sign in sign up
<<
Home , Annates, Babylonian captivity, Decet Romanum Pontificem, George Spalatin, Sacrosanctum Concilium

Heirs of the : 1520 in 2020

The Relative Relevance of Luther’s 1520 Treatises: To the Christian Nobility of The German Nation Concerning the Improvement of the Christian Estate, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, and The Freedom of a Christian

Contents

Prologue ...... 1 Introduction to the Treatises ...... 1 To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation ...... 5 The least you need to know ...... 5 Content and Analysis ...... 6 Three Walls ...... 6 10 Abuses and 27 Reforms ...... 10 Immediate Impact ...... 12 Relative Relevance for Today ...... 13 Fuller Outline of This Work ...... 14 Prelude on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church ...... 16 The Least You Need to Know ...... 16 Content and Analysis ...... 17 Lord’s Supper ...... 20 Baptism ...... 27 The Rest of the ...... 31 Immediate Impact ...... 37 Relative Relevance for Today ...... 38 Fuller Outline of This Work ...... 39 The Freedom of a Christian ...... 40 The least you need to know ...... 40 Content and Analysis ...... 41 Inner Person ...... 43 Outer Person...... 45 Immediate Impact ...... 49 Relative Relevance for Today ...... 49 Fuller Outline of This Work ...... 50 Concluding Remarks to the Treatises ...... 51 Epilogue ...... 54 Bibliography...... 56 Prologue

Romans 11:17-19 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.”

I knew nothing about as a little boy. In fact, I wasn’t even born into a Lutheran family, let alone a Christian family. I have no native German or American blood in me. For I was born in Laos, a country in southeast Asia. By God’s infinite grace and unsearchable mercy, after my family’s immigration to the United States, my family and I learned about our Lord and came to faith - a wild olive branch grafted in. The picture that Paul paints in Romans is one that is dear to me. It is a picture that is dear and common to all of us as well. We are the olive branches that have been grafted in so that now we are part of something grander than ourselves. We are a part of God’s plan of salvation, just like Martin Luther.

Introduction to the Treatises

I pray Your Honor to convey my humble gratitude to His Electoral grace, and beg him humbly that he will protect the praiseworthy Dr. Martin Luther for the sake of Christian truth. It matters more than all the riches and power of this world, for with time everything passes away; only the truth is eternal. And if God helps me to come to Dr. Martin Luther, then I will carefully draw his portrait and engrave it in copper for a lasting remembrance of this Christian man who has helped me out of great distress. And I beg your worthiness to send me as my payment anything new that Dr. Martin may write in German.1

We are living in a unique time in human history. We are the generation that gets to celebrate the 500th anniversary of many events in Luther’s life and the life of the Church. There was obviously 1517 when Luther hammered 95 discussion topics onto a church door2 and sparked a reformation. If you recall from a few years ago, there were many ways that Lutherans celebrated that year. Perhaps you got a gift like this button.3

1 Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528), arguably the greatest painter of the Renaissance/Reformation, wrote (Nürnberg, beginning of 1520) these words to George Spalatin (1484-1545), secretary to Elector Frederick the Wise (1463-1525). Please note: for most of the people mentioned in this paper, there are various spellings and versions of their names, e.g., Georg(e) Spalatin(us) or Georg Burkhardt. 2 Those original wooden doors were destroyed during the Seven Years’ War (1760). Eventually (1858), the current bronze doors were set into the original jambs at the Castle Church in , Germany. The 95 Theses are inscribed (in ) on those bronze doors. 3 This can be found at oldlutheran.com. 2

However, there are many things to celebrate after 1517. You could find something to celebrate from 1517 to 1546.4 Maybe this list would suffice:

• 1517 - 95 Theses • 1518 - • 1519 - • 1520 - Voluminous Writings from Luther • 1521 - • 1521-1522 - Castle/Publication of the New Testament in German • 1523 - An Exhortation to the Knights of the Teutonic Order That They Lay Aside False Chastity and Assume the Chastity of Wedlock • 1524 - To the Councilmen of All Cities in Germany That They Establish and Maintain Christian Schools, Publication of the (Etlich Christlich lider) • 1525 - Luther’s marriage to , On the Bondage of the Will • 1526 - Diet of Speyer, The German and Order of the Liturgy • 1527 - Whether One May Flee from a Deadly Plague • 1528 - Instructions for the Visitors of Pastors in Electoral , Confession on Christ’s Supper • 1529 - The Large and Small Catechism, • 1530 - Diet of Augsburg/ • 1531 - Apology of the Augsburg Confession • 1532 - On Infiltrating and Clandestine Preachers • 1533 - The Private Mass and the of Priests • 1534 - Publication of the complete in German • 1535 - A Simple Way to Pray • 1535-1545 - Lectures on Genesis • 1536 - The Disputation Concerning Justification • 1537 - • 1538 - The Three Symbols or Creeds of the Christian Faith • 1539 - On the Councils and the Church • 1542 - Luther’s Will, Luther’s daughter Magdalena enters heaven • 1543 - On the and Their Lies • 1544 - Brief Confession Concerning the Holy • 1545 - first meets, Against the Roman Papacy An Institution of the Devil • 1546 - Martin Luther enters heaven

This paper focuses on the year 1520. Prof. em. James Korthals has a Summer Quarter class at our Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary (Mequon, WI) that also focuses on 1520. In the description for this class, Korthals has the following:

4 This list will stop at 1546. Obviously, there are many more things to celebrate in Lutheran history after 1546. 3

… As the Holy Spirit led Martin Luther deeper into Scripture, Luther’s new understanding produced additional documents. In 1520 he published an amazing number of theological works which transformed the Reformation from an idea into a reality. This course will examine the 1520 works of Luther which brought change into and ultimately separation from the medieval church. Beginning with the publication of The Fourteen Consolations in February and ending with the three great Manifestoes, 1520 deserves attention. In the year 1520 the Reformation blossomed.5

This paper will narrow in on the three great Manifestoes mentioned above. “So what?” you may ask. “What does this have to do with me? What do these writings from 500 years ago have to do with me? I am not a church history person. I appreciate Martin Luther and all the Lord accomplished through him, but I just do not see the point. What does this have to do with me when I am still living in a world with COVID-19, cancer, and other effects of the Fall into sin? What does this have to do with me when my work has slowed or stopped? How will this help me right here and now? Will learning or reviewing all of this actually be relevant to me?”

To all of that, I would humbly say: Yes! You learned a little bit of my background above. I am also not a church history person. I appreciate Martin Luther too and all the Lord accomplished through him. I have grown in that appreciation through these 1520 writings. How will this help you or be relevant to you? Allow me to just give two ways (there will be more as you keep reading).

• Why are you the way you are? Because of the influences in your life, e.g., parents, pastors, friends, things you read and watch. Well, you have in your veins, and you probably do not even realize it. Reading some of Luther’s works from 1520, you will see where you get some of the phrases and expressions we have all come to learn and love, e.g., the narrow, Lutheran middle road. • During these past few months, why did you act the way you did to your neighbors? You were not hoarding essentials. You were not just looking out for yourself, but others, too. Why? The Freedom of a Christian will express what you have come to do almost naturally, not only these past few months, but throughout your life.

Hopefully, your interest is piqued. If you want a short summary of the three treatises in this paper, you could listen to this6 and stop reading now. If you want to go into more detail, please keep on reading. This paper has taken a few different turns due to all the uncertainty during this time. Initially this was going to a Bible study presentation with questions for you and quotes from these treatises. Then it evolved into a traditional essay, but this paper kept growing in size. So, this final form is an amalgamation of these two approaches to create a third approach. This paper is divided into the three separate treatises. Those treatises are also further divided into an outline. This paper uses some of the initial questions from the Bible study approach to separate each outline. This paper also attempts to let Luther speak for himself. After each question, in classic catechetical style, there

5 Find out more at wls.wels.net/grow-in-grace. I have been asked and tasked to take over this Summer Quarter class. Your prayers are appreciated. In addition to this paper and the Summer Quarter class, this year’s Symposium at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary (September 21-22) will also be on the 1520 treatises. 6 Here is the link (5minutesinchurchhistory.com/3-treatises/), just in case the hyperlink does not work. 4

are quotations from the treatises. Then, any comments would follow. This third approach will (Lord- willing) make this paper easier to navigate and more beneficial.

Let’s begin with a little background to see where we are in Luther’s history. October 31, 1517 was the nailing of the 95 Theses on the Castle Church doors in Wittenberg, Germany. April 26, 1518 was a meeting of the Augustinians (Luther’s monastic order) in Heidelberg. Luther defended his theology there. In the summer of 1518, formal legal proceedings in Rome began against Luther. Later that same year, Cardinal Cajetan was sent to Germany to get Luther to recant. This happened at the Diet of Augsburg (1518), and it ended up being a three-day debate on various topics, e.g., , law. In the summer of 1519, there was a debate in Leipzig between Eck and Karlstadt (and then Luther). This debate was on various topics, e.g., authority of the , indulgences, purgatory. Then, on January 9, 1520, the legal proceedings against Luther were reopened. Cajetan was the co- chair of these proceedings. Eck joined in May or June of the same year. The result of these proceedings was the , .7 It demanded that Luther recant his “errors” or be excommunicated. This was officially posted at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome on June 24, 1520.8 It gave Luther 60 days from the date of its publication in Electoral Saxony, Luther’s home territory, (late September/early October 1520)9 to recant or be excommunicated. In this papal bull, here are some of Luther’s 41 “errors.”10

• 13. In the and the remission of sin the pope or the does no more than the lowest priest; indeed, where there is no priest, any Christian, even if a woman or child, may equally do as much. • 17. The treasures of the Church, from which the pope grants indulgences, are not the merits of Christ and of the saints. • 25. The Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, is not the vicar of Christ over all the churches of the entire world, instituted by Christ Himself in blessed Peter. • 27. It is certain that it is not in the power of the Church or the pope to decide upon the articles of faith, and much less concerning the laws for morals or for good works.

7 This is Latin for “Arise, O Lord.” (cf. Psalm 74:22) It compares Luther to a fox in God’s vineyard (the church) and a wild boar that seeks to destroy the forest (the church.) The use of such language may be due to the fact that (1475-1521) approved the draft of the papal bull on May 2, 1520, while he was taking part in a boar hunt at his castle in Magliana, southwest of Rome. 8 The papal bull is dated June 15. However, on June 15, it was still missing the signatures of the pope and the customary . Martin Brecht gives July 24 as the date for this posting at St. Peter’s Basilica. (Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation 1483-1521, Translated by James Schaff, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1985), 391.) The other books in the bibliography (as well as my Seminary notes from the class “The Reformation Era”) give June 24. 9 John Eck was supposed to deliver the papal bull in person to Wittenberg. However, he made the excuse that he did not have the clothing for seeing Elector Frederick. So, the papal bull was sent with a Leipzig militiaman and arrived in Wittenberg (October 10/11). Eck had published the papal bull in Meissen (September 21), Merseburg (September 25), and Brandenburg (September 29). That filled his legal obligation to publish the papal bull in Electoral Saxony. (cf. WA, Br 2:194-195, StL 15:1576, Brecht, Road, 423.) 10 To read the entire English translation, see here. (papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10exdom.htm) 5

To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Improvement of the Christian Estate

The least you need to know11

• Title: To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Improvement of the Christian Estate12 • Published: August 18, 1520 • Original Language: German • Outline: o Address and attack the “three walls” of the Roman Church o 10 abuses in the church that a council should discuss o 27 reform proposals • Summary from someone smarter me: This was addressed to the political leaders in the Holy . It was a call to action for them, because ultimately, they are responsible for the religious growth of their people and the churches in their territories.

11 For those who may want a little more than this background and summary, but still quite manageable, see here. (reformation500.csl.edu/timeline/address-to-the-german-nobility/) 12 “Estate” perhaps could be better understood as “walk of life; way of life; status in life.” German: Stand. 6

Content and Analysis

The immediate impetus for To the Christian Nobility was a work by a papal theologian, Sylvester Prierias. He had written the Epitoma responsionis ad Lutherum.13 After reading this Epitome, Luther concluded that the Antichrist does indeed reside in Rome and thus a reform from there was going to be impossible. In mid-June 1520, Luther would publish his own response - an annotated edition of the Epitome. However, there were other mitigating factors that led to this treatise’s publication.

This was Luther’s first direct appeal to secular authorities, particularly in the opening dedication to the emperor and German nobility,14 to help with reforming the church. After repeated appeals to the church authorities fell on deaf ears, Luther proceeded to the secular authorities for help. In two other works from 1520, Good Works (late May/early June) and The Papacy in Rome (June 26), Luther had claimed that things had gotten so bad in that the secular authorities had to step in during this time of crisis.15

How is Luther like a battering ram?

Three Walls

This work is divided into three sections as indicated above. This paper focuses mainly on the first section, which itself addresses three separate “walls” that the Roman invented to insulate itself from any kind of reform. These three “walls” claimed that

1. Spiritual authority is higher than secular authority and therefore not subject to secular authority, although the spiritual authority does have power over secular; 2. The pope alone has the authority to interpret the Scriptures; and 3. Only the pope can convene a council.16

In this treatise and in this appeal to the secular authorities for help, Luther still knows where his true help is: “We tackle this job by renouncing trust in physical force and trusting humbly in God. We must seek God’s help through earnest prayer and fix our minds on nothing else than the misery and distress of suffering Christendom without regard to what evil men deserve.”17

13 Silvester Prierias (ca. 1426-1523) was the “master of the sacred palace” in the Roman . Therefore, he was the pope’s theological advisor and censor of books. He was Luther’s first Italian opponent. (Most biographical and background information is gleaned from The Annotated Luther series.) An English translation of the title is Epitome of a Response to Martin Luther. 14 This treatise was dedicated to Nicholas von Amsdorf (1483-1565), the only person in Luther’s “inner circle” who was from nobility. 15 Cf. Timothy Wengert ed., The Annotated Luther: Volume 1: The Roots of Reform (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015), 342 and American edition (AE) 39:102-103. This work will be referenced as AL in the rest of this paper. Quotations from all three treatises will give the citation from The Annotated Luther and American editions, if applicable. (The latter is the one that most people know.) 16 Cf. AL 1:371. The first wall is discussed on pages 381-387 (AE 44:127-133); the second wall pages 387-389 (AE 44:133-136; the third wall pages 389-392 (AE 44:136-139). 17 AL 1:380 (AE 44:125-126). 7

In telling about and tearing down the first wall, Luther makes this observation: “Now we see how the Romanists treat Christendom. They take away its freedom without any proof from Scripture, at their own whim. But God, as well as the apostles, made them subject to the temporal sword. It is to be feared that this is a game of the Antichrist, or at any rate that his forerunner has appeared.”18 This veiled claim that the Antichrist was in league with the papacy becomes clearer as the treatise continues.

In all of his attacks in this treatise and the other two, Luther begins with God’s Word for God’s Word is where truth is found. Against the first wall, Luther uses 1 Cor 12:12-13; 1 Pet 2:9; and Rev 5:9-1019 to show that the spiritual authority is no different from anyone else. For all Christians are baptized in the same baptism, have the same faith and the same , therefore: “Because we are all priests of equal standing, no one must push himself forward and take it upon himself, without our consent and election, to do that for which we all have equal authority.”20 So spiritual authority is not above others and thus the first wall comes tumbling down. This teaching that Luther describes is what we have come to call the of all believers. Luther lays it out beautifully when he states:

Therefore, just as those who are now called “spiritual,” that is, priests, bishops, or , are neither different from other Christians nor superior to them, except that they are charged with the administration of the word of God and the sacraments, which is their work and office, so it is with secular government, which has the sword and rod in hand to punish the wicked and protect the good. A cobbler, a blacksmith, a peasant - each has the work and office of his trade, and yet they are all alike consecrated priests and bishops, and everyone should benefit and serve everyone else by means of their own work or office, so that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, just as all the members of the body serve one another [1 Cor 12:14-26].21

Luther then remarks, “For if it is our duty to strive against the words and works of the devil and to drive him out in whatever way we can, as both Christ and his apostles command us, how have we come to the point that we have to do nothing and say nothing when the pope or his cohorts undertake devilish words and works?”22 A relevance for us today is this: we must remember that orthodoxy, i.e., staying true to God’s Word, is not just the work of the pastors and teachers. It is all our work, our job, our responsibility. Orthodoxy is too important to leave in the hands of a few. That means we all have the task of knowing what God’s Word says, being in that Word, and continually

18 AL 1:386 (AE 44:133). 19 Cf. AL 1:381-382 (AE 44:127-128). Luther sometimes does not cite a Bible reference or when he does, he typically only does book and chapter (and that from the Latin Vulgate). There was not a standard German Bible at this time. Luther’s German New Testament would not be published until 1522. Verse numbers were not being used and printed until 1551 (New Testament) and 1571 (). In this paper, the entire reference will be cited for the modern reader’s convenience. 20 AL 1:383 (AE 44:129). 21 AL 1:384 (AE 44:130). 22 AL 1:386 (AE 44:132). 8

learning that Word. We all have to stay in that Word and do as Luther: take God at his Word, even if someone else (even if a pastor or teacher) would say something contrary to that Word.

Against the second wall (the pope alone has the authority to interpret the Scriptures), Luther again starts by quoting Scripture, e.g., 1 Cor 14:30 and John 6:45.23 Then against this second wall, Luther just simply states: “Therefore, their claim that only the pope may interpret Scripture is an outrageous fancied fable.”24 Luther though anticipates some objections to try and prop up this second wall. He addresses the Catholic appeal to passages like Matt 16:19 by stating:

And although they allege that this power was given to St. Peter when the keys were given him, it is clear enough that the keys were not given to Peter alone but to the whole community.25 Further, the keys were not ordained for doctrine or government, but only for the binding or loosing of sin. Whatever else or whatever more they arrogate to themselves on the basis of the keys is a mere fabrication.26

See how Luther uses his gift of reason to understand this passage? See the leaps and bounds that the Catholics make from their misunderstanding of this passage? Another relevance for us today is this: is this misunderstanding still there in the Catholic Church?27 If so, do we still need this reminder of what Luther wrote 500 years ago? Do we need to remember this when talking to a Catholic, perhaps someone who does not understand or realize what the Catholic Church teaches?28 Could we be the ones the Lord uses to point that out and point them to the Word? Luther finishes this destruction of the second wall by tying it back in with his destruction of the first wall: “Besides, if we all are priests, as was said above, and all have one faith, one gospel, one sacrament, why should we not also have the power to test and judge what is right or wrong in the matters of faith?”29

Against the third wall (only the pope can convene a council), Luther once again (see a pattern for us to follow) quotes Scripture to prove his point: anyone is able to convene a council, e.g., Matt 18:15-17 and Acts 15.30 Luther gives one prominent example of his point: the Council of Nicaea (325).31 This was convened by the Roman emperor Constantine, not the bishop of Rome. Luther finishes his attacks against these three walls by summing up the heart of the matter:

23 Cf. AL 1:387 (AE 44:134). 24 AL 1:388 (AE 44:134). 25 Cf. Matt 16:19; 18:18; and John 20:23. 26 AL 1:388 (AE 44:134). 27 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 882, 892, 936, cf. here. (https://tinyurl.com/y9krcopb) 28 In German, there is a term: der Köhlerglaube (“coal miner's faith”). When a theologian asked a coal miner what he believes, the miner states, “What the church believes?” When the coal miner is asked what does the church believe, the miner responds, “The church believes what I believe.” In some versions his response is flushed out as, “I don’t know, but if I did, I would believe it.” Luther is said to have prayed: “God preserve us from such faith!” cf. Franz Pieper, Christian Dogmatics: Volume II, (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House 1951), 429. 29 AL 1:389 (AE 44:135). 30 Cf. AL 1:389-390 (AE 44:136). 31 AL 1:390 (AE 44:137). In fact, the seven ecumenical councils (Nicaea, 325; Constantinople, 381; Ephesus, 431; Chalcedon, 451; Constantinople, 553; Constantinople 680-681; Nicaea, 787) were all convened by the emperors. 9

With this I hope that all this wicked and lying terror with which the Romanists have long intimidated and dulled our conscience has been overcome, and that they, just like all of us, shall be made subject to the sword. For they have no right to interpret Scripture merely by authority and without learning. They have no authority to prevent a council, or much less at their mere whim to put it under obligation, impose conditions on it, or deprive it of its freedom. When they do that they are truly in the fellowship of Antichrist and the devil. They have nothing at all of Christ except the name.32

This could sum up Luther’s tearing down of these three walls:33

1. God gives to all believers a universal priesthood, so there is no difference between the spiritual and secular. 2. Since there is this universal priesthood, the pope alone cannot be the sole authority on Scripture. 3. Since there is no difference between secular and spiritual and since the pope alone is not the sole authority, then other Christians can call a council to deal with reforms in Christianity.

With their three walls that they constructed, do you see what the Roman Catholic Church has done? They made the rules of the game and were the only ones that could provide access or exception to the game. Maybe this analogy is similar. I grew up in Indiana, and my favorite team is the Indianapolis Colts. I have not lived in Indiana since I was a teenager, but I still want to watch Colts games on TV if possible. However, the NFL set up the rules on which teams play in different parts of the country. The NFL states that each team has a primary and secondary market that shows each team’s games on local TV stations. (These are usually markets that are close to the team.) So, the NFL made the rule of what teams are shown where and when. However, if you are a Colts fan, living in Wisconsin, and cannot get the Colts game, the NFL is there to “help” you watch out-of-market games. They will provide you a way to watch your team, as long as you have DirecTV (now a part of AT&T) and are willing to pay for NFL Sunday Ticket. See the similarity with what Luther talks about here?

• The NFL creates the rules and then offers viewers a solution to the rules they create, at a price and as long as viewers follow certain procedures. • The Roman Catholic Church creates the rules (the three walls) and then offer members a solution to the rules they create (e.g. their seven sacraments),34 at a price and as long as members follow certain procedures.

One of my Seminary professors is remembered to have said that there are really two things that separate Lutherans and Catholics in the area of doctrine. It is how each answers these two questions:

32 AL 1:392 (AE 44:138-139). 33 Cf. Brecht, Road, 371-372. 34 Look ahead to Luther’s next work, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church. After Luther demolishes second wall (that the pope alone can interpret Scripture), then Luther can obviously address the teaching on what a sacrament is. 10

• How are people saved? • What is the role of the pope in Christianity?

From these two, all the other differences diverge, e.g., indulgences, the Catholic sacramental system. In attacking and tearing down these three walls, Luther gives us an answer to the second question. The pope and all of spiritual authority is no different from the rest of Christianity (first wall). We are all part of the universal priesthood of all believers. Since that is the case, the pope alone does not have the authority to interpret Scripture (second wall). Since we are also all equal, all Christians can call a council (third wall). Now Luther turns to what a convened council should discuss. See how the rest of this treatise flows from Luther first tearing down the three walls? Since we are all equal as believers, Luther understands that he can suggest topics, address abuses, and offer reform ideas for a council.

Before we move to the abuses and reforms, just a word about Luther’s writing style. As is seen, Luther repeatedly goes back to God’s Word for his authority. Luther also has some clever use of rhetoric here. A genius stroke of Luther’s pen is how he presents this treatise. “... [W]hat made Luther’s argument so effective was that he presented the abuses he attacked as examples of avarice - one of the seven deadly sins. The whole papacy, Luther argued, was organized around its lust for money, making it a monstrosity.”35 Luther uses one of the papacy’s own teachings (the seven deadly sins) against itself. He shows that the papacy is committing a sin that itself condemns as deadly. In Luther’s list of abuses and reforms, the papacy’s greed keeps coming up.

After the walls come tumbling down, what does Luther build up?

10 Abuses36 and 27 Reforms37

I would just like to touch on these, although for the most part, the abuses and reforms are locked in a time, place, situation, and circumstance rather different than ours. Many of the abuses in the church were caused by and connected with the papacy. However, abuses and reforms were not limited to the church. They also extended to the universities, government, and everyday life. Now Luther did not come up with this list of abuses and reforms all by himself. Many are taken from the “Gravamina [Grievances] of the German Nation Against Rome.” This list was against the Roman Curia38 and had been brought up at almost every meeting of the imperial diet from the middle of the 15th century and most recently at the Diet of Augsburg (1518). This was another genius stroke of Luther’s pen, for these Gravamina were very patriotically German and anti-Roman. Therefore, including some items from the Gravamina was a way to possibly get some German clergy and secular authorities on his side.

35 Lyndal Roper, Martin Luther: Renegade and Prophet (New York: Random House, 2017), 148. 36 These are listed in AL 1:392-407 (AE 44:139-156). 37 These are listed in AL 1:407-465 (AE 44:156-217). 38 The was the papal court, consisting of all the engaged in papal business and all the members of the papal “household.” 11

Besides the Gravamina, there are phrases that Luther uses that underscore the biblical basis for why he could and does list these abuses and reforms.

• “Now the Romanists make the pope a vicar of the glorified Christ in heaven, and some of them have allowed the devil to rule them so completely that they have maintained that the pope is above the angels in heaven and has them at his command. These are certainly the proper works of the real Antichrist.”39 • “But Rome has become so expensive today that it allows no one to practice such knavery unless he has first bought the right to do so. If that is not a brothel above all imaginable brothels, then I do not know what brothels are.”40 • The pope is not a vicar of Christ in heaven but only of Christ as he walked the earth. Christ in heaven, in the form of a ruler, needs no vicar, but sits on his throne and sees everything, does everything, knows everything, and has all power. But Christ needs a vicar in the form of a servant, the form in which he went about on earth, working, preaching, suffering, and dying. Now the Romanists turn all that upside down. They take the heavenly and kingly form from Christ and give it to the pope, and leave the form of a servant to perish completely. He might almost be the Counter-Christ, whom the Scriptures call Antichrist, for all his nature, work, and pretensions run counter to Christ and only blot out Christ’s nature and destroy his work.41 • It is the same when the pope carries the sacrament in procession. He must be carried, but the sacrament is set before him like a jug of wine on a table. At Rome Christ counts for nothing, but the pope counts for everything. And yet the Romanists want to compel us - and even use threats - to approve, praise, and honor these sins of the Antichrist, even though they are against God and all Christian doctrine.42 • “The holy Apostle says that we already have freedom in all these things through the gospel. But they have bound us with their and robbed us of our rights so that we have to buy them back again with money.”43 • “Yet all divine treasures are common to all and serve all and ought to further the cause of unity. But the pope likes things as they are. He would not like it if all Christians were equal and one with each other.”44 • “Let the pope remain a blind leader of the blind. Neither an angel nor a pope can give you as much as God gives you in your parish church. Indeed, the pope leads you away from God’s gifts, which are yours for free, to his gifts, for which you have to pay.”45 • “The pope suppresses God’s command and exalts his own. If he is not the Antichrist, then somebody tell me who is.”46

39 AL 1:394 (AE 44:140). 40 AL 1:405 (AE 44:154). 41 AL 1:415 (AE 44:165). 42 AL 1:419 (AE 44:169). 43 AL 1:432 (AE 44:184). 44 AL 1:436 (AE 44:188). 45 AL 1:437 (AE 44:189). 46 AL 1:443 (AE 44:195). 12

• “Love is greater and is more needed than the papacy at Rome, which is without love. Love can exist apart from the papacy.”47 • “It is not many books that make people learned or even much reading. It is, rather, a good book frequently read, no matter how small it is, that makes a person learned in the Scriptures and upright. Indeed, the writings of all the holy Fathers should be read only for a time so that through them we may be led into the Scriptures.”48

See what Luther is saying? He stated it first publicly in his annotated edition of Prierias’ Epitome, the immediate impetus for this work. That veiled claim at the beginning of this treatise becomes clear at the end: the papacy is the Antichrist, or at least in league with the Antichrist.49 He says this because the papacy has set itself above and even at times contrary to Christ and his teaching (2 Thessalonians 2:4). The Church has a leader - Christ and his Word. It needs no other. It should have no other.

A relevance for us today is this: Are these three walls still standing in the Roman Catholic Church? Does this still describe the papacy? Is this still the conviction of orthodox Lutherans?

Immediate Impact

After it was published, To the Christian Nobility was hailed as a “battle trumpet.”50 This treatise was rather popular. Within two , the first printing (4,000 copies)51 all sold out. The printer, Melchior Lotter52 then planned for a larger second printing, which appeared at the end of August 1520. There was widespread agreement on many of the reforms Luther brought up. Perhaps the most poignant impact: even Luther’s enemies recognized there was some truth to what he had written.53 Interesting enough, the council that Luther had called for in this treatise ended up being the Diet of Worms (1521). However, that was not a council convened to reform the Christian estate but to refute Luther.

47 AL 1:448 (AE 44:200). 48 AL 1:453 (AE 44:205). 49 For a short discussion on the papacy and the Antichrist and Luther’s thoughts on that, see Joachim Rogge, Anfänge der Reformation: Der junge Luther (1483-1521); Der junge Zwingli 1484-1523) (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1983),195. 50 John Lang, a fellow monk and Luther’s friend said this. Lang would become pastor at and remain there until his death in 1548. 51 For some perspective on this number, cf. here. (history.com/news/printing-press-renaissance) Luther’s translation of the New Testament (1522) sold 5,000 copies in two weeks. From 1518-1525, Luther accounted for a third of all books sold in Germany. 52 Cf. Rogge, Anfänge, 198. Melchior Lott(h)er the Younger (c. 1490 - c. 1542) had been sent by his father, Melchior Lotter the Elder to Wittenberg to set up a branch of his printing business (Leipzig). Of the three treatises discussed in this paper, Lotter would publish To the Christian Nobility and The Babylonian Captivity. (His crest, the bronze serpent lifted up on a cross, can be seen at the foot of the front covers.) The other major printer in Wittenberg, Rhaus-Grunenberg, would publish The Freedom of a Christian. At this time, Luther seemed to use both with no particular pattern. However, it was Lotter who would publish Luther’s translation of the New Testament (1522). 53 An interesting case was Duke George who was fiercely against Luther and his teachings. However, he also felt that the things that Luther brought up in this treatise were true and necessary. Cf. Brecht, Road, 376-377. 13

Relative Relevance for Today (So what did you learn from this treatise?)

In the three sections of this treatise Luther laid the ax to the whole complex of ideas upon which the social, political, legal, and religious thought of the Western world had been developing for nearly a thousand years. The first section exposes and refutes theologically the three walls behind which the papacy was entrenched. By demolishing the first wall, the concept of spiritual and secular classes, Luther removed the medieval distinction between clergy and laity and conferred upon the state, the rulers of which (as Luther saw it) were Christians and therefore priests, the right and duty to curb evil no matter where it appeared. In rapid succession he demolishes the remaining two walls: the papal claim … that only the pope can interpret Scripture, and that because only the pope could summon a council the decisions of a council were invalid without papal sanction.54

… [It] is Luther’s attack on the three walls that accounts for the enduring importance of the treatise. In that attack he redefines the relationship between clergy and laity and elaborates the view of the role of secular government in church reform to which he would adhere virtually without change for the remainder of the , before adapting it into new circumstances in the 1530s.55

These two quotations sum up very well a major relevance of To the Christian Nobility: the tearing down of those three walls. Another major relevance is one that was stated above but is worth repeating. “... [I]t was addressed to laypeople, not clerics. Luther argued that since the Church seemed unable to reform itself, lay authorities must step in. In a single stroke, Luther swept away the obstacles that had prevented lay authorities from dealing with abuses in the Church, because they did not have ecclesiastical authority or imperial backing.”56 In other words, abuses and errors in the church are not just an issue for the pastors and the teachers. It is a concern for all of us. It is something we have a vested interest in because we all are part of this universal priesthood of believers. That is a reminder that is always relevant and always needed.

Here is one final summary before we move on. Roper sums up the three walls and how Luther tears them down in this way:

Papal power, Luther argued, was buttressed by “three walls”: that the Church had its own spiritual law; that the papacy alone had the right to interpret Scripture; and that only the Pope could call a Council of the Church. He made short work of each of these defenses: Scriptural law was merely an invention of the papacy, designed to frustrate laypeople from reforming the Church; the authority of Scripture must come before that of the Pope; anyone can call a council when the need arises, and those most suitable to do so are the temporal authorities.57

54 AE 44:120. 55 AL 1:372. 56 Roper, Renegade, 147-148. 57 Roper, Renegade, 148. 14

In the conclusion to this treatise, Luther issues a preview of things to come, “Well, I know another little song about Rome and the Romanists. If their ears are itching to hear it, I will sing that one to them, too - and pitch it in the highest key! You understand what I mean, dear Rome.”58 Luther has another song to sing, i.e., another treatise to publish. Luther would partly title this next little song a “prelude.” It would be pitched in a different key, i.e., sound differently than this treatise. For Luther would not hold back his polemics and disdain in the next treatise. That is our next focus: The Babylonian Captivity of the Church.

Fuller Outline of This Work

• Dedication • Introduction • Three Walls o Spiritual authority is higher than secular authority and therefore not subject to secular authority, although the spiritual authority does have power over secular; o The pope alone has the authority to interpret the Scriptures; and o Only the pope can convene a council. • 10 Abuses o How the Pope abuses o How cardinals abuse o How the Roman Curia abuses o Seven abuses dealing with benefices59 • 27 Reforms o Forbid payment of annates60 to Rome o Because of the pope’s abuses, the Christian nobility should be against him o Change how bishops are confirmed in their position o Leave secular matters to secular authorities, not to Rome o Stop papal abuse of o Stop papal abuse of absolution in reserved cases61 and the like o Remove or reduce the numbers in the Roman Curia o Abolish the oaths the bishops make to the pope o The pope should have no authority over the emperor o The pope should not claim authority over the kingdom of Naples and Sicily62 o Stop the custom of kissing the pope’s feet o Pilgrimages should be abolished or modified o No longer permit mendicant monks and cloisters63

58 AL 1:465 (AE 44:217). 59 A was a permanent ecclesiastical appointment made by the Pope. These three abuses with benefices Luther summarizes from the of Vienna (1448). 60 were the first year’s revenue from an ecclesiastical benefice. These annates were paid to the papal treasury in exchange for the appointment of that benefice. 61 Reserved cases were the ones that the granting of absolution was reserved only for the pope. 62 Since 1060, the pope had claimed authority over these parts of Italy. 63 These monks and cloisters were known for begging, which was allowed in certain areas of many cities. 15

o Every town should have a priest or bishop who is allowed to marry o Confession of sins (public or ) should be made to any fellow Christian o Remove or reduce the number of Vigils and Masses for the dead o Certain punishments of canon law should be abolished, e.g., interdict64 o All feast days should be abolished or moved to the nearest Sunday o Marriage between close relatives should be changed65 o Destroy the many pilgrimage chapels and rethink the of “saints” o Abolish all begging in Christendom o Remove or rethink Masses said by priests and monks on behalf of others o Abuses with indulgences (in their various forms) should be abolished o Address the cause of the Hussites66 and unite with them o Reform the universities o Redefine the Roman Empire67 o Reforms in the secular realm • Conclusion

64 The was a banning of the administration of the sacraments and other church rites. By Luther’s time, this was used mainly for minor infractions of church law. 65 Canon law stated that people within the first four degrees of were forbidden to marry, e.g., second cousins could not marry. However, this could be dispensed with, if the people had enough money to pay for the dispensation. 66 Hussites were followers of John Huss (c.1372-1415). Following his burning at the stake, his followers mounted a series of religious revolutions. This concluded with a peace treaty (1436). This treaty allowed Hussites to continue and hold office in Christianity. Rome never officially accepted this treaty, though it was recognized in Huss’ homeland, Bohemia (modern Czech Republic). 67 This reform was added in the second printing of this treatise. 16

Prelude on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church

The Least You Need to Know68

• Title: Prelude on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church • Published: October 6, 1520 • Original Language: Latin • Outline: o Lord’s Supper o Baptism o Penance o Confirmation o Marriage o Ordination o Extreme Unction • Summary from someone smarter than me: This was aimed at the sacramental system of the Roman Catholic Church, for it was holding the people captive with this sacramental system.

68 For those who may want a little more than this background and summary, but still quite manageable, see here. (reformation500.csl.edu/timeline/prelude-on-the-babylonian-captivity-of-the-church/) 17

Content and Analysis

In An Open Letter to the Christian Nobility, Luther demolished the three walls behind which Rome sat entrenched in her spiritual-temporal power. Now in The Babylonian Captivity of the Church he enters and takes her central stronghold and sanctuary - the sacramental system by which she accompanied and controlled her members from the cradle to the grave. Only then could he set forth, in language of almost lyrical rapture, The Freedom of a Christian.69

The above quote shows how these three treatises are interwoven and intertwined. The three were not written independently from each other but complement each other. This quote also shows a snapshot of Luther in 1520 on his road to Reformation. As we move on to this second treatise, we must remember that this was not written in a bubble, but there were factors that went into its publication, e.g., the other events in Luther’s life at this time.

Two other works in particular served as the immediate impetus for The Babylonian Captivity. One was written by an Italian Dominican monk named Isidoro Isolani (c. 1480-1528). He wrote a work titled Revocatio Martini Lutheri Augustiniani ad sanctam sedem (1519).70 He was calling Luther to recant of his errors. The other was titled Tractatus de communione sub utraque specie (1520)71 and by a Leipzig theologian Augustinus Alveld (c. 1480-1535). In this work, Alveld argued against in “both kinds.” However, Luther’s understanding of the sacraments had been in the works for a while by the time 1520 rolled around. There were his struggles as a monk with confession, penance, and the Mass. In 1519, Luther published a series of sermons on what he considered true sacraments: penance, baptism, and the Lord’s Supper.

The Babylonian Captivity was actually published in the same month (October) that the copy of Exsurge Domine arrived in Wittenberg. Luther then had 60 days to recant or be excommunicated. “It marked Luther’s final and irrevocable break with the church of Rome. There is special significance in the fact that in the same letter to Spalatin (October 3) in which he mentions the arrival of Eck in Leipzig armed with the papal bull, he also announces the publication of his book on the captivity of the church for the following Saturday (October 6).”72

Given all of this, Luther does not hold back in this treatise. He attacks the sacramental system (the jugular) of the Roman Catholic Church. “... [Luther] levels his aim at the entire sacramental system of the Roman church because it has now become clear to him this is the fundamental cause and the chief implement of the corrupt practices of the church. He deals with the sacraments in general and with each one individually, but his chief concern is with the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.”73 To add more detail to this quote, Luther spends the bulk of this work on the Lord’s Supper and Baptism. Those two make up about half of the entire treatise.

69 AE 36:5. 70 That is The Recantation of the Augustinian Martin Luther to the . 71 That is Treatise on Communion in Both Kinds. 72 AE 36:8. 73 AE 36:IX. 18

What is the issue with the sacramental system? Perhaps continuing that analogy of the NFL Sunday Ticket from earlier may help. The NFL establishes the rules for being able to watch their games. The NFL controls what can and cannot be played in each part of the country. However, through the NFL Sunday Ticket, the NFL gives people the ability to watch out-of-market games but for a price. Therefore, the NFL creates the rules and then also the exceptions to those rules. The Roman Catholic Church establishes their rules or “walls” to protect themselves, basically the church and especially the papacy. This was to keep the papacy as the sole authority. So, what the papacy says is the rule, and it can create new rules. Then the papacy makes the exceptions to those rules that it creates. The sacramental system is the means of getting past the rules that the Roman Catholic Church sets up for salvation. Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church creates the rules and then also the exceptions to those rules. So, it is holding the people captive with the sacramental system.

Why is it a Babylonian Captivity?

The first part of this title is Prelude. A prelude suggests that there is more to come on this topic, the sacraments. Luther would indeed continue to write on the sacraments. However, what about the Babylonian Captivity?74

• “The striking title of the treatise suggested that the Church was so corrupt that, like the Jews in after the destruction of and the temple, Christians were now in exile.”75 • “The title, which was extraordinarily critical of the church, was intended to indicate that the church was being held prisoner in exile like the people of .”76 • “… [Just] as the Jews were carried away from Jerusalem into captivity under the tyranny of the Babylonian Empire, so in Europe the Christians have been carried away from the Scriptures and made subject to the tyranny of the papacy. This tyranny has been exercised by the misuse of the sacraments, chiefly the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.”77 • “But this is my complaint: that the godless pontiffs boastfully claim to do this by right, that they pretend to be seeking the church’s welfare with this Babylon of theirs, and that they foist this fiction upon all people.”78 • “This is indeed ‘the people of the captivity,’ among whom all things freely given to us in baptism are held captive, while the few poor ‘people of the earth’ who are left behind, such as the married folk, appear vile in their eyes.”79

74 In addition to the reasons given above, perhaps the title is also a reference to the “Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy.” From 1309-1377, the papacy was in Avignon, not Rome. In a letter to a friend (1340-1353), Petrarch (1304-1374) referred to Avignon as “the Babylon of the West.” Perhaps the term “Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy” springs from that reference. This period in Avignon was also about 70 years, the same as the ' time in Babylon. 75 Roper, Renegade, 151. 76 Brecht, Road, 381. 77 AE 36:6 78 AL 3:74 (AE 36:71-72). 79 AL 3:82 (AE 36:78). Cf.:14. 19

Already in 1519, Luther had been asked to discuss the Catholic sacraments and their misuse.80 “I now know for certain that the papacy is the kingdom of Babylon and the power of , the mighty hunter.”81 So this title suggests that, just like the Babylonians had taken most of the people of Israel captive and taken them away to Babylon, the papacy had taken the people captive and taken them away from their “Israel” through the Catholic sacramental system.

Perhaps we need to discuss one preliminary question, before we get into the Catholic sacramental system.

How many sacraments does Luther consider as true sacraments?

To begin with, I must deny that there are seven sacraments, and for the present maintain that there are but three: baptism, penance, and the bread. All three have been subjected to a miserable captivity by the Roman curia, and the church has been robbed of all her liberty. Yet if I were to speak according to the usage of the Scriptures, I should have only one single sacrament, but with three sacramental signs, of which I shall treat more fully at the proper time.82

How much more ought we to remember our exodus from Egypt, and by this remembrance turn back to him who led us through the washing of regeneration, remembrance of which is commended to us for this very reason. This can be done most fittingly in the sacrament of bread and wine. Indeed, in former times these three sacraments - penance, baptism, and the bread - were all celebrated at the same service, and each one supplemented the other.83

There are still a few other things, which it might seem possible to regard as sacraments; namely, all those things to which a divine promise has been given, such as prayer, the Word, and the cross. … Nevertheless, it has seemed proper to restrict the name of sacrament to those promises which have signs attached to them. The remainder, not being bound to signs, are bare promises. Hence there are, strictly speaking, but two sacraments in the church of God - baptism and the bread. For only in these two do we find both the divinely instituted sign and the promise of forgiveness of sins. The sacrament of penance, which I added to these two, lacks the divinely instituted visible sign, and is, as I have said, nothing but a way and a return to baptism.84

Baptism, however, which we have applied to the whole of life, will truly be a sufficient substitute for all the sacraments which we might need as long as we live. And the bread is truly the sacrament of the dying and departing; for in it we commemorate the passing of Christ out of this word, that we may imitate him. Thus we may

80 Cf. A letter to Spalatin dated December 18, 1519. 81 AL 3:15 (AE 36:11). Cf. Gen 10:8-12. 82 AL 3:21 (AE 36:18). 83 AL 3:62 (AE 36:60). 84 AL 3:127 (AE 36:123-124). 20

apportion these two sacraments as follows: baptism may be allotted to the beginning and the entire course of life, while the bread belongs to the end and to death.85

By the end of this treatise, Luther settles on two sacraments. That is because of his definition that he uses, which is the same definition that we use today in our Lutheran circles. This definition comes up again and again throughout this treatise. A sacrament is:

• Instituted by God (cf. third quote above “divine promises”) • Earthly and heavenly elements (cf. third quote above “signs”) • Gives or strengthens faith. (“All the sacraments were instituted to nourish faith.”86)

There is one final remark to this work as a whole. Remember what Luther called the papacy in the last treatise? In this work, Roper notes, “The papacy is the “GRAND HUNTING OF THE BISHOP OF ROME,” that is, Rome is Babylon and the Pope is the Antichrist. Luther had already depicted the Pope as the Antichrist in To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, but there it had been hidden in the final sections of the ; here it is emblazoned in block capitals at the start.”87 This too comes up again and again throughout this treatise.

Lord’s Supper

The worst tyranny of the papacy he finds in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper and to this he gives his chief attention. The first captivity is the withholding of the cup from the laity; the second is found in the doctrine of ; and the third is the sacrifice of the mass. The Sacrament of the is not a magical device by which the priest brings God down from heaven but God’s own revelation of himself where he is.88

The most egregious for Luther was how the Eucharist was understood and practiced. Here he identifies three “captivities” of the Mass by which the papacy imprisons the Christian church: the reservation of the cup, the doctrine of transubstantiation, and the use of the Mass as a sacrifice and work to gain divine favor. In all three of these areas, Luther focuses on the pastoral implications of Rome’s misuse and tyranny.89

In his defense of the Lord’s Supper and its true essence (as in all things doctrinal), Luther appeals to Scripture. He says here that the key verses are Matt 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19f; and 1 Cor 11:23-25.90 In this discussion on the Lord’s Supper, Luther wants to free the people from the three specific captivities mentioned above. Let’s look at these three in more detail.

85 AL 3:127-128 (AE 36:124). 86 AL 3:64 (AE 36:61). 87 Roper, Renegade, 152. 88 AE 36:7. 89 AL 3:11. 90 AL 3:22-27 (AE 36:20-25). 21

How were people held captive in this sacrament?

Withholding the Cup (First Captivity of the Lord’s Supper)

In 1415, this captivity came to a head in Christendom. From the time of the apostles to the , communion was under both kinds, i.e., both the bread and wine were given to the people. At some point in the Middle Ages, the withholding of the cup began and became universally- accepted.91 Practically, perhaps wine was scarce and expensive during the Middle Ages, especially if there was also a famine or plague at the same time. Theologically, perhaps this was done to prevent spilling the wine and in turn, Christ’s blood.92 At the Council of Constance (1414-1418), the Catholic Church ruled to keep withholding the cup from the laity. The invention of concomitance93 was used to justify this act.

Already leading up to this captivity, Luther plants the seed that would topple this error: “That Paul delivered both kinds is so certain that no one has ever had the temerity to say otherwise. ... Both [Matthew 26:27 and Mark 14:23] attach the note of universality to the cup, not to the bread, as though the Spirit foresaw this , by which some would be forbidden to partake of the cup, which Christ desired should be common to all.”94 Luther also makes the correct conclusion that the sacrament was given to all people, not the clergy alone.95 So it is not the clergy that could even change what is not theirs to change. In the end of this section, Luther states, “This only do I desire - that no one should justify the tyranny of Rome, as if it were doing right in forbidding one kind to the laity.”96

So has much changed on this issue from 1520 to now? A little, but not really. Since Vatican II (1962-1965), there has been a compromise on this practice. “... [Communion] under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See, as for instance, to the newly ordained in the Mass of their sacred ordination, to the newly professed in the Mass of their religious profession, and to the newly baptized in the Mass which follows their baptism.”97 The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that Christ is sacramentally present under both bread and wine. Therefore if a person receives only the bread, that kind of communion makes it possible to receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace

91 Thomas Aquinas ((1225-1274) Catholic Dominican theologian at the University of Paris) writes that “But on the contrary, it is the custom of many churches for the body of Christ to be given to the communicant but not the blood. … Therefore, wisely it is observed in certain churches that the blood is not offered to the people for taking, but it is taken by the priest alone.” (Summa Theologica Part 3, Question 80, Article 12). The Council of Lambeth (1281) says that the wine is to be received by the priest alone. Perhaps the two reasons above are intertwined and are a “chicken or egg” situation. 92 This ties into the Catholic teaching of transubstantiation, discussed next by Luther. Transubstantiation teaches that the bread and wine are changed into Christ’s body and blood and thus remain so. Therefore, if the wine gets spilled, it is Christ’s blood that is spilled. That would be a dishonor to Christ’s blood. So to prevent that, just withhold the cup from the laity. Aquinas (Summa Theologica Part 3, Question 80, Article 12) uses this line of argument to justify withholding the cup from the laity. 93 Since blood is in the body of a person, if people just receive Christ’s body (bread) in the Lord’s Supper, they would also receive his blood in the body. 94 AL 3:22-23 (AE 36:20). 95 AL 3:29 (AE 36:27). 96 AL 3:30 (AE 36:28). 97 Cf. , 55, cf. here. (https://tinyurl.com/uydgv9a) 22

(concomitance).98 There is a change in the practice, but the practice can only be changed by the bishop, not because God’s Word says it. (Does the second wall from To the Christian Nobility still stand in Catholicism?)

Transubstantiation (Second Captivity of the Lord’s Supper)

At the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), it was confessed that the bread and wine was “transubstantiated” into Christ’s body and blood.99 Thomas Aquinas was the Catholic theologian who articulated transubstantiation in a very detailed form and became the most influential on this topic. To teach transubstantiation, Aquinas (borrowing from Aristotle) used terms like “substance” and “accidents.” In the Mass (Lord’s Supper), a change of substance happens when the priest says the eucharistic prayer. The bread and wine are changed in their substance (what they actually are) into the substance of Christ’s body and blood. The substance of the bread and wine cease to be there. However, the accidents of the bread and wine remain, e.g., shape, color, taste.

Interestingly enough, a few years after Luther’s death (1546), transubstantiation got the official stamp of approval from the Council of Trent (1551).100 The Council defined transubstantiation as "that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood – the species only of the bread and wine remaining – which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation."101

Where does Luther stand on transubstantiation in 1520? In this treatise, Luther is not quite there yet to call transubstantiation an absolute error.

Therefore I permit every man to hold either of these opinions, as he chooses. My one concern at present is to remove all scruples of conscience, so that no one may fear being called a heretic if he believes that real bread and real wine are present on the altar, and that every one may feel at liberty to ponder, hold, and believe either one view or the other without endangering his salvation. However, I shall now set forth my own view.102

While leaving transubstantiation as an acceptable opinion, Luther states his view in these words: “... I at last found rest for my conscience in the above view, namely that it is real bread and real wine, in which Christ’s real flesh and real blood are present in no other way and to no less a degree than the

98 Cf. 1390 here. At the end of this paragraph, it does state that “the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly.” (vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm) 99 Cf. AL 3:31. Read the product of this council here. (papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm) Under “Constitutions: Confession of Faith”, there is “His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been changed in substance, by God’s power, into his body and blood, so that in order to achieve this mystery of unity we receive from God what he received from us.” 100 The Council of Trent (1545-1563) was convened to refute many of the things brought up in the Reformation and affirm , e.g., number of sacraments, transubstantiation. 101 Council of Trent, 13th session, canon 2, cf. also 13th session, chapter 4. Read the entire session here. (papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/thirteenth-session.htm) 102 AL 3:32 (AE 36:30). 23 others assert them to be under their accidents.”103 As always and also on this topic, Luther wants to keep with the simple, basic meaning of God’s Word.104 He even cites church history to show that what he is advocating is what the Christian Church has taught for the first twelve centuries. In fact, transubstantiation is the newer teaching.105

Luther then gives an example from everyday life for what he is advocating in the Lord’s Supper. Luther uses an illustration of fire and iron. “And why could not Christ include his body in the substance of the bread just as well as in the accidents? In red-hot iron, for instance, the two substances, fire and iron, are so mingled that every part is both iron and fire. Why is it not even more possible that the body of Christ be contained in every part of the substance of the bread?”106 Roper makes the comment, “The red-hot iron is simultaneously both iron and fire - an interesting choice of analogy that would have drawn on Luther’s childhood memories of the mining world.”107

At the heart of the issue here is what Luther states as: “Since the Roman bishop has ceased to be a bishop and has become a tyrant, I fear none of his ; for I know that it is not within his power, nor that of any general council, to make new articles of faith.”108 Can the papacy make new articles of faith - which is what transubstantiation is? Luther contends: No! Luther puts his confidence for what he teaches simply like this: “Why do we not put aside such curiosity and cling simply to the words of Christ, willing to remain in ignorance of what takes place here and content that the real body of Christ is present by virtue of the words? Or is it necessary to comprehend the manner of the divine working in every detail?”109 Beautifully put! Luther echoes the words of Psalm 131 and just takes God at his Word. Put another way, Luther says:

For my part, if I cannot fathom how the bread is the body of Christ, yet I will take my reason captive to the obedience of Christ, and clinging simply to his words, firmly believe not only that the body of Christ is in the bread, but that the bread is the body of Christ. … What does it matter if philosophy cannot fathom this? The Holy Spirit is greater than Aristotle. Does philosophy fathom their transubstantiation?110

The Mass as a Sacrifice (Third Captivity of the Lord’s Supper)

As mentioned in the “Content and Analysis” for this treatise, the bulk of this treatise is spent on the Lord's Supper and Baptism. The bulk of Luther’s time on the Lord’s Supper is against this third captivity of the Lord’s Supper. Catholic theology teaches that the Mass (the Lord’s Supper) is a good work and a sacrifice that people do for God. Luther calls this the “most wicked abuse of all … that the mass is a good work and a sacrifice. And this abuse has brought an endless host of other abuses in its

103 AL 3:31 (AE 36:29). We as Lutherans call this the Real Presence. 104 Cf. AL 3:32-33 (AE 36:30-31). 105 Cf. AL 3:33-34 (AE 36:31). 106 AL 3:35 (AE 36:32). 107 Roper, Renegade, 154. AL 3:35 has the note that this illustration of fire and iron was also used by Origen (c. 184 - c. 253) to describe Christ’s incarnation. 108 AL 3:30 (AE 36:28). 109 AL 3:36 (AE 36:33). 110 AL 3:36-37 (AE 36:34). 24

train …”111 Brecht adds, “But the most godless captivity of the Lord's Supper consists in the fact that it has been made into a work or a sacrifice, which has developed into money-making schemes, brotherhoods, merits, anniversaries, and in fact the entire maintenance of priests and monks.”112 Luther considers this the most godless and wicked because of all the other errors that spawn from it.

Against this third captivity, Luther again goes back to God’s Word alone as the sole authority, nothing else, no one else.

• “But my Christ lives, and we must be careful to give more heed to the Word of God than to all the thoughts of men and of angels.”113 • “For what more sinful idolatry can there be than to abuse God’s promises with perverse opinions and to neglect or extinguish faith in them? For God does not deal, nor has he ever dealt, with man otherwise than through a word of promise, as I have said. We in turn cannot deal with God otherwise than through faith in the Word of his promise.”114

To restore the biblical understanding of the Lord's Supper, Luther addresses two separate stumbling blocks that get in the way of that biblical understanding:

1. Thinking the Mass is a good work. 2. Thinking the Mass is a sacrifice.

To remove this first stumbling block, Luther advocates sticking to the , founded in God’s Word.115

• “You see, therefore, that what we call the Mass is a promise of the forgiveness of sins made to us by God, and such a promise as has been confirmed by the death of the Son of God.”116 • “If the Mass is a promise, as has been said, then access to it is to be gained, not with any works, or powers, or merits of one’s own, but by faith alone.”117 • “For such a promise, being the truth of God, preserves even in hell those who believe it and wait for it.”118

When God’s Word is the sole authority, everything else is put into the correct perspective.

There is no doubt, therefore, that in our day all priests and monks, together with their bishops and all their superiors, are idolaters, living in a most perilous state by reason

111 AL 3:38 (AE 36:35). 112 Brecht. Road, 382. 113 AL 3:38 (AE 36:36). 114 AL 3:44 (AE 36:42). 115 AL 3:38-53 (AE 36:36-51). 116 AL 3:41 (AE 36:38). 117 AL 3:41 (AE 36:38-39). 118 AL 3:42 (AE 36:39). Cf. the footnote in AL “Luther’s reference to “‘hell’ (inferno) here corresponds to the concept of hades or the Hebrew Sheol and the notion that, before Christ, the patriarchs remained imprisoned in this place of the dead until he would release them after his resurrection. Ephesians 4:7-10 and 1 Peter 3:19- 20 were often interpreted as biblical allusions to this, and the view was relatively common in the early church.” 25

of this ignorance, abuse, and mockery of the Mass, or sacrament, of promise of God. For anyone can easily see that these two, promise and faith, must necessarily go together. For without the promise there is nothing to be believed; while without faith the promise is useless, since it is established and fulfilled through faith.119

Luther therefore does not hold back his disdain for what happened in the Lord’s Supper. “But the fact that they have no regard for or faith in the Mass itself, namely, the divine promise, causes them not the slightest qualms of conscience. O worthless religion of this age of ours, the most godless and thankless of all ages!”120 In contrast to this, Luther puts what he tries to do and what he is advocating as the proper preparation for the Lord's Supper like this:

Hence the only worthy preparation and proper observance is faith, the faith by which we believe in the Mass, that is, in the divine promise. … By what godless work could they sin more grievously against the truth of God, than by this unbelief of theirs? By it, as much as in their lies, they convict God of being a liar and a maker of empty promises. The safest course, therefore, will be to go to the Mass in the same spirit in which you would go to hear any other promise of God, that is, prepared not to do or contribute much yourself, but to believe and accept all this is promised you there, or proclaimed as promises through the ministry of the priest. If you do not come in this spirit, beware of attending at all, for you will surely be going to your condemnation. I was right then in saying that the whole power of the Mass consists in the words of Christ, in which he testifies that forgiveness of sins is bestowed on all those who believe that his body is given and his blood poured out for them.121

That is taking God at his Word.

When that does not happen, all the other errors in this sacrament happen. “For where faith dies and the word of faith is silent, there works and the prescribing of works immediately crowd into their place. By them we have been carried away out of our own land, as into a Babylonian captivity, and despoiled of all our precious possessions. This has been the fate of the Mass; it has been converted by the teaching of godless people into a good work.”122 See why Luther calls this the most wicked abuse of all? God’s Word has been twisted and contorted. God has been twisted and contorted by godless people. If someone takes God at this Word, you cannot let that twisting and contorting go unaddressed. “This is the very thing that has constrained me to write of the captivity of the church. For it is in this manner that the sacred testament of God has been forced into the service of a most impious traffic. … The truth is mightier than all of them. If you are able to refute Christ, who teaches that the Mass is a testament and a sacrament, then I will admit that they are in the right.”123

119 AL 3:45 (AE 36:42). 120 AL 3:45 (AE 36:43). 121 AL 3:45 (AE 36:43). 122 AL 3:49 (AE 36:47). 123 AL 3:52 (AE 36:49). 26

As Luther concludes this first stumbling block, he takes this stumbling block and shows what it actually does to God and to those who believe it to be true.

Why do you hesitate to give God the glory and to confess his truth - that all priests today are perversely mistaken, who regard the Mass as a work by which they may relieve their own needs and those of others, whether dead or alive? I am uttering unheard of and startling things, but if you will consider what the Mass is, you will realize that I have spoken the truth. The fault lies with our false sense of security, which blinds us to the wrath of God that is raging against us.124

So Luther sums up his defense against this first stumbling block with these words: “It is certain, therefore, that the Mass is not a work which may be communicated to others, but the object of faith (as has been said), for the strengthening and nourishing of each one’s own faith.”125

To the second stumbling block (thinking that the Mass is a sacrifice),126 Luther begins by saying: “Over against all these things, firmly entrenched as they are, we must resolutely set the words and example of Christ. For unless we firmly hold that the Mass is the promise of testament of Christ, as the words clearly say, we shall lose the whole gospel and all its comfort.”127 Again sticking with God and his Word, Luther removes this stumbling block. Luther understands that God’s Word is all he needs, and so he keeps using God’s Word again and again. Here against this stumbling block, Luther brings up this point as well. “For faith alone means peace of conscience, while unbelief means only distress of conscience.”128 Faith in God and his Word is what brings a person true peace of conscience. Luther personally found this peace of conscience after he himself had gone back to God’s Word. He now wants others to find that same peace of conscience. After stating again his sole authority against this stumbling block, Luther dismantles the elements of the Mass that were considered to be proofs for it being a sacrifice, e.g., of the bread and cup.

On the Mass, one could sum up Luther in this quote: “According to its substance, therefore, the Mass is nothing but the aforesaid words of Christ: ‘Take and eat, etc.’ … From this you will see that nothing else is needed for a worthy holding of Mass than a faith that relies confidently on this promise, believes in Christ to be true in these words of his, and does not doubt that these infinite blessings have been bestowed upon it.”129 A practical benefit of this biblical understanding of the Mass is phrased as follows:

Who would not shed tears of gladness, indeed, almost faint for joy in Christ, if he believed with unshaken faith that this inestimable promise of Christ belonged to him? How could he help but love so great a benefactor, who of his own accord offers,

124 AL 3:52 (AE 36:50). 125 AL 3:53 (AE 36:51). 126 AL 3:53-59 (AE 36:51-57). 127 AL 3:54 (AE 36:51). 128 AL 3:59 (AE 36:57). 129 AL 3:43 (AE 36:40). 27

promises, and grants such great riches and this eternal inheritance to one who is unworthy and deserving of something far different?130

In this section on the Lord’s Supper, Luther already looks ahead to baptism. Luther’s next words would be unheard-of in 1520, but not so in our time. “Who has ever been so mad as to regard baptism as a good work, or what candidate for baptism has believed that he was performing a work which he might offer to God on behalf of himself and communicate to others?”131

Baptism

What could have happened here? Where did things go wrong in this sacrament? Roper sums up the heart of the issue for Luther: “But the Pope had introduced endless numbers of works and ceremonies that destroyed the true meaning of baptism.”132 “In his discussion of Baptism Luther repudiates monasticism and insists that no vow should ever be taken beyond the baptismal vow.”133 Let’s see how baptism was taken captive and thus also the people.

What happened to baptism?

At this time, people were disregarding their baptism. This seems to stem from some comments from St. Jerome,134 who “terms penance ‘the second plank after shipwreck,’ as if baptism were not penance. This has given rise to those endless burdens of vows, religious orders, works, satisfactions, pilgrimages, indulgences, and monastic sects, and from them in turn has arisen that flood of books, questions, opinions, and man-made ordinances which the whole world cannot contain.”135 People had disregarded their baptism and so into its place, they placed many other things.

How did Luther address this?

Luther tries to get people back to the blessing of baptism. He talks about the two parts of baptism, i.e., what makes baptism so special and still important in the life of a Christian. The first part of baptism is the divine promise. Notice what Luther says about that divine promise and its impact on baptism.

• “For just as the truth of this divine promise, once pronounced over us, continues until death, so our faith in it ought never to cease, but to be nourished and strengthened until death by the continual remembrance of this promise made to us in baptism. … For the truth of the

130 AL 3:43 (AE 36:40-41). 131 AL 3:50 (AE 36:48). Cf. the Southern Baptist Convention’s beliefs here. (sbc.net/aboutus/basicbeliefs.asp) 132 Roper, Renegade, 152. 133 AE 36:7. 134 Lombard, Sentences 4, d. 14, c. 1: “As Jerome says, it is ‘the second plank after shipwreck,’ because, if anyone has corrupted by sin the clothing of innocence which he received at baptism, he may repair it by the remedy of penance. … Those who have fallen after baptism can be renewed by penance, but not by baptism; it is lawful for someone to repent several times, but not to be baptized several times.” Jerome’s quote is from his Letters 130, 9, “Let us know nothing of penitence, so that the thought of it does not lead us into sin. It is a plank for those who have had the misfortune to be shipwrecked.” Jerome’s words seemed to have morphed into something different from its initial intent. 135 AL 3:60 (AE 36:58). 28

promise once made remains steadfast, always ready to receive us back with open arms when we return.”136 • “Their hearts will find wonderful comfort and will be encouraged to hope for mercy when they consider that the promise which God made to him, which cannot possibly lie, is still unbroken and unchanged, and indeed, cannot be changed by sins … This truth of God, I say, will sustain them, so that if all else should fail, this truth, if they believe in it, will not fail.”137 • Thus you see how rich a Christian is, that is, one who has been baptized! Even if those who have been baptized would, they could not lose their salvation, however much they sinned, unless they refused to believe. For no sin can condemn them save unbelief alone. All other sins, so long as the faith in God’s promise made in baptism returns or remains, are immediately blotted out through that same faith, or rather through the truth of God, because he cannot deny himself if you confess him and faithfully cling to him in his promise.138

See how Luther keeps going back to this divine promise to find baptism’s efficacy and endurance in the life of a Christian? Luther would rephrase these points in the Large Catechism,139 when he again talks about baptism and its importance in the life of a Christian. Now building on that divine promise, Luther makes other observations about baptism.

If you would be saved, you must begin with the faith of the sacraments, without any works whatever. The works will follow faith, but do not think too lightly of faith, for it is the most excellent and difficult of all works. Through it alone you will be saved, even if you should be compelled to do without any other works. For faith is a work of God, not of man, as Paul teaches [Eph. 2:8]. The other works he works through us and with our help, but this one alone he works in us and without our help. … For the man baptizes, and yet does not baptize. He baptizes in that he performs the work of immersing the person to be baptized; he does not baptize, because in so doing he acts not on his own authority but in God’s stead. … Ascribe both to God alone, and look upon the person administering it as simply the vicarious instrument of God, by which the Lord sitting in heaven thrusts you under the water with his own hands, and promises you forgiveness of your sins, speaking to you upon earth with a human voice by the mouth of his minister.140

AMEN! Since it all depends on the divine promise, it always works. It is God doing all the work, 100%.

The second part of baptism is the sign (sacrament) “which is that immersion in water …”141 At issue here was how is the sign to be understood. Is it powerful in and of itself?

136 AL 3:61 (AE 36:59). 137 AL 3:62 (AE 36:59-60). 138 AL 3:63 (AE 36:60-61). 139 Cf. IV, 77-82. 140 AL 3:64-65 (AE 36:62-63). 141 AL 3:66 (AE 36:64). For more on the modes of baptism cf. Mark Lenz, “The Scriptures Establish the Purpose of Holy Baptism,” WLS Symposium, 2002, 2-3. (https://essays.wls.wels.net/handle/123456789/3035) 29

Thus it is not baptism that justifies or benefits anyone, but it is faith in that word of promise to which baptism is added. This faith justifies, and fulfills that which baptism signifies. … The sacraments, on the contrary, are not fulfilled when they are taking place, but when they are being believed. … We know that wherever there is a divine promise, there faith is required, and that these two are so necessary to each other that neither can be effective apart from the other. For it is not possible to believe unless there is a promise, and the promise is not established unless it is believed. But where these two meet, they give a real and most certain efficacy to the sacraments. Hence, to seek the efficacy of the sacrament apart from the promise and apart from the faith is to labor in vain and to find condemnation.142

The waters of baptism are powerful because they are connected to God’s Word, to the divine promise. With that understanding, Luther is refuting that Catholic idea of opus operatum, i.e., that the sacraments are effective when the priest says and does the motions of the rite. No, Luther contends! Since the divine promise is the first part of baptism, that is what gives the sacrament its efficacy and power.143 It is not the individual performing the rite. It is not the waters of baptism themselves. It is God’s Word.

What else does Luther say in connection to baptism?

Luther then discusses two side topics connected to baptism. The first side topic is that baptism signifies death and resurrection. In this topic, you again get to hear echoes of what would come in 1529, the Catechism.144

• “For this reason, as soon as we begin to believe, we also begin to die to this world and live to God in the life to come; so that faith is truly a death and a resurrection, that is, it is that spiritual baptism into which we are submerged and from which we rise.”145 • “Here again you see that the sacrament of baptism, even with respect to its sign, is not a matter of the moment, but something permanent. Although the ceremony itself is soon over, the thing it signifies continues until we die, yes, even until we rise on the last day.”146 • “For our whole life should be baptism, and the fulfilling of the sign or sacrament of baptism, since we have been set free from all else and given over to baptism alone, that is, to death and resurrection.”147

In this first side topic, Luther also charges the papacy with some abuses. Note again why Luther does this. He has just expressed what is the most important part of baptism: the divine promise. That is what makes baptism powerful and effective. Therefore, anything or anyone who obscures, defies, or denies that divine promise is doing the same to God.

142 AL 3:68-70 (AE 36:66-67). 143 Cf. Large Catechism IV, 26-27. 144 Cf. Large Catechism IV, 64-73. 145 AL 3:70-71 (AE 36:68). 146 AL 3:71 (AE 36:69). 147 AL 3:72 (AE 36:70). 30

• “This glorious liberty of ours and this understanding of baptism have been taken captive in our day, and to whom can we give the blame except the Roman pontiff with his despotism?”148 • “Instead he seeks only to oppress us with his decrees and laws, and to ensnare us as captives to his tyrannical power.”149 • “Therefore I say: Neither pope nor bishop nor any other man has the right to impose a single syllable of law upon Christians without their consent; if anyone does, it is done in the spirit of tyranny.”150 • “Yet with such verbal fictions they not only take captive the true liberty of the church; they utterly destroy it, even worse than the Turk, and in opposition to the word of the Apostle … For to be subjected to their statutes and tyrannical laws is indeed to become slaves of men.”151 • “In short, where there is true faith, there the word of faith must of necessity be also. Why then does not an unbelieving pope now and then hear a believing servant of his, who has the word of faith? Blindness, sheer blindness, reigns among the pontiffs.”152 • “Being wolves, they masquerade as shepherds, and being Antichrists, they wish to be honored as Christ.”153 • “Unless they will abolish their laws and ordinances, and restore to Christ’s churches their liberty and have it taught among them, they are guilty of all the souls that perish under this miserable captivity, and the papacy is truly the kingdom of Babylon and of the very Antichrist.”154

The second side topic for Luther here is the difference between and baptism. Again, Catholic theology had pushed aside baptism (and its vow to live a life of thankfulness to God) in favor of its own laws and ceremonies, e.g., religious vows and particularly here, monastic vows.

• Vows should either be abolished by a general edict, especially those taken for life, and all people recalled to the vows of baptism, or else everyone should be diligently warned not to take a vow rashly. No one should be encouraged to do so; indeed, permission should be given only with difficulty and reluctance. For we have vowed enough in baptism, more than we can ever fulfill; if we give ourselves to the keeping of this one vow, we shall have all we can do.155 • But I would most strongly advise against setting up and sanctioning the making of vows as a public mode of life. … First, because it runs directly counter to the Christian life, for a vow is a kind of ceremonial law and a human or presumption, from which the church has been set free through baptism; for a Christian is subject to no law but the law of God. Second, because there is no instance in Scripture of such a vow, especially of lifelong chastity, obedience, or poverty.156

148 ibid. 149 AL 3:73 (AE 36:70). 150 ibid. 151 AL 3:73 (AE 36:70-71). 152 AL 3:74 (AE 36:71). 153 AL 3:75 (AE 36:72) 154 AL 3:75 (AE 36:72). 155 AL 3:78 (AE 36:74). 156 AL 3:80 (AE 36:76). 31

• Therefore I advise no one to enter any religious order or the priesthood; indeed, I advise everyone against it - unless he is forearmed with this knowledge and understands that the works of monks and priests, however holy and arduous they may be, do not differ one whit in the sight of God from the works of the rustic laborer in the field or the woman going about her household tasks, but that all works are measured before God by faith alone …157 • From what has been said we recognize two glaring errors of the Roman pontiff. In the first place he grants dispensation from vows and does it as if he alone of all Christians possessed this authority … The second error is this: The pope decrees, on the other hand, that a marriage is dissolved if one party enters a monastery without the consent of the other, provided that the marriage has not yet been consummated.158 • “… [Y]ou [the pope] do not exalt faith, which alone exalts all things, but works, which are nothing in the sight of God, or which are all alike as far as merit is concerned.”159

The Rest of the Sacraments

What about the other five Catholic sacraments?

As noted earlier, Luther spends about half of this treatise on the Lord’s Supper and Baptism. So, this paper will follow his lead and try to deal with the remaining five Catholic sacraments in quick succession.

Penance is the next sacrament. For penance, Luther wastes no time in getting to the issue at hand: greed. “For, because these two sacraments [Lord’s Supper and penance] furnish opportunity for gain and profit, the greed of the shepherds has raged in them with incredible zeal against the flock of Christ, although, as we have just seen in our discussion of vows, baptism too has sadly declined among adults and become the servant of greed.”160

An interesting side note is that here Luther does at times consider this to be an actual third sacrament - on par with the Lord’s Supper and baptism. However, notice why he does that. Here is his definition for a sacrament, when he discusses penance, “For this sacrament, like the other two, consists in the word of divine promise and our faith, and they have undermined both of them.”161 There is no mention of an earthly element in this definition here. With that being remembered, Luther’s other comments on penance will make better sense.

• “So the promise of baptism remains to some extent, at least for infants; but the promise of the bread and the cup has been destroyed and made subservient to greed, faith has become a work and the testament has become a sacrifice. The promise of penance, however, has been transformed into the most oppressive despotism, being used to establish a sovereignty which is more than merely temporal.”162

157 AL3:81 (AE 36:78). 158 AL 3:82-83 (AE 36:79). 159 AL 3:83 (AE 36:80). 160 AL 3:84-85 (AE 36:81). 161 AL 3:85 (AE 36:81-82). 162 AL 3:86 (AE 36:83). 32

• “Not content with these things, this Babylon of ours has so completely extinguished faith that it insolently denies its necessity in this sacrament. Indeed, with the wickedness of Antichrist it brands it as for anyone to assert that faith is necessary.”163

In penance, Luther divides the Roman Catholic abuses into two parts.

1. “The first and chief abuse of this sacrament is that they have completely abolished it.”164 The papacy does this mainly by removing the things that make up penance: the divine promise and faith. So, with that removed, the papacy puts something else in its place. 2. “They have divided penance into three parts - contrition, confession, and satisfaction; but in such a way that they have removed whatever was good in each of them, and have established in each of them their caprice and tyranny.”165

On contrition, Luther’s biggest issue is with contrition’s definition. The papacy teaches that contrition is a merit and a work performed by the person, not a work of faith. Because of that, comes a host of other issues. Luther writes:

• “A contrite heart is a precious thing, but it is found only where there is an ardent faith in the promises and threats of God.”166 • “Therefore, although there is some truth in their teaching that contrition is to be attained by the enumeration and contemplation (as they call it) of their sins, yet their teaching is perilous and perverse so long as they do not teach first of all the beginnings and causes of contrition …”167 • “Beware then, of putting your trust in your own contrition and of ascribing the forgiveness of sins to your own remorse.”168 • “Thus we owe whatever good there may be in our penance, not to our scrupulous enumeration of sins, but to the truth of God and to our faith. All other things are the works and fruits which follow of their own accord. They do not make a man good, but are done by the man who is already made good through faith in the truth of God.”169 • “But the trouble is not so much that contrition has been exposed to tyranny and avarice, as that it has been given over completely to wickedness and pestilent teaching. It is confession and satisfaction that have become the chief workshops of greed and power.”170

163 AL 3:86-87 (AE 36:83). 164 AL 3:85 (AE 36:81) 165 AL 3:87 (AE 36:83-84). 166 AL 3:87 (AE 36:84). 167 AL 3:88 (AE 36:84). 168 ibid. 169 AL 3:88 (AE 36:85). 170 AL 3:89 (AE 36:85). 33

On confession, Luther does believe private confession is good, but he also says, “There is just one thing about it that I abominate, and that is the fact that this kind of confession has been subjected to the despotism and extortion of the pontiffs.”171 How does the papacy do that?

• “Yet in all of these faith in God is extinguished and idolatry fostered, as we see in our day. … They inculcate in the people nothing but their own inventions with fear and violence.”172 • “Hence, I have no doubt but that every one is absolved from his secret sins when he has made confession, privately before any brother or sister, either of his own accord or after being rebuked, and has sought pardon and amended our ways, no matter how much the violence of the pontiffs may rage against it. For Christ has given to every one of his believers the power to absolve even open sins.”173

On satisfaction, again Luther has an issue with the Catholic definition. For by its greed, the papacy so corrupts satisfaction that it is no longer “the renewal of one’s life.”174 What had the papacy done with satisfaction?

• “For these monstrous things we are indebted to you, O Roman See, … with which you have corrupted all humankind, so that they believe they can with works make satisfaction for sin to God, when God can be satisfied only by the faith of a contrite heart!”175 • “Moreover, how many, I ask, are possessed with the notion that they are in a saved state and are making satisfaction for their sins, if they only mumble over, word for word, the prayers imposed by the priest, even though meanwhile they never give a thought to the amending of their way of life!”176

After penance and its issues, Luther moves to confirmation. In this short section, Luther begins to question why this (and the ones that follow) would be a sacrament. “But if everything the apostles did is a sacrament, why have they not rather made preaching a sacrament? I do not say this because I condemn the seven sacraments, but because I deny that they can be proved from the Scriptures.”177 In here, one gets to see again Luther’s definition of sacraments:

But instead of this we seek sacraments that have been divinely instituted, and among these we see no reason for numbering confirmation. For to constitute a sacrament there must be above all things else, a word of divine promise, by which faith may be exercised. But we read nowhere that Christ ever gave a promise concerning confirmation … For this reason it is sufficient to regard confirmation as a certain churchly rite or sacramental ceremony, similar to other ceremonies, such as the blessing of water and the like. … Still, these things cannot be called sacraments of faith,

171 AL 3:89 (AE 36:86). 172 AL 3:90 (AE 36:87). 173 AL 3:91 (AE 36:88). 174 AL 3:92 (AE 36:89). 175 AL 3:93 (AE 36:89-90). 176 AL 3:93 (AE 36:90). 177 AL 3:94-95 (AE 36:91). 34

because they have no divine promise connected with them, neither do they save, but the sacraments do save those who believe the divine promise.178

Then comes marriage. Luther again goes back to his definition for a sacrament, ““We have said that in every sacrament there is a word of divine promise, to be believed by whoever receives the sign, and that the sign alone cannot be a sacrament. Nowhere do we read that the man who marries a wife receives any grace of God.”179 To show his point that marriage is not a sacrament, Luther mentions that marriage is not limited to believers, but is also among heathens and unbelievers. Luther then deals with a few side issues related to marriage, e.g., , impotence. In this section, there are two memorable quotes. These quotes really get at why the papacy thinks it can change or introduce items for Christians.

• They have transformed the Scriptures according to their own dreams, making anything out of any passage whatsoever. Thus they continually chatter nonsense about the terms: good work, evil work, sin, grace, righteousness, virtue, and almost all the fundamental words and things. For they employ them all after their own arbitrary judgment, learned from the writings of men, to the detriment of both the truth of God and of our salvation.180 • “But most of all we should guard against impairing the authority of the Holy Scriptures. For those things which have been delivered to us by God in the sacred Scriptures must be sharply distinguished from those that have been invented by men in the church, no matter how eminent they may be for saintliness and scholarship.”181

After marriage is ordination. Luther is fine with saying that “ordination is a certain churchly rite, on a par with many others introduced by the church fathers, such as the consecration of vessels, houses, , water, salt, candles, herbs, wine, and the like.”182 However, again what does Luther do? He goes to his definition of a sacrament. “Of this sacrament the church of Christ knows nothing; it is an invention of the church of the pope. Not only is there nowhere any promise of grace attached to it, but there is not a single word said about it in the whole New Testament. Now it is ridiculous to put forth as a sacrament of God something that cannot be proved to have been instituted by God.”183 In this quote and in this section on ordination, Luther states why he has the definition he does for a sacrament. “We ought to see that every article of faith of which we boast is certain, pure, and based on clear passages of Scripture.”184 He sticks with what God says in his Word. Luther then goes on an excursus on what is the role of the church to God and his Word.

• “The church has no power to make new divine promises of grace, as some prate, who hold that what is decreed by the church is of no less authority than what is decreed by God, since the church is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.”185

178 AL 3:95-96 (AE 36:92). 179 AL 3:96 (AE 36:92). 180 AL 3:98 (AE 36:94). 181 AL 3:100 (AE 36:96). 182 AL 3:112 (AE 36:108) cf. also AL 3:116 (AE 36:113). 183 AL 3:111 (AE 36:106-107). 184 AL 3:111 (AE 36:107). 185 ibid. 35

• “That is to say, it is the promises of God that make the church, and not the church that makes the promise of God. For the Word of God is incomparably superior to the church, and in this Word the church, being a creature, has nothing to , ordain, or make, but only to be decreed, ordained, and made. For who begets his own parent? Who first brings forth his own maker?”186 • “This one thing indeed the church can do: It can distinguish the Word of God from the words of men …”187 • For example, our mind declares with unerring certainty that three and seven are ten; and yet it cannot give a reason why this is true, although it cannot deny that it is true. It is clearly taken captive by the truth; and, rather than judging the truth, it is itself judged by it. There is such a mind also in the church, when under the enlightenment of the Spirit she judges and approves doctrines; she is unable to prove it, and yet is most certain of having it.188 • “Let this then stand fast: The church can give no promises of grace; that is the work of God alone. Therefore she cannot institute a sacrament.”189

As Luther heads back to ordination, he deals with another issue. There is the Catholic notion that ordination into the priesthood somehow makes a person better than the commoner. Luther addresses this issue and also how to change it. Get back to God’s Word!

• They have sought by this means to set up a seed bed of implacable discord by which clergy and laymen should be separated from each other farther than heaven from earth, to the incredible injury of the grace of baptism and to the confusion of our fellowship in the gospel. Here, indeed, are the roots of that detestable tyranny of the clergy over the laity. Trusting in the external anointing by which their hands are consecrated, in the tonsure and in vestments, they not only exalt themselves above the rest of the lay Christians, who are only anointed with the Holy Spirit, but regard them almost as dogs and unworthy to be included with themselves in the church.190 • If they were forced to grant that all of us that have been baptized are equally priests, as indeed we are, and that only the ministry was committed to them, yet with our common consent, they would then know that they have no right to rule over us except insofar as we freely concede it. … But the priests, as we call them, are ministers chosen from among us. All that they do is done in our name; the priesthood is nothing but a ministry.191 • “Let all, therefore, who knows himself to be a Christian, be assured of this, that we are all equally priests, that is to say, we have the same power in respect to the Word and the sacraments. However, no one may make use of this power except by the consent of the community or by the call of a superior.”192

186 ibid. 187 ibid. 188 AL 3:112 (AE 36:108). 189 ibid. 190 AL 3:115 (AE 36:112). 191 AL 3:115-116 (AE 36:112-113). 192 AL 3:119 (AE 36:116). 36

Then finally comes extreme unction/final anointing (anointing of the sick).193 Luther, in his typical sarcasm, states, “To this rite of anointing the sick the theologians of our day have made two additions which are worthy of them: first they call it a sacrament, and second, they make it the last sacrament.”194 Again as in the other six, Luther goes back to God’s Word. Even when Catholic theology goes back to the authority of the apostle of James (5:14-15) for proof of extreme unction, see how Luther responds:

• “I will say nothing of the fact that many assert with much probability that this is not by James the apostle195 … But even if the apostle James did write it, I still would say that, no apostle has the right on his own authority to institute a sacrament, that is, to give a divine promise with a sign attached.”196 • “It is evident, therefore, that they have arbitrarily and without any authority made a sacrament and an extreme unction out of the words of the apostle which they have wrongly interpreted.”197 • “Because here, as in so many other places, it [the Catholic interpretation of James 5:15] affirms what the Scriptures deny, and denies what the Scriptures affirm.”198 • “… [A] sacrament depends solely on the promise and institution of God, and requires faith on the part of the recipient.”199 • “Now I do not condemn this our ‘sacrament’ of extreme unction, but I firmly deny that it is what the apostle James prescribes; for his unction agrees with ours neither in form, use, power, nor purpose.”200

Is there an easy way to remember all of this?

There is a lot in this treatise! Braun offers this short, concise summary of The Babylonian Captivity:

For Luther, only Baptism and the Lord’s Supper carried New Testament authority. Penance, although it had the same authority and announced forgiveness, had been corrupted and had no visible earthly component. Marriage - even if instituted by God - along with confirmation, holy orders, and last rites, may be important, but they do not rise to the level of sacrament. Marriage had no visible element like Baptism and Holy Communion. Confirmation, ordination, and last rites were church rites that were perhaps even profitable for the church, but they lacked Christ’s institution. Luther

193 “The Anointing of the Sick” is called “Extreme Unction” when it is administered on people at the point of death, cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1512. Read it here. (vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4K.HTM) 194 AL 3:120 (AE 36:117). 195 It is generally assumed today that the writer is James, the half-brother of Jesus and early head of the Christian church in Jerusalem, cf. Acts 15. 196 AL 3:121 (AE 36:118). 197 AL 3:122 (AE 36:119). 198 ibid. 199 AL 3:124 (AE 36:121). 200 AL 3:125 (AE 36:122). 37

observed, ‘Neither pope nor bishop nor any other man has the right to impose a single syllable of law upon a Christian man without his consent” (70).201

Immediate Impact

In it, Luther had demolished the church as a sacramental institution which nurtured a Christians life from cradle to grave, thereby also robbing it of a great portion of its power and influence over Christians. This was in keeping with the tone of the writing, which was directed toward freedom, in part the freedom of the sacraments, but in part also dealing directly with the freedom of Christians.202

His opponent Thomas Murner decided to translate the tract into German, because he was convinced that as soon as people read it, they would be appalled. He could hardly have made a bigger mistake. The translation appeared with what had now become the standard image of Luther - based on Cranach’s depiction of him as the pious monk - and, printed in Augsburg, it simply served to spread Luther’s teaching yet more widely.203

This was one of the major works that Luther had to answer for at the Diet of Worms (1521). “As became apparent in the course of the discussion over Luther’s case at the Diet of Worms, for example, they were prepared to agree with him in many things, or, at least, to display some understanding for him, but this writing they could not affirm; it was the chief evidence of Luther’s heresy.”204

Henry VIII (1491-1547), King of England, as a staunch Catholic, ordered Luther’s writings to be publicly burned in London, in keeping with Exsurge Domine. He also took this occasion to write Assertio Septem Sacramentorum (1521).205 Henry had actually started writing this work after reading Luther’s attack on indulgences, but was spurred on to add to and publish this work after reading The Babylonian Captivity. For this work, Pope Leo X (1475-1521) gave to Henry the honorific Fidei Defensor “Defender of the Faith” and granted a ten-year for all who read Henry’s book. Because of all of this, there were continued publications and letters between Henry and Luther until 1527. As the Lord would work things out, the Catholic faith that Henry had defended against Luther in 1521, Henry himself formally left (1534) to start his own: the Church of England.206

201 John Braun, Luther’s Protest: From 95 Theses to Reformation (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2016), 52. 202 Brecht, Road, 384. 203 Roper, Renegade, 151. Remember that Luther wrote this in Latin. Latin was the language for theology and the theologians. This was not intended for the common person. However, Murner’s translation into German made it accessible to the people. Thus, this translation further exposed more issues in the Roman Catholic Church and won more people to Luther’s side. 204 Brecht, Road, 384. 205 That is The Defense of the Seven Sacraments. Thomas More also assisted with this work. 206 This is the mother church of what is globally called the Anglican Communion. Here in the United States, the Episcopal Church is a part of the Anglican Communion. 38

On a positive note, John Bugenhagen (1485-1558) was won over to Luther’s side through this treatise. After his first reading of this treatise, Bugenhagen initially considered Luther a reckless heretic. However, after reading this treatise again and with closer inspection, he was convinced otherwise. Bugenhagen moved to Wittenberg to study in the spring of 1521. He not only played an important role in the Reformation but also personally in Luther’s life. He became Luther’s friend, coworker, and colleague. He also was Luther’s pastor at St. Mary’s Church in Wittenberg. He presided over Luther’s wedding (1525) and later preached at his funeral (1546). Even after Luther’s death, Bugenhagen took care of Luther’s widow and children.

Relative Relevance for Today (So what did you learn from this treatise?)

“The primary importance of this treatise for the present-day reader of Luther lies in its courageous interpretation of the sacraments. But it is important also for its place in Luther’s progressive assault upon the total position of the Romans.”207 There are a few other things to note.

• Roman Catholicism still teaches these seven sacraments. “Christ instituted the sacraments of the new law. There are seven: Baptism, Confirmation (or Chrismation), the Eucharist, Penance, the Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders and Matrimony. The seven sacraments touch all the stages and all the important moments of Christian life: they give birth and increase, healing and mission to the Christian's life of faith.”208 • Luther’s pastoral heart for the people. “In fact, it is precisely the perceived lack of attention to Scripture and to pastoral care that drives Luther’s ire and polemic. Christians are being fleeced, coerced, and misled by those who should be guiding and caring for consciences. The errors of Rome are intolerable because they are so injurious to faith.”209 • The substance of heresy: people changing God’s Word. “Men of the most free will they are, even in the things that are God’s; they change and change again, and throw everything into confusion.”210 • If God’s Word can be changed, where does it end? “Otherwise, if we permit one institution of Christ to be changed, we make all of his laws invalid, and any man may make bold to say that he is not bound by any other law or institution of Christ. For a single exception, especially in the Scriptures, invalidates the whole.”211

Luther’s words here are sadly seen again and again in church history: one change in God’s Word can lead (and often does) to other changes in God’s Word. So, Luther gives the sound advice: Principiis obsta212 “Resist the beginnings.” Stop one change before it leads to other changes. “I defy you to prove that you have been given any authority to change these things by as much as one hair, much less to accuse others of heresy because they disregard your arrogance. It is rather you who deserve to be

207 AE 36:5. 208 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1210 cf. here. (vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2.htm) 209 AL 3:10-11 210 AL 3:23 (AE 36:20-21). 211 AL 3:23 (AE 36:21). 212 Cf. Ovid’s poem Remedia Amoris “Remedy for Love,” line 91. Perhaps this is like the phrase “Nip it in the bud.” 39 charged with the crime of godlessness and despotism.”213 Luther so succinctly sums up the relevant relevance for us with this sentence: “For what is asserted without the Scriptures or proven revelation may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed.”214

In fact, he fully expects a papal bull against him threatening him with the most dire consequences if he does not recant, and in the closing paragraphs of this treatise he explains in bitter irony that he intends this document to be the beginning or prelude of his “recantation.” If he is to recant or rechant or unsing what he has been singing hitherto, he will not really “change his tune,” but will only “pitch it in a higher key.”215

On November 29, 1520, Luther published Assertio omnium articulorum M. Lutheri per Bullam Leonis, X. novissimam damnatorum.216 In the same month, he would also publish The Freedom of a Christian. Both would continue his “recantation.” This paper now turns to The Freedom of a Christian.

Fuller Outline of This Work217

• Dedication and Introduction • Lord’s Supper o First Captivity: Withholding the Cup o Second Captivity: Transubstantiation o Third Captivity: The Mass as a Sacrifice • Baptism o First Part of Baptism: The Divine Promise o Second Part of Baptism: The Sign o Baptism Signifies Death and Resurrection o Religious Vows vs. Baptism • Penance o Contrition o Confession o Satisfaction • Confirmation • Marriage o Marriage Is Not a Sacrament o Canonical Impediments to Marriage o Impotence o Divorce • Ordination • Extreme Unction • Conclusion

213 AL 3:27 (AE 36:25). 214 AL 3:31 (AE 36:29). 215 AE 36:5. 216 That is Assertion of All the Articles of Martin Luther Condemned in the Latest Bull of Leo X. 217 This outline is a condensed version of the one found in The Annotated Luther series. 40

The Freedom of a Christian

The least you need to know218

• Title: The Freedom of a Christian219 • Published: November 11, 1520 • Original Language: Latin and German220 • Outline: o The Spiritual, New, and Inner Person o The Outer Person • Summary from someone smarter than me: First, the Christian is free and subject to no one; then second, the Christian is a servant and subject to all. He is free, since Christ has won our salvation entirely and alone; he is free, since in the gospel of forgiveness, Christ gives us all the perfection that the law requires. … But while the new man is perfect because of the forgiveness earned by Christ and given in the gospel, he lives in the flesh, in the world, with people. And the new man living still in the flesh needs to discipline the flesh by means of those good works that are pleasing to God and useful to his neighbor. Thus it is that the Christian is the servant of all and subject to all, for the sake of discipline. Without such discipline he would again fall completely in love with the world; ultimately he would abandon Christ and faith altogether.221

218 For those who may want a little more than this summary, but still quite manageable, please read all the pages from Deutschlander’s The . He has an excellent summary of this work on pages 90-92. 219 Titles of books into another language are always tricky to translate. (The previous treatises’ titles can be translated in various ways as well.) This treatise is usually titled On the Freedom of a Christian, On Christian Freedom, Christian Freedom. If one wants a fuller title of the treatise, it is Dissertation on Christian Freedom Recognized by the Author. A Letter of the same to Pope Leo X. 220 Cf. AL 1:468. That Luther writes this treatise at nearly the same time, in both Latin and German … just makes this Latin and German professor smile. 221 Daniel Deutschlander, The Theology of the Cross (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2008), 90- 91. 41

Content and Analysis

In The Address to the German Nobility, published August 18, he attacked the authority of the papacy over secular rulers, denied that the pope was the final interpreter of Scripture, assailed the corruption of the Roman Curia, enunciated his important doctrine of the universal priesthood of believers, and called for a drastic reform of the church. In The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, published October 6, he attacked the sacramental system of the church by means of which the ecclesiastical hierarchy had gained its control over all Christians. The Freedom of a Christian, published early in November, differed from the preceding two pamphlets in that it was written in a conciliatory spirit. Yet it contained a positive and unequivocal statement of Luther’s evangelical theology as applied to Christian life.222

“The most beautiful writing from this period is Luther’s On the Freedom of a Christian, which appeared in November 1520. Written in German, it is barely thirty pages long. With delicious irony, Luther wrote it at the same time as a letter of ‘apology’ to Pope Leo X, and presented the essay as a gift to the Pope along with the letter.”223 Luther addresses this treatise to the same pope who also signed the papal bull (June 24, 1520) that threatened Luther with excommunication. So the question has to be asked … what?!

What makes this treatise different?

Why would Luther write this, especially after calling the papacy the Antichrist in To the Christian Nobility and The Babylonian Captivity? We need a little bit of background. As with all controversies, there are people who tried to bridge the gaps between the opposing sides. One such man was (c.1490-1529). He was a papal ambassador to Germany and met with Luther on three different occasions (January 1519, October 1519, October 1520). However, he tried to bridge gaps that were already becoming too vast. In the end, Miltitz at least convinced Luther to write a short, conciliatory letter to Pope Leo X.224 That is the dedicatory letter attached to this treatise. The rest of the treatise itself served as a gift to the pope. The fact that this was written to the current pope, that alone would make this work different from the other 1520 works.

There are more differences though. It is different in tone - less polemical, less aggressive, more practical, more devotional. “Indeed, compared to other major tracts he produced in 1520, The Freedom of a Christian has a remarkably temperate tone.”225 It is also different in that Luther wrote both the Latin and German versions at almost the same time. It is different in layout - Luther followed

222 AE 31:329. 223 Roper, Renegade, 155. 224 Wenceslaus Link (1483-1547), head of the German Augustinians and thus Luther’s superior, also in September 1520 reminded Luther that he had promised to write a letter to the pope. 225 AL 1:467-468. This temperate tone is (for example) in comparison to the previous tract: The Babylonian Captivity. 42

the rules of rhetoric at his time, which in turn were based on the rules found in Cicero. In this treatise, there are the six parts of a speech.226

1. Exordium/Introduction - the nature of faith 2. Division of the tract - almost equal sections on the inner person and then the outer 3. Narration of the theme - how freedom and servitude work in a Christian 4. Confirmation of the theme - Luther proves his theme 5. Refutation of objections to the theme - Luther addresses certain objections to his teachings 6. Peroration - “We conclude” - concluding remarks on the main theme

This work’s main theme is expressed in these words: “The Christian individual is a completely free lord of all, subject to none. The Christian individual is a completely dutiful servant of all, subject to all.”227 This phrase alone is more than enough to ponder. Just see how others have tried to sum up this thought.

• “... [This work] makes clear that a believing Christian is free from sin through faith in God, yet bound by love to serve his neighbor.”228 • “The key to the first is justification by faith. … The key to the second principle is love. … Faith is not a sterile academic exercise, but faith in the free justification from sin by faith on account of Christ subjects us to love and serve others.”229 • “Luther argues that we have a spiritual and a physical nature … [H]e argues that the inner man should have faith in God, and we cannot arrive at faith through works of the outer man.”230 • “... ([Unless] I am mistaken) it contains a summary of the whole Christian life, if you understand its meaning.”231 • “So, this is the Christian freedom referred to above, namely, our faith, which does not cause us to be lazy and lead evil lives but instead makes the law and works unnecessary for the righteousness and salvation of the Christian.”232 • “Good works do not make a person good, but a good person does good works … Evil works do not make a person evil, but an evil person does evil works.”233 • Luther lays out the distinction between in the area of sanctification. • Luther explains his understanding of faith and works.

226 This is adapted from AL 1:471-472. Cicero himself though has the narration as second and division as third, cf. On Invention 1:15-55, especially 1:19-23. Cf. here. (https://tinyurl.com/yaxemvxj) 227 AL 1.488 (AE 31:344). The Annotated Luther translations of the three treatises are revisions of the translations from the American Edition. However, The Freedom of a Christian is changed much more (reordering of sentence structure) than in the others (updating antiquated words and language). It is changed so much that it sounds almost like a new translation instead of a simple revision. 228 AE 31:330. 229 Braun, Luther’s Protest, 54. 230 Roper, Renegade, 155-156. 231 AL 1:487 (AE 31:343). 232 AL 1:497 (AE 31:349-350). 233 AL 1:514 (AE 31:361). 43

• Luther explains what it means to be a Christian.

In summing up what a Christian is, Luther talks about the inner person and the outer person. We might be familiar with terms like “New Adam/New Man” and “Old Adam/Old Man.” If it is helpful, inner person is similar to the term “New Adam” and outer person to “Old Adam.”234

Inner Person

What does Luther mean by the inner person?

In talking about the inner person, Luther makes it obviously clear what creates this person. “One thing and one thing alone is necessary for Christian life, righteousness, and freedom, and that is the most holy Word of God, the Gospel of Christ.”235 Nothing else! Where that Word of God is removed, all is lost. “Again, there is no crueler disaster arising from God’s wrath than when it sends ‘a famine of the hearing of his word,’ as stated in Amos 8[:11] …”236 Luther goes on to make clear what he means by this Word by quoting Scripture (again), “Paul explains what this Word is in Rom. 1[:1,3]: ‘The gospel of God … concerning his Son,’ who was made flesh, suffered, rose from the dead, and was glorified through the Spirit, the Sanctifier.”237

To further prove his point, Luther describes the sinful nature of people. Roper sums up Luther like this: “Luther’s gloomy assessment of human nature actually leads to an uplifting conclusion: If everything we do is tainted with sin, then it also doesn’t matter; that is just how we are, and we cannot make ourselves godly by trying to pile up good deeds.”238 See how Luther views sinful human nature? See how that helps prove his point that it is all God and his Word, the Gospel of Christ? Follow Luther’s line of argument in these quotes:

• “For the word of God cannot be received or honored by any works but by faith alone. Therefore, it is clear that the soul needs the word alone for life and righteousness, because if the soul could be justified by anything else, it would not need the word and, consequently, would not need faith.”239 • “Indeed, this faith absolutely cannot exist in connection with works, that is to say, in connection with any presumption of yours to be justified at the same time by any works whatsoever.”240 • “Therefore, when you begin to believe, you discover at the same time that everything in you is completely blameworthy, damnable sins ...”241

234 These terms are not absolutely synonymous (as one will notice as you keep reading this paper or the actual treatise), but there is plenty of overlap. Cf. “According to the spiritual nature, which people label the soul, the human being is called a spiritual, inner, and new creature. According to the bodily nature, which people label the flesh, a human being is called the fleshly, outer, and old creature.” (AL 1:489 (AE 31:344)). 235 AL 1:490 (AE 31:345). 236 AL 1:491 (AE 31:346). 237 ibid. 238 Roper, Renegade, 156. 239 AL 1:492 (AE 31:346). 240 ibid. 241 ibid. 44

• “By this knowledge you will realize that you need Christ, who suffered and rose again for you, in order that, believing in him, you may become another human being by this faith, because all your sins are forgiven and you are justified by another’s merits, namely, by Christ’s alone.”242 • “Before all else, remember what has been said above, namely, that faith alone without works justifies, frees, and saves.”243

After showing that our works cannot save us, Luther then shows what can save us: God’s Word - the Gospel of Christ. So then, he moves on to how what Christ did becomes ours - how we are saved: faith in God’s Word. Luther shows the three powers/benefits of faith:

1. “Because no good work can cling to the word of God or even exist in the soul. Instead, faith alone and the word rule in it.”244 2. [Faith] honors the one in whom it trusts with the most reverent and highest regard possible for this reason: Faith holds the one in whom it trusts to be truthful and deserving.”245 3. “The third incomparable benefit of faith is this: that it unites the soul with Christ, like a bride with a bridegroom.”246

In talking about this third benefit of faith, Luther paints a beautiful picture of the relationship between Christ and his Church:

• “Christ is full of grace, life, and salvation; the soul is full of sins, death, and damnation. Now let faith intervene and it will turn out that sins, death, and hell are Christ’s, but grace, life, and salvation are the soul’s. For if he is the groom, then he should simultaneously both accept the things belonging to the bride and impart to the bride those things that are his.”247 • “So it happens that the faithful soul, through the wedding ring of its faith in Christ her bridegroom, is free from all sins, secure against death, protected from hell, and given the eternal righteousness, life, and salvation of her bridegroom, Christ.”248

Luther sums up this section on the inner man with these words: “From the foregoing, anyone can clearly see how the Christian is free from all things and is over all things, so that such a person requires no works at all to be righteous or saved. Instead, faith alone bestows all these things in

242 AL 1:492 (AE 31:347). 243 AL 1:494 (AE 31:348). 244 AL 1:496 (AE 31:349). 245 AL 1:497 (AE 31:350). 246 AL 1:499 (AE 31:351). 247 AL 1:500 (AE 31:351). 248 AL 1:501 (AE 31:352). Luther already used this bridegroom/bride imagery in “A Sermon on Two Kinds of Righteousness” (preached on March 28, 1518, published in 1519). Also in this sermon, there are terms that are very reminiscent of “inner man” and “outer man.” Luther describes our “alien righteousness,” i.e., a righteousness that comes to us from outside of us. “This is the righteousness by which Christ is righteous and by which he justifies others through faith …” Luther then describes our “proper righteousness,” i.e., a righteousness that is the product of the alien righteousness. “This is that manner of life spent profitably in good works …” This sermon is based on Phil 2:5-11, which Luther also uses in this treatise in the section on the outer man. For a short summary of the sermon, cf. here. (5minutesinchurchhistory.com/2-kinds-of-righteousness/) 45 abundance.”249 That is why Luther can write the first part of that paradox: “The Christian individual is a completely free lord of all, subject to none.” This is talking about the inner person. Now what about the other part of that paradox: “The Christian individual is a completely dutiful servant of all, subject to all.” Now Luther moves on to the outer person.

Outer Person

What does Luther mean by the outer person?

As what was mentioned above, outer person has some similarities with Old Adam, but there is more to it. The way that Luther describes the “outer person” could be elaborated as “the role of works in the life of a Christian.” “So, this part of the essay pertains to what was said at the beginning: The Christian is a slave of all and subject to all. Insofar as a Christian is free, he or she does nothing; insofar as the Christian is a slave, he or she does all things.”250

As repeatedly mentioned beforehand, works serve no purpose in a person’s justification before God. However, works do serve a purpose in the life of a Christian. They serve a purpose in the life a Christian leads after faith has done its work.

These works, however, ought not to be done under the supposition that through them a person is justified before God. For faith, which alone is righteousness before God, does not endure this false opinion but supposes [that works be done] only so that “the body may be enslaved” and may be purified from its evil “passions and desires” so that the eye may not turn again to these expunged desires. …

As a result, the human creature cannot be idle because of the demands of its body, and, because of the body, it attempts to do many good works to bring it under control. Nevertheless, these works themselves are not what justify someone before God. Instead, the person does them in compliance to God out of spontaneous love, considering nothing else than the divine favor to which the person wishes to comply most dutifully in all things.251

This is the first reason for doing works: to discipline or train one’s own body. Even in this section on the outer person, Luther does not leave out what he emphasized about the inner person. “Wanting to be justified and saved through works without faith is simply monstrous foolishness and ignorance of the Christian life and faith!”252

Luther uses a few examples to prove his point on the outer person, i.e., the role of works in the life of a Christian. He goes back to Adam and Eve before they sinned. Their works were not for their own salvation. Rather the works they did were to keep them busy and a way to please God.253 Another example is that of a bishop. Luther contends that a bishop does the work of dedicating a

249 AL 1:507 (AE 31:356). 250 AL 1:510 (AE 31:358). 251 AL 1:512 (AE 31:359). 252 AL 1:512-513 (AE 31:360). 253 Cf. AL 1:513 (AE 31:360). 46

church building, because he first is a bishop. That work of dedicating a church building does not make him a bishop. He is a bishop first and so does the work of a bishop.254 Following Scripture, Luther also tells that a tree must be good first, then it bears good fruit.255 Also a good or bad builder makes a good or bad house, not the other way around.256 “So also individual Christians, who are consecrated by their faith, do good works, but through them they are not made holy or Christian. For this arises from faith alone; indeed, unless they believed and were Christian beforehand, all of their works would be worthless and would be truly ungodly and damnable sins.”257

For sure, there is this paradoxical tension in Luther’s main theme: “The Christian individual is a completely free lord of all, subject to none. The Christian individual is a completely dutiful servant of all, subject to all.” However, this paradoxical tension is connected. The inner person and outer person are connected. Faith and works are connected. Luther anticipates this tension and answers with the following:

• “For just as works do not make someone a believer, so also they do not make a person righteous. On the contrary, just as faith makes someone a believer and righteous, so also it produces good works.”258 • “Therefore, let whoever wants to do good things begin not with the doing but with the believing. For only faith makes a person good, and only unbelief makes someone evil.”259 • “Therefore, we do not reject good works. On the contrary, we highly cherish and teach them. For we do not condemn them for their own sake but on account of this godless linkage and perverse opinion that try to seek righteousness [through them].”260

The second reason for doing works is the good of one’s neighbor. “For a human being does not live in this mortal body solely for himself or herself and work only on it but lives together with all other human beings on earth. Indeed, more to the point, each person lives only for others and not for himself or herself. The purpose of putting the body in subjection is so that it can serve others more genuinely and more freely.”261 So the two reasons for doing works are also connected. A Christian disciplines his own body so that he can do works for others and not for himself.

While demolishing the role of works in the inner person, Luther makes this important observation about works for the outer person:

• “For this reason, in all of one’s works a person should in this context be shaped by and contemplate this thought alone: to serve and benefit others in everything that may be done, having nothing else in view except the need and advantage of the neighbor.”262

254 Cf. AL 1:514 (AE 31:360). 255 Cf. AL 1:514-515 (AE 31:361). Cf. also Matt 7:18. 256 Cf. AL 515 (AE 31:361). 257 AL 1:514 (AE 31:360-361). 258 AL 1:515 (AE 31:361). 259 AL 1:516 (AE 31:362). 260 AL 1:518 (AE 31:363). 261 AL 1:519-520 (AE 31:364). 262 AL 1:520 (AE 31:365). 47

• “This is truly the Christian life; here truly ‘faith is effective through love.’ That is, with joy and love, [faith] reveals itself in work of freest servitude, as one person, abundantly filled with the completeness and richness of his or her own faith, serves another freely and willingly.”263 • “Here [Phil 2:1-4] we see clearly that the Apostle places the life of Christians into this framework, so that all of our works may be ordered towards the advantage of others. Since each and every person thus thrives through their own faith - so that all other works and the sum total of life flows out from that very faith - by these works, each may serve and benefit the neighbor with willing benevolence.”264 • “I will do nothing in this life except what I see will be necessary, advantageous, and salutary for my neighbor, because through faith I am overflowing with all good things in Christ.”265

As with all things, Christ is the motivation and example for these good works for the neighbor. To show that, Luther then has an exegesis of Philippians 2:5-8 and makes this application to Christians: follow the example of Christ: “Therefore, who can comprehend the riches and glory of the Christian life? It can do all things and has all things and lacks nothing. It is lord of sin, death, and hell but, at the same time, is servant and obedient and beneficial to all.”266

So how does Luther practically apply all of this?

Remember that this treatise is different in a few ways from the other two. This treatise is different also in that it is simple to see how this looks in Luther’s life and in the life of every Christian of any age.

• The work of all clerical institutions, monasteries, and priests should be of this kind, too. Thus, each would only do works of his own profession and walk of life, in order to work not toward righteousness but, in the first place, toward the subjection of his own body as an example for the sake of others, who have need to discipline their own bodies, too. In the second place, they would also obey others and do their bidding out of spontaneous love. Nevertheless, here the utmost care must be taken, so that a false trust does not presume that such works justify, earn reward, or save - which is all from faith alone, as I have repeatedly said.267 • For a free Christian will say instead, “I will fast, pray, do this and that because in this behavior I may conduct myself toward the pope, bishop, community, this or that magistrate, or my neighbor as an example. I will do or suffer all things, as Christ often did and suffered many things for me - none of which he needed for himself at all, having been ‘placed under the law’ on my account, although he was not under the law.”268 • For any work not directed toward the purpose of either disciplining the body or serving the neighbor (as long as the neighbor demands nothing against God) is neither good nor Christian. … To repeat, I fear that in all of these things nothing is sought after except what has

263 AL 1:521 (AE 31:365). Cf. Gal 5:6. 264 AL 1:521 (AE 31:365-361). 265 AL 1:524 (AE 31:367). 266 AL 1:525 (AE 31:368). 267 AL 1:527-528 (AE 31:369-370). 268 AL 1:528 (AE 31:370). 48

to do with us, because we think that through them our sins are cleansed and salvation is attained. In this way, Christian freedom is completely obliterated, because [this attitude] arises from ignorance of Christian faith and freedom.269 • For this reason, let faith be your sole concern, so that faith may be increased by exercising it either through works or suffering. Meanwhile, whatever you give, give freely and without reward, so that others may experience increase and reap benefits from you and what is yours. For in this way, you will be truly good and Christian. For what are your good works (which function most fully for bodily discipline) to you, when for yourself you are filled through your faith, in which God gives you all things?270

Luther finishes with what he began: Christ. We only do for others what Christ first did for us.

For this is what Christ did for us. For this is true love and the genuine rule of a Christian life. Now where there is true and genuine faith, there is true and genuine love. … Therefore we conclude that Christian individuals do not live in themselves but in Christ and their neighbor, or else they are not Christian. They live in Christ through faith and in the neighbor through love. Through faith they are caught up beyond themselves into God; likewise through love they fall down beneath themselves into the neighbor ...271

Our life in this world is so majestically summed up and laid out in those words. What more could be added?

Wait, did Luther add more after the conclusion?

In his usual writing style, Luther continues with a five-page272 addendum in the Latin version of this treatise. This addendum addresses a persistent charge against Luther: his understanding of Christian freedom only gave people a license to sin.273 So an opponent would argue that people need ceremonies and other works for salvation.274 Luther states that both (a license to sin and the need for ceremonies for salvation) are in error.

For we are not free from works through faith in Christ but from conjectures about works, that is, from the foolish presumption of justification acquired through works. For faith redeems, makes right, and guards our consciences, so that we realize that righteousness is not in works - although works can and should not be lacking. … Thus, in this world we are bound by the necessities of this bodily life, but we are not righteous because of them. … Thus, the necessities of life and the need to control the body cause us to act and live and exist with works and ceremonies. Nevertheless, we are righteous not through these things but through faith in the Son of God. For this

269 AL 1:528-529 (AE 31:370). 270 AL 1:529 (AE 31:371) 271 AL 1:530 (AE 31:371). 272 WA 7:69-73. 273 Cf. AL 1:531 (AE 31:372). 274 ibid. 49

reason, the same middle way is set out for each Christian, who must also keep in mind these two types of people.275

Immediate Impact

“This letter also gives evidence of Luther’s paradoxical view of the Christian’s life as both free (in the gospel) and bound to the neighbor.”276 “In this case, Luther concludes that Christians live in Christ through faith and their neighbors through love.”277 Because of its content, it is not surprising that this work became quite popular. Between 1520-1526, there were 30 printings of this work (some of the German, some of the Latin, some are translations of the Latin into German and also into English.)

Relative Relevance for Today (So what did you learn from this treatise?)

If nothing else, you can find some new insults to use among friends and foes.

• You are more corrupt than any Babylon or Sodom ever was, and, as far as I can see, are characterized by a completely depraved, hopeless, and notorious godlessness. • Your home, once the holiest of all, has become the most licentious den of thieves, the most shameless of all brothels, the kingdom of sin, death, and hell. It is so bad that even Antichrist himself, if he should come, could think of nothing to add to its wickedness.278

But on a more serious and important note, The Freedom of a Christian “is Luther’s best work on his understanding of justification by faith — and thus on what it means to be human.”279 In this treatise, you see how we are saved and why we now live the way that we do. Why are you able to “keep your head when all about you are losing theirs”?280 Why are you not the person hoarding 17,700 bottles of hand sanitizer? Even when work has slowed down or stopped, why can you still see a blessing in that? (E.g. I get to spend more time with my family.) Even when you are stuck at home most of the day, why can you still enjoy this rest that our Lord gives you? Why are you not the one looting? Why might you even be the one protecting people’s businesses from looters? Why do you check on your neighbors, friends, or family to make sure they are doing okay? Why do you make sure that God’s Word is still proclaimed in some form and fashion? (What a blessing are all those online services!) Why can you “laugh at the days to come”? (Pro 31:25) In short, why do changes in your life not change how you live your life? You still live your Christian life. You still know of your salvation. You still do good things to serve your neighbor. We may not articulate it the way that Luther does here, but we do live it each and every day: God has set us free to serve others.

275 AL 1:532-533 (AE 31:372-373). Cf. Luther’s treatise Good Works (1520). There Luther also addresses this charge that his understanding of freedom only gave people a license to sin. 276 AL 1:470. 277 AL 1:472. 278 These and many more can be found here.(https://ergofabulous.org/luther/) The website adapts phrases from Luther and turns them into memorable insults. These two are adapted from (AE 31:336). 279 “Kolb publishes new work on Luther’s treatise,” Concordia Seminary St. Louis website, December 6, 2019, csl.edu/2019/12/kolb-publishes-new-work-on-luthers-treatise/ 280 Rudyard Kipling's “If.” 50

Fuller Outline of This Work281

• Dedication o Luther’s Defense o A Narrative of Luther’s Case o Advice for Pope Leo • Introduction • The Spiritual, New, and Inner Person o What Christian Freedom is NOT o God’s Word is Necessary for the Soul o Faith Alone Justifies o Scripture Has Commands and Promises (Law and Gospel) o First Power of Faith o Second Power of Faith o Third Benefit of Faith o Why Ascribe These Things to Faith Alone? o The Prerogatives of the Firstborn o The Priestly Office o The Freedom of Christians o How Christ Must Be Preached • The Outer Person o Where Works Begin o How to Discipline the Body o Faith Alone Justifies o About Works for the Neighbor o The Fruits of Faith o A True Christian’s Knowledge • Conclusion • Appendix: Against the Freedom of the Flesh

281 This outline is a condensed version found in the Basel edition (1521) of this treatise and included in The Annotated Luther series. 51

Concluding Remarks to the Treatises

The 60 days were up. On December 10, 1520, Martin Luther formally and ceremonially gave his answer to the papal bull, Exsurge Domine.282 Together with some fellow professors and students from the University of Wittenberg, Luther went to the Holy Cross Chapel, outside the Elster Gate, on the east end of Wittenberg, where the carrion pit was located.283 A bonfire had been started there. They were burning books that supported papal authority and even several copies of canon law. “The meaning was clear to those who had gathered to witness the spectacle: [Luther] was breaking not only with the authority of the Pope, but also with the entire tradition of canon law, built up over centuries to cover all kinds of religious issues.”284 Finally Luther appeared, “trembling and

282 For a fuller description of this event, cf. Brecht, Road, 423-426. Brecht states that this took place at nine o’clock; AE 48:186 gets more specific “nine o’clock in the morning.” StL 21:1:324 has neun Uhr “nine o’clock;” StL 15:1617 has neun Uhr (vor Mittage) “nine o’clock (before noon).” The WA, Br 2:234 has hora nona “ninth hour.” Following the Roman expressions of time, the monastic day began at 6 a.m. So, the hora nona would be 3 p.m. During the 12th century however, hora nona went from meaning 3 p.m. to 12 p.m. (Hence, we have the word “noon” from nona, cf. here. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noon)) Maybe the best to say is that this happened on December 10, 1520. 283 Today, this spot is marked with an oak tree. 284 Roper, Renegade, 157. 52

praying.”285 He threw a copy of the papal bull into the fire. Luther then spoke these words, “Because you have confounded the truth of God, today the Lord also confounds you. Into that fire. Amen.”286

Now let’s put December 10, 1520, into its context. That helps us better understand this event. In Exsurge Domine, that papal bull said that all writings that have Luther’s “heresy” “shall be burned publicly and solemnly in the presence of clerics and people.” When that papal bull was first published in Rome (June 24, 1520), there was also a burning of Luther’s works. On October 23, 1520, the papal ambassador, Hieronymus Aleander (1480-1542), brought this papal bull to the city of Louvain. He reported that more than 80 Lutheran books and booklets were burned in the market on a podium. Aleander also reports such burnings in the cities of Liege, Cologne, Trier, and Mainz. All were done before December 10, 1520. “But burning heretical texts prefigured burning the heretic himself: Luther knew what fate awaited him if he were to be seized by the Pope’s forces.”287 Burning books was not the end … not for the Roman Catholic Church and not for Martin Luther. He had tried to reform from within; now he would work for reform from without. All of this set the stage for 1521.

On January 3, 1521, another papal bull was published, Decet Romanum Pontificem.288 This officially excommunicated Luther from the Roman Catholic Church. At the Diet of Worms, on April 17-18, Luther appeared before the diet to answer for his “heresy.” He still did not recant or retract his writings. So, a revised form of Decet Romanum Pontificem was also published at Worms on May 6, 1521. On May 25, 1521, the Edict of Worms was published making Luther an outlaw of the empire. The rest is for another day and another paper.

Martin Luther is another part in God’s plan of salvation. He is another olive branch grafted in. However, he is more, too. Martin Luther is a titan in Christian history, as Bugenhagen spoke at Luther’s funeral, “For [Luther] was without doubt the angel concerning whom it is written in Revelation 14, who flew through the midst of heaven and had an eternal Gospel, … This angel who says, ‘Fear God and give him the honor,’ was Dr. Martin Luther.”289 All of that being stated, perhaps we also need this good reminder on how we should study Luther. These two quotes are from The Apology of the Book of Concord, written about 40 years after Luther’s death.

Briefly, we do not number Luther among the prophets and apostles who have the testimony from God Himself that they cannot err in doctrine, for (God be praised) the distinction between prophets and apostles and other bishops, fathers, writers, and the teachers of the Church is not unknown. … We count Luther among the teachers of the Christian Church who were sent by God but who do not have the testimony from God that they cannot err in doctrine. For that reason, we also confess that Luther - especially when he began to write against the anti-Christian papacy - still erred in many points which he later himself retracted. - …

285 Cf. AE 48:192, WA, Br 2:245. 286 These words are handed down, however not in one uniform way, so there are various versions of what Luther actually said, e.g., “truth of God” could have been “saints of God” or “the Holy Place of God.” 287 Roper, Renegade, 160. 288 This is It is fitting that the Roman Pontiff. 289 For the entire sermon, cf. here. (https://tinyurl.com/yaavb2ww) 53

We approve of Luther’s writings in this way: that we regard and know that in them the doctrine for which God used the prophets and apostles is presented and genuinely recovered. We accept his writings as a witness to the truth as far as we are certain that they produce the doctrine founded on God’s Word, and no further.290

Luther is not infallible. Not everything that he writes is pure gold. Not everything in his works are applicable or even relevant to us today, e.g., some of the reform ideas of To the Christian Nobility. However, the Lord used Luther (fallible as he is) to accomplish the Lord’s work. There are many things that still apply to us and are relevant from Martin Luther. Just from these three treatises, I have noted these few.291

1. Luther took God seriously, i.e., he took God at his Word and believed that what God said in his Word is true. “His yardstick is the Bible.”292 2. Luther understood the ministerial use of reason in God’s Word.293 3. Luther’s study of God’s Word and what it says made him bold and polemical294 against all the enemies of that Word.295 4. Luther understood the tyranny of the Roman Catholic Church.296 5. Luther understood the roles of the Church and Government.297 6. Luther understood the sacraments differently than the Roman Catholic Church.298 7. Luther understood the sacraments are gifts from God, not gifts to God.299 8. Luther understood the distinction between law and gospel in sanctification.300

290 Martin Chemnitz, Chemnitz’s Works: Volume 10: Apology of the Book of Concord, translated by James Langebartels (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2018), 377, 378. 291 There are more relevant points sprinkled throughout this essay. 292 Roper, Renegade, 148. 293 E.g., The Babylonian Captivity (AL 3:36 (AE 31:34)). “For my part, if I cannot fathom how the bread is the body of Christ, yet I will take my reason captive to the obedience of Christ, and clinging simply to his words, firmly believe not only that the body of Christ is in the bread, but that the bread is the body of Christ.” 294 Polemics and personal attacks were not something that only Luther did. His opponents did the same, e.g., Exsurge Domine equated Luther with a fox and a wild boar. This was the writing style before, during, and after Luther’s time. 295 E.g., The Freedom of a Christian (AL 1:477 (AE 31:336)). Luther states that the Roman Curia is “more corrupt than Babylon and Sodom. ... Moreover, out of the Roman Church, once the holiest of all, has been fashioned a completely licentious den of thieves, the most shameless of all brothels, the kingdom of sin, death, and hell …” 296 E.g., the three walls in the treatise To the German Nobility and the entire sacramental system in The Babylonian Captivity. I do not write this lightly. I know firsthand some of the outwardly good deeds that the Roman Catholic Church does. As a new refugee family to South Bend, IN, my family and I stayed at the Seminary located at Notre Dame University. A Catholic church in South Bend also taught my family English. 297 Cf. the treatise To the German Nobility. 298 Cf. the treatise The Babylonian Captivity. 299 E.g., The Babylonian Captivity (AL 3:112 (AE 36:108)). “Let this then stand fast: The church can give no promises of grace; that is the work of God alone. Therefore she cannot institute a sacrament.” 300 E.g., The Freedom of a Christian (AL 1:530 (AE 31:371)). “Therefore we conclude that Christian individuals do not live in themselves but in Christ and their neighbor, or else they are not Christian. They live in Christ through faith and in the neighbor through love.” 54

9. Luther understood the Christian life is a life of service.301

Are there more things relevant to us today? Of course! Are there things that we can let pass like ships in the night? Of course!

As part of the title for this paper suggests, perhaps we could consider Luther’s importance for us today as: relative relevance. Does he still have relevance? Of course! Is it relative, e.g., are there things that do apply to us and others that do not? Of course! However, I want to leave you with this thought. Might this relative relevance also mean that the relevance these three treatises have for us is because it does relate to us? We are the heirs of the Reformation. We are the heirs of Luther’s 1520 treatises. We still need such writings to give us our Lutheran voice and heritage. We still need such writings to turn us back to God and his Word and turn us from the sinful nature around us and in us. In that sense, this relevance is relative (relating to us) and absolute.

If we have lost this man [Luther], who has written more clearly than any that has lived for 140 years, and to whom you have given such a spirit of the Gospel, we pray you, O Heavenly Father, that you would again give your Holy Spirit to someone who would gather your holy Christian Church … Anyone, after all, who reads Martin Luther’s books, can see how his teaching is so clear and transparent when he sets forth the holy gospel. … O God, if Luther is dead, who will then deliver the Holy Gospel to us with such clarity?302

Epilogue

If there are other works that you would like to read from 1520, I would recommend these two: Good Works303 and The Fourteen Consolations.304 In Good Works, published in late May/early June 1520, Luther has many similar themes that show up in these other three treatises, especially in The Freedom of a Christian. In Good Works, Luther discusses what good works actually are and look like, and he uses the 10 Commandments as his outline. The Fourteen Consolations was published in February 1520. It was written to Elector Frederick the Wise when he was sick. It is Luther’s attempt to comfort the elector in his sickness by focusing on the 14 different consolations, or comforts, a believer can have in sickness, i.e., a believer’s present suffering is nothing compared to the seven evils that could (but do not) come into a believer's life and the seven blessings that God does give a believer. Here is just one memorable quote from The Fourteen Consolations.

301 E.g., The Freedom of a Christian (AL 1:524 (AE 31:367). “I will do nothing in this life except what I see will be necessary, advantageous, and salutary for my neighbor, because through faith I am overflowing with all good things in Christ.” 302 Albrecht Dürer’s journal entry (May 17, 1521) is a prayer after hearing Luther had been kidnapped following the Diet of Worms. Dürer did not know whether Luther was dead or alive. 303 AL 1:257-367 (AE 44:15-114). Along with the three treatises discussed in this essay, Good Works will also be included in this year’s Symposium on Martin Luther’s 1520 Treatises at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. Pastor Oakland (Martin Luther, Neenah, WI) will discuss To the Christian Nobility; Professor Jim Danell (Martin Luther College, New Ulm, MN) Good Works and The Freedom of a Christian; and Pastor Ben Schaefer (Mt. Calvary, Redding, CA) The Babylonian Captivity. 304 AE 42:119-166. 55

Doesn’t St. John the Baptist, whom we commemorate on this day [August 29] as beheaded by Herod, astonish us all? Should not so great a man - none greater was born of a woman [Matt 11:11] - the special friend of the Bridegroom [John 3:29], the forerunner of Christ, and greater than all the prophets [Matt 11:9], should not such a man have been put to death after a public trial, or on false charges (as with Christ), or even for the sake of the people? But no, he was put to death in a prison, because of a dancing girl, the daughter of an adulteress! [Matt 14:3-11] This one saint’s humiliating death (as well as his life, so despicably and shamefully handed over into the hands of an adulteress - his worst enemy) makes all our evils small in comparison.305

I began the prologue with telling you a little bit of my history, and how I came to be a Lutheran and got to know Martin Luther. Fast forward to the present. The Lord has blessed me with faith for 30+ years. The Lord has heaped blessings upon blessings, the more of them I realize as I have a chance to reflect. (Another blessing during this extended time at home.) I was able to attend a Lutheran elementary school, high school, college, and seminary. I served as the Lord’s servant among the Lord’s people in two different congregations. I currently get to serve my Lord as pastor and professor of Latin and German at Luther Preparatory School in Watertown, WI (one of our synod’s preparatory high schools). I get to serve you all with this paper. I get to study and learn more about the people, such as Martin Luther, that the Lord has used to spread his Word. That and the following is the relative relevance for me.

As I write this, I am sitting in my office. I am surrounded by Christian and Lutheran books. I am surrounded by Hebrew and Greek books. I am surrounded by Latin and German books. I am also surrounded by our Lutheran titans who went before us.

Hebrews 12:1-2 1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us get rid of every burden and the sin that so easily ensnares us, and let us run with patient endurance the race that is laid out for us. 2 Let us keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, who is the author of our faith and the one who brings it to its goal. In view of the joy set before him, he endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of God’s throne.

S.D.G.

Khàwp jai “Thank you” to Professor Joel Otto and Mrs. Liesel Phetsanghane for previewing, proofreading, and improving this paper. Any remaining mistakes, typos, and errors are of my own making.

South Atlantic District Convention, October 9-11, 2020. Pastor Souksamay Phetsanghane.

305 The Fourteen Consolations, Chapter Six, The Sixth Image: The Evil on Our Right Hand. This is my own translation. Cf. AE 42:139. 56

Bibliography lutherdansk.dk is a Danish website (because who doesn’t go to Danish websites all the time) that has a list and links to (free) online copies of Luther’s Works (German and Latin): Weimar, Walch, and St. Louis editions. srb26.com has an index to Luther’s Works, cross-referencing the American, St. Louis, and Weimar editions.

Braun, John. Luther’s Protest: From 95 Theses to Reformation. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2016.

Brecht, Martin. Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation 1483-1521. Translated by James Schaaf. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1985.

Chemnitz, Martin. Chemnitz’s Works: Volume 10: Apology of the Book of Concord. Translated by James Langebartels. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2018.

Deutschlander, Daniel. The Theology of the Cross. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2008.

Lenz, Mark. “The Scriptures Establish the Purpose of Baptism.” WLS Symposium, 2002. https://essays.wls.wels.net/handle/123456789/3035

Luther, Martin. “The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, 1520.” Pages 9-129 in The Annotated Luther: Volume 3: Church and Sacraments. Edited by Paul Robinson. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016.

_____. “The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, 1520.” Translated by A.T.W. Steinhäuser and revised by Frederick Ahrens and Abden Ross Wentz. Pages 3-126 in Luther’s Works: Volume 36: Word and Sacrament: II. Edited by Ross Wentz. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1959.

_____. “To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Improvement of the Christian Estate, 1520.” Translated by James Estes. Pages 369-465 in The Annotated Luther: Volume 1: The Roots of Reform. Edited by Timothy Wengert. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015.

_____. “To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Improvement of the Christian Estate, 1520.” Translated by Charles Jacobs and revised by James Atkinson. Pages 115-217 in Luther’s Works: Volume 44: The Christian in Society: I. Edited by James Atkinson. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966.

_____. “The Freedom of a Christian.” Translated by Timothy Wengert. Pages 467-538 in The Annotated Luther: Volume 1: The Roots of Reform. Edited by Timothy Wengert. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015.

_____. “The Freedom of a Christian.” Translated by W.A. Lambert and revised by Harold Grimm. Pages 327-377 in Luther’s Works: Volume 31: Career of the Reformer: I. Edited by Harold Grimm. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1957. 57

Pieper, August. “Luther’s Doctrine of Church and Ministry.” The Wauwatosa Theology: Volume III. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1997.

Rogge, Joachim. Anfänge der Reformation: der junge Luther: 1483-1521; der junge Zwingli: 1584-1523. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1983.

Roper, Lyndal. Martin Luther: Renegade and Prophet. New York: Random House, 2017.

Wengert, Timothy. Priesthood, Pastors, Bishops: Public Ministry for the Reformation and Today. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008.

Zarling, Mark. “Luther and the Saints: The Priesthood of All Believers – A True Treasure of the Lutheran Reformation.” WLS Symposium, 2017. wls.wels.net/symposium-on-reformation- 500/

Here are other works recommended by the 2020 Symposium essayists.

Burnett, Amy. Debating the Sacraments: Print and Authority in the Early Reformation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.

Hendrix, Scott. Luther and the Papacy: Stages in a Reformation Conflict. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981.

Kolb, Robert. Luther’s Treatise On Christian Freedom and Its Legacy. Landham, MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2019.

_____. Martin Luther and the Enduring Word of God: The Wittenberg School and Its Scripture-Centered Proclamation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016.

Pettegree, Andrew. Brand Luther: How an Unheralded Monk Turned His Small Town into a Center of Publishing, Made Himself the Most Famous Man in Europe--and Started the Protestant Reformation. New York: Penguin Books, 2016.