Main A Unique Vessel A Strong Stand A Reformer and Shepherd

VII. Stay in the Wartburg (A.D. 1521-1522)

A. Constructive Period

Martin Luther’s stay in the Wartburg proved to be a very constructive period in his life. He began translating the Bible and was able to finish the New Testament, which he translated directly from the Greek text rather than the Latin. It was printed in September 1522. He also continued his attacks on indulgences while in his “desert.” He set forth, in detail, his views on the relationship between law and grace.

This was also a time of severe trial. He wrote to Melanchthon, his friend:

I should be afire in the spirit; in reality I am afire in the flesh, with lust, laziness, idleness, sleepiness .... Pray for me, I beg you, for in my seclusion here I am submerged in sin. [16]

B. Struggle Against Evangelicals

It was also during this time that he had struggles with various evangelicals throughout Europe. Not only did he have differences with Zwingli, as noted above, but he also had problems with the Anabaptists, Schwenckfeld, and the Zwickau prophets, including Muntzer. The strong stand for the faith of some of these evangelicals was, at times, clearer than that of Luther. One author, for example, said this about the Anabaptists who arose from among Zwingli’s followers:

Their point of departure was another aspect of the Erasmian program, dear also to Zwingli. This was the restoration of primitive Christianity, which they took to mean the adoption of the Sermon on the Mount as a literal code for all Christians, who should renounce oaths, the use of the sword whether in war or civil government, private possessions, bodily adornment, reveling and drunkenness. Pacifism, religious communism, simplicity, and temperance marked their communities. The Church should consist only of the twice-born, committed to the covenant of discipline. Here again we meet the concept of the elect discernible by the two tests of spiritual experience and moral achievement. The Church should rest not on baptism administered in infancy, but on regeneration, symbolized by baptism in mature years. Every member should be a priest, a minister, and a missionary prepared to embark on evangelistic tours. Such a Church, though seeking to convert the world, could never embrace the unconverted community. And if the state comprised all the inhabitants, then Church and state would have to be separated. In any case religion should be free from constraint. [17]

The same author notes that their lives were a testimony to those around them:

Philip of Hesse observed more improvement of life among the sectaries than among the Lutherans, and a Lutheran minister who wrote against the Anabaptists testified that they went in among the poor, appeared very lowly, prayed much, read from the Gospel, talked especially about the outward life and good works, about helping the neighbor, giving and lending. holding goods in common, exercising authority over none, and living with all as brothers and sisters. Such were the people executed by Elector John of Saxony. But the blood of the martyrs proved again to be the seed of the church. [18]

Although upset by the martyrdom of the Anabaptists, Luther's attitude toward them was one of ambivalence. On one hand, he recognized that faith cannot be forced upon others. That he was against using force is shown by this statement:

You ask whether the magistrate may kill false prophets. I am slow in a judgment of blood even when it is deserved. In this matter I am terrified by the example of the papists and the Jews before Christ, for when there was a statute for the killing of false prophets and heretics, in time it came about that only the most saintly and innocent were killed…. I cannot admit that false teachers are to be put to death. It is enough to banish. [19]

In 1531, on the other hand, a memorandum composed by Melanchthon and signed by Luther indicated how difficult it was for Luther to be consistent concerning using force on others who did not share his views. In this memorandum, Luther said that the rejection of the ministerial office was insufferable blasphemy. He also felt that those who helped in the disintegration of the state church were seditious and were thus against the best interest of the church. Luther added a postscript to this memorandum:

I assent. Although it seems cruel to punish them with the sword, it is crueler that they condemn the ministry of the word and have no well-grounded doctrine and suppress the true and in this way seek to subvert the civil order. [20]

C. Push for Radical Changes

While Luther was away in the Wartburg, some of his colleagues were actively reforming, and instigating radical changes. Although realizing the need for changes, Luther advised using moderation:

Luther believed that reform should be allowed to come gently and always without force. ‘I opposed indulgences and all the papists but never with force. I simply taught, preached and wrote God’s word; otherwise I did nothing … the word of God so greatly weakened the papacy that no prince or emperor ever inflicted such losses upon it. I did nothing. The word did everything.’ [21]

Then during [Luther’s] absence in 1521 and 1522 one innovation followed another with disconcerting rapidity. Priests married, monks married, nuns married. Nuns and monks even married each other. The tonsured permitted their hair to grow…. Priests celebrated the sacrament without vestments, in plain clothes. Portions of the mass were recited in the German tongue. Masses for the dead were discontinued. Vigils ceased, vespers were altered, images were smashed. Meat was eaten on fast days. Endowments were withdrawn by patrons. The enrollment in universities declined because students were no longer supported by ecclesiastical stipends. [22]

1. Celibacy

Some were renouncing the celibacy of the priests. Melanchthon, however, was hesitant in this regard, feeling that some of the monastic vows may still be valid.

The elector received this word of what was happening:

It is being preached that no monk can be saved in a cowl, that cloisters are in the grip of the Devil, that monks should be expelled and cloisters demolished. Whether such teaching is grounded in the gospel I greatly doubt. [23]

2. Mass

Changes were taking place in the mass. Those whom Luther had been close to in the Augustinian order in Wittenberg were doing away with the mass altogether. This was too extreme for Luther, who preferred to eliminate only the sacrificial character of the mass based on the principle that “the mass is not a sacrifice but a thanksgiving to God and a communion with believers.” [24]

3. Communion

Changes took place in the communion as well. Andreas Carlstadt, a professor of Theology at the University of Wittenberg and a close associate of Luther, allowed the brothers and sisters to partake of the wine as well as the bread, which previously had been withheld from them. Luther agreed with the restoration of this practice.

Carlstadt initiated many other changes within a short period of time. He told those that were meeting with him to call him “good neighbor” or “Brother Andreas” instead of “Herr Doktor.” A plain gray coat replaced his usual distinctive garb. Rather than accepting the financial support of the congregation, Carlstadt now earned his living at the plow.

4. Pictures

When Carlstadt advocated for the removal of all pictures from the cathedrals, mobs were prompted to break into cathedrals, and to tear the pictures off the walls, and to smash the statues. Fearing that a revolution was imminent, Luther returned to Wittenberg in early 1522 to denounce the use of violence and destruction.

In 1524 Luther was visited by Carlstadt in Jena. Carlstadt was being accused of promoting revolution, but he claimed that the charges were false. But when Luther visited Orlamunde, where Carlstadt lived, and observed the revolutionary temper of the congregation, he questioned Carlstadt's sincerity in his claim of innocence. Consequently, Luther consented to the banishment of Carlstadt, who was compelled to depart from Saxony, leaving his pregnant wife and their child to join him later.

Carlstadt could not believe that Luther would take such a stand:

[Carlstadt] departed claiming in the very words of Luther after Worms that he had been condemned “unheard and unconvicted,” and that he had been expelled by his former colleague who was twice a papist and a cousin of Antichrist. [25]

After being expelled from Saxony, Carlstadt traveled to the southern German cities. The ministers of Strassburg wrote to Luther saying:

We are not yet persuaded by Carlstadt, but many of his arguments are weighty. We are disturbed because you have driven out your old colleague with such inhumanity. At Basel and Zurich are many who agree with him. [26]

5. Civil Government

The civil government was also undergoing change. Carlstadt was vocal in this area as well, saying that there should no longer be any civil interference in church affairs. Luther agreed, especially where the government was Roman Catholic; but he was not always ready to agree if the government was “evangelical.” In other words, it depended upon whether it sided with him or with Rome.

Luther denied the church the right to use violence, delegating this to the civil authorities:

Remember that Antichrist, as Daniel said, is to be broken without the hand of man. Violence will only make him stronger. Preach, pray, but do not fight. Not that all constraint is ruled out, but it must be exercised by the constituted authorities. [27]

Luther recognized the need for civil government. Paraphrasing Luther’s views, Bainton writes:

The Kingdom of Christ is the way men behave when actuated by the Spirit of Christ, in which case they have no need for laws and swords. Such a society, however, is nowhere in evidence, not even in the Church itself, which contains the tares along with the wheat. [28]

The same author evaluates Luther’s views concerning the relationship of the church and the civil government:

… where Church and state are allied, one always dominates, and the outcome is either theocracy or caesaropapism. Luther declined to separate Church and state, repudiated theocracy, and thereby left the door open for caesaropapism. [29]

6. Old Testament practices

Certain Old Testament practices now were being revived. Luther, however, took a strong stand against the restoring of these practices, asserting that Christ is the end of the law; Mosaic law was terminated by Christ. The only law which we have today is that written on the heart (Heb. 8:10).

7. Peasants’ War

While Luther was in the Wartburg, the Peasants’ War broke out in Germany. Some suggested that the uprising of the peasants to overthrow the government was the natural outcome of Luther’s preaching. Others, however, felt that this was the result of many injustices committed over a long period of time. Bainton describes the Peasants’ War this way:

The Peasants’ War lacked the cohesion of the Puritan revolution because there was no clear-cut program and no coherent leadership. Some groups wanted a peasant dictatorship, some a classless society, some a return to feudalism, some the abolition of all rulers…. The chiefs were sometimes peasants,… sometimes … knights. The separate bands were not coordinated. There was not even unity of religion because Catholics and Protestants were on both sides. [30]

Luther strongly opposed the Peasants’ War. He said:

If the peasant is in open rebellion, then he is outside the law of God, for rebellion is not simply murder, but it is like a great fire which attacks and lays waste a whole land. Thus, rebellion brings with it a land full of murders and bloodshed, makes widows and orphans, and turns everything upside down like a great disaster. Therefore, let everyone who can, smite, slay, and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful, or devilish than a rebel. It is just as when one must kill a mad dog; if you don’t strike him, he will strike you, and the whole land with you. [31]

As a result of Luther’s strong stand against the Peasants’ War, many were alienated from him. However, just as he had urged merciless suppression during the time of the Peasants’ War, he later insisted that clemency be extended to all.

D. Enlarged Correspondence

During his stay in the Wartburg, Luther carried on extensive correspondence.

1. Bohemian Brethren

Luther wrote to the Bohemian Brethren, encouraging them to resist the pope. He fully recognized this group of brothers, though realizing that their views differed from his own.

2. Henry VIII

Henry VIII of England criticized Luther for his stand against the Catholic Church, although Henry VIII himself was not a very loyal Catholic. Luther’s reply to the criticisms of Henry VIII took the form of a rather coarse treatise entitled “Against the Reign of Henry.” As a Catholic prince, Henry had referred to Martin Luther as the “minister at Wittenberg by the grace of God.” Luther, on the other hand, now responded with this greeting: “To Henry, King of England by the disgrace of God.” Even though Luther later tried to be reconciled to Henry VIII, the damage had been done. Henry continued to regard Luther as a preacher of “unsatiated liberty.”

3. Erasmus

Luther carried on correspondence with Erasmus. Erasmus was wary of the rapid pace at which reform was taking place and took no pleasure in Luther’s adamant declarations against the pope and the papacy. “I wish Luther would be quiet for a while,” Erasmus wrote. “What he says may be true, but there are times and seasons.” He accused Luther of harshness and coarseness. Luther, on the other hand, accused Erasmus of timidity and of overlooking the grace of God.