[576] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 209 f.: “Nostri theologi velut acutuli,” etc. “Hæc tantum vacua verba sunt,” etc. “Est ridicula additio si dicas,” etc. “Torquent intelligentiam,” etc. Thus he arrives at his “immutabilis prædestinatio.” “Præcipit Deus ut irretiantur reprobi, ut ostendat iram suam,” with the pains of hell which they are absolutely powerless to escape (p. 213). See also above, p. 189 ff.
[577] Ibid., p. 6. Against the “mercenarii.” In Ficker’s text it reads: “qualium hodie in ecclesia solus est numerus.” In place of “solus” read “tantus” or some other such word.
[578] Ibid., p. 7.
[579] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 111.
[580] Ibid., p. 290. Cp. p. 317.
[581] Ibid., p. 294 f.
[582] Ibid., p. 248 f.
[583] Ibid. Of the true preacher he says: “Sub humili subiectione eiusdem auctoritatis prædicet, semper stare iudicio illius paratus ac, quæ mandata ei sunt, loqui, non quæ placita sunt sibi ac inventa.” The punishment threatened by Zach. xiii. 3 against false prophets (“configent eum”), was to be applied to those who teach subversive doctrines on their own authority, being the anathema of their ecclesiastical superiors. “Hoc est telum fortissimum, quo percutiuntur hæretici, quia sine testimonio Dei vel authoritatis a Deo confirmatæ, sed proprio motu, specie pietatis erecti, prædicant, ut Ier. xxiii. (v. 21): Ipsi currebant et ego non mittebam eos. Et tamen audent dicere: Nos salvabimur ... nos credimus ... prædicamus. Sed hoc dicere non possunt: Nos prædicamus, quia missi sumus. Hic, hic iacent! Et hic est tota vis et salus, sine quo cetera falsa sunt, licet an falsa sint non cogitent.” The Church preaches an authentic gospel, which, according to Romans i. 2, was introduced into the world with solemn sanction and according to prophecy. But the gospel of the heretic? “Monstret, ubi sit ante promissum et a quo.” Where is its attestation? “Sed horum illi nihil solliciti stulte dicunt: Nos veritatem habemus.... Quasi hoc satis sit ex Deo esse, quia ipsis ita ex Deo videatur esse.... Sic ergo authoritas ecclesiæ instituta, ut nunc adhuc Romana tenet ecclesia.” The heretics, it is true, assert that they are in possession of the really wholesome teaching. “Volunt autem summam pietatem, ut sibi videtur.” But the decision does not rest here with man’s own feelings; on the contrary, the Word of God frequently overthrows man’s own opinion: “non sinit stare sensum nostrum, etiam in iis quæ sunt [i.e. videntur] sanctissima, sed destruit ac eradicat ac dissipat omnia.” How powerfully and thoughtfully is he able to handle an argument when he has right on his side! Could anyone condemn more strongly his own later attitude?
[584] How, for instance, he exaggerates in his mystical enthusiasm the principle of authority, see below, p. 252.
[585] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 243.
[586] Ibid., p. 275 f.
[587] Ibid., p. 278.
[588] Ibid., p. 317.
[589] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 271 f.
[590] Ibid., p. 272.
[591] Ibid., p. 300 f.
[592] Ibid., p. 301.
[593] Ibid., p. 272.
[594] Ibid., p. 301 f.
[595] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 320. It cannot be proved that such gloomy forebodings were due to the influence of the apocalyptic literature then so widely disseminated in print. (See Ficker, p. xcix.) The verdict which he passes on the Church of that day is, however, as severe and comprehensive as “the sharpest criticisms of the Reformed theology, or of the apocalyptic literature” (ibid., p. xcvii.); the verdict is really a consequence of his “new conception of a personal religion” (p. xci.). On the strength of this Ficker thinks he may go so far as to say: “Just as, hitherto, he had confronted the teaching authorities with the Scripture rightly understood and opened up the religion of the gospel to the individual, bringing it home to each one as a moral force, so now under the pressure of the Scripture and of outward events, he sets up the new standard of Christian life ... thus realising in practice the religion he had discovered” (pp. xci., xcvi.).
[596] Ibid., p. 242.
[597] Ibid., pp. 298, 302, 303.
[598] Cp. Braun, “Concupiscenz,” p. 285.
[599] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 7, p. 49. De libertate christiana.
[600] Cp. J. Zahn, “Einführung in die christl. Mystik,” p. 102.
[601] Ibid., p. 271 ff.
[602] Braun, “Concupiscenz,”. 301, n. 2.
[603] P. lxxxii.
[604] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 203.
[605] Ibid., pp. 205, 206.
[606] Cp. Braun, “Concupiscenz,” p. 281, 286.
[607] Braun, p. 296.