Luther was born in 1483 to a copper miner. His Father moved the family and eventually became a mine owner. Luther grew up in a peasant society where the everyday reality of the supernatural was taken very seriously and it helped shape him…. And so events that we think today as natural - such as thunder and lightning - were credited to evil spirits. Places too were thought to be home of dark powers. Luther held this view – never outgrowing it however he also believed in forces of good – saints and angels and the power of God channeled through the church.
At age of 12 he was sent to a boarding school and then at age 18 went to the University of Erfurt where his father intended him to become a lawyer. But after a month he left law school to become a monk joining the Augustinian order of friars. This angered his dad however Martin saw something more crucial than obeying even his father’s wish… something had taken hold of him ……He had two significant experiences that shaped his decision. The death of a school friend and a narrow escape from a lightning bolt –which hit so close that it knocked him to the ground….. these awakened in him an overwhelming passion for religion and the salvation of his own soul that trumped even honouring his father’s wishes. He was struck with a sense of his sinfulness and as a result a fear of divine judgement and in medieval Europe the best way to increase ones chance of salvation was to become a monk or nun. And so Luther’s quest for salvation and assurance of it had begun. Others in the order thought Luther was very holy for all his diligence at religion. He yearned for peace with God. He was therefore scrupulous in obeying the monastic rules and observed every spiritual discipline to the nth degree -> yet he could never attain an assurance that he had made himself worthy before God. He was quickly seen as an outstanding scholar and started as junior lecturer at Wittenberg University. At this stage Johanes von Staupitz became his spiritual guide and friend. He was professor of biblical studies at the university. He was also vice-general of Augustinian friars in Saxony. One way Luther was seen as very holy was that he would spend a long time in confession. One time when he spent 6 hours in confession, Staupitz burst out “God is not angry with you…. You are angry with God! Do you not know that God commands you to hope?” Luther was indeed angry with God as he saw God demanding a perfection Luther could never give and who condemned him for not giving it.
Staupitz sent Luther off to Rome in 1511 on business for the Augustinian order. For Luther, who was in awe of Rome, the trip was profoundly disenchanting. He never forgot the cynical attitude to religion he found there or the obsession with money. He was later found repeating the Italian proverb “if there is a hell, Rome is built over it”. And so this event helped plant seeds of doubt in his mind with regard to the church and its practices.
Staupitz encouraged Luther to study for his doctorate in theology. He received his degree in 1512 and then took over from Staupitz as professor of biblical studies at Wittenberg University. Staupitz felt that in teaching others Luther would find the answers to his own problems. Luther used a new way of interpreting scripture rejecting the traditional scholastic theology which Luther saw as a betrayal of the bible’s message. He violently opposed how the traditional way of interpreting scripture blended Christianity with the philosophy of Aristotle. Luther was now a disciple of Augustine’s doctrine of the sovereign grace of God who chooses helpless sinners for salvation by his unmerited mercy. This was the 1st of his two major spiritual breakthroughs – around 1513… he came to see that the righteousness of God (Rom 1:17) is not the righteousness of God that punishes sinners but the Righteousness which he graciously gives sinners as a free gift of salvation…..
While Luther was considered an outstanding lecturer he was not alone in the reviving of Augustinian theology at Wittenberg University. Other key profs were: Andreas Bodenstein von Carlstadt, Nicholas von Amsdorf, George Spalatin and Philip Melanchthon. Melanchton, who had already published 30 books by the time he came to the University. He became a much loved friend of Luther’s –similar to David & Jonathan. They were very opposite personalities. Luther said “I am rough and rowdy and stormy, born to fight armies of devils and monsters. My job is to get rid of stumps and stones, hack away thistles and thorns, clear away wild forests. Then along comes Master Philip, gently and softly, sowing and watering with joy, according to the gifts God has so amply granted him”. As an observation….God uses a variety of things to accomplish his purposes and here we see how he uses personalities to work together, complimenting one another, bringing them together at Wittenberg in order to accomplish his purpose.
Under all these men Wittenberg University became a flourishing centre of Augustinian theology and preaching. And so the protestant reformation was led not by militant revolutionaries but by university professors!
Indulgences and Repentance
The first big issue, one that Luther is perhaps most known for is nailing his 95 theses onto the Castle Church door and indeed this is widely credited with being the start of the Reformation on 31 October 1517. Question: what do you think was the issue that Sparked the Reformation? Many may guess that is was over salvation or justification however it was not – it was over indulgences. So first of all what is an indulgence? According to the ‘Why not Catholicism website: “An indulgence is when God takes away the punishment in Purgatory that we are due to suffer for sins that have already been forgiven. According to whether this removal of punishment is total or partial, the indulgence is said to be plenary (total) or partial (partial). Indulgences can only be applied to one’s self, or to a Holy Soul in Purgatory”. In the 16C Indulgences came with a certificate of pardon issued by the pope by which the merits of the saints in heaven were transferred to a sinner, releasing him from ‘temporal penalties’ of sin; the pope could even extend these pardons to souls in purgatory hastening their passage to heaven.
In 1515 the Pope wanted to build St Peters basilica in Rome. And so Pope Leo X authorized the sale of special indulgences in Germany in order to finance it. The papal agent selling indulgences was a Dominican friar named Johann Tetzel. His preaching was really an emotional manipulation. He promised that as soon as they bought one of his indulgences on behalf of a dead relative God would instantly set the relatives poor suffering soul free from purgatory and admit it into the bliss of heaven. He would use little rhymes such “place your penny on the drum, and the pearly gates open and in struts mum” and as “as soon as the coin in the money-box rings the soul from purgatory springs” And if a person bought an indulgence for himself Tetzel claimed it would automatically wash away the foulest sin even if one had raped the virgin Mary! And so his campaign was crude, tasteless, vulgar, and sensational. It was also contrary to the official teaching of the Church on indulgences and their catechism which taught that to be effective indulgences had to be accompanied by repentance.
Now it is worth noting that while Luther was a senior professor that was not all he had responsibility for – one of his many responsibilities was as pastor of Wittenberg parish church at the castle and he was horrified that some people in his parish were buying Tetzel’s indulgences. He and others saw this all as scandalous as the indulgences were offered without the need to repent of sins.
And so on 31 October 1517 he announced that the next day he would publicly debate the indulgences at the university. And so he nailed his 95 Theses on the door of the Wittenburg castle church. This seems to us a highly unusual thing to do and a real statement moment – however in 16C Germany this was simply the typical way of making a public announcement. Luther had no wish to create a controversy – indeed he was supportive of the churches official teaching on indulgences at the time. His desire was to protect the church and defend the pope from the perversion of Tetzel’s preaching. Now I don’t know the details of the debate itself however we do know his theses was published without permission and spread thru-out all of Germany and the whole of Germany was in an uproar. His position on Tetzel’s perversion of it won widespread support particularly among both German nationalists – who didn’t like the idea of Germans financing a building in Rome - and also among ordinary German Christians.
And so with the 95 Theses he was really attacking the departure from the churches official teaching and that repentance was a necessary accompaniment to indulgences.
95 Thesis and Diet of Worms
And so in Response to Luther those who profited lodged official charges against Luther. But the pope didn’t take it seriously however he did instruct the head of the Augustinian order to end the dispute. And so the head of the Augustinian Order summoned Luther to appear before the governing body of the order in Heidelberg in 1518. In Heidelberg he presented his “Heidelberg disputation” where he defended Augustinian doctrine of sin and grace and attacked how Christian theology had been subjected to Aristotle’s philosophy. He also set out his theology of the cross -God’s rejection of man’s spiritual achievement, rejection revealed in the cross of Christ and true salvation found NOT in man’s strivings but only in Christ crucified. Luther stated the sinner must die to his achievements and despair of his own moral ability to find God if he is ever to receive the grace of Christ…… Luther contrasted this with the prevailing theology of glory in the achievement of man’s moral goodness and merit.
At this point he had no thought of breaking with the church however his pamphlet to explain the 95 theses did cast doubt on the divine right of the pope to be the head of the church. Soon he was criticizing the official teaching on indulgences and denying the pope had any power to release souls from purgatory. He also started teaching that excommunication did not affect a soul’s eternal salvation as no earthly power could ever separate a believer from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus (Rom 8)…. So if an excommunication was unjust it only severed one from the visible church but not from Christ… and if deserved yet the person is genuinely repentant then God receives him back even if the official church does not.
In AUGUST of that year, the pope gave Frederic – prince of that region of Germany – the golden rose which was the highest honour he could confer. But it came with the expectation that he be loyal and hand over Luther to the papal legate – Cardinal Cajetan. But Frederic took Luther’s side and arranged a peaceful meeting between Luther and Catejan at Augsburg in October.
Catejan was neither an extremist nor a hardline Roman Catholic defender. After the Roman-Protestant split was entrenched, he recommended a policy of conciliation advocating priests can marry and that wine of communion was for whole laity. But this got nowhere. And so in October 1518 he actually agreed with some of Luther’s points and referred to points of disagreements as ‘errors’ not ‘heresy’. Yet he didn’t like Luther and they argued and eventually he ordered him to withdraw his errors, threatening excommunication. Luther refused and Cajetan’s argument forced Luther for the 1st time to deny the infallibility of the pope. Catejan ordered him to withdraw his errors or not come into his presence again! And so Luther felt it prudent to flee Augsburg on horseback. Now at this stage he still accepted the pope as head of the church but that he was subject to correction by scripture and ecumenical council of the church. And so he appealed to an Ecumenical council to settle the dispute.
Now politics gave Luther a bit of a reprieve in the next few months as the Holy Roman Emperor lay dying. The Pope wanted Frederic the Wise of Saxony – Luther’s prince – to be the next emperor and so he could not do anything to antagonize Frederic and thus could not persecute Luther. During this time of peace Luther exhorted people to submit to the Roman Church but privately was starting to think the pope might be the anti-christ. His basis for this was that he saw that the pope was opposing scripture.
Leipzig disputation
In 1519 Johann Eck, a professor of theology at Ingolstadt university challenged Carlstadt – who was the most senior wittenberg lecturer – to defend the doctrines Wittenberg’s lecturers taught. And so the debate at Leipzig occurred with Luther and Melancthon accompanying Carlstadt to give him support. Now Carlstadt was considered a ‘boring bumbler’ in debate and Eck meanwhile was known as one of the greatest debaters of his time and according to contemporaries was an arrogant bully who was more like a butcher than a theologian! And so the debate was a bit like a World heavyweight boxing champion. Soon Eck got the better of him and Luther stepped in. As the debate swung back and forth Eck cleverly cornered Luther into admitting that his views were similar to John Huss’ the Czech, whom a church council had burnt for heresy in 1415.. This was a turning moment as it forced Luther to acknowledge that not only was the pope fallible but even ecumenical councils were fallible as he saw that the council had erred in condemning Huss. Luther now appealed to the Scriptures as the SOLE infallible authority. Halfway through the Leipzip disputation the holy roman emperor died. And while it was not Frederic who was named the new emperor, the New one – Charles V - was just and honourable even if loyal to the Roman Catholic Church. And so Both sides appealed to him and the Diet at Worms was called in 1521.
Diet of Worms-Break with Rome
Before the diet of Worms, Luther concluded that Huss was in the right with his conflict with Rome. This was no doubt a huge thing for one loyal to the Catholic church. In parallel Pope Leo was now convinced that Luther was a dangerous heretic to whom patience and tolerance could no longer be shown. As a result in 1520 a papal bull ordered Luther to submit within 60 days or be excommunicated and burnt as heretic. He was excommunicated for the following reasons:
a) Rejection of papal supremacy
b) Denial of popes power to ex-communicate
c) His view that the laity should receive wine in the mass
d) His view that the Fall of mankind had destroyed free will
The papal bull however was not popular in Germany and was met with open hostility particularly in northern Germany where Luther was a hero. People burned it and even Luther had a public burning of it. He also wrote some key documents which laid the foundation for the reformation, between the issuing of the papal bull and Luther’s public burning of it. He Wrote:
a) Address to Christian nobility of Germany – in this he declared that the pope and ecumenical councils had failed to reform the Church; he outlined the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers contrasting it with the teaching that the clergy were superior to laity and the laity could not exercise power over church; opposed papal infallibly and therefore that popes alone could interpret Scripture; and the popes claim that it alone could summon an ecumenical council of the church
b) Bablyonian Captivity of the church – this was a scholarly work comparing the church to Israel’s exile into Babylon. This is regarded as his most revolutionary writing, striking at the heart of Roman Catholic worship. In this he said that Rome’s doctrine of the sacraments robbed Christians of their freedom in Christ. In particular he attacked three errors regarding the mass:
a. Refusal to give the cup to the laity as scripture says it belong to all christians
b. Transubstantiation – he said this was derived from Aristotle philosophy. He outlined his view of Consubstantiation- that Christ’s body is truly present without changing the substance of the Bread and Wine
c. Sacrifice of the mass – that this was not a sacrifice at all but a sign of our promised inheritance through Christ’s death
In this document he also defined a Sacrament as a promise of forgiveness joined to a visible sign. As a result he asserted that four of the Roman Catholic sacraments were not indeed sacraments.
b) Freedom as a Christian -> unlike much of his previous articles which criticizes church errors, this was a positive exposition of the true meaning of Christian life. In it [PAUSE………] he showed that all blessings and benefits of Christ’s atoning work became the believer’s possession. Secondly he showed that in the spiritual realm the Christian is a perfectly free person - no longer enslaved and completely righteous before God. Yet in the physical realm he used his freedom to be a humble servant.
Diet of Worms
With the Pope wanting him burnt as a heretic and having excommunicated him, Luther’s fate depended on the holy roman emperor – Charles V. Charles was Loyal to Rome but a good politician too and he knew Luther had the backing of most of Germany. The Pope’s representative meanwhile argued he was excommunicated and therefore should be burned as a Heretic. Frederic demanded that Luther be given a free and fair hearing with a guarantee of safe conduct. Charles agreed to this. Now Huss had had a similar guarantee and yet was still burnt. Many wanted Luther not to go however he went courageously and said “even if the emperor calls me to Worms in order to kill me, or to declare me an enemy of the Empire, I shall offer to come. With Christ helping me, I shall not run away, nor shall I abandon God’s word in this struggle”.
And so Luther went and was cheered all along the way. It was reported back to Rome that “the whole of Germany was in full revolt. 9/10s raise the battle cry ‘Luther’; while the other tenth care nothing for Luther but cry out ‘death to the court of Rome’”.At Worms Luther made a speech justifying what he had written and promised that if it could be proven from scripture that he was wrong then he would be the first to throw his books in the fire. Eck however asked for a straightforward answer – would he abandon his Heretical views or not. Luther replied with his most famous words in the history of Western Christianity:
“Unless I am refuted and convicted by testimonies of Scripture or by clear reason – since I believe neither popes nor the councils themselves, for it is clear that they have erred and contradicted themselves – I am conquered by the Holy Scriptures I have quoted, and my conscience is captive to the word of God. I cannot and will not withdraw anything, since it is neither safe nor right to do anything against ones conscience. Here I stand. God help me. Amen.”
Heretic and Outlaw
Zealous traditionalists urged Charles to burn Luther but Charles had a high sense of personal honour. Luther was officially condemned as a heretic and put ‘under the ban of the empire’. This meant that anyone giving him shelter or hospitality would be committing a crime. But as the Holy Roman Empire was a loose federation it was hard to enforce and if local governments chose to protect him there was little the empire could do. Now as Luther journeyed back from Worms to Wittenberg, friends of Frederic staged a kidnapping of Luther carrying him off to Wartburg castle under Frederic’s protection. He was kept there in secrecy for 11 months. He disguised himself and took the name of ‘sir George ‘ and would from time to time go out on the streets – even asking what had happened to Luther! These 11 months at the castle were the most creative time of life. During it he translated the entire New Testament in 11 weeks. Previously there had been a german language bible translated from the Latin Vulgate – Luther’s was the first translated from the greek. It was written in a lively, popular style that all could understand. The Impact was that it transformed German religious life and even Germany itself influencing its very language. Then in 1534 the whole bible was translated – this was done jointly by Luther and his professor colleagues. In the meantime many german writers took up Luther’s cause and wrote and printed tracts/pamphlets. Many people think of the reformation and work of Luther as being simply reforming the church. So was the Reformation simply about reforming the church? For Luther the reformation was primarily about Doctrine and this can be seen through his interaction with Erasmus. Now Erasmus was the highly respected scholar, who had much in common with Luther. He too was an Augustinian monk and he also wanted to change the church. Erasmus had also published the Greek New Testament which was highly useful to Luther and indeed played a key role in saving him and in the New Testament that Luther translated. The two of them entered a dialogue and this dialogue helps us see what was at the heart of the reformation.
Erasmus too was concerned about the church, yet was of the view that what the church needed was a good moral scrubbing and bath. “Scrub off the corruption, wash off the hypocrisy and all would be well” said Erasmus. And so in 1524 Erasmus wrote “Freedom of the Human Will”. In this book he said that Luther had gone too far. The difference between them came down to how the two of them saw Christianity. For Erasmus the bible was too complicated to understand – so much more complicated the more you looked at it. Given how complicated and unclear it was, he believed we should not try and settle doctrinal matters such as the Trinity, God’s role in salvation and that these were actually harmful, distracting people from getting on with the business of Christian living. To Erasmus Christianity was essentially about morality with doctrine kept to a minimum. To Luther Christianity was a matter of doctrine first and foremost because true religion was principally a matter of faith.
Luther normally didn’t bother with arguments made against him as there were many. Yet Erasmus being so highly respected, Luther did read the “Freedom of the Will”… Luther responded by writing “The Bondage of the Will” and to quote Michael Reeves “it was a savaging” Erasmus had said that while we could never earn true merit yet God is willing to take our good intentions and treat them as better than they really are and so worthy of merit before God. Luther thought Erasmus had been worryingly glib about what he saw as the key issue – can we contribute anything to our salvation”. Erasmus believed that man’s will was not totally depraved by the fall and therefore was able to contribute towards our salvation. Luther however was adamant that for all the daily free choices we make nevertheless we cannot chose to please God – for underneath our wills is a heart that directs our wills AND is enslaved to sin. And so our wills are in bondage and therefore 100% of salvation must be God’s doing. What is really interesting is that in his book Luther said “You (Erasmus) alone have attacked the REAL ISSUE, the essence of the matter in dispute, and have not wearied me with irrelevancies about the papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such trifles….. you alone have seen the question on which everything hinges….. for which I sincerely thank you”. And so what was the issue that Erasmus had seen – well it was whether or not man could contribute to salvation and here we see the heart of the reformation. It is mind blowing to think of him referring to these issues as trifles! But Luther saw the heart of the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation was in error and thus it trumped by a longshot these other issues such as indulgences etc. And so the reformation to Luther was more like metaphorically burning it down and turning to the word of God then it was about correcting abuses
The heart of the doctrinal issues related to salvation. And at the heart was a new view on faith and sin. Starting with Sin… the things that he had once seen as sin- murder, adultery etc he now saw as a symptom of the real problem – unbelief. Luther said “This is the sin of the world that it does not believe on Christ. Not that there is no sin against the law besides this; but that this is the real chief sin”. Faith meanwhile was no longer the mere assent to creeds or the going to mass nor was faith something we must do… faith was not some inner resource which we must muster up to please God. For Luther the question have I got enough faith was to misunderstand it. Because faith in Luther’s theology was a passive thing, simply accepting receiving, believing in Christ.Luther’s definition of Righteousness was also significantly different from the RC church. Indeed Luther’s chief struggle had to do with the phrase ‘the righteousness of God’. He started convinced that this referred to God’s holiness and his unchanging hatred of sin and sinners. Luther meditated on this day and night until he understood “the just person lives by faith”….. he began to see this means that the justice of God is that by which the just person lives by a gift of God, that is by faith.. This justice is a passive justice whereby the merciful God justifies us by faith. When Luther came to see this he immediately saw the whole of scripture in a different light and he was born again. He also came to see that this was not a new view but that Augustine had held the same view.One aspect that had puzzled Luther was how righteousness could be good news to the Christian. He had seen it as primarily a quality of God used to condemn sinners….. now he saw God’s righteousness as a gift that he gives us so that we can be righteous before him. This gift of righteousness by which God declares us righteous is given to us even though we are not in ourselves righteous. And so Luther went on a journey from a troubled conscience full of fear rooted in medieval theology to a rediscovery of Augustinian view of sin, coming to see sin not simply as a weakness of being or lack of good but as rebellion against God. In other words it was a relational problem and the sinner was in bondage, powerless to help himself. But while we are powerless to help ourselves the good news is that we don’t need to be righteous… we are declared righteous not on the basis of our goodness or through a gradual process of moral improvement but on the basis of the finished work of Christ.The second major breakthrough for Luther was moving from the Augustinian view to a more distinctive evangelical viewpoint. In some respects, if his first break-through was a rediscovery of Augustine, the second was a rediscovery of Paul. He now saw that Justification was not to MAKE one righteous but to be DECLARED or reckoned as righteous. Put another way it is about our STATUS before God not a process occurring within us. Medieval theology had seen grace as a quality at work within us…. In Luther’s view righteousness was reckoned to us in order for us to become justified. They used the term “alien righteousness” to clearly show that it was a righteousness from outside of us – one that came from Christ. Melancthon in particular developed the idea of external righteousness, developing the idea of imputation. Medieval theology had talked about infusing righteousness into us and that this effected our justification. But Melancthon said it is IMPUTED to us and that our sins are not removed instead they are not counted against us. Justification then is not about making us righteous but about declaring us as .righteous. In terms of imagery – justification is about the law court whereas medieval theology saw it more as a hospital or a process of healing. And this came via faith. As we heard last Sunday – like the shopping bag – it contributes nothing to our food supply or meals yet is the vehicle by which we get these in our kitchen. And so we had the doctrine of Justification by grace alone thru faith alone in Christ alone. It is considered that perhaps the single greatest theological hallmark of the Reformation was the clear, systematic distinction it eventually made between Justification and Sanctification with Justification being Gods legal declaration of the sinner being righteous and acceptable in his sight and sanctification – the Holy Spirit’s transforming work within the believer by which Christ’s righteousness Is gradually imparted to his soul. This distinguishing between justification and sanctification was not entirely new – the Reformers in their arguments appealed to official church doctrinal statements from medieval times. They also argued that the best theologians of the past always knew that Christ alone had to be trusted for their salvation. They often cited Bernard of Clairvau – when he lay dying he was said to have seen himself before the judgement seat and his ready reply was “I confess myself unworthy of the glory of heaven, to which by my merits I could never attain but my lord possesses it by a double title: he is the only begotten son of the eternal father and he has bought it with his precious blood. This second title he has conferred on me, therefore I trust him with assured confidence to obtain it through merits of his passion”. And so they argued that it was not entirely new but there had been this strand of theology throughout the ages even if in the background or periphery of the church. What the reformers did which was new was to bring this to the forefront of theology and articulated the distinction with a clarity and precision that was new.
There is a common idea that says all Christians believe the same or perhaps you have heard that doctrinal differences only divide and are by implication unimportant. And some would say today that the differences are only minor at best…..The Roman Catholic church however saw that there were major differences and held the Council of Trent 1545-1563 as a direct response to the Reformation. This response has never been retracted and indeed before the Vatican II Council in the 1960’s the Pope affirmed the Council of Trent’s decrees it had issued saying: "What was, still is”. So what did the Council of Trent say?
---Canon IX. If any one shall say, that by faith alone the impious is justified; so as to mean that nothing else is required to co-operate in order unto the obtaining the grace of justification, and that it is not in any respect necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema (accursed). https://actheologian.com/2016/05/13/council-of-trent-canon-ix/
---Canon XII. If any one shall say, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified; let him be anathema
The contrast to Luther’s position is enormous. Luther says ‘if faith is not without even the smallest works, it does not justify, indeed it is not even faith”. Now as an aside he was not saying we are saved in order to live as we pleased but that – salvation produces good works in one’s life. He was however saying that even the slightest bit of hope for salvation being based on one’s own good works is to deny the adequacy of our one true hope – Christ. What do you thnk might be the application or blerssing of this? Because it is all based on Christ we can have assurance of our salvation and when we sin we can still have the assurance that it is all based on the finished work of Christ. Catholicism on the other hand denies the possibility of assurance. Indeed for a Catholic to express assurance was seen as a proud, presumptuous thing: The Council said “if any one says that a man who is born again and justified is bound by faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate…..and he has the gift of perseverance to the end let him be an anathema (accursed) – Canons XV-XVI.
So for the Catholics in the 16C there was no doubt that there was a wide gulf between the two.
|
Lutheran Justification
|
Catholic Justification
|
|
Forensic act
|
Healing act
|
|
Image: law court
|
Image: hospital
|
|
Alien righteousness (Christ’s)
|
Inherent righteousness (within believer)
|
|
imputed
|
Imparted
|
|
By faith alone
|
Begun with faith and continued through sacraments and good works
|
|
On basis of Christ’s finished work
|
On basis of what we shall become
|
|
An assured future
|
An uncertain future
|
Now while I have spoken about how the reformation was primarily regarding doctrine it also was about reforming worship and reforming the church itself. In reforming the Church’s worship, Luther followed an overarching principle that can really be broken into three:
1. All liturgical elements that were contrary to the teachings of the Scripture were deleted.
2. All those elements that were commanded by God were retained.
3. Those things that were neither commanded nor forbidden were considered “things indifferent”.
A significant aspect of worship that was reformed was the mass……In the Babylonian Captivity of the Church he attacked the following regarding the mass:
a. Refusal to give the cup to the laity as scripture says it belong to all christians
b. Transubstantiation – he said this was derived from Aristotle philosophy.
c. Sacrifice of the mass – that this was not a sacrifice at all but a sign of our promised inheritance through Christ’s death.
And so the Wine was given to the lay person and he taught Consubstantiation- that Christ’s body is truly present without changing the substance of the Bread and Wine and that the mass was a sign and not a sacrifice.
Regarding church music he is credited with bringing congregational singing back into the church – prior to this they did little more than watch the priest. To ensure the content of what was being sung was truth, Luther deleted heretical words from many songs and composed many new ones – perhaps the most famous one being ‘a mighty fortress is our God. He also rewrote the liturgy aiming to make it a bible teacher. He also wrote a catechism and took catechizing very seriously. He believed that everyone should memorise it and that anyone unwilling to do so should be barred from the Lord’s table and that parents should withhold food and drink from such children and that ultimately any such people should be exiled! He knew however that he could not force people to believe but he at least wanted people to know the truth. Overall the strength and success of the Reformation didn’t rely on programmes but on Luther’s never tiring pen and its emphasis on both preaching the word and its reliance on scripture alone.
Luther secretly returned to Wittenberg on 6 March 1522. He wrote to the Elector: "During my absence, Satan has entered my sheepfold, and committed ravages which I cannot repair by writing, but only by my personal presence and living word."[83] For eight days in Lent, beginning on Invocavit Sunday, 9 March, Luther preached eight sermons, which became known as the "Invocavit Sermons". In these sermons, he hammered home the primacy of core Christian values such as love, patience, charity, and freedom, and reminded the citizens to trust God's word rather than violence to bring about necessary change.[84]
Do you know what the Devil thinks when he sees men use violence to propagate the gospel? He sits with folded arms behind the fire of hell, and says with malignant looks and frightful grin: "Ah, how wise these madmen are to play my game! Let them go on; I shall reap the benefit. I delight in it." But when he sees the Word running and contending alone on the battle-field, then he shudders and shakes for fear.[85]
The effect of Luther's intervention was immediate. After the sixth sermon, the Wittenberg jurist Jerome Schurf wrote to the elector: "Oh, what joy has Dr. Martin's return spread among us! His words, through divine mercy, are bringing back every day misguided people into the way of the truth."[85]
Luther next set about reversing or modifying the new church practices. By working alongside the authorities to restore public order, he signalled his reinvention as a conservative force within the Reformation.[86] After banishing the Zwickau prophets, he now faced a battle against not only the established Church but also the radical reformers who threatened the new order by fomenting social unrest and violence.[87]
The Twelve Articles, 1525.
Despite his victory in Wittenberg, Luther was unable to stifle radicalism further afield. Preachers such as Zwickau prophet Nicholas Storch and Thomas Müntzer found support amongst poorer towns-people and peasants between 1521 and 1525. There had been revolts by the peasantry on a smaller scale since the 15th century.[88] Luther's pamphlets against the Church and the hierarchy, often worded with "liberal" phraseology, now led many peasants to believe he would support an attack on the upper classes in general.[89] Revolts broke out in Franconia, Swabia, and Thuringia in 1524, even drawing support from disaffected nobles, many of whom were in debt. Gaining momentum under the leadership of radicals such as Müntzer in Thuringia, and Hipler and Lotzer in the south-west, the revolts turned into war.[90]
Luther sympathised with some of the peasants' grievances, as he showed in his response to the Twelve Articles in May 1525, but he reminded the aggrieved to obey the temporal authorities.[91] During a tour of Thuringia, he became enraged at the widespread burning of convents, monasteries, bishops' palaces, and libraries. In Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants, written on his return to Wittenberg, he gave his interpretation of the Gospel teaching on wealth, condemned the violence as the devil's work, and called for the nobles to put down the rebels like mad dogs:
Therefore let everyone who can, smite, slay, and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful, or devilish than a rebel ... For baptism does not make men free in body and property, but in soul; and the gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who, of their own free will, do what the apostles and disciples did in Acts 4 [:32–37]. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others—of Pilate and Herod—should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, want to make the goods of other men common, and keep their own for themselves. Fine Christians they are! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants. Their raving has gone beyond all measure.[92]
Luther justified his opposition to the rebels on three grounds. First, in choosing violence over lawful submission to the secular government, they were ignoring Christ's counsel to "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's"; St. Paul had written in his epistle to the Romans 13:1–7 that all authorities are appointed by God and therefore should not be resisted. This reference from the Bible forms the foundation for the doctrine known as the divine right of kings, or, in the German case, the divine right of the princes. Second, the violent actions of rebelling, robbing, and plundering placed the peasants "outside the law of God and Empire", so they deserved "death in body and soul, if only as highwaymen and murderers." Lastly, Luther charged the rebels with blasphemy for calling themselves "Christian brethren" and committing their sinful acts under the banner of the Gospel.[93]
Without Luther's backing for the uprising, many rebels laid down their weapons; others felt betrayed. Their defeat by the Swabian League at the Battle of Frankenhausen on 15 May 1525, followed by Müntzer's execution, brought the revolutionary stage of the Reformation to a close.[94] Thereafter, radicalism found a refuge in the Anabaptist movement and other religious movements, while Luther's Reformation flourished under the wing of the secular powers.[95] In 1526 Luther wrote: “I, Martin Luther, have during the rebellion slain all the peasants, for it was I who ordered them to be struck dead.”[96]
Marriage
Martin Luther married Katharina von Bora, one of 12 nuns he had helped escape from the Nimbschen Cistercian convent in April 1523, when he arranged for them to be smuggled out in herring barrels.[97] "Suddenly, and while I was occupied with far different thoughts," he wrote to Wenceslaus Link, "the Lord has plunged me into marriage."[98] At the time of their marriage, Katharina was 26 years old and Luther was 41 years old.
On 13 June 1525, the couple was engaged with Johannes Bugenhagen, Justus Jonas, Johannes Apel, Philipp Melanchthon and Lucas Cranach the Elder and his wife as witnesses.[99] On the evening of the same day, the couple was married by Bugenhagen.[99] The ceremonial walk to the church and the wedding banquet were left out, and were made up two weeks later on 27 June.[99]
Some priests and former members of religious orders had already married, including Andreas Karlstadt and Justus Jonas, but Luther's wedding set the seal of approval on clerical marriage.[100] He had long condemned vows of celibacy on Biblical grounds, but his decision to marry surprised many, not least Melanchthon, who called it reckless.[101] Luther had written to George Spalatin on 30 November 1524, "I shall never take a wife, as I feel at present. Not that I am insensible to my flesh or sex (for I am neither wood nor stone); but my mind is averse to wedlock because I daily expect the death of a heretic."[102] Before marrying, Luther had been living on the plainest food, and, as he admitted himself, his mildewed bed was not properly made for months at a time.[103]
Luther and his wife moved into a former monastery, "The Black Cloister," a wedding present from the new elector John the Steadfast (1525–32). They embarked on what appears to have been a happy and successful marriage, though money was often short.[104] Katharina bore six children: Hans – June 1526; Elizabeth – 10 December 1527, who died within a few months; Magdalene – 1529, who died in Luther's arms in 1542; Martin – 1531; Paul – January 1533; and Margaret – 1534; and she helped the couple earn a living by farming and taking in boarders.[105] Luther confided to Michael Stiefel on 11 August 1526: "My Katie is in all things so obliging and pleasing to me that I would not exchange my poverty for the riches of Croesus."[106]
Church orders, Mecklenburg 1650.
By 1526, Luther found himself increasingly occupied in organising a new church. His Biblical ideal of congregations choosing their own ministers had proved unworkable.[107] According to Bainton: "Luther's dilemma was that he wanted both a confessional church based on personal faith and experience and a territorial church including all in a given locality. If he were forced to choose, he would take his stand with the masses, and this was the direction in which he moved."[108]
From 1525 to 1529, he established a supervisory church body, laid down a new form of worship service, and wrote a clear summary of the new faith in the form of two catechisms. Luther's thought is revolutionary to the extent that it is a theology of the cross, the negation of every affirmation: as long as the cross is at the center, the system building tendency of reason is held in check, and system building does not degenerate into System.[109]
To avoid confusing or upsetting the people, Luther avoided extreme change. He also did not wish to replace one controlling system with another. He concentrated on the church in the Electorate of Saxony, acting only as an adviser to churches in new territories, many of which followed his Saxon model. He worked closely with the new elector, John the Steadfast, to whom he turned for secular leadership and funds on behalf of a church largely shorn of its assets and income after the break with Rome.[110] For Luther's biographer Martin Brecht, this partnership "was the beginning of a questionable and originally unintended development towards a church government under the temporal sovereign".[111]
The elector authorised a visitation of the church, a power formerly exercised by bishops.[112] At times, Luther's practical reforms fell short of his earlier radical pronouncements. For example, the Instructions for the Visitors of Parish Pastors in Electoral Saxony (1528), drafted by Melanchthon with Luther's approval, stressed the role of repentance in the forgiveness of sins, despite Luther's position that faith alone ensures justification.[113] The Eisleben reformer Johannes Agricola challenged this compromise, and Luther condemned him for teaching that faith is separate from works.[114] The Instruction is a problematic document for those seeking a consistent evolution in Luther's thought and practice.[115]
Lutheran church liturgy and sacraments.
In response to demands for a German liturgy, Luther wrote a German Mass, which he published in early 1526.[116] He did not intend it as a replacement for his 1523 adaptation of the Latin Mass but as an alternative for the "simple people", a "public stimulation for people to believe and become Christians."[117] Luther based his order on the Catholic service but omitted "everything that smacks of sacrifice", and the Mass became a celebration where everyone received the wine as well as the bread.[118] He retained the elevation of the host and chalice, while trappings such as the Mass vestments, altar, and candles were made optional, allowing freedom of ceremony.[119] Some reformers, including followers of Huldrych Zwingli, considered Luther's service too papistic, and modern scholars note the conservatism of his alternative to the Catholic mass.[120] Luther's service, however, included congregational singing of hymns and psalms in German, as well as of parts of the liturgy, including Luther's unison setting of the Creed.[121] To reach the simple people and the young, Luther incorporated religious instruction into the weekday services in the form of the catechism.[122] He also provided simplified versions of the baptism and marriage services.[123]Luther and his colleagues introduced the new order of worship during their visitation of the Electorate of Saxony, which began in 1527.[124] They also assessed the standard of pastoral care and Christian education in the territory. "Merciful God, what misery I have seen," Luther wrote, "the common people knowing nothing at all of Christian doctrine ... and unfortunately many pastors are well-nigh unskilled and incapable of teaching."[125]
Catechisms
Luther devised the catechism as a method of imparting the basics of Christianity to the congregations. In 1529, he wrote the Large Catechism, a manual for pastors and teachers, as well as a synopsis, the Small Catechism, to be memorised by the people themselves.[126] The catechisms provided easy-to-understand instructional and devotional material on the Ten Commandments, the Apostles' Creed, the Lord's Prayer, baptism, and the Lord's Supper.[127] Luther incorporated questions and answers in the catechism so that the basics of Christian faith would not just be learned by rote, "the way monkeys do it", but understood.[128]
The catechism is one of Luther's most personal works. "Regarding the plan to collect my writings in volumes," he wrote, "I am quite cool and not at all eager about it because, roused by a Saturnian hunger, I would rather see them all devoured. For I acknowledge none of them to be really a book of mine, except perhaps the Bondage of the Will and the Catechism."[129] The Small Catechism has earned a reputation as a model of clear religious teaching.[130] It remains in use today, along with Luther's hymns and his translation of the Bible. Luther's Small Catechism proved especially effective in helping parents teach their children; likewise the Larger Catechism was effective for pastors.[131] Using the German vernacular, they expressed the Apostles' Creed in simpler, more personal, Trinitarian language. He rewrote each article of the Creed to express the character of the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. Luther's goal was to enable the catechumens to see themselves as a personal object of the work of the three persons of the Trinity, each of which works in the catechumen's life.[132] That is, Luther depicted the Trinity not as a doctrine to be learned, but as persons to be known. The Father creates, the Son redeems, and the Spirit sanctifies, a divine unity with separate personalities. Salvation originates with the Father and draws the believer to the Father. Luther's treatment of the Apostles' Creed must be understood in the context of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) and the Lord's Prayer, which are also part of the Lutheran catechetical teaching.[132]
Translation of the Bible
Luther had published his German translation of the New Testament in 1522, and he and his collaborators completed the translation of the Old Testament in 1534, when the whole Bible was published. He continued to work on refining the translation until the end of his life.[133] Others had translated the Bible into German, but Luther tailored his translation to his own doctrine.[134] When he was criticised for inserting the word "alone" after "faith" in Romans 3:28,[135] he replied in part: "[T]he text itself and the meaning of St. Paul urgently require and demand it. For in that very passage he is dealing with the main point of Christian doctrine, namely, that we are justified by faith in Christ without any works of the Law. ... But when works are so completely cut away – and that must mean that faith alone justifies – whoever would speak plainly and clearly about this cutting away of works will have to say, 'Faith alone justifies us, and not works'."[136]
Luther's translation used the variant of German spoken at the Saxon chancellery, intelligible to both northern and southern Germans.[137] He intended his vigorous, direct language to make the Bible accessible to everyday Germans, "for we are removing impediments and difficulties so that other people may read it without hindrance."[138]
Published at a time of rising demand for German-language publications, Luther's version quickly became a popular and influential Bible translation. As such, it made a significant contribution to the evolution of the German language and literature.[139] Furnished with notes and prefaces by Luther, and with woodcuts by Lucas Cranach that contained anti-papal imagery, it played a major role in the spread of Luther's doctrine throughout Germany.[140] The Luther Bible influenced other vernacular translations, such as William Tyndale's English Bible (1525 forward), a precursor of the King James Bible.[141]
The battle between the Turks and the Christians, in the 16th century
At the time of the Marburg Colloquy, Suleiman the Magnificent was besieging Vienna with a vast Ottoman army.[174] Luther had argued against resisting the Turks in his 1518 Explanation of the Ninety-five Theses, provoking accusations of defeatism. He saw the Turks as a scourge sent by God to punish Christians, as agents of the Biblical apocalypse that would destroy the antichrist, whom Luther believed to be the papacy, and the Roman Church.[175] He consistently rejected the idea of a Holy War, "as though our people were an army of Christians against the Turks, who were enemies of Christ. This is absolutely contrary to Christ's doctrine and name".[176] On the other hand, in keeping with his doctrine of the two kingdoms, Luther did support non-religious war against the Turks.[177] In 1526, he argued in Whether Soldiers can be in a State of Grace that national defence is reason for a just war.[178] By 1529, in On War against the Turk, he was actively urging Emperor Charles V and the German people to fight a secular war against the Turks.[179] He made clear, however, that the spiritual war against an alien faith was separate, to be waged through prayer and repentance.[180] Around the time of the Siege of Vienna, Luther wrote a prayer for national deliverance from the Turks, asking God to "give to our emperor perpetual victory over our enemies".[181]
In 1542, Luther read a Latin translation of the Qur'an.[182] He went on to produce several critical pamphlets on Islam, which he called "Mohammedanism" or "the Turk".[183] Though Luther saw the Muslim faith as a tool of the devil, he was indifferent to its practice: "Let the Turk believe and live as he will, just as one lets the papacy and other false Christians live."[184] He opposed banning the publication of the Qur'an, wanting it exposed to scrutiny.[185]
Final years, illness and death
1919Luther had been suffering from ill health for years, including Ménière's disease, vertigo, fainting, tinnitus, and a cataract in one eye.[240] From 1531 to 1546 his health deteriorated further. The years of struggle with Rome, the antagonisms with and among his fellow reformers, and the scandal that ensued from the bigamy of the Philip I, Landgrave of Hesse incident, in which Luther had played a leading role, all may have contributed. In 1536, he began to suffer from kidney and bladder stones, arthritis, and an ear infection ruptured an ear drum. In December 1544, he began to feel the effects of angina.[241]
His poor physical health made him short-tempered and even harsher in his writings and comments. His wife Katharina was overheard saying, "Dear husband, you are too rude," and he responded, "They are teaching me to be rude."[242] In 1545 and 1546 Luther preached three times in the Market Church in Halle, staying with his friend Justus Jonas during Christmas.[243]
His last sermon was delivered at Eisleben, his place of birth, on 15 February 1546, three days before his death.[244] It was "entirely devoted to the obdurate Jews, whom it was a matter of great urgency to expel from all German territory," according to Léon Poliakov.[245] James Mackinnon writes that it concluded with a "fiery summons to drive the Jews bag and baggage from their midst, unless they desisted from their calumny and their usury and became Christians."[246] Luther said, "we want to practice Christian love toward them and pray that they convert," but also that they are "our public enemies ... and if they could kill us all, they would gladly do so. And so often they do."[247]
Luther's final journey, to Mansfeld, was taken because of his concern for his siblings' families continuing in their father Hans Luther's copper mining trade. Their livelihood was threatened by Count Albrecht of Mansfeld bringing the industry under his own control. The controversy that ensued involved all four Mansfeld counts: Albrecht, Philip, John George, and Gerhard. Luther journeyed to Mansfeld twice in late 1545 to participate in the negotiations for a settlement, and a third visit was needed in early 1546 for their completion.
The negotiations were successfully concluded on 17 February 1546. After 8 a.m., he experienced chest pains. When he went to his bed, he prayed, "Into your hand I commit my spirit; you have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God" (Ps. 31:5), the common prayer of the dying. At 1 a.m. he awoke with more chest pain and was warmed with hot towels. He thanked God for revealing his Son to him in whom he had believed. His companions, Justus Jonas and Michael Coelius (de), shouted loudly, "Reverend father, are you ready to die trusting in your Lord Jesus Christ and to confess the doctrine which you have taught in his name?" A distinct "Yes" was Luther's reply.
An apoplectic stroke deprived him of his speech, and he died shortly afterwards at 2:45 a.m. on 18 February 1546, aged 62, in Eisleben, the city of his birth. He was buried in the Castle Church in Wittenberg, beneath the pulpit.[248] The funeral was held by his friends Johannes Bugenhagen and Philipp Melanchthon.[249] A year later, troops of Luther's adversary Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor entered the town, but were ordered by Charles not to disturb the grave.[249]
