Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-cx56b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-25T05:19:25.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Old Testament Promissio and Luther's New Hermeneutic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

James S. Preus
James S. Preus
Affiliation:
Harvard Divinity School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the main stream of contemporary Luther scholarship, there is broad agreement that the emergence of “reformation theology” is organically related to, if not constituted by, a new biblical hermeneutic.

Furthermore, in the search for the “sources of Luther's theology,” historians have to be, and are, frequently reminded that Luther may have gotten some of his key ideas from the Bible — however important Augustine, Bernard, Occam, Biel or Staupitz may have been for his theological formation.

Accepting these two assertions, I wish to question the adequacy of the current interpretation of Luther's hermeneutical development, and to indicate the direction in which I believe the hermeneutical changes evident in Luther's earliest exegetical writing (the Dictata super psalterium, 1513–15) can help make better sense of the well-known theological innovations which appear in his writings of the 1520's.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , April 1967 , pp. 145 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The writings of Gerhard Ebeling, especially von Luthers Hermeneutik, Die Anfänge, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 48 (1951), 172–230Google Scholar, dominate this area of Luther research. For earlier literature, see 172f., n.5 of the article cited, and bibliography in Ebeling, Evangelische Evangelienauslegung (München, 1942)Google Scholar. Cf. also idem, Hermeneutik, in RGG 3 III, 242–62; Luthers Auslegung des 14.(15.) Psalms in der ersten Psalmenvorlesung im Vergleich mit der exegetischen Tradition, ZThK 50 (1953), 280–339Google Scholar; Luthers Auslegung des 44.(45.) Psalms, in Lutherforschung Heute, ed. Vajta, V. (Berlin, 1958), 32–48Google Scholar; vom Jahre, Luthers Psalterdruck 1513, ZThK 50 (1953), 43–99Google Scholar; The New Hermeneutics and the Young Luther, Theology Today 21 (1964), 34–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 J. Pelikan, Luther the Expositor (St. Louis, 1959), 42.

3 As Ebeling stated it in Evangelienauslegung, 280, the uniqueness of Luther's exegesis in the Dictata is “not that the book of Psalms is christological generally, and that the OT was exegeted from the NT, but that with such energy and concentration an exclusively christological exegesis was established as a fundamental hermeneutical principle.” Cf. Ebeling's succinct statement, “Christ is the text,” Die Anfänge, 225.

4 Ebeling, Luthers Psalterdruck, 82. For the Praefatio Ihesu Christi, see WA 55/1, 6–11.

5 Psalm 1: “The letter is that the Lord Jesus did not yield to the favorite pursuits of the Jews and of the perverse and adulterous generation which were current in his time” (55/1,8.12–10.2); Psalm 2: “The letter concerns the fury of the Jews and Gentiles against Christ in his passion” (55/1,10.6f.); Psalm 3: “‘Lord, how they [my enemies] are multiplied’ is ad literam a complaint of Christ about his enemies the Jews” (55/1,10.10–12.). Luther insists, “Omnis prophetia et omnis propheta de Christo domino debet intelligi, nisi ubi manifestis verbis appareat de alio loqui” (55/1,6.25f.).

6 Luther singles out for attack “carnal” interpreters who “Sicut Iudei applicantes semper Psalmos ad veteres hystorias extra Christum” (55/1,2.10f.), and seems to have the 14th-century Franciscan Nicholas of Lyra in mind when he objects: “… quidam nimis multos psalmos exponunt non prophetice sed hystorice, secuti quosdam Rabim hebraeos falsigraphos …” (55/1,8.3–5). Luther here follows in the footsteps of Faber Stapulensis, whose 1509 Psalms-commentary Luther used in preparing his own. Faber objects to the Jews who make David more a historian than a prophet (“historicum potius facere quam prophetam”) (Quincuplex psalterium, Praefatio).

7 55/1,8.6f, with reference to 2 Cor. 2:16.

8 3,335.21f. Tropology is called the sensus primarius, 3,531.34.

9 3,466.26f. “… Iustitia dei … Tropologice est fides Christi Ro.1. ‘Revelatur enim Iustitia Dei in euangelio ex fide in fidem.’” Cf. 3,200.18f. and 458.9–11. It is in this Christ-faith nexus, according to Ebeling, that we find the “Urform” of the reformation doctrine of justification (Hermeneutik, 251).

10 For a full, and still the best, treatment of the intimate relationship of Christ and faith, see Erich Vogelsang, Die Anfänge von Luthers Christologie (Berlin und Leipzig, 1929). Luther states the hermeneutical rule as follows: “… deus facit omnes sanctos suos conformes fieri imagini filii sui….” (3,46.32f.); cf. Ebeling's discussion, Die Anfänge, 226, where this passage is cited. Readily available for English readers is Wilhelm Pauck's excellent introduction to Luther: Lectures on Romans (LCC vol. 15, Philadelphia, 1961); see especially p. xxxiii.

11 I hope to treat this more fully in a book-length study, now in preparation, which will set Luther's development within the medieval hermeneutical tradition in which he was trained.

12 In the preface to his scholia, Luther elevates David to a unique position even among the prophets, pointing out that he alone among them claims (in 2 Reg. 23:2) that the Spirit has spoken through him (55/2,27.8–10). Luther here follows Faber.

13 According to the Vulgate numbering, which is used throughout this study, these are Pss. 6, 31, 37, 50, 101, 129 and 142.

14 For chronological information I depend on Vogelsang in his introduction to Der junge Luther (Luthers Werke in Auswahl, ed. O. Clemen; vol. 5, Berlin, 1955); according to Vogelsang, p. 40, the Psalms-course began Aug. 16, 1513, and ran until Oct. 20, 1515, and the time-span from the exegesis of Ps. 6 to that of Ps. 142 would be from autumn, 1513, to late summer, 1515.

15 55/1,38.3–6: “Oratio Christi pro suis passionibus et peccatis membrorum suorum ut mediatoris inter deum patrem et homines.” The editors provide Faber's comparable description, 55/1,39.13–15: “Propheta in spiritu inducit Christum patrem orantem, ea quae membrorum sunt sua facientem et poenitentiam suam patri offerentem.”

16 55/1,39.15–20, with examples.

17 55/1,138.13–15: “… in isto Psalmo nulla fit confessio peccati, sed tantum questio penarum, ideo principaliter sunt verba Christi, qui sine peccato in multis tamen passionibus fuit….” Thus, the fact that sins are not being confessed in the psalm makes the christological starting-point convenient, and not really as radical as Ebeling suggests (The New Hermeneutics, 40).

18 3,171.26: “de modo vere poenitendi….”

19 3,172.24–27: “Scire ergo filium dei esse incarnatum pro salute nostra et extra eum omnes esse in peccatis, hec est eruditio ista, intellectus iste: quod nemo nisi per spiritum sanctum cognovit.”

20 3,211.8f.: “Planctus et querela mediatoris nostri in passione propter peccata nostra constituti.”

21 3,211.15–22: “Quia secundum apostolum Christus factus est pro nobis maledictum Gal. 3[:13] et peccatum 2. Cor. [5:21] et peccata nostra ipse tulit Esaie 53[:12], ideo hic psalmus in persona eius dicitur, in quo commemorat et confitetur pro nobis Deo patri peccata nostra et querit liberationem sui (i.e. nostram per ipsum et in ipso). Ideo quicunque vult illum psalmum fructuose orare, debet eum non in se, sed in Christo orare et tanquam eum audire orantem, et sic ei suum adiungere affectum et dicere Amen.”

22 3,212.34f.: “… pena eius nostram culpam significat….” This and the text given in the preceding note provide clear examples of the hermeneutical presupposition of tropology: Christ and his passion are causally significative of our own spiritual existence.

23 3,284.2: “Optima penitencium et confiteri volentium eruditio et exemplum.”

24 3,284.27–29: “Potest quidem psalmus iste secundum hystoriam in persona David intelligi. Tamen secundum propheticum sensum debet accipi in persona nature humane (i.e. ecclesie Christi).”

25 3,291.22–24: “Patet itaque psalmum istum proprie non de David, sed in persona Ecclesie prophetice factum esse: a David velut parte Ecclesie, sumpta occasione ex hystoria, que in titulo nominatur.” (The title referred to is “Ad victoriam psalmus David,” 3,284.4.)

26 4,152.30f.: “… recte pro penitentibus psalmus iste orandus deputatur….”

27 4,141.4f.: “Oratio pauperis cum anxius fuerit….” This summary is the traditional one for this psalm.

28 According to Vogelsang's chronology, p. 40 in the work cited above, n.14.

29 4,141.4f.: “Oratio pauperis populi ante adventum Christi, cum anxius fuerit….” (The italicized words belong to the early, printed text; the rest is the later gloss.) Luther makes a similar adjustment in his approach to Ps. 122, where the printed summary reads: “Oratio fidelis populi ad Deum pro opprobrio divitum et superborum” (4,407.19), and the later marginal gloss adds: “Est autem iterum petitio adventus Christi in carnem” (ibid. 32).

30 4,141.18–21: “Et est oratio populi fidelis adventum Christi postulantis, qualis fuit tempore Herodis, quando et secundum carnem ab eo vexabatur, et simul per scribas, legis corruptores, multo peius vastabatur in vera intelligentia spirituali.”

31 4,141.25–27: “Tropologice autem est oratio pro adventu spirituali Christi, quando anima a demonibus oppressa viciis, etiam foris in carne a mundo vexatur.”

32 4,141.27–30: “Sic erit et circa finem mundi in adventu secundo … ut tunc exurgere postuletur dominus Ihesus et misereatur Zion, maxime tempore Antichristi….”

33 4,418.20: “Petitio veniae pro peccatis … in persona populi fidelis.”

34 4,418.35–37.

35 4,418.35–419.18: “Est autem expressa petitio redemptionis populi a peccatis…. Ideo primo intelligitur de redemptione per Christum facta toti generi humano. Sed quia omnis, qui est in peccato, est adhuc sub lege, ideo moraliter est oratio pro quibuscunque peccatis.”

36 4,443.18–21: “Iste psalmus in spiritu et prophetico sensu est vox populi fidelis synagoge … petentis … anxie Christi adventum in carnem….” (Italics mine).

37 4,443.21f.: “… et sic facilis est psalmus intellectu.” Easier, certainly, than the intellectus described above, n.19.

38 Luther seems to have introduced the term to distinguish his meaning from the traditional “populus fidelis,” which simply referred to the Church. For Luther's use of “faithful synagogue,” cf. 4,78.34; 301.19; 346.15; 349.37; 364.28; 373.26; 399.24; 407.29; 443.19. I checked the text of nine medieval psalms-commentaries against five places in which Luther uses this designation, “faithful synagogue,” and found no occurrence of it. It therefore appears to be an important innovation on Luther's part.

39 4,443.26–29: “Et nota, quod moraliter hunc et omnes psalmos orare debes tanquam cum omnibus fidelibus devote orantibus eundem, ut scil. optes cum illis tuam quoque coram deo orationem venire et sic in unione et communione sanctorum.” (Italics mine).

40 4,443.22–26: “… quia ecclesia ipsum deputat pro poenitentibus, ideo moraliter intelligitur de adventu Christi in animam spirituali per gratiam…. Igitur pone hominen, qui exemplum martyrum intuens et sanctos preteriti temporis, pressus confusione nimis ardenter desideret gratiam.”

41 See above, n.6.

42 See above, n.25. This was consistent with the meaning of “prophetic” in Luther's preface.

43 We borrow the term “special person” from Bonaventura, who distinguishes such persons from the ordinary Israelites. The former understood the Law “spiritually,” so that for them it agreed with the Gospel (III Sent, d.40 q.1 and q.2 concl.2). H. A. Oberman has suggested the term “exegetical mysticism” for this medieval view of prophecy, which he finds represented clearly in James Perez of Valencia; see Oberman, “Simul Gemitus et Raptus”: Luther und die Mystik (paper read before the 3d International Congress for Luther Research, Järvenpää, Finland, Aug. 11–16, 1966; mimeographed and to be published), the text around n.89.

44 Luther introduces the idea of the remnant (reliquie) at 4,346.23f. and 408.24–29.

45 The spiritual advent of Christ is an important theme in the preaching of Bernard of Clairvaux, for whom Luther retained the utmost respect. See Bernard's seven sermons In adventu Domini (PL 183,35–56). Bernard grounds the spiritual advent in election on the one hand, and on the requirement of praeparatio in humilitate on the other. Thus, “medius [adventus] occultus est, in quo soli eum in seipsis vident electi” (Serm. 5 n.1; PL 183,50 D); cf. ibid. n.3; 51 D: “… Christum Dei Verbum recipiant singuli electorum.” The only references to the promise in these sermons pertain to the eschatological advent (Serm. 4 nn.1 and 5). Jn. 14:23 is the basic text which Bernard uses to instruct his hearers in preparation, which Bernard describes as follows: “Diligit enim animam quae in conspectu ejus, et sine intermissione, considerat, et sine simulatione dijudicat semetipsam. Idque judicium nonnisi propter nos a nobis exigit, quia si nosmetipsos judicaverimus, non utique judicabimur” (Serm. 3 n.7; 47 A f.).

46 4,261.25ff. The text: “Non nobis, domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam.” Luther's famous scholion on this passage is of critical importance for understanding the relation of Luther to the nominalist tradition regarding the question of meritum de congruo, to which Luther here refers favorably: cf. Oberman, “Facientibus quod in se est Deus non denegat gratiam.” Robert Holcot, O.P. and the Beginnings of Luther's Theology, HTR 55 (1962), 317–42, esp. 337ff. Here, we treat only the hermeneutical implications.

47 4,261.25–31: “Sicut adventus Christi in carnem ex mera misericordia dei promittentis datus, … nihilominus tamen preparationem et dispositionem oportuit fieri ad eum suscipiendum, sicut factum est in toto veteri testamento per lineam Christi. Nam quod promisit deus filium suum, fuit misericordia, quod autem exhibuit, fuit veritas et fidelitas eius, sicut Miche ultimo [7:20]: ‘dabis veritatem Iacob et misericordiam Abraam. …’”

48 4,261.39–262.3: “Ita et spiritualis adventus est per gratiam et futurus per gloriam … ex mera promissione miserentis dei. Promisit enim pro spirituali adventu sic: ‘petite et accipietis, quaerite et invenietis, pulsate et aperietur vobis….’” [Mt. 7:7].

49 4,262.7f.: “Sic pro adventu futuro promisit, ‘ut juste et sobrie et pie vivamus in hoc seculo, expectantes beatam spem.’” [Tit. 2:12f.].

50 4,262.13–16: “Unde sicut lex figura fuit et preparatio populi ad Christum suscipiendum, ita nostra factio quantum in nobis est, disponit nos ad gratiam. Atque totum tempus gratie preparatio est ad futuram gloriam et adventum secundum.”

51 3,368.22–24: “Christus est finis omnium et centrum, in quem omnia respiciunt et monstrant, ac si dicerent: Ecce iste est, qui est; nos autem non sumus, sed significamus tantum.”

52 3,375.32f.

53 WA TR I,136.15–17 (1532): “Per epistolam ad Romanos veni ad cognitionem aliquam Christi. Ibi videbam allegorias non esse, quid Christus significaret, sed quid Christus esset,” cited by K. Bauer, Die Wittenberger Universitätstheologie und die Anfänge der deutschen Reformation (Tübingen, 1928), 23.

54 55/1,6.26–28.

55 4,408.24–26: “Omnis Scriptura prophetarum primo de Apostolis intelligitur, quia sic cogit promissio dei, qui promisit populum Israel exaltare super omnes gentes….”

56 Cf. 3,155.20f.: “… incarnatio tropologice sumpta … est nihil aliud nisi obedientia in opere, sicut divinitas in carne.” For humility, see 3,171.22f.

57 Spiritus Creator, tr. J. M. Jensen (Philadelphia, 1953), 9–11 et passim. Scholars who view Luther's use of tropological interpretation as the gateway to the reformation doctrine of justification are anxious to show the radical difference between conformitas and the “medieval” idea of imitatio. Cf. also Vogelsang, p. 86 of the work cited above, n.10. It seems to me, however, that conformitas is simply imitatio purged of Pelagian tendencies; rather than our actively imitating Christ, God “imitates” his action in Christ by doing the same to us. This requires no change in hermeneutical principles. Bernhard Lohse's observation, regarding the influence of Augustine on Luther already in the Dictata, is relevant to my point: “Bei Augustin konnte Luther … manches über die Bedeutung Jesu Christi als des Exempels des göttlichen Gnadenwirkens lernen” (Die Bedeutung Augustins für den jungen Luther, Kerygma und Dogma 11 [1965], 133).

58 Cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III q.7 a.3 and 4. As one who in his divinity is a comprehensor, Christ is not a mere viator; he has the fullness of grace and love, but not fides or spes.

59 There is insufficient space to elaborate on this claim here, but see, e.g., 4,399.–30–400.5, in the course of which Luther says that every Christian striving to make spiritual progress ought to think and speak “as if (ac si) he were in the synagogue,” as long as he has not yet received all God's promises.

60 E.g., 4,402.19–403.22.