Luther and Liberation A Latin American Perspective SECOND EDITION Walter Altmann translated by Thia Cooper Revised and Expanded ed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC r.org/terms
Luther and Liberation This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Luther and Liberation A Latin American Perspective, Revised and Expanded Second Edition Walter Altmann Fortress Press Minneapolis This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
LUTHER AND LIBERATION A Latin American Perspective Revised and Expanded Second Edition Copyright © 2015 Fortress Press. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical articles or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Visit http://www.augsburgfortress.org/copyrights/ or write to Permissions, Augsburg Fortress, Box 1209, Minneapolis, MN 55440. Cover design: Alisha Lofgren Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Print ISBN: 978-1-4514-8268-3 eBook ISBN: 978-1-5064-0803-3 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z329.48-1984. Manufactured in the U.S.A. This book was produced using Pressbooks.com, and PDF rendering was done by PrinceXML. This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
To all the women in my life: my daughters, Sílvia, Nara, Helena, and Elisa, and my wife, Madalena, who always gave me attention and affection, even when I so often deprived them of fellowship, affection, and loving care, in the conception and trials of this book in its original version. To them, now accompanied by my granddaughters, Beatriz and Marina, and my grandsons, Lucas, Tomás, and Felipe, I reiterate my feelings and affection. This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:48:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Contents Foreword ix Abbreviations xi Preface xiii PART I. OVERVIEW OF LUTHER’S THEOLOGY AND WORK 1. Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 3 PART II. THEOLOGY WITH A NEW INTERPRETIVE KEY 2. The God of Life Against All Falsehood of the Idols of Death 27 3. In the Cross of Christ, Victory over All Evil 47 4. Conversion, Liberation, and Justification 67 5. Scripture—Instrument of Life 93 6. The Church—Poor People of God 119 7. Sacraments Tomb or Cradle of Christian Community? 147 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:50:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
8. The Reign of God in Church and State 175 PART III. EXERCISES ON LUTHER’S ETHICAL POSITIONING 9. The Political Calling and the Church 213 10. Education 229 11. The Economy and the Community 245 12. War 265 13. Resistance and Violence 281 14. Luther—Defender of the Jews or Anti-Semite? 303 PART IV. LUTHER’S LEGACY AND LIBERATION THEOLOGY 15. What Did Luther Want, in the End? 323 16. Matthew 25:31–46 Justification and Liberation 351 17. The Reception of Luther’s Concept of Freedom in Latin American Liberation Theology 367 500 Years of Reform and Beyond Epilogue 403 405 Bibliography 407 Index of Biblical Passages 423 Index of Luther's Writings 427 Index of Names 431 Index of Subjects 433 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:50:21 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Foreword Latin American theology occurs along two main lines. In one, one interrogates faith and tradition from the questioning of historicalsocial reality, particularly the large oppressed majorities. One discovers in these sources heretofore unsuspected dimensions that attune with the demands of liberation coming from everywhere. In the other, historical-social reality is illuminated with perspectives derived from faith, tradition, and the great theologians. There emerges the prophetic-denunciatory side of Christianity, its liberationist inspiration, and its unwavering utopian horizon, sustaining hope and utopias. It is from these two strands that one re-reads Luther. He is one of the fathers of the modern emancipatory spirit and one of the common theologians of Christianity. In him there is undeniably a liberationist aura and a courage to protest, which relates directly to the Latin American theology of liberation. It is an achievement of Walter Altmann in this book—Luther and Liberation—to show the fruitfulness of the figure and teachings of Luther. He sets out the main perspectives of his theology, not from a supposedly neutral point, indifferent to the demands of social reality, but mindful of them and interested in the necessary changes, without which injustice excels and the truth is imprisoned (see Rom. 1:18). ix This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:51:59 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Altmann fills a gap in Latin American theological literature. He masterfully handles the founding text of the great reformer and knows the main research on him. He confronts him with current questions and reveals the scope and possible limits of his theology. But principally he rescues its continuing relevance, to make faith an exercise of freedom, Christian love an invitation to transforming service and to the gospel of liberation in Jesus Christ, the critical standard and inspiring reference for the churches and societies. A book this good on Luther has never been written on this continent. He emerges as an ally of the poor in search of their dignity and full freedom, denied for so many centuries, but required by the Christian legacy so deeply actualized by Luther. Leonardo Boff Luther and Liberation x This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:51:59 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Preface I have never been able to read Martin Luther with detachment. It is true that he lived five centuries ago in a totally different context. However, the supposed scientific objectivity that leads either to cold neutrality or to an uncritical and devoted repetition of Luther’s assertions was never possible for me, nor attracted me. This is due, in part, to the way of doing theology that developed in Latin America in recent decades. Our experience does not allow us a sense of uncommitted detachment. In our continent, it has become almost commonplace to say that we always approach theology as affected people—affected by our past history and experience, our social setting, and our living faith commitment. When we read Luther’s writings, we are always confronted by them in a very peculiar way, which we might share to some extent—but not entirely—with others whose experiences, situations, beliefs, and views are similar. Therefore, for the sake of our own credibility, it is strongly advisable—essential, even—that we recognize for ourselves and others the context and perspective from which we approach theology. So allow me to warn readers from the beginning: as the title and subtitle suggest, this book offers a Latin American reading of Luther’s theology, with all that this implies. This has not been done as a free xiii This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
choice, much less accidentally, but from fundamental methodological and hermeneutical considerations. The other reason I have not been able to deal with Luther’s theology at a cool and comfortable distance lies in Luther and his writings themselves. Caught in the midst of a historical transition, dramatic for the Church, and, moreover, for the Western World, Luther acted and reacted in a certain way, which he concluded was relevant and necessary, in response to the signs of the times and the Word of God. He never had the leisure—even when he was confined in Wartburg Castle—nor the idea that it would be desirable or possible to retreat into a “neutral” objectivity. We know that there is no such neutrality. When dealing with Luther, we discover immediately, quite clearly, what side he is on, whatever the subject. His writings make claims that go far beyond the terms of an intellectual dispute, to encompass the life-and-death choices facing those who are struggling with the challenges of their lives. Most of the time, I find Luther’s writings fascinating; occasionally, they are also irritating. If he can still have an impact of this magnitude even after five centuries and across oceans, in the midst of different cultures and social systems, in addition to radically different ecclesial situations, how striking must Luther’s impact have been on his own contemporaries? This book is an attempt to do justice to the question of his impact in his own time and ours. Naturally, this characteristic methodological approach must not occur at the expense of an equally necessary effort at objectivity. On the contrary, the clear recognition of the conditions under which and the assumptions from which we do theology is integral and indispensable to the only form of objectivity possible: an open dialogue between Luther and us today. Thus, the reader should not be surprised to find leaps in time throughout the book. Often, I outline a problem that is significant to the Christian faith today, particularly in the Latin American context; Luther and Liberation xiv This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
next, I address Luther’s views on that particular subject; and finally, I comment on the relevance of these views for the previously outlined situation. The contrast between then and now in itself can reveal a good deal of Luther’s relevance for the present. Often, however, we have to recognize and accept radical changes. The Gospel is not preserved by the mere repetition of specific wording, but by bringing to light the original liberating event in a new context, even if this requires significant shifts in terminology, adopted concepts, and ways of reasoning. Often, practical decisions can even be antagonistic, in order to preserve the same spirit. This method of comparing our current issues with Luther’s theology in his time could have been superseded by a more intentionally historical approach. That is, we could have explored the ways in which Luther’s theology has developed over the centuries and on different continents. Such an approach would require pursuing the hermeneutical question of the historical effects of Luther’s theology. This method would have the obvious advantage of being able to examine the reasons for the frequent discrepancies between Luther and the Lutheranism that came after him. In this case it would have been necessary to deal carefully with highly significant issues such as: why and how did it happen that so many of Luther’s truly revolutionary insights were later domesticated, losing much of their impact and power, when they were not actually turned into their exact opposites? How could a radical and invincible theology, developed in the midst of life and death situations, so often be abused and perverted as a theology of preserving the status quo and of total obedience to the State, the arbitrary and atrocious authorities—as in Nazi Germany (but also, in a sense, the Lutheranism of Médici’s Brazil and, arguably, Pinochet’s Chile)? It is comforting to note that in each case there was also determined resistance—even at the price of death, as with Dietrich Bonhoeffer—based on Luther’s fundamental Preface xv This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
theological insights. However, there remains the challenge of its frequent perversion in the churches that bear Luther’s name. Although I am aware of this issue and the importance of dealing with this challenge, and though there is here and there a foray of a historical nature, this book does not address it in depth. The discussion that follows assumes that Luther’s very liberating and revolutionary impact has been lost and that it is important to recover it from its captivity. Here in particular, the gap between centuries and situations, as well as the contrast resulting from this, can be of practical use. Therefore, this book aims primarily to rescue Luther’s liberating role and his theological insights. On the other hand, however, the Reformer undoubtedly had several darker sides, some of them very serious. Here and there, I make reference to them. One chapter is devoted to Luther’s position toward the Jews, another to the controversial question of the position Luther adopted in relation to the peasant rebellion. Reference is made, albeit in passing, to his distorted and biased understanding of the Prophet Mohammed. Neither do I omit his dubious illustrations of the Anabaptists, a dissident wing of the Reformation. So I do not pretend to hide these facets, but recognize them. Nevertheless, this book is written from the basic conviction that even through Luther the gospel is liberating in a personal and ecclesial as well as a social and political sense. Therefore, Luther and his theology should be viewed primarily as witnesses to this liberating gospel. The material in this book developed and matured over decades of study, reflection, teaching, and research; it has been partially published in several forms. In fact, my interest in Luther and his theology was awakened in the first half of the 1960s, as a theology student. Later, he would become one of the major foci of my activity as professor of systematic theology. From the 1970s, under the impact Luther and Liberation xvi This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
of liberation theology in Latin America, my research was guided more and more by the question of what the relevance was of Luther’s theology, conceived almost five centuries before in a completely different socio-political, economic, cultural, and religious context, from the moment of the particularly acute confrontations in which we were living in Latin America, with many countries subjected to cruel military dictatorships, but the ecclesial and popular movements practicing liberation. How might one relate Luther’s theology to liberation theology? In 1983, commemorating the 500th anniversary of Luther’s birth, I had a chance to deliver the prestigious Carnahan Chair lectures, at ISEDET, an excellent theological institution in Buenos Aires. The lectures, as records of the seminars developed during the week, were later published by ISEDET in Spanish with the title “Confrontación y Liberación.” In 1987-1988, I was a professor at Luther Seminary, in St. Paul, MN, and one of the courses I offered was on Luther’s theology. One of the students, Mary Solberg, now Associate Professor of Religion at Gustavus Adolphus College (Saint Peter, MN), convinced me to publish in English the materials used. She had a shocking experience of insertion into the reality of El Salvador, and she became the competent translator of the book that was published by Fortress Press in 1992 (Luther and Liberation: a Latin American Perspective). A few more years of hard work allowed me to considerably expand the subjects covered and to include new topics for publication in Brazil, in Portuguese, in 1994, three times the volume of work in English, as Lutero e libertação: Releitura de Lutero em perspectiva latino-americana (Ática and Sinodal). If after over two decades, I am willing to re-launch the book, now out of print, I do so primarily because I receive regular requests for it; second, because I understand, without false modesty, that the perceptions it outlined are still relevant or at least worthy of Preface xvii This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
consideration; and third, because the interest in Luther and his theology are growing again as we approach the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, to be commemorated in 2017. My intense involvement in church leadership positions from 1995 to 2013 in the CLAI (Latin American Council of Churches), in my church, IECLB (Evangelical Church of the Lutheran Confession in Brazil), and the WCC (World Council of Churches) did not allow me to continue the research with the same previous intensity. Still, I proceeded, toward this edition, with a detailed revision and, in part, expansion of the book published in Brazil in 1994, unpublished in English. Regarding the research into Luther and his theology, the revision occurred in limited form, for some topics. The revision was deeper in those parts that address emerging issues in the current context, as the global and Latin American scene has changed considerably in recent decades. I do not believe, however, that the latest research on Luther and changes in the global context require on my part a fundamental revision of the framework that I traced and of the interpretive key that I adopted. On the other hand, I do not think the circle of interpretation has been closed. It is important that it remains open. The first part (chapter 1) provides an initial overview of the significance of Luther’s theology in his own time and for today. It also addresses the question, frequently debated, as to whether Luther should be understood as a late representative of a medieval mentality or an early representative of the modern era. The second part (chapters 2–8) deals with key issues in Luther’s theology: God, the cross of Christ, justification, Scripture, Church, sacraments, and God’s action in the church and in the political realm (the so-called doctrine of the “two kingdoms”). Although they are largely dogmatic matters, attention is given to their ethical implications. In fact, this is another basic assumption of my Luther and Liberation xviii This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
theological conception: the rigid separation between dogma and ethics is theologically questionable. For this reason, the methodology used in these chapters is as follows: the main issues emerging from our own current context are raised; then Luther’s theology relating to the issue is discussed; finally, the relevance of his theology is established. The third part (chapters 9–14) deals with specific issues of social, political, and ethical significance. The selected issues are political reform, education, the economy, war, resistance and violence, and Luther’s position on the Jews. Originally designed as materials for a seminar discussion format, each chapter begins with a selection of Luther’s key or well-known writings. This approach reflects my experience that Luther’s own writings often provide the best platform, provoking a deeper and more meaningful discussion and leading to creative and challenging insights. The selections are followed by background information, with comments on the writings and, occasionally, the different positions taken by Luther at various stages of his life. Each chapter ends with key questions and reflections that aim to motivate readers to their own reflection on Luther’s writings and the topics covered. The original context for these chapters explains their colloquial style, as well as the fact that references to academic debates around the issues are fewer than in the rest of the book. The final part (chapters 15–17) attempts to answer the intriguing question of what, after all, is Luther’s theological legacy, as well as his relationship with themes of freedom and liberation. This subject is implicit throughout the book; it most directly emerges here. Within these guidelines, we distinguish three ways of establishing the relationship between Luther’s theology and liberation theology—and, in fact, the corresponding judgments are easily discovered. The first asserts the incompatibility between the two theologies. In one variation, we find an apologetic evaluation from the Lutheran Preface xix This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
confession, characterizing liberation theology as “typically” Catholic or “fundamentally” Marxist, and therefore completely rejected. On the other hand, Luther’s theology could be set aside in its entirety beforehand as irrelevant and outdated. The second way of understanding the relationship between Luther’s theology and liberation theology establishes the basic equivalency between them. This identification could be made from an apologetic attitude of rejecting both. On behalf of another theological orthodoxy, both theologies would be regarded as equally false, a distortion of revelation, the biblical message, and the traditional teaching of the Church. In another variation, however, the parity between the two theologies could be established in order to establish mutual legitimacy. To this end, it could be based on parallels or analogies that could be found in Luther’s theology and liberation theology. The position assumed in this book is that these two ways of understanding the relationship between Luther’s theology and liberation theology—incompatibility or equivalence—are simplistic and therefore inadequate. I understand the appropriate relation to be dialectic. That is, in it we find significant analogies but also substantial dissonance. Moreover, each should be understood first of all in its own context, and one must reflect hermeneutically on how to transpose the theological insight from one context to the other. This discussion represents, in a sense, a return by another route to the initial questions of the first chapter, although enriched with the reflections, questions, and insights developed throughout the book. In sum, this book does not intend to add another image of Luther to the many existing ones. It does not aim to introduce the “real” Luther—a hermeneutically impossible task. It proposes, instead to draw a picture that is faithful to the materials existing by Luther and about him; at the same time, it does not evade the hermeneutical Luther and Liberation xx This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
question of his relevance (and his limitations) for the experience of Christians who yearn for justice and are willing to struggle for it, from their faith. Many more people than I can acknowledge by name contributed in various ways to the publication of this book. First, I must mention students and colleagues at the EST Colleges (São Leopoldo/RS); at ISEDET (Buenos Aires); and at Luther Seminary (St. Paul, MN), for their challenging questions, comments, and critique. Several great supporters offered decisive help for previous publications as well as the current one, including John Stumme, Mary Solberg, Craig Nessan, Martin Junge and Leonardo Boff, who also wrote a generous introduction to my 1994 book in Portuguese. A large challenge for this edition was to locate, in English works, the numerous citations and references in the original publications available in English or German of Luther and many other authors. The collection of the EST Colleges library enabled me to locate the quotations from Luther and several other works, but far from all. I was helped on that by Germano Streese (Luther College, Decorah, IA) and by the translator, Thia Cooper (Gustavus Adolphus College). By the way, Professor Cooper did not just translate, in a dedicated and competent manner; she became a dialogue partner and had the freedom to express her questions and suggestions, many no doubt timely. I thank the LWF (Lutheran World Federation) for supporting the publication through financing the translation and the editorial staff at Fortress Press, especially Will Bergkamp and Michael Gibson, for receiving the book in its editorial programming. In 1994 I expressed the greatest appreciation to my daughters, Sílvia, Nara, Helena, and Elisa, and especially my wife Madalena, to whom the book was dedicated with joy and gratitude. I might now add, with equal joy, three grandsons and two granddaughters: Lucas, Beatriz, Marina, Tomás, and Felipe. The process of a book’s birth reminds the author of the apostle Preface xxi This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Paul’s insight that we are but members of one body and, as such, indebted to the other members. (I Cor. 12) Walter Altmann São Leopoldo / RS, Brazil, Easter 2015. Luther and Liberation xxii This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:53:46 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
PART I Overview of Luther’s Theology and Work This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
1 Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New The Reformation originated in the action of the Augustinian monk Martin Luther (1483-1546). Luther’s outstanding importance in his own time and his relevance still today are too obvious to ignore. However, nothing is more inappropriate for Luther than to simply celebrate him.1 For “What is Luther?” asked Luther in 1522, describing himself as “poor and stinking maggot fodder,” and his name as “wretched,” so that no one should call themselves “Lutheran,” but simply “Christian.” In any case, “Neither was I crucified for anyone.”2 One of the altar paintings by Lucas Cranach, the Elder, in the 1. Luther has been celebrated in some way in each centenary of his birth. So also in 1983 numerous celebrations of the 500th anniversary of Luther’s birth were registered throughout the world—justly, but not without risk. The LWF’s proposal for the 500th anniversary of the Reformation (in 2017) is not meant as a celebration but of commemoration, centered on the event of divine grace and in gratitude for the (re)discovery of the Gospel in the Reformation, aware of the limitations, shortcomings, and sins of Luther himself and of the Reformation churches throughout history. The commemoration should take place within an ecumenical spirit and highlight the relevance of the gospel of grace in a world focused on competition and the increasing transformation of human resources and of creation into commodities, as well as the multiple forms of exclusion. 2. Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehman, eds., Luther’s Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1955–), 45:70. Cited hereafter as LW. 3 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Church of the City (Stadtkirche) of Wittenberg expresses this.3 On the right side, Luther is seen atop the pulpit, preaching to the gathered community, who can be seen on the opposite side of the painting. The crucified Jesus is prominently in the center. All attention is concentrated here. The community gazes at Jesus; Luther points to him.4 Luther considered himself even lower than John the Baptist, who, in turn, said he was unworthy to untie the sandals of Jesus. Paradoxically, Luther found all his dignity in being an instrument of God, even though he was, by nature, unworthy of this God. His mandate was solely to point to the one and only Savior. Through Jesus, the unworthy servant was an uncompromising herald. He pointed to Jesus’ wounds as an expression of the unsurpassed love of God for humanity and urged unconditional faith, able to heal consciences, provide the assurance of salvation, and make a way for all sorts of good works for the neighbor. To celebrate Luther, therefore, carries the real risk of inverting and perverting all that Luther advocated, putting him at the “center of the frame” rather than as a mere witness to the gospel. Equally, if we look at the person and work of Luther, we find that any attempt to transform him into something like a “hero” is inappropriate. We find in him, it is true, a deep and lasting consistency in pointing to the gospel and its consequences. In many respects, however, Luther was a contradictory figure. His theology, far from being linear and systematic, was much more of a continuous response, often springing up and crying out to a multitude of challenges and problems that the course of historical events set before him. We will not find in him terminological uniformity or a sequence of unchanged positions. 3. See this image on page 406. 4. The illustration on the dust jacket of Martin Luther’s Obras Selecionadas (São Leopoldo: Sinodal, 1987), reproduced this square only with the detail of Luther in the pulpit, dislocating the focus of attention intended by the painter and, certainly, of Luther’s self-understanding. Luther and Liberation 4 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
As a person, too, Luther contradicted the image of a hero. Admittedly, there were times in his life when he showed extraordinary courage, challenging, in the name of the gospel, powers that could kill him. His resistance at the Imperial Diet of Worms, where he was required to retract his writings, is the bestknown example. After his bold resistance to imperial demands, he was forced to live the rest of his life as an outlaw, under threat of being killed by any defender of the established order. We find the same courageous stand in his refusal to abandon the town of Wittenberg, despite Fredrick III’s request that he protect himself, when in 1527 the plague began decimating the city’s population. He was convinced that his place, as a healer of souls, was beside the sick and dying. However, Luther was also a frequently and deeply troubled person. A sickly person, he often had to take comfort in the suffering of Christ in his weakness. His spirit also became severely afflicted; he had an anxious conscience and an unsettled heart. Existential doubts tortured him. He encountered the fear of death again and again in the midst of life. In such situations, he could not find energy reserves within himself, but he discovered it was necessary—only this helped—“to cry out in prayer” and remember that he had been baptized, that is, accepted by God. Finally, we cannot take pride in all Luther’s positions. On the contrary, we should be ashamed of a number of them. An irascible human being, he admitted some of his excesses in accusing his adversaries, often to the point of slander. The epithet “ass” applied to the Pope was, evidently, a tame concept; “spoon of snot” is a better example of his lexical creativity. Most tragic, however, were a number of his positions with respect to certain groups of people. For example, after defending the Jews in the early years of the Reformation, his disappointment at their failure to convert to the Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 5 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
evangelical cause led Luther, toward the end of his life, to incite common people and the authorities to violently repress the Jews. Similarly, he pleaded for repression of the Anabaptists, a radical wing of the Reformation.5 The way he portrayed the Islamic faith, and the Prophet Mohammed in particular, was offensive as well. Luther’s call for the princes to massacre the rebellious peasants is all too well known. Perhaps it has never been known well enough. We can and should, of course, attend to the historical circumstances and Luther’s subjective feelings in all these instances—which we will address throughout the book6—but we should never suggest that his reprehensible positions were justified. To celebrate Luther runs the risk of exalting what cannot be celebrated, of legitimating his errors, precisely those aspects that we should criticize and overcome. Despite this, and conscious of these caveats, it is appropriate to look for the positive and liberating meaning of Luther, in the historical process. He undoubtedly played an important, even decisive role in a historical time of transition, from the Middle Ages to the modern era. This was a time of transition in all aspects: cultural, social, political, economic, and religious. The ancient medieval system was coming fundamentally to the end. A new era was gestating. Everything was in crisis. The medieval system was characterized by great cohesion, which was maintained for many centuries. It was ordained, from the top-down, by God for the world, society, and humanity. The Church instituted itself as intermediary and authorized interpreter by divine law. It was here that the historical changes led to a deep crisis through the system as a whole and each of its aspects. New values and a new 5. After years of fruitful dialogue between Lutherans and Mennonites, an emotional and historic act of reconciliation between these two confessions occurred in 2010, on the occasion of the 11th Assembly of the LWF, in Stuttgart, Germany. The act included the request for forgiveness by the Lutheran communion and the granting of pardon by the Mennonite family. 6. See the corresponding chapters in this book. Luther and Liberation 6 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
order were longed for and were being attempted. Luther occupied this place, the intersection of the new and the old. We will detect this feature in Luther’s person, life, and work. He found himself in the air of a morning that still held the night’s shadows, but already had traces of the brightness of the day that lay ahead. Extrapolating from this image, Luther, despite his own shadows, made an outstanding contribution to the dawn of the new day. I intend to develop the significance of Luther in three areas: a) the Church and spirituality; b) the relationship between faith and the world; c) society, politics, and economics. Methodologically, I do this first explaining the relevance of Luther in his time, and then addressing the question of his relevance today. I. The Church and Spirituality 1. In the last centuries of the Middle Ages there was already a deep yearning for reform of the Church. A reform of “the head and the members,” that is, a radical and widespread change was advocated. Several lay, monastic, and ecclesial movements, including the Renaissance humanism of Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466–1536), sought to reinvigorate the Church, tear from it all signs of decadence, cleanse it of abuses, and disconnect it from economic interests and political power. Significantly, the longing for church reform was allied with intense national longing; the famous “grievances of the German nation” were presented repeatedly in imperial diets from 1456,7 against the many taxes and obligations to the Church of Rome. Church dignitaries 7. Franz Lau, Luther, trans. Robert H. Fischer (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 21. Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 7 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
were both feudal lords and held political power. The sale of indulgences that Luther came to oppose was just one link in an intricate chain of tax collection and exploitation. In the context of Christendom, any reform of society would necessarily involve reform of the Church, and this would have robust momentum. Luther would strike a heavy blow when, in his 1520 treatise To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, 8 he gave profound proposals for economic and social reforms after incisively advising a radical reform of the political-religious system. It was hoped a council could be used for the necessary and longed for reform of the head and members of the Church. In previous centuries, the conciliar movement had been an opposing current to papalism. For some time, too, Luther would place hope in a council, but the Fifth Lateran Council (1512–1517) had rigorously frustrated this route, strengthening the centralized power of the papalhierarchical system. Therefore, the needed reform would have to come in other ways. Up to now we have referred to the expectation and need for reform of the Church in its structure. However, in the last centuries of the Middle Ages, there was yet another path which sought the reestablishment of religious truth. It was a movement of personal piety, namely mysticism. This movement, so to speak, rejected any pretense of institutional church reform, or at least put it on the back burner. The necessary revitalization was sought not through action on external structures, but rather within the people themselves, through a renewal of faith, religious experience, and compassion. Prayer and meditation were the preferred instruments of this path. Its goal was to achieve an intimate personal union with the Savior. This current deeply influenced Luther. 8. LW 44:123–217. Luther and Liberation 8 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Luther’s first revolutionary impact occurred precisely when, with his discovery of justification by grace through faith, he did justice simultaneously to desires for both the authenticity of personal faith and the reform of the Church. How? The doctrine of justification by faith may seem distant or strange to us today, at first glance, but it is clear that it was not a response to Luther’s intellectual curiosity. Rather, it was a profound personal experience of liberation that had immediate liberating repercussions in church and society.9 The Augustinian monk Martin Luther was in anguish, concerned to find a merciful God who did not condemn him for his sin, but who would find favor in him. Late medieval theology stipulated that “God gives grace to those who do all that they can.” To this end, Luther labored diligently on works considered acceptable to God, especially in the monastic discipline. Even though the result of his effort was impressive to others, Luther was sinking into despair. For when would he be able to say that he had already done “all that he could”? By this route, someone less meticulous in self-examination could have bragged about the achievement. Luther, with his scruples, was lost in hopelessness. In either of these cases, the desired salvation would not be achieved. When the monk, a professor of the Bible, was confronted with the text of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans 1:17—“For in the Gospel a righteousness which God ascribes is revealed, both springing from faith and leading to faith. As it is written, The man who through faith is just and upright shall live and shall live by faith”—he listened anxiously to the meaning. In anguish, Luther inwardly rebelled against God, a God who apparently is not content to punish through the law, but also manifests the same justice—certainly punitive—in the gospel itself. He sunk into his thoughts, suffering, day and night, until God had mercy on Luther.10 Indeed, “the just shall live by faith,” 9. See, for a more detailed explanation, chapter 4: Conversion, Liberation, and Justification. Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 9 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
that is, the justice of God revealed in the gospel, is not a punitive justice, but an expression of the free gift of God, who provides, through faith, life. The discovery was, for Luther, as if the gates of paradise had been thrown open before him, into which he could freely enter. The anxious search for salvation, unattainable through meritorious works, had come to an unexpected and liberating end. Desperation gave way to certainty; anguish gave way to freedom. An anxious concern for himself was replaced by an extraordinary and tireless dedication to the rediscovered good news and to the neighbor. It is not difficult to see that Luther’s profound personal discovery responded, in its own way, to the longing expressed in mysticism—with one significant advantage: no unusual, special practice was needed to obtain blessings; this was available to every person, freely, through faith. Indeed, there was no greater hope than this for the multitudes who flocked to purchase of indulgences, hoping for the mitigation or annulment of their penalties in purgatory. For the trade in indulgences afforded a seemingly easy opportunity for ordinary Christians, who could not engage in the rigorous ascetic practices, reserved for members of religious orders. It was, however, only apparently easy, because it was illusory, on the one hand, and extortionate on the other. Luther’s message that there was no easy way—Jesus wanted “the whole life of believers to be penitence” (first of the Ninety-Five Theses11)—but through God’s mercy and Jesus Christ’s death salvation is given freely to believers, spread like wildfire because it was not only an explosive liberation for Luther, but for an entire people. However, it is also clear that the response to the people’s personal 10. LW 34:337. Author’s note: “God had mercy on me” is a better translation than what appears in LW as “by the mercy of God.” 11. LW 31:25, Thesis 1. Luther and Liberation 10 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
anguish also met their social longings (discussed below) and touched the nerve center of the prevailing ecclesiastical system, since it stripped it of financial support and divine legitimation. In this way, it became possible to reform the Church, whose ultimate authority would no longer be the Pope or canon law, but the Word of God for the liberated people of God. It is significant that Luther came to call on the German nobility, that is, the political representatives in Germany, to effect the necessary ecclesiastical and social reforms, arguing that this mission was conferred on them as “priests” through baptism and faith. The discovery of the royal and universal priesthood of baptized believers implied transformative political and ecclesial militancy. 2. We now attempt a precarious leap across centuries and geography, to ask ourselves about the present significance, in our context, of Luther’s discovery, so revolutionary in its time. First, it is clear that repeating the terminology of Luther’s doctrine yields little. Predominant contemporary existential concerns are much less about guilt and condemnation, and more about the meaning of life, and from a practical material perspective of survival. Also, the expectation of the reform of the Church, in the present configuration of political, social, and economic systems, is a peripheral concern. People no longer long for liberation from the Church, but for liberation from a political, economic, and social system that discriminates, marginalizes, and imposes increasingly severe sacrifices, to the point where the cry for life is all but suffocated by the structure of the power of death. The international financial crisis from 2007 onwards, for example, caused by the greedy and irresponsible practices of powerful financial agents, unregulated and based in developed countries, cut off social benefits and caused unemployment, especially for youth. Even more serious was the increased poverty and misery around the world, including hunger, for more than a billion people Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 11 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
in poor countries. Thus, the struggle for survival can encompass all other concerns, however serious and legitimate they may be. So, we cannot simply repeat Luther’s discovery. There is no doubt, however, that several key elements therein suggest a dynamic that is still relevant today. Justification by grace and faith implies a radical principle of equality among human beings and of valuing each one of them before God, a principle uncompromisingly opposed to all forms of discrimination against people and to limitations of the quality and dignity of life. Here, people are valued for who they are, never what they possess, produce, or consume.12 Even less compatible with Luther’s discovery are situations and systems based on the exploitation of a majority by a minority of individuals and people. The degradation of any person is an offense toward God, a greater offense the lower a person is assumed to be by the standards of the current system. To give just one example, Luther recognized that the practice of torture was inconsistent and irreconcilable with his evangelical discovery.13 So we have a whole range of meanings relevant to the discovery of justification by grace through faith. The fact that it is a valuing of the human dignity that comes from God may seem strange to secularized ears today but in fact it only radicalizes the assertion. No one is entitled to violate God’s rights and put oneself in God’s place. For this 12. Appropriately the LWF, in adopting as the theme of its twelfth assembly (to be held in Windhoek, Namibia, in May 2017) “Liberated by God’s Grace,” affirms in its three subtopics that salvation, human beings, and even creation are “not for sale.” [See http://www.lutheranworld.org/news/liberated-gods-grace.] 13. In On Secular Authority, Luther argued “faith is a free act, to which no one can be forced” (LW 45:108), then moves to attack those authorities who make use of violence and torture to impose a particular faith: “Why do they persist in trying to force people to believe from the heart when they see that it is impossible? In so doing they only compel weak consciences to lie, to disavow, and to utter what is not in their hearts? They thereby load themselves down with dreadful alien sins, for all the lies and false confessions which such weak consciences utter fall back upon him who compels them. Even if their subjects were in error, it would be much easier simply to let them err than to compel them to lie and to utter what is not in their hearts. In addition, it is not right to prevent evil by something even worse” (LW 45:108–9). Luther and Liberation 12 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
reason, Luther’s “democratizing” approach to the church continues to be relevant, understanding it not as a hierarchical institutional system, but as a community or a people gathered together around and under the word of God. The development of base ecclesial communities (BECs) in Latin America in the past decades has been a sign of the vitality and relevance of this discovery. They have been, at least potentially or temporarily, instruments of the current reform of the church. II. Faith and the World 1. The relationship between faith and the world existing in the Church and in society at the end of the Middle Ages was contradictory. On the one hand, there was a principle of clear dissociation. To become fully holy, or at least reach a higher state, it was necessary to withdraw from the world, work, and daily life. The ideal of sanctity could only be achieved through monastic life, through which, escape from the world and seclusion in a convent, provided adequate conditions for the development of an “integral” religious life of sanctity. There, the conditions existed for the practice of prayer, fasting, and ascetic discipline through which the spirit was strengthened in communion with God. Only those who followed this path, for example, could possibly fulfill the Sermon on the Mount, which contained advice that was impossible for ordinary believers to follow. However, even for these believers the practice of salvation or sanctity at their fingertips was separate from daily life and the world, in that it was a church-centered practice: the veneration of relics, pilgrimages, and the purchase of indulgences. Also, these works were, at least in practice, better demonstrations than the fulfillment of the Ten Commandments, although this was equally required for Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 13 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
ordinary Christians. There is no doubt, therefore, that life in the secular realm was devalued, if not despised. If, from one angle outlined here, there was a sharp dissociation between faith and the world, from another we find an equally deep identification and mixture of the two. The Church had adopted a structure fully identified with systems of secular government. Ecclesiastical offices were traded at the whim of political and economic interests. The Church itself was the largest feudal landowner. Worldliness and the dissolution of morality had deeply penetrated the Church, and even many monastic orders were accused of corruption. On the one hand, then, there is dissociation between faith and the world, and on the other, identification. The two extremes meet! This contradictory picture was not given by accident. Luther experienced it in his own life. He sought the path of dissociation, when he entered the monastery of the Augustinians, known as one of the most serious and disciplined orders. However, he eventually discovered that, in reality, he had not left the world; he had brought it with him. He carried it, when, despite his efforts, he faced his limitations, his little slips, his doubts, and above all, his revolt against a relentlessly demanding God. He carried it when he discovered that his practice was hopelessly self-centered, as much in his frequent successes as in his occasional failures. Luther came to realize that to be centered on himself, and thus being closed to God and to the neighbor, was the ultimate nature of sin itself.14 From this discovery, obviously linked with the recognition of justification by grace through faith, Luther could look at the world more dialectically. Reality is not divided into spaces of damnation and salvation but the conflict is between damnation and salvation, 14. Hans Joachim Iwand, Glaubensgerechtigkeit nach Luthers Lehre, 2nd ed. (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1951), 22–24. Luther and Liberation 14 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
good and evil, justice and injustice, faith and sin throughout reality, in its entirety, in addition to being a battle line crossing the heart of the believer and the life of the church. Thanks to this dialectical view, Luther could simultaneously accept and affirm the beauty and joys of the world, on the one hand, and continuously battle what he recognized as evil and a threat to life. Thus, on the one hand, he discovered a new joy of living in the world as God’s creation. From the beauty of nature to the taste of his favorite beer, not to mention a broad and deep reassessment of human sexuality, all came to be wonders, in which God the creator allowed him to participate, freely and in good conscience. Luther discovered as preferred areas for the work of a Christian precisely those spaces of life hitherto despised. It is noteworthy that he dignified family life as a place of holiness, although the ideal of the family that began to take shape was, in a sense, a precursor of the bourgeois family, in which the husband is the head of the household responsible for its livelihood and the wife remains at home in charge of domestic tasks. However, one should note the progressive aspect here. At a time when domestic tasks were commonly understood only as a necessary evil, and activities outside the home were limited, Luther’s emphasis on the sanctity of the family, as well as domestic tasks and responsibilities, redefined these tasks as a privileged expression of service to God and others. Finally, it is known that Luther introduced a radically new understanding of occupational activity, to the point that he had to coin a new word in German: Beruf. 15 Beruf means craft, profession, but as its root rufen indicates, it is also vocation. Luther conferred a vocational sense to professional activity. Here too, work is not 15. See Karl Holl, The Reconstruction of morality, ed. James Luther Adams & Walter F. Bense (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1979), 113, referring to “secular callings,” without losing “the original religious connotation of the word.” Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 15 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
a necessary evil, nor is it seen predominantly as a search for selfsupport—which is present, obviously—but above all as the possibility of service to other people. There is no doubt that from here a new ethic emerged that included an unusual discipline;16 the other side of the coin is the severe critique that Luther came to have of the mendicant orders, who, instead of pursuing the work of service, would live at the expense of other people. On the other hand, however, it is important to note one additional characteristic, which derives from the fact that Luther did not value the family, home, or professions in and of themselves but rather as opportunities for service to the neighbor. They are instruments and spaces for the actualizing of faith and love. They are places to exercise a new holiness, not aimed at a sanctification of oneself, but to meet the concrete needs of others. That is, after having left the world to enter the monastery, Luther undertook a return, now bringing with him the “monastic spirit” to be practiced not apart from the world, but within it. This is not a capitulation or a dissolving of his identity into the world and its values. It is, rather, to face the challenge of living out faith and love in the world, as it is. Soon, the Christian will not only be pleased with the beauty of life, but also will be a critical and militant instrument of faith against sin, justice against injustice, love against exploitation, a struggle that is experienced within oneself and, at the same time, is developing around one. Justification by grace through faith, apart from the works of the law, unceasingly produces new good works, centered on the real needs of people. 2. Now we make our second leap into our situation today. There is no doubt that the new worldview of Luther and the development of his work ethic inserted itself into the context of historical 16. This element was correctly highlighted by Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Talcott Parsons (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1958), 79–92. Luther and Liberation 16 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
transformation, in which the medieval economy gave way to the emergence of new professions—artisans, tradespeople, public officials, jurists, and so on—requiring the reordering of mechanisms of production. The appreciation for work and, in this, discipline left its mark over the centuries but these emphases are no longer adequate today. There are at least two reasons for this. The understanding of occupations as a vocation for service is not appropriate for the current system of the division of labor, in which numerous professions are demeaned, restricted to enforced service, considering the antagonism between labor and capital, so rampant not only in the domestic economies of poor countries but also clearly observable in the growing social inequality in affluent countries. The process of the globalization of the world economy, although it has increased the exchange of goods and opened a path for some development of countries referred to as “emerging,” also imposes on a worldwide scale a type of reordering that has left behind it ballasts of poverty. The other reason is that the mere repetition of the work ethic of Luther would represent itself in our current situation, through its individualizing characteristics, or an uncritical accommodation to exploitative systems or the intentional seeking of privilege, of unfair advantage, within the prevailing unjust economic structures. It will be necessary, in this context, to extend Luther’s concepts to the valuing of collective forms of action, such as participation in neighborhood associations, cooperatives, unions and social movements. However, it remains true that these areas are essential to the experience of a new holiness, indispensable places for the presence and activity of Christians. Certainly, in these movements, the same dedication and discipline, together with a spirit of service, that Luther sought in the monastery and lived out in a new presence in the world, will be necessary. Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 17 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
III. Society, Politics, and Economics 1. As noted, Luther lived at the time of the transition from feudalism to mercantile capitalism. The feudal system was centered on the fiefdom, a large tract of land that was virtually self-sustaining economically, subject to a feudal lord, to whom the serfs, in exchange for right to subsistence on the lord’s land, as well as the preservation of life and the family, owed the product of their labor and loyalty and participation in any wars with neighboring feudal lords. The fiefdoms produced the needed food and clothing and people could count on bartering products, virtually eliminating the use of money. The hierarchical social system of feudalism was legitimized by divine law, which was represented by the Church herself, also, as we have seen, an extraordinary powerful feudal lord. Political, economic, legal, and religious power was in the same hands, or else in the hands of competitors within the same class of lords. The crusades had already opened the way for a new order. An incipient trade began to develop, for which the system of trade in goods no longer satisfied, nor was adequate. Transport routes needed to be protected and their availability could no longer be at the mercy of the goodwill of the feudal lords through whose fiefdoms transport occurred. Cities grew, where new professions emerged, especially artisans, to produce new items, to enter into the trade flow. Life in the city created new needs to be met. A new, more centralized political system was necessary. Professional armies had to be created, replacing the occasional armies of the fiefdoms. That is to say, a whole range of economic, political, and social change was gestating. The financial needs of the new system became obvious and were met by the gradually declining feudal lords, and above all, by their serfs, the peasants, which saw a series of ancient rights taken away at the same time as the introduction of new taxes. Luther and Liberation 18 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
It is true that the new order allowed a certain percentage of the peasantry to escape their servitude, to become small farmers or artisans in the cities or even workers, contractors, and tenants in the mines, as Luther’s father did. However, the price of the new order certainly was being paid by the bulk of the population. Moreover, there was even inflation, an evil that was practically non-existent in a non-monetary economy, but now it began to inflict pain on people. We cannot in this first chapter, an overview, go into the details of Luther’s political, economic, and social positions.17 It is important to note, however that he always saw a Christian responsibility for each of these areas. There is in vogue an erroneous notion that Luther would defend the autonomy of the areas of economy, politics, and the social order, subject to their own rules, unrelated to the gospel. Luther advocated, instead, that the Church as an institution should be separated from social, economic, and political privileges and pretensions. He also argued that in the political, economic, and social arenas Christians in political office should dedicate themselves to their jobs—as we have seen, as “justified priests”—through the better use of reason. These areas have, therefore, their own rationality. They are not, however, autonomous. Quite the contrary, they are subject to God’s will, and all that is done in them, through reason, should be at the service of love, meeting the needs of the people, the establishment of law, and the promotion of justice. To this end, reason must be liberated from an interest in self-promotion, to be able to serve.18 Consequently, Luther did not overlook any problem that he 17. See part III of this book. 18. Justification by grace and faith was, for Luther, a liberation of human reason too. Moreover, he attributed the leading role to reason in political and civil work. Cf. Ulrich Duchrow, Christenheit und Weltverantwortung (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett, 1970), especially 495–500. In relation to God, reason alone can attain, at the most, knowing that God exists but it is incapable of understanding who God is, and above all, God's mercy. See Gerhard Ebeling Luther: An Introduction to his Thought, trans. R. A. Wilson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), 229–30. Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 19 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
encountered. He urged municipal authorities to introduce a universal school system, for boys and girls. He advocated severing politics from the papal system. He defended, to a certain extent, the legitimate demands of the peasants. He was searingly critical of the extortionate business practices that took advantage of basic necessities to obtain illegitimate profits. As I said, it is not my intention to detail these positions now, which are somewhat contradictory. The critique of trade practices, for example, reveals a Luther clearly in defense of the exploited; his suggestions, however, are to a large extent, rooted in the medieval tradition. Conversely, in relation to the peasants, we regret that Luther, in the moment of rupture, placed himself decisively on the side of the princes and against the peasants renouncing his previous efforts at mediation but we could also argue that even then he somehow sensed the development of the historical process toward the bourgeois revolution that could not be stopped by clinging to medieval values. Whatever the framework of specific cases, it is most important, first, to note that Luther never held himself apart but instead took risks, including tragic errors, in his mission to be a herald of the gospel even in the face of political, social, and economic problems. There is, however, one more reason, often overlooked, that places Luther clearly as the promoter of a new order. As we saw, the feudal system was based on divine law, and the Church itself that represented this law held privilege, wealth, and power in the system that it legitimated with divine authority. This vicious circle had to be broken for a new era to impose itself. A divine law is, in principle, unchangeable. Luther, from his discoveries, beginning with the fundamental justification by grace through faith, which paved the way for the reformation of the Church and suggested a new view of the world and of work, resolutely rejected a divinely legitimated Luther and Liberation 20 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
political, economic, and social order. Competence in this arena is not from divine law but human law. Therefore, order should not be based on the allegedly immutable law of God but on the concrete needs that are caused by the historical process and that concretely affect the materiality and spirituality in people’s lives. These are questions within the reach of human law and its regulations and, therefore, can be reformed or replaced. With this truly revolutionary discovery, the religious legitimacy of the feudal system collapsed. However, in the Catholic Church then, there was no room for that radical transformation, nor could there be, since the denial of the Church’s feudal powers and privileges also inevitably meant the rupture with its base of divinely assured theological support. The denial necessarily had to be taken as heresy. However, the new economic, social, and political conditions made it impossible for Luther to be eliminated, as others had been before him. On the contrary, the public burning by Luther, in December 1520, of the papal bull with the threat of excommunication and the volumes of canon law powerfully symbolized a new order that had already erupted. And the Catholic Church itself had to find a path to its own later reform, in addition to the feudal order. 2. Now we make our last leap in time. Undoubtedly, it is important, in the first place, to remember that the abandonment of the political cannot legitimately be ascribed to Luther, much less collusion with injustice. Social and political responsibility is implied in the Christian faith. We can also easily discern how in his time separating politics from Church control was liberating. The submission of the State to law and understanding the law as able to be reformed according to the specific needs of the people are equally indispensable elements today. On the other hand, there are two necessary caveats. The pure and simple transposition of Luther’s theological positions is not possible Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 21 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
without distortion. Politics under the control of the Church is not a dominant reality today, and in general, it does not represent a serious risk.19 On the contrary, in a world subject to the strong influx of the processes of secularization, an incomparably more acute danger is that of remaining subject to the will of political, economic, and social systems that claim to be governed by their own laws, immune to criticism, to controls, and to human needs. In this context, it is essential to highlight the Church’s prophetic role vis-à-vis the state and oppressive and unjust systems. Secondly, it is necessary to note that Luther espoused, despite his positive critical contribution, a hierarchical view of society and politics, from the top down, although not legitimized by divine law. Thus, his political appeals were addressed, to a large extent, to the princes, who were undeniably the decisive historical subjects in the German territories in the transition from feudalism to the modern era. However, today it will be essential to emphasize that political will is exercised from the bottom up, in principle at least, for example through elections with universal suffrage. The people are the new historical subjects, even though they can often be manipulated by forces interested in maintaining privilege. The people, especially the oppressed, can be involved in so-called popular and social movements. Do we live in a new age of transition? Is there, despite many mishaps, a new order in the making? Looking at the old theological legitimation, although reinvigorated, can we foresee its bankruptcy? And can we feel, on the other hand, new and incisive theological perceptions emerging? Justified by grace through faith, the Christian 19. An analogy might be the formation of state under the rule of Islamic fundamentalism. Moreover, Christian fundamentalism presents some danger too, precisely because of its tendency to sacralize a particular political and social order. Many conservative “evangelical” groups, as their presence in society grows, show by their concepts and actions that they are not immune to this dangerous temptation. Luther and Liberation 22 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
is simultaneously liberated and committed to a determined participation in the processes in which law and order, consistent with the basic needs of our people, unfold on the horizon. In sum: Luther lived at the crossroads between the old and the new. Was he the representative of a new historical era or did he belong to the Middle Ages that were coming to an end? There is no easy answer. In his person and work, Luther showed the marks of the transition. However, amid dramatic events, wherever we look, Church and spirituality; faith and world; society, politics, and economics—we see Luther making a significant, even decisive, contribution toward the new era that was emerging. *Revised version of a lecture originally given in a series of studies on the 500th anniversary of Luther, sponsored by the Goethe Institute, Porto Alegre, Brazil, from 7 to 10 November 1983. An abbreviated version was published: Walter Altmann, “Os 500 anos do nascimento de Lutero,” Folha de S. Paulo (11 Nov. 1983): 31. The subtitle, chosen by this secular newspaper, one of the main ones in Brazil, stressed: “Under the mark of rapprochement between Catholics and Lutherans, many of the ideas of the founder of the Reformation remain relevant half a millennium later.” Luther at the Crossroads Between the Old and the New 23 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:55:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
PART II Theology with a New Interpretive Key This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:59:27 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:59:27 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2 The God of Life Against All Falsehood of the Idols of Death The question of God is raised differently, according to various cultural, socio-economic, and political contexts. In developed and affluent capitalist countries the question of God is largely raised in the context of the expansion of atheism. It is not always a well-elaborated theoretical atheism, but rather a widespread practical atheism. First, society itself is organized without taking into account God’s existence, or at least, God’s interference. This is largely the result of modernity and its rationalism, including most notably its achievements in the scientific, industrial, and technological fields, which seem to suggest that God is a totally disposable entity or, at least, absent for all practical purposes. The God hypothesis was replaced in an ever-greater number of realms of human life.1 There is no need for God anymore. So when someone gets sick, they may count on an impressive battery of devices, medicine, and medical capabilities, which can be 1. Dietrich Bonhoeffer brilliantly glimpsed and described this mechanism in his letters from prison (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Prisoner for God: Letters and Papers from Prison, ed. Eberhard Bethge, trans. Reginald Fuller (New York: MacMillan, 1954), 122–25 and 145–47). “As in the scientific field, so in human affairs generally, what we call ‘God’ is being more and more edged out of life, losing more and more ground” (Ibid., 146). 27 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:59:27 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
done without recourse to God. Of course, it can be argued that given the final outcome and inevitable end, death, all scientific resources fail ultimately. However, this does not alter the fact that, when we are not dead, humans have the ability—ostensibly, we would say in faith—to dispense with God. Conversely, modern scientific rationality could argue that the God hypothesis cannot annul the inevitability of death either. Death, then, should be combated when possible with all the resources available to human capacity and, when unavoidable, should be simply assumed as the natural and dignified end of a life. In this context, it might be interesting to take a look back at this question in the socialist world of orthodox Marxist extraction. There, too, it was supposed that technological advancement—and even more, the alleged suppression of social contradictions—would make the God hypothesis superfluous. We could even add the alleged theoretical progress. For “God” had been unmasked as an ideological instrument2 of a type of society characterized by relations of production, which was being left behind. That is, in the relations of exploitation of labor by capital, “God” functioned as a corresponding ideological element, justifying the vile reality as an unquestionable fact, giving the exploiters a good conscience and anesthetizing the conscience of the exploited. With the change in the relations of production, to collectively owned means of production, there would be no more reason to have a “God,” so God would therefore disappear.3 2. The concept of ideology is used here in its “classic” Marxist sense of false consciousness legitimating structural injustices. 3. It is known that the more orthodox the regime, the greater the tendency (or temptation?) to try to give a forced or legal impetus to this “logic” of the disappearance of the need for God. Thus, they could instill discriminatory practices against religions and their adherents, eventually through repression or persecution, or even enacting constitutionally the complete abolition of religion, as happened, for example, in Albania, which not by chance experienced an extraordinary religious revival (in particular, Orthodox Christianity) after the fall of the communist regime. Luther and Liberation 28 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:59:27 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
In fact, theoretical and especially practical atheism is, meanwhile, spreading in developed countries and also in the countries emerging from socialism in Eastern Europe. In many of these countries, one could even say that in a tacit or practical way, though not in a militated or declared form, atheism covers the majority of the population. The result, however, is somewhat ironic. While the socialist world denounced at length the existence of God as a reflection of the structure of exploitation characteristic of the capitalist relations of production, in the capitalist developed world God is more and more, in fact, effectively set aside as superfluous. It is obvious that you can find these developments in the peripheral countries of the Two-Thirds World insofar as they have been more and more inserted into a globalized system of economic relations. “Atheism” will then be more evident the more “modern” these countries or segments of their populations are, stronger in large urban, industrial, and scientific settings and among the intelligentsia, which tend to reproduce the developments of the developed world or at least aspire to them. Strictly speaking, this trend can be observed both within the privileged strata and among those committed to social change in developing countries, which still establish forms of practical cooperation with popular segments with religious practices and beliefs, such as the base communities. I. The Question of God in Latin American Reality However, the question of atheism, strictly speaking, is not taken seriously in the reality of Latin America. Significantly, it was the developed world, especially in the USA, which advanced “a theology of the death of God,”4 a theology that also fleetingly aroused the curiosity of Latin Americans in the 1960s, among the intelligentsia 4. See Thomas. J. J. Altizer and William Hamilton, Radical Theology and the Death of God (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966). The God of Life Against All Falsehood of the Idols of Death 29 This content downloaded from 132.174.252.140 on Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:59:27 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms