एक वक़्त यूरोप के पादरी लोगों को जन्नत के टिकेट बेचते थे, वहां की ज़ालिम हुकूमत लोगों पर राज-दंड से राज करती थी : रिपोर्ट

एक वक़्त यूरोप के पादरी लोगों को जन्नत के टिकेट बेचते थे, वहां की ज़ालिम हुकूमत लोगों पर राज-दंड से राज करती थी : रिपोर्ट

मार्टिन लूथर एक धर्मशास्त्री और जर्मन भिक्षु थे जिन्होंने 16 वीं शताब्दी में प्रोटेस्टेंट सुधार शुरू किया, ईसाई धर्म को हमेशा के लिए बदल दिया। उन्होंने कैथोलिक चर्च की सबसे पुरानी मान्यताओं पर सवाल उठाया और लूथरनवाद की स्थापना की।

मार्टिन लूथर महत्वपूर्ण उपलब्धियां

कैथोलिक चर्च की कुछ सबसे पुरानी मान्यताओं के बारे में एक चर्चा खोला
कला में उनके स्नातक और मास्टर की डिग्री और धर्मशास्त्र में उनके डॉक्टरेट प्राप्त किया
रोम में एक कैथोलिक चर्च के लिए एक प्रतिनिधि बनने के लिए चुना गया था
विटनबर्ग विश्वविद्यालय में एक प्रोफेसर, और बाद में धर्मशास्त्र के डीन बन गए
अपने स्वयं के चर्च / धर्म – लूथरनवाद स्थापित किया
अपने पूरे जीवन में कई काम प्रकाशित किए

मार्टिन लुथर

मार्टिन लूथर (Martin Luther) (१४८३ – १५४६) इसाई धर्म में प्रोटेस्टवाद नामक सुधारात्मक आन्दोलन चलाने के लिये विख्यात हैं। वे जर्मन भिक्षु, धर्मशास्त्री, विश्वविद्यालय में प्राध्यापक, पादरी एवं चर्च-सुधारक थे जिनके विचारों के द्वारा प्रोटेस्टिज्म सुधारान्दोलन आरम्भ हुआ जिसने पश्चिमी यूरोप के विकास की दिशा बदल दी।

जीवनी
लूथर का जन्म जर्मनी के सेक्सनी राज्य के इस्लीडेन नामक गांव में हुआ था। उनके पिता हैंस लूथर खान के मजदूर थे, जिनके परिवार में कुल मिलाकर आठ बच्चे थे और मार्टिन उसकी दूसरी संतान थे। अट्ठारह वर्ष की अवस्था में मार्टिन लूथर एरफुर्ट के नए विश्वविद्यालय में भरती हुए और सन् 1505 में उन्हें एम॰ए॰ की उपाधि मिली। इसके बाद वह अपने पिता के इच्छानुसार विधि (कानून) का अध्ययन कने लगे किंतु एक भयंकर तूफान में अपने जीवन को जोखिम में समझकर उन्होंने संन्यास लेने की मन्नत की। इसके फल्स्वरूप वह सन् 1505 में ही संत अगस्तिन के संन्यासियों के धर्मसंघ के सदस्य बने और 1507 ई. में उन्हें पुरोहित का अभिषेक दिया गया। लूथर के अधिकारी ने उनको अपने संघ का अध्यक्ष बनाने के उद्देश्य से उन्हें विट्टेनबर्ग विश्वविद्यालय भेजा जहाँ लूथर को सन् 1512 ई. में धर्मविज्ञान में डाक्टरेटर की उपाधि मिली। उसी विश्वविद्यालय में वह बाइबिल के प्रोफेसर बने और साथ साथ अपने संघ के प्रांतीय अधिकारी के पद पर भी नियुक्त हुए।

लूथर शीघ्र ही अपने व्याख्यानों में निजी आध्यात्मिक अनुभवों के आधार पर बाइबिल की व्याख्या करने लगे। उस समय उनके अंत:करण में गहरी अशांति व्याप्त थी। ईश्वर द्वारा ठहराए हुए नियमों को सहज रूप से पूरा करने में अपने को असमर्थ पाकर वह सिखलाने लगे कि आदिपाप के कारण मनुष्य का स्वभाव पूर्ण रूप से विकृत हो गया था (दे. आदिपाप)। चर्च की परंपरागत शिक्षा यह थी कि बपतिस्मा (ईसाई दीक्षास्नान) द्वारा मनुष्य आदिपाप से मुक्त हो जाता है किंतु लूथर की धारणा थी कि बपतिस्मा संस्कार के बाद भी मनुष्य पापी ही रह जाता है और धार्मिक कार्यों द्वारा कोई भी पुण्य नहीं अर्जित कर सता अत: उसे ईसा पर भरोसा रखना चाहिए। ईसा के प्रति भरोसापूर्ण आत्मसमर्पण के फलस्वरूप पापी मनुष्य, पापी रहते हुए भी, ईश्वर का कृपापात्र बनता है। ये विचार चर्च की शिक्षा के अनुकूल नहीं थे किंतु सन् 1517 ई तक लूथर ने खुलमखुल्ला चर्च के प्रति विद्रोह किया।

सन् 1517 की घटनाओं को समझने के लिए “दंडमोचन” विषयक धर्मसिद्धांत समझना आवश्यक है। चर्च की तत्संबंधी परंपरागत शिक्षा इस प्रकार है – सच्चे पापस्वीकार द्वारा पाप का अपराध क्षमा किया जाता है। किंतु पाप के सभी परिणाम नष्ट नहीं होते। उसके परिणाम दूर करने के लिए मनुष्य को तपस्या करना अथवा दंड भोगना पड़ता हे। पाप के उन परिणामों को दूर करने के लिए चर्च पापी की सहायता कर सकता है। वह उसके लिए प्रार्थना कर सकता है और ईसा और अपने पुण्य फलों के भंडार में से कुछ अंश पापी को प्रदान कर सकता है। चर्च की उस सहायता को इंडलजंस (Indulgence) अथवा दंडमोचन कहते हैं। पापी कोई “दंडमोचन” तभी मिल सकता है जब वह पाप स्वीकार करने के बाद पाप के अपराध से मुक्त हो चुका हो तथा उस दंडमोचन के लिए चर्च द्वारा ठहराया हुआ पुण्य का कार्य (प्रार्थना, दान, तीर्थयात्रा आदि) पूरा करे। सन् 1517 ई. में रोम के संत पीटर महामंदिर के निर्माण की आर्थिक सहायता करनेवालों के पक्ष में एक विशेष दंडमोचन की घोषणा हुई। उस दंडमोचन की घोषणा करनेवाले कुछ उपदेशक पाप के लिए पश्चात्ताप करने की आवश्यकता पर कम बल देते थे और रुपया इकट्ठा करने का अधिक ध्यान रखते थे। उसी दंडमोचन को लेकर लूथर ने विद्रोह किया। उन्होंने दंडमोचन विषयक दुरुपयोग की निंदा ही नहीं की, दंडमोचन के सिद्धांत का भी विरोध करते हुए वह खुल्लमखुल्ला सिखलाने लगे कि चर्च अथवा पोप पाप के परिणामों से छुटकारा दे ही नहीं सकते, ईसा मात्र दे सकते हैं। ईसा मनुष्य के किसी पुण्य कार्य के कारण नहीं बलिक अपनी दया से ही पापों से घृणा करनेवाले लोगों को दंडमोचन प्रदान करते हैं।

रोम की ओर से लूथर से अनुरोध हुआ कि वह दंडमोचन के विषय में अपनी शिक्षा वापस ले किंतु लूथर ने ऐसा करने से इनकार किया और तीन नई रचनाओं में अपनी धारणाओं को स्पष्ट कर दिया। उन्होंने रोम के अधिकार का तथा पुरोहितों के अविवाहित रहने की प्रथा का विरोध किया, बाइबिल को छोड़कर ईसाई धर्म ने कोई और आधार नहीं माना तथा केवल तीन संस्कारों का अर्थात् बपतिस्मा, पापस्वीकार तथा यूखारिस्ट को स्वीकार किया। उत्तर में रोम ने सन् 1520 ई. में काथलिक चर्च से लूथर के बहिष्कार की घोषणा की। उस समय से लूथर अपने नए संप्रदाय का नेतृत्व करने लगे। सन् 1524 ई. में उन्होंने कैथरिन बोरा से विवाह किया। उनका आंदोलन जर्मन राष्ट्रीयता की भावना से मुक्त नहीं था और उन्हें अधिकांश जर्मन शासकों का समर्थन प्राप्त हुआ। संभवत: इस कारण से उन्होंने अपने संप्रदाय का संगठन जरूरत से अधिक शासकों पर छोड़ दिया। जब काथलिक सम्राट् चाल्र्स पंचम ने लूथरन शासकों से निवेदन किया कि वे अपने-अपने क्षेत्रों के काथलिक ईसाइयों को सार्वजनिक पूजा करने की अनुमति दें तब लूथरन शासकों न उस प्रस्ताव के विरोध में सम्राट् के पास एक तीव्र प्रतिवाद (प्रोटेस्ट) भेज दिया और सम्राट् को झुकना पड़ा। इस प्रतिवाद के कारण उस नए धर्म का नाम प्रोटेस्टैट रखा गया था।

पाश्चात्य ईसाई धर्म के इतिहास में लूथर का स्थान अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण है। रोमन काथलिक चर्च के प्रति उनके विद्रोह के फलस्वरूप यद्यपि पाश्चात्य ईसाई संप्रदाय की एकता शताब्दियों के लिए छिन्न भिन्न हो गई थी और आज तक ऐसी ही है किंतु इससे इनकार नहीं किया जा सकता कि लूथर असाधारण प्रतिभासंपन्न व्यक्ति थे जिन्होंने सच्चे धार्मिक भावों से प्रेरित होकर विद्रोह की आवाज उठाई थी। भाषा के क्षेत्र में भी लूथर का महत्व अद्वितीय है। उन्होंने जर्मन भाषा में बहुत से भावपूर्ण भजनों की रचना की तथा बाइबिल का जर्मन अनुवाद भी प्रस्तुत किया जिससे आधुनिक जर्मन भाषा पर लूथर की अमिट छाप है।

काथलिक चर्च से अलग हो जाने के बाद लूथर ने अपना अधिकांश जीवन विट्टेनवर्ग में बिता दिया जहाँ वह विश्वविद्यालय में अपने व्याख्यान देते रहे और धर्मविज्ञान तथा बाइबिल के विषय में अपनी बहुसंख्यक रचनाओं की सृष्टि करते रहे। सन् 1546 ई. में वह किसी विवाद का समाधान करने के उद्देश्य से मैंसफेल्ड गए थे और वहाँ से लौटते हुए वह अपने जन्मस्थान आइसलेबन में ही चल बसे। उनके देहांत के समय वेस्टफेलिया, राइनलैड और बावेरिया को छोड़कर समस्त जर्मनी लूथरन शासकों के हाथ में थी। इसके अतिरिक्त लूथरवाद जर्मनी के निकटवर्ती देशों में भी फैल गया तथा स्कैनडिनेविया के समस्त ईसाई लूथरन बन गए थे।

वर्तमान समय का लूथरन धर्म

आजकल ऐंग्लिकन समुदाय को मिलाकर सभी प्रोटेस्टैट धर्मावलंबियों के उनतीस प्रतिशत लूथरन है। लूथरवाद का प्रधान केंद्र जर्मनी ही है जहाँ बावन प्रतिशत लोग लूथरन हैं। स्कैनडिनेवियन देशों में नब्बे से अधिक प्रतिशत लोग उसी धर्म के अनुयायी हैं जर्मनी के अन्य निकटवर्ती देशों में लगभग एक करोड़ लूथरन हैं, उत्तर अमरीका में उनकी संख्या छियासी लाख है। इसके अतिरिक्त लूथरनों ने ब्रेजिल, छोटानागपुर आदि कई मिशन क्षेत्रों में सफलतापूर्वक अपने मत का प्रचार किया है।

सन् 1947 ई. में प्रमुख लूथरन समुदायों ने मिलकर एक लूथरन विश्वसंघ (लूथरन वर्ल्ड फेडरेशन) की स्थापना की, उसका मुख्य कार्यालय जनीवा में है और “बलंद्र कौंसिल ऑव चर्चेज” से उसका निकट संबंध है। लूथरन विश्वसंघ का अधिवेशन पाँच वर्ष के बाद होता है। इसके द्वितीय अधिवेशन के अवसर पर तीन नए संगठन स्थापित किए गए थे, अर्थात्

(1) लूथरन विश्वसेवा परिषद, इसका उद्देश्य है विस्थापितों का पुनर्वास, आवश्यकतानुसार भाइयों को आर्थिक सहायता तथा गिरजाघरों का निर्माण,
(2) मिशन परिषद, विभिन्न लूथरन समुदायों के धर्मप्रचार के कार्यों का विनियोजन इसका उद्देश्य है,
(3) धर्मविज्ञान परिषद, जिसके द्वारा लूथरन चर्चों के धर्मविज्ञान विषयक अनुसंधान का समन्वय किया जाएगा। महान धर्म सुधारक थे

Luther, Cajetan, and Eck

By the summer of 1518 the causa Lutheri (“the case of Luther”) had progressed far enough to require that Luther present himself in Rome to be examined on his teachings. After his territorial ruler, the elector Frederick III of Saxony, intervened on his behalf, Luther was summoned instead to the southern German city of Augsburg, where an imperial Diet was in session. Frederick took action not because he supported Luther’s teachings—which were still being formed—but because he felt that it was his responsibility as a prince to ensure that his subject was treated fairly. Rome, for its part, acceded to Frederick’s wishes because it needed German financial support for a planned military campaign that it hoped to sponsor against the Ottoman Empire—whose forces were poised to invade central Europe from Hungary—and because Frederick was one of the seven electors who would choose the successor of the ailing Holy Roman emperor Maximilian I. The papacy had a vital interest in the outcome of this election.

Against these larger political issues, the case of the Wittenberg professor paled in importance. Luther’s antagonist at the imperial Diet, Cardinal Cajetan, was head of the Dominican order, an ardent defender of the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas, and one of the most learned men in the Roman Curia. Cajetan had taken his assignment seriously and was thus well prepared for his interrogation of Luther. Once the two men met, their fundamental differences quickly became apparent. Their encounter was made even more difficult by the fact that neither had great respect for the other—Cajetan observed that Luther had “ominous eyes and wondrous fantasies in his head,” while Luther remarked that Cajetan may well be “a famous Thomist, but he is an evasive, obscure, and unintelligible theologian.”

In Cajetan’s view the key issues were Luther’s denial that the church is empowered to distribute as indulgences the infinite “treasury of merits” accumulated by Christ on the cross—on this point Luther directly contradicted the papal bull Unigenitus Dei Filius (1343; “Only Begotten Son of God”) of Clement VI—and Luther’s insistence that faith is indispensable for justification. After three days of discussion (October 12–14), Cajetan advised Luther that further conversations were useless unless he was willing to recant. Luther immediately fled Augsburg and returned to Wittenberg, where he issued an appeal for a general council of the church to hear his case.

Luther had reason to be nervous. Papal instructions from August had empowered Cajetan to have Luther apprehended and brought to Rome for further examination. On November 9, 1518, Pope Leo X issued the bull Cum postquam (“When After”), which defined the doctrine of indulgences and addressed the issue of the authority of the church to absolve the faithful from temporal punishment. Luther’s views were declared to be in conflict with the teaching of the church.

Well aware that he was the cause of the controversy and that in Cum postquam his doctrines had been condemned by the pope himself, Luther agreed to refrain from participating in the public debate. Others, however, promptly took his place, sounding the knell of reform in both church and society. The controversy was drawing participants from wider circles and addressing broader and weightier theological issues, the most important of which was the question of the authority of the church and the pope. Eventually, a bitter dispute between Andreas Bodenstein von Carlstadt, a colleague of Luther at Wittenberg, and Johann Eck, a theologian from Ingolstadt and an able defender of the church, drew Luther back into the fray. Because the entire controversy was still considered an academic matter, Eck, Carlstadt, and Luther agreed to a public debate, which took place in Leipzig in June 1519.

The setting was hardly a friendly one for Luther and Carlstadt, because Duke George of Saxony had already established himself as a staunch defender of the church. Upon hearing the sermon of the opening ceremony, which exhorted the participants to adhere to the truth in their debating, George remarked that he had not realized that theologians were so godless as to need such preaching. The initial debate between Eck and Carlstadt covered extensive theological ground but was listless. Luther’s debate with Eck was more lively, as Eck, a skillful debater, repeatedly sought to show that Luther’s position on the issue of papal primacy was identical to that of Jan Hus, the Bohemian theologian who was condemned for heresy at the Council of Constance (1414–18). This was a conclusion calculated to shock the audience at Leipzig, whose university had been founded in the previous century by refugees from the Hussite-dominated University of Prague. Luther repeatedly denied the charge but then noted that some of Hus’s opinions, such as his assertion that there is one holy Catholic church, were not heretical. Eck’s prodding led Luther to state that even general councils, such as the Council of Constance, can be in error when they promulgate opinions not de fide (concerning the faith). This admission was perceived as damaging to Luther’s cause and allowed Eck to boast that he had succeeded in revealing Luther’s true beliefs.

Excommunication
Meanwhile, after a delay caused by the election of the new German emperor, the formal ecclesiastical proceedings against Luther were revived in the fall of 1519. In January 1520 a consistory heard the recommendation that Luther’s orthodoxy be examined, and one month later a papal commission concluded that Luther’s teachings were heretical. Because this conclusion seemed hasty to some members of the Curia, another commission, consisting of the heads of the several important monastic orders, was convened, and it rendered the surprisingly mild judgment that Luther’s propositions were “scandalous and offensive to pious ears” but not heretical. After Eck appeared in Rome and made dire pronouncements on the situation in Germany, yet another examination of Luther’s writings was undertaken. Finally, on June 15, 1520, Leo issued the bull Exsurge Domine (“Arise O Lord”), which charged that 41 sentences in Luther’s various writings were “heretical, scandalous, offensive to pious ears,” though it did not specify which sentences had received what verdict. Luther was given 60 days upon receiving the bull to recant and another 60 days to report his recantation to Rome.

The ensuing bull of excommunication, Decet Romanum Pontificem (“It Pleases the Roman Pontiff”), was published on January 3, 1521. Martin Luther was formally declared a heretic. Ordinarily, those condemned as heretics were apprehended by an authority of the secular government and put to death by burning. In Luther’s case, however, a complex set of factors made such punishment impossible. The new German king (and Holy Roman emperor), Charles V, had agreed as a condition of his election that no German would be convicted without a proper hearing; many, including Luther himself, were convinced that Luther had not been granted this right. Others noted various formal deficiencies in Exsurge Domine, including the fact that it did not correctly quote Luther and that one of the sentences it condemned was actually written by another author. Still others thought that Luther’s call for reform deserved a more serious hearing. A proposal was therefore circulated that Luther should be given a formal hearing when the imperial Diet convened in Worms later in the spring.

Understandably, the papal nuncio Girolamo Aleandro, who represented the Curia in the Holy Roman Empire, vehemently rejected this idea. His position was clear: a convicted heretic did not warrant a hearing. The Diet could do nothing other than endorse the ecclesiastical verdict and bring the heretic to his deserved judgment. Charles shared Aleandro’s sentiment but realized that the idea of giving Luther a hearing enjoyed widespread support in Germany. Charles’s adviser Mercurino Gattinara, mindful of the need for good relations with the estates (the three main orders of society—clergy, nobility, and townspeople), repeatedly urged the emperor not to issue an edict against Luther without their full consent. Gattinara’s caution was justified, because in February the estates refused to support an edict condemning Luther’s writings and instead urged that, in view of the restlessness of the commoners, Luther be cited to appear before the Diet “to the benefit and advantage of the entire German nation, the Holy Roman Empire, our Christian faith, and all estates.” Charles acceded, and on March 6, 1521, he issued a formal invitation to Luther to appear before the estates assembled in Worms. Charles’s apparent surrender was perhaps the only acceptable resolution of the matter; even Aleandro could easily convince himself that Luther’s citation was in the best interest of the church. If Luther recanted, the problem of his heresy would be removed; if he did not, the estates could no longer refuse to endorse formal action against him.

Diet of Worms

Luther appeared before the Diet of Worms on April 17, 1521. He was informed that he had been called to the meeting to acknowledge as his own the books that had been published in his name and to repudiate them. He briefly acknowledged the books but requested time to ponder his second answer, which was granted. The following day Luther admitted that he had used inappropriate language but declared that he could not and would not recant the substance of his writings. He refused to repudiate his works unless convinced of error by Scripture or by reason. Otherwise, he stated, his conscience was bound by the Word of God. According to a traditional but apocryphal account, he ended his statement with the words, “Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.”

Following his appearance, Luther participated in intense discussions involving representatives of the emperor, Aleandro, and the Saxon elector Frederick. Although every effort was made to induce Luther to recant, in the end the discussions failed over his refusal to repudiate a single sentence from the 41 cited in the papal bull. But behind that stood the charge that Luther, a single individual, presumed to challenge 1,500 years of Christian theological consensus. On April 26 Luther hurriedly left Worms, and on May 8 Charles drew up an edict against him. Charles undertook one more unsuccessful effort to obtain the support of the estates, which continued to fear that Luther’s condemnation would incite rebellion among the commoners. The Diet then officially adjourned. On May 25, after the elector Joachim Brandenburg assured the emperor of the support of the few rulers who remained in Worms, Charles signed the edict against Luther.

The document enumerated Luther’s errors along the lines of Exsurge Domine, declared Luther and his followers (some of whom were identified by name) to be political outlaws, and ordered his writings to be burned. Thus, the causa Lutheri was considered closed. It was enormously important, however, that doubts about the propriety of the edict were voiced at once. Its claim to represent the “unanimous consent of the estates” was plainly incorrect, since by the end of May most of the rulers had long since left Worms. Meanwhile, on his journey back to Wittenberg, Luther was “kidnapped” by soldiers of Frederick and taken secretly to Wartburg Castle, near the town of Eisenach, where he remained in hiding for the better part of a year. During this period few people knew of Luther’s whereabouts; most thought he was dead.

During his stay in the Wartburg, Luther began work on what proved to be one of his foremost achievements—the translation of the New Testament into the German vernacular. This task was an obvious ramification of his insistence that the Bible alone is the source of Christian truth and his related belief that everyone is capable of understanding the biblical message. Luther’s translation profoundly affected the development of the written German language. The precedent he set was followed by other scholars, whose work made the Bible widely available in the vernacular and contributed significantly to the emergence of national languages.

Controversies after the Diet of Worms
Attempts to carry out the Edict of Worms were largely unsuccessful. Although Roman Catholic rulers sought determinedly to suppress Luther and his followers, within two years it had become obvious that the movement for reform was too strong. By March 1522, when Luther returned to Wittenberg, the effort to put reform into practice had generated riots and popular protests that threatened to undermine law and order.

Luther’s attitude toward these developments was conservative. He did not believe that change should occur hurriedly. In accordance with his notion of “making haste slowly,” he managed to control the course of reform in Wittenberg, where his influence continued to be strong. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that Luther’s significance as a public figure began to decline after 1522. This is not to say that he did not play a crucial role in the continuing course of events—for he did. Nor is this to say that his influence may not be discerned after 1522—for it can. After the Edict of Worms, however, the cause of reform, of whatever sort, became a legal and political struggle rather than a theological one. The crucial decisions were now made in the halls of government and not in the studies of the theologians. Moreover, by 1523 various other reformers, including Thomas Müntzer, Huldrych Zwingli, and Martin Bucer, had arisen to challenge Luther’s primacy of place and to put forward a more radical vision of reform in church and society.

Beginning in the summer of 1524, large numbers of peasants in southwestern Germany staged a series of uprisings that were partly inspired by Luther’s reform proposals, though they also addressed long-standing economic and political grievances. By the spring of 1525 the rebellion, known as the Peasants’ War, had spread to much of central Germany. The peasants, who were supported by the reformer Müntzer, published their grievances in a manifesto titled “The Twelve Articles of the Peasants”; the document is notable for its declaration that the rightness of the peasants’ demands should be judged by the Word of God, a notion derived directly from Luther’s teaching that the Bible is the sole guide in matters of morality and belief. Luther wrote two responses—Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Peasants, which expressed sympathy for the peasants, and Against the Murderous and Robbing Hordes of the Peasants, which vehemently denounced them. Both works represented a shift away from his earlier vision of reform as encompassing societal as well as religious issues. It is likely that they helped to alienate the peasants from Luther’s cause.

Luther faced other challenges in the mid-1520s. His literary feud with the great Dutch humanist Desiderius Erasmus came to an unfortunate conclusion when the two failed to find common ground. Their theological dispute concerned the issue of whether humans were free to contribute to and participate in their own salvation. Erasmus, who took the affirmative view, argued that Luther’s insistence on the radical priority of grace undermined all human ethical effort. Luther insisted that Erasmus’s position reduced the great soteriological drama of the Incarnation and the cross to shallow moral concepts.

In 1525 Luther was isolated from various other reformers in a controversy over the meaning of the Eucharist, or the Lord’s Supper. The dispute concerned the proper interpretation of Jesus’ words of institution when he said, “This is my body…This is my blood.” Whereas Zwingli argued that these words had to be understood symbolically, as “This symbolizes my body…This symbolizes my blood,” Luther argued strenuously for a literal interpretation. Accordingly, Zwingli held that Jesus was spiritually but not physically present in the communion host, whereas Luther taught that Jesus was really and bodily present. The theological disagreement was initially pursued by several southern German reformers, such as Johannes Brenz, but after 1527 Luther and Zwingli confronted each other directly, with increasing rancour and vehemence, particularly from Luther. As far as he was concerned, Zwingli was an “enthusiast” who did not take the plain words of Scripture seriously. Thus, the reform movement became a house that was publicly divided.

In the view of some, notably Landgrave Philip of Hesse, this division had serious political implications. There was no doubt that the emperor and the princes of the Catholic territories were determined to suppress the new Lutheran heresy, if necessary by force. The disagreement over communion precluded one strategy of dealing with this ominous Catholic threat, namely by establishing a united Protestant political (and military) front. Whereas Luther, in his wonderful otherworldliness, gravely doubted the wisdom of any effort to protect the gospel by military means, Zwingli envisioned a comprehensive anti-Catholic political front that would reach from Zürich to Denmark. When Philip first entertained the notion of a colloquy between Zwingli, Luther, and a number of other reformers, he was prompted by his desire to create the basis of a Protestant political alliance. Luther was initially reluctant and had to be persuaded to attend the meeting, which was held in Marburg on October 1–4, 1529 (see Marburg, Colloquy of). From the outset Luther made it clear that he would not change his views: he took a piece of chalk and wrote the Latin version of the words of institution, “Hoc est corpus meum” (“This is my body”), on the table. In the end the two sides managed to fashion a contorted agreement, but the deep division within Protestantism remained.

On June 13, 1525, Luther married Katherine of Bora, a former nun. Katherine had fled her convent together with eight other nuns and was staying in the house of the Wittenberg town secretary. While the other nuns soon returned to their families or married, Katherine remained without support. Luther was likewise at the time the only remaining resident in what had been the Augustinian monastery in Wittenberg; the other monks had either thrown off the habit or moved to a staunchly Catholic area. Luther’s decision to marry Katherine was the result of a number of factors. Understandably, he felt responsible for her plight, since it was his preaching that had prompted her to flee the convent. Moreover, he had repeatedly written, most significantly in 1523, that marriage is an honourable order of creation, and he regarded the Roman Catholic Church’s insistence on clerical celibacy as the work of the Devil. Finally, he believed that the unrest in Germany, epitomized in the bloody Peasants’ War, was a manifestation of God’s wrath and a sign that the end of the world was at hand. He thus conceived his marriage as a vindication, in these last days, of God’s true order for humankind.

While Luther’s enemies indulged themselves in sarcastic pronouncements upon his matrimony—Erasmus remarked that what had begun as tragedy had turned into comedy—his friends and supporters were chagrined over what they took to be the poor timing of his decision. (It is noteworthy that Luther was not the first of the reformers to marry.) Katherine of Bora proved to be a splendid helpmate for Luther. Table Talks, a collection of Luther’s comments at the dinner table as recorded by one of his student boarders, pays tribute to “Dr. Katie” as a skillful household manager and as a partner in theological conversations. The couple had six children: Johannes (“Hans”), Elizabeth, Magdalene, Martin, Paul, and Margarete. Luther’s letters to his children, as well as his deep sadness at the losses of his daughters Elizabeth and Magdalene—the latter of whom died in his arms in September 1542—are indicative of the warm relationships that characterized his family and marriage.

Later years of Martin Luther
As a declared heretic and public outlaw, Luther was forced to stay out of the political and religious struggle over the enforcement of the Edict of Worms. Sympathetic rulers and city councils became the protagonists for Luther’s cause and the cause of reform. When Charles V convened a Diet to meet at Augsburg in 1530 to address unresolved religious issues, Luther himself could not be present, though he managed to travel as far south as Coburg—still some 100 miles north of Augsburg—to follow developments at the Diet. In Augsburg it fell to Luther’s young Wittenberg colleague Philipp Melanchthon to represent the Protestants. Melanchthon’s summary of the reformers’ beliefs, the Augsburg Confession, quickly became the guiding theological document for the emerging Lutheran tradition.

Luther’s role in the Reformation after 1525 was that of theologian, adviser, and facilitator but not that of a man of action. Biographies of Luther accordingly have a tendency to end their story with his marriage in 1525. Such accounts gallantly omit the last 20 years of his life, during which much happened. The problem is not just that the cause of the new Protestant churches that Luther had helped to establish was essentially pursued without his direct involvement, but also that the Luther of these later years appears less attractive, less winsome, less appealing than the earlier Luther who defiantly faced emperor and empire at Worms. Repeatedly drawn into fierce controversies during the last decade of his life, Luther emerges as a different figure—irascible, dogmatic, and insecure. His tone became strident and shrill, whether in comments about the Anabaptists, the pope, or the Jews. In each instance his pronouncements were virulent: the Anabaptists should be hanged as seditionists, the pope was the Antichrist, the Jews should be expelled and their synagogues burned. Such were hardly irenic words from a minister of the gospel, and none of the explanations that have been offered—his deteriorating health and chronic pain, his expectation of the imminent end of the world, his deep disappointment over the failure of true religious reform—seem satisfactory.

In 1539 Luther became embroiled in a scandal surrounding the bigamy of Philip, landgrave of Hesse. Like many other crowned heads, Philip lived in a dynastically arranged marriage with a wife for whom he had no affection. Engaging in extramarital relationships disturbed his conscience, however, so that for years he felt unworthy to receive communion. His eyes fell on one of his wife’s ladies-in-waiting, who insisted on marriage. Philip turned to Luther and the Wittenberg theologians for advice. In his response, which he amply augmented with biblical references, Luther noted that the patriarchs of the Old Testament had been married to more than one wife and that, as a special dispensation, polygamy was still possible. Philip accordingly entered into a second marriage secretly, but before long it became known—as did Luther’s role in bringing it about.

From the mid-1530s Luther was plagued by kidney stones and an obvious coronary condition. Somewhat sheepishly, he attributed his poor health to the severity of his life in the monastery. He nevertheless continued his academic teaching—from 1535 to 1545 he lectured on the book of Genesis, one of his most insightful biblical expositions—and preached regularly at the city church until his colleague Johannes Bugenhagen assumed that responsibility. Even then, Luther continued to preach in the Augustinian monastery. After the death of one of his oldest friends, Nikolaus Hausmann, in 1538 and that of his daughter Magdalene four years later, references to death became increasingly abundant in Luther’s correspondence. Thus he wrote in a June 1543 letter to a friend:

In February 1546 Luther journeyed, despite his failing health, to Eisleben, the town where he was born. He set out to mediate an embarrassing quarrel between two young and arrogant noblemen, the counts Albrecht and Gebhard of Mansfeld. He was successful, and he so informed his wife in what proved to be his last letter. One day later, on February 18, death came. His body was interred in the Castle Church in Wittenberg.

Significance

Martin Luther is assuredly one of the most influential figures in Western civilization during the last millennium. He was the catalyst for the division of Western Christendom into several churches, but he also left a host of cultural legacies, such as the emphasis on vernacular language. He was primarily a theologian, and there is a great wealth of insights in his writings, which in their definitive scholarly edition (the so-called Weimar Edition) comprise more than 100 folio volumes. But he was not a systematic theological thinker. Much like St. Augustine in late antiquity, Luther was what might be called a polemical theologian. Most of his writings —such as Bondage of the Will against Erasmus and That These Words ‘This Is My Body’ Still Stand Against all Enthusiasts against Zwingli—were forged in the heat of controversy and were inescapably given to one-sided pronouncements, which are not easy to reconcile with positions he took in other writings. It is, therefore, not easy to find agreement on the elements of Luther’s theology.

Moreover, the assessment of Luther’s theological significance was for centuries altogether dependent on the ecclesiastical orientation of the critic. Protestant scholars viewed him as the most stunning exponent of the authentic Christian faith since the time of the Apostles, while Catholics viewed him as the epitome of theological ignorance and personal immorality. These embarrassingly partisan perspectives have changed in recent decades, and a less confessionally oriented picture of Luther has emerged.

Certain key tenets of Luther’s theology have shaped Protestant Christianity since the 16th century. They include his insistence on the Bible, the Word of God, as the only source of religious authority, a dogma known as sola Scriptura; his emphasis on the centrality of grace, appropriated by faith, as the sole means of human salvation; and his understanding of the church as a community of the faithful—a priesthood of all believers—rather than as a hierarchical structure with a prominent division between clergy and laity. Luther was not the first to express these notions, and indeed recent scholarship on the 15th century has shown that much of what was traditionally considered Luther’s revolutionary innovation had striking antecedents. Nevertheless, the vigour and centrality that these ideas received in Luther’s thought made them in important respects dramatically new. Certain corollaries of Luther’s central teachings also made his achievement new and noteworthy. His insistence, for example, that sacred Scripture be available to commoners prompted him not only to translate the Bible into German but also to compose hymns and to advocate the establishment of schools in the cities.

Recent interpreters of Luther have attempted to understand his thought in terms of his struggle against the overpowering reality of the Devil or in terms of his intense fear of a death that would permanently separate him from God. Although there is evidence to support both views, neither quite captures Luther’s spiritual essence. What seems to characterize him more than anything else is an almost childlike trust in God’s overarching forgiveness and acceptance. Luther talked much about his tentationes (“temptations”), by which he meant his doubts about whether this divine forgiveness was real. But he overcame these doubts, and his life thereafter was one of joyous and spontaneous trust in God’s love and goodness toward him and all sinners. Luther called this “Christian freedom.”

The centre of scholarly attention in Luther studies in the late 20th century was Luther’s understanding of the proper role of the Christian in society and politics. According to many scholars, Luther’s disavowal of the German peasants in 1525 and his notion that, as he once put it, “the Gospel has nothing to do with politics” facilitated a tendency toward political passivity among Protestant Christians in Germany. Likewise, his strident pronouncements against the Jews, especially toward the end of his life, have raised the question of whether Luther significantly encouraged the development of German anti-Semitism. Although many scholars have taken this view, this perspective puts far too much emphasis on Luther and not enough on the larger peculiarities of German history.

Luther’s notions developed in opposition to the belief developed by the medieval Catholic church that all of society wore a Christian mantle. The notion of a “Christian” politics or a “Christian” economics was anathema to Luther. However, this did not mean that the public realm had no principles that needed to be honoured. What Luther rejected was the notion that there was a uniquely “Christian” approach to these realms; uniquely Christian, Luther insisted, was only that which pertained to Jesus’ salvational work of redemption.\