This mass, which the Platform, _with great moderation_, styles merely "_Ceremonies_" of the mass," p.
21, they confessedly did subsequently also abandon, as they had done private and closet masses before.
Again, if we may believe Luther himself, they certainly did a afterward change their ground in regard to the jurisdiction of the Pope and bishops.

Hear his own language in 1533, three years later: "Hitherto we have always, and especially at the diet of Augsburg, very humbly offered to the Pope and bishops, that we would not destroy their ecclesiastical right and power, but that we would gladly be consecrated and governed by them, and _aid in maintaining their prerogatives and power_, if they would not force upon us articles too unchristian.

But we have been unable to obtain this; on the contrary, they wish to force us away from the truth, to adopt their lies and abominations, or wish us put to death.

If now, (as they are such hardened Pharaohs,) their authority and consecration should fare as their indulgences did, whose fault will it be ?" He then proceeds to denounce the power and consecration which he had admitted at the time of the Augsburg Diet, and declares the church's entire independence of Rome for ordination.
[Note 1] Again, the Preamble asserts, "That the entire Lutheran Church of Germany has rejected the symbolical books _as a whole_, and also abandoned some of the doctrines of the Augsburg Confession, among others the far greater part of them, the doctrine of the _bodily_ presence of the Saviour in the eucharist." The truth of these positions is well known to those acquainted with the churches in Germany generally.

A few extracts from standard authorities may be pleasing to those not well informed on this subject.
Says _Koellner_, in 1837: "The theologians of more recent times have, as a body, departed from the rigid doctrinal system of the symbols, and let it be particularly noted, not only those who in the opposing parties are termed rationalists, but also those who, in antithesis to these, desire to be regarded as _champions for the doctrines of the church._ Accordingly, not only those who have been sufficiently denounced as heterodox, have abandoned the doctrines of the symbols, but also the so-called _orthodox_, such as _Doederlein, Morus, Michaelis_, the venerable _Reinhard, Knapp, Storr, Schott, Schwartz, Augusti, Marheinecke_, as well as _Hahn, Oltshausen, Tholuk_, and _Hengstenberg_.
In like manner has the public _pledge to the symbols_ been greatly relaxed, and is _nowhere unconditional_; but in fidelity to the principles of Protestantism, and guarding it, the obligation is always expressed with the _explicit reservation_ of the supreme authority of the Scriptures, as is evident from an inspection of the pledges prescribed in the different Protestant countries." [Note 2] Again: "It may as well be confessed and openly avowed, for the good of the church, that, _there are but few theologians who still believe and teach the doctrines of the symbols_." [Note 3] Professor _Schultz_, in his work on the Eucharist, [Note 4] in 1831, says: "If, in the most recent times, individuals have here and there arisen in the Lutheran Church itself, as defenders of Luther's views of the Lord's Supper, it must not be overlooked, that even they, sensibly feeling the difficulty of their undertaking, resort to all manner of subtle explanations and arbitrary additions, in order to explain away the objectionable aspects of this view." Finally, listen to the testimony of _Dr.Hagenbach_, of Basel, one of the most distinguished orthodox divines of Europe: "_How few Lutherans_, in this rationalizing period, firmly _adhere to the doctrine of the bodily presence_ of Christ in the eucharist: and how few Reformed adhered consistently to the doctrine of unconditional election.