Dissertation: To what extent did Luther's 1525 publication 'On the Bondage of the Will' contribute to the later construction of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola fide?

1

DissertationTo what extent did Luther's

1525 publication 'On theBondage of the Will' contribute to

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

2

the later construction ofthe Protestant Doctrine of

Sola fide?The aim of my dissertation is to research into Luther’s work

The Bondage of the Will (1525). I will analyse the influence which

this publication had on the later construction of the Doctrine

of Sola fide (faith alone) within the Protestant movement. I will

contrast the extent to which Luther’s other publications

influence the formulation of this doctrine within early

Protestantism. The three books I will additionally analyse are

Commentary on Romans (1515-16), 95 Theses (1517) and The Babylonian

Captivity (1520). Although Luther never actually published his

lectures on Romans publically like the other two books, it is

necessary to include them within the analysis so that I can

identify with the historical and theological context around

that period. I will also analyse to what extent sola fide is

affirmed by Luther within these three books.

My initial research question was: To what extent did Luther's

1525 publication 'On the Bondage of the Will' contribute to the later

construction of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola fide?

I will set out three objectives prior to the research. My

first aim will be to analyse to what extent my research has

proven that Luther’s 1525 publication On the Bondage of the Will

contributed to the Doctrine of Sola fide. My second aim will be

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

3

to see to what degree my research has highlighted the

significance that the Council of Trent had on Luther’s work.

My third and final aim will be to see if my research has

illustrated Luther’s understanding of Sola fide compared to other

reformers of the time, like Calvin or Zwingli.

I will now analyse Luther’s background and early life as an

undergraduate and later lecturing at University of Wittenberg

to analyse what extent this contributed to his later views on

Sola fide. Sola Fide translates from the Latin as fide meaning

faith and sola implying this being alone or solely, this became

central to Luther’s soteriological assertions.

Firstly background, Luther grew up within the context of the

Catholic Church in Saxony, Germany during the late 15th and

early 16th century, his father earned his living in the mining

industry, as a miner. Luther would later utilize this, as a

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

4

socialist/humanist justification for his position on

justification by faith alone. MacCulloch’s book A History of

Christianity describes him as later using this to emphasize his

“credentials as man of the people”1

In order to ascertain some theological and historical

background to Luther’s work before ‘On the Bondage of the Will’, one

must analyse Luther’s early life lecturing at the University

of Wittenberg during 1513-1517. In order to illustrate how

the majority of his thought on justification through faith

originated from his university lecturing. It will also

demonstrate the development of thought that Luther underwent

in relation to sola fide throughout his academic career.

Sola fide became a central aspect of Luther’s understanding of

salvation. Prior to this, Luther had been a monk in the

strict monastic Order of Augustinian Eremites; it was they who

sent him to Wittenberg. MacCulloch says “Perhaps it was his

order’s devotion to Augustine that directed Luther to this

fresh perception of Augustine’s views on salvation and grace”2

It is essential to acknowledge the influence that Augustine

and his works had upon Luther’s view of soteriology. The

historical context of a humanist university education and an

Augustinian monastic lifestyle prior to this provided Luther

with much theological foundation for his later publication.

It must be also noted that Luther was not the only academic

1 MacCulloch, p.6052 MacCulloch, p.606

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

5

who was beginning to have issues with the orthodox teaching on

salvation, for example Calvin and Zwingli.

Secondly I will now analyse Luther’s earlier publications

prior to his 1525 publication ‘On the Bondage of the Will’, this will

demonstrate to what extent this contributed to his later work.

I will look at Commentary on Romans (1515), 95 Theses (1517) and

The Babylonian Captivity (1520).

Luther started lecturing on Paul’s Letter to the Romans in 1515 and

the Letter to the Galatians in 1516. Luther studying of these without

the construal of conventional scholasticism, he began to

speculate what exactly salvation was in essence and to what

extent was grace attributable to this. This resulted in the

publication of his Ninety-five Theses in 1517 and which he was

later called to recant during the Heidelberg Disputation and

later trial in Rome in 1518.

MacCulloch’s A History of Christianity states “In 1515 Luther moved to

lecturing on Paul’s letter to the Romans, so central a text

for Augustine’s message about salvation.”3 This portrays how

Luther started teaching on Paul’s letter to the Romans during

his time as a lecture at the University of Wittenberg. Now I

will examine some extracts from Luther’s Commentary on Romans.

He says “Only the Gospel reveals the righteousness of God, 3 MacCulloch, p.606

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

6

that is, who is righteous, or how a person becomes righteous

before God, namely, alone by faith”4 This demonstrates how he

was interpreting Paul and exemplifies that he thought the

passage “The just shall live by faith (1:17)”5 This indicated that the

righteousness of God revealed in the Gospel was sought through

faith. He states “Is is called the righteous of God in

contradistinction to man’s righteous which comes from works.”6

This illustrates how Luther interpreted that righteousness

through one own merits was in contradistinction to God’s

revealed righteousness that was through faith. Luther

furthermore goes on to exemplify how he interprets the

majority of Paul’s Letter to the Romans through a sola fide premise.

He says “This passage shows clearly that the Apostle in this

chapter does not direct himself against such as boast of their

sins, but rather of such as think themselves righteous and

trust in their own works to save them.”7 Luther is referring to

Rom 3:5 and interprets that Paul was rebuking not the boasting

of sins but of the flawed righteousness that comes from

trusting in works and cites Rom 3:8 as an example of Paul’s

retort of this practice.

He goes to portray how it is faith in scripture that assures

of justification, “We believe most assuredly and firmly;

indeed, we know; or, we are persuade (by the divine Word) to

believe that sinners are justified by faith.”8 This shows the

emphasis Luther placed upon the scripture as justification for

4 Luther, p.41 (1954)5 Luther, p.40 (1954)6 Luther, p.41 (1954)7 Luther, pp.68-69 (1954)8 Luther, p.80 (1954)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

7

faith. Luther concludes demonstrating the importance of faith

through which Christ righteousness becomes ours in exchange

for our sins. He articulates “But (by faith) they are no longer

our sins, but His; and in exchange His righteousness is ours.”9

Reardon’s book Religious Thought in the Reformation illustrates

Luther’s antinomianism. He says “Luther himself again and

again says it as firm rebuttal of the charge that his teaching

is antinomian, or that it sees good works as indifferent in

comparison with faith.”10 This shows Luther’s disapproval of

his critics who were claiming that he saw faith and works as

mutually comparable and refutes this. He furthermore portrays

that works are of a different substance to those of imputed

grace but are as a consequence of faith and not detached

entirely from faith itself. He states “They (the work-

righteous) strive after good works and regard them as the

foundation of their righteous, the refuge of their conscience,

and the solace of their soul, although Christ alone exists (as

the foundation) before all good works.”11 This illustrates how

Luther was arguing against the futility of works in reference

to Christ’s atonement of imputed grace as soteriological

basis. He asserted that works were defunct entirely in terms

of righteousness and they were only as a consequence of faith.

For Luther it was the soteriological foundation of imputed

grace not works that he was stipulating. He says “Without

efforts, Christ offers Himself to us as our righteousness, our

9 Luther, p.80 (1954)10 Reardon, p.5811 Luther, p.166 (1954)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

8

peace, and our rest for conscience, in order that we may

always build upon this (foundation) our good works.” Here

Luther was disputing that Christ provides a foundation for

human salvation, that works simply cannot match. The imputed

grace from Christ’s atonement allows the individual to become

righteous in the presence of a righteous God. The quotes from

his lecturing on Romans illustrate the early credence Luther

gave to sola fide.

MacCulloch’s primarily supports this premise, see also

Lindberg’s The European Reformation. They both portray the

influence of Luther’s early lecturing had upon his view of

salvation and grace in his later publications. MacCulloch and

Lindberg both show the theological development that Luther

underwent during his lecturing. Luther started to dispute

increasingly that salvation was attained through grace alone

and was without any validation by the function of tradition or

sacraments. In short, he argued for faith through grace alone,

this led up to his 1525 publication Bondage of the Will. This

provided much friction between Luther and the papacy leading

up to the calling of the Council of Trent by Pope Paul III in

1545. Luther’s own work, Commentary on Romans, represents his

biblical foundation for justifying an argument of sola fide; his

use of Galatians and Hebrews likewise also supported this.

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

9

Now I will look at the second and third contributory works,

Ninety-five Theses (1517) and The Babylonian Captivity (1520). This

presented much capacity for Luther to further develop an

argument for justification through faith alone (Lt. Sola Fide).

Firstly, I will analyse Luther’s Ninety-five Theses to distinguish

to what extent this contributed towards the Doctrine of Sola

fide, as well as looking how significance of this in relation

to wider Protestantism. Secondly, I will evaluate Luther’s The

Babylonian Captivity using a likewise premise.

I will now examine my second contributory work, Luther’s Ninety-

five Theses. MacCulloch says “Luther’s protest was quickly turned

into an act of rebellion because powerful churchmen gave a

heavy-handed approach.”12 This illustrates how the Catholic

Church’s reaction to Luther’s 1517 publication Ninety-five Theses, 12 MacCulloch, p.609

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

10

led him to further exacerbate his views on sola fide in the later

1525 publication ‘On the Bondage of the Will’. However the purpose of

Ninety-five Theses was not solely to promote sola fide but to dispute

selling of indulgences and the inefficacy of a church papacy.

MacCulloch says “The squalid implication of this, an insult of

the Apostle Paul’s view of grace and salvation, led Luther to

announce (probably with a notice of the Castle Church door)

that he proposed a university disputation on ninety-five

theses, taking a decidedly negative view of indulgences.”13

This illustrates the first of many disagreements that existed

between Luther and the Roman Catholic Church. He articulates

“He wanted to talk about grace; his opponents want to talk

about authority.”14 This show difference of opinion between

Luther and his Catholic counter-parts, his argument was

largely based upon the importance of grace (Lt. Gratia).

Aland’s Martin Luther’s 95 Theses depicts Luther abhorrence of

indulgences. He says “Those who believe that they can be

certain of their salvation because they have indulgence

letters will be eternally damned, together with their

teachers.”15 This shows Luther’s loathing of the selling of

indulgences and asserts those who put their faith in them and

those who sell them will be perpetually damned. He states “The

true treasure of the church is most holy gospel of the glory

and grace of God.”16 This shows the early signs of Luther’s

emphasis on grace and the gospel as the most essential church 13 MacCulloch, p.60914 MacCulloch, p.60915 Aland, p.5316 Aland, p.56

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

11

asset. He says “No man can be assured of his salvation by any

episcopal function.”17 This demonstrates how Luther alleges

that no one can be certain of salvation through any church

practices. He states “After all, the indulgences contribute

nothing to salvation and holiness of souls [...]”18 This

concludes Luther’s condemnation of the soteriological value of

indulgences.

I will now look how contemporary scholarship has interpreted

Luther’s Ninety-five Theses. Firstly, I will look at Randell’s

Luther and the German Reformation. He articulates “So the Latin

phrase sola fide (by faith alone) became the central idea of

Luther’s thinking.”19 Randell shows how sola fide became essential

to Luther’s views. He says “Once it was accepted that ‘good

works’ were a sign of being saved rather than the cause of it,

it was impossible to attach any value to indulgences expect

for the remission of earthly penalties by the Church.”20 This

shows that when works were viewed as salvatory, indulgences

then became merely an ecclesiological chastisement. He states

“This was the stance that Luther took in his Ninety-five Theses.”21

This shows how Randell interprets the stance Luther took in

his Ninety-five Theses; namely anti-indulgence and critical of the

soteriological value of works. He says “Albert felt greatly

threatened by Luther, whose Ninety-five Theses were rapidly

17 Aland, p.6518 Aland, p.6519 Randell, p.2920 Randell, p.2921 Randell, p.29

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

12

translated into German, printed, and widely distrusted.”22 This

shows the significance of the literature, Albert of Mainz who

was Elector and Archbishop of Mainz (1514-1545) and Archbishop

of Magdeburg (1513-1545), felt seriously intimidated by

Luther’s assertions against indulgences and forwarded his

Ninety-five Theses to Rome suspecting it of being heretical.

I will now look at my third contributory work, Luther’s The

Babylonian Captivity to question the contribution this had to

Luther’s 1520 publication ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ and to assess

the ramifications this had upon the wider Protestant movement.

Lehman’s Luther’s Works (vol. 36) Word and Sacrament II cites examples

from The Babylonian Captivity of the Church of Luther’s assertion of

sola fide and challenges to Papal ordinances. He says “Therefore,

no one is obliged to obey the ordinances of the pope, or

required to listen to him, expect when he teaches the gospel

and Christ. And the pope should teach nothing but faith

without any restrictions.”23 This shows the antagonistic

undertones that Luther decrees against Papal authority and

none should be obligated to obey Papal ordinances, stipulating

they should teach nothing but faith in the gospel and Christ.

Lehman moreover shows an extract from The Babylonian Captivity where

Luther interpreted the Abraham narrative, to illustrate

justification by faith in the Old Testament. He states “And

22 Randell, p.2923 Lehman, p.70 (1975)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

13

after promising Abraham the inheritance of his seed, he gave

him circumcision as a mark of his justification by faith [Gen

17:3-11].”24 Lehman shows how Luther was interpreting not only

New Testament passages, like for example Rom 3:30 as

previously discussed, to support sola fide but also Old Testament

narratives such as Abraham’s circumcision. Like Paul had in

Rom 4, Luther also read the Abrahamic covenant as a portrayal

of justification by faith and not works. However Luther also

stipulated the importance of baptism in justification,

“Baptism, then, signifies, two-things death and resurrection,

that is, full and complete justification.”25 By this premise,

is Luther then endorsing the work of baptism as being

contributory in justification, so then is death and

resurrection through faith or with faith? I shall discuss the

role of sacraments in relation to sola fide later when I examine

the emergence of other Protestant traditions in relation to

Luther.

I will now examine extracts from ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ to

evaluate to what extent this contributed to Luther’s assertion

of a Doctrine of Sola fide as well its wider contribution to

Protestantism. Luther’s intention in the book was to respond

to Erasmus’ earlier publication On Free Will (Lt. De libero arbitrio

diatribe sive collatio) in 1524. Brecht’s Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining

the Reformation 1521-1532 shows the affiliation between Luther and

Erasmus concerning free-will and Augustine’s association to

this. He says “The title, De Servo Arbitrio, comes from a

24 Lehman, pp.43-44 (1975)25 Lehman, p.67 (1975)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

14

formulation of Augustine and in English means “concerning

Unfree [or Enslave] Choice,” instantly indicating its

antithetical relationship to Erasmus’s treatise.”26

The main themes from the book are that sin incapacitates human

ontology and thus rejects free-will because of the

overwhelming influence of sin. Furthermore, it also emphasizes

the absolute sovereignty of God and from this premise Luther

deduces that God redeems an entire individual and liberates

them. This included their will and thus converts them to God’s

means and serving to that end. The rejection of works is also

a theme; Luther stipulates that no one can achieve salvation

or redemption through their own merit. He also gives an

ontological perspective, asserting that an unredeemed person

is dominated by Satan, unless they are overpowered by a

stronger power such as God. This demonstrates Luther’s premise

of God universal sovereignty and from this premise asserts

God’s omnipotency. Luther concluded that Erasmus was not a

Christian.

Now I will look at some extracts from the literature to

establish how Luther interpreted justification. Primarily, one26 Brecht, p.228 (1990)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

15

of the predominant themes in ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ is the

complete sovereignty of God in which Luther interprets the

ontological characteristics of good and evil in relation to

free will. He says “And hence it follows, that “Free-will,”

without the grace of God is, absolutely, not FREE, but,

immutably, the servant and bond-slave of evil; because, it

cannot turn itself unto good.”27 This exhibits Luther’s

rejection that free will without grace will inherently be a

bondservant of evil, since nothing without grace is capable of

good. The exemplifies Luther’s ontological argument of the

function of grace in good and evil, stipulating that nothing

is good without God’s grace. Luther goes to demonstrate why

this ontological premise is imperative in relation to God’s

universal sovereignty thus decrees the futileness of works in

salvation given that everything done by our own merits without

grace is for evil. This is significant to emphasize this in

reference to sola fide because it helps to clarify why Luther saw

everything in justification by faith alone through grace and

not self endeavour.

The concluding discussion in Luther’s ‘On the Bondage of the Will’

discusses free will in relation to grace. Luther shows that 27 Luther, p.48 (1931)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

16

God’s revealed righteousness in the Gospel is ascertained

through faith. He articulates “The righteousness of God is

revealed in the Gospel, that it might be by faith.”28 Luther

then goes to discuss how God’s omnipotency substantiates the

inefficacy of man’s resolve to exercise any good without

grace. He says “If there were a power or ability in man to

will good, it could not be, but that, as the motion of the

Divine Omnipotence [...]”29 This shows as mentioned before,

that if man did have the ability or power to will good then it

was only viable through God’s omnipotency. He states “But this

is not the case. For God looks down from heaven, and does not

see even one who seeks after Him, or attempts it.”30 This shows

that Luther is asserting that God does not observe one who

seeks after Him or attempts to and thus presumes the

inefficacy of any self-perpetuating good from an individual’s

will otherwise God would see this. Luther goes to exemplify

that it is only through God’s grace that human will can be

turned in to good.

He articulates “Whereas, if they could make some sort of

beginning themselves, grace would not be necessary. But now,

since they cannot make that beginning, grace is necessary.”31

Luther is emphasising the significance of grace and thus one

could deduce that it is conceivable this corresponds to his

understanding of justification by faith alone. Luther

substantiates this, “The other righteousness is that of faith;28 Luther, p.203 (1931)29 Luther, p.208 (1931)30 Luther, p.208 (1931)31 Luther, p.208 (1931)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

17

which consists, not in any works, but in the favour and

imputation of God though grace.”32 He is clearly emphasising

the importance of the grace that is received through the

righteousness of faith as opposed to works. He states “But

this is not a time for setting forth a history of my own life

or works; nor have I undertaken this discussion for the

purpose of commending myself, but that I might exalt the grace

of God.”33 This shows that his exaltation of grace is essential

to the book’s intention and repudiates any self endeavour.

Luther also demonstrates in the book his approach of intense

enquiry in biblical exegesis. He says “But you who give this

advice, do not act according to it yourself: nay you act

contrary to it: you write Diatribes: you exalt the decrees of

the Popes: you try all means to draw us aside into these

strange things and contrary to the Holy Scripture: but you

consider not the things that are necessary, how that, by do so

we should corrupt the simplicity and sincerity of the

Scriptures, and confound them with the added inventions of

men.”34 This shows Luther’s response to Diatribes was to condemn

anything he saw as contrary to scripture. As well as remove

any sense of corruption allowing the plainness and

32 Luther, p.222 (1931)33 Luther, p.54 (1931)34 Luther, p.60 (1931)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

18

authenticity of scripture to emanate without any artificial

supplementations. Luther is also evidently attacking Erasmus’

exaltation of Papal decrees. Erasmus’ reaction to Luther is

demonstrated in Trinkaus’ translation of Controversies: De libero

arbitrio/Hyperaspistes 1, Vol. 76 (Collected Works of Erasmus) and shows his

assertion that Luther was acting as principal interpreter of

scripture. He said “You stipulate that we should not ask for

or accept anything but Holy Scripture, but you do it in such a

way as to require that we permit you to be its sole

interpreter, renouncing all others. Thus the victory will be

yours if we allow you to be not the steward but the lord of

Holy Scripture.”35

Luther shows the disputes he has had with his opponents over

interpreting scripture. He states “For I had the last year,

and have still, a sharp warfare with those fanatics who

subject the Scriptures to the interpretation of their own

boasted spirit”36 This illustrates the ongoing dispute Luther

was having with his adversaries and gives us some insight into

Luther’s intention to write ‘On the Bondage of the Will’, as a

response to his opposition which was predominantly Erasmus but

as well to his other opponents. Rupp & Watson’s Luther and

Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation also exemplify the distinction

between both parties; they illustrate however the different

ontological understandings of dualism between Luther and

Erasmus. They articulate “To put it very succinctly: Erasmus

thinks essentially along traditional Scholastic lines, while

35 Trinkaus (trans.), pp.204-20536 Luther, p.65 (1931)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

19

Luther does not.”37 This shows already the differing of their

intellectual traditions, Luther disliked Erasmus’

scholasticism.

They say “In spite of his well-known distaste for Scholastic

subtleties, Erasmus presupposes the metaphysical dualism of

“natural” and “supernatural” on which all Scholastic thinking

rests, and in terms of which the relation between man and God,

human nature and divine grace, is construed.”38 This shows the

distinction between Luther and Erasmus’ moderate understanding

of metaphysical dualism, in which nature and supernatural

permeate mutually in human nature and God’s grace. They

conclude “Luther, on the other hand, takes much more seriously

a quite different dualism, namely, that of God and the

devil.”39 This depicts Luther’s much more fundamental and

severe view of dualism, in which God and Satan are completely

contrary to each other.

Luther exemplifies moreover his assertion of the righteousness

bestowed through faith in Christ in relation to the

unrighteousness of works. He says “Spiritual righteousness

(which is by faith in Christ) seems foolish, yes, and unjust to men;

but the outward righteousness (of the flesh) is regarded by God as

stupid, indeed as a twofold unrighteousness, (that is,

unrighteousness in itself and unrighteousness because it demands a merit).”40 37 Rupp and Watson (eds.), p.1438 Rupp and Watson (eds.), p.1439 Rupp and Watson (eds.), p.1440 Luther, p.64 (1976)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

20

This illustrates also the undeserving nature that grace

through faith from Christ’s righteousness bought and Luther’s

rejection of outward carnal righteousness which he perceived

was quintessentially unrighteousness because of it demands a

merit. For Luther no man deserved salvation because it was a

free gift of grace and could not be earned through their self

merit. He states “Far be such a thought (you will say,) but in

the name, and by virtue of Jesus Christ, and for the

confirmation of the doctrine of Christ, all these things were

done.”41 This shows furthermore his emphasis on faith in

Christ in which all things were completed. He says “...but the

doctrine of Jesus Christ against the doctrine of “Free-

will”.”42 This evidently portrays how he sees the doctrine of

Jesus Christ as contrary to that of free will, for Luther it

appears it was either ‘all Christ’ or ‘not Christ at all’ in

his soteriological construal. Luther illustrates his criticism

of works, “But if righteousness be not imputed unto it, being

“him that worketh,” then, it becomes manifest, that all its

works are nothing but sins, evils, and impieties before God.”43

This depicts that Luther is asserting all works are futile

before God; he goes on to assert that only imputed grace makes

an individual righteous before God.

He says “For if grace come by the purpose of God, or by

election, it comes of necessity, and not by any devoted effort

or endeavour of our own [...]”44 Luther is arguing that if

grace comes by God’s intention or election then it of 41 Luther, p.55 (1931)42 Luther, p.55 (1931)43 Luther, p.222 (1931)44 Luther, pp.222-223 (1931)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

21

necessity and not by self merit. He states “But Christ is “the

way” of truth, life and salvation.”45 This shows Luther’s

Christological understanding of soteriology, in which he

employs the Gospel of John’s portrayal of Christ as ‘the way,

the truth and the life’ to substantiate his understanding of

salvation. He says “This is plainly denying Christ: for whose

grace, the Baptist here testifies, that we receive grace.”46

This evidently depicts Luther’s understanding that the

bestowment of grace an individual receives is through Christ.

He states “For the Diatribe has said, and all the Sophists

say, that we obtain grace, and are prepared for the reception

of it, by our own endeavours; not however according to

‘worthiness,’ but according to ‘congruity,’ I have refuted

that already [...]”47 This furthermore shows Luther refutation

of the Diatribe and Sophists, and thus claims they assert that

grace is obtained by one’s own endeavours and adequacy.

I will now look at how modern scholarship has interpreted

Luther’s ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ in relation to a Doctrine of Sola

fide. Brecht shows Luther early uses of Erasmus’ edition of the

Greek New Testament and illustrates how Luther saw that

Erasmus interpreted Paul differently to himself. He

articulates “In Erasmus’s edition of the Greek New Testament,

Luther had noticed in 1516 that Erasmus understood Paul

differently he did.”48 He states “Erasmus found it in the

45 Luther, p.231 (1931)46 Luther, p.229 (1931)47 Luther, p.229 (1931)48 Brecht, p.213 (1990)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

22

concept of a combination of human will and divine grace.”49

This demonstrates how Erasmus interpreted free will mutually

through human will and God’s grace, Brecht goes to on

illustrate Erasmus response to Luther’s interpretation of free

will.

He says “He devoted a special subsection to refuting Luther’s

view that without grace, man was a total sinner and thus

incapable of anything good.”50 This depicts how Erasmus

refutation of Luther’s view that without grace humans where

debaucherous, was to assert the reciprocal contribution of

grace and human will in free will. However, Erasmus did not

totally denigrate the role of grace in his disproval of a sola

gratia (grace alone) premise without human will by stipulating

the essential soteriological function of grace.

He states “Erasmus, too wanted to maintain grace as the

essential way of initiating salvation, but then would have

free will cooperate with it.”51 This demonstrates how Erasmus

viewed the role of grace as essential in soteriology but then

free-will collaborates with it. He says “The problems of man’s

ability to do anything for his salvation had been raised by

Augustine, and now it had become a contemporary issue because

of Luther.”52 This shows the earlier origins of an individual’s

ability to contribute anything soteriological with Augustine,

which Luther made an issue throughout his period. He states

“Luther’s true concern was to demonstrate that the divine will

49 Brecht, p.222 (1990)50 Brecht, p.222 (1990)51 Brecht, p.222 (1990)52 Brecht, p.225 (1990)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

23

was independent from the human will.”53 Brecht concludes that

Luther’s true apprehension was to illustrate that God’s

sovereign will was independent of human will.

Friedenthal’s Luther shows another contemporary perspective on

Luther’s intentions and how he was received in ‘On the Bondage of

the Will’. He says “He saw himself almost as a one-man council,

not realizing that what people wanted was only the support of

his great name.”54 Friedenthal construal asserts that Luther

saw himself a one-man council and did not comprehending that

his name was what people where exalting and not his works. He

states “Finally he turned to the well-worn argument that God

could not possibly have allowed the Church to be wrong

throughout all the centuries until Luther came and revealed

the truth.”55 This demonstrates Erasmus response to Luther,

portraying that God can not have left the church ignorant

until Luther arrived and publicized the truth.

Friedenthal furthermore articulates, “‘The Holy Ghost is not a

sceptic!’ There could be no Christianity without certainty of

truth.”56 This demonstrates that according to Luther

Christianity existed on the certain of truth and the

pneumatological part of the Triune Godhead was not a cynic.

Furthermore as previously discussed, Luther asserted that the

Spirit was how Christians should discern the truth of

scripture to reveal its intention. From this statement of 53 Brecht, p.225 (1990)54 Friedenthal, p.45155 Friedenthal, p.45256 Friedenthal, p.454

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

24

certainty it is logical to understand why Luther made a

pneumatological premise that Holy Spirit was not a sceptic,

for him truth was certain.

Luther’s assurance of his theological outlook is also

demonstrated by Friedenthal in relation to ontology and grace.

He says “He refused to yield an inch either on man’s absolute

sinfulness or God’s absolute grace [...]”57 This depicts how

Luther was sure in his perception that humans were entirely

sinful and God’s grace was absolute; Friedenthal goes on to

consider the meta-physical aspect of grace. He states “[...]

it was world without grace which therefore needed grace as its

only hope.”58 This is portraying that Luther’s was seeing grace

as the only hope for a world without it. Friedenthal

encapsulates how Luther viewed ontology correlation to

soteriology, “This is how man ought to feel: damned and

redeemed.”59 This illustrates an accentuated binary view of how

people ought to feel, castigated and redeemed through

salvation. Luther’s demonstrates a greater emphasis of human

moral finitude than Erasmus had done previously, express

humanity should feel their only hope is grace and not their

own merits in salvation. He says “Man’s alleged free will was

a ‘prisoner, a vassal, a slave, subject to the will of God or

the will of Satan.”60 This further supplements Luther’s

pessimistic perception of human free will, depicting them as

57 Friedenthal, p.45458 Friedenthal, p.45459 Friedenthal, p.45460 Friedenthal, p.454

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

25

prisoner, vassal and salve that were subject to either the

will of God or Satan.

He states “Absolute faith was demanded [...]”61 The absolute

statement is crucial here, for Luther it seemed that

everything was absolutely or absolutely and not and nothing

was in between this. This was with regards to many areas,

including faith and grace. Friedenthal says “Since God’s

omnipotence and all-pervading activity in the world were not

open to doubt, he explained this conflict to himself by the

fact of God’s will, into which we neither should nor could

inquire, was secret and hidden from us.”62 For Luther, God was

all knowing and all powerful and this was indisputable and

evident in God’s will which is unknowable. He states “Man was

left only with faith that God has foreseen and foreordained

everything throughout all eternity [...]”63 This demonstrates

connotations of predestination and thus results in faith being

the only viable human path. He concludes “To Luther what

mattered was always and exclusively the question of religious

faith; by comparison all other problems, whether political or

social, receded completed into the background.”64

Friedenthal shows how for Luther the ramifications of his

pursuit into the religious truth of faith surpassed the socio-

political milieu that ensued during his theological enquiry.

61 Friedenthal, p.45462 Friedenthal, p.45563 Friedenthal, p.45564 Friedenthal, p.464

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

26

Marius’ Martin Luther: The Christian between God and Death discusses

Luther association with Erasmus and the influence that

Augustine had in the debate around free-will. Firstly, I will

look at Augustine’s influence on Luther. Marius articulates

“In his 1535 preface to the edition of the Latin works, he

could still praise Augustine’s On the Spirit and the Letter for its

help in giving him his great revelation about grace.”65 Marius

shows how Luther later esteems Augustine’s influence for

assisting him in having a revelation on grace in his reading

of On the Spirit and the Letter. He says “In the beginning, he said,

he devoured Augustine, but when “Paul opened the or for me so

I understood what Justification by faith was, it was all over

with him [Augustine].”66 Initially Luther read a lot of

Augustine but when he read Paul he understood a justification

by faith premise and this devouring finished.

Secondly, I will now analyse Erasmus’ literary intentions and

Luther’s responses to them. He states “It seems probable that

Erasmus intended to publish only a Latin translation, a

revision of the Vulgate.”67 Marius asserts that is plausible

that Erasmus planned to publish a revised Latin translation of

the Vulgate. Marius goes on to discuss how Erasmus understood

the Letter of James. He says “From Erasmus, too, he would take his

doubts about the authorship of book of James, a book Luther

detested because it had been written against Paul’s doctrine

of faith as the sole necessity in salvation.”68 This depicts 65 Marius, p.34366 Marius, p.34367 Marius, p.34868 Marius, p.353

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

27

Erasmus’ doubts about the authorship of the letter and

Luther’s abhorrence of it because he believed it was written

against a Pauline doctrine of justification by faith alone. He

states “That salvation can come only through the grace of God

in faith.”69 Marius exemplifies Luther’s soteriological model,

he goes to discuss how Luther viewed Erasmus’ Greek New

Testament. He articulates “Although Luther depended heavily on

the biblical scholarship of Erasmus, he hated Erasmus’s

attitude toward the Bible expressed in the annotations of the

Greek New Testament.”70 Marius asserts that Luther despised

Erasmus attitude to the Bible and this was predominantly

noticeable in his annotations of Erasmus’ Greek New Testament.

Lohse’s Martin Luther’s Theology It’s Historical and Systematic Development

demonstrates the soteriological function of faith in Luther’s

perception of an Christological salvation. He says “Then he

said; “Faith means to believe in Jesus’ humanity, given us in

this life as our life, our righteousness and our

resurrection.””71 This illustrates how Luther interpreted

faith, depicting it through the lens of Christ’s life,

righteousness and resurrection becoming our own. He states

“Here Luther was clearly overcoming the then current idea of

faith as holding something to be true.”72 Lohse exemplifies

Luther’s challenge to the conventional notion of faith as

somewhat truthful in contrasts to the assurance of faith that

Luther strongly asserted.69 Marius, p.35570 Marius, p.44671 Lohse, p.4772 Lohse, p.47

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

28

Lohse also examines the purpose of the scriptural

fundamentalism in Luther’s interpretation of sola fide. Lohse

articulates “Luther further discussed the theological

assumption back of his views of assertion as a necessary from

of Christian faith, that is, in the clarity of Holy

Scripture.”73 This illustrates that Luther’s assertion of faith

in Christ, is substantiated in his claim of the clarity of

Scripture. He says “With Luther the priority of the Word of

God, thus of the truth of faith, remains intact prior to

faith.”74 This shows that faith was subordinate in correlation

to scripture; Lohse is asserting that Luther was employing a

scripturally based faith and that this scripture was essential

before any faith could ensue.

He states “[...] Luther intended to say that in clinging to

something by faith is not enough to hold the truth of faith to

be true; that what is needed us a truly saving faith, that the

divine truth also applies pro me.”75 This furthermore

demonstrates that this faith Luther was asserting was not a

blind faith but a genuine saving divine faith based upon the

truth of scripture. Lohse shows how this faith correlates with

the ontological aspects that are present in ‘On the Bondage of the

Will’. He says “This why the area to which faith is directly

assigned always concern human existence as a whole”76 This

depicts that Luther was stipulate that faith concerned entire 73 Lohse, p.16474 Lohse, p.20375 Lohse, p.20376 Lohse, p.201

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

29

human existence and explains why Luther was so concerned with

Erasmus’ earlier Diatribe on Free Will in 1524 because it associated

this faith conjoined with man’s own free-will efforts.

I would criticise Luther in this assertion because it

denigrates that humans can do anything good without God’s

imputed grace through faith in the scriptures. Luther seems to

disregard any ontological concept of altruism or self-

perpetuated good. Also it further illustrates his binary

approach whether that is: good and evil; God and Satan or

faith and works, they always appear diametrically opposed in

Luther’s explanations.

I will now analyse McGrath’s Christian Theology: An Introduction to

show Luther’s disregard for Aristotelian ideas and medieval

theology. He articulates “Martin Luther, the great German

reformer, argued that medieval theology had allowed a number

of such distortions to arise through an excessive, and

partially uncritical, use of Aristotelian ideas in the Middle

Ages.”77 Luther despised is distortion this bought to medieval

theology which was unsuspecting and disproportionate in its

use of Aristotelian ideas. He states “Increasingly openly, he

loathed the presence of Aristotle in scholastic theological

discussion, and he came to despise the nominalist idea of

salvation contract between God and humanity which Gabriel Biel

had pioneered.”78 This shows how Luther applied his loathing of

Aristotle and scholasticism in his despising of nominalism in

77 McGrath, p.17578 MacCulloch, p.606

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

30

the metaphysical understanding of salvation, McGrath cites

Biel as an example of this tradition. Reardon’s book Religious

Thought in the Reformation also illustrates Luther’s disapproval of

a nominalism. He says “Luther himself again and again says is

as firm rebuttal of the charge that his teaching is

antinomian, or that it sees good works as indifferent in

comparison with faith.”79 This demonstrates how Luther’s

antinomian teaching is asserted because of difference it saw

good works in parallel value to faith. This illustrates the

context to which Luther was challenging; he was arguing that

any apologetics type argument that used philosophy with

theology was not permissible within Christian soteriology.

I will now look at my final section on the different

perceptions that permeated from the European Reformations and

contrast the similarity and differences of other reformers use

of sola fide in comparison to Luther. Firstly I will look at how

Zwingli and Calvin used a Doctrine of sola fide and then examine

the function of baptism in relation to this.

McGrath exemplifies this diversity that ensued during the

Reformation, “The term “Reformation” is traditionally used by

historians and theologians to refer to the western European

movement, centering upon individuals such as Martin Luther,

Huldrych Zwingli, and John Calvin.”80 This illustrates the

variety within Protestantism during the 15th and 16th century.

He says “Initially, up to about 1525, the Reformation may be

79 Reardon, p.5880 McGrath, p.44

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

31

regarded as revolving around Martin Luther and the University

of Wittenberg, in modern-day northeastern Germany.”81 McGrath

defines Luther’s 1525 publication ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ as

significant point in Reformation history since before it had

revolved solely around Luther. Reardon shows the differences

that began to permeate after this amongst Luther, Calvin and

Zwingli. He says “Moreover, as Zwingli differed from Luther,

so too did Calvin from Zwingli”82 McGrath also furthermore

illustrates the diversity that existed in early Protestantism.

He says “The reformation initially led to the formulation of a

cluster of protestant churches in Europe”83 This exemplifies

the misunderstanding in applying the term Reformation to the

various Europeans movements rather than using Reformations.

McGrath shows the complexity of this movement, “The

Reformation movement was complex and heterogeneous”84

Firstly I will look at Zwingli (1484-1531) who was recognised

for leading the Suisse reformation. Reardon says “Although the

Reformation had its beginnings in Germany they were quickly

followed by a parallel movement in Switzerland.”85 This shows

that although the beginnings of European Reformation initially

began in German, it quickly spread into Switzerland. McGrath

articulates similar movements, “However, the movement also

gained strength, independently at first, in the Swiss city of

Zurich in the early 1520’s.”86 This shows how Luther’s ideas 81 McGrath, p.4482 Reardon, p.9183 McGrath, p.4384 McGrath, p.4485 Reardon, p.9186 McGrath, p.44

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

32

began to permeate out of northeastern Germany and in to the

rest of central Europe, starting in Switzerland.

McKim’s The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther likewise exemplifies

Zwingli’s influence. He states “Like many of his

contemporaries, Zwingli viewed the first decades of the

sixteenth century as a period of rebirth and renewal for the

church and society.”87 Zwingli was acting in the same reforming

conduct as his contemporaries but unlike Luther, their

theological views differed. As McKim states Zwingli is best

known for “his early theological statements of the Reformed

faith, his Eucharistic differences with Martin Luther and the

establishment of the Zurich synod.”88 This illustrates how

Zwingli differed from Luther eucharistically speaking.

He says “Sometime between 1519 and 1522 Zwingli moved beyond

his humanistic education goals to espouse a reformation

involving rejection of the authority and teachings of the

medieval church.”89 This illustrates how like Luther, Zwingli

looked to move away from Papal authority to an authority of

scripture (Doctrine of Sola scriptura) as his soteriological

justification. The extent to which Luther’s ‘On the Bondage of the

Will’ however had contributed to Zwingli’s view is questionable

87 McKim (ed.), p.250 (1998)88 McKim (ed.), p.249 (1998)89 McKim (ed.), p.250 (1998)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

33

since McKim shows that Zwingli rejection of medieval Catholic

teaching and its authority had began before the book was

published. Zwingli evoked a movement outside of medieval

Catholicism and formulated a church separate from Rome and

Papal authority, based solely on the infallible Word of God.

This portrays that Luther’s 1525 book The Bondage of the Will (Lt.

De Servo Arbitrio) had not contributed to Zwingli’s reformation

views but on the contrary was written as response to Erasmus’

On Free Will (Lt. De libero arbitrio diatribe sive collatio).

In conclusion, the question here might be to what extent did

Luther’s 1525 publication ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ contribute to

Zwingli’s interpretation of sola fide?

Chadwick’s The Early Reformation of the Continent shows Luther’s

influential legacy. He says “The importance of what he did was

shown by the generations who afterwards used and were affected

by what he had done.”90 He goes on to explain the difference of

language that existed between Swiss-German and Luther’s German

and they altered many words of Luther’s Bible but still

accepted his influence and finished translation Bible in 1529.

He states “Swiss-German was so different from Luther’s German

that they needed to alter many words thought they accepted his90 Chadwick, p.32

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

34

influence and had is translation Bible, complete in 1529.”91

This demonstrates that although Zwingli did not direct

associate his Suisse Reformation ideas with the theology from

‘On the Bondage of the Will’, he did however use a Swiss-German

translation of Luther’s bible. Thus Luther had to some extent

influenced Zwingli; otherwise they would not have used

Luther’s 1524 German translation of the New Testament for

their own Swiss-German edition.

I will now analyse the extent to which Luther contributions

influenced Calvin (1509-1564). Chadwick shows the division

that ensued between Lutherans and Calvinists during the

Reformations, which Calvin himself tried to counter in his

Secunda Defensio (1556). De Greef’s The Writings of John Calvin: An

Introductory Guide illustrates Calvin’s publication of this, “In

January 1556 Calvin wrote a second treatise against Westphal,

Secunda defensio [...]”92 In Secunda Defensio Calvin called for

concordance amongst the dividing factions of different

evangelic expressions. Chadwick articulates this, “Calvin’s

reply, Secunda Defensio, was a cry of faith in the basic unity of

Lutheran and Reformed. It made no difference.”93 Chadwick goes

on to demonstrate this division still subsists today and was

predominately centred upon variations in interpreting the

Eucharistic. He states “Thus Lutheran and Reformed were

divided till modern times by these views of the nature of the

Presence in the eucharist.”94 91 Chadwick, p.3392 De Greef, p.18093 Chadwick, p.23894 Chadwick, p.238

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

35

Lohse demonstrates a contrary view to Chadwick and illustrates

a more acquiescent theology amongst the reformers. He says

“Where Luther himself gave no comprehensive view, as was done,

by Melanchthon in later editions of his Loci Praecipui Theologici, or

by Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, a systematic

overall view can indicate a like between the various doctrines

and the inner dynamic of Luther’s theology.”95 This shows that

the internal dynamics of Luther’s theology did contribute to

various doctrines that ensued and a correlation can plausibly

be made between Luther with Melanchthon’s apologetics and

Calvin. Although this could never be on matters such as

interpretations on the presence of Christ in the Eucharistic,

doctrines such as sola fide, sola scriptura (scripture alone) and sola

gratia (grace alone) were certainly present amongst all the

reformers.

Lane’s John Calvin Student of the Church Fathers asserts how it is

indisputable that Calvin did depend of Luther and also cites

Bucer. He says “His dependence upon Luther and Bucer is

undoubted and yet they are rarely named by Calvin, since his

references are not acknowledgment of indebtedness.”96 This

shows the influence although indirectly referenced by Calvin

was still prevalent in his works. Cottret’s Calvin A Biography

95 Lohse, p.796 Lane, p.30

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

36

shows this concurrence between Calvin and Luther in relation

to the debate over free-will with Erasmus. He states “He

follows Luther in his denial of free will, and refers to Saint

Augustine.”97 This demonstrates Luther’s influence on Calvin,

Cottret furthermore gives Calvin’s interpretation of how he

understood free will. He says “He denounces the illusion of

the person who believes himself to will, when God is will

through him.” 98 This shows like Luther, that Calvin was

asserting the delusion of supposing a self will and the

actuality of God’s will, which emanates through an individual.

To understand the extent of Luther’s contribution towards the

later Protestant Doctrine of Sola fide, one must also analyse the

influence that the Diet of Augsburg had on how Luther’s

teaching was received. The Diet of Augsburg was called in 1530

by Elector John under the summons issued by Charles V, the

then King of England and began on the 8th April. The council

sought to construct a defence against the Turks in the south

as well as address religious tensions in the empire. Brecht

says “He was concerned about arriving at a uniform, Christian

97 Cottret, p.31298 Cottret, p.312

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

37

truth, doing away with everything incorrectly interpreted on

either side, and restoring the unity of the church”99 This

shows how the then King sought to try reconcile both sides of

the Church, those who believed Luther’s viewed were

justifiable and those who wanted to remain in the preceding

medieval sacramental tradition that had existed for centuries

previous. However those who followed Luther had been

previously marginalised at other councils. Brecht illustrates

this, he says “At the Diet of Speyer the year before, King

Ferdinand, representing his brother the emperor, had decreed

that the Edict of Worms should be reinstated and that Luther’s

followers be discriminated against.”100 This demonstrates the

hostility Luther faced from nobility and church, this would

have enormous repercussions later at the Council of Trent in

1545, when both sides’ differences would become

irreconcilable.

I will now analyse the sacramental role of baptism in relation

to sola fide and examine how Luther and his contemporaries

responded to the emergence of Anabaptists. Brecht’s Martin Luther:

The Preservation of the Church 1532-1546 shows Luther’s retort of

Anabaptists. He states “Although Luther intervened, in the

Reformation taking place in individual territories only when

he was called upon, and his participation thus did not follow

any schedule; he made every available opportunity to oppose

the spread of Anabaptism.”101 This shows Luther’s denunciation

99 Brecht, p.369 (1990)100 Brecht, p.369 (1990)101 Brecht, p.34 (1993)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

38

of Anabaptists using every chance to discredit their beliefs.

He says “At the end of 1532 he warned the council of Münster

in Westphalia and Bernhard Rothmann, the local preacher, not

to fall prey to Zwinglianism and Anabaptism.”102 This

represents Luther’s abhorrence of the Anabaptist movement,

three years before ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ in 1525, but also his

discrediting of Zwinglianism and warns the council of Münster

not to fall victim to both parties. As well as Luther, Bucer

also discredited the Anabaptist movement and Brecht examines

this.

He says “At the beginning of March 1534 Bucer’s Account from the

Holy Scriptures was published, on which he distanced himself from

the Anabaptist in Münster [...] which showed that he had come

closer to the Lutheran position [...]”103 This demonstrates

Bucer’s publication of Account from the Holy Scriptures in 1534,

detached any association with himself and anabaptists and

Brecht demonstrates how this brought him nearer to

Lutheranism. Brecht also cites the example of Menno Simons, a

Dutch Catholic priest, this symbolizes that the Anabaptist

movement was acknowledged by some members of the church. He

says “By the year 1531, still a Catholic priest and

ministering in a Catholic parish, he was sure that it was

wrong to baptise babies; that the anabaptists who taught this

was wrong might be mistaken in several of their beliefs but

not in their main doctrine.”104 This demonstrates that

102 Brecht, p.34 (1993)103 Brecht, p.42 (1993)104 Chadwick, p.117

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

39

condemnation of infant baptism came not only from the

Anabaptist movement but also from within the Catholic Church

itself. Asserting, that although the movement was mistaken in

a number of its belief; it was however correct in its main

doctrinal statement of rejecting infant baptism.

I will now examine Luther’s understanding of baptism in

relation to faith. Lohse says “Nevertheless, in 1523, even for

Luther the problem of baptism and faith, or of faith and

baptism was hanging fire.”105 This depicts that for Luther this

was a complicated notion to comprehend conclusively, given

Luther’s assertion of justification by faith. Is then baptism

supplementary to faith or conjoined with it? Does faith have

soteriological priority over baptism and thus baptism is then

symbolic of salvation through this faith? There seems to be

little definitive answer by Luther on this, as he recognizes

that infant baptism had been practiced for centuries in the

Church since the very earliest origins and so to denounce it

would be degrading to his ancestors. He states “His most

important argument reads that when baptism is made dependent

on faith, we will scarcely ever arrive at the assurance of

having sufficient faith and thus at the validity of our

baptism.”106 This portrays that if baptism was dependant of

faith then it would not be assuring of its sufficient faith

and of the baptism. He concludes “Baptism rather points to the

fact that salvation comes only from God.” 107 Lohse’s

105 Lohse, p.303106 Lohse, p.305107 Lohse, p.305

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

40

interpretation of Luther depicts that the sacrament of baptism

points solely to the divine aspect of salvation.

I will now look at the emergence of a Lutheran Doctrine of Sola

fide in order to analyse whether this contributed to wider

Protestantism. Firstly, I will look at some Lutheran articles

of faith that where published leading up to the Council of

Trent (Lt. Concilium Tridentinum). This council began after much

delay in 1545 and eventually ended in 1563. In preparation for

the council, Luther wrote The Smalcald Articles in 1537. He says

“All have sinned and are justified freely, without their own

works and merits, by His grace, through the redemption that is

in Christ Jesus, in His blood (Romans 3:23-25). This is

necessary to believe. This cannot be otherwise acquired or

grasped by any work, law or merit. Therefore, it is clear and

certain that this faith alone justifies us.”108 This shows the

establishment of Lutheran doctrine and demonstrates the

emergence of a Doctrine of Sola fide and it’s imperativeness in

Lutheran theology and demonstrates that both grace and faith

where fundamental to their core beliefs. With the emergence of

a Catholic counter-reformation and the increasing

fundamentalist evangelicals, the divide between those

supporting Roman Catholicism and those who did not grew wider

leading up to the council.

I will now look at Augsburg Confession (1530) and Apology of the

Augsburg Confession (1531). Chadwick demonstrates another example

of the emergence of Lutheran doctrine before the Council of

Trent, highlighting the affiliation between the Augsburg 108 Luther, p.289 (2005)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

41

Confession (Lt. Confessio Augustana) and Melanchthon’s apology. He

states “In many of the corpora doctrinae the Augsburg Confession

was treated as inseparable from the apology. It now contained

a systematic doctrine of justification by faith.”109 This shows

how both articles contained a methodical explanation of the

Doctrine of Sola fide. Both articles were significant in their

contribution to the ‘Body of Doctrine’ (Lt. Corpora Doctrinae);

this was a 16th and 17th century collection of Protestant

confessional/creedal writings of their faith. Chadwick

concludes showing Luther’s approval of Melanchthon’s

Commonplaces (Lt. Loci Communes). He concludes “Luther liked it

and it became the standard textbook for instruction in

Christian doctrine.”110 This depicts the beginnings of a

formulation of standardises instruction of Lutheran doctrine.

The Smalcald Articles and Augsburg Confession plus Apology where later

included in the Book of Concord (1580) and this would later

demonstrate the standardisation of Lutheranism with the

Doctrine of Sola fide being central to its core beliefs.

Brecht shows the irreconcilable differences that permeated

amongst the Roman Catholics and the evangelical leading up to

the Council of Trent. He says “At the time the gulf between

Luther and the pope, between the evangelical and the Roman

Church, was seen by both sides as unbridgeable.”111 Brecht goes

on to exemplify the outcome of these irreversible differences,

asserting that Luther foresaw this cumulating the beginnings

109 Chadwick, p.231110 Chadwick, p.234111 Brecht, p.361 (1993)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

42

of a war with the arming of the emperor and pope. He states

“On 3 February 1546 Luther mentioned the arming of the emperor

and the pope against the evangelicals. He did not live to see

the outbreak of the Smalcald War.”112 Luther died before

outburst of the Smalcald War although it is plausible that he

would not have endorsed this as his intention was to reform

and define religious truth and not to promote disunity amongst

warring factions. Brecht’s scholarship portrayed the Council

of Trent’s significance because it illustrates the

irreconcilable differences amongst Roman Catholics and the

emerging evangelicals.

In conclusion to the original research question; to what

extent did Luther's 1525 publication 'On the Bondage of the Will'

contribute to the later construction of the Protestant Doctrine

of Sola fide? The three areas of research that I set out prior

all had evidence to support this hypothesis.

In terms of my first area of research, I looked in to Luther’s

early life and contributory works. Firstly, it seems plausible

to correlate Luther’s early life as Augustinian monk and his

lecturing at the University of Wittenberg did contribute to

his later position on justification by faith as MacCulloch

demonstrated. In terms of my first contributory work, the

extract from Mueller’s translation of Luther’s Commentary on

Romans showed his reading of Paul though a sola fide premise. My

second contributory work Ninety-Five Theses also substantiated

evidence of sola fide. Aland depicted Luther’s abhorrence of 112 Brecht, p.367 (1993)

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

43

indulgences and MacCulloch illustrated the heavy handed

response to this by the Catholic Church. Randell showed how

this contributed to sola fide, explaining that Luther’s saw

indulgences as works and in direct opposition to grace which

was freely receive through faith.

Lehman exemplified the significant of my third contributory,

The Babylonian Captivity. This showed how Luther redefined the

traditional seven sacraments of Roman Catholicism to only

those that were substantiated by scripture and also his call

for the pope to teach nothing but faith. However Lehman did

portray a contradiction in Luther’s assertion of sola fide.

Initially, he cites Luther’s interpretation of the

circumcision of Abraham in Gen 17:3-11 to substantiate

justification by faith in the Old Testament. Later, Lehman

refers to Luther’s understanding of baptism, which he asserts

Luther saw as full and complete justification. Is this a

discrepancy in Luther’s sola fide premise? Lohse commentates on

how Luther understood this sacrament in relation to sola fide,

stating that baptism points to salvation being solely from God

through faith.

The second area of research, I looked into extract from

Luther’s ‘On the Bondage of the Will’. I concluded from this research

that the main themes of this where; the rejection of free

will, the diametric opposition of good and evil. The only

possible was for humans to be anything commendable is through

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

44

grace that is freely bestowed from faith in God and can never

be achieved through self endeavour or merit. As well as

Luther’s metaphysical premise that God is universal

sovereignty and omnipotent. After examining extracts from the

book, I then looked at how modern scholarship has received

Luther. I would agree with Friedenthal’s analysis because it

demonstrated the absoluteness of faith and grace that Luther

was asserting. Marius illustrated how Luther did not just

interpret some of scripture and theological issues though his

interpretation of Paul but almost all of it. Citing James’

epistle as an example, Luther’s detested it because he

interpreted it was contrary to Paul’s justification by faith.

I would conclude that ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ did contribute

somewhat to the different outcomes of the reformation with it

assertions of absolute faith in terms of ontology. McGrath and

Reardon illustrated this contribution and the heterogeneous

nature of the European Reformations. However it is plausible

that Luther did not envisage that his stipulations on sola fide

would later cumulate in some of the outcomes of the European

Reformations. For example; the German Peasants’ War (1524-

1525) which I doubt Luther would have endorsed.

In terms of Luther influence upon other reformers, Chadwick

showed the difference between the Suisse and German

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

45

reformations. Chadwick also demonstrated that although

Luther’s ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ was not used directly by

Zwingli, his German New Testament was however translated into

Suisse-German for their use. Chadwick also showed the

differences that ensued between Reformed and Lutherans and

cited Calvin’s Secunda Defensio as an attempt to unify their

differences. Lane argued that it was certain that Calvin did

depend of Luther, although he never directly quoted him,

demonstrating that some of Luther’s theology was clearly

evident in Calvin’s works. Cottret showed the consensus

between Calvin and Luther in relation to the debate over free-

will with Erasmus. Both Cottret and Lane substantiate that

Luther’s ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ and wider Lutheran theology

contributed to Calvinism both directly and indirectly.

Furthermore, this also shows affirming evidence to my original

research question, Luther’s book was evidently influence other

reformers outside of his own movement.

However, In terms of some of the ramifications of Luther’s

contributions, it was evident that he would not have agreed

with all them, for example; the Anabaptists movement and

predestination theologies. Brecht showed his disapproval of

Anabaptists and Zwinglianism, warning the council of Münster

in Westphalia not to fall prey to them three years prior to

publishing ‘On the Bondage of the Will’. Given that Luther was already

warning of his disapproval of these groups, were the roots of

division already sewn amongst reforming groups? Lohse showed

how Luther interpreted Baptism, asserting that it points

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

46

towards the fact that salvation comes only from God. In terms

of the significance of the Council of Trent to the adoption of

sola fide as Lutheran doctrine, Chadwick demonstrated extracts

from the Augsburg Confession (1530) and Apology of the Augsburg

Confession (1531). Also, Luther’s The Smalcald Articles (1537)

illustrated furthermore the beginnings of a standardised

Lutheran systematic doctrine which included sola fide. These

three articles were later incorporated in The Book of Concord

(1580). Brecht showed the irreconcilable differences between

Lutherans and Roman Catholics by the time the council

convened. In conclusion Luther did contribute towards a wider

Doctrine of Sola fide but his greatest influence was in later

Lutheranism. Calvin seems to be the only substantial

Protestant reformer other than those who adhered to

Lutheranism that ‘On the Bondage of the Will’ and the Doctrine of sola

fide contributed too. I found little evidence other than

Zwingli’s use of Luther’s German New Testament to substantiate

his influence on Zwinglianism.

Word Count: 9825

BibliographyAland, K. (ed.), Martin Luther’s 95 Theses, Concordia Publish, 1967.

Brecht, M., Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation 1521-1532,

Fortress Press, 1990.

Brecht, M., Martin Luther: The Preservation of the Church 1532-1546, Augsburg

Fortress, 1993.

Bierma, L. D. (trans.), de Greef. W., The Writings of John Calvin: An

Introductory Guide, Westminster John Knox Press, 2008.

Chadwick, O., The Early Reformation of the Continent, OUP, 2001.

Cottret, B., Calvin A Biography, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000.

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

47

Dunn, J. D. G. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to St Paul, CUP, 2003.

Lane, A. N. S., John Calvin Student of the Church Fathers, T&T Clark, 1999.

Lehman, H. T. (ed.), Luther’s Works (vol. 36) Word and Sacrament II,

Fortress Press, 1975.

Lindberg, C., A Brief History of Christianity, Blackwell, 2006.

Lindberg, C., The European Reformations, Blackwell, 1996.

Lohse, B., Martin Luther’s Theology It’s Historical and Systematic Development,

Augsburg Fortress, 1999.

Luther, M., The Bondage of the Will, Watchmaker, 1931.

Luther, M., ‘The Smalcald Articles’ in Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions,

Concordia Publishing House, 2005.

McKim, D. K. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion Martin Luther, CUP, 2003.

Mueller, J. T. (Trans.), Luther, M., Commentary on Romans, Kregel,

1954.

MacCulloch, D., A History of Christianity, Penguin, 2009.

Marius, R., Martin Luther: The Christian between God and Death, Harvard

University Press, 1999.

McGrath, A. E., Reformation Thought: An Introduction, 2nd ed., Blackwell,

1993.

McKim, D. K. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion Martin Luther, CUP, 2003.

Mueller, J. T. (Trans.), Luther, M., Commentary on Romans, Kregel,

1954.

Mullet, M. A., The Catholic Reformation, Routledge, 1999.

Nowell, J. (trans.), Friedenthal, R., Luther, The Camelot Press,

1970.

Randell, K., Luther and the German Reformation, 1517-55, Hodder &

Stoughton, 1989.

Reardon, B., Religious Thought in the Reformation, Longman, 1981.

Rupp, G. & Watson, P. S. (eds.), Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and

Salvation, Westminster/John Knox Press, 1978.

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022

48

Trinkaus, E. (ed.), Controversies: De libero arbitrio/Hyperaspistes 1, Vol. 76

(Collected Works of Erasmus), Toronto Press, 1999.

0906715 Dissertation 08/10/2022