Luther's Understanding Research Articles

Die Woord van God by Luther

Luther's understanding of the Word of God. This paper attempts to show that Martin Luther is much more than a great personality from the past. He is in fact an important theological father of the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk. Our theology must be understood from the perspective of Luther's theology. A call is also made that theologians from the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk not turn their backs on Luther. This paper concentrates on Luther's understand-ing of the Word of God. It gives perspectives on historical developments in Luther's theology. It also disCusses the following themes: the Bible as the Word of God, the relationship between Old and New Testament, the relationship between law and gospel, the position of the pope and the role of experience in understanding the Word of God.

Freiheit. Anmerkungen zu Herbert Marcuses Lutherkritik

The essay starts from Herbert Marcuses's critique of Martin Luther's concept of liberty. Marcuse accuses Luther of having applied freedom to the »inward« person while the »outward« person was subject to secular forces. In a second train of thought, the essential features of the critique are put down to the assessment of Luther and the Reformation by Ernst Troeltsch. In a third step, Oswald Bayers metacritique is used to elucidate the theological examination of Marcuse's critique of Luther. In the fourth place, the focus of the discussion is pointed to the question whether Marcuse's critique could be seen as inappropriate when compared with Luther's totus-homo-anthropology. But if - as shown in the fifth paragraph - the whole person is marked as spirit or flesh, then the devaluation of the »outward« person (flesh) which Marcuse had criticized repeats itself on the totus-homo-level. In a sixth step the thesis is put forward that Luther's totus-homo-anthropology offers a solution with regard to the critique expressed by Marcuse exactly then, if it is interpreted not with regard to the difference between >inward< and »outward« person or between spirit and flesh but in the horizon of other differentiations. In this direction the distinctions between »old person - new person«, »coram deo - coram mundo«, »faith - works< as well as »already - not yet< are suggested as further leading interpretations. In the last step it is pointed out that Luther's understanding of freedom is lead by the idea of the divine fluxion of goods. It comes from Christ and sets the whole person free through the »joyous exchange<, so that he can look after the need of his neighbour in liberating love.

Wechsel ohnegleichen. Über die Grundstruktur der Rechtfertigung und Heiligung und das Austauschen von »Gaben« in Luthers »Tractatus de libertate christiana«

Article Wechsel ohnegleichen. Über die Grundstruktur der Rechtfertigung und Heiligung und das Austauschen von »Gaben« in Luthers »Tractatus de libertate christiana« was published on January 1, 1998 in the journal Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie (volume 40, issue 2).

Paradoxie in Werner Elerts Grundbestimmung der Dogmatik

The article tries to understand the category of paradox in the work of Elert not only in opposition to the rational but also in relation to it and thus seeks to analyze the rational function of paradox in Elert's conception of the foundation of dogmatics. The paradox in question here is not the so-called christological paradox. It is first the paradox of the deus absconditus which characterizes in a certain respect the natural relation of humans to God (I). This paradox allows no immanent solution at all in accordance with all natural conceptions of a rational understanding of the world. As such it characterizes in several respects the understanding of the gospel as its only transcendent solution (II). In so far as the gospel in a certain way presupposes an acknowledgment of that paradox it must be considered as paradoxical itself, thus being a paradox solution of the former paradox. Its paradox character is essentialy due to a genuine Lutheran understanding of justification emphazising the dependence of certainty of faith on the iustitia aliena; the paradox character of the gospel can finally be considered as the paradoxality determining the relation of law and gospel (III). This paradoxality related to the gospel thus has a basic systematic function by determining the condition under which the testimony of Christ is perceived as word of God himself -this word strictly being separated from the - paradox - experience of natural existence under the abscondity of God. Elert indeed does not relate the gospel to natural existence in a way of rational correlation nor does he simply replace correlation by mere confrontation. He rather establishes the correlation between the kerygma of Christ and natural existence in a way of paradoxical connexion (Anknupfung) as confrontation with the paradoxality of natural existence itself (IV).

Hegel and the Spirit: Philosophy as Pneumatology.

and the explores the meaning of Hegel's grand philosophical category, the category of Geist, by way of what Alan Olson terms a pneumatological thesis. Hegel's philosophy of spirit, according to Olson, is a speculative pneumatology that completes what Adolf von Harnack once called the orphan in Christian theology - the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Olson argues that Hegel's development of philosophy as pneumatology originates out of a deep appreciation of Luther's dialectical understanding of Spirit and that Hegel's doctrine of Spirit is thus deeply interfused with the values of Wurttemberg Pietism. Olson further maintains that Hegel's Enzyklopadie is the post-Enlightenment philosophical equivalent of a Trinitatslehre and that his Rechtsphilosophie is an ecclesiology. Thus and the demonstrates the truth of Karl Barth's observation that Hegel is the potential Aquinas of Protestantism. Exploring Hegel's philosophy of spirit in historical, cultural and personal religious context, the book identifies Hegel's relationship with Holderlin and his response to Holderlin's madness as key elements in the philosopher's relibious and philosophical development, especially with respect to the meaning of transcendence and dialectic.

Protestant Thought and Republican Spirit: How Luther Enchanted the World

Arguments about the emergence of modern political theory often claim that Protestantism's significance was that it evacuated the political world, that a more properly political ethic took its place, a “disenchanted” one. I shall consider Luther's understanding of biblical history, thoughts on the Christian prince, and view of the “bonds of union” between Christians in order to understand the relationship between the political and spiritual realms. I suggest that even though Luther argues for the separation of the two realms, his political realm is by no means disenchanted. His politics can only be understood in light of his claims about the purview of God the Father and God the Son. “Political vacuum theories,” I suggest, misconstrue the relationship between politics and religion in Protestant thought.

TESTIMONIUM SPIRITUS SANCTI—AN EXAMPLE OF BERNARD-RECEPTION IN LUTHER'S THEOLOGY -

Summary In 1546, the year of Luther's death, Philip Melanchthon wrote a Vita Lutheri. Here we find a remarkable story about Luther's new understanding of the Gospel. According to this tale the young Augustinian friar Luther would have been comforted often in the friary of Erfurt by an old man. This man had told him, that the remission of sins should not only be believed generally, but personally. This was confirmed by the Creed and a statement of Bernard of Clairvaux (1090–1153) in his first Sermon In annuntiatione. Melanchthon claims to have heard this story of the early monastic years (1508) from Luther himself, but it cannot be found in any of Luther's writings or Table Talks. The famous quotation from Bernard's In annuntiatione turns up for the first time during Luther's Lectures on Romans in 1516. Bernard's exposition of Rom. 8,16 surely made a big impression on Luther, as he referred to it, time and again. The abbot of Clairvaux directed him to the remission of sins in relation to Rom. 3,28, one of ...

Luther and Hobbes on the Question: Who Was Moses, Who Was Christ?

The debate about the identity of early liberal thought can be gainfully entered into by considering how important the political identity of Christ and Moses (whom Christ purports to fulfill) was in early liberal thought. I first consider the outlines of the debate about the relationship between Christianity and early liberal thought, then discuss Luther's understanding of the meaning of Christ's fulfillment, suggesting how, on theoretical grounds, it could be disruptive of political order. I then turn to Hobbes's understanding of Moses and of Christ. Hobbes's abiding concern for the unity of sovereignty rests, I argue, on the claims of reason and on his understanding of Christ's fulfillment of Moses. It is this later understanding which is something of an answer to Luther's stark dialectic according to which Christian faith was said to have superseded the law of the Old Testament. I conclude that notwithstanding his indebtedness to reason, Hobbes's thought is within the Protestant orb.

Luther on Thomas Aquinas: The Angelic Doctor in the Thought of the Reformer by Denis R. Janz

BOOK REVIEWS 145 Luther on Thomas Aquinas: The Angelic Doctor in the Thought of the Reformer. By DENIS R. JANZ. Veroffentlichungen des Instituts fiir Europiiische Geschichte Mainz, Abt. Religionsgeschichte, Bd. 140. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1989. Pp. ii + 124. DM 38 {cloth). As Denis Janz, specialist in the late medieval context of Luther's thought (Luther and Late Medieval Thomism, 1983), points out in the "Prospectus," a study of Luther's understanding of Thomas has an inherent appeal, for, " rightly or wrongly, Thomas and Luther are inevitably regarded as the standard-bearers of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism" {p. 1). The recent completion of the necessary critical indices has made the task possible, and the result is a fine and necessary contribution to the work of all scholars interested in the thought of these two pivotal Christian thinkers. The method of Janz is straightforward: assemble the references to Thomas in Luther's works, organize them into appropriate categories, exegete their meanings, and discern important tendencies or perspectives common to these texts. Then "the accuracy of Luther's understanding and the cogency of his critique " can be evaluated from the perspective of twentieth cenrtury historical knowledge {p. 2). Janz recognizes that there are significant hermeneutical difficulties inherent in such a study and that any evaluation " may well imply a notion of history as progress, perhaps even a confidence in the intellectual superiority of modernity over the past " (p. 3) . The result bears out the soundness of his approach. Chapter I examines "Luther on the Person of Thomas." Luther, sharing in and contributing to his time's distinctive theological polemic, had no shortage of epithets for Thomas, from " Sophist " to " beggarly paunch " {p. 4) . The remarkable thing is the surprising number of complimentary things he has to say. At different times of his career Luther referred to Thomas as " this holy man " or " a man of ' great genius ' . . . woefully misunderstood " {p. 5) . A most interesting example is the different uses he makes of a story of Thomas's struggle with despair when near death, when Thomas faced his Anfechtung by holding the Bible and saying "I believe what is in this book" (p. 8). Sometimes Luther cites it as an example of the weakness of implicit faith; but other times he makes no critical comment on Thomas, and the story implies the victory of faith over despair. These different uses show the ambiguity of Luther's attitude toward Thomas as a person, and what in balance seems to be " grudging respect " for an " example of how great persons can at the same time be seriously mistaken " (p. 10). 146 BOOK REVIEWS Chapter U, which comprises the bulk of the hook, carefully examines the substantive issues on which Luther mentions and responds to Thomas: experience, the use of Aristotle, Scripture, penance and indulgences , the Lord's Supper, monasticism, justification, law, baptism, angels, papal authority, purgatory, and the veneration of images. On some of these issues Janz sees only a minor critique of Thomas by Luther and sometimes little real difference between their positions. Both Luther and Thomas give primacy to the literal sense of Scripture, and "both teach that the Church and theology stand under the authority of Scripture" (p. 30). On this question Luther's critique has more to do with the Thomists than Thomas. In regard to penance and indulgences Luther criticizes Thomas's view, though here again there is distortion of Thomas by the Thomists, which Luther correctly suspects (pp. 44-45) . Though Luther disagrees with Thomas's understanding of the Lord's Supper, he feels Thomas was entitled to his opinion; what he cannot bear is how Thomas has been raised " to the level of an infallible teacher," with his opinions transformed "into articles of faith" (p. 48). Justification, the heart of Luther's thought, is "a relatively insignificant issue " in his critique of Thomas, as Luther eventually comes to understand better the key place Thomas gave grace (pp. 60, 61) . Luther sees Christ as the " abrogation " of the law and criticizes Thomas for not seeing it this way; however, this is a linguistic misunderstanding of Thomas, probably based on Gabriel Bicl's teaching, so that Thomas and Luther are...

A New Version of a Mid-sixteenth century Vernacular Tract on the Eucharist: A Document of the Early Edwardian Reformation?

The document presented here makes available a hitherto unknown version of an anonymous vernacular tract dating from the middle years of the sixteenth century. The only known version of the tract until now — extant in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge — was first published by Dr P. N. Brooks in an appendix to his monograph on Thomas Cranmer's eucharistic doctrine (1965).Beyond placing it in the ‘mid-sixteenth century’, Brooks did not attempt t 0 attribute it to an author or indicate its precise historical context beyond suggesting that it provided a ‘valuable period example of the Lutheran understanding of the eucharistic presence’ such as was favoured by Richard Cheyney (bishop of Gloucester, 1562-79) and Archbishop Thomas Cranmer in the period between abandoning transubstantiation and embracing a version of the Reformed doctrine. The longer version of the tract which has since come to light in the Bodleian would seem to call for some reassessment of that estimate. For while consistent with a Lutheran doctrine of the eucharistic presence, the Bodleian version concludes with sections on eucharistic adoration and oblation (not found in the Corpus MS). This suggests a closer affinity with the position championed by opponents of the religious changes in the reign of Edward VI, or at least an attempt at a doctrinal consensus between those of the ‘old’ persuasion and those of the ‘new’.

Left Brain, Right Brain

Parish pastor “The trouble with you seminary professors is that you don't know what's going on in the parish. Your ivory-tower theology has little to do with the problems I encounter in my work. Six months as an assistant here and you'd teach something different.” Seminary professor in a practical field „The problem with so many of you in the classical fields is that you never make what you teach practical enough. What good is comparing Luther's and Barth's understanding of law and gospel? What we need is a theology that directly addresses the specific issues of ministry. We need a theology of death, of evangelism, of administration. You have to speak to the concrete realities of the parish.” Seminary professor in a classical field: “What do I know about psychology, church growth, conflict management, or spiritual formation? I have enough trouble keeping up to date in my field, without also reading about psychotherapy or Christian education. You practical types are the ones to bridge the disciplines so that theology has an impact on practice. Otherwise students can just as well study what you teach at the university.”

Albert the Great and Martin Luther on Justification

ALBERT THE GREAT AND MARTIN LUTHER ON JUSTIFICATION ONE RESULT of the ecumenical revolution which occurred in that remarkable decade, the 1960s, was the appearance of a number of studies comparing Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther. Stephen Pfiirtner uncovered similarities between Luther's understanding of faith and Aquinas's theology of hope. Harry McSorley displayed in Augustine, Aquinas and Luther a triad of interpretations of free will, sinful bondage and grace. H. Vorster's book on freedom in Aquinas and Luther represented a Protestant contribution to this conversation between two of the great Western theologians. The final position of consummate achievement belongs to Otto Pesch's one thousand page study of justification in Aquinas and Luther.1 Some German reviewers of these books, sensitive to history and historicity, pointed out the cultural and intellectual distance between Aquinas and Luther. As if in support of this gap, McSorley and Pesch had shown that Luther had little if any direct knowledge of Aquinas's writings.2 Nonetheless, cultural history and the question of comparing one thinker and his 1 S. Pfiirtner, Luther and Thomas on Sol,vation (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965); H. McSorley, Luther, Right or Wrong (New York: Paulist, 1969); H. Vorster , Das Freheitsverstiindnis bei Thomas von Aquin und Martin Luther (Gottingen : Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1965); O. Pesch, Die Theologie der Rechtfertigung bei Martin Luther und Thomas. von Aquin (Mainz: Griinewald, 1967); C. Hennig, Cajetan und Luther (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1966). This enterprise began with Y. Congar, "Luther," Vraie et fausse reforme dans l'eglise (Paris: Cerf, 1950), pp. 377ff. On the changing view of Luther in Catholic scholarship in general , cf. R. Stauffer, Luther as Seen by Cavholics (Richmond: John Knox, 1967). 2 Cf. McSorley, pp. 139f., and Pesch, "Existential and Sapiential Theology. The Theological Confrontation between Luther and Thomas Aquinas," Catholic Scholars Diol,ogue with Luther (Chicago: Loyola, 1970), pp. 6lfl'. 539 540 THOMAS F. O'MEARA, O.P. Zeit.geist with another cannot be quickly dismissed. To select thinkers from different ages and to claim that they easily or clearly agree, or that they participate in some single, eternal, transcendental truth is to deserve the critique of scholars and the burial ·Of history itself. Weltgeschichte will be the Weltgericht of such an enterprise. If, however, we wish to understand why two thinkers from admittedly different cultural worlds (such as the Parisian thirteenth and the German sixteenth centuries) do disagree, then our enterprise is legitimate. For to compare two thinkers adequately and fairly is at the same time to compare their cultural worlds and to see both the similarities and differences therein. The following essay does indeed abstract from the thought-forms of Luther and Albert, which are quite different. We will look at the issue of justification , especially of justification within or apart from the activity of the human personality of the one justified. Although truth is not easily timeless, it is possible to examine how an Albert and a Luther, an Augustine and a Biel maneuver within the dialectic of the grace of an omnipotent God and the fallen freedom of a creature. In counterposing Aquinas and Luther, scholars in the 1960s were doing more than comparing two of the great figures in Western Christian theology. They were doing more than composing the counterpoint of an ecumenical fugue. For Aquinas and Luther are not only individuals: they formed the collective consciousness of parts of Christianity. And this primal role belongs also to Aquinas's teacher, for not only is he a medieval thinker of import but before Aquinas he gave the momentum to the great thirteenth century. The Roman Catholic has until recently thought almost exclusively out of an Aristotelian-Thomist framework; the catechisms of Catholicism since Trent are, in the main, simplified scholasticism. The Lutheran family of the Reformation, however , thinks out of the framework of Paul and Augustine which Luther vivified anew. For instance, for the Roman Catholic, sin is a free, disoriented action contrary to the natural and ALBERT AND LUTHER ON JUSTIFICATION 541 eschatological plan of God; for the Lutheran, sin is the human condition, the prior and present ecology of our world before God's wrath and word. Despite the recent...

The Lutheran Doctrine of the Ministry: Catholic and Reformed

THIS ARTICLE is encyclopedic, not in the sense that it covers the universe from A to Z, but rather because it seeks to give a condensed yet comprehensive and reliable account of its subject. It argues no over-all thesis, but does contain a multiplicity of minor ones which reflect with reasonable faithfulness, I hope, the present state of scholarship in this area. The general impression which emerges is that while the structure of the Lutheran understanding of the ministry is very different from the traditional Roman Catholic one, there are few, perhaps no, points of irreducible conflict. Yet my purpose is not to insist on this conclusion. Those who are not persuaded will find here, I hope, the data needed for responsible disagreement. In the three sections which follow I deal with the Lutheran doctrine of the ministry, first, in its official traditional form, second, in the light of contemporary developments, and third, in relation to current Catholic thought.