Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T05:38:00.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Homo Viator: Luther and Late Medieval Theology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Steven E. Ozment
Steven E. Ozment
Affiliation:
Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Despite the persistence of significant differences over the interpretation of humilitas in Luther's early works, an apparent consensus is afoot on both the nature of the problem which drove him to his Reformation theology and the nature of the discovery which forms the heart of this theology. As the picture now comes into focus in the secondary literature, the problem Luther apparently confronted so despairingly might be summarized as the viator-status of Christian life within the traditional medieval ordo salutis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 62 , Issue 3 , July 1969 , pp. 275 - 287
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The alternatives are defined by ERNST BIZER and HEINRICH BORNKAMM. See BIZER'S, Fides ex auditu: Eine Untersuchung iiber die Entdeckung der Gerechtigkeit Gottes durch Martin Luther (Neukirchen, 1961), 29f, 31, 51.Google ScholarBornkamm's, reply: Zur Frage der Iustitia Dei beim jungen Luther, I, ARG 52 (1961), 23f.Google Scholar; II, ARG 53 (1962), 20, 24Google Scholar. Recent contributions to the debate are HEIKO A. OBERMAN, Wir sein pettier. Hoc est verum: Bund und Gnade in der Theologie des Mittelalters und der Reformation, ZKG III/IV (1967), 232–52Google Scholar, esp. 249f, and my own study, Homo Spiritualis: A Comparative Study of the Anthropology of Johannes Tauler, Jean Gerson and Martin Luther (1500–16) in the Context of their Theological Thought, in Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, VI (Leiden, 1969), 159–183Google Scholar.

2 Brandenburg, Albert, Gericht und Evangelium: Zur Worttheologie in Luthers erster Psalmenvorlesung (Paderborn, 1960), 141Google Scholar.

3 Prenter, Regin, Der barmherzige Richter: Iustitia Dei passiva in Luthers Dictata super psalterium 1513–1515 (Kobenhavn, 1961), 73Google Scholar.

4 Schwarz, Reinhard, Fides, Spes und Caritas beim jungen Luther (Berlin, 1962), 171Google Scholar.

5 Gerrish, B. A., Grace and Reason: A Study in the Theology of Luther (Oxford, 1962), 126Google Scholar. Cf. Cranz, F. Edward, Luther, Martin, in Reformers in Profile: Advocates of Reform, 1300–1600, ed. Gerrish, B. A. (Philadelphia, 1967), 95fGoogle Scholar.

6 Oberman, Heiko A., “Iustitia Christi” and “Iustitia Dei”: Luther and the Scholastic Doctrines of Justification, HTR 59 (1966), 19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarOberman's, article now appears with other classical statements on the nature of Luther's Reformation discovery in Der Durchbruch der reformatorischen Erkennlnis bei Luther, Wege der Forschung, CXXIII (Darmstadt, 1967)Google Scholar. Included in this collection are statements from H. Denifle, H. Grisar, E. Hirsch, E. Stracke, G. Pfeifper, R. Prenter, A. Peters, and H. Bornkamm.

7 OBERMAN'S termini technici, iustitia Christi and iustitia Dei, set the discussion systematically within its late medieval context but do not make a material advancement beyond VOGELSANG in the interpretation of the nature of Luther's Reformation discovery.

8 Vogelsang, Erich, Die Anfänge von Luthers Christologie nach der ersten Psalmenvorlesung (Berlin, 1929), 64, 103, 119Google Scholar.

9 The importance of this hermeutical combination for Luther's Reformation discovery, especially as interpreted by GERHARD EBELING, is critically assessed by Harvard church historian Preus, James S., Old Testament Promissio and Luther's New Hermeneutic, HTR 60 (1967), 145–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 PL, 182, 998 C — 999 A; cf. ibid., 991 A-B for the deificatio effected in the unto mystica, and PL, 183, 1125 A-B, 1126 A-B.

11 PL, 182, 995 C-D: “Est qui confitetur Domino quoniam potens est, et est qui confitetur quoniam sibi bonus est, et item qui confitetur quoniam simpliciter bonus est. Primus servus est, et timet sibi; secundus, mercenarius, et cupit sibi; tertius, nlius, et defert patri. Itaque qui timet, et cupit, utrique pro se agunt. Sola quae in filio est charitas, non quaerit quae sua sunt (1 Cor. 13:5).”

12 “Haec vero unio amantis cum amato ab Aristotile in Ethicis tangitur ubi ait: ‘Amicus est alter ego,’ [Elhica, IX, 9] cuius unionis ratio exprimi videtur cum ab eodem dicitur: ‘Amicorum est idem velle et idem nolle [Ethica, IX, 12; Rhetorica, II, 4].’ “De mystica theologia speculative, cons. 40, 104.20ft., in loannis Carlerii de Gerson. De mystica theologia, ed. Andre Combes (Lugano [1958]).

13 Ibid, cons. 42, 113.5ff.

14 Ibid., cons. 42, 113.14ff.

15 “Denne sehe der mensche an die eigenschaft der einiger einikeit des wesens, wan Got ist an dera lesten ende der einvaltikeit und in ime wirt alle manigvaltikeit geeiniget und einvaltig in dem einigen ein wesende. Sin wesen ist sin wurken, sin bekennen, sin lonen, sin minnen, sin richten alles ein, sin barmherzikeit, sin gerechtekeit; dar in gang und trage din unbegriffelichen grosse manigvaltikeit, das er die einvaltige in sinem ein valtigen wesende.” Die Predigten Taulers, ed. Vetter, Ferdinand (Berlin, 1910), 277.14ftGoogle Scholar.

16 That significant differences between TAULER and LUTHKR still remain despite this parallel is not denied. See Homo Spirilualis, 44f., 197ff.

17 “Nam omnia attributa divina coincidere in Deo et totam theologiam esse in circulo positam, sic quod iustitia in Deo est bonitas et e converso… et in hoc concordant omnes sancti, qui ad infinitam Dei simplicitatem respexerunt.” From the Apologia doctae ignorantiae (1449) in Cusamis-Konkordanz, ed. Zellinger, Eduard (München, 1960), 91, § 45Google Scholar.

18 Ibid., 147, § 85: “Filiatio igitur est ablatio omnis alteritatis et diversitatis et resolutio omnium in unum, quae est transfusio omnium unius in omnia.” Cf. Hoffmann, Ernst, Nikolaus von Kues: Zwei Vortrdge (Heidelberg, 1947), 51 fGoogle Scholar.

19 Itinerarium mentis in Deum, VI, 5.

20 Ibid., VII, 2.

21 In the Schmalkaldic Articles, that article over which there can be absolutely no compromise, “es falle Himel und Erden,” is the sola fide. Luthers Werke in Auswahl, 4, Schriften von 1529–1545, ed. Clemen, Otto (Berlin, 1959), 296fGoogle Scholar.

22 The locus classicus in the early LUTHER is the passage in the lectures on Romans: “Nunquid ergo perfecte iustus? Non, sed simul peccator et iustus; peccator re vera, sed iustus ex reputatione et promissione Dei certa, quod liberet ab illo, donee perfecte sanet. Ac per hoc sanus perfecte est in spe, in re autem peccator…” WA 56,272.16ft. Later (Sept., 1538), LUTHER summarizes this situation as follows: “Quomodo concordant sanctum esse et orare pro peccato? Mira profecto res est. Es ist warlich ein fein ding. Reim da, wer reimen kan. Duo contraria in uno subiecto et in eodem puncto temporis.” WA 39/1, 507.20ff.

23 OTTO H. PESCH, Professor of Dogmatics and Ecumenical Theology at the Albertus Magnus Academy in Walberberg near Bonn, concludes: “Für [Thomas] Gottes Gnade dem Menschen nicht nur seinen siindigen Willen verzeiht, sondern diesen Willen selber wandelt. Wegen dieses gewandelten Willens, oder pointiert formuliert: wegen dieses nicht nur begnadigten, sondern begnadeten Willens kann Thomas keinen peccator in re zugeben.” Footnoting these words, PESCH adds: “Dann steht Thomas naher bei Paulus als Luther, denn auch Paulus kennt keinen peccator in re.” Die Theologie der Rechtfertigung bei Martin Luther und Thomas von Aquin, in Walberberger Studien der Albertus-Magnus-Akademie, 4 (Mainz, 1967). 529Google Scholar.

24 For a brief sketch of the main issues raised by LUTHER'S early opponents, see Jedin, H., Wo sah die vortridentinische Kirche die Lehrdifferenzen mit Luther, Catholica 2 (1967), 85–100Google Scholar; Oberman, H. A., Roms erste Antwort auf Luthers 95 Thesen, Orientierung 20 (1967), 231ffGoogle Scholar.

25 Iacobi Hoochstrati Disputationes contra Lutheranos, in Primitiae pontificiae theologorum Neerlandicorum Disputationes contra Lutherum inde ab a. 1519 usque ad a. 1526 promulgatae, Bibliotheca reformatoria Neerlandica, III, ed. Pijper, F. (The Hague, 1905), 546Google Scholar.

26 Ibid., 566: “Habitat etiam Christus in nobis per charitatem, nam scriptura ait, qui manet in charitate in deo manet et deus in eo, et qui non diligit manet in morte id est non applicatur ei medicina passionis ad vitam, quocirca fides qua nobis efficaciter passio Christi ad salutem applicatur, est fides quae per charitatem operatur, ut sic mors Christi nobis applicetur non solum secundum intellectum per fidem, verum etiam secundum affectum per charitatem.”

27 Ibid., 582, 589.

28 Ibid., 589: “Perspicuum igitur fit ex omnibus praehabitis, quemadmodum in construenda domo pars prior tempore antecedens est fundamentum, cui caeterae partes superadduntur, nobiliores ita in iustificatione hominis. Pars prior iustitiae est fides: cui altera pars iustitiae nobilior superadditur charitas.”

20 Ibid., 588: “…neque enim ille qui fidem sine charitate accipit simpliciter ab infidelitate curatur. Remanet nanque culpa praecedentis infidelitatis.”

30 Ibid., 590–91: “Sicut charitas est donum dei, quo quis meretur donum vitae aeternae (ita fides est donum dei) quo pervenitur ad charitatem seu iustitiam. Cur ergo non fatemur donum fidei mereri charitatem, sicut charitas meretur vitam aeternam. Ad hanc instantiam facilis est responsio. Homo enim iam fide donatus, ante impetrationem seu assequutionem charitatis adhuc impius est et iniustus, deo rebellis secundum affectum, ac per hoc in displicentia dei. Proinde nihil apud Deum mereri potest, quod ei debeatur. Secus quando adepta charitate, constitutus est in gratia, tanquam dei amicus, et dei films. Tune enim per opera bona, quae sunt dei munera, potest vitam mereri aeternam…”

31 Ibid., 607; WA 7, 54f.

32 “Charitas, non sola fides est, quae animam sponsi sui Christi, connubio iungit.” Hochstraten, , op. cit., 609Google Scholar; cf. 593f.

33 Ibid., 609–10: “Nullas conditiones in quibus fundetur Spirituale matrimonium animae cum Christo addit iste audaculus assertor, quam ut tantum credamus Christo omnia bona promittenti, de eoque confidamus, tanquam omnia bona largituro, de mutuo vero amore, quo anima super omnia Christum diligat, qui est charitas, de caeteris divinis praeceptis, quorum observationi promittitur, et debetur vita aeterna, ne verbum quidem facit. Quid igitur aliud faciunt istiusmodi indignissimi spectaculi iactores, quam quod in spirituali matrimonio animae ad Christum, animam similem faciunt et conferunt prostitutae et adulterae, quae marito suo scienti et conniventi illudit, quotidieque fornicationes et adulteria alia super alia committens ex castissimo viro lenonem, atque suae turpitudinis ignavum patronum facit. Quasi vero Christus citra delectum, assumat sponsam etiam nephandissimam, usqueadeo de munditia sponsae suae sit negligens, ut nee earn mundam efficere curet aut cupiat, nee sui amatricem reddere, sed duos dumtaxat actus internos de ea requirat, credendi videlicet et confidendi, de iustitia vero, caeterisque iustitiae virtutibus non curet, sed his duobus actibus habitis, aliorum vitiorum consortium haud abhorreat. Quasi posset esse quaedam participatio iustitiae cum iniquitate Christi ad Belial.”

31 Cf. WA 7,25.26ff.; 54.36ff.; 55.17ff.

33 Summa Theologiae (Marietti edition), II-IIae, q. 6, art. 2, ad 3: “…Ille qui accipit a Deo fidem absque caritate non simpliciter sanatur ab infidelitate, quia non removetur culpa praecedentis infidelitatis…”

34 Ibid., II-IIae, q. 7, art. 2, ad 3: “…fides etiam informis excludit quandam impuritatem sibi oppositam, scilicet impuritatem erroris, quae contingit ex hoc quod intellectus humanus inordinate inhaeret rebus se inferioribus, dum scilicet vult secundum rationes rerum sensibilium metiri divina. Sed quando per caritatem formatur, tune nullam impuritatem secum compatitur: quia ‘universa delicta operit caritas,’ ut dicitur Prov. 10 [, 12].”

37 A. M. LANDGRAF argues that THOMAS summarizes the position of early and high Scholasticism when he maintains that charitas and not fides is the indispensable bond between man and the mystical body of Christ. Grundlagen fiir ein Verstandnis der Busslehre der Früh und Hochscholastik, ZkTh 45 (1927), 161–94Google Scholar; esp. 192–94. In this connection DUNS SCOTUS cites an opinion supporting the necessity of charitas for meritorious acts: “… hoc autem, quo meritorie agit, non potest esse pura natura, quia tune ex solis naturalibus posset meritorie agere, quod videtur error Pelagii; igitur requiritur aliquid supernaturale, non fides vel spes, patet, quia manent in peccatore, ergo charitas.” I Sent., dist. 17, q. 3 in Joannis Duns Scoti opera omnia, X, ed. Vives, (Paris, 1893), 74Google Scholar.

38 Cf. Ebeling, Gerhard, Glaube und Liebe, in Martin Luther: 450 Jahre Re-formation (Bad Godesberg, 1967), 69ffGoogle Scholar. On the horizontal, nonmeritorious nature of Christian charity in LUTHER'S theology, see Winoren, Gustaf, Luther on Vocation, trans. Rasmussen, C. C. (Philadelphia, 1957), 37–50Google Scholar. It is perhaps pertinent to point out that, in his commentary on canon 9 of the decree on justification, CALVIN opposed Trent's interpretation of the Reformation's sola fides as not being a viva fides. “This canon is very far from being canonical… They imagine that a man is justified by faith without any movement of his own will, as if it were not with the heart that a man believeth unto righteousness.” Antidote to the Council of Trent, Calvin's Tracts, III (Edinburgh, 1851), 151Google Scholar.