Suffering and the Cross in the Theology of Martin Luther

2019 ◽  
pp. 63-70
Author(s):  
István Pőcze
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Robert Kolb

This chapter examines Martin Luther’s theology of the sacraments. Luther maintained that sacraments were a form of the Word instituted by Christ that conveyed the forgiveness of sins, and were connected with an external sign—and as such were a powerful way for believers, many of whom were illiterate, to experience firsthand and personally the grace of God. He identified Baptism and Eucharist as sacraments, and occasionally Confession (Penance) as well, though not as a separate sacrament but as an extension of the sacrament of Baptism. Baptism marked not only the establishment of one’s relationship with God, but also identification as part of the church community, and was therefore a sign of oneness in God. Regarding Eucharist, Luther rejected transubstantiation and the idea of Christ being “re-sacrificed” at the Mass, and yet he took Christ’s words of institution literally in identifying the bread and wine as the Body and Blood of Christ, and thus, “food of the soul.” As connected to Luther’s “theology of the cross,” by which believers are utterly dependent upon the grace of God in Jesus Christ, sacraments are a means by which believers can receive and be nourished by that grace.


Author(s):  
Vincent Evener

The present book argues that Martin Luther and his first allies and intra-Reformation critics (Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt and Thomas Müntzer) appealed to suffering to teach Christians to distinguish between true and false doctrine, teachers, and experiences. In so doing, they developed and deployed categories of false suffering, in which suffering was received or simply feigned in ways that hardened rather than demolished self-assertion. These ideas were nourished by the reception of teachings about annihilation of the self and union with God received from post-Eckhartian mysticism. Luther, Karlstadt, and Müntzer developed this mystical inheritance in different directions, each of which intended to shape Christians for differing forms of ecclesial-political dissent: Luther redefined union with God as a union with Christ through faith and the Word, and he counseled Christians to endure persecution as divine work under contraries; Karlstadt described union with God as “sinking into the divine will,” and he upheld this union as a postmortem goal that required, here and now, constant self-accusation and improvement on the part of the individual and the community; Müntzer looked for God to possess souls according to the created order, making Christians into actors for the execution of God’s will on the earthly plane. The democratization of mysticism that so many scholars have attributed to these reformers’ teachings involved a delimitation: mysticism joined to Reformation teaching was used to identify false experiences, false teachers, and ultimately false Christianity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-37
Author(s):  
Casey Spinks ◽  

Martin Luther has given little explicit influence on philosophy, and in 1950 Jaroslav Pelikan called for further work into investigating a ‘Lutheran philosophy.’ The beginning of this work lies in Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation, in which he attacks the method of scholasticism and counters with the method of truly Christian theology, a theologia crucis. Such counter, this article argues, entails a shift in Christian philosophizing, a shift that sharply distinguishes between God and man and yet, through this distinction, as Luther asserts, allows one to “call the thing what it actually is”—and thus leads to a truly Christian philosophy.


1970 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-114
Author(s):  
Deborah Casewell

This article is concerned with how a particular concept of ontology switched from theistic to atheistic to theistic again due to the influences and disciples of Martin Heidegger. It is agreed that Heidegger took aspects of Christian thought, namely from Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, and Søren Kierkegaard, stripping them of their relation to God and instead orientating them to nothingness. Despite Heidegger’s methodological atheism, his ontology was taken up by a number of theologians such as Ernst Fuchs and Rudolf Bultmann, who in their turn influenced Eberhard Jüngel, who in turn mentioned the direct influence that Heidegger has on his thought. Whilst Jüngel acknowledges his debts to Heidegger in the area of ontology, Jüngel also seeks to incorporate the history of God into ontology, where the history of God as Trinity is defined by the passivity of Christ on the cross, and how that event redefines evil’s work in nothingness. This article initially explores how Heidegger formulated his account of ontology, then explores how Jüngel re-Christianized Heidegger’s ontology; evaluating what can be drawn from these shifts about the relationship between ontology and history.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document