OCT 1 1973

ARCHIVES

Volume XLIV September Number 4 Luther and the Late Medieval Augustinians: Another, Look David C. Steinmetz

The author is professor of history at Duke University, Durham, N. C.

On July 17, 1505, , the writings of St. Augustine.3 And M. A., of the University of Erfurt, there is probably, among the late applied for admission to the Reformed medieval scholastics, no doctor whose Congregation of the Order of the mastery of the of St. Augus­ Hermits of St. Augustine. When, later tine is more impressive 4 or whose that year in September, he received ability to interpret the ideas of St. the tonsure and black habit of the Augustine in the categories of his own Austin Friars in the monastery church time is more successful 5 than the of the Augustinian cloister near Leh­ famous general of the Augustinian mann's bridge in the northeastern Order, Gregory of . part of Erfurt, he entered an order The question of the relationship dedicated to theological study, espe­ of Martin Luther to the theological cially to the study of the writings of traditions of his own order, to ,hie St. Augustine. At Oxford, Cambridge, he was exposed in a lesser or greater Paris, and other centers of medieval degree, has remained one of the inter­ learning - but especially at Paris 1 esting, if unsolved problems of Luther -doctors of the Augustinian Order research. Was there a revival of Augus- had distinguished themselves for the breadth and profundity of their learn­ 3 "Without wishing to make of this connec­ ing. had no more tion more than the evidence can sustain, it does famous pupil than , not seem likely that Petrarch could have been whose independence of his teacher unaware of the Augustinians' theological views, especially since he was introduced to the study was so marked that he was even re­ of St. Augustine by the Augustinian Hermit, garded by some Thomists as a rival of Dionigi of Borgo San Sepolcro," Charles Aquinas.2 Petrareh found in the Augus­ Trinkhaus, In Our Image and Likeness: Humanity tine scholarship of the Italian Augus­ and Divinity in Italian Humanist Thought, Volume 1 (London: Constable, 1970), p.61. tinians an aid for his own studies in See A. Zumkeller, "Augustinerschule," pp. 1 Of the Augustinians whose commentaries 206-207. on the have survived, 42 Out of 75 4 "What is so new in Gregory is the fact that lectured on the Sentences at Paris, including such he is the best Augustine scholar of the Middle famous doctors as Giles of Rome, James of Ages from the milieu which created the Mil­ Viterbo, Alexander of San Eipidio, Henry of leloquium," Damasus Trapp, "Augustinian Friemar, Augustinus of Ancona, William of Theology of the 14th Century: Notes on Edi­ Cremona, Henry of Friemar the Younger, tions, Marginalia, Opinions, and Book-Lore," Hermann of Schild esche, Thomas of Strassburg, Augustiniana 6 (1956), p. 181. Gregory of Rimini, Alfons Vargas of Toledo, 5 Gordon Leff, Gregory of Rimini, Tradition Hugolino of Orvieto, Dionysius of Montina, and Innovation in Fourteenth Century Thought to name only a few. See the table found on (Manchester: The University Press, 1961), pages 174-176 of Adolar Zumkeller, "Die pp.241-242: " ... what the Augustinians did for Augustinerschule des Mittelalters: Vertreter tradition in the thirteenth century he achieved und philosophisch-theologische Lehre," Analecta in the fourteenth. He recast it and adapted it; August-iniana 27 (1964), 167-262. and thereby preserved it. When the full history 2 "Dafuer spricht auch der Umstand, dass of fourteenth-century thought comes finally to manche Thomasschueler seiner Zeit in ihm be written, Gregory may well prove to have [Giles of Rome] einen ausgesprochenen Gegner been its St. : the very divergence des Aquinaten sehen wollen," A. Zumkeller, between them is the measure of his achieve­ "Augustinerschule," p. 180. ment." 246 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS tlO1anism in the Augustinian Order, If he rejects the Augustinian teaching which played an important role in the concerning , he may theological development of Martin affirm with real gusto Augustinian Luther? As straightforward and simple ecclesiology. No Donatist rides againSt as this question appears, it has proven the enemy with the banner of a dis­ unbelievably complex and difficult to credited heretic flying overhead. The answer. This paper will try, in as brief teaching of St. Augustine's opponents a manner as possible, to point out the is far more likely to be introduced difficulties which confront the his­ under the aegis of an Augustine, now torian when he attempts to address at last authentically understood. And this question, to survey the history of one can always appeal to the moderate the answers which have thus far been Augustine against the Augustine who suggested, to indicate some of the spoke excessively. more obvious deficiencies in those It seems to me a serious mistake to answers, and to recommend some regard as nothing more than theolog­ directions which further historical ical posturing this universal respect research might profitably pursue. for the teaching of St. Augustine, even when that teaching is misunderstood or abandoned. Men can venerate St. 1. INITIAL DIFFICULTIES Paul and come to very different con­ Some difficulties only become ap­ clusions about the import of his teach­ parent when one has immersed oneself ing. A medieval theologian may be in the primary sources; but other genuine in his commitment to Augus­ difficulties dog the historian's footsteps tinianism and yet, for a variety of from the very outset. What, for ex­ historical reasons beyond his own taste ample, is meant by the term "Augus­ and preference, only be receptive to tinian"? There are, so far as I am able certain Augustinian motifs, while re­ to determine, five different senses in maining totally deaf to others. What which this term is used by historians is at stake is not his sincerity, but the who discuss the phenomenon of late theological climate of an epoch. When medieval . Apart from Thomas Aquinas meets St. Augustine, the sheer confusion which this plurality he changes him into an Aristotelian; of meanings introduces, there is the when Martin Luther meets him, he additional danger that an historian, transforms him into a modernus. It is who has demonstrated the Augus­ the strength of the Augustinian tra­ tinianism of a late medieval theologian dition that it can speak with many in sense three, will assume that he has tongues and is attractive even in a proven it in senses two, four, and five stunted and truncated form. as well; and, what is worse, will begin The term "Augustinian" may also to draw conclusions on the basis of be used to describe the theology of those unproven assumptions. the Augustinian Order. When it is The term "Augustinian" may be used in this sense, it is not used used simply to designate the theology evaluatively to mean agreement with of the Latin West in general. No Latin the teaching of St. Augustine, but theologian, however Pelagian his own descriptively to mean the actual teach­ theological instincts, is absolutely ings of members of the Augustinian unaffected by the teaching of St. Order, whether those teachings are Augustine. If he finds little that is faithful to St. Augustine or not. Adolar relevant for his own theological situ­ Zumkeller,6 and to some extent ation in the anti-Pelagian writings of

St. Augustine, he nevertheless will 6 For Zumkeller, "Augustinerschule" and cite the early anti-Manichaean writings "Ordensschule" are interchangeable terms. See in support of his theological position. Zumkeller, "Augustinerschule," p. 169. LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS 247 Damasus Trapp as well, have used Ages without paying any attention "Augustinian" in this somewhat more whatever to the affiliation of that theologically neutral and descriptive right wing with any of the orders. If a sense. Are there any tendencies in the theologian is Augustinian in a more teaching of the Augustinian Order radical sense than, say, Thomas which characterize the order as a Aquinas, he qualifies to be regarded as whole and not simply a party within a late medieval Augustinian.9 Perhaps, the order? If so, those tendencies right wing is the wrong term to use, deserve to be called Augustinian, as since it carries the connotation of op­ similar tendencies within the other position to all theological currents of mendicant orders might be called one's own time. Thomas Bradwardine Franciscan or Dominican. could be said to be a right-wing "Augustinian" may also be used Augustinian who resisted the theolog­ evaluatively to describe a party within ical currents of the 14th century, but the Augustinian Order which agrees hardly Gregory of Rimini, who gave with St. Augustine on a wide range of Augustine a 14th-century voice. issues and at a depth which is more Augustinian in this fourth sense is the profound than the merely nominal designation for a sentiment in theology Augustinianism of all medieval which takes Augustine without ice or theologians. A. V. Mueiler is certainly water and translates him into the using Augustinian in this evaluative theological categories of a later age. and descriptive sense when he at­ In the later to be tempts to show the continuity between Augustinian in this sense generally the teaching of Hugolino of Orvieto, meant such things as a stress on Simon Fidati of Cassia, Augustinus predestination, on concupiscence as an Favaroni of Rome, Jacobus Perez of essential ingredient of original sin, on Valencia, and Martin Luther.7 To grace as the precondition of moral some extent, H . A. Oberman wishes virtue as well as of merit, and on the to use Augustinian in this sense,8 merits of the Christian as nothing though, since Oberman is a more more than merita de congruo or half­ subtle historian than Mueller, he uses merits. Augustinian in other senses as well There is, of course, a fifth and last and with far more qualifications. sense of the term "Augustinian" which Some historians use the term also plays a part in adding complexity "Augustinian" to describe the theo­ to the historian's task. As anyone who logical right wing of the later Middle has studied theology knows, Augus­ tinianism and Pelagianism are terms in the history of Christian thought 7 A. V. Mueller, Luthers Theologische Quetlen with a life of their own. They are (Giessen, 1912); Theol. Stud. u. Krit. (1915), frequently used to mean not strict l31-172; "Agostino Favaroni (t 1443) e la teologia di Lutero," Bilychnis 3 (Rome, 1914), agreement with the teaching of Au­ 373-387; "Giacomo Perez di Valenza, O. S. gustine and Pelagius so much as the Aug., Vescovo di Chrysopoli, e la teologia di embodiment of a tendency which in Lutero," Bilychnis 9 (1920), 391-403; "Una special cases may go beyond the fante ignota del sistema di Lutero: II beato original teaching. In one sense it is Fidati da Cascia e la sua Teologia," Bilychnis 10 (1921), fase. 2.

8 Heiko A. Oberman, "Headwaters of the 9 I defend the use of Augustinian in this : I nitia Lutheri - initia re/orma­ sense in Misericordia Dei, The Theology 0/ tionis," unpublished lecture delivered on Aug. Johannes von Staupitz in its Late Medieval Setting, 23, 1971, to the Fourth International Congress SMRT 4 (Leiden: E. ]. Brill, 1968), pp. 30-34. for Luther Research held in St. Louis, Mo. Cita­ See my review of "Willigis Eckermann, OSA: tions are from the typescript which was made Gottschalk Hotlen, OESA (t 1481): Leben, Werke available to the delegates. Unfortunately, this und Sakramentenlehre, " in ZKG 80 (1969), typescript did not include the critical apparatus. 411-414. 248 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS possible to say that Thomas Aquinas That a man had access to a book does is more Augustinian than Luther on not prove that he read it or, if he read the question of merit if the standard is it, that he recommended it to his fidelity to the original teaching of friends or thought it sheer rubbish. St. Augustine. But one can also hold Catalogs of monastic libraries are without absurdity that Luther is more interesting and do prove accessibility. Augustinian than Thomas if the frame They do not, by themselves, prove of reference is the more perfect influence. embodiment of a tendency. The same thing is true with respect To complicate the problem still to parallels. If two men are found to further, historians must always bear teach the same thing or very nearly in mind the context and intention of the same thing, it does not in and-of theological affirmations. Original itself prove the influence of one man formulations do not always mean the upon the other. They may both have same thing in changed historical been influenced by a third party who circumstances. Indeed, it may be mayor may not have been the same necessary to formulate views in a more person. Or they may have, by very extreme way - or even in a totally different paths and for very different different way - in order to say the reasons and under very different cir­ same thing. Augustinians in the 15th cumstances, come to similar conclu­ century faced a revived semi-Pela­ sions. It is an important discovery gianism. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th when an historian can demonstrate century did not.10 The fact of the similarities in thought between two difference of context between Thomas theologians who he suspects may have and 15th century Augustinians has influenced each other. But similarities not been taken sufficiently into account do not establish influence. They only by historians who for the most part establish agreement. That is important, have been content merely to compare but it is not the same thing as influence. the formulations of these theologians More and other evidence is required to against the standard of the teaching of demonstrate influence. This is a point St. Augustine. which we need to keep continually in A second kind of difficulty which mind as we examine the history of plagues the historian very early in the scholarship on this question. game, even though it is not peculiar to this problem, is the question of in­ II. SURVEY OF SCHOLARSHIP fluence. What kind of evidence is FROM required to establish influence? It MUELLER TO OBERMAN is an exceedingly complex question The thesis that Luther was in­ and one which would deflect us from fluenced by an Augustinian theological our main purpose were we to explore tradition within his own order was first it in any depth. Nevertheless, there stated in a sharp and unsubtle way by are two principles which we need to Alfons Victor Mueller.1 1 In a series fix firmly in mind before we survey of books and articles beginning with the literature on the question of the Luthers Theologische Quellen in 1912, relation of Luther and late medieval Mueller argued that Simon Fidati of Augustinianism. Both principles are Cassia (d. 1348), Hugolmo of Orvieto negative. An historian has not dem­ (d. 1374), Augustinus Favaroni of onstrated influence when he has Rome (d. 1443), and Jacobus Perez of proven accessibility or parallelism. Valencia (d. 1490) were representa­ tives of an Augustinian school within

10 On this problem see Harry J. McSorley, Luther: Right or Wrong? (New York, 1969), p.167. 11 See footnote 7 above. LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS 249 the Augustinian Order and were in less he saw in these late medieval the most direct and immediate possible friars forerunners of the Augustinian sense forerunners of the Reformation. theologians at the Council of Trent.13 Between their teaching and the new Mueller's work, which was meant to Reformation theology of Martin Lu­ cast light on Martin Luther, proved for ther there exists una di./ferenza di Stakemeier to cast light instead on the forma, non di sostanza. general of the Augustinian Order, Mueller's thesis was, of course, dis­ Girolamo Seripando. cussed excitedly, both by Reformation Stakemeier was attacked by Hubert historians and by specialists in late Jedin in a sharply critical article in the medieval thought. While Mueller did T heologische Revue for 1937.14 Stake­ win some - at least partial-converts meier had not proven the influence to his point of view, the great majority of these theologians on each other of historians was inclined to view his or on Seripando. He had simply placed work with SusplC1on. There were the teaching of these theologians in indeed no strong prima facie grounds parallel columns. He had demonstrated for confidence in his historical method. similarity, not influence. In order to In his treatment of Perez and Luther, prove the lines of influence, Stake­ for example, Mueller summarized in meier needed to work assiduously in only 13 pages the teaching of Luther the primary sources, a very difficult on faith, hope, certitude of salvation, task indeed, since most of the mate­ penance, original sin, concupiscence, rials needed to prove influence are Bap(ism, marriage, free WIll, and stili scattered and unedited! In his double justice, and compared Luther's book Stake meier had not worked teaching on each point with quotations through the primary sources for him­ from the writings of Perez. When on self but had simply been content with the last page Mueller announced the repetition of the evidence which triumphantly the full agreement of Mueller had assembled in his own Luther and Perez, other historians books and articles. might be forgiven if they pteferred to Jedin's judgment in his History of reserve judgment. the Council of Trent, written many The deficiencies in Mueller's years later, summarizes fairly well the methodology, the errors in his judg­ judgment of Catholic historians on ment and unnecessary sharpness of Stakemeier's adaptation of Mueller: his polemic against the historians who Not proven, and scarcely capable of criticized him diminished the impact proof, is the hypothesis that Seripando of his insights. Still there were some was the most prominent upholder of a historians who were attracted to his school tradition of his Order so that he ideas. In 1937 Eduard Stakemeier in and his fellow Augustinian Luther were his book, Der Kampf um Augustin auf as two branches on one and the same 15 dem Tridentinum, took up part of tree. Mueller's thesis. He agreed with the Aufstellungen in diesem Punkte unhaltbar sind. critics of Mueller that there existed Was diese Augustiner ueber die Rechtfertigung an unbridgeable chasm between the aus dem Glauben sagen, ist nichts anderes als teaching of the late medieval Augus­ die schon vom hI. Thomas erklaerte Lehre von tinians and Martin Luther; 12 neverthe- der fides Jormata iustificans. Wenn Mueller hier sagt, das sei nur una dijJerenza di forma. non di sostanza, so widerspricht er sich selbst."

13 Stakemeier, Kampf, p. 22. 12 Eduard Stakemeier, Der Kampf um Au­ gustin auf dem Tridentinum (Paderborn, 1937), 14 Theologische Revue 36 (1937), 425-430. p. 21: "Zwischen diesen Augustinertheologen 15 Hubert Jedin, A History of the Council of des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts und der Gesamt­ Trent, Vol. II, The First Sessions at Trent, trans. lehre Martin Luthers ist ein saleh wesentlicher by Dam Ernest Graf, O.S.B. (Edinburgh, 1961), und grundsaetzlicher U nterschied, dass Muellers p. 258. 250 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS

The Protestant judgment concerning Gregory of Rimini; Toner 23 on Au­ Mueller's original thesis was no less gustinus Favaroni of Rome; Zumkeller pessimistic. Gordon Rupp, who has on Hugolino of Orvieto,24 Dionysius the gift for brief resume of issues, of Montina,25 and Hermann von characterized the state of the question Schildesche; 26 Eckermann 27 on GOtt­ with these words: schalk Hollen; Wolf,28 Weijenborg 29 The suggestion which A. V. Mueller and Steinmetz 30 on Staupitz; Stake­ offered as the clue to Luther's develop­ meier 31 and Jedin 32 on Seripando; ment, that there was a revival of Au­ gustinianism in the milieu in which Luther was trained, has never gOt beyond the stage of an interesting hypothesis. 22 Footnote 5 above.

Augustine was always a main ingredient 23 N. Toner, "The Doctrine of Original Sin in medieval theology. The Bible and according co Augustine of Rome (Favaroni) the Fathers, Augustine, Aristotle, were (t 1443)," Augustiniana 7 (1957), 100-117, the main elements. You might add a 349-366, 515-530; "The Doctrine of justifica­ double dose of Augustine to the pre­ tion according co Augustine of Rome (Favaroni) existing mixture of and (t 1443)," Augustiniana 8 (1958), 164-189,299- Aristotle, but the result would be a 327,497-515. Gregory of Rimini, or a Bradwardine, a 24 Adolar Zumkeller, Hugolin von Orvieto recognizably medieval Augustinianism und seine theologische Erkenntnislehre (Wuerz­ worlds apart from Luther's theology as burg, 1941); "Hugolin von Orvieco (ob. 1373) ueber Urstand und Erbsuende," Augustiniana it developed in these formative years. I 6 3 (1 953), 35-62, 16)-193: 4 (1()~ 4) , 2 ~ -46 ; "Hugolin von Orviero ueber Praedestination, And there, at least for the time being, Rechtferrigung und Verdiensr," /jllgusliniana the debate ground to a halt. 4 (1954), 109-156; 5 (1955), 5-51

While interest in Mueller's thesis 25 Adolar Zumkeller, Dionysius de Montina: subsided, two related developments ein neuentdeckter Augustinertheologe des Spaetmit­ provided the kind of evidence essential telalters (Wuerzburg, 1948). for a reassessment of the problem, 26 Adolar Zumkeller, Hermann von Schil­ "Luther and late medieval Augus­ desche O.E.SA. (Wuerzburg, 1957); Schriftum lind Lehre des Hermann von Schildesche (Rome and tinianism." On the one hand, a number Wuerzburg, 1959); "Wiedergefundene exege­ of historians have, from a variety of tische Werke Hermanns von Schildesche," different perspectives, written mono­ Augustinianum 1 (1961),236-272,452-503. graphs and articles on individual 27 Willigis Eckermann OSA, Gottschalk theologians of the Augustinian Order: Hoflen, OESA (t 1481): Leben, Werke und Sakra­ Schueler,17 Wuersdoerfer,18 Vignaux,19 mentenlehre (Wuerzburg, 1967). Oberman,20 Trapp,21 and Leff22 on 29 Ernst Wolf, Staupitz und Luther, Ein Beitrag zur Theologie des johannes von Staupitz und deren Bedeutung fuer Luthers theologischen 16 Gordon Rupp, The Righteousness of God: Werdegang. Queflen und Forschungen zur Reforma­ Luther Studies (London, 1953), p. 140. tionsgeschichte, Vol. 9 (Leipzig, 1927): "johann 17 Martin Schueler, Praedestination, Suende von Sraupitz und die theologischen Anfaenge und Freitheit bei Gregor von Rimini (Stuttgart, Luthers," LutherJahrbuch 9 (1929), 43-86. 1934). 29 Reinoud Weijenborg, O.F.M., "Neuent­ 18]. Wuersdoerfer, Erkennen und WiSJen deckre Dokumenre im Zusammenhang mit nach Gregor von Rimini, BB, Vol. XX, Pt. 1 Lurhers Romreise," Antonianum 32 (1957), (Muenster i. W., 1917). 147-202.

19 Paul Vignaux,justification et predestination 30 David C. Steinmetz, Misericordia Dei, au XIV' siecle, Duns Scot, Pierre d'Auriole, Guil­ The Theology of johannes von Staupitz in its Lale laume d'Occam, Gregoire de Rimini (Paris, 1934). Medieval Setting, SMRT 4 (Leiden: E. ]. Brill, 20 Heiko A. Oberman, Archbishop Thomas 1968); Reformers in the Wings (Philadelphia: Bradwardine: A Fourteenth Century Augustinian Fortress Press, 1971). (Utrecht, 1958); The Harvest of Medieval 31 Eduard Stakemeier, Der Kampf um Au­ Theology, Gabriel Biel and Late Medieval Nominal­ gustin auf dem Tridentinum (Paderborn, 1937). ism (Cambridge, Mass., 1963). 32 Hubert jedin, Girolamo Seripando, 2 vols. 21 Footnote 4 above. (Wuerzburg, 1937). LUTHER AND THE AUG USTINIANS 25\

Werbeck 33 on Jacobus Perez of Augustinian Order, as one might use Valencia; Lohse 34 and Ferdigg 35 on the term Franciscan School to char­ John of Paltz; O 'Malley 36 on Giles of acterize the theology of that order. Viterbo - and so the list goes on. Nevertheless, it should be added that Though these books and articles do these historians came swiftly to the not represent a consensus on the conclusion that the Augustinian Order nature of the theological currents in does house a special kind of theo­ the Augustinian O rder in the 14th and logical Augustinianism. 15 th centuries, they do provide us Damasus Trapp in his article, "Au­ with the kind of data which was not gustinian Theology of the 14th Cen­ generally available at the time when tury: Notes on Editions, Marginalia, Mueller wrote his works. Opinions and Book-Lore," divides The second development was Augustinian theology into two equally important. Two historians, epochs.37 The first stretches from both members of the Augustinian Giles of Rome to Thomas of Strass­ Order, have attempted to elaborate burg; the second begins with Gregory an overarching theory concerning the of Rimini. Early Augustinianism is direction of the theological movement heavily influenced through Giles of of the order as a whole. They have not Rome by T homas Aquinas. It is not presumed to single out a party within surprising, for example, that early the order but simply to describe the Augustinians joined with Thomas common elements which unite thp Aquinas and the Dominica s i Op­ separate parties. To use the distinc­ posing the doctrine of the immaculate tions I tried to draw at the beginning conception of the Virgin Mary de­ of this essay, they were not interested fended by Scotus and the . in isolating Augustinianism in senses Later Augustinianism is more heavily three or four, as a radical party within depe ndent on Augustine himself, or outside the Augustinian Order, but having recovered a far wider corpus of only in sense two, as the theology of the writings of Augustine than was at the order itself, whether it agreed in all the disposal of Giles of Rome. As a POlllts with St. Augustine or not. The sign of this new independence vis-a-vis Augustinian School, as used by these its own past, the Augustinians shift historians, refers to the theology of the their alliance from the Dominicans to the Franciscans on the question of the immaculate conception. Through­ 33 Wilfrid Werheck, 'J acobus Perez von out its history, however, Augus­ Valencia, Untersuchungen zu seinem Psalmen­ tinianism is marked by its careful kommentar,"' Beitraege zur historischen T heologie 28 (Tuebingen, 1959). historical scholarship, by its desire for better texts, and its concern for proper 34 Bernhard Lohse, "Moenchtum und Reforma­ tion, Luthers Auseinandersetzung mit dem Moenchs ­ documentation. The Augustinian ideal des Mittelalters (Goeningen, 1963). Order provides a home for intensive 35 Marcus Ferdigg, O.F.M., De Vita et historical research in the writings of Operibus et DoctTina Joannis de Paltz, O.E.SA., St. Augustine, a research which bears Dissertation at the Antonianum (Rome, 1961). fruit in the theological reflection of its Since published in the Analecta Augustiniana 30 (1967), 210-321; 31 (1968), 155-318. doctors. A more ambitious attempt at syn­ 36 John W. O'Malley, S.]., Giles of Viterbo on Church and Reform, A Study in Renaissance thesis than Trapp's important essay Thought, SMRT 5 (Leiden: E. ]. Brill, 1968); is the lengthy article by Adolar Zum- "'Giles of Viterbo: A Sixteenth-Century Text on Doctrinal Development,"' Traditio 22 (1966), 445-450; "'Fulfillment of the Christian Golden 37 Damasus Trapp, O.E.S.A., "'Augustinian Age under Pope Julius II: Text of a Discourse Theology of the 14th Century: Notes on Edi­ of Giles of Viterho, 1507,"' Traditio 25 (1969), tions, Marginalia, Opinions and Book-Lore,"' 26'5-338. Augustiniana 6 (1956), 147-265. 252 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS keller, "Die Augustinerschule des redemption and as little as possible Mittelalters: Vertreter und philo­ to the activity of human nature. The sophisch-theologische Lehre," in the Augustinians came down heavily on Analecta Augustiniana for 1964.38 predestination ante praevisa merita Zumkeller accepts Trapp's periodiza­ and on original sin. They denied that tion of the theology of the Augustinian it was possible to merit first grace and Order and his stress on the importance affirmed in the strongest possible way for the Augustinians of a critical­ the necessity of grace for morally good historical method. Nevertheless, acts. When forced to make a choice even before that historical conscious­ the Augustinians tended to stress th~ ness is fully developed, the Augus­ personal relationship to God which is tinian Order shows "ein klar aus­ established in grace rather than to gepraegtes augustinisches Element," 39 accent the more abstract notion of reflected in the independence of Giles grace as a habitus. The Augustinians of Rome from the teaching of his wish to stress gratia increata, grace as master, St. Thomas Aquinas. The the personal presence of the Spirit, historical consciousness which marks even when they do not give up the the modern Augustinian school, idea of grace as gratia creata, the beginning with Gregory of Rimini, habit of love. These motifs, which are intensifies but does not initiate the present from the very first, are Augustinianism of the Augustinian heightened in intensity, following the Order. compilation of the Milleloquium and This common AuguStlO1an element the theological acrivi(y of Gregory of which binds together the A ugus­ Rimini. The Augustinians are strongly tinianism of Giles of Rome with the oriented toward Scripture and the Augustinianism of Gregory of Fathers and sense the importance of Rimini, Zumkeller, following A. Trape, exact quotation in theological exposi­ characterizes as a stress on the primacy tion. Though the Augustinians quote of love and on the primacy of grace.40 their own doctors and are conscious The Augustinians stressed the primacy of a theological identity over against of love when they gave preference to the other orders, they are marked the good over the true, to the will over more by their source studies in Augus­ the intellect. Augustinians called tine than by their loyalty to the theology an effective science and opinions of Giles of Rome. caritas its goal. The subject of theology In an address to the Fourth Inter­ is God as glo rificator, and the essence national Luther Congress entitled, of eternal blessedness is an experience "Headwaters of the Reformation: more aptly described as an act of will lnitia Lutheri - initia reformationis," rather than an act of intellect. Heiko Oberman attempted to apply A stress on the primacy of grace the results of this research on late meant at the very least a tendency to medieval Augustinianism to the ques­ attribute as much significance as pos­ tion of Luther's early theological sible to the divine initiative in human development.41 Though Oberman made use of the research of Trapp and Zumkeller, he was interested, like 38 Adolar Zumkeller, "Die Augustinerschule Mueller, to show a line of influence des Mirrelalters: Venreter und philosophisch­ within the Augustinian Order, begin­ theologische Lehre," Analecta Augustiniana 27 ning with Gregory of Rimini and (1964),167-262; "Das Ungenuegen der mensch­ lichen Werke bei den deurschen Predigern des culminating in the theology of Martin Spaetmittelalters," ZeitschriJt luer katholische Luther. As the father of the modern Theologie 81 (1959), 265-305. Augustinian school, Gregory combines 39 Zumkeller, "Augustinerschule," p. 193.

40 Zumkeller. "Augustinerschule." p. 194. 41 Footnote 8 above. LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS 253 three elements: , which order by Dionysius of Montina and shapes "the prolegomena of the schofa Hugolino of Orvieto.47 In Augustinus modern a Augustiniana" and thus se­ Favaroni (d. 1443) Oberman finds an cures "the bridge to the world of the ecclesiology which is the "allegorical senses, of science and of experienced counterpart to the tropological com­ reality;" 42 humanism "as the quest for mercium admirabile between Christ and the mens Augustini by returning to the the believer," 48 which is such a strik­ fontes Augustini/' 43 and Augus­ ing element of the treatise by Staupitz tinianism reflected in Gregory's single­ on predestination and which occurs at minded stress on justification sofa roughly the same time in luther. The gratia. 44 All three elements - nomi­ tradition of affective meditation, which nalism, humanism, and Augustinianism is opposed to the speculative mysticism - are mediated to luther by a line (by of Eckhart, is preserved for luther by no means unbroken) which one can Jordan of Saxony, ludolf of Saxony trace in his own order. This modern and John of Paltz.49 Oberman even Augustinian school or via Gregorii is finds foreshadowings of Staupitz' given a new direction by luther and reinterpretation of gratia gratum becomes the vera theologia of the circle faciens as the grace which makes God of theologians at the University of pleasing to us in the sentence ofJordan Wittenberg.45 of Saxony: "Omnia quae Christus When luther was called to teach passus est ita debent homini esse philosophical ethics on the faculty accepta et grata, ac si pro ipsius of arts in 15 08, he was obliged by the solummodo salute ea sit passus." 50 statutes of the University of Witten­ According to Oberman, there are berg to teach according to the via "at least four potential agents of trans­ Gregorzz. Whereas earlier historians mission of the llldicated Augustinian had tended to regard this requirement tradition:" 51 only as an obligation to teach accord­ 1. The library at Wittenberg had ing to the via moderna, Oberman wishes copies of both the De gestis Safvatoris to see in it the obligation to teach by Simon Fidati of Cassia and a manu­ according to the principles of the script (the only known surviving copy) schola Augustiniana moderna.46 This of the Sentences Commentary of Hugo­ means for Oberman far more than the lino of Orvieto.52 Since these books requirement to teach nominalist were accessible, luther could have philosophy. The via Gregorii embraces read them. And each in its own elements of humanism and theological Augustinianism as well. 47 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 47. "We can The Augustinian line within the say, however, that already in the earliest docu­ ments Luther thinks and writes as if Favaroni, Augustinian Order which interests Gregory of Rimini, and Jacobus Perez combine Oberman begins with Gregory of in constituting his working library. Above all, Rimini, the Doctor authenticus whose this tradition is personified in Johann von teaching was propagated within the Staupitz to whose impetus Luther felt so deeply indebted and who for his part was wiJling to attest to his role as forerunner of the vera 42 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 43. theofogia .... "

43 Ibid. 48 Oberman, "Headwaters," pp. 32-33. Ober­ man here cites the texts of Favaroni quoted by 44 Oberman, "Headwaters," pp. 31-32, 42. ZumkeJler, "Augustinerschule," pp. 237-238, 45 Oberman, "Headwaters," pp. 47-48: though the conclusions which he draws concern­ "Hence there exists the optimal chance to do ing these texts advance beyond ZumkeJler. justice to the initia Lutheri when we see his 49 Oberman, "Headwaters," pp. 34-35. development and discovery as that of the Augus­ tinian monk finding and founding a new direc­ 50 Ibid. tion for the former via Gregorii." 5! Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 36. 46 Oberman, "Headwaters," pp. 38-40, 42. 52 Ibid. 254 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS peculiar way represents elements of Carlstadt had lectured on Thomas the via Gregorii, the modern Augus­ Aquinas according to the principles of tinian school. Capreolus. Since Capreolus saw as a 2. It is possible that, during the major task the importance of bringing years when Luther was writing his Gregory of Rimini and Thomas first lectures on the Psalms, he may Aquinas into harmony with each have made use of the commentary on other, he quotes long sections of the Psalms by the Augustinian, Gregory of Rimini in his De/en­ Jacobus Perez of Valencia (d. 1490).53 siones. 61 Thus via Carlstadt, Gregory Perez agrees, as Wilfrid Werbeck has of Rimini exercises an influence on the convincingly shown,54 with Gregory development of the vera theologia at of Rimini and his disciples on many Wittenberg. questions. Oberman summarizes his position 3. In addition to Bartholomaeus by observing: von Usingen, Luther's teacher at Taking stock of this cumulative, ad­ Erfuft, who stressed the importance mittedly circumstantial evidence, we of Gregory of Rimini,55 John of can point to the schola Augustiniana Staupitz was a particularly important moderna, initiated by Gregory of Rimini, channel of late medieval Augus­ reflected by Hugolino of Orvieto, ap­ tinianism for Luther.56 While Staupitz parently spiritually alive in the Erfurt was, to use the phrase of Jeremias,57 Augustinian monastery, and trans­ Luther's Schueler as well as his Vater, formed into a pastoral reform-theology by Staupitz, 3.S the o~~asio proxima ­ his decisive impact on Luther is beyond not causal -for the inception of the dispute. Luther claims that it was theologla vera at Wittenberg.62 Staupitz who led him to the discovery of the meaning of vera poemtentla.58 III. SOME OBJECTIONS J Furthermore, after the period of the It may seem ungracious to suggest Tuebingen sermons (1497 -98), we that there are difficulties with the find in Staupitz "the acceptatio doctrine proposed solution to the question of as part of the sola gratia, combined the relationship between Luther and with the tropological application of the late medieval Augustinians out­ 'Favaroni's theme' of the exchange of lined by Oberman. It is a bold and iustitia and peccata between Christ and imaginative application of the results the believer." 59 of late medieval research to one of the 4. A fourth channel of possible in­ perennially puzzling issues of Luther fluence was Andreas Bodenstein of scholarship.63 And it may well be, in Carlstadt. Carlstadt dedicates his commentary on the De Spiritu et

Littera to Staupitz and indicates that 6) Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 38.

Staupitz frees him from 62 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 41.

"by showing 'Christi dulcidinem' in 63 There is, of course, the further method­ the right relation of spirit and letter." 60 ological question whether one should proceed by comparing the modern research on late medieval Augustinianism (which mayor may 53 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 37. not be the theology of the Order of the Hermits 54 Werbeck, Perez, pp. 210-258. of St. Augustine as Luther himself perceived 55 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 39. it) with Luther's theology at an early stage of 56 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 37. his development or whether one should take as his point of departure Luther's own comments 57 Note the title of the book: Alfred Jeremias, Johannes von Staupitz, Luthers Vater und Schueler on the theologians of his tradition. Leif Grane, (Berlin, 1926). with whom I am inclined to agree, is very much of the opinion that we must begin with Luther's 58 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 37. texts, with his own comments on the late 59 Ibid. medieval scholastic tradition as he perceives it 60 Oberman, "Headwaters," pp. 37-38. and only move in the second place to modern LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS 255 spite of the objections which can be That is an important fact to be taken raised against them, that the funda­ into account by historians. Neverthe­ mental intuitions of Mueller and Ober­ less, circumstantial evidence for man are correct and only require a parallels and accessibility does not by tightening of the evidence adduced to itself prove influence. support them. Nevertheless, there are To throw the matter even more in problems with the thesis as it presently doubt, Luther does not quote the theo­ stands. logians - Simon, Hugolino, and 1. The first difficulty has to do with Perez 65 - whose works were acces­ the circumstantial nature of the sible to him. If Luther is in fact a evidence used to support the hy­ representative of the schola Augus­ pothesis first proposed by Mueller tiniana moderna, one of whose dis­ and refined by Oberman. What has tinguishing marks is great care in the been demonstrated is not a line of in­ accurate citation of sources and a fluence stretching from Gregory to concern to quote the theologians of Luther, but only similarities in thought its own order, this silence is - to say between certain selected Augustinian the least - remarkable. Fundamental theologians and the accessibility of sources of Luther's thought, especially the results of their theological reflec­ when those sources are in his own tions in the library at Wittenberg.64 order and when Luther is not bashful in his later life to praise the theologIans scholarship on late medieval theology '· His· who helped him on his way,66 are not torisch gesehen kann man die verschiedenen cited, either in his early works or in Fragen ueber Luthers Verhaeltnis zur mit· h IS T abletafk. If -argumentum e silentio telalterlichen Tradition nicht durch Vergleich von umfassenden Lehrkomplexen bewaeltigen. - Luther is in fact decisively influenced Schon 1935 hat Paul Vignaux diese Methode preisgegeben, urn stan dessen eine eingehende Textanalyse zu fordeen. Mit ausgangspunkt in 'Pelagianismus' der Ockhamisten Anregung Luthers eigenen positionen will Vignaux ueber von Gregor erhalten hat, weist Zumkeller aber die Mutmassungen hinaus zu einer unminel· nur auf die Bemerkung ueber die Leipziger baren Konfrontation Luthers mit den von ihm Disputation, W A 2, 394 hin." Leif Grane, behandelten Theologen durchdringen. Vignaux' "Gregor von Rimini und Luthers Leipziger Methode blieb aber eine Zeidang fast un· Disputation," Studia Theologica 22 (1968), p. 31. beachtet. Weiterhin wurden die tatsaechlich 65 Werbeck makes it quite clear that all that vorliegende Texte, worin sich Luther auf die can be demonstrated at the moment is the pos· jeweils behandelten Theologen bezieht, nicht sibility of the use of the commentary on the Zentrum der Untersuchungen, sondeen bloss Psalms by Perez, not the fact of its use. See Belegstellen fuer verschiedene im voraus Perez, p. 47. According to Ebeling, Luther konzipierte Auffassungen ueber 'Luther', bzw. specifically cites in his first lectures on the den oder die mittelalterlichen Theologen, urn Psalms: Augustine, Cassiodorus, the Glossa die es ging." Leif Grane, "Luthers Kritik an Ordinaria, the Glossa Interlinearis, Peter Thomas von Aquin in De captivitate Babylonica," Lombard, Hugh of S. Caro Card., Nicholas of ZKG 80 (1969), p. 2. Lyra, Paul of Burgos, Matthias Doering, John of Turrecremata, and Faber Stapulensis. Gerhard

64 Grane against Zumkeller, and now Ober· Ebeling, "Luthers Auslegung des 14. (15.) man, is pessimistic about the results of this line Psalms in der ersten Psalmenvorlesung im of inquiry. In spite of the fact that Hugolino of Vergleich mit der exegetischen Tradition," Orvieto, Gregory's illustrious disciple, is in the ZThK 50 (1953), p. 280, footnote 1. library at Wittenberg, proof of the influence of 66 The frequent references in this connection Gregory on Luther is still lacking for the earliest to Staupitz are well known. While Luther period of Luther's development. "Doch nicht acknowledges that he received everything einmal unter dieser Voraussetzung kann gesagt from Staupitz ("Ex Erasmo nihil habeo. rch hab werden, dass es bisher gelungen sei, Auswirkun· all mein ding von Doctor Staupitz; der hatt mir gen dieser Kenntnis von Gregor waehrend der occasionem geben." WATR 1 Nr. 173 Feb. or Jahre festzustellen, in denen die theologische Mar. 1532), he remarks wryly that had he only Auffassung Luthers ausgeformt wurde . read Wessel Gansfort earlier, his enemies would Anderer Meinung ist A. Zumkeller. .. Fuer have seen "Lutherus omnia ex Vvesselo seine Annahme, dass Luthers Kampf gegen den hausisse." (WA 10.2.317) 256 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS by these representatives of the via though he differs with him on several G regorii, then Luther decisively departs as well 70 - he does not quote Gregory from the via Gregorii by not acknowl­ of Rimini but repeatedly turns to Giles edging that fact. of Rome and Thomas of Strassburg, Furthermore, similarities in thought representatives of the older Augus­ are not by themselves sufficient to tinian school. To be sure, he does establish lines of influence. To take quote John of Paltz, but while Paltz an example of this which comes readily is important as a representative of to mind, it can be demonstrated with­ affective mysticism, he is hardly a out much difficulty that Staupitz radical Augustinian in his theology.71 agrees with the late medieval Augus­ The strongest Augustinian opinions nOlan nominalist, John Pupper of which Staupitz cites are those of Goch (d. 1475), on twelve crucial Augustine himself, supported, of theological issues. On at least nine of course, by copious citations from the those issues Staupitz is in fundamental first Gregory, Pope Gregory the disagreement with Thomas Aquinas.67 Great.72 Yet in spite of his overwhelming Staupitz does fit the general char­ agreement with Goch against Thomas, acteristics of the Augustinian Order Staupitz has been influenced by as those characteristics are sketched T homas and is completely oblivious of by Z umkeller and Trapp. He is widely the existence of the writings of John read in Augustine and in the sermons Pu!-,p er of eoch.lis Agreement does on Hinh quotes Augustine 163 times not prove influence; neither does from 24 works.73 He is attached to the disagreement disprove it. There must opinions of Giles and of Thomas be acknowledgement of sources, Aquinas, though without becoming a quotation of them, some kind of Thomist. When he differs with Thomas tangible evidence in the texts them­ - and those differences are funda­ selves before historians can claim mental- he cites Jean Gerson 74 and influence. This kind of tangible evi­ not Gregory of Rimini as the support dence has, by and large, not yet been for his deviation. Except fo r his wide produced. reading in Augustine and his partiality 2. There are even more difficulties to certain nominalist ideas, Staupitz with the hypothesis that Staupitz is the mediator of the via Gregorii, the acceptatio divina. and denial of virtue apace modern Augustinian school, to Luther. from grace.

While Staupitz is in agreement with 70 For example, reprobation ante praevisa Gregory on many questions 69 - demerita. all epistemological questions, the rejection of gratia creata, the redefinition of gratia gratum faciens, and the identification of prima gratia with predestination. For a discus­ 67 The comparison between Staupitz and sion of theological issues in Gregory and Goch and the evidence supporting it are given Staupitz see the literature cited above in foot­ in my article, "Libertas Christiana: Studies in notes 4, 5, 17-20, 28, 30, 38. the Theology ofJohn Pupper of Goch (d. 1475)," Harvard Theological Review 65 (1972), 191·230. 71 A point which Oberman also makes, "Headwaters," p. 36. 68 For the relation of Staupitz to Giles of Rome and Thomas Aquinas, see Ernst Wolf, 72 The fullest treatment of the sources which Staupitz und Luther, pp. 27·29, 80-82, 219·220. Staupitz quotes is found in Wolf, Staupitz und Wolf overestimated the importance of Thomas Luther, pp. 23-25. Jeremias observes in Staupitz, and Giles for Staupitz (on this point see Miseri· p. 87: "Von den Augustinischen Schriften sind cordia Dei, pp. 22·28), nevertheless Staupitz ihm besonders gelaeufig: die Psalmenkom· d~es rely on them, especially in matters of mentare, das Enchiridion, die Buecher ueber . die Dreieinigkeit und die Konfessionem." 73 Wolf, Staupitz und Luther, p. 23. 69 For example, predestination ante praevisa merita, the dialectic of the potentia dei absoluta 74 Staupitz, Hiob (1497-8) 23.186.41-187.3. and the potentia dei ordinata, the doctrine of See my Misericordia Dei, pp. 27, 106-107. LUTHER AND THE AVGUSTINIANS 257 appears to be more of a representative whose mens is the special concern of of the scho/a Augustiniana antiqua the scho/a Augustiniana antiqua et than of via Gregorii. moderna. That Staupitz, Favaroni, and What has not been sufficiently dis­ Jordan agree may in the last analysis cussed in the writings on Staupitz is be evidence that the historical scholar­ that the two most important writings ship of the Augustinian Order, the which we have from his hand are return ad Jontes Augustini, issued in sermons on Job and sermons on important theological conclusions, Paul,75 Staupitz exegetes the Old Augustine makes the point in his Testament poetical book of Job with sermons that the property of man is the aid of Gregory the Great and­ his sin, untruth, and death.76 The what is perhaps even more important property of God is His goodness, to note! -with the aid of Augustine's truth, and life. Man with his property Enarrationes in psa/mos. In this Augus­ possesses God and is possessed by tinian interpretation of the Old Testa­ Him. Christian experience may be ment, Staupitz develops themes which summed up as this possession of God, assist him in his interpretation of Paul. whom one possesses only as one re­ It is via Augustine and the Old Testa­ nounces the possession of oneself. In ment that Staupitz turns to Paul. His this possession of God a marvelous sermons breathe the atmosphere, not exchange takes place. \Y/hat is properly only of Augustine's interpretation of God's-namely, life-becomes man's; the Psalms, but also of the Augustinian and what is properly man's - namely, homiletical lit rature in g , ral. d ath b com s God's. A s in It is therefore not surprising that describes this exchange in these words: one can find in Augustine himself, God died, that an exchange might be especially in his sermons and com­ effected by a kind of heavenly contraCt, mentaries on the Old Testament, many that man might not see death. For Christ of the themes which are also distinc­ is God, but He died not in that Nature tive of Staupitz' theology and which In which He is God. For the same Per­ Oberman claims to find in Favaroni son is God and man; for God and man is and Jordan of Saxony. It is possible one Christ. The human nature was assumed, that we might be changed for that they are in all three, because they the better, He did not degrade the are first in Augustine, and their Divine nature down to the lower. For presence may not prove influence by He assumed that which was not, He did the via Gregorii but only influence by not lose that which He was. Forasmuch a common source, the Augustine then as He is both God and man, being pleased that we should live by that which was His, He died in that which 75 The Libel/us also includes themes from was ours. For He had nothing Himself, the Old Testament, especially Isaiah, The Song whereby He could die; nor had we any­ of Songs, and the Psalms, from John and the Synoptic Gospels, but the Pauline themes thing whereby we could live. For what dominate. It is clear after reading this powerful was He Who had nothing whereby He treatise why Staupitz, who based them on could die? In the beginning was the sermons preached in Nuremberg, was hailed at Word, and the Word was with God and Nuremberg as a second Paul. According to the Word was God, If thou seek for any­ Jeremias, Staupitz, p. 36: "Die Adventspredigten thing in God whereby He may die, Staupitz' in der Nuernberger Augustinerkirche thou wilt not find it. But we all die, who Dezember 1516 wurden zu einem der bedeu­ are flesh; men bearing about sinful tungsvollsten Ereignisse seines Lebens. Man flesh. Seek out for that whereby sin sagte: so erwas sei noch night dagewesen. Man erwartete das Hoechste von Staupitz. Man may live; it hath it not. So then neither sagte in Nuernberg: 'Dieser Staupitz ist's, der could He have death in that which was Israel erloesen wird!' Man nannte diesen 'Schueler' des Paulus' einen 'Herold des Evan­ 76 Serm. 32.10.10. PL. 38.202. In Ps. 145.11. geliums und der wahren Theologie.''' PL. 37 .1891. 258 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS

His own, nor we life in that which was In the same way, Staupitz' reinter_ our own; but we have life from that pretation of gratia gratltm faciens as the which is His, He death from what is grace which makes God pleasing to ours. What an exchange' What hath He the Christian may be explained as a given and what received? Men who scholastic translation of the maxim trade enter into commercial inter­ developed by St. Augustine in his course for exchange of things. For second discourse on Psalm 32 (33): ancient commerce was only an exchange "He pleases God who is pleased with of things. A man gave what he had and received what he had not .... And who God." 80 The mark of the justified can enumerate all these exchanges? man is that he is pleased with God. But no one gives life to receive death. Because he is pleased with God, he Not in vai n then was the voice of the praises Him. And that praise is itself Physician as He hung upon the tree. For pleasing to God. . in order that He might die for us because the Word could not die, The Word was The idea is, of course, central to made flesh and dwelt among us .... Peter Staupitz.81 Justification is the restora­ put his trust in Him, and tottered; but tion of the ability to praise God. The norwithstanding he was not disregarded justified man praises God because he and left to sink, but was lifted up and finds God pleasing to him. The grace raised. For his trust whence was it? Not which restores the laus dei is the from anything of his own; but from what gratia gratum f aciens. Therefore it is was the Lord's.77 the grace which makes God pleasing There In Augustlne's sermons on to the Christian and thus initi:ltes the the New Testament is the commerciltm praise of God. There may, of course, be admirabife. To be sure the marriage a much more complex history behind metaphor is not employed as it is in Staupitz' redefinition of gratia gratltm Staupitz 78 and Luther,79 nor is the faciens, and he may in fact prove not exchange an exchange of peccata and to be the first medieval theologian to iustitia but rather of death and life. define it that way. However, since -as Nevertheless, there is an exchange of O ckham taught us - that theory is best properties between Christ and the which explains the evidence with the Christian which takes place in the fewest assumptions, I am inclined to experience of faith. The incarnation, regard it as nothing more than a which is itself a commerciltm admirabile. scholastic translation of a maxim of is tropologically applied to the be­ St. Augustine taken from the Enar­ liever. The humanity which was as­ rationes in psalmos. It is evidence not sumed was my humanity; the death of Staupitz' interest in Jordan of which was destroyed was my death. Saxony - a thesis which is debatable­ When Staupitz uses the idea of the but of his attachment to the Enarra­ heavenly exchange between Christ tiones - a fact which is beyond debate! and the Christian, he may in fact be 3. The suggestion that Carlstadt is doing nothing more than adapting an one of the channels by which Gregory important theme from the homiletical of Rimini enters the discussions of literature of St. Augustine. the vera theofogia by the Wittenberg theologians is an interesting one and deserves further study. The usual 77 Serm. 80.5. PL. 38.496. Translation by channels cited for the influence of R. G. Macmullen in Sermons on Selected Lmons of the New Testament by S. Augustine, Vol. 1 (Oxford, 1844), pp. 240-241.

78 See my Misericordia Dei, pp. 90-91. 80 In Ps. 32, Second Discourse, Serm. 1.1.

79 H. A. Oberman, .. 'Iustitia Christi' and PL. 36.277. 'Iustitia Dei; Luther and the Scholastic Doc­ 81 See my Misericordia Dei, p. 55, for a brief trines of Justification," HTR 59 (1966), 1-26. resume on this point. LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS 259

Gregory on Luther are Pierre d' Ailly ,82 the text which is being interpreted. who cites Gregory copiously because Luther and Staupitz lead Carlstadt into he likes him, and Gabriel Biel,83 who Augustine, but the conclusions to quotes him just as copiously because which Carlstadt comes are not the he does not. Nevertheless, the really same as the conclusions of his col­ interesting question is not how Carl­ leagues.85 The vera theologia is marked stadt relates to Gregory of Rimini, by a preoccupation with Scripture and but how Carlstadt, Staupitz, and St. Augustine, not identity of con­ Luther relate to Augustine. Never are clusions. Luther and Staupitz more representa­ IV. DIRECTIONS FOR tive of their order than when they FURTHER RESEARCH drive Carlstadt to the study of St. Au­ To some extent, of course, by in­ gustine. It is Luther, functioning as a dicating difficulties with the proposed humanist scholar, who challenges the solutions to the question of the rela­ authenticity of a treatise alleged to tionship of Luther to the late medieval have been written by Augustine.84 He Augustinians, we have already drawn angers Carlstadt with his text-critical attention to several of the tasks which remarks and pushes him back ad /ontes remain for further research. If it is to Augustini. When Carlstadt buys the be demonstrated that Luther stands at new edition of Augustine's works in the end of an Augustinian line within order to refute the Augustine scholar­ the Augustinian Order (the via ship of his younger colleague, he is Gregorzi), then textual evidence of led by a treatlse of Staupltz to under­ influence must be adduced to support stand what is the mens Augustini and that hypothesis. If that evidence can­ thereby to a fundamental reorientation not be produced or can only be pro­ of his own thought. It IS as Augusttne duced for a few of the necessary con­ scholars - as humanists and as exegetes nections, then perhaps this hypothesis - that Staupitz and Luther force Carl­ should be set aside in favor of some stadt not to immerse himself in late other which explains the evidence medieval Augustinianism but in the more adequately. I do not have such a sources themselves. substitute hypothesis to propose and To be sure, the question how do am willing to be convinced by the Luther and Staupitz understand Au­ hypothesis as it stands. But more and gustine and to what extent is their better evidence must be discovered to approach to Augustine shaped by support it. currents in their own time is an impor­ There is also good reason to reopen tant one. Still, in our concern with the question of the relationship of hermeneutics and the proper approach Staupitz and Luther. Wolf approached to Augustine in the 15th and 16th the question of the influence of centuries, we must not lose sight of Staupitz on Luther from a point of view which now seems far too limited.

82 Louis Saint-Blancat, "Recherches sur les Oberman has made an important sources de la theologie lutherienne primitive beginning with the reexamination of (1509·1510)," Verbum Caro 8 (1954), 81·91; this question by pointing out the strik­ "La theologie de Luther et un nouveau plagiar de Pierre d'Ailly;' Positions lutheriennes 4 (1956), ing parallel between Luther's letter 61·77; Horst Beintker, "Neues Material ueber of 1518, which emphasizes the die Beziehungen Luthers zum mittelalterlichen centrality of Staupitz in Luther's dis­ Augustinismus," ZKG 68 (1957), 144·148. covery of the meaning of vera poeni­ 83 Leif Grane, "Gregor von Rimini und tentia, and Luther's reflections in Luthers Leipziger Disputation," Studia Theo· 1545 about his discovery of the mean- logica 22 (1968), 29·49. 84 Gordon Rupp, Patterns of Reformation (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969), pp. 55·63. 85 See my Misericordia Dei, pp. 171·181. 260 LUTHER AND THE AUGUSTINIANS ing of the iustitia dei. 86 Furthermore, orders or to no order. Luther has Oberman attempts to interpret pralse for Jan H US,87 Wessel Gans­ Staupitz as a member of the Witten­ fort,88 and John Pupper of Goch,89 berg circle of theologians to which even though he reads them after the Luther and Carlstadt also belong, thus main lines of his own early develop_ emphasizing the role of Staupitz as ment are set. Nevertheless, the ques­ a colleague as well as Luther's Vater tion how Luther perceives these and Schueler. theologians is an important index to his One is struck by the similarity, own understanding of the mens Augus­ perhaps accidental, between Staupitz' tini. Luther sees the vera theologia as theological career and the movement continuous and discontinuous with of Martin Luther toward the vera the views of these late medieval Augus" theologia. Staupitz begins his career tinians. What that perception implies by lecturing on the Old Testament. He is an important question which has interprets the Book of Job with the not been given sufficient attention. aid of the Moralia of Gregory the Finally, no one can feel at ease with Great and the Enarrationes in psalmos the conclusions which are proposed of Augustine. In this Old Testament about Luther and the late medieval exegesis he develops themes which Augustinians until there is more appear later in his writings, but clarity about the much larger question, especially in the Pauline exegesis of how is Augustine understood in the the Libellus. Scholastic references - not how is he which abound in the sermons on understood by a party of radical Hiob and the Decisio very nearly disap­ Augustinian theologians within or pear in the later writings where Scrip­ outside the Augustinian Order, but ture and St. Augustine are the real how is he perceived by all theologians, authorities. The atmosphere of the whatever their dogmatic stance? We Pauline interpretation is the atmo­ cannot understand the significance of sphere of the Augustinian exegetical the interpretation of St. Augustine by, and homiletical writings in which the say, Gregory of Rimini until we can laus Dei is the dominant motif. It is the measure it against the interpretation Augustinian exegesis of the Old Testa­ of St. Augustine by Capreolus, d' Ailly, ment which is the door for Staupitz Biel, Panormitanus, Cusa, Petrarch, into the New Testament, but especially Gansfort, and many others who have into the writings of St. Paul. To what thus far been left out of consideration. extent this movement is important The question, Luther and the late for Martin Luther is a question which medieval Augustinians, can only be remains to be investigated. given a satisfactory answer when we As every Luther scholar knows, the have achieved greater clarity about question of the relationship of Luther the question, Augustine in the later to late medieval Augustinianism is not Middle Ages. On this larger question simply a question of the relationship we have barely begun to work. of Luther to the theological currents within his own order. Radically Au­ Durham, N. C. gustinian positions are defended by theologians who belong to other 87 WA 29.50.

88 WA 10.2.316 If. 86 Oberman, "Headwaters," p. 37. 89 W A 10.2.329 If.