Abraham believed God...Luther on Genesis 15:6

At this point there arises an important debate concerning the Law and faith: whether the Law justifies, whether faith does away with the Law, etc.

In this connection Paul learnedly stresses the matter of time: that in this chapter Moses is speaking about righteousness and a righteous or justified Abraham prior to the Law, prior to the works of the Law, yes, prior to the people of the Law and before Moses, the lawgiver, was born. Accordingly, he says that righteousness is not only not from the Law but is prior to the Law, and that neither the Law nor the works of the Law contribute anything toward it.

Then what? Is the Law useless for righteousness? Yes, certainly. But does faith alone, without works, justify? Yes, certainly. Otherwise you must repudiate Moses, who declares that Abraham is righteous prior to the Law and prior to the works of the Law, not because he sacrificed his son, who had not yet been born, and not because he did this or that work, but because he believed God who gave a promise.

In this passage no mention is made of any preparation for grace, of any faith formed through works, or of any preceding disposition. This, however, is mentioned: that at that time Abraham was in the midst of sins, doubts, and fears, and was exceedingly troubled in spirit.

How, then, did he obtain righteousness? In this way: God speaks, and Abraham believes what God is saying. Moreover, the Holy Spirit comes as a trustworthy witness and declares that this very believing or this very faith is righteousness or is imputed by God Himself as righteousness and is regarded by Him as such.

Luther, M. (1999). Luther’s works, vol. 3: Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20. (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald, & H. T. Lehmann, Eds.) (Vol. 3, pp. 20–21). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Third Use of the Law (Commonplaces of Theology, Melanchthon)

Melanchthon 

"The third use of the Law pertains to the regenerate. Insofar as the regenerate have been justified by faith, they are free from the Law. This must be said under this locus. For they are indeed freed from the Law, that is, from the curse and condemnation and the wrath of God, which is set forth in the Law, that is to say, if they remain in the faith and fight against sin in confidence in the Son of God, and overcome the terrors of sin. 

"Yet in the meantime it must be said that the Law which points out the remnants of sin, in order that the knowledge of sin and repentance may increase, and the Gospel also must proclaim Christ in order that faith may grow. Furthermore, the Law must be preached to the regenerate to teach them certain works in which God wills that we practice obedience. For God does not will that we by our own wisdom set up works or obedience, but He wills that we be ruled by his word, as it is written, "In vain do they worship me by the commandments of men, Matt.15:9. Again, "Your Word is a lamp unto my feet, "Ps. 119:105."

"When human reason is not directed by the Word of God, it is very likely to lack something. For it is seized by wicked desires or gives its approval to iniquitous works, as is apparent in the laws of the gentiles. The divine order that we are to obey God remains unchangeable. Therefore, even though we are free from the Law, that is from damnation, because we are righteous by faith for the sake of the Son of God, yet because it pertains to obedience, the Law remains, that is, the divine ordinance remains that those who have been justified are to be obedient to God. Indeed, thy have the beginning of obedience which we shall now discuss under its own locus as to how it is pleasing to God. These comments suffice to give us instruction regarding the threefold use of the Law."

Melanchthon, Phillip, Loci Communes, 1543, trans. J.A.O. Preus (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1992) 74.

Arguments of the Adversaries (Commonplaces of Theology)

The 1543 edition of Melanchthon's Commonplaces of Theology  lists 18 points of contention between Melanchthon and the Romanists. Melanchthon rehearses an argument and then responds. Below are examples of the arguments of the adversaries:

I The word "righteousness" means obedience according to all the commandments. Faith of which we are speaking is not properly the work of all the commandments: Therefore we are not justified by faith.

III "He who does not love remains in death." Therefore it is impossilbe to say that a person is righteous by faith alone.

V We are righteous by grace: Grace is the love which is poured into the heart: Therefore we are righteous by infused love.

XI Righteousness is in the will: Faith is not in the will: Therefore we are not justified by faith.

XIV  Matthew 19:17," If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." Therefore it is possible to satisfy the law and our obedience merits eternal life.

XV "Forgive and it will be forgiven you, Matt.6:14: Therefore our forgiving spirit merits the remission of sins

XVII Her sins, which were many, have been forgiven her because she loved much," Luke 7:47: Therefore remission f sins takes place on account of love

XVIII Eternal life is called a reward: Therefore it is owed to us because of our works.

Charles V, 1500-1558

In October, 1529, the brave defenders of Vienna turned back massive Turkish forces from the walls of the city. The victory relieved the empire of immediate danger from a Turkish invasion and insured the success of Charles V over his opposition in northern Italy. On his birthday, February 24, 1530, Charles was crowned emperor in Bologna by Pope Clement VII, the last crowning of a German emperor by a pope. With great confidence Charles summoned the imperial diet to convene in Augsburg.

The diet was to supply further aid against the Turks and by reconciling differences was to bring religious unity to Germany. Charles spoke of setting discord aside and called on all the estates to be ready to express their views on religious questions. But behind these conciliatory words lay his strong determination to proceed against the Protestants with fire and sword, should they not yield to his kindness, that is, to the extent that his other political plans allowed.

Luther, M. (1999, c1960). Vol. 34: Luther's works, vol. 34 : Career of the Reformer IV (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (Vol. 34, Page 5). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Indulgences, historical background

According to the officially approved practice of the medieval church, absolution of sin was granted to the sinner who had repented, upon his confession and satisfaction; the latter consisted of punishments (such as fasting, prayers, pilgrimages, or even exclusion from the Eucharist) imposed on the penitent sinner by the bishop or the priest on the basis of certain ecclesiastical regulations. Yet the sinner who was reconciled with God through absolution still had to experience purgatory. This was considered a place and state of temporary punishment where the sinner would expiate his venial sins and experience such punishment as was still due, so to speak, for mortal sins already forgiven. Having thus completely atoned for his guilt he would be admitted to the Beatific Vision of God.


Indulgences relaxed or even commuted the punishment the penitent would have to undergo both in this world and in purgatory. Indulgence letters were granted for certain religious works (such as participation in a crusade, the visiting of certain shrines, Praying in sanctuaries where relics of saints were kept, ordering and paying for the celebration of masses) or simply for the payment of money to the church, a practice which became extremely popular in the later Middle Ages. The treasury of the merits of Christ, of the Blessed Virgin, and of all the saints was considered to make available benefits sufficient to compensate for all the sinner’s punishments. The treasury of merits was entrusted to and administered by the church, which made it available to the faithful by the granting of indulgences. There were two types of indulgences: a partial one, available only at specific times and places, and a general or plenary one, which was periodically granted by the popes. During the later Middle Ages indulgences came to be thought of mainly as a means of shortening the time a sinner would have to spend in purgatory. The church went so far as to assure the faithful that they could shorten not only their own suffering but also that of their loved ones already in purgatory. Since purgatory was to cleanse the sinner of any guilt as yet unatoned, people increasingly considered indulgences to be a means of canceling their guilt. When Luther first began to deal with this problem the papacy had issued various decrees concerning the understanding and handling of indulgences, but it had not yet promulgated a general dogma on this matter. See O.D.C.C., pp. 688 f., 1125 f.

In 1506 Pope Julius II proclaimed a plenary indulgence which was renewed by Pope Leo X; the proceeds were to go toward the construction of the Church of St. Peter in Rome. In 1515 Albrecht of Brandenburg (1490–1545) was put in charge of the administration of this plenary indulgence in the ecclesiastical provinces of Mainz and Halberstadt. He had become archbishop of Magdeburg in 1513 and at the same time administrator of the diocese of Halberstadt. In 1514 he was elected archbishop of Mainz, thus becoming the highest church dignitary in the Empire. This accumulation of offices was altogether contrary to ecclesiastical custom. To acquire the necessary dispensation and the chair of Mainz, Albrecht had to pay a huge sum of money, which was advanced by the Fuggers, one of the biggest banking concerns of the sixteenth century. The sale of indulgences in the Archbishop’s territories was to provide the means of reimbursing the Fuggers. One-half of the income was designated for the Curia, and the other half for the Fuggers. The actual promotion of the indulgences was entrusted to sub-commissioners and preachers (one of them being the Dominican John Tetzel, see O.D.C.C., p. 1336), for whose guidance Albrech’s chancellery had published an Instruction, listing the various benefits of the indulgences offered to the people.

Moved by a deep pastoral concern, Luther nailed his Ninety-five Theses (see WA 1, 233 ff.; LW 31, 25 ff.) to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg on October 31, 1517. In these theses, intended for a public academic disputation, Luther protested against the sale of indulgences—“the bingo of the sixteenth century” (Bainton, p. 72)—as an institution which undermined the individual’s religious responsibility, the majesty of God’s law, and the biblical understanding of repentance.

Vol. 48: Luther's works, vol. 48 : Letters I (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (Vol. 48, Page 43-45). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Erasmus, ?1466-1536

Two movements were especially important in shaping the religious life of the first part of the sixteenth century: the Reformation and Christian Humanism, of which Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466?–1536) was the acknowledged leader. Both movements shared the desire to return to the original sources of the Bible and the early Fathers, on the basis of which conclusions could be drawn and then applied to a reform of the church, the individual’s faith, and society as a whole. Luther got acquainted with Erasmus’ work in 1516 when he used the Humanist’s Greek text of the New Testament as the basis for his biblical studies; see p. 23. Luther had a deep respect for Erasmus’ learning but quickly realized the fundamental difference between his own theological position and that of Erasmus. Although he did not hesitate to express his opinion, he did his best not to make an issue out of this divergence; see pp. 40, 53.

Erasmus had known of Luther since the Ninety-five Theses were spread throughout Germany (see Allen 3, 785), and it seems that he was impressed with the Wittenberg professor; see Allen 3, 939. However Erasmus also was aware of differences existing between them, although for him they were more a matter of propriety than of theology. Yet both men—and especially their friends (see p. 122; p. 150 n. 10; pp. 184 f.)—hoped that mutual respect would bind them together so that they could and would support each other’s program. This hope was eventually destroyed by the development and clarification of Luther’s thought and the events of the Reformation after the Leipzig Disputation (June/July, 1519; see p. 126).

In 1524/25 Erasmus and Luther clashed on the question of free will. This controversy brought out the differences and clearly established the line which separated both men and made it impossible for them to be tolerant of one another’s point of view. Depending on their denominational ties, different scholars have characterized Erasmus’ thought either as Roman Catholic or Protestant. In either case, Erasmus is misunderstood. He was, as the Litterae obscurorum virorum stated, “homo pro se,” an entity unto himself (see Böcking, Supplementum 1, 279).



Luther's works, vol. 48 : Letters I (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (Vol. 48, Page 116-117). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Frederick the Wise, 1463-1525

Frederick the Wise (1463–1525; after 1486 one of the seven electors of the Holy Roman Empire) was a member of the Ernestine branch of the ruling family in Saxony and one of the most outstanding and capable rulers of the first quarter of the sixteenth century. He reorganized the government of his territory and promoted the Reichsreform, which was intended to provide a new order for the administration of the Empire. He was a pious man, who was more sincere in this regard than many of his contemporaries. Although he was quite thrifty, he was willing to spend great sums of money to add to the collection of relics at the Wittenberg Castle Church.

In his attitude toward Luther, Elector Frederick was guided by his piety, a responsible conscience, and a feeling for justice; contrary to the opinion of many scholars, he was not influenced by political reasons (such as territorial antagonism to the Emperor) or by any economic considerations (such as confiscation of the property of churches that had gone over to the evangelical party). He supported Luther in a careful yet effective way, and on the basis of his key role in Imperial politics he was in a very good position to protect the Reformer. Elector Frederick deliberated over every move he made, but once he had come to a decision, he proceeded with determination.

He was probably the last of the men around Luther (whom, incidentally, he apparently never met, and with whom he usually communicated through Spalatin) to gain an insight into and understanding of the Reformers thought. Finally, in his dying hour, he publicly professed his adherence to the Reformation by receiving the Lord's Supper with bread and wine. This was the deed of a man who was slow to decide and act, but once convinced of the right of what he undertook, was willing to assume full responsibility for his action.


(1999, c1963). Vol. 48: Luther's works, vol. 48 : Letters I (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (Vol. 48, Page 49-50). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.