Luther. Grisar Hartmann
is given” he sometimes looks upon as actual, sometimes as saving grace. To follow him through all his erroneous notions would be endless.
[516] Ibid., p. 114.
[517] Ibid., p. 167.
[518] Ibid., p. 111.
[519] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 179.
[520] Ibid., p. 178. See above, p. 209, n. 1.
[521] Ibid., p. 178.
[522] Ibid., p. 181. The passage quoted from Augustine is in “De nuptiis et concupiscentia ad Valerium,” l. 1, c. 23; Migne, P. L., xliv., col. 428.
[523] “Contra Julianum,” l. 3, c. 26; Migne, P. L., xliv., col. 733 sq.
[524] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 182.
[525] Ibid., p. 221.
[526] Ibid. “Bonitas Dei facit nos bonos et opera nostra bona; quia non essent in se bona, nisi quia Deus reputat ea bona. Et tantum sunt vel non sunt, quantum ille reputat vel non reputat. Idcirco nostrum reputare vel non reputare nihil est. Qui sic sapit, semper pavidus est, semper Dei reputationem timet et expectat. Idcirco nescit superbire et contendere, sicut faciunt superbi iustitiarii, qui certi sunt de bonis operibus suis. Perversa itaque est definitio virtutis apud Aristotelem, quod ipsa nos perficit et opus eius laudabile reddit.” The nominalistic doctrine of acceptation also comes out in Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation (“Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, pp. 352, 356), though he explains it in such a fashion that it is clear he does not wish to go as far as Occam’s paradox to be mentioned immediately. He answers the objection that the same act cannot be pleasing and displeasing to God at the same time, thus: “The Scholastics are acquainted only with an acceptation by God without forgiveness; we, on the contrary, know that the evil in all works is forgiven through Christ, our righteousness, Who makes good all our defects; just as the saints have so-called merits only in Christ, for Whose sake God accepts graciously their works which He would not otherwise accept.” “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 370. Cp. W. Braun, “Die Concupiscenz,” etc., p. 213, where he rightly draws attention to the fact that A. Jundt, “Le développement de la pensée religieuse de Luther jusqu’en 1517,” Paris, 1906, has not drawn his “information regarding Scholasticism from the right source, but from Harnack’s and Seeberg’s works, and even from Denifle’s quotations.” Cp. “Hist. Jahrbuch,” 27, 1906, p. 884: “Jundt knows nothing of the Catholic literature on the matter,” etc.
[527] Braun, pp. 191, 211; “Werke,” Weim. ed., 1, p. 42; 2, p. 536.
[528] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 221.
[529] Ibid.
[530] Cp. “Schol. Rom.,” p. 183.
[531] Ibid., p. 89.
[532] Ibid., p. 90 f.
[533] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 91.
[534] Ibid., p. 93.
[535] Ibid., p. 95.
[536] Ibid., p. 96.
[537] Ibid., p. 100 f.
[538] Cp. what he says in “Schol. Rom.,” p. 85, about the “opera iusta, bona, sancta extra vel ante iustificationem.” On p. 84 he says, our good deeds should be directed towards the end “ut mereamur iustificari ex ipso (Deo).” In the interpretation of chapter ii. he explains verse 14: “Quicumque legem implet est in Christo et datur ei gratia per sui præparationem ad eandem, quantum in se est,” p. 38.
[539] Cp. Denifle-Weiss, 1², p. 608.
[540] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 41.
[541] Ibid., p. 83 f.
[542] Ibid., p. 84.
[543] Ibid., p. 114 f.
[544] Denifle-Weiss, 1², p. 465.
[545] “Schol. Rom.,” p. 104 f.
[546] J. Ficker in the preface to Luther’s Commentary on Romans, p. lxxi.
[547] For the explanation of certain expressions of Luther’s in this Commentary, e.g. that “God infuses grace,” and that faith without works does not justify, see Denifle-Weiss, 1², p. 466.
[548] “Tischreden,” ed. Förstemann, 2, p. 148: “Pugnat esse ex Deo natum et simul esse peccatorem.” Cp. Weim. ed. 2, p. 420.
[549] “Opp. Lat. exeg.,” 23, p. 160. By “saints,” Luther means the pious folk who follow his teaching.
[550] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 2, p. 420 (in the year 1519).
[551] Cp., for the absence of assurance of salvation, “Schol. Rom., “ p. 104: “Ex sola Dei reputatione iusti sumus; reputatio enim eius non in nobis nec in potestate nostra est. Ergo nec iustitia nostra in nobis est nec in potestate nostra,” and, p. 105: “Peccatores (sumus) in re, iusti autem in spe “; p. 108: “Sanus perfecte est in spe,