This is a slice of my philosophical, lay scientific, musical, religious skepticism, and poetic musings. (All poems are my own.) The science and philosophy side meet in my study of cognitive philosophy; Dan Dennett was the first serious influence on me, but I've moved beyond him. The poems are somewhat related, as many are on philosophical or psychological themes. That includes existentialism and questions of selfhood, death, and more. Nature and other poems will also show up here on occasion.
Wednesday, August 21, 2019
Luther vs Eck, 1519
I just got to thinking the other day that, with the 95 Theses (and legendary claims about them) two years ago, I probably "should" do some semi-regular blogging about 500th anniversary Luther events at least through the 1521 original date if not through 1530.
And I am reminded that his debate with Johann Eck, which really put him in the road map, happened in July 1519.
Wikipedia has a good basic overview of the Leipzig Debate. (Note: At one time, overall, in defense of critics, I would have rated Wiki a B-plus if not even an A-minus. Now, based in part on how many entries it lacks — and in the case of current affairs, seemingly refuses to add — it's a flat B.)
So, first, not quite a legend, but, close. Remember that Luther was not alone. Karlstadt actually went first, and was considered the heavier hitter. From a Lutheran POV, he was written out because of later bumbling and intransigence. But, given that much of that intransigence was actually simply being more "Reformed," why hasn't the Reformed tradition picked up on him at least a small bit more?
Eck did win one big point, that in essence is a ticking time bomb for Catholicism AND for any version of Protestantism that claims any sort of hierarchical power. If both popes AND councils can err, as Eck stated and Luther conceded, than how can any church claim any authority over any individual, or any individual's interpretation?
To put it another way, to Luther's own time and to pending future events, Luther vs. the Schwármer was hoist on his own petard by Johann Eck. Or Luther vs. Karlstadt, for that matter.
The bigger issue yet is that, other than calling on secular government to uphold his interpretation of the bible by military force, Luther never wrestled with that.
Eck? "Tradition" of the Holy Roman Church remained in place. This was also true, of course, in the Orthodox world. It remained true in the Church of England and, to a lesser degree, in the Wesleyan / Methodist world.
This same issue extends to the canon of Scripture. Luther claimed that Purgatory exists nowhere in the Bible. Praying for the dead, tis true is found only in 2 Maccabees, which Luther was soon enough to reject. That said Protestant grounds for rejecting deuterocanonical books are themselves unstable, as pre-Masoretic Texas Tanakhs didn't have Esther, among other things — as In addition, as Wiki notes, Hebrews clearly, and Paul seemingly, reference deuterocanonical works.
Here, as with his "epistle of straw" on James and his thinking that Revelation should also "come out," Luther was adopting an individualist stance, while expecting others to follow him. Had he looked at New Testament canons from some of the smaller churches in the Orthodox tradition, and their omitting it, he might have followed through on the impulse to declare Revelation non-canonical.
Of course, this reaches its acme in 19th century America. Short of proving fraud against Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy (seemingly easy with the former, though), how can you say these aren't legitimate new revelations? It's like a "marketplace of ideas" for Christian religion, but Luther wanting a thumb on the scales.
However, baptisms for the dead — and without any condemnation of the practice — appears in 1 Corinthians. Yes, it's in the form of a rhetorical question, but Paul makes it look common — and acceptable. Luther, as was his wont elsewhere, seems to simply ignore this. (He later ignores that this might just undercut Lutheran and old Catholic ideas about baptism.)
And, in turn, this too sets a track for followers. Fundamentalists of today ignore the call to stone people to death for tattoos, to shun them or whatever for wearing wool-polyester blends on clothing and many other things. Luther himself and his catechisms of a decade later try to claim a separation in the Torah between moral, civil and ceremonial uses of the law.
In all of this, though Eric Metaxas is wrong in spades to make Luther into an anachronistic modern evangelical preacher, in some ways, contra horrified Lutherans, a thread is there.
Labels:
biblical criticism,
Luther (Martin),
Lutheranism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment