Second Commentary on the Doctrine of Abstinence

c) p. 26, seqq.

d) He says this in the Preface of the previous edition toward the end: I can guarantee the authenticity of the facts that are reported in this little work. The

What therefore he maintains and judges, he has provided proof in several places, though he took pains in reviewing the events that took place under the Elector Prince, JOACHIM II. Here, here you may read the history of the corrected sacraments inserted, c) but in the same place are criticisms—the memory of which seemed long since to have been buried and entombed by the antiquity of time—brought forth again into the light and for all to see. For although there is no doubt for us that the author consulted archives and instruments of public documents in explaining the profane affairs of the House of Brandenburg, d) it is so far from the truth, however, that we should persuade ourselves that he, writing the history of the asserted religion, drew from public acts and writers of proven faith, that it appears clearly and obviously to anyone who tastes these matters even with the tips of his lips how much he has deviated and strayed from the uncorrupted monuments of those times, and how many things he has borrowed, especially from LUDWIG MORERIUS (whom he also praises), besides MAIMBOURG, VARILLAS, and others who were weighed down by prejudiced opinions against the students of purer doctrine. That no scruple may remain, I provide a summary of those things which he has brought forward on this opinion