Being Shaped by Freedom: An Examination of Luther's Development of Christian Liberty, 1520–1525

Being Shaped by Freedom

An Examination of Luther’s Development of Christian Liberty, 1520–1525

Brett Muhlhan

With a foreword by Dennis Ngien

Being Shaped by Freedom

An Examination of Luther’s Development of Christian Liberty, 1520–1525

Copyright © 2012 Brett Muhlhan. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.

Pickwick Publications

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3

Eugene, OR 97401

www.wipfandstock.com

isbn 13: 978-1-61097-477-6

eisbn 13: 978-1-62189-960-0

Cataloguing-in-Publication data:

Muhlhan, Brett.

Being shaped by freedom : an examination of Luther’s development of Christian liberty, 1520–1525 / Brett Muhlhan, with a foreword by Dennis Ngien.

xvi + 284 pp. ; 23 cm. Includes bibliographical references and index.

isbn 13: 978-1-61097-477-6

1. Luther, Martin, 1483–1546. 2. Liberty—Religious aspects—Christianity. 3. Theological anthropology—Christianity. 4. Peasants’ War, 1524–1525. I. Ngien, Dennis, 1958–. II. Title.

bt333.5 m767 2012

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Foreword

Acknowledgments

Abbreviations

Chapter 1: Introduction

Part One: The Substance of Luther’s Early Concept of Freedom

Chapter 2: The Polemical-Historical and Theological Context of Luther’s Freedom Tractate

Chapter 3: The Freedom Tractate’s Theological Anthropology and Spiritual Ontology

Chapter 4: The Freedom Tractate’s Personal and Personal-Social Imperative

Part Two: The Testing of Luther’s Concept of Freedom

Chapter 5: Testing the Personal-Social Imperative

Chapter 6: Testing the Official-Social Imperative

Chapter 7: Integrative Conclusion

Bibliography

Foreword

Keenly aware of the complex historical structure in which Luther’s concept of freedom was conceptualized, Brett Muhlhan proceeds to show the two sides of the same coin in relation to it: the indicative law-gospel distinction, and the imperative which extends into the personal imperative, the personal-social imperative, and the official-social imperative. The personal imperative (I-self) is characterized in substance by Christ’s cruciformity, which entails conformity and imitation. This, Brett avers, is a helpful ordering of Luther’s faith-works schema. Brett is right to observe Luther’s methodological development of Christian freedom, which proceeds from genuine Christian ontology to its rightful implications for the I-self, the I-neighbor, and the I-state. To quote Brett: "The logical progression from faith—that affects inner liberation—to faith that implies radical personal and social works, had already been well defined by Luther in his sermon Two Kinds of Righteousness and his more detailed account on faith and works. The Freedom Tractate is a comprehensive polemical/pedagogical restatement and application of his theological development throughout 1519 and 1520 ."

Chapter 3, The Freedom Tractate’s Theological Anthropology and Spiritual Ontology, illuminates how God relates to human persons through both hands—law and gospel, wrath and mercy. Although God uses both hands, God’s right-handed action must shine, because God is characteristically right-handed. Divine mercy is an ontological predicate of God, and wrath is his reaction against that which might severe his relationship with his creatures. As regards divine ontology, God is mercy, not wrath. This brings into light the interplay between mercy and wrath in a construction of proper human anthropology. Arguably, if divine ontology grounds our anthropology, as Brett rightly discerns, then it is precisely the impact of divine revelation and grace on the human person that enables Luther to cut through the synthetic law-making of the Roman Scholastics.

The liberation of souls, in Brett’s estimation of Luther, did not arise from the fantastic speculative law-making of the ‘theologians of glory,’ but in Christ as Lord and Savior and the effectual impact this revelation has on humanity. This means Luther’s understanding of the freedom of the Christian is deeply christological and soteriological. What God has done for us (Christology), he does in us (pneumatology) to issue in us a dispositional change from bondage to self to festive service of God. "The presence of God, in Christ, imparts freedom to the perichoretic unity of the person. It does not overwhelm personality but recreates it, and begins to conform it to the image of Christ (conformitas Christi). This reflects what Brett calls human perichoresis (circumincessio), [which] is a foundational starting point for grasping the imperative implications that arise from his conception of Christian freedom (freiheitsbegriff)."

In Part Two, Brett fleshes out Luther’s concept of freedom as love homiletically in his 1522 Invocavit Sermons, and his political writings 1523–25. Essential to the Invocavit Sermons is the power of the Word, which Luther considers as the freedom to effect evangelical change. The heart matters most, not the outward change. The assurance in the heart comes from justifying grace, not by means of the removal of external images. Genuine worship emanates from the heart that is touched by the word, the God-ordained means by which one frees one’s heart from idols. This is in accordance with Luther’s dictum, faith active in love.

Brett takes issue with Dietmar Lage who dualizes Luther and Karlstadt by accusing the former of being apolitical. He argues instead that these two figures were theologically at odds. Without undermining good works, Luther understood them in light of his newfound concept of Christian freedom, viewing them as the necessary implication of justifying faith. In contrast to Karlstadt, Müntzer, and their followers, who embodied a false and enslaving relationship before God, the self and the neighbor, Brett shows the consistency in substance throughout Luther’s later writings, in which Luther’s concept of freedom engenders genuine relational freedom before God, the self, and the neighbor. Against Luther scholars including Preus, Sider, and Lage, Brett demonstrates that Luther’s theological method of his Freedom Tractate has its own implication for socio-political life, and how it dismantles legalistic theology and works-righteousness of the radical reformers. The personal and personal-social imperative implies each other, not to be separated. This, to Luther, is among the chief things of the Christian faith, and Brett has captured it.

Brett displays a comprehensive knowledge of the principles and materials treated in the subject, lucidity in communicating that knowledge, and originality and independence in applying them. His work provides evidence of a significant awareness of and ability to interact with related scholarly literature that goes beyond Luther scholarship. He possesses a striking individual style, which is clear and lively in presentation without detracting from the internal logic of the reformation theology, and the polemical-historical and theological context of Luther’s 1520 De libertate Christiana and later works. While Brett recognizes the polemical character in Luther’s concept of freedom as he struggled with the papists in 1520, he does not ignore the catechetical character in Luther as he confuted the reformers in 1522–25. These two aspects—catechetical and polemical—reveal the works of the reformer as the theologian who cared about theological precision, and the pastor who was mindful of the estate of the people, both ecclesiastically and politically.

Throughout Brett shows a talent for sound theological exposition, and an analytic gift to unearth the complex structure and substance of Luther’s thinking on such an important topic. Praiseworthy is his ability to amplify the close and causal relation between the theological nature of freedom which Luther developed in his 1520 Freedom Tractate and the later works. I trust that this monograph, a substantial study of high quality will deserve ecumenical reception.

Dr. Dennis Ngien,

Professor of Systematic Theology, Tyndale Seminary, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

Research Scholar in Theology, Blackfriars Hall, Oxford University;

Founder, Centre for Mentorship & Theological Reflection, Toronto

Acknowledgments

In the first instance, spontaneous thanks are due my wife Kathy for her consistent and perceptive support during this project. Kathy has embodied the effectual nature of Christ present in faith, and I have, on numerous times, received his warmth and encouragement through her. Second, I am deeply grateful to God for the provision of two doctoral supervisors. My original Doktorvater, Jeff Silcock, was an intellectual guide and bearer of Lutheran wisdom. As I thrashed out a pathway for this research he revealed the importance of understanding Luther in context and embodied a rich passion for the German tradition. The providential move from the Australian Lutheran College, Adelaide, to Vose Seminary gave me the opportunity to interact with Dr Mike Parsons. Mike was a deep reserve of reformation history and theology and helped me greatly in the process of shaping this dissertation. He was also a kind and attentive pastoral carer and a competent guide through the last major hurdles of the doctoral process. Due thanks also go to my mother in law, Merilyn. Her constant prayer vigil for me has given me strength in times of loneliness and acute Anfechtung . Finally, I would like to return to thankfulness and dedicate this work to my wife (Kathy). Kathy, you have been a continual source of love and encouragement and I would like to honor you with this, my first major work.

Semper et aeternum

Abbreviations

AC Augsburg Confession

Ap Apology of the Augsburg Confession

BC The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Edited by Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000

CD Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics. 14 Vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1956–75

Epit Epitome of the Formula of Concord

FC Formula of Concord

KN Sources and Contexts of the Book of Concord. Edited by Robert Kolb and James A. Nestingen. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001

JLE Journal of Lutheran Ethics

LC Large Catechism

LQ Lutheran Quarterly

LstA Martin Luther, Eight Wittenberg Sermons. In Martin Luther: Studienausgabe, Vol. II, edited by Hans-Ulrich Delius. Berling: Evangelische, 1983

LW Luther’s Works. American Edition. 55 Vols. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1955–

PE Works of Martin Luther. Philadelphia Edition. 6 Vols Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1915–43

SA Smalcald Articles

SC Small Catechism

SD Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord

Smith Preserved Smith, Luther’s Correspondence and Other Contemporary Letters, Vols. 1 and 2. Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1913

Tractate Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope

VS Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, 1993. Online: http://www .vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor_en.html

WAD. Martin Luthers Werke, Kritische Gesamtausgabe. 60 vols. to date. Weimar: Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1883–

1

Introduction

This thesis has two major parts. Part I analyses the substance of Luther’s concept of freedom. It first presents an understanding of the historical-polemical background of Luther’s Freedom Tractate ( De liberate christiana ) and then analyses the Freedom Tractate to discover how Luther understood the complex nature of Christian freedom in its indicative, forensic, and passive sense (perfect lordship) and also in its imperative, cooperative, and active sense (perfect servanthood). In essence this part of the research will demonstrate that Luther’s concept of freedom is a relational freedom at its very core.

Part II is an analysis of how Luther’s concept of freedom (Frei-heitsbegriff) was tested and developed throughout the relational conflict with the Radical Reformation during the 1522 Wittenberg Crisis and the 1525 Peasant’s Revolt. The research analyses how he put his views on Christian liberty into practice during these two connected periods with his catechetical preaching at Wittenberg throughout March 9–16 in 1522 and his writing against the radical Reformers through 1524–25.

It will be shown that there is a definite correlation between the theory of the Freedom Tractate and the theoretical practice of the Invocavit Sermons he preached during the 1522 Wittenberg crisis. The Freedom Tractate explains the theological substance and ethical form of freedom, while the Invocavit Sermons reveal how Luther brought this theology—a theology related to the rule of Christ—to bear on a concrete historical situation. There is an interaction between what is necessary for a Christian and what is volitional in light of Luther’s growing conviction about justification by faith.

After the faith-works struggle of 1520 and the Radical Crisis of 1522, his polemical works during the 1524–25 Peasant’s Revolt subjects his doctrine of freedom to a more extreme historical test than that of the Wittenberg crisis, which reveals a consolidation of the complexity within his doctrine of freedom. Running in conjunction with the analysis of freedom is Luther’s theological and polemical assertion that the performative word actually creates and gives form to freedom. It opposes license and legalism and advocates a middle way (via media). Essentially, for Luther, Christian freedom has a definite, cruciform shape and that cruciformity is thoroughly relational in its essence.

One important purpose of this research is to develop the polemical interpretations of Luther’s theology by Bayer, Hütter, and Jüngel and to incorporate the recent ethical-pastoral focus on Luther by Leroux and Ngien with the ethical component in Luther’s doctrine of freedom. This development will take place by 1) a close reading of Luther, 2) elucidating Luther’s distinctive theology of freedom by examining his multiple theological convictions, and 3) highlighting the consistency of Luther’s approach to Christian freedom during the polemical struggle he encountered in several specific contexts.

The Freedom Tractate reveals a profound insight Luther had into the inner and outer life of the Christian underlined by the many theological distinctions that support this insight. Luther contends that a correct understanding of the benefits conferred by Christ to the believer sets a precedent for relating to the dialectical self and to other people (the neighbor).¹ The Christian—as lord and servant—is so perfectly free, that they can be Christ for the neighbor (alter Christus pro vicino). Yet this profound contention appears to have been radically misconstrued and set in false antithesis by Luther’s early interpreters, such as Karlstadt and Müntzer. Bayer, Hütter, Lohse, and Jüngel highlight this tendency by Luther critics and seek to correct the situation. These authors though, tend to base their critique on their own theological assumptions about Luther. We will seek to go beyond their theses with a comprehensive development of what Luther actually meant by Christian freedom and how he expected a life of liberty to take shape (Lebensgestaltung). It is at this point that we highlight the importance of understanding how Luther distinguishes the twofold indicative nature of justifying faith (how God relates to humanity through the law and gospel—coram Deo) and his threefold perspective on the imperative of Christian liberty (relationship with the self, the neighbor, and the world—coram ipso, vicino et mundo).

The research will seek to understand how Luther embodied and practiced his theology of freedom, especially in regard to his catechetical preaching during the Wittenberg crisis and his polemical writing during the 1525 Peasant’s Revolt. An analysis of the powerful enactment of Luther’s theological conviction about Christian freedom is conducted using his Invocavit Sermons. They show how he brought the key principles of this theology to bear on an ecclesial situation. Luther was called out of hiding at the risk of his life to address the rampant anarchy of a reform gone mad.² Freedom and justification by faith had been misconstrued to the point of civil unrest and destruction. It appears that Luther’s key understandings had been construed to serve an entirely different agenda. On 9 March, 1522, Martin Luther mounted the pulpit to give a series of sermons for a period of eight days. The power of these theologically-laden sermons had an instant impact which (temporarily) stemmed the tide of anarchy. They reveal a maturing and insightful application of the foundational meaning of Luther’s reformation convictions. They also reveal Luther’s expectation that the love of God through the preached word actually intervenes and brings about a change of heart.³

Luther calls people to live in faith and love according to God’s word. He believes the preached word will produce results if and when people make room for the word. This making room for the word is part of the imperative nature of Christian freedom that we want to highlight as a formational (cooperative) necessity. There is a theology of participation in the Invocavit Sermons that resonates with Luther’s theology of union in the Freedom Tractate. It also lays the foundational substance of his refutation of Müntzer’s and Karlstadt’s radical moralism during the events surrounding the 1525 Peasants Revolt. Luther had been warned by the papacy that his stand against the papal heteronomy of state would end in anarchy since he denied the church the right to rule the temporal world. Luther tried to avoid giving justification to this charge by preaching and writing against the radical reform movement while not conceding on his doctrine of freedom.⁴

The research seeks to discover the expectations Luther had in regard to how the word works and how the freedom of the Christian should manifest itself in the Christian life; a life lived in both spiritual and temporal spheres. Luther can say that he agrees in principle with some of the radical Reformers’ convictions, but he is directly opposed to how Karlstadt, Müntzer, and their followers implement these convictions. He sees a definite deception on the part of the radical reformers in their abuse of the weaker brothers. This deception violates many of the principles foundational to his concept of freedom.

Luther does not expect that the newfound principles of reform will act on their own, nor that they are open to any form of embodiment. But according to his theology, the Reformation principles embodied by the free and obedient Christian life meet with the humility and wisdom of the preached word and creatively shape godly and scriptural freedom. It is a cruciform way of life. I will contend that the cruciformity of Christian life remained at the heart of Luther’s doctrine of freedom, yet some of its aspects need to be nuanced in light of the overall development––in theory and practice––that Luther’s theology underwent throughout the crisis of radical impatience.

Review of Key Literature

The primary documents examined for this thesis are Martin Luther’s The Freedom of a Christian (LW 31:327–77; WA 7:20–38); Eight Sermons at Wittenberg (LW 51:67–100; WA 10:1–64); and his Against the Heavenly Prophets (LW 40:74–223; WA 18:62–125). The research will also make use of other important works by Luther such as To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation (LW 44:115–217; WA 6:404–69), the Babylonian Captivity of the Church (LW 36:3–126; WA 6:497–573), the Admonition to Peace (LW 46:3–43; WA 8:291–334), the Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants (LW 46:45–55; WA 18:357–61), and An Open Letter on the Harsh Book Against the Peasants (LW 46:57–85; WA 18:384–401).

Of the secondary literature, of particular importance is Eberhard Jüngel’s The Freedom of a Christian, because of his argument with modern philosophical misinterpretations of Luther’s theology, in particular the inner and outer distinctions of Christian ontology.⁵ Bayer’s work Marcuse’s Criticism of Luther’s Concept of Freedom6 draws the same conclusions about Luther’s theology and its critics, but in my view, both Jüngel and Bayer leave the substance of Luther’s theology hanging in dialogue with the older philosophical traditions rather than Luther’s own theological/polemical context. For instance, Jüngel’s monograph states that Luther’s theology, whose potential for significance in our time, a time so studiously linguistic, cannot be highly enough prized.⁷ Jüngel acknowledges the underdevelopment of Luther’s importance for our time and moves quickly into a defensive dialogue with twentieth-century theologians who had misconstrued Luther, such as Scheler, Marcuse, and Bloch. It seems though that Jüngel operates within a too generalized conceptualization of Luther’s Freiheitsbegriff and, therefore, appears to leave some of the relational potency of Luther’s theology out of his argument. We seek to recognize this contribution but go beyond it and dialogue more closely with the contextual theological and ethical challenges to Luther’s concept of Christian freedom.

In relation to what form (Gestalt) Luther’s ethical component of freedom takes, we interact with the recent scholarship of Leroux and Ngien.⁸ Both have convincingly argued for a theologia crucis approach to Luther’s personal ethics. Both scholars have also examined the pastoral and spiritual shape manifested in Luther’s theology. This book also engages with Oswald Bayer who has successfully interfaced Luther with the modern hermeneutical challenge. In his essays Bayer contributes a wealth of critical engagement with the major philosophical and theological trends that have influenced advanced modernity. In light of Bayer—and Luther—we will engage Neil Leroux’s rhetorical approach to Luther’s Invocavit Sermons with the intention of developing the cooperative action given to the listener as an imperative. Rhetorical genius is only as effective as the listener allows. This will be the place in which Luther’s reasonable discipline is developed. Superimposed over the exposition of Luther’s rhetorical genius is his understanding of God’s role in actively shaping Christian freedom.

In the examination of the historical-polemical contexts to the tractate and sermons, we will be required to critically engage the work of Berndt Hamm, David Yeago, Dietmar Lage, James Preuss, and Ronald Sider. Hamm and Yeago both contend for the conciliatory and Catholic Luther, although I believe that Hamm and Yeago’s theses have more to do with post-Vatican II ecumenism than the actual historical nature of the Freedom Tractate.⁹ I see the importance of their work for this project in that they challenge the traditional reading of Luther, which sees him as a sectarian leader that strived to create a new Christianity. Ronald Sider, Dietmar Lage, and James Preuss need to be challenged on their basic contention that Luther and Karlstadt were theologically compatible at the time of the Wittenberg crisis and were only polarized by unfortunate timing. Harold Ristau’s work, Demonological Rhetoric: Luther against the Heavenly Prophets, adds considerable weight to this process in that his work clearly details the theological difference between Luther and Karlstadt, by means of an excellent analysis of Luther’s literary response to Karlstadt, his 1525 Against the Heavenly Prophets.¹⁰ Through our analysis of the situation and of Luther and Karlstadt’s writings, we will contend that there is indeed a large theological gap—in theory and in method––that exists between both men and that many interpreters fail to recognize the nuances that exist in and around Luther’s doctrine of the two kingdoms which seem to confuse interpretive perspicuity.

Theoretical Rationale and Method

The primary theoretical approach for this research will be the inductive theory-generating type. The inductive approach will seek to draw general conclusions from three particular historical contexts. It will move from the particular contextual works of Luther, to the formation of a general theory-synthesis that can be clearly stated and defended. The paradigm seeks to describe and understand the emergence of a generating theme yet submits such interpretation to critical review from both inside and out.¹¹ Myers’ approach seeks to understand the primary texts by observation and analysis and is used in the attempt to generate a model for understanding Luther on freedom that can be stated and then defended. This research will place priority on Luther’s textual-contextual meaning over that of Luther’s interpreters, while acknowledging and interacting with the secondary literature where appropriate. It is flexible. The a priori assumption is that there will be a synthesis that is both profound and relevant in Luther’s work. The strength of this approach is that it will allow the research findings to speak for themselves and allow a thesis to emerge during the research.

Myers says, Pro-active research emphasizes the subjective involvement of the researcher, promotes community interaction and seeks critical transformation as a guiding premise.¹² I acknowledge a subjective leaning towards Luther that has been tempered by interaction with several Luther scholars. I am also aware that I have a subjective desire to transform the widespread misconstrual of Luther’s concept of freedom into a community willingness to explore the efficacy of Luther’s theology for our time. The acknowledgement of authorial intention on the part of the researcher—to listen to Luther and his contextual meaning—presupposes original authorial intent. By delving into both specific historical-contextual periods and the broad corpus of Luther’s writing, I will endeavor to better understand the specific and broad nature of what Luther actually meant in his doctrine of freedom.

On the basis of sound reasoning for authorial intent, it is the intention of this research to prioritize Luther’s writing and its inherent meaning. Vanhoozer has integrated the speech-act theory in such a way that it has become a genuine theological paradigm.¹³ His work will add weight to Luther’s view on the performative nature of the word and the importance of textual authorial intent, which shifted Luther’s scholastic interpretive lens to a more christological-literal one. One of the key insights we will use from Vanhoozer is his development of the locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary aspects to Christian proclamation and understanding.

On the basis of Luther’s forensic breakthrough (God’s communicative action), we will dialogue with Leroux’s rhetorical approach (the author’s action), and Bayer’s explication of Luther’s threefold rule (the recipient’s action).¹⁴ In my view all three represent sound hermeneutical positions that can be built upon to create a better understanding of Luther’s concept of freedom.

I hope to show that Luther is consistent in the application of his evangelical theology. I will contend that a contextual use of Luther’s middle way (via media) navigates successfully between the forms of legalism and antinomianism that he encountered throughout 1520–25. I will critically examine the relationship between Luther’s theology and practice of freedom and, in doing so, will highlight the distinctions he makes between the personal, personal-social and official-social imperatives. We will interact with Ngien’s work on Luther’s theology and piety in this instance.¹⁵

The historical, theological, and linguistic analysis will concentrate on discovering the meaning of Luther’s texts in light of the historical circumstances within which he wrote them. This book will principally attempt to drink from Luther’s reforming theological spring instead of at the brook that flows from it.

Synopsis of Chapters

Following the introduction, chapter 2 outlines the historical and polemical context of the Freedom Tractate. This chapter analyses the basic argument that Luther had with the theological opponents that he named in the letter that accompanied the Freedom Tractate to Leo X. The faith-works battle with the papal controversialists had reached its high point late in 1520. The Freedom Tractate is a climactic polemical exposition of his concept of freedom over against papal works-righteousness. Running parallel to this polemic is a positive catechetical instruction about the complex nature of his concept of freedom. In continuing to refute the second plank theology of the papal penitential system, Luther models his own evangelical direction for Christian faith and works. One of the core issues at stake for Luther, in the struggle for Christian freedom, is the relational character of freedom before God (coram Deo).

Chapter 3 examines the substance of Luther’s understanding of freedom before God. Luther contends for a distinction in the ontology of Christian being. This distinction (not separation) is recognition of the impact that justification by faith has on the soul of a Christian. As part of Christ’s gifting of inheritance in the great marital exchange, the Christian receives a perfectly free lordship from the Son of God. Since this lordship is received by faith alone, Luther contends that there is absolutely no human act that merits this gift. Luther destroys the idea of merit with his thoroughgoing analysis of the human condition as submerged under sin (sub conditione peccati). The role of his law-gospel distinction is of the utmost importance in drawing scriptural conclusions about human falleness and the need for an external act of mercy from God. Luther’s law-gospel distinction forms the indicative basis and the first two principles of Luther’s concept of freedom.

Chapter 4 concludes Part One of the research with an examination of the substance of Luther’s personal and personal-social imperative. Before Luther moves to joining perfectly free lordship with its implications for the neighbor, he defines the nature of freedom and necessity of works for the personal self. For Luther, the now/not-yet eschatological tension of outer bodiliness calls for affirmative action by the Christian. It is a call to enact the received ontology of dutiful servanthood. In this way Luther excludes the role of works from the redemptive relationship before God (coram deo). Any thought of the necessity of works is firmly placed in the horizontal (creative) relationship as the Christian confronts the antithetical self (coram ipso), the neighbor (coram vicino), and the structures of the world (coram mundo). It is only in relation to the doctrine of creation that the Christian is, for the duration of the now/not-yet tension, called to do works of necessity. The works of necessity are distinguished by works related to the self as the Christian confronts the Spirit-flesh antithesis of their actual being and as they relate to the antithetical world of their neighbor. In this understanding Luther demolishes any idea of Christian self-help and contends that any work of necessity against the sinful nature is in the service of love for the neighbor. Luther’s personal and personal-social imperative form the third and fourth principles of his concept of freedom.

With chapters 5 and 6, the research moves into an examination of Luther’s concept of freedom in two historical contexts (Part Two). Chapter 5 analyses the way in which Luther brought his concept of freedom to bear on the 1522 Wittenberg Crisis and chapter 6 does the same in relation to the 1524–25 Peasant’s Revolt. The 1522 Invocavit Sermons are a precise and powerful enactment of the first four principles contained in Luther’s concept of freedom. The research examines the way in which Luther enacts his Freiheitsbegriff throughout the sermons and shows that Luther is consistent in his response to the initial movements of the radical crisis in 1522. This contention will set up our overall argument that Luther remained consistent and faithful to his 1520 understanding of Christian freedom throughout the entire course of the radical crisis. The theology that won Luther support and acclaim in 1520 is the same theology he brought to bear throughout 1522–25. Our research shows that while Luther remained steadfast, it was the radicals that had deviously misconstrued his theology and had, therefore, departed from the evangelical direction of Luther’s reforming intent.

Chapter 6 examines more thoroughly this contention for Luther’s consistency via an analysis of the literary response Luther contributed during the Peasant’s Revolt. In this process the research finalizes the development of the complex structuring of Luther’s concept of freedom with the addition of his official-social imperative. The official-social imperative is the fifth and last major principle in Luther’s concept of freedom. Although Luther had alluded to the official-social imperative early in the Freedom Tractate, he did not fully express his understanding of this concept until after the 1522 Wittenberg Crisis. This is largely due to the fact that the struggle he had had with his opponents during 1520–22 had been waged under the authority of Christ’s spiritual kingdom which allowed Luther to invoke the first four of his key principles of freedom. When the radical reform movement rebelled against the authority of the state, Luther was compelled to respond with the last key principle of his concept of freedom. When this call for humility before God’s temporal institution of authority was abrogated by the radical reform movement, Luther, consistent with his theology, had no recourse left but to call the state to enact its divine providential calling to protect society from the satanic advances of the radical movement. Only after Luther had exhausted all other admonitions to adhere to the fivefold structure of his concept of freedom, was he forced to call for the sword to protect his neighbors within the state. Not to do so would have neglected the fourth principle of his concept of freedom.

Chapter 7 concludes the argument with an integrative conclusion that draws everything into a substantive close, contending that Luther remained faithful to his concept of freedom in his response to the 1522–25 radical crises. In remaining consistent throughout this intense struggle for evangelical freedom, Luther demonstrates that his concept of freedom is relational in character, cruciform in substance, and complex in structure. To misconstrue any part of this formulation is, in Luther’s mind, a departure from biblical and evangelical freedom. A misconstrual of this understanding is also, for Luther, a giving up of the sublime gift of freedom that Christ has won and given to humanity. The experience of the knowledge of this sublime gift is the driving force behind Luther’s personal passion and his theological genius. His concept of freedom is in itself a unification of the personal and theological nature of Christian freedom that has profound implications for the personal and social spheres of life.

1

.

Dialectical self refers to the I-self relationship that encompasses the element of human self dialogue and the spirit-flesh antithesis.

2

.

This is an action that Luther appeals to over against the cowardice of Müntzer who refused to allow his theology to be accountable and face the consequences of his action. Müntzer had a reputation for fleeing the fights he instigated.

3

.

First clearly stated by Luther in the

28

th thesis of his

1518

Heidelberg Disputation, The love of God does not find, but creates, that which is pleasing to it (LW

31

:

57

).

4

.

Edwards, The Reception of Luther’s Early Understanding of Freedom,

104

–

20

.

5

.

Jüngel, The Freedom of a Christian,

1988

.

6

.

Bayer, Marcuses Criticism of Luther’s concept of Freedom,

1992

.

7

.

Jüngel, The Freedom of a Christian,

44

.

8

.

Leroux, Luther’s Rhetoric; Ngien, Luther as Spiritual Advisor.

9

.

Hamm, Luther’s Freedom of a Christian and the Pope,

249

–

67

; Yeago, The Catholic Luther,

37

–

41

.

10

.

Many thanks go to Harold Ristau for making this yet to be published work available for my research.

11

.

Myers, Discerning Appropriate Research Methods,

24

.

12

.

Ibid.,

28

.

13

.

Vanhoozer, First Theology. Of course, Vanhoozer has developed this theological approach to speech-act theory by building on the work of authors such as Searle and Austin.

14

.

Prayer (oratio), meditation (meditatio) and spiritual attack (tentatio).

15

.

Ngien, Reaping the Right Fruits, and Luther as Spiritual Advisor. Added to this will be Bengt Hoffman’s Theology of the Heart, John Kleinig’s Grace upon Grace, and Jean Leclerq’s The Love of Learning and the Desire for God.

part one

The Substance of Luther’s Early Concept of Freedom

2

The Polemical-Historical and Theological Context of Luther’s Freedom Tractate

Introduction

When Luther wrote his On the Freedom of a Christian he was already convinced that the papacy had badly misconstrued the truth about relationship with God ( coram Deo ), with the self ( coram ipso ) and with the neighbor ( coram vicino ). The tractate, therefore, is an antithetical protest against this misconstrual of truth and a positive catechetical restatement of his doctrine of justification and its implications for evangelical relationship. This chapter traces the antithetical nature of the tractate by analyzing the main opponents Luther faced during the tractate’s composition. It then proposes that baptism, for Luther, is the concrete catechetical source of genuine relational freedom with God, the self, and the neighbor and that this understanding of baptism presupposes and underpins the theology of the tractate.

Throughout Luther’s clearest exposition of biblical freedom, his The Freedom of a Christian (1520), there runs an anti-text that serves to underline the polemical-relational nature of the Freedom Tractate.¹ This anti-text is developed to teach the recipients of the tractate how to discern who the false teachers are, what they teach and how to boldly resist them.² The tractate directly confronts the false teachers of its time. They are alluded to more than ninety times in the tractate and accompanying letter to Leo X. For example,

I have, to be sure sharply attacked ungodly doctrines in general, and I have snapped at my opponents.³

Many people have considered Christian faith an easy thing, and not a few have given it place among the virtues. They do this because they have not experienced it and have never tasted the great strength there is in faith.⁴

This ignorance and suppression of liberty very many blind pastors take pains to encourage. They stir up and urge on their people in these practices by praising such works, puffing them up with their indulgences, and never teaching faith.⁵

Hence the Christian must take a middle course and face those two classes of men. He will meet first the unyielding, stubborn ceremonialists who like deaf adders are not willing to hear the truth of liberty.⁶

Based on the positive text—Luther’s forensic view of justification as an ontology of perfect lordship and servanthood (Herrnsein und Knechtsein)—the Christian is freed to