The Elector informs Luther that the ambassadors of Duke George and the Bishop of Mainz had not provided proof that Luther had mentioned Duke George by name in the sermon, but admonishes him to avoid mentioning Duke George's name as much as possible.
The concept is in the Weimar Archives, p. 75, No. 22, printed by Burkhardt, p. 227.
Our greeting before. Venerable, dear devotee! When you gave us an answer to the letter sent to us by our dear cousin, Duke John of Saxony, son of our cousin, Duke George, we do not want to reproach you in your gracious opinion, although our lord uncle and brother, the Bishop of Mainz, and our cousin, Duke George, had their advisors and ambassadors with us, they did not report anything about the matters of which our cousin H. John wrote to us. Only von Carlwitz, who is now one of our cousin Duke George's secret advisors, has thought of the same things against us and reported them for himself: although our cousin would have been somewhat impatient when the report was made to his dear one, it would have been talked out of S. L.'s mind again. But the said Carlwitz has asked that we be graciously in favor of it. Since we have not yet learned that you thought of our cousin by name in the same sermon on All Saints' Day, as the young Margrave stated, 4) our gracious request is to you, if you may do it without burdening your conscience, that you spare our cousin as much as possible, so that we may maintain peace with S. L. externally, and his love may not have to attack us on the Grimmish Treaty.
But what you may not refrain from doing in conscience or for your own salvation against S. L. theologians, we do not want to give you any measure of that.
3) In Burkhardt: "den".
4) See the last note to No. 2101.
Letters from the year 1534. No. 2102 to 2106.
and do not want you to understand this in any other way than that we mean it graciously, which we are inclined to recognize towards you in all graces. Date Weimar, Wednesday after the holy Christian day 1535 [Dec. 30, 1534].
No. 2103.