Martin Luther's Legacy: Reforming Reformation Theology for the 21st Century

MARTIN LUTHER’S LEGACY Reforming Reformation Theology for the 21st Century MARK ELLINGSEN

Martin Luther’s Legacy

Mark Ellingsen Martin Luther’s Legacy Reforming Reformation Theology for the 21st Century

Mark Ellingsen Atlanta, GA, USA ISBN 978-1-137-58757-2 ISBN 978-1-137-58758-9 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-58758-9 Library of Congress Control Number: 2017937475 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifcally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microflms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifc statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affliations. Cover credit: FineArt/Alamy Stock Photo Printed on acid-free paper This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Nature America Inc. The registered company address is: 1 New York Plaza, New York, NY 10004, U.S.A.

For Betsey The special one who accompanies me in all my journeys with Luther and most everywhere else

vii Preface Nobody studies Luther alone, especially if they are Lutherans like myself. The footnotes in this book just begin to hint at my numerous intellectual debts in understanding the frst Reformer. Add to that the hundreds, no thousands of conversations I have had about this Reformation Father for over 50 years with Luther scholars from across the globe, Lutheran theologians of most every stripe, and even colleagues in Lutheran ministry who love his heritage. This book is a “thank-you” for all I’ve learned. One of its main messages is that these colleagues are pretty much correct. Martin Luther really taught what almost all of them said he did. His thought is so rich that most interpretations of the Reformer are correct, at least in part about him. Most everybody is right about Luther—in part—because the other interpreters are right about him too. What Philip Schaff wrote over a century ago about Augustine (Luther’s great infuence) applies to the Reformer: “In great men, and only great men, great opposites and apparently antagonistic truths live together. Small minds cannot hold them.”1 What Schaff said about Augustine as being such a person can apply to Luther, that he may still hold a mediating place between the great traditions of Christendom, the prospect of a future reconciliation in a higher (more pastorally sensitive) unity.2 Letting Luther teach us about the diversity in his thought and its pastoral implications, an invitation to learn more about him from most of Luther’s interpreters, is in large part what this book is about.

viii Preface My song of praise to my fellow-students of Luther in this Preface would be woefully incomplete if I failed to mention the one who has been with me most every year, through most every new insight I’ve had about the Reformer in all the years I have known him. I refer Betsey, the one I live with, who has been with me in all my journeys—the ones with Luther and all the other journeys of life as well. As we talked about this book we considered some other book dedications I want to write sometime, like to a couple of beloved newer spouses of two of our children not to mention some grandchildren we love a whole lot. They deserve some books too someday, if I don’t run out of gas. But there was no way I was going to let a book on the theologian I so dearly love, the man whose writings have helped make my life so sweet, without this book being for the one who has been with me in these journeys, through all the ups and downs of a life in ministry, and who when talking about them together has made what Luther taught me even better and a lot more fun. Now you know why this book is for Betsey, even though I’ve had a lot of other helpers. Mark Ellingsen Notes 1. Philip Schaff, “Prologomena: St. Augustine’s Life and Work,” in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol.1 (1886; reprint ed.; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), p. 23. 2. Ibid., p. 24.

ix 1 Introduction: Luther the Reformer, Past and Present 1 2 Scripture and Theological Method 19 3 God and Trinity 75 4 Christology 97 5 The Holy Spirit 109 6 Creation and Providence 119 7 Human Nature, Sin, and Free Will 135 8 Atonement 157 9 Justifcation 167 10 The Christian Life (Sanctifcation) 217 11 Church 269 Contents

x Contents 12 Ministry 279 13 Sacraments 287 14 Eschatology 299 15 Social Ethics 307 16 Conclusion: How Luther Still Reforms Us Today 335 Appendix 339 Index 345

xi Texts by Luther Ab.Chr. Confession concerning Christ’s Supper [Von Abendmahl Christi, Bekenntnis] (1528) Act. Aug. Proceedings At Augsburg [Acta augustana] (1518) Adv. Advent Sermons [Adventpostille] (1522) (1525) Adv.bull. Against The Anti-Christ’s Bull [Adversus exerabilem Antichristi bullam] (1520) Ambr. Cath. A Response to the Book of Master Ambrosius Catherines [Ad librum eximii Magfstri Nostri Magistri Ambrosii Catharini, defensoris Silverstri Prieratis asccerimi, responsio] (1521) Anbet.Sak. The Adoration of the Sacrament [Von Anbeten des Sakraments des heligen Leichnams Christ] (1523) Ander Ep.Pet. Sermons On the Second Epistle of St. Peter [Die ander Epistel S. Petri, und ein S. Judas gepredigt und augelegt] (1523–1524) Antinom. (1) First Disputation Against the Antinomians [Die erste Disputation gegen die Antinomer] (1537) Antinom. (2) Second Disputation Against the Antinomians [Die zweite Disputation gegen die Antinomer] (Jan. 1538) Antinom. (3) Third Disputation Against the Antinomians [Die dritte Disputation gegen die Antinomer] (Sept. 1538) Abbreviations

xii Abbreviations Ap.Conc. Call of Martin Luther For a Council [Appellatio f. Martini Luther ad Concilium] (1518) 28 Art. Action On the 28 Articles [An der Rat zu Erfurt: Gutachten uber die 28 Artikel der Gemeine] (1525) Assert.art. Response to the Bull of Leo X [Assertio omnium articulorum M. Lutheri per bullam Leonis X novissimam domnatorum] (1520) Auff.Ed. Commentary On the Alleged Imperial Edict [Auff das Vermeyut keiserlich Edict Ausgangen ynn] (1531) Auff.Ems. Answer To the Hyperchristian, Hyperspiritual, and Hyperlearned Book By Goat Emser in Leipzing [Auff das uberchristlich ubergeystlich und uberkunstlich buch Boks Emszer zu Leypczick Antwortt] (1521) Auff.Leip. Concerning the Answer of the Goat in Leipzig [Auff des bocks zu Leypczick Antwort] (1521) Aus. Joh. Another Interpretation of John 1–14 [Ein ander Auslegung uber Joh. 1–14] (n.d.) Aus.Mos. An Interpretation of Some Chpaters of Other Books of Moses [Auslegung der etliche Kapitel des andern Buchs Mosi, gepredigt zu Wittenberg] (1524–1526) Aus.Vat. An Exposition of The Lord’s Prayer for Simple Laymen [Auslegung deutsch des Vaterunsers für die einfältigen Laien] (1519) Ban. A Sermon On the Ban [Ein Sermon von dem Bann] (1520) Bapt. Rom. On the Papacy in Rome: Against the Most Celeberated Romanist in Leipzig [Von dem Bapstum zu Rome: widder den hochberumpten Romanisten zu Leiptzck] (1520) Beid.Ges. On Receiving Both Kinds in the Sacrament [Von beider Gestalt des Sakraments zu nehmen] (1522) Bet. Personal Prayer Book [Betbuchlein] (1522) Betr.Leid. Christ A Meditation On Christ’s Passion [Ein Sermon von der Betrachtung des heiligen Leidens Christi] (1519) Bib.DB Bibliograph of Prints [Bibliographie der Drucke mit Jahresangabe] (1546) BR Letters Br. auf.geyst. Letter To the Princes of Saxony Concerning the Rebellious Spirit [Eyn brief an die Fürsten zu Sachsen von dem auffrurischen geyst] (1524) Br. Schwarm. Letter To the Christians in Strasbourg Concerning Enthusiasts [En Brif an die Christen zu Strassburg wider den Schwärmgeist] (1524)

Abbreviations xiii Brief. Card.Al. Letter To Cardinal Albrecht (1518) Brief. Rech. Letter To Hans von Rechenberg [Ein Sendbrief An Hans v. Rechenberg] (1522) Brief Schieich. Infiltrating and Clandestine Preachers [Ein Brief D. Martin Luthers von den Schieichern und Winkelpredigern] (1532) Brief. Staup. Letter To Johann Staupitz (1518) Bull. Bep. Bis. Against the Spiritual Estate of the Pope and the Bishops Falsely So Called [Die Bulle Des Ecclesiastic Wittenbergk Wider die Bepstischen Bichoff, Die da gibt Gottes genade zu lon allen den, die sy haltenz, und in volgen] (1522) Butz. Seven Psalms of Penance [Der sieben Butzpsalmen] (1525) Capt. Bab. The Babylonian Captivity of the Church [De Captivitate Babylonica Ecclesiae] (1520) Christ. Adel To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation [An den Christlichen Adel deutscher Nation von den Christlichen Standesn Besserung] (1520) Christ.Bish. An Example of How to Consecrate a Christian Bishop [Exempel, einen rechten christliche Bischof zu weihen] (1542) Christ. ver. That a Christian Assembly or CongregationHas the Right and Power to Judge All Teaching and to Call, Appoint, and Dismiss Teachers, Established and Proven by Scripture [Das eyn Christliche versamlung odder gemeyne recht und macht habe, alle lere tzu urteylen und lerer zu beruffen, eyn und abzusetzen, Grund und ursach aus der schrifft] (1523) Christ. Vorm. Christian Exhortation to the Livonians Concerning Public Worship and Concord [Eyne Christliche vormanung von eusserlichem Gottis dienste unde eyntracht in die yn lieffand] (1525) Con.lob. Consolation for Labor and Load [Tessaradecos consolatoria pro laboruntibus et oneratis] (1520) Cont. Lov. Against the Thirty-Two Articles of the Louvian Theologists [Contra asinos Parisienses Lovaniensesque; also titled Wider dei XXXII Artikel der Theologisten zu Löwen] (1545) I Cor. Commentary on I Corinthians 7 [Das siebente Kapitel S. Pauli zu den Korinthern ausgelegt] (1523)

xiv Abbreviations Deut. Lectures on Deuteronomy [Deuteronomion Mosi cum annotationibus] (1525) Dial.Pri. A Dialogue With Silvestri Prieratis [Ad dialogum Silvestri Prieratis de potestate papae responsio] (1519) Dict. Ps. Lectures on the Psalms [Dictata super Psalterium] (1513–1516) Disp.Christ. Disputation on the Divinity and Humanity of Christ [Die Disputation de divinitate et humanitate Christ] (1540) Disp.Ec. Disputation Against John Eck [Disputatio et excusatio F. Martini Luther adversus criminationes D. Johannis Ecci] (1519) Disp. Heid. The Heidelberg Disputation [Disputatio Heidelbergae habita] (1518) Disp.hom. The Disputation Concerning Man [Die Disputation de homine] (1536) Disp. indulg. The Ninety-Five Theses [Disputatio pro declaration virtutis indulgentiarum] (1517) Disp. just. Disputation on Justifcation [De Disputation de iustifcation] (1536) Disp.miss.priv. Disputation Against Private Masses [Die Disputation contra missam Privatam] (1536) Disp.nup. Disputation on the Wedding [Die Zirkulardisputation de veste nuptiali] (1537) Disp.potest. The Disputation on the Authority of Councils [Die Disputation de potestate concilii] (1536) Disp. Schol. Theol. Disputation Against Scholastic Theology [Disputatio contra scholasticam theologiam] (1517) Disp.Verb. The Disputation Concerning the Pasage: “The Word Was Made Flesh” [Die Disputation de sententias Verbum caro factum est] (1539) Disp. Wider. Kais. Disputation on the Right of Opposition Against the Authority [Die Zirkulardisputation uber Das Recht des Widerstands gegen den Kaiser] (1539) Dol. On Translating and on the Intercession of the Saints [Sendbried vom Dolmetschen und Furbitte der Heiligen] (1530) Dr. Hier. Concerning the Three Hierarchies [Von den drei Hierarchien] (n.d.) Dr. Sym. The Three Symbols or Creeds of the Christian Faith [Die drei Symbola oder Bekenntnis des Glauben Christi] (1538)

Abbreviations xv Dtsch. Kat. The Large Catechism [Deutscher Katechismus] (1529) Dtsch.Ord. An Exhortation to the Knights of the Teutonic Order That They Lay Aside False Chastity and Assume The True Chastity of Wedlock [An die herrn Deutsch Ordens, das sie falsche keuscheyt meyden und zur rechtenehlichen keuscheyt greyffen Ermanung] (1532) Dup. just. Two Kinds of Righteousness [De duplici iustitia] (1519) Eel.Leb. The Estate of Marriage [Uom Eelichen Leben] (1522) Ehe. On Marriage Matters [Von Ehesachen] (1530) En.ep. Explanations of the Epistles and Gospels [Enarrationes epistolarum et euangeliorum, quas postillas vocant] (1521) Ep.Jes. The Epistle of the Prophet Isaiah [Die Epistel des Propheter Jesaia, so man in der Christmesse lieset] (1526) Ep. 1.Joh. Lectures on 1 John [Vorlesung über den 1.Johanesbrief] (1527) Ep.Pr. Epilogue to a Pamphlet of Sylvester Prieras [Epitoma responsionis ad Martinum Luther (per Fratrem Silvestrum de Prierio)] (1520) Erm. Fried. Admonition to Peace, A Reply to the Twelve Articles of the Peasants in Swabia [Ermahnung zum Fridenauf die zwold artikel der Bauernschaft in Schwaben] (1525) Ess.9 Account of Isaiah 9 [Enarratio capitis noni Essaiae] (1543/1544) Ess.53 Account of Isaiah 53 [Enarratio 53. Captis Essiae] (1544) Ev.Joh.1-2 Sermons on the Gospel of John 1–2 [Auslegung des ersten und zweiten Kapitels Johannis im Predigten] (1537/1538) Ev.Joh.3-4 Sermons on the Gospel of John 3–4 [Auslegung des dritten und vierten Kapitels Johannis im Predigten] (1538/1540) Ev.Joh.6-8 Sermons on the Gospel of John 6–8 [Wochenpredigten über Joh.6–8] (1530–1532) Ev.Joh.14-15 Sermons on the Gospel of John 14–15 [Reihenpredigten über Johannes 14–15] (1533)

xvi Abbreviations Ev.Joh.16 Sermons on the Gospel of John 16 [Das XVI Kapitel S. Johannis gepredigt und ausgelegt] (1538) Ev.Joh.16-20 Sermons on the Gospel of John 16–20 [Wochenpredigten überJoh.16–20] (1528–1529) Ex. Sermons on Exodus [Predigten über das zweite Buche Mose] (1524–1527) Fast. (1518) Two Lenten Sermons [Zwei deutsche Faternpredigten von 1518] Fast. (1525) Lenten Sermons [Fastenpostille] (1525) Fest. Festival Sermons [Festpostille] (1527) Fid.in. The Acquisition of Infused Faith [De fde infusa acquisitia] (1520) Form. Miss. An Order of Mass and Communion for the Church At Wittenberg [Formula Missae et Communionis pro Ecclesia Vuittembergensi] (1523) Gal. (1519) Commentary on Galatians [In epistolam Pauli ad Galatas M. Lutheri commentarius] (1519) Gal. (1535) Commentary on Galatians [In epistolam S. Pauli ad Galatas Commentarius] (1535) Geist.Aug. Exhortation to All Clergy Assembled At Augsburg [An der gantze geistlichkeit zu Augsburg versamlet auff den Reichstag] (1530) Gen. Lectures on Genesis [Genesisvorlesung] (1535–1545) Gl.Ed. Commentary on the Alleged Imperial Edict [Glosse auf das vermeinte kaiserliche Edikt] (1531) Gr. Serm. Wuch. Longer Sermon on Usury [Grosser Sermon von dem Wucher] (1520) Grnd. Defense and Explanation of All the Articles [Grund und Ursach aller Artikel] (1521) Grnd. Bull. Defense and Explanation of all the Articles Which Were Unjustly Condemned by the Roman Bull [Grund und Ursach aller Aritkel D. MartinLuthers, so durch römische Bulle unrechtlich verdammt sind] (1521) Gut.Werk. Treatise on Good Works [Sermon von den guten Werken] (1520) Hab. Lectures on Habbakuk [Der Prophet Habakuk ausgelegt] (1526) Hagg. Lectures on Haggai [Vorlesungen uber die Kleiner Propheten: In Haggeum] (1525) Haus. House Sermons [Hauspostille] (1544)

Abbreviations xvii Heb. Lectures on Hebrews [Die Vorlesung über den Hebraerbrief ] (1517) Henr. Against King Henry VIII of England [Contra Henricum Regem Angliae] (1522) Himm.Proph. Against the Heavenly Prophets [Wider die himmlischen Propheten von den Bildern und Testament] (1524) Hndb. Observations on Augustine’s Writings [Luthers Handbermerkungen zu Augustins Schriften de trinitate und de civitate dei] (n.d.) Hndb.Sent. Observations on The Sentences of Peter Lombard [Handbemerkungen Luthers Zu den Sentenzen des Petrus Lombardus] (1510–1511) Hspost. House Postil [Hauspostille] Inst.min. Concerning the Ministry [De instituendis ministris ecclesiae] (1523) Jes. (1527-1529) Lectures on Isaiah [Vorlesungen über Jesaja] (1527–1529) Jes. (1527-1530) Lectures on Isaiah [Vorlesungen über Jesaja] (1527–1530) J.Christ. That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew [Dass Jesus Christus ein geborner Jude sei] (1523) 1.Joh. Sermons on I John [Etliche schone Predigten aus der ersten Epistel S. Johannis Von der Liebe] (1532) Jon. Lectures on Jonah [Der Prophet Jona ausgelegt] (1526) Jud. und Lug. On the Jews and Their Lies [Von den Juden und iren Lugen] (1543) Kat.pred. Ten Sermons on the Catechism [Katechismus predigten herausgegeben von G. Buchwald] (1528) Kauf. und Wuch. On Trade and Usury [Von Kaufshandlung und Wucher] (1524) Kirchpost.E. Church Postil for the Epistles [Kirchen–Postille– Epistel–Predigten] (1522/1544) Kirchpost.G. Church Postil for the Gospels [Kirchen-PostilleEvangelien-Predigten] (1522/1544) Kl.Ant. Short Answer to Duke George [Klein Antwort auf Herzog Georgen] (1533) Kl.Kat. Small Catechism [Kleiner Katechismus] (1529) Kl. Proph. Lectures on the Minor Prophets [Vorlesungen uber die Kleinen Propheten] (1524–1526)

xviii Abbreviations Kl. Serm. Wuch. Short Sermon on Usury [Kleiner Sermon von dem Wucher] (1519) Kl.unt. A Brief Instruction on What to Look for and Expect in the Gospels [Eyn kleyn unterricht, was man ynn den Evanglijus suchen und gewartten soll] (1521) Konz. On the Councils and the Church [Von den Consiliis und Kirchen] (1530) 15.Kor. Commentary on I Corinthians 15 [Das 15.Kapitel der Ersten Epistle S. Pauli an die Korinther] (1532) Kr. leut. On Whether Soldiers, Too, Can Be Saved [Ob Kriegesleute auch in seligem Stande sein konnen] (1526) Kr. Trk. On the War against the Turks [Vom Kriege Wider der Turken] (1529) Kurz. Bek. A Short Confession of the Holy Sacrament [Kurzes Bekenntnis vom heiligen Sadrament] (1544) Kurz Form A short Form of The Ten Commandments [Eines kurze Form der zehn Gebete, eine kurze Form des Vaterunsers] (1520) Kurz Vat. A short Form of The Lord’s Prayer [Ein kurtze form, des Vater noster zu verstehen und zu beten, fur die junge kinder im christenglauben] (1519) Latom. Against Latomus [Rationis Latomiae confutatio] (1521) Leid. Christ. A Meditation on Christ’s Passion [Ein Sermon Betrachtung des heilige Leiders Christi] (1519) Leip.Disp. The Leipzig Disputation [Resolutiones Lutherianae super propositionibus suis Lipsiae disputatis] (1518) Letz. Wort. Treatise on the Last Words of David [Von den letzten Worten Davids] (1543) Lib.christ. The Freedom of a Christian [Tractatus de libertate christiana] (1520) Lib. Ex. Cath. On the Book of Ambrose Catharini [Ad librum eximii Magistri Nostri Magistri Abrosii Catharini, defensoris Silverstri Prieratis accerimi, responsio] (1521) Lied. Hymns [Lieder] Magn. Commentary on the Magnifcat [Das Magnifcat verdeutschet und ausgelegt] (1521) Mar. Ges. The Marburg Colloquy [Berichten von Hedio, Des Marburger Gesprach] (1529)

Abbreviations xix Matt. Ann. Annotations in Some Chapters of Matthew [Annotationes in aliquot capita Matthaei] (1538) Matt.5-7 Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount [Das 5., 6. Und 7. Kapitel S. Matthaei gepredigt und ausgelegt] (1530–1532) Matt.11-15 Sermons on Matthew 11–15 [Wochenpredigten über Matth.11–15] (1528/1529) Matt.18-24 Sermons on Matthew 18–24 [Matth.18–24 in Predigten ausgelegt] (1537–1540) Men. Avoiding the Doctrines of Men [Von Menschenlehre zu meiden, und Antwort aud Spruche, so man fuhret, Menschenlehre zu starken] (1522) Mis.Mess. The Misuse of the Mass [Vom Mistbrauch der Messe] (1521) Mos. How Christians Should Regard Moses [Ein Unterrichtung wie sich die Christen in Mosen sollen schicken] (1525) Mos. Dec. Moses’ Holy Exclamations [In Genesi Mosi librum sanctissimum Declamationes] (1525) Ord. gem. Kast. Ordinance of a Common Chest [Ordnung eyns gemeynen Kastens] (1523) Papst. Mit. The Papacy and Its Members [Das Papstthum mit seinen Gliedern] (1526) Pfar.Wuch. Treatise on Usury to the Pastors [And die Pfarrherrn wider den Wucher zu predigen] (1540) 1 Pet. Sermons on the First Epistle of St. Peter [Epistel S. Petri gepredig und ausgelgt] (1522) 2 Pet. Sermons on the Second Epistle of St. Peter [Die ander Epistel S. Petri und S. Judas gepredigt und ausgelgt] (1523/1524) Pot.leg. On Magisterial Laws in the Church [De poteste legis ferendi in ecclesia] (1530) Prae.Witt. SomeWittenberg Precepts Made Public [Decem praecpta Wittenbergensi praedicuta populo] (1518) Pred. Sermons [Predigten] Pred. Deut. (1529) Preaching on Deuteronomy [Predigten über das fünfte Buch Mose] Pred. Deut. (1530/1564) Sermons On Deuteronomy [Predigten über das 5. Buchs Mose] Pred.Gen. Sermons on Genesis [Predigten über das erste Buche Mose] (1526–1528)

xx Abbreviations Pred. Kind. A Sermon on Keeping Children in School [Eine Predigt, dass man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle] (1530) Pred.1.Mos. (1523/1524) Sermons on Genesis [Predigten über das erste Buch Mose] Pred.1.Mos. (1527) Sermons on Genesis [Uber das erste Buch Mose, Predigten] Pred.2.Mos. Sermons on Exodus [Predigten uber das zweite Buch Mose] (1524/1527) Pred.Sol. Notes on Ecclesiastes [Vorlesung uber den Prediger Solomo] (1532) Pref. Proph. Preface to Prophets of the Old Testament About Christ [Prophetiae veteris testament de Christo] (1542) Promodisp.Fab. The Promotion Disputation of Theodore Fabricius and Stanislaus Rapagelanus [Die Promotionsdisputation von Theodor Fabricius und Stanislaus Rapagelanus] (1544) Promodisp.Heg. The Promotion Disputation of Peter Hegemon [Die Promotionsdisputation von Petrus Hegemon] (1545) Promodisp.Kopp. The Promotion Disputation of Heironomus Kopp and Friedrich Bachofen [Die Promodisputation von Heironomus Kopp und Friedrich Bachofen] (1543) Promodisp.Mar. The Promotion Disputation of Johann Marback [Die Promotionsdisputation von Johann Marback] (1543) Promodisp.Pall. Preface to the Promotion Disputation of Palladius and Tileman [Vorrede zur Promotionsdisputation von Palladius und Tilemann] (1537) Promodisp.Pet. The Promotion Disputaton of Peter Hegemon [Promotionisdisputation von Petrus Hegemon] (1545) Promodisp.Schmed. The Promotion Disputaton of Heinrich Schmedenstede [Promotionisdisputation von Heinrich Schmedenstede] (1545) Promodisp. Scot. The Promotiondisputation of John Scotus [Promodisputation von Johannes Macchabaus Scotus] (1542) Prop.Sat. Propositions against the Synagogue of Satan [Propositiones adversus totam synagogam Sathannae et universas portas inferarum] Ps. Lectures on the Psalms [Psalmenauslegungen] (1529/1532)

Abbreviations xxi 2.Ps. Second Lectures on the Psalms [2. Psalmenvorlesungen] (1519/1521] Ps.2 Commentary on Psalm 2 [Enarratio Psalmi secundi] (1532/1546) 8.Ps. Commentary on Psalm 8 [Der achte Psalm Davids gepredigt und ausgelegt] (1537) Ps.45 Lectures on Psalm 45 [Vorlesungen uber die Psalmen 2, 51, 45] (1532/1533) Ps.51 Exposition of Psalm 51 [Ennaratio Psalmi LI] (1532/1538) Ps.68 Commentary on Psalm 68 [Deutsche Auslegung des 67. (68) Psalmes] (1521) 82.Ps. Commentary on Psalm 82 [Der 82. Psalm ausgelegt] (1530) 90.Ps. Commentary on Psalm 90 [Ennarraio Psalmi XC] (1541) Ps.101 Commentary on Psalm 101 [Auslegung des 101 Psalmos] (1534–1535) Ps.110 Sermons and Commentary on Psalm 110 [Der CX. Psalm, Gepredigt und ausgeleget] (1535) 118. Ps. Commentary on Psalm 118 [Der hundertundachtzehnte Psalmen] (1521) 119. Ps. Interpretation of 119 Psalms [Der 119 Psalm, verdolmeticht und ausgelegt] (1529) 127.Ps. Exposition of Psalm 127 [Der 127.Psalm ausgelegt au die Christen zu Riga in Liesland] (1524) Quest.vol.hum. Questions on the Strength of the Human Will without Grace [Quaestio de viribus et voluntate hominis sine gratia disputata] (1516) Rad. To the Councilmen of All Cities in Germany That They Establish and Maintain Christian Schools [An der Radherrn aller Stedte deutsches lands: das sie Christliche schulen auffrichten und halten sollen] (1524) Rath. To the Councilmen of All the cities of Germany That They Establish and Maintain Christian Schools [An die Ratherren aller Städte deutscheslands, das sie christliche Schulen aufrichten und erhalten sollen] (1524) Reich.Gott. On the Kingdom of God: What It Is and How [Vom Reiche Gottes, was es sei und wie] (1525)

xxii Abbreviations Reih. Gen. A Sermon Series on Genesis [Reihenpredigten uber 1.Mose] (1523–1524) Res. Explanations of The Ninety-Five Theses [Resolutiones disputationum de indulgentiarum virtute] (1518) Res.Cath. Response to Ambrose Cathanni [Ad librum eximii Magistri Nostri Magistri Ambrosii Catharini defensoris Silverstri Prieratis acermim responsio] (1521) Res. pap. Resolutions on the Propositions of the Power of the Pope [Resolution Lutherana super propositione sua decimal tertia de potestate papae] (1519) Rom. Lectures on Romans [Die Vorlesung uber den Romerbrief ] (1515–1516) Schlus. On the Keys [Von den Schlüsseln] (1530) Schmal.Art. Smalcad Articles [Adie Smalkaldischen Artikel] (1537) Sch.Reisz. Christian Text to W. Reiszenbuch [Christliche Schrift an W. Reiszenbuch] (1525) Send.Al. Open Letter to Lord Albrecht [Sendschreibenan Herzog Albrecht von Preuszen] (1532) Send.Buch. An Open Letter on the Harsh Book against the Peasants [Ein Sendbrief von den harten Buchlein wider die Bauern] (1525) Send.Rech. A Letter to Hans von Rechenberg [Ein Sendbrief Liber die Frage, ob auch jemand, ohne Glauben verstorben, selig warden wage (An Hans v. Rechenberg)] (1522) Sent.Lom. To The Sentences of Peter Lombard [Zu den Sentenzen des Petrus Lombardus] (1510–1511) Serm. (1514-1517) Early Sermons [Sermone aus den Jahren 1514–1517] Serm.Bereit. A Sermon on Preparing to Die [Ein Sermon von Bereitung zum Sterben] (1519) Serm.Bu. Sermon on the Sacrament of Penance [Ein Sermon von dem Sakrament der Busze] (1519) Serm.dr.gut. A Sermon on the Three Kinds of Good Life for the Instruction of Consciences [Sermon von dreierlei gutem Leben, das Gewissen zu unterwichten] (1521) Serm.ehe.St. Sermon on the Estate of Marriage [Ein Sermon von dein ehelichen Stand] (1519) Serm. G.K. On Rogantide Prayer and Procession [Ein Sermon von dem gebet und procession von der Kreutz wochen] (1519)

Abbreviations xxiii Serm. H.M. A Treatise on the New Testament, That Is The Holy Mass [Ein Sermon von den neuen Testament. Das its von der heiligen Messe] (1520) Serm.heil.Leid. A Sermon on the Meditation of Christ’s Holy Passion [Ein Sermon von der Betrachtung des heiligen Leidens Christi] (1519) Serm.hoc.Sak. The Blessed Sacrament of the Holy and True Body of Christ and the Brotherhoods [Eyn Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sakrament des heiligen Wahren Leichnams Christi und von den Bruderschaften] (1519) Serm.poen. The Sacrament of Penance [Sermo de poenitentia] (1518) Serm.Ruch. Sermon on Soberness and Moderation [Ein Predig Von Ruchterfait und Wassigkait] (1539) Serm. S. P. P. A Sermon on the Festivalof St. Peter and St. Paul [Ein Sermon gepredigt zu Leipzig auf dem Schloss am Tage Petri und Pauli] (1519) Serm. S. Steph. Sermon on Saint Stephen’s Day [Sermo in die S. Stephani] (1515) Serm. S. Thom. Sermon on St. Thomas’ Day [Sermo die S. Thomae] (1518) Serm. Sak. The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ – Against the Fanatics [Sermon von Sakrament des Leibes und Blutes Christi, wider die Schwarmgeister] (1526) Serm. Tauf. The Holy and Blessed Sacrament of Baptism [Eyn Sermon von dem heyligen hochwirdigten Sacrament der Taufte] (1519) Serv.arb. The Bondage of the Will [De servo arbitrio] (1525) Som. Post. Summer Sermons [Sommerpostille] (1526) Som. Post. (Cruc.) Cruciger’s Summer Sermons [Crucigers Sommerpostille] (1544) Sp.OT. Sayings from the Old Testament [Spruche aus dem Alten Testament] (n.d.) Sterb. A Sermon on Preparing to Die [Ein Sermon von der Bereitung zum Sterben] (1519) Stuf. Lectures on the Psalms of Ascent [Vorselung über die Stufenpsalmen] (1532/1533) Sum. Ps. Summaries on the Psalms, and Causes of Interpreting [Summarien über die Psalmen und Ursachen des Dolmetchens] (1533)

xxiv Abbreviations Sup. ann. Computation of the Years of the World [Supputatio annorum mundi] (1541) Tauffbuch. The Order of Baptism Newly Revised [Das tauffbüchlein auffs Neue zugericht] (1526) Taul.Serm. Marginal Notes on Tauler’s Sermons [Luthers Randbemerkungen zu Taulers Predigten] (1516) Tess.Con. FourteenConsolations [Tessaradecas Consolatoria pro laborantibus et onerantis] (1520) Thes. Antinom. Theses against Antinomians [Die Thesen gegen die Antinomer] (1537–1540) Thes. Wel. Theses Concerning Faith and Law [Die Thesen für Promotionsdisputation von Heironymus Weller und Nikolaus Medler] (1535) I Tim. Lectures on I Timothy [Vorlesung über den 1. Timotheusbrief] (1527–1528) Tit. Lectures on Titus and Philemon [Vorsesung über dieBriefe an Titus und Philemon] (1527) Torg. The Torgau Sermon on Christ’s Descent Into Hell [Die Dritte Predigt Von Jesu Christo ein Predigt zu Hohe zu Torgau gepredigt] (1533) Tract. Ec. Treatment of In What the Church Is to Take Refuge [Tractatulus de his, qui ad eccleias contugiunt] (1517/1520) Trost. An. Comfort When Facing Grave Temptations [Trőstung für eine Person in hoher Anfechtungen] (1531) Trost. Christ. A Letter of Consolation to the Christians At Halle [Trőstung an die Christen zu Halle über Herr Georgen ihres Predigers Tod] (1527) TR Table Talk [Tishreden] Uber. Answer to the Hyperchristian, Hyperstpiritual, and Hyperlearned Book by Goat Emser in Leipzig—Including Some Thoughts Regarding His Companion, the Fool Murner [Auff das ubirchristlich, ubirgeystilch und ubirkunstlich buch Bocks Emszers zu Leypczick Antwortt D.M.L. Darynn auch Murnarrs seynsz geselln gedacht wirt] (1521) Und. beich. A Brief Instruction, How One Sould Confess [Ein kurz underwensung, wie man beichten soll] (1519) Unter. Art. Instruction on Some Articles [Unterricht auf etlich artickell, die im von seynen abgunnern auff gelegt und zu gemessen Vuerden] (1519)

Abbreviations xxv Unter.Buch. An Instruction to Penitents Concerning the Forbidden Books of Dr. Martin Luther [Ein Unterrich der Beichtkinder über die verbotenene Büucher] (1521) Unter. Visit. Instructions for Visitors of Parish Pastors in Electoral Saxony [Unterricht der Visitatatorn an die Pfarhern ym Rursurstenthum zu Sachssen] (1528) Ver.Kor. Publication of the Koran [Verlegung des Alcoran Bruder Richardi] (1542) Verm. Admonition Concerning the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Our Lord [Vermahnungzum Sakrament des Leibes und Blutes Christi] (1530) Verm. Zu Aug. Exhortation to the Clergy Assembled at the Diet of Augsburg [Vermahnung an die Geistlichen, versammelt auf dem Reichstag zu Augsburg] (1530) Verm.Christ. Exhortation to All Christians [Eine true Vermahnung zu allen Christen, sich zu hutten vor Aufruhr und Emporung] (1522) Verm.Fried. Admonitition to Peace:A Reply to the Twelve Artices fo the Peasants of Swabia [Vermahnung zum Friedeen auf die zwölf Artikel der Bauerschaft in schwaben] (1525) Verm.Geitst. Exhortation to All Clergy [Vermahnung and die Geistlichen, versammelt aud den Reichstag zu Augsburg] (1530) Verm.Trk. Appeal For Prayer against the Turks [Vermahnung zum Gebet wider Türcken] (1541) Vor. Brent. Preface to on the Prophet Amos [Vorwort zu In prophetan Amos Iohannis Brentii] (1530) Vor.Deut.Schr. Preface to the German Edition of Luther’s Writings [Vorrede zum.1. Bande der Wittenberger Ausgabe der deutschen Schriften] (1548) Vor. D.T. Preface to the Complete Edition of a German Theology [Vorrede zu der vollstandigen Ausgabe der “deutschen theologie”] (1518) Vor.Emp. A Sincere Admonition to All Christians to Guard against Insurrection and Rebellion [Eyn trew vormanung Martini Luther tzu allen Christen sich tzu vorhuten fur auffruhr unnd Emporung] (1522) Vor.Hist. Preface to Galeatius Capella’s History [Vorrede zu Historia Galeatii Capellae] (1538)

xxvi Abbreviations Vor.Kor. Preface to the Koran [Vorrede zu Theodor Bilianders Koranausgabe] (1543) Vor.Lat. Prefaces to the Complete Edition of Luther’s Latin Writings [Vorrede zum ersten Bande der Gesamtausgabensein lateinischenSchriften] (1545) Vor.Lib. Preface to the Book of Rites and Customs of Turks [Vorwort zu dem Libellusde ritu et moribus Turcorum] (1530) Vor. N.T. Prefaces to the New Testament [Vorrede auff. Das neue Testament] (1546/1522) Vor. O.T. Prefaces to the Old Testament [Vorrede auff das Alte Testament] (1545/1523) Vor. Ps. Lectures on Psalms 2, 51, 45 [Vorlegungen über die Psalmen 2, 51, 45] (1532) Vor. Rheg. Preface to Urbanus Rhegius [Vorrede zu Urbanus Rhegius, Prophetiae verteris testament de Christo] (1542) Vot.monast. Judgment of Martin Luther on Mastic Vows [De votis monasticis Martini Lutheri iudicium] (1521) War.Papst. Why the Books of the Pope Were Burned [Warumb des Papsts und seiner Jungernn Bucher von Doct. Martino Luther vorbrant seynn] (1520) Wein. Christmas Sermons [Weihnachtpostille] (1522) Wellt. Uber. Temporal Authority: To What Extent It Should Be Obeyed [Von welltlicher Oberkeit, wie weit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig sei] (1523), Widder. Dr. Luther’s Retraction of the Error Forced Upon Him by the Most Highly Learned Priest of God, Sir Jerome Emser. Vicar in Meissen [Ein Widerspruch D. Luthers seines Yrrthums, erczwungen durch den allerhochgelehrtesten Priester Gottis Herrn Hieronymo Emser, Vicarien Zu Meiszen] (1521) Wider Antinom. Against the Aninomians [Wider die Antinomer] (1539) Wider Bau. Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants [Wider die rauberischen und morderischen Rotten der Bauern] (1525) Wider Hans Against Hanswurst [Wider Hans Wurst] (1541) Wider Pap. Against the Papacy: An Institution of the Devil [Wider das Papsttum zu Rom vom Teuffel gestiffet] (1545)

Abbreviations xxvii Wider sabat. Against the Sabatarians [Wider die Sabbather an einen guten Freund] (1538) Wider Turk. Sermon against the Turks [Heerpredigt wider den Turken] (1529) Wider Wuch. Pastoral Admonition against Usury [An die Pfarrhern wider den Wucher zupredigen Vaermahnung] (1540) Wied. On Rebaptism [Von der Wiedertaufe an die zwei Pfarherrn] (1528) Winck. The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests [Von der Winckelmesse und Pfaffenweyhe] (1533) Wint. Winter Sermons [Winterpostille] (1528) Worm. Diet of Worms [Verhandlungen mit D. Martin Luther auf den Reichstage zuWorms] (1521) Wort. That These Words of Christ, “This Is My Body,” Still Stand Firm Against the Fanatics [Das diese Wort Christi “Das ist mein Leib” noch fest stehen wider die Schwarmgeister] (1527) Zach. Lectures on Zechariah [Der Prophet Zacharja ausgelegt] (1527) Zeph. Lectures on Zephaniah [Vorlesungen über die Kleiner Prophetens: Zephajab] (1525) Zirk.c.c. The Circular Disputation of the Council of Constantinople [Die Zirkulardisputation de concilio Contantiensi] (1521) Collections in Which These Texts Appear BC The Book of Concord. Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert,eds. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000. CS Collected Sermons. John N. Lenker and Eugene Klug, eds. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000. LW Luther’s Works. St. Louis-Philadelphia: Concordia Publishing House— Fortress Press, 1955ff. W2 Dr. Martin Luthers Sammtliche schriften. Johann George Walch, ed. St. Louis, 1880–1910. WA D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe). Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1883ff. WABR Dr. Martin Luthers Briefe, Senuschreiben und Bedenken. Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1825–1856.

xxviii Abbreviations WADB D. Martin Luthers Werke: Die Deutsche Bibel. Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe). Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1906– 1914. WATR D. Martin Luthers Werke: Tischreden. Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe). Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1912– 1921.

1 We are well acquainted with Martin Luther, we think.1 Some readers will already be familiar with the story of how this young man, born to an upwardly mobile peasant couple (at least his father) in 1483 and planning on a career in law, vowed to become a monk, joining the Augustinian Order, after safely escaping a frightening thunderstorm. Others will also be aware of how as a brilliant student and protégé of the Order’s leader Johann von Staupitz, trained in Nominalist thought and Augustine’s theology, the subject of our book was called to the faculty of Saxony’s Wittenberg University. And most everyone knows that during his frst years on the faculty of this new university, after (some think it happened prior to) a Tower Experience which changed his understanding of St. Paul’s concept righteousness of God, this young professor went on heroically to challenge the selling of Indulgences, leading to the Reformation. Luther’s own account of his breakthrough in the Tower suggests it happened in 1519, as the other events he describes in the narrative as happening at the time of his life-changing experience (including his having lectured on Galatians and Hebrews as well as initiating a new round of lectures on the Psalms) transpired in that year. However, the essence of what he learned from The Tower Experience already appears in a 1516 sermon, as he claimed that God’s work is creating righteousness.2 Many historians and social critics even think of Luther as the frst modern man, asserting individual judgment and conscience over the norms of the medieval establishment.3 Others insist that he was a CHAPTER 1 Introduction: Luther the Reformer, Past and Present © The Author(s) 2017 M. Ellingsen, Martin Luther’s Legacy, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-58758-9_1

2 M. ELLINGSEN thoroughly late medieval German.4 For some, he is a great theologian, the father of Protestantism. For others he is a heretic. And still others see him as a Catholic theologian. Most everyone on all sides would concede the importance of Justifcation by Grace Alone in his thought. Usually the Luther we encounter says a great deal about the views of the one interpreting him.5 With the 500th anniversary of the Reformation now upon us (there is no evidence, though, that Luther himself actually nailed the NinetyFive Theses on the Wittenberg church door as myth would have it), it is crucial for the sake of historical accuracy that we break with these old paradigms of interpreting the frst Reformer.6 These older paradigms transform Luther into a systematic theologian, even if he becomes systematically paradoxical.7 The rough edges in his thought are suppressed in favor of the themes dearest to the interpreter’s constructive thinking. Yet, as we shall see, when Luther is interpreted in this modern, systematic mode, we are led to misinterpret what the Reformation was all about. It is hard to make a systematic theologian out of him, since he never wrote a complete systematic treatise summarizing all his teachings. (The closest thing to such a treatise, his Smalcald Articles, does not include a developed hermeneutic and discussion of biblical authority.) Yet if we remain committed to systematizing him, we are likely to join the media and modern historiography in viewing the events of October 31, 1517 and what follow s as the dawn of modernity and its celebration of individuality over traditional norms, the struggle against corruption in the Church, the Protestant break with Tradition in favor of the authority of Scripture alone, and as an expression of Luther’s psychological turmoils. In fact, as we shall observe, the Reformation might not have happened had Luther himself not broken with a systematic model of theology. Yet we still need handy summaries of the richness of his thought, resources for preaching and teaching the Reformer’s insights without so simplifying him as to result in a book which is more about the interpreter’s views than Luther’s. Providing such a handy summary is one aim of this book. Its other rationale emerges when we clarify what Luther is doing Methodologically as an alternative to doing theology systematically. The pastoral–contextual model of doing theology that we will observe in Luther was not only reforming in his sixteenth-century context. I am going to demonstrate how his approach might help his

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 3 twenty-frst-century heirs, might reform how theology is done today. And given the perceived irrelevance of theology today to the detriment of the Western church and the mess it is in, the Church as a whole needs this new model. The Richness of Luther’s Theology The book will demonstrate that the many different versions of Luther have some truth to them. For when the Reformer is read in all his richness, almost all the various venerable traditions of Luther interpretations are correct (at least sometimes). My thesis that Luther was not offering a systematic theology is not a new insight. In the last half of the twentieth-century German scholar Paul Althaus made this point.8 Along with other famed German interpreters Werner Elert, Gerhard Ebeling, and Gerhard Heintze, as well the eminent American Historian Jaroslav Pelikan, Althaus noted that the Reformer operated in a pastoral, contextually conditioned manner.9 In a 1530–1531 entry in Table Talk Luther confrmed this: “True theology is practical, and its foundation is Christ, Whose death is appropriated through faith.”10 I propose to move Luther scholarship beyond this insight and direct scholars to recognize the presence of a pattern to the conceptual diversity in Luther’s contextual thought. Throughout his career he articulated similar themes when addressing similar pastoral concerns. Identifying the precise nature of this pattern to his use of Christian concepts is rich in theological and pastoral implications. It can provide us not only with a fresh appreciation of the strengths of the various traditions of Luther interpretation. There is, as Heinrich Bornkamm writes in 1970, “something of Luther’s spirit [and thought] in all his legitimate heirs.”11 His thought is rich enough to spawn many heirs. Identifying the pastoral purposes for which Luther deployed various doctrinal confgurations can also be an important step in the development of a new paradigm for systematic theology, one which is sensitive to today’s pastoral contexts. The paradigm for Luther research that I propose takes lessons from the Reformer about not just what contemporary Lutherans should proclaim, but also learns lessons from him about when to proclaim his various insights.12 There are risks in taking all that Luther wrote so seriously. He himself noted in a 1537 letter that the only works he wrote that he would acknowledge are The Bondage of the Will and his Catechisms. At the end

4 M. ELLINGSEN of his life he even suggested that it would be better if all his books were burned.13 But his work as a whole has had and continues to exert infuence on the Church and Western society. And this is a book about his legacy, about what we can learn from his writings. And so what I am doing in this book is to offer a conceptual study of Luther’s writings, an analysis which may or may not be relevant for drawing conclusions about his mature faith. No matter how much of Luther’s corpus we consider, Luther himself acknowledged his reliance on the contextual approach we have identifed in his thought. Of course he still held out for the overall consistency in his thought. In 1522, while acknowledging the context-conditionedness of his thought, he wrote, My doctrine does not in any part contradict itself; nor can it do so, since it is the doctrine of Christ, and the whole world already knows that on faith, on love, on works, and on those matters which the Spirit of Christ teaches us in Holy Writ I have ever been of the same mind, have always taught and written the same thing even though I have daily progressed more and more by practice and study and have presented the same matters at time from this angle, at another from that and have treated them more clearly and fully at one time than at another, as Scripture itself does.14 Elsewhere in a later 1540 reference in Table Talk he clearly endorses this sort of contextuality. He is recorded as asserting, “This [the preaching of Law and Gospel] shouldn’t and can’t be comprehended in a fxed rule. Christ Himself preached [the Law and the Gospel] according to circumstances.”15 In another remark over table he adds, A preacher is like a carpenter. His tool is the Word of God. Because the materials on which he works vary, he ought not always pursue the same course when he preaches. For the sake of variety of his auditors he should sometimes console, sometimes frighten, sometimes scold, sometimes soothe, etc.16 Luther also advises that preachers vary their style, sometimes scolding, sometimes soothing, suiting preaching to the place and circumstances.17 He likewise observed elsewhere that there is a limit, a time, and an age for every doctrine.18 In addition, the Reformer argued that biblical

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 5 themes emphasized should be related to the context one was addressing. In a 1525 treatise he wrote, The Word in Scripture is of two kinds: the frst does not pertain or apply to me, the other kind does. And upon that Word which does pertain to me I can boldly trust and rely, as upon a strong rock. But if it does not pertain to them, then I should stand still. The false prophets pitch in and say, “Dear people. This is the Word of God.” That is true; we cannot deny it. But we are not the people. God has not given us the directive.19 Luther applied these insights to reading Scripture and trying to sort out tensions in it.20 Thus he once claimed that Paul and James seem to disagree because they are each defending different aspects of the Gospel. Indeed, he claims, much that is in Scripture is depicted according to the context to which it is addressed.21 Likewise the Reformer insisted that the topic of preaching should be geared to its context and also that pastoral style should differ depending on the circumstances and persons addressed.22 Similar points are even made in The Small Catechism regarding the contextual sensitivity one must have in formulating the themes the preacher stresses.23 He even claimed in one context that different doctrines are most appropriately considered in different points in the Christian life. Thus, he urged that Christ and the Gospel be considered prior to sin, in order that its depth might be fully recognized, and that only later Predestination receive consideration.24 A similar point was expressed by Luther in his 1535 Lectures on Galatians. He maintained that good works and love must be taught in their proper place, but not when the issue was justifcation: We concede that good works and love must also be taught; but this must be in its proper time and place, that is, when the question has to do with works apart from this chief doctrine … So since we are now dealing with the topic of justifcation, we reject and condemn works; for this topic will not allow of any discussion of good works.25 There are rich scholarly, ecumenical, and theological implications in the pastoral–-contextual paradigm that I propose for interpreting Luther. Essentially, as we shall observe, the Reformer’s praxis–oriented theological method entails that we should stress dialectical elements of faith more in contexts in which Pelagianism is on the horizon. Mere exposition of

6 M. ELLINGSEN the faith, to be sure, still embodies some dialectical patterns (e.g. the distinction of Law and Gospel, the distinction between God’s Work and human works, the distinction of the Two Kingdoms). But when the concern addressed is apologetics, exhorting the living of the faith (sanctifcation), or when comforting despair, then the dialectical elements of Christian faith are almost entirely unifed. This analysis provides some handles on the diversity of Luther’s thought, on the diversity within the Lutheran heritage and in the Christian tradition in general. These trends also make good parish sense. Those who have pastored will resonate with this wisdom. The time to confound with dialectical thinking is when encountering legalistic attitudes, when encountering those who are absolutely certain that their views are the view of God. But when ministering to those with doubts, with those in despair, then an unambiguous affrmation of the love of God, of the compatibility of faith and reason, is in order. Likewise, the compatibility of Law and Gospel, of faith and works, is in order when confronting sloth in the Christian life. The paradigm for Luther Research that I propose offers a new, pastorally sensitive way of doing theology. It breaks with the dominant systematic model of theology which has prevailed in the academy since the Enlightenment, if not as long ago as the Middle Ages. By this prevailing systematic model I refer to theologizing which seeks logically to organize the affrmations of the faith around some foundational, fundamental principles—whether it be a philosophical commitment like existentialism or process philosophy, a sociopolitical agenda like feminism or liberation, or around a given doctrinal theme like Justifcation by Grace, a Sovereign God, Holiness, or the like. Such a theology is not sensitive to the need to address all the pastoral concerns that church leaders encounter in everyday ministry. The perceived irrelevance of systematic theology by many pastors is in part a function of the inadequacies of even the best theologies to address every pastoral situation. The paradigm I propose might remedy this shortcoming, as it entails that the theological task is not just to articulate and elaborate on the classical doctrines of the faith. One must also seek to identify the sort of contexts (pastoral concerns) for which a given construal of a doctrine is best-suited. My proposal is that as we identify Luther’s use of Christian concepts, the contexts for which he deployed a given conception, we will learn lessons regarding the purpose and the context in which to utilize specifc formulations of doctrines (for

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 7 example, when to emphasize the opposition of Law and Gospel, when to deploy a Third Use of the Law, when to stress the Real Presence of the Sacraments and an authoritative view of ministry, and when not to). Knowing when to proclaim a given affrmation for the right pastoral context, not just how to say it, makes theology a lot more practical. And identifying the pattern in Luther’s use of Christian concept is not only a new, never-done-before interpretation of his thought, it is a fresh way of making theology more relevant. It also opens the way for rich ecumenical explanations, as it is likely we will fnd that many of the disagreements among theologians are not fundamental disagreements at all, that they agree when they address similar pastoral concerns, but just disagree because they are addressing different pastoral concerns.26 These are indeed revolutionary fndings and insights. Reforming our reading of Luther can reform modern theology. How This Approach Helps Us Understand the Reformation The reading of Luther I propose in this book is needed if we are fully to appreciate his Reformation legacy, and the signifcance of the events on October 31 about 500 years ago. Much research has been devoted to Luther’s dependence on, though troubled relationship with Scholastic theology.27 And the paradoxical character of his thought has been widely recognized in the academy.28 But what has not been noted is that the contextually related, unsystematic character of his theology is what made possible the heart of Luther’s Reformation insights, the focus on sola gratia and sola fde. It is no accident that the budding Reformer’s Disputation against Scholastic Theology preceded his Ninety-Five Theses. No less than Luther, the great Scholastic theologians recognized the rich diversity of the biblical witness. But unlike Luther, in dealing with the tensions found in the biblical witness, Scholastics were committed to resolving these tensions, positing smooth transitions between grace and works, between Law and Gospel, between reason and faith. For example Thomas Aquinas wrote, The divine rights of grace do not abolish the human rights of natural reason.29

8 M. ELLINGSEN Now although the truth of the Christian faith … surpasses the capacity of the reason, nevertheless that truth that the human is naturally endowed to know cannot be opposed to the truth of Christian faith.30 One need only examine several Scholastic magna opera to see this Method in action. A thesis is stated, its antithesis given, and then arguments are mounted to resolve these tensions and the truth of the original claim. We can observe this approach in Aquinas’s treatment of Justifcation. The tensions between grace and works, between Law and Gospel, between divine justice and charity, must be synthesized. Thus he insists that justifcation is brought about by God’s love (the Good News of faith) and by the achievement of justice (the regulation of our action.)31 Although the Nominalists did not posit this sort of smooth transition between reason and the Word of God one can still observe this synthesizing in how they carry on theological discourse.32 For example, in Gabriel Biel the acceptance of the offer of grace is necessary in order to explain how we can be in friendship with God. (It would make no sense to say we were friends if God merely accepted our works.)33 The Scholastic distinction between the meritum de condigno (merit achieved with the help of grace) and the meritum de congruo (doing what the believer is capable of doing, merit achieved without aid and so merely non-meritorious preparation for justifying grace) as well as the distinction between God’s necessitates absoluta and God’s self-binding decisions necessarily to save those who do what is in them with justifying grace (necessitas consequentiae) provide further examples of the Scholastic propensity to resolve tensions between competing alternatives or dialectical tensions like grace and works or divine Providence and human freedom.34 Luther will have none of this subtle synthesizing. It has been contended that the heart of Luther’s critique of Scholasticism is the Reformer’s Nominalist critique of Aristotle.35 Luther clearly had a signifcant amount of criticism to level against the Philosopher of Aquinas: I fnd it more than astonishing that our scholars can so brazenly claim that Aristotle does not contradict Catholic truth.36 41. Virtually the entire Ethics of Aristotle is the worst enemy of grace. This in opposition to the Scholastics.

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 9 43. It is an error to say the no man can become a theologian without Aristotle. This is in opposition to common opinion. 50. Briefy, the whole Aristotle is to theology as darkness is to light. This in opposition to the Scholastics.37 But rejecting Aristotle, though signifcant in shaping Luther’s theological convictions about the bondaged will, his breaking with the idea of grace as a habit, and his rejection of transubstantiation was not the whole story in the budding Reformer’s break with Scholastic theology.38 Other ways in which he breaks with Scholastic suppositions (and its stress on rational syntheses of the tensions in Christian faith) are most signifcant and need to be considered: 45. To state that a theologian who is no logician is a monstrous heretic – this is a monstrous and heretical statement. This is in opposition to common opinion. 46. In vain does one fashion a logic of faith, a substitution brought about with regard for limit and measure. This is in opposition to the new dialecticians.39 47. To say that Augustine exaggerates in speaking against heretics is to say that Augustine tells lies almost everywhere. This is contrary to common knowledge.40 These comments give permission to challenge the medieval (and modern systematic) model of fnding synthesis of the tensions in Christian thought (since there is no internal logic of faith according to Luther).41 The frst proposition of the Disputation with the Scholastics noted in the preceding quotation is especially signifcant. Some Scholastic theologians seem to have criticized Augustine for his failure to be suffciently systematic, for not always reconciling tensions between spirit and letter, between faith and works. Luther wants to join the African Father in embracing these unresolved paradoxical tensions. Armed with these methodological suppositions the budding Reformer did not need to try to smooth out tensions in his classic Reformation affrmations. And so it appears that without this break with Scholastic theology, apart from his commitment to doing theology without resolving the tensions inherent in Christian faith, we would not have found the Reformer positing tensions between faith and works, likely would

10 M. ELLINGSEN not have had the results of October 31, 1517 transpire. The reading of Luther that I introduce in this book provides us with fresh insights about what the Reformation was all about (overcoming systematic distortions of Christian faith in favor of a theology sensitive to the richness of the biblical witness, providing a theology rich enough to deal with everyday life in all its diverse situations). Luther’s Reformation really was a reform of how to do theology—even if the Church has not fully caught on yet. The Way Ahead The rest of the book will demonstrate the validity of my thesis about reading Luther, providing readers with the sort of guidance on how to do a pastorally sensitive theology that I have promised. A chapter will be devoted to the Reformer’s teachings on each of the major doctrines. Such a classical order of dogmatic presentation is not an imposition of a system on Luther like many modern interpreters have done. We must keep in mind that long before the development of modern systematic theology, organizing theological content according to a narrative arrangement of the classical doctrinal loci was practiced by the Scholastics and Dogmatic Theologians of the Protestant Orthodox era. Arranging Luther’s thought in this narrative model (starting with authority and then moving to God and proceeding with His acts in Creation, Redemption, Sanctifcation, and the things of the Church—the order of the Nicene Creed) may not be the order Luther himself would have used had he written a book organizing his thought on each of the classical doctrines. As we shall observe at times he would want us to start with the doctrine of Justifcation or Christology. But when he actually go around to sketching his version of the faith, as he did in his Catechisms and even the Smalcald Articles, the order of doctrines more closely followed the narrative order of arranging doctrines employed in this book. The difference between the approach of pre-modern theologians I am using in analyzing Luther and those engaged in systematic theology is like the very signifcant difference between formal and material presuppositions. The former arranges data and activities in such a way that it does not infuence the outcome. The latter set of presuppositions sets the agenda of the investigation. Modern systematic theologians opt for presuppositions about the faith (philosophical suppositions, political suppositions, some sort of doctrinal emphasis) that shape how the content of the faith is articulated, impact

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 11 behavior. An example of a material presupposition is that you need a college degree to get a good job. That presupposition infuences behavior and how you tell the story of the America dream. By contrast, merely interpreting a theologian’s thought in relation to the historic doctrines is a formal presupposition. This presupposition orders chaos, but does not determine the outcome of the analysis. An example of such a presupposition is the rules of a basketball game. These presuppositions order the chaos of 10 players on the court. But they do not mandate whether the fast break and full-court press are more effective than a deliberate offense and a zone defense. And so likewise, interpreting Luther in relation to the historic doctrines does not bias the interpretation towards any particular conclusions about what he taught. In recognizing the richness of Luther’s thought with this interpretive approach, we will come to appreciate not just the validity of many of the different versions of the Reformer’s thought but also the ecumenical friendliness of his theology. In noting a consistent pattern in his use of Christian concepts we will take the frst steps in developing a theology for the parish and every-day life, presenting the insights of the academy in such a way that we can learn how to use them in everyday life. As we do, we will take steps towards reforming theology today in a manner consistent with the Reform Luther undertook 500 years ago. In undertaking this task and in all the theologizing we do, students of Luther do well to heed the Reformer’s warning: If presumption even in secular affairs, when reliance on wealth or power or wisdom puffs up the heart, is never indulged in without danger, it is far more dangerous in theology; yet this is the very place where it is most commonly found … Thus we must daily fght against this latent pest, and, above all, not to be pleased with ourselves.42 The diversity in Luther’s theology can help us do this. Notes 1. Luther may not have been born to as poor a family as he suggests in TR (1544), WATR5:558, 13. Also see his lineage described in Charlotte Methuen, “Luther’s Life,” The Oxford Handbook of Luther’s Theology. Robert Kolb, Irene Dingel, and L’Ubomir Batka, eds. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), p. 7; Hans Schwarz, True Faith in the True

12 M. ELLINGSEN God: An Introduction to Luther’s Life and Thought (rev. and exp. ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2015), pp. 7–8. 2. For Luther’s description of The Tower Experience, see Pr. op. lat., WA 54: 184–187/ LW 34:334–338. For other descriptions, see TE (1532), WATR3:228f., 24ff./ LW54:193; Ibid. (1538), WATR4:72f., 27ff. / LW54:308–309; cf. Serm. St. Thom., WA1:112, 10/ LW51:18: “Ut haec clavius intelligantur sciendame quite sit opus Dei. Et nihil aliud nisi iustitiam … facere.” Regarding the likelihood of a 1519 date for The Tower Experience, see Alister E. McGrath, Luther’s Theology of the Cross (Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1985), pp. 95ff., 142–145. 3. An early example of presenting Luther as a forerunner of modernity is evident in Gotthold Lessing, Anti-Goeze (1778), I. Also see Wilhelm Dilthey, “Auffassung und Analysie des Menschen im 15. Und 16. Jahrhundert (1891/1892),” excerpted in Heinrich Bornkamm, Luther im Spiegel der deutschen Geistgeschichte (Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1955), pp. 232–233; Max Weber, Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Talcott Parsons (New York and London: Routledge, 1930); Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1 (3 vols. in 1; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967), p. 86. Luther’s remarks at the Diet of Worms (1521), WA7: / LW32:112–113 and Lectures on Galatians (1535), WA40I :177, / LW26:97, as Luther appeals to free conscience, could be taken in support of their thesis. But it is not clear that the conscience is really free for Luther, but is rather subordinate to God and His Word. See Gerhard Ebeling, Luther: An Introduction to his Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972), p. 193. 4. See Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, vol. 2, trans. Olive Wyon (New York: Macmillan Co., 1931), 552. Also see Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil, trans. Rileen Walliser-Schwarzbart (New York and London: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 80–81. 5. For an excellent survey of how Luther is systematized by most of his modern interpreters, so that that the main themes of the Reformer’s thought refect the interpreter’s agenda, see Bernhard Lohse, Martin Luther’s Theology: Its Historical and Systematic Development, trans. and ed. Roy A. Harrisville (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1999), pp. 3–7. My dissertation, “Luther in Context” provides detailed documentation of this process in the interpretations of Luther offered by Werner Elert, Gustaf Aulen, and Regin Prenter. On the importance of Justifcation by Grace for Luther, see Ch.VIII, n.1. 6. For a discussion of whether Luther actually posted the Theses, see Eric Gritsch, A History of Lutheranism (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000), p. 274; Erwin Iserloh, The Theses Were Not Posted: Luther between Reform

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 13 and Reformation, trans. J. Wicks (Boston: Beacon, 1968); Heinrich, Bornkamm, Thesen und Thesenanschlag Luther: Gerichten und Bedeutung (Berlin: Topelmann, 1967). Philip Melanchthon, Opera, vol. VI, in Corpus Reformatorum, pp. 161–162, merely noted, based on hearsay evidence, that Luther made the Theses public in church on Oct.31, 1517. 7. Karl Barth has interpreted Luther in this paradoxical mode, notably in his The Epistle To the Romans, trans. Edwyn Hoskyns (London, Oxford, New York; Oxford University Press, 1933), p. 141. 8. Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, trans. Robert Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), p. 3. 9. Paul Althaus, “Die Bedeutung der theologie Luthers fur die theologische Arbeit,” Luther–Jahrbuch, (1961): 28; Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, p. 262; Gerhard Ebeling, Luther: An Introduction To His Thought, trans. R. A. Wilson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), p. 49; Werner Elert, Morphologie des Luthertums, vol. I (München: C. H. Bed’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1931), pp. 104–105; cf. Carter Lindberg, “Luther on Poverty,” Harvesting Martin Luther’s Refection on Theology, Ethics, and the Church, ed. Timothy J. Wengert (Grad Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2004), p. 136. 10. TR (1531–1532), WATR1:72, 16/ LW54:22: “Vera theologia est practica, et fundamentum eius est Christus, cuius mors fde apprehenditur.” 11. Heinrich Bornkamm, Luther im Speiger der deutscher Geistgeschichte (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1970), p. 196. 12. A word about what is meant by pastoral context and how it can be identifed should be added. The concern for the context of Luther’s theology does not obligate us to portray the full chronological development of his thought or to acknowledge every one of his intellectual debts. Of course these historical factors must be considered to some extent in order to avoid anachronistic interpretation. Nevertheless the concern is not so much with Luther’s intellectual (or even his emotional) psyche, as it is with a purely conceptual study of the theological concerns he had in view in deploying the various images he uses. To this end I have asked Luther to be his own interpreter, allowing him to identify for us the concern that he (or a biblical passage as he interprets it) had in view. Or when failing to receive explicit clarifcation, efforts will be made to surmise, on the basis of what he did say, his instructions for determining the purpose for which a given Christian image may be used. All this can be accomplished by close textual analysis or Luther’s treatises. No exhaustive study of historical antecedents will be necessary. Thus “context” in this book always refers to “literary context,” an interpretive decision which should neither distort the Reformer’s thought nor hide his true intentions behind any veil of “formalism.” The occasional nature

14 M. ELLINGSEN of Luther’s treatises should entail that the literary context adequately reveals the historical and psychological context as well. The texts are the only legitimate access anyone has to Luther and his world of concerns. 13. BR (1537), WABR8:99f./ LW50:172–173; Pr. op. lat., WA54:180, / LW34:327–328. 14. Henr., WAl0II:189.6: “Non enim mea doctrina sibi ulla parte pugnat nec pugnare potest, cum sit Christi, et orbi toto iam constet me de fde, de charitate, de operibus et de iis, quae sacris literis spiritus Christ nos docuit, semper fuisse eodum sensu, semper eadem docuisse et scripsisse licet usu et studio de die diem magis ac magis profcerem et easdem res nunc sic, nuc sic tradiderim, aliquando ciarius, alibi locupletius, alibi copiosius et varie tractarem, quo modo et ipsae sacrae literae easdem res tractant.” 15. TR (1540), No.5269, WATR5:38, 9/ LW54:404: “Respondit Doctor: Man sols and kans in kein gewiss regeil fassen. Es hats Christus selbst nach seiner gelegenheitt gepredigett. Drumb, wie der locus oder text gibt, so neme man es, legem und euangelium, dan man muss beides haben.” Cf. Antinom.(3), WA39I :571ff., 10ff./ LW47:104–105. Yet in another context in response to Antinomians Luther insisted that the Law precede the Gospel; see Kirchpost.G., W211:754f., 18/ CS1/2:386. 16. TR (1532), No.234, WATR1:98f., 27ff./ LW54:31: “Praedicator est quidem faber; instumentum eius est verbum Dei. Quia autem subiecta, in quae operator, variant ideo non debet perpetuo idem tenor esse in docendo, sed pro verietate subietorum aliquando consolari, terrere, obiurgare, placare etc. debet.” 17. Ibid. (1532), WATR1:98f., 26ff./ LW54:31; Ibid., WATR2:44, 8/ LW54:138: “Convenientia sunt Paedicanda pro loco et personis.” This was Luther’s advice for pastoral care in general. See his Gal. (1535), WA40I :625f., 29ff./ LW26:414. His remarks in Antinom. (3), WA39I :571–574, also confrm context-dependency. Luther concedes in this text that in the early portions of his career he had taught about repentance in a manner similar to the Antinomians. He proceeds to argue, however, that because the situation has changed a different kind of teaching is necessitated. 18. Vor. N.T., WADB7:24, 5 /LW35:378. 19. Mos., WA16:385f., 26/ LW35:170: “Es ist zweyerley wort ynn der Schrifft: Eines geht mich nicht an, betrifft mich auch nicht, Das ander betrifft mich, Und auff das selbige, das mich angehet mag ichs kuntlich wagen und mich darauff als auff einen starcken selsen verlassen, Trifft es mich nicht, so sol ich still stehen. Die falschen Propheten faren zu und sprechen: ‘Liebes volck, das is das wort Gottes,’ Es ist war, wir kunnens ja nicht leuchen. Wir sind aber das volck nicht, zu den redet. Gott hat uns

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 15 auch widder dis noch ihenes geheissen, das er yhn zu thuen besolen hat.” Cf. Aus.Mos, WA16:284f., 27ff.; Jon., WA19:195, 3/ LW19:42. 20. Promodisp.Pall., WA39I :237, 3. 21. Dict.Ps., WA3:422, 13/ LW10:358–359. 22. TR (1532), WATR2:44, 8/ LW54:138; Ibid., WATR1:98f., 26ff; Gal. (1535), WA40I :625f., 29ff. 23. Kl. Kat., Pref.18, WA30I :274, 20/; BC349.18. 24. Vor.N.T., WADB7:22f., 33ff./ LW35:378f. 25. Gal. (1535), WA40I:240, 17/ LW26:137: “Concedimus, docendum quoque esse de bonis operibus et charitate, Sed suo tempore et loco, quando scilicet quaestio est de operibus extra hunc capitalemarticulum… Itaque cumiam versemur in loco communi de iustifcatione, reicimus et damnamus opera.” 26. A comparison of Luther’s use of theological concept with the pattern to the use of these same concepts by Augustine as articulated in my The Richness of Augustine: His Contextual & Pastoral Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005) and Wesley in my “Wesley as Contextual Theologian: A New Paradigm for Overcoming Tensions in the Wesleyan/Holiness Heritage,” The Asbury Theological Journal 59, nos. 1–2 (Spring/Fall, 2004): 77–88, suggest that the pattern to the use of Christian concepts found in Luther embodies an ecumenical pattern. Cf. my “Contextual Theology and a New Ecumenism,” The Christian Century (August 13–20, 1986): 713–714. 27. Steven Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250–1550 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1980), pp. 231–239, 310; Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil (New York and London: Doubleday, 1990), pp. 159–161; Adolar Zumkeller, “Die Augustinertheologen Simon Fidati von Cascia und Hugolin von Orvieto und Martin Luthers Kritik an Aristoteles,” Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte 54 (1963): 15, 37 (the previous two concerning Luther’s critique of Aristotle). On how Luther inherited skepticism about High Scholasticism form the ethos of Wittenberg University, see Alister E. McGrath, The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation (2nd ed.; Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005), esp. p. 105. Jaroslav Pelikan, From Luther to Kierkegaard (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950), pp. 3, 4, noted that it is likely that Luther’s knowledge of High Scholasticism (via antique) was second-hand. 28. Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, pp. 26, 32, 33; Werner Elert, The Structure of Lutheranism, trans. Walter A. Hansen (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1962), pp. 59ff.; Gerhard Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross; Refection on Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation 1518 (Grand Rapids, II: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1977).

16 M. ELLINGSEN More recently, dissenting voices about this matter have been raised by Theodor Dieter, “Martin Luther’s Understanding of Reason,” Lutheran Quarterly XXV (2011) and Christine Helmer, “Introduction to Luther’s Theology in Global Context,” Religion Compass 3 (2009): 13, who argue that the Reformer was not so inclined to neglect reason in supporting his positions, not so inclined to break with Scholastic theology on that issue. I can concur with these colleagues in calling attention to the diversity in Luther’s thought, noting how the agenda of his interpreters impacts how he is read. But both she and Dieter are wrong if they are taken as rejecting the presence of dialectical components in Luther’s thought (as the discussion which follows indicates). And they are also wrong, the book demonstrates, if they are construed as implying that Luther’s theology as a whole is rationally coherent in a Western logical (Aristotelian) sense. I also go beyond Dieter’s and Helmer’s appreciation of the presence of diversity in Luther’s thought insofar as I identify the pattern to the diversity in his thought. 29. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (1266–1273), 2a–2ae, x.10: “Jus autem divinum, quod est ex gratia, non tollit just humanum, quod ex naturali ratione.” 30. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles (1259–1263), bk.1, ch.vii: “Quod veritati fdei Christianae … rationis capacitatem excedat, haec tamen quae ratio naturaliter indita habet, huic veritati contrariria esse non possunt.” 31. Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 1/2ae, Q.113, Art.1. 32. On the rejection of a smooth transition from reason to faith, see William of Occam, Ordinatio (cf.1323), II, Q.IX. 33. Gabriel Biel, The Circumcision of the Lord (n.d.), c, in Sermones (Brixen, 1583). 34. For the Nominalist use of these distinctions, see Gabriel Biel, Epithoma partier et Collectorium Circa IV Sententiarum (1495), II,d.27,q.1,art.2; Robert Holcot, Lectiones super libros Sapientiae (1481/1489), lect.145B. 35. Joseph Lortz, Die Reformation in Deutschland (4th ed; 2 vols.; Freiburg, 1962); Leif Crane, “Die Anfange von Luthers Auseinandersetzung mit dem Thomasmus,’ Theologische Literaturzeitung 95 (1970): 242–248. Also consider Alister E. McGrath, Luther’s Theology of the Cross: Martin Luther’s Theological Breakthrough (Oxford: Blackwell, 1985), pp. 136– 141. 36. Hndb., WA9:27, 22–24: “Sed multo mirior nostratium qui Aristoltelem non dissonaire catholicae veritati impudentissime garriunt.” 37. Disp. Schol. Theol., 41, 43, 50, WA1:226, 10ff./ LW31:12: 41. Tota fere Aristotelis Ethica pessima et gratiae inimical. Contra Scholast.

1 INTRODUCTION: LUTHER THE REFORMER, PAST AND PRESENT 17 43. Error est dicere: Sine Aristotle non ft theologus. Contre dictum commune. 50. Brevitur, Totus Aristotles ad theologiam et tenebrae ad lucem. Contra schol. Cf. BR (1518), WABR1:150, 41. 38. Disp.Schol.Theol., 5, 6, 21, 30, WA 1:224f., 22ff./ LW31:9, 10, 11, Gut.Werk., 4, WA6:207,15/ LW44:26–27; Capt.Bab., WA6:508, 7/ LW36:29. 39. Disp. Schol. Theol., 45, 46, WA1:226, 17ff./ LW31:12: “45. Theologus non logicus est monstrosus haereticus, Est monstrosa et haeretica oratio. Contra dictum commune.” 46. Frustra fngitur logica fdei, Suppositio mediate extra terminum et numerum. Contra recent. Dialect.” 40. Ibid., 1, WA1:224, 7/ LW31:9: “1. Sicere quod Augustinius contra haereticos excessive loquantur, Est dicere Augustam fere ubique mentium esse. Contradictum commune.” 41. As we shall observe during the book, there is an internal or narrative logic of Christian faith, but this is not to say that Luther is wrong in condemning here the idea that there is a rational logic of faith. 42. Ps.131, WA40III:388, 15 (WLS:1358): “Sienim in politicis, eum aut opum aut potentiae aut sapientiae fducia infuntur animi, nonquam sine periculo abil, in Theologia lange periculosissima est, et tamen ibi maxime est … Quare quotidie contra hanc latentem pestem pugnandum est et cavendum praecipue, ne quis sibi placeat, quasi teneat distinctionem Legis et Eungelii.”

19 Though perhaps not a systematic theologian, Luther had a high regard for theology. In remarks written for a graduating student he called theology “the queen of all wisdom and knowledge.”1 The Reformer’s approach is not properly understood unless we realize that he did not understand himself to be elevating his own agenda, but was merely articulating what the best theologians of the Church always knew.2 Or as he put it in a 1532 sermon, “For I must place the Word of God above everything else … I must be willing to risk my body and life, the popularity of the work, my goods, my reputation, and all my happiness.”3 We have already noted Luther’s troubled relationship with Scholastic Theology and how this entails a critique of Aristotle on whom the followers of Thomas Aquinas depended.4 As a result, and as we shall observe further in this chapter, Luther had suspicions about the use of Philosophy in Theology.5 If used, philosophical concepts and reason frst need to be bathed in faith, he contended while articulating the logic of Christian faith or offering comments with an apologetic intent.6 In one such context he notes that such an apostolic philosophy will be more eschatologically oriented, focusing not on the essence of what things are but on what they might become or how they relate to life.7 The Reformer speaks of the weakness of human knowledge when he is engaged in polemics.8 The problem with the prevailing philosophy in his day, rooted in Greek Philosophy, was that reality was defned in terms of essence. Luther changes the focus to existentia, the external relations one CHAPTER 2 Scripture and Theological Method © The Author(s) 2017 M. Ellingsen, Martin Luther’s Legacy, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-58758-9_2

20 M. Ellingsen has. For him, one’s essence is determined by what one does or is done to them.9 From such a perspective, Luther could deem the study of history as nothing else than viewing God’s work—grace and wrath.10 When we rest in God’s good pleasure with God’s Word, he claims, then all we do becomes glorious and remains forever, while histories of the world are eternally wretched. Such a view of the tensions between ordinary history and history from God’s perspective is most suggestive of Luther’s endorsement of something like the modern notion of “salvation-history” as distinct from ordinary history.11 Reason and the Knowledge of God Philosophy, like reason, always has its place in earthly matters, including law and medicine, the Reformer contended.12 At times, when explaining the logic of Christian faith, he was even willing to affrm that through reason we can know God.13 For apologetic purposes, the Reformer posits the natural knowledge of God (while conceding it is imperfect).14 He even embraces a cosmological argument.15 Reason even tells us what God is like. In his Catechism the Reformer defnes Him as “that to which we look for good and in which we fnd refuge in very time of need.”16 To have a god, he says, is to trust and believe in that with your whole heart.17 But Luther warns in other contexts, when teaching the Commandments of God, that the natural knowledge of God can lead to idolatry.18 Yet he seems to engage in precisely this exercise, not naming it idolatry, when his focus shifts to comforting despair or exhorting Christian life. Then he claims that we all shape a God for ourselves.19 He goes so far in one polemical setting as to contend that we have a general knowledge (accessible to all) of God as omnipotent.20 (Could this be a way of his contending that such a vision of a wrathful God is a human construction?) And when addressing the logic of a text he was exegeting, with some polemical agendas in view, he even claims that we know God generally as merciful.21 Perhaps he is contending here that a baptized reason already saturated with faith, does see God in this loving way. But in polemical contexts he claims that “It is the nature of reason that it seeks to understand and to measure God according to the Law.”22 The contextuality of Luther’s thought is obviously evident in these instances. It refects further in polemical contexts or when criticizing

2 SCRIPTURE AND THEOLOGICAL METHOD 21 philosophy when he insists that God is incomprehensible (presumably denying access to God through reason).23 Also in such contexts or when explaining the logic of faith or offering comfort Luther insisted that God is only known in the Word.24 We will observe this even more clearly later in the chapter when we consider his Theology of the Cross. And in similar contexts he posits a distinction between the general knowledge of God (accessible to all) and the particular knowledge of God (regarding what the Lord thinks of us and how we are saved).25 This distinction made in contexts when he was not totally rejecting some role for reason in knowing God, clearly connects with the Reformer’s commitment to biblical authority, with what many contend to be a commitment on his part to the authority of Scripture alone (sola scriptura).26 But in fact, there is more to this story. Scripture Alone (Sometimes) True enough, on some occasions, like when critiquing newer Catholic practices of the day, the Reformer claimed that no work not found in Scripture should be undertaken.27 The assent of faith is due only to what is in Scripture, he contends.28 When defending his position in Catholic polemics Luther affrmed the authority of Scripture, the most reliable of all testimonies, he claimed.29 It is said to be our frst principle.30 He asserts that it is the true lord and master of all writings and doctrine.31 And as he refers to Scripture in another work: The queen must rule and everyone must obey and be subject to her. The Pope, Luther, Augustine, Paul, or even an angel from heaven … these should not be masters or arbiters, but only witnesses, disciples, and confessors of Scripture.32 In this connection Luther speaks of the Christian’s freedom to judge doctrine.33 He also insisted in this connection on the clarity of Scripture, that it is its own interpreter, which is said to be the easiest and clearest interpretation.34 These commitments entail that we do not need Tradition as an interpretive guide, for Scripture’s literal sense is clear. This in turn undermines the validity of the use of allegorical interpretation. These commitments refect elsewhere in Luther’s writings. When addressing polemical concerns, critiquing episcopal authority, Tradition

22 M. Ellingsen is said not to be authoritative, even if it lasted for a thousand years.35 He even asserted on at least two occasions that Councils can err.36 In his view a Council has no more authority to establish new articles of faith (a position more compatible with the Eastern view of the consensus fdelium) than the Catholic position on the authority of Councils.37 But he did take a Conciliarist position in other polemical circumstances, contending that Councils have more authority than the Pope.38 In the same spirit, in face of temptation, the Reformer claims that one must cling to the Word and cast aside discussion contrary to it.39 While dealing with papal abuses, he claims that the Church can only discern the books of the Bible, the canon.40 Yet when in a similar context concerned with the Gospel, he claims that “the Gospel is not believed because the Church confrms it but rather because people sense that it is the Word of God.”41 (Regarding the canon, it is interesting to note that Luther included the Apocrypha in his frst German translation of the Bible, referring to it as “Those Books Are Not Held Equal to the Scriptures, but Are Useful as Good to Read.”42) But there are times when the Reformer appeals to Tradition, while explaining the logic of faith or when making arguments especially to authorize infant baptism, Christ’s Presence in the Eucharist, or the Immaculate Conception, as well as to authorize The Creed and the Trinity.43 Councils never err, Luther claimed, while considering essential things of faith.44 They have no intrinsic authority, but can represent the universal Church if in accord with Scripture.45 Luther as Dialectical Theologian: Philosophical Roots Endorsement of the paradoxical character of Luther’s thought is widespread in the academy.46 That is true, but not all the time. We have already noted that the Reformer was very critical of Aristotle, and so of systematizing his own theological convictions. His roots in Nominalist philosophy explain this point of view. The Reformer claimed that Occam was his master.47 He embraces the Nominalist realism and its claim that things are defned by their essence, not just their impact on the observer.48 Luther also speaks of the infuence of Johann von Staupitz on him.49 Mysticism was another infuence he acknowledged, even prior to the Reformation when he either sought

2 SCRIPTURE AND THEOLOGICAL METHOD 23 to depict the Christian life or offered a response to despair.50 All of these infuences entailed critique of the rationalist approach to the theology of his day. Of course once again Luther was not systematically consistent in endorsing these convictions, as in polemics he repudiated Mysticism.51 We have already observed that Luther understood himself as a contextual theologian. He is overtly critical of a systematic approach: 45. To state that a theologian who is not a logician is a monstrous heretic – this is a monstrous and heretical statement. This is in opposition to common opinion. 46. In vain does one fashion a logic of faith, a substation brought about with regard for limit and measure. This is in opposition to the new dialecticians.52 47. To say that Augustine exaggerates in speaking against heretics is to say that Augustine tells lies almost everywhere. This is contrary to common knowledge.53 Luther’s critique of reason, already observed in connection with the knowledge of God, relates to faith as a whole. When exhorting faith in a sermon he proclaimed, “The natural light of man and the light of grace cannot be friends. Human nature wants perception and certitude as a condition of faith. Grace wants faith prior to perception.”54 Even when just explicating faith or critiquing works-righteousness he claimed that human reason does not understand faith; it remains hidden.55 Reason is the devil’s whore, he claims when critiquing Erasmus’s defense of free will.56 In Scripture, he claims, one fnds nothing but “contrast and antithesis.”57 He even makes this claim when merely explaining the faith.58 In the same spirit he contends that every assertion is said to be hidden under its denial.59 Yes, Luther was a dialectical theologian, but not all the time, only in polemics and a lesser extent when expositing the faith. And yet for all of his use of dialectical paradoxical thinking, when addressing death and sin he claimed that “faith reconciles opposites.”60 When dialoguing with philosophy he was even open to its use as long as it was clearly subordinated to Christ and the Word, that we had become fools in Christ.61

24 M. Ellingsen Luther the Literalist: The Result of Theological Development? Luther was very aware how easily Scripture could be or has been distorted, claiming it was a “wax nose.”62 Most of the time Luther’s hermeneutical method involved denial of allegorical interpretation in favor of concentrating on the literal sense.63 Allegory, he claims, is too hard to understand.64 In one early context Luther claimed that the spiritual meaning of the Bible is not merely its allegorical, but its mystical meaning.65 For him, even early in his career prior to the Reformation, the literal sense referred to the plain meaning of Scripture interpreted christologically, that is in light of the message of God’s unconditional love and justifcation by grace through faith revealed in Christ.66 He made a similar point nearly two decades later in 1535 claiming that “The chief point of all Scripture is that … God is merciful, kind, and patient.” Scripture is about the God Who promises he once contended while offering comfort.67 Explaining the faith in earlier lectures Luther said much the same, claiming that Scripture always proclaims the mercy of God and our sin. The Majesty of God is supreme; we are completely worthless … If only our faith were strong, this gracious disposition of God would make us fearless in all things.68 These comments are not prescriptive for reading Scripture critically, which, as we shall observe, Luther endorsed in some contexts. But at this point Luther is merely offering descriptions of his conclusions about the main themes of the Bible’s literal sense. When the context changed to defending faith, there is some change in the Reformer’s characterization of Scripture’s main point. He claims that Scripture’s purpose is to reveal sin.69 Its every word fnds meaning in Christ, or He is said to be the King of Scripture when Luther was exhorting faith or was engaged in polemics.70 Concerned with pointing out our sin he says that “If you would interpret well and confdently, set Christ before you …”71 This entails for the Reformer that one thing Scripture taught was that life was possible only under the forgiveness of sin.72 But when dealing with Christian ethics, his sense of Scripture’s main point changes again. He claims that Scripture is “written for our instruction, that is our moral upbuilding, to be understood as an example.”73