SLAYING THE MONSTER OF UNCERTAINTY CHRIST AND INTROSPECTION IN LUTHER’S DOCTRINE OF ASSURANCE By

Martin S Kemp

A project submitted to Moore Theological College in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Divinity (Honours) 29th October 2007

CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS

3

SYNOPSIS

4

1. INTRODUCTION

5 5 7 10

2. ASSURANCE IN LUTHER’S EXEGETICAL WRITINGS

12 12 13 15 16 17 19 23 24

Looking out or looking in? Assurance and early Protestantism Recent scholarship on Luther and assurance Approaching Luther’s writings

Psalms (1513–15) Romans (1515–16) Galatians (1516–17, published 1519) 2 Peter (1523, published 1524) 1 John (1527) Galatians (1531, published 1535) Sermon on the Mount (1532) Luther’s exegetical writings – summary

3. ASSURANCE IN LUTHER’S TREATISES AND DISPUTATIONS Treatise on Good Works (1520) On the Bondage of the Will (1525) The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests (1533) Disputation Concerning Justification (1536) Against the Antinomians (1539) Luther’s treatises and disputations – summary

4. ASSURANCE IN LUTHER’S PASTORAL WRITINGS Correspondence Hymns Sermons Luther’s pastoral writings – summary

5. CONCLUSION Christ and introspection in Luther’s doctrine of assurance Assessing the assessment of Luther The pastoral application of Luther’s doctrine Areas for further research BIBLIOGRAPHY

26 26 28 30 31 33 34 35 36 39 40 43 44 44 45 46 47 48

2

ABBREVIATIONS

CWE

Collected Works of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 1974- .

LSC

Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel. Translated and Edited by Theodore G. Tappert. Library of Christian Classics, Volume 28. London: SCM Press, 1955.

LW

Luther’s Works. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan (Vols 1-30) and Helmut T. Lehmann (Vols 31-55). St Louis: Concordia (Vols 1-30) and Philadelphia: Fortress (Vols 31-55), 1955-1986.

ML

Martin Luther: Selections from his Writings. Edited by John Dillenberger. New York: Doubleday, 1962.

Romans

SML

Martin Luther, Commentary on Romans. Translated by J. Theodore Mueller. Grand Rapids: Kregel. 1976 [151516]. Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 volumes. Translated by John Nicholas Lenker et al. Edited by John Nicholas Lenker. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.

3

SYNOPSIS Protestant theology has long asked the question regarding the grounds of Christian assurance. Is it to be found solely in the objective work of Christ as the Holy Spirit commends that work to us through the gospel, or can we become confident of our salvation as we search our own lives for evidence of regeneration? Luther is often described as one who emphasises the former path as the right avenue towards certainty. This project is concerned with testing this reputation; is Luther’s doctrine of assurance dominated by an objective understanding of certainty, or does the reformer leave space for introspection as a means of being sure that we own a saving faith? Others who have broached this issue recognise both elements of assurance within Luther’s work, yet there is a sense that the reformer has not integrated the two with any real success. Part of our analysis will be to assess these readings of Luther in light of our own reading of the reformer. To gain an accurate picture of Luther’s thought we need to read him across time and genre, tracing his views on assurance through his exegetical writings, his treatises and disputations, and finally his pastoral writings. From this analysis we see while Luther does major on the objective aspect of assurance, he also confirms on the basis of certain Biblical texts that assurance can be taken from the observation of our personal holiness. However, this concession towards introspection is only ever an aid to certainty and does not replace the assurance which stems from looking unto Christ. The balance Luther strikes between the two modes is born out of his soteriology and eschatology, and also has a seed in his training within the Nominalist school of William of Ockham. This conclusion shows that Luther’s doctrine of assurance is not inconsistent with the rest of his thought. Rather it’s is rooted in other doctrines affirmed by Luther and reflects theological motifs particular to the reformer, particularly his simul iustus et peccator. Finally we note that Luther maintained his emphasis on the objective when ministering to those under his own pastoral care, perhaps without deference to the concessions he had made to introspection within his exegetical writings. If we are to take the whole of Luther’s theological insights as a model for our own pastoral practice, then some place should be made for introspection to act as an aid in developing the assurance of faith.

4

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Looking out or looking in? Assurance and early Protestantism. When opening his analysis concerning the development of the doctrine of assurance within the reformed tradition, Joel Beeke describes how the “theologians and pastors of post-Reformation churches struggled for theological precision in defining the relationship between personal assurance of faith and saving faith”.1 This struggle resulted in a varied vocabulary which strived to describe the different aspects of the Christian’s confidence of personal salvation. Two aspects which emerged were those of “objective and subjective assurance”. This is the difference between knowing that salvation is yours through the objective viewing of God’s work for us—a knowledge which holds despite what self-doubt we might possess—and the personal confidence of feeling assured within our own spirits. Linked with this was the further distinction between the grounds of assurance: the objective aspect was grounded in the external work of Christ on the cross for us, while the subjective feelings of assurance were fed by an introspection which sought evidence of the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives. Beeke links these ideas together when he associates the practical syllogism of second generation Calvinism as a device which helped “define subjective assurance”.2 The relationship between these aspects of personal assurance has stimulated not a small amount of theological discussion. The question, as posed by Randall Zachman, is whether “our knowledge of the grace of God [is] derived solely from the testimony of the Father in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit”, or whether “we also testify to ourselves, via the good conscience, of the grace of God towards us”.3 Historically we can observe within the early reformed tradition a move which brought a greater emphasis on the subjective, act-based avenue towards the personal assurance of faith. Signs of true regeneration were sought after in the behaviour of individuals, and this led to a theology observable among the Puritans “who sought assurance of election Joel. R. Beeke, The Quest for Full Assurance: The Legacy of Calvin and his Successors (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1999), 1. 2 Beeke, Quest fcr Full Assurance, 2. The practical syllogism runs thus: “Those only who do ‘x’ are saved. But I do ‘x’. Therefore I am saved.” Beeke, Quest for Full Assurance, 65 n153. 3 Randall C. Zachman, The Assurance of Faith: Conscience in the Theology of Martin Luther and John Calvin (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 1. 1

5

through signs of grace”.4 The question as to why this change took place has generated a discussion all of its own. Some see the post-Reformation developments as a disastrous move which led our understanding of assurance too far away from Calvin’s ideas and too far down the subjective path.5 Others see no qualitative distinction between Calvin and his successors, but do admit to an observable change in emphasis where the subjective elements of assurance were given more attention.6 Those who see the change in emphasis as a positive move are quick to point out the pastoral necessity of such a development. According to Beeke, this was a move which was stimulated by “people’s tendency to take for granted God’s saving grace”.7 Furthermore, D.A. Carson observes that assurance is an existential concept, and so any notion of assurance which does not have at least some concern with a subjective element can be found wanting.8 This project is concerned with the ideas concerning assurance put forward by Martin Luther (1483–1546) in the first half of the sixteenth century. It is hoped that the same kind of questions asked in study of the reformed tradition will help identify the nature of Luther’s doctrine and then assess the usefulness of his contribution. Luther’s written legacy is one which has the assurance of faith as a regular theme, and the reformer himself possessed an acute sense of what it meant to struggle with what he at one point calls “the monster of uncertainty”.9 When it comes to defeating this monster, Luther’s reputation is one which has him emphasising the objective nature of personal assurance. Zachman comments that “Luther is often described as being pre-eminently concerned with consoling terrified consciences by directing them away from the law and toward the certainty of divine mercy found in Jesus Christ alone”.10 Our concern is to see whether this reputation is warranted; to investigate whether Luther’s theology of assurance really ought to be characterised as a doctrine adverse to personal introspection, or whether, like Beeke and Dever have shown with Calvin, the German Roger E. Olson, The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition and Reform (Downers Grove: IVP, 1999), 501. 5 See for example, R.T. Kendall, Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979); Basil Hall, ‘Calvin against the Calvinists’ in John Calvin (ed. G.E. Duffield; Appleford: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1966), 19–37. 6 See Beeke, Quest for Full Assurance; Mark Dever, Richard Stibbs and the ‘Truly Evangelical Church of England’: A Study in Reformed Divinity and Early Stuart Conformity. PhD Thesis, Cambridge, 1992. 7 Beeke, Quest for Full Assurance, 18. 8 D.A. Carson, ‘Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of Assurance’ in Justification and Christian Assurance (ed. R.J. Gibson; Explorations 10; Adelaide: Openbook, 1996), 95. 9 LW 26: 387. 10 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 2. 4

6

reformer has a place for a more subjective type of assurance based on deeds done in the body. Such an analysis will also go some way to confirm, refine or even challenge some recent opinions concerning the place of introspection within Luther’s doctrine. Recent scholarship on Luther and assurance Those who have already attempted to shed light on this issue generally follow one of three lines of argument. The first sees Luther as having no place whatsoever for an internally generated sense of assurance based on works done in the body. Steven Ozment argues in this way, writing that Luther too [in addition to Calvin] expected true believers to be busy with good works, but their presence did not constitute an indirect commentary on one’s salvation nor did their absence the suggestion of anyone’s eternal damnation. For Luther, works might attest a strong faith, but they resolved no man’s anxiety over his final destiny; only faith in God’s promise did that.11

A second approach to the question sees within Luther’s writings some recognition of the life lived as a source of assurance, but reads such statements as anomalous to the main contours of Luther’s theology. Richard Olmsted admits that Luther at times displays a “motif” which describes assurance has having some basis in Christian living, but offers a quick dismissal of the motif’s presence, suggesting “the possibility that it represents a piece of Luther’s Augustinian heritage that has not been fully assimilated to his christocentric Reformation theology”.12 Instead, Olmsted chooses to describe Luther’s doctrine of assurance as an exhortation to “stake all on faith’s object”, thereby “shutting the door on introspection”.13 Bernhard Lohse also recognises the presence of such a motif in Luther’s work, but maintains that it occurs so rarely that “such occasional utterances may not be too heavily weighted”.14

Steven Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250–1550: An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980), 379. For similar arguments along these lines see Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil (trans. Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart; Hammersmith: Fontana, 1993 [1982]), 165, 176–77; and Henry Chadwick, ‘Justification by Faith: A Perspective’, One in Christ 20 (1984): 196. 12 Richard H. Olmsted, ‘Staking All on Faith’s Object: The Art of Christian Assurance According to Martin Luther and Karl Barth’. Pro Ecclesia 10 (2001): 137–38. 13 Olmsted, ‘Staking All on Faith’s Object’, 138. 14 Bernhard Lohse, Martin Luther’s Theology: It’s Historic and Systematic Development (trans. and ed. Roy A Harrisville; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999 [1995]), 266. 11

7

A third line of reasoning recognises within Luther both aspects of assurance working together. In an attractively simple scheme, Robin Bruce Barnes suggests that “perhaps the best general formation of Luther’s view is that we have one kind of salvationcertainty by faith, another kind by love.”15 Drawing a parallel with Luther’s view of there being two types of justification, the inner justification of the heart and the external justification of love, Barnes proposes that in similar fashion we have “two kinds of testimony that give certainty: internal testimony, by which the heart believes with certainty, and external testimony by which we are assured and confirmed a posteriori that we are in a state of grace.”16 One study within this third approach which perceives an inconsistency to Luther’s thought is that conducted by Randall Zachman. In keeping with most Luther scholars, Zachman reads Luther as focusing on the external work and word of Christ: “the basis of our knowledge and assurance that God is gracious towards us is the work of Jesus Christ, revealed to us by the gospel and the Holy Spirit.” 17 But aside from demonstrating the centrality of an externally orientated ground of assurance within Luther’s thought, Zachman asks the key question in our analysis: “Does Luther allow for a testimony of good conscience that confirms us in our faith in Christ, inasmuch as it bears witness that our lives are beginning to conform to the commands of God?”18 Zachman answers in the affirmative, picking up a theme in Luther which sees the value of external signs of grace in their ability to demonstrate genuine belief in the eyes of other human observers: “the testimony of the good conscience has its most direct use not before the judgment seat of God—for there we are all sinners—but before the judgment of the world.”19 Yet Zachman also detects a motif within Luther which paints regenerative signs as having a role in assuring us of our status before God as members of the elect: Such self testimony strengthens our confidence in the mercy of God in Jesus Christ and also confirms our faith that we have been elected by God […] A faith that bears fruit in good works bears witness that we have been elected,

Robin Bruce Barnes ‘The Assurance of Salvation in Luther’, Lutheran Quarterly 3 (1989): 213. Barnes, ‘The Assurance of Salvation in Luther’, 213. 17 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 2. Another who writes of the tension within Luther’s views on this subject is Paul Althaus: “All of this becomes a second pole in Luther’s theology of justification. Does it constitute a danger for the first and the decisive pole of faith alone? Does it contradict it? The tension seems to be great.” The Theology of Martin Luther, American ed. (trans. Robert C. Shultz; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966 [1963]), 247. 18 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 70. 19 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 81. 15 16

8

just as a faith that does not bring forth works testifies that we have not been elected.20

However, while Zachman is happy to describe the variegated nature of Luther’s understanding of assurance, he does see a weakness in the reformer’s doctrine. Zachman regards Luther’s concession towards introspection as having a continuing effect upon subsequent generations, describing how protestant theology would act upon the possibility that “the foundation and confirmation of faith might be reversed”, re-centring assurance on the introspective appraisal of Spirit-led works done in the body.21 It is Zachman’s contention that Luther left the door open to this reversal by leaving the objective and introspective elements of assurance in an awkward tension.22 This brief review of secondary scholarship helps to sharpen the particular question we are asking of Luther. The most fruitful avenue of discovery is not to prove whether Luther ever broached the subject of introspective assurance; that much seems to be affirmed by a number of scholars already. What is of interest is how Luther related both aspects of assurance and whether his configuration maintains any inherent weaknesses or inconsistencies. Essentially what we are embarking on is an exercise in historical theology. Zachman attaches this label to his work, adding that as a historical theologian he is merely trying to understand the reformers “on their own terms, with no judgment as to who is right and who is wrong”.23 In a similar vein Bradley and Muller see the historical task as one of getting the original message and context right: “Where the ethicist, the philosopher, or the theologian judges crime or error or heresy, the historian reports analytically with a view toward meaning in the original context.”24 Hence our analysis will be concerned with revealing what it is that Luther said on the issue of assurance through an investigation of primary source material. Our critical analysis will not extend to judging Luther’s ideas against the norms of Scripture or modern systematics, but will be limited to seeing whether the aforementioned readers of Luther have provided us with an adequate description of his thought and whether the reformer himself described assurance in a way which is consistent and sustainable. Approaching Luther’s writings Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 84. Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 246. 22 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 246. 23 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 13. 24 James E. Bradley and Richard A. Muller, Church History: An Introduction to Research, Reference Works, and Methods (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans, 1995), 60. 20 21

9

Timothy Lull has commented that “the great pleasure of reading Luther is complicated by several problems”, the greatest being “the sheer mass of material.”25 Add to this the fact that “there is no agreed ‘canon’ of Luther’s writings nor a single central work” and we are left with a challenge when thinking about which writings to collate for the task at hand. A number of factors present themselves for consideration when selecting primary sources. Alister McGrath has shown that Luther’s theology exhibited signs of change over time,26 so some temporal spread of sources would be desirable. Given the absence of a definitive systematic statement from Luther and in light of him being a “contextual theologian” whose writing was often in response to “specific opponents and immediate pastoral challenges”,27 it seems prudent to have samples from the different types of writing left behind by the reformer. Such an approach is adopted by Zachman so as to “gain as accurate a picture as possible” of Luther’s theology.28 In addition to these issues, Heiko Oberman comments that when speaking of Luther “the man and his cause are so intimately linked that any separation of the two will be at the expense of both.”29 Hence some representation should be sought from those items, such as Luther’s personal correspondence, which allow deeper insight into the man’s personality. Finally it should be noted that some particular documents have formed the source of modern discussion over Luther’s approach to assurance, such as his lecture material on Galatians.30 This material, together with Luther’s thoughts on other sections of the Bible which lend themselves to discussions on assurance, ought to find a place within our analysis. Given these factors our analysis of Luther’s thought will span three central chapters. with the first assessing Luther’s exegetical writings. Beginning with his earliest lectures—conducted on the Psalms between 1513–15—our first chapter will trace the reformer’s thought through his exegetical writings finishing with his 1532 commentary on the Sermon on the Mount. Our analysis will then take into account selected treatises and disputations, starting with his 1520 Treatise on Good Works and finishing with Against the Antinomians (1539). Another chapter will look at Luther’s written legacy as a pastor as we examine his letters, hymns and sermons. As these items are perused we Timothy F. Lull, ‘Luther’s Writings’ in The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther. (ed. Donald K. McKim; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 39. 26 Particularly in regard to justification, see Alister E. McGrath, Reformation Thought: An Introduction, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999), 119–29. 27 Lull, ‘Luther’s Writings’, 39. 28 Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 14. 29 Oberman, Luther, 314. 30 See articles by Barnes, ‘The Assurance of Salvation in Luther’, 209–22; and Olmsted, ‘Staking All on Faith’s Object’, 135–58. 25

10

will keep in mind Bradley and Muller’s advice that “institutional church history and the history of doctrine now demand a more holistic approach that takes full cognizance of the subtle social, political and philosophical influences on theology.”31 Hence the variegated background which formed these documents will have to inform our own examination. A final methodological note is that we should recognise historical theology—while distinct in its outlook and purpose—as a discipline which does not exist in isolation. McGrath understands historical theology as both a critical and pedagogical tool, and as a discipline which overlaps with other components of the theological “cathedral” such as Biblical studies, pastoral theology, church history and of course, systematics.32 Geoffrey Bromiley argues that historical theology is just as theological as it is historical, and to that end calls participants in the discipline to contribute to the Church’s task of “instructing and upbuilding its members.”33 With these words in mind we will be mindful to draw out implications of Luther’s thought for the life of the Church, and to suggest further areas of research in other Church disciplines.

Bradley and Muller, Church History, 3. McGrath, Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), 5–14. 33 Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Historical Theology: An Introduction (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1978), xxvii. 31 32

11

CHAPTER TWO

ASSURANCE IN LUTHER’S EXEGETICAL WRITINGS

In 1512 Luther took over from Johannes von Staupitz, his early monastic mentor, as lecturer in Biblical Theology at the newly established university in Wittenberg. Luther would deliver exegetical lectures throughout his career, completing a series on the latter chapters of Genesis a few months before his death.34 Perhaps the chief background issue related to how Luther approached the exegetical task is his schooling in the via moderna of William of Ockham.35 This Nominalist school eschewed all philosophical speculation which was not tested against data, and at the University of Erfurt where the young Luther would enrol in 1501, this meant theology found its basis in Scripture.36 Hence when lecturing on Scripture Luther was dealing with the ultimate authority; any statement on the nature of assurance would have to find its basis in God’s written Word. We will survey seven series of lectures starting with the reformer’s first series on Psalms, delivered between the years 1513–15, and finishing with his thoughts from the year 1532 on the Sermon on the Mount. Psalms (1513–15) Luther’s exegetical writings from his early career offer us a unique opportunity to observe his developing protestant doctrine. As Albrecht Beutel comments, “Luther’s series of early lectures—first on Psalms (1513/14), then on the letters to the Romans (1515/16), Galatians (1516/17) and Hebrews (1517/18)—is an invaluable source of information for understanding Reformation theology.”37 The issue of spiritual doubt was a constant plague upon Luther’s mind at this time; his spiritual anxiety as an Augustinian envoy to Rome in 1511 shows that this mindset predates even the earliest

Jaroslav Pelikan, Introduction to LW 8: ix. McGrath argues that it was this school of thought which provided the strongest influence over the young Luther. The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation 2nd Ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 103–15. 36 Oberman, Luther, 118–19. 37 Albrecht Beutel, ‘Luther’s Life’, trans. Katharina Gustavs, in The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther. (ed. Donald K. McKim; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 7. Luther’s series on Hebrews will not form part of our assessment as its treatment of our issue is not as comprehensive as that found the reformer’s other early lectures. 34 35

12

exegesis that we will examine here.38 On top of Luther’s Nominalism, the advice of Staupitz to look in times of spiritual turmoil to “the wounds of Christ, which were visible signs … of God’s steadfast mercy”39 leaves us with a troubled monk who was already predisposed to look for both a Scriptural and objective answer to spiritual doubt. Describing Psalm 31 as “a beautiful prayer of a conscience that is fearful and that acknowledges it has sinned”, Luther is well aware of the anguish which comes from observing one’s own sin.

40

The solution to this plight is found by attending to the

quality of one’s faith by meditating on Christ: “Faith is the light, strength, and substance of things to be hoped for, and is built up out of passages and examples of Christ.”41 Similarly, when commenting on Psalm 41, Luther describes “the conscience grieving over his sins”, but also how it is “the understanding about Christ, that is a living and true faith in Christ, [which] sets one free.”42 This faith in Christ is one which allows us to be refreshed and strengthened through the “oil of grace” by which Christ “soothes the sorrow.”43 The early Luther is acutely aware of the trials which attend to a lack of certainty, but has a mind that looks externally to Christ for help. This help seems to be in the order of strengthening our own spiritual ‘constitution’; Christ is our spiritual trainer, helping us fight doubt by ourselves in the ring. Romans (1515–16) One of the ongoing debates within Luther scholarship is over the date of his ‘Reformation breakthrough’.

44

In his contribution to this discussion McGrath

concludes that the “basic change” happened “at some point in 1515.”45 One reason for this is the marked theological difference between Luther’s exegetical writings on either side of this date. Indeed, as we move into Luther’s lectures on Romans we notice a view of assurance distinguishable from that produced by Luther as he lectured on the Psalms.

See Oberman’s account of this trip in Luther, 146–50. David C. Steinmetz, Luther in Context, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 9. 40 LW 10: 139. 41 LW 10: 141–42. 42 LW 10: 191. 43 LW 10: 192. 44 For a brief overview of this debate see Lohse, Martin Luther: An Introduction to his Life and Thought (trans. Robert C. Schultz; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986 [1980]), 150. 45 McGrath, Reformation Thought, 110. 38

39

13

When commenting on Romans 2:14–15, Luther remarks about the role our human consciences have in judging us before God. This judgment can have two outcomes, each determined by the conscience’s view of deeds done in the body: The conscience of every person groans and cries out when a person does what is evil […] but it is at peace when a person does what is good, as Cicero says (Cato Maior, 3, 9): “The satisfaction that a person receives from a life well lived brings with it memories that are filled with joy.”46

In this way the Gentiles of Romans 2:15 have consciences which at times defend them and at other times accuse them; good works will give hope, but these are accompanied by evil works which lead to despair. That such Gentiles only ever fulfil the law “in part” serves Paul’s argument that “all men, Jews and Gentiles, are sinners and so in need of divine grace.”47 So while the observation of good works can give an occasional sense of assurance, the placement of good deeds along side evil works means that such assurance is short lived, if it’s experienced at all. “But from whom,” Luther then asks, “do we obtain thoughts that excuse us?”48 “Only from Christ and in Christ” is his answer: “[The believer] quickly turns from himself to Christ and says: ‘He has atoned for my sins. He is just and my Justifier, who died for me.’” 49 At this point we observe a clear shift in Luther’s thinking. The problem of guilty consciences still presents itself, and Luther’s answer remains rooted in Christ’s work, yet it is a different work described here than a few years earlier. Christ is more than a coach in our corner; he has done the work for us and we have reaped the benefits of the exchange of sin for an alien righteousness, the least of which are ‘thoughts that excuse us’. In his comments on Romans 8 Luther again deals with the issue of personal assurance, although this time through the lens of predestination rather than justification. “Salvation rests in no wise upon ourselves and our conduct, but is founded solely upon what is outside us, namely, on God’s election.”50 So how are we sure of our own election? Here Luther speaks about the effect of the Word of God on sensitive believers: Everywhere in Scripture those are praised and encouraged who listen to God’s Word with trembling. As they despair of themselves, the Word of God Romans, 60. Romans, 59–60. 48 Romans, 60. 49 Romans, 60–61. 50 Romans, 131. 46 47

14

performs its work in them. If we anxiously tremble at God’s Word and are terrified by it, this is indeed a good sign.51

Of interest here is Luther’s configuration of both the objective and introspective elements of assurance. The believer takes comfort by observing their own internal feelings, yet the generation of these feelings is the product of the external Word of judgment. The ground of assurance remains outside the believer, yet it has an internal, subjective effect. Galatians (1516–17, published 1519) After lecturing on Romans Luther started on Galatians, and in a letter written on the eve of this series the reformer revealed his fear that “the presence of the plague may not permit it [the lecture series] to continue once I have begun it.”52 The reality of death in the form of the plague would have given the issue of assurance a particular relevance as Luther expounded the epistle. As he does with Romans, Luther emphasises the objective grounds of personal assurance. A particularly clear statement is found in his discussion of Galatians 2:16: If your conscience troubles you and you are a sinner and are seeking to become righteous, what will you do? Will you look around to see what works you may do or where you may go? No. On the contrary, see to it that you hear or recall the name of the Lord, that is, that God is righteous good and holy; and cling to this, firmly believing that He is such a one for you.53

We also note in these lectures a point where Luther diagnoses a cause of spiritual doubt, again drawing a link with the external nature of our salvation. Those who are “troubled with doubts” are “not yet able to distinguish between the sound judgment of faith and the works of the Law [as] they are not willing to desist from the works of the Law and do not trust sufficiently in the righteousness of faith alone.”54 Spiritual anxiety comes from a residual tendency to attempt righteousness through works; confidence comes when the true nature and source of our righteousness is grasped. But while Luther might affirm that assurance can be found by looking to Christ, does he leave any place for introspection? Luther addresses the place of good works in the Romans, 131 –32. LW 27: x. 53 LW 27: 221. 54 LW 27: 382. 51 52

15

life of the believer by asserting that deeds are not done not to appease God but “on account of the brother, who wants or needs them, just as the apostle himself did them.”55 The Christian ought to be cast an introspective eye over these works “to see how diligent he is in love to bear the weaknesses of others.”56 Here we look at ourselves as a means of disciplining our love of others, but not as a way of being sure of our salvation. That certainty is obtained by objective means, where all we need do is cling to Christ’s name and trust that in him is our salvation. 2 Peter (1523, published 1524) Luther’s commentary on 2 Peter was born out of a series of sermons delivered in January and February of 1523.57 In his forward to the commentary, Luther remarks that Peter’s purpose in writing was to “disprove two errors that result from the misconception of faith, namely, the error which ascribes to works the power, […] and, on the other hand, the mistaken notion that faith can exist without good works.” 58 Luther’s most explicit treatment of our issue comes in his comments on 2 Peter 1:10, and it is here we see Luther’s desire to strike the correct balance between faith and works shaping his thoughts on assurance. Through the observation of our good works, faith becomes “stronger and stronger until it is sure of the call and election and cannot be found wanting.”59 Luther continues, “If your faith is well exercised and applied, you will finally gain assurance”.60 While in and of itself this is a strong statement in favour of a worksbased assurance, we note that Luther places such certainty firmly within context. Luther has already pointed us to Peter’s emphasis on faith in our dealings with God, 61 and the reformer prefaces his comments on v10 by affirming that “the election and God’s eternal foreordination is firm enough in itself and requires no confirmation.” 62 What follows in 1:10 pertains “to the strengthening of faith”, 63 and although assurance through works is a genuine possibility, it’s only a secondary means given as a concession on account of our weakness: LW 27: 329. LW 27: 395. 57 LW 30: x. 58 LW 30: 149. 59 LW 30: 159. 60 LW 30: 159. 61 Commenting on 2 Peter 1:3, Luther explains “Here Peter begins to write about the kind of blessings we have received from God through faith, namely, that—since we have learned to know God through faith—divine power has been granted to us.” LW 30: 153. 62 LW 30: 158. 63 LW 30: 158. 55 56

16

Although the call and election is firm enough in itself, yet it is not strong and firm enough for you, since you are not certain that it pertains to you. Therefore Peter wants us to confirm this call and election for ourselves with good works.64

As we live out our calling and elect status we are strengthened in our confidence, although the certainty of our salvation always finds its seed within the strength of the divinely appointed call and election. 1 John (1527) As John’s first letter contributes much to the New Testament’s discussion of assurance,65 a review of Luther’s lectures on the epistle would seem a necessary step in determining the reformer’s teaching on the matter. An outbreak of the plague had forced a sizable number of students to flee from Wittenberg. Because of the disruption Luther called a recess in the series of lectures he was delivering on Isaiah and taught a series on 1 John to those who remained behind.66 As with Luther’s first series on Galatians, the context of impending sickness and death leads us to expect an acute treatment regarding the issue of assurance. One also wonders whether the choice of an epistle with a high concern for this particular doctrine was driven by an attempt to meet the pastoral issues of that period. Luther’s introduction to the epistle recognises the trials of the day while also providing a spiritual interpretation as to their source: Since I see that the devil is assailing us on all sides and that we do not have peace anywhere, we should bear in mind that God wants to keep us in His church, in which He has given us His Word.67

With this talk of Satanic attack Luther emphasises another cause for spiritual doubt alongside the residual temptation to look back in vain upon our works. An awareness of satanic aggression was part and parcel of medieval spirituality, and in speaking of the Devil Luther reveals himself as “a child of his time.” 68 According to Oberman’s LW 30: 158. Carson, ‘Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of Assurance’, 59. 66 Jaroslav Pelikan, Introduction to LW 30: xi. 67 LW 30: 219. 68 Oberman, The Reformation: Roots and Ramifications (trans. Andrew Colin Gow; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 60. 64 65

17

analysis, “Luther’s apocalypticism” was characterised by a call for the gospel to be proclaimed “to gather the faithful together and to strengthen them against the raging attacks of Satan.”69 Such an analysis makes sense of what we see here in Luther’s lectures on 1 John, where Satan is blamed for the tribulations being experienced by the church and the gospel is understood to be the major weapon of response. 70 As part of Satan’s strategy in the eschaton he “sometimes assails our confidence and takes peace away”, leading men and women to doubt their salvation. 71 How can the Christian find peace when under such attack? Luther clearly believes that Christ’s objective work grants us Christian confidence, and that the knowledge of such actions done on our behalf is conveyed through God’s Word: When I feel sin, why should I despair, and why should I not feel that it has been forgiven? For the blood of Christ washes sins away. The main thing is that we cling simply to the Word. Then there is no trouble.72

Yet Luther also observes a theme where works can be used to signal something about the nature of our faith. Commenting on 1 John 2:4, Luther relates how true knowledge of God will result in the fruit of good works, enabling one to see that “the knowledge itself is not false and counterfeit”.73 Luther sees the main application of this test as one which enables Christians to identify the false teachers whom might assail them.74 So while this test of faith is a genuine test, its purpose is not to assure the believer. Rather Luther applies this test to the exposing of false Christians, a use which has an appropriate fit within the purpose of the epistle.75 But while the observation of bodily deeds helps to distinguish true Christians from pretenders, Luther speaks elsewhere of works as a means of being sure of our standing before God. When commenting on 1 John 3:14 Luther concedes that love displayed through godly actions has a part to play in the development of Christian confidence:

Oberman, The Reformation, 62. See especially LW 30: 219, quoted in part above. 71 LW 30: 303. 72 LW 30: 227. 73 LW 30: 238. 74 LW 30: 239. 75 Luther starts his discussion of 1 John 2:3–6 by reminding his students that “The Apostle is writing against two classes of people, as we have said at the outset, namely, against those who are presumptuous and rely on works and against those who are licentious or slothful”. LW 30: 237. 69 70

18

Indeed, even we ourselves know that we have been translated, because we love the brethren. Love for the brethren is the proof by which we know that we have been translated into life. On the basis of this one proof I declare that I have been translated into life if I love my brother, even though I still feel other sins in my flesh.76

Even stronger are Luther’s comments on 1 John 3:19: “This [love for the brethren] is the evidence with which we assure ourselves of our calling and by which it is established that we are standing in the truth”.77 But Luther places this introspection within the wider context of an objectively driven confidence. This is important for Luther, as the quality of our works vary over the course of our lives: If you lack works, yet you should not lack faith. Even if persuasion is lacking, yet faith and hope are greater […] Even if our conscience makes us fainthearted and presents God as angry, still “God is greater than our heart”. Conscience is one drop; the reconciled God is a sea of comfort.78

The Christian life is one of inconsistent holiness, and as a result our confidence falls as we observe the ongoing presence of ungodliness. But assurance is available when we place our faith in the steadfast God’s who has promised salvation. Galatians (1531, published 1535) Luther revisited Galatians as way of re-affirming the Protestant doctrine which had developed over the preceding decade and a half. “As I often warn you”, Luther wrote in his preface, “there is a clear and present danger that the Devil may take away from us the pure doctrine of faith and may substitute for it the doctrines of works and of human traditions.”79 By 1531 Luther had weathered substantial disputes and challenges and so these later Galatians lectures offer an insight into his mature thought. Luther himself isolated these lectures, along with his material on Deuteronomy and John’s Gospel, as some of his most useful work.80

LW 30: 274. LW 30: 279. 78 LW 30: 280. 79 LW 26: 3. 80 “If my advice were taken, only the books of mine that contain doctrine would be printed, such as my Galatians, Deuteronomy, and John. The rest [of my books] should be read merely for the history, in order to see how it all began, for it was not so easy at first as it is now.” Tabletalk recorded during the winter of 1542–43, LW 55: 440. 76 77

19

As he did when first lecturing on Galatians, Luther identifies an unnecessary and misplaced deference for the Law as a cause of spiritual doubt, counselling believers to “let the Law go away now, and let the Gospel come; for this is the time to hear the Gospel, not the Law.”81 But this time round we find the motif of satanic attack is emphasised when diagnosing the causes of spiritual anxiety. Like he did in his lectures on 1 John, Luther warns his students that “the Devil will attack you vigorously and will try to swamp you with piles, floods, and whole oceans of sins, in order to frighten you, draw you away from Christ, and plunge you into despair,” immediately continuing that the solution to attacks against our sense of assurance is to look objectively to Christ’s work conducted on our behalf. 82 But what we see here and in the 1 John lectures forces us to conclude that this was not a static theme, especially when we note the motif’s lower frequency in Luther’s early exegetical work. Despite being an established presence in the medieval background the Devil becomes a more significant figure for Luther as time progresses. The increasing attention on Satan in Luther’s later exegetical material finds a plausible explanation in Luther’s own understanding of the events surrounding the Reformation, recorded in his comments on Galatians 5:4: The doctrine of the papists about human traditions, works, vows, merits etc., was so widespread in the world that it was regarded as the best and the surest. By means of it the Devil established and most strongly reinforced his kingdom. Therefore it is no wonder that today, when it is being attacked by us and scattered ‘like chaff before the wind’ (Ps 1:4), Satan is raging so ferociously, filling everything with turmoil and scandals, and stirring up the whole world against us.83

The persecution experienced by Luther as the Reformation progressed was interpreted as having Satanic origins, so it is only natural that Satanic causes for distress were identified by Luther with increasing frequency as opposition to the Reformation movement grew. In the face of such oppression Luther insists that assurance be sought in the work and person of Christ, a theme which remains constant throughout his expanded treatment of the epistle: “For if faith is to be sure and firm, it must take hold of nothing but Christ alone; and in the agony and terror of conscience it has nothing else to lean on LW 26: 117. LW 26: 35. See also LW 26: 54, 381; LW 27: 22. 83 LW 27: 19. 81 82

20

than this pearl of great value.”84 But as he did when lecturing on 1 John, Luther admits that bodily deeds have a place in granting us assurance. When commenting on Galatians 4:6 Luther starts by affirming the objective nature of our assurance. Because God has sent the Holy Spirit into our hearts we are sharing in Christ’s own Spirit. Christ is certain that “in His own Spirit He is pleasing to God,” so by virtue of sharing Christ’s Spirit we also share in his certainty. 85 This is what Luther calls the “inward testimony”, by which “the heart should believe with complete certainty that it is in a state of grace.”86 But Luther then proceeds to grant that introspection does have a place in attaining assurance: But the external signs […] are these: to enjoy hearing about Christ; to teach, give thanks, praise, and confess Him, even at the cost of property and life; to do one’s duty according to one’s calling in a manly way, in faith and joy; not to take delight in sin; not to invade someone else’s calling but to serve one’s own; to help a needy brother, comfort the sorrowful, etc.87

This concession is followed by an important explanatory clause: “By these signs we are assured and confirmed a posteriori that we are in a state of grace.”88 Assurance through works is obtained after the fact of our salvation. While works do point to our being saved, they do so only in a secondary sense. This is demonstrated by the following paraphrase of what the believer should say to themselves in the struggle against doubt. Here personal introspection has a role, but almost as an afterthought: In Him I believe. If I am a sinner, and if I err, He is righteous and cannot err. Besides, I enjoy hearing, reading, singing and writing about Him. There is nothing I want more than to make His Gospel known to the world and to convert many people.89

By the time Luther ends his comments on Galatians 4:6 he has returned to his usual declaration that assurance is found by looking at Christ: Let us thank God, therefore, that we have been delivered from this monster of uncertainty […] And this is our foundation: the Gospel commands us to

LW 26: 89. See also LW 26: 138, 151–53, 159, 180, 378, 386–87. LW 26: 378–79. 86 LW 26: 379. 87 LW 26: 379. 88 LW 26: 379. 89 LW 26: 379. Emphasis added. 84 85

21

look, not at our own good deeds or perfection, but at God himself as he promises, and at Christ himself, the mediator.90

Perhaps one reason for Luther’s relegation of works to a secondary place when speaking about assurance can be found in his eschatologically informed views on sanctification. While works are expected to follow on from faith in Christ, sin is always present with the believer: My flesh, the world, and the Devil do not permit faith to be perfect. I would, of course, wish that the little light of my faith that is in my heart might be diffused through my whole body and all its members. But this does not happen; it is not diffused all at once, but it has begun to be diffused […] we shall be completely leavened when this sinful body is destroyed and we arise new with Christ.91

Luther displays what we might now call an inaugurated eschatology; believers have begun to achieve their end in Christ but are waiting for their perfection at the final resurrection.92 This now-but-not-yet state means that works are an inconsistent means of gauging our status before God. There will always be times when “the conscience feels nothing but sin and supposes that God is wrathful and Christ is hostile.”93 In light of our imperfect lives and tender consciences we are to remember that “works do not bring righteousness and comfort, but that this is achieved by the Spirit through faith in Christ.”94 In the meantime certainty is available as long as we cling to the promise of what Christ has achieved on our behalf, regardless of how irregular the sanctification process appears to be. In turn this leads us to another theological foundation behind Luther’s take on assurance. That we can find assurance regardless of our imperfections can be seen to reflect Luther’s simul iustus et peccator formulation. When commenting on Galatians 3:6, Luther declares: “Thus a Christian man is righteous and a sinner at the same time, holy and profane, an enemy of God and a child of God.”95 Luther goes on to say that LW 26: 387. LW 26: 351. 92 A similar eschatology is present in Luther’s earlier lectures on Romans: “We shall be the best philosophers and best students of nature when we learn of the Apostle to regard nature as one that waits, groans and travails, or as one that abominates what now is and desires what is to be, and is not yet.” Romans, 124. 93 LW 27: 27. 94 LW 27: 27. 95 LW 26: 232. 90 91

22

the fact of our being justified can lead to assurance despite our sinfulness: “We, on the other hand, teach and comfort an afflicted sinner this way: ‘Brother, […] you still have spots and wrinkles (Eph 5:27), and yet you are holy’.”96 So in the same way that we are justified through faith in Christ despite our ongoing sin, we remain assured on the basis of Christ’s achievement despite our imperfect works. Sermon on the Mount (1532) Luther’s commentary on this part of the first Gospel derives from a series of sermons delivered between late 1530 and the northern spring of 1532.97 The reformer’s aim was to wrest the Sermon from the interpretive wiles of “the vulgar pigs and asses, the jurists and sophists, the right hand of that jackass of a pope and of his mamelukes.”98 The key passage for our topic comes with Luther’s comments on Matthew 6:14–15. Here Luther distinguishes between two types of forgiveness: an inward forgiveness which we receive “through the Gospel and the Word of God”, and a forgiveness which we demonstrate “outwardly through works.”99 The second type of forgiveness which we work to bestow on others is evidence that we have received the first, and, as such, can be used as a basis of assurance. 100 But this assurance is understood in such a way that “the inward has precedence as the stem and root from which the good works must grow as fruit.”101 Nonetheless, “outward righteousness […] is the witness of this, and as Peter says, its ‘certification,’ an assurance that the other is really present.” 102 Peter’s charge to make our call and election sure (2 Peter 1:10) figures largely in Luther’s discussion of Matthew 6:14–15, with the reformer affirming the comments he made almost a decade earlier that works-based assurance is a genuine possibility, although only as a support to the confidence obtained by looking at Christ. As Luther continues his comments on Matthew 6 he introduces new language which helps to further elucidate the supporting role played by works when seeking personal assurance: It is also true that this work, as he discusses it here, is not a mere work like the others, which we do of ourselves; for it does not ignore faith. He takes the LW 26: 233. Jaroslav Pelikan, Introduction to LW 21: xx. 98 LW 21: 3. 99 LW 21: 149. 100 LW 21: 150. 101 LW 21: 150. 102 LW 21: 150. 96 97

23

work and puts a promise on top of it, so that it might quite appropriately be called a sacrament, a means of strengthening faith […] we should not look to ourselves but to the word and promise of God, clinging to it by faith. Then if you do a work on the basis of this word and promise, you have a sure indication that God is gracious to you. In this way your own work, which God has now taken to Himself, is to be a sure sign of forgiveness for you.103

Deeds done in the body do not form the basis of our assurance, only the promise of Christ does that. Yet they do act as a strengthening sign of that promise—as a sacrament no less—which can bolster assurance in a way additional to that of casting our eyes and ears to the promises of God fulfilled in Christ. Luther’s exegetical writing – summary Summarising Luther’s views on assurance as relayed in his exegetical writings means recognising some constant themes but also some clear patterns of development. From his early lectures on Psalms the ‘monster of uncertainty’ was always there as Luther’s tormentor, and Christ has always been seen as having a prominent place in any solution. But the lectures on Romans demonstrate a significant shift in Luther’s thoughts about assurance from those observable in his material on the Psalms. Assurance is the product of external factors which reflect the external nature of our salvation. The justification which leads to an alien righteousness and our election by God both mean that our certainty of salvation is rooted outside of ourselves; it’s not just the product of our Christ-aided personal resolution to have firmer faith in times of doubt. A constant theme from 1515 onwards, this external and objectively sourced assurance affects the individual internally; we sense real comfort as the news and promise of Christ’s salvation is heard in the gospel. This type of assurance finds its theological basis in Luther’s soteriology. Our justification by faith and resultant alien righteousness in addition to God’s gracious election means that our sense of assurance, just like our salvation, is a product of external factors. Aside from this constant theme of objective assurance, there are a number of themes which show signs of development through the 1520s and into the 1530s. While the constant temptation to think about the works of the Law is always seen as a major cause of spiritual doubt, Luther refers to Satan as a cause of uncertainty with increasing frequency as the reformation progresses. This is a product of Luther’s ‘apocalyptic’ eschatology which has Satan raging in the face of the Church’s gospel proclamation. We also see a developing motif which sees some value in the believer 103

LW 21: 150. Emphasis added.

24

looking at their own deeds done in the flesh. These deeds are useful for making judgements on an earthly scale, such as judging whether one has loved his or her neighbour properly and judging true Christian teachers from false ones. These judgments are made possible by the fact that works necessarily follow from true faith. Aside from his emphasis on the objective, Luther does have moments where he implies that assurance of salvation is made possible by means of introspection. Luther affirms this possibility from the first half of the 1520s with his lectures on 2 Peter, but such confidence is only ever cast as an aid to that assurance which is gained by looking out at Christ’s work. By the time Luther’s commentary on the Sermon on the Mount had been published, he was using sacramental language to describe this works-based assurance. Luther’s reluctance to speak of introspective assurance aside from it only having a supportive role seems to be informed by his eschatology. While we wait for our physical redemption our works remain imperfect, and the resultant trials which come from the observation of our sinfulness find a better salve as we cling to the promises of Christ.

25

CHAPTER THREE

ASSURANCE IN LUTHER’S TREATISES AND DISPUTATIONS

The opposition encountered by the Reformation provided the stimulus for Luther to produce not a small number of polemical works. These writings form a significant part of Luther’s corpus, so the assessment of any aspect of the reformer’s theology should take them into account. Mark Edwards distinguishes between those works dating from the early part of Luther’s career and those which came later; the earlier items being born out a context where the Reformation movement was being defined while those which followed were written “when building and defending an institution.” 104 These different stages of the reformation saw Luther engaging with different combatants; Romans Catholics in the early stages followed later on by others within the Reformation movement. To gain as accurate a picture as possible we will assess five works ranging over nineteen years, a period which sees Luther engage with a variety of theological concerns. Treatise on Good Works (1520) By 1520 Luther’s view on justification had taken a discernable shape in contrast to that of medieval Catholicism. This shape was related in various treatises produced over the course of that year; most notably To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, and On the Freedom of the Christian. However, the 1520 treatise which provides the material most explicitly tied to our topic is the Treatise on Good Works. As Luther’s ideas disseminated, objections were raised concerning his views of grace, including the charge that “his stress on justification by faith alone had led […] to a total neglect of good works and a concomitant rise of lawlessness, license, and immorality.”105 Taking the form of an extended commentary on the Ten Commandments, the Treatise on Good Works grew out of a sermon prepared by Luther to affirm the place of godliness alongside justification by faith.106 Mark U. Edwards Jr., ‘Luther’s Polemical Controversies’ in in The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther. (ed. Donald K. McKim; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 192. 105 James Atkinson, Introduction to Treatise on Good Works, LW 44: 17. 106 Atkinson, Introduction to Treatise on Good Works, LW 44: 17–18. 104

26

Luther’s opening premise is that moral norms are set by God’s command: “The first thing to know is that there are no good works except those works God has commanded, just as there is no sin except that which God has forbidden.” 107 Luther’s second premise is that “the first highest, and most precious of all good works is faith in Christ.”108 It is our faith in Christ which renders our actions acceptable to God and ‘good’. Works done by those who “lead a good life in the sight of their fellowmen” amount to nothing and “are absolutely dead” if they do not stem from faith. 109 Correspondingly a true faith in Christ will necessarily result in certain good works. In affirming the primacy of faith Luther indicates that our confidence of salvation is found by placing our faith in Christ. Spiritual doubt comes when “he who is not at one with God, or is in a state of doubt, worries and starts looking about for ways and means to do enough and to influence God with his many good works.”110 Luther associates spiritual confidence with a right understanding of our salvation, as shown in the following passage: Look here! This is how you must cultivate Christ in yourself, and see how in him God holds before you his mercy and offers it to you without any prior merits of your own. It is from such a view of his grace that you must draw faith and confidence in the forgiveness of all your sins. Faith, therefore, does not originate in works; neither do works create faith, but faith must spring up and flow from the blood and wounds and death of Christ. If you see in these that God is so kindly disposed toward you that he even gives his own Son for you, then your heart must grow sweet and disposed toward God. And in this way your confidence must grow out of pure good will and love —God’s towards you, and yours towards God.111

Here “faith and confidence” is obtained through looking to the work of Christ as it results in the forgiveness of our sins. That faith must spring from “the blood and wounds and death of Christ” is perhaps an echo of Staupitz’s influence on Luther, who had told the younger monk to look to “the wounds of Christ” in order to become assured.112 LW 44: 23. LW 44: 23. 109 LW 44: 24. 110 LW 44: 27. 111 LW 44: 38. 112 Steinmetz, Luther in Context, 9. 107 108

27

While good works have nothing to do with our salvation, Luther does grant them a place as a means of exercising and strengthening faith: In this way Faith strengthens itself through the two works of the third and second commandment. Thus faith goes out into works and through works comes back to itself again, just as the sun goes forth into its setting and comes again at its rising.113

Elsewhere Luther encourages his readers to “begin with a weak spark of faith and strengthen it more and more every day by exercising it in all your living and doing.”114 2 Peter 1:10 figures in Luther’s thoughts in this area, with the reformer reading the Petrine verse as an encouragement to toughen up our trust in God: “honouring God’s name helps very much to strengthen and increase faith, although all works help to do this, as St. Peter says in 2 Peter 1:10.” 115 Although Luther doesn’t explicitly join the dots between works and assurance here in his Treatise on Good Works, we do see a logic that has works in a supporting role which strengthens faith. It is this faith in Christ which is then clearly seen as the avenue by which salvation-certainty is attained. As we have seen in the previous chapter, the potential to see works as a secondary avenue for the gaining of assurance would be realised by the time Luther was to lecture on Peter’s second epistle. On the Bondage of the Will (1525) In 1524, Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam published On the Freedom of the Will. With what is essentially a synergistic view of salvation the humanist defends the existence of a truly free human will “by which man may be able to direct himself towards, or turn away from, what leads to salvation.”116 Luther’s response in the following year was On the Bondage of the Will, where he takes issue with Erasmus’ theology labelling it a threat to the doctrine of salvation by grace alone. The central argument of Luther’s reply consists of two movements, the first of which showing up the inconsistencies within Erasmus’ own argument,117 the second aiming to prove positively that salvation is all of God and can only be achieved by God’s sovereign action.118 Central to Luther’s critique is the understanding that any argument for free choice leads not just to the LW 44: 79. LW 44: 60. 115 LW 44: 40. 116 CWE 76: 21. 117 LW 33: 102–60. 118 LW 33: 160–212. 113 114

28

affirmation of there being “some little bit of endeavour or desire” within the individual but of a “full and free ability to do everything without the grace of God.”119 Towards the end of On the Bondage of the Will Luther addresses the issue of personal assurance. This section begins with an assertion that “there are two kingdoms in the world which are bitterly opposed to each other.” 120 That we humans belong either to the kingdom of Satan or to the kingdom of Christ is “sufficient to confute the dogma of free choice, seeing that we are bound to serve in the kingdom of Satan unless we are delivered by the power of God.”121 Luther then goes on to say that even if we were granted free choice as Erasmus understands it, it would only lead to a situation where one’s “conscience would never be assured and certain how much it ought to do to satisfy God.”122 While grace remains only a help to our free will then within the conscience there will “always remain an anxious doubt whether it pleased God or whether he required something more.”

123

True assurance does not come through an

observation of works done in the body, but only through our comprehension of the promises of the gospel: Moreover, we are also certain and sure that we please God, not by the merit of our own working, but by the favour of his mercy promised to us, and that if we do less than we should or do it badly, he does not hold this against us, but in a fatherly way corrects us.124

In this way Luther links personal assurance to our clear understanding of the object of saving faith: the mercy of God held out in the gospel.

The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests (1533) Throughout his career Luther wrote on the sacraments, most famously as a result of his dispute with Zwingli and Oecolampadius.125 The document from Luther’s sacramental writing which has the most to say to our topic is The Private Mass and the LW 33: 144. LW 33: 287. 121 LW 33: 288. 122 LW 33: 289. 123 LW 33: 289. 124 LW 33: 289. 125 For a brief survey of Luther’s sacramental writings over the course of his career as a reformer see Lull, ‘Luther’s Writings’, 50–51. 119 120

29

Consecration of Priests, a treatise in which Luther attacks the validity of the private mass introduced to the Church by Pope Gregory at the turn of the seventh century.126 At one point Luther speaks of how the Devil aims to bring our sins to our attention: “the Devil does not lie when he holds before us our manifest evil works and life.” 127 But such accusations, regardless of their truth, need not end in us doubting our salvation: He [Satan] is lying when he tries to force me to despair. […] At this point then, the time is ripe for rescue and help from heaven above; either a brother will stand by you with a spoken Word of God, or the Holy Spirit himself will be in your heart, reminding you of such a spoken Word and saying “[…] But now like St Peter turn back to Christ, and look at what he has done for you. For Christ in turn has passed sentence on your answer of ‘yes’ [to the Devil’s charge] by his blood and it shall not harm you.”128

Further to the spoken Word being a source of comfort, Luther also points to the sacraments as a means of bolstering assurance. In critiquing the medieval Catholic teaching on the Lord’s Supper, Luther laments that the Catholics “did not instruct the people as to how they were to receive it in faith for the comfort and strengthening of their conscience.”129 Luther goes on to define a sacrament as an element which is attached to and symbolic of God’s word of promise,130 so the assurance available through participation in the sacraments arcs back to the objective word from heaven of our certain salvation in Christ.

Disputation Concerning Justification (1536) The Disputation Concerning Justification is the record of the verbal licentiate examination of two University of Wittenberg students, Jakob Schenk and Philipp Motz.131 Luther had presided over the examination which took as its subject the doctrine of justification with special reference to Romans 3:28. The disputation opens with the presentation of two sets of theses followed by arguments for and against Martin E. Lehmann, Introduction to The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests, LW 38: 143–44. 127 LW 38: 157. 128 LW 38: 157–58. 129 LW 38: 181. 130 LW 38: 198–99. 131 LW 34: 148. 126

30

those propositions put forward. The opening thesis of the first group sets the tone for what will be discussed concerning assurance later on: 1. It is clear enough from this passage [Romans 3:28] that the method of justifying man before God must be distinguished from the method of justifying him before men.132

The opening theses also set out the basic tenants of the doctrine of justification including the imputation of an alien righteousness appropriated by faith alone and the reality of ongoing sin in the life of the believer.133 In the ensuing dialogue the argument was put to the candidates that the Bible’s demand for righteous living means that justification is not by faith alone. We have recorded the responses both of the students and also those of Luther himself. At a number of points Luther stresses that good works are the necessary fruit of genuine faith.134 Building on this point, Luther relates faith to works using the language of efficient and effective causality, attributing the former to faith and the latter to works: After the forgiveness of sins, love ought to follow. This love shows all men that we have remission of sins and that we have been pronounced righteous by God, and this is called outward righteousness. This righteousness follows, the former precedes, since the order is a priori, that is, from the efficient cause of justification. I am really bound to view the works of man from the effective cause, so that he may show by his works that he has faith.135

The cause which is efficient for justification is the forgiveness of sins, a state which is only obtainable “by faith in Christ.”136 Furthermore, that works are necessary does not mean they should be considered an efficient cause, as “many things are necessary which are not causes.”137 It has been noted that “the necessity of Aristotelian logic for theology […] was sharply called into question” by Luther’s work,138 yet the use of ‘causal’ language shows the reformer to be somewhat influenced by Aristotelian

LW 34: 151. Theses III.27–29 and III.23–24, respectively. LW 34: 152–53. 134 LW 34: 161, 165, 176, 189, 190. 135 LW 34: 162. 136 LW 34: 161. 137 LW 34: 171. 138 Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 1483–1521 (trans. James L. Schaaf; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 172–73. 132 133

31

philosophy. At points in the disputation Luther shows that he has read the philosopher, although not always in agreement.139 Luther concluded that two types of righteousness ensue from this state of affairs. There is an “inward” righteousness before God which is gained through faith in Christ and an “outward” righteousness obtained through the outworking of faith in acts of love.140 Knowledge of both types is needed if one is to be confident before both God and humanity: Before God, faith is necessary, not works. Before men works and love are necessary, which reveal us to be righteous in our own eyes and before the world.141

The discernment of people’s works is needed because of the reality of hypocrisy, yet God in his omniscience is able to operate on a different plane: For the works indicate whether I have faith. I conclude, therefore, that he is righteous, when I see that he does good works. In God’s eyes that distinction is not necessary, for he is not deceived by hypocrisy. But it is necessary among men, so that they may correctly understand where faith is and where it is not.142

At one point Luther mentions the confidence we have in light of God’s forgiveness: “But we ought to cleanse it [knowledge of original sin] away and grow day by day in good works and yet know that we are living under mercy, where we have peace of conscience.”143 So while we have confidence in front of others through an observation of our works, peace before God is obtained by remembering God’s mercy. While this type of assurance is not spoken about in great detail, the logic of the Disputation Concerning Justification is such that we are pointed to this more objective avenue of assurance as we consider our position before the divine judge. While works are sufficient to justify ourselves before humanity, faith is the avenue for justification before God. Against the Antinomians (1539) LW 34: 191. LW 34: 162. 141 LW 34: 162. 142 LW 34: 161. 143 LW 34: 181. 139 140

32

Written seven years before his death, Luther’s treatise Against the Antinomians was penned by the reformer as a retraction on behalf of his former pupil John Agricola. Agricola had been claiming that Christian preaching ought to pass over the law and begin with the gospel, as “what can best induce genuine sorrow over one’s sin and a turning from it is not the preaching of the law, but the preaching of the gospel of God’s immeasurable grace in Christ.”144 In the climax to the debate which followed, Agricola had asked Luther to pen a retraction so that Luther would himself be satisfied. Says Luther in the opening paragraphs: “since he [Agricola] feared that he could not compose a statement that would command sufficient respect, he urged me to do it.”145 In the resultant treatise Luther maintains that knowledge of the law is necessary to prick the conscience into seeing that its needs Christ’s salvation: How can one know what sin is without the law and conscience? And how will we learn what Christ is, what he did for us, if we do not know what the law is that he fulfilled for us and what sin is, for which he made satisfaction?146

Throughout the treatise Luther refers to the Devil as one who is actively trying to extinguish the gospel in the lead up to Christ’s second coming: “he will not die until the last day.”147 Satan’s activity sees him lulling people into a false sense of security by “teaching them to heed neither law nor sin, so that if sometime they are suddenly overtaken by death or by a bad conscience, they have grown so accustomed to nothing but sweet security that they sink helplessly into hell.”148 Such persons “must be roused to repentance not only by the sweet grace of and suffering of Christ […] but also by the terrors of the law.”149 Luther’s pastoral eye recognises not only those who endanger themselves by thinking nothing of their sin, but also those who are all too aware of their shortcomings. Luther describes this second group as […] dejected and downcast hearts who feel their sin and fear God and who therefore must be comforted. To such, the dear Jesus can never be portrayed sweetly enough. They need much more of this, as I have discovered in many of them–to say nothing of myself.150 Franklin Sherman, Introduction to Against the Antinomians, LW 47: 102. LW 47: 108. 146 LW 47: 113. 147 LW 47: 117. 148 LW 47: 111. 149 LW 47: 111. 150 LW 47: 111. 144 145

33

So we note here that a lack of assurance is cured by looking to the message about Christ. Personal introspection regarding works done in the body is not mentioned; rather it is the observation of a lack in works which is appealed to as a means of stirring the complacent out of their slumber. Luther’s treatises and disputations – summary As we have seen in Luther’s exegetical work, the reformer’s treatises and disputations speak strongly of the objective nature of Christian assurance. Our confidence in salvation is linked to the very nature of that salvation; we are saved by coming to Christ with faith in his act and promise of salvation, and so it is by a Spirit led faith in Christ’s work and word that we are assured of his cleansing and forgiveness of sin. However, nowhere in these writings does Luther point to the introspective analysis of good deeds as a means of assuring ourselves as being righteous in God’s eyes. As a necessary outworking of faith, works can be used both to defend ourselves before human judges and also to detect hypocrites within the church, but the closest Luther comes to using deeds as a measure of faith is to affirm in his Treatise on Good Works that actions done as a form of spiritual exercise can strengthen faith in times of weakness.

34

CHAPTER FOUR

ASSURANCE IN LUTHER’S PASTORAL WRITINGS

In the introduction to his edited collection of Luther’s pastoral letters, Theodore Tappert points out that Luther’s career as a reformer is book-ended by actions which reveal him as a “pastor and shepherd of souls.”151 The nailing of the 95 theses to the door of the castle church in Wittenberg during 1517 was prompted by a concern for local residents as they encountered Johannes Tetzel peddling indulgences, while Luther’s death in 1546 occurred the day after he oversaw the reconciliation between two “quarrelling counts of Mansfield.”152 Given the great pastoral implications of the doctrine of assurance, an analysis of Luther’s writings as a pastor presents itself as a useful avenue for our investigation. One obvious source of data is Luther’s pastoral correspondence, where the reformer addresses the doubts of his acquaintances as they’re presented in their various forms. This section of our analysis will also take into account Luther’s hymns, as it was the reformer’s opinion that music provided an important means of conducting pastoral ministry: “For whether you wish to comfort the sad, to terrify the happy, to encourage the despairing, to humble the proud, to calm the passionate, or to appease those full of hate […] what more effective means than music could you find?”153 Luther’s homiletical material will form a third area of study in this chapter, as “the pastoral concern of Luther is [also] prominently revealed in his sermons.”154 The sources used in our analysis of Luther’s preaching will not be as widely spread as those used to discuss his correspondence and hymnody, with the narrower focus allowing space to engage a little with Zachman’s assessment of the reformer. A word should also be said regarding the availability of our source material in this section. In accessing translated letters, sermons and hymns we find ourselves at the fuller mercy of those who have edited the various English translations of Luther’s work. A much greater array of Luther’s significant exegetical and polemical work has Theodore G. Tappert, General Introduction to LSC, 13. Tappert, General Introduction to LSC, 13. 153 LW 53: 323. 154 Tappert, General Introduction to LSC, 13–14. 151 152

35

been provided for us in English, and editors have wielded a sharper sword when it comes to selecting from among the shorter works. Luther himself wrote of the extent of his correspondence, saying that if he had “kept only the letters that have been sent to me I could have filled a large building.”155 Hence we only have access to a relatively small sample of material in this area, and our selection of items is a process which is yet another step removed from the reformer himself. Such circumstances suggest that any conclusions drawn from this part of our analysis should be made subject to further refinement through a deeper study of this section of Luther’s corpus. Correspondence While editorial control is somewhat diluted when it comes to assessing this part of Luther’s written legacy, Tappert’s editing does afford us one advantage in that it collects in one volume a selection of Luther’s letters of spiritual counsel. One of the earliest is a letter written by Luther to his Augustinian colleague George Spenlein in 1516. In it Luther outlines his new understanding of imputed righteousness and the associated implications for our sense of assurance: Meditate on this love of His and you will see His sweet consolation. For why was it necessary for Him to die if we can obtain a good conscience by our works and afflictions? Accordingly you will find peace only in Him and only when you despair of yourself and your own works. Besides, you will learn from Him that just as He has received you, so He has made your sins His own and has made His righteousness yours.156

Here assurance looks in the same direction as our faith; not to anything we have done but to work done by Christ on our behalf. The theme of looking to the work and promise of Christ to sustain our assurance is repeated throughout Luther’s correspondence. In 1530 Luther wrote to Jerome Weller, a border in Luther’s home and tutor to his children, advising that: When the Devil throws our sins up to us and declares that we deserve death and hell, we ought to speak thus: “[…] I know One who suffered and made satisfaction in my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Where He is, there I shall be also.”157

LW 54: 206. LSC, 110. 157 LSC, 86. 155 156

36

Three years before his death Luther wrote to a ‘Mrs M’ who was worried that because she had spoken some words in anger she was bound to “remain in the Devil’s power for ever.”158 Luther counsels her to […] be content and confident. Your sin is forgiven. Rely resolutely on this. [Do not revive your own notions.] Give heed to all that your pastor and preacher tell you [from the Word of God]. Do not despise their counsel and comfort, for it is God himself who speaks to you through them, as Christ said “Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted,” and, “He that heareth you heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me [Luke 10.16].” Believe this, and the Devil will stop bothering you.159

From these examples we see that Luther maintained the pastoral practice of pointing people to Christ’s work and his promise. The second and third examples see Luther focus in on the Devil as the one who is responsible for our doubt, while the earlier letter sees doubt as the product of bad theology. This distinction again emphasises the heavier emphasis on satanic attack as the seed of doubt in Luther’s later theology. One of the benefits of reading through Luther’s correspondence is that we can see the reformer’s response to doubt as it manifests itself in various ways. In opening his 1531 letter to Barbara Lisskirchen, Luther reports that “your dear bother Jerome Weller has informed me that you are sorely troubled about eternal election.”160 Luther responds by saying that it is no business of ours to look into those decrees of God which are hidden from us: “such thoughts as yours are a vain searching into the majesty of God and a prying into his secret providence […] it is of no profit to you to gape at that which you are not commanded.”161 But Barbara is told to hold on to what God has revealed, namely the gospel of “Christ given for us”: If you believe, then you are called. And if you are called, then you are most certainly predestinated [sic.]. Do not let this mirror and throne of grace be torn away from before your eyes. If such thoughts still come and bite like fiery serpents, pay no attention to the thoughts or serpents. Turn away from these notions and contemplate the brazen serpent, that is, Christ given for us. Then, God willing, you will feel better.162

LSC, 102. LSC, 103. Parentheses added by editor. 160 LSC, 115. 161 LSC, 115. This is a common response by Luther regrading this issue. See LSC, 132, 138. 162 LSC, 116. 158 159

37

Another issue faced by Luther’s friends is the trustworthiness of God. When writing to one Valentine Hausmann in 1532, Luther is sorry to “have learned of the trouble” his correspondent was enduring “on account of [his] terror.”163 Luther agrees that it may “appear to us that [God] means evil and harm”, but insists that “what he does is for our benefit, even if we do not understand it.”164 Valentine must “take to heart that there is no doubt that [his] terror comes from the Devil.”165 When terror strikes the solution is to “remember at that very time nothing but prayers and the word of God”, for “he [Satan] cannot endure prayer and the Word of God.”166 Luther’s letters also show the reformer prescribing a multi-pronged treatment for spiritual anxiety. At a number of points he suggests the company of other Christians as means of fighting off doubt.167 But even here the company of others is a means of being strengthened by the divine promise: “let them listen to the words of some good man as to the voice of God from heaven.”168 Luther also points those he’s shepherding to the sacraments, especially those who are concerned about their election: “He instituted them to make you more certain and to drive such speculations out of your mind.”169 But does Luther’s approach include an exhortation to assess one’s own life as a means of gaining assurance? Does our reformer encourage people towards an introspective analysis of deeds done in their own body? The one point at which Luther seems to guide someone down this path is in a letter to his own Father, John Luther, in 1530. Luther senior was sick and, as subsequent events would show, only a few months away from death.170 Writing to his father about the perseverance of the saints, Martin confidently asserts that “God has already sealed this teaching and faith in you and has testified to it by such marks as that you have suffered much slander, abuse, obloquy, mockery, scorn, hatred, and odium for his names sake, as we all have done.” The suffering for faith endured by John Luther was one means of him being sure of his faith. But immediately after this his son reverts back to the objective assurance to which we have become accustomed: “Let your heart be strong and at ease in your trouble, for we have yonder a true mediator with God, Jesus Christ, who has overcome death and sin for us and now sits in heaven with all his angels, looking down on us and awaiting us so that when we set out we need have no fear or care lest we should LSC, 120. LSC, 120. 165 LSC, 121. 166 LSC, 121. 167 LSC, 95, 117–18. 168 LSC, 118. 169 LSC, 132. 170 See notes in LSC, 30. 163 164

38

sink and fall to the ground.”171 So to summarise Luther’s doctrine of assurance as presented in his letters we can say that while on at least one occasion he used the life lived in the body as a means of assuring his father, his usual pastoral strategy was to point people to the objective work and promises of Christ. Hymns In a letter written to Matthias Weller in 1534, Luther exhorts his friend to find spiritual solace in music: “begin striking the keys and singing in accompaniment, as David and Elisha did, until your sad thoughts vanish.”172 Certainly the hymns left behind by the reformer show that he had a concern to strengthen believers during times of uncertainty. Described as “most likely his second hymn”, Dear Christians, Let Us Now Rejoice (1523), traces the believer’s movement from sinfulness to righteousness.173 In the ninth and penultimate verse, the congregation sings about how comfort in the Christian life is found by looking to God and bestowing our spirits upon him: To heaven unto my Father high, From this life I am going; But there thy Master still am I, My Spirit on thee bestowing, Whose comfort shall thy trouble quell, Who thee shall teach to know me well, And in the truth shall guide thee.174

In another hymn from the same year, From Trouble Deep I Cry to Thee, Luther links our spiritual comfort with the nature of our salvation as promised by God’s Word: With thee counts nothing but thy grace To cover all our failing. The best life cannot win the race, Good works are unavailing. Before thee no one glory can, And so must tremble every man, And live by thy grace only Hope therefore in my God will I, On my deserts not founding; LSC, 31. LSC, 97. 173 Ulrich S. Leupold, Introduction to Dear Christians, Let Us Now Rejoice, LW 53: 217. 174 LW 53: 220. 171 172

39

Upon him shall my heart rely, All on his goodness grounding. What his true Word doth promise me, My comfort shall and refuge be; That will I always wait for.175

The gaining of assurance by external means is a theme continued into the following year, with Luther looking to the Spirit as the provider of comfort in the second verse of Come, God Creator Holy Ghost: For thou art called the Comforter, The blessed gift of God above, A ghostly balm our quickener, A living well, fire and love.176

Finally we note that towards the end of his career Luther’s hymns were still looking to objective realities as a means of obtaining assurance. God’s steadfast character is the basis of our confidence in From Heaven the Angel Troop Came Near (1543): He will nor can from you go hence; Set you in him your confidence. Let many battle on you make, Defy them—he cannot forsake.177

So in summarising this brief look at Luther’s hymnody, we note that assurance is spoken of purely in objective terms. Confidence and comfort come from sources outside the believer, be it Christ’s work of salvation, God’s word of promise, or the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Sermons As a preacher Luther aimed to adapt himself “to the circumstances of the common people,”178 and this concern to address the needs of his congregation extended to the issue of assurance. In 1519 Luther was commissioned by one Mark Schart to offer “some help in dealing with distressing thoughts about death”,179 and so later in the year Luther produced A Sermon on Preparing to Die. In this sermon Luther uses LW 53: 224. LW 53: 261. 177 LW 54: 307. 178 LW 54: 236. 179 Martin O. Dietrich, Introduction to A Sermon on Preparing to Die, LW 42: 97. 175 176

40

language which reflects the artistic culture of his time. During this period a major artistic motif was the “battle between God and the Devil”, where Satan was often depicted as enslaving human beings in a hell-bound manner.

180

Luther speaks of the

“terrifying image of death” and of the “unavoidable image of hell and eternal damnation”; images which we have “etched” into minds.181 When facing the anxiety caused by such imagery, Luther’s counsel is to “engrave that picture of grace in yourself with all your power and keep it before your eyes”; the “picture of grace” being “nothing else but that of Christ on the cross.”182 Here again is the counsel to look out towards the objective work of Christ as a way of becoming assured. This work of Christ is also presented in the sacraments, “which contain nothing but God’s words, promises, and signs.”183 Luther asserts that […] there is no better way on earth to comfort downcast hearts and bad consciences. In the sacraments we find God’s Word—which reveals and promises Christ to us with all his blessing and which he himself is—against sin, death, and hell.184

While the above sermon demonstrates Luther’s emphasis on the objective aspect assurance, a sermon on the Lord’s Supper first published in 1524 has a quite a bit to say regarding the role of introspection in the life of the believer. Randall Zachman has isolated a passage within this sermon as evidence that Luther saw proof of our sanctification as an essential element if we are to be assured “that God has elected us”, quoting Luther’s statement that “even if all the angels and the whole world were to testify that you had received the Lord’s supper profitably, it would be weaker testimony than that furnished by your conduct. “185 But a closer reading of the sermon reveals that Zachman has misrepresented the reformer. Earlier Luther explains how Christ’s words of institution,186 spoken with the Supper, allow participants to be assured of their faith: 180

John Dillenberger, Images and Relics: Theological Perspectives and Visual Images in SixteenthCentury Europe (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 21. 181 LW 42: 101. 182 LW 42: 104. 183 LW 42: 109. 184 LW 42: 111. 185 Zachman, Asurance of Faith, 84. Zachman may be guilty of conflating two of Luther’s sentences here, although not at the expense of the reformer’s intended sense. Lenker’s edition of the sermon (which Zachman cites) reads: “even if all the angels and the whole world were to testify that you had received the Lord’s supper profitably, it would be weaker testimony than that furnished by yourself. This you cannot reach unless you consider your conduct, whether it shines forth, works in you, and bears fruit.” SML 2: 211. 186 Matt 26:26–28; Mark 14:22–24; Luke 22:19–20; 1 Cor 11:23–26.

41

Thus you see how we are to understand the words of the institution of the Lord’s Supper and firmly hold to them; for in them all the virtue is centred, we all must know them, understand them, and cling to them in faith, so as to be able to defend ourselves and to repulse the foe. When you wish to go to the Lord’s Supper listen to the words spoken, and be assured that they contain the whole treasure on which you are to stand and rely, for they are really spoken to you.187

Through this understanding of the centrality of God’s Word we make “right use of the Supper, serving not to torture, but to comfort and gladden the conscience.”188 But once Luther has established the word-based sacrament as a means of spiritual comfort, he turns his attention to “the second thought” concerning the Supper, namely that “it is our duty to let the benefit and fruit of the Lord’s Supper become manifest, and we ought to show that we have received it with profit.”189 Receiving the supper profitably means giving ourselves up in service to our neighbour as Christ gave himself up for us.190 “Of course”, Luther continues, “we still live in the flesh, and this is so deeply rooted in us that we are unable to furnish this symbol and evidence as perfectly as we should.”191 But the Lord’s Supper is given as a gift “for our training” in this area; a means of help as we live in service of one’s neighbour. In this context Luther claims that if “you are to be sure of partaking profitably of the Lord’s Supper, there is no better way than to observe your conduct toward your neighbour.”192 Luther speaks strong words to those who, after participating in the Supper, show no charity to others: “when you fail to do this you are not a Christian, or only a weak one.”193 But he does not see failure in this area as final, or even as avoidable: You can feel whether you are kind to him who injured you, and whether you are merciful to him who is sick. Thus you can discover whether the Lord’s Supper is producing any fruit through your life. If you experience nothing,

SML 2: 206. SML 2: 207. 189 SML 2: 208. 190 SML 2: 208–09. 191 SML 2: 209. 192 SML 2: 211. 193 SML 2: 211. 187 188

42

go to God and tell him of your shortcomings and troubles; we all must do the same thing as long as we live, for, as we have said, not one of us is perfect.194

So while Zachman has Luther declaring that an observation of one’s holiness is essential when affirming one’s election, we see that Luther’s emphasis is on works as an affirmation of whether the Lord’s Supper is being heeded as a goad unto neighbourly love. Election is simply not the issue here. In fact, assurance of salvation is rooted in the words of institution as one takes the Supper, not in the actions of the Christian life. Furthermore, Zachman picks up Luther’s insistence on the necessity of faith flowing into works, concluding that if “the absence of the testimony of a good conscience [growing out of sanctification and love] can completely falsify alleged faith in Jesus Christ, then its presence is an essential component in the assurance of faith.” 195 But Luther himself stops short of such a strong conclusion. A lack of works may mean an absence of faith, but it is a common observation among believers and may only mean that the individual is of “weak” faith. In this light a poor result from one’s own introspection is not meant to drive us into doubt but is meant to drive us in faith back to God and also to discipline our lives so that they match up with our profession. Luther’s pastoral writings – summary As a pastor Luther did not shy away from his duty to comfort those in spiritual despair. While his writing in this area reflects the range of ways in which spiritual anxiety can manifest itself, including worries about election and doubts over God’s character, Luther’s remedy maintains a particular constancy. Our reformer constantly points his friends and congregations to look outside themselves to Christ’s work done on their behalf as it is described in God’s Word and sacraments and as it is applied to their hearts by the Holy Spirit. Only once in the above analysis does Luther encourage a correspondent to peruse his own life, and even then this advice is matched by an exhortation to cling to the work of Jesus. Nonetheless, introspection does have some role to play in the Christian life, but this is limited to providing some sort of check on the progress of sanctification, particularly in the area of living out the divine love spoken about in the Lord’s Supper.

194 195

SML 2: 214. Zachman, Assurance of Faith, 84–85.

43

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION

Christ and introspection in Luther’s doctrine of assurance As a man in his sixties, Luther reflected on his state of mind when a young monk, recalling that “he lived in dread of the last day.”196 Yet just six months before his death Luther was able to write to one of his correspondents that “In Him we shall find our election to be sure and pleasant, for without Christ everything is in peril”.197 With his ‘Reformation breakthrough’ Luther had found the assurance which had alluded him as a sincere yet troubled cleric; certainty of faith came hand in hand with the complete salvation obtained on our behalf by the work of Christ and promised to us through God’s Word. Luther himself declared how a proper understanding of salvation is central to the theological task,198 and we have seen—from as early as 1515—his Christcentred soteriology governing his thoughts on how we might obtain assurance. If our salvation is sourced externally then assurance is also to be found by looking outside of ourselves. This emphasis on the objective was a regular theme throughout Luther’s career, finding a voice in his lectures, polemics, letters, hymns and sermons. On many occasions he exhorts his readership and listeners to fix their eyes on Jesus as he is presented in the word of promise and the sacraments, and to listen to the Holy Spirit as he reminds us about what Christ has done. Yet Luther saw a need for Christians to scan their own lives for evidence of holy living. The necessity of good works as a corollary of trusting in Christ means there is a very real connection from deeds back to genuine faith. Luther promotes this connection both as a means of detecting hypocrites within the church and as a tool for monitoring our progress along the path of sanctification. And yes, at some points Luther does affirm that the observation of personal holiness is a way of being assured ML, 5. LSC, 137–38. 198 “The real salt is the true exposition of Scripture, which denounces the whole world and lets nothing stand but the simple faith in Christ. When this is gone, then it is all over, and all the rest of our teaching and rebuking is worthless […] In short, without this article of faith, that we are justified and saved only through Christ and that apart from Him everything is damned, there is no defence or restraint, no boundary or limit for every heresy and error, every sect and faction, with everyone thinking up and broadcasting some peculiar idea of his own.” LW 21: 59. 196 197

44

that we possess a saving faith. However, this concession towards introspection does not exist without some serious qualification from the reformer. Whenever Luther speaks of assurance through works it is always accompanied by another statement which commends the objective aspect of our assurance. In this way assurance through works is seen as an additional means of certainty; a path which strengthens rather than replaces the assurance taken from Christ and his promises. To this end Luther’s language about works as a sacrament is particularly instructive; deeds bolster our confidence which has its seed in God and his Word. It is also significant that Luther’s discussion of work-based assurance is detected most often in his exegetical writing. The under-representation of this motif in the reformer’s polemical and pastoral material seems to indicate that Luther only really spoke about it when the text demanded so. When Luther is not tied to any particular text his argument tends to follow the natural contours of his theology, resulting in an emphasis on the objective nature of assurance. But that Luther affirms introspective assurance as demanded by the text is testimony to the reformer’s Biblicism, a value born out of his Nominalist background and refined during the course of the Reformation. Aside from having a root in his soteriology, Luther’s emphasis on the objective seems to have also been influenced by his eschatology. As we approach the final day, the Devil is active in undermining the confidence of believing men and women by reminding them of their spiritual shortcomings. This source of strife became all the more clear for Luther as the Reformation progressed, and the way to defeat this attack was equally apparent. “Believe in this”, and here Luther is speaking of the gospel, “and the Devil will stop bothering you.”199 The emphasis on the objective is also necessary due to our redemption being inaugurated but not yet consummated. Hanging between the ages, our imperfect lives mean that we cannot rely on our holiness to consistently reflect our status as saved people. In a reflection of the thinking that produced his simul iustus et peccator, the reformer concludes that while good works may occasionally grant us a sense of assurance, true confidence finds its object in Christ and his Word. Assessing the assessment of Luther We have seen that whenever Luther speaks of introspection he does so without loosing his grip on the central tenant of his theology: our salvation and justification by faith alone. Furthermore, exhortations unto self-examination are always subordinated to the practice of looking upon Christ. These qualifications stem out of other aspects of 199

LSC, 103.

45

Luther’s theology, namely his soteriology and eschatology, and so, contra Olmsted and Lohse, it seems unnecessary to consider such references as anomalous intrusions into the reformer’s theology. Instead they reflect a theologian who is attempting to uphold the entire counsel of God in a way which is interconnected and which reads the various sections of Scripture in a complimentary fashion. Zachman’s thesis that Luther creates an unfortunate tension within his doctrine of assurance is misconstrued on a number of counts. That Luther created a ‘tension’ by conceding the possibility of an introspective assurance is hard to fathom given the constant qualifications put forward by the reformer. After reading Luther we are left in no doubt that an assurance based on the observation of works is only ever an aid to certainty; it cannot be relied upon as a separate means of affirming faith. What's more, that our confidence of election is reliant upon our sanctification is also a misreading of the reformer. A number of times in this study we have seen Luther point to Christ’s work and Word in answer to the specific issue of how to be sure of one’s election. Further to this, we have seen that Zachman’s understanding of Luther’s view of election is based on a misreading of the primary material. While Zachman has helpfully identified the different colours making up Luther’s teaching on assurance, he has failed to convincingly establish that the reformer created a problematic tension within the doctrine. The pastoral application of Luther’s doctrine Perhaps one area where Luther could have been more consistent is in the pastoral application of his views. While the emphasis on the objective is no surprise, Luther rarely exhorted his correspondents to assess their own lives as a means of gaining assurance. Such exhortations seem to be under-represented despite Luther’s concession that introspection can be used as an aid to certainty. If our own pastoral practice were to mirror the whole of Luther’s theology then surely there would be times when it would be appropriate to instruct people to seek out evidence of the Spirit’s work in their lives. Nevertheless, this would have to a be a practice accompanied by constant exhortations to look to Christ and the gospel, for when it comes to works and faith, “a preacher should not try to separate the two, although he should push faith to the fore.”200 We introduced this investigation with a comment about how theologians in the postReformation era struggled to come up with the right vocabulary to describe the 200

LW 44: 242.

46

different facets of Christian assurance, and about how subjective feelings of assurance came to be linked with the act of introspection. Luther’s discussion of the matter has shown that the subjective element of assurance need not be sourced only from the observation of works done in the body. Trust in the objective work of Christ is an existential affair for Luther; we trust Christ by consciously letting go of what we think we achieve here in the flesh. ‘Feeling’ assured is not only the domain of those who can see the Spirit at work, but is also—and perhaps even to a fuller extent—the right of those who give all over to Christ. We need not be fearful of promoting a passionless assurance when directing people to the objective work of Christ. Areas for further research But the pastoral significance of Luther’s doctrine of assurance is not limited to striking the right balance between the objective and introspective moods of assurance, nor is it exhausted by thinking about the language and expectations of Christian confidence. We have not had time to discuss the complete shape of Luther’s teaching on the matter, leaving aside certain ideas such as how the struggle for assurance is itself a help to the believer.201 A fuller study of Luther’s doctrine of assurance would provide plenty of stimulating material when ministering to those who are lacking confidence in their faith. A historical question also presents itself in regard to how Luther’s doctrine was altered by subsequent generations within the Lutheran tradition.202 Finally it should be said that if Luther’s insights are to be of lasting value to the Church then they should be tested against the Biblical passages used by the reformer as a source. As Luther himself said, “anybody who wishes to be a theologian must have a fair mastery of the Scriptures, so that he may have an explanation for whatever can be alleged against any passage.”203 It would be the reformer’s own wish that his insights find a defence within the pages of the Bible.

201

In 1532 Luther wrote to Valentine Hausmann, counselling him to “accept this scourge [of doubt] as laid upon you by God for your own good, even as Saint Paul had to bear a thorn in the flesh, and thank God that he deems you worthy of such unbelief and terror, for they will drive you all the more to pray and seek help and say, as it is written in the Gospel, ‘Lord, help thou mine unbelief!’” LSC, 119. 202 Note Olson’s take on what happened after Luther: “[German] Pietists simply believed that Luther had been a bit one-sided in his emphasis on the objective aspects of salvation and that Lutherans [i.e. those subscribing to Lutheran Orthodoxy] tended to neglect even more the subjective, inward side of salvation.” The Story of Christian Theology, 475. 203 LW 54: 111.

47

BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES Erasmus, Desiderius

Collected Works of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974– .

Luther, Martin

Commentary on Romans. Translated by J. Theodore Mueller. Grand Rapids: Kregel. 1976 [1515–16].

__________.

Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel. Translated and Edited by Theodore G. Tappert. Library of Christian Classics Vol. 28. London: SCM Press, 1955.

__________.

Luther’s Works. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan (Vols 1–30) and Helmut T. Lehmann (Vols 31–55). St Louis: Concordia (Vols 1–30) and Philadelphia: Fortress (Vols 31–55), 1955–1986.

__________.

Martin Luther: Selections from his Writings. Edited by John Dillenberger. New York: Doubleday, 1962.

__________.

Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 volumes. Translated by John Nicholas Lenker et al. Edited by John Nicholas Lenker. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.

SECONDARY SOURCES Althaus, Paul

The Theology of Martin Luther, American edition. Translated by Robert C. Schultz. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966 [1963].

Barnes, Robin Bruce

‘The Assurance of Salvation in Luther’, Lutheran Quarterly 3 (1989): 209–222.

Beeke, Joel R.

The Quest for Full Assurance: The Legacy of Calvin and his Successors. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1999.

Beutel, Albrecht.

‘Luther’s Life’, Translated by Katharina Gustavs. Pages 3–19 in The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther. Edited by Donald K. McKim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

48

Bradley, James E. and Muller, Richard A.

Church History: An Introduction to Research, Reference Works, and Methods. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans, 1995.

Brecht, Martin

Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 1483–1521. Translated by James L. Schaaf. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.

Bromiley, Geoffrey W.

Historical Theology: An Introduction. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1978.

Carson, D.A.

‘Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of Assurance’. Pages 59–97 in Justification and Christian Assurance. Edited by R.J. Gibson. Explorations 10. Adelaide: Openbook, 1996.

Chadwick, Henry

‘Justification by Faith: A Perspective’, One in Christ 20 (1984): 191–225.

Dever, Mark

Richard Stibbs and the ‘Truly Evangelical Church of England’: A Study in Reformed Divinity and Early Stuart Conformity. PhD Thesis, Cambridge, 1992.

Dillenberger, John

Images and Relics: Theological Perspectives and Visual Images in Sixteenth-Century Europe. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Edwards, Mark U.

‘Luther’s Polemical Controversies’. Pages 192-205 in The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther. Edited by Donald K. McKim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Hall, Basil

‘Calvin against the Calvinists’ Pages 19–37 in John Calvin. Edited by G.E. Duffield. Appleford: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1966.

Kendall, R.T.

Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.

Lohse, Bernhard

Martin Luther: An Introduction to his Life and Thought. Translated by Robert C. Schultz. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986 [1980].

__________.

Martin Luther’s Theology: It’s Historic and Systematic Development. Edited and Translated by Roy A Harrisville. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999 [1995].

49

Lull, Timothy F.

‘Luther’s Writings’. Pages 39–61 in The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther. Edited by Donald K. McKim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

McGrath, Alister E.

Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998.

__________.

Reformation Thought: An Introduction, 3rd edition. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999.

__________.

The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation, 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

Oberman, Heiko A.

Luther: Man Between God and the Devil. Translated by Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart. Hammersmith: Fontana, 1993 [1982].

__________.

The Reformation: Roots and Ramifications. Translated by Andrew Colin Gow. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994.

Olmsted, Richard H.

‘Staking all on Faith’s Object: The Art of Christian Assurance According to Martin Luther and Karl Barth’. Pro Ecclesia 10 (2001): 135–158.

Olson, Roger, E.

The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition and Reform. Downers Grove: IVP, 1999.

Ozment, Steven

The Age of Reform 1250–1550: An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980.

Steinmetz, David C.

Luther in Context, 2nd edition. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

Zachman, Randall C.

The Assurance of Faith: Conscience in the Theology of Martin Luther and John Calvin. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

50