Martin Luther early life: Luther was born on
November 10, 1483 in Eisleben in the county of Mansfield in northern Germany.
Luther’s father, Hans, was the son of a Thuringian peasant, a free peasant. Martin
Luther’s earliest childhood education took place in the Latin school at
Mansfeld. There and at home he received a religious education in the
late-medieval Catholic teachings that were typical of the times. These included
the belief in Mary and the saints, current popular superstitions and beliefs in
personal devils and witches, as well as the popular visits to religious
shrines.[1]
In 1501 Martin Luther’s father sent him to the University of
Erfurt for the purpose of studying for a legal career. The city of Erfurt was
the most important commercial center in Thuringia, with a population of about
20,000 inhabitants. The burghers of the city had founded their own university
and demonstrated their piety by constructing so many churches and other
religious buildings that the inhabitants called Erfurt the little Rome. Almost
every Catholic monastic order was represented there.[2]
The Thunderstorm
Experience: In May of 1505 Luther registered as a law student in the
university, though he was apparently never happy with his decision. In July of
the same year he became frightened when he was caught in a severe thunderstorm
and was thrown to the ground by a flash of lightning. Luther called upon St.
Anne and vowed that he would become a monk if his life were spared. Two weeks
later Luther entered a monastery of the Augustinian order at Erfurt.
Sale of Indulgences
and the 95 Theses: In 1517 Johann Tetzel came into Saxony near Wittenberg selling
indulgences on behalf of Archbishop Albert of Mainz. Pope Julius II had
inaugurated a plenary Jubilee Indulgence to obtain funds for rebuilding the
basilica of St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome, and the indulgence was revived by
Pope Leo X. A special arrangement was made with the archbishop, who needed
money to obtain the archbishoprics of Mainz and Magdeburg and the bishopric of
Halberstadt. Half of the money raised by the sale of the indulgences was to go
to repay the loan from bankers to the archbishop, and the other half was to go
to the pope to help pay for the cathedral. Tetzel claimed that the indulgence
gave complete forgiveness of all sin. Luther decided to make a public protest
to these abuses.[3]
Luther arguments and his assertion (1) the pope exercises
his authority by human, not divine, right and was therefore not infallible; (2)
the church of Rome was not supreme over the other churches; (3) the church of
Christ was a spiritual communion of saints; (4) church councils could and did
err because they were composed of erring men and did not exist by divine right;
and (5) Scripture was the ultimate, divine authority in all matters pertaining
to religion (sola scriptura). In addition to these assertions, Luther
was forced by the clever Eck into admitting the validity of many of John Hus’s
ideas.[4]
God and Revelation: Paul Althaus wrote that Luther’s “theology of
the cross permeated all of Luther’s theological thinking.” He developed his
theology of the cross early in his career. Luther prepared 28 Theses for the
Heidelberg Disputation of 1518, just a few months after posting the ninety-five
theses, and in these theses we find his earliest and most articulate expression
of the term. During these years Luther struggled with trying to find a gracious
God with whom he could stand in a justified relationship. He wanted to be
assured of his right standing before God, but found the traditional approach in
medieval Catholicism to be unsatisfactory. Luther came to emphasize the
apprehension of God in the suffering and lowliness of the cross in contrast to
the apprehension of God on the basis of the visible created world.[5]
The late medieval church, influenced by such theologians as Peter
Lombard and Thomas Aquinas, emphasized natural theology. According to
these ideas, God revealed Himself in numerous ways, including human reason, and
there were numerous ways to access the grace of God.
In the Heidelberg Disputation, Luther called any theology not
based on the cross a “theology of glory.” He said, “a theologian of glory calls
evil good and good evil. A theologian of the cross calls the thing was it
actually is.” Luther believed that any theology based on anything apart from
the cross misinterpreted the truth. It was wrong, Luther argued, for so-called
theologians “to look upon the invisible things of God as though they were
clearly perceptible in those things which have already happened.” Instead, true knowledge of God came by His
self-revelation
in
Christ. While Luther acknowledged that God had revealed Himself in
nature, he did not think this led people to God. Because humanity is in a depraved
state of alienation from God, man could not come to know God fully in this way.[6]
Luther used Exodus 33:18-23, to say that like Moses of old, man
could only perceive the backside of God. God always remains a hidden God, both
in His transcendence and in His revelation. Only in the cross did God reveal
His true character. By Christ’s suffering, God revealed Himself as a God who
loved human being and wished to show mercy to them. The message of the cross
revealed the depths of human sin and condemnation. Thus one could only come to
true knowledge of God by means of this judgment. Luther asserted that “man must
utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive the grace
of Christ.”[7]
Luther’s View of
Justification: The central doctrinal principle for Luther was that justification
is by grace through faith. “Through faith” did not mean a means for
apprehending grace but a mode of living by and in the power of God’s grace. In
a 1519 sermon entitled “Two Kinds of Righteousness,” Luther distinguishes
between what he calls “alien righteousness” and our “proper righteousness.” By
alien righteousness Luther means “the righteousness of another, instilled from
without. This is the righteousness of Christ by which he justifies us through
faith...” Citing Romans 1:17, “For in it the righteousness of God is
revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, ‘But the righteous human shall
live by faith’,” Luther asserts that “Through faith in Christ,
therefore, Christ’s righteousness becomes our righteousness and all that he has
becomes ours; rather, he himself becomes ours.” Luther’s concept ruled out
every attempt to justify or acquit oneself before God. One was made acceptable
before God in the lively apprehension of God’s word of love and mercy. This conclusion
brought to an end for Luther any religious attempt to justify himself before
God in terms of the prescribed combination of sacraments and works as found in
Catholicism. The first slogan of Luther’s reformation was sola fide,
“faith alone.”[8]
Church in Luther's
Definition: Luther’s view of
Church is not a hierarchical, institutional system but a community or a people
gathered around, under the word of God. He said, “Thank God, a seven year old
child knows what the Church is, namely, holy believers and sheep who hear the
voices of their shepherd”. These words of Luther provide a concise and apt
synthesis of his ecclesiology. Only these two elements enter into the
definition of Church: the congregation of believers (sheep
that listen) and the word of God (the voice of their shepherd). The elements
Luther excluded from the definition are also meaningful. The definition that
appeared in the Smalcald Articles explicitly rejected ecclesiastical ceremonies
and liturgical symbols as constitutive of the Church. Also excluded were institutional
elements except the “congregation” or coming together of believers and the
predominance of an ecclesiastical hierarchy. According to Luther, the point of
departure of defining the Church was not general, universal organization but
rather the local community. And even in this definition of 1537, dated
twenty years after the Reformation began; there was no sign of denominational
confessionalism.[9]
The key element of Luther's ecclesiology is his understanding of
the church as the people of God. Or the congregation of saints: “We shall this
time confine ourselves simply to the children’s Creed, which says, “I believe
in one holy Christian Church, the communion of saints." Here the creed
clearly indicates what the church is namely a communion of saints that is, a
crowd or assembly of people who are Christians and holy, which is called a
Christian holy assembly, or Church....Church is nothing but an assembly of
people, though they probably were heathens and not Christians. Now there are
many peoples in the world; the Christians however, are a people with special
call and therefore called not just ecclesia, “Church” or “People”, but Sancta
Catholics Christiana... Thus the “Holy Christian Church” is synonymous with
“holy Christendom" or “whole Christendom”. The Old Testament uses the term
“God's
People”. For Luther, the church was originally and fundamentally the
community of those who shared faith in Christ. “Community” is the New
Testament term, which is called “people of God” in the Old
Testament. The Church comprises God’s people, Luther contented, not the
pastors, the bishops, or the pope: “... the pope is not the people much less a
holy Christian people. So too bishops, priests, and monks are not holy,
Christian people...” Where there was only one baptism, only one gospel, only
one people there too all were Christians, all equal priests. For Luther the Church
is the child of the Gospel. It is brought forth and shaped by the word
of God. Without it, the community would be a community, but not the Christian
and holy community; a people but not the people of God. Luther distinguished
between the internal (invisible) and the external (visible) Church.
The Church is the creature
of the word of God and the Church as human organization, the Church as an
object of faith and the manifestations of faith. In the explanation of apostle’s
creed, once more we note Luther’s strong criticism against institutionalism.
For what is believed is neither physical nor visible. All of us can see the
external Roman Church. That is why it cannot be the true church, which is
believed and which is a community or assembly of saints in faith. but no one
can see who is holy or who believes.[10]
The church is the place of healing. Luther frequently admonished
the community to love those in need and to protect the vulnerable. Church is
the body of Christ in this world. In this way, in all instability and in love,
the Church is an instrument that battles against evil. Political duties must be
exercised by Christians on behalf of the well-being of the people.
Sacraments: Luther understands sacraments as Christ’s promises; more specifically he sees them as “bodily
words” (leibliches Wort).
This refers to the Augustinian definition of the sacrament: the word comes to
the element and so there is a sacrament (accedit
verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum). Sacraments are instituted by Christ and communicate grace to those who receive
them in faith. It is necessary that there is a command to perform them (“Do this for the remembrance of me”) and a promise (“This is my body given for you”) and a
clearly identifiable material element.
For Luther, not all seven traditional sacraments meet these requirements. Thus
Luther speaks of two or three sacraments: baptism (together with penance) and
the Lord’s
Supper. But Luther is aware that the term “mysterion” – the Greek
equivalent to the Latin “sacramentum” – is not used in the New Testament in
order to denote those events that are traditionally called “sacraments.” Thus
there is a certain flexibility to define the term “sacramentum.”
Baptism: Christ’s promise in baptism is that the baptized belongs to him as
God’s child and is saved eternally. This promise is received only in faith in
this promise. If a baptized person does not believe in the promise of baptism,
he or she contradicts the reality that is created by that promise and denies
his or her salvation. Nevertheless, even by unbelief or sin the promise of
Christ given in baptism is not destroyed. Thus any re-baptism would seriously
violate Christ’s faithfulness and trustworthiness. A traditional image
explained that baptism was the ship that brought people safely through the sea
of disaster, but that in the case of a mortal sin the ship wrecked while
penance remained as a plank by which people could save their lives. Luther
changed the image by claiming that the
ship would not break into pieces from sin; rather the sinner falls from the
ship but would be called to enter the ship again by faith in the promise of
baptism. This faith included for Luther recognition of and contrition for
one’s sin. Thus penance is closely connected to baptism, and often baptism and
penance are seen as one sacrament. The promise of baptism is given by word and
water at a certain moment in a person’s life, but it extends over and includes
the whole life of the baptized. The baptized are called during their whole life
to return to baptism and its promise: by recognition of their sins, by
contrition and repentance, by faith in and gratefulness for Christ’s mercy.[11]
By baptism, human beings are at the same time brought into union with
Christ and are incorporated into the Church. Therefore baptism creates the
common Christian reality of the spiritual estate to which all baptized belong
by baptism. Thus there is no separation of two Christian estates, the lay and
the consecrated; rather there is one spiritual estate, Luther’s understanding
of baptism leads him to deny the medieval division of society into these two
groups. Baptism aims at the faith of the baptized, and through faith
constitutes the union with Christ by which the Christian – as bride –
participates in the possessions and qualities of Christ – as bridegroom. Since
Christ is priest and king, the baptized also participate in Christ’s priesthood
and kingship. Thus one has to state, “Every baptized person is a priest,” and
“every baptized person is a king.” It is clear that the words “priest” and
“king” receive a new “metaphorical” meaning when used in these two sentences.
This meaning is not improper; it is a new meaning whose content is not easy to
explain. Christ as priest brings God’s concerns to human beings and brings
their concerns to God, and he is offering his life to God. Accordingly, the
Christian as priest will have to bring other human beings’ concerns to God
(prayer) and God’s concern to human beings (communication of the Gospel), and
he or she will give his or her life to God in obedience to his will and in
lifelong repentance. There will still be differences of ministry that are
instituted by God, but these differences do not deny the reality of one
spiritual estate created by baptism.
Lord’s Supper: It is understood from the reality of a testament the promise of someone who is about to die of which the Latin
version of the words of institution speaks. Initially, Luther understood Christ’s promise (testamentum) as promising grace and forgiveness of sins, but in
the debate with Huldrych Zwingli he developed this understanding and came to emphasize that Christ gives
himself, his body and blood that are really present. It is not faith that
makes Christ present; it is Christ who gives himself, his body and blood, to
the communicants, whether or not they believe this. Christ’s body and blood are
present “in, with and under” the species of bread and wine. There is an
exchange of properties (communicatio
idiomatum) between Christ’s body and blood on the one hand and bread and
wine on the other hand so that there is a sacramental union between bread and
Christ’ s body and between wine and Christ’s blood. It is not only a
“consubstantiation” but rather an exchange of properties that creates a new
type of union in analogy to the union
in Christ.[12]
There were some area of conflict between Luther and his opponents with
respect to the Lord’s Supper.
Luther was critical of the fact
that it was forbidden for lay people to receive communion under both species,
bread and wine. Luther did not argue that in such a celebration lay people
would only receive half of Christ. They would indeed receive the whole or full
Christ. But Luther denied that the church had the competence to withdraw the
species of the wine from the laity. In the words of institution one reads clearly,
“Take and drink all of it.” (Matthew 26:27) Luther found that the church
government arrogates a competence to itself that is contrary to the Gospel
itself.[13]
The other area of conflict has to do with the problem of how to grasp
conceptually what the “change” in the Lord’s Supper would mean. The fourth
Lateran Council used the verb “transubstantiare”
which implies (or seems to imply) Aristotle’s distinction between substance and
accidents. For Luther, this explanation was one possibility to explain what
happens in the Eucharist, but he could not see how these philosophical concepts
and distinctions could be made binding for all Christians.
Conclusion: As we have seen in the above theology of Luther, Luther‘s Reformation theology is a complete system with
unity and depth, and it stands against the trends of medieval theology as a
whole, not simply in particular Doctrines. It is also a strong contextual and
relevant theology of His time. It is the people’s theology. Luther had no
intention to start a new denomination or church, but the process of
deconstruction that had went through the reformation, had gone beyond the
recovery of the R. Catholic Church, to bring back everything as before. The
institutionalized system of the Medieval Christian religion was over turn when
Martin Luther stood against the powerful Papacy all alone. Saying “…, Here I stand, I can do no other. God help
me”
No comments:
Post a Comment