Collected Works of Martin Luther
Page 75
And yet we should humbly tell these prelates (especially should the preachers rebuke them, yet only by showing them from the Word of God) that they are acting against God and show them what He would have them do, and in addition diligently and earnestly pray to God or them; even as Jeremiah wrote to the children of Israel in Babylon that they should zealously pray or the king of Babylon, or his son and for his kingdom, although he had taken them captive, had troubled and slain them and done them all manner of evil.
And we can easily do this if we remember that the ban and all unrighteous authority cannot harm our souls, provided we submit to them, and they must ever be of profit, unless they are despised. So also are the authorities a thousandfold worse in the sight of God than we, and are therefore to be pitied rather than wickedly to be despised. For this reason we are also commanded in the law of Moses that no one shall revile the rulers, be they good or evil, even though they give great occasion. In short, we must have evil or childish rulers, — if it is not the Turk, then it must needs be the Christians. The world is far too wicked to be worthy of good and pious lords, it must have princes who go to war, levy taxes and shed blood, and it must have spiritual tyrants who impoverish and burden it with bulls and letters19 and laws. This and other chastisements are rather what it has deserved, and to resist them is nothing else than to resist God’s chastisement. As humbly as I conduct myself when God sends me a sickness, so humbly should I conduct myself toward the evil government, which the same God also sends me.
18. When we are justly and deservedly put under the ban our chief concern should be to correct the sins of commission and omission which caused the ban, since the ban always is imposed on account of sin (which is far worse than the ban itself), and yet here as elsewhere things are perverted, so that we only consider how much the rod hurts and not why we are punished. Where can you find men to-day who are as much in fear of sinning and provoking God as they are in fear of the ban? Thus it happens that we are more in fear of the wholesome chastisement than of the heinous sins. We must let men think and act thus, because the natural man does not see the spiritual harm in sin as he feels the smarts of chastisement; although the fear of the ban has also been exaggerated by the tyrannous methods and threatenings of the spiritual judges who drive the people to fear punishment more than sin.
When, however, we are unjustly put under the ban, we should be very careful that we in no way do, omit, say or withhold that on account of which we are under the ban (unless we cannot do so without sin and without injury to our neighbor)20, but rather should we endure the ban in humility, die happily under it, if it cannot be otherwise, and not be terrified, even though we do not receive the sacrament and are buried in unconsecrated ground. The reason is this: Truth and righteousness belong to the inner, spiritual fellowship21 and may not be abandoned under penalty of falling under God’s eternal ban. Therefore they dare not be surrendered for the sake of the external fellowship, which is immeasurably inferior, nor because of the ban. To receive the sacrament and to be buried in consecrated ground are of too little consequence that or their sake truth and righteousness be neglected. And that no one may think this strange I will go further and say that even he who dies under a just ban is not damned, unless indeed he did not repent of his sin or despised the ban. For sorrow and repentance make all things right, even though his body be exhumed or his ashes cast into the water22.
19. The unjust ban then is much more to be desired than either the just ban or the external fellowship. It is a very precious merit in the sight of God, and blessed is he who dies under an unjust ban. God will grant him an eternal crown for the truth’s sake, on account of which he is under the ban. Then let him sing in the words of Psalm cix, “They have cursed me, but Thou hast blessed me.” [Ps. 109:28] Only let us beware of despising the authorities, and humbly declare our innocence; if this does not avail, then we are free and without guilt in the sight of God. For if we are in duty bound by the commandment of Christ to agree with our adversary [Matt. 5:25]; how much more should we agree with the authority of the Christian Church, be it exercised justly or unjustly, by worthy or unworthy rulers.
An obedient child, though it does not deserve the punishment it receives from its mother, suffers no harm from the unjust chastisement, nay, by its very patience it becomes much dearer and more pleasing to the mother; how much more do we become lovable in God’s sight, if at the hands of evil rulers we endure the unmerited punishment of the Church, as our spiritual mother. For the Church remains our mother because Christ remains Christ, and she is not changed into a step-mother simply because of our evil rulers. Nevertheless, the prelates and bishops and their officials should be temperate and not hastily use the ban, for many bans means nothing else than many laws and commandments, and prescribing many laws is to set many snares for poor souls. And so by numerous ill-advised bans nothing more results than great offence and an occasion or sin, by which the wrath of God is provoked, although the ban was ordained to reconcile Him. And although we are truly bound to obey them, still more are they bound to direct, change and regulate their decree and authority according to our ability and need and for our correction and salvation; for we have shown from St. Paul23 that power is given not for destruction but for edification [2 Cor. 13:10].
20. The ban should be applied not only to heretics and schismatics, but to all who are guilty of open sin, as we have shown above from St. Paul, who commands that the railer, extortioner, fornicator and drunkard be put under the ban [1 Cor. 5:11]. But in our day such sinners are let in peace, especially if they are bigwigs; and to the disgrace of this noble form of authority, the ban is used only for the collection of debts of money, often so insignificant that the costs amount to more than the original debt. In order to gloss this over they have hit upon a new device, saying they put under the ban not because of debt but because of disobedience, because the summons was not respected; were it not for debt, however, they would forget the disobedience, as we see when many other sins, even their own, escape the ban. A poor man must often be disobedient if he is cited to go so many miles, lose time and money and neglect his trade. It is utter tyranny to summon a man to come such a distance across country to court.
And I commend the temporal princes24 who will not permit the ban and the abuses connected with it in their lands and among their people. What are princes and counsellors for if they do not concern themselves with and judge such temporal matters as debts, each in their city and province and among their subjects? The spiritual powers should be concerned with the Word of God, with sin, and with the devil, in order to bring souls to God, and should relinquish temporal cases to the temporal judges, as Paul writes25[1 Cor. 6:1]. Indeed, as things are now, it is almost necessary to use the ban in order to drive the people into the Church and not out of it.
21. Whether one be justly or unjustly under the ban, no one may exclude him from the Church until the Gospel has been read or the sermon preached26. For from the hearing of the Gospel and the sermon no one shall or can exclude or be excluded. The hearing of the Word of God should remain free to every one27. Nay, those who are under a just ban ought most of all to hear it, that they may perchance be moved by it to acknowledge their sin and to reform. We read that it was the ancient practice of the Church to dismiss those under the ban after the sermon, and if a whole congregation were under the ban the sermon must be allowed to proceed just as though there were no ban. In addition, even though he who is under the ban may not remain for the mass after the sermon, nor come to the sacrament28, nevertheless he should not neglect it, but spiritually come to the sacrament, that is, he should heartily desire it and believe that he can spiritually receive it, as was said in the treatise on the sacrament29.
ENDNOTES.
1 In the preceding treatise on the Blessed Sacrament.
2 See above, p. 10.
3 See above, p. 18.
4 I. e., the necessaries of life.
5 E. g., the crusades against heretics, and the inquisition of the
thirteenth century. Luther’s statement that to burn heretics is contrary to the will of the Holy Spirit was condemned in the Bull Exsurge Domine, of July 15, 1520.
6 Cf. p. 53.
7 Cf. p. 10.
8 See Vol. I, pp. 53, 163 ff.
9 The officials were officers of the bishops’ courts; see also below, p. 103.
10 In Vito, lib. V, tit. xi, c. I,Cum medicinalis.
11 According to Luther’s interpretation of 1 Cor. 5:5. Cf. also Acts 5:5.
12 The passage quoted from the canon law.
13 For instances see the Gravamina of the German Nation (1521), Wrede, Deutsche Reichstagsakten, II, 685.
14 Thiele, Luthers Sprichwörtersammlung, No. 276.
15 I. e., a cleric.
16 This statement also was condemned in the papal bull.
17 The “officials” were the administrators of this discipline, see above, p. 41.
18 A very important limitation for Luther’s position.
19 See Open Letter to the Nobility, below, p. 98.
20 Again an important limitation.
21 See above, p. 41.
22 The ashes of Hus were cast into the Rhine (1415), and the body of Wycliff was exhumed and cremated and the ashes cast into the water (1427).
23 See above, p. 42.
24 In 1518 both George and Frederick of Saxony took the position that spiritual jurisdiction should be limited to spiritual matters. Gess, Akten und Briefe zur Kirchen politik Georgs 1, 44.
25 Luther puts a peculiar construction upon this passage.
26 The ancient service was divided into the service of the Word (missa catechumenorum) and the celebration of the sacrament (missa fidelium); before the second, those under the ban as well as the catechumens were required to withdraw.
27 The “great ban” excluded from all services.
28 According to Roman Catholic usage there is a distinction between hearing mass and receiving the sacrament.
29 Compare Treatise Concerning the Blessed Sacrament, above, p. 25.
A Brief Explanation of the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer (1520)
Translated by A. T. W. Steinhaeuser
CONTENTS
A BRIEF EXPLANATION (EINE KURZE FORM) OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE CREED, AND THE LORD’S PRAYER
INTRODUCTION
ENDNOTES.
A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE CREED, AND THE LORD’S PRAYER
PREFACE
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
A BRIEF CONCLUSION TO THE TEN COMANDMENTS
THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE COMMANDMENTS
THE CREED
THE LORD’S PRAYER
AMEN
ENDNOTES.
A BRIEF EXPLANATION (EINE KURZE FORM) OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE CREED, AND THE LORD’S PRAYER
1520
INTRODUCTION
THE WORK HERE presented bears the German title, Eine kurze Form der zehn Gebote, eine kurze Form des Glaubens, eine kurze Form des Vaterunsers. It is the most important of Luther’s catechetical works prior to the Catechisms of 1529, and deserves the name that has been given it, “the first evangelical catechism.”1
To be sure, the name “catechism” was not applied to the Kurze Form at the time. In mediaeval usage “catechism” was the name for oral instruction in the elements of Christian truth. This instruction had been based from time immemorial upon the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer. The decalogue held a minor place and was overshadowed by the commandments of the church. During the later Middle Ages the influence of the sacrament of penance gave it a higher position. It gradually became a subject of “catechetical” instruction, but only alongside of the other standards for the classification of sins.2 It was the work of Luther so to expound the Ten Commandments as to give them a permanent place of their own in Christian instruction, side by side with the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer.
The first manuals of instruction of this kind were prepared for the use of the priests, to guide them in the questioning of penitents, but with the discovery of the art of printing popular hand-books for the use of the laity became more and more common, and with certain of these manuals Luther was familiar.3
From the beginning of his ministry at Wittenberg, Luther had preached from time to time upon the Ten Commandments and the Lord’s Prayer. In 1518 his friend Agricola published a series of sermons on the Lord’s Prayer which Luther had preached in Lent, 1517.4 In the same year Luther published his own Kurze Auslegung der zehn Gebote, ihrer Erfüllung und Uebertretung.5 The year 1519 saw the publication of the Kurze Form das Paternoster zu verstehen und zu beten, and the Kurze und gute Auslegung des Vaterunsers vor sich und hinter sich.6 7 The Treatise on Good Works8, which is essentially an exposition of the decalogue, was written in the early months of 1520. During the same period the mind of Luther was frequently occupied with the abuses of the confessional, as we learn from the Confitendi Ratio,9 and the Kurze Unterweisung wie man beichten soil.10 All the material for the first and third parts of the present work was, therefore, in hand and had appeared in print before 1520.
In 1520 the Kurze Form came from the press.11 It consists of three separately composed expositions of the three chief subjects of catechetical instruction in the Middle Ages. The expositions of the Commandments and the Lord’s Prayer are reproductions of the Kurze Auslegung der zehn Gebote and the Kurze Form das Paternoster zu verstehen und zu beten. The treatment of the Apostles’ Creed is new, as is also the Introduction, in which Luther sets forth the relation of the three parts to one another in the unity of the Christian life.
The work is not scientific and theological, but popular and religious. Its purpose is primarily devotional, not pedagogical. The mediæval root out of which it grew is not to be denied. The catalogue of transgressions and fulfilments attached to the explanation of the decalogue shows that it is intended to be a manual for penitents, but the spirit in which the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer are explained is not mediæval, and the manner in which the explanations of the decalogue are simplified and rid of the excrescences of the XV Century hand-books shows the new evangelical conception of confession to which Luther had attained. The division of the Creed into three articles instead of the traditional twelve marks an epoch in the development of catechetical instruction. The little book contains passages of rare beauty, clouded at times, we fear, by the new language into which it has here been put, and seldom has the Wesen des Christentums been more simply and tellingly set forth than in the treatment of the Creed.
In 1522 Luther republished the Kurze Form with a few slight changes and a number of additions under the title Betbüchlein. The Betbüchlein ran through many editions, and grew in the end to a book of rather large proportions, a complete manual of devotion.
In its original form and as the chief content of the Betbüchlein, the Kurze Form exercised a profound influence upon the manuals of Christian doctrine that appeared in ever-increasing number after 1522.12 Its influence extended to England, where Marshall’s Goodly Primer (1534 and 35) offered to English readers a translation of the Betbüchlein, in which, however, no acknowledgments were made to the original author.13
The Kurze Form is found in Weimar Ed., VII, 194 ff.; Erl. Ed.,
XXII, 3 ff.; Clemen Ed., II, 38 ff.; Walch Ed., X, 182 ff.; St.
Louis Ed., X, 149 ff.
LITERATURE
F. Cohrs, Die evang. Katechismusversuche vor L.’s Enchiridion (especially I, 1 ff. and IV, 229 ff.), Arts. Katechismen L.’s and Katechismusunterricht in Realencyk., X, 130 ff., and XXIII, 743 ff., and Introd. to Betbüchlein in Weimar Ed., X; O. Albrecht, Vorbemerkungen zu den beiden Katechismen von 1529, in Weimar Ed., XXX’, 426 ff. (Further literature cited by all the above.) See also Gecken, Bilderkatechismus d. XV Jh. and von Zezschwitz, System d. Katechetik (especially II, i).
CHARLES M. JACOBS.
LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,
Mount Airy, Philadelphia
ENDNOTES.
1 Cohrs, Evang. Katec
hismusversuche, I, 4.
2 von Zezschwitz, Katechetik, II, 176, 265 ff.
3 Weimar Ed., X’, 475.
4 Weimar Ed., IX, 122 ff. The same series was republished by Luther himself, ibid., IV, 74 ff.
5 Weimar Ed., I, 248 ff.
6 Weimar Ed., VI, 9 ff.
7 Weimar Ed., VI, 20 ff.
8 Vol. I, pp. 187 ff.
9 Vol. I, pp. 81-101.
10 Weimar Ed., II, 47 ff.
11 On the exact date, see Weimar Ed., VII, 195; Clemen, II, 38.
12 See Cohrs, IV, 326 ff.
13 For this information I am indebted to the Rev. J. F. Bornhold, of Mount Holly, N. J. The act was discovered almost simultaneously by Pro. M. Reu, of Dubuque, Iowa.
A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE CREED, AND THE LORD’S PRAYER