CHAPTER VI. THE CHANGE OF 1515 IN THE LIGHT OF

THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS (1515-16) _pages_ 184-261

1. THE NEW PUBLICATIONS.

Denifle the first to utilise the Commentary on Romans. Ficker’s recent edition of the original. General remarks on the Commentary. Aim of St. Paul according to Luther _pages_ 184-187

2. GLOOMY VIEWS REGARDING GOD AND PREDESTINATION.

Luther’s “more profound theology” and unconditional predestination to hell; God’s will that the wicked be damned. God to be approached in fear and despair, not with works and in the hope of reward. The mystic on resignation to hell. Man’s will and his salvation entirely in God’s hands. Objections: Is it not God’s will that all be saved? Why impose commandments which the will is not free to perform? Unperceived inconsistencies _pages_ 187-197

3. THE FIGHT AGAINST “HOLINESS-BY-WORKS” AND THE OBSERVANTINES IN THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

Luther’s aversion to works and observances. His rude description of the “Observants” and “Justiciaries.” The very word “righteousness” a cause of vexation _pages_ 197-202

4. ATTACK ON PREDISPOSITION TO GOOD AND ON FREE WILL.

Human nature entirely spoiled by original sin. Being unable to fulfil the command “_Non concupisces_,” we are ever sinning mortally. Uncertainty of salvation; the will not free for good. Interpretation of Rom. viii. 2 f. Against Scholasticism. In penance and confession no removal (_ablatio_) of sin _pages_ 202-209

5. LUTHER RUDELY SETS ASIDE THE OLDER DOCTRINE OF VIRTUE AND SIN.

The habit of sanctifying grace; “cursed be the word ‘_formatum charitate_’”; sin coexistent with grace in the good man; Augustine on concupiscence. “Nothing is of its own nature good or bad”; the Occamist acceptation-theory against the “Aristotelian” definition of virtue and the scholastic doctrine that virtues and vices are qualities of the soul _pages_ 209-213

6. PREPARATION FOR JUSTIFICATION.

Christ’s grace does all, and yet man disposes himself for justification. Man’s self-culture. Inconsistencies explained by reminiscences of his early Catholic training _pages_ 213-214

7. APPROPRIATION OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST BY HUMILITY—NEITHER “FAITH ONLY” NOR ASSURANCE OF SALVATION.

Imputation applied to justification. Another’s righteousness is imputed to us and becomes ours; sin remains, but is no longer accounted; our inability to know whether Christ’s righteousness has been imputed to us. Advantage of fear. “He who renounces his own self and willingly faces death and damnation” is truly humble, and in such humility is safety. Faith not yet substituted for humility. Passivity again emphasized _pages_ 214-222

8. SUBJECTIVISM AND CHURCH AUTHORITY. STORM AND STRESS.

The back place already taken in Luther’s mind by the Church and her teaching-office; his preference for a theology of his own invention. Our duty of not judging Luther by the later Tridentine decrees. His Catholic sentiments on the hierarchy; denounces abuses whilst respecting the rights of the Roman Church; desiderates a reduction of festivals; reproves Bishops for insisting on their rights instead of rejoicing to see them infringed. On listening to the inner voice _pages_ 223-230

9. THE MYSTIC IN THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

Luther’s misapprehension of Tauler and other mystics clearly proved in the Commentary. Quietism. The “Spark in the Soul.” The “Theology of the Cross.” The “Night of the Soul.” Readiness for hell the joy of the truly wise; Christ and Paul the Apostle, two instances of such readiness _pages_ 230-240

10. THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS AS A WORK OF RELIGION AND LEARNING.

Its witness to the unsettled state of the writer’s mind. Texts and commentaries utilised; neglect of Aquinas’s Commentary; the author’s style; obscenity and paradox; a tilt at the philosophers; the character of the work rather spoilt by unnecessary polemics. Appeal to Augustine. Misuse of theological terms. “The word of God is every word which proceeds from the mouth of a good man.” Contradiction a criterion of truth. All the prophets against observances. Unconscious self-contradiction on the subject of freedom. Whether any progress is apparent in the course of the Commentary. Comparison of Luther’s public utterances with those in the Commentary. Some excerpts from the Commentary on Hebrews _pages_ 241-261