By Digenes Akritas
The team at Uncut Mountain Press is pleased to announce an upcoming publication: an Orthodox critique of the doctrine of salvation according to Martin Luther, a work by the esteemed Professor Emeritus of the School of Pastoral Theology at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Demetrios Tselengides.
The book offers an in-depth and highly articulate examination of the sources and origins of Luther’s thought and the historical context that shaped its development, as well as a critical analysis, from an Orthodox perspective, of its dogmatic principles and theological presuppositions. According to Professor Tselengides, modern scholarship on Lutheranism often overlooks the great theological chasm separating Protestantism from Orthodox Patristic theology:
The salvation of man constitutes the center of Luther’s entire theology. This fact, as was only natural, aroused the intense interest of Western theological thought, with the result that Luther’s soteriology became an object of scholarly concern not only for Protestant but also for Roman Catholic theologians. But they viewed Luther through the prism of their own confessional presuppositions...they focused their interest chiefly on defending or, respectively, disputing the correctness of his soteriology. These researchers did not bring forward certain positions of his that would be of particular interest to an Orthodox theologian within the perspective of the existing theological dialogue between Orthodox and Lutherans...they did not highlight positions that delineate our existing dogmatic differences...or certain aspects of soteriology where the Lutherans seem, to some extent, to approach Orthodoxy. The present study attempts, from an Orthodox standpoint, a systematic presentation and analysis of Luther’s dogmatic teaching concerning the salvation of man, with particular emphasis, however, on these dogmatic differences and the outward points of convergence.
Luther Hammers His 95 Theses to the Door (1872), by Ferdinand Pauwels. Oil on canvas, in the Eisenach Collection, Wartburg-Stiftung.
That is, the text serves not only as an examination of Luther’s soteriology but also as an examination of Western theology as a whole. Professor Tselengides observes that the differing approaches taken by Protestant and Roman Catholic scholars in their critique of Luther’s theology point to a broader theological divide, indeed, to a different set of theological presuppositions, that separates Orthodox Patristic theology from Western theological thought:
Within the framework of Western theology, both Roman Catholic and Lutheran, the term “salvation” is not encountered very frequently; instead, the term “justification” is far more commonly employed. The preference of Western theology for the term “justification” is by no means accidental; it is due to the juridical spirit, which even to this day continues to structure and permeate Western theology as a whole, despite the efforts that have been made from time to time to free it from this influence. This juridical spirit, whose roots must be sought in the Roman mentality, even after the collapse of Rome and its institutions, continued, as is well known, to decisively to influence theological thought in the West. It influenced it to such a degree that this spirit came to constitute the most fundamental characteristic of Western theological thinking. And because this legalistic spirit harmonizes perfectly with the content that Western theology assigned to the term “justification,” it becomes readily understandable why this term was preferred within Western Christendom.
Western scholars who concern themselves with the dogmatic teaching regarding the justification of man interpret the term “justification” either in the legalistic, juridical sense of the word, according to the model of a judicial process ending in the gracious acquittal of the accused, or in the ontological sense, when justification is understood as the “rebirth” of man. The first interpretation of justification in its juridical sense is represented in a particularly pure form by Scholasticism. Thus, according to Scholastic theology, justification constitutes the settlement of a guilty relationship and the satisfaction of the supreme juridical order. With the second interpretation of justification, however, we have a transcendence of the scholastic and legal understanding of salvation. In this case, justification is understood not simply as the resolution of a legal liability, but as liberation from demonic powers and as the vivification of man. This is precisely what Luther maintained, and in this way he approached, to some extent, the Orthodox patristic teaching concerning the salvation of man.
The Posting of Luther's 95 Theses (1878), by Julius Hübner, oil on panel.
It is upon this legalistic or juridical mode of thinking that all of Western theology concerning salvation is founded. But what were the historical factors that contributed to the formation of Luther’s theological thought? What theological, social, and philosophical currents ultimately resulted in the Reformation initiated by Luther? Professor Tselengides continues:
If we seriously take into account that Luther’s teaching concerning the justification of man constitutes the central theme of his entire theology...then we understand that everything connected with the event of the Reformation has its point of reference, directly or indirectly, in his soteriology. Taking this presupposition as our basis, we shall refer to those historical, theological, political, and socio-economic conditions that compose the surrounding atmosphere and the broader climate within which Luther’s dogmatic teaching concerning the salvation of man was conceived. And this because we believe that Luther’s soteriology, as the central theme of the Reformation, found resonance among the peoples of the West because a broader climate receptive to it had been prepared much earlier.
The Reformation's principal aim was the abolition of the centralized authority of the papacy and the purification of Roman Catholicism from arbitrariness and abuses. But it did not arise suddenly in the first decades of the sixteenth century. Long developments that eroded the system of papal authority had prepared it: the destabilization of Scholastic theology by the nominalists, as well as the weakening of papal authority due to the “Babylonian Captivity of the Church” (1309–1377) and the Papal Schism (1378–1415). Likewise, the new ideas concerning the limitation of the centralized authority of the pope, which were expressed through the reforming councils, together with the moral corruption of the popes and the humanism promoted by the Renaissance, began to prepare the ground for a new theological thought and a dynamic institutional transformation in religious life. In any case, the events that gave birth to the Reformation bear intensely the characteristics of the Western manner of theological thought and ecclesiastical life. Chronologically, from the fourteenth century onward, the explosive age of the sixteenth century began to be prepared. More specifically, in the first decades of the fourteenth century, an event of particular importance for the Reformation was the fact that Scholastic theology began to be shaken by the nominalists. Scholastic theology was the ideological foundation of organized ecclesiastical and political life. Divine authority on the one hand, and human knowledge on the other, structured with strict, immovable, and static outlines not only ecclesiastical but also political and cultural life. After the destabilization, however, of Scholastic theology, and especially of Scholastic realism, and consequently of ecclesiastical authority, theological thought began to emancipate itself from the official papal church, with the result that Holy Scripture became detached from the tradition of the church.
Religious fragmentation in Central Europe at the outbreak of the Thirty Years' War (1618)
The historical presuppositions and general social climate described above served to create a fertile theological environment for Luther and for others, such as Hus and Wycliffe, within which the Protestant Reformers could act to dismantle the immense ecclesiastical and political authority that the Papacy exercised over Western Christendom. At the same time, the Renaissance had an immense impact in preparing the philosophical climate that would ultimately lead to the Reformation. Scientific discoveries and philosophical movements such as humanism introduced new ideas concerning individuality and redirected spirituality toward the human person rather than toward the divine.
As Professor Tselengides again points out:
Thus, in Luther’s age, man had awakened to the awareness of his own individuality and had begun, above all else, to seek the assurance of an inner peace with God, the certainty that God had turned toward him in love as a distinct person, despite the fact that man was unable to cast off his sinfulness. In other words, Renaissance individualism found an ideal application in Luther’s religious Reformation and especially in the soteriological principle of sola fide, since this principle excludes the mediation of any other person or institution for the salvation of man. By means of this same soteriological principle, Luther questioned and fought against papal authority as an institution necessary for salvation.
In any case, the humanists further prepared the ground for Luther’s work both because they disapproved of Scholastic theology and because they encouraged the study not only of classical texts but also of the origins of Christianity, and because they introduced new methods for the interpretation of Holy Scripture.
These philosophical currents had such a profound impact on Western European society that they became particularly popular among the more educated upper classes and, indeed, came to be regarded as a solution to their own political and social concerns. This presented an opportunity for European princes and monarchs to free themselves from the political pressure imposed upon them by the Papacy. Thus, they were eager to support and even protect Luther from the numerous attempts by Papal authorities to capture and execute him.
With the protection and encouragement of the German princes, Luther’s doctrine spread, and the movement resulted in the seizure and confiscation of Papal lands, which were subsequently reorganized and redistributed by the respective sovereign states. Thus, Luther’s doctrine of salvation was not merely a theological idea but also the catalyst for a massive political upheaval of the existing ecclesiastical and political order. In other words, heresy was knowingly adopted and encouraged by the state, not merely for theological reasons, but also as a means of asserting its authority and sovereignty over its own dominions without interference from the Pope.
Luther Monument in Worms, a statue of Luther surrounded by the figures of his lay protectors and earlier Church reformers, including John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, and Girolamo Savonarola.
Since Professor Tselengides points to the protection afforded to Luther by the German princes following his condemnation and the issuance of an order for his execution, it becomes clear that, without their political interest in and support for his movement, Protestantism would never have survived:
Luther offered the exclusive sphere of ecclesiastical jurisdiction to the political authority, especially since the evident favor of the powerful ruler of Saxony had secured not only his protection by a significant portion of the German princes but also the silent tolerance of the others. The princes who accepted the Reformation freed themselves from papal control, became owners of the ecclesiastical property within their territories, and undertook the establishment of local churches in which they instituted local synods. Thus Luther bestowed an exceptional gift upon the powerful men of the Holy Roman Empire, who, acting as bishops, in a manner of sorts, would be able to supervise the local churches. This action of Luther favored the emergence of national churches, strengthened the authority of the lesser German princes, and contributed to the fragmentation not only of the religious but also of the political unity of Western Christendom. Since, therefore, the German princes supported Luther’s Reformation in order to acquire national autonomy over papal centralization, and because Luther himself had an immediate need for this support, the Reformation and Luther’s theology inevitably became linked with the historical and social framework shaped by the demands of the German princes. Thus, in the development of his theology, Luther had to seriously take into account the new socio-political reality formed through the conflict between the German princes and papal authority.
Finally, we may also mention the socio-political conditions identified by Professor Tselengides as contributing to the popularity of Luther’s doctrine of Sola Fide (“salvation by faith alone”). Indeed, one of the greatest episodes of social unrest in German history was the Peasants’ Revolt of 1525. Revolts against conditions of serfdom were widespread throughout Europe at this time, and the territories of present-day Germany were no exception.
The emphasis placed by the Roman Catholic Church on tithes and indulgences, whereby individuals were expected to give a portion of their income to the Church in connection with the remission of temporal punishment, placed significant economic burdens upon the peasantry. Thus, Luther’s teaching that salvation occurs through faith rather than through works, or, in this particular context, through practices such as the purchase of indulgences, was an attractive idea even to the peasantry.
But again, for the German princes, these “indulgences,” which Roman Catholics theologically grounded in the superabundant merits of Christ and the saints, constituted a prerogative of the Pope, who administered them within the framework of the exercise of his spiritual authority.
As Professor Tselengides again points out:
In practice, indulgences became a means of acquiring economic power and quickly developed into an 'instrument’ for the exercise of papal political authority. Luther’s reaction against indulgences essentially challenged not only the extension of the pope’s spiritual jurisdiction into “Purgatory,” but above all was directed against centralized papal authority. Thus, when the German princes, after systematizing their own taxation systems, realized with dissatisfaction that enormous sums of money were being exported from Germany for the officials of the papal court, and that the pope’s political authority was opposing their own power, they placed Luther under their protection, as we have already seen, because they grasped the political and economic dimensions of his message. Apart, however, from the princes, Luther’s call for the abolition of taxation in favor of the pope, as well as his challenge to indulgences, also found a favorable response among the broader public. Yet beyond and behind the economic dimension of indulgences, and especially behind their rejection, there the underlying basis of Luther’s soteriological thought clearly lies. This will become clearer in the course of our study.
Such was, in general terms, the broader climate within which the Reformation was conceived and developed, the undisputed core of which remains Luther’s soteriological teaching.
0 comments