Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T09:22:01.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of Testament in Luther's Lectures on Hebrews

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Kenneth Hagen
Kenneth Hagen
Affiliation:
Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For some decades now, Luther scholars have concentrated on the early “young Luther” (1513–16). He is being dissected month by month, year by year. It may be another decade or so, however, before any attempt can be made at a complete presentation of the theology of the young Luther. This study is intended to be a partial contribution to the construction of a full picture of the young Luther.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , January 1970 , pp. 61 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1970

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 Hagen, Kenneth, Changes in the Understanding of Luther: The Development of the Young Luther, Theological Studies 29 (Sept., 1968), 472–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Luther's own lecture notes are not extant. Two sets of student lecture notes have survived. One of these was the set of notes on chapters 1–5 of the Scholium taken by Sigismund Reichenbach, and in the mid-sixteenth century another set of student lecture notes was copied by Aurifaber and someone else. In 1899 Hermann Vopel and Johannes Ficker discovered Aurifaber's copy of student notes in the Vatican library. Ficker also made another important discovery in 1904: Reichenbach's lecture notes. Ficker, however, was reluctant to publish an edition of the lectures, partly because he never gave up hope that additional material might be discovered. Finally in 1929, tired of waiting for Ficker's edition, Emanuel Hirsch and Hanns Rückert came out with a critical edition of the Vatican manuscript (Luthers Vorlesung über den Hebräerbrief nach der Vatikanischen Handschrift [Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte, vol. 13; Berlin, 1929]). Shortly after the appearance of the Hirsch-Rückert edition, Ficker, published his critical edition (Luthers Vorlesung über den Hebräerbrief 1517–18 [Anfänge reformatorischer Bibelauslegung, vol. 2; Leipzig, 1929])Google Scholar. Ficker also prepared the Weimar edition (WA 57.III [Weimar, 1939]).

3 Boendermaker, J. P., Luthers Commentaar op de Brief aan de Hebreën 1517–1518 (Assen, 1965)Google Scholar. Boendermaker's study goes beyond previous work on these lectures in that he examines Luther's relation to some of the medieval exegetes of Hebrews. However, his work is incomplete. He limits his study to the exegesis of Chrysostom, the Glossa, and Lyra, but then proceeds to summarize their relation to Luther by describing them as “the exegetical tradition” (74). Boendermaker does not even treat all those medieval exegetes whom Luther explicitly quotes in his lectures — Valla, Faber, Erasmus. Besides, there are a number of other exegetes of Hebrews who are important representatives of the medieval exegetical tradition, namely, Alcuin, Aquinas, Tarantasia, and Dionysius the Carthusian. Furthermore, Boendermaker's comparison of Luther with medieval exegetes plays no significant part in his discussion of “Important Theological Concepts Found in Luther's Lectures” (85–113). And, finally, his interest in the “young Luther” is largely limited to the “Turmerlebnis” problem and the influence of “the mystical tradition” on Luther.

Previous work on Luther's Lectures on Hebrews was done from the perspective of their relation either to the thought of Erasmus (Vogelsang, Erich, Die Bedeutung der neuveröffentlichten Hebräerbrief-Vorlesung von 1517–18: Ein Beitrag zur Frage: Humanismus und Reformation [Tübingen, 1930])Google Scholar; the thought of Augustine (Hamel, Adolf, Der junge Luther und Augustin, ihre Beziehungen in der Rechtfertigungslehre nach Luthers ersten Vorlesungen 1509–18, II [Gütersloh, 1935]Google Scholar); the “Turmerlebnis” problem (Gyllenkrok, Axel, Rechlfertigung und Heiligung in der frühen evangeliscken Theologie Luthers [Uppsala, 1952]Google Scholar; and Bizer, Ernst, Fides ex auditu. Eine Untersuchung über die Entdeckung der Gerechtigkeit Gottes durch Martin Luther [2d ed.; Darmstadt, 1961])Google Scholar; the contemporary effort by New Testament scholars to interpret the Epistle (Baruzi, Jean, Le commentaire de Luther à l'Epître aux Hébreux, Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses 11 [1931], 461–98)Google Scholar; selected writings of Luther (Thimme, Hans, Christi Bedeutung für Luthers Glauben. Unter Zugrundelegung des R¨omerbrief- des Hebräerbriefdes Galaterbrief-kommentars von 1531, und der Disputationem [Gütersloh, 1933])Google Scholar; the development of Luther's theologia crucis (Ellwein, Eduard, Die Entfaltung der theologia crucis in Luthers Hebräerbriefvorlesung, in Theologische Aufsätze: Karl Barth zum 50. Geburtstag [Munich, 1936], 382–404)Google Scholar; or to Luther's exegesis of Heb. 10:5 (Brandenburg, Albert, “Solae aures sunt organa Christiani hominis.” Zu Luthers Exegese von Hebr. 10,5f., in Einsicht und Glaube. Gottlieb Söhngen zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Joseph Ratzinger und Heinrick Fries [Freiburg, Herder, 1962]Google Scholar).

4 Bibliographies of medieval commentaries on Hebrews are scant. In addition to the critical editions of Hirsch-Rückert and Ficker, Denifle's study of Western exegesis of Rom.1.17 is of some help for locating texts, though not every one who commented on Romans also commented on Hebrews: Denifle, Heinrich, O.P., Die abendländischen Schriftausleger bis Luther über “Justitia Dei” (Rom. 1:17) und “Justificatio,” I, Part 2 (2d ed., Luther und Luthertum; Mainz, 1905)Google Scholar. Spicq, C., O.P., in his L'Epîre aux Hébreux (Paris, 1952)Google Scholar, has an annotated “Bibliographie” which is a general survey of the exegesis of Hebrews from the Eastern commentaries of the ancient Church up to our own time. More valuable for its almost exhaustive bibliography is Stegmüller's, FridericusRepertorium Biblicum Medii Aevi (7 vols.; Madrid, 1950–61)Google Scholar. Stegmüller lists both manuscript and printed copies. For complete manuscript listings of the medieval Hermits of the Order of St. Augustine see Zumkeller, Adolar, Manuskripte von Werken der Autoren des Augustiner-Eremitenordens in mitteleuropäischen Bibliotheken, Augustiniana 11 (1961), 27–86, 261–319, 478–532Google Scholar; 12 (1962), 27–92, 299–357; 13 (1963), 418–73; 14 (1964), 105–62. Eduard Riggenbach has made a study of the early medieval Latin commentaries on Hebrews: Historische Studien zum Hebräerbrief. Part I: Die ältesten lateinischen Kommentare zum Hebräerbrief (Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons und der altkirchlichen Literatur; Leipzig, 1907). Landgraf, A. has worked on the Pauline commentaries of the twelfth century: Familienbildung bei Paulinen-kommentaren des 12. Jahrhunderts, Biblica 13 (1932), 61–72, 169–93Google Scholar; Untersuchung zu den Paulinenkommentaren des 12. Jahrhunderts, , Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale 8 (1936), 253–81Google Scholar.

5 St. John Chrysostom (354–407) composed 34 Homilies on Hebrews which were first issued after his death from stenographic notes by the Antiochene priest Constantine. It is an open question in Chrysostom research when and where Chrysostom delivered these sermons (Baur, Chrysostomus, O.S.B., John Chrysosiom and his Time, trans. Sr.Gonzaga, M., R. S. M., II [London, 1960], 94–95)Google Scholar. In the sixth century Cassiodorus (d. 563) delegated his friend Mutian, probably a monk, to translate into Latin Chrysostom's Homilies on Hebrews (Opera; Basel, 1504; PG 63.237–456). We will use Migne's edition of Mutian's translation.

6 Von den Konzilliis und Kirchen, 1539, WA 50.519.22–27: “Let them take a book of the Bible and look up the interpretations of the Fathers and the same thing will happen to them that happened to me when I took up the Epistle to the Hebrews with the Gloss of St. Chrysostom, Titus and Galatians with the help of St. Jerome, Genesis with the help of St. Ambrose and St. Augustine, the Psalter with all the exegetes that I could find and so on.”

In his Table Talk Luther associates his lectures on Hebrews with Chrysostom, while indicating disappointment in him: “Cum primum legerem epistolam ad Hebraeos, ibi accipiebam Chrysostomum eumque legebam, sed er liess mich stecken an allen orten, da ich sein dorfft. Er ist ein lauter wescher, lest den Text fallen; tantum moralia tractat” (WA Tr. 1.85.1–3, Nr. 188, Feb.-March, 1532). “Dum epistolam ad Hebraeos enarrarem et Chrysostomum consulerem, nihil ad argumenta epistolae scripsit. Et credo Chrysostomum, summum rhetorem, habuisse auditorium copiosum, sed sine fructo docuisse” (WA Tr. 4.50.3–6, Nr. 3975, August, 1538

7 “Es ist die Grundlage der gesamten abendländischen Auslegungsliteratur zum Hebräerbrief geworden” (Riggenbach, 11).

8 PG 63.237.

9 PG 63.255.

10 PG 63.273.

11 PG 63.317.

12 PG 63.291.

13 Biblia cum Glossa ordinaria, Nicolai de Lyra postilla, moralitatibus eiusdem, Pauli Burgensis additionibus, Matthiae Thoring replicis (6 vols.; Basel, 1498–1502, 1506–1508); In Epistolam ad Hebreos, VI (Basel, 1508), 131r–162v. There are two other editions of the Bible used in the critical apparatus of the new edition (in progress) of Luther's Dictata super Psalterium: Biblia … cum concordantiis … summariis omnium capitum divisionibus, quattuor repertoriis propositis … una cum vera nominum Hebraicorum interpretatione (Basel, 1509); Biblia cum concordantiis veteris et novi testamenti necnon et iuris canonici, ac diversitatibus textuum, canonibusque evangeliorum ac quibusdam temporum incidentibus in margine positis et accentu singularum dictionum (Venice, 1511).

14 Smalley, Beryl, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1952), 64Google Scholar. Boendermaker has hung on to the bibliographical legend that ascribed the marginal Gloss to Walafrid Strabo and the interlinear Gloss to Anselm of Laon (Boendermaker, 23). In 1949, J. de Blic, in a posthumous article, unmasked the Strabo-Anselm authorship of the Glossa as legendary (Smalley, 57). The major figures in the composition of the Gloss on St. Paul and the Psalms were, first of all, Anselm of Laon (d. 1117) and, secondly, Gilbert de la Porrée (d. 1154), who expanded Anselm's text. Gilbert's Media Glosatura was expanded by Lombard between 1135 and 1136, 1142 and 1143, and is known as the Magna (or Maior) Glosatura: Super epistolas Pauli glossa ordinaria et magistralis, in the Basel Bible of 1508 (first published separately in Paris, 1535; PL 192.399–520).

15 Biblia cum Glossa ordinaria (Basel, 1506–1508), 131r–131v:

“Primum proponit audienda esse verba Christi conferendo eum prophetis, quia in eo locutus est Dominus ut in prophetis; et maior est eis. Deinde commendat eum alternatim secundum utramque naturam humanam scilicet et divinam. Postea comparat eum angelis et praefert, multa interserens de excellentia eius secundum utramque naturam. Deinde comparat eum Moysi et prefert. Deinde multis rationibus et auctoritatibus gratiam fidei umbre legis preferendam declarat. Et sacerdotium Christi Levitico sacerdotio; et testamentum novum veteri eiusque sacrificium unum multis illius sacrificiis proponendum ostendit, quia ibi umbra, hic veritas. Tandem ponit fidei descriptionem, eam multis testimoniis commendans. Circa finem vero moralem subdit instructionem.”

16 Ibid., 133v.

17 Ibid., 139r.

18 Ibid., 149r.

19 We will use the Marietti edition: Super Epistolas S. Pauli Lectura, ed. Cai, P. Raphaelis, O. P., II (8th ed.; Rome, 1953), 335–506Google Scholar. Aquinas' Lectura super Hebreos occurred between either 1261 and 1264 (P. Mandonnet), or 1265 and 1268 (P. Synave), or 1259 and 1269 (J. M. Vostè).

20 Ibid., 335.

21 Ibid., 337.

22 Ibid., 357.

23 Ibid., 372.

24 Ibid., 374.

25 Ibid., 389.

26 Ibid., 419.

27 Ibid., 421.

28 Ibid., 436.

29 Ibid., 389: “Sicut a principio huius epistolae dictum fuit, intentio Apostoli est ostendere Christum excellentiorem esse omnibus his ex quibus lex habet auctoritatem, scilicet angelis, quorum ministerio data fuit, Gal.III, 19: ‘Ordinata per angelos,’ — et Moyse, qui fuit legislator, I0.1,17: ‘Lex per Moysen data est,’ — et sacerdotio et pontificatu Aaron, per quem lex administratur.”

30 Ibid., 371.

31 Ibid., 433.

32 Ibid., 422: “Item in illo dicuntur quaedam, quae pertinent ad cultum Dei, et ista sunt caeremonialia: quaedam vero, quae ad rectitudinem vitae, et ista sunt praecepta moralia, quae manent: alia vero, non. In Novo autem adduntur consilia illis praeceptis, quae dantur perfectis, qui sunt capaces spiritualium. Et sic manent praecepta eadem, sed promissa diversa. Item sacramenta sunt diversa; quia ibi erat figura tantum, hie autem figurae veritas expressa. Per omnia ergo testamentum illud est melius.”

33 Nicholas of Lyra, O.F.M. (d. 1349), composed his influential Postilla litteralis super totam bibliam between 1322 and 1331, and his In epistolas Pauli in 1329 (Hailperin, Herman, Rashi and the Christian Scholars [Pittsburgh, 1963], 138Google Scholar; Lyra, Epistola Pauli ad Hebreos, Lyrani Postillae [Nuremberg, 1493]). Lyra's Postilla moralis was completed in 1339 and published separately before 1478; thereafter it was usually printed with the Postilla litteralis, e.g., Venice, 1588 (Hailperin, 142).

34 Biblia cum Glossa ordinaria, Nicolai de Lyra postilla, moralitatibus eiusdem (Basel, 1506–1508), 133v: “Et ideo in hac epistola ostendit eminentiam novi testamenti respectu veteris, ostendens quod vetus comparatur ad novum sicut disposition ad formam, et sicut imperfectum ad perfectum quod evacuatur et cessat adveniente perfecto, ut dicitur 1 Cor.13 [10].”

35 Ibid., 150v.

36 Ibid., 131v.

37 Ibid., 132v.

38 Ibid., 132v (Proemium).

39 Ibid., 132v–133r (Proemium): “Considerandum tamen quod diversimode evacuantur precepta moralia legos et cerimonialia et iudicialia. Ad cuius intellectum sciendum, quod quando fit mutatio a contrario in contrarium, oportet terminum a quo totaliter evacuari, sicut quando ex albo fit nigrum, albedo tollitur. Quando autem ex imperfecto fit perfectum; non tollitur totaliter terminus a quo sed tantum eius imperfectio, scilicet, quando ex minus albo fit magis album non tollitur albedo precedens, sed tantum eius imperfectio. Ulterius considerandum, quod quando corrumpitur terminus a quo per accidens illud quod est ei adiunctum corrumpitur, potest tamen manere cum termino ad quem si non habeat ad ipsum contrarietatem, non tamen manet numero, sed specie tantum, sicut quando de aere fit ignis, manet qualitas symbola. Cerimonialia igitur evacuantur primo modo, contrariantur nove legis cultui…. Moralia autem precepta evacuantur tantummodo secundum quid, scilicet, quantum ad imperfectionem…. Et sic patet quod moralia precepta veteris legis non evacuantur quantum ad substantiam solum legis, sed quantum ad imperfectionem. Propter quod dicit apostolus i. Cor. xiii. ‘Cum factus sum vir, evacuavi quae erant parvuli.’ Status autem veteris legis comparatur puero, secundum quod habetur Ga. iii. a. ‘Lex pedagogus noster fuit’; pedagogus autem est ductor pueri. Status nove legis comparatur viro perfecto; et ideo sicut manet idem homo quantum ad substantiam in pueritia et virili etate, remota tantum imperfectione pueritie, sic est de moralium preceptorum evacuatione. Iudicialia autem precepta evacuantur tertio modo, quia adveniente lege gratie, cessat eorum obligatio.”

40 Ibid., 132v.

41 Aquinas, p. 422.

42 Lyra, 133v.

43 Ibid., 133r.

44 Adnotationes in latinam Novi Testamenti interpretationem, ed. Erasmus (Paris, 1505).

45 Epistolae Pauli Apostoli (1st ed., Paris, 1512; 2d ed., Paris, 1515).

46 Novum instrumentum cum Annotationibus (Basel, 1516).

47 Epistolae Pauli Apostoli, 230v.

48 Ibid., 246v.

49 Ibid., 234r: “Sed inter Mosen et Christum: latum est differentiae intervallum. … Ergo qui in Mose confidunt: in umbra confidunt. Et qui in Mose plus confideret quam in Christo; in umbra plus confideret quam in veritate, quae tanto praecellit et efficacior est umbra: quanto dominus servo, immo quanto ens non ente et Deus creatura. Et ut umbra, adveniente luce, vanescit et nihil est: ita si ad Christum confers nihil est Moses; tanta luce est Christi praeeminentia.”

50 Ibid., 242v: “Atqui venit Christus ut consumaret et perficeret omnia, ut ipse dixit, ‘Non veni solvere legem, sed adimplere.’ Lex enim nova veteris est adimpletio. Erat enim vetus non simpliciter lex, sed legis inchoatio, ut typus inchoatio consumationis operis.”

51 Expositio in Epistolam Pauli Apostoli ad Hebraeos. PL 100.1031.

52 In Epistolam B. Pauli ad Hebraeos, In Omnes Divi Pauli Epistolas Enarratio, II (Lyon, 1692), 163, 179, 216.

53 Additiones 1–1100 ad postilam Nicolae de Lyra, Gen.-Apoc. (Lyon, 1490), 136r.

54 Enarratio in Epistolam Beati Pauli ad Hebraeos, Enarrationes Piae ac Eruditae in Omnes Beati Pauli Epistolas (1st ed., Cologne, 1530. Opera Omnia, 13; Monstrolius, 1901), 469.

55 This conclusion adds another dimension to our general understanding of the medieval concept of law and gospel. On the basis of sermonic and academic works, Heiko A. Oberman has shown that Gabriel Biel in accord with traditional medieval academic theology taught that “whether Old or New, both Testaments fall in the same category: Lex,” and both their dispensors fall in the category of Legislator (The Harvest of Medieval Theology: Gabriel Biel and Late Medieval Nominalism [Cambridge, 1963], 119). The medieval academic or systematic tradition held that the two laws differ only in degree. The law of Christ fulfilled and perfected the law of Moses by “the interiorization of righteousness” (ibid., 112ff.). In its interpretation of Hebrews the medieval exegetical tradition gives Oberman's treatment of the “medieval tradition” (ibid., 119) a broader base of support.

56 WA 57.III.5.10–16: “Notandum in hac epistola, quod Paulus gratiam extollit adversus superbiam legalis et humane iustitie probans, quod sine Christo nec lex nec sacerdotium nec prophetia neque denique angelorum etiam ministerium ad salutem satis fuerit, immo haec omnia in Christum futurum instituta et facta fuerint. Omnino igitur solum Christum docendum proponit.”

57 It is difficult to see how Boendermaker, in his comparison of Luther and Lyra, could claim that the following quotations from Luther and Lyra show “important agreement”: “Lu: gratiam extollit adversum superbiam legalis et humane iustitiae. Ly: ostendit eminentiam novi testamenti respectu veteris” (op. cit., 27). In pointing out a difference between Luther and Lyra on Law and Gospel, Boendermaker misreads comparatio (of the two Testaments) in Lyra (op. cit., 160r) as cooperatio (Boendermaker, 69, 78).

58 Boendermaker, 78.

59 WA 57. III. 15. 18–21: “Postquam Christi commendavit excellentiam, qua angelis melior effectus est, iam prona sequela eum praeferendum docet Mosi, de quo Iudei summam post angelos habebant opinionem, ut sic etiam Mosi fiduciam ab eis tolleret et in solum Christum converteret.” Lyra makes the following statement with regard to the same loci: “UNDE FRATRES etc. [Luther's comments are made with regard to UNDE]. Postquam apostolus declaravit excellentiam novi testamenti respectu veteris per hoc quod preeminet Christus angelis, hic consequenter ostendit hoc idem per hoc quod excellit Moysen” (op. cit., 138v). Boendermaker does not mention this parallel (op. cit., 34).

60 WA 57. III. 188. 18–19: “Ex quatuor colligit excellentiam Christi et sacerdotii eius, aeternitate, benedictione, perpetuitate, decimatione.”

61 WA 57. III. 207. 9–10: “Diversam munditiam novi et veteris testamenti pulchre describit et per antitheses deducit.” In his Scholium on Rom. 12:1 (“Hostiam viventem”) Luther distinguishes between munditi before God (heilig) and before man (rein) (WA 56. 444. 9–21).

62 WA 57. III. 82. 22–23. “Exaggerat et ante oculos ponit utriusque testamenti differentiam, quia illud vetus scil. fuerit timoris, hoc autem novum amoris.”

63 WA 57. III. 113. 13–18: “Sic autem firmare est meram hipocrisin agere et magis infirmare, videlicet quia voluntas cordis longe in aliud respicit quam in legem, scil. in penam vel commodum. Ideo Helias 3. Regum arguit eos claudicare in duas partes, et aliud agere in corde et aliud simulare in opere. Talis est omnis homo, qui est extra Christum.”

64 WA 57. III. 113. 21–23: “Lex et evangelium etiam hac ratione differunt, quod in lege sunt opera plurima, sed externa omnia, in evangelio vero opus est unicum, sed internum, quod est fides.”

65 WA 57. III. 136. 22–24: “Fragosus enim sermo pertinet ad legem, ut figuratum est Exodi 20., ubi in vocibus buccine, caligine montis et igne fulguris terrebantur audientes, …”

66 WA 57. III. 36. 8–11: “Huc usque voluit Apostolus saepius ingredi differentiam veteris et novi testamenti. Sed prius ei curandum fuit, ut imbecilles surgerent ad audiendum, nunc vigilantibus auditoribus inducit differentiae rationem.”

67 WA 57. III. 43. 18–21: “Summa cap. 8.: Colligit et summam facit dictorum, quibus differentias personales sacerdotio novi et veteris testamenti declaravit, deinceps simul differentias et ex officio, ex oblationibus ex tabernaculo ostensurus.”

68 Cf. Burgos (Additio II to c. 7), 147r: “Ex quo patet manifeste quod translato sacerdotio veteris testamenti necesse est ut legis translatio fiat, quantum ad cerimonialia et iudicialia tantum; non autem quantum ad moralia; que nullam dependentiam habebant a sacerdotio etc.”

69 WA 57. III. 190. 16–25: “Unde hic notandum, quod vocabulum lex hic ab Apostolo usurpatum dupliciter potest accipi. “Primum secundum inferiorem intelligentiam, qua significat coeremonialia tantum, scilicet vestes et ornamenta externa sacerdotum, item hostias et sacrificia carnalium pecorum, item judicia et doctrinas leprae et immunditiarum ex tactibus mortuorum et similia. Sic sensus est, quod lex translata est, id est huiusmodi coeremoniae lege praeceptae abrogatae sunt, et ea, quae significabantur per haec, instituta, hoc est spiritualia atque interior vestis et ornatus sacerdotum.”

70 WA 57. III. 192. 16–25: “Secundo potest ‘lex’ accipi iuxta superiorem intelligentiam, qua incedit Apostolus in epistola ad Romanos et Galatas, ubi per ‘legem’ simpliciter intelligit, quicquid divinitus et humanitus praecipitur, sive sit ceremoniale sive iudiciale et morale. Sic sensus est: ‘lex translata est’ id est per Christum impleta est. Ipse enim ‘finis est legis,’ sicut dicit Matthei 5.: ‘Non veni solvere legem, sed implere.’ Hic prima ad Timot. 1.: ‘Iusto non est lex posita,’ id est ex quo iustus habet omnia, quae requirit lex, iam est extra legem, quia non debet legi, sed facit legem et vita eius est lex ipsa viva et plena. Ideo sacerdotis novi officium proprie non est docere legem, sed monstrare gratiam Iesu Christi, quae est plenitudo legis.”

71 WA 57. III. 50. 16–17: “Arguit a minori probans Christi redemptionem esse aeternam, quia aliam quam veterem.”

72 “Prior to Erasmus, Pauline authorship of Hebrews was generally accepted, though discussion continued on the question of the modus scribendi and the stilus. Erasmus, in 1516, is probably the first to express serious doubt as to Pauline authorship. (Novum instrumentum cum Annotationibus, 585, 586, 590.) In his 1517–18 Lectures on Hebrews Luther does not categorically accept Pauline authorship but he does not clearly reject it until 1522.

73 Hebrews sometimes gives Luther a clue to his Christological interpretation of a Psalm (WA 3.224.25). Perhaps a reason why Luther became so preoccupied with the Old Testament is that he feels that the old is more Christological than the new: “vetus lex frequentius loquitur ad deum filium, sicut lex nova ad patrem. Unde et ps. 101 Apostolus Hebr. 1. exponit tanquam ad Christum dictus sit ….” (WA 3. 553. 24–26).

74 Die Anfänge von Luthers Hermeneutik, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kircke 48 (1951), 208, 211.

75 Preus, James Samuel, From Shadow to Promise. Old Testament Interpretation from Augustine to the Young Luther (Cambridge, 1969), 155CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 Ibid., 163.

77 WA 3. 128. 17–18: “‘Lex domini’ non sic Mosi ‘immaculata,’ Et hoc sic, quia ‘convertens animas’ non tantum manus sicut lex Mosi.”

78 WA 57.III.161.8–11: “Quarto ‘per divisionem spiritus et animae’ i.e. separans affectus spiritus ab affectu animali; fides enim ubique purificat cor, Actorum 15. et ps.18: ‘Lex Domini immaculata’ etc.”

79 WA 55.11.31.4–32.10: “‘Voluntas in lege Domini’ facit Christianum, non autem manus. Unde Evangelium dicitur cohibere tam manum quam animum, lex autem Mosi solam manum; Verum nec Evangelium est lex Christi, nisi fide capiatur. Lex enim Domini ‘viva est et efficax’; ideo non est litere vel verba. Sed fides verborum alioquin semper sub lege est, quandiu non habet fidem Evangelii; unde psal.4: ‘Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui, Domine.’ Non sufficit, quod sit signum, nisi sit impressum signum et ‘signatum,’ hoc autem est, esse fidem, scil. Evangelium suscipere et fide (credendo) imprimere. Sic Christus per Hieremiam dicit se suam legem scribere in cordibus eorum, non in mortuis membranis. Quia Verba Evangelii bene Scribunt et loquuntur, Sed non fidem. fides autem est ‘lex Domini immaculata,’ ‘purificans corda eorum,’ ut infra psal.18.”

80 WA 57.III.147.20–148.7: “Fides enim verbi purificat, quia sicut verbum Dei est purissimum et optimum, ita facit eum, qui adheret ei, similem sui purum et bonum, et omnino, quicquid ipsum habet et potest, impertit suo adherenti et credenti, psal.18: ‘Lex Domini immaculata convertens animas.’ Et Christus Joan.15.: ‘Vos mundi estis propter sermonem, quem locutus sum vobis.’ Ita et psal.50. dicitur Hebraice: “Tibi soli peccavi, propterea iustificabis in verbo tuo, mundabis in iudicando te.’ Iste est iustus, sapiens, verus, bonus etc., qui credit in verbum Dei.”

81 WA 3.279.8–9: “‘Testamentum meum,’ verbum Dei, quo testatur nobis de futuris et invisibilibus.”

82 WA 3.279.30–33: “In hac vita enim non rem ipsam, sed testimonia rerum tenemus, quia fides non est res sed argumentum rerum non apparentium. Ita Evangelium et verbum Dei est testificatio de rebus ipsis eternis.”

83 WA 3.491.10–11: “‘Respice’ miserendo ‘in testamentum tuum’ pastum scil. fidei et evangelii, quia eternum est, ut rursum refloreat et prevaleat.”

84 WA 3.144.22–25: “‘Firmamentum’ secretum, vel consilium Domini i.e. mysterium nove legis, quod idem est consilium Domini, ‘est dominus timentibus eum,’ est apud eos, qui timent eum: ‘et testamentum ipsius’ i.e. novum pactum suum, ostende eis ‘ut manifestetur illis’ et solum talibus.”

85 WA 57.III.211.16–22: “Iste locus Apostoli plane aperit allegoricam intelligentiam legis Moysi, qua cognoscimus omnia illius legis de Christo et in Christo promissa figurataque fuisse, ideoque (ut superius visum est) sub nomine testamenti et promissionis olim definitam fuisse mortem eius, qui verus esset Deus et verus homo. Cum enim mori non possit et moriturum sese promittat (scilicet dum testatur), necesse fuit, ut homo fieret et sic impleret, quod promiserat.”

86 WA 3.144.8–11: “‘Universae viae domini,’ in quibus ambulant sui, ‘misericordia et veritas,’ gratia et plenitudo: ‘requirentibus’ per fidem ‘testamentum eius’ scilicet novum, quod est spirituale ‘et testimonia eius’ ab apostolis et discipulis nunciata.”

87 WA 3.144.15–17: “‘Quis est homo qui timet dominum,’ q.d. non quero, quis sit filius Israel: ‘legem’ Evangelium ‘statuit’ Dominus ‘ei in via quam elegit’ scilicet Dominus, vel ipse timens Dominum.”

Cf. WA 3.278.7–10 (on Ps.49:5): “‘Congregate’ vos angelice virtutes ‘illi sanctos eius’ in se et aliis: ‘qui ordinant’ ordinate tradiderunt et disposuerunt ‘testamentum eius’ legem evangeliumque ‘super sacrificia’ ad sacrificandum ei et colendum.” 4.42.4 (Ps.88:40): “‘Avertisti’ avertere fecisti, ut non reciperent eam impii, ‘testamentum’ legem ‘servi tui’ Christi et populi eius.” 4.44.7–9: “‘Avertisti’ scilicet ab illis ad gentes ‘testamentum’ evangelium ‘servi tui,’ ut Matt.21 ‘auferetur a vobis regnum.’”

88 WA 57.III.216.20–217.1; 217.21–22: “Duae sunt questiones. Una, quomodo veteris legis sancti iustificati sint, quos his Apostolus negat sanctos esse per legem iustos et perfectos, cum tamen certum sit opera eorum i.e. legis et obedientiae fuisse meritoria, quin et multi emendati sunt per illa, ut Lucas 1. Zacharias et Elisabeth et coeteri. Ex praedictis facilis est responsio. His, qui fuerunt ex fide, erant vere bona meritoria, i.e. dum legem simul intus spiritualiter et foris corporaliter servabant…. quia ‘omnia cooperantur in bonum sanctis,’ et ‘universae viae iusti misericordia et veritas’ sunt.”

89 WA 3.157.28–34: “[‘Vox Domini’] Licet vox anagogice sit ipse Christus incarnatus, quia sicut verbum induit vocem, sic filius Dei carnem, tamen aptius hoc loco ipsa Evangelii vox per mundum sonans in apostolis intelligitur. Quia olim in prophetis factum fuit super eos solummodo verbum Domini, super Christum autem in monte facta fuit vox de celo, quod significat, quod evangelium olim erat in verbo et occulto, nunc autem in manifesto et voce.”

90 WA 3.184.25–30: “Sic Ecclesia a generatione in generationem transfundit vinum et oleum suum, verbum et gratiam Dei. Sunt autem utres veteres et novi, id est populi novi et veteris testamenti. Et ‘vinum novum non in utres veteres.’ Sic ait dominus, quando voluit facere distinctionem inter consolationem carnis et spiritus. Quia homo carnalis non capit consolationem spiritus.”

91 WA 57.III.108.15–109.2: “Igitur quod alii virgam istam interpretantur potestatem inflexibilem, apparet quidem, sed re vera non est aliud quam idem scil. ipsum evangelium seu verbum Dei. Nulla enim potestate alia regit Christus Ecclesiam quam verbo, sicut scriptum est: ‘Verbo Domini celi firmati sunt’ etc.”

92 WA 3.259.1–3: “Quia diffusa est gratia in labiis tuis. Quare hic distinguendum. Labia Christi sunt preter personalia.

“Primo utrunque testamentum spiritualiter audiendo et exponendo.”

93 WA 56.338.14–26: “Quare Evangelium vocetur verbum spiritus, Spirituals doctrina, verbum gratie et declaratio sermonum veteris legis et intelligentia in mysterio abscondita etc. Respondetur, Quod ideo proprie, Quia docet, ubi et unde gratia seu charitas habeatur, Scil. Ihesum Christum, quem lex promisit, Evangelium Exhibet. Lex precipit Charitatem et Ihesum Christum habendum, Sed Evangelium offert et exhibet utrunque. Ideo dicit psalmo 44.: ‘Diffusa est gratia in labiis tuis.’ Ideo Evangelium, si non recipiatur, ut loquitur, similiter est Litera. Et proprie Evangelium est, Ubi Christum predicat: Ubi autem arguit et reprobat aut precipit, nihil aliud facit, quam quod presumentes de propria Iustitia destruit, ut gratie locum preparet, ut sciant non ex viribus suis, Sed per Christum solum Iegem impleri, qui diffundit spiritum in cordibus nostris.”

94 WA 57.II.60.20–22.

95 WA 57.III.195.22–24: “Novi testamenti haec est gratia, quod verbum et litterae eius docent ea, quae spiritus sunt, et verba gratiae dicuntur iuxta illud psalmi 44.: ‘Diffusa est gratia in labiis tuis.”

96 WA 3.386.15–17: “‘si dormiatis’ a tumultu cupiditatum quiescentes ‘inter medios cleros’ duo testamenta, vel fide inter temporalia et celestia vivere.” Cf. 396.9ff.

97 WA 57.III.185.2–8: “Quam pulchre coniungit utrumque, fidem et patientiam! Fides enim facit cor fixum haerere in coelestibus penitusque rapi et versari in invisibilibus. Ideo necessaria est patientia, qua sustentetur non solum in contemptu allicientium, sed etiam in tollerantia sevientium rerum visibilium. Sic enim fit, ut fidelis inter coelum et terram pendeat et ‘inter medios cleros,’ ut psalmus ait, ‘dormiat,’ hoc est, in Christo in aere suspensus crucifigatur.”

98 WA 4.68.20–21: “‘Scapulis suis’ doctoribus ‘obumbrabit tibi’ docebit te fidem: ‘et sub pennis eius sperabis’ duobus testamentis per spem enutrieris.”

99 WA 4.68.34 and footnote.

100 WA 4.62.1.

101 Luther cites this verse in his Lectures on Hebrews 4:14 to say that we are sheltered from eternal punishment in the humanity of Christ, our high priest. WA 57.III.164.14–18: “His enim, qui territi sunt a timore eterni illius iudicii et horrende incisionis et divisionis, non est reliquum refugium nisi unicum illud asilum, quod est Christus, pontifex noster, in cuius humanitate sola protegimur et salvamur a iudicio huiusmodi, ut psal. 90.: ‘Scapulis suis obumbrabit tibi, et sub pennis eius sperabis.’

102 WA 4.176.26–36: “Tercio Penne due sunt duo testamenta, Ventorum, id est spiritualium hominum, doctorum, prelatorum. Et iste due penne singulorum iunguntur, quia vetus et nova lex conveniunt, sicut homo vetus occisus et homo novus suscitatus. Vetus lex hominem veterem monstrat mortuum, nova vivum novum exhibet. Et sic amice conveniunt, ut supra dictum. Unde et Angeli pinguntur et finguntur duabus alis et Cherubin similiter. Quia omnis doctor duo testamenta debet habere, sicut dominus Matth. 13. docuit dicens: ‘omnis scriba doctus in regno coelorum similis est homini patrifamilias, qui profert de thezauro suo nova et vetera.’ Quia de homine novo et vetere debet loqui et docere, quomodo ille destruatur et iste edificetur, ne vinum novum in utres veteres immittat, sed in novos etc.”

103 WA 4.179.30–180.9: “Sed notandum singulariter, quod ‘in convallibus’ dicit, quia mons et mons habent eandem vallem. Sic vetus lex et nova lex faciunt eandem vallem. Et ideo dicitur ‘Convallis’ propter consortium lateralis montis, ut si mons monti dicat: ‘Vallis mea est tue convallis, et vallis tua mee convallis, quia eandem vallem habemus et communi valle concordamus.’ Et hee convallis sunt diverse Ecclesie singulatim. Nam et multi sunt montes hinc et inde, multi Apostoli et multi prophete, quorum quilibet duo faciunt convallem suam, immo omnes convalles. Secundo notandum, quod convalles in radicibus sunt montium, non in cacumine. Quia scilicet prophete et Evangelium conveniunt in una Ecdesia, in uno spiritu, in una radice veritatis, in una fide, in una humilitate, licet in vertice different. Quia illa in gloria seculi, ista in gloria coeli altissima est. Et illa velut pars seu collis inferior, ista autem superior. Unde et illa ps.41 dicitur ‘Mons modicus,’ nostra autem ‘mons magnus et superior,’ sive ‘mons excelsus’ Matth. 17. Sic ergo Ecclesia intra medium duorum montium versatur in hac vita, id est inter veterem et novam legem concordantes. Ps. 67. ‘Si dormiatis inter medios cleros etc.’ Hec sunt duo testamenta, due sortes, due hereditates, quibus instruitur Ecclesia in hac vita.”

104 WA 3.552.5–6: “‘Testamentum dei’ legem, qua testatus est gratiam futuram in fide vel legem Christi.”

105 WA 57.II.82.1–15: “Quia Apostolus promissiones Dei vocat ‘testamentum,’ sicut et alibi in Scripturis vocatur, ut psal. 81.: ‘Audi, Israhel, et contestabor tibi’ etc., manifeste indicat futurum fuisse, ut Deus aliquando moreretur et sic in promissione Dei tanquam in nuncupate) testamento suo incarnatio simul et passio Dei intelligeretur. Quia, ut Hebre.9., ‘testamentum in mortuis confirmatur.’ Quare nec Dei testamentum confirmari potuit, nisi Deus ipse testatur moreretur. Unde ibidem nono de Christo: ‘Idcirco novi testamenti mediator est, ut morte intercedente repromissionem accipiant.’ Hinc etiam concordatur ista differentia, quod beatus Ieronimus ‘pactum’ pocius quam ‘testamentum’ dicendum putat. Nam qui paciscitur, vivus manet, qui testatur, moriturus est; ita Ihesus Christus ut Deus immortalis fecit pactum, idem simul et testamentum, quia futurus mortalis, quare recte idem est pactum et testamentum, sicut idem Christus est Deus et homo.”

106 WA 4.134.20 and 26: “Quia lex spiritualis et euangelium idem sunt…. Igitur psallere est Euangelium et spiritum predicare, citharisare autem est testimonia ex lege adhibere (seu legem spiritualiter predicare).”

107 WA 4.306.8–19 (on Ps.118:1).

108 WA 3.336.1–3; 23–25: “‘Deus repulisti nos’ sic enim apparet coram hominibus, non utendo nostris virtutibus, ‘et destruxisti nos’* secundum veterem hominem: ‘iratus es’ vetustati nostrae ‘et misertus es nobis’ dando vitam secundum novum hominem.

* Secundum synagogam, ut aedificaret Ecclesiam, sic enim et Apostoli destruunt, scil, secundum statum synagoge: Iudaei primum, postea et gentes secundum suum.”

109 WA 3.145–27.

110 WA 57.III.79.16–80.11.

111 WA 3.290.4–13.

112 WA 4.310.35.

113 WA 4.109.13–14