|
Martin Luther’s
attacks on the medieval Roman Catholic Church’s doctrines and
practices initiated perhaps the most momentous revolution of the past
two millennia and made him, without question, one of the truly pivotal
figures of Western Culture. Few
documents played a more central role in the history of the Protestant
Reformation than Martin Luther’s Prelude
on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church.
The Captivity was
the second of Luther’s three great treatises of 1520, and marks the
peak of Luther’s incendiary theological radicalism.
The first of the 1520 treatises, Luther’s
Open Letter to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, argued
that in times of crisis Scripture allowed for secular powers to act
independently of the pope to call a council to bring about Church
reform. The immediate
political significance of this document was immense, especially among
the German peoples. However,
while the tone of this letter was bitterly critical of the Roman Church,
in it Luther wrote as one who would reform the Church, not lead a revolt
against it. Luther’s
position changed dramatically with the publication of the Babylonian
Captivity, the second of his great treatises of 1520.
It was here that Luther
took an explicitly insurrectionary position, writing that the pope was
the antichrist and arguing that true Christianity had to be rescued from
the “Babylonian Captivity” into which the Roman Church had led it.
The Captivity marked
the crowning moment of Luther’s theological radicalism and represents
the point of irreparable fracture between his own writings and the Roman
Church.
As a work of theology, the Captivity
is primarily an attack on the Roman Church’s sacramental system, the
practices and teachings that gave the Church its spiritual and temporal
authority. For Luther, a
reformed theology of the sacraments was the key to rescuing true
Christianity from its “Babylonian Captivity”.
The central argument of the Babylonian Captivity was that
the essence of a true sacrament is that of a divine promise, and that
each Christian had to accept this promise for himself.
The incendiary corollary to this was Luther’s argument that
there was no role for the Church to play in administering the mass.
This amounted to an act of theological sedition for it severed
the bond between laymen and the pope, and called for individual
Christians to cement their bond with God independently of the Roman
Church. In Luther’s
view the centuries-old notion that priests were intermediaries who
administered the mass was the fraudulent and self-enriching “teaching
of godless men”. The
radicalism inherent in Luther’s entirely novel re-conceptualization of
the sacraments was no minor theoretical matter.
Luther himself saw that the practical implications of the
Captivity ’s argument were enormous and potentially lethal for the
Church. He addressed this
question in the Captivity,
writing, “But you will say: What is this?
Will you not overturn the practice and teaching of all the
churches and monasteries, by virtue of which they have flourished all
these centuries? For the
mass is the foundation of their anniversaries, intercessions,
applications, communications, etc., that is to say, of their fat income.
I answer: This is the very thing that has constrained me to write
of the captivity of the church. For
it is in this manner that the sacred testament of God has been forced
into the service of a most impious traffic…”.
By severing the bond between priests and laymen Luther had set
forth an argument that undermined the Roman Church at its most
fundamental level. From a
broader historical perspective the still greater importance of this
argument was that it was the first clear and authoritative expression of
the spiritual individualism at the heart of the Protestant Reformation.
Luther’s Captivity
drove a wedge between Church authority and the individual Christian and
effectively reduced the core of a Christian’s bond with God to two
simple elements: God’s promise, or sacrament, and man’s faith in
that promise. Luther’s
reformed notion of the sacraments put each individual’s spiritual fate
in his own hands. More than
this, Luther’s notion of the sacraments galvanized the distinctly
evangelical thrust of Protestantism as he argued that the way to know
and accept God’s promise was through Scripture and faith, not the
practices and teachings of the Roman Church.
This meant that spreading the gospel was the essence of being a
‘priest’ of Christ, not careful observance of Church-sanctioned
rituals and practices.
The fact that the Captivity
was Luther’s most revolutionary work was immediately apparent to
Church officials and theologians all across Europe.
Nothing that he wrote was more important in sealing his break
with the Catholic Church. Indeed,
the outcome of his trial at the Diet of Worms in 1521 was determined by
his refusal to publicly disavow authorship of the
Babylonian Captivity. The
publication of the Captivity
and Luther’s refusal to recant it at Worms marks a point at which
individual conscience and the forces of empire crashed with astounding
and epoch-shaping force, setting off a disruption so great that five
centuries later the shock waves are still rippling through the social,
cultural, religious and economic fabric of the Western world.
More
on the content of the Babylonian Captivity
While the Captivity’s
stinging rhetoric, the call for a “priesthood of all
believers” and Luther’s characterization of the Pope as the
antichrist got the attention of all of Europe, the true importance of
this slim pamphlet lies in the fact that in it Luther offers, for the
first time, a sustained and comprehensive ecclesiastical attack on
Church power and practice. The
Babylonian Captivity was
Luther’s theological tour de force.
The subject of the Captivity
is the Church’s sacramental system, through which the Church exercised
spiritual and cultural control over Christians’ lives from birth to
death. Luther’s method
was to compare the practices of the Church’s centuries-old sacramental
system with what was written in the New Testament.
For Luther, the true Christian’s bond to God could be secured
only through acceptance of God’s testament – i.e., through faith:
“Without this faith, whatever else is brought to it by way of prayers,
preparations, works, signs, or gestures are incitements to impiety.”
Luther’s conclusion was that of the seven sacraments observed
by the Catholic Church – baptism, eucharist, penance, confirmation,
marriage, ordination and extreme unction – only two, baptism and the
eucharist, were true sacraments. Luther
wrote, “Only in these two do we find both the divinely instituted sign
and the promise of forgiveness of sins.”
For Luther the other so-called sacraments were mere works, as
opposed to faith in God’s promise.
Luther wrote, “For God does not deal, nor has he ever dealt,
with man otherwise than through a word of promise…We in turn cannot
deal with God otherwise than through faith in the Word of his promise.
He does not desire works, nor has he need of them…There is no
doubt, therefore, that in our day all priests and monks, together with
their bishops and all their superiors, are idolators, living in a most
perilous state by reason of this ignorance, abuse, and mockery of the
mass, or sacrament, or promise of God.”
Luther’s discussion of the mass was the central and most
incendiary component of the Captivity and posed the greatest
practical threat to the Church. Luther’s
argument was that there was no role for the Church to play in
administering the Mass – effectively this amounted to an act of
theological sedition for it severed the bond between laymen and the Pope
and called for individual Christians to free themselves from the tyranny
of the Roman Church. Sedition
was exactly what Luther thought was required to restore Christianity to
its true foundation, human faith in God’s promise.
Luther wrote in the Captivity, “For where faith dies and
the word of faith is silent, there works and the prescribing of works
immediately crowd into their place.
By then we have been carried away out of our own land, as into
Babylonian Captivity, and despoiled of all our precious possessions.
This has been the fate of the mass; it has been converted by the
teaching of godless men into a good work”.
Luther’s attack on the Church’s role in administering the
mass went against centuries of Church practice, and Church leaders
recognized from the first that this view not only undermined their
authority but also the Church’s primary sources of revenue. Luther
knew that his critique of the seven sacraments was a threat to the
Church’s very existence as an institution.
Luther wrote, “But you will say: What is this?
Will you not overturn the practice and teaching of all the
churches and monestaries, by virtue of which they have flourished all
these centuries? For the
mass is the foundation of their anniversaries, intercessions,
applications, communications, etc., that is to say, of their fat income.
I answer: This is the very thing that has constrained me to write
of the captivity of the church. For
it is in this manner that the sacred testament of God has been forced
into the service of a most impious traffic.”
In Luther’s Captivity he argues that the whole machinery
of the Church along with its carefully proscribed rituals and practices
were not just theologically groundless but dangerous diversions from the
essence of what it was to be a Christian.
While the Captivity is one of Luther’s most theoretical
writings, its practical implications were truly momentous.
The shockingly caustic tone of Luther’s attack on the Church
and his revolutionary insistence on understanding the Mass strictly
according to Scripture are enough to make the Captivity a central
document of the Reformation. However
the Captivity’s importance is greater still, for this document
integrates Luther’s attack on existing Church practice with his notion
of the “priesthood of all believers.”
Luther’s notion of the “priesthood of all believers,” a
slogan which spread like wildfire from Luther’s pen to the lips of
dissenters all across Europe, was one of his great contributions to the
Protestant movement, initiating a groundswell of spiritual
egalitarianism and underwriting the distinctly evangelical cast of early
Protestantism. As
with his notion of the Mass, for Luther the essence of Christian
priesthood was to be discovered and understood only through Scripture.
The account of Christian priesthood that Luther found there –
i.e., that all Christians are Christ’s priests by virtue of having
been baptized – was, again, very much at odds with Church practice.
Luther writes: “If they (the papists) were forced to grant that
as many of us as have been baptised are all priests without distinction,
as indeed we are, and that to them was committed the ministry only, yet
with our consent, they would presently learn that they have no right to
rule over us except in so far as we freely concede it. For thus it is
written in 1 Peter 2:9, "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal
priesthood, and a priestly kingdom." Therefore we are all priests,
as many of us as are Christians…And the priesthood is nothing but a
ministry, as we learn from 1 Corinthians 4:1, "Let a man so account
of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries
of God." In arguing
that all Christians are
priests through baptism, as opposed to select individuals being made
into priests through ordination by the Church, Luther was denying that
the Church played any essential role in selecting and bestowing upon
priests any so-called “indelible character” that guaranteed their
spiritual authority over laymen. For
Luther the notion of a Church-bestowed “indelible character” was, as
he wrote, “a laughing-stock.” Elaborating
on this, Luther wrote, “I admit that the pope imparts this character,
but Christ knows nothing of it; and a priest who is consecrated with it
becomes thereby the life-long servant and captive, not of Christ, but of
the pope; as it is in our day. Moreover, unless I am greatly mistaken,
if this sacrament and this lie fall, the papacy itself with its
characters will scarcely survive; our joyous liberty will be restored to
us; we shall realize that we are all equal by every right, and having
cast off the yoke of tyranny, shall know that he who is a Christian has
Christ, and that he who has Christ has all things that are Christ's and
is able to do all things (Philippians 4:13).”
Luther’s doctrine of the “priesthood” of all Christians
galvanized a movement of religious individualism and spiritual
egalitarianism that continues to reverberate through Western Culture to
this day.
The radicalism of Luther’s reasoning and rhetoric in the
Babylonian Captivity was the focus of his trial at the Diet of Worms
in 1521. His refusal to
disavow authorship of this pamphlet led to his being branded a heretic
and an outlaw – he would have been executed were it not for the
protection of Frederick the Wise. It is worth noting that if Luther had
recanted his Captivity, a reconciliation with the Church would
almost certainly have been negotiated – indeed, by 1521 gradual reform
of Church practice was already underway under the impetus of moderate
thinkers such as Erasmus and even the Luther of 1517, whose famous 95
Theses were controversial but still within the bounds of what Church
leaders could and would tolerate. Not
so for the Luther who wrote the Babylonian Captivity of 1520, for
unlike the 95 Theses, the Captivity struck a direct and piercing
blow to the Church’s ecclesiastical and economic core and threatened
to completely discredit the authority of church officials from the pope
all the way down to parish priests.
As the Church immediately recognized, Luther’s Captivity
was an act of revolution, a revolution they sought to avoid by trying to
persuade its author, under threat of execution, to publicly deny that he
ever wrote it. There can be
no question that Luther’s Babylonian Captivity is a document of
surpassing importance in the history of the Protestant Reformation and
indeed Western Culture. |