Luther in the Eucharistic Debates: Sola Scripture or Divinization of Man? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Luther's principle of sola scriptura in recent ecumenical discussion
In this paper I argue that Luther's Scripture principle, which is often said to have become obsolete due to our understanding of the historical origins of the canon, has in fact become widely accepted across different denominations. This, I show, becomes apparent once we observe two factors that are often neglected: first, gauge sola scriptura against its historical rival, the Tridentine doctrine of an oral tradition as a second source of revelation; secondly, accept that the Scripture principle can be held in a historicist version that acknowledges the Bible as the foundation of historic Christianity. I initially argue the former point by an examination of Joseph Ratzinger's engagement with the so-called Geiselmann thesis. In a second part of the paper, I explain the significance of historicisation for our understanding of Scripture and tradition. I defend my endorsement of a historicised version of the Scripture principle against its critique by Karl Barth while agreeing with Barth's historical observation of an increasing rapprochement between Protestant and Catholic views of Scripture since the 19th century.
The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura rests squarely upon a hermeneutical foundation of protestant Bible interpretation. This paper provides a critical evaluation of those principles which defined Martin Luther's hermeneutical method. Emphasis is given to the internal consistency of Luther's literal historical-grammatical hermeneutic with his Christocentric method. The first part of the paper includes a summary of those protestant principles of biblical interpretation upon which the cries of 'Sola Scriptura' rest, including: 1) the authority of Scripture; 2) the sufficiency of Scripture; 3) the perspicuity of Scripture; 4) the requirement of faith and spiritual illumination; 5) an affirmation of the literal or grammatical-historical interpretive method; 6) the rejection of allegory as a valid interpretive method; and finally 7) the Christocentric principle which perceived the centrality of Christ in all of Scripture.3 The latter part of the paper contains a critique of the compatibility of the seventh point listed above with the six which precede it. In other words, it assesses the consistency of Luther's appeal to a normal historical-grammatical hermeneutical method with his Christocentric principle of biblical interpretation.
Annales theologici, 2017
Scriptura, a hallmark of the Protestant Reformation. ii. Luther and Scripture. iii. Th e fi ve principles of Lutheran interpretation of Scripture. iv. Further attempts to understand sola Scriptura. v. Scripture and Catholic Th eology. vi. Sola Scriptura and solus Christus. vii. Luther's Christ as personal Savior. viii. Th e life of Christ in the Christian believer. ix. Lutheran kenosis and the realism of salvation. x. Summing up.
LUTHER AND SOLA SCRIPTURA: AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL SHIFT IN SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION?
Originally this paper was intended to be a defense of the Reformers -Luther in particular -against Gregory's labeling them as the "unintended reformers" that gave way to today's secular world, hostile to Christian truth claims. However, as I began to take Gregory's long and well argued book, The Unintended Reformation, seriously, I understood that my defense plan was not as easy as I had initially hoped. One of the difficulties, I discovered, was my lack of deep understanding of the key reformation concept which he portrays as one of the roots of secularization in thought: sola scriptura.
Justification and Faith in Luther's Theology
Theological Studies, 1983
I N THIS year filled with commemorations of the life Martin Luther began a half millennium ago, a straightforward exposition of the heart of his theology can be of interest and even of use. Also, the American Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue is currently treating justification, and consequently we can look forward to receiving a major clarification of the doctrinal issues, in terms of common convictions, divergent confessional emphases, and an exchange of probing questions on sin, faith, grace, and the new life and activity given his members by Christ the Redeemer. In his day Luther stood at the center of acrimonious controversy on numerous aspects of the doctrine of justification, but in this essay the emphasis will fall on historical retrieval and on what we hope will be a coherent exposition of Luther's central themes. The approach will be in part genetic and in part systematic. I distinguish Luther's early thought (1513-17), the transition year 1518, and his mature teaching in 1519 and after. Certain consistent lines of thought do, of course, appear all through Luther's productive years, but there are other elements of considerable importance that predominate only in certain periods or that have an ascertainable time of emergence in Luther's theology. I hope to convey something of the movement of his development, by noting some of Luther's early insights into St. Paul and then sketching the developed formulation he offered to the Church of his day. The themes of a theology of justification include humankind's fall and the legacy of sin, God's merciful approach to sinners, the commitment of faith, reconciliation with God, and a graced life of righteousness. Luther at times showed impressive synthetic powers in drawing up comprehensive statements on these matters. One thinks of the Heidelberg Disputation (1518), The Freedom of a Christian (1520), the Antilatomus (1522), Luther's biblical prefaces (1522 and later), sections of De servo arbitrio (1525), and the exposition of the Miserere (1532). With Luther, a passage on justification often included important material on the * This article is substantially the paper given in May 1982 at the Centre orthodoxe du Patriarcat oecuménique, Chambésy/Geneva, as part of the colloquium "Luther et la réforme allemande dans une perspective oecuménique." I am grateful for permission from the Director of the Center, Most Reverend Metropolitan Damaskinos of Tranopolis, to adapt the paper for another audience and to anticipate in this article the forthcoming publication of the colloquium papers by the Orthodox Center. 3 4 THEOLOGICAL STUDIES doctrine of revelation, on God's rule of creation, and on the redemptive work of Christ. Justification frequently was the place where much of Luther's thought fused into cohesive unity. Luther presents special problems for the historical theologian, both because of the abundance of his utterances and because of the profound influence of situations on his teaching. The give-and-take of disputation and controversy frequently set the scene for Luther's accounts of God's grace and of believing existence. Still, the work itself of articulating his perception of Christian conversion was for Luther a labor of searching the Scriptures and amassing texts and references. The Vulgate Bible must come first among the situations affecting Luther's teaching. Consequently what he said is a classic part of the Christian heritage, and one approaching Luther today can reasonably expect to learn from him about conversion and the new life opened up in the sphere of Christ's redemptive influence.
In 2017, the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, many are quick to pledge support to Luther and the Reformer's doctrine of Scripture--Sola Scriptura--or to decry and deny it, yet the discussions concerning this doctrine reveal that not everyone knows what Sola Scriptura actually meant. What we need is a proper understanding of what Sola Scriptura meant and what biblical warrant it has or does not have. This paper is small effort to meet the first need, an understanding of Sola Scriptura in the thought of the Reformers, particularly Luther. It is argued that Scripture for Luther was authoritative and inerrant, clear, and sufficient for all Christian belief and practice.
The Devil is in the Details: Luther, Zwingli and the Eucharistic Controversy
What is the "exegesis of the words of institution: 'This is my body?'" 1 How does one understand this based on sola scriptura? While this question may seem inconsequential, it resulted in the first major split in the Reformation. Martin Luther and the German Reformation held for a real presence in the Eucharist, while Ulrich Zwingli and the Swiss Reformation held for a spiritual or symbolic presence. While both Luther and Zwingli were against the use of philosophy, behind each exegesis is a philosophical system with its presuppositions. Given that a fracture in religion would lead to a fracture in Protestant Germany, Philip I of Hesse attempted to reconcile the two opposing groups at Marburg in 1529. While the two groups did agree on fourteen of the fifteen articles, the issue of the Eucharist would be so crucial to both groups that they left unreconciled. This paper will compare and contrast the two reformers' views and bring their hidden philosophical underpinnings to light. This paper will first expose Luther's eucharistic theology, next, Zwingli's eucharistic theology, and finally, compare the two theologies. Luther's Eucharistic Theology The problem with Luther's theology is that his position kept changing throughout his life. His later positions were at times contradictory to his earlier positions. 2 In 1518-19, his writings did not seem to be heretical but were more pastoral rather than dogmatic. 3 After 1520 there was a massive shift in his thought, where he flat out rejected transubstantiation in favor of consubstantiation. 4 In 1526, Luther shifted his focus entirely from "faith itself" and "the practice whereby one should correctly use that which he believes" to "what a person should believe…that 1 G.W. Bromiley, ed., Zwingli and Bullinger (Westminster John Knox Press: Louisville, KY, 2006), 178. 2 When Zwingli accuses Luther of this, Luther himself admits to this and states, "you know, Zwingli, that all the ancient writers have again and again changed their interpretations of passages of Scripture as time went on and their judgment matured" (
Pillar or outcome? Luther's practical theological aim and its theopaschitical implications
An often misunderstood element in Luther’s Theology was the combination of its anti-scholastical, practical aim (“vera theologia est practica”) with its highly theoretical outcome. A reason for it might be found it the increasing role of such outcome, which at a given point seemed to have turned into a proper pillar of his own Theology. An example of this (at least apparent) contradiction is provided by the Christological background of the anti-roman doctrine of the Justification as fröhlicher Wechsel/admirabile commercium, which, due to its particular interpretation of the Doctrine of the so-called communicatio idiomatum, lead to the consistent, and nonetheless rejected formulation of a Doctrine of the Theopaschy. Aim of this paper is to sketch such consistent background, its development in the controversies of the second half of the 16th Century, as well as the attempt to save this peculiar element beside the Christological controversies, deriving it no longer from the Christological Doctrine of communicatio idiomatum, but rather from the one of so-called status exinanitionis et exaltationis, keeping a look on its originally practical aim.