that only Melanchthon's tract on the power and primacy of the pope was officially added to the others. Luther must not have known of Melanchthon's "small conduct" on this occasion and of the fact that his articles were not officially recognized, for otherwise he could not have written in his preface "These have been accepted by our side and unanimously subscribed to, etc." It was due to Kolde and Virck that we know of this, whereas Thieme has treated of the contents of these articles in an appreciative way.83
Because Luther in the introduction acknowledges once more the symbols of the old Church, we here refer to Kattenbusch's writing concerning Luther's position in respect to the œcumenical confessions.83
23. Luther and Agricola's Antinomism, 1537
It is known that the antinomistic tendencies of Agricola once more threatened to disturb the peace in 1537, and it is also known how Luther stood in regard to this. Kawerau shows that Luther was not only compelled to deal with Agricola in 1527 in the same matter, but that already in 1524 he, Bugenhagen and Melanchthon gave their opinion in a very similar case — concerning the method of preaching of the pastor in Chemnitz, Dominicus Beyer. Kawerau also shows just what the final stand of Luther in 1537 against Agricola had been. He sheds new light on Agricola's character who, as soon as he had escaped to Brandenburg, retracted every concession made by him to the Wittenberg theologians and immediately taught his heresy in the new edition of his catechism, 1541. His catechism is again made accessible through the latest volume (1916) of the present writer's "Quellen z. Geschichte des kirchl. Unterrichts."83a
