Just What Did Luther (and Ardnt, Spener, and others) Discover

My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. -Proverbs 2

The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field? Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old. -Mt 13

For this noble book, though it be poor and rude in words, is so much the richer and more precious in knowledge and divine wisdom. And I will say, though it be boasting of myself and 'I speak as a fool,' that next to the Bible and St. Augustine, no book hath ever come into my hands, whence I have learnt, or would wish to learn more of what God, and Christ, and man and all things are? Let as many as will, read this little book, and then say whether Theology is a new or an old thing among us; for this book is not new.[1]

What did Luther mean "for this book is not new" in the preface toTheologia Germanica? Was it a necessary insight common to the Reformation, the Pietists, the Great Awakening, and the Modern Missionary Movement? Is it waiting to be discovered anew in this day? This paper suggests reasons why this treasure remains hidden from many.

Theologia Germanica, was written in the 1300's by an anonymous German author who is sometimes known by the same name as the community he belonged to, Friends of God. Luther spoke of its "Theology," that is, its insights concerning the mystical union of the believer with God through a living faith created by the living Word in the believer's heart. "Not new" is the free offer God makes us through his Word of a real and intimate relationship with God through Christ by the Holy Spirit. Luther took Theologia Germanica in one hand and Scripture in the other, and plumbed the depths of the union with Christ motif, especially in Paul's Epistles and the Gospel of John, and Luther realized he had discovered treasure buried by the Scholastics.

Just What Did Luther Discover?

History speaks of "Martin Luther's Reformation discovery" as though it is commonly understood what he discovered, but is it?. Was it more than the justification by grace through faith? Luther's breakthrough was certainly "faith alone justifies," but what doesjustification entail? What he discovered had been hidden away long enough for Luther to sound like a heretic to many, radical to others, and God's "blessed Martin" to others.

What exactly wass the relation of justification to sanctification for Luther? Do we know what Luther thought about growth in the Spirit?Have we forgotten what Luther discovered?

If we consider the fact that the Lutheran camp split into two parties soon after Luther's death, was this only a reaction to Melanchthon's irenic moves toward Calvinists and Catholics as commonly taught? Luther's followers were divided on his basic teachings, and one may wonder if they did not fully understand the implications of Luther's discovery. If those who had a chance to put their questions to Luther directly misunderstood him, how much more likely could it be obscured from many in the generations to follow, and how might each generation's "scholastics" rebury this treasure?

Most of the studies on the theology of Martin Luther are on the doctrine of justification, and some on ethics, but few are on holiness, though there is new interest around the idea that what Luther was actually teaching about justification was similar to Orthodox theosis or "divinization."

Around the time Luther made his famous "Reformation discovery" (1515-1517?), he made another less famous one: a dust-covered copy of Theologia Germanica. Necessary to a fuller understanding of Luther is to see the relation between the two rediscoveries. Surprising is how Luther was not the only one to make the discovery of the same dust-covered book, and the second person, Johann Arndt, began a second reformation which actually came closer to realizing the potential for achieving the radical holiness that lies in Luther's insights.

That movement, Pietism, began several generations later through the work of Philipp Jakob Spener, was midwife to Moravianism, Wesleyanism, the modern missionary movement, the Great Awakening, and so on down to present day expansion. All bear the seeds of the apostolic movement, which is our hope for yet another reformation or renewal.

I have the idea that Luther was so consumed by his task of convincing Christendom that the just live by faith that it was necessarily left to his students to make the application that would be the rigorous pursuit of an interior and exterior holiness. This is not to say that Luther did not write much on the subject of holy living, or that it is a defect in his work. Indeed Luther turned the Western Church toward a more helpful understanding that was never lost in the Eastern Church. When the Medieval mystics spoke of the inner way to God, they said "Imitate Christ." Luther said, "Be conformed to Christ by the Word." In so doing he said that we become "Little Christs". Luther grasped the concept that by grace though faith we are grasped by Christ and achieve union with God.That much is known by many Lutherans, and it is only now that through the Finnish Lutheran School a case is being made that Luther also saw that God ontologically changes us through his Word and Spirit. It is yet to come to pass that a serious case is being made by anyone that theosis or no theosis, Luther said that we are to live the holy life God demands, rather Lutherans are becoming more antinomian very day.

For Luther, justification and sanctification were inseparable. What God did for him was such a powerful transforming experience of the holy that Luther writes about it as a conversion in which he was born-again:

I meditated night and day on those words until at last, by the mercy of God, I paid attention to their context: "The justice of God is revealed in it, as it is written: 'The just person lives by faith.'" I began to understand that in this verse the justice of God is that by which the just person lives by a gift of God, which is by faith. I began to understand that this verse means that the justice of God is revealed through the Gospel, but it is a passive justice, i.e. that by which the merciful God justifies us by faith, as it is written: "The just person lives by faith." All at once, I felt that I had been born again and entered into paradise itself through open gates. [2]

Luther's understanding of justification may have been wrongfully interpreted by many as Lutheranism changed through the theological conflicts that led to the Book of Concord, the battle between Orthodoxy and Pietism, Rationalism and the effects of the Enlightenment, the Confessional Movement, Liberalism, and Liturgical Renewal. The 1989 dissertation by Risto Saarinen entitled The Transcendental Interpretation of the Presence-of-Christ Motif in Luther Research shows that the ontology of German Philosopher Hermann Lotze (1817-1881) influenced Luther scholars to think that the way Christ was present in the believer was merely the believer being affected by the will of God, "He is present as this will in us," not as a unity of being.[3] Influential German theologian Albrecht Ritschl (1822-1889) took up Lotze's argument and claimed that Luther retained vestiges of the old, metaphysical view" as opposed to the new correct" understanding. This led Ritschl and all who followed his thought to a fundamental misunderstanding of justification, and since sanctification is linked to justification, a fundamental misunderstanding of Luther's thought on sanctification.

Another theological question of major importance for Lutherans here is how this new, "correct" understanding of Ritschl did not "correct" Luther, but rather significantly altered one of his most basic methodologies, Law and Gospel. Luther taught that only those who can rightly separate Law and Gospel are worthy to be called theologians. One must ask what is the difference between the use of the law to guide us and "He is present as this will in us?"

A further result of thinking that God's presence in the believer is being influenced by God was a change in attitude toward the authority of Scripture. Believers were being disconnected from their source of grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It is illustrative of a tendency in liberal theology in general. Though all desire a warm relationship with God, when the authority of Scripture is undermined with claims that it was written by primitive "incorrect" people and we now have a "correct" understanding, the integrity of Scripture is undermined. This creates a faulty foundation on which everything rests insecurely. This is seen, for example, in Ritschl in his disparagement of Pietism though his theological approach relied on a subjective interior experience. "There are also connecting links between the subjectivism of the Pietists and the theological liberalism of Albrecht Ritschl and his school, whose insistence on interior religious experience in the form of feeling is a basic idea of Pietism, although the Ritschlian school is opposed by devout Pietists as well as by Orthodox Lutherans."

We also have to take into account the confessional movement in the 19th century and the prevailing of the critical method of studying Scripture, both coming out of Luther's Germany. Both movements held up an intellectual understanding as "correct" and a distrust of subjective religious experience in Lutheran theologians. The result has been a false legitimacy given to a truncated view of Luther's teaching on sanctification that cannot be sustained by an unprejudiced reading. Another reason "this book" has been as good as buried in the 20th century is the near unanimous scorn for the Pietists shown by Karl Barth, Ernest Troeltsch, Paul Tillich, Reinhold Niebuhr, and Emil Brunner. [4]

Of course, this distrust of emotion continues. This suspicion or misunderstanding was a major attack in the 17th century of certain proponents of Lutheran Orthodoxy against Pietists. It still divides Pentecostals/Charismatics and the rest of the church, and is a division between and within denominations with suspicion being the root cause of many congregational splits, and it is even behind the so-called "worship wars" going on in North American congregations.

Therefore, because the ascendancy of an intellectual understanding of Luther's reformation discovery in battle with an understanding that includes the experiential or subjective, since the mid-nineteenth century only variations of the forensic idea of justification has been taught in Lutheran seminaries, chiefly that the believer is declared innocent in the divine courtroom. However, the pendulum may swing the other way. The research begun by Tuomo Mannermaa at the University of Helsinki has reopened Luther's works for us to see that Luther's idea of what happens at justification is much more than being declared innocent. "Clearly the concept of real participation in God is fundamental for Luther's theology. Luther employs other terms as well to describe this idea of participation, such as "unification with God" or the "transformation of man." The concept of participation reaches its peak expression in the ancient notion of theosis or "divinization." [5]

The above comes from the book Union with Christ: the Finnish Breakthrough in Luther Research, which could serve as a rediscovery of the treasure Luther found for people searching for additional biblical theology on gifts. How are believers holy? How does Christ live in us? Mannermaa explains this further:

This understanding of faith as partaker in divine properties was essential for Luther. When he describes his reform-engendering discovery in the famous passages of the preface of volume one of his Latin works (1545), participation in the properties of God has the decisive role: Luther says that he began to understand that the justice of God means the justice ?through which the just lives through the gift of God.' This discovery consists clearly in the insight that the justice of God is donum, gift, through which the just live. This insight, Luther says, opened to him the gateway of heaven, and he was enabled to see the Holy Scripture in a new way. The idea of participation in Christ and in His divine properties was thus the content of his so-called reformatory insight, and at the same time, his criticism of scholastic theology. [6]

Luther's writings about participation in Christ though his grace and gifts go back to his earliest writings. This is from his Preface to Romans (1522):

The gifts and the Spirit increase daily in us, yet they are not complete, since evil desires and sins remain in us which war against the Spirit, as Paul says in [Romans] chapter 7, and in Galatians, chapter 5. Genesis, chapter 3, proclaims the enmity between the offspring of the woman and that of the serpent. But grace does do this much: that we are accounted completely just before God. God's grace is not divided into bits and pieces, as are the gifts, but grace takes us up completely into God's favor for the sake of Christ, our intercessor and mediator, so that the gifts may begin their work in us.[7]

My hypothesis is that Luther rediscovered a biblical theology of justification including the possibility of a progressive sanctification as one cries out to God for growth in grace and gifts in a mystical union of Christ and baptized believer. It is made possible by grace through faith created by a living Word. However, it is not necessary to find specific teachings of Luther on any specific gifts in order to legitimize them. They exist and Scripture explains why.

Having considered "what did Luther know and when did he know it?? this paper turns to "who else was in on it."

Johann Arndt (1555-1621)

True Christianity, (1606-09), was the most prized German Lutheran devotional book by the common people, and it went through 20 different editions during the author's life. In the 19th century, it was found in many homes in Germany and Scandinavia, and if the Scandinavian immigrants to America were to bring two books on the boat, one would be the Holy Bible and the other was True Christianity.

A very interesting event happened in 1597. Arndt found a dust-covered copy of the 1520 reprint of Theologia Germanica edited by Luther for the Augustinian press with the express permission of Johannes Staupitz. Luther, Staupitz, Johannes Tauler, and the author of Theologia Germanica were primary influences on Arndt. 80 years previously, Luther had found the older, less complete, dust-covered copy. Both Luther and Arndt made the same rediscovery and their work shows its significance. Without the background of a living and active Word of God creating the possibility of a mystical union with God, Arndt's writings would perhaps be nothing more than a dry moralism that inspires few and transforms none. One wonders what Luther would mean for us if not for his mystical side (which we see as indeed so "mystical" as to be unappreciated, misunderstood, or even rejected by later Lutherans).

The difference between Arndt and Luther's theology of sanctification and what did each find in Theologia Germanica would make for an interesting study, one that I have certainly not completed considering the breadth of Luther's works. However, as Peter Erb points out:

Theologia Germanica influenced True Christianity but not extensively; citations are extremely brief and of little significance for Arndt's theology as a whole. In many cases, Arndt like Luther, deliberately ignored any statements in the original that referred to ecstatical mystical union at the end of a graduated process toward the divine, and reshaped them according to his understanding of a union with all believers with Christ in faith.? [8]

However, unlike Luther, Arndt saw no reason to rethink his source radically. Arndt saw something his teacher could not, that one need not throw out the idea of a graduated process toward the divine. He saw it as a development shaped by grace, as growth of love for God achieved by grace through faith. Arndt would have been a pastor for twenty years at the time of the discovery of Theologia, grounded in the Lutheran tradition which is scrupulous in separating Law from Gospel, and avoiding an appearance of teaching "works," that by doing certain things you can earn anything with God, yet we find in him a voice quite different at times from Luther. Is he ?advancing" in Lutheran thought, or has he left it behind?

A quick glimpse achieved by looking at a few chapter headings of Book Three, Part One: On True Faith and Holy Living show how Arndt is similar to and how he may differ from Luther:

#4- The Word of God is a word of truth, a living seed, the wisdom of God,

power and life, defense and nourishment, a source for union with God.

#7- The highest consolation of believers is forgiveness of sins, gained by

true repentance, confession and constant prayer, available only in Christ

and in faith in his promises.

#9- He who is justified begins to lead a new godly life, a new creature,

bearing fruits.

Arndt's different approach is evident in #7 with the words "true," and "constant" and in #9, justification stated as beginning. Was Luther opposed the idea of a measurable growth in sanctification, and would he deny Arndt's use of language? Luther stated again and again the relation of justification (by grace) to sanctification (mediated through gifts) as in this representative statement, "It is well known that the new obedience in the justified brings with it the daily growth of the heart in the Spirit who sanctifies us." [9]

This relation can be explored in his commentary on Ps. 51.1:

Without the Holy Spirit, he could not pray this. I apply this to the sanctification of the flesh and to mortification, or the new obedience which ought to follow in the justified? It is well known that the new obedience in the justified brings with it the daily growth of the heart in the Spirit who sanctifies us? To a man trained in scholastic theology it seems absurd that such a holy prophet cries out for the gifts of the Holy Spirit as though he did not have any. But both our own experience and examples like this have taught us that no one can ask for grace except one who is justified, and that no one can ask for the gifts of the Spirit except one who is sanctified. Such people have received "the first fruits of the Spirit" (Rom. 8:23), and therefore they also yearn for, and want to receive, the tithe (Num. 18:12-24). Because they have been reborn to life, therefore they want to reject death completely, with its remnants. They hope and look for perfection, and daily they experience their great separation from it. [10]

Luther taught that in faith the believer progresses from justification into sanctification, that it is possible to grow by asking for the gifts of the Spirit. We see here inchoate Pietism in the yearning for perfection that was to mark all Pietist writings.

Arndt saw this in Luther, and when he had his discovery experience with the "Theology" in Theologia Germanica, he agreed with Luther that, "this book is not new." What Arndt was able to do next was to "Lutheranize" Theologia. Peter Erb said, "But, although following Tauler, Arndt is never unaware of his Lutheranism and immediately places his words in an eschatological context, insisting at the same time that no possibility exists for a man to work his way into such a union; even the experience of the union already granted is a gift of grace. [11]

Near the end of his life Arndt stated why he wrote the book, his concern for a life that bears fruit in holy living through a union with Christ. Below we see in a paradigmatical way how he developed ideas he found in Luther's thought:

In the first place, [a] I wished to withdraw the minds of students and

preachers from an inordinately controversial and polemical theology which

has well nigh assumed the form of an earlier scholastic theology.

Secondly, [b] I purposed to conduct Christian believers from lifeless

thoughts to such as might bring forth fruit. Thirdly, [c] I wished to

guide them onward from mere science and theory to the actual practice of

faith and godliness. And fourthly, [d] to show them wherein a truly

Christian life that accords with true faith consists, as well as to

explain the apostle's meaning when he says, "I live; yet not I, but Christ

liveth in me," etc. (Gal.2:30). [10]

Arndt condemned teaching faith as a "mere theory" and an "art of disputation," and gave an appeal to add holiness of life to purity of doctrine. Philipp Jakob Spener picked this up in Pia Desideria and called Arndt a "second Luther," a title he could claim himself, though a "second Arndt" would be a more accurate title.

We have seen how Arndt laid out a theology for a second reformation. Now we look at the person who actually began it.

Philipp Jakob Spener (1635-1705)

Spener was greatly influenced by Arndt's True Christianity, which was his favorite book next to the Bible, and also the collection of Arndt's sermons, for which his Pia Desideria was originally written as a preface. Spener is often thought of as the Father of Pietism because Pia Desideria contained an indictment of Lutheran Orthodoxy with a plan for reform. However, True Christianity was both of those things. Perhaps he can rightly be called the founder because of the success of the program put forward in Pia Desideria. It should also be noted that while Spener studied Arndt's works and clearly picked up his mantle, his thought and style of writing was his own. It should also be noted that these two were not the only voices decrying Lutheran Orthodoxy's need to lose its polemical edge and become more a religion of the heart.

The third of the six suggestions for reform in Spener's little book was the need for several methods to propagate Scripture. He states that what they get in church on Sunday morning should be expanded, and secondly they should be encouraged to read Scripture privately:

Thought should be given to the more extensive use of the Word of God mong us. We know that by nature we have no good in us. If there is to be any

good in us, it must be brought about by God. To this end the Word of God

is the powerful means, since faith must be rekindled through the gospel,

and the law provides the rules for good works and many wonderful impulses

to attain them. The more at home the Word of God is among us, the more we shall bring about faith and its fruits.[11]

It was that and the following that enabled the Spirit to do a major work in renewing the church: the establishment of small groups called conventicles to meet on Sunday afternoons to pray, read Scripture and discuss sermons. This practice became widespread and led to a movement that lasted for several centuries:

For a third thing, it would perhaps not be inexpedient, and I set this down

for further and more mature reflection, to reintroduce the ancient and

apostolic kind of church meetings. In addition, our customary services with

preaching, other assemblies would also be held in the manner in which Paul

describes them in 1Corinthians 14:26-40. One person would not rise to

preach (although this practice would be continued at other times), but

others who have been blessed with gifts and knowledge would also speak and present their pious opinions on the proposed subject to the judgment of

the rest, doing all this in such a way as to avoid disorder and strife. [12]

The regular gathering of a small group of believers in one of their homes was unknown at the time, and created immediate controversy as it spread. Spener's little book was reprinted again and again. It may have been viewed as revolutionary to some clergy, but it was, in fact, as Spener said, a reintroduction of apostolic church meetings. It was, of course, a forerunner of today's small groups, cell church, and house church movement. Until his death Spener worked with the people whom he influenced and defended them and his writings against their detractors.

As important was the success of Spener's spiritual son August Hermann Franke and his godson Count Nicholas von Zinzendorf. Spener rescued Franke from attacks at Dresden by recommending him to the new school at Halle. Under Franke, the University of Halle became a center for the training of mission minded pastors. Spener was godfather to Zinzendorf, who attended Halle as a student. It was with these two men that Luther's Reformation finally became more than the reform of a territorial church to a movement to reach people in other lands who hadn't heard of Jesus. One can almost see God's hand shaping the hearts of Zinzendorf and his Moravians and moving them around the globe. We can trace their influence on the Awakening through their trips from Germany to America and back to Europe.

Another clear connection is when John Wesley heard Luther's Preface to Romans read at a Moravian prayer meeting on Aldersgate Street in London, his heart was strangely warmed, it really was no coincidence and that is true for several ways. One reason Luther's thought had a profound influence on the Moravians is they heard a voice similar to Jan Hus, their founder who lived 100 years before Luther. But before they became a missionary movement, that message had to go through the change of Arndt's progressive sanctification wrought through prayerful repentance and the witness of a holy life. Spener's clear thinking, Franke's passion and Zinzendorf's love of Jesus were all necessary. Wesley then took it a step further, and the Holiness movement in the late 1800's took it another, and so on.

In closing, Luther's insights into how God empowers us through his gifts to live a holy life seems to be hidden from many even though there is a trail of people who discovered and developed it further. We see it in the Pietist movement, the Modern Missionary Movement and the Awakening. Our hopes for the renewal of the Lutheran and other mainline churches today lie in the treasure that is the mystical union of the believer with God through a living faith created by the living Word in the believer, "for this book is not new."

[1] Martin Luther, Preface to Theologia Germanica, Second Edition (1518), translated by Charles Kingsly Manchester, 1854.

[2] Martin Luther, Preface to the Complete Edition of Luther's Latin Works (1545), translated by Bro. Andrew Thornton, OSB, ?Vorrede zu Band I der Opera Latina der Wittenberger Ausgabe. 1545," vol. 4, Luther's Werke in Auswahl, ed. Otto Clemen, 6th ed., (Berlin: de Gruyter. 1967). 421-428.

[3] Carl E. Braaten, Robert W. Jenson, eds., Union with Christ, the New Finnish Interpretation of Luther, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 7. See section 3. ?Epistemological and Theological Presuppositions of Luther Research.?

[4] F. Ernest Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965), 1.

[5] Carl E. Braaten, Robert W. Jenson, eds., Union with Christ, the New Finnish Interpretation of Luther (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), see following section 4. ?Luther's Concept of Participation and/or Divinization,?10-12, and, section 5. Participation and Love,? 13-19.

[6] Union with Christ, 17.

[7] Martin Luther, Preface to Commentary on Romans, translated by Bro. Andrew Thornton, OSB from http://www.ccel.org/l/luther/romans/pref_romans.html

[8] Peter Erb, True Christianity, translation and introduction by Peter Erb (New York: Paulist Press, 1979), 15.

[9] Martin Luther, Luther's Works, Volume 12, Psalm 51.11, Fortress Press/Concordia Publishing House, electronic edition.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Philipp Jacob Spener, Pia Desideria, edited and translated by Theodore G. Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1964), 87-89.

[12] Ibid.