Did Martin Luther teach penal substitution?

The Wikipedia article on Penal Substitution states (under the heading "Differing views "): > Critics, however, argue that the theory of penal substitution is solely a later development, only forming part of orthodox Christian thought during the Protestant Reformation of the 16th-century, being advocated by Martin Luther and Calvin. Under the heading "Anselm, the Reformers, and John Wesley ," it goes into more detail on Luther's position: > Broadly speaking, Martin Luther followed Anselm, thus remaining mainly in the "Latin" model identified by Gustaf Aulén. He held, however, that Christ's atoning work encompassed both his active and passive obedience to the law;: as the perfectly innocent God-man, he fulfilled the law perfectly during his life AND he, in his death on the cross, bore the eternal punishment that all men deserved for their breaking the law. Unlike Anselm, Luther thus combines both satisfaction and punishment. (This is not the entire segment on Luther's views.) However, footnote 10 , on the earlier statement including Luther among those advocating penal substitution, reads: > Gustaf Aulén, a critic of penal substitution theory, disputed in his 1931 book *Christus Victor* that Luther accepted penal substitution. 'Under Aulen's assessment, Martin Luther revitalized the Christus Victor paradigm. According to Aulen, however, beginning with Melanchthon himself, Luther's reappropriation of the classic theme was quickly lost within later Protestant circles as more objective, "Latin," theories were allowed to displace it.' (Paul R. Eddy and James Beilby, 'The Atonement: An Introduction', in P. R. Eddy and J. Beilby [eds], *The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views* [Downers Grove: IVP, 2006], p. 13) Recognizing that there is some dissension on this point, my question is: *Did* Luther teach penal substitution? Whatever other sources an answer may use, please provide direct quotations from Luther's own works to support the answer.