Erasmus and Luther: Forces of Reform

 

An analysis by Janis Kuenning    Somewhere between 1517 and 1521 Luther’s resolve became more clarified and strengthened. Though he had no initial intention of breaking with Rome, his internal struggle with what seemed to him the impossibility of salvation as presented by the church broke into an adamant belief in the Pauline teaching that “Man is justified by faith apart from the working of the Law!” (Romans 3:28) This belief seemed to free Luther from the pressures of his times that encouraged self-hatred and a blind obedience to authority. His statements about the Roman Catholic Church reflected this strong awakening in him to the point where he challenged the Pope’s absolute authority. He was excommunicated and called to defend his teachings at Worms before all the Christian rulers of his day. Here again he formulated his new sense of freedom in the terms of the supremacy of conscience, his own being “Captive to the Word of God.” This defense seems similar to scriptural prophets of old.    After this hearing, Luther went into hiding. He had now broken with any support from Rome and from sympathizers like Erasmus who were against schism. Later Luther debated Erasmus over the concept of ‘Free Will’ and it was here that a very complete separation occurred. Luther simply did not accept the humanistic outlook of the world. “Far be it for Christians to be skeptics and academics.” Luther’s vision was more grounded in scripture and social events that transformed him personally rather than any scholarly pursuits.    Luther’s challenge to the religious authorities was upheld and protected by the German princes, who were, for different reasons, in tension with Rome over its workings in competition with the nation-states. Unlike Erasmus, Luther actually seemed to have no optimism for the Kingdoms of this world. Despite their protection of him, Luther expressed in his ‘two Kingdoms’ theory writing that peace would not come through princes and rarely ever would rise a truly Christian prince: “The just shall live by faith.” (Romans 1:17) Luther had confidence in the Kingdom of God but very little confident in the Kingdoms of this world. He did not foresee, as Erasmus did, Christian princes ruling a peaceable kingdom.    Erasmus’s adamant stand on war, provoked especially by popes such as Leo III, seemed in contrast to Luther’s stand on the gruesome Peasant War (1524-1525) that was a result of the influence of the Reformation. I think it is comparable to the doubt and fear raised over Liberation theology in recent decades and teaches us an unfortunate lesson in history.    Unlike Erasmus, Luther did not appeal to, nor remain in the Catholic Church and gradually formed a new church in which he supported the universal priesthood of the faithful and rejected the ‘human thought’ that one could earn or deserve salvation. In other words, I think he brought the church hierarchy, based on the Roman model, down to ground level.    While Erasmus leaned toward acceptance of the ancient wisdom of Roman rule overall, Luther saw it as a direct contrast to Christian teaching found in scripture. Relying on scripture and the words of Christ alone, Luther saw the hierarchy and its resulting behavior as a worldly practice rather than a religious one. Luther saw the structure as promulgating more of a nation-state than a Christianity community. Freed from the guilt and shame many felt at the time, (exemplified in the payment of indulgences), Luther in the end was free not only of that guilt and shame so epic in his times, but free to challenge the leaders of the church itself on the basis of his own God given conscience.    Erasmus and Luther rode on tides of a tumultuous age of upheaval and change. One might be seen more as a ‘thinker,’ the other a ‘doer.’ One stood for gradual reform, the other for immediate change. One helped guide the tide of necessary reform within the Catholic Church. The other took the stand that even the Church, and certainly it follows, that secular authorities can be challenged, made up as they are of human beings. From Erasmus in this sense, I learned of the value of objectivity and tolerance and cool headedness in educating and guiding fellow men and women through times of crisis. From Luther I learned that the primacy of conscience is a fundamental principle that can stem the tides of crisis by means of taking a firm and committed stand. Both lessons of this historical period in Church history can and will, I am sure, continue to guide great leaders and individuals in our present culture.