The Place of Angels in the Theology of Martin Luther
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects "heavenly Theologians": The lP ace Of Angels In The Theology Of Martin Luther Christopher J. Samuel Marquette University Recommended Citation Samuel, Christopher J., ""heavenly Theologians": The lP ace Of Angels In The Theology Of Martin Luther" (2014). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 359. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/359 “HEAVENLY THEOLOGIANS”: THE PLACE OF ANGELS IN THE THEOLOGY OF MARTIN LUTHER by Christopher J. Samuel A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2014 ABSTRACT “HEAVENLY THEOLOGIANS”: THE PLACE OF ANGELS IN THE THEOLOGY OF MARTIN LUTHER Christopher J. Samuel Marquette University, 2014 This dissertation examines a virtually untouched aspect of Martin Luther’s theology: his angelology. Specifically, it argues four main points: that Luther does, over his corpus, present an angelology; that his angelology is indebted to and in conversation with the prior theological tradition; that his concern with the angels is evident throughout his career; and that his major angelological concerns are pastoral in nature. Furthermore, it presents Luther’s answers to four basic angelological questions: 1) what are the angels?; 2) what is the angels’ role in Creation?; 3) what is the nature of their relationship with humanity?; and 4) what is the nature of their relationship with the church? The first step taken is to present a brief survey of Luther’s angelological context by examining the works of Augustine of Hippo, John Chrysostom, Pseudo-Dionysius, Peter Lombard, Bernard of Clairvaux, Bonaventure, Thomas Aquinas, and Gabriel Biel, and to offer evidence of their influence on Luther on this specific topic. Their answers to these same angelological questions are then discussed. Luther’s answers to these questions are then examined, organized according to different periods in his life: Pre-1526, 1526-1535, and 1536-1545. One major text from each period is singled out for closer examination: his Lectures on Hebrews, Lectures on Zechariah, and Lectures on Genesis. In doing so, this dissertation shows that Luther’s angelology can provide major insight into other areas of his overall theology, such as his ontology, cosmology, eschatology, and ecclesiology, but also that his angelology reveals his immersion in the theology of both the early and medieval churches – and is therefore a subject worthy of further exploration. “… how hard it is for us to believe, though the good news was preached and sung for us by angels, who are heavenly theologians and have rejoiced in our behalf! Their song is the most glorious. It contains the whole Christian faith. For the gloria in excelsis is supreme worship. They wish us such worship and they bring it to us in Christ. Ever since the fall of Adam the world knows neither God nor his creation. It lives altogether outside of the glory of God. … For this reason the angels here [in the Christmas story] recall fallen men to faith and love, that is, to glory towards God and peace on earth.”1 1 LW 54.327.#4201 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Christopher J. Samuel For me, writing a dissertation has been a paradoxical task. On the one hand, writing and researching day after day, week after week, constantly thinking, constantly worrying over every argument and every word or what is left to be done can only be done by the author of the work. On the other hand – the more accurate hand – the dissertation writing process has made me increasingly aware of just how many people have shared this journey with me, and thankful for their unconditional presence and support of me and my task. And so, I would first like to thank my friends and colleagues in the Theology department at Marquette University for the opportunity to talk, commiserate, vent, and laugh with each of them. Next, I would like to thank my family for their continuing encouragement and love, not only during my time at Marquette, but throughout my academic career. I must also thank my board members for their charity in agreeing to read and comment on my dissertation, and for their guidance at its inception. I would especially like to thank my advisor, Mickey L. Mattox, who has been a source of calm, unwavering support and encouragement, and has been invaluable to me as an instructor and mentor. Lastly, I must thank my wife Laura. I truly and literally could not have done this without her unfailing, unconditional, unending love and support. Luther himself preached that, “… over and above all [other loves] is married love, that is, a bride’s love, which glows like a fire and desires nothing but the husband. She says, ‘It is you I want, not what ii is yours: I want neither your silver nor your gold; I want neither. I want only you. I want you in your entirety, or not at all.’ All other kinds of love seeks something other than the loved on: this kind wants only to have the beloved’s own self completely.”1 She has shown me this kind of love every minute of our life together, and I can think of no other blessing I cherish more. Nor can I think of any other thing that has so comforted me and completed me as she does. She is my angel, in every way that matters. 1 LW 44.9. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... I TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................ III INTRODUCTION: “DOES LUTHER HAVE AN ANGELOLOGY?” .................................. 1 INT.1. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................4 Int.1.1. Michael Plathow (1994) .............................................................................4 Int.1.2. Jürgen Beyer (1996) ...................................................................................6 Int.1.3. Bengt R. Hoffman (1998) ............................................................................7 Int.1.4. Bruce Gordon (2000) .................................................................................9 Int.1.5. Scott Hendrix (2005) ................................................................................11 Int.1.6. Philip M. Soergel (2006) ..........................................................................13 Int.1.7. Denis Janz (2010) .....................................................................................15 INT.2. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................17 INT.3. THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE .................................................................................22 CHAPTER I: ANGELS IN THE EARLY AND MEDIEVAL CHURCH ............................. 25 I.1. WHY THESE THEOLOGIANS? ........................................................................................25 I.1.1. Augustine (354-430 CE) ..............................................................................26 I.1.2. Chrysostom (347-407 CE) ...........................................................................28 I.1.3. Pseudo-Dionysius (5th/6th Century CE) .......................................................30 I.1.4. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153 CE) ........................................................33 I.1.5. Peter Lombard (1096-1165 CE) ..................................................................35 I.1.6. Bonaventure (1221-1274 CE) ......................................................................36 iv I.1.7. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 CE) ...............................................................37 I.1.8. Gabriel Biel (1420/25-1495 CE) .................................................................40 I.2. WHAT ARE THE ANGELS? ............................................................................................41 I.2.1. Augustine .....................................................................................................41 I.2.2. Chrysostom ..................................................................................................46 I.2.3. Pseudo-Dionysius ........................................................................................48 I.2.4. Bernard of Clairvaux ...................................................................................50 I.2.5. Peter Lombard .............................................................................................52 I.2.6. Bonaventure .................................................................................................54 I.2.7. Thomas Aquinas ..........................................................................................61 I.2.8. Gabriel Biel .................................................................................................66 I.3. WHAT IS THEIR ROLE IN CREATION? ...........................................................................68 I.3.1. Augustine .....................................................................................................68 I.3.2. Chrysostom ..................................................................................................70 I.3.3. Pseudo-Dionysius ........................................................................................72 I.3.4. Bernard of Clairvaux ...................................................................................76