This Month's Colloqium

Colloquia Archive

In the most generally accepted confessional statement characteristic for those American Christians commonly called "Lutherans" the so-called unaltered Augsburg Confession of 1530, the church is described as follows:

"Our churches also teach that one holy church is to continue forever: The church is the assembly of saints (congregatio sanctorum) in which the gospel is taught purely and the sacraments administered rightly. For the unity of the church it is enough (satis est) to agree concerning the preaching of the gospel and the administration of the sacraments. It is not necessary that human traditions or rites or ceremonies, instituted by human beings, should be alike everywhere. It is as Paul says, "One faith, one baptism one God and father of us all, etc. "(Eph.5:6)⁽¹⁾

While this statement was not formulated by Luther, who for political reasons was not allowed to be present at Augsburg, but by his friend and colleague Philip Melanchthon, it reflects, as we shall, Luther's thought accurately and articulates the convictions which characterize Luther's ecclesiology.

It is obvious that the unity of the church in the description here proposed does not depend on organization or bureaucracy but on faith in word and sacrament and men and women who share this faith. We want to ask, does this understanding of the church have anything to suggest for the ecumenical efforts of our age?

It may be of some interest that Luther's doctrine of the church was neglected for centuries by Luther scholars. The focus of interest was always his teaching concerning justification by grace through faith, the doctrine to which Luther himself attributed the greatest significance.⁽²⁾ Nevertheless it was his understanding of the church, gained through his study of the Holy Scriptures, as a young professor of biblical studies at the university of Wittenberg, which later, once the reformation had begun, supplied a main resource for his ability to stand against the authorities of the established church of his time.

This is generally accepted in contemporary Luther research as the result of the pioneering work of Karl Holl and Paul Althaus. They pointed out early in the last century that Luther long before he became the "reformer," indeed as early as his lectures on Psalms in 1513, had developed an understanding of the church which enabled him later, during the conflict following the indulgence controversy, to take an independent position against an institution which based its claims on authorities relativized by Luther's biblical studies, namely tradition and council, pope and canon law.

This undermining of the conventional authorities had happened early in the conflict. In the celebrated 95 Theses of 1517 Luther had alluded to the fact that the gospel, the proclamation of the grace of God, is the most important treasure of the church. In thesis 62 he wrote: "the true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God."⁽³⁾

His opponents realized at once that this statement implied that Luther really did not accept any other treasure of the church besides this gospel, e.g., the treasure of merits allegedly accumulated by the saints through their works of supererogation. By placing the gospel squarely in the center of the church, Luther undermined, without realizing it at first, the value and even the relevance of the treasures the pope claimed to administer. At the same time he proclaimed that the church, called into existence through the proclamation of the gospel, constitutes a fellowship or communion where the spiritual possessions of one member automatically benefit all other members. He asserted that in order to mediate these spiritual possessions an outward legal transaction was not necessary. While the pope had a valid function as the bishop of Rome, he was not needed as a spiritual banker, distributing for a fee the merits of the moral overachievers to the moral underachievers. All this was very colorfully expressed in the 95 Theses.

Here again his opponents, especially the brilliant John Eck, recognized at once that Luther had attacked the economic foundation of the established church of the time. Eck tried to refute these theses on very practical grounds by stating that if Luther were correct the membership in any of the "religious brotherhoods" so popular among serious Christians at that time would be worthless.⁽⁴⁾ Luther himself, however, did not realize, then, how far removed from the official position of his church his views were. He was still willing to make God's forgiveness dependent upon subjection to the priest. He stated in Thesis 7: "God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to his vicar, the priest."⁽⁵⁾ But as far as the power of the pope was concerned he stated in 1517 that the pope could only declare and announce the forgiveness of sins like any other priest.⁽⁶⁾

In the famous Leipzig debate with Eck, Luther came to the realization that while universal councils had been helpful and the pope was indeed subject to them, the church rested on something that was, in Luther's judgment, far more authoritative than even the most eminent councils, namely, the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In this crucial development Luther's historical studies proved of great value to him. Long before the Leipzig disputation where Eck maneuvered Luther to admit publicly that even a much-respected universal council might err, Luther had occasionally insisted that the authority of the pope had not always been recognized by the church. The writings of Pope Gregory I played an important part in this realization, since this pope had refused to claim superiority over other churches. This assertion had been made an issue by Eck even before the disputation at Leipzig and Luther had pointed out that if Peter was, indeed, the first pope, biblical history clearly shows that whenever someone else was in possession of the truth, Peter had to listen to him as the discussion with Paul unmistakably demonstrates.

Furthermore, the history of the ancient church makes it obvious that the church of Christ existed for twenty years before Peter founded the congregation at Rome.⁽⁷⁾ Luther also observed that African bishops and the bishops of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem at the time of Cyprian and Augustine did not consider themselves subject to the authority of the bishop of Rome.

As a matter of fact, the council of Nicea recommended the churches of Italy to the care of the pope "out of an old authority" rather than by divine right.⁽⁸⁾ The papacy is therefore a human historical order, not an institution of God. We may subject ourselves to this authority as long as such subjection does not lead us into sin.

In the disputation at Leipzig Luther had to go still a step further in his break with the teachings of the established church. Eck accused Luther during the debate of defending heretical opinions, condemned by the generally respected council of Constance. This brought up the question whether this council had erred in the condemnation of Jan Hus. Luther asserted that Constance had, indeed, erred. It had erred in condemning clear testimonies of Holy Scripture because heretics might have misused them. He added that proceeding in "this manner one might have to condemn the entire Bible."⁽⁹⁾

Luther's biblical studies had convinced him that the gospel is at the center of the Christian church, a notion picked up by Melanchthon in the Augsburg Confession as we observed earlier. Long before he came in conflict with the hierarchy he saw the word of God and the sacraments as the constitutive elements of the church. Interpreting the words in Psalm 2:9 "shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel" in his biblical lectures of 1513 using the then-customary allegorical fashion of exegesis, he wrote: "Rod of iron is the holy gospel, which is Christ's royal scepter in his church and kingdom.. .it is called a rod because it directs, convicts reproves and upholds, etc.⁽¹⁰⁾ ...The second reason is that it is inflexible and of an invincible straightness. For the gospel could not be twisted into evil by heretics or corrupters, though many have tried in vain to do so… Rather it is trustworthy and made of iron, so that whoever relies on it will be guided to salvation without fail... The third reason is that like iron it crushes and crumbles, subdues and shapes everything... So the gospel puts the misshapen in order."⁽¹¹⁾

A little later he wrote in the same commentary: "Therefore, just as the blessed virgin was the womb from which came forth the Christ, God, so scripture is the womb from which arises divine truth and the church."⁽¹²⁾ Or, "The church has been built by the word of the gospel."⁽¹³⁾ or, "The church has been founded on its own basis through the heaven of scripture and through faith."⁽¹⁴⁾ These quotations taken from Luther's pre-reformation writings indicate clearly the close relationship between church and gospel in his thinking and help to explain why the ecclesiastical authorities had so little power over him, once the conflict had begun. His opponents were unable, as Luther saw it, to base their claims on the only authority that constitutes and governs the church, the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Since the emphasis on the "word of God" and the "gospel" was such an integral part of Luther's theology and especially of his understanding of the church long before his open conflict with the ecclesiastical authorities, it cannot surprise us that in the 95 Theses, mentioned earlier, it was the gospel which determined Luther's conception of the church.

Here he insisted that the true treasures of the church are not the accumulated merits of the saints but only the gospel. Fatal to the indulgence sales was Luther's claim that every Christian, living or dead, participated in this true treasure without the need to go through channels established by the ecclesiastical establishment. In thesis 37 he wrote: "Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God even without indulgence letters."⁽¹⁵⁾

Some scholars have asserted that at this time, in 1517, Luther may not have realized himself what the implications of this understanding of the church might imply. Thus R. Seeberg observed: "The chief elements of Luther's conception of the church mar also be traced in his writings of the pre-reformation period, but they are made powerless by his bondage to the canonical ideas upon the subject."⁽¹⁶⁾ But once challenged, Luther defended himself with an ecclesiology, which, while not originally articulated in conflict with the institution, but in the university classroom, made the power claims of the institution meaningless to him.

In 1521 Luther wrote to Ambrosius Catherinus: "Tota vita et substantia ecclesiae est in verbo dei." [The entire life and substance of the church rest in the word of God.] He explained: "I don't mean the written gospel, but the word that is proclaimed, neither do I mean every sermon preached in a church and from a pulpit, but the genuine word which proclaims faith in Christ."⁽¹⁷⁾ Here we have the emphasis on the gospel as the clue to the church, summarized by Melanchthon in the Augsburg Confession.

The gospel constitutes the church, which is the ongoing expression of the proclamation of the gospel. This also explains Luther's dislike for the German word Kirche, because he considered it easily misunderstood as describing a building, rather than a people. The gospel creates a people, these people may or may not erect a building, they may organize a variety of institutions with a multitude of administrators but neither the building nor the institutions or their administrators establish the church in Luther's sense. Only the people called together by the Holy Spirit through the gospel are the church.

In the ensuing debate it became ever more obvious to Luther that this church is first of all the communion of saints confessed in the creed and secondly the universal Church, far more inclusive than he thought the church of Rome was willing to be. The expression communion of saints so dominant in Luther's language about the church had a long and somewhat confusing history in the West. While the phrase was part of the so-called "Apostle's Creed" its exact meaning was the subject of a wide-ranging debate. The term had been explained as meaning the sacraments by Abelard and others, the saints by Bruno of Würzburg, the angels by Alexander of Hales. Thomas Aquinas following Augustine applied the term to the people of God, saying: "The church is the same thing as the assembly [congregatio] of the faithful and every Christian is, therefore, a member of the church."⁽¹⁸⁾

Luther picked up this Augustinian tradition and interpreted the creedal phrase "communio sanctorum" as an explanation of the word "church." He was aware of the fact that these Latin words were a relatively late addition to the creed, but claimed that they were a legitimate and illuminating explanation of the preceding word "church,"⁽¹⁹⁾ In an explanation of the Apostle's Creed, published in 1520, he wrote: "I believe that in the entire world there is but one holy universal (gemeyne) Christian church. It is nothing else but the congregation (gemeyne) or assembly of saints, the godly believing men and women on earth who are called, preserved and ruled by the Holy Spirit and increased daily through the sacraments and the word of God."⁽²⁰⁾

He added that nobody not found in this communion of saints could be saved and continued: "I believe that in this communion all things are held in common, everyone's property belongs to everyone else and nobody has any private property [niemand ichts eygen sey]. Thus I and every believer are aided by the prayers and good works of the whole congregation. They support and strengthen us all and at all times, in life and in death. In this way everybody bears the others burden as St. Paul teaches Galatians 6:2."⁽²¹⁾

This statement describing the communal character of the church is more radical in its implications than anything Thomas Münzer or the so-called radical wing of the reformation ever said. Luther insisted that the true veneration of the saints belongs in the church, but it is for him the service of the living saints, the fellow Christians in need. This is far more important than the veneration of the saints who have departed this life.

The church that Luther knew had taught Christians to seek the assistance of the saints in heaven in order to attain their goals here on earth. In a sermon on All Saints day published in 1523 Luther said: "If you want to honor the saints distinguish between those who are dead and those who are alive. Whatever you want to do for the saints, turn it from those who are dead to those who are alive. The living saints are your neighbors, the naked, the hungry, the thirsty, poor people with large families, people who suffer shame. Apply your help to them, do your work here, use your tongue to protect them, your coat to cover them, and help to defend their honor."⁽²²⁾

The lives of the saints who have departed from this world are not known to us. We cannot begin to comprehend where and how they live. The communion of saints must therefore be realized here on earth. "Leave the dear saint in heaven alone," Luther wrote, "cultivate those who live with us now. This will give all of us enough to do and furnish us the opportunity to act as Christians."⁽²³⁾

The task of Christians in this world is to demonstrate that the church is, indeed, the communion of saints, the setting where we serve each other and the world. It is the only real "brotherhood" for here all of us are brothers and sisters, closely bound together so that a greater unity could not even be imagined.

Luther insisted that believers constitute a real communion of saints, because as a consequence of the work of Christ, they have been baked together with Christ and with each other into one bread.⁽²⁴⁾ Against the accusations of some of his opponents, who claimed that Luther's notion of the church was merely a platonic idea … that he planned "to build a church like Plato's republic, which exists nowhere,"⁽²⁵⁾ Luther insisted on the physical reality of this divinely instituted communion of saints. It lived in the flesh but not according to the flesh.⁽²⁶⁾ "It is not without place and body, but place and body are not the church."⁽²⁷⁾

The church's holiness is not derived from the members but from its head. For Luther, the church was holy not because a few holy people live in it, "but because God lives in it."⁽²⁸⁾ And because God is in the church, because it has been called into existence by the Holy Spirit, membership in this church is so essential. He who wants to know Christ cannot find him by trusting his own reason, he must go to the church, but not the church built of wood and stone, but the church which is the communion of saints.

But as we observed earlier, this church is universal in character. Luther, indeed, disliked the word "catholic" [which explains the substitution "Christian" in the Lutheran versions of the Apostle's Creed for most of history] just as he disliked the word Kirche and for the same reason. The words seemed equally confusing to him. He tried to find other words that might be more lucid.

But he consistently emphasized the universality of the church. He insisted that it extends far beyond the limits of the church of Rome ruled by the pope. It exists all across the world and since the time of Adam and Eve. It will continue as long as time will last because of the continuing work of the Holy Spirit.

He claimed that the existence of the church did not depend on any legal arrangement with the church of Rome. Luther believed that even those Christians not subject to the papacy were nevertheless members of the universal Christian church. In 1520 he wrote that the Russians and Greeks who do not recognize the supremacy of the pope are members of the one holy universal church. "There are the Moscovites, White Russians and Greeks, the Bohemians and other great countries, they all believe as we do, baptize as we do and preach as we do."⁽²⁹⁾

The criterion for the catholicity of the church according to Luther is not some legal agreement with the pope and his institution, but rather the presence of the marks of the church, the word and the sacraments. "We talk of the outward word orally preached by human beings like you and me. This Christ left behind as an outward sign that enables us to recognize his church or his Christian people in the world. We talk of an oral (mündlich) word which is sincerely believed and publicly proclaimed before the world as he says, he who confesses me before the people I shall confess before my father and his angels. Wherever you hear the word and preaching of faith and confessing and acting accordingly you have, no doubt, the true ecclesia sancta catholica."⁽³⁰⁾

This holy catholic church is universal as time and space are concerned, for it is the holy Christian people. Luther honored and paid close attention to the testimony of this universal church. But when he spoke of it he did not limit it to the church in which he had been raised, though he never denied that the gospel had been preached in the church in which he was brought up. But he insisted that the true church included all Christians everywhere in all places and at all times.

We asked in the beginning, what is the possible significance of Luther's ecclesiology for the unity of the church today?

The answer I would suggest is twofold. By his emphasis on reopening the examination of ecclesiology on the basis of the scriptures and through a study of church history, he suggested an approach, a methodology for achieving Christian unity that may be of use even today in our quest for unity. It is not so much Luther's doctrine of the church which is a profound aid to our search for unity, but his willingness to open up the discussion of the doctrine of the church; to use scripture and church history to thaw out frozen positions between east and west and north and south in his own time.

The specific ecclesiological insights of Luther are almost always interesting, sometimes clearly wrong [e.g. the notion of the prince as emergency bishop], sometimes brilliantly right. They are only then aids to our quest for unity when they are in accordance with the witness of scripture.

It may be helpful to us that Luther used scriptural evidence, as for example the disagreement between St. Peter and St. Paul, to relativize the absolute claims of the papacy of his time. He also used the best historical investigations available to him, namely, those of the humanists, to demythologize what he considered exaggerated papal claims. Here Luther may be helpful in our ecumenical endeavors, since we all acknowledge the authority of scripture for Christians and desire to be honest in our understanding of Christian history.

But above all Luther's emphasis on the church as the communion of saints, in which we all share and are baked together into one bread, may help us to overcome the divisions which plague the church in our time - divisions between the rich and the poor, between the continents, between the races and sexes, between North and South, developed and developing people. For Luther the church was a people with a common loyalty to a king who had purchased this people at a high price. Their unity was not a human achievement; it was offered to them by their king. It was the task of the people to apprehend this gift.

1. T.G Tappert (ed.) The Book of Concord, p. 32

2. E.g. Theodosius Harnack, Luthers Theologie, a seminal work of the 19th century, does not deal with Luther's doctrine of the church at all and the doctrine receives little attention from Luther scholars before the 20th century. Cf. Forell, The Reality of the Church as the Communion of Saints. 1943.

3. Luther's Works, American Edition (AE) 31, 31.

4. Weimarer Ausgabe 1,302 Asterisci Lutheri Adversus Obliscos Eck II (1518)

5. AE 31,26 Thesis 7

6. See Thesis 6 AE 31,26

7. WA 2,195 RESOLUTIO LUTHERIANA SUPERPROPOSITIONE xm DE POTESTATE PAPAE (1519)

8. WA 2,230 RESOLUTIO LUTHERlANA ETC. (1519)

9. WA B 1,470

10.WA 3,32 [AE 10,35] DICTATA SUPER PSALTERIUM (1513-16)

11. AE 10 36

12. AE 10,397

13. AE 11,347

14. AE 11 326

15. AE 1.29

16. R.Seeberg, Textbook of the History of Doctrine. Vol. n, p 289

17. W A 7,721 ADLIBERUM EXIMII MAGISTRI NOSTRI MAGISTRI AMBROSII CATHARINI DEFEBSIORISSIL, VESTRI PIERATIS ACCERRIMI RESPONSIO (1521)

18. ⁱSeeberg, op.cit., p.144

19. W A 7,219 EINE KURZE FORM DER ZEHN GEBOTE, DES GLAUBENS, DES VATERUNSERS (1520)

20. WA 7,219 IBID.

21. WA 7,219 IBID.

22. WA 10(3) 407 ff. Sermon on the 20^th Sunday after Trinity (Nov. 2, 1522)

23. WA 17(2) p. 253 FESTPOSTILLE ANDREASTAG MATTH 4:18-22 (1527)

24. W A 12 p.490 EYN SERMON AM GRUNEN DONNERSTAG (!523)

25. WA 7, p.683AUF DAS 'OBERCHRISTLICHUSW BUCHEMSERS ANTWORT (1521)

26. WA 7 p. 719 AD LffiERO EXIMII MAGISTRI NOSTRI MAGISTRI AMBROSn CATHERINI DEFENSIO PRIERIATIS (1521)

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid.

29. W A 6,p.287 VON DEM PAPSTTUM IN ROM WIDER DEN HOCHBERUÜHMTEN ROMANISTEN ZU LEIPZIG (1520)

30. W A 50 p. 629 VON DEN KONZLIEN UND KIRCHEN (1539)