the wife of Johann Luther, had both the other virtues that befit an honorable woman, as well as especially chastity, godliness and diligent prayer, and other honorable women looked to her as a model of virtue. This woman 1) answered me several times on the question about the time when her son was born: she remembers the day and the hour exactly, but regarding the year she is doubtful. However, she said for certain that he was born on the tenth of November, at night after eleven o'clock, and the child was given the name Martin, because the next day, on which the child was incorporated into the Church of God through baptism, was dedicated to Martin. But his brother Jacob, an honorable and reliable man, said that the family's opinion about his brother's age was that he was born in 1483 AD.
After he had reached the years in which he could be taught, the parents diligently encouraged their son Martin by instruction in the home to the knowledge and fear of God and to the practice of other virtues, and, as is the custom with respectable parents, saw to it that he learned to read and write, and it carried him, while he was still a small child, the
1) In the old edition of Walch incorrectly: "When I sometimes asked Lutherum about the time of the birth of his son, he answered me" etc.
Father of Georg Aemilius 2) to the school. Since he is still alive, he can testify to what is told here.
At that time, however, the schools in which grammar was taught in the Saxon cities were only moderately respected, so Martin, when he had entered his fourteenth year, was sent to Magdeburg, together with Johann Reinecke. The latter subsequently became an excellent man, and by his virtue attained a great reputation in these lands. There was always a very great mutual love between these two, Luther and Reinecke, which had arisen either from a coincidence of their natures or from this communion of their studies as boys. But Luther did not stay longer than one year in Magdeburg.
Then he heard in the school in Eisenach for four years a teacher who taught grammar more correctly and more skillfully than it was taught elsewhere 3). For I remember 4) that Luther praised the intellectual gifts of this man. But he was sent to this city because his mother had sprung from a respectable and old family in that region. Here he completed his grammatical studies, and since he had both an exceedingly sharp mind and was especially gifted in eloquence, he soon surpassed his peers, and easily surpassed the other young people who studied with him in choice of words and fluency of expression in speaking and writing, in unbound speech and in verse.
Now that he had tasted the sweetness of the sciences, and was by nature burning with desire to learn, he bore a desire to go to high school as to the source of all learning. And such an excellent head could have mastered all sciences in turn, if he had found skillful teachers, and perhaps the gentle studies of true philosophy and the care taken in the formation of speech would have served to soften the vehemence of his nature. But at Erfurt he fell into the spiky dialectics of that time, which he quickly acquired because, due to the sharpness of his mind, he saw through the causes and sources of the rules better than others.
2) The father was called Nicolaus Omeler or Oemler. The son, a scholar, called himself iVI. deorZius ^emilius, as he is also called in Luther's letters, De Wette, Vol. V, pp. 182 and 280.
3) Instead of utti, ulidi will be read.
4) Our template has: neruini instead of: nEnnui.
Since his studious mind demanded more and better things, he read most of the works of the old Latin writers: Cicero, Virgil, Livius and others. These he read, not as children are wont to take out mere words, but as a lesson or pictures of human life. Therefore, he looked more closely at the advice and sayings of these writers, and since he had a faithful and firm memory, most of what he had read and heard was present and before his eyes. Therefore, he excelled so much in his youth that the whole high school was amazed at Luther's intellectual gifts.
Since he was adorned with the dignity of a master of philosophy when he was twenty years old, he began to study law on the advice of his relatives, who thought that such great gifts of intellect and eloquence should be brought to light and used for the common good. But shortly after, when he was twenty-one years old, he suddenly came to the monastery of the Augustinian monks in Erfurt without the knowledge and will of his parents and relatives and asked for admission. Since he was accepted, he not only learned the teachings of the church with the greatest diligence, but also imposed on himself the most rigorous discipline, and in all exercises with reading, disputing, fasting, praying, he was far ahead of everyone. However, he used to eat and drink very little by nature, which often amazed me, although he was neither small nor weak in body. I saw that for four days in a row, although he was quite well, he ate and drank absolutely nothing; otherwise I often saw that for many days he was content with a small loaf of bread and a herring every day.
But it was the occasion for entering the monastic state, which he thought was the most suitable for godliness and the study of the teachings of God, that, 1) as he himself told and many know: Often, when he was persistently thinking about the wrath of God or the extraordinary examples of punishment, he was suddenly struck with such great terror that he almost passed away. And I myself have seen, when in a disputation on the doctrine of effort, he was frightened, that he lay down on his bed in a nearby chamber, where he often repeated this saying and mixed it into his prayer: He has decided all under sin, so that he might
1) It is to be erased in the original either here, or better still the preceding tuit, because it is too much.
have mercy on all. He felt these terrors either first or most violently in that year, since he had lost a comrade who had been killed by I don't know what kind of accident.
Therefore, it was not poverty but the striving for godliness that led him to the monastic life. Although he daily studied the doctrine in use in the schools and read the sententiarios, and in public disputations he clearly explained to the astonishment of many the aberrations that were inextricable for others, he treated these studies only as a secondary work, because he did not seek in this state the glory of a good head, but nourishment for godliness, and easily appropriated these scholastic doctrines. In the meantime, he eagerly read the sources of heavenly teaching, namely the prophetic and apostolic writings, in order to instruct his heart about the will of God and to nourish the fear of God and faith with solid testimonies. That he put more emphasis on this study was induced by the sufferings and terrors just mentioned.
He also told that he had often been strengthened by the speeches of an old man in the Augustinian monastery in Erfurt. When he told him about his fright, he heard him talk a lot about faith and said that he had been pointed to the confession of the holy Christian faith, in which it says: I believe forgiveness of sins. He had interpreted this article in this way: one must not only generally believe that some sins are forgiven, just as the devils believe that they are forgiven to David or Peter, but it is God's command that we, each man for himself, believe that our sins are forgiven. And this interpretation, he said, was confirmed by a saying of Bernard, and he was shown the place in the sermon on the Annunciation where these words are written: But add this, that you also believe this, that through him your sins are forgiven you. This is the testimony that the Holy Spirit gives you in your heart: Your sins are forgiven you. For this is the apostle's opinion, that a man is justified by grace through faith.
Luther said that he was not only strengthened by this word, but also made certain about the whole conception of Paul, who so often inculcates this saying: We are justified by faith. Since he had read the interpretations of many on this, he would have been convinced at that time, both by the speeches of this man and by
the consolation of his heart, perceived that the interpretations 1) which existed at that time were null and void. Little by little, as he read and compared the sayings and examples told in the prophets and apostles, and awakened faith by daily invocation, he received more light.
At that time he also began to read the books of Augustine, where in the interpretation of the Psalms and in the book "Of the Spirit and the Letter" he found many clear sayings that confirmed this doctrine of faith and the consolation that was kindled in his heart. But he did not yet leave the writers of sentences completely. He could recite the Gabriel and Cameracensis almost word for word by heart. Long and much he read the writings of Occam, whose acumen he preferred to that of Thomas and Scotus. He also diligently read Gerson. But all the works of Augustine he had often read and very well imprinted in his memory.
He began this very diligent study in Erfurt, where he stayed in the Augustinian monastery for four years.
But because at that time the venerable Lord Staupitz, who had helped to found the high school in Wittenberg, wished to promote theological studies in the newly established high school, he transferred Luther to Wittenberg in 1508, since he was now in his twenty-sixth year. Here, under the daily exercises in school and in sermons, his high gifts began to shine out even more. And as wise people, Doctor Martin Mellerstadt and others heard him, Mellerstadt often said that this man had such high spiritual gifts that he had a clear idea that he would change the usual way of teaching, which was the only way in schools at that time.
Here he first read the dialectics and physics of Aristotle, but in the meantime he did not stop his studies to read the theological writings. After three years he left for Rome because of disputes among the monks. When he returned in the same year, he was decorated with the doctorate according to the common custom of the schools, as they say, for which the Duke of Saxony, Elector Frederick, paid the costs. For he had heard him preach, and both the spiritual gifts and the power of speech, as well as the excellence of the things
1) Instead of interpretatlonem will read Interpretationes.
The sermons were written by Luther and admired by the audience. And in order to see that, so to speak, the doctorate was attached to him in a mature mind, one must know that Luther was in his thirtieth year in that year. He himself told that when he very much fled from it and refused, he was ordered by Staupitz that he should allow himself to be adorned with this dignity. He jokingly said that God would now have much to do in his church, in which he would use his ministry. Although this word was spoken in jest at that time, it nevertheless came true, as many foreshadowing meanings precede changes.
Then he began to interpret the Epistle to the Romans, then the Psalms. He illuminated these writings in such a way that, according to the judgment of all godly and intelligent people, a new light of doctrine seemed to go out after a long and dark night. Here he showed the difference between the Law and the Gospel; here he refuted the error that prevailed in the schools and sermons at that time, which taught that men deserve forgiveness of sins by their own works, and that men are righteous before God by outward piety (disciplina), as the Pharisees taught. Therefore, Luther called the hearts of men back to the Son of God and, like the Baptist, showed the Lamb of God who bears our sins; he showed that sins are forgiven by grace for the sake of the Son of God, and that, of course, this benefit must be received by faith. He also enlightened the other parts of the church doctrine.
This beginning in very good things gave him great prestige, especially since the life of the teacher coincided with his speech, and it was seen that the speech was not only in the mouth, but in the heart. This admiration of his life brought him great affection in the hearts of the listeners, as the ancients also said: An honorable walk, as they say, finds the most faith everywhere. That is why later, when he changed some of the current customs, respectable men who knew him did not oppose him vehemently and, because of the reputation he had previously acquired through clear exposition of the right doctrine and holy life, agreed with him in the opinions by which, as they saw to their great sorrow, the whole world was divided.
But at that time Luther did not change anything in the customs, rather he was a strict guardian of the
discipline among his own. Neither did he mix in anything of offensive opinions, but only made the common and absolutely necessary doctrine ever clearer, namely of repentance, of the forgiveness of sins, of faith, of the right consolation in the cross. By the sweetness of this doctrine all godly people were greatly delighted, and the scholars were pleased that Christ, the prophets and the apostles were, as it were, led out of darkness, out of prison and mud; that it could be recognized what difference there was between law and gospel, between the promises of the law and the promise of the gospel, between philosophy and gospel - which, of course, was not present in Thomas, Scotus and the like of them - between spiritual righteousness and righteousness in worldly things.
In addition, Erasmus' writings had already directed the efforts of the youth to the learning of the Latin and Greek languages. Therefore, many who had a good and refined mind, now that they had been shown a more lovely way of teaching, began to detest the barbaric and sophistical teaching of the monks.
Luther himself also began to study the Greek and Hebrew languages, so that he could judge all the more correctly through knowledge of the peculiar manner of speech and expression, and by drawing the doctrine from the source.
While Luther was busy with this, letters of indulgence were offered for sale in these lands by the Dominican Tetzel, a very impudent swindler. Luther, who was burning with zeal for godliness, was enraged by his ungodly and shameful sermons, and he published the Theses on Indulgences, which are in the first volume of his [Latin] works. And these he publicly posted on the church adjoining the castle at Wittenberg on the day before the Feast of All Saints in 1517. Here Tetzel did not leave his kind, and, since he even hoped to earn thanks from the Roman Pontiff, called together his council, some monks and theologians who understood something of their sophistry, even if only a little, and ordered them to write something against Luther. In the meantime, he himself, in order not to be inactive, no longer hurls sermons but banishing rays against Luther, shouts everywhere that this heretic must be burned with fire, also publicly throws Luther's theses and the sermon on indulgences into the fire. Through this raging of Tetzel and his accomplices, Luther was
The new law will make it necessary to act more broadly on these matters and to protect the truth.
These were the beginnings of this dispute, in which Luther, who did not yet suspect or dream of a future change of customs, did not even completely reject indulgences, but only demanded moderation. Therefore those falsely accuse him who say that he began with an apparent cause in order to change the regime afterwards and to gain power either for himself or for others. And so much is missing that he should have been instigated or incited by the people at court, as the Duke of Brunswick wrote, that rather Duke Frederick even regretted that strife would be aroused, foreseeing far ahead that, although the beginning was for a good cause, nevertheless this flame would spread further, as is said about strife in Homer: A small quarrel immediately rises to heaven by the first impulse. And since Frederick, above all the princes of our time, loved public tranquility to the highest degree, was not at all greedy, and used to direct his advice above all things to the common good of the whole world, as can be seen from many things, he neither instigated Luther nor applauded him, and often made known his grievance, which he constantly harbored, fearing greater discord.
But as a wise man, who not only followed worldly prudence, which commands to suppress the tender beginnings of all changes as quickly as possible, but also consulted the divine guide, which commands to hear the gospel and forbids to go against the known truth, and calls the obstinacy, which goes against the truth, a blasphemy terribly condemned by God, he did what many other godly and wise people have done: he gave way to God, he diligently read what was written and would not dampen what he believed to be the truth.
I also know that he has investigated the judgment of learned and wise people about the matters themselves, and that at the Imperial Diet, which Emperor Carl V held in the city of Cologne after his coronation, he kindly asked Erasmus of Rotterdam to tell him freely whether he thought that Luther was mistaken in these matters of dispute, of which he had primarily dealt. Then Erasmus said straight out that Luther was right, but that he missed the Lindigkeit in him. Duke Frederick wrote to Luther about this in all seriousness and admonished him that he should moderate the sharpness of his writing.
It is also known that Luther would have promised Cardinal Cajetan to be silent, if silence would be imposed on his opponents. From this it can be clearly seen that at least at that time he had not yet decided to continue other fights, but that he desired silence, but that he was gradually pushed to other subjects, since unlearned writers attacked him from all sides.
Hence followed the disputations of the difference of divine and human laws, of the shameful desecration of the Holy Communion by selling it and giving it to others. Here the whole doctrine of sacrifice had to be expounded and the right use of the sacraments shown. And when godly people in the monasteries heard that it was necessary to flee idolatry, they chanted to go away from godless bondage.
So Luther added to the explanation of the doctrine of repentance, forgiveness of sins, faith, indulgences, then also these subjects: the difference of divine and human laws and the doctrine of the use of Holy Communion and the other sacraments, and of vows. And these were the main objects of dispute. The question of the power of the Roman bishop brought Eck on the track for no other reason than that he inflamed the hatred of the pope and the kings against Luther.
But the Apostolic, Nicene and Athanasian Creeds he kept completely pure. Then, in many writings, he explains in great detail what should be changed in the customs and human statutes and why. And what he wanted to be kept and which form of doctrine and administration of the sacraments he approved of is evident from the confession which the Duke of Saxony, Elector John, and Prince Philip, Landgrave of Hesse etc., presented to Emperor Carl V at the Imperial Diet in Augsburg in 1530. The same is also clear from the customs of the church in this city and from the doctrine which our church leads, the summa of which is clearly comprehended in this confession. I am telling this for the sake of the godly, so that they will not only see which errors Luther has punished, which idolatry he has abandoned, but also so that they will know that he has presented the entire doctrine necessary for the church and has restored purity in the ceremonies, and has given the godly an example of how to arrange the churches.
should. And it is useful that the descendants know what Luther approved of.
At this point I do not want to mention who are the ones who first distributed Holy Communion in both forms, who first had the private masses, where the monasteries were first abandoned. For Luther had done little about these things before the Imperial Diet, which took place in the city of Worms in 1521. He himself did not change the customs, but in his absence Carlstadt and others changed the customs. And since Carlstadt had done some things too hastily, Luther returned, and about what he approved or did not approve, declared his opinion in clear testimonies, which he published.
We know that the people who are in power in the world abhor all changes very much, and one must admit that in this sad confusion of human life, even if discord is stirred up because of the most just causes, there is always something evil mixed in. Nevertheless, it is necessary in the church that the commandment of God be preferred to all human things. The eternal Father has spoken this word of his Son: "This is my beloved Son, him you shall hear." And he threatens blasphemers with eternal wrath, that is, those who seek to destroy the truth they have recognized. Therefore, it was Luther's godly and necessary duty, especially since he had the teaching office in the Church of God, to punish the pernicious errors that epicurean people even accumulated with an outrageous impudence, and the listeners had to agree with him, since he taught right. But even if a change is detestable, if there are many disadvantages in the discord, as we see with great regret that there are many of them, those are to blame who spread the errors in the beginning, and also those who now protect them with diabolical hatred.
I mention this not only to defend Luther and his followers, but also so that godly hearts at this time and among the descendants may consider how the government of the true church of God is and has always been, how God, through the voice of the Gospel, is selecting an eternal church from this sinful mass, that is, from the great gathering of people, among whom the Gospel shines like a spark in the darkness. How, however, in the time of the Pharisees, Zacharias, Elizabeth, Mary and many others were the guardians of the right doctrine,
Even before our times, there were many who called upon God in the right way, in that some held more and others less clearly to the teachings of the Gospel. Such was also the old man of whom I have spoken, who often helped Luther in his struggle with terror and was to some extent a guide to the doctrine of faith. So we too should implore in fervent prayer that God may henceforth preserve the light of the Gospel in many, as Isaiah prays for his hearers [Cap. 8, 16]: "Seal the law to my disciples." Next, what I have mentioned shows that the made-up superstition does not endure, but is eradicated by God. Since this is the cause of the changes, it must be prevented that no errors are taught in the church.
But I return to Luther. Just as he got involved in this matter at the beginning without seeking his own benefit, so too, although he was by nature hot-tempered and inclined to anger, he was nevertheless always mindful of his office, and fought only by teaching, and forbade to take up arms, and wisely distinguished between the offices of a bishop, who instructs the church of God, and that of the authorities, who keep the crowd in check with the sword in certain places.
Therefore, since several times the devil (who strives to destroy the church by arousing aversions and to heap shame on God, and, as he is a mischievous fellow, takes pleasure in the errors and the ruin of wretched people) had inflamed agitated heads to this end, He has not only made the dignity and all the fetters of the worldly order glorious, but has also strengthened it. But when I consider how many great men in the church have often been in error in this matter, I fully believe that his heart was governed not only by human diligence but also by divine enlightenment, that he remained so consistently within the limits of his office.
He therefore cursed not only the rebellious teachers of our time, the Muenzer and the Anabaptists, but also the bishops of the city of Rome, who most brazenly and impudently claimed by the decrees they issued that Peter was not only commanded to the office of teaching the gospel, but that the temporal rulers were also handed over to him.
Yes, he exhorted all to give to God what is God's, and to the emperor what is the emperor's.
Emperor, that is, that they should serve God in good conscience through true repentance, through knowledge and spreading of the right doctrine, through right prayer and through the fulfillment of duty. However, each one should be reverently obedient to his worldly regime in all civil duties for the sake of God. And so Luther at least held himself: he gave to God what is God's, he taught rightly, he called upon God rightly; he also had the other virtues that are necessary for a man who pleases God. Furthermore, in worldly matters, he avoided all rebellious advice in the most constant way. I think that these virtues are such a great adornment that one could not wish for others that would be higher in this life.
And although the virtue of this man himself is also worthy of praise, who used the gifts of God with reverence, one must give thanks to God primarily for having restored the light of the Gospel to us through him, and his teaching must be kept in memory and spread. And I do not turn to the cries of the epicureans or hypocrites, who either ridicule or condemn the revealed truth, but in fact firmly hold that the unanimous teaching of the whole general church of God is precisely this word of doctrine, which resounds in our churches, and that according to the knowledge of this doctrine the calling and the life must necessarily be directed; yes, that this is precisely the doctrine of which the Son of God says [Jn. 14:23], "He that loveth me shall keep my word, and my Father shall love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." For I speak of the summa of doctrine as it is understood and expounded in our churches by godly and learned men. For though some may explain things more and others less appropriately and adequately at times, or one may at times speak more unadorned than the other, there is nevertheless unanimity among the godly and learned in the main points of the matter.
And since I think much and often of the doctrine at all times, it seems to me that from the time of the apostles, after the first purity, four significant changes in the doctrine followed. The age of Origen, although there were some who held to the right doctrine, among whom, I believe, was Methodius, who rejected the nonsensical teachings of Origen, nevertheless twisted the gospel into worldly wisdom in the hearts of the great multitude, i.e., he
They were taught this evil delusion of reason, that an outward discipline deserves forgiveness of sins, and that it is the righteousness of which it is said: The righteous shall live by faith. This age lost almost all the distinction of the Law and the Gospel, and lost the apostolic way of speaking, because it did not hold the proper meaning of the words "letter, spirit, righteousness, faith". And if the real meaning of the words is lost, which are the designations for things, then other things must necessarily be invented. From this seed sprouted the error of Pelagius, which has spread far and wide. Therefore Origen, although the apostles had given the church the pure doctrine or clear and wholesome sources, mixed in much filth.
In order that the errors of this age might be at least partially removed, God awakened Augustine. He has purified the sources to some extent, and I have no doubt that if he were judge of the disputes of our time, we would have him completely on our side; at least in forgiveness by grace in vain, in righteousness by faith, in the use of the sacraments, in the middle things, he keeps it clear with us. Although in some places he states more clearly, in others less clearly or actually what he wants, the reader will recognize, if he reads his writings with honesty and the ability to judge, that he is with us. For the fact that our opponents sometimes cite individual sayings torn out of his writings against us, and refer to the fathers with great clamor, they do not do this out of love for the truth and out of attachment to antiquity, but in a flattering way they use the reputation of the ancients for the present idols, to whom these idols of the last time were still unknown.
But it is evident that nevertheless the seed of superstition was present in the time of the fathers. That is why Augustine also wrote a number of things about vows, although he speaks of them in a less offensive way than others. But the infirmities of their time always attach something of their inconsistency even to good people, because we love, as we love the fatherland, so we love the existing customs in which we are raised, and the word of Euripides is very true: xxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx [All that is customary is sweet^. Ah, that God would grant that all who boast that they follow Augustine would take into account the constant opinion and, that I say so, the heart of Augustine, and not merely deceive him.
melte sayings falsely twisted to their opinions.
And the restored light has been useful to the descendants through the writings of Augustine. For after that Prosper, Maximus, Hugo and some of their equals, who were leading in scholarship, almost followed the guidance of Augustine, until the time of Bernard. But since in the meantime the rule and the wealth of the bishops had grown, the age of the giants followed. Disreputable and unlearned people ruled in the church, some of whom had only learned something from the arts of the Roman court or from the judiciary.
Therefore the Dominicans and Franciscans arose; seeing the debauchery and the works of the bishops and abhorring their wicked ways, they began a very moderate life and shut themselves up, as it were, in a prison of discipline. But at first the ignorance of superstition made more. Afterwards, when they saw that the study of people in high schools was directed only to jurisprudence, because in Rome many had already attained great prestige and wealth through the affairs of strife, they sought to bring people back to the study of theology. But they lacked the right insight. Albertus and similar people, who were devoted to the teachings of Aristotle, began to transform the teachings of the church into philosophy. And this fourth age has poured into the evangelical sources not only filth, but poison on top of it, that is, opinions that approved of obvious idolatries. There are so many aberrations and false opinions in Thomas, Scotus and similar teachers that more sensible theologians have always asked for another kind of teaching, which would be simpler and purer.
And it cannot be said without a tremendous insolence that a change of this doctrine would not have been necessary, since it is well known that a large part of the sophisms in these disputations is not understood even by those who have grown old in this kind of teaching. Then, obviously, idolatries are confirmed, since they teach that the sacrifice [of the mass] is given to the one who only performs the outward work, since they excuse the invocation of images, since they deny that sins are forgiven by grace through faith, since they make human ceremonies a torture for the conscience, yes, there are many other abominable and blasphemous things which, when I think of them, make me shudder all over.
Therefore, we want GOtte, the eternal father
of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, through the ministry of Martin Luther, has once again had the filth and poison thrown out of the evangelical sources, and has restored the pure doctrine to the Church. When we commemorate this, it is fitting that all the godly on earth unite their prayers and sighs, and ask with a fervent heart that God may confirm what he has worked in us, for the sake of his holy temple: Living and true God, eternal Father of our Lord JEsu Christ, you Creator of all things and of the Church, yours is this word and promise: For my name's sake I will have mercy on you; for my sake, yes, for my sake I will do it, so that I will not be blasphemed. I beseech thee with all my heart, that for thy glory, and for thy Son's sake, thou wilt always gather unto thee an everlasting church, even among us, by the voice of thy gospel; and for thy Son's sake, our Lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified for us, and was raised again, who is our Mediator and Advocate, rule our hearts by the Holy Ghost, that we may call upon thee aright, and serve thee according to thy good pleasure.
Govern also the educational institutions and guide and maintain these communities and their discipline, which are the shelters of your church and studies. Since you have created the human race for the sake of being known and called by men, for which reason you have revealed yourself with glorious testimonies, do not let these multitudes be destroyed among whom your teaching resounds. And since your Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, when he was about to enter his death throes, prayed for us: Father, sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth, we add our prayer to the prayer of our high priest, and at the same time pray with him that thy doctrine may always shine among the human race and guide us. We have heard that Luther also prayed this daily, and under such prayer his soul gently departed from the mortal body, now that he was in his sixty-third year.
Posterity has many monuments of his erudition and godliness. He published doctrinal writings in which he understood the salutary and necessary doctrine of man, which instructs the devout heart about repentance, faith and the right fruits of faith, about the use of the sacraments, about the difference between the law and the gospel, about the difference between the gospel and worldly wisdom, about the dignity of the worldly state, about the dignity of the worldly state, and about the dignity of the worldly state.
Finally, he wrote about the most important articles of doctrine that must be present in the church. Then he added controversial writings in which he refuted many errors that are harmful to people. He also published exegetical writings, that is, many interpretations of the prophetic and apostolic writings. Even the enemies confess that in this kind of writings he surpasses the interpretations of all that exist.
All godly hearts recognize that these are great merits. But truly in usefulness and effort these works are equal to the translation of the Old and New Testaments, in which there is such clarity that the German text alone can serve instead of a commentary. However, it is not bare, but has very learned annotations added to it, 1) and the tables of contents on the individual parts, which both indicate the summa of the heavenly doctrine and inform the reader about the nature of the speech, so that devout hearts can take solid testimonies of the doctrine from the sources themselves. For Luther did not want to keep hearts fixed on his writings, but to lead the hearts of all to the sources themselves. He wanted us to hear the voice of God Himself, he wanted true faith and prayer to be kindled in many, so that God would be praised rightly and many would become heirs of eternal life.
This will and these great works must be praised with a grateful heart and remembered as an example, so that we, each according to his measure, also strive to adorn the church. For it is to these two ends that the whole life and all endeavors and attempts in life are primarily to be directed: first, that we glorify God's glory; second, that we benefit the church. Of the first of these Paul says [1 Cor. 10:31], "Do everything for the glory of God"; of the other, the 122nd Psalm, v. 6 [Vulg.], "Ask for that which is for the peace of Jerusalem," and there is added in the same verse the exceedingly sweet promise that those who love the Church will be happy and blessed. These heavenly commandments and these promises should cause all to learn the doctrine of the church rightly, to love the ministers of the gospel and the wholesome teachers, and to devote diligence and effort to spreading the right doctrine and maintaining the harmony of the true church. Farewell, dear reader. Wittenberg, June 1, 1546.
1) This will refer to the Prefaces, and the Summaries to the Psalter.