CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Volume 48, Numbers 2 & 3 APRIL-JULY 1984 The Use of the Church Fathers in the Formula of Concord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J.A.O. Preus 97 Clergy Mental Health and the Doctrine of Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Robert Preus 113 Luther's Last Battles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mark U. Edwards 125 The Doctrine of Man: Christian Anthropology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eugene F. Klug 141 Luther the Seelsorger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . George Kraus 153 Wittenburg and Canterbury . . . . . . . . . . . The Grace of God as the Foundation for Ethics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John Stephenson 165 . . . . . . . Jeffery Gibbs 185 Implications of Recent Exegetical Studies for the Doctrine of the Lord's Supper: A Survey of the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John T. Pless203 Propitiation in the Language and . . . . . . . . . . Douglas Judisch221 Typology of the Old Testament Theological Observer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .245 Book Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 1 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, LI BRARY FT. WAYNE, IfiOiANA 45525 Luther's Last Battles Mark U. Edwards, Jr. Martin Luther1 was thirty-four years old when his Ninety-five Theses swept the German nation. He was thirty- seven when he was excommunicated by the Roma' Catholic church, forty-one when he married the former nun Katharine von Bora, and forty-six when the Augsburg Confession was read to the Imperial Diet. On 10 November 1530 he turned forty-seven, and already behind him were his "breakthrough" to Reformation theology, his rejection of the Roman Catholic church, the Peasants' War, the major battles of the Sacramen- tarian controversy, and the submission of the Augsburg Confes- sion. Although the vast majority of historical studies on Luther deal exclusively with the events through 1530, Luther did not die at the closing of the Imperial Diet of Augsburg. On the con- trary, he lived another fifteen years, dying of heart failure on 18 February 1546, at the age of sixty-two. It may seem puzzling that biographers and historians neglect the older Luther, for we are extraordinarily well informed about his activities in these later years.2 In his home Luther was the center of attention and surrounded by children, students, friends, and guests. At meals, various students and guests assiduously copied down all Luther's utterances, preserving a vast wealth of obiter dicta for posterity. From these remarks, and from his voluminous correspondence and the observations of friends and guests, there emerges a picture of Luther as a devoted, often tender-hearted father, a loving, teasing, and sometimes irritable husband, a man of strong friendships, and a compassionate pastor and counselor. Luther also continued his labors at the University of Wit- tenberg. In 1531 he presented a series of lectures on Galatians. From time to time he lectured on selected Psalms. Beginning in 1535, he undertook to expound the book of Genesis, a labor that occupied him until 1545. He also participated in the reform of the theological faculty in 1533 and in the reorganization of the university curriculum in 1536. He frequently took part in disputations. In 1535 he became dean of the university, a posi- tion he held for the rest of his life. Many hours were spent in training students for the ministry and placing them in parishes. He also served his university and community as pastor and preacher. For years Luther and his coworkers had labored on a German translation of the Old Testament, publishing their ef- forts a part at a time. In 1531 they completed a revision of the Psalms, in 1532 a German edition of all the Prophets, and in 1533 various other books. Finally, in 1534, the full German Bi- ble appeared. After Luther's death, a revision of the transla- tion, begun in 1539, appeared in the year 1546. Clearly, the older Luther remained intensely involved in academic, pastoral, and familial activities. But Luther was also very much concerned in these later years with affairs beyond Wittenberg. Through written opinions and published treatises he participated fully in several bitter controversies. It is this ac- tivity, and especially his published polemics, that nistor ians find most difficult to explain and integrate into their overall view of Luther. In some of the treatises, Luther apparently retreated from positions of principle established earlier in his career. In others, he contributed to disputes that seem so petty or mundane as to be unworthy of a man of his religious stature. And some of the later polemics were so violent and vulgar that they offended contemporaries and remain offensive to this day. In the last five or six years of his life, for example, Luther published violent attacks on Catholics, Turks, Jews, and other Protestants. The most notorious of these polemics are his at- tacks on the Jews, especially his On the Jews and Their Lies and his On the Ineffable Name and On Christ's Lineage, both of 1543. These treatises contain considerable exegesis of the Old Testament, but this is overshadowed by the pervasive vulgarity of Luther's language and by the incredibly harsh recommenda- tions he offered for the treatment of contemporary Jews. Their synagogues and schools should be burned, their homes destroyed, their books seized, their rabbis forbidden to teach, and their money taken away from them. They should be put to work in the fields or, better yet, expelled from Germany. Even contemporary Protestants were shocked by these writings. Rivaling his anti-Jewish treatises for vulgarity and violence of expression is Against Hanswurst of 1541. Luther outdid even the violence and vulgarity of Against Hanswurst in his 1545 Against the Papacy at Rome, Founded by the Devil. On the heels of these treatises he published a series of scatological and violent woodcuts that, in most graphic terms, suggested how good Christians should treat the papacy. I n these and other treatises, Luther bestialized his opponents, most frequently Luther's Last Battles 127 likening them to pigs or asses, or called them liars, murderers, and hypocrites. They were all minions of the devil. He directed the devil to his ass, he renamed the papal decretals "decraptals" [Drecketalen] and the Farnese pope "Fart-ass" (farlz Esel) and "Her Sodomitical Hellishness Pope Paula 111," and he threw around words for excrement with great abandon. In the wood- cuts by Lucas Cranach that Luther commissioned at the end of his life, he had the papal church depicted as being expelled from the anus of an enormous she-devil and suggested, once again in picture, that the pope, cardinals, and bishops should be hung from gallows with their tongues nailed alongside. Not all of his later polemics were vulgar; many had strong political overtones, and so raise the question whether religious principle was occasionally being subordinated to politics. By the late 1520's, most of the leaders of the Protestant estates were prepared to use armed force to defend their faith, even against an imperially led attack. In Warning to His Dear German Peo- ple ( 1 53 1 ) and Concerning the Three Hierarchies (1 539), Luther a p p e e sustain the ruler's decision, even though in earlier years he had most adamantly rejected armed resistance to the emperor in defense of faith. In the 1530's the Protestant rulers also decided to reject out of hand a papal invitation to a general council of the church, although for years they and Luther had called for a council. Although Luther disagreed with their deci- sion, he was given the task of discrediting the council called by the pope and justifying the Protestant refusal to participate in it. He was also given the task of justifying in print the seizure of the bishopric of Naumburg by Elector Johann Friedrich, and he defended and applauded the two offensives of the League of Schmalkalden against Brauschweig-Wolfenbuttel. He was much criticized at the time for many of these activities and publications, which have cast a shadow over the older Luther's reputation to this day. It is not the historian's job to save Luther's reputation on matters where he deserves censure. But the historian must insist that those who wish to dispense praise and blame first under- stand what they are judging. At the heart of this paper rests the conviction that in both popular and scholarly works the older Luther is being judged without a full understanding of the cir- cumstances he faced. It is only as we enlarge our view to con- sider the changed character of the Reformation movement by the late 1520'~, the new pressures impinging on Luther, and the severely limited alternatives that he faced, that we can fairly 128 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY judge the polemics of his later years. To view Luther as entan- gled within his net of time and circunlstances is to transcend .the need to accuse or to excuse. Illness and Anger It is sometimes argued that the polemical excesses of the older Luther are attributable to his age and poor health-he was violent, abusive, vulgar, and overly verbose because he was a sick, irascible, and slightly senile old man. It is true that throughout his career as a reformer Luther was often not well.3 At one time or another he suffered from constipation, diarrhea, frequent headaches, dizziness, an open ulcer on his leg, severe and recurring uric acid stone attacks, probable arthritis, and severe angina, among other afflictions. Spasms caused by stone attacks are among the most painful experiences that one can have. It seems unlikely that these medical problems would have failed to contribute to Luther's infamous irascibility. His generally poor health, and especially his p robable arteriosclerosis with its usual circulation impairment, raises the question of possible senility, or at least of reduced intellectual acuity, in his later years. Renal damage may have been caused by extended retention of urine during the acute stone attacks of 1537.' Each condition may have exacerbated the other condi- tions. Finally, it has been argued by some that Luther, especially the older Luther, was mentally ilI, a manic-depressive. That Luther suffered from severe illnesses and depression cannot be denied. That he was mentally ill, a manic-depressive, is another matter altogether, and has been hotly d i ~ p u t e d . ~ Although it seems highly unlikeIy that illness played n o role in shaping some of the later polemics, it is, as we shall see in a mo- ment, difficult t o discern a pattern of influence. Luther's repeated complaint that his illnesses kept him from his work suggests at least one way t o test for the effects of illness and age: how productive was Luther during these later years? This is not, actually, an easy question t o answer, as there are many confounding factors; but statistics on publications are suggestive. ' To begin with, it must be remembered that by almost any standard, Luther was enormously productive throughout his life. In 1531 he was sick for six months and still produced 180 sermons, wrote at least 100 letters and 15 treatises, lectured on Galatians, and worked on his translation of the Old Testament. Luther's Last Battles 1 29 And in 1537, when he suffered his most severe and debilitating stone attack, he preached some 90 sermons, lectured, wrote at least 55 letters, and produced some 25 treatises. Many of the treatises of this year were written during his convalescence from the stone attack. By themselves these statistics represent truly remarkable productivity. Only when such figures are compared with Luther's earlier years can the effects of illness and age be assessed. ~f attention is turned to 1530 as a plausible dividing line be- tween the younger and the older Luther, it is seen that two-thirds of his first editions issued from the press during the period 1516-1530. In the remaining fifteen years of his life, the period 1 53 1 - 1546, Luther produced the remaining third of his original works. The decrease in Luther's publishing activity is even more dramatic than these figures suggest, since nearly thirty percent of the original publications during the later period are short forewords to the works of others. Only about eleven percent of his original publications in the earlier period are forewords. As large as this decline was, it must be understood in relation to the prodigious productivity of the earlier period. Excluding Bible translations, some 360 of Luther's original works were printed in the period 15 16-1 530. The latter period saw only 184 original works, yet this is still a staggering number by any measure. It must be stressed that the major decline in Luther's produc- tivity came in the late 1520's, years before his most severe ill- nesses; 1523 witnessed the greatest number of first editions of Luther's works. The real decrease in publication did not come until after 1525. The most significant decline in first editions oc- curs between the period 1521-1525 and the period 1526-1530: 192 first editions in the earlier period and only 95 in the follow- ing period. Given its timing and character, this sharp decline in the second half of the 1520's may be more plausibly explained by the development of the Reformation beyond Martin Luther, by effects of the Peasants' War, or by changes in the printing in- dustry rather than by changes in Luther's health? The decline in the number of original publications during the last fifteen years of Luther's life was very gradual, with no sharp discontinuity in, for example, 1537, that might point to the effects of renal failure or the onset of acute senility or manic-depressive psychosis. From 1531 to 1535, some 74 original works appeared, from 1536 to 1540 the figure dropped to 61, and in the last five years, 1541 to early 1546, there ap- peared 49 original works. 1 30 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY It seems likely that aging and ill health played some role in the gradual decline during the last fifteen years of Luther's life. The quantitative evidence does not allow us t o go beyond this bland conclusion. The evidence does not support any hypothesis positing a sharp discontinuity in the late 1530's indicating the onset of senility or mental illness. What about a qualitative decline? It is true that his most in- famous polemics, his most vulgar and violent attacks, occur during the last five or six years of his life. But once again the pattern is not clear, and a precipitating cause, or causes, is dif- ficult to discern. Luther continued t o produce lucid, well-reasoned argument and exegesis up to his death. For exam- ple, his masterwork On the Councils and the Church (1539) was composed after his major stone in 1537; he continued to Iecture on Genesis until 1545; and massive and important revisions of his Bible translation occurred during this period. Every polemic Luther produced during these later years con- tained sections devoted to clear and persuasive exposition of doctrine and exegesis of Scripture. One may take, for example, Against Hanswurst (1 541), a politically inspired treatise, and one of the coarsest Luther ever produced. Fully two-thirds of the treatise is given over to violent, uninhibited attacks on Duke Heinrich and his Catholic allies. Yet the treatise is remarkable for the great eloquence of its insults and for the injection of some theological considerations into an otherwise largely secular debate. Sandwiched between the invective and abuse is a lucid discussion of the characteristics of the true and false church and a briefer comment on the distinction between person and office. The independent worth of this section on the true and fahe church was attested to by its later publication in com- bination with the "Schmalkadic Articles." Luther's notorious vulgarity and violence of expression shows no clear pattern that demonstrates the influence of mental or physicaI illness. Throughout his later years, Luther produced both violent and temperate polemics. For example, Luther's violent and abusive Against Hanswurst was followed four years later by the moderate To the Elector of Saxony and the Land- grave of m s s e Concerning the Captured Heinrich of Braunsch weig ( 1 545). The differences between these two treatises can best be explained not by changes in Luther's physical or mental health but by changes in external cir- cumstances. The abuse and coarseness found in the earlier treatise was a Luther's Last Battles 131 deliberate polemical tactic, and it was in keeping with the general tenor of the dispute. In the later treatise Luther sought t o dissuade the landgrave from releasing Duke Heinrich, who had been recently captured by the Protestants. This goal called for a calm, reasoned argument, which Luther easily produced. The Struggle Between the True a n d False Church The polemics of the old Luther cannot be adequately explain- ed by pathology, nor can they be fully explained b y reference t o Luther's Augustinian view of history or his a p o c a l ~ ~ t i c exPecta- tions, although both these factors were probably n ~ o r e influen- tial than his ill health. Early in his career as a reformer, Luther's reading of the Bible had convinced him that practically from the beginning of the world there had been a perpetual, unchanging struggle between the true and false c h ~ r c h . ~ H e saw this struggle involving a recurrent contest between true and false prophets and apostles. Believing that mankind did no t change and that the devil never slept, he saw the struggles that went o n in the days of the prophets and the apostles as being no different from the struggles going on in his own time. Their experiences established a paradigm of the dynamics o f all sacred history. Within this paradigm, the papacy was the antichrist; the Turks were Gog; contemporary Jewry was the remnant of a re- jected people suffering under God's wrath; and his Protestant opponents were contemporary false prophets a n d apostles. They were all members of the false church; behind them loomed the figure of the devil, the father of lies. More often than not, Luther directed his polemical attack at the devil he saw behind his opponents rather than at the opponents themselves. Further- more, since Luther was always drawing comparisons and parallels between these opponents and the opponents of the pro- phets and apostles, it was only natural that he would see the true prophets and apostles as having provided a precedent for the way in which one should deal with such opponents. As a result, he could explain and justify his polemics and his stubbornness on points of doctrine by pointing to the example set by these men of God. Luther's view of history and of his own role in it can help ex- plain some of the polemics of the old Luther. It can help us understand how Luther could recommend such harsh and in- humane treatment of Jews and supporters of the papacy. H e thought he was attacking the devil himself. Some o f LutherYs 132 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY language may also be attributed to this biblically-based view of the struggle. When, for example, he rebuked his age for its fail- ings, it was a prophet like Jeremiah from whom he often bor- rowed his style, his tone, even the language itself. And when he blasted the papacy as a wanton whore, he was borrowing polemics from Hosea and Ezekiel. But this explanation, also, is insufficient. Luther's view of the world and his role in the struggle between the true and false church develops early and is fully formed by 153 1. It cannot fully account for the peculiar polemics of the last years. Luther's apocalyptic expectations must also be considered. ' O It cannot be denied that the passion of Luther's polemics was increased by his conviction that he was living in the last times. In his writings and in his prayers, he was tom between bewailing these signs of his time and hailing them as a certain prelude to the Last Judgment. However, as important as his apocalyptic beliefs were for his later polemics, this apocalyptic dimension does not account for a change. An apocalyptic mood suffuses nearly all of the older Luther's polemics. One may consider, for example, some of his most overtly apocalyptic writings:" On War Against the Turks and The Army Sermon Against the Turks (1529), Admonition to Prayer Against the Turks (1 541), and Admonition to the Pastors in the Superintendency of the Church of Wittenburg, co-authored with Johann Bugenhagen (1543). In all these writings the true antichrist for Luther was the Pope, but the Turks were seen as the devil incarnate, Gog, and the little horn in the Book of Daniel. The only striking dif- ference between the earlier writings and the later ones, however, is the greater pessimism about the likelihood of imperial success against the Turks. Not only was there the intervening record of constant defeat to sour Luther's expectations, but there was also what he viewed as an increasing ingratitude of the Germans toward the renewed gospel and an ever-expanding worldliness and sinfulness at all social levels. This last point suggests certain personal factors that may have compounded Luther's general apocalyptic expectations. The older Luther was sorely disappointed with the course of events from the mid-1520's onward. Such disappointment is often ad- duced to explain how Luther could pen the tolerant and sym- pathetic That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew in 1523 and then display such total intolerance, and make such inhumane and violent recommendations concerning the Jews, in the anti- Jewish treatises of his last years.I2 Luther's apocalyptic mood Luther's Last Battles 133 may also have been reinforced by his fears for the fate of the Reformation movement after his own death. These fears were shared by others. Elector Johann Friedrich commissioned the "Schmalkaldic Articles" partly to serve as Luther's "last testa- ment" both against Catholics and against deviants within the Lutheran ranks. Luther himself seems to have viewed as his last testament against these different opponents his anti-Jewish treatises of 1543, his Short Confession on the Supper (1 544), and Against the Papacy at Rome, Founded by the Devil (1545) along with the associated cartoons. When asked why he had published the cartoons, Luther replied that he realized that he did not have long to live and yet he still had much which ought to be revealed about the papacy and its kingdom. For this reason he had published the pictures, each a whole book's worth of what ought to be written about the papacy. It was, he stated, his testament. I freely concede that Luther's health, world-view, apocalyp- tic expectations, and fears for the Reformation movement after his own demise are all significant for an understanding of his later polemics. But I would add that the external circumstances and challenges that he and his movement faced in these later years may be even more significant for an understanding of Luther's polemics. From Movement to Church The Peasants' War of 1525, the visitations of 1527 and 1528, the threatening recesses of the diets of 1529 and 1530, the for- mation of the Protestant League of Schmalkalden in 1531-these and similar events in the late 1520's and early 1530's were both cause and effect of a transition from a revolu- tionary movement consisting primarily of ideologically commit- ted individuals to a more conservative movement led by rulers of territories and city-states. This transition was unavoidable if the Reformation was to en- dure. It is one .thing to initiate a revolution; it is quite another to pass it on to your descendants. The former may be accomplish- ed with belief and individual effort; the latter requires institu- tions and bureaucracy. But these new circumstances imposed new and difficult requirements on Luther. They called for a willingness to compromise, to accommodate belief to political necessity, to take sides publicly in disputes where no great prin- 134 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY ciples were at stake and where ideological conviction found itself leagued with political self-interest. Too great a readiness to compromise or reach accommodation would have opened him to the charge of hypocrisy and insincerity, accusations fatal to his authority. Too great a rigidity and dedication to complete consistency and purity would have deprived him of influence over crucial events. Principles had to bend to necessity. The years after 1530 saw a shift in Luther's correspondence and his published polemics that reflected the change in the character of the Reformation movement itself. A much larger percentage of his total correspondence in these later years was directed to secular authorities. ' A similar change occurred with his polemics. The polemics of the previous decade or so includ- ed a significant number of treatises that were directed towards the unconverted, open-minded Catholics and dedicated to the exposition of the Protestant faith. In contrast, the polemics of these later years were largely works of exhortation, aimed at the converted and designed to deepen beliefs already held; these were often politically inspired and of direct political significance. This shift in the character of Luther's polemics and their in- tended audience is manifested also in the locations where the works were printed and reprinted.I4 In contrast to the earlier years where a number of printing centers throughout Germany accounted for a substantial percentage of works by Luther, the later years saw most of the printings and reprintings being done in Wittenberg, supplemented by the production of a few staunchly Lutheran cities in central and northern Germany. Luther, statistics suggest, had become the publicist for an established, territorially defined ideology. Of course, the greatly heightened role of politics and the ac- companying shift in the character and audience of Luther's polemics come a good decade before the 1540's. For example, in the matter of armed resistance to the emperor for the sake of the Gospel, Luther, under pressure from Landgrave Philipp, from the elector, and especially from the jurists and political ad- visors, grudgingly "allowed" the Protestant estates in 1530 to adopt a positive legal justification for such resistance." This stance left him profoundly uncomfortable. In fact, the tension he felt seems to have spilled over into the polemics he wrote on this issue. Despite his own theological reservations, in Warning to His Dear Germans (1 53 1 ), Luther encouraged the Protestants Luther's Last Battles 135 to resist a Catholic attack on the basis of practical considera- tions, even if the attack was led by the emperor. With its impas- sioned language, abusive characterizations of Opponents, and almost summary discussions of the theological issues involved, it was obviously intended to be a treatise of exhortation rather than lt may have deepened convictions already held, but it was unlikely to convert anyone from outside the Protestant ranks. In short, its intended audience was Protes- tant, not Catholic or any third party. And its intended purpose was to rally Protestants to the defense of their faith, not to con- vince them to resist passively an unjust attack by the Catholic emperor. It was a political polemic, and it was written at the re- quest of Landgrave Philipp. It and Concerning the Three Hierarchies ( 1 539), which justified resistance to the emporeror when he was acting as a servant of the papacy, served the in- terests of the League of Schmalkalden and were reprinted whenever there was a threat of Catholic attack. Many of the polemics o f Luther's last six years were similarly political and written at the express request of Luther's elector. The issues on which they were written were normally not of Luther's choosing. On a number of occasions, Elector Johann Friedrich quite deliberately used Luther's rhetorical skills in political matters. Luther's participation in the dispute with Duke Heinrich of Braunschweig-Wolfenbuttel and his justifica- tion of the electoral seizure of the bishopric of Naumburg are the two more prominent examples, but not the only ones. l 6 In fact, except for Against the Bishop of Magdeburg, Cardinal Albrecht (1539), all the major anti-Catholic and anti-Turkish polemics of his last years were written at the instigation of the elector. Even Against the Papacy at Rome (1545), the most violent and vulgar treatise to issue from Luther's pen, was writ- ten at the behest of Elector Johann Friedrich. In short, the elec- tor was using Luther's extraordinary polemical abilities as one more weapon in the ongoing struggle between Protestant and Catholic forces. Luther's task was to exhort Protestants to stand fast in the face of the Catholic and Turkish threat and to reassure them that God was on their side. The elector encourag- ed and ~ ~ m m e n d e d Luther's vehemence and even vulgarity, not only for the ~ o r k s that he himself had commissioned, but also for works which attacked the Jews and the Sacramentarians. The vulgarity and violence of the treatises of the old Luther may be partly attributable to Luther's ill-health, world-view and beliefs, but some of the responsibility must be apportioned but 136 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY to the changed, more political circumstances in which the Reformer found himself, and to the encouragement he received from Landgrave Philipp and Elector Johann Friedrich. But like earlier explanations, this one is only partial, and potentially misleading if not qualified. The old Luther was not a docilely obedient publicist for the League of Schmalkalden or the elector of Saxony. When his conscience demanded it, he defied even a direct electoral prohibition and refused to count the political costs of his action. As he saw it, if he did not res- pond to public attacks on his teachings, it was equivalent to de- nying and forsaking them. So when the Catholic Duke Georg of Saxony publicly attacked the Warning to His Dear German People and Glosses on the Alleged Imperial Edict (1531), Luther replied, ignoring his elector's command that he not publish an attack on the duke. In the negotiations that followed the public dispute, Luther stated the limits of his obedience. He would refrain in the future from anti-Catholic polemics, but only "to the extent that it is possible in respect to my conscience and the [Protestant] teachings." Some years later, in his public dispute with Cardinal Albrecht over the death of Hans Schonitz, ~ u t h e r once again followed his conscience rather than the dictates of political wisdom. Unable in good conscience to remain silent in the face of the Cardinal's wrongdoing, Luther did what he could to minimize possible adverse effects on the Protestant cause, but he published his attack nonetheless. Final- ly he forced the elector to abandon plans to attack the city of Halle and refused to countenance publicly Landgrave Philipp's bigamy despite threats that the landgrave would defect to the CathoIics or attack him in print. An examination of Luther's last battles reveals a man who saw the world engaged in a metaphysical struggle between good and evil. He was a man gripped by apocalyptic hopes and fears; a man who had given his name to a movement that had taken, from his perspective, a painful and frustrating direction. He was a man deeply involved in the politics of his time-as an advisor to his prince and coreligionists, as an indirect participant in col- loquies between Protestants and Catholics, as a worried observer of wars and threats of war, and as the most influential publicist within Protestantism. Through compromise and ac- comodation to political realities, he tried to maintain his in- fluence in order to preserve his central insights into Christian faith. But opponents and circumstances disappointed his hopes Luther's Last Battles 137 and marred his efforts. He often found himself mired in petty disputes that brought neither him nor the movement any credit. He was misunderstood and held responsible for actions that he himself deplored. As his own death neared, bringing with it both promised relief and fear for the fate of the movement, he became ever more pessimistic, praying not only for his own release but for the end of the world. Luther remained involved and productive to his death. Sus- tained by his faith, his trust in God as the author of history, and his robust sense of humor, he continued to learn and grow, especially in his study of history. He was vulgar and abusive when he wished to be, moderate and calmly persuasive when it suited his purposes. But, most importantly, all the treatises of his old age, even the most crude and abusive, contained some exposition of the Protestant faith. Luther could never just at- tack; he always had to profess and confess as well. FOOTNOTES 1. This essay is drawn from my Luther's Last Battles: Politics and Polemics, 1531-46 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1983), where the various issues are discussed in detail with appropriate references. [Ed. This book is available through the seminary bookstore.] 2. The most thorough and authoritative study of the older Luther is the study by Julius Kostlin, revised in I903 by Gustav Kawerau (Martin Luther, Sein Leben und Seine Schrifren, fifth edition (Berlin, 1903); volume two deals with the older L,uther). A two-volume collection of essays on the older Luther was recently edited and published by Helmar Junghans, Leben und Werk Martin Luthers von 1526 b& 1546 (Got- tingen, 1983). H. G. Haile, Luther: An Experiment in Biography (New York, 1980) offers a fine, sprightly overview that focuses on the older Luther. 3. There is considerable literature on Luther's physical and mental health. Among the best is Annernarie Halder, Das Hornsteinleiden Martin Lurhers (Munich, 1969). See also Friedrich Kuchenmeister , Dr. Martin Lurhers Kmkengeschichfe (Leipzig, 1881); Wilhelm Ebstein, D. Mar- tin Luthers Krankheiten und deren Ein fluss aufseinen korperlichen und geisfigen Zustund (Stuttgart, 1908); Erwin Mulhaupt, "Luthers Kampf mit der Krankheit," Luther 29(1958): 1 15-23; and Ethel Bacchus and H. Kenneth Scattiff, eds., "Martin Luther: A Panel Postmortem," Chicago Medicine 69( 1%6): 107- 16. 4. This is suggested by H. G . Haile, Luther A n Experiment in Biography, pp . 220-22 1. 138 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY 5 . Four of the more prominent, and notorious, diagnoses are Heinrich Deinifle, Luther und Luthertum in der emen Enfwicklung (Mainz, 1904); Albert Maria Weiss, L utherpsychologie ah Schlussel zur Lutherlegende: Erganzungen zu B n i f e s Luther und Lutherthum (Mainz, 1906); Hartmann Grisar, Luther, 3 vols. (Freiburg, 191 1-1 2); and Paul J. Reiter, Martin Luthers Umwelt, Character und Psychose, vol. 2 (Copenhagen, 1941). Drawing heavily on these Catholic works is Erik Erikson, Young Man Luther (New York, 1958). Erikson's book, in turn, has generated considerable secondary literature. For a bibliography and several of the best articles on the subject, see Roger Johnson, ed., Psychohistory and Religion: The Case of Young Man Luther (Philadelphia, 1977). 6. For several replies to the works cited in the previous note, see Gustav Kawerau, Luther in katholischer Beleuchtung: Glossen zu H. Grhars Luther (Leipzig, 191 1); Heinrich Boehmer, Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung, fifth ed. (Leipzig, 19 18); and Eberhard Grossmann, Beitrage zur psychologischen A nalyse der Reformatoren Luther and Calvin (Basel, 1958). 7. On Luther's productivity, see Alfred Dieck, " Luthers Schaffenskraft, " Luther 27(1956):35-39, for a year-by-year summary of Luther's productivi- ty. In chapter one and the appendix of Luther's Last Battles, my own statisti- cal survey of Luther's publication is discussed, which is partly summarized here. h . The older Marxist argument that the Peasants' War marked the end of the popular Reformation was challenged by Franz Lau's classic article "Der Bauernkrieg und das angebliche Ende der lutherischen Reforma- t ion als spon tane r Volksbewegung," Luther Jahrbuch 26(1959):109-34. The debate is far from over, however. (The best recent work on the Peasants' War, now translated into English, is Peter Blickle, The Revolution of 1525: The German Peasants' War from a New Perspective, translated by Thomas A. Brady, Jr. and H. C. Erik Midelfort (Baltimore, 1981). The editors have provided a useful' bibliography of relevant English publications). On the face of it, this decline in publication would appear to support those who see an end to the popular Reformation in these years. Miriam Chrisman, however, has shown in the case of Strasbourg that all types of printing declined at this time, and not merely religious materials. So this decline may reflect economic changes rather than a waning of interest in Luther's works (Cf. Miriam Chrisman, Lay Culture, Learned Culture: Books and Social Change in Strasbourg, 1480-I599 [New Haven, 1982)). 9. The literature on these issues is immense, See Mark U . Edwards Jr., Luther and the Old Testament (Philadelphia, 1969); Scott ~ e n d r i x , Ec- clesia in Via: Ecclesiological Developments in the Medieval Psalms Ex- Luther's Last Battles 139 egesis and [he Djcfata super Psalteriutn (1513-ljlS) of Martin Luther (Leiden, 1974); Ernst Schafer , Luther UIS Kirchenhbtoriker (Gu tersloh, 1897); john M. Hcadley, Luther's View of Church History (New Haven, 1963); Hans von Campenhausen, "Reformatorisches Selbstbewuss- tsein und reformatorishes ~eschichtsbewusstein bei Luther, 1517-1522," Archiv jkr Refonnafionsgeschichfe 37( 1 940) : 1 28-49; Wolfgang Gunter, "Die geschichtstheologischen Voraussetzungen von Luthers Selbstver- standnis, " in Von Konstanz nach Trient. Beitrage zur Kirchengeschichte von den Reformkonzilien bis un Tridentinurn. Fesrgabe fir August Fran- ten. ed. R. Bawner (Paderborn, 1972). pp. 379-94; Wolfgang Hohne, Luthers Anschauungen uber die Kontinuitat der Kirche (Berlin-Hamburg, 1963). pp. 124-56; and Ulrich Asendorf, Eschutologie bei Luther (Gottigen, 1967), pp. 214-21. 10. This aspect is heavily stressed by Heiko Oberman in Luther Mensch zwischen Gott und Teufel (Berlin, 1981) (This volume will soon appear in English translation, published by Yale University Press). 11. On the Turks and on Luther's writings against the Turks, see John W. Bohnstedt , The Infidel Scourge of God: The Turkish Menace as Seen by German Pamphleteers o f the Reformation Era, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 56, part 9 (Philadelphia, 1%8); George W. Forell, "Luther and the War Against the Turks," Church History 14(1945):256-7 1 ; Stephen A. Fischer-Galati, Otroman Imperialism and German Protestantism, 1521A1555 (Cambridge, Mass., 1959); H. Lamparter, Luther Stellirng rum Turkenkrieg (Munich, 1940); Harvey Buchanan, "Luther and the Turks, 1519'1529,'' ARG 47(1956): 145-59; Egil Grislis, "Luther and the Turks," Muslim World 64(1974):180-93, 275-91; and chapter five, Luther's Last Battles. 12. The literature on Luther's relation to the Jews is so vast that a monograph recently appeared on the liturature itself (Johannes Brosseder, Luthers Stellung zu den Juden im Spiegel seiner In ferpreten. Interpretation und Rezeption von Luthers Schrifien und Ausserungen zum Judentum im 19. und 29. Jahrhundert vor aIlem in deutschsprach/gen Raum [Munich, 19721). See also Kurt Mei er , "Zur Interpretation von Luthers Judenschriften," in Vierhunderrfunfzig Jahre lutherische Reformation, 151 7 - 1967 (Berlin-Gottingen, 1%7), pp. 233-52; C. Bernd Sucher, tuthers Stellung zu den Juden. Eine In- terpretation aus germanistischer Sicht (Nieu wkoop, 1977), pp. 125-99.). For detailed examination of this issue, see especiaIly Wilhelm Maurer, "Die Zeit der Reformation," in Kirche und Synagoge, edited by Karl-Heinrich Rengstorf and Siegfried von Kortzfleisch (Stuttgart, 19681, 1 : 363-452; Hei ko A. 0 berman, Wurzeln des Antisernitismus: Chrkremnga rend Judenphge irn Zeitalter w n Humanismus und Refir- 140 CONCORDIA THEOLOGlCAL QUARTERLY mation (Berlin, 198 1) (soon to appear in English translation, published by Fortress Press); and chapter 6, Luther's Last Battles. 13 See Karl Trudinger, Luthers Briefe und Gutachten an weltliche Obrigkeiten zur Durch fuhrung der Re formation (Munster , 1975), 8-10. 14. Cf. Luther's Last Battles, chapter 12. 15. The literature on Luther and resistance is vast, especially if the many pieces on Luther's two kingdoms doctrinear-??onsidered. For a general overview of the recent literature, see Rudolf Ohlig, Die Zwei + Reiche + Lehre Luthers in der Auslegung der deutschen lutherischen Theologie der Gegenwart seit 1945 (Bern, 1974); and the bibliography in Heinz Scheible, ed., Das Widerstandsrecht als Probl + ???y? deutschen Protestanten (Gutersloh, 1969). Very useful is the older work by Karl Muller, Luthers Ausserungen uber das Rechf des bewaffneten Widerstands gegen den Kaiser (Munich, 1915). Two recent works are also useful: Hermann Kunst, Evangelischer Glaube und @o ? W?ische Verant wortung: Martin Luther als politischer Berater seiner Landesherrn und seine Teilnahme an den Fragen des offentlichen Lebens (Stuttgart, 1976); and Eike Wolgast, Die Wittenberger Theologie und die Politik der evangelischen Stande (Gutersloh, 1977). Wolgast's discussion is by far the best recent consideration of the mat- ter, and should be consulted by those interested in all the legal and theological details. In English one might consult Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1978); W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, "Luther and the Right of Resistance to the Emperor," in C. W. Dugmore, ed. Studies in the Reformation: Luther to Hooker (London, 1980); and chapter 2, Luther's Last Battles. :6 Luther's Last Battles, chapters 7 and 8. Dr. Mark U. Edwards, Jr., is a professor of history at Purdue University.