"This I say that we may know how to instruct and direct those (if such we should meet with) who are being afflicted and tormented by such thoughts of the devil to tempt G.o.d, when he entices them to search the devious ways of G.o.d outside of revelation, and to grope about trying to fathom what G.o.d plans for them--whereby they are led into such doubt and despair that they know not how they will survive. Such people must be reminded of these words [Rom. 11], and be rebuked with them (as St. Paul rebukes his Jews and wiseacres) for seeking to apprehend G.o.d with their wisdom and to school Him, as His advisers and masters, and for dealing with Him by themselves without means, and for giving Him so much that He must requite them again. For nothing will come of it; He has carefully built so high that you will not thus scale Him by your climbing. His wisdom, counsel, and riches are so great that you will never be able to fathom or to exhaust them. Therefore be glad that He permits you to know and receive these things somewhat by revelation." (E. 9, 15 sqq.; St. L.
12, 641 sqq.)
In a sermon on 2 Pet. 1, 10, delivered in 1523 and published in 1524, Luther said: "Here a limit [beyond which we may not go] has been set for us how to treat of predestination. Many frivolous spirits, who have not felt much of faith, tumble in, strike at the top, concerning themselves first of all with this matter, and seek to determine by means of their reason whether they are elected in order to be certain of their standing. From this you must desist, it is not the hilt of the matter.
If you would be certain, you must attain to this goal by taking the way which Peter here proposes. Take another, and you have already gone astray; your own experience must teach you. If faith is well exercised and stressed, you will finally become sure of the matter, so that you will not fail." (E. 52, 224, St. L. 9, 1353.)
After a discussion at Wittenberg with a fanatic from Antwerp, in 1525, Luther wrote a letter of warning to the Christians of Antwerp, in which he speaks of G.o.d"s will with respect to sin in an illuminating manner as follows: "Most of all he [the fanatic] fiercely contended that G.o.d"s command was good, and that G.o.d did not desire sin, which is true without a doubt; and the fact that we also confessed this did not do us any good. But he would not admit that, although G.o.d does not desire sin, He nevertheless permits (_verhaengt_) it to happen, and such permission certainly does not come to pa.s.s without His will. For who compels Him to permit it? Aye, how could He permit it if it was not His will to permit it? Here he exalted his reason, and sought to comprehend how G.o.d could not desire sin, and still, by permitting sin, will it, imagining that he could exhaust the abyss of divine majesty: how these two wills may exist side by side.... Nor do I doubt that he will quote me to you as saying that G.o.d desires sin. To this I would herewith reply that he wrongs me, and as he is otherwise full of lies, so also he does not speak the truth in this matter. I say that G.o.d has forbidden sin, and does not desire it. This will has been revealed to us, and it is necessary for us to know it. But in what manner G.o.d permits or wills sin, this we are not to know; for He has not revealed it. St. Paul himself would not and could not know it, saying, Rom. 9, 20: "O man, who art thou that repliest against G.o.d?" Therefore I beseech you in case this spirit should trouble you much with the lofty question regarding the secret will of G.o.d, to depart from him and to speak thus: "Is it too little that G.o.d instructs us in His public [proclaimed] will, which He has revealed to us? Why, then, do you gull us seeking to lead us into that which we are forbidden to know, are unable to know, and which you do not know yourself? Let the manner in which that comes to pa.s.s be commended to G.o.d; it suffices us to know that He desires no sin. In what way, however, He permits or wills sin, this we shall leave unanswered (_sollen wir gehen la.s.sen_).
The servant is not to know his master"s secrets but what his master enjoins upon him, much less is a poor creature to explore and desire to know the secrets of the majesty of its G.o.d,"--Behold, my dear friends, here you may perceive that the devil always makes a practise of presenting unnecessary, vain, and impossible things in order thereby to tempt the frivolous to forsake the right path. Therefore take heed that you abide by that which is needful, and which G.o.d has commanded us to know, as the wise man says: "Do not inquire for that which is too high for you, but always remain with that which G.o.d has commanded you," We all have work enough to learn all our lifetime G.o.d"s command and His Son Christ." (E. 53, 345; St. L. 10, 1531; Weimar 18, 549f.)
247. Statements Made by Luther in 1528.
In a letter of comfort written July 20, 1528, Luther says: "A few days ago my dear brother Caspar Cruciger, Doctor of Divinity, informed me with grief that on his various visitations he learned from your friends that you are afflicted with abnormal and strange thoughts pertaining to G.o.d"s predestination, and are completely confused by them; also that you grow dull and distracted on account of them, and that finally it must be feared that you might commit suicide,--from which Almighty G.o.d may preserve you!... Your proposition and complaints are: G.o.d Almighty knows from eternity who are to be and who will be saved, be they dead, living or still to live in days to come,--which is true, and shall and must be conceded; for He knows all things, and there is nothing hidden from Him, since He has counted and knows exactly the drops in the sea, the stars in the heavens, the roots, branches, twigs, leaves of all trees, also all the hair of men. From this you finally conclude that, do what you will, good or evil, G.o.d still knows whether you shall be saved or not (which is indeed true) yet, at the same time, you think more of d.a.m.nation than of salvation and on that account you are faint-hearted, nor do you know how G.o.d is minded toward you; hence you grow dispirited and altogether doubtful."
"Against this I, as a servant of my dear Lord Jesus Christ, give you this advice and comfort, that you may know how G.o.d Almighty is disposed toward you, whether you are elected unto salvation or d.a.m.nation.
Although G.o.d Almighty knows all things, and all works and thoughts in all creatures must come to pa.s.s according to His will (_iuxta decretum voluntatis suae_), it is nevertheless His earnest will and purpose, aye, His command, decreed from eternity, to save all men and make them partakers of eternal joy, as is clearly stated Ezek. 18, 23, where He says: G.o.d does not desire the death of the wicked but that the wicked turn and live. Now, if He desires to save and to have saved the sinners who live and move under the wide and high heaven, then you must not separate yourself from the grace of G.o.d by your foolish thoughts, inspired by the devil. For G.o.d"s grace extends and stretches from east to west from south to north, overshadowing all who turn, truly repent, and make themselves partakers of His mercy and desire help. For He is "rich unto all that call upon Him," Rom. 10, 12. This, however requires true and genuine faith, which expels such faint-heartedness and despair and is our righteousness, as it is written Rom. 3, 22: "the righteousness of G.o.d through faith in Jesus Christ unto all and upon all." Mark these words, _in omnes, super omnes_ (unto all, upon all), whether you also belong to them, and are one of those who lie and grovel under the banner of the sinners." "Think also as constantly and earnestly of salvation as you [now] do of d.a.m.nation, and comfort yourself with G.o.d"s Word, which is true and everlasting, then such ill winds will cease and pa.s.s entirely."
"Thus we are to comfort our hearts and consciences, silence and resist the evil thoughts by and with the divine Scriptures. For one must not speculate about G.o.d"s Word, but be still, drop reason and, holding the Word to be true, believe it, and not cast it to the winds, nor give the Evil Spirit so much power as to suffer ourselves to be overcome, and thus to sink and perish. For the Word, by which all things and creatures in all the wide world, no matter what they are called, have been created and made and by which all that lives and moves is still richly preserved, is true and eternal; and it must be accounted and held to be greater and more important, mightier and more powerful than the fluttering, empty, and vain thoughts which the devil inspires in men.
For the Word is true, but the thoughts of men are useless and vain. One must also think thus: G.o.d Almighty has not created, predestinated, and elected us to perdition, but to salvation, as Paul a.s.serts, Eph. 1, 4; nor should we begin to dispute about G.o.d"s predestination from the Law or reason, but from the grace of G.o.d and the Gospel, which is proclaimed to all men." "Hence these and similar thoughts about G.o.d"s predestination must be judged and decided from the Word of G.o.d"s grace and mercy. When this is done, there remains no room or occasion for a man thus to pester and torment himself,--which neither avails anything even if he should draw the marrow out of his bones, leaving only skin and hair." (E. 54, 21ff.)
248. Statements Made by Luther in 1531 and 1533.
In a letter of comfort, dated April 30, 1531, Luther refers to the fact that he, too, had pa.s.sed through temptation concerning predestination.
"For," says he, "I am well acquainted with this malady, having lain in this hospital sick unto eternal death. Now, in addition to my prayer I would gladly advise and comfort you, though writing is weak in such an affair. However, I shall not omit what I am able to do (perhaps G.o.d will bless it), and show you how G.o.d helped me out of this affliction, and by what art I still daily maintain myself against it. In the first place, you must be firmly a.s.sured in your heart that such thoughts are without doubt the inspiration and the fiery darts of the foul fiend.... Hence it is certain that they do not proceed from G.o.d, but from the devil, who therewith plagues a heart that man may become an enemy of G.o.d and despair,--all of which G.o.d has strictly forbidden in the First Commandment, bidding men to trust, love, and praise Him--whereby we live. Secondly: When such thoughts come to you, you must learn to ask yourself, "Friend, in what commandment is it written that I must think or treat of this?"... Fourthly: The chief of all the commandments of G.o.d is that we picture before our eyes His dear Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.
He is to be the daily and the chief mirror of our heart, in which we see how dear we are to G.o.d, and how much He has cared for us as a good G.o.d, so that He even gave His dear Son for us."
"Here, here, I say, and nowhere else, a man can learn the true art of predestination. Then it will come to pa.s.s that you believe on Christ.
And if you believe, then you are called; if you are called, then you are also surely predestinated. Do not suffer this mirror and throne of grace to be plucked from the eyes of your heart. On the contrary when such thoughts come and bite like fiery serpents, then under no circ.u.mstances look at the thoughts or the fiery serpents, but turn your eyes away from them and look upon the brazen serpent, _i.e._, Christ delivered for us.
Then, by the grace of G.o.d, matters will mend." (St. L. 10, 1744 sq.; E.
54, 228.)
In Luther"s _House Postil_ of 1533 we read: "From the last pa.s.sage: "Many are called, but few are chosen," wiseacres draw various false and unG.o.dly conclusions. They argue: He whom G.o.d has elected is saved without means; but as for him who is not elected, may he do what he will, be as pious and believing as he will, it is nevertheless ordained that he must fall and cannot be saved; hence I will let matters take what course they will. If I am to be saved, it is accomplished without my a.s.sistance; if not, all I may do and undertake is nevertheless in vain. Now every one may readily see for himself what sort of wicked, secure people develop from such thoughts. However, in treating of the pa.s.sage from the Prophet Micah on the day of Epiphany, we have sufficiently shown that one must guard against such thoughts as against the devil, undertake another manner of studying and thinking of G.o.d"s will, and let G.o.d in His majesty and with respect to election untouched [unsearched]; for there He is incomprehensible. Nor is it possible that a man should not be offended by such thoughts, and either fall into despair or become altogether wicked and reckless."
"But whoever would know G.o.d and His will aright must walk the right way.
Then he will not be offended, but be made better. The right way, however, is the Lord Jesus Christ, as He says: "No one cometh unto the Father but by Me," Whoever knows the Father aright and would come unto Him must first come to Christ and learn to know Him, _viz_., as follows: Christ is G.o.d"s Son, and is almighty, eternal G.o.d. What does the Son of G.o.d now do? He becomes man for our sakes, is made under the Law to redeem us from the Law, and was Himself crucified in order to pay for our sins. He rises again from the dead, in order by His resurrection to pave the way to eternal life for us, and to aid us against eternal death. He sits at the right hand of G.o.d in order to represent us, to give us the Holy Spirit, to govern and lead us by Him, and to protect His believers against all tribulations and insinuations of Satan. That means knowing Christ rightly."
"Now when this knowledge has been clearly and firmly established in your heart, then begin to ascend into heaven and make this conclusion: Since the Son of G.o.d has done this for the sake of men, how, then, must G.o.d"s heart be disposed to us, seeing that His Son did it by the Father"s will and command? Is it not true that your own reason will compel you to say: Since G.o.d has thus delivered His only-begotten Son for us, and has not spared Him for our sakes, He surely cannot harbor evil intentions against us? Evidently He does not desire our death, for He seeks and employs the very best means toward a.s.sisting us to obtain eternal life.
In this manner one comes to G.o.d in the right way, as Christ Himself declares, John 3, 16: G.o.d so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Now contrast these thoughts with those that grow out of the former opinion, and they will be found to be the thoughts of the foul fiend, which must offend a man, causing him either to despair, or to become reckless and unG.o.dly, since he can expect nothing good from G.o.d."
"Some conceive other thoughts, explaining the words thus: "Many are called", _i.e._, G.o.d offers His grace to many, but few are chosen, _i.e._, He imparts such grace to only a few; for only a few are saved.
This is an altogether wicked explanation. For how is it possible for one who holds and believes nothing else of G.o.d not to be an enemy of G.o.d, whose will alone must be blamed for the fact that not all of us are saved? Contrast this opinion with the one that is formed when a man first learns to know the Lord Christ, and it will be found to be nothing but devilish blasphemy. Hence the sense of this pa.s.sage, "Many are called," etc., is far different. For the preaching of the Gospel is general and public, so that whoever will may hear and accept it.
Furthermore, G.o.d has it preached so generally and publicly that every one should hear, believe, and accept it, and be saved. But what happens?
As the Gospel states: "Few are chosen," _i.e._, few conduct themselves toward the Gospel in such a manner that G.o.d has pleasure in them. For some do not hear and heed it; others hear it, but do not cling to it, being loath either to risk or suffer anything for it; still others hear it, but are more concerned about money and goods, or the pleasures of the world. This, however, is displeasing to G.o.d, who has no pleasure in such people. This Christ calls "not to be chosen," _i.e._, conducting oneself so that G.o.d has no pleasure in one. Those men are chosen of G.o.d and well-pleasing to Him who diligently hear the Gospel, believe in Christ, prove their faith by good fruits, and suffer on that account what they are called to suffer."
"This is the true sense, which can offend no one, but makes men better, so that they think: Very well, if I am to please G.o.d and be elected, I cannot afford to live so as to have an evil conscience, sin against G.o.d"s commandments, and be unwilling to resist sin; but I must go to church, and pray G.o.d for His Holy Spirit; nor must I permit the Word to be taken out of my heart, but resist the devil and his suggestions, and pray for protection, patience, and help. This makes good Christians, whereas those who think that G.o.d begrudges salvation to any one either become reckless or secure, wicked people, who live like brutes, thinking: It has already been ordained whether I am to be saved or not; why, then, should I stint myself anything? To think thus is wrong; for you are commanded to hear G.o.d"s Word and to believe Christ to be your Savior, who has paid for your sin. Remember this command and obey it. If you notice that you are lacking faith, or that your faith is weak, pray G.o.d to grant you His Holy Ghost, and do not doubt that Christ is your Savior, and that if you believe in Him, _i.e._, if you take comfort in Him, you shall by Him be saved. Dear Lord Jesus Christ, grant this unto us all! Amen." (E. 1, 204; St. L. 13, 199.)
249. Statements Made by Luther in 1538 and 1545.
In his remarks of 1538 on Matt. 11, 25. 26, Luther says: "Christ speaks especially against those who would be wise and judge in religious matters, because they have on their side the Law and human reason, which is overwise, exalting itself against the true religion both by teaching and by judging. Hence Christ here praises G.o.d as doing right when He conceals His secrets from the wise and prudent, because they want to be over and not under G.o.d. Not as though He hid it in fact or desired to hide it (for He commands it to be preached publicly under the entire heaven and in all lands), but that He has chosen that kind of preaching which the wise and prudent abhor by nature, and which is hidden from them through their own fault, since they do not want to have it--as is written Is. 6, 9: "See ye indeed, but perceive not," Lo, they see, _i.e._, they have the doctrine which is preached both plainly and publicly. Still they do not perceive, for they turn away from it and refuse to have it. Thus they hide the truth from themselves by their own blindness. And so, on the other hand, He reveals it to the babes; for the babes receive it when it is revealed to them. To them the truth is revealed since they wish and desire it." (W. 7, 133.)
In a letter giving comfort concerning predestination, dated August 8, 1545, Luther wrote: "My dear master and friend N. has informed me that you are at times in tribulation about G.o.d"s eternal predestination, and requested me to write you this short letter on that matter. Now to be sure, this is a sore tribulation. But to overcome it one must know that we are forbidden to understand this or to speculate about it. For what G.o.d wants to conceal we should be glad not to know. This is the apple the eating of which brought death upon Adam and Eve and upon all their children, when they wanted to know what they were not to know. For as it is sin to commit murder, to steal, or to curse, so it is also sin to busy oneself searching such things. As an antidote to this G.o.d has given us His Son, Jesus Christ. Of Him we must daily think; in Him we must consider ourselves (_uns in ihm spiegeln_). Then predestination will appear lovely. For outside of Christ everything is only danger, death, and the devil; in Him, however, there is nothing but peace and joy. For if one forever torments himself with predestination, all one gains is anguish of soul. Hence flee and avoid such thoughts as the affliction of the serpent of Paradise, and, instead, look upon Christ. G.o.d preserve you!" (E. 56, 140; St. L. 10. 1748.)
250. Statements Made by Luther in His Commentary on Genesis.
Luther"s _caeterum censeo_, that we are neither to deny nor to search the hidden G.o.d (who cannot be apprehended in His bare majesty--_qui in nuda sua maiestate non potest apprehendi_, E., Op. Lat. 2, 171), but to adhere to the revelation He has given us in the Gospel, is repeated again and again also in his _Commentary on Genesis_, which was begun in 1536 and completed in 1545. In the explanation of chap. 26, 9 we read, in part: "I gladly take occasion from this pa.s.sage to discuss the question concerning doubt, concerning G.o.d and G.o.d"s will. For I hear that everywhere among the n.o.bles and magnates profane sayings are spread concerning predestination or divine prescience. For they say: "If I am predestinated, I shall be saved, whether I have done good or evil. If I am not predestinated, I shall be d.a.m.ned, without any regard whatever to my works." Against these unG.o.dly sayings I would gladly argue at length if my ill health would permit. For if these sayings are true, as they believe them to be, then the incarnation of the Son of G.o.d, His suffering and resurrection, and whatever He did for the salvation of the world, is entirely abolished. What would the prophets and the entire Holy Scriptures profit us? what the Sacraments? Let us therefore abandon and crush all this," all these unG.o.dly sayings.
Luther proceeds: "These thoughts must be opposed by the true and firm knowledge of Christ, even as I frequently admonish that above all it is useful and necessary that our knowledge of G.o.d be absolutely certain, and being apprehended by firm a.s.sent of the mind, cleave in us, as otherwise our faith will be in vain. For if G.o.d does not stand by His promises, then our salvation is done for, while on the contrary this is to be our consolation that, although we change, we may nevertheless flee to Him who is unchangeable. For this is what He affirms of Himself, Mal.
3, 6: "I am the Lord, I change not," and Rom. 11, 29: "For the gifts and calling of G.o.d are without repentance." Accordingly, in the book _De Servo Arbitrio_ and elsewhere I have taught that we must distinguish when we treat of the knowledge of G.o.d or, rather, of His essence. For one must argue either concerning the hidden or the revealed G.o.d.
Concerning G.o.d, in so far as He has not been revealed to us, there is no faith, no knowledge, no cognition whatever. Here one must apply the saying: What is above us does not concern us (_Quae supra nos, nihil ad nos_). For such thoughts as search for something higher, beyond or without the revelation of G.o.d, are altogether diabolical; and by them nothing else is achieved than that we plunge ourselves into perdition, because they are occupied with an unsearchable object, _i.e._, the unrevealed G.o.d. Indeed, rather let G.o.d keep His decrees and mysteries concealed from us, for there is no reason why we should labor so much that they be disclosed to us. Moses, too, asked G.o.d to show His face, or glory, to him. But the Lord answered, Ex. 33, 23: "Thou shalt see My back parts; but My face shall not be seen. _Posteriora mea tibi ostendam, faciem autem meam videre non poteris_." For this curiosity is original sin itself, by which we are impelled to seek for a way to G.o.d by natural speculation. But it is an enormous sin and a useless and vain endeavor. For Christ says, John 6, 65; 14, 6: "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me." Hence, when we approach the non-revealed G.o.d, there is no faith, no word, nor any knowledge, because He is an invisible G.o.d whom you will not make visible."
With special reference to his book _De Servo Arbitrio_ Luther continues: "It was my desire to urge and set forth these things, because after my death many will quote my books and by them try to prove and confirm all manner of errors and follies of their own. Now, among others I have written that all things are absolute and necessary; but at the same time (and very often at other times) I added that we must look upon the revealed G.o.d, as we sing in the Psalm: "_Er heisst Jesus Christ, der Herr Zebaoth, und ist kein andrer Gott_," "Jesus Christ it is, of Sabaoth Lord, and there"s none other G.o.d." But they will pa.s.s by all these pa.s.sages, and pick out those only concerning the hidden G.o.d. You, therefore, who are now hearing me, remember that I have taught that we must not inquire concerning the predestination of the hidden G.o.d, but acquiesce in that which is revealed by the call and the ministry of the Word. For there you can be certain regarding your faith and salvation and say: I believe in the Son of G.o.d who said: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life," John 3, 36. In Him therefore is no d.a.m.nation or wrath, but the good will of G.o.d the Father. But these very things I have set forth also elsewhere in my books, and now I transmit them orally, too, _viva voce;_ hence I am excused--_ideo sum excusatus_."
(E., Op. Exeg. 6, 200. 292. 300; CONC. TRIGL. 897f.)
251. Luther Never Retracted His Doctrine of Grace.
It has frequently been a.s.serted that Luther in his later years recalled his book _De Servo Arbitrio_, and retracted, changed and essentially modified his original doctrine of grace, or, at least silently, abandoned it and relegated it to oblivion. Philippi says in his _Glaubenslehre_ (4, 1, 37): "In the beginning of the Reformation [before 1525] the doctrine of predestination fell completely into the background. But when Erasmus, in his endeavors to restore Semi-Pelagianism, injected into the issue also the question of predestination, Luther, in his _De Servo Arbitrio_ with an overbold defiance, did not shrink from drawing also the inferences from his position. He, however, not only never afterwards repeated this doctrine, but in reality taught the very opposite in his unequivocal proclamation of the universality of divine grace, of the all-sufficiency of the merits of Christ, and of the universal operation of the means of grace; and he even opposed that doctrine [of _De Servo Arbitrio_] expressly as erroneous, and by his corrections took back his earlier utterances on that subject." Endorsing Philippi"s view as "according well with the facts in the case," J. W. Richard, who, too, charges the early Luther with "absolute predestinarianism," remarks: "But this is certain: the older Luther became, the more did he drop his earlier predestinarianism into the background and the more did he lay stress on the grace of G.o.d and on the means of grace, which offer salvation to all men (_in omnes, super omnes_) without partiality, and convey salvation to all who believe." (_Conf. Hist._, 336.)
Time and again similar a.s.sertions have been repeated, particularly by synergistic theologians. But they are not supported by the facts.
Luther, as his books abundantly show, was never a preacher of predestinarianism (limited grace, limited redemption, etc.), but always a messenger of G.o.d"s universal grace in Christ, offered in the means of grace to all poor and penitent sinners. In his public preaching and teaching predestination never predominated. Christ Crucified and His merits offered in the Gospel always stood in the foreground. In _De Servo Arbitrio_ Luther truly says: "We, too, teach nothing else than Christ Crucified." (St. L. 18, 1723; E. v. a. 7, 160.) Luther"s sermons and books preached and published before as well as after 1525 refute the idea that he ever made predestination, let alone predestinarianism, the center of his teaching and preaching. It is a fiction that only very gradually Luther became a preacher of universal grace and of the means of grace. In fact, he himself as well as his entire reformation were products of the preaching, not of predestinarianism, but of G.o.d"s grace and pardon offered to all in absolution and in the means of grace. The bent of Luther"s mind was not speculative, but truly evangelical and Scriptural. Nor is it probable that he would ever have entered upon the question of predestination to such an extent as he did in _De Servo Arbitrio_, if the provocation had not come from without. It was the rationalistic, Semi-Pelagian attack of Erasmus on the fundamental Christian truths concerning man"s inability in spiritual matters and his salvation by grace alone which, in Luther"s opinion, called for just such an answer as he gave in _De Servo Arbitrio_. Wherever the occasion demanded it Luther was ready to defend also the truth concerning G.o.d"s majesty and supremacy, but he always was and remained a preacher of the universal mercy of G.o.d as revealed in Christ Crucified.
Nor is there any solid foundation whatever for the a.s.sertion that Luther later on retracted his book against Erasmus or abandoned its doctrine, --a fact at present generally admitted also by disinterested historians.
(Frank 1, 129. 135. 125.) In his criticism of the _Book of Confutation_, dated March 7, 1559 Landgrave Philip of Hesse declared: "As to free will, we a long time ago have read the writings of Luther and Erasmus of Rotterdam as well as their respective replies; and, although in the beginning they were far apart, Luther some years later saw the disposition of the common people and gave a better explanation (_und sich besser erklaeret_); and we believe, if a synod were held and one would hear the other, they would come to a brotherly agreement in this article." (_C. R._ 9, 760.) But Flacius immediately declared that this a.s.sertion was false, as appeared from Luther"s _Commentary on Genesis_ and his letter to the Elector concerning the Regensburg Interim. (Preger 2, 82.) Schaff writes: "The Philippist [Christopher] Lasius first a.s.serted, 1568 that Luther had recalled his book _De Servo Arbitrio;_ but this was indignantly characterized by Flacius and Westphal as a wretched lie and an insult to the evangelical church. The fact is that Luther emphatically reaffirmed this book, in a letter to Capito [July 9], 1637, as one of his very best." (_Creeds_ 1, 303.) In his letter to Capito, Luther says: "_Nullum enim agnosco meum iustum librum nisi forte "De Servo Arbitrio" et "Catechismum_,"" thus endorsing _De Servo Arbitrio_ in the same manner as his Catechism. (Enders 11, 247.) Before this Luther had said at his table: "Erasmus has written against me in his booklet _Hyperaspistes_, in which he endeavors to defend his book _On Free Will_, against which I wrote my book _On the Enslaved Will_, which as yet he has not refuted, and will never in eternity be able to refute. This I know for certain, and I defy and challenge the devil together with all his minions to refute it. For I am certain that it is the immutable truth of G.o.d." (St. L. 20, 1081.) Despite numerous endeavors, down to the present day, not a shred of convincing evidence has been produced showing that Luther ever wavered in this position, or changed his doctrine of grace.
Luther"s extensive reference to _De Servo Arbitrio_ in his _Commentary on Genesis_, from which we freely quoted above, has frequently been interpreted as a quasi-retraction. But according to the _Formula of Concord_ these expositions of Luther"s merely "repeat and explain" his former position. They certainly do not offer any corrections of his former fundamental views. Luther does not speak of any errors of his own, but of errors of others which they would endeavor to corroborate by quoting from his books--"_post meam mortem multi meos libros proferrent in medium et inde omnis generis errores et deliria sua confirmabunt_."
Moreover, he declares that he is innocent if some should misuse his statements concerning necessity and the hidden G.o.d, because he had expressly added that we must not search the hidden majesty of G.o.d, but look upon the revealed G.o.d to judge of His disposition toward us-- "_addidi, quod aspiciendus sit Deus revelatus.... Ideo sum excusatus_."
(CONC. TRIGL., 898.) Luther"s entire theological activity, before as well as after 1525, was an application of the principle stressed also in _De Servo Arbitrio, viz._, that we must neither deny nor investigate or be concerned about the hidden G.o.d, but study G.o.d as He has revealed Himself in the Gospel and firmly rely on His gracious promises in the means of grace.
252. Luther"s Doctrine Approved by Formula of Concord.
Flacius, who himself did not deny the universality of grace, declared at the colloquy in Weimar, 1560, that, when taken in their context, Luther"s statements in _De Servo Arbitrio_ contained no inapt expressions (_nihil incommodi_). He added: "I do not want to be the reformer of Luther, but let us leave the judgment and discussion concerning this book to the Church of sound doctrine. _Nolo reformator esse Lutheri, sed iudicium et discussionem istius libri permittamus sanae ecclesiae_." (Planck 4, 704, Frank 4, 255.) In Article II of the _Formula of Concord_ the Church pa.s.sed on Luther"s book on the bondage of the will together with his declarations in his _Commentary on Genesis_. In referring to this matter the _Formula_ gives utterance to the following thoughts: 1. that in _De Servo Arbitrio_ Luther "elucidated and supported this position [on free will, occupied also by the _Formula of Corcord_] well and thoroughly, _egregie et solide_"; 2.
that "afterwards he repeated and explained it in his glorious exposition of the Book of Genesis, especially of chapter 26;" 3. that in this exposition also "his meaning and understanding of some other peculiar disputations, introduced incidentally by Erasmus, as of absolute necessity, etc., have been secured by him in the best and most careful way against all misunderstanding and perversion;" 4. that the _Formula of Concord_ "appeals and refers others" to these deliverances of Luther.
(CONC. TRIGL. 896, 44.)
The _Formula of Concord_, therefore, endorsed Luther"s _De Servo Arbitrio_ without expressing any strictures or reservations whatever, and, particularly in Articles I, II and XI, also embodied its essential thoughts though not all of its phrases statements, and arguments. The said articles contain a guarded reproduction and affirmation of Luther"s doctrine of grace, according to which G.o.d alone is the cause of man"s salvation while man alone is the cause of his d.a.m.nation. In particular they reaffirm Luther"s teaching concerning man"s depravity and the inability of his will to cooperate in conversion; the divine monergism in man"s salvation; the universality of grace and of the efficaciousness of the means of grace; man"s responsibility for the rejection of grace and for his d.a.m.nation; G.o.d"s unsearchable judgments and mysterious ways; the mystery why some are lost while others are saved, though all are equally guilty and equally loved by G.o.d; the solution of this problem in the light of glory where it will be made apparent that there never were contradictory wills in G.o.d. In its doctrine of predestination as well as of free will, therefore, the _Formula of Concord_ is not a compromise between synergism and monergism, but signifies a victory of Luther over the later Melanchthon.
253. Att.i.tude of Apology of the Book of Concord.
The att.i.tude of the _Formula of Concord_ with respect to Luther"s _De Servo Arbitrio_ was shared by contemporary Lutheran theologians. They expressed objections neither to the book itself nor to its public endors.e.m.e.nt by the _Formula of Concord_. In 1569 the theologians of Ducal Saxony publicly declared their adherence to the doctrine "set forth most luminously and skilfully (_summa luce et dexteritate traditum_)" in _De Servo Arbitrio_, the _Commentary on Genesis_, and other books of Luther. (Schluesselburg 6, 133.) That the authors of the _Formula of Concord_ were fully conscious of their agreement with Luther"s _De Servo Arbitrio_ and his _Commentary on Genesis_ appears also from the _Apology of the Book of Concord_, composed 1582 by Kirchner Selneccer, and Chemnitz. Instead of charging Luther with errors, these theologians, who were prominent in the drafting of the _Formula or Concord_, endorse and defend his position, _viz_., that we must neither deny nor investigate the hidden G.o.d, but search the Gospel for an answer to the question how G.o.d is disposed toward us.
In this _Apology_ the opening paragraph of the section defending Article XI of the _Formula of Concord_ against the Neustadt theologians reads as follows: "In their antilog [antilogia--attack on Article XI of the _Formula of Concord_] regarding G.o.d"s eternal election and predestination they merely endeavor to persuade the people that in this article the doctrine of the _Christian Book of Concord_ [_Formula of Concord_] conflicts with the teaching of Doctor Luther and his book _De Servo Arbitrio_, while otherwise we ourselves are accustomed to appeal to Luther"s writings. They accordingly charge the _Book of Concord_ with condemning Luther, who in the book called _Servum Arbitrium_ maintained the proposition that it was not superfluous but highly necessary and useful for a Christian to know whether G.o.d"s foreknowledge (_Versehung_) is certain or uncertain, changeable, etc. Now, praise the Lord, these words of Dr. Luther are not unknown to us, but, besides, we also well know how Dr. Luther in his last explanation of the 26th chapter of the First Book of Moses explains and guards these words of his." (Fol.
204a.) After quoting the pa.s.sages from Luther"s Genesis, which we cited above (p. 223f.), the _Apology_ continues: "With this explanation of Luther we let the matter rest. If our opponents [the Neustadt theologians] wish to brood over it any further and in their investigating and disputing dive into the abyss or unfathomable depth of this mystery, they may do so for themselves [at their own risk] and suffer the consequences of such an attempt. As for us we are content to adhere to G.o.d in so far as He has revealed Himself in His Word, and lead and direct Christianity thereto, reserving the rest for the life to come." (405a.)
254. Agreement of Apology with Formula of Concord and Luther.
Doctrinally also, the _Apology of the Book of Concord_ is in agreement with both Luther and the _Formula of Concord_. This appears from the following excerpts: "Nor does the _Christian Book of Concord_ [_Formula of Concord_] deny that there is a reprobation in G.o.d or that G.o.d rejects some; hence also it does not oppose Luther"s statement when he writes in _De Servo Arbitrio_ against Erasmus that it is the highest degree of faith to believe that G.o.d, who saves so few, is nevertheless most merciful; but it does not intend to ascribe to G.o.d the efficient cause of such reprobation or d.a.m.nation as the doctrine of our opponents teaches; it rather holds that, when this question is discussed all men should put their finger on their lips and first say with the Apostle Paul, Rom. 11, 20: "_Propter incredulitatem defracti sunt_--Because of unbelief they were broken off," and Rom. 6, 23: "For the wages of sin is death." In the second place: When the question is asked why G.o.d the Lord does not through His Holy Spirit convert, and bestow faith upon, all men, etc. (which He is certainly able to do--_das er doch wohl koennte_), that we furthermore say with the Apostle [Rom. 11, 33]: "_Quam incomprehensibilia sunt iudicia eius et impervestigabiles viae eius_--How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out," but not in any way ascribe to the Lord G.o.d Himself the willing and efficient cause of the reprobation and d.a.m.nation of the impenitent."
"But when they, pressing us, declare, "Since you admit the election of the elect, you must also admit the other thing, _viz_., that in G.o.d Himself there is from eternity a cause of reprobation, also apart from sin," etc., then we declare that we are not at all minded to make G.o.d the author [_Ursacher_] of reprobation (the cause of which properly lies not in G.o.d, but in sin), nor to ascribe to Him the efficient cause of the d.a.m.nation of the unG.o.dly, but intend to adhere to the word of the Prophet Hosea, chapter 13, where G.o.d Himself says: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in Me is thy help." Nor do we intend to search our dear G.o.d in so far as He is hidden and has not revealed Himself. For it is too high for us anyway, and we cannot comprehend it. And the more we occupy ourselves with this matter, the farther we depart from our dear G.o.d, and the more we doubt His gracious will toward us." (206.)
The _Apology_ continues: "Likewise the _Book of Concord_ [_Formula of Concord_] does not deny that G.o.d does not work in all men in the same manner. For at all times there are many whom He has not called through the public ministry. However, our opponents shall nevermore persuade us to infer with them that G.o.d is an efficient [_wirkliche_] cause of the reprobation of such people, and that He decreed absolutely from His mere counsel [_fuer sich aus blossem Rat_] to reject and cast them away eternally, even irrespective of their sin [_auch ausserhalb der Suende_]. For when we arrive at this abyss of the mysteries of G.o.d, it is sufficient to say with the Apostle Rom. 11: "His judgments are unsearchable," and 1 Cor. 15, 57: "But thanks be to G.o.d, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." Whatever goes beyond this our Savior Christ Himself will reveal to us in eternal life."
"Nor is there any cause for the cry that the _Book of Concord_ did not distinguish between _malum culpae, i.e._, sin which G.o.d neither wills, nor approves, nor works, and _malum poenae_, or the punishments which He wills and works. For there [in Article XI] the purpose was not to discuss all questions which occur and might be treated in this matter concerning G.o.d"s eternal election, but merely to give a summary statement of the chief points of this article; and elsewhere this distinction is clearly explained by our theologians. Nor is there any one among us who approves of this blasphemy, that G.o.d wills sin, is pleased with it, and works it; moreover, we reject such speech as a blasphemy against G.o.d Himself. Besides, it is plainly stated, p. 318 [edition of 1580; CONC. TRIGL. 1065, 6], that G.o.d does not will evil acts and works, from which it is apparent that the _Book_ [_Formula_]
_of Concord_ does not at all teach that G.o.d is the author of _malum culpae_ or of sins in the same manner as He executes and works the punishments of sins." (206 b.)