As the tourist gazes upward at the immense dome of St. Peter’s, he reflects upon the glories of papal Rome. He little knows that he is looking upon a historic symbol of Western Christendom’s shattered unity. Built to shelter the bones of a Galilean fisherman, the magnificent structure was erected with monies derived from the sale of indulgences. But this commerce was fatefully challenged by the 95 theses of a lowly German monk in Wittenberg long before completion of the lofty basilica.
Martin Luther’s theses do not reflect the shining glory of Reformation at noontide; rather, they appear today as a foregleam of dawn shouldering aside the twilight. They fall strangely upon the modern ear and in content are more Catholic than Protestant. Thus today, neither side claims the content as a whole. But the spirit is Protestant, and for this they are celebrated. The Protestant hears in them a whispered promise of light to come.
The complex doctrine of indulgences is the property of the Church of Rome. Unknown by the Greek and Latin fathers, it was developed by medieval schoolmen and sanctioned by the Council of Trent. It refers to the presumed remission of the temporal punishment of forgiven sin on condition of penitent prayers or other pious works such as payment of money to church or charity. Presupposed in the practice is: (1) the teaching that sin requires a penalty on earth or in purgatory even after reconciliation of sinner to God through penitence and absolution; (2) existence of the “treasury of merits” derived from Christ’s infinite merits along with the merits of saints who have performed works of supererogation; (3) the belief that the church has the right of administering the benefit of these merits. The power extends even to departed souls in purgatory for the shortening of their sufferings.
During and after the crusades, the practice of indulgences was used by popes toward increasing their power, and it degenerated into a regular traffic, becoming a means of ecclesiastical and monastic wealth. But as a result of his profligacy, the hedonistic Pope Leo X found himself badly in need of money to finish St. Peter’s. After selling the archbishopric of Mainz to Albert of Brandenburg, who had thus gone into debt to the German banking house of Fugger for 10,000 ducats, the pope allowed Albert to dispense an indulgence in his territories for an eight-year period in order to pay his debt. Half the income, besides the 10,000 ducats already paid, was to go to the pope for St. Peter’s, the other half to the Fuggers.
To proclaim the indulgence, Albert appointed Johann Tetzel of the Dominican order. The Reformation would have taken place sooner or later without Tetzel, but as things turned out, Tetzel was the trigger.
An experienced vendor, he was often received like a messenger from heaven by townsfolk. In solemn procession he would be led to the church where the papal bull of indulgence on velvet cushion would be placed on the high altar. Erected in front of it was a cross with silken banner bearing the papal arms, and at the foot of the cross was set a large iron chest for the indulgence money. Tetzel made extravagant claims for the bull and luridly described the pains of purgatory being suffered by relatives and friends who were pictured as asking: “Will you let us lie here in flames?” The solution was simple: “As soon as the money in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory’s fire springs.”
Though Tetzel could not gain permission to enter Saxony, he came to the border, where Luther’s Wittenberg parishioners could make their way to purchase pardons. As early as the summer of 1516 Luther had preached a sermon of warning against trust in indulgences. Silence now would be a betrayal of conscience … thus the celebrated events of the eve of All Saints, October 31, 1517.
Luther was seeking further light on the question of indulgences, and had not so much as a dream of breaking from the Roman Church. He wished an academic disputation on his 95 propositions which bore the title “Disputation for Clarification of the Power of Indulgences.” These Latin theses were not a protest against pope or Church, but rather against the abuse of indulgences. They imply belief in purgatory, and do not mention faith and justification as such, though these were already essential elements in Luther’s thought. Later, when the theses were published in his collected works (1545), he wrote: “I allow them to stand, that by them it may appear how weak I was, and in what a fluctuating state of mind, when I began this business. I was then a monk and a mad papist, and so submerged in the dogmas of the Pope that I would have readily murdered any person who denied obedience to the Pope.”
Nonetheless, the theses reflect a confrontation between a personal experience of justification by faith with direct communion with Christ, on the one hand, and, on the other, an external system of priestly mediation and human merit. Thesis one sounds the keynote in asserting that Christ’s call for repentance is intended for “the whole life of believers.” The second thesis distinguishes between true repentance and “sacramental penance, that is, of the confession and satisfaction which are performed under the ministry of priests.” However, the third thesis declares that inward penitence must manifest itself in various mortifications of the flesh. Repentance is to continue until entrance into heaven.
Theses five and six affirm that the pope cannot remit guilt except by declaring God’s remission, nor has he the power to remit punishments except those imposed by him or the canons. Inasmuch as such punishments have reference to this life only, Luther thus removes the presumed papal power over purgatory. He seems to assume papal ignorance on the excesses of “the preachers of pardons,” for otherwise the pope “would prefer that the Basilica of St. Peter should be burnt to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep” (thesis 50). But Luther added that these excesses made it difficult to answer keen questionings of the laity, such as: “Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of most holy charity and of the supreme necessity of souls … if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of that most fatal thing, money, to be spent on building a basilica …?” (thesis 82).
Luther struck fatally at the theoretical foundation of indulgences, the scholastic fiction of a treasury of merits. Then he trumpeted: “The true treasure of the Church is the holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God” (thesis 62).
In setting forth a human depravity requiring lifelong repentance, and alongside it God’s free grace in Christ, Luther was proclaiming in essence the doctrine of justification by faith. As Philip Schaff puts it: “By attacking the abuses of indulgences, Luther unwittingly cut a vein of mediaeval Catholicism; and by a deeper conception of repentance which implies faith, and by referring the sinner to the grace of Christ as the true and only source of remission, he proclaimed the undeveloped principles of evangelical Protestantism, and kindled a flame which soon extended far beyond his original intentions” (History of the Christian Church, Vol. VII, p. 160).
Nothing less than eternal salvation was at issue. And the issue is still live. Roman soteriology is still protested by Protestants. Luther’s theses and their implications still demand resolution, a prerequisite to any vital Catholic-Protestant rapprochement. Even yet, we must return to Wittenberg and meet in the twilight of the Castle Church door before we can enjoy the blazing high noon of unity in truth.
END
Basic Christian Doctrines Available As A New Book
With this issue, CHRISTIANITY TODAY officially begins its seventh year of publication. To the world-flung staff of contributors and correspondents the Editors say a hearty thank you for helping build and extend the readability and significance of the magazine. Besides those scholars and writers who maintain the established features of every issue we credit also those who participate in CHRISTIANITY TODAY’S symposiums and special projects. One of these, the series on Basic Christian Doctrines, comes out this week in book form as a Holt, Rinehart and Winston publication. This collection of essays on Christian beliefs appears just after the series has concluded in CHRISTIANITY TODAY, and as a stimulus to further study includes also a previously unpublished essay on the various disciplines of theology. Basic Christian Doctrines answers today’s growing interest in probing the theological perspectives of many traditions, and it does so by supplying devout and relevant expositions by an international corps of sturdy evangelical scholars from various denominations. The text will make a serviceable addition to every minister’s study and to every church library. We compliment Holt, Rinehart and Winston on the appearance of this attractive volume and commend it to our readers.
Does It Matter Less And Less What Church Members Believe?
If American clergymen find any comfort in the fact that the skit appearing elsewhere in this issue mirrors the confused beliefs of some churchgoers in Germany, they should take a hard look at the situation at home.
Recently a Southern Baptist pastor in Dallas, Texas, polled his membership. The 135 unsigned responses were less than reassuring. While all considered personal faith in Jesus Christ and surrender to him as Lord essential to salvation of the soul, 20 per cent insisted on additional requirements for salvation such as baptism, church membership, and a good moral life.
Two members found baptism significant only as a means to church membership. Ten per cent of the Baptists responding favored admitting members from other faiths without requiring immersion.
Denominational distinctives are coming to count less and less in American churches. While clergymen seem to emphasize them in neighborhood calling, they minimize these distinctives in interdenominational ministerial meetings. Were this relaxing of hard lines the result of theological awakening and of new devotion to Bible doctrines it would distress us little. The fact is, however—and a disturbing fact—that for many people what one really believes seems to matter far less than once it did—particularly in the churches.
END
Color Line In State University A Wobbly Defense Of Freedom
Mississippi’s refusal to admit James Meredith to the state university was a bold act of state defiance against the Federal government. Even though occurrences in Little Rock never went so far, the outcome of Mississippi’s resistance is hardly in doubt. Short of compliance with Federal court orders, the Governor of Mississippi can keep troops from his door only by closing “Ole Miss”—a political price he can hardly afford to pay.
The struggle between authority and freedom is age-long. In both political and ecclesiastical arenas the tug of war has usually been uneven, with victory going to authoritarianism at the cost of creeping encroachment on individual rights. Hence the existence and validity of the proverb, “Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom, and the absence of any similar slogan for authoritarianism. At least some Americans in the North will not fail to understand the legitimate Southern concern caused by the Federal government’s constant gnawing at States’ Rights. Yet most of them—joined by more and more devout leaders in the South—will regard Mississippi’s choice of a purely racial issue as a vulnerable sector along which to battle for the worthy cause of freedom.
END
A Protestant Prayer For The Vatican Council
Almighty God, who hast commanded us to love and pray for all men, especially those of the household of faith, we now gladly pray Thy blessing upon the Second Vatican Council. May the Spirit of Jesus Christ endow all true brethren there, leading them into the paths of righteousness and into the ways of unity and peace. May the Body of Christ be healed of its sore divisions. May the world once more see that the Church is one even as Thou, O Father and Son, art one. May this Council hold council with Thee. Work Thou Thy work, that all Christians may again be found in the unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace.
Father, we pray for them and Thy Church by praying also for ourselves. We confess our own sins and failures. We have been too little hurt by the divided Body of Christ; too little have we prayed for our separated brethren. Through long centuries we have been too willing to accept things as they are, when we should have sought healing before Thy throne, believing that with Thee all things are possible. Bestow thy blessing upon every believer that calls in truth upon Jesus Christ. Bless us that we may together confess one faith, together eat one holy food, and together bear witness to the redemption that is in Christ Jesus alone. Amen.
