Luther Archives - Page 2 of 9

August 25, 2024August 25, 2024

In, With, and Under: Sacramental Union, Not Transubstantiation

Holy Scripture clearly affirms the substantial presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper. Yet, throughout the history of the Church, theologians have explained this presence in different ways. In Western Christendom before the Reformation, transubstantiation became the standard doctrine. The Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 dogmatized transubstantiation as official and infallible Church teaching. The Council of Trent reaffirmed transubstantiation after the Reformation was underway.

Luther On Transubstantiation

*Martin Luther distributing Holy Communion*

Martin Luther took a different approach. In On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, Luther rejected transubstantiation, while still allowing that it could be accepted as a theologoumena. Although he later became more opposed to the doctrine, Luther was never as hostile to transubstantiation as he was to the sacramental teaching of the southern Reformers. This was largely because although transubstantiation is a misguided account of the substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist, it nevertheless affirms the core biblical teaching that Jesus is present in the elements of the Lord’s Supper.

July 26, 2024July 27, 2024

Eternal Election Through Temporal Word and Sacrament Ministry

Throwback Post

The divine power and sacramentality of the word of justification raises the issue of predestination. We will discuss this question in greater detail on the basis of Luther’s answer in The Bondage of the Will (1525) in a future chapter. Here it is important briefly to note how Luther deals with the issue in light of his doctrine of the sacramentality of the gospel.

Although Luther comments on predestination somewhat infrequently, he does have a clear doctrine of predestination derived from engagement with St. Paul and St. Augustine of Hippo.¹ Nevertheless, unlike Augustine, Luther describes election as executed by God in and through the preaching of the promise in Christ. In a passage in “A Sermon on Preparing for Dying” (1519) Luther writes:

Therefore fix your eyes upon the heavenly picture of Christ, who for your sake went to hell and was rejected by God as one damned to the eternal perdition, as He cried on the cross, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?” Behold, in that picture your hell is overcome and your election assured, so that if you but take care and believe that it happened for you, you will certainly be saved in that faith.²

July 23, 2024July 22, 2024

Mystical Union by Faith: Vows Before Consummation

Throwback Post

According to Martin Luther, the believer receives all that is Christ’s , through faith in the word: “The one who has faith is a completely divine man, a son of God, the inheritor of the universe. He is victor over the world, sin, death, and the Devil.”¹ The scholastics claimed that the habitus of love makes faith living. But Luther argued this was incorrect. Love is not the “form” (in the Aristotelian sense) of faith. Christ is.² Faith holds Christ like a ring holds onto a jewel.³

In other words, because faith takes its reality from Christ and his alien righteousness, it lives on and subjectively justifies the sinner. As Lutheran theologian Regin Prenter observed: “Faith lives completely and alone by the real presence of Christ. To the same extent that Christ is really present, faith is really present, and only to that extent.”⁴ Moreover, to use the terminology of later Protestantism, Luther believed the Word of God and the saving faith it creates did not simply justify believers. It sanctifies them as well. Here the Reformer echoed Jeremiah’s description of the Holy Spirit working through the proclamation of the New Covenant to write the commandments on the hearts of believers (Jer. 31:33).

Luther’s Use of Aristotle

Luther clearly rejected the medieval Church’s belief that habits implanted in the soul sanctified the Christian. However, interestingly, he did not totally abandon the language of formation taken from Peripatetic philosophy. Nevertheless, instead of using Aristotle’s concept of ethical formation through habits (i.e., augmentation of human agency and right performance), Luther used Aristotelian epistemology’s concept of objects of consciousness imposing their form on the knower’s intellect.

July 20, 2024July 18, 2024

Marriage and Sexuality: The Estate of the Family

In his Genesis Commentary, Martin Luther recognizes that there are three great estates: the family, the Church, and the state.¹ God established each of these estates to channel creational goods to his creatures. Luther terms these primal and universal institutions of human life the “three estates” (status, ordines, regimina, stände). Later Lutherans, following the early-nineteenth century theologian Adolf von Harless, began calling them the “Orders of Creation” (schöpfungsordnung).² Other modern theologians, however, divided the estates somewhat differently. When economic production split from the home during the industrial revolution, many Lutherans (including Dietrich Bonhoeffer) designated the “economy” as its own separate order.³

For Luther, the most primal Order of Creation is the Church, since it began when God gave Adam the Word before he had created Eve.⁴ This being said, it could be argued that there is no real estate of the Church until Adam could preach to Eve. For this reason, we will begin with the Order of the Family.⁵ The discussion below will provide an opportunity to flesh out many of the issues regarding the theology of gender as well as marriage and the family.

The Purpose of Marriage

In Eden, God established marriage for the propagation of the human race in order to fulfill the mandate of creation. Bearing and raising children was part of primal humans’ priestly calling. As John Walton notes, the first couple would be able to cultivate more and more land as they had more children. Eventually, the first family could have expanded the Garden until the garden-temple enveloped the whole of creation.⁶

July 16, 2024July 18, 2024

Holy Absolution: Objective Justification Received by Subjective Faith

Throwback Post

Luther’s significant catechetical sermon of 1519 clearly shows his belief in the divine power and sacramentality of the Word of God. In “The Sacrament of Penance,” Luther begins by radically modifying his pre-Reformation theology of confession and absolution in light of his discovery the gospel as the pure promise of righteousness and salvation for the sake of Christ. The medieval Church had spoken of three parts to penance: confession, absolution, satisfaction.¹ By contrast, Luther now speaks of three elements: absolution, grace, and faith.²

In the beginning of the sermon, Luther boldly states that absolution is a unilateral and unconditional divine action: “It follows, then, in the first place, that he forgiveness of guilt, the heavenly indulgence, is granted to no one on account of the worthiness of his contrition over his sins, nor on account of his works of satisfaction, but only on account of his faith in the promise of God, ‘What you loose . . . shall be loosed.”³ Jesus’ historical promise establishes the validity of the word; receiving the word in faith makes it efficacious. “For as you believe, so it is done for you.”⁴ Here we can observe Luther’s use of the Ockhamist concept of covenantal causality, albeit used in a way that guarantees the promise of grace rather than the meritorious character of congruous merit.

Absolution is a divine efficacious word (Thettel-Wort) and not a mere piece of information (Heissel-Wort).⁵ The word that the priest (or pastor) speaks is a sacramental instrument wherein the wholly present God communicates his grace: “This is why it [confession and absolution] is called a sacrament, a holy sign, because in it one hears the words externally that signify spiritual gifts within, gifts by which the heart is comforted and set at peace.”⁶ The sinful heart is only set at peace by divine grace present in the objective word. It follows that the word itself is the divine instrument that creates faith in the heart. As suggested earlier, the logical implication of this is that validity of the sacrament and its efficacy are all contained in the Word of God itself.⁷