What is Faith?

Martin Luther's Definition of Faith:
An excerpt from
"An Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Romans,"
Luther's German Bible of 1522
by Martin Luther, 1483-1546

Translated by Rev. Robert E. Smith
from DR. MARTIN LUTHER'S VERMISCHTE DEUTSCHE SCHRIFTEN.
Johann K. Irmischer, ed. Vol. 63
(Erlangen: Heyder and Zimmer, 1854), pp.124-125. [EA 63:124-125]

August 1994

Faith is not what some people think it is. Their human dream is a delusion. Because they observe that faith is not followed by good works or a better life, they fall into error, even though they speak and hear much about faith. ``Faith is not enough,'' they say, ``You must do good works, you must be pious to be saved.'' They think that, when you hear the gospel, you start working, creating by your own strength a thankful heart which says, ``I believe.'' That is what they think true faith is. But, because this is a human idea, a dream, the heart never learns anything from it, so it does nothing and reform doesn't come from this `faith,' either.

Instead, faith is God's work in us, that changes us and gives new birth from God. (John 1:13). It kills the Old Adam and makes us completely different people. It changes our hearts, our spirits, our thoughts and all our powers. It brings the Holy Spirit with it. Yes, it is a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn't stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever. He stumbles around and looks for faith and good
works, even though he does not know what faith or good works are. Yet he gossips and chatters about faith and good works with many words.

Faith is a living, bold trust in God's grace, so certain of God's favor that it would risk death a thousand times trusting in it. Such confidence and knowledge of God's grace makes you happy, joyful and bold in your relationship to God and all creatures. The Holy Spirit makes this happen through faith. Because of it, you freely, willingly and joyfully do good to everyone, serve everyone, suffer all kinds of things, love and praise the God who has shown you such grace. Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire! Therefore, watch out for your own false ideas and guard against good-for-nothing gossips, who think they're smart enough to define faith and works, but really are the greatest of fools. Ask God to work faith in you, or you will remain forever without faith, no matter what you wish, say or can do.

The Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christby J.I. Packer

On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. (LUKE 24:1-3)

Jesus’ resurrection, which was a divine act involving all three Persons of the Godhead (John 10:17-18; Acts 13:30-35; Rom. 1:4), was not just a resuscitation of the ruined physical frame that was taken down from the cross for burial. It was, rather, a transformation of Jesus’ humanity that enabled him to appear, vanish, and move unseen from one location to another (Luke 24:31, 36). It was the creative renewing of his original body, the body that is now fully glorified and deathless (Phil. 3:21; Heb. 7:16, 24). The Son of God in heaven still lives in and through that body, and will do so forever. In 1 Corinthians 15:50-54, Paul envisages that Christians who are alive on earth at the moment of Christ’s return will undergo a similar transformation, though in 2 Corinthians 5:1-5 he shows himself aware that Christians who die before the Second Coming will be “clothed” with their new body (the “eternal house in heaven”) as a distinct event, at or after the time of the old body’s return to dust (Gen. 3:19).

Christianity rests on the certainty of Jesus’ resurrection as a space-time occurrence in history. All four Gospels highlight it, focusing on the empty tomb and resurrection appearances, and Acts insists on it (Acts 1:3; 2:24-35; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30-32; 13:33-37). Paul regarded the Resurrection as indisputable proof that the message about Jesus as Judge and Saviour is true (Acts 17:31; 1 Cor. 15:1-11, 20).

Jesus’ resurrection demonstrated his victory over death (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor. 15:54-57), vindicated him as righteous (John 16:10), and indicated his divine identity (Rom. 1:4). It led on to his ascension and enthronement (Acts 1:9-11; 2:34; Phil. 2:9-11; cf. Isa. 53:10-12) and his present heavenly reign. It guarantees the believer’s present forgiveness and justification (Rom. 4:25; 1 Cor. 15:17) and is the basis of resurrection life in Christ for the believer here and now (John 11:25-26; Rom. 6; Eph. 1:18-2:10; Col. 2:9-15; 3:1-4).

Luther's Morning Prayer

My Heavenly Father,

I thank You, through Jesus Christ, Your beloved Son, that You kept me safe from all evil and danger last night. Save me, I pray, today as well, from every evil and sin, so that all I do and the way that I live will please you.

I put myself in your care, body and soul and all that I have. Let Your holy Angels be with me, so that the evil enemy will not gain power over me.

Amen.

The History of the Reformation

How Christ Restored the Gospel to His Church

Mass Confusion & Marriage… Martin Luther

One of the great phrases that came out of the Protestant Reformation is the phrase “post tenebras lux.”

It’s Latin and it means, “After darkness, light.”

In fact, many Lutheran Churches to this day still hold ”tenebras” services every year on Good Friday. “Tenebras” services are marked by solemnity and by silence as worshippers read and sing of Christ’s passion and ponder how their sin and disobedience led to His death in their place. The service is always held in a darkened chapel. At the end of the “tenebras” service, the few candles that are used are blown out as the congregation files out quietly in the darkness and head home without speaking to each other or fellowshipping with each other.

All of that is transformed, of course, two days later on Easter Sunday morning into joy and singing and light. The darkness is gone…the light has come. Easter Sunday is filled with celebration as worshippers read and sing of Christ’s victory over death and the grave.

“Tenebras” means darkness. That darkness is observed on Good Friday. “Lux” means light. That is what is pondered and celebrated on Easter Sunday…”After darkness, light.”

Now when the phrase “post tenebras lux” is used, it is normally used in reference to the recovery of the doctrine of justification and to the principle of “sola fide” but there is a sense in which the phrase refers to other things associated with the Reformation as well. It refers to the reformation of worship and to the reformation of clerical orders. It refers to the accessibility of Scripture and to the reformation of the sacraments and it even refers to the reformation of the concepts of work and family.

You can see now, I think, how the phrase was used. That which was dark was illuminated by Scripture and by Christ’s great redemptive work…by the gospel. People were no longer held in the bondage of superstition and idolatry. They were no longer held in bondage and ignorance of what Christ had accomplished on their behalf. They could see at last what Christ had accomplished on their behalf. They were a little like the man who had been born blind but who could now see for himself. They were like the people Isaiah described when he wrote: NIV Isaiah 9:2…The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned.

That is what happened in the Reformation…”post tenebras lux.” Men came to see their lives as having meaning in Christ. Men came to see their vocations as having meaning in Christ. Men who had been cobblers were suddenly grateful that God had granted them a vocation and calling. They were no longer ashamed of having menial positions in life. They no longer looked with jealously and envy upon those called to other or higher vocations. Instead, they rejoiced in what others had been called to even as they rejoiced in their own vocation and calling.

Listen to what Luther taught his people:

To serve God simply means to do what God has commanded and not to do what God has forbidden. And if only we would accustom ourselves properly to this view, the entire world would be full of service to God, not only the churches but also the home, the kitchen, the cellar, the workshop, and the field of townsfolk and farmers. It is certain that God would have that sort of order not only in the church and world order but also in the home. All, therefore, who serve the latter purpose — father and mother first, then the children, and finally the servants and neighbors — are jointly serving God; for so He wills and commands.

In the light of this view of the matter a poor maid should have the joy in her heart of being able to say: “Now I am cooking, making the bed, sweeping the house. Who has commanded me to do these things? My master and mistress have. Who has given them this authority over me? God has. Very well, then it must be true that I am serving not them alone but also God in heaven and that God must be pleased with my service, How could I possibly be more blessed? Why, my service is equal to cooking for God in heaven!”

In this way a man could be happy and of good cheer in all his trouble and labor; and if he accustomed himself to look at his service and calling in this way nothing would be distasteful to him. But the devil opposes this point of view tooth and nail, to keep one from coming to this joy and to cause everybody to have a special dislike for what he should do and is commanded to do. So the devil operates in order to make sure that people do not love the idea of work and at the same time to rob them of the joy they feel and to diminish their service to God.1

Now, I can’t tell you what a revolutionary idea that was. The idea that common people should ever hope to view their common labor and their common vocation as a gift from God was revolutionary in every sense of the word. Up until Luther, the world thought that unless a man was a priest or a monk and unless a woman was nun, he or she was insignificant. But Luther said, “No…we are all priests. Your vocation and your contentment in your vocation should not be dependent upon your being in vocational ministry or in being a figure of public acclaim. If God wills that fine…if He does not do that, you ought to still do what he has granted you to do to the glory of God.”

Even today, it is a truth that is not proclaimed nearly often enough or loudly enough. As a result, lay people want to be ministers. Ministers want to be lay people…rich, lay people but lay people. Women want to be men. Kids want to be adults and adults want to be kids. Everyone wants what they believe to be the principal place of honor and the end result is that even Christians grumble about being something other than what they are. That is why so many people today have so much leisure time and are yet so unfulfilled. That is why so many wives and children live lives of deep, abiding bitterness. Of course, many times husbands do not help the matter…for they hold their wives and children in contempt in the name of the principle of “submission.” But the idea, Luther’s idea…the Reformation idea, that life and work are a gift from God militates against all that. In fact, in the Reformation, the underlying concept that life and work were a gift from God led to a transformation of how society viewed individual purpose and importance. It later found its ultimate expression in the rise of what was called the Puritan work ethic.

There is one particular story…my personal favorite…that especially illustrates the way Luther and the reformers looked at these things. Once Luther was asked by a shoe maker, “Dr. Luther…I am but a humble cobbler but I am grateful to God for Christ’s justifying work on my behalf…what should I do in light of Christ’s great redemptive work?”

Luther response, “Make a better shoe.”

You see, Luther believed that life ought to be lived in gratitude for what Christ had done. He believed in the worth of the individual not just because he had a sentimental view of man but rather because he saw man as a reflection of His creator and the instrument through which God accomplished His purpose. That was a theme that Luther hammered over and over again. Still it was not a reality that happened very quickly. It was certainly not a reality that happened with any sort of neatness or order. In fact, and I think we have to be honest here a Protestants, it only happened over a period of time and while it was happening there was a great deal of confusion and error.

What many common people thought they heard in Luther’s teaching on the priesthood of all believers was that all authority was to be cast aside. What they thought they heard is that in the same way the church had overthrown the authority of Rome and replaced it with the authority of Scripture so the common man ought to overthrow the authority of governmental rule and replace it with his own individual freedom and self-rule. But that was not what Luther was saying at all. Luther was not a huge advocate of individual rights. He was not opposed to individual rights in principle but such rights were always relegated to a secondary position behind the proclamation of the gospel, the greater good of Christian society and the purpose and will of God.

Luther was not a modern day capitalist.
He was not a Republican.
But neither was he a communist.
He was most assuredly not a Democrat.

Luther was a medieval man struggling to live out the implications of the gospel. I think he was the last of the great medieval men and the first of the great moderns. And because he stood in the transition between those tow great epochs life around Luther was sometimes very messy.

Life in the Reformation was sometimes messy.

That was especially true in Wittenberg while Luther was locked away in Wartburg Castle. He was there from May 4, 1521 till March 1, 1522. You will remember he was “kidnapped” by Frederick the Wise after the Diet at Worms and that he was “kidnapped” for his own protection. The Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, had both excommunicated him and ruled him to be an obstinate heretic. That meant that if they could find him and catch him, they could kill him. They wanted to kill him. But Frederick the Wise, the Elector of Saxony and Luther’s Prince and Protector did not want that to happen.

So, he hid Luther out in the Wartburg Castle through the last half of 1521 and the first half of 1522 and waited. Now where Luther was hidden and who had hidden him there was a great secret at the time. Not more than a half a dozen people in Germany knew the real truth…the whole truth. It is said that not even Frederick the Wise knew where he was…and that was true. He refused to let his aides tell him where they had hidden Luther. He wanted to be able to say to the other electors and to the Holy Roman Emperor that he honestly had no idea where Luther was.2

While Luther was in the Wartburg Castle, in order to disguise himself, he grew out his hair and his beard and laid aside his monastic robe and began to wear the clothes of a knight. He went by the name Junker George…which meant Knight George.3

In the first weeks and months of his seclusion, there were many reports of his capture and death. Common people mourned the loss of Luther terribly. Even his bitterest enemies wished that whoever had taken him or whoever had killed him would just come out with it all. One Catholic leader fearing a revolt by the people wrote to Albrecht the Archbishop of Mainz saying, “The only way of saving ourselves is to light torches and hunt for Luther through the whole world, to restore him to the nation that is calling for him.”4 It was harder, it seems, for his enemies to deal with the ghost of a martyr than with a living legend. And then suddenly people began to receive letters from Luther. Still, he never revealed where he was. He signed his letters cryptically…From Luther on the Isle of Patmos or From Luther in the Wilderness or something like that.5

Now the Reformation did not stop just because Luther went into hiding. While he was sequestered at the Wartburg Castle, the Reformation continued and it continued with great speed.6 In his absence, leadership fell to Philip Melanchthon the Greek professor at the university and to Carlstadt the archdeacon at the Castle Church and to Gabriel Zwilling an Augustinian monk who like Luther had a gift for preaching.

Of the three men…Melanchthon, Zwilling and Carlstadt…only Melanchthon remained resolutely loyal to Luther. The other two men and Carlstadt in particular were not only disloyal to Luther…they wanted to replace Luther. Carlstadt in particular and this is my own personal opinion, longed to be Luther.

He wanted the relationship Luther had with the people of Wittenberg. He wanted the limelight Luther had…and yet he was never really able to capture the hearts and minds of Luther’s flock. Still, he was perfectly willing to step into Luther’s place and position. He wanted to step into Luther’s place and position. He wanted to drive the Reformation ahead in Luther’s absence so that when Luther finally did return he would find that he had long since been left him behind.

Still, that is not quite how it worked out. But I am getting ahead of myself. As I was saying, in Luther’s absence the Reformation pressed ahead, not so much theologically as it did practically.

In September 1521, Melanchthon offered communion in both kinds to the people…that is, he offered them both bread and cup.

In November, at Zwilling’s urging an in light of Luther’s rejection of the sacrament of Orders, thirteen monks of the Augustinian Order at Wittenberg revoked their vows and left the monastery.7

In Christmas Day 1521, Carlstadt officiated over the service at the Castle Church at Wittenberg. He wore no vestments…only a plain black robe. He said the mass…a scaled down version of the mass…eliminating all references to Jesus being offered as a sacrifice in the mass. At the point of consecration, he switched from Latin into German. For the first time in their lives, the 2,000 people or so in attendance heard these words in their own language, “This is the cup of my blood of the new and eternal testament, spirit and secret of the faith, shed for you for the remission of sins.”

Carlstadt then offered the elements to the congregation without their having attended confession. In fact, he told them if they needed confession they were unworthy of the sacrament. What they needed, he argued, was faith in what Christ had accomplished on their behalf. Carlstadt distributed the elements in both kinds to the congregation. He actually placed the wafers into the hands of the congregants. One of the men who received the bread from Carlstadt dropped the piece h had been holding. Carlstadt told him to pick it up…but the man…who only moments before had been bold enough to come down to the front of the church and receive the bread and cup…seeing the wafer on the floor was so terrified at seeing Christ’s body desecrated that he could not bring himself to touch it.

I want you to remember that picture. A man liberated on the one hand and yet still captive on the other. It is a wonderful picture of the state of the Reformation at that moment in time.

In the weeks that followed an at Carlstadt’s urging, the town council issued its first ordinance concerning the mass. From that point on, it was to be conducted about as Carlstadt had done in the Christmas service. The town council issued other ordinances as well at Carlstadt’s urging. Some of the ordinances were simply Luther’s ideas put in effect. For example, begging was forbidden. The genuinely poor of the town were no longer permitted to beg but were provided for out of a general fund distributed by the council.8 Prostitution was forbidden. But then Carlstadt went beyond Luther. He urged the council to outlaw the presence of images of any kind in the churches. Zwilling, in fact, led an iconoclastic riot in which the citizens of the town rushed into the churches and destroyed all the images, pictures, crucifixes and crosses they could lay their hands on. Zwilling led the party but it was Carlstadt’s doctrine.

Carlstadt took as his text, “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any
likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.”

But Carlstadt was not relying on scripture alone. His understanding the 10th commandment was buttressed by the deep seated idolatry he had struggled with in first coming to the faith. He had been so deeply attached to images that they had diverted him from true worship. He had in fact worshipped them and now that he had come to faith he despised them all the more for the way he had been deluded. He wanted everything to go.

That included music.

“Relegate organs, trumpets, and flutes to the theater,” he argued. “Better one heart—felt prayer than a thousand cantatas of the Psalms. The lascivious notes of the organ awaken thoughts of the world. When we should be meditating on the suffering of Christ, we are reminded of Pyrarnus and Thisbe. Or, if there is to he singing, let it be no more than a solo.”9

Carlstadt wanted worship to be genuinely spiritual. He wanted it to not be tainted by anything materialistic. It is a wonder, I think, that he did not give up the sacraments themselves.

In January, Carlstadt took a wife. Frederick the Wise was flabbergasted not with the reform but with the confusion. Finally, he issued his own instructions.

We have gone too fast. The common man has been incited to frivolity, and no one has been edified. We should have consideration for the weak. Images should be left until further notice. The question of begging should be canvassed. No essential portion of the mass should be omitted. Moot points should be discussed. Carlstadt should not preach any more.10 About that time, three men from the town of Zwickau showed up in Wittenberg. Their names were Nicholas Storch, Thomas Drechsel and Marcus Thomae…also known as Marcus Stubner.11 They are known in history as the Zwickau Prophets. Storch was a tailor. Drechsel a weaver and Stubner had been at one time a student at Wittenberg. These three men were remarkable in their manner and in their claim. They claimed they had been sent by God to take over the Reformation at Wittenberg. “Though Luther had gone far, he had not gone far enough,” they argued.12 That claim had been implicit in the actions and reforms of others. Carlstadt had essentially made the same claim in his rapid advancement of new ideas and reforms. But these three men went beyond Carlstadt. They claimed to possess direct revelation from God. In fact, they claimed continuing direct revelation from God.

Storch, the leader of the three, claimed a direct and continual word from God. To that he added an extraordinary knowledge of the Bible…and extraordinary knowledge of the Bible despite the fact that he was apparently illiterate. But Storch did not depend upon on his knowledge of the Bible. He claimed that God spoke to him in direct revelations and in dreams and in visions and he claimed that because God did, in fact, speak to him directly the Bible was no longer of very much importance.13 I love the way D’Aubigne summarizes their thought. “What is the use,” said they, “of clinging so closely to the Bible? The Bible! always the Bible! Can the Bible preach to us? Is it sufficient for our instruction? If God had designed to instruct us by a book, would he not have sent us a Bible from heaven? It is by the Spirit alone that we can be enlightened. God himself speaks to us. God himself reveals to us what we should do, and what we should preach.” Thus did these fanatics, like the adherents of Rome, attack the fundamental principle on which the entire Reformation is founded — the all-sufficiency of the Word of God.14

You see, in essence, Storch had claimed to be God’s new prophet to the elect. To make matters worse, he advocated the idea of violently overthrowing unbelievers. That is, he wanted to put unbelievers to the sword. In fact, he claimed that the destruction of unbelievers was inevitable but that when it came he would be God’s prophet to them all. Listen to how D’Aubigne puts it: “Woe! woe!” said they; “a Church governed by men so corrupt as the bishops cannot be the Church of Christ. The impious rulers of Christendom will be overthrown. In five, six, or seven years, a universal desolation will come upon the world. The Turk will seize upon Germany; all the priests will be put to death, even those who are married. No ungodly man, no sinner will remain alive; and after the earth has been purified by blood, God will then set up a kingdom; We (by that they meant Storch) will be put in possession of the supreme authority, and commit the government of the nations to the saints. Then there will be one only faith, one only baptism. The day of the Lord is at hand, and the end of the world draweth nigh. Woe! woe! woe!”

Then…the new prophets called upon all men to come and receive from their hands the true baptism, as a sign of their introduction into the new Church of God.15

They rejected the idea of infant baptism. They insisted that the true saints be rebaptized with their baptism. They were called “anabaptists”...those that rebaptized.

Stubner, the young man who had once been a student at Wittenberg, claimed that God had granted to him the ability to read other people’s minds. Later, and I have to tell you this one story, when Luther met with Stubner, Stubner told him that he could read his mind. Luther asked him what he was thinking. Stubner said, “You are wondering whether or not what I said might be true.” Luther responded by saying that yes that was indeed what he had been thinking. He then asked Stubner to tell him what Bible verse he was pondering…Stubner vacillated. Luther told him, “The Lord rebuke you, O Satan.’”

Melanchthon had been deeply impressed by Storch right from the beginning. He was worried that rejecting the Zickau Prophets outright might mean a rejection of God’s prophetic word. He wrote to Luther to ask him what to do and how he should respond. Luther replied that Melanchthon ought not worry very much about the Zwickau Prophets. He assured Melanchthon that they were frauds. He asked Melanchthon to ask them whether they had suffered in their revelations…or whether their revelations had come easily. He assured Melanchthon that receiving God’s revelation was always painful and that their pride and arrogance demonstrated that they had never communicated with God face to face.

Luther moved to accommodate the weak in faith. He moved to go slowly in dealing with those who were unable to make the transition to the reformed view of things quickly.

Now about that same time another man from Zwickau, a man by the name of Thomas Muntzer began to preach the violent overthrow of government. He was like the Zwickau Prophets except educated. He set himself forth as the end time, great prophet of God and he charged the peasants to overthrow the nobility…to indeed kill all but the faithful, the elect. He despised Luther’s view of providing for the weaker brothers. He argued that those who were weak in faith were not in the faith and all and should be sacrificed. He called Luther and this is hard for me to imagine…he called Luther Dr. Easychair and Dr. Soft-Life because of his concern for the weak and helpless.

Luther could see that the princes of Germany were going to have to act. Muntzer was willing to destroy everything to elevate himself. Frederick the Wise had had enough. The people of Wittenberg had had enough. They appealed to Luther to come home.

He did and when he did he put things right in Wittenberg. He restored order. He expelled Carlstadt. He admonished the people, encouraged the princes and blasted Muntzer and the Zwickau Prophets as devils and he did all of that by preaching. He preached eight sermons in a row when he returned and restored order and civility and peace almost instantly. Luther was a reformer, a prophet, and an educator…but he was primarily a pastor. Luther shepherded his sheep. Now I wanted to bring all of this up…Carlstadt, the Zwickau Prophets and Thomas Muntzer to show you that the Reformation was not always neat and tidy. There were times of great confusion as people began to try to figure out the implications of the gospel. I also wanted to show you that Luther exercised great leadership and patience and a tremendous amount of endurance. Luther wrote against Muntzer and his followers and against the Prophets and yet the sway they had over the peasants was never completely wretched away. There remained a great deal of unrest and that unrest eventually worked itself out in the Peasants’ War of 1525. Around a hundred thousand peasants were killed…the Prophets were banished…Carlstadt was banished…Muntzer was executed…and many people, especially his theological opponents in the Roman Church blamed Luther. They accused him of going from nearly being a martyr to making martyrs. Luther always felt that he should have done more…that he should have acted sooner…that he had dawdled too long but that is a bit unfair.

It was a messy time and in light of the many forces coming into play at the time, I think Luther was one of the few men able to see the whole picture with any sort of clarity. He was able to discern who the real enemies were and he always exercised a shepherd’s heart toward the poor and the oppressed.

Now in the minute or two I have left. I want to just introduce to you to Luther’s wife, Katie. Luther was married in June 1525 shortly after the peasant uprising. The woman that he married was named Katie von Bora. She and eleven nuns had escaped from a nunnery…and yes she was held there against her will. They had escaped in the spring of 1523 and had been aided in their escape by a merchant who made deliveries to their convent. They escaped in a wagon containing empty barrels that had once contained pickled herring…a fish that was preserved in a brine solution…something like sardines. The popular story goes that the nuns actually got in the barrels and that the barrels stacked in the merchant’s wagon were covered over by a tarp. The barrels with the nuns in them were delivered after an insufferable two day ride to Luther’s residence in Wittenberg. I think modern scholarship has determined that the women were not actually in the barrels more or less lined the edges of the wagon and that the tarp stretched over the top formed a sort of a tent in the merchant’s wagon and that the runaway nuns were all together in a clump in the middle.

Anyway when they arrived in Wittenberg they were a mess. One of the women was the sister of Luther’s old prior von Staupitz.

Luther felt that the he was obligated to take care of the nuns and he did so. He also felt that since they had revoked their vows it was appropriate for them to get married if they wanted. Over the next two years, he…and this is one of the wonderful quirks of history played the role of a matchmaker. In 1524, Luther found that he had three ex-nuns left. One of the nuns, Katie von Bora had agreed to marry one of the ex-monks and then changed her mind. She sent word to Luther that she didn’t want to marry the man that had been arranged for her but that she was not against the idea of marriage and that she was willing even to marry Luther if he ever thought he might be so inclined. Luther dawdled. Frederick the Wise’s secretary Spalatin wrote Luther a letter and suggested that he give it some thought. Luther answered back.

As for what you write about my marrying, do not be surprised that I do not wed, even if I am so famous a lover. You should be more surprised when I write so much about marriage and in this way have so much to do with women that I do not turn into a woman, let alone marry one. Although if you want my example you have it abundantly, for I have had three wives at once (he is referring to the three final nuns to be placed) and have loved them so hard as to lose two to other husbands. The third (Katie von Bora) I hold barely with my left hand, and she is perhaps about to be snatched from me. You arc really the timid lover who do not dare to marry even one.16

Anyway, in June 1525 they were married. Luther had dawdled because he thought he might wind up martyred at any moment.

He was not in love when he got married…neither was his bride. No, there marriage was a statement…an affirmation that marriage was a holy and righteous institution given by God to the comfort of his people. But something happened over the next twenty years of their marriage. They fell in love…deeply in love. They had six children. Martin Luther learned to be mocked and laughed at because of his adeptness at both changing and washing diapers.

It was a messy time.

Footnotes:

1 Martin Luther, edited by Ewald M. Plass “Faith Sanctifies All Work”… Sect. 1699 in What Luther Says: An Anthology Vol. 2. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959), 560.

2 Roland Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther, (New York: Abingdon Press, 1950), 193.

3 Roland Bainton, 195.

4 J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, History of the Reformation of the 16th Century, Book 9, Chapter 1, 774-5.

5 Roland Bainton, 193.

6 Roland Bainton, 197.

7 Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation 1521-1532, translated by James L. Schaaf, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1990), 23.

8 Roland Bainton, 207.

9 Roland Bainton, 208.

10 Roland Bainton, 210.

11 Martin Brecht, 36.

12 J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, 811.

13 Richard Marius, Martin Luther; The Christian Between God and Man, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1999), 323.

14 J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, 811.

15 J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, 812.

16 Roland Bainton, 286.

From the pulpit Ministry of pastor tom browning Arlington Presbyterian Church Page 1 January 2, 2005

The 95 Theses by Martin Luther

Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God's remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope's pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter's church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope's wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The "treasures of the Church," out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God -- this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: -- "Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."

83. Again: -- "Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

84. Again: -- "What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"

85. Again: -- "Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?"

86. Again: -- "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"

87. Again: -- "What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"

88. Again: -- "What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"

89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?"

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.